Why Winning Elections Matters

For those who believe that politicians don't keep promises, the Social Security debate is proof positive that elections matter. Here's another example....

The U.S. Senate pressed ahead on Wednesday with a business-backed bill to curb class-action lawsuits, rebuffing attempts to soften the measure that is part of President Bush's push for sweeping legal reforms.

The bill, a bipartisan compromise which aims to shift most class-action lawsuits to federal courts, is expected to pass the Senate as early as Thursday. Opponents tried Wednesday to limit its impact, with little chance of stopping the measure.

But senators denied three attempts to carve out exceptions to the bill, refusing to exclude consumer, civil rights and wage cases or those filed by state attorneys general.

On each amendment, some Democrats joined the majority of Republicans to vote against watering down the bill.

"We have to keep amendments off this measure. They could possibly derail the whole bill," said Sen. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican.

Republican leaders in the House of Representatives have pledged to pass the measure as it now stands and send it to President Bush for signing into law.

Bush urged the Senate on, saying he wanted a "clean bill" sent to his desk as quickly as possible.
"The problem is people are filing suits all over the country in a state courthouse that's affecting people in other states," he said in an appearance at the Department of Commerce.

"They've come up with a reasonable solution that says interstate class actions ought to be conducted in the federal court," Bush said of the class-action bill."

Class-action lawsuits let plaintiffs combine claims into one suit against a common defendant. The bill would authorize federal courts to hear such suits involving over $5 million and involving persons or companies from different states.

Critics charge the bill is about letting corporate wrongdoers off the hook by moving complaints about defective products or corporate misbehavior into federal courts, which have been less sympathetic toward such cases.

Stanton Anderson, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's legal officer, predicted the bill could be law within a month, giving momentum to other measures Bush wants. These include caps on medical malpractice awards and limits on asbestos lawsuits.

This bill would have zero traction if John Edwards was sitting near the seat of power. And in many ways, it's similar to Bush's push on Social Security and private accounts. Kerry indicated during the election that he intended to make no changes to Social Security. Again, this is an issue which becomes part of the public debate simply because President Bush won re-election.

I mention this because I think it refutes the charge, often made, that the two parties are so similar that it does not matter who wins a particular election. There are plenty of actions that have taken place in the last four years that would not have happened with Al Gore as President, and we already have examples of how things are different due to the defeat of John Kerry.

I understand the argument from the perspective that everyday life won't change because one person or another will be in office, but it actually does change. The impact of policy decisions like the bill Congress plans to pass on class-action lawsuits will impact Americans in a number of ways, from small business owners to consumers to lawyers to alleged tort victims. And the impact may or may not be soemthing you realize, but it's there.

The policy differences between our two major parties may not seem that big, but they are significant. It's important not to lose sight of that in future elections.