Melvin Watt: “Mr. Chairman, let me put this in perspective for my colleagues, because this started out to be a part of a…”

“Mr. Chairman, let me put this in perspective for my colleagues, because this started out to be a part of a three-amendment package. Unfortunately, two of the three amendments the Committee on Rules did not see fit to make in order. So I want to talk a minute about the other two amendments and put this in context. No. 1, this bill clearly preempts State law insofar as substantive law is concerned on products liability and in the area of punitive damages. But the bill actually goes beyond that to preempt State law, procedural law, by not only telling the States what standard of proof will be required, but also what the burden of proof will be in their courts. The bill then, after it has preempted both procedural and substantive State law, says you cannot have access to the Federal courts under any circumstances to do any of this, so in effect it mandates the State courts not only the substance of what they shall apply as law, but the procedure by which they must apply the substantive law.”