Henry's Legal Reform Bill Veto Criticized
National and state business leaders are calling Governor Henry's weekend veto of the comprehensive lawsuit reform measure a killer for Oklahoma's economic climate.
"This is a mistake on his (Henry's) part that will have serious consequences for the state's business climate," stated the National Association of Manufacturers on its "ShopFloor.org" blog this weekend. The NAM posted the comments Saturday after Henry vetoed Senate Bill 507, an omnibus lawsuit reform measure that contained nearly all of the provisions the governor himself has repeatedly claimed to favor.
Though it's difficult to assign a specific dollar number, economic experts say the veto is likely to have far-reaching harmful implications for Oklahoma, a statement from Speaker Lance Cargill's House claims.
"Certainly states that neglect tort reform will fall behind states that enact lawsuit reform," said Rex Pjesky, Ph.D., an assistant professor of economics at Northeastern State University in Tahlequah. "Lawsuit reform is important because it sends the message that Oklahoma is open for business. The tort reform bill would have helped everyone know that we want them to come to Oklahoma to create jobs, raise their families, and join us in prosperity."
The governor claimed in his veto message that, "SB 507 did little to help innocent business owners who rack up costs fighting a frivolous complaint that is ultimately thrown out of court."
Oklahoma's conservative legislative leaders say the governor's contention is absurd, and that business leaders were overwhelmingly in favor of SB 507.
Oklahoma's State Chamber reacted to the governor's veto with dismay: "Even though small business owners and large Oklahoma corporate citizens came together in their effort to communicate the importance of his signing of the lawsuit reform elements he himself called for, the plain fact is that he chose to listen to his trial lawyer friends," said Mike Seney, senior vice president of operations for The State Chamber.
According to the Pacific Research Institute, a think tank in favor of lawsuit reform, Oklahoma ranks among the 15 worst states overall in terms of a poor lawsuit reform environment. Oklahoma is ranked 38th for problems ranging from lawsuit threats to monetary losses from harmful verdicts.To make matters worse, surrounding states like Colorado, Kansas and Texas have all passed strong lawsuit reform measures and rank among the top 10 states with the best lawsuit reform laws, while Missouri, Arkansas and Louisiana each rank far ahead of Oklahoma in terms of reform efforts.
Just across the Red River border, Texas ranks number one among all states for the best lawsuit reform. Even California, known for its litigious environment, ranks better than Oklahoma.
One respected Oklahoma legal scholar who has worked on lawsuit reform efforts agrees that the governor's veto is bad news for the state. In a recent post on the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs' "Under the Dome" blog, Oklahoma City University constitutional scholar and law professor Andrew Spiropoulos noted that, "Our leading lawyers ... ought to prefer the common good to their litigation success. We deserve better, but we won't get it, unless we are willing to demand it from our officials and ourselves."
"This is a mistake on his (Henry's) part that will have serious consequences for the state's business climate," stated the National Association of Manufacturers on its "ShopFloor.org" blog this weekend. The NAM posted the comments Saturday after Henry vetoed Senate Bill 507, an omnibus lawsuit reform measure that contained nearly all of the provisions the governor himself has repeatedly claimed to favor.
Though it's difficult to assign a specific dollar number, economic experts say the veto is likely to have far-reaching harmful implications for Oklahoma, a statement from Speaker Lance Cargill's House claims.
"Certainly states that neglect tort reform will fall behind states that enact lawsuit reform," said Rex Pjesky, Ph.D., an assistant professor of economics at Northeastern State University in Tahlequah. "Lawsuit reform is important because it sends the message that Oklahoma is open for business. The tort reform bill would have helped everyone know that we want them to come to Oklahoma to create jobs, raise their families, and join us in prosperity."
The governor claimed in his veto message that, "SB 507 did little to help innocent business owners who rack up costs fighting a frivolous complaint that is ultimately thrown out of court."
Oklahoma's conservative legislative leaders say the governor's contention is absurd, and that business leaders were overwhelmingly in favor of SB 507.
Oklahoma's State Chamber reacted to the governor's veto with dismay: "Even though small business owners and large Oklahoma corporate citizens came together in their effort to communicate the importance of his signing of the lawsuit reform elements he himself called for, the plain fact is that he chose to listen to his trial lawyer friends," said Mike Seney, senior vice president of operations for The State Chamber.
According to the Pacific Research Institute, a think tank in favor of lawsuit reform, Oklahoma ranks among the 15 worst states overall in terms of a poor lawsuit reform environment. Oklahoma is ranked 38th for problems ranging from lawsuit threats to monetary losses from harmful verdicts.To make matters worse, surrounding states like Colorado, Kansas and Texas have all passed strong lawsuit reform measures and rank among the top 10 states with the best lawsuit reform laws, while Missouri, Arkansas and Louisiana each rank far ahead of Oklahoma in terms of reform efforts.
Just across the Red River border, Texas ranks number one among all states for the best lawsuit reform. Even California, known for its litigious environment, ranks better than Oklahoma.
One respected Oklahoma legal scholar who has worked on lawsuit reform efforts agrees that the governor's veto is bad news for the state. In a recent post on the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs' "Under the Dome" blog, Oklahoma City University constitutional scholar and law professor Andrew Spiropoulos noted that, "Our leading lawyers ... ought to prefer the common good to their litigation success. We deserve better, but we won't get it, unless we are willing to demand it from our officials and ourselves."
Labels: 2007 Legislature, Brad Henry, Legal Reform, Veto
posted by Mike McCarville @ 3:38 PM
<< Home