[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 39 (Monday, April 7, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2790-S2791]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. KENNEDY (for himself, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Dodd, Mr. Akaka, Mr. 
        Inouye, Mr. Robb, Mr. Lautenberg, Mr. Moynihan, Mrs. Boxer, Mr. 
        Wellstone, Ms. Moseley-

[[Page S2791]]

        Braun, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Feingold, and Ms. Mikulski):
  S. 516. A bill to amend section 1977A of the Revised Statutes to 
equalize the remedies available to all victims of intentional 
employment discrimination, and for other purposes; to the Committee on 
Labor and Human Resources.


                     The Equal Remedies Act of 1997

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I am proud to introduce the Equal 
Remedies Act of 1997, for myself and 13 other sponsors. The purpose of 
our legislation is to end a glaring inequality in the current Federal 
antidiscrimination laws.
  The Civil Rights Act of 1991 gave women, religious minorities, and 
disabled persons the right to recover compensatory and punitive damages 
for intentional employment discrimination, but only up to specified 
monetary limits. By contrast, victims of such discrimination on the 
basis of race or national origin can recover damages without such 
limitations.
  The Equal Remedies Act of 1997 will end this double standard by 
removing the caps on damages for victims of intentional job 
discrimination on the basis of sex, religion, or disability. No one 
should be subject to second-class remedies under our civil rights laws. 
Victims of discrimination who suffer injuries deserve a full remedy for 
those injuries, without arbitrary limits.
  The caps serve no justifiable purpose. The standard of proof and the 
definition of intentional discrimination are identical under the Civil 
Rights Act of 1991 and the longstanding race discrimination statute. 
There is no reason to expect significantly more litigation, or 
significantly larger jury awards if the caps are removed.
  For the vast majority of victims of intentional discrimination, the 
caps do not affect the amount of damages. But, for others--victims with 
the most serious injuries from intentional discrimination--the caps are 
an unfair barrier to recovering full damages for their injuries. 
Employers who have committed the most outrageous acts of discrimination 
will no longer be shielded from full responsibility.
  The double standard in current law protects the worst lawbreakers and 
denies relief to those who have been harmed the most. By enacting the 
Equal Remedies Act of 1997, Congress will be affirming the basic 
principle of equal justice for all Americans.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the 
legislation may be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                 S. 516

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Equal Remedies Act of 
     1997''.

     SEC. 2. EQUALIZATION OF REMEDIES.

       Section 1977A of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1981a) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)--
       (A) by striking paragraph (3); and
       (B) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (3); and
       (2) in subsection (c), by striking ``section--'' and all 
     that follows through the period and inserting ``section, any 
     party may demand a jury trial.''.

                          ____________________