About

  • TheWatchdogBlog.org is published by Public Citizen's Congress Watch. We work to ensure that Congress represents citizens by exposing the harmful impact of money in politics and fighting for an improved democracy. We also champion consumer interests before the U.S. Congress and seek to preserve citizen access to the courts to redress corporate harm and negligence.



Our Mascot

  • Our mascot, Brandice
Statement of Policies

Auto Safety

Gagging the Government on Auto Safety

Don’t Quote NHTSA on That…What’s happening at the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)? Depending upon whom you ask you might get no answer at all—or at least no answer for use on the record. NHTSA seems to have pulled the proverbial shade on any kind of transparent, open door communication policy between the press and its staff, leaving crucially important safety information unavailable for on-the-record publication and consumers in the dark about agency dealings.

Perhaps an example is in order.  Given a situation like the I-35 bridge collapse catastrophe, if a reporter seeks on-the-record information, two options apparently exist: contact the office of NHTSA administrator Nicole Nason (trained in law, not engineering), or pursue the questionably ambiguous process of obtaining special permission to speak on the record with a real expert, after what can only presumably be a nip/tuck job by higher-ups of all the expert’s statements. Forget contacting the now inappropriately titled communication staff—the policy applies to them, too. The other “choice” involves use of information without official attribution; a process frowned upon by responsible publications around the country.

Continue reading "Gagging the Government on Auto Safety" »

The Beginning of the End of the SUV?

Decades of neglecting the rollover threat posed by Ford Explorers may end up having billion-dollar consequences for the automaker, reports the Sacramento Bee. On June 4, trial will begin in a Sacramento California Superior Court in a class-action suit claiming the automaker deceived customers about the safety of its Explorer models, and the damages may be large enough to bankrupt the automaker.

The claim is based on California’s unfair competition and false advertising laws, seeking damages and disgorgement of profits against Ford for marketing the sport-utility vehicle as a replacement for the quintessential family vehicle: the station wagon. Plaintiffs say Ford marketed the Explorer as safe and reliable despite Ford’s knowledge of the vehicle’s inherent rollover risk.

The value of Explorers owned inCalifornia depreciated $1,000 to $1,300 below normal levels after vehicle instability became widely publicized during the Ford/Firestone tire failures. Ford continues the blame faulty tire design for causing its SUVs to rollover, but if the jury is unpersuaded by this argument, Ford could be forced to pay $500 million in damages and an additional disgorgement of Ford’s $2.135 billion profits from California Explorer sales.

This marks the first such case to reach trial, although a similar suit is pending in Illinois.  The class of plaintiffs includes California residents who bought, owned or leased a 1991-2001 model-year Ford Explorer between 1990 and Aug. 9, 2000. Explorer drivers must still own their vehicle or must have sold it or ended their lease after Aug. 9, 2000. All qualifying residents are members of the lawsuit unless they opt out through the court’s Web site.