The product liabilty problem

Republicans have identified a lot of legitimate problems in the way our society functions. My problem with Republicans is that most of time the problems they identify are with laws that are imperfect solutions to bigger problems, and the Republican solution is generally to repeal the law and go back to the earlier bigger problem.

Product Liability law is one good example.  A free market often is really poor about punishing firms with dangerous, defective or unhealthy products.  You usually have no way of knowing if a product is unhealthy, dangerous or defective when you buy the product, so it can't really be a factor in your purchase decision.  If 5% of a particular products are dangerously defective most consumers will never know it unless they happen to know someone in that 5% that was injured, and the topic comes up in conversation.  So businesses that put their money into marketing rather than careful design and testing will do just fine in the market, maybe better than the more safety oriented companies.

Congress years ago created a Consumer Product Safety Commission but they have always been relatively ineffective.  There are millions of products and few regulators.   So eventually the courts filled the void by creating the products liability action.  When I was in Law School back in the 1970's product liability action were still a fairly hot new topic in the law.

I don't think there is any real question that products liability lawsuits have made the marketplace, and the world, a safer place.  But Republicans have some legitimate complaints about product liability lawsuits.  There is so much money to be made that marginal claims are worth pursuing vigorously.  Not necessarily by the injured consumers but by the lawyers who can lump a group of injured consumers together.  It is enormously lucrative for many law firms, some of who could care less if the claim is legitimate.  In addition what often makes the suits so lucrative is the punitive damages.   But instead of the money going to the broader public benefit - as normal fines imposed by government do -  it is a windfall to the people who sued and their lawyers.

Our societal goal ought to be to make products liability lawsuits easy to bring to maximize public safety, but set limits on the return realized by the parties bringing the lawsuit, with the bulk of punitive damages going to the public benefit in some way.

Republican solutions generally involve limiting the lawsuits - in effect turning back to clock to remove impediments to companies careless pursuit of profit.

There is no question in my mind the Democrats have had little interest in refining the products liability law because of the financial support trial lawyers provide to the party.

I'm sure there is a middle ground where consumers and their lawyers can be compensated enough to make it worth their while to bring suits without making it so lucrative as to invite pursuit of the most marginal defects.