REPUBLICANS 1, LAWYERS 0 (Hillary voted no)

NY POST ^ | February 19, 2005 | EDITORIAL

[Liz]

The benefits of expanded GOP control in both chambers of Congress were evident this week with the passage of a major tort-reform measure.

Yesterday, President Bush signed that measure into law. As a result, lawyers seeking to cash in on class-action suits will find it harder to "shop" for favorable local judges. Instead, they'll have to take those cases to federal courts, in a much more fair process.

Bear in mind that this bill lost by a single vote in the Senate last time. This time, it passed 72-26. Their party's losses in the last election plainly inspired several Democrats to vote on common sense, rather than their leaders' wishes.

As for the bill's merits, Bush has rightly noted that the tort system is in bad need of repair. The mess is a drain on the economy, allowing plaintiffs to unfairly target deep-pocketed businesses, which pass on their legal costs to consumers. Frivolous or unfair medical-malpractice suits threaten to drive many doctors and specialists out of business.

The new law targets one of the worst legal abuses: "forum shopping" — taking the case to, say, an obscure town in Mississippi or Texas to greatly boost the odds of getting a too-friendly judge and jury.

Now lawyers can only take a class-action suit to a state court if the main defendant and more than a third of the plaintiffs are from that same state. If not, they must go to the federal courts.

But federal courts would only hear class-action suits involving a minimum of $5 million. And plaintiff lawyers will face some restrictions on their fees.

New York's junior senator, Hillary Clinton (a lawyer herself), sought to do New York — and the nation — a big disservice (and her fellow lawyers a favor) by voting against this sensible measure.

[Mamzelle]

re: I would think the appropriate remedy would then be to require that sutis take place in the state where the alleged malfeasance occurred)))

Careful with that common sense stuff...here's why it wouldn't work. The firm of Breck, Mousse and Hairjel want to file a class action against Bayer aspirin because millions of people have endured minor stomach upset on their way to enjoying relief from headaches. Each one of the million sufferers will get a coupon for $4.50 for a bottle of aspirin. The lawyers will collect $3 for every coupon issued. But, where to file? How about Hattiesburg, Mississippi? Great juries there. But how to make it a Hattiesburg problem...

Aren't there drugstores in Hattiesburg that sell aspirin? Sue that drugstore!!make Fred's Pharmacy a defendant along with Bayer...that makes it a Hattiesburg lawsuit...

I understand where your common sense is coming from--but unfortunately, the law has no common sense.

[Dilbert56]

Issues like these will force her Thighness to make direct choices just as she's trying to fuzz up her image. She made overtures to the pro-life crowd but everyone knew it was simple posturing. When pro-life groups offer to meet with her, it ups the ante. Nice words, Senator, can you also walk the talk?

The Republicans need a clear trail of votes like this to be in place by 2007. Either she'll have to moderate her voting record, and piss off her liberal friends, or she'll be trapped by her Senate record a la Kerry. Soon she'll figure out that the only thing in the middle of the road is roadkill. Then we'll have the Democrats nominating another Northeast liberal.

[Honestfreedom]

Too early for wind surfing. They should have held the vote in June and he would have missed it. Not that there is anything wrong with it, I am looking forward to the summer and the water.

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

Actions speak louder than words.

Bill Clinton's wife can utter all the centrist statements she wants. But when it comes down to it, she's still a Leftist. Her nay vote on this finds it source not so much in favoring lawyers, of which she is one, but of using the litigation system to redistribute wealth from wealthy enterprises that became wealthy through Capitalism to 'the people' who she believes are the slaves and victims of any corporation.

Her dissent found its source in Marxism.

[cajun scpo]

Three 'major' votes in the early days of the Senate.

Condi Rice [Senate Roll Call Vote 0002] Dems [32-12] [Jeffords Nay]
Al Gonzales [0003] Dems [6-35] [Jeffords Nay]
Class Action Fairness Act [0009] Dems [18-26] [Jeffords Yea]

Four dem's voted YEA on all three.

Landrieu (D-LA) [maybe she is getting the message from home - next test will be on first Judicial nominee]
Lieberman (D-CT)
Nelson (D-NE)
Salazar (D-CO)

Eleven voted NAY on all three [no surprises here].

Akaka (D-HI)
Boxer (D-CA)
Byrd (D-WV)
Dayton (D-MN)
Durbin (D-IL)
Harkin (D-IA)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Levin (D-MI)
Reed (D-RI)

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

You hit upon another reason why Bill Clinton's wife voted nay on this bill. Not only is it a Marxist redistribution of wealth from corporations to "the people," but it also keeps medical costs so high, that she maintains the need to come riding in on her Socialist horse with a national healthcare bill in her hand.

She is a disgusting Leftist. She must be trounced from office.

And thanks from all of us who agree with you for sticking it to that parasite you were forced to deal with.

By the way, they use the term "compensate" because its definition implies a balance. This sense of right allows them and the lawyers to sleep at night. But you are correct, it is not "compensation," but blood-letting.

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

Their view of better healthcare is Socialized medicine. They have a vested interested in enabling lawsuits and keeping malpractice insurance unsustainably high. Their solution will be to put all medical care under the control of the federal government.