Subject: File No. S7-06-04
From: Mark Sorlie

March 30, 2005

Jonathan G. Katz
Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission
Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, NW
Washington, DC 20549-0609

Jonathan Katz:

I am a licensed insurance professional and variable products salesperson. The new disclosure requirements contained in the SEC's proposal regarding the sale of mutual funds and variable products are unnecessary and will provide no meaningful additional protection to consumers.

The products I sell pay virtually the lowest commission in the marketplace. If this proposal passes, I will probably benefit. However, I feel compelled to ask the question, "at what point do we return to buyer beware? At what point do we stop letting one bad apple spoil the whole bunch? Are we the big brother to everybody? Is there no accountability?

Can we blame all of our aches and pains on somebody else? Do we not have brains?"

Why doesn't the SEC focus its efforts on getting consumers to carefully read the prospectus they receive? All the information is there.

I agree that there are some exorbitant fees being charged, mostly by the reps who are fee-based. Most commissions in the products are fair. The consumer (or is it the media?) seems obsessed with fee-based planning. Is that because they don't have the brains to find someone who is trustworthy? Or they don't want to make the effort?

For these reasons, I urge the NASD withdraw the proposed rule.

Thank you for your consideration of my views on this matter.


Mark Sorlie