Byron Dorgan: “I want to explain why I offered this amendment. As I do so, let me say is that I have supported the notion of product…”

“I want to explain why I offered this amendment. As I do so, let me say is that I have supported the notion of product liability reform. I voted for this bill coming out of the committee, although I had a problem with this section. I likely will vote for this bill going out of the Senate with respect to product liability reform. But the standard is that you must prove that a company, that there is clear and convincing evidence that the harm was carried out with a conscious, flagrant indifference of the safety of others. If you have proven that standard of a company that they moved forward with a conscious, flagrant indifference of the safety of others, why on Earth would you want to put a cap on punitive damages? The whole notion of punitive damages is to punish a company that would do that. We have very few punitive damages awarded in this country. It is not a crisis. Yes, I think we should have some product liability reform, and I support that. But the bill last year that was brought to the floor of the Senate reforming the product liability laws had no cap on punitive damages; none at all. Now this year they bring a bill to the floor with this cap. This cap should be stricken. I hope that Members of the Senate will support my amendment.”