SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
neera tanden
To Protect Consumers, Biden Cracks Down on 'Corporate Tricks' Like Hard-To-Cancel Services
"The administration is cracking down on all the ways that companies—through paperwork, hold times and general aggravation—waste people's money, waste people's time," a White House official said.
Aug 12, 2024
The Biden administration on Monday launched a wide-ranging consumer protection campaign called "Time Is Money" aimed at cracking down on hard-to-cancel services, deliberately poor customer service, and other "corporate tricks" that involve overly complicated or burdensome processes, such as in the filling out of insurance claims.
The effort involves a number of agencies and initiatives, some already underway, like a proposed Federal Trade Commission (FTC) rule, first announced in March 2023 and currently under public review, that would require companies to make it as easy to cancel a subscription or service as it is to sign up. At least one regulation the administration included as part of "Time Is Money" is already final: a Department of Transportation rule on automatic refunds for airline tickets that are canceled or significantly changed.
Other changes are forthcoming, the White House says. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) will introduce a rule that would require companies under its jurisdiction to allow callers to escape customer service "doom loops" and speak to a human being by pressing a single button; the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is considering a similar initiative for cable and other communications companies, as well as a proposal like the FTC's proposed easy-to-cancel rule.
"The administration is cracking down on all the ways that companies—through paperwork, hold times, and general aggravation—waste people's money, waste people's time," said Neera Tanden, a domestic policy adviser to President Joe Biden, a Democrat, according toHuffPost.
"For example, you want to cancel your gym membership or subscription service to a newspaper," Tanden said. "It took one or two clicks to sign up, but now to end your subscription or cancel the membership, you have to go in person or wait on hold for 20 minutes."
"These seemingly small inconveniences don't really happen by accident," she added. "They have huge financial consequences."
BREAKING: Banks, credit card companies, and more will be required to let customers talk to a human by pressing a single button under a new Biden administration proposed rule.
The @CFPB rule is part of a campaign to crack down on customer service “doom loops.”
— More Perfect Union (@MorePerfectUS) August 12, 2024
Tanden, a former Hillary Clinton aid who has often been at odds with progressives, was careful to clarify that regulations were not aimed at "shaming corporations writ large."
The White House said the new campaign fits with its long-standing effort to improve customer experience with government services. In 2021, Biden signed an executive order calling for federal agencies to streamline and simplify the services they offer. The U.S. State Department has since launched a trial effort to renew passports online, and the Internal Revenue Service has launched a "Direct File" program that's free to use, following a successful pilot.
The "Time Is Money" campaign is also in keeping with the administration's consumer protection agenda. Both the FTC—led by Chair Lina Khan, a favorite of progressives—and the U.S. Department of Justice have stepped up antitrust enforcement. And in October the FTC announced a crackdown on junk and hidden fees.
All of these initiatives have come from the executive branch, making them vulnerable to reversal if Republicans take control of the White House or U.S. Congress next year. Democrats may be hoping the presumed popularity of efforts such as "Time Is Money" help prevent that from happening.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Critics Say Biden Plan to Cut Drug Costs Too Friendly to Big Pharma
"Federal agencies have shown themselves reluctant to act against unreasonable prices, and this new proposal may give them permission to continue to do nothing," said one expert.
Dec 07, 2023
While welcoming the White House's willingness to tackle pharmaceutical companies' patent abuse and high prescription drug prices, progressive critics argued Thursday that U.S. President Joe Biden must do more to challenge Big Pharma's monopoly power.
The White House on Thursday announced "new actions to promote competition in healthcare and support lowering prescription drug costs for American families, including the release of a proposed framework for agencies on the exercise of march-in rights on taxpayer-funded drugs and other inventions."
Under the Bayh-Dole Act of 1980—legislation meant to promote the commercialization and public availability of government-funded inventions—federal agencies reserve the right to "march in" and authorize price-lowering generic alternatives to patented medications developed with public funding.
The federal government has never invoked march-in rights, which are staunchly opposed by the pharmaceutical and other industries and interests.
"American taxpayers pay more for research than any country in the world: Hundreds of billions of dollars on research relevant to developing new drugs through the [National Institutes of Health] and other agencies," White House domestic policy adviser Neera Tanden said at a Thursday press briefing, according toThe Hill.
"But at the same time, pharmaceutical companies charge Americans two to three times—and sometimes even more than that—for the same drugs than what they can charge in other countries," she added.
The White House said Thursday that the Department of Commerce and Department of Health and Human Services "released a proposed framework for agencies on the exercise of march-in rights that specifies for the first time that price can be a factor in determining that a drug or other taxpayer-funded invention is not accessible to the public."
The issue of greedy pharmaceutical companies charging exorbitant prices for publicly funded drugs took center stage during the Covid-19 pandemic, when corporations reaped record profits selling vaccines and other treatments developed fully or partly with taxpayer money.
U.S. Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee Chair Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—a leading congressional critic of Big Pharma greed—called Thursday's announcement "a step forward in the right direction."
Sanders continued:
But, in my view, much more must be done. The American people are sick and tired of seeing hundreds of billions of their tax dollars going to the research and development of new treatments and cures only to end up paying, by far, the highest prices in the world for prescription drugs. In my view, the administration should reinstate and expand the reasonable pricing clause to require the pharmaceutical industry to charge affordable prices for new prescription drugs developed with taxpayer support. It should also move to substantially lower the price of the prostate cancer drug Xtandi by allowing companies to manufacture generic versions of this treatment. This is a drug that was invented with taxpayer dollars by scientists at UCLA and can be purchased in Canada for one-fifth [of] the U.S. price.
In March, patient advocates blasted the Biden administration's refusal to compel Pfizer to lower Xtandi's price, even though the lifesaving prostate cancer drug—which has a nearly $190,000 annual price tag—was developed completely with public funds.
Peter Maybarduk, director of the Access to Medicines program at the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said: "March-in can be, should be, a powerful tool to support fair pricing and access to publicly funded medicines, as President Biden importantly suggests. Unfortunately, the administration's march-in policy is far more limited than the statute allows."
"It should be quickly revised to recommend use of march-in wherever publicly funded medicines are unreasonably priced," he continued. "Where most drug prices already are egregious and force rationing, few drugs will seem 'extremely' priced by comparison. Federal agencies have shown themselves reluctant to act against unreasonable prices, and this new proposal may give them permission to continue to do nothing."
"Unfortunately, the administration's march-in policy is far more limited than the statute allows."
"The examples the announcement offers evade the main and important use case: Where drug corporations abuse their monopoly power to charge exorbitant prices, ignore the government contribution to [research and development], and charge Americans more than people in other countries," Maybarduk asserted.
"The final guidelines must be adjusted so they explicitly cover these scenarios and establish commonsense criteria for what constitutes an unreasonable price," he added. "Falling short risks doing nothing to lower the prices of taxpayer-funded medicines for patients, and instead perpetuating an unacceptable status quo. Americans have a right to expect not to be price gouged for medicines they paid for in the first place."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Urging Senate to 'Ignore the Parliamentarian,' Sanders to Force Vote on $15 Minimum Wage Amendment
"I regard it as absurd that the parliamentarian, a Senate staffer elected by no one, can prevent a wage increase for 32 million workers."
Mar 01, 2021
Calling on the Senate Democratic majority to disregard the advice of the unelected parliamentarian, Sen. Bernie Sanders late Monday announced he will force a vote this week on an amendment to include a $15 minimum wage provision in the pending $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief package.
"At a time when millions of workers are earning starvation wages, when the minimum wage has not been raised by Congress since 2007 and stands at a pathetic $7.25 an hour, it is time to raise the minimum wage to a living wage," Sanders, the chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, said in a statement.
"The Senate should ignore the parliamentarian's advice, which is wrong in a number of respects."
--Sen. Bernie Sanders
The Vermont senator's announcement came as the White House and Senate Democrats signaled a retreat from the effort to include a minimum wage increase in the coronavirus relief package after the parliamentarian advised last week that the measure would run afoul of the Byrd Rule, which requires provisions of reconciliation bills to have a direct--not "merely incidental"--impact on the federal budget.
Citing two anonymous Democratic aides, the Washington Postreported Monday that "Senate Democrats will move forward with a version of the relief bill that does not attempt to raise the minimum wage." Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a floor speech Monday that the chamber will begin voting on the sprawling relief package this week, with an initial procedural vote expected as early as Wednesday.
In his statement Monday night, Sanders said he was "extremely disappointed by the decision of the parliamentarian, who ruled that the minimum wage provision was inconsistent with the Byrd Rule and the reconciliation process."
Echoing the calls of progressive House Democrats and dozens of grassroots advocacy groups representing millions of people across the U.S., Sanders said his "own personal view is that the Senate should ignore the parliamentarian's advice, which is wrong in a number of respects."
"I am not sure, however, that my view at this point is the majority view in the Democratic caucus," the Vermont senator added, alluding to opposition from Sens. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) and Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.). "Obviously, as soon as we can, we must end the filibuster that currently exists in the U.S. Senate. Given the enormous crises facing working families today, we cannot allow a minority of the Senate to obstruct what the vast majority of the American people want and need."
\u201cLet's do this. 60% of the American people want us to increase the minimum wage to $15 an hour. In the Senate, we would call that a "super-majority."\u201d— Warren Gunnels (@Warren Gunnels) 1614644049
Progressives in recent days have pushed Vice President Kamala Harris to overrule the parliamentarian's advice, which she has the constitutional authority to do. Should the vice president opt to use that authority, it would take 60 votes in the Senate to overrule her.
But White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki was adamant during a Monday briefing that Harris will not attempt to overrule the parliamentarian, the official tasked with interpreting Senate rules.
Asked by NBC News reporter Geoff Bennett why the White House appears to be fighting harder to salvage the collapsing nomination of budget office pick Neera Tanden than to keep the minimum wage increase in the coronavirus relief package, Psaki accused Bennett of "mixing a few things kind of irresponsibly."
\u201c.@GeoffRBennett: Why push for Neera Tanden's confirmation and not push as hard, one could say, for raising the minimum wage?\n\nJEN PSAKI: I think that's mixing a few things kind of irresponsibly, if I'm being totally honest\u201d— Aaron Rupar (@Aaron Rupar) 1614629552
Sanders made clear Monday that he will continue pushing to raise the federal minimum wage to $15 an hour if his coronavirus relief amendment fails to pass this week.
Following the parliamentarian's advisory ruling against the proposed pay raise last week, Sanders and Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) began crafting a backup plan that would impose tax penalties on large corporations that don't pay their employees $15 an hour. But Sanders and Wyden reportedly dropped the plan after it became clear that the measure would be too difficult to implement and that there wouldn't be sufficient support to include it in the emerging Covid-19 relief package.
Speaking to the press about his new $15 minimum wage amendment, Sanders said Monday that "there will be a roll call vote, and we'll see who votes for it and doesn't."
"I would suggest that those who vote against it from a political point of view, that's a mistake. The American people want to see that minimum wage raised," Sanders continued. "Let me be very clear--if we fail in this legislation, I will be back."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular