Straight talk about the insurance industry.

Lawyer jokes and uninformed statements bashing the civil justice system have dogged plaintiff attorneys through many a golf game, PTA meeting, or dinner party. When a myth about civil justice rears its head, you need to respond with the facts.

Q: The insurance industry is there to help out families when they re under great financial stress, so why does It come in for such public criticism?

A: Maybe because it seems the insurance industry in consistently places its own bottom line ahead of the needs of policyholders.

For example, the insurance industry pushed for a provision in the current pension reform measure that would have benefited the industry at the expense of those injured by the negligence or misconduct of others. Under the proposal, an insured who received an award or settlement in a personal injury lawsuit could recover nothing until all benefits the insurer paid for the insured's injuries were reimbursed.

In most cases now, a person's health insurance carrier pays for treatment of injuries sustained because of another person's actions. If you are hurt by a drunk driver, a defective product, or a negligent doctor, your insurer foots the bill. That's why you pay premiums.

If there's a lawsuit, and an injured person recovers damages from the person who caused the harm, the health insurer can recoup some or all of its costs. But most states have laws that allow payment to the insurer after a lawsuit only after the injured person is "made whole," which usually means he or she can keep enough money to compensate for future costs incurred because of the injury.

This is really important for people with serious disabilities, whose future medical costs over a lifetime can run into millions of dollars.

The provision in the pension bill would have allowed health insurers to be reimbursed first, potentially leaving a person with severe injuries little or nothing for living expenses and medical care. Putting insurers first in the pay line--before the victim--means they would get paid twice: first from all the premiums, deductibles, and co-pays they've collected, and then from the court settlement. Fortunately, this provision was removed from the bill.

Rather than consider legislation to further enhance the insurance industry's profit margin--it made $44.8 billion in profits in 2005--Congress should adopt stricter regulations and take a look at repealing the industry's antitrust exemption.