[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 5 (Tuesday, January 25, 2005)]
[House]
[Pages H184-H188]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CHALLENGES TO OUR FREEDOMS AND RIGHTS HERE AT HOME
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Mike Rogers of Alabama). Under the
Speaker's announced policy of January 4, 2005, the gentleman from
Louisiana (Mr. Jindal) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of
the majority leader.
Mr. JINDAL. Mr. Speaker, this month, this year started off as
potentially a great month, a great year for democracy and for freedom.
The President gave a soaring speech about spreading freedom and liberty
across the world. We have elections coming for the first time to the
people of Iraq.
Yet even despite this optimism and this hope, there are also serious
challenges to our freedoms and our rights right here at home. Tonight I
want to speak about both those opportunities and those challenges. We
have got opportunity in Iraq with free elections. We have got threats
here at home with frivolous lawsuits threatening our freedoms,
threatening our way of life. We have got threats here at home with
recent IRS rulings and decisions threatening the ability of homeowners
to keep their homes, to live in their homes. Finally, we have threats
here at home threatening the ability of people across the wonderful
State of California from enjoying the great oysters from my home State
of Louisiana.
Just today, I want to start first with the threat of frivolous
lawsuits and the threat that poses to our way of life. In today's news,
we find that a Federal appellate court has reinstated a lawsuit against
the McDonald's restaurant, against the McDonald's chain. For those of
you not familiar with this lawsuit, it was brought in New York by a
family claiming that McDonald's restaurant should be responsible for
the fact that their children have eaten too much of McDonald's food.
{time} 2045
I am a parent. I have got two beautiful young children, a 3-year-old
girl and a little 9-month-old boy. My little 3-year-old girl enjoys
McDonald's. She likes eating out. She likes the playground as much as
the food. And it is my job, it is her mother's job, it is both of our
jobs to make sure that our daughter eats a balanced meal. We would
never in a million years think of blaming another, think of bringing a
lawsuit against a restaurant for the fact that our daughter eats too
many chicken McNuggets or too many French fries.
In my mind this is just one more example of frivolous lawsuits, one
more example of how frivolous lawsuits can actually erode our freedoms,
our liberties, our economic rights. If this lawsuit in particular and
frivolous lawsuits in general are allowed to stand, I fear that we will
not have freedoms that we take for granted, the freedoms to go our
favorite restaurants, the freedoms to open and operate small
businesses, the freedoms to earn a living.
In today's newspaper as well, from today's Wall Street Journal, I
want to share with this House, all the way from Europe and Ireland they
talk about curbing the ``American disease.'' I put that in quotes,
``American disease.'' They are not talking about our agricultural
products. They are not talking about some kind of new biological
threat. They are talking about personal injury lawsuits. Today in the
Wall Street Journal, on the front page of the B section, they talk
about the fact that litigation has been booming in Europe. Indeed, the
nickname in some circles is the ``American disease.'' They talk about a
restaurant owner, Pat McDonagh, who is worried about the fact that
American-style lawsuits are coming to Ireland. In his restaurant he
actually videotaped an adolescent customer pouring water on the floor
in the restroom in one of his restaurants so that he could pretend to
fall and sue the restaurant owner.
In Ireland they have put in place several reforms. They have put in
place a mandatory arbitration panel without involving lawyers, where
plaintiffs and defendants can go and argue their case. Both of them
still maintain the right to go to court after this arbitration panel.
But already despite the fact they have got one of the highest
concentrations of attorneys per people, already with some of these
reforms, they are beginning to see real results.
In Europe, again quoting from the Wall Street Journal, they said the
Republic of Ireland was the Texas of Europe in terms of litigation
before the new reforms. The Republic of Ireland was the Texas of
Europe. I do not think this is an export we want to become known for. I
do not think we want to brag about the fact we are exporting our legal
system, our lawsuits to other corners of the world.
In Ireland the number of personal injury claims dropped 20 percent,
20 percent, this year after they adopted these reforms. Liability
insurance rates for both government and private employers also dropped
40 percent last year alone. Auto insurance premiums are back to where
they were in 1999. It is not just Ireland. The UK has also introduced
reforms to cut down the cost of litigation in civil claims courts. In
France they are trying to slow down the runaway costs of medical
malpractice insurance.
Going back to Mr. McDonagh, going back to Ireland, not only did he
see an adolescent stage a fall, he also saw a young pregnant woman with
her husband also apparently stage a fall in his restaurant. That
adolescent tried to file a 38,000 pound claim. When Mr. McDonagh went
public with his evidence, went public with the proof that he had, not
only was the adolescent reprimanded but many claims suddenly
disappeared. After this video, after these reforms, they have seen the
total liability claims, which in Ireland had been climbing at a rate of
over 50 percent for the previous 3 years, finally begin to slow down.
Insurance rates had tripled in 3 years, and finally they are beginning
to see some relief. In Ireland legal fees and related costs account for
almost half, 46 percent, of the awards in settlements. So this is
[[Page H185]]
money that is not even going to legitimately injured customers.
The moral of this story: one, when Ireland adopted commonsense
reforms, they saw insurance rates drop. They saw the number of claims
being filed drop. They saw legal fees dropping. What we can learn from
this case is with commonsense reforms, we can restore Americans' trust
in our legal system. We can also make sure that we are not known across
the world for exporting our legal system.
I am proud of the fact that the administration is introducing three
commonsense reforms to reform our legal system, first, in the medical
liability area; second, in the class action lawsuit reform area; and,
third, in asbestos litigation.
First, let us start off talking a little bit about the need for
reforms in class action lawsuits. These are an important part of our
legal system. However, when they are abused, they truly harm not only
the injured parties; they undermine our country's faith in our entire
judicial system. When we look at the reforms that are being offered,
first we need to understand the problems that we face. Right now the
cost of litigation per person in the United States is far higher than
in any other major industrialized nation. Let me repeat that. The cost
of litigation per person in United States is far higher than any other
industrialized nation. That is an important fact. These are countries
we have to compete with economically. And as long as the cost of
lawsuits and defending those lawsuits are higher here, that is like a
hidden tax on every worker, on every consumer right here in America.
Lawsuit costs have risen substantially over the past several decades.
A large portion of these costs are going to lawyers' fees, transaction
costs, never even reaching injured parties. Small businesses spend on
average about $150,000 per year on litigation expenses alone. Looking
at the medical liability area alone, we could save billions of dollars
for American taxpayers. We could lower the cost of health care by
billions of dollars just by adopting commonsense reforms.
These are the kinds of reforms that were adopted in my home State of
Louisiana, adopted in California decades ago through Democratic
legislatures, through bipartisan majorities. These are the kinds of
reforms that can restore not only some sensibility to our legal system,
save our taxpayers, save our health care patients billions of dollars.
They can also make sure that injured patients are truly being
compensated for their injuries. Frivolous lawsuits, excessive jury
awards, are driving many health care providers out of communities,
forcing doctors to practice overly defensive medicine.
In the neighboring State, in Mississippi, last year alone, they had a
health care crisis. Many towns, many communities could not find doctors
willing to deliver babies because of the malpractice crisis right next
door. They literally had doctors threatening to move across the border
into Louisiana, setting up clinics and hospitals across the border to
treat patients from Mississippi. Fortunately, they have taken some
steps to reform their legal system. We still have a health care system
in crisis. We still have many communities that do not have health care
providers. Even those communities with health care providers often have
to charge higher insurance premiums, higher health care costs thanks to
frivolous lawsuits.
The President has proposed a very sensible plan. He allows unlimited
compensation for true economic losses. He allows recoveries for
noneconomic damages up to a reasonable amount. He allows punitive
damages for the worst cases. He also makes sure that old cases cannot
be brought to court several years after they have actually taken place.
And, finally, he makes sure that defendants only pay judgments in
proportion to their actual fault. If we listen carefully, patients will
be able to collect their noneconomic damages; they would be able to
collect reasonable punitive damages in the worst cases. We would make
sure that defendants are only liable for what they caused, that we do
not go searching for the deep pockets, we do not just go suing the
first person we can find. We would make sure that the people that are
hurt are truly compensated. At the same time we control the unnecessary
costs, the frivolous lawsuits that are plaguing our health care system
today.
The second reform that has been presented is truly reforming our
class action system. We support class action reforms to limit the abuse
of large nationwide class action cases to return justice to the truly
injured parties. The current system, which is so abused, often does not
benefit injured parties. It undermines our American judicial system.
Often we have injured parties that receive awards with little or no
value. They give us little coupons in the mail, while their attorneys
receive large fees.
It makes sense to move these cases to the Federal system. And
oftentimes we are involving interstate class action lawsuits. We are
talking about cases that affect many citizens. We are talking about
cases that involve more money, that involve interstate commerce issues.
It makes sense that these cases should be heard in a Federal court.
This does not alter in one way the right of a plaintiff to bring a
legitimate claim to court. So in addition to protecting our physicians,
protecting our health care system from frivolous lawsuits, we also need
to do more to revamp our current class action system.
Finally, the third piece of tort reform, frivolous lawsuit reform,
that has been proposed is fixing our asbestos litigation system. We
need to help those workers that have truly been injured with a fairer
system and a long-term solution. The current system leaves little or no
funds to pay current and future asbestos victims. Already we have
bankrupted over 74 companies. My concern is those that were truly
injured, there will be no funds left for them, and in the meantime we
will destroy several companies rather than truly compensating those
that have been injured.
I think that the frivolous lawsuits and out-of-control legal system
can pose a very serious threat to America's freedoms, can pose a very
serious threat to the American Dream. We are a country of economic
opportunity. We are a country where small business owners can create a
better quality of life by serving their customers. We need to preserve
the risk-taking, the entrepreneurial spirit that not only makes America
great, makes America a beacon of hope and opportunity for people all
over the world, but also makes sure that not only we but our children
have jobs, make sure that their economic growth continues unabated.
These three reforms are necessary, in the medical malpractice, in the
class action area, and then finally in the asbestos area, to make sure
that we restore some reason to our legal system, to make sure that we
truly compensate those that have been injured, those that have been
injured through others' neglect, but at the same time we do not punish
honest business people, we do not punish physicians trying to provide
high-quality medical care, we do not engage in frivolous lawsuits, we
do not perpetuate a lottery-style system.
A second topic I would like to talk about to the Members of the House
today is that, now that we have talked about one of the challenges
facing us here at home, I would like to talk about an opportunity
abroad. And if the Members will permit me, I would like to quote from
our President's inaugural address, just a few lines from that stirring
speech where he talked about the hope, the freedom, the principles of
democracy being spread across the world. I would like to quote from
what our President said on that cold morning: ``We have seen our
vulnerability, and we have seen its deepest source. For as long as
whole regions of the world simmer in resentment and tyranny, prone to
ideologies that feed hatred and excuse murder, violence will gather and
multiply in destructive power and cross the most defended borders and
raise a mortal threat. There is only one force of history that can
break the reign of hatred and resentment and expose the pretensions of
tyrants and reward the hopes of the decent and tolerant, and that is
the force of human freedom.''
Our President went on to say: ``We are led by events and common sense
to one conclusion: the survival of liberty in our land increasingly
depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for
peace in our world is an expansion of freedom in all the world.''
[[Page H186]]
The President then later in his remarks and as he was talking about
how our national interests coincide with the basic principles upon
which this country was founded, our national interests lie in promoting
freedom and democracy to the peoples of the world. But he goes on to
caution: ``This is not primarily the task of arms, though we will
defend ourselves and our friends by force of arms when necessary.
Freedom, by its nature, must be chosen and defended by citizens, and
sustained by the rule of law and the protection of minorities. And when
the soul of a nation finally speaks, the institutions that arise may
reflect customs and traditions very different from our own. America
will not impose our own style of government on the unwilling. Our goal
instead is to help others find their own voice, attain their own
freedom, and make their own way.''
As I think about the President's remarks, I think in particular of
the situation in Iraq. And I want to share just one last line from the
President before I talk further about what is happening in Iraq. Our
President went on to say: ``Some, I know, have questioned the global
appeal of liberty, though this time in history, 4 decades defined by
the swiftest advance of freedom ever seen, is an odd time for doubt.
Americans, of all people, should never be surprised by the power of our
ideals. Eventually, the call of freedom comes to every mind and every
soul. We do not accept the existence of permanent tyranny because we do
not accept the possibility of permanent slavery. Liberty will come to
those who love it.''
When I listened to those remarkable words, when I listened to the
President's inaugural address, I thought what a wonderful role America
has to play. It is not our job to be the policemen of the world. The
President was very quick to say this is not primarily a matter of arms,
but it is a matter of spreading hope and standing on the side of those
fighting for freedom and democracy across the world. Not only is it the
right thing to do, and it is, but it also is the best way to secure
America's safety.
There is a little girl back at home in Louisiana that gets this, and
before I share with the Members what she has to say, I yield to the
gentlewoman from North Carolina (Ms. Foxx).
Ms. FOXX. Mr. Speaker, I rise to discuss an issue of great importance
to the citizens of the Fifth District of North Carolina. We are deeply
concerned about the skyrocketing costs of medical malpractice insurance
because it is limiting access to quality and affordable health care all
over western North Carolina, but particularly in the rural portions.
The escalating cost of health care is a major concern in the fifth
district.
{time} 2100
Just 2 weeks ago, I held meetings with community leaders in all 12
counties in my district. The issue of the rising cost of medical
insurance was raised at each and every meeting. After all, the American
Medical Association has determined that North Carolina is one of 19
States in the country that is currently identified as a ``crisis''
State.
Due to an onslaught of frivolous lawsuits, our physicians are being
forced to pay exorbitant premiums on their liability insurance. The
rates have risen so high that many family practitioners and OB-GYNs are
being forced to retire early or simply go out of business. Doctors are
refusing to deliver babies or perform surgery because they are afraid
of being sued. That is especially a problem in our rural communities,
where many doctors are sole practitioners.
Just as alarming, our medical school enrollments are on the decline,
which will limit the health care available to our future generations.
Recently, I spent 2 days with medical professionals in my district.
According to the experts in the medical community of Forsyth County,
there was at least a 20 to 40 percent increase last year in medical
malpractice insurance premiums. The biggest impact, again, was felt in
the specialty fields like OB-GYN, emergency medicine and surgery.
What is happening across North Carolina is that doctors are no longer
going into specialized fields like obstetrics. This is short-changing
the people of the Fifth District, because it is limiting access to the
health care specialists they need. We must remember that this is an
issue that affects everyone, not just doctors.
In early 2003, with the backing of the Bush administration, the U.S.
House of Representatives moved quickly to address medical liability
reform by passing H.R. 5, the HEALTH Act, Help Efficient, Accessible,
Low-Cost, Timely Health Care. Unfortunately, the U.S. Senate failed to
pass this meaningful and important legislation. I look forward to the
debate this year in the House.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues in the House and Senate to address
this health care crisis. We need to enact meaningful medical
malpractice reform. My priority is that the citizens of Fifth District
of North Carolina and all across the Nation have continued access to
quality, affordable health care.
Mr. JINDAL. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I want to thank my
colleague for making the point and reiterating the point how important
it is to defend our freedoms at home, even as we are fighting to defend
freedoms abroad.
As I was saying, the President in his stirring inaugural remarks
talked about the importance of spreading freedom across the world; not
only that it is consistent with our highest ideals, our goals, our
principles, but also as an effective means of defending America's
freedoms here at home.
I want to share this with you. There is a little girl back in my
district that understands it. The story in our local paper opens with a
quote that says, ``They fight for us.''
``Four-year-old Katelyn Swansen is talking about her heroes, the
American troops fighting overseas in Iraq. It seems like a big
statement coming from a very little girl's mouth, but she says it with
pride as she shows off the poster she made to send to the troops.''
I am going to read a little bit from this article.
Her pre-K teacher at the local YMCA has taught not only little
Katelyn, but also her 12 classmates, to know all about what it means to
be an American and about the sacrifices the American troops are making
in Iraq. These kids, they may not be able to say ``patriotism,'' they
may not even know what it means, but they are practicing being good
Americans.
The words may seem jumbled, they may not be pronounced correctly, but
when they say the Pledge of Allegiance, they say it with pride, they
say it from their heart.
On a blackboard behind them, the words say, ``The YMCA Supports our
Troops USA,'' and there is a flag. And on Ms. Restivo's desk, that is
the teacher, there is a small picture of her stepson, who is a private
first class.
Seth Restivo is a member of the U.S. Army National Guard. He is
currently deployed to Iraq. The kids have made a stack of posters to
send to his unit and made handprints on the posters. The teachers wrote
on these handprints, ``These small hands support our troops in a big
way.''
A poster was also made using handprints from Seth's 4-year-old son
Triston, who also attends that same YMCA childcare center in Covington.
Ms. Restivo says her son signed up to be in the National Guard when
he was only 16. He is now 19. He left for boot camp as soon as he
graduated from high school in May 2004. He left for Iraq a week before
Christmas. He is currently in Baghdad, spending most of his time
cleaning weapons. He has been deployed for 10 months.
She says it is important for her students, even though they are too
young to learn about the soldiers who are fighting for their freedom,
she says it is important that they know about America and about the
true heroes. It is important for them to learn about what is going on
for our country.
Those posters will be mailed to her stepson. I think 4-year-old
Katelyn and I think her classmates truly understand what it means to be
American. I think they truly understand the sacrifices being made by
our brave men and women in uniform, being made overseas to defend our
way of life and also to help the Iraqi people to find freedom.
On January 30th, an historic day is approaching us as, for the first
time in decades, after decades of dictatorship and oppression, the
Iraqi people will be finally be able in a free election to decide their
own freedom.
[[Page H187]]
Back in December, the International Republican Institute did a survey
that showed over 67 percent of Iraqis supported going forth with the
elections as scheduled, over 67 percent. According to their own
independent election committee, over 7,000 candidates representing 75
political entities, 27 organizations and 9 coalitions plan to
participate in the National Assembly elections, over 7,400 candidates.
These elections should reflect the will of the Iraqi people. They
should lay the groundwork for the drafting of a constitution that
represents the will of the Iraqi people and embraces freedom and
democracy, and, finally, to result in a representative government
committed to peace, stability and democracy. These are our hopes, these
are our goals.
Now, can we in America guarantee what happens after these elections?
Certainly there is no guarantee. But what we can know, what we can do
is this: We can give the Iraqi people the best chance they have got for
stability, for peace, for freedom. We can give them the best chance
that entire region has by allowing these elections to proceed.
It will be up to the Iraqi people after these elections take place to
decide for themselves. We are not able to impose order externally. What
we are able to do is turn over, with time, turn over as quickly as we
can, the responsibility for the safety back to Iraqi forces. Over
120,000 forces of varying kinds have been trained.
You have got not only the national elections, but in local elections
you have got over 111 political entities that have submitted candidate
lists. You have 256 political entities composed of almost 19,000
candidates registered to compete in the 20 different elections.
You see just the birth of democracy in that country. Is it perfect?
No. Are there challenges? Absolutely. But what we are witnessing is an
historic moment, an important moment for the Iraqi people, an important
moment for that entire region.
Now, again, America cannot force its will on another country. We
cannot force the Iraqi people to live in peace, or we cannot force upon
them a stable democracy. What we can do by giving them these elections
is give them the opportunity to take that responsibility for
themselves. What we can do by transferring the responsibility of
security back to trained Iraqi forces is to make sure they have the
best chance for a peaceful future. That is good for the Iraqi people.
That is also good, however, for the entire region and also for the
American people.
I have talked today about the threats to freedom at home, I have
talked about the opportunity to spread freedom across the world. I also
want to talk in closing about two additional threats to freedoms right
here in America, and in particular threats that impact the people of
Louisiana.
The first threat I want to talk to you about concerns a bill that I
am filing tomorrow. This is a bill about people, the Disaster
Prevention Protection Act of 2005.
My State and many States have properties that are subject to
flooding, and because of this problem, FEMA has got a program, flood
mitigation grant program, that has been in place for several years.
These grants have been given out in my State in particular for the last
10 years, but there has been a similar program literally in place for
decades.
These grants are given to people after a disaster hits or to prevent
a future disaster from hitting. They are designed to save the Federal
Government money. Instead of allowing homes to flood repeatedly, the
Federal Government, in partnership with local homeowners, acts to
prevent the worst floods, acts to prevents the worst floods damage from
happening.
The grants are 75 percent from the Federal Government, 25 percent
from the private homeowner. The States work with local municipalities,
so there is a State component as well. Over the last 3 years, this has
benefited literally dozens, hundreds of families, in Louisiana. We are
talking about approximately $8 million.
This is a program that has worked well, but here is the challenge:
Eighteen months ago the IRS changed how these grants were considered.
The grant is now going to be considered as income. The result is we are
now forcing families in the higher tax brackets. We are talking about
families who were never told these grants would be considered taxable
income when they got this money in the first place. So now you have the
awful situations where people may be forced to sell their homes to pay
the taxes on the grants that they received to save their homes in the
first place.
I think this is a tragedy, and one that would be very simple to fix.
That is why tomorrow I am filing my very first piece of legislation to
address this problem.
This sounds like a theoretical problem. We are talking about 500
homes. But I want to give you three specific examples to show what I am
talking.
In Slidell, Louisiana, we have a family whose home was damaged again
during two hurricanes, Hurricane Isadore and Hurricane Lili. It has
been substantially damaged. The challenge the owner of this home has,
she is eligible to receive and received one of these Federal grants.
However, she has a son who is now injured and is now a paraplegic. He
is going to college on a Pell grant. If she has to pay Federal income
tax on her grant, not only will her son lose his grant, he may very
well have to drop out of college.
I will give you a second case. We have a 67-year-old widow living in
Slidell, Louisiana, in a home her husband built for her many, many
years ago. Her only income is Social Security. Her home is
substantially damaged, and she is actually in a rental property right
now. She has saved every penny and used all of her savings to
participate in the FEMA program, to come up with the matching funds,
her 25 percent. Her plans are finally completed, she is ready to go
back and construct and repair her home, but now she is afraid. She is
afraid to start, because she cannot afford to pay the taxes.
Her house has been sitting empty for 2 years in substantially damaged
condition. It continues to deteriorate. If she is not allowed to
participate in this program, she will have to sell her home to pay the
taxes on the grant. She will lose the home that her husband built for
her.
Finally, a third example. We have a family of five whose home was
declared substantially damaged, again after Hurricanes Isadore and
Lili. The primary homeowner is now disabled, and they are now also in a
rental unit. One of their children is receiving a Pell grant for
college.
If they are forced to pay Federal taxes on their grant, not only will
they lose their Pell grant, they are looking at not only the loss of
their home, but they are worried they may have to file for bankruptcy
protection.
To me, this is the worst kind of tragedy. We are adding insult to
injury. We are talking about families that have already been hurt
through a natural disaster. We as the Federal Government have tried to
help them recover and to avoid future losses.
To come in now, after the fact, to try to impose an income tax after
the fact I think does serious harm not only to their personal finances,
but to their liberties, their ability to live in their own homes, to
own their own homes. For their sake and for the sake of many families
that may find themselves in a similar situation, I hope this House will
pass this legislation.
Finally, the final threat to our freedoms at home that I would like
to talk about today, we in Louisiana are proud of the fact that we are
home to some of the world's finest seafood. I know many people in this
House and across the country watching tonight have enjoyed our shrimp,
have enjoyed crawfish. You have probably also enjoyed our oysters.
This week we are celebrating in Washington Mardi Gras. Many people
will be eating Louisiana's fine oysters this week. To this House, I
want to make sure that we free the American people, we allow the good
people of the Great State of California to enjoy the freedom of also
partaking in Louisiana's oysters. I call upon the good Governor of
California to lift the ban and allow Louisiana's oysters to be consumed
in California so they might not be deprived of this valuable commodity.
It has been my privilege, Mr. Speaker, to address this House, to talk
about the opportunities to spread democracy and freedom across the
world; the excitement of watching the Iraqi people participate in their
first free election
[[Page H188]]
in decades. A perfect election, no; an historic election, yes; and one
filled with great promise and potential for the future.
I have also talked today about the threats we face to our future
right here at home, through frivolous lawsuits, what we can do to
address that. Just today we found out that McDonald's is yet again
going to court to defend itself from the claims of a family who ate too
much McDonald's food and now wants to blame the restaurant.
We also heard from my colleague today from North Carolina, also
talking about the threat of frivolous lawsuits and the threat that we
may lose doctors in our most underserved communities.
We also talked about the threat to that most important property right
in America, the right to own one's home, posed by a recent IRS ruling.
And finally, not to trivialize it, but finally the threat being faced
by those communities who may not have access to Louisiana's fine
seafood.
____________________