The bill restores the Federal Arbitration Act to its original purpose and intent, which is to let businesses on equal footing arbitrate. Consumers are not on equal footing with businesses because they don’t do repeat business with the arbitrators.

The repeat player effect leads to bias. In one example, the National Arbitration Forum was found to have actual financial ties to companies it arbitrated disputes for. The Minnesota attorney general sued NAF over this.

Arbitration certainly does exist as a problem in real estate cases. Arbitration clauses in builder contracts and home warranty policies hamstring homeowners and hide complaints. One arbitration firm was being run by a twice disbarred lawyer! These may be viewed as big benefits to businesses but the unfairness to the consumer is crystal clear. Arbitration in nearly every consumer transaction now is almost always non negotiable and biased; this is why the Arbitration Fairness Act is good for the public even if it would end a sweet deal for businesses who believe escaping accountability is a legitimate business practice. Honest businesses have nothing to fear from this, but they DO have something to fear from dishonest businesses that under cut them, and do things that result in more and more regulations.