|
===Fair Arbitration Act===
Senator [[Jeff Sessions]] ([[Republican Party (United States)|R]]-[[Alabama|AL]]) has introduced abills modifying the Federal Arbitration Act, all substantially the same.<ref name=burch>{{cite journal|last=Burch|first=Thomas V.|title=Regulating Mandatory Arbitration|journal=Utah Law Review|year=2011|volume=2011|issue=4|pages=1309–1376|url=http://www.epubs.utah.edu/index.php/ulr/article/viewFile/675/516|accessdate=15 October 2013}}</ref>{{rp|1335}} The bill was titled the "Fair Arbitration Act" in 2007 and 2011;<ref name=bennett>{{cite journal|last=Bennett|first=Steven C.|title=The Proposed Arbitration Fairness Act: Problems and Alternatives|journal=Dispute Resolution Journal|date=May–July 2012|volume=67|issue=2|pages=32–42}}</ref>{{rp|35}} it was previously introduced in 2000 (under the title "Consumer and Employee Arbitration Bill of Rights"),<ref name=sternlight-2006>{{cite book |last=Sternlight |first=Jean R.|title=Arbitration Law in America: A Critical Assessment|publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2006|pages=127–184 |chapter=Consumer Arbitration |isbn=0-521-83982-3}}</ref>{{rp|181}} and 2002 (under the title "Arbitration Fairness Act"),.<ref name=surdyk>{{cite journal|last=Surdyk|first=Alicia J.|title=On the Continued Vitality of Securities Arbitration: Why Reform Efforts Must Not Preclude Predispute Arbitration Clauses|journal=New York Law School Law Review|year=2009/10|volume=54|pages=1131–57|url=http://www.nylslawreview.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/54-4.Surdyk.pdf|accessdate=26 December 2013}}</ref>{{rp|1134}} 2007, and 2011.<ref name=bennett>{{cite journal|last=Bennett|first=Steven C.|title=The Proposed Arbitration Fairness Act: Problems and Alternatives|journal=Dispute Resolution Journal|date=May–July 2012|volume=67|issue=2|pages=32–42}}</ref>{{rp|35}} All of those bills were substantially the same.<ref name=burch>{{cite journal|last=Burch|first=Thomas V.|title=Regulating Mandatory Arbitration|journal=Utah Law Review|year=2011|volume=2011|issue=4|pages=1309–1376|url=http://www.epubs.utah.edu/index.php/ulr/article/viewFile/675/516|accessdate=15 October 2013}}</ref>{{rp|1335}} The Fair Arbitration Act would impose standards on arbitration proceedings based on the AAA Consumer Due Process Protocol.<ref name=harding />{{rp|413}}<ref name=sandler-holstein-childress>{{cite journal|last=Sandler|first=Andrew L.|last2=Holstein-Childress|first2=Victoria|title=Supreme Court and Congress Focus on Mandatory Pre-Dispute Arbitration Agreements: The Debate Continues|journal=Corporate Officers & Directors Liability|date=2011-07-05|volume=27|issue=1|pages=1–10|url=http://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/supreme-court-and-congress-focus-on-mand-11139/|accessdate=12 October 2013|publisher=Thomson Reuters}}</ref>{{rp|7–8}} The 2007 version of the bill (S. 1135 in the [[110th Congress]]) would impose a number of regulations on arbitration agreements in general, including regulating how conspicuous arbitration agreements are, requiring arbitration to be conducted by "an independent, neutral alternative dispute resolution organization", and mandating that "[e]ach party shall have a vote in the selection of the arbitrator",<ref name=fair-arbitration-act-2007>Fair Arbitration Act, S. 1135, 110th Cong. (2007)</ref>{{rp|§17(b)(2)(B)}}{{#tag:ref|Sources disagree as to the effect of this provision. Stipanowich interpreted the provision to bar "list selection of arbitrators" and require the appointment of a three arbitrator panel, where each party selects one arbitrator.<ref name=stipanowich />{{rp|48}} Sam Luttrell wrote that the provision would prohibit "the institutional appointment of arbitrators" and "impose[]" the "party-arbitrator system".<ref name=luttrell>{{cite book|last=Luttrell|first=Sam|title=Bias challenges in international commercial arbitration : the need for a 'real danger' test|year=2009|publisher=Wolters Kluwer Law & Business|location=Austin|isbn=978-90-411-3191-1}}</ref>{{rp|161}} Alexander wrote that the Fair Arbitration Act would require parties to have "a voice ... in the selection of the arbitrator".<ref name=alexander />{{rp|110}} In a statement made on April 17, 2007, upon the introduction of the 2007 bill, Sen. Sessions said that "All parties to the arbitration will have an equal voice in selecting a neutral arbitrator. This ensures that the large company who sold a consumer a product will not select the arbitrator itself, because the consumer with a grievance will have the right to nominate potential arbitrators, too. As a result, the final arbitrator selected will have to have the explicit approval of both parties to the dispute. This helps ensure that the arbitrator will be a neutral party with no allegiance to either party."<ref name=congressional-record-2007-04-17>''[[Congressional Record]]'', Senate, [http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2007-04-17/pdf/CREC-2007-04-17-senate.pdf April 17, 2007].</ref>{{rp|S4614–15}}|name=fair-arbitration-act-arbitrator-vote|group=nb}} who would be required to meet certain qualifications and provide broad neutrality disclosures.<ref name=stipanowich />{{rp|48–49}} The 2007 bill would also regulate the arbitration process itself by setting time limits on the process, requiring application of the law of the state where the nondrafting party of the agreement resides,{{#tag:ref|In a statement made on April 17, 2007, upon the introduction of the 2007 bill, Sen. Sessions said that under the Fair Arbitration Act, arbitrators would be required to apply "the same conflict of laws principles that a court would" to determine what state's law would apply in arbitration.<ref name=congressional-record-2007-04-17 />{{rp|S4615}}|name=fair-arbitration-act-choice-of-law|group=nb}} and demanding that the arbitrator grant "relevant and necessary prehearing depositions".<ref name=stipanowich />{{rp|49}} The 2007 bill would also require arbitration agreements to allow either party to pursue an action in small claims court instead of arbitration.<ref name=bedikian>{{cite journal|last=Bedikian|first=Mary A.|title=Alternative Dispute Resolution|journal=The Wayne Law Review|year=2007|volume=53|pages=73–111|url=http://digitalcommons.law.msu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1114&context=facpubs|accessdate=14 July 2013}}</ref>{{rp|109}} According to Stipanowich, the bill was opposed by "commercial clients and practitioners" who saw the bill as making it difficult for the parties to adapt the arbitration process.<ref name=stipanowich />{{rp|49}} Jean Sternlight criticized that the Fair Arbitration Act would only outlaw specific unfair practices and businesses could therefore devise and implement new unfair arbitration practices not covered by the Fair Arbitration Act.<ref name=sternlight-2006 />{{rp|181}} According to Sternlight, consumer and employee advocacy groups opposed the Fair Arbitration Act because it would legitimize pre-dispute agreements to arbitrate consumer and employee disputes.<ref name=sternlight-2006 />{{rp|181}} Sam Luttrell criticized the Fair Arbitration Act's neutrality requirements, saying they would prevent familiar arbitrators with expertise, who do not meet the neutrality requirements of the Fair Arbitration Act, from presiding over commercial arbitrations.<ref name=luttrell />{{rp|161}} According to Thomas V. Burch, the Fair Arbitration Act "received little, if any, widespread support": none of the 2000, 2002, or 2007 versions had cosponsors.<ref name=burch />{{rp|1335–36}}
===Consumer Financial Protection Bureau study and rulemaking===
|
