Legal problems facing Rep. Michael Grimm, R-N.Y., named sponsor of the preferred House version of legislation reauthorizing the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) are likely to have "zero impact" on House action on the legislation, according to several insurance lobbyists.
Grimm's indictment in Brooklyn comes at a sensitive time for TRIA. The Senate Banking Committee is likely to take up its version of reauthorization legislation by mid-May. And key members of the House Financial Services Committee have asked the Government Accountability Office to prepare by May 15 a report outlining options for renewal that would include a study on the costs and benefits of the TRIA, along with the potential impact of scrapping the law.
Rep. Randy Neugebauer, R-Texas, chairman of the Financial Services panel's Housing and Insurance Subcommittee, one of the representatives who asked for the study, as well as Rep. Jeb Hensarling,R-Texas, are demanding that industry "have more skin in the game" in any renewal legislation. They want to put a conservative "stamp" on the program that could include legislation phasing out the program, or, eventually limiting it to events caused by nuclear, biological, chemical and radiation attacks.
At the same time, the consensus of industry lobbyists and congressional staffers is that there is considerable sympathy for Grimm in Washington and an apparent willingness to allow him to have his day in court.
That occurred even as Grimm Monday asked House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, to "remove him" from the House Financial Committee as he works through his problems.
Grimm was indicted Monday on 20 counts of fraud related to federal charges of underreporting payroll while running an Upper East Side restaurant. The probe started on allegations of illegal fund-raising. The indictment was unsealed in Federal District Court in Brooklyn.
In his letter to the speaker, Grimm asked to be removed from the committee until the case is resolved. Boehner spokesman Michael Steel confirmed the speaker's receipt of the letter.
"The Speaker believes Rep. Grimm's decision is appropriate under the circumstances," he said.
Grimm is the primary sponsor of "the TRIA Reauthorization Act of 2013," H.R. 508. It would extend the program for 5 years. Another House bill would extend it for 10 years, but that is seen as unrealistic.
As for the private reaction in Congress to Grimm's indictment, one lobbyist said he has talked to several colleagues, "and all are agreed that there is zero impact of this indictment on TRIA."
The lobbyist said "There also is a considerable amount of goodwill toward Grimm for his doggedness on that issue and others like flood insurance reform."
The lobbyist added that, "Nobody's happy to see this. This town is all too willing to throw Members in legal trouble under the bus. But Grimm's response of malicious prosecution rings true to many of us, with a lot of things not adding up.
"The politically expedient thing may be to try to force him out of office, but a lot of people in town think the guy deserves his day in court," the lobbyist said.
Meanwhile, the next step on TRIA is seen as action in the Senate Banking Committee within the next few weeks on S. 2244,
The current authorization runs out Dec. 31. The bill, with Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., the lead sponsor, would extend the program for 7 years.
It would increase the amount of losses insurers must cover before federal aid steps in, from the current $27.5 billion by $2 billion annually, until it reaches $37.5 billion in five years. Another change is to reduce the total amount the federal government will cover from the current 85% to 80% over the same 5-year period.
Specifically, under the current law, the first $27.5 billion of insured losses are either covered by insurers or recouped by the government through a surcharge on commercial insurance policies. That would rise to $37.5 billion under the new bill, which was written by the staff of the Senate Banking panel.
There is opposition within the insurance industry to the Schumer bill, which has broad support amongst Schumer's colleagues. But P&C industry officials are unhappy with the bill because it would phase-in an increase in the deductible for insurers from a catastrophic attack by 33% for each insurer over time.
But, the increased "skin in the game" is believed necessary to get it through the much more conservative House.
|Want to continue reading?
Become a Free PropertyCasualty360 Digital Reader
Your access to unlimited PropertyCasualty360 content isn’t changing.
Once you are an ALM digital member, you’ll receive:
- Breaking insurance news and analysis, on-site and via our newsletters and custom alerts
- Weekly Insurance Speak podcast featuring exclusive interviews with industry leaders
- Educational webcasts, white papers, and ebooks from industry thought leaders
- Critical converage of the employee benefits and financial advisory markets on our other ALM sites, BenefitsPRO and ThinkAdvisor
Already have an account? Sign In Now
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.