May 1, 1995 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE S5913

ADDITIONAL COSPONSORS

S. 3

At the request of Mr. DOLE, the name

of the Senator from Virginia [Mr. WARNER] was added as a cosponsor of S. 3,

a bill to control crime, and for other

purposes.

S. 12

At the request of Mr. BREAUX, the

name of the Senator from Virginia [Mr.

ROBB] was added as a cosponsor of S.

12, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to encourage savings

and investment through individual retirement accounts, and for other purposes.

S. 38

At the request of Mr. HATCH, the

name of the Senator from Virginia [Mr.

WARNER] was added as a cosponsor of S.

38, a bill to amend the Violent Crime

Control and Law Enforcement Act of

1994, and for other purposes.

S. 105

At the request of Mr. DASCHLE, the

name of the Senator from South Dakota [Mr. PRESSLER] was added as a cosponsor of S. 105, a bill to amend the

Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that certain cash rentals of farmland will not cause recapture of special

estate tax valuation.

S. 234

At the request of Mr. CAMPBELL, the

name of the Senator from Alaska [Mr.

STEVENS] was added as a cosponsor of

S. 234, a bill to amend title 23, United

States Code, to exempt a State from

certain penalties for failing to meet requirements relating to motorcycle helmet laws if the State has in effect a

motorcycle safety program, and to

delay the effective date of certain penalties for States that fail to meet certain requirements for motorcycle safety laws, and for other purposes.

S. 304

At the request of Mr. SANTORUM, the

name of the Senator from Mississippi

[Mr. COCHRAN] was added as a cosponsor of S. 304, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the

transportation fuels tax applicable to

commercial aviation.

S. 351

At the request of Mr. HATCH, the

name of the Senator from Washington

[Mr. GORTON] was added as a cosponsor

of S. 351, a bill to amend the Internal

Revenue Code of 1986 to make permanent the credit for increasing research

activities.

S. 354

At the request of Mr. BREAUX, the

name of the Senator from Ohio [Mr.

GLENN] was added as a cosponsor of S.

354, a bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide tax incentives to encourage the preservation of

low-income housing.

At the request of Mr. BREAUX, the

name of the Senator from Mississippi

[Mr. COCHRAN] was withdrawn as a cosponsor of S. 354, supra.

S. 358

At the request of Mr. HEFLIN, the

name of the Senator from Alaska [Mr.

STEVENS] was added as a cosponsor of

S. 358, a bill to amend the Internal

Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for an

excise tax exemption for certain emergency medical transportation by air

ambulance.

S. 463

At the request of Mr. BREAUX, the

name of the Senator from Louisiana

[Mr. JOHNSTON] was added as a cosponsor of S. 463, a bill to amend title 28,

United States Code, with respect to the

treatment of certain transportation

and subsistence expenses of retired

judges.

S. 476

At the request of Mr. NICKLES, the

name of the Senator from Indiana [Mr.

LUGAR] was added as a cosponsor of S.

476, a bill to amend title 23, United

States Code, to eliminate the national

maximum speed limit, and for other

purposes.

S. 524

At the request of Mr. WELLSTONE, the

name of the Senator from Illinois [Ms.

MOSELEY-BRAUN] was added as a cosponsor of S. 524, a bill to prohibit insurers from denying health insurance

coverage, benefits, or varying premiums based on the status of an individual as a victim of domestic violence

and for other purposes.

S. 548

At the request of Mr. ROCKEFELLER,

the name of the Senator from Delaware

[Mr. BIDEN] was added as a cosponsor of

S. 548, a bill to provide quality standards for mammograms performed by

the Department of Veterans Affairs.

S. 615

At the request of Mr. AKAKA, the

names of the Senator from Oklahoma

[Mr. INHOFE], and the Senator from

Wisconsin [Mr. KOHL] were added as cosponsors of S. 615, a bill to amend title

38, United States Code, to require the

Secretary of Veterans Affairs to furnish outpatient medical services for

any disability of a former prisoner of

war.

S. 641

At the request of Mr. KENNEDY, the

names of the Senator from Alaska [Mr.

MURKOWSKI], and the Senator from Wyoming [Mr. SIMPSON] were added as cosponsors of S. 641, a bill to reauthorize

the Ryan White CARE Act of 1990, and

for other purposes.

S. 650

At the request of Mr. SHELBY, the

name of the Senator from Montana

[Mr. BURNS] was added as a cosponsor

of S. 650, a bill to increase the amount

of credit available to fuel local, regional, and national economic growth

by reducing the regulatory burden imposed upon financial institutions, and

for other purposes.

At the request of Mr. MACK, the

names of the Senator from Wyoming

[Mr. THOMAS], the Senator from North

Carolina [Mr. HELMS], the Senator

from South Dakota [Mr. PRESSLER],

and the Senator from Idaho [Mr. CRAIG]

were added as cosponsors of S. 650,

supra.

S. 688

At the request of Mr. MURKOWSKI, the

names of the Senator from Mississippi

[Mr. COCHRAN] and the Senator from

Maine [Ms. SNOWE] were added as cosponsors of S. 688, a bill to provide for

the minting and circulation of one-dollar silver coins.

SENATE RESOLUTION 75

At the request of Mr. MOYNIHAN, the

names of the Senator from California

[Mrs. BOXER], the Senator from New

Jersey [Mr. BRADLEY], the Senator

from West Virginia [Mr. BYRD], the

Senator from Rhode Island [Mr.

CHAFEE], the Senator from Maine [Mr.

COHEN], the Senator from South Dakota [Mr. DASCHLE], the Senator from

Ohio [Mr. DEWINE], the Senator from

Connecticut [Mr. DODD], the Senator

from New Mexico [Mr. DOMENICI], the

Senator from Ohio [Mr. GLENN], the

Senator from Washington [Mr. GORTON], the Senator from Alabama [Mr.

HEFLIN], the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. HOLLINGS], the Senator from

Hawaii [Mr. INOUYE], the Senator from

Louisiana [Mr. JOHNSTON], the Senator

from Nebraska [Mr. KERREY], the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. KERRY],

the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr.

KOHL], the Senator from New Jersey

[Mr. LAUTENBERG], the Senator from

Vermont [Mr. LEAHY], the Senator

from Connecticut [Mr. LIEBERMAN], the

Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. PELL],

the Senator from South Dakota [Mr.

PRESSLER], the Senator from Virginia

[Mr. ROBB], the Senator from Maryland

[Mr. SARBANES], the Senator from Illinois [Mr. SIMON], the Senator from Wyoming [Mr. SIMPSON], the Senator from

South Carolina [Mr. THURMOND], and

the Senator from Minnesota [Mr.

WELLSTONE] were added as cosponsors

of Senate Resolution 75, a resolution to

designate October 1996, as ‘‘Roosevelt

History Month,’’ and for other purposes.

SENATE RESOLUTION 97

At the request of Mr. THOMAS, the

names of the Senator from Arizona

[Mr. MCCAIN] and the Senator from

Wyoming [Mr. SIMPSON] were added as

cosponsors of Senate Resolution 97, a

resolution expressing the sense of the

Senate with respect to peace and stability in the South China Sea.

SENATE RESOLUTION 103

At the request of Mr. DOMENICI, the

names of the Senator from Oklahoma

[Mr. NICKLES], the Senator from Georgia [Mr. COVERDELL], and the Senator

from Virginia [Mr. ROBB] were added as

cosponsors of Senate Resolution 103, a

resolution to proclaim the week of October 15 through October 21, 1995, as

National Character Counts Week, and

for other purposes.
S5914 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD — SENATE May 1, 1995

AMENDMENT NO. 603

At the request of Mr. MCCONNELL the

name of the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. FAIRCLOTH] was added as a cosponsor of amendment No. 603 proposed

to H.R. 956, a bill to establish legal

standards and procedures for product

liability litigation, and for other purposes.

AMENDMENTS SUBMITTED

fCOMMONSENSE PRODUCT

LIABILITY REFORM ACT

KYL AMENDMENT NO. 611

Mr. KYL proposed an amendment to

amendment No. 603, proposed by Mr.

MCCONNELL, to amendment No. 596,

proposed by Mr. GORTON to the bill

(H.R. 956) to establish legal standards

and procedures for product liability

litigation, and for other purposes; as

follows:

At the appropriate place, insert the following new section:

SEC. . LIMITATION ON NONECONOMIC DAMAGES.

(a) IN GENERAL.—With respect to any

health care liability action, in addition to

any award of economic or punitive damages,

a claimant may be awarded noneconomic

damages, including damages awarded to

compensate the claimant for injured feelings

such as pain and suffering, emotional distress, and loss of consortium.

(b) LIMITATION.—The amount of noneconomic damages that may be awarded to a

claimant under subsection (a) may not exceed $500,000. Such limitation shall apply regardless of the number of defendants in the

action and the number of claim or actions

brought with respect to the injury involved.

(c) NO DISCLOSURE TO TRIER OF FACT.—The

trier of fact in an action described in subsection (a) may not be informed of the limitation contained in this section.

(d) AWARDS IN EXCESS OF LIMITATION.—An

award for noneconomic damages in an action

described in subsection (a), in excess of the

limitation contained in subsection (b) shall—

(1) be reduced to $500,000 either prior to

entry of judgment or by amendment of the

judgment after entry;

(2) be reduced to $500,000 prior to accounting for any other reduction in damages required under applicable law; and

(3) in the case of separate awards of damages for past and future noneconomic damages, be reduced to $500,000 with the initial

reductions being made in the award of damages for future noneconomic losses.

(e) PRESENT VALUE.—An award for future

noneconomic damages shall not be discounted to present value.

DEWINE AMENDMENT NO. 612

Mr. DEWINE proposed an amendment

to amendment No. 603, proposed by Mr.

MCCONNELL to amendment No. 596, proposed by Mr. GORTON to the bill, H.R.

956, supra; as follows:

In section 12(5) of the amendment, add at

the end thereof the following new sentence:

‘‘Such term does not include an action where

the alleged injury on which the action is

based resulted from an act of sexual abuse

(as defined under applicable State law) committed by a provider, professional, plan or

other defendant.’’.

HATCH AMENDMENT NO. 613

Mr. HATCH proposed an amendment

to amendment No. 603, proposed by Mr.

MCCONNELL to amendment No. 596, proposed by Mr. GORTON to the bill, H.R.

956, supra; as follows:

In section 20(d)(1), strike ‘‘with technical

assistance’’ and insert ‘‘with grants or other

technical assistance’’.

SIMON (AND WELLSTONE)

AMENDMENT NO. 614

Mr. SIMON (for himself and Mr.

WELLSTONE) proposed an amendment to

amendment No. 603, proposed by Mr.

MCCONNELL to amendment No. 596, proposed by Mr. GORTON to the bill, H.R.

956, supra; as follows:

At the appropriate place insert the following:

SECTION . STATE OPTION.

(a) A provision of this subtitle shall not

apply to disputes between citizens of the

same State if such State enacts a statute—

(1) citing the authority of this section; and

(2) declaring the election of such State

that such provision shall not apply to such

disputes.

(b) If a dispute arises between citizens of

two States that have elected not to apply a

particular provision, ordinary choice of law

principles shall apply.

(c) For purposes of this section, a corporation shall be deemed a citizen of its State of

incorporation and of its principal place of

business.

KENNEDY AMENDMENT NO. 615

Mr. KENNEDY proposed an amendment to amendment No. 603, proposed

by Mr. MCCONNELL to amendment No.

596, proposed by Mr. GORTON to the bill,

H.R. 956, supra; as follows:

On page 8, line 20, insert after ‘‘subsection’’

the following: ‘‘(b) and’’.

Strike the material from page 9, line 4

through page 10, line 17, and insert in lieu

thereof the following ‘‘The provisions of this

subtitle shall not be construed to preempt

any state statute but shall govern any question with respect to which there is no state

statute’’.

DODD AMENDMENT NO. 616

Mr. DEWINE (for Mr. DODD) proposed

an amendment to amendment no. 603,

proposed by Mr. MCCONNELL to amendment no. 596, proposed by Mr. GORTON

to the bill, H.R. 956, supra; as follows:

Strike section 15 of the amendment and

insert the following new section:

SEC. 15. UNIFORM STANDARDS FOR AWARD OF

PUNITIVE DAMAGES.

(a) GENERAL RULE.—Notwithstanding any

other provision of law, punitive damages

may, to the extent permitted by applicable

State law, be awarded against a defendant in

an action that is subject to this Act if the

claimant establishes by clear and convincing

evidence that the harm that is the subject of

the action was the result of conduct that was

carried out by the defendant with a conscious, flagrant indifference to the safety of

others.

(b) BIFURCATION AND JUDICIAL DETERMINATION.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any

other provision of law, in an action that is

subject to this Act in which punitive damages are sought, the trier of fact shall determine, concurrent with all other issues presented, whether such damages shall be allowed. If such damages are allowed, a separate proceeding shall be conducted by the

court to determine the amount of such damages to be awarded.

(2) ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE.—

(A) INADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE RELATIVE

ONLY TO A CLAIM OF PUNITIVE DAMAGES IN A

BIFURCATED PROCEEDING.—Notwithstanding

any other provision of law, in any proceeding

to determine whether the claimant in an action that is subject to this Act may be

awarded compensatory damages and punitive

damages, evidence of the defendant’s financial condition and other evidence bearing on

the amount of punitive damages shall not be

admissible unless the evidence is admissible

for a purpose other than for determining the

amount of punitive damages.

(B) PROCEEDING WITH RESPECT TO PUNITIVE

DAMAGES.—Evidence that is admissible in a

separate proceeding conducted under paragraph (1) shall include evidence that bears on

the factors listed in paragraph (3).

(3) FACTORS.—Notwithstanding any other

provision of law, in determining the amount

of punitive damages awarded in an action

that is subject to this Act, the court shall

consider the following factors:

(A) The likelihood that serious harm would

arise from the misconduct of the defendant

in question.

(B) The degree of the awareness of the defendant in question of that likelihood.

(C) The profitability of the misconduct to

the defendant in question.

(D) The duration of the misconduct and

any concealment of the conduct by the defendant in question.

(E) The attitude and conduct of the defendant in question upon the discovery of the

misconduct and whether the misconduct has

terminated.

(F) The financial condition of the defendant in question.

(G) The total effect of other punishment

imposed or likely to be imposed upon the defendant in question as a result of the misconduct, including any awards of punitive or

exemplary damages to persons similarly situated to the claimant and the severity of

criminal penalties to which the defendant in

question has been or is likely to be subjected.

(H) Any other factor that the court determines to be appropriate.

(4) REASONS FOR SETTING AWARD AMOUNT.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any

other provision of law, with respect to an

award of punitive damages in an action that

is subject to this Act, in findings of fact and

conclusions of law issued by the court, the

court shall clearly state the reasons of the

court for setting the amount of the award.

The statements referred to in the preceding

sentence shall demonstrate the consideration of the factors listed in subparagraphs

(A) through (G) of paragraph (3). If the court

considers a factor under subparagraph (H) of

paragraph (3), the court shall state the effect

of the consideration of the factor on setting

the amount of the award.

(B) REVIEW OF DETERMINATION OF AWARD

AMOUNT.—The determination of the amount

of the award shall only be reviewed by a

court as a factual finding and shall not be

set aside by a court unless the court determines that the amount of the award is clearly erroneous.

NOTICES OF HEARINGS

fCOMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS

Mr. MCCAIN. Mr. President, I would

like to announce that the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs will be holding