Posted on 08/15/2002 2:41:58 PM PDT by PhiKapMom
SENS. DASCHLE AND EDWARDS CHOOSE TRIAL LAWYERS OVER AMERICAN JOBS
Delayed And Dangerous: After Months Of Delay, The Resulting Democrat Senate Terrorism Legislation Puts Business At The Mercy Of Personal Injury Trial Lawyers
________________________________________________
TRIAL LAWYERS ARE "CALLING IN A CHIT ON THIS ONE."
"[T]he Democrats are insisting that the [terrorism insurance] bill not limit non-economic damage claims by victims of terrorist attacks - reportedly at the urging of trial lawyers' lobbyists. Republicans favor a cap. Trial lawyers have given heavily to top Democrats and the Democratic National Committee over the years, and they appear to be calling in a chit on this one."
(Ted Bunker, "U.S. Insurers Slow Economy Post-Sept. 11," The Boston Herald, June 10, 2002)
PRESIDENT BUSH RECOGNIZES THE IMPORTANCE OF TERRORISM INSURANCE TO PROTECT AMERICAN JOBS
President Bush Calls The Legislation Critical For Jobs. "'Terrorism insurance is critical to promoting and protecting jobs and America's economic security.'"
(President Bush as quoted in article by Andrew Taylor, "Senate Gets Some GOP Support In Passage Of Terrorism Insurance Bill," Congressional Quarterly, June 22, 2002)
"[Terrorism insurance would provide] insurance companies with billions of dollars in government funding to help pay claims from future terrorist strikes."
(Jackie Spinner, "Terrorism Insurance Bill Passed By Senate," The Washington Post, June 19, 2002)
President Bush Urges Congress To Get Construction Workers "Back To Work." "'If you're worried about jobs like I am, if you want your hard hats working, we've got to get terrorism insurance passed so these large commercial projects go forward. We want people working in America. And the United States Congress can provide a means necessary to get these construction workers back to work.'"
("Bush Begins Midwest Swing," The White House Bulletin, August 14, 2002)
President Bush Warns That The Terrorism Insurance Bill Must Have Reasonable Litigation Procedures. "'The final terrorism insurance package must include reasonable litigation procedures so that Americans who are victimized by terrorism do not also fall victim to predatory lawsuits and punitive damages. . . .'"
(President Bush as quoted in Jesse Holland, "Dispute Over Limiting Lawsuits May Hold Up Terrorism Insurance Bill," The Associated Press, June 19, 2002) These litigation procedures would insure that civil litigation does not spiral out of control with victims of terrorism suing insurance companies or other victims of terrorism for exorbitant amounts.
President Bush Met With Labor Representatives And Business Leaders On Terrorism Insurance Legislation. "President Bush . . . address[ed] representatives of business and labor at the White House . . . regarding economic problems resulting [from] the shortage of terrorism insurance. Participating in the event with the President . . . [were] union workers from the building construction trades whose jobs will be lost by the slowdown in construction caused by the terrorism insurance crisis. Those attending the event . . . include[d]: J.W. Marriott, Jr., Marriott International; Nelson C. Riding, Catellus Development Corporation; David Creamer, MAC Commercial Mortgage Corporation; James P. Hoffa, International Brotherhood of Teamsters; and Edward Sullivan, Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO."
("President Bush to Address Business and Labor Leaders Regarding Terrorism," PR Newswire, April 5, 2002)
Referring To President Bush's Support For Quick Congressional Movement On Terrorism Insurance Legislation, Edward Sullivan, President Of AFL-CIO's Building And Construction Trades Department, Praised Republican Efforts To Create Jobs. "I support people who support my members and jobs for my members. We're not going to agree on all the issues, whether it be with the Democrats or the Republicans. So, we support people that support our issues no matter what party they come from . . . ."
("Unlikely Allies Push Senate On Terrorism Insurance," Real Estate Finance Today, April 15, 2002)
Teamster Leader Hoffa Indicated A Large Drop In Major Construction As A Result Of The Delay Of Terrorism Insurance's Passage. "Traditional Democratic allies James Hoffa, president of the AFL-CIO, and Edward Sullivan, president of the union's Building and Construction Trades Department, joined Bush in urging the Senate to vote on H.R. 3210, the Terrorism Risk Protection Act. . . . According to Hoffa, there has been a 17 percent drop off of major construction projects this year, projects that employ 'tens of thousands' of people."
("Unlikely Allies Push Senate On Terrorism Insurance," Real Estate Finance Today, April 15, 2002)
Teamster Leader Hoffa Stated "It's Hard To Imagine A Liability Issue." "The unions for their part support the Republican position on punitive damages. 'When you look at the World Trade Center, it's hard to imagine a liability issue. Who do you sue? . . . It's really not the typical tort case where an elevator falls or the building wasn't constructed right. . . . Obviously, . . . [September 11 terrorist attack] was a cataclysmic event where there really isn't any fault.'"
("Unlikely Allies Push Senate On Terrorism Insurance," Real Estate Finance Today, April 15, 2002)
Hoffa Does Not Object To Liability Limits. "Hoffa indicated after the event that he does not object to attaching some kind of liability limits to the legislation. 'I believe that people should have their redress in courts, but I do believe that there are certain catastrophes that speak for themselves--that it's just not a liability thing . . . . ' Hoffa said he has not talked to Daschle about the issue, but he plans to do so."
("As Bush Urges Action, Senate Skirmishes On Terror Coverage," Congress Daily/A.M., April 9, 2002)
THE REPUBLICAN-LED HOUSE PASSED TERRORISM INSURANCE AND RESPONSIBLE LIABILITY LIMITS
The House Set Reasonable Liability Limits. "The GOP-dominated House passed a measure that would allow plaintiffs to sue for all of their actual economic losses, but would limit non-economic damages and bar punitive damages and would cap lawyers' fees when cases were settled out of court."
(Morton Kondracke, "Trial Lawyers As A Political Issue," The San Diego Union-Tribune, July 28, 2002)
House Republicans United Behind This Key Legislation. "The [Terrorism Risk Protection] bill (H.R. 3210) . . . passed November 29,[2001]. . . . House leaders [included] provisions in the bill to limit the ability of terrorism victims to sue insurance firms and other companies."
(Keith Perine, "House Passes Insurance Bailout, But Curbs On Right To Sue Cloud Bill's Prospect In Senate," Congressional Quarterly, December 1, 2001; H.R. 3210, CQ Vote #464, Adopted 227-193: R 207-9; D 19-183; I 1-1, November 29, 2001)
DASCHLE'S DEMOCRAT SENATE DELAYED AND TURNED TERRORISM TRAGEDY INTO OPPORTUNITY FOR TRIAL LAWYERS
Daschle Delayed And Delayed And Finally Passed The Trial Lawyers' Preferred Terrorism Insurance Bill. After a seven-month delay, the Senate, passed a terrorism insurance bill with none of the liability limits included in the House version.
(Morton Kondracke, "Trial Lawyers As A Political Issue," The San Diego Union-Tribune, July 28, 2002)
Jim Murphy, Chairman Of The Mortgage Bankers Association, Said Democrat Senate Delay Has Been Very Costly. "'We are looking at billions of dollars in commercial financing that has been killed in the first half of the year because thus far Congress has been unable to reach agreement on a Bill. The delay has been costly, and those costs will continue to go up the longer the delay.'"
(Jim Murphy as quoted in "Lack Of Terrorism Coverage 'Has Killed $8bn In Property Deals,'" Insurance Day, July 17, 2002)
The Senate Version Would Not Protect Businesses From Suits For Punitive Damages. "Although the Senate bill would prohibit federal money from being used to pay punitive damages from lawsuits, it would not shield businesses."
(Jackie Spinner, "Terrorism Insurance Bill Passed By Senate," The Washington Post, June 19, 2002)
Edwards' "Arm Twisting" Defeated An Amendment To The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act That Would Have Imposed Limits On Personal Injury Trial Lawyers' Ability To Sue In The Wake Of A Terrorist Attack. "These ruminations on the increasingly weird captivity of the Daschle Democrats by the lawsuit industry come after a party-line vote on an amendment to impose modest limits on trial lawyers after a terrorist attack. Naturally, it was defeated thanks to manic arm-twisting by Majority Leader Tom Daschle and Senator John Edwards (himself a trial lawyer with White House aspirations)."
(Editorial, "Tort Terrorism," Wall Street Journal, June 20, 2002)
A Wall Street Journal Editorial Criticized Senate Democrats For Selling Out On Terrorism Insurance For Personal Injury Trial Lawyer Donations. "Senate Democrats will have lain themselves flat for their lawyer patrons in return for campaign dollars with which to fight the battle for Senate control this fall."
(Editorial, "Tort Terrorism," Wall Street Journal, June 20, 2002)
A Prominent Company Head Believes Trial Lawyers Weighed In Too Heavily On This Bill. "[American International Group Chairman Hank] Greenberg . . . acknowledged that he had . . . underestimated the influence of the trial lawyers on federal lawmakers. 'I've said publicly that I didn't think the trial bar voted the Senate, but I was wrong . . . [t]hey apparently do.'"
("AIG's Greenberg Pronounces Federal Terrorism Reinsurance Backstop Dead," Insurance Chronicle, April 1, 2002)
The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Believes The Senate Version Leaves A "Glaring Loophole" For Trial Lawyers. "The Chamber expressed concern that the Senate version did not include reasonable limits on punitive damages. 'The Senate bill contains a glaring loophole that could force victims of terrorist attacks to pay punitive damages for the acts of terrorists. . . . [T]his loophole creates another crack in our legal system that will allow unscrupulous trial lawyers to exploit the aftermath of any future terrorist attacks . . . .'"
(U.S. Chamber Of Commerce, Press Release, June 18, 2002)
Thanks
Ever notice that Trial Lawyers never seem to be cast as the bad guys on TV?
1. The GOP retakes the Senate with at least a 3 vote majority ( so that if a couple of wusses I won't mention decide to switch parties...we won't get hurt) and
2. Trent Lott is NOT the Majority Leader...He's gotta go...I really think that Rick Santorum is the guy for the job. Frist would be OK, too, but health care issues....prescription drugs, etc..will be a big campaign issue for the Dems, and they'll just demonize Frist as a millionaire doctor...
Dems paying off the trial lawyers goes hand in hand with Dems paying of the public worker unions.
The Dems insistence on making airport security workers public employees (and therefore Dem constituents) has already put airline passengers at risk. If the Republican plan had been passed the incentives on private sector security companies to keep their contracts and/or to avoid fines, along with the greater flexibility and creativity of the private sector, would have already brought airport security largely into compliance with the necessary standards (at substantially lower cost to the taxpayer, I might add). The Dem plan we have been stuck with is already well on track miss it's one year deadline, and at that I don't think it's too cynical to suspect that the system may be even worse when the public employees are finally in place.
Now the Dems want to sacrifice the safety of Americans again by denying the proposed Home Land Security Agency the ability to hire and fire at will, or even to award bonuses based on competence. Their consituents (public employees) must be afforded special protections unavialable to ordinary American workers no matter how much it costs in taxpayer dollar, or lives.
Oh, yeah, and don't forget, for all their whining about the poor victims of the bubble (stock) market collapse, Dems killed legislation that would have given ordinary workers in private sectors unions the same protections share holders now have. No auditing requirements are in place for Union books, even though pension funds are regularly raided by corrupt bosses, nor is there any requirement for union leaders to sign off on the accuracy of their financial statements. Ordinary workers must pay for the corruption that allows Dems to use the unions for money laundering, signing dead people to the voter roles, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.