Lee Fisher: Corporate Democrat

I've had a discomfort with Lee Fisher ever since his days as attorney general, when his office refused to help consumers who were being charged outrageous fees to inspect or obtain copies of their hospital records.

The December 1995 issue of The Ohio Observer magazine had an article, titled "The Hospital Records Rip-Off," about the problem of the excessive fees. Inspection fees were often between $15 and $25, and fees for copies were anywhere from 95 cents to $22 per page.

The fees often prevented people from obtaining access to their hospital records. Those records not only contained important information about their health, but also were often necessary for them to have in order to enforce various legal rights.

Here's what the article said about the response of Fisher's office to the problem:

"When a complaint about the fees charged by a Columbus hospital was lodged with the attorney general's consumer protection section several years ago, a letter reportedly was drafted to inform the hospital its inspection fees were in violation of Ohio Revised Code Section 3701.74 and the Consumer Sales Practices Act.

"The executive staff of then-Attorney General Lee Fisher reportedly stopped the letter from being sent. Acting chief counsel Nancy J. Miller later issued a one-page letter stating that the law is unclear whether the fees are illegal, that there is doubt as to whether the Consumer Sales Practices Act applies to the transaction and that the attorney general's office could not provide assistance in the matter.

"Two former assistant attorneys general who worked in the consumer protection section said the office probably would never take action on such an issue because of the political power of the hospital lobby. They also said they had witnessed other failures of the section to act against apparent consumer fraud in situations where the perpetrators had political influence. Both said such unequal enforcement of the laws was a major reason for their decision to leave the attorney general's office and go into private practice."

Although Fisher's office refused to help the hospital patients, a few years later a private law firm brought a class-action lawsuit on the patients’ behalf. The lawsuit claimed that the fees violated the Consumer Sales Practices Act, which Fisher's office had the primary responsibility for enforcing - but had refused to.

(Of course, AG Betty Montgomery's office also took the side of the hospitals. She appeared to be catering to their lobbyists as much as Fisher apparently had. But many would say that's to be expected from a Republican.)

The private lawsuit ultimately pressured the hospitals to agree to lower their inspection and copying fees and support legislation that would prevent the fees from exceeding certain specified amounts. If Fisher's office had had its way, though, hospital patients would have continued to be charged the outrageously high fees.

In working on Democratic campaigns, I had heard Fisher talk about the importance of government taking care of the little guys, because the big guys can take care of themselves. It sounded great. But his office's handling of this matter made such talk appear to be mere political rhetoric.

And now I wouldn't be surprised if Fisher is raking in big campaign contributions from corporate interests and other big guys he has taken care of in the past, while he mouthed support for the little guys.

In view of his performance on the hospital-records issue, I don't expect Fisher to be on the side of consumers the way a Democrat should.