All that is required to get the legislation enacted, he said, is a bit of will power.

Many people looked to the Memorial Day recess as a kind of psychological deadline for the legislation. After that date, the thought was that Congress would be so tied up with other issues and so focused on the November elections that it would be hard to move a terrorism insurance bill.

But David Farmer, senior vice president of federal affairs for the Downers Grove, Ill.-based Alliance of American Insurers, said that artificial deadlines rarely apply to the Senate, where the legislation has been stalled.

"The old saying, ?It ain't over till it's over,' applies," Mr. Farmer said. "The only deadline that matters is when the 107th Congress adjourns."

Carl Parks, senior vice president of federal government relations for the National Association of Independent Insurers in Des Plaines, Ill., agreed. He acknowledged that time is short.

When the Senate returns from the Memorial Day recess on June 3, Mr. Parks said, there essentially will be only 13 weeks left in the session. Moreover, he said, during most of those weeks, the Senate will only meet for three days.

And in that time frame, Mr. Parks said, the Senate will have to deal with a variety of "must do" bills, including 13 appropriations bills, welfare reform, and possibly a prescription drug benefit under Medicare.

Nonetheless, Mr. Parks said, there is evidence of movement. The insurance industry, developers, labor unions, the White House and others are making a strong case about the economic consequences of failing to enact a bill, he added.

Julie Rochman, senior vice president of public affairs for the Washington-based American Insurance Association, noted that the terrorism bill is not like a traditional bill, which has to go through the committee process in the Senate. That is not the case with terrorism insurance legislation, she said, which will go right to the floor once an agreement is worked out.

Moreover, she noted that Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., just last week reiterated his intention to bring a bill to the floor. "This bill will still happen," she said.

Everyone agrees that the main bone of contention is whether to include tort reform to restrict lawsuits. Neither the proponents nor the opponents of tort reform have shown any willingness to compromise.

"It's like a game of chicken," said Monte Ward, vice president of federal affairs for the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies in Indianapolis. "I don't know that either side is willing to give up now."

But in addition to tort reform, there might still be some lingering questions among some senators about the need for a federal role at all.

Mr. Farmer said there is some continued confusion about the capacity of the industry and the amount of new capital coming into the market. Some seem to believe the market is responding, Mr. Farmer said, but the reality is dramatically different. The industry, he said, is making an intense effort to demonstrate the implications of failing to enact a bill.

Mr. Wood agreed, noting the recent determination by the New York insurance department, that while an act of terrorism may be excluded from insurance policies, a fire following the terrorist act is not. Moreover, he said, most jurisdictions seem to be following the New York department's interpretation.

He said he is now hearing from the brokerage community that there is a burgeoning availability crisis in the market for larger property risks. This is why a federal backstop is so necessary, Mr. Wood said.

Ms. Rochman added that the country is being told every day that there is a 100 percent chance of another attack.

She remains confident the bill will get done despite the passing of Memorial Day. "I think they can get this teed up right when they get back," she said.