Ah, so a company that knows a product is defective but chooses not to recall it because it is more cost effective to settle any personal injury claims out of court than to complete the necessary repairs should NOT be subject to punitive damages? Where is the motivation for a company to act ethically? A company is totally insulated from making immoral decisions because, no matter what, it knows it is only faced with the prospect of paying the actual damages.
This isn't all that far fetched, and since it's Ford, it'll ring true. Let's say that Ford knew all the Bridgestone tires were defective and would cause SUVs to roll over, but it calculated that a recall of all Ford Explorers would be MUCH more expensive than settling the 200 or so wrongful death lawsuits that were brought against Ford as a result of SUV rollovers. So you don't think there should be an option for a jury to hit Ford with punitive damages? It should ONLY be required to pay the actual damages of the 200 or so wrongful death suits? Where is Ford's motivation to create a safer product? Where is the motivation by Ford to fix the product it knows to be defective? Oh, there isn't any.
Outlawing contingency fees
Nothing like squashing the voice of the poor. Let's say you are a $19,000/yr janitor at a private school, and while you are at your job, you are exposed to asbestos over a period of 15 years and you get cancer. Now, you haven't been able to save up much money over your life, only making $19,000 and having kids to feed and whatnot, and now what savings you had is being drained by medical expenses related to the cancer. Medicaid and your insurance from your job at the school (if you are lucky enough to have it) just doesn't cover everything. Now, the school is obviously negligent in keeping the asbestos around, but asbestos litigation is tricky and highly specialized, not to mention time consuming. And you just don't have the $15,000 or $20,000 it will take to litigate this kind of case. You're screwed.
Gee, if only there was a system which allowed the attorney to bear the risk of the cost of the case while collecting a slightly increased premium for his services. Oh my God, there is such a system! Contingency! The poor janitor gets to go to trial, gets his day in court, while the attorney bears the risk of the case. Everyone goes home happy and it's just plain better.
Lawyers forbidden from running from office
Well, let's not let freedom get in the way of this utopia you've created.