The content isn't all that difficult to suss out, but there are very few indications on the page of what it may be. It would probably help your prospective users tremendously to have something mentioning... oh, I don't know, how about Workers' Compensation coverage? There are several big walls of text explaining everything except what the site is for. That extends to the meta description tag as well -- there's no mention of Workers' Compensation anywhere except incidentally in the list under the "Search for Current Coverage" section. As much as you may want to find a replacement for "POO" as a site name, the name is not as big a deterrent to use (and discovery) as the omission of the site's raison d'être.
Once you state the purpose, you can get rid of most of the rest of the text. Your disclaimer does not need center-stage presence; it can be moved to a page footer or even to a separate page. Speaking of which: until you can fold all of the functionality you want into the map, you might want to move the duplicated lists onto separate pages (or at least to separately-viewable tabs on the page). There's just too much going on right now, and the first thing I noticed was a whole bunch of lists of state names that looked the same to my eye, and not enough to differentiate the lists. Sure, you have a text explanation, but it doesn't actually explain anything—you know what your site is for and how things are structured, but I'd bet cash money that very few of the people who would actually find the site useful would know what's going on. If you state outright what seems utterly obvious to you, you won't need very much of the explanatory text that's there right now. People are pretty good at figuring out what a link is all by themselves; they're not very good at guessing what a site is about from a few scattered clues expressed in an unfamiliar industry jargon. Since this site seems to be aimed primarily at policy holders/buyers (and people who may or may not be covered under those policies) rather than insurers, they're not likely to be familiar with the territory.
I'm afraid there's no soft way of putting this: the content is the main obstacle at the moment. You can spend months futzing with the layout and typography, but as long as the content remains opaque, it won't make any difference to the site's usability. You might not be able to do a whole lot about the linked content (sometimes it seems that legislation and forms pursuant to it are deliberately obfuscated), but you can do a whole lot better explaining your end. Until Frank down at the hardware store can figure it out, it's just your own online list of links.
You can save yourself a lot of markup if you use <dl>, <dt> and <dd> tags instead of the <ul> and <li> tags you have linked to the map. Right now, you have a "title" and a "blurb" for each of the categories under each state (and are illegally using the same id for multiple elements), and are using a span to style the title and inserting a non-semantic line break. If you use the definition/description list instead of an unordered list, you get two separately (and globally) stylable elements—the term and the description/definition, so there's no need to include inline styling info. All you'd need is a visibility handle (which should be a class rather than an id).
