RIGHT TO REPAIR Congress Takes Up
Information Access ... Again CHICAGO, IL (November 16, 2005) - "It was the best of times; it was the worst of times." While this is the opening of Charles Dickens' "Tale of Two Cities," it also describes the plight of the Right to Repair (R2R) issue today.
On November 10, a hearing of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection was convened, chaired by Rep. Cliff Stearns. According to the Subcommittee's memorandum to its members, the purpose of the hearing was to "provide members the opportunity to examine issues related to the recent negotiations between automobile manufacturers and the automotive aftermarket industry."
To
watch and listen to the archived hearing, please click
here.The hearing followed a series of 10 meetings between the two, initiated by the legislation's co-sponsors Representative Joe Barton and Senator Lindsey Graham, with the objective being to seek resolution by the industry without legislation. According to both the facilitator, the observer and most industry reps, the talks came close to achieving the goal of a non-legislated resolution, but broke down on September 30, with outstanding issues including governance, enforcement and oversight, tool information and immobilizers.
Since then, Rep. Barton's staff met separately and privately with the parties at those meetings to get feedback on what had prevented a resolution. Each of the parties was called to testify on November 10, and testimony from the American Automobile Association was also requested. Those wishing to watch the hearing online can
view
the Webcast online.
Despite much progress during the facilitated talks, Steven Cole, the facilitator from the Council of Better Business Bureaus testified that, "The process was tasked with very challenging time constraints." Cole also told the subcommittee that the parties reached general agreement on a third-party dispute resolution process, with details to be worked out as to how the process would work through a restructured and better funded NASTF. When questioned by Barton and Stearns as to what the most important unresolved issue was, Cole replied, "The most important issue is governance." Some of the industry reps agreed with this; some didn't.
The quiet observer James Kohm, Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Associate Director, Division of Enforcement, represented the neutral observer with his testimony. He advocated a voluntary self-regulatory solution as Barton and Graham had urged the parties to reach, and said, "The Commission continues to believe that, in the long run, a voluntary, self-regulatory approach is the best solution to the concerns that have been raised. If Congress determines, however, that legislation is appropriate, the Commission believes it is important that the resolution of particular disputes be decided and implemented by industry participants rather than the government."
"Further, any governmental intervention in this area requires great care to avoid unnecessary impact on existing markets," he added. "The Commission is concerned that a mandatory, uniform approach could result in higher costs for consumers and leave the industry less flexible to address a rapidly changing marketplace."
Kohm told the subcommittee that, "In formulating a plan, the parties looked to the information-sharing structure created by NASTF to provide information, training and tools to automotive service professionals. In the course of their discussions at the CBBB, both sides looked to improve the NASTF structure to streamline the process and provide the necessary support to technicians who face problems obtaining information."
The future remains cloudy While industry parties testifying acknowledged the progress and spirit of the facilitated talks, each of the two sides provided testimony, consistent with their previous bottom line opposed positions - with the AAIA, AASP, and CARE favoring a legislated remedy, while the ASA, AIAM and AAM argued for a non-legislated solution. The failure of the talks, and the continued polarization between the two camps was reflected in the frustration and comments of subcommittee members.
Several members told the audience that if the industry couldn't reach resolution, no one would like Congress's solution. The closing statement of the hearing's chairperson was concise and telling. Before setting down his gavel, Stearns closed the hearing by stating, "I will recommend to Representative Barton the crafting of a letter to the FTC to create an independent board and to create a dispute resolution process." The sponsors of proposed legislation will consider the report, mark up the bill with changes reflecting the hearing and events preceding it and plan to reintroduce the legislation into Congress this month.
It has been surmised that these were veiled warnings, seeking to motivate renewed industry negotiations and push the industry's leadership will reach out to each other. If not, the subcommittee members plan to bring a legislated answer to this issue in the coming days.
