Groups in Oregon are fighting for consumer rights in the face of what they call "a concerning request" from PacifiCorp, the state's second largest electricity provider.

Earlier this year, PacifiCorp asked the Oregon Public Utility Commission to set limits on future lawsuit awards, restricting payments to actual damages for property and loss of life.

Jagjit Nagra, executive director of the Oregon Consumer Justice group, said this request puts customer rights in jeopardy.

"Because essentially what they're saying is that if you want electricity, you have to, you the consumer, have to take the risk, not just of us being negligent, as the jury found earlier, but also for us being recklessly indifferent to causing harm to our customers, " Nagra said.

Nagra pointed out the company's request protects its investors, and argues that removing nonpunitive damages relieves PacifiCorp of responsibility and denies consumers the ability to seek adequate remedies for their losses. He noted the filing came after a Multnomah County jury found PacifiCorp liable for wildfires that occurred on Labor Day of 2020 and ordered them to pay nearly $72 million in damages to the victims.

Mike Goetz, general counsel for the Oregon Citizen's Utility Board, shares the concern and said allowing customers to pursue damages ensures utilities operate their systems safely. He explained, for his organization, one major concern lies in the legality of PacifiCorp's filing.

"We feel there are legal issues related to the filing and that it may not be either within the scope of the Oregon Commission's authority to grant a filing like this, and that such a broad and sweeping liability waiver may not be eventually enforceable by Oregon courts, " he continued.

Another important aspect is the growing threat of wildfires due to climate change. Goetz said the need for utilities to make responsible operational changes, given the increasing risks associated with wildfires.

"Utilities no doubt will have to invest in their system and make sure that they're operating it in a safe way to minimize their role in starting and spreading wildfires and to also make sure that their system is resilient to wildfires that are caused not by their doing," Goetz said.

Overall, he added, the issue comes down to fairness between large corporations like PacifiCorp and consumers who often lack alternatives.

Oregon Consumer Justice and Oregon Citizens Utility Board have said they both intend to intervene in the proceedings, to protect customer rights and amplify the voices of those who could be affected in the future.


get more stories like this via email

Massachusetts residents struggling to pay high food prices are acquiring a growing amount of debt to pay their bills, according to a new report.

The Urban Institute found 60% of adults reported using credit cards to buy groceries but only 20% managed to pay the minimum monthly payment.

Kassandra Martinchek, senior research associate at the Urban Institute, said nearly 25% of families have dipped into savings to keep everyone fed.

"Some families are really struggling to even meet their basic needs and are taking riskier financial strategies that could leave them less capable to cope with a future financial shot," Martinchek pointed out. "Something like losing their job."

While U.S. inflation slowed last year, the average Massachusetts household continued to spend more than $270 a week on groceries with Boston ranking in the top 20 cities with the highest grocery prices.

The report shows adults with very low food security were also more likely to experience challenges in repaying their debt compared with those with less severe food hardship. For families taking advantage of "buy now, pay later" options, 37% reported missing payments on their loans.

Martinchek emphasized missed debt payments during a time of price hikes could have long-lasting effects.

"They could have constrained access to affordable credit options and struggle to take advantage of different wealth building opportunities," Martinchek noted.

Martinchek added it is especially the case for historically disadvantaged households. The report suggests policymakers strengthen social safety nets to help families as pandemic aid expires, and to bolster credit counseling and debt-management services.

Ohio lawmakers are exploring ways to address the state's looming retirement crisis.

According to The Pew Charitable Trusts, if the personal retirement savings situation remains unchanged, Ohio could expect to see a more than $11 billion increase in state spending over the next two decades.

House Bill 501 would create a Joint Legislative Study Committee tasked with studying retirement options for small businesses and state-facilitated workplace programs to improve access to retirement savings.

Amy Milam, associate state director of outreach and advocacy for AARP Ohio, said people are more likely to save for their golden years when they can do so by having a percentage of their paycheck deducted.

"In Ohio, we have 42% of Ohio's private sector workers -- that's roughly 1.8 million people -- who do not have access to a retirement savings plan through their employer," Milam reported.

Nationwide, around 64% of Hispanic workers, and 45% of Asian American workers lack access to an employer-provided retirement plan. According to an AARP report, almost three of four workers with less than a high school diploma lack a work-based retirement plan, a much higher percentage than those with a bachelor's degree.

Milam added more than a dozen other states have created partnerships with employers to offer state-sponsored plans to give employees access to Individual Retirement Accounts.

"Giving employees a simple way to save for retirement on the job means that fewer Ohioans will need to rely on public assistance later in life," Milam emphasized. "Which will benefit the individual and will also benefit the state by saving taxpayer dollars."

In some states, investment companies have pushed back on state-sponsored plans, seeing them as competition. But a 2023 survey by AARP found 92% of Ohio business owners support legislation creating a public-private retirement savings option for workers.

UPDATE: A response has been added from the Alliance for Automotive Innovation. (2:02 p.m. PDT, May 14, 2024)


A new study showed the flame retardants used in the seats of many cars emit toxic gases, and recommended the federal government reevaluate its flammability standards.

Researchers at Duke University and the Green Science Policy Institute in Berkeley studied the air and foam from 101 cars model year 2015 and newer, and found traces of two carcinogens on California's Prop. 65 list of harmful chemicals.

Robert Herrell, executive director of the Consumer Federation of California, called on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration or state officials to act.

"We would hope that the relevant federal authorities would take a look at this," Herrell urged. "They have indicated that they're aware of this study, they're reviewing it. In some cases, California chooses not to wait necessarily for the feds to act, and we can try to act ahead of that."

The Alliance for Automotive Innovation said in a statement, "Automakers are committed to sustainability and include approved flame retardants in all passenger vehicles to meet the flammability standards required by the federal government to reduce...deaths and injuries to motor vehicle occupants caused by vehicle fires."

The study, in the journal Environmental Science & Technology, found the chemicals are released into the air two to five times more often in the summer when the car is hot. It recommended people park in the shade, air out their cars before getting in and avoid using the recirculated air feature in their vehicles.

Herrell noted his group fought to get the government to require furniture manufacturers to phase out similar flame retardants.

"Historically, the auto industry has really lagged behind on safety and consumer protection issues," Herrell asserted. "More often than not, they've been sort of dragged kicking and screaming into the modern age."

The flame retardants at issue do not prevent burning but they slow a fire's progression. Many fires starting inside cars begin with a dropped cigarette, so some experts have suggested the feds update flammability standards with a new anti-smoldering requirement, which could be met without the use of these types of chemicals.


get more stories like this via email