Conclusions From A Veteran Of The Regulatory Wars

At the recent fall conference of the National Alliance of Life Companies, an industry lobbyist and veteran of the regulator-regulated wars at the National Association of Insurance Commissioners gave the audience the benefit of his experience.

Rick Campbell, managing partner with the Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard law firm, listed seven things he said he has learned regarding the small face amount issue in the last 18 months.

We present them here without comment and simply as food for those who find themselves on either side of the issue.

The seven things, according to Campbell, are:

1. Small face amount policies were tied to race-based policies in 2000 and the industry has been fighting an uphill battle ever since.

2. There is an expectation among regulators that the industry should create or identify a problem in the small fact amount area and then come up with a solution.

3. There is a presumption by some regulators and consumer advocates that the industry acts in bad faith.

4. There is the presumption that no competition exists in the small face amount market and that therefore there needs to be regulatory intervention.

5. There is a widely held view that there are excessive profits being made by the industry in the small face amount market.

6. There is no regulatory appreciation for the fact that policyholder peace of mind has any value.

7. There is an unwritten, unspoken rule followed by some regulators that if they won’t buy the product, then no one else should.


Reproduced from National Underwriter Life & Health/Financial Services Edition, November 12, 2001. Copyright 2001 by The National Underwriter Company in the serial publication. All rights reserved.Copyright in this article as an independent work may be held by the author.


Copyright 2001 by The National Underwriter Company. All rights reserved. Contact Webmaster