John Cornyn: “the managers of this legislation, Senator Pryor and Senator Stevens, have introduced what I think is, by and large, a…”

“the managers of this legislation, Senator Pryor and Senator Stevens, have introduced what I think is, by and large, a very good bill designed to protect consumers. As a matter of fact, I support the expansion of enforcement authority not only to include the Department of Justice, Federal law enforcement authorities, but also to deputize State attorneys general to seek injunctions for violations of the act. That comes from my experience as serving as the attorney general of my State for 4 years. I think the State attorneys general can provide additional resources in their capacity as the chief consumer protection officer of their State to make sure that consumers are protected. Although in talking to my colleagues, the question was raised, well, if there is only an injunction sought, then why do we need a prohibition against contingency fees that might be paid to outside lawyers to whom this job would be outsourced? And the answer to that is, lawyers can get pretty creative sometimes and figure out a way to pay an outside lawyer a contingency fee even when all the relief that is granted is an injunction. I want to be clear about what this amendment is and what this amendment is not. This amendment has no bearing whatsoever on the right of an individual if they can't afford any other way to hire a lawyer than based on a contingency fee arrangement.”