I think you've commented generally on it in the past, but does that kind of thought make any sense?

the reason is that there are very few instances where consumers are offered any real choice. Isn't that correct?

But I would like to thank the witnesses very much for being here. You have been excellent, and this has been very informative, and I really appreciate your work, Mr. Chairman.

In other words, almost all of the clauses are mandatory pre-dispute clauses that are imposed by companies like AT&T or the bank.

These can be a scourge on consumers when they are imposed and applied abusively.

Saving them is a profoundly important objective, and it is an objective well served by alternative dispute resolution and even by arbitration in many cases, but not when it is abusively applied and made mandatory.

Thank you for your leadership in this area, which I think has been very, very valuable.

Well, isn't the problem really today in the wireless and the cable industry and many industries where there really is effectively no consumer choice?

But, in fact, in many instances of consumer life, consumers may have no choice, even if there is no gun pointed to their head, which is, again, the phrase you used, but to use a service or buy a good where pre-dispute mandatory arbitration…

If the Attorney General goes into tort law and tries to be a plaintiff's attorney, I do not think that is a good idea.

Would you agree that clauses that are not fairly explained and indeed are concealed or obfuscated requiring arbitration are abusive and should be illegal?

I appreciate your testimony, and I am grateful that there will be a second round.

I rise as a proud cosponsor of the Currency Exchange Rate Oversight Reform Act, S. 1619. We are all aware, in this Chamber and around the country, that China has been manipulating its currency flagrantly and blatantly at the expense of our…

I think that an audio and visual recording of Supreme Court proceedings would potentially do the same.

I think that openness and transparency improves institutions.

I will proceed, then, as in morning business. First, I thank and commend the Senator from Ohio on his very important efforts on Chinese currency manipulation. I am proud to be a cosponsor with him on his legislation. I intend to introduce…

are we in morning business? The PRESIDING OFFICER. We are not in morning business.

The fact that it's declining is a big red flag to a finding of monopoly power.

But there's no question about the fact that Google is really the behemoth in the search market these days and that it far outsizes its nearest competitor.

But, you know, I've been trying to think of the analogy here to what the ordinary consumer can understand as what Google does, and as I sat here, you know, the racetrack analogy. You run the racetrack, you own the racetrack. For a long…

I want to just express my appreciation for his acknowledgement, and I hope also his receptivity to suggestions to do better.

Because its share of internet searches and advertising is not in excess of 80 percent?

Has Google ever scraped or co-opted content?

But to return to my analogy, there's no allegation that you necessarily exclude those other horses.

Thank you for being here, Mr. Schmidt. We welcome you here and I want to join my colleagues who have remarked on what a tremendous success story Google is, a great American success story, a great consumer success story.