The fall harvest is upon us and Minnesota farmers are hoping their equipment will hold up.
Supporters said there is a glaring loophole in a new state law designed to level the playing field in the electronics repair market: agriculture.
Minnesota has joined a handful of states that have passed so-called “right to repair” laws that require manufacturers of certain products to provide documentation, parts and tools to independent repair shops and product owners. The measures follow complaints that technology companies have a monopoly on performing repairs.
Gary Wertish, president of the Minnesota Farmers Union, said they support the new changes but wish they would include farm machinery.
“This really limits the rights of farmers,” Wertish claimed. “If you buy a piece of equipment for that much money, you should have the right to repair it yourself or, if not, take it to an independent dealer.”
Tractors and other equipment are being fitted with new technology. Wertish pointed out that a farmer who has to drive several hours to a dealer to get an electronic repair done has less time in the field and potentially reduces his profits. Companies like John Deere argued that they share details through industry agreements called memorandums of understanding, but skeptics countered that they did not provide enough access.
Wertish noted that it would be great if farmers could do repairs themselves if they could. He added that more independent mechanics could strengthen the rural economy and believes that creating competition would not be a major disruption to large dealerships.
“If they provide good service, and they do, they will still get a large share of customers,” Wertish argued. “They will still rely on them.”
As large repair shops struggle with staffing shortages, Wertish stressed that having more options could ease some of the pressure during the busy farming season. He hopes Minnesota lawmakers will revisit the issue next session to consider possible changes. Congress is also under pressure to pass similar legislation at the federal level.
Get more stories like this by email
More than 70% of Coloradans believe pharmaceutical companies, hospitals and insurance companies overcharge, according to a new statewide survey on the consumer experience in healthcare.
90% of respondents support policy solutions that include transparency in health care prices and an end to the practice of surprise bills.
Priya Telang, communications manager for the Colorado Consumer Health Initiative, said nearly three-quarters of Coloradans are experiencing financial hardship due to the high cost of health care.
“They are uninsured due to high insurance costs or they are delaying treatment because they cannot afford it or because they are afraid of the costs,” Telang explained. “People cannot afford their basic health care costs.”
More than two in three Coloradans say they have delayed or foregone health care because of the cost. Nearly 40% who received treatment struggled to pay those bills, had to deplete their savings, max out their credit cards, deal with debt collectors, or go without basic necessities like food, heat, and even shelter.
Most respondents blamed large industrial companies for unfair pricing. With the November election approaching, Telang said the poll should make clear that voters are looking for candidates who can provide affordable health care for all Americans, even in the face of the country’s most powerful special interests.
“This is a bipartisan issue,” Telang argued. “Republicans and Democrats alike are tired of continuing to struggle with high prices for their health care or prescription drugs.”
Nine out of 10 Coloradans support important cost-cutting measures. They believe hospitals, doctors and insurers should provide upfront cost estimates and cap out-of-pocket costs for life-saving drugs like insulin. They believe drug prices should be standardized and affordable and that the attorney general should take legal action to stop price gouging.
Get more stories like this by email
Criticism of plans to restructure the US Postal Service is growing.
Postmaster General Louis DeJoy’s 10-year plan, “Delivering for America,” was announced in 2021 but has only really gained momentum this year. The plan is designed to make the U.S. Postal Service more efficient and reduce expenses, and would move mail through larger processing centers instead of smaller, local ones.
Senator Jeff Merkley (D-Oregon) said this has led to a slowdown in mail delivery.
“He has a plan to eliminate or downsize our regional sorting centers,” Merkley explained. “That means that mail from Bend, Medford and Eugene — all over the state — will just have to go to Portland, get sorted there and then get sent back.”
DeJoy has paused the consolidation of his centers until the end of the year but said he would continue to pursue his “Delivering for America” plan. He was appointed Postmaster General by the Postal Service Board of Governors in 2020 during the Trump presidency.
Merkley noted that he has heard from constituents that mail delivery is always delayed. For example, late fees are charged when mailing checks for bills or rent. He also noted that medications are not reaching people on time.
“In some cases, they can’t apply until their medication is out or almost out. That means they have to apply at the last minute and by the time the mail arrives, they have a spot open,” Merkley noted. “They either miss out on their medication or they have to buy it locally at a much higher price.”
Merkley added that the Delivering for America plan was unrealistic and should be reversed.
“Every other government service we provide is subsidized,” Merkley stressed. “We don’t expect this to be 100% self-sustaining. The post office is so important to people, so important to our communities, so important to our small businesses, so important to our communications, so important to our sense of community that we should maintain it as a quality service.”
Get more stories like this by email
Consumer groups are opposing a proposed California law that would make it easier to repossess cars or other property by exempting repossessing officers from trespassing laws.
U.S. Assembly Bill 2120 would allow debt collectors to seize vehicles parked on private property, such as driveways.
John Van Alst, senior staff attorney at the National Consumer Law Center, opposes the bill.
“Every year, numerous people are killed or injured,” Van Alst stressed. “We see repossessers and consumers injured or killed, we see children still sitting in the car when it is repossessed.”
The California Association of Licensed Reposessors argues that it is safer to seize a car from a person’s home than to leave it parked in public. The bill passed the state Assembly and is now in the Suspense File awaiting consideration by the Senate Budget Committee.
Van Alst noted that the police may need to act as mediator in lawful repossessions.
“In California, there is a process called Replevin that allows for a more orderly process,” Van Alst explained. “You can get a court order and, if necessary, the assistance of law enforcement.”
The law only applies to agents who are registered with the Department of Consumer Affairs and who leave within a reasonable time after the vehicle or other property is seized. In 2021, Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed a similar bill, citing concerns about potential mistreatment or altercations.
Get more stories like this by email
