« Extending Statutes of Limitation | Main | COUNTY ATTEMPTS TO BLOCK BROADWATER »
Vigorous Campaign Helps Catholic Church Defeat Abuse Laws
Vigorous Campaign Helps Catholic Church Defeat Abuse Laws
Charles Lane
Religious News Service (29 May 2006)
Earlier this month the Colorado Legislature became the latest in a series of states to reject bills broadening opportunities for victims of childhood sexual abuse to sue their perpetrator’s employer. The debate in Colorado was vigorously noisome and experienced teary legislative sessions, high-dollar lobbying campaigns, and polarizing accusations of scandal, cover-up, and discrimination. For those wanting to extend statutes of limitation around the country, Colorado was a depressing capstone in a string of losses that has ominous repercussions for future attempts to bring similar legislation to other states.
This year the Catholic church racked up wins in 13 states by taking a more hard-line approach and reversing from the muted defense it took in 2003 when similar legislation went before the California legislature and ultimately led to more than 800 lawsuits. According to church lobbyists, a more vocal stance and lobbying assistance from the insurance industry and school board associations have been key to their victories across the country.
In all but one state legislation was defeated or stalled. The hold-out, Ohio, legislation was gutted to remove a so-called “look back window” that would have allowed for a one-year grace period for civil suits to be brought in cases where the statute of limitations may have run out long ago. Replacing the look back window is a “civil registry” which allows victims to have their abuse proved in court without the possibility to sue for damages. Many see this law as unconstitutional and soon to be thrown out.
David Clohessy, National Director of the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests called the defeats “terribly discouraging,” and lashed out against a church that he said “did a masterful job at deception and using hardball tactics like spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to protect the cover up and put kids at risk.”
Tim Dore, Director of the Colorado Catholic Conference who fought the legislation, disagreed and instead framed the debate as a chance to find an equitable way to help survivors. He also noted the church’s right to protect its coffers from civil lawsuits. “It’s a beauty to see the democratic process in action when people come together to protect their church.”
Dore refused to give specifics on how much it cost to defeat the bill, only that it was less than $100,000, which is half the conference’s annual budget. The conference purchased newspaper ads, automated telemarketers, mass mailings, and outside lobbying consultants.
All this is at the extreme end of a new pattern to defend a church that was pilloried after reports of sexual abuse by Catholic priests dominated the media in 2002. On the heels of stories about priests abusing children and bishops covering up their crimes, the church did little to oppose sweeping legislation in California that allowed victims to sue the church for damages now totaling more the 800 million dollars.
“I think in California the matter was pushed through as the church was going through a crisis,” said Mark Chopko, general counsel at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops. Chopko, who advises Catholic lobbyists facing legislative efforts in their states, added that Catholics “have looked at California aghast at the damaged it has caused the church.”
California Catholic officials said that there was little time to mount a defense and public opinion of the church availed no political leverage.
“It was like a speeding train when it came and it passed in just six weeks,” said Carol Hogan, communication director for the California Catholic Conference based in Sacramento. “It would have been a more egregious bill if we took up the fight because of our political position. It happened in the middle of a feeding frenzy here.”
The lesson of California translated into a starkly more vocal opposition against the lawyers, lawmakers and survivors pushing for statute of limitation reform. In several states the debate turned bitter with accusation of anti-Catholicism and victim advocates alleging the church is still covering up abuse.
Ultimately the church seized the upper hand by defeating attempts to create a California-style look back window in eight states (Colorado, Maryland, Ohio, Iowa, Michigan, New York, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin) and two states (New Jersey and Maryland) that tried to outright eliminate all statute of limitations in sex abuse cases. That said, many of these states already have laws that favor victims of abuse by using discovery language that allow lawsuits to come forward after survivors “discover” the abuse which could be 40 or 50 years after the crime.
Clohessy maintains that Catholics “are winning because they hire tons of lobbyists and high price PR firms.”
However, more potent allies to the church have been found in school districts and insurance companies whose attention is sharpened when bills propose extending statutes of limitation for both public and private institutions, which, according to Catholic lobbyists, is the only way to extend statutes fairly.
“Any time there’s an attempt to extend the statute of limitations we’re against it,” said Julie Rochman, spokeswoman for the American Insurance Association.
Because insurance companies pay a portion of lawsuits against churches the industry dispatched representatives to states where bills looked likely to pass including Colorado, Iowa, and Ohio. In those states, they either helped mollify or completely stalled legislation.
“We really didn’t have to address the issue. It was mainly the insurance industry,” said Sara Edie, director of the Catholic Conference in Iowa where “look back window” legislation was introduced but never made it out of committee.
“It was the school districts working behind the scenes who really helped defeat this,” said Tim Luckhaupt of the Ohio Catholic Conference.
In Colorado, Dore credits school districts for lobbying lawmakers who had little appetite for saddling taxpayers with civil litigation. In speaking about both schools and insurance companies, Dore said “when they stepped in lawmakers couldn’t tolerate it anymore. They saw that it was not just the church having problems with the bill but others as well.”
This year’s legislative season does not bode well for future attempts to pass laws similar to California’s look back window which leaves victim advocates unsure how to proceed. Catholic lobbyists have found a success recipe for victory by framing the debate as unfair in targeting a single private entity. But when language is broadened to be more inclusive it is immediately squashed by multiple groups opposed to opening a litigation free-for-all at tax-payer and industry expense.
Posted by 1000monkeys on May 31, 2006 03:42 AM