Coalition of consumer organizations urge supermarket industry to address “digital discrimination”

/in Consumer Education, Consumer Protection, Featured Home - Consumer Education, Featured Home - Consumer Protection, Press release/by

November 17, 2022

Media contact: National Consumers League – Melody Merin, melodym@nclnet.org, (703) 298-2614

This week a coalition of national consumer organizations urged leading supermarket chains to offer alternatives to digital-only discounts. Currently, many senior citizens and lower-income shoppers cannot take advantage of digital-only discounts due to smartphone or internet inaccessibility.

In the past couple of years more and more weekly specials advertised by some supermarkets for meat, fish, poultry, produce, and store-brand items are digital-only deals. They typically require shoppers to first go online to electronically “clip” the offers to add them to their loyalty card account to be charged the sale price in the store.

Because 25 percent of seniors don’t use the internet and 39 percent don’t have smartphones, according to a 2021 study by the Pew Research Center, they are effectively shut out of these deals. Similarly, 43 percent of low-income households lack broadband internet access.

The consumer groups suggested multiple ways that supermarkets can offer an offline alternative to digital-only deals to accommodate both the digitally-disconnected and the digitally-challenged shoppers, which include: 

  •  Utilizing barcoded “clip or click” store coupons in store circulars so the customer can choose their preferred redemption method (e.g., Vons and The Giant Company).
  • Empowering cashiers to charge the digital price upon request.
  • Offering physical store coupons next to digital-only deals for those who did not/could not electronically “clip” the offer (e.g., H-E-B).

The letter to supermarket executives was sent on November 15 to the following chains: Kroger, Albertsons, Stop & Shop, Star Market/Shaw’s, Ralphs, QFC, Jewel Osco, Randalls, Fred Meyer, King Soopers, Smart & Final, and Safeway.

Consumer Action, Consumer Reports, Consumer World, National Consumers League, and U.S. PIRG are the consumer organizations pressing supermarkets to expand the way they offer digital-only deals.

The full letter can be viewed here.

###

About the National Consumers League (NCL)

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 https://nclnet.org.

DC Attorney General files consumer protection lawsuit against football team and its owners

/in Consumer Protection, Featured Home - Consumer Protection, Press release/by

November 9, 2022

Media contact: National Consumers League – Katie Brown, katie@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington D.C.— District of Columbia Attorney General Karl Racine announced today that he has filed a consumer protection lawsuit against the Washington Commanders, their owner Daniel Snyder, the National Football League (NFL), and NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell for allegedly colluding to deceive DC residents about an NFL investigation into the team’s toxic workplace culture, which includes sexual harassment.

The National Consumers League is pleased that DC Attorney General Karl Racine can use the District of Columbia Consumer Protection Procedures Act (DC CPPA) to address broad ranging issues of public concern with respect to this lawsuit. NCL had a hand in the drafting and passage of this important consumer protection legislation, which was originally introduced by DC Councilmember Mary Cheh and adopted into law in 2012 and further strengthened with later amendments.

“We think that Attorney General Racine’s application of this consumer protection statute underscores the importance of broadly protective statutes that address fraud and deception,” says NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg.

###

About the National Consumers League (NCL)

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 https://nclnet.org.

NCL welcomes minimum wage for tipped workers in the District of Columbia

/in Featured Home - Workers Rights, Press release/by

November 9, 2022

Media contact: National Consumers League – Katie Brown, katie@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington D.C.— The National Consumers League welcomes the decision by the voters of the District of Columbia to support Initiative 82, lifting tipped workers from the subminimum wage to a full minimum wage and to be phased in over the next five years. NCL’s founders, who wrote the first minimum wage laws in the United States at the turn of the 20th Century, is part of the One Fair Wage (OFW) movement headed by visionary Saru Jayaraman. OFW aims to do away with the subminimum tipped wage across America. That subminimum wage is a relic of post-slavery emancipation in the U.S. when African Americans were expected to work for free and get a tip if they were lucky.

Four years ago, residents of the District overwhelmingly voted to support Initiative 77 to get rid of the $5.05 tipped wage and move to the full DC-mandated minimum wage for all tipped workers. Unfortunately, in 2018, the DC Council voted 8-5 to overturn the will of the people and the law never went into effect. However, One Fair Wage and Initiative 82 backers were able to get the measure on the ballot again in 2022, and once again, the measure won by overwhelming margins. This time, DC Council members have pledged to let the ballot measure become law.

Currently, the tipped wage is $5.35. Initiative 82 affects all in DC who rely on tips to bring them up to the minimum wage, which will be $16.10 by 2027 and will apply to restaurant servers, bartenders, nail salons workers, and parking lot attendants.

Employers are required by current law to ensure that if tips don’t bring workers up to the minimum wage, they must make up the difference. Unfortunately, more often than not this doesn’t happen. As DC Councilmember Mary Cheh has noted, the current law “is an invitation to cheat.”

The statement below is attributable to Sally Greenberg, Executive Director of the National Consumers League:

“NCL is deeply appreciative that the voters of the District have once again decided that all workers in DC are entitled to earn the same minimum wage. We hail the overwhelming popularity of Initiative 82 among DC residents and applaud the work of One Fair Wage and the organizers of Initiative 82 in getting this measure on the ballot. This is a big win for workers.

“As a former waitress, I can attest that relying on customers to tip you so that you make minimum wage is unsustainable. Many customers tip minimally, some don’t tip at all, and employers frequently don’t make up the difference. As a result, tipped workers – many of whom are women and people of color – end up with poverty wages; are subject to some of the highest rates of sexual harassment; and are unable to feed their families under the current system.

“Initiative 82 is long overdue. We need to say goodbye to the tipped wage and give all workers in the District the respect they deserve and that includes the right to earn the same minimum wage as all other workers.

“NCL looks forward to working with the DC Government and the  Attorney General’s office to see this measure implemented across the District in the coming months.”

###

About the National Consumers League (NCL)

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 https://nclnet.org.

Nation’s leading advocacy groups express their concern over partnership between Major League Baseball and CBD maker

/in Press release/by

November 9, 2022

Media contact: National Consumers League – Katie Brown, katie@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington D.C.— The National Consumers League, along with CADCA – a national nonprofit organization committed to creating safe, healthy, and drug-free communities globally – submitted today a joint letter to the commissioners of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Major League Baseball (MLB) expressing concern over the recently announced partnership between MLB and cannabidol (CBD) maker Charlotte’s Web.

“The lack of the product is not well understood by the public and this type of agreement sends … a deceptive message to consumers, implying that CBD is regulated – or at the very least, tested, and proven safe,” according to the letter.

 

To view the letter to FDA, click here.

 

###

About the National Consumers League (NCL)

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 https://nclnet.org.

Twitter must do its part to limit the spread of false information and hate speech on its platform, says NCL

/in Press release/by

November 4, 2022

Media contact: National Consumers League – Katie Brown, katie@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington D.C.—The National Consumers League (NCL), America’s oldest consumer advocacy organization, had previously urged Elon Musk to protect user privacy while continuing to regulate dangerous and misleading content when he announced his plans to acquire Twitter. Now that Musk has finalized his purchase, NCL is seeing worrying signs that one of the largest social media platforms may become an even greater vector for misinformation and dangerous rhetoric. 

“As a service that reaches millions of users daily, Twitter has a social responsibility to ensure that its space is not used to spread demonstrably false information or discriminatory messaging,” said NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg. “All social media platforms, regardless of who their largest shareholder is, must do their part in limiting misinformation that hampers the COVID-19 recovery and hate speech against marginalized populations. This is not an abstract exercise in free speech—these are matters that impact real lives.” 

More broadly, Musk’s acquisition is only the latest example of the United States’ regulatory system failing to prevent massive wealth and asset consolidation into the hands of a few. Allowing a select number of billionaires to dominate nearly every industry is disastrous for consumer welfare and incompatible with the nation’s democratic principles.

###

About the National Consumers League (NCL)

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 https://nclnet.org.

Consumer groups call for moratorium on smaller airplane seats pending FAA safety review

/in Consumer Protection, Featured Home - Consumer Protection, Press release, Transportation/by

November 2, 2022

Media contact: National Consumers League – Katie Brown, katie@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Advocates caution that out-of-date emergency evacuation testing standards could put flyers at risk 

Washington D.C.— A coalition of six consumer advocacy organizations yesterday filed comments in response to a Federal Aviation Administration’s (FAA) inquiry regarding minimum passenger seat dimensions. The groups called for the FAA to prohibit airlines from installing smaller seats in commercial jets while the agency reviews and updates its decades-old emergency evacuation testing standards.

“Airlines have a profit incentive to cram more people on their planes,” said Sally Greenberg, Executive Director of the National Consumers League, which organized the letter. “This trend has created a dangerous environment that could impede safe evacuation in the event of an emergency. The FAA has looked the other way for decades as the airlines have increasingly prioritized their bottom lines over passenger safety.”

U.S. law requires air carriers to ensure that they can evacuate their aircraft in 90 seconds or less. In an alarming number of real-world emergencies in recent years, evacuations took between two and five minutes, even though every airline has certified that their planes comply with federal standards. Despite this, the FAA continues to rely on emergency evacuation testing standards that reflect what flying was like in the 1990’s, not the environment that passengers encounter today.

To address the insecurity of current flying conditions, the consumer groups called on the FAA to take immediate action, including:

  • Instituting a moratorium on the further shrinking of passenger seats. Airlines have reduced the sizes of seats to record lows, having shaved off several inches from when the federal government last updated U.S. evacuation standards.
  • Updating federal evacuation standards to reflect the modern cabin environment, accounting for smaller seat sizes, increased baggage around the cabin, and the proliferation of personal electronic devices.
  • If necessary, provisionally requiring that airline seats be no smaller than 32 inches in pitch (commonly referred to as legroom) and 20 inches in width. These dimensions would ensure that seat sizes are not smaller than the typical minimum dimensions that airlines utilized in the early 1990s.

“In addition to hampering evacuation speeds, it’s important to consider how diminished seat sizes impact traveler health, even when there is not an emergency,” said John Breyault, Vice President of Public Policy, Telecommunications, and Fraud at NCL. “Cramped airline seating increases the risk that passengers will experience deep vein thrombosis and pressure sores. Current seat sizes make flying more dangerous and often embarrassing for many passengers, particularly those with disabilities or those who are too large to safely fit into the seats.”

In addition to NCL, the letter was signed by the American Economic Liberties Project, Consumer Action, Consumer Federation of America, Ed Perkins on Travel, and U.S. PIRG.

To read the coalition’s full comments to the FAA, click here.

###

About the National Consumers League (NCL)

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 https://nclnet.org.

The National Consumers League applauds Federal Housing Finance Agency’s (FHFA) recent decision to validate updated credit scores

/in Press release/by

October 31, 2022

Media contact: National Consumers League – Katie Brown, katie@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington D.C.— The National Consumers League applauds Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) Director Sandra Thompson’s recent decision to validate updated credit scores for the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs). By allowing the use of updated innovative, more predictive scores like FICO10T which reduce the impact of unpaid medical debt and include alternative data sources like rental housing payment information, more consumers will be able to get scored and have access to the market.

However, we are disappointed that FHFA will require the use of VantageScore 4.0  Our concern is prompted by the fact that VantageScore, the company that created VantageScore 4.0, is owned by the credit bureaus, who  have proven themselves to be careless with consumer credit data and consumer protection laws over the years.

In fact, over the past few months, congressional leaders like Housing Banking Chair Maxine Waters and House Majority Leader James Clyburn have raised significant concerns about the anti-consumer activities of the credit bureaus. In August, Chair Waters called on the CFPB to put a moratorium on Equifax after it reported faulty credit scores for millions of consumers. On October 14,  Leader Clyburn requested that the CFPB investigate and review the nation’s largest credit bureaus for possible violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act.

In July of 2021, NCL joined with other consumer groups in sending a letter to the CFPB and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) asking them to update a 2012 study about the accuracy of financial data at the credit bureaus.

In addition to our concerns about data accuracy and anti-consumer anti-competitive behavior by the credit bureaus and the score that they own, NCL is also concerned about the potential cost burdens for consumers that will result from transitioning to this two-score system. Back in our 2018 comments, we asked FHFA to consider what the impact would be for the FHFA, the GSEs, mortgage companies, banks, and most importantly for taxpayers and consumers.

As FHFA works to implement this decision over the next year, we hope they keep the concerns of consumers first and foremost. The housing economy is struggling and we need to ensure consumers aren’t left paying the cost of this transition in increased fees and hidden payments.  We also need to make sure FHFA listens to the concerns of Congress and the consumer community when it comes to the credit bureaus. There is much work to be done and we stand ready to help in any way that we can.

###

About the National Consumers League (NCL)

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 https://nclnet.org.

NCL urges FDA and FTC to investigate potentially false advertising claims made by a recent-FDA approved anti-wrinkle drug

/in Press release/by

October 26, 2022

Media contact: National Consumers League – Katie Brown, katie@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington D.C.— The National Consumers League (NCL) recently submitted a letter to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) urging the agencies to look into misleading advertising claims made by a recent FDA-approved anti-wrinkle drug called DAXXIFY™ (DaxibotulinumtoxinA-lanm).

Revance Therapeutics, Inc., the manufacturer of DAXXIFY™, is promoting the drug’s ability to reduce the appearance of facial lines and wrinkles in about half of its users for about six months. However, FDA-required labeling verifies that roughly one-third of users experience no or mild facial lines for six months after injection – a 20 percent discrepancy from the company’s claim.

NCL believes this discrepancy is concerning and warrants a closer investigation. Moreover, a study mentioned in the company’s press release appears to make inaccurate claims about its results, according to NCL.

We ask that if our concerns are warranted, the FDA and the FTC should hold Revance Therapeutics to accurate claims and insist that the company correct anything deceptive in their advertising, says NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg.

To view the full letter, click here.

###

About the National Consumers League (NCL)

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 https://nclnet.org.

Court decision jeopardizes CFPB and threatens critical government programs, says NCL

/in Press release/by

October 24, 2022

Media contact: National Consumers League – Katie Brown, katie@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington D.C.— Last week, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau’s (CFPB) funding structure is unconstitutional due to its non-reliance on annual Congressional appropriations. This ruling sets a dangerous precedent that could cause irreparable harm to consumers by undoing critical regulations against predatory fees and practices among financial servicers. Additionally, the Fifth Circuit’s logic, if extended across the federal government, would upend numerous federal entities that are also self-funded or otherwise receive revenue without regular Congressional appropriation, including Social Security and Medicare. 

The following statement is attributable to NCL Executive Director Sally Greenberg: 

“For more than 11 years, the CFPB has served as a dedicated champion for consumers in the federal government, preventing abusive, discriminatory, and predatory practices in the finance sector. The Fifth Circuit’s decision against the CFPB’s funding structure not only jeopardizes the CFPB’s invaluable work but also puts other key regulators at structural risk, such as the Federal Reserve System, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC). The Fifth Circuit’s ahistorical logic threatens other critical government programs as well, such as Social Security and Medicare. I hope upon further appeal, the American judicial system will not choose to side with payday lenders again.” 

###

About the National Consumers League (NCL)

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 https://nclnet.org.

NCL Health Policy Associate testifies on behalf of the Preterm Birth Alliance at the FDA hearing on the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research’s (CDER’s) proposal to withdraw approval of Makena

/in Featured Home - Health, Health, Health policy, Press release/by

October 17, 2022

Media contact: National Consumers League – Katie Brown, katie@nclnet.org, (202) 207-2832

Washington D.C.— Today, NCL Health Policy Associate Milena Berhane representing the Preterm Birth Prevention Alliance testified at The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) hearing on the Center for Drug Evaluation and Research’s (CDER’s) proposal to withdraw approval of Makena or 17P. Milena’s full testimony can be found below.

Hello and thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Milena Berhane, and I am a Health Policy Associate at the National Consumers League. I am here representing The Preterm Birth Prevention Alliance, a coalition of 15 maternal and women’s health advocacy organizations that came together in 2021 with a shared concern about the state of preterm birth in the U.S. and what the proposed withdrawal of Makena and its generics could mean for women at risk.

Collectively, the Alliance seeks to improve preterm birth outcomes in the U.S. by maintaining access to safe, FDA-approved treatments and advocating for more diverse medical research that adequately represents the experiences of newborns and women of color.

Since convening as an Alliance, our members have included the following pre-existing organizations with their own missions, leadership and voices coming together to speak with one voice on this issue. These groups include:

  1. 1,000 Days
  2. 2020Mom
  3. The American Association of Birth Centers
  4. Black Women’s Health Imperative
  5. Black Mama’s Matter Alliance
  6. Expecting Health
  7. Healthy Mothers, Healthy Babies
  8. Healthy Women
  9. Miracle Babies
  10. The National Birth Equity Collaborative
  11. The National Black Midwives Alliance
  12. The National Consumers League
  13. The National Partnership for Women and Families
  14. Sidelines and
  15. SisterReach

Over the next few minutes, I will speak to why we believe it is unnecessary and potentially detrimental to cut off access to this entire class of drugs. And I will address how removing 17P and its generics will not affect all women equally.

For full transparency, the panel should be aware that COVIS Pharma – the sponsors of Makena – are one of more than 100 funders who support the work of the National Consumers League. The company has provided some initial funding to support the Alliance but is not involved in the strategic direction of the Alliance or its activities. And—like all of NCL’s funders—does not hold sway over our positions or efforts.

As I’m sure you know and will hear from many others, women of color have substantially higher rates of preterm birth than their white counterparts. According to the March of Dimes 2021 Report Card, while the U.S. preterm birth rate declined a fraction of a percent in recent years—from 10.2 percent in 2019 to 10.1 percent in 2020—rates of preterm birth increased for Black and American Indian/Alaska Native women, who continue to be up to 60 percent MORE likely to give birth preterm compared to White women.

We at the Alliance believe that the removal of Makena and its generics would exacerbate these inequities and contribute to the already stark divide in maternal and infant health outcomes between Black, Indigenous, and other women of color and their white counterparts.

For more than a decade, maternal-fetal medicine specialists have safely used 17P and its generics to help women with recurrent preterm birth carry their babies closer to term, improving the chances of a healthy birth and reducing the risk of long-term health issues for the infant. Taking it off of the market would mean cutting off access to the only safe and effective drug for this indication, which would leave pregnant women and their providers without an affordable approved alternative.

The Alliance believes the FDA should allow for additional studies to learn which populations 17P is MOST effective in treating. And we believe this can and should happen while maintaining access to 17P for women at high risk of adverse outcomes. Based on available evidence, maternal healthcare providers and their patients should have the opportunity to decide together whether 17P would be beneficial to them in their pregnancy. 

I want to pause on this point of available evidence. All of the clinical trial and real-world evidence to date points to Makena and its generics being safe for women who have had a previous preterm birth. This makes keeping 17P on the market a question of efficacy, not safety. So why aren’t we doing everything possible to understand which populations 17P is most effective in treating before taking it off the market entirely?

Given the discrepancy in efficacy data between the original and confirmatory trials, it seems a logical next step would be to conduct additional efficacy studies in the population known to be at highest risk for recurrent preterm birth, which in the U.S., is Black and indigenous women.

Yet, the proposal to withdraw approval was based not on the original trial – MEIS (“Mees”) – which included nearly 60% African American and other women of color in the United States and found that 17P substantially reduced the rate of recurrent preterm delivery among women at high risk for preterm birth. Instead, the proposal to withdraw seems to be based on the results of the confirmatory trial – PROLONG – which was conducted primarily outside of the U.S. among mostly white European women, and which found Makena to not have the same level of efficacy as in the MEIS trial.

These trials studied two vastly different patient populations, one inclusive of women in the U.S. most vulnerable to preterm birth and one not. So the fact that they had different outcomes is not surprising. What doesn’t make sense is why the outcomes among white European women should carry more weight in decision-making than the outcomes among women of color in the U.S.

The Preterm Birth Prevention Alliance believes that evidence of efficacy for women of color in the U.S should be more determinative than a lack of demonstrated efficacy on white women in Europe.

In 2021, a meta-analysis study called EPPPIC (“eh-pick”), published in the Lancet, pooled data from thirty-one randomized trials in asymptomatic women at risk of preterm birth.  It concluded that both 17P injections and vaginal progesterone reduced the risk of preterm birth before 34 weeks in high-risk women with singleton pregnancies. It also noted that shared decision making with women that have high-risk singleton pregnancies, should discuss an individual’s potential risks and benefits. However, despite this reinforcing conclusion about the efficacy of 17P, the agency made no change to its recommendation to remove.

To achieve birth equity and protect the physical, financial, and emotional wellbeing of mothers and infants, we cannot study pregnant women as a monolith.  Instead, we must gain a better understanding of who can benefit most from treatments like 17P, through more diverse studies that include adequate representation from the women in this country who we know are most affected and are at the highest risk.

We believe that this research must explore the causes of disparate outcomes and risk of eliminating approved treatment options before a decision is made. And we believe that while these additional studies are conducted, 17P should absolutely remain available to patients and providers.

This last point is truly critical from the Alliance’s perspective. Considering the proven, life-impacting outcomes from the first clinical trial, years of anecdotal clinical data, and follow-up studies like EPPPIC, we believe that maintaining patient access to 17P while additional studies are conducted is KEY. The Alliance is fighting for a more inclusive healthcare system that gives every pregnant person an equal chance at having the best birth outcomes possible.

We do not believe that removing 17P from the market without understanding who could benefit the most from its use is in the best interests of patients or healthcare providers, especially without any other approved treatment options available. 

Women of color need a seat at the table.

Thank you.

###

About the National Consumers League (NCL)

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 https://nclnet.org.