• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Insurers Just Saying "No" To TARP?

    What if they ran a bailout program and no one came? Last year, the Bush Administration Treasury Department opened TARP’s doors to insurance companies, a number of which promptly filed for aid. Last week, the applications of six of those were approved, totalling some $22 billion. But rather than rush to claim their winnings, most of the firms are reconsidering. According to the Wall Street Journal, one — Ameriprise Financial — has already said no, and another — Prudential — is expected to decline soon. Two others, Allstate and Principal Financial Group may also decline. The remaining two — Hartford and Lincoln National — seem more likely to accept, although they want to review the final terms.

    The hesitancy is due to the same factors that have led banks to run screaming for the TARP exits. TARP aid, which looked relatively free at first, now comes with substantial strings — or worse, as a look at federally-occupied Detroit shows.

    The insurance companies are right to be afraid. They should be very afraid.

    Posted in Ongoing Priorities [slideshow_deploy]

    7 Responses to Insurers Just Saying "No" To TARP?

    1. Cheryll Lawand F says:

      Congradulations to Ameriprise Financial for saying

      no to federal aid with serious stings attached! How long will it take for americans and the

      private industries to wake up and realize we have a federal govenment too willing to take control of

      everything! Ameriprise set the precedence that others should follow.

    2. Barb -mn says:

      Please insurers, stand strong. Anything you accept from this government is a set-up to take you down. Please, if you are going down don't look to the teat of government. Use your strength and mental abilities to do what is needed and if need be, go down with the ship.

    3. Connor Illinois says:

      Seems the business community can learn from the example that was made of GM, Chyrsler, and Chevy. Perhaps we won't need to boycott as many companies as I originally thought. I'm encouraged. Lets see Obama's next move now that corporate America is on to his game, and the rest of rank and file Americans are catching on too. Go Tea Party-ers!

    4. Matt, Houston says:

      Should we have given the banks money with no strings attached, or just let them go bankrupt and bring the financial temple down on our heads in order stand up for classical economic principles?

    5. Laurie, San Antonio says:

      Regarding Matt in Houston, you don't give money to failing businesses. They couldn't get it right in the first place so giving them more money to lose is not the answer. In a FREE market, if you screw up too many times you fail. It makes room for new entrepreneurs who have a better mousetrap.

    6. Pingback: The Hill’s Blog Briefing Room » The Foundry

    7. Pingback: The Hill’s Blog Briefing Room » MORNING READ

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×