Editor’s Note: In agents’ hands

More members of Congress hail from backgrounds as state legislators than any other occupation. This means that the exposure of these former state-turned-federal lawmakers to insurance issues typically involved auto insurance, according to the powerful U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., who chairs the House Financial Services Committee that considers insurance legislation in Washington, himself a former state representative. Given that few issues are more politically volatile than auto insurance, the number of Congress men and women eager to revisit insurance issues once they get to Washington is not high, quips Frank.

In remarks before the annual meeting of the Property Insurers Association of America recently, Frank acknowledged that insurance is perhaps one of the issues members of Congress know the least about, in part because so much of the oversight occurs at the state rather than federal level. (Note to advocates of an optional federal charter: not many in Congress are looking to change that — no sane Washington politician is excited about returning to the days of fielding complaints about auto or home insurance.)

Which is Frank’s way of saying that members of Congress need and value the input they receive from industry executives and lobbyists. Frank has a reputation as a smart, well-prepared and busy legislator, and one who requires that those who call on him be accurate and “don’t over-argue their case” — or they are likely to feel the edge of his sharp wit for wasting his time.

Frank encouraged insurance executives to contact their own House and Senate members whom, he maintained, would welcome the opportunity to learn from their expertise on insurance. While there may be differences of opinion, Frank’s suggestion is that the involvement matters and can make a difference in what Congress does.

Such contact is even more influential, he says, than money. Frank contends that while political contributions are necessary and nice, they are not as important to most Washington politicians when it comes to positions on issues as people think. Rather, the real currency of value is the solid counsel that experts can provide on a subject.

Of course many insurance executives and agents are already doing what Frank suggests, building relationships with their elected representatives and offering their counsel.

Indeed few, if any, special interests have as much influence in Congress as do independent agents. Agents have what Frank terms “an outgoing culture” much like real estate agents and very much unlike bankers. Agents are everywhere — in every district, at every Rotary meeting, on every community board. They are “most effective, energetic, and numerous,” in the words of the Massachusetts Democrat.

Because of their numbers, energy and expertise, agents influence much of what happens — and doesn’t happen— in Washington on insurance legislation. “No major change is going to come over the opposition of the agents,” Frank says.

The strength of the voice of independent agents in politics is not new. But as Congress looks to renew the federal terrorism insurance program, revamp the flood program, consider a national catastrophe plan and perhaps reshape insurance regulation, it is reassuring to be reminded that not only are agents still providing counsel to lawmakers in Washington but also, as Frank acknowledges, that advice is heeded.