Consumer Law & Policy Blog

"Maxed Out" Now Available for Purchase or Rental

We have previously discussed the critically-acclaimed movie "Maxed Out" here and here.  "Maxed Out" surveys the state of consumer debt in this country in a way that you won't easily forget.  It is now available for purchase for $15 to $20 from folks like Amazon and for rental from the usual mega-renters like Neflix and Blockbuster.  Worth viewing.

It is all about spin and PR.

Thursday, Senator Russ Feingold and Representative Hank Johnson introduced the Arbitration Fairness Act of 2007, comprehensive legislation to ban mandatory pre-dispute arbitration clauses in employment, consumer, franchise, and civil rights disputes. In my humble opinion, if passed this will be the most significant piece of consumer legislation of the last three decades.

This seemed to be something the public would like to know about, so I went to the assignments editor at the TV station I work with. She is the person who reviews daily events to decide which stories will be covered. She had not heard about the bill and did not receive a press release. I explained how important this bill was and convinced her that it was something the viewers would be interested in. We did a web search to see what we could find. We found nothing. Even Senator Feingold’s website did not have anything. Finally, 24 hours a latter and after a lot of effort, the station did two stories on how this bill affects consumers and employees, explaining what has happened to their legal rights.

The moral of this little story is simple: until consumer advocates learn to play the game of spin and public relations, it will be a long, hard, upheld battle to enact consumer reforms. Business has perfected these skills and consumer groups have a long way to go to catch up. Business has turned “tort reform,” into a mantra, and re-defined and vilified the phrase “trial lawyer.” They can take an isolated event like a lawsuit involving a pair of pants or a cup of coffee and turn it into a national obsession for months. They know how to play the game, and they play it extremely well. They have convinced the public that lawsuits are bad, and we are all better off with fewer legal rights and less access to the courts. Until consumer advocates start playing the game as well, (or at least get on the same field) and find the resources to compete, consumer reform may be slow in coming.

Just my thoughts.

June 2007 NHTSA Recalls

The June 2007 safety recall report compiled by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is available here.  Sorry about the delay, but the agency just posted it, almost two weeks after the month ended.  It seems that while the Consumer Product Safety Commission posts its monthly recall reports right after the month ends, NHTSA is delayed for some reason.

Comprehensive Arbitration Fairness Act to be Introduced in Congress Tomorrow

Tomorrow, Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) and Representative Hank Johnson (D-GA) will introduce the Arbitration Fairness Act of 2007, comprehensive legislation to ban mandatory binding arbitration clauses in employment, consumer, franchise and civil rights disputes.  There'll be a press conference at the Capitol tomorrow at noon.  In addition to Sen. Feingold and Rep. Johnson, the speakers will be Joan Claybrook, the President of Public Citizen; Jordan Fogal, a consumer who was denied access to the courts because of a mandatory arbitration agreement in her contract to buy her home; other people harmed by mandatory arbitration agreements; and representatives from the American Association for Justice, Center for Responsible Lending, Consumer Federation of America, Homeowners Against Deficient Dwellings, Home Owners for Better Building, National Association of Consumer Advocates, National Consumer Law Center (on behalf of its low income clients), National Consumer Coalition for Nursing Home Reform, National Employment Lawyers Association and Public Justice.

NPR on Arbitration

From NPR's Marketplace, July 9, 2007:

The SEC is expected to sign off soon on a merger of the NASD and the NYSE. Critics fear combining the two self-regulatory groups will make it even harder for investors to get action on their complaints. Amy Scott reports.

Listen now.

Partner Pleads Guilty to Conspiracy in Milberg Weiss Case

In case you missed it, stories in the morning papers, including in The New York Times and The Washington Post, report that former named Milberg Weiss partner David Bershad has pleaded guilty to conspiracy charges stemming from a criminal case pending since last year against the Milberg Weiss law firm, Bershad, and another former partner, Steven Schulman.  As the Post summarizes it:

David J. Bershad, who oversaw financial operations at the New York-based firm, agreed to forfeit $7.75 million, pay a $250,000 fine and tell the government about how he and others allegedly obstructed justice and misled judges about secret payments to plaintiffs in scores of securities lawsuits.

The article explains that the Bershad plea bargain is likely to put pressure on others who may be implicated in the case.

Google and Privacy

Privacy advocates have lately been concerned about Google for a number of reasons.  Google reportedly retains records of user searches for eighteen months, has access to the emails of those using its gmail service, and can tell which addresses its users have searched for on Google maps, among other things.  Google's intended acquisition of Doubleclick has prompted EPIC, US PIRG and CDD to file a complaint with the FTC seeking an investigation into the privacy consequences of the acquisition (you can read the initial complaint here and supplementary materials here; EPIC has a page of information about the deal here).   

Google itself says quite a bit about privacy.  Highlights of its privacy policy appear here and from there you can jump to the full privacy policy.  Among the highlights is this quote: "We make good faith efforts to provide you access to your personal information upon request and to let you correct such data if it is inaccurate and delete it, when reasonably possible."  So on June 28, I sent Google the following email through its web site:

I have reviewed Google's Privacy Policy.  I would like to know what specific information, if any, Google retains about me.  For example, I would like to see a list of the search requests I have made that Google retains. 

Thank you.

I haven't yet heard back.  Google's web page through which I sent the email says "We'll review your note and follow up with you only if we require more info or we have additional info to share."  Consequently, I'm not sure if I will in fact hear back from them. 

State Security Freeze Laws

U.S. PIRG's Consumer Blog has this excellent discussion of state security freeze laws -- laws that allow consumers to put a freeze on their credit reports.  These laws are weapons against identity theft.  As the PIRG post puts it:

Your best defense against identity theft is to freeze your credit report. That way, when a thief applies for credit using your purloined Social Security Number, he or she is denied when the cell phone company or department store contacts the bureau and is told that your report is frozen.

The PIRG post surveys what various states have done and discusses the progress of weaker, but  non-preemptive proposed federal legislation.

How the Leegin Decision Will Hurt Consumers on the Internet

by Greg Beck

In Leegin Creative Leather Products v. PSKS, the Supreme Court last week overturned the nearly century-old rule in Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co. that an agreement between a manufacturer and a distributor to set minimum prices is a per se violation of antitrust law. In doing so, the five-justice majority was persuaded by the amici curiae brief of twenty three economists, who argued that, at least in some cases, the availability of less expensive products on the Internet may be bad for consumers. The Supreme Court found persuasive the economists' argument that minimum-price agreements can help avoid the so-called "free-rider problem," which comes up when consumers shop at traditional retailers to make their decisions about what to buy but then use the Internet to find the cheapest available price. As the economists wrote:

A Sermon on Payday Lending

The District of Columbia Council, our local equivalent of a state legislature, is considering payday lending legislation.  Earlier today, on the WAMU radio station, the Reverend Graylan Scott Hagler of the Plymouth Congregational United Church of Christ delivered some passionate commentary on the evils of payday lending and the need for legislation in the District.  It's worth a listen.   (On a related note, proposed payday lending legislation has also recently been introduced at the federal level.)