Mr. McRaith said the states would then, through legislative action, join the commission, and through the commission, states would develop uniform regulatory standards in certain subject matters. States would then be responsible for implementing and enforcing the standards.

However, Mr. McRaith said if a state fails to comply with the national standard, there would be federal preemption through a federal insurance office.

In that case, the draft explains, "The OII/ONI [Office of Insurance Information/Office of National Insurance] will receive authority to promulgate rules based on the commission standards." Those rules would preempt any conflicting state laws or regulations, the draft notes.

NAIC President and New Hampshire Insurance Commissioner Roger Sevigny said the NAIC developed this draft because it wanted to be proactive rather than reactive regarding regulatory modernization. With Congress showing interest in insurance regulation, Mr. Sevigny said the NISC proposal allows the states to remain the functional regulator of insurance.

State legislators, however, said they are not happy with the proposal as it stands.

Kentucky State Representative Bob Damron, D-Nicholasville, said there is no solid, bi-partisan commitment from Congress to regulate insurance, and that the NAIC should join with other state-based groups in opposing federal intervention altogether rather than seeking a partnership with the feds through NISC.

"You cannot let the federal government get involved in this process and then expect them to let you run the show," he told regulators.

He also said the NAIC risks a rebellion among state legislators by advocating a plan that takes away their legislative authority.

Rhode Island State Rep. Brian Patrick Kennedy, D-Hopkinton, speaking on behalf of the National Conference of State Legislators, furthered that point by stating that the proposal asks legislatures to approve NISC standards, but then once approved, the legislatures could not exercise their "day-to-day legislative clarity" over the lines of insurance under jurisdiction of the commission.

He also criticized the federal preemption provision, declaring, "Advocating for federal preemption of sovereign states that choose not to participate is unacceptable, and NCSL will oppose it."

NAIC regulators are seeking an equal role for themselves with commissioners at the federal level, but they are doing it "at the direct expense of state legislators," said Mr. Kennedy.

Insurance industry representatives expressed support for the goal of regulatory modernization and uniformity, but took issue with parts of the NISC proposal. Deirdre Manna, of the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America (PCI), said NISC should not be able to implement national standards that have not first been adopted by a certain number of states.

Bob Detlefsen, of the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, echoing Rep. Damron's concerns, said the idea that the NAIC could imbed within the federal government a commission of regulators, and have the fed insurance office do the bidding of the commission, "seems a little unrealistic."

Mr. McRaith closed the session by questioning whether some of the loudest critics have read through the draft. Earlier in the meeting, he said after reading letters received in response to the draft, "clearly there is either a factual or conceptual misunderstanding of the proposal as framed."

The draft can be accessed at http://www.naic.org/committees_ex_regulatory_modernization_sg.htm.