[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 18]
[Senate]
[Pages 25511-25512]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      VOTE ON CLASS ACTION REFORM

  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I want to express my disappointment about 
the outcome of the last vote. I voted not to invoke cloture. I did so 
with great reluctance. A number of Members called me over the last 
several days about the class action reform bill that was before us. I 
appreciate very much the comments of both the majority leader and the 
minority leader, my good friend from Delaware, Tom Carper, Herb Kohl, 
and others who have worked very hard on this legislation. I have great 
respect for what they have tried to do.
  I hope the majority leader will take up the offer of the Democratic 
leader and so we come together and work out what the provisions of this 
bill ought to be, at least the main provisions of it, and move forward. 
I am deeply committed to class action reform, but I do not want to move 
forward under a process where I am being told merely that I have a 
right to bring up amendments. I have that right anyway.
  It seems to me if we are going to try to put a bill like this 
together, it takes meaningful cooperation, it takes sitting down. It is 
hard work. We have done it in the past. As the author of the securities 
litigation reform bill, the uniform standards legislation, terrorism 
insurance, the Y2K bill--all matters that brought together the trial 
bar and the business community trying to sort it out--I know that this 
can be done. It took a lot of work and a lot of hours to do it in the 
past. I strongly recommend on class action reform, that we make the 
same sort of effort.
  It is not that difficult to get a good bill, but it does take work. 
Again, it takes meaningful cooperation. We need to have that if we are 
going to succeed.
  I am terribly disappointed, but I must say to those who argued for 
cloture that there is a way of achieving the right results and the 
process we just went through this is not the way to go, in my view.
  I can say, without invoking the names of my colleagues, there are a 
number of us who voted no on cloture who believe as strongly as I do 
about the need for reform and who would like to see a bill passed. So 
the majority leader and his staff, the staff of the Judiciary Committee 
and other interested parties--and there are not that many--if they can 
put something together, we can move forward. We could have another 
cloture vote, if we need to have one, although I doubt we will need 
one, with a more cooperative process there would be no need for one. I 
believe we can and should go forward.
  The challenge is whether or not they want to do that. If they just 
want to have a 59-to-39 vote and move on to another issue, then that 
may indicate to some of us what the real intentions were here. If they 
are interested in getting this bill done, then there is a way to do it.
  There are those of us who are willing to roll up our sleeves and get 
it done. In fact, many of the same people have been involved for months 
now in the asbestos legislation. I have an uneasy feeling we are 
heading in the same direction with that bill. It takes hard work. 
Members from both sides have to sit down, bring people together, and 
put in the hours it takes to finish the job.
  If we allow this to sort of wander along without dealing with the 
intricacies and the complicated questions involved, then one can almost 
predict with certainty what is going to happen at the end of the day. 
So the offer is there. I make it to my friends and colleagues on this 
side of the aisle and the other. I am prepared to be a part of those 
efforts, if they find it fruitful and worthwhile, or to sit on the 
sidelines and watch it happen and be supportive of whatever they are 
able to produce.
  Let's move forward and get this done. The American people deserve 
better. We are not working together as often as we should on critical 
questions. If we do not do it, then we do a great disservice to the 
American public.
  So I hope the leaders would take up the offers that have been made, 
sit down and see if we cannot pull this bill together. For those who 
are interested, we ought to be prepared to start that process today--
this afternoon--if people are so willing.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I ask for 2 minutes of personal 
privilege to add a few remarks to the Record. I, too, remain firmly 
committed to class action reform and have stated so publicly many times 
and will continue to state publicly that intention.
  There are two or three reasons I could not vote to move to debate on 
this bill because there were not clear indications given that certain 
language in this underlying bill would be removed.
  I understand the legislative process. I am clear about the 
legislative process, but I am also clear about the way that 
arrangements can be made in this Chamber, arrangements with this White 
House and the House so that we can come out with a bill that is fair to 
the American public, that helps us to increase jobs, to remove the 
forum shopping, and to eliminate the abuses that are in this system, 
without undermining people's rights to get their day in court.
  So as one of the votes that obviously could have made a difference in 
the outcome today, I most certainly remain open. The language, however, 
regarding mass torts must be removed. The coupon settlement language 
must be addressed. The jurisdictional question somewhere between the 
Feinstein and Breaux language would be acceptable, and the bounty 
provisions, which are very important to civil rights legislation, must 
be addressed.
  These are four issues that I am going to be discussing, and if the 
side that is for reform is really interested in real reform and not 
just a political issue, these discussions can be had with this Senator.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas.
  Mr. BROWNBACK. Mr. President, I will speak briefly about this issue 
as well. I think as we bring this up, it is important, if we can, to 
move this forward and get it resolved. One of the things we need to be 
constantly focusing on is what can we do to grow jobs and create jobs.
  We have been pressing forward. The Federal Reserve has been pressing 
forward, keeping interest rates low. We have been pressing forward in 
cutting taxes to try to stimulate. The early medicine seems to be 
working. We are starting to get some economic growth. We are starting 
to get some job creation taking place.
  Another clear area of importance and need is this area of litigation 
reform. This is sapping a great deal of strength out of the economy and 
sapping strength from job creation. This is one of the areas we need to 
reform. I think there are ways that we can do this and still protect 
the rights of the individual, rights of those who are harmed in the 
system, but we are going to have to start to address this problem if we 
are going to be serious about job creation in the country and serious 
about what all we can do as a legislative body in creating an 
atmosphere and situation in the United States that can be

[[Page 25512]]

the most growth oriented, and in a way that still protects all the 
rights of individuals in this country.
  Those are the efforts that are taking place. That is what we are 
trying to do with this.

                          ____________________