[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 105 (Thursday, July 30, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Page S9433]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mr. Durbin):
  S. 2373. A bill to amend title 28, United States Code, with respect 
to the use of alternative dispute resolution processes in United States 
district courts, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the 
Judiciary.


                   alternative dispute resolution act

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the 
Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998. My Judiciary Subcommittee 
on Administrative Oversight and the Courts has jurisdiction over this 
matter, and I am very pleased that the ranking member of the 
subcommittee, Senator Durbin, has joined me in sponsoring this bill. It 
will require every Federal district court in the country to institute 
an alternative dispute resolution, or ADR, program. The bill will 
provide parties and district court judges with options other than the 
traditional, costly and adversarial process of litigation.
  ADR programs have been gaining in popularity and respect for years 
now. For example, many contracts drafted today--between private 
parties, corporations, and even nations--include arbitration clauses. 
Most State and Federal bar associations, including the ABA, have 
established committees to focus on ADR. Also, comprehensive ADR 
programs are flourishing in many of the States.
  ADR is also being used at the Federal level. In 1990, for example, 
President Bush signed into law a bill that I introduced called the 
Administrative Dispute Resolutions Act. The law promoted the increased 
use of ADR in Federal agency proceedings. In 1996, because ADR was 
working so well, we permanently re-authorized the law. And earlier this 
year, the executive branch recommitted themselves to using ADR as much 
as possible.
  Since the late 1970s, our Federal district courts have also been 
successfully introducing ADR. In 1998, we authorized 20 district courts 
to begin implementing ADR programs. The results were very encouraging, 
so last year we made these programs permanent. It's time to take 
another step and make ADR available in all district courts.
  Mr. President, ADR allows innovations and flexibility in the 
administration of justice. The complex legal problems that people have 
demand creative and flexible solutions on the part of the courts. There 
are numerous benefits to providing people with alternatives to 
traditional litigation. For example, a recent Northwestern University 
study of ADR programs in State courts indicated that mediation 
significantly reduced the duration of lawsuits and produced significant 
cost savings for litigants. That means fewer cases on the docket and 
decreased costs. The Federal courts should be taking every opportunity 
to reap the benefits that the state courts have been enjoying.

  Mr. President, the fact of the matter is that ADR works. The future 
of justice in this country includes ADR. Perhaps one of the signs of 
this is that many of the best law, business, and graduate schools in 
the country are beginning to emphasize training in negotiation, 
mediation, and other kinds of dispute resolution.
  Quite simply, this bill will increase the availability of ADR in our 
Federal courts. It mandates that every district court establish some 
form of professional ADR program. It provides the district, however, 
with the flexibility to decide what kind of ADR works best locally. The 
bill also allows a district with a current ADR program that's working 
well to continue the program.
  This bill is the Senate companion to H.R. 3528, which was reported 
out of the Judiciary Committee today without any opposition. Our bill 
tracks the original House bill, except for some findings and a few 
technical changes to improve the legislation. These changes were 
included in the bill reported out of committee. The House bill received 
overwhelming, bipartisan support, passing 405-2.
  The Department of Justice, along with the administration, the 
Administrative Office of the Courts, and the American Bar Association, 
including its business section, all support the legislation with these 
improvements. The consensus is clear: ADR has an important role to play 
in our Federal court system.
  Mr. President, this bill is a step in the right direction for the 
administration of justice in our country. Increased availability of ADR 
will benefit all of us. It should be an option to people in every 
judicial district of the country. This bill assures that it will be.
                                 ______