U.S. Lawmakers Fault States for AIG Collapse


State insurance regulators are angry that four members of Congress who support federal oversight of the industry are blaming states in part for the collapse of insurance giant American International Group Inc., an event that escalated the financial crisis on Wall Street.

"This is not a time for political opportunism," Joel Ario, Pennsylvania's insurance commissioner, said of the lawmakers. "I'm disappointed in the political chutzpah of some people."

Connecticut insurance commissioner Thomas Sullivan said state insurance regulators , attending their annual fall meeting in the Washington, D.C., area on a range of issues including AIG, "were shocked" to read a Sept. 23 Wall Street Journal op-ed by U.S. Sens. John Sununu (R-N.H.) and Tim Johnson (D-N.D.) and U.S. Reps. Melissa Bean (D-Ill.) and Ed Royce (R-Calif.).

The lawmakers wrote that the $85 billion federal bailout of AIG was proof that Congress should approve their two-year-old legislation to strip states of their authority to regulate insurance companies. Instead, they propose that insurance companies have the option to choose a federal or state regulator. The proposal has split the insurance industry; large companies generally endorse it while small insurers generally oppose it.

Without such a change, the four lawmakers warned, "it is likely that the federal government (ie. the American taxpayers) will be forced to pay for more bailouts in the future." They argued that the bailout of AIG, a holding company with 71 subsidiaries that operate under state laws, shows the oversight job has become too complex for states alone. State officials said the U.S. Office of Thrift Supervision regulated the holding company.

State insurance officials accuse the lawmakers of exploiting the financial crisis to drum up support for their bill, which was introduced long before the problems on Wall Street. They say AIG's 71 insurance companies under their supervision are the healthiest part of the company's finances and were a key reason that the Federal Reserve Board approved the bailout of the company in the first place. Those insurance companies are likely to be sold to raise the money needed to pay off the loan.

"What got the Fed in the end to make this loan was the value of the insurance (company) assets," Ario said. "The real story is, state regulation shined."

Neither the House nor Senate version of the bill has cleared a committee, and action is unlikely before Congress adjourns this year.

The lawmakers, who are members of financial services committees in the Senate and House, receive their largest share of campaign contributions from individuals and political action committees representing the insurance, securities and investment industries, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The donations come from people on both sides of the debate over creating a single federal insurance regulator.

Royce, asked about state officials' assertions that they had nothing to do with AIG's collapse, said in a statement that while state insurance regulators did all they could to prevent the deterioration of AIG, each state only has authority over the companies within its borders. No one oversees both the holding company and its subsidiaries, which Royce called "a clear systemic blind spot in the state-based system."

If a federal regulator were in place before AIG imploded on Sept. 16, the California congressman said, "the federal government would likely be $85 billion richer."

Jonathan Lipman, a spokesman for Illinois' Bean, referred a reporter to a statement that said the bailout of an international company with more than $1 trillion in assets proved that insurance regulation is "too complex, too interconnected worldwide to allow the limited resources of state regulators to serve as the only option for oversight."

The lawmakers' criticism is the first time states have been blamed for some role in the financial collapse. Congress and other officials are rushing to stem the financial crisis before they turn to pinning down exactly what happened, who is responsible and how they can tighten regulation and oversight.

States have at least two financial responsibilities. They have regulated the insurance industry since it began in the 1860s. They also oversee the banking and securities industries, sharing responsibility with federal agencies.

The Bush administration in March released a proposal similar to the lawmakers' that would allow insurance companies a choice between being regulated at the state or federal level, the same dual system that banks have. The proposal to launch an Office of National Insurance was part of acomprehensive plan by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson to overhaul the nation's financial regulatory system. Congress is reviewing the plan.

Large insurance companies, many represented by the American Insurance Association, say the dual system would cut costs and the red tape of needing 50 states' approval. They say it also would allow them to offer more product choices at lower costs for homeowners', life and auto insurance. Health insurance is not part of the proposal.

Smaller firms, represented by the Property Casualty Insurers Association, prefer the current state-run system. If there were two regulators, they say, consumers and insurers alike would be confused about who oversees which of their policies and who is ultimately accountable if they have a dispute.

Consumer groups such as the Consumer Federation of America, and state officials fear insurers would cherry-pick the weaker regulator of the two.

"The oversight will really be lacking," said Sandy Praeger, the Kansas insurance commissioner and president of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners.

State insurance officials say they welcome a discussion about regulation as long as the industry and Congress do not link it to the AIG bailout.

"The government didn't bail out an insurance company," said Roger Sevigny, New Hampshire's insurance commissioner. "There weren't any insurance company subsidiaries of AIG in trouble. The government bailed out AIG and its financial holdings."

Ario and New York insurance commissioner Eric Dinallo are heading a working group of state insurance commissioners to oversee the sell-off of AIG's profitable insurance divisions to pay back the government's $85 billion loan over the next two years.

The sell-off presents no major regulatory hurdles and can be completed within the two-year term of the loan, said Dinallo, who has experience dealing with Wall Street as chief of the investment protection division of the New York attorney general's office under Eliot Spitzer. Spitzer named Dinallo insurance commissioner in April 2007.


Related Stories

    • Stateline Story
    September 30, 2008
    image description

    Cascading economic problems flowing from the crisis on Wall Street are forcing states to urgently redraw their financial blueprints for the rest of this year and next to cushion the impact of the credit squeeze, staggering paper losses for millions of ordinary Americans and soaring energy prices.

    • Stateline Story
    September 3, 2008
    image description

    Sept. 2, 2008,  6:45 p.m. EDTWith the exception of Gov. Sarah Palin's lawyer, it appears U.S. Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign staffers didn't ask key Alaskans what they thought about the first-term governor before naming her his running mate, the Anchorage Daily News, The New York Times and others report. If they had, McCain's people might have heard something like this: "She's a total beginner on national and international issues," the Anchorage Daily News wrote in an editorial, it's her "one huge weakness." "Most people would acknowledge that, regardless of her charm and good intentions, Palin is not ready for the top job," the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner wrote. "At the national level Palin will have to be much more than a fresh and pretty face. Even in the next 24 hours she'll need a boatload of schooling on a shipload of issues, and the savvy to convince others she really does know what she's talking about," The Juneau Empire wrote. The Juneau paper continues: "For Palin and her handlers to say she's reformed a corrupt political system in her first two years as Alaska's governor is a stretch at best. So is saying she boldly bucked the influences of big oil in the state, and that she flatly said no to Ketchikan's infamous 'bridge to nowhere,' that had been earmarked in the federal budget." The editorial writers also noted some serious political risks, among them an ongoing investigation into Palin's termination of Public Safety Commissioner Walt Monegan. Some charge Monegan was fired because he failed to bow to pressure from Palin's allies to fire a state trooper who had a messy divorce from Palin's sister.  "It's a gamble that could pay off big, or it could be a bust of unparalleled proportions," The Juneau Empire wrote of McCain's choice. The Fairbanks paper concluded, "It's clear that McCain picked Palin for reasons of image, not substance. She's a woman. She has fought corruption. She has fought the oil companies. She's married to a union member. These are portrayals for campaign speeches; they are not policy positions." But all three papers say the attention paid to Alaska is good for the state. And the Anchorage paper notes that Palin offers a compelling political image. "Palin is comfortable around guns and snowmachines and fishing boats. She has a son in the military, soon to be deployed to Iraq. Those nontraditional female credentials help communicate the toughness that Republicans want to project in their campaign. Her youth and good looks are a handy complement to McCain, who is the oldest first-time presidential candidate in U.S. history." -Christine Vestal Comments

    • Stateline Story
    February 6, 2008
    image description

    This column was published simultaneously by The Politico.It took a while for most of the presidential candidates to figure out that voters want "change" and action on a variety of issues that affect their lives. They might have gotten it sooner if they had noticed the way that many states, led by innovative governors, are moving forward in areas like health care, immigration and global warming.

    • Stateline Story
    April 6, 2006
    image description

    In a disturbing new trend, unelected federal regulators are usurping states' powers to protect their citizens, leaders of the National Conference of State Legislatures charged at a national gathering in Washington, D.C. Lawmakers said they are seeing a rise in use of the federal regulatory process to preempt state laws in areas of consumer protection, tort law and the environment.

    • Stateline Story
    March 10, 1999
    image description

    Emboldened by the booming economy and robust budget surpluses, state legislators in many parts of the country are making 1999 the year of the pay raise. Lawmakers in 10 states -- Maryland, Kentucky, Idaho, Illinois, California, New York, Colorado, Arizona, Massachusetts, and Connecticut -- will be getting fatter salaries this year. And five other states -- Kansas, Georgia, Arkansas, South Carolina and Tennessee are talking about paying their legislators more. One exception to the national trend is New Mexico, where lawmakers get no salary for their 60-day session, just a per diem. That per diem was just cut by $1, bringing it down to $124 per day. more