Thus far, the debate about an optional federal charter for insurance companies has focused primarily on whether and how federal regulation of U.S. insurers will improve services for insurance consumers in the United States. But insurance, like banking and securities, is increasingly becoming a globalized market. U.S. insurers are increasingly diversifying their risks by offering their services abroad, and the reinsurance business model requires worldwide geographic diversification. In addition, non-U.S. insurers and reinsurers who would like to compete in the United States complain that entry to the U.S. market is cumbersome and costly because of the fifty-state regulatory system. Globalization of markets requires that regulators coordinate their policies; this is difficult for the United States because no one authority--even the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC)--can make binding commitments about U.S. regulatory policies. Are these obstacles depriving U.S. consumers of the benefits of international competition? If so, can they be overcome by the states or the NAIC? If not, is an optional federal charter a necessary response to a globalizing market?