Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: TUESDAY, May 9, 1995 TAG: 9505090130
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A-2 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: The New York Times
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Medium
An effort to shut off debate on the legislation, which the Senate has been considering for three weeks, not only failed to win the needed two-thirds majority, but fell short of even a simply majority, with 43 in favor and 49 opposed.
As a result, Senate leaders are planning to take a scalpel to the bill this morning to pare it even further. The measure that is expected to emerge would set limits on damages only in lawsuits involving faulty products. That would make it similar to the original Senate bill, which Dole, R-Kan., had sought to expand to bring it closer to the sweeping version passed by the House last month.
Sen. Slade Gorton, R-Wash., predicted that the bill, thus amended, was likely to pass. Sen. John Rockefeller IV, D-W.Va., who with Gorton has been pressing for national standards in product liability lawsuits, said he thought the measure would attract enough Democrats to be approved today.
If the Senate passes even a scaled-back version of the bill, it would still have to be negotiated with the House measure to come up with a final version.
The past two weeks of heated debate and negotiation over this issue have provided a stark demonstration of how the Senate's majority Republicans are a far less potent force in their chamber than is the Republican majority in the House. The Senate Republicans, and especially Dole, have been frustrated in their efforts to move quickly with the kind of major legislation that their House counterparts have been able to pass.
Dole, who is seeking the Republican presidential nomination, took a gamble on broadening the Senate measure to match the House version. He apparently did not have a clear idea of the depth of his support, however, a miscalculation that is the equivalent of a trial lawyer's asking a question of a witness without knowing the answer.
The bill to be considered today would limit punitive damages a jury may award someone in a product liability lawsuit to whichever is greater: $250,000; or twice the amount of damages for lost wages, medical expenses and ``pain and suffering.'' Punitive damages may be awarded by juries in especially outrageous circumstances. The bill also would allow a judge to remove that limit under certain circumstances, including those in which the conduct of the manufacturer was especially heinous.
Robert Brandon, a lobbyist for several consumer groups, said that the provision was largely meaningless because under the bill, a company that objected to a judge's removing the limit could demand and be granted a new trial. Brandon said that no successful plaintiff would want to risk a second trial against a large company.
Another problem, said Joan Claybrook, the president of Public Citizen, a consumer group, is that it might be unconstitutional for a judge to increase punitive damages. Claybrook said that courts have held that that would violate a person's right to a trial by jury.
The bill would not protect small businesses from all civil liability suits as Dole had proposed, but instead would set stricter limits on punitive damages in cases involving companies with fewer than 25 full-time employees.
by CNB