Fingerprinting helps keep felons out of insurance business – but few states do it
General August 24th, 2009A recent article in Insurance Journal suggests that the use of fingerprinting during background checks of would-be insurance producers can be very effective in weeding out convicted criminals. Fingerprinting, however, is not utilized everywhere. According to the article, only 17 states require producers to submit fingerprints as part of the license application process, and more than 30 states are actually forbidden by law from obtaining fingerprints. Criminal background checks are still performed in virtually all cases, but fingerprints would allow for more extensive checks.
In the survey conducted by Insurance Journal, 11 of the 26 states they polled use fingerprinting in their license applications processes. Each of these “fingerprinting” states reported that it had helped them identify applicants who had served time in prison or had other substantial run-ins with the law. Convicted forgers, child abusers, and even rapists (all of whom, of course, had lied on their applications) were discovered among the potential licensees.
The controversy over fingerprinting is another example of significant differences in insurance regulation and governance from state to state. Some in the industry see this as a reason for the federal government to take a role, however limited, in making sure regulations across the country are more uniform.
Is fingerprinting of potential insurance agents an invasion of privacy, or is it necessary to weed out people with serious criminal histories? Should the federal government step in? Let us know what you think!
The constitution does not authorize the federal government to regulate activities within the states. States need to do their own police work, their own licencing & set their own rules.
If the federal government were to attempt to do any of these
1. It would be unconstitutional
2. It would be sloppy
3. It would be a nightmare for those that had to work with it.
Have you ever tried to get the federal government to do anything, then gotten caught up in their levels of bureaucracy.
This is not to say that we can not make the states do a better job. However, at the state level each person makes more of a difference than at the federal level where our voice are too diluted or just too far away.
Fingerprinting is far to invasive on our constitutional rights to be done for professional licenses. To many times mistakes are made and being in a data base can be a dangerous intrusion. frankly
TN now requires fingerprinting before you are issued an insurance license. I think this is a great move…not only does it assure the agencies hiring these new producers that they have a clear criminal background, but it should also help the clients have more piece of mind toward the insurance industry. Afterall, confidence and trust are our key selling points!
I think there is enough regulations on agents but maybe something needs to be done to the insurance companies that hire less than desirable people in the first place. I don’t care what insurance company you apply to it seems like they just want a bunch of bodies out there most offer no training, no salry, they try and rate everyone, then blame everything on the agent.
This is a very controversial subject, but my opinion is that the industry should adopt regulations nationwide that protect the integrity of our business – to include fingerprinting. There is absolutely no reason why not, and every reason why it should be a requirement.
Fingerprinting incoming insurance agents is just another way to protect the general public. Since agents deal with accepting payment, quoting, and social security numbers, it is necessary to make sure that the individuals that are handling this sensitive information are people that are trustworthy. I do NOT believe the Federal Government should step in – I believe this should be regulated and monitored by the governing branches of insurance companies (i.e. Corporate office of Farmers, State Farm, etc.)
It’s hard to understand how some states would allow former criminals to become insurance agents by not requiring fingerprints
I have heard horror stories in Florida on how some agents would pocket the money intended for auto policies. Florida used to require fingerprints for their agents, I don’t know if they still do
Fingerprinting incoming insurance agents is just another way to protect the general public. Since agents deal with accepting payment, quoting, and social security numbers, it is necessary to make sure that the individuals that are handling this sensitive information are people that are trustworthy. I do NOT believe the Federal Government should step in – I believe this should be regulated and monitored by the governing branches of insurance companies (i.e. Corporate office of Farmers, State Farm, etc.)