Consumer Law

Report on the American Council on Consumer Interests Conference

By Jeff Sovern

by Jeff Sovern

Some comments on the Annual Conference of the American Council on Consumer Interests (ACCI), which I attended last week:

ACCI seems to be made up largely of people who study consumer matters, including something called consumer science, financial planning, consumer behavior, and consumer education.  Its members include academics, economists, financial planning people and others.  But it includes few law professors. Norm Silber of Hofstra is a longtime ACCI leader (it was Norm who told me about ACCI and urged me to come), but I didn't see any other law professors there, and saw only a couple of lawyers. It strikes me as a conference from which consumer law professors might benefit, though I was told that the topics of the conference vary widely from year to year and it was just happenstance that I attended a conference with a lot of discussions that I found of interest. 

The conference was presented in partnership with the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, at their conference center.  I have never before written on this blog about a facility, but I have to write about this one, in part because I wonder if it has consequences for policy judgments, crazy as that may sound. I have never been in a more palatial place for meetings, or classes for that matter.  I say that as someone who has at one time or another been in numerous schools (including Ivy League schools), law firms, and hotel conference centers,  The Fed's conference center was extremely comfortable, with reclining chairs in the meeting rooms.  Of course it had state-of-the-art technology, including smart boards.  The facilities were beautifully appointed, with wide corridors, elegant furniture, and artwork on the walls. 

I started to wish that all the conferences I attend (not to mention my classes) could be conducted in such lavish surroundings.  But of course the cost of such a facility would preclude that.  Then I began to wonder who paid that cost.  It seems unlikely that the facilities were a gift to the Fed.  If not, that means the money ultimately came from the taxpayers.  While the Fed has income from its investments, and so could have funded the facility from that income, presumably any excess income belongs to the government and so could be used to reduce the burden on taxpayers.  Personally, even though I benefited from the facility, I'm not enthusiastic about having the government pay for such sumptuous facilities.

I'm also curious about the impact of working in such surroundings.  Perhaps the Atlanta Fed is unique among the Fed's facilities (though another conference attendee said he had been in a different Fed facility and that it too was elegantly furnished).  Maybe this seems a bit far-fetched, but somehow it seems like it would be hard to worry about the problems of the poor while in such a place.  Unfair and deceptive practices seem like less of a possibility when you're that comfortable.  How can you identify with those who have been victimized by predatory lenders when you're surrounded by beauty?  If the Consumer Financial Protection Agency (or Bureau) ends up in the Fed, I hope their offices are a little bit less nice.

I also hope to find time to blog in the next few days about some of the content of the conference.

Full post as published by CL&P Blog on April 18, 2010 (boomark / email).