[Cincinatus' Wife]

And the teachers unions will be waging their war, along with the EPA -- because RICK PERRY HAS BEEN WAGING A WAR AGAINST THEM!

Rick Perry knows to have jobs you need an environment that is welcoming to employers.

Rick Perry:

FIRST: "Don't spend all the money!"

SECOND: "Have a fair and predictable tax and regulatory policy!"

THIRD: "Have a legal system that doesn't allow for over suing and make loser pay!"

[Venturer]

If he is against trial lawyers he can’t be all bad.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Trial Lawyer Money Floods Texas Political System

The Money Trail

A clear, straightforward system for reporting campaign finance contributions is essential to the public’s ability to participate knowledgeably in elections. The Texas Legislature has established the framework for such a system and the Texas Ethics Commission maintains it. When transparency is missing, or the contributions and disclosures are concealed, the public is not aware of the significant contributions impacting a particular race ... and the public should know.

This report focuses exclusively on contributions by plaintiff lawyers to state officeholders and candidates. These lawyers, however, are major players in federal elections and local and county races. As such, a broad discrepancy exists between the influence trial lawyers wield in our political system and their revealed financial activities.

Further complicating any attempt to chronicle the size and scope of political involvement by plaintiff lawyers is a myriad of political action committees through which they funnel money. Innocent sounding names disguise the fact that these PACs are actually additional trial lawyer conduits. Several of their surrogates include: Texas 2000, Constitutional Defense Fund, the Carl A. Parker PAC, and the Lone Star Fund.

These PACs serve a dual purpose for the plaintiffs’ bar: They conceal from the public and the casual observer that the funding for specific campaigns originated with trial lawyers. And, they make it almost impossible for researchers to definitively link the source of contributions with its ultimate recipient.

A Single Interest

The plaintiffs’ bar consistently portrays itself as the champion of “the little guy.” The advocate of the average citizen who has been injured, swindled or taken advantaged of by business and without whose legal assistance grievous wrongs would remain uncompensated and harmful corporate practices would continue.

This characterization is inaccurate because it conveniently paints an incomplete picture.

In reality, plaintiffs’ attorneys look to file lawsuits against large corporations—they invariably go after the “deep pockets.” The hysteria over mold—and its consequential increase in home insurance rates—is the latest in a long line of trial lawyer targets. Next in their sights: fast food restaurants.

The wealthiest plaintiff lawyers hunt constantly for new areas of litigation, and the more potentially lucrative the better. With “the little guy” out in front, these trial lawyers use the law and our courts to mine corporations for personal financial gain.

MORE: Sept 2002: PDF: How Texas Trial Lawyers Are Attempting to Dump Millions of Dollars into Texas Political Campaigns… Without Leaving any Fingerprints

[palmer]

Don’’t forget that the trial lawyers here will be against him too.

[10thAmendmentGuy]

Perry has been vague about exactly what kind of tort reform he’d like to see on the federal level, and said he wouldn’t want to impinge on states’ rights. Trial lawyers aren’t so sure that Perry would hold back if given the opportunity to attack their profession on a grand scale.

With a few exceptions, plaintiff's lawyers are scum, but if Rick Perry pushes for tort reform at the federal level (which the article hints at as a possibility), that would make Perry pretty scummy as well. There's no constitutional basis for the federal government enacting tort reform that would cover state courts. If we're talking about tort reform in federal courts then there's no constitutional impediment, but federal courts are already far less friendly to state courts.

I strongly admire what he did in Texas when it comes to tort reform. I wish New York had similar reforms. That said, he'd better not try to push similar reform on all state courts through Congress. He seems to me to be pretty strong on states rights and the Tenth Amendment, so I do hope the article is incorrect when it alludes to the possibility of Perry trying to implement federal tort reform.

I remember when President Bush stepped on the Tenth Amendment in 2004. I'm one of the biggest supporters of gun rights that you'll find, but President Bush signed a bill that gave firearm manufacturers and dealers immunity from federal lawsuits. It was completely unconstitutional and stripped states of the rights to govern their own court systems. The NRA, of which I am a member, pushed it because they care more about protecting gun manufacturers/dealers than they do about respecting our constitutional system of government. One of the key tents of our federalist system is that matters like this are left to the states. Texas has done a good job implementing tort reform. New York has not. New York loses jobs to Texas because of that fact, and that is a good thing, because the states should compete against each other. What made Bush's decision even worse is that 33 of the 50 states already had laws on the books similar to the one he signed, so he basically signed the federal legislation to force the remaining 17 states into being like those 33.

I apologize for belaboring the point, but I really hate when Republicans (the party that claims to support and respect the constitution, because we know that the Democrats definitely don't) treat it like toilet paper. I would hope that Rick Perry would not sign a similar law. I have no objection to tort reform, but the tort reform for state courts needs to take place at the STATE LEVEL only.

[10thAmendmentGuy]

Sorry, what I meant to say in paragraph 3 of my post #6 is that the bill President Bush signed gave immunity from lawsuits to gun manufacturers/dealers in STATE courts. Obviously Congress has the authority to grant immunity from lawsuits to gun manufacturers/dealers in FEDERAL courts, but they do not have the right to shove it down the throats of STATE courts, and that is precisely what the legislation in question did. I would be interested in hearing Rick Perry’s position on that, because it would tell me quite a bit about whether he sticks to his guns when it comes to defending the Tenth Amendment from all attacks.

[steelyourfaith]

That the trial lawyers are lining up in opposition to Perry will be recognized as a tacit endorsement for the policies of Perry by those Americans who happen not to be trial lawyers. Let them waste their filthy lucre.

[Lazamataz]

Boy, the trial lawyers sure know how to make a guy look better. Perry is really starting to get my attention,

[10thAmendmentGuy]

Out of curiosity, now that I've explained an example of unconstitutional tort reform passed at the federal level, where do you come down on it? I looked back at past FreeRepublic threads involving this bill that was signed by President Bush in 2004 (Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act), and I found that most Freepers were in favor of it, despite the fact that it clearly violates the Tenth Amendment. There was one thread, however, which linked to an article where Congressman Paul explained his opposition to the bill:

Gun supporters split over Rep. Paul

Here's a quote from the article:

"A staunchly pro-gun-rights lawmaker has repeated his opposition to legislation that would protect firearms manufacturers from liability suits, despite a report that the National Rifle Association may pull its support for him in the next election.

Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, voted to oppose H.R. 1036, the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, because he said he feared it would be an unconstitutional enhancement of federal power. As WorldNetDaily reported, the bill passed the House earlier this month 285-140.

But because he voted against the bill, the NRA may drop its support of Paul in the future, according to Chicago Sun-Times syndicated columnist Robert Novak.

"Paul evoked the NRA's ire April 9 by opposing a bill that would order federal and state courts to immediately dismiss lawsuits against gun makers and gun sellers," Novak wrote. "Paul always has defended Second Amendment protection for gun owners. However, he objected to Congress legislating against state rights."

I know which side I come down on. Even though Ron Paul is a wack-job when it comes to foreign policy, he is 100% right on this issue. We cannot pick and choose which laws to support that violate the Constitution. We must either decide that we are going to respect the Constitution and what it stands for by opposing all legislation passed by Congress which exceeds its authority, or we have no principles on which to stand.

[freedomfiter2]

Perry deserves a lot of credit if he has stood against the zombie horde of lawyers that is killing the country.

[SumProVita]

Wow! If trial lawyers AND the NEA are against him.....he MUST be good!

[Condor51]

America’s trial lawyers are getting ready to make the case against one of their biggest targets in years: Texas Gov. Rick Perry. ..... Among litigators, there is no presidential candidate who inspires the same level of hatred – and fear – as Perry .... And if Perry ends up as the Republican nominee for president, deep-pocketed trial lawyers intend to play a central role in the campaign to defeat him.

Dear 'Trial Lawyers',
Go ahead, make Perry's millennium.

You scum sucking bottom feeders are detested by 97.926% of every breathing human in America. And the ONLY reason you're still around is that you've rigged the Legal System so your presence in a court of law is required. [Note: Not Wanted.]

So knock yourselves out. You'll be committing a modern day version of 'Calling Out' Wild Bill Hickok for a gunfight₍₁₎.

(1) Historical note 'Trial Lawyers' -- Hickok never lost a gunfight.
(personally, I'd think about that. but that's just me)

[ding_dong_daddy_from_dumas]

But more important is the myth that we’re doing great down here, when we’re not. We’re falling behind the rest of the country, and the country is falling behind the rest of the world.

"We????" Who is this "we?"

[deport]

The Trial Lawyers will do whatever is in their powers to sidetrack Perry. He has been a throne in their side for the last few years and Texas has slowly gotten then under control starting even before Perry was Gov. Trial lawyers are no friend of the conservative side no matter who the candidate becomes.

[Ann Archy]

WOW!! The more I see his ENEMIES, the more I LIKE him!!

[Rapscallion]

I really believe trial lawyers, all of them, suck the life out of the US in addition to all the other things they suck. Damn them all to hell.

[muddler]

Lawyers, can’t live with em, can’t kill em.

[sergeantdave]

Lawyers are not sympathetic figures. Hang the bottom-feeder John Edwards around the trial lawyers’ necks, and they’ll be seen as the thieving, goosestepping fascist scum they are.