Current Events in February 2007

An Addict's Glossary

Law enforcement officials say identity thieves and methamphetamine users have their own language. Here are a few examples:

• Cranksters -- Meth users;

• Tweaker -- A methamphetamine abuser who probably has not slept in 3-15 days and is irritable and paranoid. According to Narconon Southern California, an inpatient drug and alcohol education and rehabilitation service, tweakers are considered the most dangerous type of meth abuser to medical personnel and law enforcement officers;

• Lurping -- A meth addict searching for anything he or she can sell or trade. It's also used to mean stealing anything that is not nailed down;

• Boogling -- This term means stealing mail in Utah. It can also mean stealing your credit card number by diving into dumpsters, looking over your shoulder, taking your mail and using camera phones to take a picture of your credit card;

• Car Clout -- Car burglary or theft from a vehicle.

Components of Identity Theft

Detective Byron Pierce of the Overland Park, Kansas, Police Department, says there are three components involved in identity theft.

They are:

• Collectors: These are the people solely responsible for collecting stolen information. These people may break into your car, or they might be a trusted employee inside a finance institution, a medical office, or anyone who has access to personal data;

• Converter: This is the person with the technology expertise. He or she has the computers, scanners and digital cameras used to make the fraudulent I.D. or checks;

• Passers: This person is often indigent or desperate for money. Collectors or converters will dress-up these individuals and send them out to buy merchandise, get credit cards, cash checks or open other accounts with the phony ID's.

"Ninety-percent of time, the person we arrest is the passer," Pierce says. "And that's the person who is usually standing on the corner, peddling drugs. He's the lowest person on the totem pole -- all he gets is paid. And when he is arrested, he's simply replaced. It doesn't affect the overall operation."

Next: What Can You Do?

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, in a broader warning, says that all Peter Pan peanut butter purchased since May 2006 should be discarded.

The agency had earlier said that certain batches of Peter Pan and Wal-Mart's Great Value brand peanut butter -- those with a product code on the lid beginning with 2111 -- might contain salmonella.

Meanwhile, in Sylvester, Georgia, government and company investigators are swarming over the ConAgra Foods plant, trying to determine how salmonella got into batches of the peanut butter, admidst rapidly increasing reports of consumer illness and at least one lawsuit against ConAgra.

The plant has been shut down since Wednesday, when the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned that Peter Pan brand peanut butter and some batches of Wal-Mart's Great Value house brand were linked to a salmonella outbreak that has sickened at least 300 people nationwide since August.

The number of those sickened is likely much higher than the official estimate as many cases are never diagnosed, as consumers -- like Glenda of Richland, Washington -- simply suffer through the illness on their own.

"I know for sure that three jars that I have eaten from have the correct serial numbers on them," Glenda said in a complaint to ConsumerAffairs.com, "I have been to the emergency room 3 times with severe cramping, vomiting and diarrhea since August and have had many other bouts that are undocumented since that time as well, plus persistent fatigue and aching eyes and wrists."

"My husband has also had several minor bouts of stomach cramping and vomiting," Glenda said.

Deborah of Salem, N.C., had a similar experience.

"I purchased the Peter Pan Peanut Butter with the product code 2111 which has just been recalled. After consuming a peanut butter and banana sandwich I became very ill with stomach cramps, diarrhea and vomiting," she said. "I thought it was just a stomach virus thinking that there was nothing in a peanut butter and banana sandwich that could make me sick."

"It was lucky for me that I because sick on Friday night and was sick through the weekend but did not miss any work. It just left me weak and not feeling well for about a week," she said.

But while young, healthy adults may be able to fight off the illness on their own, the very young and the very old are much more susceptible to complications.

"My mother-in-law is almost 90 ... She ate some Peter Pan peanut butter (and) a few days later she stared saying she could't breathe. They took her to the hospital, did all kinds of blood tests ... then we find out about salmonella," said Kenneth of Bosque Farms, N.M.

First Lawsuit

The first of what's likely to be a rash of lawsuits was filed against ConAgra in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Mo., Friday by Susanna and Brian Cox of St. Joseph, Mo.

The lawsuit says Susanna Cox and the couple's two children began developing gastrointestinal illnesses in October after eating Great Value peanut butter, made by ConAgra.

What To Watch For

The affected jars of Peter Pan and Great Value peanut butter have a product code located on the lid of the jar that begins with the number "2111." Both the Peter Pan and Great Value brands are manufactured in a single facility in Georgia by ConAgra. Great Value peanut butter made by other manufacturers is not affected.

If consumers have any of this Peter Pan or Great Value brand peanut butter in their home that has been purchased since May 2006, they should discard it.

Symptoms of foodborne illness caused by Salmonella include fever, diarrhea and abdominal cramps. In persons with poor underlying health or weakened immune systems, Salmonella can invade the bloodstream and cause life-threatening infections.

Individuals who have recently eaten Peter Pan and Great Value brand peanut butter beginning with product code 2111 and have experienced any of these symptoms should contact their doctor or health care provider immediately. Any such illnesses should be reported to state or local health authorities.

In Sylvester, Georgia, government and company investigators are swarming over the ConAgra Foods plant, trying to determine how salmonella got into batches of the peanut butter, admidst rapidly increasing reports of consumer illness and at least one lawsuit against ConAgra.

The plant has been shut down since Wednesday, when the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warned that Peter Pan brand peanut butter and some batches of Wal-Mart's Great Value house brand were linked to a salmonella outbreak that has sickened at least 300 people nationwide since August.

The number of those sickened is likely much higher than the official estimate as many cases are never diagnosed, as consumers -- like Glenda of Richland, Washington -- simply suffer through the illness on their own.

"I know for sure that three jars that I have eaten from have the correct serial numbers on them," Glenda said in a complaint to ConsumerAffairs.com, "I have been to the emergency room 3 times with severe cramping, vomiting and diarrhea since August and have had many other bouts that are undocumented since that time as well, plus persistent fatigue and aching eyes and wrists."

"My husband has also had several minor bouts of stomach cramping and vomiting," Glenda said.

Deborah of Salem, N.C., had a similar experience.

"I purchased the Peter Pan Peanut Butter with the product code 2111 which has just been recalled. After consuming a peanut butter and banana sandwich I became very ill with stomach cramps, diarrhea and vomiting," she said. "I thought it was just a stomach virus thinking that there was nothing in a peanut butter and banana sandwich that could make me sick."

"It was lucky for me that I because sick on Friday night and was sick through the weekend but did not miss any work. It just left me weak and not feeling well for about a week," she said.

But while young, healthy adults may be able to fight off the illness on their own, the very young and the very old are much more susceptible to complications.

"My mother-in-law is almost 90 ... She ate some Peter Pan peanut butter (and) a few days later she stared saying she could't breathe. They took her to the hospital, did all kinds of blood tests ... then we find out about salmonella," said Kenneth of Bosque Farms, N.M.

First Lawsuit

The first of what's likely to be a rash of lawsuits was filed against ConAgra in U.S. District Court in Kansas City, Mo., Friday by Susanna and Brian Cox of St. Joseph, Mo.

The lawsuit says Susanna Cox and the couple's two children began developing gastrointestinal illnesses in October after eating Great Value peanut butter, made by ConAgra.

What To Watch For

The affected jars of Peter Pan and Great Value peanut butter have a product code located on the lid of the jar that begins with the number "2111." Both the Peter Pan and Great Value brands are manufactured in a single facility in Georgia by ConAgra. Great Value peanut butter made by other manufacturers is not affected.

If consumers have any of this Peter Pan or Great Value brand peanut butter in their home that has been purchased since May 2006, they should discard it.

Symptoms of foodborne illness caused by Salmonella include fever, diarrhea and abdominal cramps. In persons with poor underlying health or weakened immune systems, Salmonella can invade the bloodstream and cause life-threatening infections.

Individuals who have recently eaten Peter Pan and Great Value brand peanut butter beginning with product code 2111 and have experienced any of these symptoms should contact their doctor or health care provider immediately. Any such illnesses should be reported to state or local health authorities.

But according to a University of Missouri-Columbia scientist, environmental chemicals found in everyday plastics and pesticides also may influence obesity.

Frederick vom Saal, professor of biological sciences in MU's College of Arts and Science, has found that when fetuses are exposed to these chemicals, the way their genes function may be altered to make them more prone to obesity and disease.

"Certain environmental substances called endocrine-disrupting chemicals can change the functioning of a fetus's genes, altering a baby's metabolic system and predisposing him or her to obesity. This individual could eat the same thing and exercise the same amount as someone with a normal metabolic system, but he or she would become obese, while the other person remained thin," vom Saal said. "This is a serious problem because obesity puts people at risk for other problems, including cancer, diabetes, cardiovascular disease and hypertension," he added.

Using lab mice, vom Saal has studied the effects of endocrine-disrupting chemicals, including bisphenol-A, which recently made news in San Francisco, where controversy has ensued over an ordinance that seeks to ban its use in children's products.

In a recent study, vom Saal found that endocrine-disrupting chemicals cause mice to be born at very low birth weights and then gain abnormally large amounts of weight in a short period of time, more than doubling their body weight in just seven days.

He followed the mice as they got older and found that these mice were obese throughout their lives. He said studies of low-birth-weight children have shown a similar overcompensation after birth, resulting in lifelong obesity.

"The babies are born with a low body weight and a metabolic system that's been programmed for starvation. This is called a thrifty phenotype,' a system designed to maximize the use of all food taken into the body. The problem comes when the baby isn't born into a world of starvation, but into a world of fast food restaurants and fatty foods," vom Saal said.

More research must be done to determine which chemicals cause this effect. According to vom Saal, there are approximately 55,000 manmade chemicals in the world, and 1,000 of those might fall into the category of endocrine disrupting.

These chemicals are found in common products, from plastic bottles and containers to pesticides and electronics.

"You inherit genes, but how those genes develop during your very early life also plays an important role in your propensity for obesity and disease. People who have abnormal metabolic systems have to live extremely different lifestyles in order to not be obese because their systems are malfunctioning," vom Saal said. "We need to figure out what we can do to understand and prevent this."

By Joseph S. Enoch
ConsumerAffairs.com Congressional Correspondent

February 16, 2007

The CPSC is currently powerless to enact new rules or levy fines because it has had only two commissioners since Chairman Hal Stratton, another Bush appointee, abruptly resigned six months ago to become a lobbyist.

Bush is expected to make his appointment during the long President's Day weekend, while Congress is out of town.

The White House refuses to comment. Spokesmen there have not returned seven phone calls from ConsumerAffairs.com over the last week and Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill have had no official word on whether an appointment is pending.

But David Baker, a lawyer who represents companies before the CPSC, said he has heard from a number of "private Republican lobbyists" that the appointment "is likely to be a recess appointment."

Under a recess appointment the nominee can take his or her place at the commission for one year without Congressional approval.

Hacks and Flacks

The recess appointment authority is intended to fill vacancies in agencies during an emergency while Congress is in recess. Presidents have used it in the past as a way to ensconce controversial, often spectacularly unqualified political insiders who would be unlikely to win Congressional approval.

"There's no need for him to recess appoint," Michael Teague, spokesman for Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.) said. "If he recess appoints someone, it must be because the person has some sort of dark cloud hanging over them."

The Senate Commerce Committee advanced legislation sponsored by Pryor Tuesday to restore authority to the commission. The measure, which now goes to the full Senate, would allow commissioners to continue routine business despite a vacancy on the commission.

"I think it would be a very negative symbol for the Bush administration to circumvent the normal means of appointment," said Baker, who said he is a Republican.

Rachel Weintraub, director of Product Safety and senior counsel at the Consumer Federation of America, said she cannot comment on potential nominees but said, "Any chairman of the CPSC cannot be biased toward any market."

"Every second of a consumer's day, you're surrounded by products that this commission has jurisdiction over," Weintraub told the San Francisco Chronicle. "When this commission can't do its job properly, consumers can potentially feel this impact in a devastating way."

Because of Baroody's Republican ties and history of opposing strong safety regulation, his appointment is unlikely to be popular with the Democratic-controlled Congress.

Interim Measures

If Bush does not nominate a replacement soon, Pryor, chairman of the Senate Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs, Insurance and Automotive Safety, has proposed legislation that will reauthorize the two commissioners' powers for another six months while Bush makes up his mind or simply continues to ignore the commission.

"My measure ensures product safety is not put at risk because this administration doesn't make it a priority," Pryor, whose subcommittee has jurisdiction over the CPSC, said.

This is the third time Bush has left the CPSC without a quorum. In the CPSC's 35-year history, the only other time the commission has gone so long without a quorum was during the adminstration of Bush's father, George H.W. Bush.

"This shows that this is not a major priority for the Bush Administration," said Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.) who is vice chair of the Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade and Consumer Protection, the House subcommittee that has jurisdiction over the CPSC. "(This is) the only organization charged to protect consumers from dangers in the marketplace."

"The lack of quorum? I'm sorry, I don't know," Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), who sits on the subcommittee with CPSC jurisdiction, said. "There hasn't been an appointment? That's unfortunate. How long has that appointment been delayed?"

Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) said he is planning to discuss the topic with some of his staff members but said, "I have not followed that issue very clearly."

Sen. John Sununu (R-N.H.) did not return three phone calls from ConsumerAffairs.com while Rep. Sue Myrick (R-N.C.) would not step off the House floor to be interviewed. Both also serve on committees with oversight responsibility.

Toyota is fond of describing the Prius hybrid as the car of the future and many Prius owners are as forgiving of problems with their little cars as newly-minted grandparents are of their offsprings' foibles.

That may be changing however. Aging Priuses are bringing with them problems many owners are finding hard to forgive.

Richard has a 2001 Prius in Palm Desert, California, that now has 103,000 miles on it.

"The car has died on the freeway four times," he told us. "The second time the dealer had the car for 53 days waiting for parts."

"The car is extremely hard on tires. Just can't keep them balanced. The heat inverter has gone out twice. The service representative said these cars just don't do well in the desert. The gas tank has been replaced. Also the steering column. The main computer has been replaced as well as a smaller one," Richard told ConsumerAffairs.com.

Worst of all?

"The mileage has not been what they (Toyota) advertised," he wrote. "I only use this car to drive short trips around town because I just can't trust it on the freeway."

Trust is becoming an illusive quality for a growing number of Prius owners forced to deal with snowy weather and slippery or unstable road conditions.

A Northern Virginia Prius owner first reported the hybrid's traction problem.

"When my car is on any kind of slick surface that causes one of the front wheels to slip, all power to the drive system is stopped," Christopher wrote from Reston, Virginia.

Now two other Prius owners have confirmed the traction problem, despite Toyota's denials.

Alex told us from Blowing Rock, North Carolina that the "electric and gasoline drive systems totally shut down if front wheel or wheels lose traction. I'm in total agreement with (Christopher's) comments," he wrote.

"The Prius is totally unsafe in any situation in which the front wheels lose traction which then causes the engine to completely shut down," Alex told us.

Alex said that "the shutdown occurs on any loosely packed (gravel or loose dirt at an intersection) or slippery (ice or packed snow)surface."

"Toyota attempts to spin this into a safety feature is total hype," Alex told us.

A Toyota spokesperson had previously explained to ConsumerAffairs.com that the condition Alex and others experienced was a result of the traction control system in the Toyota attempting to provide vehicle stability.

Toyota spokesman Bill Kwon agreed that the traction control system in the Prius could impact performance in snowy conditions but insisted that was not a safety problem.

"Prius has TRAC (traction control) as standard equipment," he said. "The purpose of traction control is to help prevent wheel spin and minimize slippage of the drive wheels by applying brakes and/or reducing engine power."

Alex is not buying any of the Toyota explanation.

"This is a most serious flaw in the design of the car and needs to be corrected, sooner rather than later. I'm positive you will find that this concern is shared by many Prius owners who have encountered the identical situation," he wrote.

Serge in Goode, Virginia is another Prius owner who has encountered that identical situation.

"I have a Prius and I consider the car dangerous in all conditions because of this power stoppage when the wheel senses any slippage," Serge told us.

"For instance," he continued, "It will do the same thing while driving up a graveled driveway or attempting to gain highway speed while in an acceleration lane and driving across a sand or gravel patch. The pedal goes dead and you could get severely hurt by losing acceleration."

"Toyota's statement is ridiculous and I think it is only a matter of time until they are sued and forced to do something about this serious problem," he wrote.

Finally, Anthony in Salinas, California wrote that he has encountered difficulty keeping his Prius aimed in the proper direction on wet roads.

"In driving rain I suddenly lost all control and all power in my Prius, the auto drifted into a left skid, turning 180 degrees on the highway then completing a 360 spin on the opposing traffic shoulder about 200 feet from the start. Has this loss of directional control and braking been reported"?

While Anthony's problem did not occur in the snow, clearly seems to be a problem with the traction system in his Prius suggesting a more sophisticated traction control system might stabilize the little hybrid before it spins out of control.

Sen. Richard Durbin (D-IL) and Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) have introduced legislation to put all food safety responsibilities under a single new Food Safety Administrator.

The Safe Food Act also would modernize the 100-year old food safety laws, and give the new chief a unified budget. The legislation is supported by the nonprofit food safety and nutrition watchdog group, the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI).

The government's finite food safety resources are not equitably split between the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and the Bush Administration's 2008 budget proposal makes matters worse, according to CSPI.

USDA regulates 20 percent of the nation's food supply, and the Administration proposes giving the department $270 million in new money for food safety and security. FDA regulates 80 percent of the food supply, including fresh vegetables like spinach and lettuce, but it will get only $10.6 million in new food safety money, despite being underfunded already.

"The Bush food safety budget defies logic," said Caroline Smith DeWaal, director of food safety at CSPI. "While the budget clearly recognizes the need for more funding for food safety, money is being directed at animal health problems and meat and poultry at the expense of preventing outbreaks from fresh produce."

The Safe Food Act would create a Food Safety Administration, similar to the Environmental Protection Agency, that would take responsibility for food safety and labeling from USDA and FDA.

The bill would also establish a comprehensive program to protect public health and bolster consumer confidence in the safety of the food supply. Currently, food safety monitoring, inspection, and labeling functions are spread across 12 federal agencies.

"It makes no sense to have one agency regulate chickens and another regulate eggs, or to have one agency regulate cows and another to regulate milk," said CSPI food safety staff attorney Ken Kelly. "When one cabinet secretary is responsible for pepperoni pizza and another is responsible for cheese pizza, you know something's wrong."

The Safe Food Act would consolidate the activities of various federal agencies responsible for the nation's food supply including USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service and Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service; the FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition; and the Commerce Department's National Marine Fisheries Service.

The bill also includes a traceback provision, gives the new agency recall authority, and requires more frequent inspections to help prevent future E. coli outbreaks.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently designated food safety as one of the high risk federal government programs. Agriculture, including all food production, is about 13 percent of the gross domestic product, and the largest industry in the U.S., according to GAO.

Unsafe food poses a significant burden on consumers. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 76 million people suffer from foodborne illness each year, resulting in 325,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths.

Children and the elderly are most likely to experience severe cases of illness and death from foodborne pathogens. Outbreaks, like the one that occurred last fall from tainted spinach, can easily exceed $100 million in damages to both victims and the industry.

To protect against identity theft, consumers who have shopped at the TJX Stores, including Marshalls, TJ Maxx, Home Goods, AJ Wright, and used their credit or debit card, or a check, to pay for goods purchased, may wish to take the following cautionary steps:

1. Call one of the three major credit bureaus and place a one-call fraud alert on your credit report:

• Equifax: Call (800) 525-6285, and write: P.O. Box 740241, Atlanta, GA 30374-0241.
• Experian: Call (888) 397-3742, and write: P.O. Box 9532, Allen, TX 75013.
• TransUnion: Call (800) 680-7289, and write: Fraud Victim Assistance Division, P.O. Box 6790 Fullerton, CA 92834-6790.

You only need to call one of the three credit bureaus; the one you contact is required by law to contact the other two credit bureaus. This one-call fraud alert will remain in your credit file for at least 90 days. The fraud alert requires creditors to contact you before opening any new accounts or increasing credit limits on your existing accounts. When you place a fraud alert on your credit report, all three credit bureaus are required to send you a credit report free of charge.

2. Order a copy of your credit report, and look for unauthorized activity. Look carefully for unexplained activity on your credit report.

3. If there is unexplained activity on your credit report, you may want to place an extended fraud alert on your credit report. If after reviewing your credit report you believe there is unexplained activity, you may want to place an extended fraud alert on your credit report. In order to do this, you need to file a police report with your local police department, keep a copy for yourself, and provide a copy to one of the three major credit bureaus. Then an extended fraud alert can be placed on your credit file for a 7-year period.

This will mean that any time a user of your credit report (for instance, a credit card company or lender) checks your credit report, it will be notified that you do not authorize any new credit cards, any increase in credit limits, the issuance of a new card on an existing account, or other increases in credit, unless the user takes extra precautions to ensure that it is giving the additional credit to you (and not to an identity thief).

4. Contact the fraud departments of your credit card issuers or bank. You may want to contact the fraud department of the credit card company or bank that you used when you made purchases at the TJX stores. These financial institutions can monitor your account for suspicious activity. You may also wish to cancel these accounts; you can discuss this option with your credit card company or bank.

Additionally, TJX has established a toll free customer help line. Callers from the United States may reach the help line at (866) 484-6978. TJX has also posted information on its web site at www.tjx.com.

Source: Massachusetts Attorney General

There's a shift in the wind here in Washington, D.C., and it's not just from the bone-freezing winter.

Consumer groups and technology advocates are aggressively challenging the federal government to provide more oversight and advocacy for equal access to the Internet, aided by a Democratic Congress that is eager to challenge the Republican Administration.

Rep. John Dingell (D-MI), chair of the powerful House Energy and Commerce committee and its Telecommuncations subcommittee, challenged the Federal Communication Commission (FCC) to provide testimony on a host of issues, ranging from the level of broadband penetration in the United States to how the Universal Service Fund (USF) is collected.

Although the FCC hearing scheduled for Feb. 15th was canceled due to the death of Committee member Ron Norwood (R-GA), the commissioners provided pre-hearing answers to the questions Dingell put forth.

FCC chair Kevin Martin claimed that broadband penetration across the United States was constantly increasing, from 9 million in 2001 to 65 million today.

"That's nearly six times as many high-speed lines as when I joined the commission," Martin said. Martin also cited data from the Pew research center that found broadband use jumping from 60 million in 2005 to 84 million in 2006.

However, the Pew findings indicated that 45 percent of overall American households had broadband Internet access, out of a nation of 300 million.

The US ranked 21st among developed nations for broadband access, according to the International Telecommunications Union.

The data the FCC uses to measure broadband penetration has also been frequently criticized as inaccurate, such as using subscriber ZIP codes to measure access instead of where development has actually taken place.

The slow pace of nationwide broadband penetration is often attributed to the costs of building infrastructure across a nation as large as the U.S., as well as the desire of telecommunication companies to cater to richer client groups in clustered urban areas.

Supporters of net neutrality have challenged the desire of telecom companies to "redline" poor areas out of broadband development altogether.

AT&T-Bellsouth

Martin and fellow Commissioner Deborah Tate were also challenged by Dingell to explain their comments on the approval of the AT&T-BellSouth Merger.

AT&T offered numerous concessions to push the merger forward, including a promise to maintain net neutrality on its basic Internet services for up to thirty months.

Martin and Tate, both Republicans who went along with concessions grudgingly, said that they would not allow the concessions to guide future decisions in related matters, claiming that a "minority" of Commissioners -- in this case, Democratic members Jonathan Adelstein and Michael Copps -- should not be allowed to make decisions normally dictated by the majority.

"An industry-wide policy of the Commission must be approved by a majority of the commissioners," Tate said. "While I voted to support the merger, including the voluntarily-agreed to conditions, it is important the conditions not represent the policy of the Commission with regard to the broader industry."

FTC Wants Everyone To Get Along

Meanwhile, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) convened a two-day conference on "Broadband Connectivity Competition Policy."

FTC Chair Deborah Platt Majoras, a Republican who has been critical of net neutrality issues in the past, continued to evince a resistance to regulation, claiming "market solutions" would solve any difficulties.

Fellow commissioner Jon Leibowitz said that more constructive dialogue was necessary, and that participants in the debate "[listened] to the other side sort of just enough to mock it."

Participants in the forum included representatives from telecom giants such as Verizon and Cisco, consumer groups such as Media Access Project, and lobby groups like the anti-net neutrality Hands Off The Internet. Hands Off's co-chairman Christopher Wolf used his testimony to claim there was "zero evidence of harm to consumers or competition to warrant such regulation."

"[C]ompetitive conditions in the market for broadband access will protect consumers from the hypothetical harm theorized by net neutrality proponents," Wolf said.

Media Access Project's Harold Feld bemoaned the panel makeup, saying it was dominated by industry apologists.

"So the pro and con industry reps and pro and con academics each have their own panel, but the "consumers" (i.e., us regular folks actually using broadband) have to share "our" panel with two industry reps and two academics," he said on his blog.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has taken legal action to stop Sprint Nextel Corp. from using what he claims are deceptively worded wireless telephone fees.

According to the attorney general's lawsuit, Sprint Spectrum, a subsidiary of Sprint Nextel, violated the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act by implying that an additional fee on customers' bills was a state-imposed tax. Abbott also charged Sprint Nextel with violating a 2004 court order prohibiting the company from deceptive billing practices.

"Sprint Nextel has defrauded its customers and violated a court order, blatantly disregarding the laws of the State of Texas," Abbott said. "Texans will not tolerate Sprint Nextel's unlawful business practices. Once again, the Office of Attorney General is taking decisive legal action to crack down on Sprint Nextel's false, misleading, and deceptive acts."

In January, Sprint Nextel began charging Texas customers a 1 percent fee, claiming it was necessary to reimburse the company for a state-imposed tax.

Sprint Nextel describes this fee as a "Texas Margin Fee Reimbursement," wording which the Attorney General's lawsuit alleges is deceptive because the tax does not become effective until Jan. 1, 2008, and has not been set at a 1 percent rate.

The attorney general also charged Sprint Nextel with violating a court-approved agreement prohibiting Sprint from implying that their discretionary fees are required by the government.

The agreement stems from a 2004 investigation into Sprint's deceptive billing practices. Under the court order, the company is required to clearly separate government-mandated charges from those imposed at Sprint Nextel's discretion.

The lawsuit, which requests temporary and permanent injunctions against Sprint Nextel, asks the court to stop the deceptive billings and to compel the company to reimburse all customers who paid this fee. The petition also seeks civil penalties of $20,000 per violation under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

Stinging from defeat in a Hurricane Katrina damage claim in Biloxi, the company says it will no longer insure homeowners and businesses in the state, where it is the largest single insurer with a 30 percent market share. Allstate pulled out of Mississippi's six coastal counties last year.

"It is no longer prudent for us to take on additional risk in a legal and business environment that is becoming more unpredictable," said Senior Vice President Bob Trippel, in a statement.

State Farm is among a number of insurance companies hit with staggering claims in the wake of Katrina and other storms that have pounded the Gulf Coast in recent years.

While Allstate and some other carriers have cut back on coverage in storm-prone coastal areas, none until now has blacklisted an entire state.

The decision is expected to have significant impact on consumers. Currently State Farm holds 30 percent of the homeowner policies in the state. Other companies currently serving Mississippi will have to fill the gap.

State Farm has had a number of setbacks in Mississippi since Hurricane Katrina ravaged the state in 2005.

In January, a proposed $50 million class action settlement between the company and Mississippi homeowners was derailed by the judge hearing the case. U.S. District Judge L.T. Senter said the proposed settlement did not adequately spell out how payments would be determined and which homeowners would get them.

Also last month Gulf Coast property owners who lost nearly everything during Hurricane Katrina won a victory in court when a U.S. District Judge sided with them, ordering State Farm to pay $223,292 in damages the company had initially rejected.

Mississippi Attorney General Jim Hood had also filed suit against State Farm but dropped his state court suit when State Farm agreed to the tentative class action settlement. Hood had predicted the class action settlement would cost State Farm as much as $500 million.

Hood has also been pursuing a criminal investigation of State Farm, which he said he would drop when the class-action settlement is finalized.

After learning of State Farm's announcement, Hood said the company was trying to back off its commitment to remain in the state, which he said was part of the lawsuit settlement.

"The whole reason for reaching the settlement with them was to keep them here," Hood said.

Homeowners in Mississippi's coastal counties who can't find a private insurer can turn to the state's wind-insurance pool, where rates are as much as 90 percent higher than commercial insurance.

Are you one of the millions of homeowners who went for one of those enticing variable or adjustable rate mortgages only to see your monthly payment, which started off low, continuing to rise, escalating to the point where it's harder and harder, or even impossible, for you to keep up your payments?

Unfortunately, this is an all-too-common scenario being played out across America.

According to the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA), an estimated $1.5 trillion in adjustable rate mortgages (ARM) are going to see another increase in interest rates this year alone. The MBA predicts this will prompt homeowners to refinance about $700 billion worth of those adjustable rate mortgages.

Skyrocketing adjustable rate mortgages are one of the reasons that foreclosures have been on a steady increase.

Realtytrac.com says foreclosures in the U.S. were up 42 percent in 2006 from the previous year. Overall, one foreclosure was filed for every 92 U.S. households last year. The Detroit-Dearborn area had the most foreclosures-one for every 21 households.

Fortunately, there are less damaging solutions than a foreclosure -- such as refinancing or even filing for a certain kind of bankruptcy. So before you put in a call to your local loan shark take a look at some better options that don't come with a clause for "kneecapping."

Refinancing

The first and possibly best option to consider is refinancing. Today, if you qualify, you can actually switch to a fixed-rate loan for nearly the same interest rate as an adjustable. This means the interest rate on the loan stays the same for the life of the loan and you no longer have to worry about rising interest rates.

The problem is that an increasing number of homeowners can't do that without forking over something called a "prepayment penalty," costing thousands of dollars.

These penalties tend to apply to those adjustable-rate mortgages that have low teaser rates that balloon up once the introductory period ends as well as option-adjustable rate mortgages where you can make interest-only payments or in some cases even less than interest-only.

Another obstacle to refinancing is the current slump in the housing market where values of some homes have decreased to below their purchase price. This has lenders tightening credit standards, thus making mortgages as well as refinancing harder to get.

A survey conducted by the Federal Reserve Board found that 15 percent of all U.S. banks have tightened their credit standards on residential mortgage loans in the past three months. That's the highest percentage of banks since the early 1990s.

This means some lenders are demanding proof of income, minimum credit scores, and at least some kind of down payment.

Banks aren't the only institutions clamping down. Some mortgage companies that built their reputation on lending to those with less than stellar credit ratings are discontinuing some so-called "exotic loans" that allowed homeowners to borrower 100 percent of the purchase price.

Most Lenders Want to Avoid Foreclosure

One thing to understand when faced with a possible foreclosure is that the banks or mortgage companies don't want it any more than you do.

They lose money too because houses sold in foreclosure often sell for less than the amount left on the mortgage. So they'll usually work with you to come up with an alternate solution. For example, Bank of America is allowing some borrowers with high interest adjustable rate mortgages to refinance into a different loan at no cost.

It's up to you, however, to contact your bank or mortgage company to see if refinancing with another loan is even possible. The sooner you do this, the better. Some states have foreclosure laws that give you more time than others.

However, if you live in Texas, you have less than a month to make an overdue payment before the foreclosure process begins.

Modify Your Current Loan

If refinancing isn't available, try to work out a plan with your lender to modify your current loan that would allow you to make either a smaller payment, or to miss a payment until you have the funds.

This option is possible if you can prove that you will have money coming in the future, such as from an anticipated tax refund, an inheritance, a bonus, or any other future income, or from payments you are owed for work you've already completed.

You will have to prove the money will be forthcoming. Your lender may insist this be done by a certain date.

Another possibility would be to modify the loan to spread out past money-due by adding portions of it to the regular monthly payment until your payments are up to date.

Sell Your Home

If foreclosure is on the horizon, and refinancing or modifying your loan is out of the picture, there's another possible solution before filling for bankruptcy: put your home up for sale.

Even if you can't get the full market price, it's better than the lender repossessing the property, in which case you'll get nothing.

Obviously, time could be a factor here. If you are being forced to sell your home to avoid foreclosure, you might not be able to wait for a better offer as you could do if you were not racing against the clock.

There are other factors besides time that will influence what price you could get, e.g. how much in demand your particular community is right now, the condition of your house, or even the type of house you are selling.

Some lenders, in order to avoid foreclosures, are offering to let you sell the property for less than the total amount due on the mortgage and then forgive the remaining debt. But it will depend on whether this option would cost the lender less than foreclosing. If you consider this option, borrowers have the added advantage of not having to put a foreclosure on their credit report.

Will Mortgage Insurance Help?

If you think that private mortgage insurance you had to buy because you put less than 20 percent down is going to help you avoid foreclosure, forget it. You may have paid for this insurance, but it's the lender who benefits, not you.

That's because mortgage insurance is paid out to a lender when it can't recover its costs after foreclosing on the loan and selling the mortgaged property. You still lose everything.

Beware of "Rescue" Scams

There are predators out there taking advantage of homeowners who are facing foreclosure. They pretend to offer foreclosure rescue services, often for a fee, and end up robbing you of your house and home.

One such scam is called "equity skimming" whereby a phony buyer offers to pay off your mortgage if you agree to move out and give him or her the deed to your property. The buyer will then sometimes rent out the property. But what he or she doesn't do is make any mortgage payments so eventually the lender is forced to foreclose.

Other scam artists will offer to provide, for a fee, things you can do on your own for nothing, such as working out a new payment plan with your lender.

Legitimate Foreclosure Services

There are legitimate organizations that help financially strapped homeowners avoid foreclosure and most of them are certified by the U.S. Housing & Urban Development [HUD] Department.

One of them is the Home Ownership Preservation Foundation [HPF]. It works with people nationwide to help homeowners set up budgets and mortgage payment plans. You can all them at 1-888-995-HOPE or go to their website at www.hpfonline.org.

The Bankruptcy Option

If all other options are exhausted, and the only thing standing between you and foreclosure is to declare personal bankruptcy, enter this financial arena with caution. Also keep in mind that filing for personal bankruptcy could cost from $1,500 to $5,000.

There are two kinds of bankruptcy so make sure you choose the right one.

Chapter 7 erases all debts including your mortgage. But that doesn't stop your lender from putting a lien on your house and foreclosing which means you can be out on the street within weeks depending on your state's foreclosure law.

Chapter 13 reorganizes your debts. You still have to pay off your debts but you'll have three to five years to do so. This gives you extended time to pay off those mortgage payments you missed, and it allows you to continue living in your home under a new mortgage payment schedule.

Don't try to file bankruptcy without a lawyer. The forms you can buy online are not adequate. If you qualify, you may be able to get reduce-fee or even free legal counsel from Legal Aid or other not-for-profit organizations in your community.

You can also call your local Bar Association and inquire about attorneys who will work "pro bono" (free) or at a reduced rate for clients in true financial distress.

A word of advice: Don't ask for free legal advice unless you are truly desperate. Contrary to popular opinion, lawyers have to eat too.

Heading Off Foreclosure

Admitting you're in financial trouble is hard for most people. But don't let it stop you from taking action as soon as you think you may be facing difficulties when it comes to keeping up with rising adjustable rate mortgage payments.

Don't think you're the first person to hit a rough spot. Nearly all of us have been there. Don't be shy about asking for help.

As noted earlier, most lenders want to avoid foreclosure as much as you do. Work with them. Get help from legitimate agencies to manage your debt. And remember, there are options to avoid foreclosure. Use them.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is warning consumers not to purchase or use Wild Kitty Cat Food due to the presence of Salmonella, a pathogen.

The FDA said that during routine monitoring activities, it collected and analyzed a sample of frozen raw Wild Kitty Cat Food and detected Salmonella in the product.

Cats and other pets consuming this food may become infected with Salmonella. People can also become infected with Salmonella if they handle or ingest the cat food, touch pets that consumed the food, or touch any surfaces that came into contact with the food or pets.

The specific products covered by this warning are Wild Kitty Raw All Natural, Frozen Cat Food Chicken with Clam Recipe, Net Wt. 3.5 oz (100g) and 1 lb in plastic containers. Some of these containers may be uncoded.

Salmonella can cause serious illnesses in small children, frail or elderly people, and people and pets with weakened immune systems. Other people and pets may suffer short-term symptoms, such as high fever, severe headache, vomiting, nausea, abdominal pain, and diarrhea. Long term complications can include arthritis.

The Wild Kitty Cat Food is sold nationwide to retail stores and through distributors and internet sales, nationwide.

Consumers who have purchased this product should not feed it to their pets, but should instead dispose of it in a safe manner (e.g., in a securely covered trash receptacle).

Anyone who is experiencing the symptoms of Salmonella infection after having handled the product should seek medical attention, and report use of the product and illness to FDA's Office of Emergency Operations. In addition, people who have concerns that they may have Salmonella should contact their medical doctors and the local health departments. People who have concerns whether their pet has Salmonella should contact their veterinarian.

People may risk bacterial infection not only by handling their cat, but by contact with the pet food, food bowl, cat box and surfaces exposed to these items, so it is important that they thoroughly wash their hands with hot water and soap.

Since young children, elderly people, and people and animals with weakened immune systems are particularly at risk from exposure, they should avoid handling all the items listed above and surfaces exposed to these items.

Bank of America has begun quietly offering credit cards to customers in the Los Angeles are who don't have a Social Security number, The Wall Street Journalreports. Such persons are usually undocumented immigrants.

The newspaper said that Bank of America, the country's second-largest bank, is offering credit cards to consumers who have had an account at the bank for three months or more, even if they do not have a credit history or Social Security number.

It's the latest indication that American financial institutions are serious about doing business with the millions of undocumented immigrants who until recently have had no access to such routine services as checking accounts, credit cards, home mortgages and personal loans.

The newspaper said that Bank of America tested the program at five branches in Los Angeles last year and has now expanded it to 51 additonal branches in Los Angeles County, thought to have the largest concentration of undocumented workers and illegal immigrants in the U.S.

It said the bank hopes to roll the program out nationally later this year.

The credit cards won't be cheap. They carry a high interest rate, typically about 21 percent, and an annual fee, but they do offer a way for non-citizens to build a credit history so that they can purchase cars, homes and other big ticket items on credit.

There is nothing illegal about the practice, Bank of America said. But critics say a major bank should not be helping people who violate immigration laws.

"They are clearly crossing the line; they are actually aiding and abetting people who broke the law," said a spokesman for the Federation for American Immigration Reform.

To review applicants, Bank of America is using a procedure called "judgmental lending," pioneered by MBNA Corp., the credit card giant acquired by the Charlotte-based Bank of America last year. Instead of using credit reports, bank employees make subjective judgments based on their personal observation of the customer.

The VA is notifying 1.8 million veteran patients and doctors that a hard drive containing their personal information has been missing from an Alabama veterans' hospital.

The missing hard drive contains personally identifying information on 535,000 veterans, and billing information for 1.3 million doctors.

The hard drive was discovered missing on Jan. 22 but, as usual in such cases, the public was not alerted.

VA officials first said the drive contained information on 48,000 veteran patients but now concede the actual number is nearly 40 times more than what was originally reported.

The information included Social Security numbers for the patients, and names in several instances, as well as Medicare billing codes for the doctors.

At the time of the original notification, the VA said that the drive belonged to an unidentified "mid-level" employee. The drive allegedly lacked encryption.

The VA originally said it suspected theft in the disappearance, and began a criminal investigation with the help of the FBI. As usual, the VA claimed it had seen "no evidence" that the data was misused.

The agency plans to offer a year of free credit monitoring to any affected individual, though it did not disclose who it was partnering with to offer the service.

Congress Incensed

Alabama's Congressional and state representatives were incensed at the data breach and the lag time between the discovery and the notification. Rep. Artur Davis (D-Birmingham) chastised the VA when the breach was originally disclosed for its repeated failures to protect information.

"[The VA] should be held to a better standard than the private sector, not a lesser standard," Davis said at the time. "This is a continuous problem of veterans who go into the VA."

Dubious Distinction

The continuing problems at the Veterans' Administration have given it the dubious honor of being synonymous with the phrase "data breach," an accolade formerly held by data broker ChoicePoint after it sold personal information to a ring of Nigerian criminals.

The VA's reputation was tarnished after a laptop containing records on 26.5 million veterans was stolen from the home of an analyst in Maryland in May 2006.

The laptop was eventually recovered after an anonymous tip led to the arrest of two Maryland teenagers and a juvenile connected with the theft.

In the course of the inquiry into that laptop's theft, the VA was found to have kept the theft secret for nearly a month before disclosing it to the affected veterans.

The unidentified analyst was dismissed from his position for the breach, a move he contested on grounds that VA employees had been given permission to take data home with them on numerous occasions.

The VA had also covered up two smaller data breaches in the twelve-month period preceding the laptop theft.

The last VA breach prompted numerous hearings before Congress, and a series of legislative efforts is underway to improve data security and codify disclosure requirements nationwide. Critics charge that many of the bills are too friendly to industry and government agencies, and offer too many exemptions to be of any use.

Serious Danger

Despite the VA's claims that it had seen no evidence the missing data was misused, the threat is very real for affected victims of a data breach.

Smart hackers will often mix and match stolen data from different people, creating new "synthetic identities" that can be used to get new credit accounts. Because the thieves are using existing information, rather than making up fake identities, the fraud is much harder to detect.

Missing medical information is particularly dangerous, as the data can be used for "medical identity theft," where the culprit gets expensive medical procedures and leaves the bill for the unknowing victim to pay.

Medical fraud is much harder to prove than typical credit or bank fraud, and can leave victims with ruined credit and thousands of dollars in debt.

Many Hewlett Packard and Lexmark consumers with inkjet printers may find that their ink cartridges are no longer working -- not because they are out of ink or because they're broken, but rather, because the manufacturers designed them to shut down after a certain amount of time.

ConsumerAffairs.com has received a few complaints from consumers who say their ink cartridges, although full of ink, just stopped working.

"I bought my HP ink 3 months ago, used it only twice and now my printer 'doesn't detect a cartridge!'" wrote Helga of Clearwater, Fla. "This is downright crooked. It should last for as long as there is ink in it."

The majority of ink cartridges with timers are manufactured by Hewlett Packard (HP) and Lexmark, said Alwin Morgenstern, chief operating officer of freerecycling.com, a company that recycles ink cartridges.

A letter from "Beebo" to TheInquirer.net, a news website, reported that when he purchased discounted and expired HP ink cartridges, they wouldn't work. When he tried to use them, a warning would pop up saying the cartridges had expired.

Beebo examined the copper connector pins on his old cartridge and the new ones and found that the new ones had one extra pin. He removed that pin and sure enough, the cartridge printed fine.

For years, the cartridges have had suggested "sell by dates," said HP's senior ink and media scientist, Nils Miller. But in 1999, HP installed chips on some cartridges that communicate with the printer to tell it how long it has been since the cartridge was manufactured and installed in the printer. After a certain time, the printer will discontinue use of the cartridge.

Miller said it is a precautionary measure that prolongs the life of the printer's delicate ink plumbing.

"We are trying to maintain control over the interactions between the cartridge, ink delivery system and print head," Miller said.

HP and Lexmark installed this timing mechanism because many manufacturers began to move away from integrated ink cartridges, that is, cartridges that contain the ink, the delivery system and the print head all in one package. Instead, many printers now have all those parts built into the printer rather than the cartridge.

With an integrated ink cartridge, those delicate parts were replaced with each new cartridge.

Miller said that over time, ink can yield some sediment that could potentially clog the plumbing and the print head and that is why there is a timer.

Printers with built-in plumbing are nothing new, Miller said. But in the past, they were reserved for high end office machines that consumed larger quantities of ink in shorter periods of time. Many printer manufacturers began offering these same printers on the consumer level because the cartridges have more room to hold more ink. Miller said HP followed suit because of "market pressure."

The lifespan of many of HP's and Lexmark's expiring ink cartridges is 54 months after they are manufactured and 2.5 years after they are installed in the printer. A few of the cartridges have shorter lifespans of three years and 18 months after the cartridge is installed in the printer.

Morgenstern charged that the forced expiration date is a ploy for the manufacturers to make more money.

"Most cartridges will work fine at least one to two years after they expire," Morgenstern said.

Miller agreed saying that it's likely the cartridge would work fine after it expires.

"It doesn't mean those cartridges are filled with sludge immediately after the expiration date," Miller said.

But he said that HP has to be conservative because it could be very expensive for consumers to replace or repair parts in the printer.

Miller said consumers should strongly considered purchasing printers that utilize integrated ink cartridges.

"From an engineering and consumer point of view, integrated ink cartridges are good for customers who use their printers intermittently," Miller said. "If you're only going to use your printer once a week and then go maybe five weeks without using it, that's when you would want integrated ink."

Miller said non-integrated ink cartridges are good for consumers who use their printers regularly and will go through the ink faster than it can expire because those printers' cartridges frequently have a larger reservoir.

He also suggested consumers avoid stockpiling ink cartridges but rather just buy one or two at a time.

Consumers whose cartridges expire will receive no reimbursement, said Katie Neal, HP's spokeswoman. Her only suggestion was that consumers use the prepaid envelope that comes with the cartridge and mail it back to HP so it can properly be recycled.

If consumers would like to receive some reimbursement for their expired cartridge, they can send it to freerecycling.com where they will receive as much as $3.60. For more information visit freerecycling.com.