NASHVILLE, Tenn. - Governor Bill Haslam's tort reform bill (HB1993/SB2001) has passed the key Senate Judiciary Committee and will now go on to the House and the floor of the Senate. The bill sets arbitrary caps on damage awards.

But opponents say the panel only got half the truth and the measure, in effect, values a Tennessean's life at only $750,000. Supporters of the bill pointed to "big verdicts" in some tort cases as a justification.

Phillip Miller, president of the Tennessee Association for Justice, says the Senate panel was fed information about cases such as one involving a jury award of $34 million for what was referred to as "just a broken hip." But Miller says what the panel didn't hear were the details of the 16 months of abuse, untreated pain, and the eventual death of an elderly man. Miller says the case wasn't about money, but about what happened to a loved one.

"And when the jury returned this verdict, what they were trying to do and what they wanted to do, was to send a message that this is so outrageous that the only way we can make this corporation understand how bad this is, is to return a big verdict, and that's what they did."

Miller says this bill, which would impose an arbitrary cap of three-quarters-of-a-million dollars on damages a jury may award for pain, would also take away the power of juries.

Miller says it's hard to put a price tag on what is lost if a loved one is hurt or killed.

"This bill says, 'Well, you can get their lost wages and for everything else, all the important stuff like not having someone to walk you down the aisle, not having someone to talk to when you break up with your boyfriend, all that other stuff, the stuff that's really important, that's worth $750,000.'"

Miller says the bill includes caps for non-economic damages and gives a jury very limited power in punishing a company that has acted irresponsibly.

Supporters of the bill say it fixes a flaw in the Tennessee civil justice system that puts the state at a competitive disadvantage for attracting new businesses and jobs.

Miller says there's no problem with runaway jury verdicts, adding that the system isn't broken and doesn't need to be fixed. He says the average verdict in the state is $400,000.


get more stories like this via email

Farmers and ranchers in Montana and across the nation are calling on Congress to pass the American Beef Labeling Act.

Most food is required to have country-of-origin labeling, but not beef and pork. From 2011 to 2015, beef and pork were included in the requirement, so consumers would know where their meat was born and raised.

Gilles Stockton, president of the Montana Cattlemen's Association and a cattle rancher from Grass Range, said when the law was repealed, prices in his community went from roughly $2.50 a pound to a $1.50 a pound, and have stayed at the lower end.

"That's put a lot of pressure on the ranching community, especially the younger ranchers trying to get into the business," Stockton pointed out. "Then you compound those poor prices with the effects of COVID and supply chains and a drought," he added. "We're looking at a real catastrophe for Montana ranchers right now."

Opponents of country-of-origin labeling for beef include the World Trade Organization, who argued it is a trade barrier. A bipartisan group of 10 senators have expressed their support for this bill, including Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont., and this week, groups who want consumers to be able to choose to support American ranchers are coming together to put pressure on the rest of Congress.

Stockton noted country-of-origin labeling would not single-handedly solve the challenges ranchers are facing. He said in addition, the Packers and Stockyard Act needs to be enforced as intended. It aims to ensure competition in the meatpacking and livestock markets.

"Quite obviously, there is little if none competition in the cattle industry market," Stockton asserted. "Country of Origin Labeling is an important part of restoring transparency to that market competition."

The Biden administration this month announced a new partnership for enforcing the Packers and Stockyards Act between the Department of Justice and the Department of Agriculture (USDA).

When people complained about errors on their credit reports last year, the big three credit-reporting agencies provided relief in just 2% of cases monitored by the feds - compared with 25% in 2019, according to the latest report from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

The report said Equifax, Experian and Transunion often failed to respond substantively to an error, especially if the consumer hired a third party, such as a credit-repair company or law firm. John Heath, directing attorney at Lexington Law, specializes in credit cases and said unresolved errors can keep people from buying their first home or car - and even from getting a job.

"Potential employers are looking at credit reports as a way to determine whether somebody is going to be a good fit," he said.

Heath would like to see Congress change the Fair Credit Reporting Act to require credit-reporting agencies and companies that offer credit terms to respond to third-party inquiries. The three credit-repair agencies did not respond by deadline to a request for comment.

The Rev. Andre Chapple, senior pastor at Faith Church Los Angeles and chief executive of the African American Empowerment Coalition, said problems with credit block many people from building wealth as homeowners, and many aren't sure where to turn for assistance.

"We help people to understand that whole ecosystem of credit and credit responsibility," he said. "We help them get free credit repair for three months. As a result, their credit scores are increasing significantly."

Consumers submitted more than 700,000 complaints to the CFPB about the credit-reporting firms from January 2020 to September 2021, which is more than half of all complaints the bureau received.

Time was, when someone told you, "Now, you're cooking with gas!" it was meant as a compliment. But research shows that using a gas cooktop or range can introduce dangerous pollutants in your home.

According to the Arizona Public Interest Research Group Education Fund, many retailers fail to adequately inform people of the dangers of cooking with gas, and should warn them at the point of sale. Diane Brown, director of Arizona PIRG, said an open gas flame can release carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, formaldehyde and particulate matter into a home kitchen.

"Running a stove for as little as one hour can lead to concentrations of unsafe pollutants that far exceed health-based standards," she said. "Exposure can contribute to asthma, especially in children."

Arizona PIRG has said it wants retailers to put mandatory product-safety warnings on all natural gas stoves. The group has pointed to data from a 2020 study by medical and environmental groups that found natural gas contributes to climate change as well as air pollution in confined spaces.

Brown said it's important for people to know there are nontoxic alternatives to gas appliances.

"Cooking with electric and induction technology offers a healthier, safer and more energy-efficient choice for consumers," she said. "Electric and induction cooktops are compatible with renewable energy."

Brown said Arizona PIRG is calling on major national retailers to attach warning labels to gas stoves that describe potential health risks and stress that proper ventilation is crucial. They also recommend installing carbon monoxide alarms in homes where gas appliances are in use.

"Consumers deserve to have adequate warning of potential dangers of products," she said, "particularly when it comes to a costly, long-term decision like purchasing a kitchen appliance."

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission has voluntary regulations for gas appliances but does not require mandatory safety warnings.