Last week, the Department of Justice started their own web site for consumers. Among other things, consumers can click on a state (displayed in a map of the United States) and find out if the state offers choices for consumers, and if the real estate agent can rebate 'some or all' of the commission back to the consumer. DOJ and NAR have been locked into a battle of wills on a couple fronts for some time. The DOJ is of the opinion that consumers do not have enough choices in terms of services (or minimum) services that licensees provide, and that 'minimum service' laws are contrary to the consumer's best interests. NAR, and many licensees, feel that real estate is an infrequent transaction, and that consumers are best served by having an agent who has minimal levels of duties and responsibilities to him or her. My observation today, short and sweet: all the license laws we now have were enacted, originally, to protect the consumer. We have lots of choices for consumers in our industry; and I think most agents provide real value for their clients. Our industry is no more perfect than any other, but before we decide that the answer is less responsibility and fewer duties, let's consider what benefits the consumer. Can the average consumer price a home correctly (with or without Zillow?) Can they negotiate? Are they able to complete the paperwork needed for the transaction? Can they protect their own interests? Or, does the average consumer need a fair amount of assistance for a very complicated process with multiple players?