Day 024 - 15 Sep 94 - Page 17
1
2 Here I can guarantee the court that I would have either
3 written, I do not recall, or reviewed a draft from my
4 counterpart, in all likelihood Mr. Sheldon in California,
5 which we then set up the channels to our Attorneys General
6 who would have reviewed and possibly made changes in it
7 before they signed them. I do not believe in this
8 instance that either the Attorneys General actually did
9 the initial drafting, but who did the drafting is as
10 irrelevant to us as who did the typing. The question is
11 on whose behalf is it being sent out.
12
13 We wanted the companies here to have a clear message that
14 this was not just some low level rumblings within the
15 Attorneys General offices and, therefore, asked that our
16 Attorneys General signed off on the letters. In terms of
17 enforceability or notice, or anything like that, to the
18 companies, it did not matter a whip whether it came from
19 me signing on behalf of the two states or from the two
20 Attorneys General.
21
22 In this instance we wanted to send a strong message to the
23 companies that this was an effort that was of interest to
24 both states and, therefore, asked that our Attorneys
25 General be the authors of the letter.
26
27 Ms. Steel, if you had asked me a question -- I do not
28 recall what it was, so I cannot answer!
29
30 MS. STEEL: I am trying to remember what it was. Yes, in the
31 June 3rd letter it mentions about the ten states who had
32 given Texas and California the authority to speak for them
33 on this issue. Do you know how that came about?
34 A. Yes. During the meetings that we held or conceivably
35 in telephone conversations after the meetings we held in
36 Los Angeles, one or more companies -- I cannot recall who;
37 it might have been McDonald's and it might well not have
38 been McDonald's -- knowing of the fact that there were
39 other states that took an enforcement interest in consumer
40 protection matters on a national scale as well as
41 specifically nutritional matters, said, in essence:
42 "Well, if we resolve this matter with you all, what we
43 are going to need to fear is that one of the other states
44 is going to come in and second guess what you all have
45 done and demand specifically labelling on the packaging
46 itself".
47
48 We advised them that we could not speak for, at that time,
49 the other states, but agreed to go visit informally with
50 other states with whom we worked on an ongoing basis in
51 contact, and asked those Attorneys General whether they
52 could give us the permission to informally sign off on
53 this resolution on their behalf. We did that. We spoke
54 with the states and got permission to say what we did in
55 the letter. In fact, this resolution did end the matter.
56 There were no actions by any other Attorneys General
57 subsequent to the resolution of the booklets.
58
59 MR. MORRIS: Can I ask you to make one point about June 3rd
60 letter 1986? To save time, I will not read it all out,
