Statement of Congressman John D. Dingell, Ranking Member
Committee on Energy and Commerce

SUBCOMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, TRADE,
AND CONSUMER PROTECTION HEARING ENTITLED
"REPAIRING THE 21ST CENTURY CAR: IS TECHNOLOGY
LOCKING THE CONSUMER OUT?"

September 22, 2004

Mr. Chairman, I thank you for recognizing me, and for recognizing all Members for opening statements. The gagging of Members that occurred last week in full Committee should never be repeated, and I will continue efforts to see that Committee rules, and their interpretation, properly reflect the traditions of this Committee.

On another procedural matter, I regret that we will not be hearing today from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) despite my request that the FTC be allowed to offer its views. Therefore, the minority Members are delivering to you today a letter pursuant to Rule XI of the House of Representatives requesting at least one additional day of hearings on the subject of today’s hearing. I am mystified why the leading federal consumer protection agency was not invited to a hearing on the availability of automobile repair information. Moreover, the proposed legislation on this matter sponsored by Chairman Barton and Rep. Towns would give significant authority to the FTC. Members and the public are entitled to hear from the FTC on this entire subject.

Despite my misgivings with respect to FTC’s absence, I am pleased that we are holding this hearing today. H.R. 2735, "The Motor Vehicle Owners’ Right to Repair Act of 2003" was reportedly introduced to help small independent repair shops. There are, however, questions surrounding this legislation with which our witnesses may be able to help us.

For instance, why is the most vocal and well-funded supporter of this bill – the CARE Coalition – primarily comprised of, and funded by, large corporations, many of which sell inexpensive replacement parts from overseas? Moreover, why does the leading trade association representing independent service shops – for whom this legislation was supposedly created – oppose the bill? This is a most curious question.

This issue is not as simple as it may appear. The publicly stated objectives of this legislation are laudable. Consumers should be able to chose who repairs their automobiles. It is not, however, the bill’s stated objectives with which I am concerned. It is the means through which this legislation seeks to achieve its stated objectives, and the consequences, whether intended or not, that give me pause.

It is possible to help consumers and assist independent repair shops without jeopardizing the rights of automobile manufacturers and their suppliers. Independent service stations across the Nation have joined with the world’s automobile manufacturers to create the National Automobile Service Task Force. This task force has designed a non-legislative means through which the bill’s stated objectives are being achieved. I am told that independent service stations are now receiving the information they need to repair all makes and models of motor vehicles.

No one should expect an undertaking of this magnitude to be perfect upon its inception. There will be errors and there will be flaws. It requires communication, perseverance, and most importantly, the willingness of all stakeholders to succeed.

To the current members of the task force I say: continue to work diligently and keep us apprised of your progress. To those who are intent on criticizing the good will of others, I suggest that you use a portion of the vast resources you have spent on multi-media presentations and high-priced lobbyists to help the task force achieve a real victory for consumers and independent repair shops.

Mr. Chairman, I look forward to hearing from our witnesses, and I look forward to a more thorough and complete examination of this issue in the near future.

- 30 -

(Contact: Jodi Seth, 202-225-3641)