As presidential candidates continue to criss-cross the country in hopes of nabbing their party's nomination, there may be room for one more name–mine.

And while it's true I have yet to determine if I will, in fact, accept the nomination of the Contingency Party for president of these United States, let it be known I have completed work on a comprehensive platform that clearly delineates the direction in which I believe our industry, and thus our nation, must turn.Friends, it is no longer enough to complacently sit by and act as if there are no divisions among us, no dissension within the ranks–that everything is, to use the vernacular, just peachy keen. Contrary to what my detractors claim, I do not raise these issues to sow discord, but rather to unite us as an industry behind certain inalienable principles. I repeat my offer to step aside in favor of any other candidate who will accept and espouse these two fundamental propositions:1. If it ain't fixable, break it!My good friend Bill Wilson, head guru of the IIABA Virtual University, recently sent out an e-mail requesting responses to several certificate of insurance issues he plans to address at an upcoming industry conference. Due to popular demand, Bill has recently taken the step of consolidating certificate information, including an extensive white paper covering all the key COI issues (including court cases), in its own section of the VU. To his efforts, I say "hurrah!" To the COI, I say, "Get thee to a nunnery!"Talk about beating a dead horse! For decades, my message has echoed a plethora of others–COIs are merely memorandums of current coverage, no more or less, essentially representing copies of the dec pages while saving a few trees. But has this convenient truth calmed the waters, soothed fevered brows and let us all declaim, "Move along now, nothing to see here?" Nay! The lowly, "noncoverage creating nor altering" COI has turned into the mouse that roared, the 800-pound gorilla, the elephant in the middle of the dinner table.In economic terms, we've created a COI "bubble." But rather than bursting it, denizens on all sides are pumping the bubble full of steroids, insisting the COI not diminish but take on an entirely new significance and power. Disclaimer language grows like mold in a damp forest. Mutations arise. Pages are added. If one follows the logical path of such discussions, soon the COI will be the policy, with the coverage forms enclosed just to make the envelope thicker: "For informational purposes only. Please see applicable Certificate of Insurance for specific coverage provisions, limits and effective dates."So let's just cut to the chase, kill the certificates and start sending all those certificate requesters a complete, fully certified copy of the policies. Naturally, they'll want some kind of executive summary of what the policies provide–which, if history is any indication, they'll use to hold the agent and carrier accountable for any misunderstandings or failures to meet the multitude of hold harmless and risk transfer provisions contained in the construction contracts. Happy to oblige, as soon as they provide us with an executive summary of their bloated, obtuse contractual requirements, which we'll then use to hold them and their legal counsels accountable for either overreaching or demanding the impossible and unreasonable.Thus, I declare: Enough of the duct taping and repainting the broken-down concept of the COI. Dust it and move on to something new.2. Seek first to understand, then to be understood. If our industry could wrap its brain around Stephen Covey's Fifth Habit of Highly Effective People, then, as Dr. Seuss would say, "Oh, the places we would go!"Every study on communications and every focus group of consumers drives home the same message: Failure to communicate clearly how one's product or service is meeting the wants and needs of buyers places the seller squarely on the path to perdition. For the vast majority of insureds, I suggest the only need we're clearly meeting is to get some mandate off their back. If all of the requirements regarding insurance purchases were removed–financial responsibility laws, lender/landlord, mortgage–I believe a majority of consumers would walk away from their insurance in a heartbeat.Witness the NFIP, which finds, seemingly to its surprise, that vast numbers of flood insurance purchasers jettison their coverage the moment they're notified they're no longer required to maintain it. Note that the flood risk hasn't changed, only the requirement. And what agent hasn't faced an insured who, when confronted by a price that seems a bit too stiff for current circumstances, wants coverage cut as low as possible? "Just give me what I need to meet the requirements," they proclaim. And we're appalled.We have to realize that these examples represent a classic difference in viewpoint. Unless an insured has had a claim that conclusively proved the value of their coverage, the typical consumer literally has no clue about the point of all this insurance. It's like trying to sell clothes in a world with no mirrors: How do you convince a person who thinks they look just fine stark naked? (As one pundit observed some years ago, "Every guy who hasn't shaved thinks he's Don Johnson, when he really looks like Yasser Arafat.")Consider the endless complexities of our policy language, and the resulting inability of an insured to connect it to his personal needs:o We tell them the best property coverage is a special "all-risk" form. While this form starts with a seemingly simple insuring agreement, it's immediately followed with a multi-page exposition of state-of-the-art complexity, wherein the carrier tries to take back literally every possibility of providing unintended coverage.o We use terms like "guaranteed" or "extended" replacement cost, and then wonder why the insured missed the limitations to only a given percentage of Coverage A–whatever that is.o We include coverage for watercraft under homeowners' liability, then proceed to load it up with length, horsepower and motor limitations that can only be fully resolved with a separate boat policy. Ditto for certain types of motorized land conveyances. Owned golf carts, anyone?o We add insureds to commercial policies like water, then try to take back the broadening of coverage provided in a myriad of ways, including the threat of outright voiding of coverage under certain property general conditions.I could go on, but no doubt you've been in CE seminars where the instructor filled days with a litany of coverage "secrets." Pity the poor insureds who actually pay for this stuff, yet are banned from our meetings where only the licensed and approved amongst us are granted access to the sacred mysteries. Let's vow to make this easier to grasp for all, and take advantage of the truth behind Covey's habit: Once we understand their world and how they see it, we can directly connect our solutions to their needs.Consider one real-world example. It's an accepted maxim in marketing that providing various levels of products and services allows consumers to make a sound choice as to what best fits their perceived needs and willingness to pay. There's a reason hotel chains run the gamut from Motel 6 to the Ritz-Carlton. Hotel marketers have learned folks have different opinions of what constitutes best value in overnight accommodations. And if a consumer chooses a Holiday Inn Express over a Hilton, no one questions that the consumer has the final say.Yet in our industry, we treat policies that offer lesser levels of coverage as if they were somehow unclean. Good heavens, agents are told in seminars, you can't write an HO-2 on a new single-family home in a nice neighborhood! You could get sued if the insured finds out you didn't write the best coverage available! If the insurance industry were running the hotel industry, we'd offer multiple levels of accommodations, then tell marketers it's a potential E&O if they don't sell everyone on the Four Seasons.But what if the insured would be perfectly happy with the coverage provided by an HO-2 or, God forbid, an HO-1 on that brand-new house? No, can't let them do that–they'll surely come after you later when they find out what they bought.Aha! "When they find out what they bought" says it all. Evidently they have no clue, and thus we have to protect them from themselves. Why do they have no clue? Because we've written the forms in Greek! And because we wrote the forms in Greek, they have to trust us. Then, when the claim isn't fully paid, the only possible reason is they shouldn't have trusted us, so we get sued: the agent for obviously selling them the wrong coverage, and the carrier under "contract of adhesion" for using Greek instead of the common tongue. And we're OK with this?So, my friends, unlike other candidates who snow you with endless position papers and complex solutions to little-understood issues, I am willing to stand on a mere two planks. Out with the obtuse and the obsolete and in with the clear and simple. I urge my fellow candidates to quit flip-flopping and make a firm commitment to these principles. If not, I will have no choice but to enter the race. And believe me, if that happens it won't be pretty.Let freedom ring!My name is Chris Amrhein, and I approved the content of this message. I'm sure you will, too.Chris Amrhein is an insurance educator and speaker with more than 30 years in the industry. He is also chief fun officer of www.insuranceisfun.com, where his newest book of insurance musings, "Yes, Virginia, There Is Insurance," is now available. Readers may contact Chris at [email protected].