Following a hearing that kept lawmakers at the state Capitol late into the evening, legislation meant to help victims from last year’s oil spill was stripped of nearly all of its enabling language. Supporters say the Wednesday night maneuver means that coastal residents impacted by BP’s oversight, particularly cleanup workers, will face even more challenges when trying to address lingering and future health care needs. In many respects, the debate had all the makings of a classic tort reform battle, pitting trail lawyers against big business. Rep. Patrick Connick, R-Marrero, wanted to make “null, void and unenforceable” all settlements and releases executed by BP that in turn let the oil giant off the hook for any future medical care or related benefits. Specifically, House Bill 389 targeted any latent illnesses or diseases that could be medically proven to be caused by the BP oil spill. “Today we have word that we still have oil at the base of the Gulf and plumes are out there,” Connick told the House Civil Law Committee.
Connick faced two main arguments against his bill, the chief offensive being tort in nature. The Louisiana Association of Business and Industry opposed the bill, specifically its retroactive elements, and the group was joined by other interests at the table. The other attack on Connick’s proposal was, in essence, the argument that the bill isn’t needed. “Couldn’t we just have the state sue BP for any medical needs and costs that might come up?” asked Rep. John LaBruzzo, R-Metairie. Rep. Neil Abramson, D-New Orleans, eventually amended the bill in a fashion that stipulates that all contracts and waivers executed by BP will be governed by Louisiana—something current law arguably does already. —Jeremy Alford
