There have been two incidents of the Actuarial Review being unable to report
on ABCD activities:
1. The ABCD refused Walt Wright, managing editor of AR to cover one
particular proceeding after the accused actuary waived all confidentiality
requirements. This is a messy story in that the ABCD may have "misrepresented"
its rules to Wright on the way to denying him access to the proceedings.
Since then AR has gotten its hands on the transcripts of the entire hearing
and it is quite an unhappy story.
2. After the AR got the transcripts and the waivers of confidentiality from
the subject actuary, Wright wanted to run an article on the proceeding --
basically reporting on what happened. The story basically was to relate the
facts -- and the facts would have shown just how the ABCD was running
roughshod over a CAS fellow. There was great discomfort on the part of the
board of directors of the CAS to allow this story to go forward. So, out of
respect for that discomfort, I, as editor-in-chief of AF, unilaterally decided
to pull the article pending assurances given by the then president that board
of directors would be looking into the matter.... and that they would like to
have that done before the story is published. Well, it has been over a year
and a half and nothing has been done on that point. I am trying to follow up
with Al Beer to determine where the matter stands. I feel this is an
important story that our membership needs to hear -- as the CAS has delegated
a lot of authority to the ABCD.
Incidentally, Walt Wright has the blow-by-blow on the ABCD story.
Stan Khury
----------
From: daniel.roth@cna.com
Sent: Monday, August 11, 1997 11:13 AM
To: casnet@lists.casact.org
Subject: ABCD Changes
I'm a bit concerned about the silence on the proposed changes to the AAA
bylaws that relate to the ABCD. Does anyone know if the deadline for
comments, originally August 1, was extended? Is there something I'm missing
as to why more people do not appear concerned about the movement of the ABCD
further away from the rules of fair play and the light of public scrutiny?
(Anyone recall the ABCD's refusal to let the Actuarial Review report on its
activities?)
<<File: winmail.dat>>