Content deleted Content added
m Spelling/grammar/punctuation/typographical correction |
m link [cC]onsumer protection |
||
Line 95:
==Political lobbying==
The DSA serves as a [[public relations]] and [[lobbying group]] acting on behalf of its member companies.<ref name=NCAHF>{{cite web|last=Barrett|first=Stephen|title=Consumer Health Digest #11-39|url=http://www.ncahf.org/digest11/11-39.html|publisher=National Council Against Health Fraud|accessdate=June 16, 2012}}</ref><ref name=CAI>{{cite web| last=Taylor| first=Jon M.| title=Direct Selling Association (DSA) vs. Consumers| url=http://mlm-thetruth.com/legal/legal/dsa-vs-cons/| publisher=Consumers Awareness Institute| accessdate=2012-06-17| url-status=dead| archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20120613215210/http://mlm-thetruth.com/legal/legal/dsa-vs-cons| archivedate=2012-06-13}}</ref> The DSA played a role in petitioning the [[Federal Trade Commission|Federal Trade Commission (FTC)]] to exempt multi-level marketing companies from [[consumer protection]] regulations outlined in the FTC's 2006 proposed Business Opportunity Rule, encouraging people to write 17,000 form letters complaining about the rule from 2006 to 2008.<ref name=klein>{{cite news|last=Klein|first=Karen E.|title=The Multibillion-Dollar Direct-Selling Industry Dodges the FTC|url=http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-04-16/the-multibillion-dollar-direct-selling-industry-dodges-the-ftc#p1|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120419122915/http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-04-16/the-multibillion-dollar-direct-selling-industry-dodges-the-ftc#p1|url-status=dead|archive-date=April 19, 2012|accessdate=June 16, 2012|newspaper=[[Bloomberg News]]|date=April 16, 2012}}</ref><ref name=stroud/><ref>{{cite news|last1=Greenberg|first1=Herb|authorlink1=Herb Greenberg|title=How Multi-Level Marketers Dodged a Bullet|url=https://www.cnbc.com/id/100360456|accessdate=31 July 2015|work=CNBC|date=9 January 2013}}</ref> The law was passed in 2012, with most multi-level marketing companies considered exempt.<ref name=stroud>{{cite news|last1=Stroud|first1=Matt|title=How lobbying dollars prop up pyramid schemes|url=https://www.theverge.com/2014/4/8/5590550/alleged-pyramid-schemes-lobbying-ftc|accessdate=31 July 2015|work=The Verge|date=8 April 2014}}</ref>
The DSA supported and allegedly drafted much of the language of the "Anti-Pyramid Promotional Scheme Act" introduced by US Representative [[Marsha Blackburn]], and an amendment to the US House of Representatives' omnibus Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill for fiscal year 2018 by US Representative [[John Moolenaar]] that would have limited the ability of the FTC and other agencies to classify companies as pyramid schemes and to investigate whether MLMs are pyramid schemes.<ref name="Kosman2017">{{cite news|last1=Kosman|first1=John|title=DeVos' family seeks deregulation of Amway so it can beat Herbalife|url=https://nypost.com/2017/09/18/devos-family-seeks-deregulation-of-amway-so-it-can-beat-herbalife/|accessdate=6 May 2018|work=[[New York Post]]|date=18 September 2017}}</ref><ref name="Gingerich2017">{{cite news|last1=Gingerich|first1=Jon|title=Pyramid Scheme Protection Law Pits Legal Group Against Multilevel Marketers|url=http://www.odwyerpr.com/story/public/9601/2017-10-20/pyramid-scheme-protection-law-pits-legal-group-against-multilevel-marketers.html|accessdate=6 May 2018|work=O'Dwyer's: The Inside News of PR & Marketing Communications|date=20 October 2017}}</ref> The amendment would have disbarred the Treasury Department, the Judiciary Department, the Small Business Administration, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the FTC, or any other agencies from using any monies to take enforcement actions against pyramid operations for the fiscal year.<ref name="Gingerich2017"/> The Act would blur the lines between legitimate MLM activity and pyramid schemes established under the original 1979 FTC case by deeming sales made to people inside the company as sales to an “ultimate user,” thus erasing the key distinction made in the ruling between sales to actual consumers of a product and sales made to members of the MLM network that are used for recruitment of additional members or to qualify for commissions.<ref name="NCL2018">{{cite news|last1=NCL Communications|title=Public interest groups' letter to Congress in opposition of Moolenaar pyramid scheme rider|url=http://www.nclnet.org/congress_moolenaar_letter|accessdate=6 May 2018|publisher=[[National Consumers League]]|date=March 2018}}</ref><ref name="Gingerich2017"/><ref name="VanderNatTINA">{{cite web|last1=Vander Nat|first1=Peter|title=Why This Anti-Pyramid Scheme Bill is Outrageously Wrong for Consumers|date=23 May 2016|url=https://www.truthinadvertising.org/why-hr-5230-is-wrong/|publisher=[[Truth in Advertising (organization)|Truth in Advertising (TINA.org)]]|accessdate=6 May 2018}}</ref> The amendment was opposed by a coalition of consumer interest groups including [[Consumer Action]], the [[Consumer Federation of America]], [[Consumers Union]] (the publisher of ''[[Consumer Reports]]'' magazine), [[Consumer Watchdog]], the [[National Consumers League]], and the [[Public Interest Research Group|United States Public Interest Research Group]] (US PIRG),<ref name="NCL2018"/> as well as [[Truth in Advertising (organization)|Truth in Advertising (TINA.org)]] in its original incarnation.<ref name="VanderNatTINA"/>
| |||