Lawyers have a bad reputation, especially in the United States. This is probably why Republicans (and FoxNews) like to say “trial lawyer” any chance they get when talking about John Edwards. In the Vice-Presidential Debate tonight the issue of tort reform came up. The Bush-Cheney camp has been working this issue on the campaign trail saying that they will change the legal system.

I think that almost everybody would agree that the legal system in the United States needs some fixing. The next question is who is best equipped to fix it?

At first glance it would be fair to say that John Kerry and John Edwards aren’t the right people for the job. After all, Edwards is a lawyer and has the backing of lawyers across America. Since lawyers are making a lot of money in the system right now, Edwards is unlikely to make changes that have a negative impact on the legal profession. George Bush and Dick Cheney don’t have this same motivation.

But let’s step back from this question for a moment and consider the potential positive and negative implications of tort reform. Currently companies are forced to pay extremely high liability insurance premiums and doctors may be afraid to take on certain patients for fear of risking a lawsuit. Tort reform could solve these problems.

So we can see that corporations and medical professionals are among those who would benefit from tort reform. Interestingly, private citizens and trial lawyers account for only a fraction of the lawsuits filed in America. Businesses are actually accountable for four times the number of lawsuits than average joes. While most people believe that there are too many frivolous lawsuits out there, not many people realize that it is corporations who are launching the lion share of these frivolous suit.

If tort reform initiatives are targeted at curbing lawsuits against corporations, this will be a grave mistake. As it stands right now, the average citizen has almost no effective recourse against a corporation other than through the court system.

The threat of lawsuit is a deterrent to corporations. They know that if they bring unsafe products to market or act in ways that harm the public that they can be held accountable. The political trend has been one of deregulation. Corporations are not being watched as closely by government as they once were. Tort reform should not curb the ability of the average citizen, with the help of a lawyer (who often get paid only if their client wins the case), to hold a negligent corporation accountable.

Let’s return to the question of whether Bush-Cheney or Kerry-Edwards is best to reform tort law. We have already noted that the Kerry-Edwards ticket may be in a conflict of interest because Edwards is a trial lawyer. But the Bush-Cheney camp is equally, if not more, in a conflict of interest because both George W. Bush and Dick Cheney have vast corporate interests. Just like in court, this election pits the trial lawyer against the corporate CEO. If the Democrats decide how tort reform is enacted, corporations may loose. If the Republicans change the tort system, we all may loose.