NEXT MONTH, agents and brokers will head to Washington, D.C., for their annual spring lobbying of legislators as part of conferences conducted by the Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America and the National Association of Professional Insurance Agents. In advance of these events, agents and brokers crossed a major 2005 legislative objective off their list when President George W. Bush last month signed into law the Class Action Fairness Act. The act, widely hailed as landmark legislation, will move class-action suits larger than $5 million, with certain exceptions, to the federal judiciary from state courthouses.

“Enactment of the Class Action Fairness Act is an important first step in creating needed legal reform in America,” Robert A. Rusbuldt, IIABA's CEO, said in a press release. “This bill will strike a balance, in class-action cases, between the needs of consumers and small businesses.”

The American Insurance Association was equally pleased. “President Bush's signature puts class action reform across the finish line,” said Melissa Shelk, vice president of federal affairs for the American Insurance Association, “making winners of businesses held hostage by frivolous lawsuits and consumers who have received nothing more than worthless settlement coupons.”

In general, proponents of the act say it will put an end to plaintiff attorneys' venue shopping and place lawsuits before what they believe will be a higher caliber of judges and juries. They also point out that the cases will be heard by justices who are appointed for life and therefore insulated from the political pressures that can be exerted on judges in those states where they are elected.

That point certainly resonates with me. Many, many moons ago, I worked for a newspaper in Madison County, Ill., (just across the Mississippi from St. Louis), which tort-reform advocates have branded the nation's No. 1 “judicial hellhole.” I saw first-hand the fairly transparent effort of a major plaintiff attorneys' firm to finance the defeat of a judge it didn't want hearing cases in the county courthouse. The importance of such venues to plaintiffs attorneys was underscored by the fact that 19 class-action suits were filed in Madison County in the week before the Class Action Fairness Act was signed into law, according to the Wall Street Journal. That brought the total for the year to 23, compared with five for the same period in 2004. A similar flurry of filings was seen in Miller County, Ark., and no doubt in many other litigation-friendly county seats.

None of this is to say that class-action lawsuits don't play an important role in society. It was in Madison County, as a matter of fact, that a jury in 2003 ordered Philip Morris to pay $10.1 billion dollars (in a verdict being appealed) for allegedly misleading smokers about the risks of light cigarettes. While one can argue about the size of such eye-popping awards and about smokers' responsibilities for their own health problems, I think it is fair to say there's a consensus that reducing smoking is in society's interests. To the degree that it has promoted that interest, I think the Philip Morris case and others like it have served a useful purpose. But I also think that purpose will be much more equitably, dispassionately and sanely served by moving these cases into the federal courts.

It's hard to say how much of an impact the Class Action Fairness Act will have on insurance. While it reforms one facet of the tort system, it makes no substantive changes to tort law itself, or to the size of potential awards or plaintiffs attorneys' fees. Still, removing class-action cases from state (really county) venues that consistently have stuck it to corporate defendants could lead to lower costs, both for insurers and insurance buyers. Robert Hartwig, chief economist at the Insurance Information Institute, told the Wall Street Journal as much and added that the act also could encourage insurers to offer higher limits for certain liability policies. Regardless, the act marks a big step forward

Full agendas

Despite passage of the Class Action Fairness Act, plenty remains on the agendas for PIA's Federal Legislative Summit, which will be held on April 7, and IIABA's National Legislative Conference, which follows on April 20-22. Spurred on by concerns over the future of contingency commissions, agents and brokers are expected to turn out in large numbers for the events. IIABA's block of rooms at its main conference hotel has been sold out for weeks, and the overflow is being booked into a nearby facility. Senate Majority Whip Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), will speak at the event. Speaker arrangements at PIA's function had not been finalized at the time this was written. (Registration information is available at www.pianet.org and www. iiaba.org.) Among the issues that agents and brokers are expected to discuss with legislators are the following:

oThe extension of the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act. The act, which gives insurers a backstop for terrorism losses, is set to expire on Dec. 31. Last month, legislation that would extend TRIA for two years was introduced in the Senate.

o The State Modernization and Regulatory Reform Act. Last fall a “discussion draft” of the act was introduced in a House committee. Among other things, the draft called for the adoption of standardized agent licensing and the creation of a federal regulatory oversight panel for the insurance industry. It's also thought possible that provisions regulating contingency commissions could be added to the proposed legislation, although for now the contingency debate largely remains a state issue addressed by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners and the National Conference of Insurance Legislators.

o Other tort reform efforts. The Class Action Fairness Act is only the first of several tort reform efforts agents would love to see enacted. Others address such issues as medical malpractice and asbestos litigation.

Special Reports /

What's Going On: Agents get a win as they head into lobbying season

Related Stories

Recommended For You