I'm starting to think itmight be a good idea for states, cities and other municipalentities to have their risk managers elected by the voting public.

With government risk managers gathered in Orlando this week forthe Public Risk Management Association's annual meeting (www.primacentral.org), I figuredthe time is right to run this idea up the flag pole and see ifanyone salutes.

After all, we elect all kinds of cockamamie positions, fromjudges to attorneys general to, yes, insurance commissioners. Whynot have a person responsible for the public welfare directlyaccountable to the people they serve?

I know, to make the post of public risk manager an electedposition could politicize the job. But that might not be a badthing.

One of the problems with public risk management is that it doesnot always have a high profile within local government. Indeed,PRIMA's new president–Laura Peterson, state risk manager forNebraska–told NU in an exclusive interview with our own CarolineMcDonald that to be effective, public risk managers must make theircase to those with the authority to make things happen. Such powerbrokers differ from one locale to another–it could be the governor,or the legislature's appropriations staff, or others within thebureaucratic maze. (For the full story, go to http://www.property-casualty.com/Issues/2010/June-7-2010/Pages/Public-Risk-Managers-Need-Access-To-Power-Brokers.aspx.)

The point is, Ms. Peterson says risk managers need a seat at the“decision-making table” to do their jobs most effectively.

Having a popular mandate to enhance safety for public sectorworkers and the local citizens they serve could give risk managersall the political capital they need to become a power broker intheir own right. It certainly would raise the position's profile,and perhaps guarantee more press coverage–for better or worse.

In many states we elect judges, who have the power to sendpeople to jail. Wouldn't it be nice to elect people who have thepower to protect us? Who are responsible for the safety of ourpublic infrastructure? Who see to it that our public sectoremployees are working in a safe environment?

Those who do a good job controlling risk and cost, who promotesafety and prevent worst-case scenarios, would be rewarded withreelection. Those who don't get the job done would be voted out,replaced by someone who knows their position depends on how wellthey mitigate the potential for loss.

Some would no doubt see the risk manager post as a steppingstone to higher office, just as some elected insurancecommissioners have behaved. But so what? Again, it's an addedincentive to do a great job–to have a solid record on which torun.

Of course, campaign financing would be a problem. I can see theinsurance companies and brokers lining up now to contribute to arisk manager's campaign fund, thereby setting up potentialconflicts of interest and charges of corruption down the line. Apublicly-financed campaign would be best, though unlikely.

On the other hand, carriers and brokers would also have to dealwith public sector buyers who have their own independent powerbase. That could garner more respect on the part of the vendorsthey deal with, and give them more leverage in negotiations forterms, conditions, price and service.

What do you folks think?