Our November/December cover expresses a yearning for my image of the press of the past and a more divergent expression of thought. Timely perhaps, as I have to admit I hate election years now. The two year cycle is bad enough, but the four year cycle is the worst by far. I don’t have overwhelming optimism for a much brighter future regardless of the November results. To be completely honest I believe that “enlightened” self interest rules both parties. Sounds so much better than “They’re all crooks.” But I still vote!
Watching any network television program inflicts political ads that leave me feeling like the Malcolm McDowell eyes-forced-open scene in A Clockwork Orange. Creative editing, half truths and inflammatory polarizing rhetoric abound, alongside extrapolations of votes for, or most often against, legislation without any context whatsoever. Maybe just maybe it was a poorly drafted crappy bill with too much ambivalent language, or had a whole bunch of unrelated ridiculously expensive malarky tacked on to try to sway obstinate but for sale votes. Or it would have hurt the many to appease the few… Yet it comes out as “he/she hates you and everything ‘we’ should stand for.” Although I may reliably be disappointed in at least some results, when it’s all over I claim a certain sort of kinship with the man encountered on the roadside hitting himself on the head with a hammer over and over again. When asked, “Why are you doing that?” The man sagely replies, “Cause it feels so good when I stop!”
Our industry has sure seen its share of adverse legislation proposed, much of it either thoughtlessly or deliberately ignorant of the enormous good our industry provides to Americans. Two grandmas get fleeced by crooks and in the resultant emotional kneejerk our entire industry is painted as evil in the mainstream media, and the rest of America is potentially faced with increased difficulty in obtaining products that benefit them. And of course there is the periodic money grab for the inside buildup on insurance products and the treatment of various insurance products in, particularly state, estate taxes. If I were in western Washington State, and needed to go to the coast of California, I would travel east to Idaho, south to Nevada, and then west to Cali. I don’t care how many dirt roads it would take to avoid “That State.” (That said, I do love much about the non-tax-policy-involved warm hearts in Oregon and will miss six wonderful people I know there.)
I seem to have gotten a bit far afield in my attempts to avoid offending readers affiliated with either party. My personal belief is that the vast majority of Americans want our country to prosper and for those in need to be aided. I think that where citizen thought seems to differ most significantly isn’t idealistically, but rather in the means to those ends. I also believe that being firmly entrenched in polarizing positions kills any sort of ultimately helpful compassionate compromise. That said, as I was once advised by a reader in Cali, let me swerve back into “My Lane.”
So what do we face as an industry going forward? If the stock market declines it will affect us. If interest rates remain high or increase it will also affect us. If inflation rises it will affect the abilities of less privileged Americans to afford protection for their families. If the mainstream media, and politicians, continue to target and demonize “Insurance Companies” it will affect us and the public’s willingness to purchase our products. While we in the industry, including guys like me scavenging at the fringes, know that most often the target of attacks are either health insurance or property/casualty companies, Suze Orman and her ilk notwithstanding, the fact remains that the more frequently the term “Insurance” is drummed into the consciousness of those perhaps less informed, less willing, or less farsighted, in a negative light, it breeds and reinforces an obstinance to act to protect their families. It is a damned shame that there isn’t a compulsion for pundits, politicians and personal injury attorneys to specify the type of insurer they are targeting…that’s some legislation I could definitely get behind! No widow ever complained about a life insurance claim check other than wishing it had been for more. It’s irresponsible at best and collaterally harmful to lump all “Insurance” together haphazardly (although I admit I do it freely and with a clear conscience with politicians).
So where does that leave me? Professionally and personally conflicted regarding interest rates for one… I fancy a move to North Carolina to be closer to my wonderful in-laws, but trading a three percent mortgage for a six or seven percent one cows me immeasurably. (Additionally the P&C coverage, particularly anywhere near the coast, where they live, is daunting to say the least.) But higher interest rates generally benefit our industry and attract more customers (and advertisers). So, at present, I’m looking to Powerball, becoming demonized as a one percenter, and missing the more widespread divergence of thought expressed by a more “free” press.[SPH]
