[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 140 (Thursday, October 8, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12021-S12022]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          CLASS ACTION REFORM

 Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise to express my continued strong 
interest in meaningful class action reform--and to announce that, 
although we do not have the time necessary to move legislation any 
further this year, class action reform remains one of my highest 
priorities. Although many class action lawsuits do result in 
significant and important benefits for class members and society, too 
many class lawyers put their self-interest above the best interests of 
their clients--resulting in unfair and abusive settlements that 
shortchange class members while their lawyers line their pockets with 
high fees.
  To address this growing problem, Senator Grassley and I introduced 
the Class Action Fairness Act of 1998 (S. 2083). The bill is a moderate 
approach to weed out the worst abuses, while preserving the benefits of 
class actions. It encourages closer scrutiny of class actions through 
several provisions. It requires that proposed class action settlements 
be in plain, easily understandable English and be sent to state 
attorneys general, so they have an opportunity to weigh in with any 
objections. It requires courts to determine what damages will actually 
be paid to class members before awarding attorneys' fees, rather than 
calculating fees based on overvalued estimates of meaningless coupon 
settlements. And it moves more class actions to federal courts, which 
generally give closer scrutiny than state courts and can promote 
efficiency and avoid a collusive ``race to settlement'' by 
consolidating overlapping cases.
  These proposals have earned a broad range of support. Even Judge Paul 
Niemeyer, the Chair of the Judicial Conference's Advisory Committee on 
Civil Rules, who has studied class actions closely and testified before 
Congress on this issue, expressed his support for this ``modest'' 
measure, noting in particular that increasing federal jurisdiction over 
class actions will be a positive ``meaningful step.''
  This year, our bipartisan measure was reported favorably by the 
Judiciary Subcommittee on Administrative Oversight and the Courts. 
Unfortunately, as the term has winded down, we have been too busy with 
other pressing issues to give this proposal the full consideration it 
deserves. Still, we already have made several revisions

[[Page S12022]]

to improve the bill and address concerns that have been raised, and in 
my view any remaining concerns can be worked out.
  So next year, class action reform will be one of my highest 
priorities. I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that 
we eliminate those abuses that too often give class actions a bad name.

                          ____________________