The Marsh and Roundtable comments were likely prompted by signs that the insurance industry/business lobby efforts to persuade Congress to act promptly on renewing the legislation were flagging.

Momentum for renewal has been reduced because most legislators don't want to be out in front of the Bush administration, which has ignored business entreaties for quick renewal action.

The House Financial Services Committee has signaled that it won't take up a renewal bill until after the administration determines its policy on the measure.

Presidential support is deemed crucial to TRIA renewal, and the White House and Treasury Department have made it clear through recent comments on the measure that nothing will happen until the mandated Treasury Department report on the bill's effect on the marketplace over the last several years is completed and sent to the White House. By law, the report must be submitted to Congress by June 30.

Several sources this week confirmed that while the House Financial Services Committee will likely hold a hearing sometime in May on the proposal, no legislation will be introduced until the White House signals whether it will support renewal.

The legislation expires Dec. 31, but both insurers and companies want it renewed quickly because a provision in most contracts says terrorism coverage would terminate Dec. 31 if the legislation is not extended.

In a letter to House and Senate leadership, signed by members of the Roundtable, Steve Bartlett, president and chief executive officer, acknowledged that while TRIA may not be the long-term answer to how policy holders, insurers and the government deal with terrorism coverage, it has helped to prevent the economic dislocation that could have occurred post 9-11.

"We recognize that TRIA is not working perfectly for all stakeholders," Mr. Bartlett said. "However, it keeps policyholders from bankruptcy, insurers from insolvency and taxpayers from paying the full cost of a catastrophic terrorist event. It is essential that TRIA be extended for a reasonable period of time," he added.

Comment from Marsh is unusual. The company rarely takes a public stand on federal political issues.

The Marsh report said that the purchase of terrorism insurance in 2004 varied significantly, depending on a company's total insured values and location. One trend noted by Marsh is that smaller companies, those with total insured values of less than $100 million, were less likely than larger companies to purchase terrorism coverage.