The Washington Post editorial board has generally taken the big business, powerful interests position on consumer legal rights-- take them away, now! The Post supports caps on damages, it supported weakening the class action laws, the list is endless. Even when it sort-of, kind-of admits that consumers have a problem, as it does Saturday in its editorial A Good Arbiter -- its solution is pro-business. Consumers don't need better disclosure of mandatory arbitration, and the other meaningless provisions of the Post-backed Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL) proposal, S.1135, the Fair Arbitration Act of 2007. Consumers need a law that reinstates their right to go to court, and the right to choose arbitration only after a dispute has arisen, not as a condition of obtaining a cell phone or a credit card or a health insurance policy or even a nursing home for a parent. (On this last, the Post admits an "exception" to its pro-business rule may be appropriate: "Allowing residents or their families to sue may be the only way to prod nursing homes to improve care.") Previous blog explains real solutions.