The fall of California Insurance Commissioner Chuck Quackenbush was painful to watch. There was no quick, quiet exit. It was a drawn-out, three-month ordeal documented and driven day by day by the Los Angeles Times and the California Legislature. You felt like an interloper watching each day as the allegations and speculation mounted, creating a heap that even a gifted politician could not move.

It was never a secret that Chuck Quackenbush had higher political aspirations, perhaps as a U.S. Representative or Senator, and it felt a bit odd to watch his career crumble around him. Most of us are afforded privacy when there’s crumbling.

You’ll find the sundry details of this story on the news page. But the Quackenbush debacle begs a discussion of elected vs. appointed insurance commissioners. Quackenbush raised the issue himself at one point, saying his position should not be elected. He said it almost like it was an excuse, that none of this was his fault but rather the fault of partisan politics and an ill-crafted design.

Quackenbush is not the only elected commissioner. Three other elected commissioners come immediately to mind: Bill Nelson of Florida, Deborah Senn of Washington and Jim Brown of Louisiana. Both Nelson and Senn are currently running for positions in the U.S. Senate.

And what three commissioners got wholly involved in settling Holocaust claims? Quackenbush, Nelson and Senn. Brown is still defending himself in what he termed a “political drive-by shooting” during his dirt-flinging re-election campaign last fall.

That Quackenbush took advantage of his position by continually putting his face on television shouldn’t surprise anyone. Almost every press release on the Washington State Department of Insurance site begins something like, “Washington Insurance Commissioner Deborah Senn said today…” with a mug shot opposite the release. Nelson and Brown do the same.

But is using the office of insurance commissioner to get somewhere higher wrong on its most basic level? (Not including illegal acts, of course.) Doesn’t it mean that the official is beholden to the consumer rather than the parties being regulated? That’s the design as envisioned by post-Reconstruction policymakers. That’s why in Texas, we have an elected railroad commissioner, comptroller and attorney general.

I’m not saying elected insurance commissioners are the way to go. Just pointing out the reasons for having them. Can an appointed commissioner be a consumer advocate? Of course. Will an appointed commissioner escape the politics that seem to swirl around elected regulators? No. In fact, until recently in Texas, the executive staff at TDI was changing with the political seasons. A two-term governor helped in that arena, as did Gov. Bush’s decision not to oust all of the TDI employees hired during former Gov. Ann Richards’ tenure.

Quackenbush obviously did something wrong, either in lack of supervision or on a personal level. Even if he is innocent of the criminal charges, he was in charge, a precarious place on many levels. His demise should be considered a touchstone for the conversation on elected versus appointed insurance regulators.

Can Quackenbush be resurrected? I hear Henry Cisneros is being courted by the Texas Democrats.

Topics Texas Washington