Should The US Government Support The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (Tria) Critical Thinking Samples

- Overview of the Issue:
The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA), originally passed due to the aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack of the Twin Towers, is reportedly due to expire on December 2014. Several policymakers, insurance experts, as well as public and private employers have apparently evaluated the need for TRIA to continue with the US government’s support or be allowed to expire has been the subject of continued debate. The current discourse aims to assert that the US government should continue supporting the TRIA due to the significant positive benefits to stakeholders.
- Personal Perspective:
One asserts that extending the TRIA through the US government’s support would be more beneficial to various stakeholders. The enactment of the TRIA enabled spreading the risk of terrorist attacks to a wider range of clientele. Specifically, reports have disclosed that the TRIA protects taxpayers of potential losses ensuing from terrorism attacks. In addition, coverage in terrorism insurance allegedly enables greater resilience of communities and the entire nation to terrorism risks. Concurrently, the expiration of the TRIA was noted to have potential disturbing consequences in workers’ compensation through restricting providing workers’ compensation coverage to high terrorism-risk employers. Finally, the TRIA would protect the federal treasury from significant recovery losses which would be sustained in the event of a major terrorist attack.
- Counter-argument Perspective:
Advocates coming from private insurance groups contend that TRIA should not be extended. Accordingly, an extension would mean undermining the private insurance industry since the prices of insurance coverage would be significantly less with the government subsidy. The supporters of non-governmental support disclosed that the purpose within which TRIA was initially enacted has already been served. In addition, since more than 13 years have transpired since the September 11 attack, experience on handling terrorism risks have already been apparently appropriately addressed.
- Argument Summary:
Overall, after weighing the costs and benefits of supporting the extension of the TRIA, it is evident that there are greater advantages to its continued support. The magnanimity of stakeholders who would benefit from the continued application of the TRIA far exceeds the limited few private companies which signified contest to the program. In addition, since terrorism continues to pose significant risks to the nation, the TRIA remains the most plausible and viable recourse that would help spread the risk to a wider range of stakeholders and protect taxpayers in an eventual major terrorist attack.