[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 74 (Friday, May 5, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6200-S6201]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                       THE STAKES IN LEGAL REFORM

  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, as we continue the legal reform debate, I 
think it is important to take a few minutes and focus on what is and is 
not at stake here.
  What is at stake is whether we are going to continue with a legal 
system that is too costly, too long, and too unfair. What is at stake 
is whether the [[Page S6201]] powerful trial lawyers lobby will 
continue to protect their privileges through irresponsible scare 
tactics.
  Because, let Members be clear, the last week has demonstrated not 
only that the American people--over 83 percent--want reform; a majority 
of the Senate wants reform too.
  Only President Clinton and his trial lawyer allies defend the status 
quo.
  What they will not do, however, is engage in a debate on the merits. 
I was disappointed to see President Clinton parrot the standard trial 
lawyer line that legal reform protected ``drunk drivers, murderers, 
rapists, and abusers of women and children.''
  Mr. President, I have been here awhile, but I must say that I rarely 
have seen such an offensive twisting of the truth. President Clinton 
knows better and he should be ashamed of engaging in such tactics.
  The truth is that we have State and Federal criminal codes to deal 
with these people. The real irony that is apparently lost on President 
Clinton is that those same criminal codes generally contain--in 
addition to prison terms--fines and penalties that are typically $5,000 
or $10,000 for serious felonies.
  Those criminal fines are only a very small fraction of the 
multimillion-dollar punitive damage award. So why is President Clinton 
not attacking the criminal code for protecting criminals? Why have his 
crime proposals not ever addressed this issue?
  Because this is about politics, not policy. Our legal reforms focus 
on the civil code, not the criminal code. President Clinton knows that.
  But President Clinton also knows who raised millions of dollars for 
him in 1992--the trial lawyers. And he knows who raised $25 million for 
Democrat House and Senate candidates between 1989 and 1994--the trial 
lawyers.
  Think about it. There is a lot talk of special interests in this 
town, but no single-issue group comes anywhere close to bringing this 
much money to bear on Federal campaigns. And no other group is so 
generous and so exclusively for the party of President Clinton.
  So, despite the evidence that there is bipartisan support for these 
reports--and expanding them so that every American can benefit--when 
the chips were down, the trial lawyers and President Clinton started 
trying to scare the American people.
  And yesterday, that tactic worked. Only two Democrats voted for 
reform. But this tactic will fail in the end. I am proud that we are 
trying to pass legal reform that benefits as many Americans as 
possible. I will continue to work for reforms that help small 
businesses, and volunteer and charitable organizations.
  I believe the American people see past the irresponsible rhetoric. 
They know we are continuing to fight for their interests.
  But the reality, Mr. President, is that we cannot bring this debate 
to a close without bipartisan support. Forty-five Republicans did their 
part. Reform will not happen unless the Democrats put the interests of 
the American people ahead of the interests of the trial lawyers and 
their huge financial stake in the Democrat Party.
  I plan to bring this bill to a vote again on Monday or Tuesday. The 
American people need and deserve these reforms, and I for one do not 
intend to allow scare tactics to deter us from our responsibility to 
pass a legal reform package.
  We hope to bring this bill to a vote. We think the American people 
want Members to vote. We believe there is still a possibility because 
there is some bipartisan support. We will have to have 60 votes. That 
is what happens in this place. We need 60 votes to shut off debate, so 
we can pass even a narrowed product liability bill.
  We believe it is a big step in the right direction and I hope we will 
have the bipartisan support that Senator Rockefeller from West Virginia 
and Senator Gorton from Washington have been working for, for the past 
2 weeks.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DASCHLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________