Campaign against Specter ~ Bump!
Last year the House passed the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act of 2004 (H.R. 4571), which would help alleviate the tort burden on the American people, estimated to be as high as $250 billion annually. However, the legislation has yet to pass out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Should H.R. 4571 fail to move in the Senate in the next several weeks, it is a sure bet that similar legislation will reappear before the Judiciary Committee in 2005. After all, lawsuit abuse is accelerating the rapid increase in health care costs and driving doctors out of business.
Although the prospects for crucial tort reform will be brighter in the 109th Congress, one man could derail chances for passage: Sen. Arlen Specter. Despite being at odds with his own party's support for necessary tort reform, Senator Specter is now in line to replace Sen. Orrin Hatch as Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which would have jurisdiction over this issue.
As journalist Timothy Carney pointed out recently in The Washington Times, Senator Specter's record on tort related issues is abysmal:
In May of 1995, weeks into the new Republican majority, Mr. Specter tried to derail a product-liability reform bill. He voted against limits on attorney fees for medical liability suits and against limiting punitive damages to three times economic damages (not a hard cap, since economic damages would not be capped). Mr. Specter also voted against an amendment to limit non-economic damages to $500,000 and against another to protect OB/GYNs from being sued for problems they didn't cause.
According to public record for the 2003-4 election cycle, Specter ranked number five in the Senate in terms of campaign funds received from lawyers and law firms. Only John Kerry, John Edwards, Joe Lieberman, and Tom Daschle received more. In fact, lawyers and law firms gave Specter over $1.8 million--almost three times as much as the next closest industry!
Why would Republicans, after defeating Kerry, Edwards, and Daschle in part by criticizing their trial-lawyer financing, simply hand the Judiciary Committee gavel to someone who shares this triumvirate's disdain for tort reform? This is precisely the politically embarrassing scenario that will occur should the GOP allow rigid institutional rules on seniority to carry the day.
There is an additional danger for taxpayers associated with allowing Senator Specter to become the Chairman of such as powerful committee as the Senate Judiciary. Politicians are notorious for trading votes and favors in order to protect parochial interests. It is not unimaginable that a Chairman Specter would use the leverage provided by his new position to win concessions on other fiscal matters of concern to him. Given that Senator Specter helped water down President Bush's tax cuts and was just named the 2003 Congressional Porker of the Year by another organization because of his penchant for supporting profligate spending, our cause of limited government could be in jeopardy should Specter obtain the Chairmanship.
Last year the House passed the Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act of 2004 (H.R. 4571), which would help alleviate the tort burden on the American people, estimated to be as high as $250 billion annually. However, the legislation has yet to pass out of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Should H.R. 4571 fail to move in the Senate in the next several weeks, it is a sure bet that similar legislation will reappear before the Judiciary Committee in 2005. After all, lawsuit abuse is accelerating the rapid increase in health care costs and driving doctors out of business.
Although the prospects for crucial tort reform will be brighter in the 109th Congress, one man could derail chances for passage: Sen. Arlen Specter. Despite being at odds with his own party's support for necessary tort reform, Senator Specter is now in line to replace Sen. Orrin Hatch as Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which would have jurisdiction over this issue.
As journalist Timothy Carney pointed out recently in The Washington Times, Senator Specter's record on tort related issues is abysmal:
In May of 1995, weeks into the new Republican majority, Mr. Specter tried to derail a product-liability reform bill. He voted against limits on attorney fees for medical liability suits and against limiting punitive damages to three times economic damages (not a hard cap, since economic damages would not be capped). Mr. Specter also voted against an amendment to limit non-economic damages to $500,000 and against another to protect OB/GYNs from being sued for problems they didn't cause.
According to public record for the 2003-4 election cycle, Specter ranked number five in the Senate in terms of campaign funds received from lawyers and law firms. Only John Kerry, John Edwards, Joe Lieberman, and Tom Daschle received more. In fact, lawyers and law firms gave Specter over $1.8 million--almost three times as much as the next closest industry!
Why would Republicans, after defeating Kerry, Edwards, and Daschle in part by criticizing their trial-lawyer financing, simply hand the Judiciary Committee gavel to someone who shares this triumvirate's disdain for tort reform? This is precisely the politically embarrassing scenario that will occur should the GOP allow rigid institutional rules on seniority to carry the day.
There is an additional danger for taxpayers associated with allowing Senator Specter to become the Chairman of such as powerful committee as the Senate Judiciary. Politicians are notorious for trading votes and favors in order to protect parochial interests. It is not unimaginable that a Chairman Specter would use the leverage provided by his new position to win concessions on other fiscal matters of concern to him. Given that Senator Specter helped water down President Bush's tax cuts and was just named the 2003 Congressional Porker of the Year by another organization because of his penchant for supporting profligate spending, our cause of limited government could be in jeopardy should Specter obtain the Chairmanship.