|
The Administration supports the intent of H.R. 911 -- to facilitate the work
of an ever-growing number of volunteers -- but we remain concerned with
several of the bill's provisions.
H.R. 911 is a reasonable attempt to address the country's need for the services
of an ever-growing number of volunteers. It is targeted to those acting
without financial motives, and limited with respect to the types and extent of
liability excluded. The bill permits States not only to opt out of the bill's
provisions entirely but also to require proper licensing and evidence of
financial responsibility. None of the bill's limitations on liability would
apply to misconduct that constitutes a crime of violence, an act of
international terrorism, a hate crime, or to any misconduct that involves
intoxication, drug use, a sexual offense, or the violation of any State or
Federal civil rights law. Application of the bill's provisions only to harm
arising after the effective date effectively ties the bill's purpose -- to
encourage volunteering -- to its effect.
While the Administration applauds the intent of H.R. 911, it remains concerned
about several of its provisions. First, the total prohibition on joint and
several liability for non-economic damages would unfairly and inequitably
impact poor, sick, and older Americans -- those most likely to use volunteer
services. Second, sections 3(a) and 4(e)(2) apply the principle of one-way
preemption: State laws that further limit volunteer liability are recognized,
but those that expand plaintiff's rights are not. While perhaps appropriate in
the context of encouraging individuals to volunteer, one-way preemption in
general remains a troubling interference with state prerogatives. Finally, the
definition of "non-profit organization" remains too broad, encompassing
organizations about which no independent judgment of their public benefit has
been made.
The Administration will work with the Congress to resolve these concerns.
|
