NCL statement on White House “Protecting Americans from Online Censorship” proposal

/in , , , /by

August 12, 2019

Media contact: National Consumers League – Carol McKay, carolm@nclnet.org, (412) 945-3242 or Taun Sterling, tauns@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC—The National Consumers League, America’s pioneering consumer and worker advocacy organization, is urging the Trump Administration not to move forward on its reported proposal to require the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to regulate speech on the Internet. As reported, the draft proposal would severely curtail the protections that website operators receive under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. These protections are crucial to website operators’ abilities to moderate content, including hate speech, violence, and other objectionable content.

The following statement is attributable to John Breyault, vice president of public policy, telecommunications and fraud at the National Consumers League:

An open and well-moderated Internet is crucial to consumers’ ability to get the information they need to make informed marketplace decisions and to hold industry and government officials accountable. Nonetheless, the Trump White House seems determined to pursue a fairness doctrine for the Internet in order to placate a small, but vocal portion of the President’s base. In the name of protecting against largely fictitious ‘conservative bias,’ the Administration’s proposal would direct the independent FCC and FTC to exercise authority they don’t legally have and which their leaders have said they don’t want. If reports about the draft executive order are true, the results could be disastrous for consumers and free speech online. This proposal is deeply misguided. We urge the Administration to consign it to the dustbin of history.

###

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.

Trump’s fuel economy rollbacks: a loss for workers, consumers, the environment

/in , , , , , /by

headshot of NCL LifeSmarts intern Alexa

By NCL LifeSmarts intern Elaina Pevide

Cars are baked into American life – around 83 percent of households own one – so any change in the cost or availability of gasoline affects an enormous group of Americans.

Although most of us have grumbled about the cost of gas at some point—and memories of the Great Recession and its dramatic spikes in gas prices are enough to send shivers down the spine of many Americans—some Americans are affected more than others by increases. Did you know that low-income households spend twice as much of their income on gasoline as other Americans? For this group, fuel economy is an especially close-to-home issue.

The Obama Administration made significant headway in improving fuel economy standards and fostering American innovation when it announced the One National Program in 2010. That program unified the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) greenhouse gas emission standards with the fuel economy standards set by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). This initiative set long-term goals for fuel efficiency aiming at Model Year 2025, when vehicular CO2 emissions were slated to be reduced by half. The One National Program was a win-win for consumers and the environment. Obama’s initiative would have made the American automotive industry a world leader in environmentally-friendly innovation while also giving the U.S. a huge advantage in a turbulent global economy adapting to the threat of climate change.

Perhaps the greatest benefactor of Obama’s One National Program was the average consumer. Doubling fuel economy means that consumers get twice the bang for their buck at the pump. These benefits would eventually help the less affluent the most, many of whom own used vehicles. Low-income secondhand car owners would pay little of the front-end cost of innovation, but would still save hundreds of dollars on gas on later model used cars.

During the last 7 months of the Obama Administration, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy determined that, given the success of the program thus far, the program would maintain its initial goal of a 54.5 mpg fuel economy standard by 2025. Unfortunately, the Trump administration did not take long to backpedal on this dramatic win for consumers, workers, and the environment.

On March 15, 2017, then-EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt and Department of Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao reopened the evaluations. Two weeks later, they provided their disappointing and controversial results: the Trump EPA did not believe in the efficacy of the One National Program. By August, NHTSA and the EPA announced a new rule, called the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient (SAFE) Vehicles Rule, the euphemistically-named rollback that handed the automotive industry a big win. The federal actions revoked the ability of California and 13 other states to enforce their own higher standards for environmentally-friendly vehicles.

The SAFE Vehicles Rule is misnamed. The Trump Administration is, in our view, mistaken in its assertions that the freeze and rollback of fuel economy standards will benefit anyone. An analysis by the Consumer Federation of America found that the program has already saved consumers $500 billion, with an extra $400 billion to be found in health, macroeconomic and environmental benefits. Trump’s plan will end these savings and cost the average American household $4,500. We know that fuel efficiency creates a healthy economy, environment, and, thus, a healthier society. Sadly, the current Administration has thrown that out the window.

Global warning and climate change are urgent problems. According to an article from Union of Concerned Scientists, cars and trucks account for nearly one-fifth of all U.S. emissions, emitting around 24 pounds of carbon dioxide and other global-warming gases for every gallon of gas. About five pounds comes from the extraction, production, and delivery of the fuel, while the great bulk of heat-trapping emissions–more than 19 pounds per gallon–comes right out of a car’s tailpipe.

Improving vehicular fuel efficiency is crucial to the future of the United States. High fuel economy standards reduce our need for foreign oil and encourage American companies to keep up with the green innovation around the world. As Europe, China, and other regions address global warming and reducing auto emissions, America is rolling back the clock. As a nation heavily reliant on cars for daily life, we call upon President Trump, his federal appointees, and the auto industry, to reverse these foolhardy decisions and demand improved fuel economy–to set us back on track towards the goals we were on course to meet just a few years ago.

Elaina Pevide is a student at Brandeis University where she majors in Public Policy and Psychology with a minor in Economics. She expects to graduate in May of 2020.

Calling an end to the health and humanitarian crisis at the border

/in , , , , , /by

Nissa ShaffiFlorence Kelley, first general secretary of the National Consumers League (NCL), was a pioneer in progressive social reform during a time in our nation’s history that was defined by mass immigration and egregious health violations. 120 years later, we bear witness once again to the unconscionable transgressions occurring in migrant detention centers across the border with regards to immigrant rights and access to health care. 

At this very moment, people who are exercising their legal right to seek asylum, according to international and U.S. law, are being systemically dehumanized. The atrocities occurring at our border completely tarnish the social protections that NCL has historically fought to solidify.

On July 10, the House Oversight Committee held a hearing to examine the humanitarian crisis at the border. The investigation followed the release of a July 2 report by the Office of Inspector General (OIG) detailing the dangerous and unsanitary conditions migrant detainees are experiencing at Custom and Border Patrol (CBP) and Immigration Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities.

Images of children sprawled across cold concrete floors in overcrowded holding cells, wrapped in nothing but flimsy mylar blankets, prompted members of Congress, immigration lawyers, and physicians to visit various migrant detention centers throughout Texas to witness the matter firsthand.

Visitors noted a stench that could be detected immediately upon entry into the facilities, which was attributed to detainees being sardined into holding cells, in conditions that have been classified as inhumane and in violation of international law. A majority of detainees have been denied access to basic toiletries like soap and toothbrushes to help them maintain their hygiene. Additionally, individuals have not been able to shower in weeks, are sleep deprived, and are housed in frigid temperatures in rooms that have been given the apt moniker of the “ICE Box.” Many migrants have claimed that they were wearing the same soiled clothes that they wore during their long passage into the country.

These facilities were not designed to house migrants for prolonged detainment. Regulations prohibit the detention of detainees for longer than 72 hours, yet OIG reported that migrants had been held indefinitely, some even as long as several weeks. The unsanitary conditions prevalent in the detention centers have resulted in outbreaks of the flu, lice, shingles, scabies, and chickenpox. The processing centers in the facilities are housed beyond infrastructural capacity, leading border officials to take desperate measures to hold detainees in cages and under overpasses. These dangerous conditions will inevitably advance the spread of disease, endangering the lives of detainees as well as the general public who will come into contact with CBP and ICE agents.

These facilities are privatized, for-profit migrant detention centers that function outside the purview of federal oversight and accountability. Shareholder interests call for incentivized cuts to medical staffing, which as a result, has led to cruel and negligent practices that have encouraged the spread of disease, the proliferation of trauma, and the violation of human rights.

NCL calls on Congress to address the harrowing health and human rights violations taking place at our borders. NCL strongly advocates for a principled, comprehensive immigration reform that treats all immigrants with respect and dignity, no matter their legal status in the United States. NCL’s immigration policy advocates to:

  • keep families together;
  • ensure a humane pathway to citizenship and builds upon the success of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) to incorporate young immigrants into mainstream society; and
  • ensure effective enforcement that protects our borders, fosters commerce, and promotes the safe and legitimate movement of people and goods at our ports of entry.

To learn about NCL’s immigration policy, click here.

The National Consumers League calls on lawmakers to work together to enact humane immigration policy reform that genuinely encompasses the promise of American values. Congress must act swiftly and in the best interest of migrants detained to collectively bring an end to this humanitarian crisis.

Finally, regulation where it’s needed: seven new bills with a focus on consumer safety

/in , , , /by

headshot of NCL Health Policy intern Alexa

By NCL Health Policy intern Alexa Beeson

This June, the House Energy and Commerce’s Consumer Protection and Commerce Subcommittee held a hearing in which they considered seven different bills concerning product safety. The hearing was motivated by a commitment to removing life-threatening products from the market, which–somehow–remain in circulation for purchase. Most notably, the bills address furniture tip-over (H.R. 2211), crib bumpers (H.R. 3170), inclined infant sleepers (H.R. 3172), and fire safety (H.R. 806).

The witnesses included Will Wallace, a manager at Consumer Reports; Crystal Ellis, a devastated mother and founder of Parents Against Tip-Overs; Chris Parsons, the president of Minnesota Professional Fire Fighters; and Charles A. Samuels, a member of Mintz, a law firm that represents manufacturers of some of the products implicated in various accidents.

Ellis was especially moving. She lost her son, Camden, five years ago on Father’s Day in a tip-over accident involving an unstable dresser. The day she testified would have been her son’s 7th birthday. Camden’s death and the deaths of many others in tip-over accidents catalyzed the founding of Parents Against Tip-Overs, which advocates for children who were victims of unsafe consumer products. Ellis recounted the devastating loss of her son and pleaded that the committee act to protect other children from suffering the same fate. Ellis urged the committee to evaluate the standards set forth by the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC), which are not regulated enough to prevent tip-overs.

Furniture tip-over is a more widespread problem than you might realize. According to the CPSC, an estimated annual average (2014-2016) of 9,300 children ages 0-19 were treated in the emergency department for furniture tip-over injuries, not including televisions or appliances. If you include television and other appliances, which were not covered in the bills at the hearing, the number jumps to more than 15,000. From 2000-2016, furniture tip-overs killed 431 children.

These deaths could have been prevented by enforcing stricter safety regulations. The current CPSC regulations do not demand mandatory safety standards for tip-over prevention. The product manufacturing industries are only held to a voluntary standard. Additionally, products under 30 inches tall are exempt from any such safety regulations. However, as found by a Consumer Reports investigation, shorter furniture still causes major tip-over accidents.

The Stop Tip-overs of Unstable, Risky Dressers on Youth (STURDY) Act would seek to change these standards. The bill would require the CPSC to mandate manufacturers to produce more rigorous testing of their products; to perform more “real-world” testing and to revise consumer warning requirements, ensuring higher standards of product safety and transparency.

The National Consumers League thanks the Consumer Protection and Commerce Subcommittee for taking measures to hold industry accountable with regards to product safety standards. One positive message that everyone can take away from this hearing is that times are changing. Industry will be held accountable, and consumers will be protected. It looks like the time for the CPSC to take charge in handling consumer safety and protection–instead of letting industry set its own rules–is just around the corner, to paraphrase Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ).

Alexa is a student at Washington University in St. Louis where she studies Classics and Anthropology and concentrates in global health and the environment. She expects to graduate in May of 2020

NCL: Consumers should be able to access broadcast channels for free via Locast

/in , , , , , , /by

August 5, 2019

Media contact: National Consumers League – Carol McKay, carolm@nclnet.org, (412) 945-3242 or Taun Sterling, tauns@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC—Last week, the four largest broadcast networks—ABC, CBS, Fox, and NBC—filed suit against Locast, a free streaming service operated by the non-profit Sports Fans Coalition NY. The networks’ lawsuit seeks to block Locast’s streaming of local broadcast programming. The suit alleges that Locast violates copyright laws by failing to compensate the networks for their programming.

The following statement is attributable to NCL Vice President of Public Policy, Telecommunications, and Fraud John Breyault:

Consumers can already legally obtain free over-the-air broadcast channels via an antenna on their roofs. We think broadcasters would be better off embracing an innovative technology that allows consumers to more easily access their ad-supported content.

To secure public accessibility of broadcast signals, the Copyright Act expressly permits non-profit organizations to retransmit free over-the-air broadcasts. Locast is operated by the non-profit Sports Fans Coalition NY as a free public service. NCL supports broad consumer choice for access to local broadcast channels.

This year alone, the four largest broadcast networks are expected to generate more than $10 billion in retransmission-consent fees from cable and satellite providers that carry the networks’ programs. These fees are largely passed onto consumers in the form of higher monthly cable and satellite bills. Along with advertising that networks and local television stations sell, retransmission fees support the production of critically important local news content as well as traditional entertainment programming. 

NCL and Sports Fans Coalition (SFC) have a history of working together on a range of important consumer issues. In 2014, together we successfully petitioned the Federal Communications Commission to repeal the Sports Blackout Rule. In 2018, we jointly urged the Federal Trade Commission to protect consumers in the live event ticketing marketplace by cracking down on deceptive “white label ticketing websites.” We have also worked with SFC to create a landmark “Sports Bettor’s Bill of Rights” to ensure that consumers are protected as more states move to legalize online sports betting.

###

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.

Consumer group calling on Congress to pass Hot Cars Act on Heat Stroke Prevention Day, July 31

/in , , , , /by

July 31, 2019

Media contact: National Consumers League – Carol McKay, carolm@nclnet.org, (412) 945-3242 or Taun Sterling, tauns@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC—Washington, DC—Just days after the tragic deaths of one-year-old twins who were accidentally left behind by a parent in a car in the Bronx over the weekend, advocates pointing to today’s observance of Heat Stroke Prevention Day to call attention to a bill in Congress that would mandate new cars come with technology to prevent such tragedies.

The Hot Car Act would require that all new cars come equipped with an alarm system that reminds drivers to check the car after exiting. The bill calls for “a distinct auditory and visual alert to notify individuals inside and outside of the vehicle of the presence of an occupant.” This alarm will only occur when the vehicle senses a physical presence in the back seat.

Heatstroke is the leading cause of deaths in vehicles (excluding crashes) for children 14 years old and younger, according to Consumer Reports. Although some may believe that hot car tragedies could never happen to them, more than 900 children have died in hot cars since 1990, and 17 fatalities have been recorded in 2019 alone, according to safety advocacy group KidsAndCars.org.

“This lifesaving technology is already available, so why wouldn’t we expedite its implementation and allow children and their families to benefit from it?” said NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg. “Just as we have overcome other dangers in cars–kids dying in trunks, backover accidents, deadly electric car windows–the auto industry now has the technology available to prevent these tragedies. Kids shouldn’t pay with their lives when we can readily fix the problem. The auto industry can do something about this and should.”

The Hot Cars Act alert system follows in the tradition of other essential vehicle alarm systems that have become commonplace for consumers, such as chimes that remind drivers to use a seat belt, indicate that headlights have been left on, or doors have been left ajar.

The alarm system also has relevance beyond the summer months. Sensors and alarms in new cars will also prevent children from being left unattended in dangerously cold temperatures. The proposed technology would also alert pet-owners if their furry friend is about to be left behind.

“These hot car deaths have happened for many years to many doting, devoted, and loving parents. Human beings make mistakes, but we now have the technology that can prevent these mistakes and help protect children, so let’s use it,” said Greenberg.

The Senate introduced its version of the bill in May, which was sponsored by Senators Roger Wicker (R-MS), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), and Maria Cantwell (D-WA). 

The National Consumers League once again commends Representatives Tim Ryan (D-OH), Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) and Peter King(R-NY) for their continued leadership on this issue and urge members of Congress to support this important children’s protection 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.

Consumer group: Capital One breach highlights need for Congressional action on data security legislation

/in , , , , , , , /by

July 30, 2019

Media contact: National Consumers League – Carol McKay, carolm@nclnet.org, (412) 945-3242, or Taun Sterling, tauns@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC—Just one week after consumers received relief from the massive Equifax breach, yet another massive breach—this time at Capital One bank—is placing consumers at risk, yet again, of identity theft.

In one of the largest financial breaches in history, more than 100 million Capital One accounts and 140,000 Social Security numbers were reportedly compromised. As was the case in previous breaches, the Capital One breach appears to have stemmed from a third-party cloud hosting vendor that stored Capital One’s data.

The National Consumers League (NCL), the nation’s pioneering consumer and worker advocacy organization, is calling on Congress to immediately pass comprehensive privacy legislation and protect highly personal data.

“Consumers are sitting ducks if big banks like Capital One, giant hotel chains like Marriott, and credit scoring companies like Equifax don’t take the necessary steps to protect our data,” said John Breyault, NCL’s vice president of public policy, telecommunications, and fraud. “When companies like Capital One are sloppy in protecting consumers’ data, it allows hackers steal consumer information which ultimately fuels identity theft and other frauds against us.”

“More than five years after hackers compromised the personal information of nearly 110 million Target customers, criminals are still breaking through supposedly strong firewalls and stealing consumers’ personal data from companies. Any data security legislation must require that consumer data be protected with strong fines and criminal penalties for failing to do so,” said NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg.

###

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.

DOT green lights more concentration, less competition in American-Qantas alliance

/in , , , /by

July 24, 2019

Media contact: National Consumers League – Carol McKay, carolm@nclnet.org, (412) 945-3242, or Taun Sterling, tauns@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC—The National Consumers League (NCL), America’s pioneering consumer and worker advocacy organization, is disappointed in the Department of Transportation’s (DOT) decision to approve a grant of antitrust immunity to a new international alliance between American Airlines and Qantas Airways. The following statement is attributable to Sally Greenberg, NCL executive director:  

“In 2016, the Obama DOT found that an American-Qantas tie-up would ‘reduce competition and consumer choice.’ Less than three years later, the Trump DOT has decided that the American-Qantas alliance will be ‘procompetitive’ and ‘likely to generate substantial benefits for the traveling public’ in the U.S.-Australia market. We are at a loss to understand how allowing the Big Three airline alliances to control 86 percent of the U.S.-Australia market will generate substantial benefits for flyers. This decision is yet more evidence that the Trump DOT is intent on putting the interests of big airlines ahead of the interests of the flying public. The woeful absence of competition in the airline industry today has led to higher prices, poor service, and nowhere for the flying public to go. This decision only adds insult to injury for consumers.”

###

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.

The ‘tampon tax’: an unconstitutional loss to American consumers

/in , , , , /by

headshot of NCL LifeSmarts intern Alexa

By NCL LifeSmarts intern Elaina Pevide

Bingo supplies in Missouri, tattoos in Georgia, cotton candy in Iowa, gun club membership in Wisconsin; what do these products and services have in common? They are all treated as tax-exempt by states that still put a tax on tampons.

Sales taxes on menstrual products, often referred to as “tampon taxes”, are still present in 35 states. Tampon taxes are cited as a major contributor to the “pink tax”, the heightened cost of products and services marketed toward women. For example, a purple can of sweet-smelling shaving cream for women will almost always cost more than its male counterpart across the aisle. This trend translates across industries. A 2015 study from the Joint Economic Committee found that women pay more 42 percent of the time for products from pink pens to dry cleaning. These pricier goods and services serve no benefit to the consumer and have no apparent improvement in function or quality. The pink tax cuts into women’s spending power and takes advantage of consumers simply on the basis of gender.

Tampon taxes and the pink tax have both been making waves recently as pressing feminist issues. While markups on products for women are unjust, activists are targeting the tampon tax as priority number one. Menstrual products, they argue, are necessities and states have the power to cut sales taxes on them by labeling them as such. States give tax exemptions to other items– like bingo supplies, tattoos, and cotton candy–that are far less vital to the health and success of consumers. Today, five states do not have sales taxes on any products, five states have always given hygiene products tax-exemption status, and five states have successfully fought to eliminate the tampon tax. Currently, 35 states remain with 32 having tried–and failed–to pass legislation on the matter.

States resistance to eliminate the tampon tax, typically for fiscal reasons, is at odds with the interests and demands of consumers. A survey of 2,000 women, conducted on behalf of menstrual cup company Intimina, found that three out of four women believe the tampon tax should be eradicated. Nearly 70 percent of those surveyed interpreted taxes on feminine products as a form of sexism.

Countless advocacy organizations have been established out of the need to provide consumers with affordable menstrual products and eliminate the tampon tax. One such group, Period Equity, recently launched a campaign with reproductive care company LOLA called “Tax Free. Period.”. Their campaign calls for the remaining 35 states with a tampon tax to eliminate it by Tax Day 2020. In the meantime, they’re gearing up for a legal battle to challenge the states that refuse to comply. Their argument? Taxes on a product that affect only women and other individuals who menstruate is a form of discrimination and thereby unconstitutional.

As reproductive rights groups await the response of state legislatures and federal courts on this issue, the half of Americans that use menstrual products in their lifetime are suffering. Women make less in wages than men but are forced to spend more. The tampon taxes expound gender inequality and costs American consumers millions of dollars each year–dollars that could benefit their families and stimulate the economy elsewhere. Period Equity’s tagline says it best: “Periods are not luxuries. Period.” It’s about time for American tax policy to reflect that reality.

Elaina Pevide is a student at Brandeis University where she majors in Public Policy and Psychology with a minor in Economics. She expects to graduate in May of 2020.

DC takes lead in fight against deceptive hotel resort fees

/in , , , , /by

July 10, 2019

Media contact: National Consumers League – Carol McKay, carolm@nclnet.org, (412) 945-3242 or Taun Sterling, tauns@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington, DC—The National Consumers League (NCL) is applauding District of Columbia (DC) Attorney General Karl Racine for his action this week to rein in Marriott International’s use of deceptive “resort fees.” According to the consumer group, the fees hide the true cost of a hotel stay and are too often presented to consumers in a “take it or leave it” fashion at the end of their hotel stays. On Tuesday, Racine filed a lawsuit against Marriott alleging that the hotel chain violated consumer protection laws by not including resort fees in the advertised room rates, luring consumers with deceptively low prices.

“Hotel resort fees tacked on at the end of a hotel stay are deceptive, plain and simple,” said NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg. “That’s why NCL and other consumer groups have been raising the alarm about these anti-consumer practices for years. We are grateful to General Racine for leading the charge against Marriott and putting other hotels on notice that deceptive hotel resort fees have no place in the District.”

Advocates’ issue with resort fees is that they prevent consumers from being able to accurately compare the cost of a hotel room when they don’t know what the all-in costs will be until the end of their stay. Mandatory hotel resort fees leave consumers stuck paying extra costs that may have discouraged the booking had they been disclosed up-front.

Marriott owns, manages, and franchises more than 5,700 hotels and 1.1 million hotel rooms in more than 110 countries, including at least 29 hotels in the District of Columbia. In 2012 the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) warned Marriott and nearly two dozen other hotel chains that their pricing practices around resort fees may violate federal consumer protection laws by misrepresenting the true price of hotel rooms. In 2017, the FTC’s Bureau of Economics issued a report concluding that “separating mandatory resort fees from posted room rates without first disclosing the total price is likely to harm consumers.”

Marriott has charged resort fees to tens of thousands of District consumers over the years, totaling millions of dollars. Racine’s lawsuit alleges that over the past decade, Marriott has violated the District’s Consumer Protection Procedures Act and harmed District consumers.

“Marriott had fair warnings on several occasions but continued this unfair and deceptive business practice. We are so pleased that General Racine is seeking monetary relief for residents of the District who have been forced to pay these fees,” said John Breyault, NCL Vice President of Public Policy, Telecommunications, and Fraud. “We urge other state attorneys general to enforce their consumer protection laws against Marriott and other hotel chains whose are sticking millions of consumers with these deceptive, unwanted fees.”

The complaint is available at: https://oag.dc.gov/sites/default/files/2019-07/Marriott-Complaint.pdf

###

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.