NCL letter to Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation in support of Fair Fees Act – National Consumers League

/in /by

June 28, 2017

The Honorable John Thune
Chairman
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
United States Senate
512 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

The Honorable Bill Nelson
Ranking Member
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
United States Senate
512 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senators Thune and Nelson,

The National Consumers League (NCL) urges you to support the FAIR Fees Act of 2017. The bill, sponsored by Senators Markey and Blumenthal will increase competition and benefit consumers who are increasingly abused by the airlines’ nickel-and-diming practices.

Thanks to unchecked consolidation, four major airlines now control more than 80% of all domestic flights. This unprecedented concentration of power has allowed the proliferation of punitive add-on fees to spread unchecked. Through an industry-wide “unbundling” strategy, the three biggest U.S. airlines — United, American, Delta — increased their ancillary fees revenue from $5.3 billion in 2008 to $14.69 billion in 2015, a staggering 177% increase. [1] U.S. air carriers, legally barred from colluding on fares, have shown a willingness to collaborate on fees. In 2013, for instance, the three largest domestic airlines all increased their cancellation/change fees from $150 to $200 within two weeks of each other. [2]

The massive increase in ancillary fees coincided with a long period of low fuel costs and historically high profits for the airlines. [3] In a truly competitive marketplace, airlines would have shared their savings with consumers to increase their market share, or at the very least, the increase in fees would have coincided with additional service. Unfortunately for consumers, the ancillary fees charged by the airlines bear no relation to the actual cost for the airline to provide the service that these fees allegedly support.

Fortunately, the FAIR Fees Act, which received bipartisan support when it was considered last year, would rein in this abusive practice. Under the legislation, airlines would be prohibited airlines from charging cancellation, baggage or other ancillary fees that are “unreasonable or disproportionate to the costs incurred by the air carrier,” as determined by the Department of Transportation.

Increasing competition is the best solution for improving consumers’ air travel experience. In the absence of competition, rules banning unfair and deceptive practices, such as advertising low fares only to slam consumers with large ancillary fees that bear no relation to the cost of providing the service is the next best step. NCL urges you to support the bipartisan FAIR Fees Act, and we hope we can count on your help in advancing this common sense pro-consumer legislation through committee.

Sincerely,

Sally Greenberg
Executive Director
National Consumers League

CC: Members of the Senate Commerce Committee

[1] IdeaWorksCompany.com. 2016 CarTrawler Yearbook of Ancillary Revenue. September 20, 2016. Online: https://www.cartrawler.com/ct/media/2016/09/CarTrawler-ancillary-revenue-yearbook-2016.pdf

[2] Mayerowitz, Scott. “Analysis:Airline mergers have already led to higher fares,” Associated Press. August 14, 2013. Online:https://indianexpress.com/article/news-archive/web/airline-mergers-have-already-led-to-higher-fares/

[3] Mouawad, Jad. “Airlines Reap Record Profits, and Passengers Get Peanuts,” New York Times. February 6, 2016. Online: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/07/business/energy-environment/airlines-reap-record-profits-and-passengers-get-peanuts.html

 

NCL disappointed in House committee vote to give airlines control of air traffic control – National Consumers League

/in /by

June 28, 2017

Contact: National Consumers League, Cindy Hoang, cindyh@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC–The National Consumers League (NCL) today expressed disappointment with the passage of anti-consumer legislation extending the authorization on the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. The following statement is attributable to Sally Greenberg, NCL executive director:

Yesterday, in a near party-line vote the Republican members of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure voted to give away our public airspace to the airlines. Under this proposal, the very entities that have suffered numerous computer outages that downed thousands of flights, would be in charge of the critical Air Traffic Control (ATC) infrastructure.

It is mind-boggling that in an era of record airline consolidation, members of the committee chose to give even more control to the oligopolistic airline industry. It is further troubling that, when given the choice to support an amendment to ensure that government representatives of the newly privatized ATC corporation act in the public interest, the committee again declined even this modest improvement, ensuring that the airline industry has full control of the ATC corporation.

The National Consumers League urges members of the House and Senate to reject this radical and dangerous privatization proposal and to vote “no” on any bill or amendment that gives control of the nation’s critical ATC infrastructure to the airlines. We will continue to do all we can to oppose this anti-consumer, anti-competition legislation.

###

About the National Consumers League

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

NCL letter to the Senate Commerce Committee in support for Markey/Blumenthal Passengers’ Bill of Rights – National Consumers League

/in /by

June 26, 2017 

The Honorable John Thune
Chairman
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
United States Senate
512 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510 

The Honorable Bill Nelson
Ranking Member
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
United States Senate
512 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senators Thune and Nelson,

The National Consumers League urges you to support the Airline Passengers’ Bill of Rights introduced by Senators Markey and Blumenthal.[1] This pro-consumer legislation would lay the groundwork for increased competition and introduce long-awaited consumer protections to the airline marketplace.

Today, unchecked consolidation has allowed 4 airlines to control 80% of domestic flights. This consolidation has left many cities at the mercy of one or two airlines, and left many consumers with no choice but to keep returning to the same airlines that continue to mistreat them. Given this lack of competition and choice, it is perhaps little wonder that consumers are forced to suffer from a laundry list of mistreatment including:

  1. Airlines have increased load factors to more than 80%.[2] This makes overbooking situations more likely and increases the hardship faced by consumers when mass cancellations occur either due to weather, or due to a airline wide technological failure.
  2. 40,629 paying consumers were involuntarily bumped in 2016.[3]
  3. Seat size pitch has dropped from 35 inches in the 1970s an average of 31 inches today.[4] The decreased seat size has raised concerns in the medical community due to the fear of deep vein thrombosis[5] and disability rights community who are concerned that their constituents are not able to use the inflight lavatories.[6]

With shrinking seats, involuntary bumpings, and with few rights in the event of a cancellation, it is perhaps not surprising that airline complaints have skyrocketed nearly 70% in recent months.[7] The Passengers’ Bill of Rights will address these concerns by:

  1. Prohibiting involuntary bumping – Airlines that wish to continue the practice of overselling will have to revert to the free market concept of offering increasing levels of compensation to motivate consumers to take a later flight.
  2. Requiring airlines to maintain interline agreements with other airlines, and compensate consumers for lengthy delays – Interlining agreements will allow consumers to get to their destination sooner, and in the event that flying on another airline is not possible, they will receive the accommodations they deserve.
  3. Creating a minimum seat size standard – After careful study by health professionals and input from the disability rights community, the Department of Transportation will create a minimum seat size standard that will protect consumers from the adverse health effects of squeezing yourself into a small seat.
  4. Reining in out-of-control nickel-and-diming – Airlines will be required to justify sky-high ancillary fees for services like changes and cancellations and baggage fees. Airlines will also be required to refund bag fees immediately when a bag is lost or damaged.
  5. Reinstating passengers’ access to the courts – Consumers will once again be able to hold airlines accountable for denying them basic rights, including denying people with disabilities access to airline facilities
  6. Beginning to address the lack of competition in the airline industry – The GAO will begin a long-overdue review of the impact of the dramatic consolidation of the U.S. airline industry on consumers and competition

U.S. airlines have long claimed that deregulation, combined with competition would lead to a better air travel experience for all. Unfortunately for consumers, the mergers they promised would improve their service have instead only raised prices and lowered customer service. The Passengers’ Bill of Rights would restore the basic rights of passengers when they fly. NCL strongly urges you to support this common sense, pro-consumer legislation.

Sincerely,

Sally Greenberg
Executive Director
National Consumers League

CC: Members of the Senate Commerce Committee

[1] “MARKEY, BLUMENTHAL INTRODUCE AIRLINE PASSENGERS’ BILL OF RIGHTS,” Press release. June 26, 2017. Online: https://www.markey.senate.gov/news/press-releases/markey-blumenthal-introduce-airline-passengers-bill-of-rights

[2] Bureau of Transportation Statistics. “Load Factor (passenger-miles as a proportion of available seat-miles in percent (%)) All U.S. Carriers – All Airports,” Online: https://www.transtats.bts.gov/Data_Elements.aspx?Data=5

[3] United States Department of Transportation. Air Travel  Consumer Report. Pg. 35. April 2017. Online: https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/resources/individuals/aviation-consumerprotection/278481/2017-april-atcr.pdf

[4]Congressman Steve Cohen. “Reps. Cohen and Kinzinger, Senators Blumenthal, Schumer, Markey, Menendez and Feinstein Introduce Bipartisan, Bicameral SEAT Act,” Press release. March 9, 2017. Online: https://cohen.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/reps-cohen-and-kinzinger-senators-blumenthalschumer-markey-menendez-and

[5] “Safety risk of shrinking airline seats questioned,” Los Angeles Times. April 14, 2015. Online:             https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-airline-seat-risks-20150414-story.html

[6] Eng, Dinah. “Smaller Bathrooms on Planes Pose Challenges for Passengers,” New York Times. December 23, 2016. Online: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/23/travel/smaller-airplane-bathrooms-challenges-forpassengers.html

[7] U.S. Department of Transportation. Air Travel Consumer Report. June 2017. Pg. 37. Online: https://cms.dot.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/docs/resources/individuals/aviation-consumer-protection/282456/2017juneatcr_0.pdf

NCL statement on the Senate Republican release of the Better Care Reconciliation Act of 2017 – National Consumers League

/in /by

June 23, 2017

Contact: National Consumers League, Cindy Hoang, cindyh@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC–The following statement is attributable to Sally Greenberg, NCL executive director:

After weeks of unprecedented closed-door meetings and deal making, Senate Republicans released their version of a bill to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act. This cruel legislation shows a brazen disregard for the well-being of Americans, and prioritizes special interests and tax breaks for the rich over affordable healthcare for all. Provisions of this bill include the elimination of essential health benefits, the establishment of ineffective high risk pools to cover America’s most vulnerable populations, and catastrophic cuts to Medicaid that surpass those included in the House bill. The bill directly contradicts President Trump’s guarantee to leave Medicaid intact, and represents a broken promise to the American people to improve upon the House’s legislation and ensure affordable coverage for every American. 

The National Consumers League urges patients and consumers to engage their Senators and ask them to vote “no” on this bill that will take healthcare away from millions of Americans. We will continue to work with our colleagues in the health and advocacy arenas to vehemently oppose this unscrupulous bill.

###

About the National Consumers League

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.

School lunches crucial for growing kids – National Consumers League

/in /by

Students who are hungry or malnourished have trouble concentrating and learning. In fact, students who get healthier meals show a 4 percent improvement in test scores, according to Dr. Michael Anderson, associate professor of Agricultural and Resource Economics at the University of California, Berkeley. Anderson found that “students at schools that contract with a healthy school lunch vendor score higher on CA state achievement tests, with larger test score increases for students who are eligible for reduced price or free school lunches.”

Indeed, Congress recognized the value of a nutritious meal  when it enacted in 2010 the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act, spurred by First Lady Michelle Obama’s advocacy. In passing that Act, Congress noted that not only did children need regular meals but that healthier choices were better for children’s learning and cognition. So not only are more kids getting food, but the meals are healthier and include fruits and vegetables. As the USDA noted on its website:

Improving child nutrition is the focal point of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010. The legislation authorizes funding and sets policy for USDA’s core child nutrition programs: the National School Lunch Program, the School Breakfast Program, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), the Summer Food Service Program, and the Child and Adult Care Food Program. The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act allows USDA, for the first time in over 30 years, opportunity to make real reforms to the school lunch and breakfast programs by improving the critical nutrition and hunger safety net for millions of children. 

But under Republican leadership, the House of Representatives, and now USDA Secretary Sonny Purdue, we may be taking steps backward. Perdue wants to roll back rules that required schools to reduce sodium content in meals and offer more whole grains.  In his rollback plan, Purdue is also raising the allowed fat content in flavored milk from fat-free to 1 percent. The Berkeley team led by Anderson has found that diets high in trans and saturated fats – often found in high sodium foods or highly processed foods – have a negative impact on learning and memory. Some may argue that students simply won’t eat fruits or vegetables in defense of rolling back the healthier meals. However, three large studies by Pew Charitable Trusts found that food waste – an issue NCL is deeply involved in – actually declined in 12 Connecticut schools when better nutrition rules were in place.

Making healthier foods more convenient for students decreased consumption of unhealthy foods by 28 percent. Simply moving the salad bar from a corner of the lunchroom to the center increased sale of these vegetables and fruits. In her recent column in the New York Times, columnist Jane Brody noted that, “offering students a choice between two vegetable options and having them pay cash for unhealthy items like desserts and soft drinks … may enhance consumption of healthier foods without reducing revenue or participation in school lunch programs. While the studies are not conclusive, they suggest that with a few simple steps, schools may have an impact on the foods students eat.”

School nutrition programs are helping kids across the country adopt healthier eating habits and become better learners. The proof is ample. Why go backwards now? NCL calls on USDA Secretary Perdue to resist industry pressure to reverse these promising trends in school lunch and other feeding programs for children.

In defense of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau – National Consumers League

/in /by

In its short tenure, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), under Director Richard Cordray has done an excellent job  of preventing consumers from harm and helping wronged consumers get the recourse they deserve. The American people have seen the great work the Bureau has accomplished, and it is not surprising that the CFPB enjoys support from both sides of the aisle. Unfortunately, given the success of the CFPB as a consumer watchdog, it is also not too surprising to see the very industries and actors the CFPB has been charged to regulate, amass support for its weakening or even outright dismantling in Congress. 

Earlier this month, the House of Representatives passed the Financial CHOICE Act, the first step in the latest effort to dismantle one of the most successful consumer protection agencies in America’s history. Given the amount of rhetoric from the CFPB’s detractors, it’s worth setting the record straight about the history, structure, and success of the agency.

In 2008, the United States experienced the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression. As the dust settled, there was a much-needed examination of factors contributing to the collapse. One of the things we learned was that consumers were often preyed upon or tricked into predatory loans.

Predatory lenders, including sketchy mortgage companies, payday and car title loan companies, and “no credit needed” car dealerships helped create an environment where consumers could become ensnared in an inescapable cycle of debt. Another cause of the crisis was bureaucratic paralysis due to too many agencies sharing consumer protection responsibilities. As a result, agencies often felt they did not have the authority to protect consumers from financial predators.This created an environment where unsavory lenders were emboldened to engage in loan shark tactics. Absent strong consumer protections, when the stock market crashed, many Americans had no choice but to default on their loans, making the crisis worse. In the wake of trillions of dollars in losses, the American people vowed to never allow such a situation to happen again.

The ensuing wave of consumer and policymaker revulsion coalesced in the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. By any objective measures, the CFPB has been a runaway success in its mission to protect and empower consumers. So far, the CFPB has returned almost $12 billion to nearly 29 million wronged consumers. Consumers at Bank of America, Citibank, and JPMorgan Chase received $1.7 billion in refunds after they were charged for needless and unwanted services. Likewise, it was the CFPB that investigated and provided $100 million in financial relief to consumers when Wells Fargo defrauded its customers.


While the CFPB has had many big wins for consumers, it has also become a leader in mediation between harmed consumers and lenders. Since its formation, the CFPB, has collected over 1 million complaints. After collecting each complaint, the CFPB will work with the consumer to provide a resolution, typically within 15 days. The CFPB then takes that complaint information and puts it into a searchable database. This database allows consumers, government agencies, and advocates to identify emerging trends and work with industry and policymakers to stop harmful practices.

The CFPB has also been incredibly effective at preventing consumers from becoming victims in the first place. For instance, the CFPB created rules to prevent loan-shark style payday and car-title lenders from sucking consumers into unmanageable debt spirals. Likewise, the Bureau severely limited the prevalence of last dollar scams, which prey on consumers who are on the verge of bankruptcy. The CFPB has also been active in helping consumers navigate large, once-in-a-lifetime purchases like home mortgages. A few years back, the Bureau created rules ending “booby trapped mortgages.” The CFPB added protections that forced lenders to seriously consider a borrower’s ability to repay a loan, as well as a requirement to provide consumers with “know before you owe” disclosures that inform homebuyers how much they need to budget for their mortgage before they sign on the dotted line. It is because of these initiatives that home buyers have a much better understanding of how much they will end up paying.

Thanks to these and other successes, it is no wonder that an overwhelming majority of Americans (even a majority of Trump supporters) approve of the work the CFPB is doing and do not support efforts to weaken the agency. Unfortunately, the CFPB’s consumer protection success has created powerful enemies in the banking and financial services industry.

Opponents of the CFPB, emboldened by the results of the 2016 elections, are challenging the very structure that made it successful, starting with its funding source. The CFPB was created to be independent of the highly politicized appropriations process in Congress. Similar agencies including the Federal Reserve, Comptroller of the Currency, and FDIC are also funded independent of the appropriation process for the same reason. The creators of these financial institutions understood the importance of insulating critical financial protection agencies from the pressure of politics.

The CFPB’s detractors also argue that the agency is not accountable, which is simply not true. The CFPB is accountable to the Financial Stability Oversight Council, which has the authority to veto the Bureau’s rules. In addition, the CFPB reports twice a year to Congress and is accountable to the Federal Reserve’s Inspector General, as well as the Government Accountability Office. All of these agencies have conducted audits of the CFPB on numerous occasions. Detractors of the CFPB wish to either undermine the bureau’s ability to receive funds or splinter the agency’s leadership structure.

These baseless attacks must not be allowed to go on unchecked. The work the CFPB does is too important to let unscrupulous lenders dismantle it with anti-consumer legislation like the Financial CHOICE Act. As this bill progresses to the Senate for consideration, rest assured, this is an issue we take very seriously at NCL, and we will not rest until we have done everything we can to prevent the dismantling of the CFPB.

The Rise of Coding Bootcamps – National Consumers League

/in /by

 

Coding schools are hot. A quick Google search removes any doubt about that. Countless pages of results follow a similar, well-worn format: an intensive course of anywhere from 3-6 months, taught by “experienced” programmers who have worked at “leading startups.” The sales pitch concludes with impressive graduation rates, salaries, and job placement statistics—and perhaps a list of the cutting-edge companies at which their alumni work, like Google, Facebook, and LinkedIn.

Coding bootcamps are a large and rapidly growing industry. In 2016, 91 schools raked in nearly $200 million in profits and graduated 17,966 coders. This was an eightfold increase from 2013, expanding to 69 cities across the United States (as well as other cities internationally). 

Where did these bootcamps come from? More importantly, how did they grow to their current size? To answer these questions, it’s important to look into the underlying societal and educational factors behind the rise of these short-term, high-octane programming schools.

At the height of the Great Recession, America’s slow, uneven recovery was led in large part by Silicon Valley. Even as earnings nosedived across the nation (and low-wage jobs grew to outnumber mid- and high-wage ones), tech continued its strong performance. In 2014, Silicon Valley salaries were up by an astonishing 30 percent, a bright spot that defied the nation’s otherwise inconsistent economic performance. Even today, amidst fears of a tech slowdown (characterized by declining venture capital and growing inequality), tech remains strong. In 2016, for the fifth year in a row, Silicon Valley was the fastest-growing economy in America; its 8.9 percent growth rate even outpaced China’s (which stood at 6.9). Salaries remain high, with intense competition for designers and programmers driving salaries of anywhere from $123,000 to $312,000 per year.

 

Given the high cost of a traditional four-year computer science degree and the fact that many students leave high school unprepared for the rigor of undergraduate (let alone graduate) education, coding bootcamps can be an attractive alternative for students who want to reap the benefits of the tech boom. Compare, for example, the $45,370 average annual tuition at a private college with the $11,451 price tag on the average coding bootcamp, and it’s easy to see the appeal of the second option. The hands-on experience afforded by a coding bootcamp (which is often missing in a four-year C.S. program) can also appeal to budding programmers. A 2015 Bloomberg profile of bootcamp students found that in addition to cost, they feared that traditional colleges would not offer the practical, real-world education that a bootcamp might.

Unfortunately, as we’ll explore in future posts, all that glitters about coding bootcamps is not gold. While many can and do offer an incredible opportunity to quickly set off down a new career path, the industry is rife with misleading and sometimes outright fraudulent claims. And, facilitated by lax government regulation, some unscrupulous schools take advantage of the very circumstances that have propelled the industry to such great heights.

Child Labor Coalition applauds the introduction of two congressional bills to reduce dangerous child labor in U.S. agriculture – National Consumers League

/in /by

June 13, 2017

Washington, DC—The Child Labor Coalition (CLC) and its 35 members applaud the re-introduction late yesterday of two congressional bills that would significantly reduce child labor in U.S. agriculture and largely equalize child labor laws for wage-earning children on farms with current rules for non-farm work.

In the House of Representatives, Rep. Roybal-Allard (D-CA) re-introduced the Children’s Act for Responsible Employment (CARE), which would amend the Fair Labor Standards Act, removing the exemptions that prevent the nation’s child labor laws from applying to children who work for wages on farms.

“A 12-year-old is not allowed to work in our air-conditioned office,” said Sally Greenberg, executive director of the National Consumers League and a co-chair of the CLC. “Yet, that same child is allowed to work unlimited hours, seven days a week on a farm, performing back-breaking work.”

CARE would also raise the age at which children laboring on farms can perform hazardous work from 16 to 18, which is the norm for all non-farm work. “We lose far too many children to work accidents on farms,” said CLC Coordinator Reid Maki. “This change is long overdue.”

“Child farmworkers work at far younger ages, for longer hours, and under more hazardous conditions than children are allowed to work in any other industry. It’s time to end this double standard in U.S. law and ensure they have the same protections as other working youth,” said CLC-member Jo Becker, children’s rights advocacy director for Human Rights Watch.

Under CARE, children who work on their family’s farm would continue to be exempt from child labor laws so they may learn farming skills from their parents.

Yesterday, Rep. David Cicilline (D-RI) and Sen. Dick Durbin (D-IL) also reintroduced legislation—the Children Don’t Belong on Tobacco Fields Act—that would ban child labor in U.S. tobacco fields.

“In the last Congress, more than 60 organizations endorsed this legislation, which is critical to protect child farmworkers from nicotine poisoning and unnecessary pesticide exposure,” said Norma Flores López, the CLC’s Domestic Issues Committee chair. “Impoverished farmworker children should not be asked to help harvest such a dangerous crop.”

“Senator Durbin and Congressman Cicilline get it,” said First Focus Campaign for Children President Bruce Lesley, also a member of the CLC. “We don’t let kids consume tobacco products; we sure shouldn’t let kids risk their lives to produce them.”

“The proposed ban on child labor in tobacco and the CARE Act would go far to protect child farmworkers from well-established work dangers,” said CLC Co-Chair Dr. Lorretta Johnson, secretary-treasurer of the American Federation of Teachers, who added that child labor and migration have a profound impact on the education of child farmworkers. “More than half of children who regularly work on farms will not graduate from high school. That is unacceptable. Until all children, regardless of where they are born, have the same opportunity to receive an education, we will continue advocating and fighting on their behalf.”

“Yesterday marked the global celebration of World Day Against Child Labor,” said NCL’s Greenberg. “We would like to thank Rep. Roybal-Allard, Rep. Cicilline, and Senator Durbin for standing up for America’s most vulnerable workers—farmworker children.”  

###

About the Child Labor Coalition

The Child Labor Coalition, which has 35 member organizations, represents consumers, labor unions, educators, human rights and labor rights groups, child advocacy groups, and religious and women’s groups. It was established in 1989, and is co-chaired by the National Consumers League and the American Federation of Teachers. Its mission is to protect working youth and to promote legislation, programs, and initiatives to end child labor exploitation in the United States and abroad. The CLC’s website and membership list can be found at www.stopchildlabor.org.

Counting calories? New lawsuit will make restaurants show you the stats – National Consumers League

/in /by

Peter Lehner is Senior Strategic Advisor at Earthjustice. He directs the sustainable food and farming program, developing strategies to reduce health, environmental, and climate harms from production of our food and to promote a more environmentally sound agricultural system.

How many calories are in a burger with a side of onion rings? About 80 percent of Americans would like to know, and food retailers were supposed to start telling them—until the Trump administration decided to allow the industry to delay another year.

Yesterday, we pushed back. Earthjustice, on behalf of the Center for Science in the Public Interest and the National Consumers League, is now challenging this illegal delay in court.

In 2014, the FDA announced that chain restaurants, supermarkets, convenience stores and similar food retailers would need to make calorie counts and other nutritional information available to consumers, and gave the industry one year to comply.  Since then, the deadline for compliance has been delayed three times. Meanwhile, several cities and counties instituted their own nutrition labeling requirements, so even the National Restaurant Association supported the move to a uniform, national standard. Yet, one day before the rule was to become enforceable in May, the Trump administration arbitrarily—and illegally—delayed it for another year.

More wait equals more weight. Allowing industry to keep consumers in the dark about nutritional information contributes to the obesity epidemic in America.

Two-thirds of U.S. adults and one-third of U.S. children are overweight or obese, and eating out is a significant factor in this health crisis. On average, Americans eat one-third of their calories away from home, and studies show that people tend to consume more calories and saturated fat—but fewer fruits and whole grains—when eating out. In particular, children typically consume almost 55 percent more  calories when they eat a meal at a restaurant compared to a meal at home.

Part of this unhealthy pattern is due to a lack of information. Not many people would realize (without consulting a company’s website) that Applebee’s Spinach and Artichoke Dip appetizer has 960 calories, more than twice as many calories as the Chicken Wonton Tacos appetizer (460 calories); or that a chocolate chip muffin from Whole Foods Market has 920 calories—nearly twice as many calories as a blueberry scone and almost half of a person’s suggested daily caloric intake. Even professional dieticians, when asked to estimate the calorie count of the previously mentioned burger with onion rings, underestimated by almost half.  (They guessed 865 calories—the real answer was 1550.)

Calories aren’t the only concern. Few would guess that some chain restaurant entrees have more than two-and-a-half times the daily maximum amount of sodium recommended for healthy adults. People with high blood pressure need to watch their sodium intake, while those with high cholesterol or heart disease are instructed to consume less saturated fat.  Many people with diabetes need to monitor their carbohydrate consumption to administer proper insulin dosages, and the federal government advises that we all cut back on saturated and trans fats, added sugars and sodium.  But without access to nutrition information, following such health guidelines is nearly impossible when eating out.

“Knowledge is power, and studies show that when consumers have nutrition information available, they use it—purchasing 150 fewer calories, on average, when this information is displayed.”

Knowledge is power, and studies show that when consumers have nutrition information available, they use it—purchasing 150 fewer calories, on average, when this information is displayed. The total calories purchased by New York City Starbucks customers decreased by 6 percent after a local menu labeling policy took effect. Considering that a relatively small energy imbalance can, over time, result in obesity, these differences are critical. Even the FDA concluded that a uniform, national nutrition labeling requirement could save between $3.7 and $10.7 billion over 20 years.

Research also shows us that when restaurants have to be more transparent about what’s in their food, they start to offer healthier options. In King County, Washington, chain restaurants decreased the calorie content of their entrée items by an average of 41 calories each after a local law requiring nutrition labeling took effect. Another study found that the number of healthier menu items increased from 13 to 20 percent at fast-food chains subject to nutrition labeling requirements.

There’s an environmental benefit to nutrition labels as well. By encouraging smaller portions, nutrition labeling can help reduce the amount of food waste in landfills, which release climate-polluting methane gas and also contribute to air and water pollution. Since 40 percent of food in the United States ends up in landfills — much of it from restaurants — reducing this food waste can have significant environmental benefits.

Delaying the labeling requirement one day before it was supposed to become enforceable, and without an opportunity for public comment in advance, is illegal. By denying the public access to vital health information, the Trump FDA is once again taking the side of big business over the public’s right to know. We are living in the age of big data, where every aspect of our lives can be measured in excruciating detail. We can count the number of steps we take and the number of minutes we sleep—shouldn’t we have basic health information about our food?

NCL statement in support of HOT CARS Act of 2017 to prevent child heatstroke deaths by getting much-needed technology into vehicles – National Consumers League

/in /by

June 7, 2017

Contact: National Consumers League, Cindy Hoang, cindyh@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC – Today, U.S. Representatives Tim Ryan (D-13th OH), Peter King (R-2nd NY) and Jan Schakowsky (D-9th IL) introduced the Helping Overcome Trauma for Children Alone in Rear Seats Act (HOT CARS Act of 2017, H.R. 2801), a bill to  prevent children from dying in hot cars when unknowingly left alone in vehicles. The bi-partisan bill has support from more than twenty of the nation’s leading public health, consumer and safety organizations, experts in neuroscience and the brain memory system, along with families who have tragically lost their child or were seriously injured due to child heatstroke.  The unfortunate reality is that hundreds of wonderful, loving and attentive parents can get distracted and forget to drop their child off. Studies have shown that this can happen to anyone, anywhere. The bill’s introduction coincides with the kickoff of the National Vehicular Heatstroke Prevention Campaign by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

“We need Congress to require technology that warns drivers that a child may remain in the vehicle, because despite the fact that since 1990 800 children have died in hot cars, automakers haven’t worked to prevent these deaths.  The industry is well aware of the hazard; so it falls to Congress to require technology built into vehicles to send warnings.  Our cars today alert drivers when they leave their keys in the car, their lights on, or their trunk open – none of which are life threatening. It is not unusual for the government to mandate safety features to protect lives. Cars are mandated to have seat belts, interior trunk-releases, and rear backup cameras,” said Sally Greenberg, NCL’s Executive Director. “Already this year nine children have died in hot cars, and the scorching summer days of high temperatures are still ahead of us.  This is not just a ‘seasonal’ problem.  These deaths are happening year round.

Greenberg worked for passage of another law enacted by Congress in 2008 that requires rear view cameras as standard equipment in all cars by May of 2018.  “This is a very reasonable and effective way to stop preventable, unnecessary injuries and deaths.”

The HOT CARS Act would require the U.S. Department of Transportation to issue a final rule requiring cars to be equipped with a system to alert the drive if a passenger remains in the back seat when a car is turned off.

“These are tragedies attributable to common stressors like a change in routine or lack of sleep or even simple distractions can all have an effect on even the most responsible parents,” said Greenberg. She noted that Dr. David Diamond, a professor in the Departments of Psychology, Molecular Pharmacology and Physiology at the University of South Florida, spoke about how the brain works and how leaving a child in a car can happen to the best of parents or caregivers.  “The one aspect which is not a factor is that these children were not forgotten by parents who were reckless with regard to care for their children. This modern day phenomenon must be explained from a brain science perspective, not one that blames parents for being negligent.” He continued, “We must have a system that provides a reminder to parents of the presence of a child in the backseat for that rare occasion when a child’s life is in danger because parents, through no fault of their own, lose awareness of the presence of their child in the car.”

To learn more about Forgotten Baby Syndrome, click here.

###

About the National Consumers League

The National Consumers League, founded in 1899, is America’s pioneer consumer organization. Our mission is to protect and promote social and economic justice for consumers and workers in the United States and abroad. For more information, visit www.nclnet.org.