| Description: |
|
This bill will eliminate lawsuits for asbestos-related disease in federal and state courts and establish instead an workers' compensation system for asbestos.
Votes: On Feb 15, 2006, by a vote of 58 to 41, the bill was defeated. The bill's authors vow to keep trying to pass the bill. So stay tuned. It's not over 'til the ... sings!
Description: S 852 This bill will eliminate lawsuits for asbestos-related disease in federal and state courts and establish instead an workers' compensation system for asbestos.
Click here for more info.
Click here for Senator Kennedy's 10 flaws in S 852.
Click here for the AFL-CIO statement in OPPOSITION to S 852.
Click here for the Environmental Work Group FACT SHEET on S 852. Click here for other background information on this legislation. Click here to read about hurdles the bill will raise for asbestos victims. Click here to read what this bill will do to legitimate asbestos victims.
Click here for a FACT SHEET on S 1125 (the prior version of this bill) to understand the dangerous nature of this proposed federal legislation.
The bill was reported out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 26, 2005 by a vote of 13 - 5. It now goes to the Senate Floor. Three Democrats - Patrick Leahy of Vermont, Dianne Feinstein of California and Herb Kohl of Wisconsin - joined the Judiciary Committee?s 10 Republicans in supporting the measure.
But other Democrats, including Sens. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Joseph Biden of Delaware, are preparing to fight the bill. Those two voted against the legislation in committee along with Democratic Sens. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Charles Schumer of New York and Richard Durbin of Illinois.
Senator Kennedy has said the legislation is "deficient, unfair and unworkable." Click here to see Kennedy's comments.
Three of the Republicans who voted in favor of the measure - Jon Kyl of Arizona, John Cornyn of Texas and Tom Coburn of Oklahoma - said that they did so only to move it to the floor, and that they would oppose it there unless it was significantly changed. Moreover, the legislation has been opposed by some companies that have used asbestos and insurers, as well as labor organizations and trial lawyers. It is supported by some asbestos makers, as well as the National Association of Manufacturers.
AFL-CIO Opposes Specter Asbestos Comp Bill
The AFL-CIO has announced that it is opposing the Specter Asbestos Compensation Bill. The labor federation had originally offered support for a draft of the bill if certain changes were made.
But, after reviewing an earlier draft of the Specter bill, the AFL-CIO pointed out numerous provisions that would unfairly deny compensation to victims or result in unnecessary obstacles or delays in the processing of many types of asbestos claims. For example, the AFL-CIO strongly opposed the elimination of coverage for 40,000 asbestos-related lung cancers (the so-called level VIIs) without permitting these individuals to document asbestos exposure through CT scans. Although changes were made to permit use of CT scans for one category of claims, the bill as introduced still would result in denial of compensation to an estimated 25,000 to 30,000 victims of asbestos-related lung cancer, even though many would qualify if permitted to use appropriate diagnostic technology.
Similarly, S. 852 would prevent 60,000 to 80,000 individuals with varying degrees of illness from access to any forum for as long as two years in the event that the trust fund is not operational. The bill also includes provisions establishing medical criteria for lawsuits by individuals who have both asbestos-related disease and silica-related disease that will bar many of them from seeking redress in the courts for their silica-related injury, while at the same time limiting their compensation from the asbestos fund to $25,000.
As drafted, the bill fails to establish clear and workable criteria to trigger the statute of limitations for bringing claims for specific disease levels, particularly for victims of non-malignant diseases that get progressively worse. It is also unclear what circumstances will trigger the sunset of the Fund, which claims will be allowed to go forward in court if the Fund sunsets, and what statutes of limitation will apply. The victims of asbestos disease deserve to have these issues clearly and squarely addressed. We cannot support legislation that leaves such critically important questions to be resolved through litigation in the courts, which may further delay justice for thousands of asbestos victims.
PUBLIC CITIZEN PRESS RELEASE: a handful of Fortune 500 companies win relief from their liability worth tens of billions of dollars in the Senate's asbestos trust fund bill.
The complete Public citizen report is available at http://www.citizen.org/documents/master%20report.pdf |
Printer-Friendly Page
