One of the more outspoken consumer advocates–Birny Birnbaum, executive director of the Center for Economic Justice–is packing it in as an NAIC-funded representative, complaining the deck is stacked against him and his colleagues because of the overwhelming advantage insurers enjoy in terms of resources.

The fact that the National Association of Insurance Commissioners even pays to have consumer advocates attend its national meetings demonstrates NAIC's commitment to keeping the public involved when formulating national regulatory policies.

Still, I can appreciate how overwhelmed Mr. Birnbaum and his colleagues must feel, as their little band of Davids is hard put to match the lobbying firepower of insurance industry Goliaths.

"Insurers spend tens of millions of policyholder-supplied funds to lobby for insurer interests. In contrast, consumer interests have few such resources," Mr. Birnbaum complained at NAIC's national meeting last month in San Francisco.

"The imbalance is on display at the NAIC, where over a thousand industry representatives–many of whom are former insurance regulators–are paid to present and press the industry viewpoint during and between NAIC meetings," he added.

Meanwhile, Mr. Birnbaum pointed out, there are only a handful of consumer representatives, most of whom are volunteers. "The current consumer participation budget at the NAIC is $120,000–less than the salary of one industry lobbyist," he lamented.

Still, I was disappointed to hear about Mr. Birnbaum leaving the field of battle, and not just because he "gives good quote," as journalists say. I believe it's better to be a player than a spectator as broad regulatory policy is made–out of sight, out of mind, if you will.

Be that as it may, Mr. Birnbaum made a number of intriguing suggestions on how to level the playing field when it comes to making sure the views of consumers are adequately heard. Mr. Birnbaum would:

o Create a Public Insurance Council, with 50 cents from each insurance policy sold collected by states to fund a public or quasi-public agency.

o States could pass laws establishing consumer organizations that would be authorized to enclose a one-page pamphlet with insurance policies that would "describe the organization and invite consumers to join for an annual membership."

o Give consumers a veto over whether their premiums could be used for insurer lobbying. "Consumers should be presented with a choice: 'Do you want any part of your premium to go to insurers for government relations, to a publicly chartered consumer organization for consumer advocacy, or neither?'" suggested Mr. Birnbaum.

The question is, what would a Public Insurance Council do? Would it have any regulatory authority, or simply represent the consumer's viewpoint?

And who would that "consumer" be? The Risk and Insurance Management Society already ably represents the interests of corporate insurance buyers. Would this new entity only represent individual consumers?

Would it be limited to personal lines, or would small-business owners–who often depend on their insurance agents to serve as their risk managers–gain a voice via this new council as well?

How would policy be set by such a council? Indeed, the biggest complaint I hear about today's consumer advocates is that no one elected them to represent anybody. Who sets their agenda? Who are they accountable to?

How would such an entity be created–by the NAIC, unilaterally? That could be dicey. Or by Congress, as part of its overhaul of financial services regulation–perhaps as a subdivision of the widely discussed Federal Insurance Office?

What do you folks think?