House and Senate committees on Thursday killed each other's bills which included punitive damages businesses might face in lawsuits “ which should stay dead.

The action raises doubts whether corporations will get protection from punitive damages they almost convinced lawmakers was essential in this special session.

But the interests of the public prevailed, so far.

In crafting general civil justice tort reform legislation, the House and Senate should keep in mind that the goal is to make Mississippi's legal climate a good place to grow a business, not give away the farm.

The House had resisted giving big corporations a green light for ignoring public health and safety “ as the Senate bill did “ until Wednesday, when it approved a cap. But both sides apparently have now seen the error of imposing a cap or limit on punitive damages.

The purpose of punitive damages is to punish and deter businesses from acting harmfully, not reward them. By imposing a cap on punitive damages, the House and Senate would be rewarding rogue businesses.

If the House and Senate had agreed on a cap, they may as well take out ads in every newspaper, magazine and trade publication and post on the Internet for all multi-national corporations that pollute and build shoddy products to see inviting them to locate here.

• The House would have limited a corporation's penalty to no more than 10 percent of net worth of the business;
• The Senate would have limited a corporation's penalty to three times economic damages or $5 million.

You can bet, there were individuals with sharp pencils and only a purse for a conscience figuring the cost of doing business in Mississippi under those caps: How much it would cost them to leave their waste, destruction and liability here for "X" amount of profit. Individuals, consumers, those who bear the brunt of corporate wrongdoing, would suffer it.

The House started off innocently enough, trying to cap damages for small local businesses. But, we all know where the road paved with good intentions goes. And it was leading to Mississippi as a haven for corporate misbehavior.

With the Senate provision, $5 million is chump change for a multinational. It makes producing shoddy, dangerous products profitable “ particularly if locating in Mississippi shields it from lawsuits in other states.

With the House plan, corporations that would stand to gain enormous profits by manufacturing a dangerous product but have not done so out of fear from lawsuits would be rewarded by locating here because it would only calculate a penalty based on net worth, not the amount of profit.

Even the author of the House provision, Rep. Carmel Wells-Smith, R-Pascagoula, admitted it protected multi-billion dollar companies like WorldCom, General Motors or Enron, but reasoned: "If 10 percent is punitive on the small companies then 10 percent is punitive on the large companies. If it's fair for one, it's fair for the other. "

Well, no. It's unfair to consumers and does not protect the public's interest, health or welfare.

There should be no cap on punitive damages.

The big question now returns to a cap on non-economic damages, which is necessary, even vital, to achieving tort reform in Mississippi. Both chambers approved a $500,000 cap for a medical malpractice reform bill signed into law over a week ago. That should stay alive in general tort reform.

Otherwise, without a non-economic damage cap, there won't be any tort reform for the business community.