The rationale, the intensity and the focus of consumer protection issues change with the times.

As babyboomers reach retirement age, policy pundits expect consumers to clamor for more oversight of skilled nursing homes and the funeral industry, just as graying and balding consumers are now focused on food and pharmaceutical safety.

Naturally, government needs to change with the times, as well. Fraud investigators now need to tail door-to-door shysters and cyberspace scammers. Consumer education efforts need to be Internet-based and market-targeted. A generation ago the hot consumer topic was credit abuse; now it is identity theft.

In assessing the ability of the Department of Consumer Affairs to meet these challenges, the Little Hoover Commission was too often told: "We are doing the best we can with what we have got." Even if that is true, that is not the benchmark the State should be striving for.

Because consumer education saves money and prevents the need for costly government intervention in markets, the State needs to restore General Fund support for at least the most important consumer education needs.

Because the public expects the government to act in the public interest -- and expects policy makers to at least be told how their decisions will affect the public interest -- the State needs to restore its consumer advocacy efforts.

Because the Department of Consumer Affairs is still burdened by an organizational structure that discourages efficiency and frustrates consumer protection, at least incremental improvements need to be made to clarify the director's authority in relation to the boards.

And because government's consumer protection functions are as diverse as the market, the State needs to restore the relationships that yield cooperation. It can begin that process by gathering, analyzing and acting on the information that will ensure government is responding to the most important consumer issues of the day.

The Little Hoover Commission's recommendations would require some additional expenditure of public funds. But if implemented correctly, the recommendations also could be expected to make the consumer protection apparatus more efficient. And by increasing the effectiveness of those protection efforts, the recommendations would save the money of taxpayers in their role as consumers.