If Only The NASD Was Held To A Legal Standard

The big difference between the lawsuit mentioned in a previous post, and the NASD propaganda campaign against indexed annuities, is that the lawsuit requires that eventually the accusers prove their claims with specific evidence. A lawsuit also allows that the insurance side has the complete opportunity to disprove the false accusations, all in an officially supervised public forum with equal rules applied to both sides. The judicial system is supposed to listen to all evidence without bias and without prejudice, and then rule based upon the factual presentation of each party made in the scheduled sessions. Courts specifically attempt to remove all influence of rumor, gossip, and pubic opinion from judicial decisions. After each side gets their say, there is an official determination by a judge or a jury, and if there have been false accusations and the court finds so, this ruling can set aside those false claims and their negative effects once and for all.

Unfortunately, unlike these ambitious attorneys, by choosing to wage their battle in the media, the NASD has found a gap whereby they are not officially being held accountable for their misinformation and false accusations. They are left unchecked when they overstep their authority and intrude into the insurance industry and make inappropriate criticisms of indexed annuities. Despite the best attempts of the insurance companies, and other annuity friendly voices to clear up these misstatements or correct erroneous information, this kind of propaganda attack being used by the NASD forces annuity proponants, the issuing insurance companies, as well as the state insurance commissioners, into a defensive posture. Years of conditioning has made the public weary of defensive positions and caused them to doubt the sincerity of someone who has to constantly fight to defend their dignity and honor. In spite of our legal precident for innocence UNTIL proven guilty, in the court of public opinion, it seems to always work the other way.

When you have a carefully orchestrated effort, such as being put forth by the NASD to steal all credibity from an entire industry sector, then you have an unfair fight that would probably benefit from the balanced and structured processes of our courts. It brings to question the power and influence we have allowed this "voluntary" self-regulatory organization to acquire, where they can so deliberately attempt such a massive influence campaign against an entire industry to which they have absolutely NO authority. The motives of the NASD are the same greed and personal agenda exhibited by the attorneys who are leading this class action lawsuit against the insurance companies. It is all about the money.

The fight that the insurance companies have with the law firm is a very winable battle because of the fair processes of our courts and the triumph that system can afford truth and justice. But the battle with the NASD will be a fight that will likely never conclude. As long as insurance products, such as indexed annuities are taking such massive amounts of money from the securities industry, this fight will continue.

An interesting "tell" in all of this is the fact that so many broker dealers, like Schaub, are beginning to produce their own indexed annuities. This move could be construed as either a validation by these broker dealesr of the value of this financial product, or it could be that these broker dealers do NOT expect the NASD to ultimately prevail, so they are preparing to become part of this fight for that market share in a different way. This competative approach to fighing the gains of indexed annuities is one that the NASD should notice and encourage from their broker dealers who are whining about lost revenue. And it is this kind of competitive approach that usually leads to more and better product selection for the benefit of the buying public. If the NASD was willing to wage a fair fight, everyone could end up the winners.