Not sure I know everyone well enough to vacation with them.

And fairly certain nobody knows me well enough for this to be OK. I'm not sayin' -- I'm just sayin'.

Today was the hearing for Senate Bill 538 -- a bill from the AG's office that would create this idea of an "unconscionable trade practice". Essentially, it requires the Government to think for people -- seriously, it actually prohibits "providers of goods and services" from "charging a price they know to be significantly in excess of what is charged for comparable goods and services." It also would stop a salesperson from intentionally selling something to somebody that they know they wouldn't reasonably be able to pay for.

Like one of my c-stores would say "I'm not sure you can really afford that snickers, Ms. Johnston. I'm afraid I can't sell it to you."

Anyway, it's possibly the worst bill (Well... maybe the 2nd worst if you've seen AB240) I've seen all session. Like veto-worthy bad, if somehow the legislators were silly enough to pass it.

The bill, sponsored by Senate C&L, raised the ire of a lot of my lobbyist bretheren. And you could see while the Deputy AG was there presenting the bill, there was a pen of lobbyists in the corner -- the power-brokery type ones who are more or less the vanguard of the status quo -- and me.

Chairman started the hearing on the bill and WENT OFF on the bill, really saying that only one section (on mortgage practices) was even remotely acceptable. He said everything we in the lobby group had been thinking. Then, when asking for public comment or testimony or whatever, he shot us all the look of death. Then he showed off when nobody who came up, and said "yeah, good, because I would've cut your throat."

I mean, I'm glad the bill's dead, but how do we take credit for killing a bill if the Chairman does it without us even asking? How will we continue to charge our clients unreasonable rates if we can't take credit for this stuff? C'mon, man, throw a lobbyist a bone!

dts