Copyright 1999 The Christian Science Publishing Society
The Christian Science Monitor
October 14, 1999, Thursday
SECTION: OPINION; READER'S WRITE; Pg. 10
LENGTH: 672 words
HEADLINE:
Letters
BYLINE: Ann Spragens, George Rawitscher and
Lamar Smith
BODY:
Time to
reform class-action lawsuits? Regarding "State Farm verdict
makes case for class-action reform" (Oct. 5): The ruling
against State Farm and its policyholders by a Marion, Ill., jury is a threat to
commerce and consumers on many levels. However, the verdict most importantly
should sound a strong call for reform of the way the US
judicial system handles class-action litigation.
Because of a class-action system that is severely out of
whack, a small group of individuals in south central Illinois were forced into
making a decision that will affect millions of auto-insurance consumers across
the country through higher insurance premiums. The verdict also hands already
rich and powerful automakers a monopoly on the aftermarket parts business.
The case against State Farm is just the latest illustration of
the need for sweeping reform of the nation's class-action mechanism.
The Alliance of American Insurers, a national trade association representing
312 insurers, is currently drafting legislative initiatives, procedural changes,
and other tools designed to reduce incentives to bring suits that do little but
enrich lawyers and increase insurance costs.
The initiatives
would move lawsuits from state to federal courts, derail baseless class actions
while strengthening state regulation, and create a presumption of validity for
insurers in much the same way government standards are invoked in product
liability cases.
Other proposals are aimed at controlling
discovery costs, promoting alternative dispute resolution, and enabling appeals
of class certification long before a case goes to trial. All of these
initiatives are procedural in nature, protecting consumers rights, not lawyers'
pocketbooks.
The immediate detrimental effect of the State Farm
ruling on consumers is bad enough. Let's not compound the problem by passing up
a chance to reform the class-action system that made it possible. Ann Spragens,
Downers Grove, Ill. Senior vice president and general counsel Alliance of
American Insurers
Ratify the test-ban treaty Regarding "New era
of doubt over arms deals" (Oct. 7): One view says, "We need to arm so as to be
in a position of strength since nothing else will work" (hence, thumbs down on
the treaty), while the other says, "Don't fan the flames of the arms race again.
Especially the deadliest of all, nuclear" (hence the treaty is the only
civilized way to proceed).
I am with the latter view, since I
believe (being a physicist) that our system of explosion monitoring by seismic
and satellite methods is already good and can be made better, reducing the
loopholes to smaller and smaller dimensions. I also believe that the path to
building a fabric of trust among nations is possible and necessary in this ever
more interconnected world. George Rawitscher, Storrs, Conn.
Overhauling immigration Thank you for your attention to an important subject
in your editorial "Reforming US gatekeepers" (Oct. 1). There is growing
consensus in the House of Representatives for action to improve immigration
services and enforcement. I hope to bring the Immigration Reorganization and
Improvement Act of 1999 before the House Immigration Subcommittee soon.
The editorial reflected an ongoing commitment by the Monitor to
keep its readers informed about immigration, perhaps the only government policy
that affects all Americans. Lamar Smith, Washington Chairman, House Subcommittee
on Immigration and Claims
The Monitor welcomes your letters and
opinion articles. Due to the volume of submissions, we can neither acknowledge
nor return unpublished submissions. All submissions are subject to editing.
Letters must be signed and include your mailing address and telephone number.
Mail letters to 'Readers Write,' and opinion articles to Opinion
Page, One Norway St., Boston, MA 02115, or fax to 617-450-2317, or e-mail to
oped@csps.com
(c) Copyright 1999. The Christian Science Publishing
Society
LOAD-DATE: October 13, 1999