The fewer restrictions there are

It is not well written, and doesn't really make sense. However, fee arrangements in this case refers to the fees charged by the lawyer who is advertising his or her services.



This statement suggests that a law which prohibits any advertisement which does not include specific information on fee arrangement does not mitigate in favor of lower legal costs for consumers. However, there is nothing in logic in the sentence which leads to that conclusion, nor does the author explain why he or she thinks that a leaving out specific information on fee arrangements would lower legal costs.

It is a poorly written and even more poorly reasoned claim.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The fewer restrictions there are on the advertising of legal services, the more lawyers there are who advertise their services, and the lawyers who advertise a specific service usually charge less for that service than the lawyers who do not advertise. Therefore, if the state removes any of its current restrictions, such as the one against advertisements that do not specify fee arrangements, overall consumer legal costs will be lower than if the state retains its current restrictions.


This writer thinks:
Lawyers will advertise more if there are fewer restrictions in advertising laws.
Lawyers who advertise will charge clients less than lawyers who do not advertise.

Therefore . . . (he concludes)
If the state removes restrictions, legal costs will be lower because lawyers will advertise more.

Other information in the sentence:A sample of a current restriction is an advertisement that does not state fee arrangement. Fees that lawyers charge for their services must be stated in the advertisement.

Mr Fish,

well said

thanks ..that was very helpful