Read more at Florida Politics
By: Drew Wilson

‘Florida’s rise as one of the nation’s premier destinations for business and capital was not an accident.’

The James Madison Institute (JMI) is teaming up with a Texas-based policy organization to make the case that Florida’s economic success is tied in part to legal reforms that supporters say have created a more predictable business climate.

JMI and the Texas Conservative Coalition Research Institute released a joint white paper this week, “The Litigation Lobby: Civil Justice Reform and the Future of the Texas-Florida Economic Advantage,” examining tort reform efforts in both states.

The paper argues that policymakers should resist efforts to roll back changes enacted over the past several decades.

The report contends that Florida and Texas have emerged as national economic leaders in part because lawmakers pursued civil justice reforms designed to limit excessive litigation costs and provide greater certainty for businesses and insurers.

“Florida’s rise as one of the nation’s premier destinations for business and capital was not an accident,” said Robert McClure, President and CEO of The James Madison Institute. “It was built over decades, in part, by deliberate legal reforms that gave businesses and families confidence in a fair, predictable system.”

The paper highlights several issues JMI and its Texas counterpart say warrant continued attention, including third-party litigation financing, proposals to expand liability in certain lawsuits, and efforts to revive legal fee structures that reform advocates argue contributed to higher insurance costs.

Among its recommendations, the report calls for greater transparency surrounding litigation funding agreements, safeguards against foreign involvement in lawsuit financing, and renewed scrutiny of proposals that could increase damage awards and litigation exposure.

The publication arrives as Florida continues to debate the long-term effects of recent tort reform measures enacted by the Legislature. Supporters argue that those changes are helping stabilize the insurance market and improve the state’s business climate, while critics contend they have made it more difficult for consumers to pursue legitimate claims.