May 2011

May 24, 2011 09:38 AM

U.S. Chamber "sponsors" House Judiciary hearing today

The House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution holds a hearing this afternoon entitled, "Can We Sue Our Way to Prosperity?: Litigation's Effect on America's Global Competitiveness."

True to form, the Committee has selected lobbyists and consultants from the U.S. Chamber’s Institute for Legal Reform to testify and carry the water for corporations that refuse to be held accountable when their negligence injures or kills Americans.

Scheduled to testify are John Beisner of Skadden Arps and Paul Hinton of NERA Economic Consulting.  Beisner and his law firms have been paid over $1.5 million by the Chamber over the last decade to push for corporate immunity, while also defending Merck against Vioxx claims.  Hinton has been paid tens of thousands of dollars more by the Chamber to generate junk reports pretending to estimate the costs of litigation.

May 23, 2011 03:05 PM

Widespread Opposition to H.R. 5 Grows

Sunday's Washington Examiner featured an opinion piece by Randy Barnett, constitution law professor at Georgetown Law Center and senior fellow at the Cato Institute, denouncing H.R. 5.

Barnett declares the bill unconstitutional and a federal government takeover.

“This bill alters state medical malpractice rules by, for example, placing caps on noneconomic damages. But tort law — the body of rules by which persons seek damages for injuries to their person and property — have always been regulated by states, not the federal government. Tort law is at the heart of what is called the ‘police power’ of states.  What constitutional authority did the supporters of the bill rely upon to justify interfering with state authority in this way?”

“Constitutional law professors have long cynically ridiculed a ‘fair-weather federalism’ that is abandoned whenever it is inconvenient to someone’s policy preferences,” continues Barnett.  “If House Republicans ignore their Pledge to America to assess the Constitution themselves, and invade the powers ‘reserved to the states’ as affirmed by the Tenth Amendment, they will prove my colleagues right.”

May 20, 2011 04:28 PM

Patients Blast Indiana Malpractice Law

Last night, ABC affiliate WRTV in Indianapolis chronicled the hardships faced by patients in Indiana injured by medical negligence. This story explains the problems of Indiana’s medical malpractice laws, which caps the amount injured patients can receive, and lets negligent healthcare providers off the hook. This story is all too common, and some of these hardships may become reality for all Americans if H.R. 5 becomes law.

All told, this story is yet further proof that improving patient safety by reducing medical errors should be the priority, not eliminating accountability.

May 19, 2011 11:35 AM

Op-Ed: Medical Malpractice Is Issue for the States

Today's edition of Roll Call, a widely-read DC-based newspaper, published an op-ed I authored on the extreme, anti-patient bill H.R. 5 that is currently moving through the U.S. House of Representatives.

H.R. 5 would not only undermine our health care system and patient safety, but would be a one-size-fits-all, Washington knows best solution, to an issue that has always been decided by the states.  As I write in the op-ed:

Not only will H.R. 5 make health care more dangerous for patients, but it is already raising eyebrows on both sides of the aisle as a massive federal government takeover of an issue that has strictly been in the domain of states since the founding of our nation.

Be sure to read the entire piece, and write your member of Congress and urge them to put patient safety first.

May 17, 2011 01:28 PM

Bill Introduced to Ban Forced Arbitration Clauses

Sens. Al Franken (D-MN), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) and Rep. Hank Johnson (D-GA) today introduced the Arbitration Fairness Act at a press conference in DC. This legislation will restore consumers’ rights to seek justice through the courts by eliminating forced arbitration clauses in employment, consumer, and civil rights cases.

Owly Images

Forced arbitration clauses are hidden in the fine print of various consumer contracts, which run the gamut from credit cards and cell phone contracts to nursing home care and employee contracts.  Consumers and employees are often forced to sign these clauses in order to receive services or get hired.  In the event of a dispute with the corporation, mandatory binding arbitration says that a consumer or an employee cannot take their case to court but instead to a private arbitration forum.  Often times the company picks the arbiter who will decide the outcome.  The consumer can never take legal action and forced arbitration applies even if a consumer is seriously injured by a product or service.

AAJ has been an outspoken advocate for arbitration fairness. In the last week, both the New York Times and Los Angeles Times have called on Congress to pass the Arbitration Fairness Act, in light of the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion.

May 16, 2011 11:14 AM

Corporations Loving Lawsuits

It's no secret that the "tort reform movement" is a creation of big corporations - like insurance, drug, and oil companies - who want to prevent everyday Americans from getting justice in the courtroom.  Yet many do not know that these same corporations are often the biggest lawsuit filers themselves.

That's what we call hypocrisy.

Look no further than today's Wall Street Journal report on ways corporations are using lawsuits to generate more revenue.  Here's the kicker:

The recent enthusiasm for litigation - or threats of litigation - as a revenue-raising tool comes as companies move toward trimming their overall legal spending and asking their in-house legal staffs to do more.  The trend also coincides with a big push by business lobbyists for caps on damage awards in certain types of lawsuits and steps to make it tougher for consumers to band together to sue companies.

Corporations say: one rule for us, one rule for everybody else.

May 12, 2011 09:00 AM

AAJ Advocates for Safe Roadways

Today, we have submitted comments to FMCSA (Federal Motor Carrier Safety) about their proposed guidelines for the NAFTA cross-border trucking pilot program. The program would allow Mexican-based trucks to operate in the United States. While the proposal might yield some economic benefits, we believe allowing Mexican-based trucks to self-insure, as proposed, is not in the best interest of U.S. motorists.
 
Every year, more than 4,000 people are killed and over 100,000 injured in truck crashes in the United States. Mexico does not have the same safety requirements for trucks and their operators as required in the states, and allowing them to operate in the state could potentially increase the risk of accidents on U.S. highways. At a minimum, Mexican-based trucks should have to carry independent insurance.

May 11, 2011 07:46 PM

Committee approves H.R. 5, totally ignores nation's patient safety crisis

This evening, the House Energy and Commerce Committee doubled-down on legislation that chips away at fundamental legal protections of patients while doing nothing to address the very real and serious patient safety crisis in America.
 
By a vote of 30-20, the deceptively-named Help Efficient, Accessible, Low-cost, Timely Healthcare (HEALTH) Act of 2011 (H.R. 5), was reported out of Commitee.

This legislation is an extreme, anti-patient bill that would take away legal rights of injured patients by:

  • Imposing a one-size-fits-all $250,000 cap on non-economic damages that injured patients can seek;
  • Extending this cap to health care providers that intentionally harm or kill patients, as well as insurance companies that refuse to pay just claims for medical bills;
  • Limiting the right to seek justice when injured by a defective medical device, drug, or abuse suffered in nursing homes.

Removing legal accountability will also remove incentives to improve safety and leave people at risk for more injuries from negligent care.  Read more about the bill, and AAJ's calls for improving patient safety, here.

May 11, 2011 10:10 AM

Bill Falls Short on Protecting Patients

I blogged earlier on The Huffington Post about today's House Energy and Commerce Committee markup of H.R.5. Check out why Congress should vote against this extreme, anti-patient bill:

A study released last month found that one out of every three hospital patients encounter a medical error. Previously, the Institute of Medicine found that as many as 98,000 people die every year from preventable medical errors, the equivalent of two 737s crashing every day for a whole year. Since that time there has been much talk about improving patient safety, but as recent research suggests, not only has little improvement been made, but the problem is much worse than previously thought.

May 10, 2011 02:17 PM

Law school dean slams SCOTUS decision in Concepcion

Erwin Chemerinsky, dean at UC Irvine School of Law, discusses the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in AT&T Mobility v. Concepcion and the blow this delivers to American consumers. The Court decided that the Concepcions must have their dispute resolved in arbitration, a result that likely means no justice at all for thousands of other consumers. 
 
The Concepcions signed a take-it-or-leave-it contract that contained a forced arbitration clause, but because the amount of their claim was so small, a class action lawsuit was the only way to seek recourse in this case.  After all, individuals will hardly take the time to fight a $30 claim.  But when consumers band together as a class, they have the power and resources to challenge a big corporation like AT&T.