Today is Election Day in the U.S. and there are a number of great battles going on across the country. But, you cannot be involved unless you vote - so, get out there!

My favorite election watch today (besides Casinos for Ohio) is the New York 23rd Congressional District. There, third-party Conservative Party candidate, Doug Hoffman, after a conservative Republican revolt, is the main candidate running against the Democrat. The original Republican candidate, Assemblywoman Dede Scozzafava, has come out in support of Democrat Bill Owens and against Hoffman.

That prompted some really virulent attacks on Scozzafava by the talk show folks, including Limbaugh who stated, "we can say that she's guilty of widespread bestiality. She has screwed every RINO in the country." Nice. I also love Doug Hoffman's website where he decries his opponent as a "Nancy Pelosi Democrat who has marshaled ACORN and the labor unions to get-out-the-vote on his behalf."

So, to tie all of this back to business insurance, I am pretty sure that Mr. Hoffman would not support efforts at health insurance reform should he be elected.

A Coastal Risk Symposium, hosted by the Travelers Institute takes place today at the Maritime Center in Charleston, S.C. with the purpose to "bring together business, government and community leaders to identify strategies and solutions to protect and insure the coastal region."

Part of the discussion will focus on the Resilient Coasts Blueprint prepared by the Heinz Center and Ceres. The Blueprint concisely states a proposed strategy to address risks posed by coastal development and the commercial insurance costs associated with such risks. It proposes cost effective and common sense solutions to mitigate risks and losses. For example, the introduction discusses how commercial customers of insurer FM Global experienced 85% less damage from Hurricane Katrina owing to the insurer's hurricane loss and prevention program. The claim is that the insurer's $2.5 million investment in pre-disaster prevention resulted in a $500 million savings in avoided losses. Pretty incredible.

The Plan encompasses adaptable building codes, research, and allowing premiums to reflect real risks to "communicate" the real cost to consumers along with other common sense proposals. If you or your business is among the over 50% of Americans who live and do business in a coastal region, the Blueprint is definitely worth taking a look at.

The Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) passed in 1993 extended legal rights and protections to employees caring for themselves or family members in times of medical need.

The FMLA can be difficult for both employees and employers to navigate. And, as with many laws, gaps in coverage cause result in situations that are fundamentally unfair or divergent from the purpose of the law. Unfortunately, our men and women serving in the military and their families were not explicitly covered by this pre-911 law.

Most Americans would assume that FMLA benefits would be extended to family members caring for injured servicemembers or that working spouses of servicemembers could attend to family needs during deployments. However, that was not always the case. Prior amendments (2008) to the law addressed some discrepancies, but the Defense Authorization Act for 2010, signed by the President on Wednesday, explicitly extends FMLA benefits to servicemembers and their families in the following situations:

• A next of kin can take up to twenty-six weeks of unpaid leave to care for a seriously injured or ill veteran (as long as the injury manifests within 5 years of discharge).
• Employees will be entitled to 12 weeks of unpaid leave to attend to "exigencies" when a family member is deployed overseas and is applicable to reservists, National Guard and regular active duty members.

Both clarifications are important. First, psychological, neurological and traumatic brain injuries often manifest years after service. Second, the 2008 amendments left a great deal of confusion regarding whether active-duty regular servicemembers and their family were covered in the event of a deployment. The Department of Labor adopted the position that "family members of those in the Regular Armed Forces" were not covered by the FMLA exigency provisions.

The Small Business Administration is urging victims of the Atlanta Georgia area flooding that occurred from September 18 through October 8, 2009, to complete and return applications for emergency assistance and loans by November 23, 2009.

The SBA is concerned that many business and home owners will not have settled with their insurance company by that time. Thus, the victim will not know what portion of the damage will be covered by insurance and what portion will need to be covered by a loan. The SBA is urging victims to complete and return the paperwork even if the amount of the insurance settlement is unknown. The SBA will make the full loan in return for reimbursement when settlement insurance proceeds are recovered.

Businesses and non-profit organizations of any size (in a specific geographic area affected by the flooding) may borrow up to $2 million to repair or replace damaged or destroyed real estate, machinery and equipment, inventory, and other business assets. Interest rates are as low as 4 percent for businesses with terms up to 30 years. Loan amounts and terms are set by the SBA and are based on each applicant's financial condition.

Business loan applications may be downloaded from www.sba.gov/services/disasterassistance. Applications may be returned to one of the Business Recovery Centers or mailed to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, Texas, 76155. Anyone unable to visit one of the Centers may obtain information and loan applications by calling the SBA's Customer Service Center at 1-800-659-2955 (or 1-800-877-8339 for the hearing impaired) Monday through Saturday, 8 a.m. to 9 p.m. EDT, or send an email to disastercustomerservice@sba.gov.

It is open enrollment season for many employer-sponsored health plans. 2010 figures to be an interesting year as employers look at ways to trim costs and provide for their employees. Employers provide such benefits to encourage retention and to retain high-value employees and open enrollment offers the employer the challenge of educating the employee about their benefits. I have an article with helpful tips for employers working through open enrollment.

Another factor this year is the effect of the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2008 (GINA). This Act will be in effect for 2010 health plans and prevents employers from seeking genetic information for purposes of determining health plan premium rates.

The challenge is that genetic information and "collection" are not clearly defined in the implementing regulations, rules, and law. A fact sheet is available from the Department of Labor to provide some basic guidance.

Open enrollment often involves the collection of information from employees and dependents. The concern is that some of the information requested will violate GINA exposing the employer to potential penalties. A full analysis of any particular circumstance is beyond this post, but employers should be aware of this new requirement and seek advice from their health insurer or legal counsel to insure open enrollment questionnaires do not violate GINA.

I visited Washington, D.C. over the weekend, arriving last Thursday. My thanks goes to the Office of Congresswoman Betty Sutton for arranging and guiding my kids on an excellent tour of the U.S. Capitol.

The weather was terrible, but it was exciting to be "inside the beltway" during a time when the health insurance reform debate is in full swing. It is easy to direct anger at "Congress" as a generic concept. However, when you walk the halls of the Longworth or Rayburn buildings where the Representatives work, it really puts a human face on federal government. Small offices, diligent staff, red badges, green badges, vending machines, security, and a House Floor that is really not as big as it looks on CSPAN, are all images that remain with me.

I'll share more of my visit and some pictures in future posts.

During press briefings last week, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs stated, in answer to questions about employment and job creation, that the White House may be looking at extending COBRA premium assistance past January 1, 2010. Mr. Gibbs stated, "the President -- some of the things the President is talking about there -- obviously there are a number of ideas that have been implemented that are coming to a legislative end, whether it is...extending certain unemployment benefits, whether we're looking at the notion of extending some of the COBRA benefits."

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 set up an assistance package to provide recently unemployed workers up to 65% of COBRA premiums to maintain health insurance. While popular with employees, the imposition of the program created an administrative headache and an unforeseen cost to employers seeking to survive by shedding payroll costs. The legislative subsidy will expire on January 1, 2010.

This means employees laid off after January 1, will not receive the 65% premium subsidy. And, with a 9.8% unemployment rate, this translates into many laid off workers unable to maintain health insurance coverage without some assistance. We'll keep an eye on this and report on any updates.

This is a site about business insurance, so this post may be a bit out of context.

There is a phishing/trojan e-mail scam going around. The e-mail (got one this morning) is very official looking. It claims to come from the IRS and claims that the recipient has "unreported" or "under-reported" income. It includes a link. It is a scam. Do not open the e-mail and do not open the link.

The IRS does not send out e-mails like this. The IRS has posted information about the scam on its site.

Unleashing a trojan or revealing vital information through such a scam could cause a serious disruption to your business through network downtime or fraud. A network risk policy is one way to protect your business against such scams. I had to tie this post into insurance somehow!

I am a sucker for insurance fraud stories. The bad guys come up with ingenious methods of committing fraud and I am often just stunned that someone comes up with some of these schemes. In most cases, the bad guys get caught...eventually. Fraud steals from every legitimate insured business. And, because these are bad guys and thieves, I enjoy reading about their capture and demise.

I found a website that will deliver such stories directly to my e-mail. The Coalition Against Insurance Fraud is a "national alliance of consumer groups." The Board of Directors and members and officers consist of a number of insurance companies and their representatives, the NAIC, law enforcement, and consumer groups. Its website is very informative and has a "tools" section that has a great deal of information for agent, adjusters, consumers, and business owners. But, I particularly liked having the top fraud stories of the day sent to my e-mail.

As a kid, prior to being old enough to drive, I remember sitting in the back seat of an old station wagon while adult relatives discussed Ohio moving to mandatory auto insurance. See, at the time, auto insurance was optional. That meant when some truly horrific accidents happened those involved could not pay their hospital and repair bills because the other guy was uninsured.

But, what I remember most, was hearing a claim by some insurance industry representative that auto insurance rates would decline by 25% or more if everyone was required to purchase auto insurance. I recall an uncle stating that claim was a lie. Seemed harsh. Harsh, but prescient. Ohio did pass mandatory auto insurance, rates never declined, and competition was non-existent.

Don't get me wrong, mandatory car insurance is a necessity and a great public policy decision. But, without a public option, or an extremely limited option that kicks in only after some pretty extreme circumstances, the poor cannot afford to drive to jobs increasingly far away and the law makes criminals out of the uninsured -- just look at your local court's docket.

Yesterday, encouraged by the leadership of a Senator who represents fewer Americans than reside in my county, the Senate Finance Committee rejected a public insurance option as part of health reform. This could be considered an effort at bi-partisanship, or one could look at who the Chairman's top contributors are and draw your own conclusions.

In the face of a personal mandate and requirement on business to carry health insurance, it is not reform for there not to exist a viable public option readily available and affordable. In my market, premium rates vary so dramatically that there is really no reason to the rates. One insurer requires over $800 per month, while comparable coverage (limited to a pretty decent HMO) exists for $242 per month including a dental plan. $800, and I am not in business. $242, and I am in business and could afford an employee and provide that health benefit. The public option needs to exist in order to allow people to actually afford this envisioned mandate.