[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 18]
[Senate]
[Pages 25498-25499]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                       CLASS ACTION FAIRNESS ACT

  Mr. CORZINE. Lastly, Mr. President, I want to say something about the 
bill that we are going to be debating in the next hour or so, class 
action fairness.
  I am not a lawyer, so I am not as sharp on all of the terminology and 
all the other issues, but it is very clear to me that we are taking the 
small ``d'' democratic processes out of access to our courts with the 
legislation that is underlying the motion to proceed.
  I think it is absolutely essential that we maintain the checks and 
balances in our present Federal constitutional system. That does not 
mean there are not abuses, and it does not mean we should not move to 
correct some of the things with regard to venue shopping, with regard 
to coupon procedures, which, by the way, are not even dealt with in 
this bill.
  I think this is a radical move. I am very much in favor of Senator 
Breaux's proposal, a modified approach, that will deal with some of the 
flaws. His bill would preserve state class actions while sending truly 
national class actions to Federal court. At the same time, it addresses 
the problem of abusive coupon settlements, which is something that the 
bill before us does not touch.
  But instead, at a time when we are fighting a war in Iraq, when we 
are fighting a war on terrorism worldwide,

[[Page 25499]]

and we are facing historic budget deficits and job losses, we are 
debating a radical bill that would legislate away the legal rights of 
American families. This legislation would dramatically alter the 
constitutional distribution of judicial power. It would: remove most 
State law class actions into Federal court; clog the Federal courts 
with State law cases and make it more difficult to have Federal civil 
rights cases heard; deter people from bringing class actions; and 
impose barriers and burdenson settlement of class actions.
  I am not a lawyer, but I can appreciate that class actions are 
critical tools for ordinary citizens who want to hold wrongdoers 
accountable. For many people who can't afford lawyers, class actions 
are the only way to vindicate their rights. For consumers victimized by 
negligence, fraud and reckless misconduct, it is their opportunity to 
exercise their democratic rights.
  Simply put, class actions promote efficiency and level the playing 
field, giving persons who are injured in the same manner by the same 
defendants the ability to hold the wrongdoers accountable. This sort of 
collective action gives ordinary citizens the ability to level the 
playing field with powerful defendants. For example, by allowing groups 
of citizens to band together and demand a safe and healthy environment, 
class actions often result in courts requiring companies to stop 
poisoning our neighborhoods and our water. Without the class action 
tool, it would often be impossible for ordinary citizens to take on 
powerful defendants when they damage the environment and cause illness.
  Class actions are also essential to the enforcement of our Nation's 
civil rights law. They are, in fact, often the only means by which 
individuals can challenge and obtain relief from systemic 
discrimination. Class actions have on important occasions served as a 
primary vehicle for civil rights litigation seeking broad equitable 
relief.
  In far too many cases, justice delayed is justice denied. No one 
recognizes this better than the manufacturers and the polluters, who 
would prefer these cases to be in the Federal court system, where there 
is a tremendous judicial backlog.
  Overloading these courts will inevitably delay the resolution of all 
cases in Federal courts. Indeed, the Judicial Conference of the United 
States, headed by Chief Justice Rehnquist--not someone with whom I 
often agree, I might add--has told Congress that the Federal courts are 
not equipped to handle all these cases. That is why he opposes this 
bill.
  The delays caused by clogged courts would be particularly damaging in 
cases where civil rights plaintiffs are seeking immediate injunctive 
relief to prohibit discriminatory practices--such as racial profiling 
or predatory lending.
  In addition to the above concerns, I was very distressed to learn 
that the manager's amendment slips mass torts back into this bill, 
greatly expanding the scope of the bill. This change makes the bill 
even more extreme, and, by federalizing individual tort suits, will 
flood the Federal courts with cases involving questions of State tort 
law.
  By sending a majority of mass tort actions--cases involving products 
liability and environmental damages--to Federal courts, the bill would 
completely jam the already overburdened Federal courts and delay 
justice to hundreds, perhaps thousands, of people injured by defective 
drugs and medical devices, like the Dalkon Shield, and environmental 
contamination.
  Class actions are an important tool for ordinary citizens to level 
the playing field and vindicate their rights. They promote safety, 
protect our health and environment, and are essential to enforcement of 
our civil rights laws.
  The legislation before us would impose new and substantial 
limitations on access to the courts for victims of discrimination, mass 
torts, consumer fraud, and other misconduct. This is not a balanced, 
fair approach. I urge my colleagues to reject it.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. CORZINE. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New Mexico.

                          ____________________