I don't think, frankly, giving the Commission a whole lot of resources is going to solve the problem.
You have no objection to the Congress working on tightening that definition up and being more helpful.
We want to ensure the FTC has the capabilities and resources necessary to keep our consumers safe.
Magnuson-Moss did not kill FTC rulemaking. A change in enforcement philosophy killed FTC rulemaking.
If we move forward and repeal, or substantially change, the Magnuson-Moss safeguards, what's it going to hurt?
You have the record--the letter in the record, but let me note some of those signatories here in order to exemplify the ...
Consumer advocates believe we need to liberate the FTC from statutory limitations that have shackled the Commission from...
The FTC plays a key role in ensuring the safety of American consumers and financial services.
We're asking for a little over $17 billion in fiscal year 2011 to continue the R&D in all sorts of areas.
Absolutely, Senator. And I'm a Republican, I should add. But, that was my view then, and it is my view now.
Might it be that, if we provided the FTC with more resources, this 7-year average proceedings could be shortened?
my first choice is that the FTC be given all of the authority over consumer protection law enforcement
Been used one time.
I know Senator Pryor's prior record in enforcement, and he would've done the rules a lot faster.
We can bring much-needed transparency to financial services by fully preserving the FTC's enormously important role in p...
I would support a prevalence requirement that meant something.
I would argue that it's really Congress's role to decide when FTC needs that authority, delegate it appropriately, and t...
Thank you. Continuing with Chairman Muris, Commissioner Rosch said there were no Magnuson-Moss rules since 1978. Is that...
