[Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents Volume 32, Number 12 (Monday, March 25, 1996)]
[Page 514]
[Online from the Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

<R04>
Letter to Congressional Leaders on Product Liability Legislation

March 16, 1996

Dear Mr. Leader:

    I will veto H.R. 956, the Common Sense Product Liability Legal 
Reform Act of 1996, if it is presented to me in its current form.
    This bill represents an unwarranted intrusion on state authority, in 
the interest of protecting manufacturers and sellers of defective 
products. Tort law is traditionally the prerogative of the states, 
rather than of Congress. In this bill, Congress has intruded on state 
power--and done so in a way that peculiarly disadvantages consumers. As 
a rule, this bill displaces state law only when that law is more 
beneficial to consumers; it allows state law to remain in effect when 
that law is more favorable to manufacturers and sellers. In the absence 
of compelling reasons to do so, I cannot accept such a one-way street of 
federalism, in which Congress defers to state law when doing so helps 
manufacturers and sellers, but not when doing so aids consumers.
    I also have particular objections to certain provisions of the bill, 
which would encourage wrongful conduct and prevent injured persons from 
recovering the full measure of their damages. Specifically, the bill's 
elimination of joint-and-several liability for noneconomic damages, such 
as pain and suffering, will mean that victims of terrible harm sometimes 
will not be fully compensated for it. Where under current law a joint 
wrongdoer will make the victim whole, under this bill an innocent victim 
would suffer when one wrongdoer goes bankrupt and cannot pay his portion 
of the judgment. It is important to note that companies sued for 
manufacturing and selling defective products stand a much higher than 
usual chance of going bankrupt; consider, for example, manufacturers of 
asbestos or breast implants or intra-uterine devices.
    In addition, for those irresponsible companies willing to put 
profits above all else, the bill's capping of punitive damages increases 
the incentive to engage in the egregious misconduct of knowingly 
manufacturing and selling defective products. The provision of the bill 
allowing judges to exceed the cap in certain circumstances does not cure 
this problem, given Congress's clear intent, expressed in the Statement 
of Managers, that judges should do so only in the rarest of 
circumstances.
    The attached Statement of Administration Policy more fully explains 
my position on this issue--an issue of great importance to American 
consumers, and to evenly applied principles of federalism.
    Sincerely,
                                                  Bill Clinton

Note: Identical letters were sent to Bob Dole, Senate majority leader, 
Thomas Daschle, Senate minority leader, Newt Gingrich, Speaker of the 
House of Representatives, and Richard Gephardt, House minority leader. A 
statement of administration policy on H.R. 956 was attached to the 
letter. The letter was made available by the Office of the Press 
Secretary but was not issued as a White House press release.