Received: from gargoyle.uchicago.edu by zaphod.uchicago.edu (5.59/4.7) id AA18667; Wed, 25 Jul 90 23:55:51 CDT Received: by gargoyle.uchicago.edu from uchimvs1.uchicago.edu (5.59/1.14) id AA14522; Wed, 25 Jul 90 23:55:50 199 Date: Wed, 25 Jul 90 23:55:50 199 From: MATHRICH%UMCVMB.BITNET%UCHIMVS1@gargoyle.UChicago.EDU Message-Id: <9007260455.AA14522@gargoyle.uchicago.edu> Received: (from UMCVMB.BITNET for via BSMTP) Received: (from MAILER@UMCVMB for MAILER@UCHIMVS1 via NJE) Apparently-To: (M-MAILER-0122; 102 LINES); Wed, 25 Jul 90 23:53:26 CST Received: by UMCVMB (Mailer R2.07) id 4144; Wed, 25 Jul 90 23:44:29 CDT Date: Wed, 25 Jul 90 23:42:53 CDT From: "Rich Winkel UMC Math Department" To: mkvemuri%zaphod%gargoyle.uchicago.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, davidow%zaphod%gargoyle.uchicago.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, Q4095%pucc.BITNET@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, nelson%clutx.clarkson.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, james968%ccwf.cc.utexas.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, terri%csd4.csd.uwm.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, c3ar%zaphod%gargoyle.uchicago.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, harelb%zaphod%gargoyle.uchicago.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, mary%zaphod%gargoyle.uchicago.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, john.w.lamperti%dartmouth.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, madhav.chari%dartmouth.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, stet%mac.dartmouth.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, sin%math.ufl.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, braden%venera.isi.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, hiramc%sco.COM@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, MATHRICH%UMCVMB.MISSOURI.EDU@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, arens%venera.isi.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, hansen%aerosmith.esd%sgi.com@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, DICKSON%HARTFORD.BITNET@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, BREEDING%SEARCH.enet.dec.com@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, gst%gnosys.svle.ma.us@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, jjc%mayo.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, FIFRAN%LSUVM.SNCC.LSU.EDU@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, bmiller%venera.isi.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, robert%marvax.Berkeley.EDU%ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, allard%venera.isi.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, michelma%division.cs.columbia.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, BOBM%MAX.ACS.WASHINGTON.EDU@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, froncio%caip.rutgers.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, bertoldi%astro.princeton.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, jha%lfcs.ed.ac.uk@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, dm%think.com@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, mikey%boulder.colorado.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, gscott%portia.stanford.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, avatar%pnet51.orb.mn.org@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, UNCPJS%UNC.BITNET@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, avila%swinger.csd%sgi.com@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, jeffb%music%sgi.com@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, sco!barta%ucscc.UCSC.EDU@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, dave%sgi.com@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, lara%sgi.sgi.com@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, STUKAS%IRISHMVS.CC.ND.EDU@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, archer%sgi.com@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, wile%ISI.EDU@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, sco!brigid%uunet.uu.net@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, msg%fiji%sgi.com@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, wiener%spot.colorado.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU, fylz!fyl%beaver.cs.washington.edu@UCHIMVS1.UCHICAGO.EDU Subject: Fwd from Christic Institute /* Written 4:31 pm Jul 22, 1990 by christic in cdp:chr.contragate */ /* ---------- "NEW YORK TIMES ON RICO REFORM" ---------- */ ----------------------------------------------------------------- NEW YORK TIMES: NO TIME FOR RICO `REFORM' Editorial, The New York Times, 21 July 1990 Just as the savings and loan scandal awakens the public to the costs of fraud, some members of Congress propose undercutting the country's most sweeping civil fraud law. The 1970 law is called ``Civil RICO,'' short for Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations. It enables private citizens as well as government to seek trible damages for all kinds of commercial fraud. Its enemies call for ``RICO reform,'' but the measures they espouse more closely resemble fraud relief--for the crooks. By Attorney General Dick Thornburgh's cautious estimate, one- third of the S&L scandal, whose cleanup cost is estimated as high as $500 billion, is the result of criminal fraud as distinguished from negligence and incompentence. There aren't enough investigators on public payrolls to catch all the thieves or recoup what they haven't spent. That makes this a bad time to weaken the law that lets fraud victims sue for their own relief. Yet Congress soon must confront a RICO bill that would do just that. A House measure would give Federal judges wide discretion to dismiss fraud suits or slash treble damage awards designed to encourage and reward private plaintiffs. It's more carefully drawn but hardly more acceptable than a Senate bill that ran aground in the ethical quagmire surrounding the ``Keating Five'' --Senators charged with helping shield from scrutiny a campaign contributor's failing savings institution. Civil RICO was designed to augment prosecutions with the added deterrent of heavy private damages even in the absence of a criminal case. The latest bill, now pending before the House Judiciary Committee, would allow the special RICO damages only where convictions have already been obtained. Otherwise, a plaintiff would have to prove ``egregious criminal conduct'' for which each person being sued was a kingpin. The bill demands ``clear and convincing'' proof, the highest burden in civil law, instead of the usual burden, which is to produce only a preponderance of the evidence. And amazingly, the bill would be retroactive, wiping out dozens of suits that have already been filed. No matter how often this provision is ridiculed, its backers shamelessly reintroduce it. Even if the House Judiciary Committee eliminates this retroactive provision, that would only cure the bill's worst feature. It would still spare future defrauders. Business fraud suits brought under RICO may not constitute the law's major purpose, pursuing enterprises infiltrated by mobsters. But it remains a splendid fraud law that needs to be tuned, not gutted. The ``reformers,'' too frequently found among the targets of thrift, securities, commodities and insurance investigations, do not deserve the special treatment they seek. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Andrew Lang tcn449 TCN christic PeaceNet Media Department 76247,3214 CompuServe Christic Institute uunet!pyramid!cdp!christic UUCP (202) 797-8106 voice cdp!christic%labrea@stanford Bitnet (202) 462-5138 fax cdp!christic@arisia.xerox.com Internet