By James Ostrowski

January 30, 2004

Now that Howard Dean has self-destructed and John Kerry, as I predicted on December 3^rd, is the favorite to win the Democratic nomination; and now that Clark is fading and Lieberman wishes he was doing as well as Clark, it is a good time to consider the only other candidate who has a chance to stop Kerry. No, not Al Sharpton, silly. John Edwards. We know Kerry, but Edwards is a mystery to most of us.

Will Americans elect a trial lawyer President? It wouldn’t be the first time. One thinks of John Adams, Jefferson and Lincoln. It should not be surprising to see a lawyer in charge of a nation founded in large part by lawyers. 24 signers of the Declaration of Independence were lawyers. But a personal injury lawyer? An “ambulance chaser”?

I am a trial lawyer who sometimes handles personal injury cases. A person who is injured because of another’s acts should have the right to seek compensation from the tortfeasor. That compensation must extend to non-monetary damages. One example proves the point. If a woman is raped but has no medical injury and no lost wages, should she be denied compensation for pain and suffering?

The problem with personal injury lawsuits is not the core principle, which a true libertarian would be hard-pressed to deny. Rather, liability for injuries has been extended beyond any reasonable definition of causation. People who stupidly bring on harm to themselves have nevertheless been allowed to blame others with deep pockets. The tort system has been corrupted by the infusion of a welfarist, redistributionist, soak-the-rich ethic.

Jurors are drawn from a society which has lost respect for property rights. Jurors think nothing of rendering huge and incomprehensible verdicts because generations of politicians have taught them not to worry about who is going to pay for huge and incomprehensible federal budgets. It’s just paper money. A system originally based on individual rights and personal responsibility has been transformed into a tawdry race for big bucks from those with deep purses, acquiesced in by jurors whose envy of the wealthy has been stoked for decades by politicians.

My thesis is proven by the marriage between plaintiffs’ lawyers and the Democratic Party. Trial lawyers are among the biggest contributors to Democratic candidates. They therefore join league with the entire liberal-welfare-regulatory-state program. Ironically, those who wish to retain the core of a tort litigation system based on individual rights and personal responsibility end up funding politicians whose platform is premised on the destruction of those libertarian values. And this, even more than the plaintiff bar’s increasing efforts to impose liability on innocent deep pockets, is why we should be wary of plaintiffs’ lawyers in politics.

Like any good lawyer, trial lawyer Edwards would have emphasized the individual responsibility of the defendants he sued in court. Yet, no such message appears on his website where he outlines his policy proposals. He will make the taxpayers responsible for paying one year of college tuition for every student. What did we do to those students to deserve being forced to compensate them? What did the students do to deserve such largesse other than breathe? No trace of individual responsibility there.

Edwards will make taxpayers pay for health insurance for other people’s uninsured children—12 million of them. What tort did we commit to deserve this plaintiffs’ verdict against us? And without even a trial to defend ourselves! Edwards wants to create a “National Database for Medical Records and Billing”, presumably one that any good hacker could break into.

Edwards will cut taxes for companies that promise to make things in the United States. Thus, responsibility for such decisions will pass from individual companies to the bureaucrats. Form madness and legal fee sadness will also result. Since we are too irresponsible to do research, Edwards will increase federal spending on that. This itself is irresponsible since the federal government is broke. Edwards doesn’t care about that detail as he makes a long series of proposals to help senior citizens get free medical care. No longer will people be responsible for themselves or their families. Some anonymous taxpayers will pay.

Edwards is a big believer in tax credits of various kinds. He doesn’t trust people to spend their money the right way. They are not responsible enough. Edwards will tell them how. He unequivocally supports HUD, perhaps the worst federal department of all time. (Okay, the IRS.)

Edwards is a fellow who boasts of his success as a trial lawyer who held individuals responsible for their specific alleged misdeeds. Yet, his political program is built upon the exact opposite principle. His proposals strip away freedom and responsibility from people and businesses, and force them to be responsible for the infinite needs of millions of total strangers. His political philosophy mirrors the modern corruption of the tort system. Forget individual responsibility and aim for the deep pockets.

In grammar school, the nuns used to tell us that freedom required responsibility. Years later, I realized that the reverse is the case: responsibility requires freedom. An Edwards Administration will value neither freedom nor responsibility.