Former Leader of MADD Says Proposition 51 ‘Discriminates’

Candy Lightner, founder and former president of Mothers Against Drunk Driving, voiced opposition Tuesday to Proposition 51, the so-called “deep pockets” initiative on the June 3 ballot, calling the measure “brutally unfair” to injury victims.

Backers of the measure were quick to alert reporters that Lightner was not speaking on behalf of MADD, the national organization founded in 1980. The pro-51 campaign noted that MADD is officially neutral on the issue.

One of the results of Proposition 51’s passage could be smaller amounts collected by people suing for personal injury or wrongful death damages. In cases of more than one defendant, each would be assessed according to his degree of fault for the non-economic category of damages, such as “pain and suffering.” The law now provides that defendants pay according to their means, not their degree of fault, making it more likely for plaintiffs to collect full jury awards.

Lightner, now of Dallas, was living in Sacramento in 1980 when her daughter was struck and killed by a drunk driver. She founded MADD less than a week later, and the organization now has nearly 400 chapters nationwide.

Lightner said Proposition 51 “discriminates against compensation for the most profound harm a victim can suffer--that which can’t be repaired, replaced, stitched up or brought back: the loss of a spouse or child, or limbs, or eyesight, or ability to have children, or the pain and trauma of slow death.”

Lightner was ousted as MADD’s president last October but remains as a consultant to the anti-drunk driving organization. She said Tuesday that she recognizes that MADD is officially neutral on the measure, adding that her appearance was as a member of the Coalition for Consumer Justice, a Ralph Nader-backed organization.

MADD’s national president, Norma Phillips of Escondido, said that both sides lobbied MADD last month for an endorsement. She said the organization opted for neutrality because members determined there were good arguments on both sides of the issue.

Joining Lightner in condemning the measure Tuesday were representatives of several victim’s organizations. They all urged the initiative’s defeat because of its reduced compensation features.