Texas 2009 - 81st Regular

Texas House Bill HR798

Introduced
3/13/09  
Refer
3/16/09  
Report Pass
3/24/09  
Enrolled
5/21/09  

Caption

Expressing opposition to any federal legislation that would create an optional federal charter for insurers.

Impact

The resolution points out that allowing insurers to opt out of state regulations could have significant negative repercussions. It emphasizes that state lawmakers possess a unique understanding of their constituents' needs, enabling them to respond effectively to changing market conditions. An optional federal charter is portrayed as a potential threat to consumer protection, possibly allowing insurers to evade laws that have been designed to safeguard policyholders and ensure financial solvency.

Summary

HR798 is a resolution expressing opposition to any federal legislation that would create an optional federal charter for insurers. The resolution highlights the importance of state insurance regulators, who have been providing effective consumer protection and industry oversight for over 150 years. Proponents of the federal charter argue that it would allow insurers to operate more flexibly; however, the resolution counter-argues that this would undermine the rigorous protections and tailored regulations that states can offer based on local market needs.

Contention

One major point of contention mentioned in the resolution revolves around tax revenue implications. The measure suggests that implementing a federal charter could ultimately remove around $14 billion in premium taxes and fees from state budgets, which are crucial for funding state services. Furthermore, the document warns that a dual regulatory system would likely lead to confusion and create a more complex regulatory framework, potentially promoting inefficiencies in the industry.

Final_notes

The resolution also references the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1945, which affirms the states' roles as primary regulators of insurance. It argues that there is no compelling reason to alter this established regulatory framework, suggesting that the proposed federal legislation is not only unnecessary but may also complicate the current system of regulation that has historically functioned effectively.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

No similar bills found.