I know Obama already has by introducing S.2147, which makes crimes with sentences in excess of one year punishable against government contractors.

A summary found here: http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s110-2147

I believe Clinton sponsored in the Senate HR.4102, which instructs the president not to use private contractors in mission critical functions. (I don’t have the url.)

Both were responding to Blackwater, but would also address this concern to some extent. (Although IMO, Clinton’s plan wouldn’t be as effective since it doesn’t apply to non-mission critical contractors.)

Sure, a company will tell you that its arbitration clause is voluntary, but your “choice” as a consumer/employee is either sign it or don’t do business. As such clauses become increasingly commonplace, it’s becoming harder and harder to find a company/employer who doesn’t demand that you sign one.

For example, Stephanie Mencimer at Mother Jones wrote about her experience car shopping. When the first dealer she hit up demanded that she sign some bullshit arbitration clause, she shopped around – and was unable to find a single dealer, selling the car she wanted, who did not demand that she sign an arbitration clause. So she found a used car from a private seller…and the bank that loaned her the money to buy the car had an even worse arbitration clause in its loan docs! So she signed the fucking clause. “Voluntary” my ass.

And this is just shopping for a car. Imagine, say, trying to find a job in the midst of a recession. And the only companies hiring insist on some ridiculous, borderline criminal binding arbitration clause. I guess you could “choose” to pass on the job and sell your house, your kidneys, and your children to pay the bills instead. /snark

Even worse is that arbitration isn’t even a fair process; in many (most? all?) of the clauses, the corporation demanding arbitration retains sole discretion in choosing the arbitration company that will hear the case – essentially making them the arbitrator’s employer. And if they want repeat business, it sure as shit behooves the arbitrator to rule on their employer’s behalf, no? In another MoJo article, Mencimer quotes a Public Citizen study that found that “in 94 percent of 19,000 cases, NAF arbitrators ruled in favor of the businesses that hired them.”

So also, contact your Congresspeople and tell them to 1) make binding clauses unenforceable, since they’re unconstitutional and 2) pass legislation regulating non-binding arbitration clauses. At the very least, the party agreeing to arbitration should be able to choose the arbitrator – this will help to level the playing field somewhat. Also, the proceedings should be subject to the same disclosure laws as are court proceedings. The public has a right to know what the hell a company’s up to, and this is a collective right that neither party should be able to sign away.* If companies have less to gain from arbitration (e.g., a guaranteed win and privacy), then perhaps fewer of them will demand it, and it will actually be voluntary. Then again, if it’s all non-binding, additional regulation may be moot anyway.

Of course, there are some cases where arbitration clauses (binding or not) should be un-fucking-enforceable, such as when a violent crime is involved. Like when you’re sent to a war zone, gang-raped by your co-workers, and then are treated like a criminal yourself.

* Republicans and libertarians, what with all their circle jerking about the “forces of a free market”, should be behind us all the way here. After all, if consumers are unable to make informed choices about who to do business with, then there are no “forces” to speak of.