Massie: This Is the Big Guys Versus the Little Guys
Floor remarks: the fight in Washington is still the big guys versus the little guys.
Original by Office of Rep. Thomas Massie on YouTube ↗ · Is this yours? Claim credit →
Transcript
Download captionsClick any timestamp to jump to that moment.
- Gentle lady yields back. We just strike the last word. Gentleman from Kentucky is recognized. >> You know, a lot of the fights or the debates up here are left versus right.
- And there are a few of them that aren't left versus right. This is one of those. This is the big guys versus the little guys. said, "We don't have enough people
- up here speaking for the little guys," which could include patent holders who've taken a beating legislatively in
- the courts over the last decade or two decades and are struggling. This is just another effort to keep them from getting their day in court. Uh this, you know,
- there's a boogeyman here, which is China or other foreign adversaries. If that were really what this bill went was going to go after, we could narrowly
- tailor a bill that did that. And in fact, I'll offer an amendment to make this bill into that. But that is not what this bill is. This bill is so
- overly broad that it will basically deter investments in legitimate claims that that startups and small plaintiffs
- have. Um, the bill's language is so expansive that it may require disclosure of entire chains of financial interests, including venture capitalists, limited
- partners, pension funds, or even shareholders of public companies. It compels submission of funding agreements to opposing parties without protections
- for proprietary information like funding amounts, waterfall structures, or investment terms. Information that has no relevance to the legal merits of the
- case. But it could help the defendants, the big guys, know how deep your pockets are and how long they're going to have to go to starve you out in the
- litigation. Even the requirement for inc camera review is problematic. Defendants are not required to disclose indemnification agreements. Yet
- plaintiffs must expose sensitive financial backing that could be weaponized through retaliation, harassment, or reputational damage.
- Registered investment adviserss already subject to full FEC oversight would be swept into disclosure mandates duplicating regulations without any
- national security justification. And by admitting that these disclosures are inadmissible and not discoverable, the bill conceds that they serve no
- evidentiary purpose and are instead designed to chill litigation finance, ultimately benefiting large corporate defendants. You don't have to take my
- word for it. Listen to the groups on the outside, some conservative, some liberal, but all trying to rep represent
- everyday Americans who deserve their day in court. And if this bill passes, it will squatchch their voice by cutting
- off their funding, by intimidating their financeers. Um, and that's what the big guys would love. So, I'm going to be opposed to
- this bill and I will offer um amendments and hopefully they will be accepted because they're offered in good faith to
- do what we're being told the bill does, which is to keep foreign adversaries from infiltrating our our courts and changing the balance of justice in the
- United States. And with that, I yield back. Gentleman yields back. I believe the gentleman from Kentucky has an amendment. >> Have an amendment at the desk. Clerk
- will report >> amendment to the amendment point of order. >> Point of order reserved by the ranking member from Maryland. Without objection, the me be considered as read. The
- gentleman from Kentucky is recognized to explain his amendment. This this is a very simple amendment. Um, it's been proposed today by the proponents of the
- bill that this is about keeping foreign influence out of our courts and our foreign adversaries, keeping them out of our uh, IP and generally protecting
- America from foreign influence. So, my amendment offered in good faith would limit this bill to exactly that. It
- says, and it makes an exception for the financial disclosure for anybody who's a citizen or lawful permanent resident of the United States or any entity
- organized and principally operated under the laws of the United States or any state thereof and not controlled directly or indirectly by a foreign person. That's all that's all the
- amendment does. It's very simple. It basically says that this bill is about foreign adversaries and we're not going to make it broadly applicable to other
- things. And u I yield back.
Comments
You have to be logged in. A comment stays up until three different people flag it. Then it comes down. Nobody on our side reads the queue.