To the Editor:
In a January 1 opinion piece entitled “A Smarter Plan to Make Retirement Savings Last,” the authors call for yet another federal program to help consumers attain some measure of financial security.
Mandatory “guaranteed retirement accounts” would give retirees a steady stream of income from funds managed by an “independent federal agency”. The problems with this proposal are both obvious and significant, providing too many reasons for concern.
Another governmental program—even under a guise of “independence”—is not what is necessary. What would be better is more support for those things that are already out on the market, readily available to and designed for the people the authors seek to help with their proposal. Life insurance is a fundamental component of financial planning. Consumers sit down with local agents and brokers and discuss short- and long-term goals, risk preferences, and family circumstances. Buyers talk about how much they can afford and about benefit options. Life insurance products have come a long way to provide comprehensive financial security far beyond payment of a death benefit.
By failing to mention the term “insurance” even once in their commentary, the authors do a great disservice to the millions of people who need more retirement security right now and to the thousands of licensed and regulated professionals who work every day to help people attain economic security.
Instead of “trying out” whether GRAs would work, more should be done to support life insurance products already in the marketplace.
Lawrence J. Holzberg
President, National Association of
Insurance and Financial Advisors—New York State New York, NY
Lawrence J. Holzberg, LUTCF President, NAIFA – New York State