William Tauzin: “What can we conclude about this Presidential veto? This is the second time the President has vetoed a tort reform bill…”

“What can we conclude about this Presidential veto? This is the second time the President has vetoed a tort reform bill passed by this House and Senate, passed by large numbers of both Republicans and Democrats. In fact, the last time he vetoed a tort reform bill we did, in fact, override his veto. What can we conclude about this veto? First of all, we can conclude the President must think this bill is extreme. The gentleman in the well who just spoke obviously agrees with him. But the Democratic Senator Rockefeller who supports the bill on the Senate side said special interests and raw political considerations of the White House have overridden sound policy judgment. Democratic Senator Lieberman who worked closely with the President throughout this process said, President Clinton is dead wrong about this bill. It must be reasonable. Let us look at the bill. It says that it is going to hold manufacturers primarily responsible instead of sellers. It says that it is going to reduce manufacturers' liability to the extent that a claimant has altered or misused a product. And it says that there is an absolute defense to drug and alcohol abuse. That certainly sounds reasonable to me. What can we conclude? The President is against all tort reform. We ought to override his veto.”