Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The FTC's Top Consumer Protection Official Can't Go After Facebook -- or 100 Other Companies (theverge.com)

Posted by msmash on from the how-about-that dept.

The Federal Trade Commission's top consumer protection official is prohibited from handling the cases involving 120 different companies, including Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, and Uber, according to financial disclosure documents published by Public Citizen this week. From a report: Andrew Smith, who heads the FTCs Consumer Protection Bureau, would be in charge of handling investigations into some of the country's largest companies and any consumer protection violations that may occur. But due to his conflicts of interest, Smith is barred from participating in any investigations involving the companies he previously provided legal services for. "It's a big world out there, and the FTC has very broad jurisdictions," Smith said to The Verge. "There are plenty of investigations that I'm involved in." Smith was approved by a 3-2 Republican majority in May.

9 of 75 comments (clear)

  1. bullshit story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No - he can't be in charge of the investigations
    Yes - he can delegate those investigations to other officers under him - just like happens in the Justice Department.
    I'm sure the Verge was all up in arms when Maxine Waters was re-upped to the banking committee in the house after she abused her powers to cut out a sweet deal for her husband's bank.

    1. Re: bullshit story by cayenne8 · · Score: 2
      This is just another case of a much LARGER problem in Government (especially federal)....

      Each regulatory agency is merely a revolving door between the industry to be regulated and the regulators.

      Another horrible example of this is with the FDA....you see leaders and CEO's and the like of agro-businesses leaving their companies, to go into lead the FDA....and we never get good food policies for the nation, as that these guys do NOT recuse themselves from conflicts of interest, but they perpetuate it and freely rule in favor of the agro industry over that of the general public. Hence, our food system cannot change where needed.

      This happens in all departments, and I wish there could be stipulations that if you worked in the industry you are regulating, then you can't regulate on the govt side.

      I realize that having someone in charge of regulating some industries that has no experience it the actual industry/tech, etc would have problems knowing what it was all about, but what is a better way to get more unbiased regulation?

      I don't like much regulation at all, but of course, there has to be some....and best that that regulation and investigation is honest and not biased by having them essentially self regulate with always having one of their own on the Federal govt side of things.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  2. Forget 2 cars in every garage by schklerg · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's a fox in every hen house for the US.

    --
    Be Excellent To Each Other
  3. tentacles by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Whether or not the chair of the Consumer Protection Bureau is personally able to head investigations is less important to me than the question of why you would want to appoint a CPB chair who has all these previous financial ties to the biggest companies his agency is supposed to be protecting consumers from?

    It's like appointing Mr Fox to be the head of the Henhouse Security Agency and thinking it's OK because he's not personally responsible for protecting the henhouse. I mean, what the fuck else is his job, then and why would you think he's going to delegate that responsibility to someone who has the hens' best interests in mind?

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
    1. Re:tentacles by CaptainDork · · Score: 2

      Sorta like FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, Verizon shill.

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
  4. Reminds me of a certain landlord during the 1980's by magusxxx · · Score: 2

    He purposefully hired several lawyers to do simple legal stuff for only one reason.

    So a tenant wouldn't be able to hire anyone local if they decided to sue him.

    Makes me wonder if some of these large companies do the same thing. Hire lawyers with political ties so if/when they get into power they won't be able to go after them.

    --
    Care killed the cat, but satisfaction brought it back.
  5. Re:Anothe reason why "independence" is bad by ilsaloving · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Independence isn't the problem. The problem is that they hired someone who can't do the job due to conflict of interest.

    This would be no different if he was voted in or appointed. Of course, the way the rest of this administration is managed, I can't help but go into conspiracy theory territory and think that this was done intentionally to make it harder for the FTC to do it's job.

  6. Citizens United by sdinfoserv · · Score: 3, Insightful

    THIS is EXACTLY why we need to pull corporate money out of politics AND reign in lobbyists. Bar lobbyists from serving on high level posts.

    1. Re:Citizens United by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 2

      THIS is EXACTLY why we need to pull corporate money out of politics AND reign in lobbyists. Bar lobbyists from serving on high level posts.

      I propose reign in by guillotine. Works just as well for politicians as for lobbyists. Throw in international tax dodgers from the Panama Papers and other sources and we'll have a much better society in mere days.