|
|
|
Cliston Brown
|
|
Phone:
|
|
202-639-0497
|
|
|
|
cliston.brown@pciaa.net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PCI Testimony Calls On Senate To Address Systemic Risk
|
WASHINGTON—David
A. Sampson, president and CEO of the Property Casualty Insurers Association of
America (PCI), calls upon the Senate Banking Committee in prepared testimony to
focus on the issue of systemic risk. Sampson’s testimony, which is attached, is
being submitted for Tuesday’s Senate Banking Committee hearing, “Perspectives
on Modernizing Insurance Regulation.”
In his testimony, Sampson says that the
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 left gaps in systemic risk oversight, including
the fact that it did not cover investment bank holding companies such as Lehman
Brothers or Bear Stearns or other entities, such as derivatives firms.
“Not only did systemic risk oversight apply to a
too-limited universe of entities, but the focus was on the risk of other
affiliates to the bank and the systemic risk of the banks to the larger economy.
We now understand that systemic risk is not solely bank-centric,” Sampson said.
“(Former Federal Reserve Chair Alan) Greenspan now admits that the risk models
created were inadequate, particularly to guard against irrational systemic
behaviors. And the need for institutionalized and systematic information
sharing envisioned at the time was never adequately realized. These are the
precise gaps that need to be addressed, and that can be fixed with minimal
unintended consequences using the existing regulatory structure, freeing
Congress to then move onto the next phase of carefully and thoughtfully
reviewing larger regulatory restructuring issues.”
PCI continues to advocate that Congress must
address these crucial gaps rather than focusing on the decades-old debate over
state-vs.-federal insurance regulation, which is too complex and divisive at
this time to be solved quickly. Sampson also argues that Congress should not
confuse systemic risk with solvency issues, which are separate and distinct and
should be bifurcated. The role of a solvency regulator is to prevent company
failure, while the role of a systemic risk overseer is to allow company
failure.
“Solvency regulation is conducted by the primary
functional regulator for each subsidiary to avoid its failure,” Sampson said.
“Systemic risk regulation is conducted by the consolidated umbrella supervisor
to control the contagion affect of subsidiary failures when they occur.”
To this end, PCI advocates the creation of a
systemic risk overseer rather than the creation of a large bureaucracy or
restructuring scheme.
“Solving the systemic risk crisis does not
require a vast new bureaucracy or radical restructuring of our regulatory
system,” Sampson said. “It does require plugging the loopholes and refocusing
the existing system of holding company systemic risk regulation that in
hindsight was clearly too limited. Congress can ensure that a strengthened
systemic risk overseer and information sharing system is neither duplicative
nor optional, and works in tandem with the existing primary functional
regulators.”
PCI has addressed the crucial issue of systemic
risk in a two-page informational paper it provided to members of Congress and
Congressional staff. This paper, along with numerous other resources on this
important topic, can be found online at www.pciaa.net/reg-reform.
PCI is composed of more than 1,000 member
companies, representing the broadest cross-section of insurers of any national
trade association. PCI members write over $176 billion in annual premium, 39.5
percent of the nation’s property casualty insurance. Member companies write
43.8 percent of the U.S. automobile insurance market, 29.6 percent of the homeowners
market, 32.8 percent of the commercial property and liability market, and 38.4
percent of the private workers compensation market.
###