[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 31, Number 51 (Monday, December 25, 1995)]
[Pages 2210-2211]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]
<R04>
Message to the House of Representatives Returning Without Approval the
Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995
December 19, 1995
To the House of Representatives:
I am returning herewith without my approval H.R. 1058, the ``Private
Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.'' This legislation is designed
to reform portions of the Federal securities laws to end frivolous
lawsuits and to ensure that investors receive the best possible
information by reducing the litigation risk to companies that make
forward-looking statements.
I support those goals. Indeed, I made clear my willingness to
support the bill passed by the Senate with appropriate ``safe harbor''
language, even though it did not include certain provisions that I
favor--such as enhanced provisions with respect to joint and several
liability, aider and abettor liability, and statute of limitations.
I am not, however, willing to sign legislation that will have the
effect of closing the courthouse door on investors who have legitimate
claims. Those who are the victims of fraud should have recourse in our
courts. Unfortunately, changes made in this bill during conference could
well prevent that.
This country is blessed by strong and vibrant markets and I believe
that they function best when corporations can raise capital by providing
investors with their best good-faith assessment of future prospects,
without fear of costly, unwarranted litigation. But I also know that our
markets are as strong and effective as they are because they operate--
and are seen to operate--with integrity. I believe that this bill, as
modified in conference, could erode this crucial basis of our markets'
strength.
Specifically, I object to the following elements of this bill.
First, I believe that the pleading requirements of the Conference Report
with regard to a defendant's state of mind impose an unacceptable
procedural hurdle to meritorious claims being heard in Federal courts. I
am prepared to support the high pleading standard of the U.S. Court of
Appeals for the Second Circuit--the highest pleading standard of any
Federal circuit court. But the conferees make crystal clear in the
Statement of Managers their intent to raise the standard even beyond
that level. I am not prepared to accept that.
The conferees deleted an amendment offered by Senator Specter and
adopted by the Senate that specifically incorporated Second Circuit case
law with respect to pleading a claim of fraud. Then they specifically
indicated that they were not adopting Second Circuit case law but
instead intended to ``strengthen'' the existing pleading requirements of
the Second Circuit. All this shows that the conferees meant to erect a
higher barrier to bringing suit than any now existing--one so high that
even the most aggrieved investors with the most painful losses may get
tossed out of court before they have a chance to prove their case.
Second, while I support the language of the Conference Report
providing a ``safe harbor'' for companies that include meaningful
cautionary statements in their projections of earnings, the Statement of
Managers--which will be used by courts as a guide to the intent of the
Congress with regard to the meaning of the bill--attempts to weaken the
cautionary language that the bill itself requires. Once again, the end
result may be that investors find their legitimate claims unfairly
dismissed.
Third, the Conference Report's Rule 11 provision lacks balance,
treating plaintiffs more harshly than defendants in a manner that comes
too close to the ``loser pays'' standard I oppose.
I want to sign a good bill and I am prepared to do exactly that if
the Congress will
[[Page 2211]]
make the following changes to this legislation: first, adopt the Second
Circuit pleading standards and reinsert the Specter amendment into the
bill. I will support a bill that submits all plaintiffs to the tough
pleading standards of the Second Circuit, but I am not prepared to go
beyond that. Second, remove the language in the Statement of Managers
that waters down the nature of the cautionary language that must be
included to make the safe harbor safe. Third, restore the Rule 11
language to that of the Senate bill.
While it is true that innocent companies are hurt by frivolous
lawsuits and that valuable information may be withheld from investors
when companies fear the risk of such suits, it is also true that there
are innocent investors who are defrauded and who are able to recover
their losses only because they can go to court. It is appropriate to
change the law to ensure that companies can make reasonable statements
and future projections without getting sued every time earnings turn out
to be lower than expected or stock prices drop. But it is not
appropriate to erect procedural barriers that will keep wrongly injured
persons from having their day in court.
I ask the Congress to send me a bill promptly that will put an end
to litigation abuses while still protecting the legitimate rights of
ordinary investors. I will sign such a bill as soon as it reaches my
desk.
William J. Clinton
The White House,
December 19, 1995.
Note: This message was released by the Office of the Press Secretary on
December 20.