Trent Lott

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Brownback) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).

Mr. LOTT. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Brownback) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, let me inquire of the parliamentary situation. I believe, under the agreement, we will now go off this legislation, and we are ready to have some remarks with regard to the judicial nomination for the Southern District of Mississippi.

Mr. LOTT. So are we ready to proceed? I ask unanimous consent that I be allowed to begin my remarks in support of this nominee.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain) and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Voinovich).

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain) and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. Voinovich).

Mr. LOTT. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).

Mr. LOTT. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).

Mr. LOTT. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain). The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber desiring to vote?

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Brownback) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain). The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Are there any other Senators in the chamber desiring to vote?

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Brownback) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Brownback) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I have introduced a bill requiring insurance companies to provide a written ``plain English'' explanation on the front page of each new homeowner's policy. It is a commonsense, customer-friendly service that could benefit insurers, consumers, and taxpayers, I cosponsored a similar measure during the last Congress. The changes from last Congress are minimal. The new bill, called the Homeowners' Insurance Nondisclosure Act, deals exclusively with homeowners' policies, the area where most insurance coverage disputes arose following Hurricane Katrina. Homeowners' policies are notoriously long, complicated, and written in legalese. Even for homeowners who are familiar with legal documents like mortgages and deeds, insurance policies are hard to understand. That is because these policies are a contract between two parties, defined in precise legal terms. In the case of homeowners' policies, most consumers depend heavily on their agents for a good-faith explanation. Yet, unlike a mortgage or deed, insurance policies are a competitive product purchased by consumers. While we can't erase complex legalese from an insurance document, I do think it is reasonable for insurers to provide their paying customers with a simple, concise explanation of their policy. If passed, this bill would require insurers to place a basic description of what the policy will not cover in a ``noncoverage box,'' stating in bold letters, twice the size of the body of the policy text, all conditions, exclusions, and limitations pertaining to the individual policy's coverage. Consumer groups like this proposal, and insurers should, too. It requires nothing of insurance companies except a little extra ink, but it could save insurers, their customers, and taxpayers much more. One consumer group contends that had there been a plain English explanation of homeowners' policies before Katrina, American homeowners could have saved up to $65 billion in lost claims. Insurers and taxpayers could save an untold amount of time and money in averted negotiations and court costs associated with disputes. Using existing laws that govern unfair or deceptive practices, my bill would require the Federal Trade Commission, FTC, to enforce penalties against insurers who fail to comply with the noncoverage disclosure. Predictably, some big insurance companies are already criticizing this bill, so expect some in the insurance industry to show resistance even in the face of this commonsense, cost-effective, consumer-friendly requirement. Their reaction is typical of some in the insurance industry's overall response since Hurricane Katrina--to delay, distract, and distort, saying ``no'' even to the most simple, sincere solutions. That is what prompted lawmakers like U.S. Representative Gene Taylor and me to initiate this legislation and other major insurance reforms aimed at making insurance more dependable for the consumers who must buy it. I hope insurance companies will play by significantly different rules when the next Katrina-like disaster hits America--rules which better protect consumers. And for homeowners, some of those rules will be clearly displayed on the first page of every new homeowner's policy, written in plain English.

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi).

Mr. LOTT. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi).

Mr. LOTT. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi).

Mr. LOTT. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi).

Mr. LOTT. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi).

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).

Mr. LOTT. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).

Mr. LOTT. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).

Mr. LOTT. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).

Mr. LOTT. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi) and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).

Mr. LOTT

Mr. LOTT. The following Senators are necessarily absent: the Senator from Kansas (Mr. Brownback), the Senator from Wyoming (Mr. Enzi), and the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain).