[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 82 (Thursday, June 12, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S5629-S5630]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
THE PRODUCT LIABILITY REFORM ACT OF 1997, BIOMATERIALS ACCESS ASSURANCE
ACT OF 1997
______
LAUTENBERG (AND OTHERS) AMENDMENT NO. 375
(Ordered referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation.)
Mr. LAUTENBERG (for himself, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Durbin, and Mr. Wyden)
submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by them to the bill (S.
648) to establish legal standards and procedures for product liability
litigation, and for other purposes; as follows:
On page 9, line 14, strike ``; or'' and insert a semicolon.
On page 9, line 16, strike the period and insert ``; or''.
On page 9, between lines 16 and 17, insert the following:
(iii) any tobacco product or component of a tobacco
product.
On page 11, between lines 14 and 15, insert the following:
(16) Tobacco product.--
(A) In general.--The term ``tobacco product'' means--
(i) cigarettes;
(ii) little cigars;
(iii) cigars as defined in section 5702 of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986;
(iv) pipe tobacco;
(v) loose rolling tobacco and papers used to contain loose
rolling tobacco;
(vi) products referred to as spit tobacco; and
(vii) any other form of tobacco intended for human
consumption.
(B) Cigarette defined.--For purposes of this paragraph, the
term ``cigarette'' means--
(i) any roll of tobacco wrapped in paper or in any
substance not containing tobacco that is to be burned;
(ii) any roll of tobacco wrapped in any substance
containing tobacco that, because of its appearance, the type
of tobacco used in the filler, or its packaging and labeling
is likely to be offered to, or purchased by consumers as a
cigarette described in clause (i);
(iii) little cigars that are any roll of tobacco wrapped in
leaf tobacco or any substance containing tobacco (other than
any roll of tobacco that is a cigarette within the meaning of
clause (i)), with respect to which 1,000 units have a weight
of not to exceed 3 pounds; and
(iv) loose rolling tobacco and papers or tubes used to
contain that tobacco.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, I rise to discuss an amendment I am
submitting today to the product liability bill to protect the Nation's
public health from the dangers of tobacco. I am joined in this effort
by my colleagues Senator Durbin, Senator Harkin and Senator Wyden.
Without this amendment, the product liability bill provides the
tobacco industry with a backdoor escape hatch from the settlement
negotiations in which they are currently engaged. Without this
amendment, the tobacco industry will not have to make concessions to
the public health community that could save millions of American lives.
Mr. President, 36 States have now gone to court to recover the
millions of dollars in Medicaid and other health care costs that were a
direct result of the tobacco industry's deceitful and deadly practices.
Thousands of Americans who have been grievously injured by tobacco
products, and the loved ones of those who have been killed by tobacco,
are seeking compensation from the tobacco industry for their lethal and
addictive products. Currently, a bipartisan group of State attorneys'
general are involved in sensitive negotiations with the tobacco
industry concerning compensation for the illness and death caused by
its products. Whether one supports the concept of a settlement or not,
the fact that the tobacco industry has come to the table is an amazing
development.
They have come to the table because they realize that this President
and enough of us in Congress will not allow them to continue seducing
and poisoning our children without an appropriate response. They also
know that they will be subject to increasing civil liability in the
court system. I applaud the attorneys' general for bringing such strong
cases against them, that they realized it was time to sit down and
possibly release our Nation's children from their stranglehold.
Mr. President, right now, one of the major sticking points in the
talks between the attorneys' general and the Big Tobacco is the issue
of restrictions on product liability suits that will be brought against
the tobacco industry in the future. The industry has asked for a cap on
punitive damages, and it wants to eliminate joint and several liability
in tobacco cases. The attorneys' general are currently trying to work
this issue out with the tobacco companies.
Mr. President, 17 of these attorneys' general have signed on in
support of our effort to remove tobacco from the scope of the product
liability bill. I ask unanimous consent that letters signed by the
attorneys' general endorsing this effort be printed in the Record. As
time goes on, I expect additional pledges of support from more
attorneys' general.
There being no objection, the letters were ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Department of Justice,
June 12, 1997.
Dear Members of the U.S. Senate: We, the undersigned state
Attorneys General, ask you to support the Lautenberg Tobacco
Amendment to S. 648, the Product Liability Bill. While we do
not in this letter take a position on the overall product
liability bill, we support the exclusion of the tobacco
industry litigation and tobacco from the scope of the bill.
Frankly, we are asking you not to let the tobacco industry
off the hook. If the product liability bill passes without
the changes contained in the Lautenberg amendment, the bill
could affect the negotiations we are involved in today.
Senator Lautenberg's amendment excludes ``tobacco
products'' from the scope of product liability litigation
affected by S. 648. This is the right thing to do. Without
the amendment, the tobacco industry will gain substantial
protection without conceding anything to the state
governments and public health advocates who are now at the
negotiating table.
Therefore, we strongly urge you to support the Lautenberg
Amendment. We are trying to make historic breakthroughs in
these settlement negotiations. It would be a tragedy to take
a step backwards.
Sincerely,
Tom Miller,
Iowa Attorney General.
Winston Bryant,
Arkansas Attorney General.
Bob Butterworth,
Florida Attorney General.
Jeffrey Modisett,
Indiana Attorney General.
J. Joseph Curran,
Maryland Attorney General.
Scott Harshbarger,
Massachusetts Attorney General.
Frank Kelley,
Michigan Attorney General.
Joe Mazurek,
Montana Attorney General.
Hubert H. Humphrey III,
Minnesota Attorney General.
Peter Verniero,
New Jersey Attorney General.
Tom Udall,
New Mexico Attorney General.
W.A. Drew Edmondson,
Oklahoma Attorney General.
D. Michael Fisher,
Pennsylvania Attorney General.
Jan Graham,
Utah Attorney General.
James Doyle,
Wisconsin Attorney General.
Don Siegelman,
Alabama Attorney General.
____
Attorney General of Missouri,
Jefferson City, MO, June 9, 1997.
Sen. Frank Lautenberg,
Washington, DC.
Re S. 648
Dear Senator Lautenberg: I applaud your efforts to ensure
that the tobacco industry is exempted from the coverage of S.
648, the Products Liability Bill. As Missouri's chief law
enforcement officer, I have filed suit against a number of
manufacturers of cigarettes and other tobacco products. I
have been active in the negotiations between the Attorneys
General of the suing states and the tobacco industry. The
sweeping protections afforded manufacturers in S. 648 must
not be extended to the tobacco industry during the pendency
of these historic
[[Page S5630]]
lawsuits and negotiations. Good luck with your amendment and
thank you for your efforts.
Sincerely,
Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon,
Attorney General.
Mr. LAUTENBERG. Mr. President, if the product liability bill passes
in its current form, the tobacco industry will get what it wants, and
the American public will receive nothing in return. As reported out of
the Commerce Committee, the product liability bill will cap punitive
damages and eliminate joint and several liability in tobacco liability
cases. This would be another sweetheart deal for big tobacco, and it
would undercut the state attorneys' general. This is unacceptable. And
what will America lose if we don't pass my amendment? Mr. President, I
say perhaps millions of lives.
The tobacco industry is on the verge of agreeing to stop marketing to
American children, to stop lying and hiding the truth from the American
public, to commit to actual target numbers for reduction of teen
smoking, to subject themselves to appropriate regulation by the Food
and Drug Administration and to back real reforms that will put teeth
into laws that prohibit the sale of cigarettes to kids. Do we in
Congress want to throw that away forever? Do we want to give big
tobacco the green light to continue seducing and addicting our
children? I certainly hope not.
Mr. President, that is why it is critical that we pass my amendment,
which would exempt tobacco products from the restrictions on liability
covered by the product liability bill. Regardless of how any Senator
feels about the overall goals of the product liability bill, exempting
tobacco is the right thing to do. We should not sell out our Nation's
public health to the tobacco lobby. Congress should not provide the
tobacco industry with a back door deal through the product liability
bill. To prevent this from happening, we must attach my amendment.
Mr. President, some of my colleagues might ask: ``Why should we give
tobacco litigation a carve-out from the restrictions of this bill?' The
answer is simple and rather straightforward: The tobacco industry is
unlike any other American industry. No other industry in this country
kills over 400,000 Americans each year. No other industry has conspired
to deviously addict children to its product. No other industry has
submitted such highly questionable testimony to Congress and the
courts. Is this Congress prepared to undercut unprecedented public
health programs and give the tobacco industry the sweetheart deal they
have been dreaming of? Is Congress going to bail out the industry once
again? The American people won't tolerate it.
Mr. President, this Senator will do everything I can to prevent that
from happening. I ask my colleagues to join me in support of this
effort to remove tobacco litigation from the restrictions of the
product liability legislation. It is the right thing to do for the
public health, for our State's highest law enforcement officials, and
most important, for our kids.
____________________