Steve Cohen: “I continue to oppose the product liability reform bill for two main reasons: it unnecessarily intrudes upon the…”

“I continue to oppose the product liability reform bill for two main reasons: it unnecessarily intrudes upon the prerogatives of our State governments and the purported problem the bill attempts to address--the impact of punitive damages--is overstated. For over two centuries, tort law has been developed by our common law courts and State legislatures. The same is true for our contract law, real property law, insurance law, and a host of other subjects. The core principles of tort law are the same across the country, but each State has adjusted its laws to suit its individual needs, experimented with liability reforms, and attempted to strike a careful balance the interests of business and consumers. The Federal product liability bill would put an end to this era of local experimentation and adjustment. Instead, it would contribute to the trend of the last half century of centralizing power in Washington. Unfortunately, the product liability bill will be only the first step in this process. Once it is completed other interests will follow with pleas for Federal intervention. And eventually the States will be stripped of yet another area of authority. This trend runs entirely counter to the generally accepted principle that the Federal Government is too big and that more authority should be returned to the States and localities. Ironically, we are taking this step at a time when the States are vigorously engaged in the topic of tort reform.”