Putting consumers first

Budgets inform decision-making (keep awake, dear reader, it gets better.)

The budget adage applies just as much to the public sector as the private. Public interest erodes whenever consumer protection gets reined in (even a slight bit) to avoid putting Washington taxpayers on the hook.

Since the inception of Washington’s Consumer Protection Act in 1961, the state Attorney General’s Office has been liable for attorneys’ fees when a judgment in a government enforcement action doesn’t swing its way. The policy makes public-interest sense in suits deemed frivolous or involving small businesses. But what about enforcement with the big dogs?

That’s the conundrum — Washington’s institutional disincentive to tackle certain complaints against deep-pocketed defendants who’ve racked up exorbitant legal fees.

ADVERTISEMENT
0 seconds of 0 secondsVolume 0%
Press shift question mark to access a list of keyboard shortcuts
00:00
00:00
00:00
 

Washington is one of only two states in the country that shove the burden on taxpayers. It makes for an unacceptable liability, influencing the nature of what consumer cases to pursue.

The AG’s office still goes after the big dogs that engage in deceptive or unfair practices, but it sometimes tip-toes from large suits when there’s a slight risk of losing.

Push the envelope with a big corporation that might be defrauding Washington consumers? The answer should be yes, but the reality is an ambiguous, “on-the-the-other-hand” maybe.

One of the more galling illustrations is the 2006 case of State v. Pacific Health Center, Inc.

The case appeared to be a slam dunk: A physician was practicing medicine without a license. Not surprisingly, the state won in trial. Then the Appeals Court determined that practicing medicine without a license didn’t meet the technical definition of consumer fraud. As the Attorney General’s Office notes, is was a technical victory on a sole claim by a defendant.

As a result, the state (read: Washington taxpayers) got stuck with the bogus doctor’s attorneys’ fees to the tune of $420,000.

Then-Attorney General Rob McKenna had had enough and resolved to curtail the state’s liability. McKenna’s 2011 agency-request legislation would have aligned Washington law with 48 other states. Not surprisingly, big business interests hold sway in Olympia, and the bill was deep-sixed. It was a major disappointment for the AG’s talented consumer protection division.

In 2014, AG Bob Ferguson is revisiting the question with his own request legislation.

“Unlike virtually every other state, Washington’s current law puts tax dollars at risk,” Ferguson said. “My proposed legislation will level the playing field for consumers by removing the requirement that the state pay attorneys’ fees.”

The litmus test of any law is whether it’s in the public interest. This couldn’t be clearer.

In 2014, legislators need to put consumers first.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

toon
Editorial cartoons for Monday, June 9

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer testifies during a budget hearing before a House Appropriations subcommittee on Capitol Hill in Washington on Thursday, May 15, 2025. (Al Drago/The New York Times)
Editorial: Ending Job Corps a short-sighted move by White House

If it’s jobs the Trump administration hopes to bring back to the U.S., it will need workers to fill them.

Comment: Trump’s science policy won’t set a ‘gold standard’

It’s more about centralizing control of science to make it easier to deny what it doesn’t agree with.

Comment: Can NASA’s popularity save it from deep budget cuts?

NASA logos are brand fixtures, a sign of public support. That could wane if cuts limit it’s reach into space.

Comment: Sen. Ernst’s sarcasm won’t help her keep her seat

Her blunt response regarding Medicaid cuts won’t play well in Iowa and won’t win back MAGA faithful.

Comment: Using prejudice against prejudice won’t end antisemitism

The Trump administration’s targeting of immigrants, dissent and universities only assures a longer fight.

FILE — A Ukrainian drone pilot in the Kharkiv region of northeastern Ukraine on April 24, 2025. Assaults in Russia and Ukraine have shown major military powers that they are unprepared for evolving forms of warfare, and need to adapt. (Tyler Hicks/The New York Times)
Comment: How Ukraine’s drone strike upends the rules of warfare

Inexpensive drones reached deep into Russia to destroy aircraft that were used against Ukraine.

toon
Editorial cartoons for Sunday, June 8

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

A rendering of possible configuration for a new multi-purpose stadium in downtown Everett. (DLR Group)
Editorial: Latest ballpark figures drive hope for new stadium

A lower estimate for the project should help persuade city officials to move ahead with plans.

A rendering of the new vessels to be built for Washington State Ferries. (Washington State Ferries)
Editorial: Local shipyard should get shot to build state ferries

If allowed to build at least two ferries, Nichols Brothers can show the value building here offers.

Solar panels are visible along the rooftop of the Crisp family home on Monday, Nov. 14, 2022 in Everett, Washington. (Olivia Vanni / The Herald)
Editorial: ‘Big, beautiful bill’ would take from our climate, too

Along with cuts to the social safety net, the bill robs investments in the clean energy economy.

When will Congress stand up to Trump?

Waste, fraud, and abuse? Look no further than the White House. Donald… Continue reading

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.