I want to ask him one question about the very helpful punitive damages agreement he negotiated with us last night. My understanding is, this agreement tracks very closely with what the Clinton administration has agreed to in the past with respect to product liability. In fact, our agreement seems to be more generous to plaintiffs than what the administration has agreed to in the past. In the past, they seemed to have said we ought to look at something that would have two times compensatory damages. This legislation has three times the damages, to make sure there is a fair shake for the consumer. Is that the understanding of the Senator from Connecticut? I ask because he has been involved in this issue involving punitive damage questions for quite some time. I think he has been very fair to plaintiffs in this area. It seems to me, actually, the Senator has gone beyond what has been talked about in various other discussions that we had.
Ron Wyden: “I want to ask him one question about the very helpful punitive damages agreement he negotiated with us last night. My…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing a punitive damages agreement related to product liability legislation.
Share
More from Ron Wyden
Common sense prevailed today and that’s great news for Oregonians who shouldn’t have to worry about getting slammed with a huge tax hit on top of losing their home to wildfire.
Oregon’s Coast Guard works tirelessly every day to keep our coastal communities and fishermen safe, and they deserve the same tools as the rest of our military branches to operate efficiently.
Safe drinking water is not a partisan issue. Families across the country expect that when they turn on the tap, their water is safe to drink.
And when Democrats retake the majority in the Senate, RFK will be at the top of the list of Trump officials the finance committee will hold accountable for endangering American families.





