Legislature(1995 - 1996)
1996-10-21 House Journal
Full Journal pdf1996-10-21 House Journal Page 4784 HB 158 The following letter, dated June 14, 1996, was received: Dear Speaker Phillips: Under authority of art. II, sec. 15, of the Alaska Constitution, I have vetoed the following bill: SENATE CS FOR CS FOR HOUSE BILL NO. 158(RLS) am S(ct rls fld S) An Act relating to civil actions. I agree with many Alaskans that meaningful reform of Alaskas civil justice system is necessary. The system should be more efficient yet just, and we should reduce frivolous litigation while preserving the ability of innocent victims to be compensated for injuries caused by others. Alaska businesses are faced with the risk of excessive lawsuit awards, high liability insurance rates and the threat of settlement or costly litigation. These costs ultimately are passed on to Alaska consumers. I believe we can improve the system while protecting the rights of all Alaskans. Unfortunately, this bill does not fairly and reasonably address these problems. During this years legislative session, some good concepts for reforming our civil justice system were discussed, including reasonable limits on punitive damages, cutting back on frivolous lawsuits, insurance rate reductions and mediation to encourage early settlement of suits. Few of those concepts survived in this bill in a form that improves the situation. Instead, the current version was hastily rewritten in the dead of night and subject to little public review. When problems were identified by my Administration and others, they were ignored. As a result, this bill falls far short of the mark of meaningful and responsible tort reform. It is extreme, seriously flawed and fails to implement these positive aspects of tort reform in a reasonable way. In fact, in some cases, this bill makes problems worse by increasing litigation expenses, lengthening the litigation process and clouding the 1996-10-21 House Journal Page 4785 HB 158 rights of thousands of Alaskan families. A growing number of Alaskans from all walks of life -- fishermen, Native organizations, local governments, conservation groups -- oppose the bill. I am vetoing this bill for three primary reasons: it was the product of a flawed public process, it dictates poor public policy, and it contains serious legal defects and constitutional problems. Flawed public process. Although the bill was the subject of many hearings, the Legislature chose to ignore the progress made during that process. Instead, the bill was largely rewritten by the Senate Rules Committee with little public notice or involvement. One result of that process, which supporters of the bill claim is unintentional, is dangerous and likely unconstitutional. This bill would retroactively preclude certain punitive damage awards to innocent victims, even after a jury has issued a verdict. In a case familiar to all Alaskans, I am advised this provision could jeopardize the rights of 30,000 Alaskans affected by the Exxon Valdez oil spill. No responsible public official can or should take that risk. Even legislative leaders recognized this flaw in the bill when, on the 28th day of the 30-day special session, they requested another opportunity to correct the bill. Poor public policy. The bill is littered with poor public policy provisions which complicate, instead of streamline, the civil justice system which increases the amount, cost and complexity of litigation and which limit the rights of innocent Alaskans to reasonable and just compensation for injuries caused by others. Certainly a key provision of any tort reform effort should be reduced insurance rates so individuals and businesses receive some relief from the high cost of insurance. Yet, there is no guarantee of reduced insurance rates resulting from this bill. Despite many efforts by my Administration and others to provide meaningful relief in liability insurance rates as part of this bill, the Legislature rejected them.