Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I am here today to correct an inequity as I see it in the car and truck renting and leasing industry. By reforming vicarious…
Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, I am here today to correct an inequity as I see it in the car and truck renting and leasing industry. By reforming vicarious liability to establish a national standard that all but a small handful of States already follow, we will restore fair competition to the car and truck renting and leasing industry and lower costs and increase choices for all consumers.
Currently, a small number of States impose vicarious liability, or liability without fault, on companies simply because they own a vehicle involved in an accident. Whether or not the vehicle is at fault is irrelevant. These vicarious liability lawsuits cost consumers nationwide over $100 million annually.
These laws apply to where the accident occurs. It does not matter where the car or truck was rented or leased. Since companies cannot prevent their vehicles from being driven to a vicarious liability State, they cannot prevent their exposure from these laws and then raise their rates accordingly. These higher costs have driven many small companies out of business, reducing the consumer choice and competition that keeps costs down.
While this amendment seeks to level the playing field, I want to emphasize that the provisioning will not allow car and truck renting and leasing companies to escape liability if they are at fault. Accident victims will continue to be compensated according to individual State law.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Boucher), the amendment cosponsor.
Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. The amendment requires that vehicles be covered, still be covered by the State-established minimum insurance levels for vicarious liability.
The bottom line is, if we limit vicarious liabilities, they are still going to be covered by the minimum standard. There is never going to be an instance where the vehicle goes out there and is not insured.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I had several and, unfortunately, due to the speed in which amendments were moving this morning, we are not going to get to all of them. We have the House majority whip, the gentleman from Missouri (Mr. Blunt) who wanted to speak on this, and also the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Burns).
Mr. Chairman, this amendment I think makes sense. It is a consumer amendment. It is going to save consumers $100 million annually.
The fact that a company can be liable simply because they own the vehicle even though they were not involved I think is ridiculous.
The bottom line is that this is still going to require that vehicles be covered by the State-established minimum levels for insurance. There is never going to be a situation where a vehicle goes out there or someone goes out there that there is not a lease to State minimum standard. That is still going to be in place.
What this simply says, there is unlimited liability in this situation where we have a vicarious liability law in a State. We are trying to put together some sort of a national standard. I think it makes sense. I think it is good for the consumer, and it is going to make a big difference.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.