Orrin Hatch

The Hatch-Feinstein-Breaux bill contains many provisions that mirror those contained in the proposed settlement of June 20 of last year. We are trying to accomplish the art of the impossible. We want to enact this astounding settlement…

My point is, that is why contingent fees are so important. A lot of the people who came to me could in no way have spent a day in court without a contingency fee lawyer who was willing to take the risk of bringing their case before a jury…

When I tried cases for plaintiffs on contingency fees, I won most all of them. It was not a matter of not getting paid, because I was always able to win a bigger verdict than I could have gotten through settlement or they could have gotten…

I have been there, and I have to say, when we start setting salaries for attorneys, or any other group of people, that is going to be the end of the free market system, as far as I am concerned.

Don't you think they deserve better than average compensation for that significant accomplishment?

The head of Compaq, or the head of Hewlett-Packard or Larry Ellison, the head of Oracle, or any of them for that matter are all very wealthy people who some people think lucked their way into this wealth. I happen to believe they worked…

Nobody has been able to accomplish what these attorneys have achieved. They brought the whole tobacco industry to their heels and tried to get the U.S. Congress--at least the Senate, so far--to try to do something about the deplorable…

Not to dwell on that industry--Steve Jobs; he deserves every penny he made. He helped make the computer industry what it is today. Isn't that correct?

I admire people who are innovative and creative. Take Bill Gates, for example. I admire him. I think what he has done at Microsoft is nothing short of phenomenal. But should we begrudge the fact that he has earned his spot in our society…

Let me ask one other question. I admire some of the top corporate leaders in the world as well as the top sports figures in the world.

Well, let me ask the distinguished Senator this: It seems to me we must also examine the precedent we are setting here in having the U.S. Congress single out any one profession by capping their earnings.

As I understand it, the bill that the distinguished Senator has worked on, the one that is on the floor before us today--as much as I dislike the bill, as much as I think it will not solve the problem, as much as I think it will not bring…

I remember when Jackie Pressler was the chairman of the Teamsters. He came before our committee and somebody brought out that he made over half a million dollars a year and was kind of needling him that it was too much money for a labor…

If Michael Jordan wants to make $60 or $80 million a year, or Tiger Woods, who is earning millions of dollars a year, should Congress be setting their salary?

I had to agree with him. I thought he was worth every penny he made, whether you agree or disagree. What about entertainers? Do we set an amount of money they can make?

It is very unlikely that anybody is going to get away with some big windfall under the provisions that apply in this bill and, I might add, in the substitute that we have worked on as well.

In the Florida settlement, the court threw out the contingency fee arrangement, which it found to be clearly excessive under the circumstances. This shows that the State courts are best equipped to address this issue by utilizing the…

The States have already shown a willingness to step in and prevent unreasonable and excessive fees in the tobacco settlements.

Under any view of federalism, there is no justification for Congress, whatsoever, entering an area of pure State jurisdiction, altering the rights and the liabilities or remedies of private parties, and then dispensing with all due process…

In addition, the regulation of attorneys' fees properly, at least as I view it, belong in the domain of the States, and such usurpation of State prerogatives may very well violate the Tenth Amendment in the eyes of many constitutional…

Recent court opinions, if my colleague would permit me to ask another question, such as New York v. United States or Printz v. United States has made the Tenth Amendment a shield against Federal impositions on the sovereign authority of…

By capping a fee, such an interference is a taking under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. The Supreme Court cases clearly show that the Federal Government cannot confiscate money or interfere with a lawful contract. Is the Senator…

If Congress, as it would be doing here, at least as I understand the intent of this amendment, were to interfere retroactively with private contracts, it would be unconstitutional for a variety of reasons; isn't that right?

Isn't it also true a contract between a plaintiff and his attorney is a legally enforceable contract, which Congress should not impair?

As you have been an attorney who has tried cases on both sides of the issue, you understand very well that without the attorneys in the Castano group, we would not be where we are today with the original settlement.