|
Book Review: Indianapolis Star
Lawyers get rich; we get a warped idea of blame
Peter J. Pitts
March 15, 2003
Let's get one thing clear from the get-go. It's all about the money. This is the take-away message from Walter Olson's insightful and frightening critique on the current wave of mass class-action and tort litigation. Why frightening? Because, according to Olson, trial lawyers are trying (and with a good deal of success) to become America's fourth branch of government.
Olson begins his study with an introduction titled, "Better Living Through Litigation," and that covers both ends of the self-justifying legal argument. On the one hand, "better living" means "helping people" by providing access to justice. But on the other dirtier and more frequently used hand, it means "better living" for successful litigators through contingency fees, a new Mercedes and a second home in the Hamptons. Remember, it's all about the money.
Consider this statement from a recent article in Class Action Reports and then extrapolate the consequences, "The greatest barrier to courtroom justice is the marketplace reality that most victims are not even aware that they have been injured." That's a direct quote from a well-read legal journal. It's also a line that would not seem out of place in a "Saturday Night Live" sketch about ambulance-chasing lawyers. But it's not funny.
It's time to prosecute the litigators. The unfortunate but predictable results of today's out-of-control, irresponsible but highly remunerative lawyering are courts that are overcrowded and underfunded, auto insurance and professional liability rates that are too high and, unfortunately, personal responsibility levels that are way too low and declining.
According to the Council on Competitiveness, Americans spend $300 billion a year on litigation. And who pays the price? We all do in higher insurance premiums, fewer and more expensive available professional services, and clogged courts. What's most disturbing, however, are the effects such lawsuits have on our diminishing view of personal responsibility and how they have warped our perspective on blame.
Blame is what people do when they find themselves on the wrong end of the risk/reward equation. Blame supposes fault, and as Plutarch wrote, "to find a fault is easy; to do better may be difficult."
Why the urgent need for tort reform? Because it is a giant first step toward saving the concept of personal responsibility. Why is this important? Because responsibility educates. As Winston Churchill wrote, "I am always ready to learn, but I do not always like being taught." Buck-passing has, unfortunately, become our new national pastime -- and it can be very lucrative.
Are your children misbehaving? It's because of violent television. Did you fail to get into the college of your choice? It's because of unfair admissions practices. Did you lose a bundle in the stock market? It's because of corporate mismanagement. Are you overweight? It's because fast food creates an overwhelming craving that no human being could possibly control.
Yesterday's "ambulance chasers" are today's "fault absolvers." And when something is viewed as somebody's fault, then in our society, somebody pays. We suffer from an appalling dearth of personal responsibility. And the fault absolvers encourage that failing.
Sadly, our elected representatives are both unwilling and unable to undertake serious tort reform legislation. And why do you think that is? Could it be money? (Hint: Yes.) It's time for Americans to write their elected representatives and demand action on meaningful and long overdue tort reform. Or we can simply accept the words of that great American philosopher, Alfred E. Newman, "What? Me worry?"
Pitts is a senior fellow at the Institute for Strategic Communications and an adjunct professor at the School for Public and Environmental Affairs at Indiana University
|
