THE HOUSE
Price-Fixing Issue
By a vote of 235 to 157, the House sent to the Senate a bill to help plaintiffs win lawsuits against vertical price-fixing, which occurs when manufacturers seek to enforce a minimum product price. The bill (HR 1236) eases Supreme Court-set standards of evidence that make it easy for judges to dismiss such suits. It gives plaintiffs a better chance of advancing their case to a jury.
The bill is backed by discounters such as Burlington Coat Factory and K mart and opposed by business groups such as the Chamber of Commerce and National Assn. of Manufacturers, according to floor debate.
Supporter Dan Glickman (D-Kan.) urged colleagues to “vote for your constituents who can’t afford to shop at full-price retailers.”
Opponent G. V. (Sonny) Montgomery (D-Miss.) said the bill’s defeat would “preserve the freedom of manufacturers . . . to determine how their products are marketed and serviced.”
Members voting yes supported the bill.
How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Gallegly (R) x Rep. Lagomarsino (R) x
Substitute Bill
By a vote of 155 to 242, the House rejected a substitute version of the bill (above) to combat vertical price-fixing. The amendment sought to preserve exacting standards of evidence that plaintiffs, such as discounters suing manufacturers, must satisfy under 1984 and 1988 Supreme Court rulings. It also attempted to codify the 1911 court ruling that vertical price-fixing is illegal.
Sponsor Chuck Douglas (R-N.H.) said Congress should “not fool around with Supreme Court decisions” that have evolved over the decades.
Opponent Lawrence J. (Larry) Smith (D-Fla.) said the amendment “would kill this bill.”
Members voting yes supported the substitute.
How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Gallegly (R) x Rep. Lagomarsino (R) x
Standards of Evidence
By a vote of 192 to 204, the House rejected an amendment to HR 1236 (above) toughening the standards of evidence in vertical price-fixing cases. This retained the bill’s objective of making it easier for plaintiffs to avoid dismissal by a judge, and gain a jury trial, of their suits accusing manufacturers and distributors of conspiring against them because of their low prices.
Supporters said the amendment would protect manufacturers who cut off discount dealers for reasons other than pricing policies. Foes said antitrust policy is best served when vertical price-fixing cases are decided by juries.
Members voting yes wanted to make it easier for judges to dismiss vertical price-fixing cases for lack of evidence.
How They Voted Yea Nay No vote Rep. Gallegly (R) x Rep. Lagomarsino (R) x
