Michael Moore's Sicko is getting impressive reviews across theboard. If you're not familiar with it (or been living under a rockfor the last month or so), the movie takes on the health-careindustry in Moore's typical scathing documentary approach bypointing out the failures of American health insurance companies,pharmaceutical companies, and the politicians who have been paidmillions to seemingly do their bidding.

Gets one to thinking what it would be like if Moore followed upwith some type of expos? on the P&C insurance industry (SickoToo?). He could go down to the Gulf Coast and talk to some of thethousands of people who thought they had full coverage (includingwind and flood) only to find out after the fact that the carriernever fully explained their policy limitations. I can see it now;Moore flashes the roundabout “if-then” exclusions on screen thatare so filled with legalese and circuitous language thatpolicyholders would rather opt for a weekend stay at Abu Ghraibthan attempt to decipher.

While he's in the South, he could meander over to the SunshineState and check in with the many who, in addition to theirhurricane-damage woes, are in many cases also contending withopaque sinkhole coverage. As the camera shows a home swallowed bythe ground, Moore might mutter a rhetorical question to theaudience, “If homeowners' insurance doesn't pay for this, what doesit pay for?”

Note that these are not claim issues, but coverage issues.Adjusters can do only so much in these catastrophe settlements. Thesad part is that the carriers are seldom called to task after thefact. What good would it do then? After the dust settles and thewater is gone, there's the possibility of litigation, but that'sexpensive and the larger carriers will fight tooth and nail incourt. It all sounds like perfect fodder for Moore.

Given Moore's valid comparisons to successful health-caresystems operating in Canada, France, Great Britain, and Cuba, itwould be interesting to see what he would uncover in the P&Carena if he compared the U.S. claim industry to other countries. Doother countries invite controversy and conflicts of interest bycontracting to use insurance companies' adjusters in times ofcatastrophes to determine whether storm damage is wind orflood-related, like the National Flood Insurance Program does?Would Moore uncover a better way?

The health-care industry is now on notice. Insureds are “mad ashell” and aren't going to take it much longer. If the same attitudewas fostered in the P&C market, what kind of changes wouldcarriers have to make to avoid being cast in the same light? Andwould any of it alleviate the ulcer-ridden stomachs ofadjusters?