Rep. Conyers on Class Action

[paineinthearse]

Rep Conyers spoke eloquently last night on this same topic. I will apend his House speech later.

This transcript is printed in full, as its souce is Rep. Conyers new political website -
http://www.johnconyers.com/index.asp?Type=NONE&SEC={456ECCD5-4EAC-4C6D-8A17-89728B250AE2}

Op-Ed from Congressman Conyers Regarding Class Action
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Metrotimes.com - Visiting View - 3/9/05

A classless action

By Rep. John Conyers, Jr.

To listen to the bill’s supporters, the class action bill that recently was passed and signed into law is a mere procedural fix designed to prevent national class actions from being heard in state courts. The truth is the Republican bill will notonly federalize nearly all state class actions, it is loaded with special interest goodies that will help corporate wrongdoers and stop civil rights, labor and dangerous-drug cases dead in their tracks. That is why it was opposed by bothstate and federal judiciaries, consumer and public interest groups, environmentaland health organizations, and civil rights and labor groups.

This Republican Party assault on victims and consumers is unprecedented in its scope and stunning in its breadth. Collectively, these measures will close the courthouse doors on millions of Americans harmed by intentional wrongdoing, negligence and fraud, and fighting to keep their families out of financial hot water. Long after the 109th Congress is forgotten, American consumers and workers will be paying the price for these special interest bills through needless injuries and uncompensated harm. First and foremost, the class action legislation will remove class actions involving state law issues from state courts -the forum most convenient for victims of wrongdoing and with the judges most familiar with the substantive law - to the federal courts, where the case will take much longer to be resolved and is muchless likely to be accepted.

You don’t have to take my word for it, just ask big business. The nation’slargest bank, Citicorp, admits “the practical effect may be that many cases will never be heard. Federal judges, facing overburdened dockets and ambiguities about applying state laws in a federal court, often refuse to grant standing to class action plaintiffs.” Forbes magazinewrites, “the legislation will . . . make it more difficult for plaintiffs to prevail, since . . . federal courts are . . . less open to considering . . . class action claims.”

Passage of this legislation is likely to be particularly devastating for civil rights and labor cases. As the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights under the Law explained prior to its passage, “the consequences of the for class actions . . . would be astounding and, in our view, disastrous. Redirecting state law class actions to the federal courts will choke federal court dockets and delay or foreclose the timely and effective determination of federal cases.”

The legislation is equally harmful to workers with wage and hour claims. Often, dozens of employees bring one lawsuit together in state courts, where state wage and hour laws typically provide more complete remedies for victims of such violations than the federal statute. For example, the federal Fair Labor Standards Act offers no protection for a worker who worked 30 hours and is paid for 20, but many states have laws requiring the worker to get paid for the full extent of his orher work. Under the class action bill, these cases will be moved to federal Court where they face likely death and certain delay.

Since the November election, we have heard a lot of talk about “values.” But, someone tell me, where is the value in cutting off access to the courts for senior citizens who suffered heart attacks because they took Vioxx for their arthritis? Where is the morality in preventing poor workers from joining together to obtain compensation when unscrupulous employers pay them slave wages? Where isthe righteousness in telling victims of discrimination that they will have to wait years for a federal court to consider violations of their own state laws?

Our citizens need more protections against such wrongdoers, not less. Unfortunately, the Republican assault on our civil justice system takes us inprecisely the wrong direction.

[paineinthearse]

1. House of Representatives - March 20, 2005

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?r109:28:./temp/~r1096glnu5:e183901:

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers), ranking member of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Massachusetts for his leadership tonight.

Mr. Speaker, if we pass this bill, we will be intruding in the most sensitive possible family decision at the most ill-opportune time. It will be hard to envision a case or circumstance that Congress will not be willing to involve itself from now on if this precedent is approved this evening. By passing legislation which takes sides in an ongoing legal dispute, we will be casting aside the principle of the separation of powers. We will be abandoning our role as a serious legislative branch, and we will be taking on the role, as we have done during this debate, of judge, of doctor, of priest, of parent, or spouse.

By passing legislation which wrests jurisdiction away from a State judge and sends it to a single preselected Federal court, we will forego any pretense of federalism. The concept of a Jeffersonian democracy as envisioned by the Founders and the States as ``laboratories of democracy,'' as articulated by Justice Brandeis, will lie in tatters.

By passing this legislation in a complete absence of hearings, committee markups, no amendments, in complete violation of what we once called ``regular order,'' we will send a signal that the usual rules of conduct and procedure no longer apply when they are inconvenient to the majority party.

My friends on the other side of the aisle will declare that this legislation is about principle and morals and values. But if this legislation was only about principle, why would the majority party be distributing talking points in the other body declaring that ``this is a great political issue'' and that by passing this bill ``the pro-life base will be excited''?

If the President of the United States really cared about the issue of the removal of feeding tubes, then why did he sign a bill as Governor in Texas that allows hospitals to save money by removing feeding tubes over a family's objection?



If we really cared about saving lives, why would the Congress sit idly by while more than 40 million Americans have no health insurance, or while the President tries to cut billions of dollars from Medicaid, a virtual lifeline for health care for millions of our citizens?

When all is said and done, this bill is about taking sides in a legal dispute, which we should not be doing. Last year, the majority passed two bills stripping the Federal courts of their power to review cases involving the Defense of Marriage Act and the Pledge of Allegiance because they feared they would read the Constitution too broadly. Last month, the majority passed a class action bill that took jurisdiction away from State courts because they feared they would treat corporate wrongdoers too harshly. Today, we are sending a case from State courts to the Federal courts, even though it is already the most extensively litigated right-to-die case in the history of the United States.

There is only one principle at stake here: manipulating the court system to achieve predetermined, substantive outcomes. By passing this bill, it should be obvious to many that we are no longer a Nation of laws, but have been reduced to a Nation of men. By passing this law, we will be telling our friends abroad that even though we expect them to live by the rule of law, Congress can ignore it when it does not suit our needs. By passing this law, we diminish our Nation as a democracy and ourselves as legislators.

Do not let this bill pass.

[Rose Siding]

2. Federalizing all state court jurisdiction is epidemic

Class action, SCHIAVO. It's all a power grab. Federal judges are political appointees.