The first is that the FDA doesn't require Lexapro's makers to statistically back up their claim that Lexapro is more effective than Celexa, which is basically Lexapro's parent. (Forest Laboratories changed the molecular structure of Celexa, which was about to lose its patent protection, in order to create Lexapro in 2002.) In fact, Forest has even used this near-interchangeability to its financial advantage:

The F.D.A. views the two medicines as so interchangeable that the agency recently approved Lexapro's use in depressed adolescents based in part on the results of a study Forest conducted using Celexa.

The second is that sales of Lexapro are on the wane, and correspondingly Forest "has been recently raising the price." But, "Many doctors say they believe that Lexapro is the best antidepressant, so they prescribe the drug despite its cost."

"Document Details Plan to Promote Costly Drug" [New York Times]
(Photo: mandiberg)

They pointed out that as the program continues, the most fuel-efficient cars will sell out, lessening the fuel-saving impact of future purchases.

As the program continues, however, many dealerships have run out of the most popular and fuel-efficient new cars, so more trades may result in lower fuel economy improvements, smaller rebates, and potentially a less dramatic sales rate than what was credited to the program in its first weeks.

Cash for clunkers: Senate approves $2 billion extension [Consumer Reports Cars]

(Photo: G Travels)

(Photo: smcgee)

He writes:

Just came back from my local Radio Shack and when I got home noticed the sales tax was set at 8.875 instead of the usual 8.375. You see the tax rate was supposed to go up on July 1st but because our State Senate has been in a stalemate for the last few weeks nothing has been done, including passing the new sales tax.

I called a friend of mine who happens to manage a Radio Shack and asked him what was up and he told me that the computers are programed from the district office and he had called them to let them know of the error a day ago but it has not been fixed yet.

So just let shoppers in NY to keep an eye out for the tax rate while shopping at Radio Shack this weekend.

RELATED: City Council Endorses Sales Tax Increase [The New York Times]

We've been writing about this a fair amount in the last few months, and a recent post summarizes some of the points of contention between the House and Senate, Democrats and Republicans, and consumers and credit card companies. We've also been defining some of the phrases that are being thrown around, like double-cycle billing and universal default.

With the increase in activity in the Senate comes fact sheets and talking points from congressional and committee offices. Here is a summary (PDF) of the Senate bill. We also have some comparison charts and other fact sheets were working on that we'll get up soon.

There's also the Consumers Union site Defend Your Dollars, which is writing about the reform process.

We'll be posting more throughout the week; in the meantime, send us your questions!
(Photo: waynegunn)

When I was seven, I saved the lives of my two younger cousins who were playing on the railroad tracks. They did not notice the train coming, but I did and frantically ran to them. I was able to toss them both to safety, but I fell and my pants got caught on the rail. I have been living with one leg ever since.

Thirty surgeries and two decades later, I was doing fine as a medically trained professional, drawing blood for lab tests at the University of Southern California Hospital. I did my job just as easily on crutches as with a properly fitting prosthetic leg, and had supervisors who understood that I needed to switch between the two because artificial legs don't always fit the way they should. Padding wears down and that extra pressure causes painful blistering that can take weeks to heal, months if the blisters get infected. It also takes weeks to get my leg back when it needs to be refitted.

When staffing needs at USC changed and I had to transfer to the Tenet facility at Garfield Medical Center, my working environment turned ugly. In this day and age, when the law says employers have to accommodate the disabled, the last thing I expected to hear from my new supervisor was, "Go home and put on your leg," but it was something she told me over and over. I did what she asked for as long as I could because I did not want to lose my job, but wearing the leg on top of the blisters gave me a bad infection. Artificial limbs wear out and, at this time, I also had to get a new leg, which meant a lengthy medical review process and insurance delays to replace my basic prosthetic device which costs $34,000. Because my supervisor refused to let me do my job on crutches, I was unable to work for six months. When I returned to Garfield, my job was gone.

The only work they had for me was as a daily hire on the graveyard shift, where a new supervisor let other workers make disparaging remarks to me. When I complained to her, she said I should not take it seriously, that they were just "playing around." I could not let my situation continue, so I told the human resources department I was filing a grievance. My job performance reviews were the only thing that changed after that. They went from always good to always bad.

I thought I had an "open-and-shut case" of discrimination, so I found a lawyer and he filed a lawsuit against Tenet and Garfield. Four days later, I was fired for something I never did, mislabel specimens.

Evidence and facts matter in a court of law, but I didn't have access to one. Tenet employment contracts include a binding mandatory arbitration clause which prevented me from having my case heard before a real judge in a legitimate court. Instead, my case was reviewed by an arbitrator Tenet hired, guaranteeing I would lose and they would be protected.

I was never going to get a fair hearing, but just to make doubly sure of that, Tenet offered the arbitrator two more case to handle while she was in the process of evaluating my case. I lost, of course, but because of this treachery and the strong evidence we had, my lawyer tried to get a regular court to throw out the arbitration decision. That was a failure too.

You can ask your members of Congress to support the Arbitration Fairness Act here, you can also check out the Fair Arbitration Now website and sign a petition to ban forced arbitration.

Previously: The Arbitration Fairness Act Is In The House
Mandatory Binding Arbitration: The Worst Choose Your Own Adventure Ever
What Is Mandatory Binding Arbitration?
(Photo: mindonfire)

Last time we checked in, the Fed had passed some good regulations that stopped some of the worst abuses by credit card companies. Unfortunately, those regulations won't go into effect until July 2010 and they don't go as far as what Congress and the President want. The Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights, sponsored by Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) cleared the House by a wide, bipartisan margin, but didn't get out of the Senate before it adjourned. On the other side, Senator Chris Dodd's (D-Conn.) Credit CARD Act contains much of the same language as the House bill but also adds important protections for consumers under 21, who are often targeted by credit card companies marketing on campuses.

With the renewed vigor of a new Congress and administration, both houses of Congress are working on getting legislation passed and sent to President Obama. Here's what the legislation will do:

• Banks can only increase a credit card's APR if the rate is a promo rate that expired, if the rate is based on an index (for instance, prime plus 3%) and the index increases, or if the customer is late or doesn't make a payment on that account. This effectively bans universal default, where a bank will increase a card's APR because you were late on paying a different card.
• Bans double cycle billing
• Banks can't charge fees or consider you in default if your entire balance consists solely of interest that accumulated on the charges.
• Banks cannot notify credit agencies that you have a new credit account until you use or activate that account
• Banks cannot charge fees for paying by phone or online.

The House bill will take effect one year after the bill becomes law, or no later than July 2010, when the Fed regulations take effect. One exception to this is an amendment that was added will require banks to notify customers 45 days before raising their interest rates; this measure will take effect 90 days after the bill is signed.

President Obama has indicated that he'd like to include more protections, such as requiring banks to apply credit card payments to balances with the highest APR, rather than split proportionally. Obama is also proposing requiring companies to get consumers' permission before adding overdraft protection, rather than just giving consumers the chance to opt out, like under the House bill. Additional protections include requiring that payments be due at the same time every month, and that billing statements disclose how long it will take to pay off the balance when making only the minimum payment.

Lots of good stuff out there. Politically tricky as it may be, we'd love to see merchant agreement violations like minimum purchase and and fees for using credit cards addressed somehow, but that will have to wait till another day.

(Photo: jakesdad)

"New Bill Looks to Clamp Down on Mobile Spam" [InternetNews via mocoNews]
(Photo: nate steiner)

The bipartisan senators from North Carolina, a leading tobacco-growing state, have joined to introduce a competing bill in the Senate that would give tobacco regulatory power not to the FDA, but to the Department of Health and Human Services.

The Senate bill, sponsored by Sen. Richard Burr, R-N.C., and Sen. Kay Hagan, D-N.C., would create the Tobacco Regulatory Agency within the department. A similar House alternative by Rep. Steve Buyer, R-Ind., was defeated 284-142.

What the passed House bill will do instead is create within 90 days of its enactment a Center for Tobacco Products within the FDA that will report to the Commissioner of Food and Drugs just like all other FDA entities.

Philip Morris, the nation's largest cigarette maker, supports the House version of the bill, figuring that FDA oversight will kill any potential competitor.

The Senate is expected to take up the measure after the Easter recess.

House votes to give FDA power over tobacco [AP]
(Photo: Welvis Tarn)

Although only 56 senators responded to the survey, ten reported errors on their tax returns, and six have paid back taxes. Two of the senators that reported errors, Chris Dodd and Amy Klobuchar, had overpaid their taxes.

Our favorite response comes from the office of the reliably wacky Tom Coburn of Oklahoma:

After Dr. Coburn left the House, the House continued to pay him for three months. Apparently, they were very pleased with his service. However, because the payments were made in error Dr. Coburn returned all of the checks to Treasury. Yet, the House sent a W-2 to the IRS, but not to Coburn, reporting income that had been returned. After a long fight, the House and the IRS admitted their error and the IRS sent Coburn a corrected W-2. This is the government in charge of "stimulating" our economy.

(Photo: EricGjerde)

The Senate hearings yesterday were a sad reminder of the problems in our food safety system. Whether it was due to underfunding, understaffing, or bureaucratic mismanagement, the FDA hadn't directly inspected the plant since 2001:

According to the FDA, it last inspected PCA's Blakely plant in 2001, before the company started producing peanut butter. It relied on state inspectors to review the factory in 2006, 2007 and 2008 — and those inspections showed unsanitary practices the FDA later said were "somewhat resolved."

"It was not until 2007, when the plant was inspected under FDA contract by the Georgia Department of Agriculture, that we recognized that in addition to just producing peanuts, they were producing peanut butter and peanut paste," Dr. Steve Sundlof of the agency's Food Safety and Applied Nutrition center told the Senate Agriculture Committee on Thursday.

When federal officials obtained the company's records, they discovered that 12 times in the past two years the company knowingly shipped products that initial tests showed were contaminated with salmonella.

PCA says further tests came back negative, which is why they shipped the products anyway, which seems to be the worst possible safety protocol to follow when it comes to the food supply (but a great one if you're only minding the bottom line, we suppose).

Even if the FDA had known that PCA produced peanut butter and peanut paste, and that the products had at one time tested positive for salmonella, the agency can't legally stop the company from shipping the product.

"The FDA does not have authority to force a manufacturer who's producing contaminated food to recall it," [former FDA associate commissioner William] Hubbard said. "They can beg them to, but they cannot order them to — and that's a flaw in the system."

And finally, the reason it took so long to trace the salmonella outbreak back to PCA was partly due to a lack of infrastructure that would allow doctors to aggregate data on patients in order to see trends. You'd think that by 2008, creating a database that can cross-reference patient variables and look for patterns would be a possibility, but when Senator Harkin asked a CDC official at yesterday's hearing why this wasn't the case, the official responded that there was no money to set up such a system.

FDA officials said they moved as fast as they could given the evidence they had. But Dr. Robert Tauxe, deputy director of the CDC's food-borne bacterial illness division, agreed the system is overly complicated, prone to delays and underfunded.

"The reality is that we have 50 different states, each with their own authorities, each with their own processes and each with their own budgets," Tauxe said.

Surely the savings that would result from reduced sick leave and fewer hospital bills would justify improvements. Hey Google, maybe you can help? Bill and Melinda Gates? Got any extra foundation money? It would be nice to have an infrastructure that works.

Hubbard said the result is "an embarrassment" to a 21st-century nation — about 5,000 deaths a year from food poisoning, with another 325,000 hospitalized and tens of millions sickened, according to CDC figures.

"We are losing the equivalent of the World Trade Center attacks every eight months to food-borne illness," Hubbard said.

"Poor oversight fueled salmonella outbreak, critics say" [CNN]

RELATED
"Vilsack Says Single Food-Inspection Agency Needed" [Bloomberg]
(Photo: Dano)

All good apologies should sport a combination of three components, according to the money printers over at the Harvard Business School:

• Acknowledging that you failed.
• Admitting that you feel bad for failing.
• Taking responsibility for being a failure.

For far too many of you Inauguration day did not turn out as planned. On behalf of the entire 2009 Inaugural Team, I apologize to each one of you who did not get onto the Capitol grounds, to those stuck in the tunnel, to those who had negative interactions with police officers, and those who experienced all three terrible situations. In addition, I regret the inability of the myriad of officials involved in the planning or the execution to respond to the chaos which unfolded.

Many of you had a very negative reaction to my initial reaction that “puffy or heavy coats” might have been one of any number of factors that contributed to our break-down that day. Obviously, I failed to better understand the anger, humiliation, frustration and sense of helplessness that was felt and experienced by so manyor explain myself.

The number of citizens adversely affected by this is still unclear. The initial information I had was less than 5000. I have now seen the photographs from the tunnel and the streets near the purple gates. I have watched hours of tapes of several of the gates to the Capitol grounds. I saw thousands of people in massive groups. Movement seemed impossible. They yelled for information and guidance. It apparently fell on deaf ears. Wether it is 5000 or 10,000, it is too many.

There is little solace for you in the fact that for many the event was successful, even if crowded and cold. That no one was seriously physically injured, hospitalized, nor were an arrest made is positive but does not excuse failures elsewhere.

This was a massive undertaking; the biggest event in DC history. The planners included, as you know United States Secret Service, United States Capitol Police, Metropolitan Police Department of DC, Park Police, Presidential Inaugural Committee, Armed Forces Inaugural Committee, numerous executive branch agencies, DC government, and the States of Maryland and Virginia.

The plan was approved by many and executed by scores, depending on the area of responsibility. Senator Feinstein has directed that a very exhaustive and transparent investigation and review be conducted by the United States Secret Service, United States Capitol Police, Metropolitan Police Department of DC, Park Police and the offices of the House and Senate Sergeant at Arms. This has begun. We assigned senior personnel who were NOT involved in the planning and execution. The Senator expects the report no later than 60 days and hopes that it is closer to 30.

Over these several days I have tried to provide information as I knew it or as it became know to me. My experience is that initial information is often inaccurate, or incomplete, and even insensitive because of the lack of context. I operated from the presumption that silence and no comment was frustrating per se.

Meeting with people who were in the tunnel and people involved in this Facebook group, reading and responding to emails, and watching the films (amateur and professional) continues to shed light on weaknesses in the planning and execution. Some failures resulted from good intentions but poor follow through; other failures were the result of inattention; many problems were directly related to the number of people.

Some facts as I know them today. The north bound tunnel was never intended to be used as a pedestrian walk way; the north bound tunnel was never intended to be used as a holding area for guests arriving at the purple gate, or for anyone else. But I watched the tape where law enforcement personnel directed people from the street to the tunnel. I believe, although at this point I cannot say with certainty, they were trying to clear the street and bring some order.

There have been many questions about gates being opened or closed. As to the Purple gate it opened before 8am; people with special needs were admitted. Watching films of that gate, and there are no direct angles, indicate that the flow of pople was very slow, very limited around 9 am. The initial understanding is thast the USCP officers were attemping to bring some orgaization to the gate area. People moved through this gate until well afternonn.

There was room on the grounds in overflow areas; the use of those overflow areas was part of the plan if more people came then past experience indicated. Many more came, everybody invited came. But the same amount of tickets were given for this Inaugration as the last several. The reason everbody did not get through the screen into those open overflow areas is a central as yet unanswered question. The joint investigative is working that as a key question.

Why was the gate area near purple so congested, as well as near the blue gate and the silver entrance? Preliminarily, based on interviews, reviewing tapes, emails, this face book information, some people came to the incorrect gate, too little information for those not familar with the area to navigate their way to the correct gate, hundreds, maybe thoudsands arrived with tickets sent to them by enties which were meant to be commerative and were not valid for admission, many heading to the parade and they could not get to their gates, poor, incorrect of no crowd mangement in the vicinity of the gates, the Mall filled quickly and people wandered or were improperly advised to try other streets or, unfortunately, tunnels.

We continue to gather facts. I respectfully request you give the joint review team an opportunity to complete the report.

We are here to listen (read) ; we want to understand more about your experience. But, I have another confession; I am brand new to face book; I joined last night. Although I typed many a homicide investigation during my days in Chicago, I remain a slow, hunt and peck typist. I love spell check on my computer and black berry and regret I have not found that same support on face book. So give me some slack in that area.

I cannot answer all your questions; all the facts are not avilable yet; the investigation and review continues. In addition, many more were involved in the planning and execution and they are not here with me.

But all the leaders of this operation are committed public servants who deeply regret our collective or systemic failures. We will get to the bottom of those weaknesses or failures and also tell about things that worked.

Thank you.

The Sergeant at Arms is the Congress' badass. He has lots of mundane administrative responsibilities but he's also charged with enforcing the chamber's rules and is one of the few people empowered to arrest the President of the United States.

So how did the Sergeant do? Gainer hit all the apology high notes. He apologized, took responsibility, and promised a clear and responsible path towards a solution. He also gave a surprisingly complete explanation for the failure. What most impressed us though was that he took the time to join Facebook to deliver his message. His office could have issued a press release or written on any Congressional website (he controls them all) but instead he reached out directly to those who were affected.

Despite the good effort, nothing can replace a missed piece of history—but it's nice to see the Sergeant at Arms trying.

Topic: Inauguration [Facebook]
Sgt. at Arms apologizes on Inaugural mess [Politico]
Purple Tunnel of Doom [Wikipedia]

As the Senate prepares to push back the deadline, the House Energy and Commerce Committee is trying to clear the coupon backlog by "tweaking accounting rules," presumably to make it look like the Commerce Department has spent less than the $1.34 billion it was given. We guess there isn't much interest in actually providing more funds to the program, so why not pull a Wall Street-style accounting caper to gin-up some extra cash?

The transition to digital has been woefully underfunded from the start. We've spent less than $10 million on public education, while England, five times smaller than Alaska, spent close to $400 million on their transition. Unless Congress acts fast, expect your grandparents to call on February 17 asking what happened to all their stories.

Rockefeller Drafting Legislation To Postpone DTV Switch [Congress Daily]
PREVIOUSLY: Consumers Union Asks Congress To Delay Digital Broadcast TV Switch
(Photo: Tubes.)

You'll probably hear it a lot more in 2009, because the Senate and Citibank have just reached an agreement to allow cramdowns for homeowners who have filed for Chapter 13 bankruptcy protection.

The WSJ writes:

Nearly 10 million homeowners are having trouble making their mortgage payments, according to Moody's Economy.com. The proposed changes in bankruptcy rules could help as many as 800,000 troubled borrowers keep their homes, estimates Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com.

Lenders have been opposed to the idea because they obviously don't want to make loans that can later be adjusted by a court, but with the risk of so many foreclosures on the horizon, they're starting to see it in a different light, according to Forbes:

Schumer said he received calls Thursday from several banks - which he did not name - indicating their potential interest in supporting the idea.

"This is a breakthrough day," the senior senator from New York said in a news conference on Capitol Hill. "We've been stymied because the banking industry opposed this simple provision, which is key to getting a floor to the housing market."

A key provision of the bill is that the cramdowns would only be extended to borrowers who prove that they've asked their lender for a loan modification before filing for bankruptcy, and who received their loan before the bill goes into effect.

The senators behind the bill are going to try to attach it to President-elect Obama's economic stimulus package, but there's likely to still be plenty of opposition from the mortgage industry, so it's not yet a sure thing by any means.

"Citi reaches deal with lawmakers on home loans" [Forbes] (Thanks to Snarkysnake!)
"Plan to Cut Foreclosure Rate Clears Key Hurdle" [Wall Street Journal]
(Photo: respres)

The store, Pettet Jewelry in Peoria, is offering the charms "for sale with a donation," whatever that means. For only thirty-five dollars, you can own a sterling silver Senate seat charm, which will surely amuse every single person you ever meet. Call us when you can buy a charm of Blagojevich's hair.

(Photo: Getty)
Thanks, Marc!

The New York Times says that the White House has failed to drum up enough support among Senate Republicans, who have enough power to kill the bill. Also added to the bill is an amendment that would require banks who are participating in TARP to disclose their lending activity.

Senator Richard C. Shelby of Alabama, the senior Republican on the banking committee, called the proposal “a travesty” and said that he would filibuster the bill. “This is an installment on a huge bailout that will come later,” he said.

Bloomberg says that millions of jobs are at stake if even one automaker fails.

Job losses would total 2.5 million to 3.5 million from an automaker failure in 2009, including 1.4 million people in industries not directly tied to manufacturing, according to a Nov. 4 report from the Center for Automotive Research, which conducts studies for government agencies and companies.

House Passes Auto Rescue Plan [NYT]
GM Time Is Short as Senate Debates, Vendors Seek Cash (Update2) [Bloomberg]
(Photo: damageinc86 )

RCRWireless reprinted part of T-Mobile's response:

“Although your letter states that carriers’ prices for text messaging appear to have increased since 2005, the opposite is true,” states Robert Dotson, president and CEO of T-Mobile USA Inc. “Since 2005, the prices that T-Mobile charges for text messages — 90% of which are purchased in texting package plans — have fallen by more than half.

AT&T came right out and (almost) blamed Senator Kohl for the spate of lawsuits:

“As you probably know, since your letter was made public, 20 class-action lawsuits have been filed around the country against AT&T and other national carriers, specifically alleging price-fixing for texting messaging services. All but one of these cases cite your inquiry as one of the bases of alleged collusion. We are therefore eager to clear up any misunderstanding,” said Timothy McKone, executive VP for federal relations at AT&T.

If fees for text messaging bundles have dropped, while fees for single-serve text messages have shot up 20 cents, then in a way both sides are right—but if that's the case, we think the carriers are being intentionally dense about the true meaning of the Senator's line of questioning, which (we think) is an attempt to determine whether the carriers colluded to hike individual rates enough to drive customers into more profitable bundle services.

Wireless carriers counter antitrust concerns over rising costs of texting [RCRWireless]
(Photo: Getty Images)

The bailout will be expanded to pension plans, local governments, and community banks. Here are the details as reported by Reuters:

• The $700 billion in buying power would be doled out by Congress in stages. After the first $250 billion is authorized, the President could request another $100 billion. The final $350 billion could be cleared by a further act of Congress.
• Washington will take a stake in companies helped through the program so that taxpayers can share in the profits if those companies get back on their feet.
• A new congressional panel would have oversight power and the Treasury secretary would report regularly to lawmakers in two elements of a multi-level oversight apparatus.
• Compensation limits would be set for the chiefs of participating firms to prevent excessive pay and "golden parachutes" for those who might tap government aid and then quit.
• The federal government may stall foreclosure proceedings on home loans purchased under the plan.
• Alongside the plan to buy securities outright, the Treasury Department will conceive an alternative insurance program that would underwrite troubled loans and would be paid for by participating companies.
• If the government has taken losses five years into the program, the Treasury Department will draft a plan to tax the companies that took part to recoup taxpayer losses.

Both parties will now release their Whips into the horde of election-weary members. Expect an exciting (yes, exciting) vote late tonight before the Asian markets open.

Lawmakers Reach Tentative Bailout Deal [WSJ]
PREVIOUSLY: BREAKING: Congress Has A Bailout Plan
(Photo: Associated Press)

CNN says:

Both parties and both houses agreed Thursday to a set of principles on revisions to the rescue plan, which calls for the Treasury Department to buy up bad mortgage securities from banks in an effort to get them to lend again.

The proposal will help homeowners, curb executive pay packages at participating firms and provide oversight of Treasury's actions, said Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., a key architect of the congressional effort. He did not provide details but said lawmakers will sit down with Treasury officials to discuss it.

"We've reached a fundamental agreement on a set of principles, one, for taxpayers, which is tremendously important," Dodd said.

Americans should "legitimately feel better about the overall approach," said Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass., who heads the House Financial Services Committee.

CNN also noted that the stock market was up over 300 points on news that a bailout may be forthcoming.

Congress has a plan [CNN]

Why Personal Letters Beat Form Letters
Don't get suckered in by the quick and easy "Write to Congress!" form letters littering the internet. Form letters are not an expression of values; they are a show of organizational strength. If the NRA convinces five million people to send letters opposing gun control, it shows that the NRA can muster five million people to action, not that five million people necessarily care about gun laws. Congressional offices know this and generally disregard form letters.

So what happens when you send a letter?

Every office has its own procedures for tabulating constituent correspondence, but most will produce a report at the end of week breaking down how many letters were received by issue area, separating out form letters from letters sent by individual constituents.

Members treat each type of letter differently, but most look for individual letters as a barometer of their district's concerns. These are the letters that have the most influence, the ones we will show you how to write.

What Should Your Letter Say?
We adhere to the three paragraph rule: introduce yourself, introduce your issue, request action. Congressional offices have staffers whose days are spent solely on the mail, so make their lives easier by keeping letter succinct and to the point.

• Introduce Yourself: There is a two-prong test for determining your worth: 1) Are you a constituent? 2) Are you an important constituent? Feel free to puff up your chest. Are you a lifelong member of the district? Are you associated with community groups? Say so! Convince the reader that yours is a voice of experience and wisdom.
• Be specific: Don't just ask a Member to oppose mandatory binding arbitration agreements. Ask them to rush to the floor to support S.1782, The Arbitration Fairness Act of 2007.
• Marshall Facts: Your argument—and you are making an argument—must be supported by facts. Feel free to use facts gleaned from us or other sources, but don't copy and paste paragraphs of pre-written text from form letters. Personal experiences are particularly effective, and often moving. Share them!
• Be Exceedingly Polite, Please: Congress attracts haughty personalities. Staffers don't appreciate being spoken down to or insulted. You are trying to rally them to your cause, so be nice.
• Clearly State Your Request: Plainly tell your representative that you want them to support or oppose a certain bill. If you want a response, explicitly (but politely) ask for one.

Send Your Letter To The Right Place
Only write to your representatives. You have three: one Representative in the House, and two Senators. Do not send more than three letters. Some citizens try to get their voice heard by writing to all 435 members of the House. Congressional courtesy compels the 434 Members who do not represent the zealot to forward his letter to the one lucky Member who does. This angers the Member's staff greatly at the expense of any point you are trying to make.

The addresses for your Representatives and Senators are available online, but don't waste your time with an email. Letters carry significantly more weight. Send your letter to the Capitol, where the legislative staff is based, though it will take a while to arrive since all incoming Congressional mail is irradiated thanks to those still-unidentified Anthrax mailers.

For an even greater impact, send your letter care of the staffer covering the issue. These staffers - called Legislative Assistants - are the Member's eyes and ears on their assigned issue areas. Finding the staffer destined to read your letter is easy: call the Capitol switchboard (open 24 hours a day!) at (202) 224-3121, ask for your Member's office, and ask the person who answers for the name of the staffer handling the issue area or bill number. Once you get that name, address your letter like this:

Member Of Congress
c/o Staffer
Office Building/Number
Washington, DC 20515

What Should You Expect In Return?
It depends. There are 535 Congressional offices and each handles constituent correspondence differently. The vast majority respond to letters with either a form letter pre-written by a Legislative Assistant, or with a more personal response written by a Legislative Correspondent. Controversial issues that attract many letters normally receive a form letter response, while smaller issues or specific questions often receive the attention of a personalized response.

Conclusion
Members of Congress work for you. Without your votes, they won't stay in office. They go to great lengths to cultivate a positive relationship with you, their boss. Very few people take the time to write to a Member of Congress, so the few that do carry a disproportionate influence.

Fifteen minutes is well worth the time to influence a $2 trillion enterprise.

(Photo: indi.ca)

The New York Times says:

But one after another, senators from both parties said that, while they were prepared to move fast, they were far from ready to give the administration everything it wanted in its proposed $700 billion plan to buy up and hopefully resell troubled mortgages.
...
Senator Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut and chairman of the Senate banking panel, called the Treasury proposal “stunning and unprecedented in its scope and lack of detail.”

Asserting that the plan would allow Mr. Paulson to act with “absolute impunity,” Senator Dodd said, “After reading this proposal, I can only conclude that it is not only our economy that is at risk, Mr. Secretary, but our Constitution, as well.”

Another expression of disgust came from Senator Jim Bunning, Republican of Kentucky, who said the plan would “take Wall Street’s pain and spread it to the taxpayers.”

“It’s financial socialism, and it’s un-American,” Mr. Bunning said.

Paulson responded that he was "angry" at Wall Street and that he needed the bailout not for the fat cats who bet badly and lost, but for you, the taxpayer.

“This is all about the taxpayers. That is all we are about,” said Paulson, who was formerly the CEO of Goldman Sachs for 7 years before becoming Secretary of the Treasury in 2006.

Finance Officials Face Wary Lawmakers [NYT]
(Photo:Andrew Councill for The New York Times)

From ABCNews:

In court documents, federal prosecutors say UBS bankers helped set up many of the secret accounts in Liechtenstein and, overall, hid as much $20 billion belonging to US citizens.

"Sums are enormous and UBS appears to have been particularly aggressive in the way they marketed their activities in the US and elsewhere," said Christensen. "So UBS is extremely vulnerable to losing their license in the US."

One UBS banker, Bradley Birkenfield, pleaded guilty last month and admitted to smuggling cash and diamonds for Americans trying to hide their wealth from the IRS.

In federal court documents obtained by ABC News, federal prosecutors allege that Birkenfield's bank trained bankers traveling to the US in "techniques to avoid detection" by law enforcement authorities, "including training bankers to falsely state on customs forms that they were traveling into the United States for pleasure and not business".

There will be Senate committee hearing tomorrow and ABC says that "among those called to testify are foreign bank account holders, including one of the wealthiest men in Los Angeles," and that the tax dodgers could face criminal prosecution.

Hundreds of Super Rich Under Investigation [ABCNews]

Kieber reportedly sold three CD's full of names and data to tax authorities to 12 countries including Germany, Great Britain, France, Italy and the United States.

Tax authorities in Italy published the full list of names.

In Germany, the disclosures led to the arrests of several prominent CEO's on charges that had evaded millions of dollars in taxes.

A former UBS private banker, Bradley Birkenfeld, has agreed to a plea deal and is reported to be cooperating with US authorities in bring charges against American citizens on tax evasion charges.

The Liechtenstein bank, LGT, is owned by the tiny country's ruling family led by Prince Hans-Adam II.

Kieber's Washington lawyer, Jack Blum, says Kieber should be considered a whistleblower and a hero, not a thief, for revealing how the super rich hid billions of dollars using the Liechtenstein bank.

Whatever you think of thieves (we're not fond), you have to admit that it takes serious balls to be comfortable pissing off a fairly large percentage of the world's super-rich and powerful tax evaders.

Day of Reckoning? Super Rich Tax Cheats Outed by Bank Clerk [ABC News]

We're curious what Senator Obama and Senator McCain have to say about this—particularly, whether Obama will vote speak out against it. Oh wait, he's too busy campaigning to weigh in on important issues, right? Because that's how career politicians work. (End of rant on politicos not doing their jobs.)

"Deal clears way for wiretap-law overhaul" [CNN]
New FISA Bill Would Grant Telcoms Immunity; Vote Is Tomorrow" [Slashdot]
(Photo: Getty)

Here's what happened: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) filed a motion for cloture—Senate-speak for shut-up and stay on topic—which requires a supermajority of 60 votes for approval. Without cloture, Senators can yack forever like a bunch of riled-up monkeys. The vote on cloture failed 49-42, empowering Republicans to filibuster our beautiful piece of legislation into the ground.

What protections have Senate Republicans stolen from you? Let's look at Senator Rockefeller's (D-WV) substitute amendment sporting the new, improved Passenger's Bill of Rights:

TITLE IV—AIRLINE SERVICE AND SMALL COMMUNITY AIR SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS

SEC. 401. AIRLINE CONTINGENCY SERVICE REQUIREMENTS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 417 is amended by adding at the end the following:

SUBCHAPTER IV—AIRLINE CUSTOMER SERVICE ``§.41781. AIRLINE CONTINGENCY SERVICE REQUIREMENTS.

(a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of the Aviation Investment and Modernization Act of 2008, each air carrier shall submit a contingency service plan to the Secretary of Transportation for review and approval. The plan shall require the air carrier to implement, at a minimum, the following practices:

(1) PROVISION OF FOOD AND WATER.—If the departure of a flight of an air carrier is substantially delayed, or disembarkation of passengers on an arriving flight that has landed is substantially delayed, the air carrier shall provide—

(A) adequate food and potable water to passengers on such flight during such delay; and

(B) adequate restroom facilities to passengers on such flight during such delay.

(2) RIGHT TO DEPLANE.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—An air carrier shall develop a plan, that incorporates medical considerations, to ensure that passengers are provided a clear timeframe under which they will be permitted to deplane a delayed aircraft. The air carrier shall provide a copy of the plan to the Secretary of Transportation, who shall make the plan available to the public. In the absence of such a plan, except as provided in subparagraph (B), if more than 3 hours after passengers have boarded a flight, the aircraft doors are closed and the aircraft has not departed, the air carrier shall provide passengers with the option to deplane safely before the departure of such aircraft. Such option shall be provided to passengers not less often than once during each 3-hour period that the plane remains on the ground.

(B) EXCEPTIONS.—Subparagraph (A) shall not apply—

(i) if the pilot of such flight reasonably determines that such flight will depart not later than 30 minutes after the 3 hour delay; or

(ii) if the pilot of such flight reasonably determines that permitting a passenger to deplane would jeopardize passenger safety or security.

(C) APPLICATION TO DIVERTED FLIGHTS.—This section applies to aircraft without regard to whether they have been diverted to an airport other than the original destination.

(b) POSTING CONSUMER RIGHTS ON WEBSITE.—An air carrier holding a certificate issued under section 41102 that conducts scheduled passenger air transportation shall publish conspicuously and update monthly on the Internet website of the air carrier a statement of the air carrier's customer service policy and of air carrier customers' consumer rights under Federal and State law.

(c) REVIEW AND APPROVAL; MINIMUM STANDARDS.—The Secretary of Transportation shall review the contingency service plan submitted by an air carrier under subsection (a) and may approve it or disapprove it and return it to the carrier for modification and resubmittal. The Secretary may establish minimum standards for such plans and require air carriers to meet those standards.

(d) AIR CARRIER.—In this section the term `air carrier' means an air carrier holding a certificate issued under section 41102 that conducts scheduled passenger air transportation.''.

(b) REGULATIONS.—Not later than 60 days after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Transportation shall promulgate such regulations as the Secretary determines necessary to carry out the amendment made by subsection (a).

So what's different from the old versions?

• Compliance: Airlines now have 60 days, not 90 days, to get their act together and slap together a contingency plan;
• Advertising: Congress wants this Bill of Rights placed "conspicuously" on each arline's website. No burying the Bill of Rights in a site index;
• Not Just For Departures: The substitute amendment now covers delayed arrivals.

We're not wild about the absence of civil penalties, or empowering pilots to stall if they "reasonably determine" that take-off is less than 30 minutes away. As compensation for these losses, Senator Rockefeller tossed in this gem of a sweetener:

SEC. 402. PUBLICATION OF CUSTOMER SERVICE DATA AND FLIGHT DELAY HISTORY.

Section 41722 is amended by adding at the end the following:

(f) CHRONICALLY DELAYED FLIGHTS.—

(1) PUBLICATION OF LIST OF FLIGHTS.—An air carrier holding a certificate issued under section 41102 that conducts scheduled passenger air transportation shall publish and update monthly on the Internet website of the air carrier, or provide on request, a list of chronically delayed flights operated by the air carrier.

(2) DISCLOSURE TO CUSTOMERS WHEN PURCHASING TICKETS.—An air carrier shall disclose the following information prominently to an individual before that individual books transportation on the air carrier's Internet website for any flight for which data is reported to the Department of Transportation under part 234 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, and for which the air carrier has primary responsibility for inventory control:

(A) The on-time performance for the flight if it is a chronically delayed flight.

(B) The cancellation rate for the flight if it is a chronically canceled flight.

(3) CHRONICALLY DELAYED; CHRONICALLY CANCELED.—The Secretary of Transportation shall define the terms `chronically delayed flight' and `chronically canceled flight' for purposes of this subsection.''.

If an flight is chronically late, not only must the airline broadcast their shame on their website, but they must also warn travelers before selling tickets that their flight will likely be delayed.

The Passenger's Bill of Rights was tacked onto a much larger bill reauthorizing the FAA. Members of Congress could rip out the Bill of Rights and and pass it separately, but the Congressional calendar crowds up before elections, and our important little bill has little hope of standing out.

Like a Price Is Right Danger Price loser, we don't get the contingency plans; we don't get the food or water; and we don't get the chronically delayed flight notifications. We get nothing. Thanks, Senate Republicans!

Air safety, passenger rights bill hits dead end in Senate [AP]
On the Cloture Motion (Motion to Invoke Cloture on the Rockefeller Amdt. No. 4627 (Subst.) to H.R. 2881 ) [U.S. Senate]
(Photo: Getty)

"We really do literally have five or six major corporations in this country that determine for the most part what Americans see, hear and read every day," said Sen. Byron L. Dorgan (D-N.D.), the lead sponsor of the resolution. "I don't think that's healthy for our country."

Dorgan has 25 senators behind his bill, including Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois, and is confident it will pass the Senate. A similar bill has been proposed in the House.

The Bush administration has threatened a veto, but Dorgan could try to attach the resolution to a must-pass bill to make it harder for the White House to block.

Senate panel moves against FCC media-ownership rules [L.A. Times]
S.J. 28 - A Joint Resolution Disapproving The Rule Submitted By The Federal Communications Commission With Respect To Broadcast Media Ownership [THOMAS]
Write Your Senator
Write Your Representative
PREVIOUSLY: How To Write To Congress
(AP Photo/Jae C. Hong)

On Friday, February 15, 2008, the President signed into law:

H.R. 3541, the "Do-Not-Call Improvement Act of 2007," which prohibits the automatic removal of telephone numbers registered on the Federal "do-not-call" registry; and

S. 781, the "Do-Not-Call Registry Fee Extension Act of 2007," which extends permanently the authority of the Federal Trade Commission to charge fees to telemarketers required to access the Federal "do-not-call" registry and specifies the fees to be charged.

For anyone who doubts the list's usefullness, read one Ars Tech editor's experience:

My family recently moved into a new home, and with it, we received a new phone number (I didn't want a new one, but in Massachusetts they can be strict about towns and their exchanges). At our old house we had been covered by the DNCR, but at the new home, we weren't because we had a new number. It took one week, at most, before the unsolicited calls started. When they started, they were frequent and annoying. Life "off" the DNCR was horrible.

After about another week of putting up with it (it just sat on a long "to do list" as we attended to other move-in crises), we finally got around to signing up our new number, and even though the Registry gives ample time for opt-out information to be followed by telemarketers, in reality we were spam-call-free within a week. In short, the DNCR works, it's fast, and telemarketers are by and large obeying it when expected.

Both measures passed the House on a voice vote and cleared the Senate by unanimous consent.

Statement by the Press Secretary [The White House]
Do Not Call Registry saved from mandatory reset [Ars Technica]
PREVIOUSLY:
Liveblogging The Do Not Call Improvement Act and CPSC Reform Act Committee Markups
FTC Vows Not To Expire Numbers From The Do Not Call List
Should Do Not Call List Registrations Last Forever?
(Photo: Getty)

"Whatever the senate does they should not delay this package. They should not keep money out of your pocket, the sooner you get a check, the more likely it is that the stimulus package will kick in and make a difference. So my attitude is if that if you're truly interested in dealing with the slowdown in the economy—the Senate ought to accept the House package, pass it, and get it to my desk as soon as possible."

(AP Photo/Tim Sloan, Pool)

She had been garnished by a credit card company, courtesy of one of those cavernous collections law firms with one attorney (if that) and about 100 paralegals. The firm had saved her bank account information from when she paid off another credit card company that also was a client of the firm. She did not know the second credit card company even had a judgment against her, and it took her a week to find out who garnished her because her bank wouldn't talk, and this was done without notice. This is all legal by the way.....

Eventually at the firm's suggestion, she began faxing paperwork to the credit card company's lawyers to "prove" the funds were SSI and SSA. They'd receive the fax, come up with some reason that the paperwork was insufficient, a page missing, a smudged entry, but never call back to tell her things were amiss. She'd finally follow up, and then she'd hear the next excuse. This went on for two more exasperating weeks. Finally, after much prodding (she was sure the account would be voluntarily released any day now), she sought legal counsel from a legal aid office, which seemed a bit overworked (obviously), and frankly a little peeved that she believed the credit card company's lawyers were ever gong to release this. She was dressed down for being optimistic and trusting.

Five weeks after the garnishment, she finally got access to her "exempt" funds, having skipped needed medication, rent payments, insurance payments, and who knows what else. She would NEVER have gotten an attorney at all if I had not begged her to do so. She does not trust lawyers and had no idea how to find one even if she did want one. And, she had family to lend her money. Most people in this position don't. The point is that things are worse than this for most people in her shoes, and many poorer people do not feel they have access to a lawyer. They are right in many cases. That is why it makes no sense to make the consumer prove the garnished funds are not SSI or SSA.

The five federal agencies responsible for regulating banks have drawn up nine best practices for banks to follow:

• Promptly notify a consumer when a financial institution receives a garnishment order and places a freeze on the consumer's account;
• Provide the consumer with information about what types of federal benefit funds are exempt, including SSA and VA benefits, in order to aid the consumer in asserting Federal protections;
• Promptly determine, as feasible, if an account contains only exempt federal benefit funds such as SSA or VA benefits;
• Notify the creditor, collection agent, or relevant state court that the account contains exempt funds in cases in which the financial institution is aware that the account contains exempt funds;
• If state law or the court order will permit a freeze not to be imposed if the account is determined to contain only exempt federal benefit funds, act accordingly if that determination is made;
• Minimize the cost to a consumer when the consumer's account containing exempt federal benefit funds is frozen, such as by refraining from imposing overdraft, NSF, or similar fees while the account is frozen or refunding such fees when the freeze has been lifted;
• Allow the consumer access to a portion of the account equivalent to the documented amount of exempt federal benefit funds as soon as the financial institution determines that none of the exceptions to the federal protections against garnishment of exempt federal benefit funds are triggered by the garnishment order;
• Offer consumers segregated accounts that contain only federal benefit funds without commingling of other funds; and
• Lift the freeze on an account as soon as permissible under state law.
• 
  

Think Public Benefits are Exempt from Execution? Think Again [Credit Slips]
(Photo: O Pish Posh)

H.R. 3010: Arbitration Fairness Act of 2007
What It Does: Prevents corporations from shackling consumers with extra-judicial mandatory binding arbitration agreements.
Status: Hearings held in both the House and Senate.

H.R. 2881: The Passengers Bill Of Rights
What It Does: Prevents airlines from caging passengers on planes for hours at a stretch without access to food, water, and restrooms.
Status:Approved by the House as part of the FAA Reauthorization Act, 267-151-14. Currently simmering in the Senate.

H.R. 3610: Food and Drug Import Safety Act of 2007
What It Does: Strengthens the FDA by granting the power to issue mandatory recalls.
Status: Hearings held in the House Energy and Commerce Committee.

H.R. 3541: Do-Not-Call Improvement Act of 2007
What It Does: Makes Do Not Call List registrations permanent.
Status: Approved by the House. Floor debate pending in the Senate.

H.R. 1525: Internet Spyware (I-SPY) Prevention Act of 2007
What It Does: Subjects spyware makers to jail terms and multi-million dollar fines.
Status: Approved by the House, languishing in the Senate.

S. 2045: CPSC Reform Act of 2007
What It Does: Gives the CPSC the staff and support it needs to do a slightly less pitiful job.
Status: Passed by the Senate Commerce Committee. Companion legislation unanimously approved by the House.

S. 2033: Cell Phone Consumer Empowerment Act of 2007
What It Does: It's the most impressive bill of the 110th Congress. It battles dragons and slays evildoers.
Status: Hearing held in the Senate Commerce Committee.

H.R. 4332: Financial Consumer Hotline Act of 2007
What It Does: Establishes a consumer hotline for banking complaints.
Status: Introduced, stuck in the House Financial Services Committee.

H.R. 3915: Mortgage Reform and Anti-Predatory Lending Act of 2007
What It Does: Attempts to prevent a recurrence of the subprime meltdown by tightening oversight of the mortgage industry.
Status: Approved by the House 297-127-14. The Senate Banking Committee is slow-mulling companion legislation.

H.R. 3678: Internet Tax Freedom Act Amendments Act of 2007
What It Does: Keeps the internet nice and tax-free until 2014.
Status: Signed by the President! Now known as Public Law No: 110-108.

H.R. 946: Consumer Overdraft Protection Fair Practices Act
What It Does: Caps overly-punitive debit card fees.
Status: Introduced, stuck in the House Financial Services Committee.

S. 704: Truth in Caller ID Act of 2007
What It Does: Bans caller ID spoofing.
Status: Approved by the House. Passed the Senate Commerce Committee.

H.R. 698: Industrial Bank Holding Company Act of 2007
What It Does: Bans Walmart from opening a bank.
Status: Approved by the House 371-16-45, dead in the Senate Banking Committee.

H.R. 2669: College Cost Reduction and Access Act
What It Does: Steals money from rich student loan companies and gives it to students.
Status: Signed by the President! Now known as Public Law No: 110-84.