[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 42 (Tuesday, March 7, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H2781]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               IMPORTANCE OF INCREASING CAPITAL FORMATION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Smith] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. SMITH of Michigan. Madam Speaker, during my 5 minutes I would 
like to comment on two different areas. One is to report on the 
testimony before the Committee on the Budget today. Witnesses appearing 
before the Committee on the Budget stressed the importance of 
increasing capital formation in this country if we expect to increase 
our standard of living.
  I, and we all, should be particularly concerned, because as we 
compare what is happening in the United States with other nations 
around the world, we see that the United States ranks either last or 
very close to the bottom in terms of the amount of savings. For every 
take-home dollar, our savings are very low. You compare our 5 percent 
savings with countries like Japan at almost 19 percent, South Korea at 
approximately 32 percent, we see that we have encouraged spending and 
consumption rather than savings that are so important to having capital 
available for investment.
  In comparing the United States with the rest of the world, we also 
see that the investment in those new tools and machinery per worker is 
lagging in this country compared to the rest of the world, and not 
surprisingly, the rate of increase in our productivity is also at 
nearly the bottom of the list.
  I bring this to my colleagues because I think we are tremendously 
challenged today with a problem of other countries, now that we are 
past the cold war, doing everything that they can do to attract capital 
investment. If we want to increase our standard of living in this 
country, we cannot just look at pretend things like increasing the 
minimum wage. What we have got to do is look at true improvements in 
our economy and the true availability of more and better jobs by 
encouraging businesses to buy that machinery and that equipment and 
those facilities that are going to increase the efficiency of those 
workers, increase the productivity, and ultimately increase their wages 
and standard of living.


                    the attorney accountability act

  I would like to briefly comment on a second area, and that relates to 
the passage this afternoon of H.R. 988. I was disappointed that we 
ended up with only attorneys being able to offer amendments in the 
limited time period simply because of the rules and precedents that 
allow the recognition of members of the committee; in this case, 
essentially all the committee members of the Committee on the Judiciary 
are attorneys.
  The title of the bill that we passed this afternoon was the 
``Attorney Accountability Act.'' In fact, this bill as currently 
written does little to make attorneys accountable. The only part of the 
bill that does anything to make lawyers accountable for their actions 
is the change in rule 11, and that change requiring a mandatory penalty 
for violation of the rule applies only in a small number of cases in 
which an attorney is actually sanctioned by a judge under rule 11 and, 
of course, as we heard in much of the testimony, there are very few 
sanctions, and even when there is a sanction, that attorney-judge has 
the latitude of not imposing any sanction on the attorney, but simply a 
sanction, a financial sanction on the client.
  Madam Speaker, in conclusion, my amendment would have made an 
attorney liable for half of any attorney's fee award a client cannot 
pay. This
 sanction is not unduly harsh. There can be no award of fees unless: 
First, a settlement is offered; second, the offer is rejected; and 
third, the jury returns a verdict less than the offer.

  In the few cases in which these conditions are met, the award is 
limited. First, it is capped at the amount of the offeree's expenses; 
second, it is limited to the actual costs incurred from the time of the 
offer through the end of the trial; and third, the judge has discretion 
to moderate or waive the penalty when it would be manifestly unjust.
  These modest steps, it seems to me, should have been necessary if we 
truly intend to make attorneys accountable.
  My amendment would have told lawyers, ``This is a court, not a 
lottery office. You are an officer of this court, and as an officer of 
this court, you have a responsibility to the court and the other 
litigants not to waste their time and money, and if you ignore these 
responsibilities, you can be held liable.''
  Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to express these 
thoughts.

                          ____________________