Victims oppose asbestos bill

Colorado asbestos victims and their families on Tuesday called on U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar to vote against an asbestos compensation bill, calling it a "bailout" for major corporations.
The bill, which Congress could vote on as early as today, calls for creation of a $140 billion fund to compensate victims of asbestos-related illnesses. The trust fund would be financed by asbestos companies and managed by an administrator housed at the U.S. Department of Labor.
Critics contend the trust fund is less than what's needed to compensate all current and future victims, while releasing companies that use asbestos from accountability.
Supporters, on the other hand, have said the measure will eliminate lengthy and costly court litigation, while ensuring that money goes directly to victims.
Salazar, a Colorado Democrat, has not said how he will vote on the legislation but expressed strong concerns Tuesday, saying it could set up a system that "has the potential to bust the federal treasury."
"Our commitment to fiscal discipline should not simply be rhetorical," Salazar said in a news release. "While I believe we need a federal solution to this issue, I will not support a program that has the high potential of bankrupting our government any further."
Asbestos is a group of silicate minerals used in many industrial processes.
Asbestos fibers, which easily are inhaled, can cause numerous health problems, including a fatal and incurable cancer called mesothelioma. Asbestos fibers also can attack the lungs without causing cancer.
Deanie Pate, of Denver, said her 65-year-old father, who worked in a steel mill and in the construction industry for more than 38 years, was diagnosed with mesothelioma in November 2004. Doctors told her family he had three to six months to live.
"He's lost 60 pounds. I can easily pick him up," Pate said, adding that doctors advised him to get a lung and his diaphragm removed to prolong his life.
His health, however, continues to diminish, she said. Two weeks ago, he suffered a heart attack.
"He was such a healthy man. Now, they've told us to call a hospice in less than six months."
The asbestos compensation bill does not guarantee a just compensation to the large number of people who have been affected by asbestos or those who will be affected in the future, said Bill Vandenberg, program director for the Colorado Progressive Coalition.
In Colorado, some 75 percent of school buildings have asbestos, he said.
According to EWG Action Fund, an environmental working group, more than 80,000 tons of ore have been transported from Montana to plants in Denver where attic insulation and other products that create asbestos-contaminated dusts were produced.
The passage of the bill "will hurt real people," Vandenberg said.
U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard, a Colorado Republican, backs the bill.
Supporters say passage of the bill will create a trust fund that will allow for timely payments to those who need the money most - victims, not their lawyers.
"Although the bill under consideration in the Senate is not perfect, it is a welcome step toward addressing the broken system that has been sabotaged by fraudulent claims and plagued by lengthy delays and outrageous lawyers' fees," Allard said in a statement.
According to a 2005 RAND Institute for Civil Justice study, claimants have received about 42 percent of awards in asbestos litigation; the rest has gone to lawsuit costs and attorneys' fees.
Carolyn Benton, of Greeley, who lost her husband to an illness that has no known cause other than asbestos, said the issue is not money, but holding companies accountable.
"Last week it was my husband. Next week it could be your family member," she said with a quivering voice as other asbestos victims held handmade signs that read: "Salazar stand with Coloradans, not Corporations."
About a dozen people representing a variety of organizations, including the Sierra Club and AFL-CIO, attended the rally.

mesothelioma-attorney-case.com endorses kennedy statement on asbestos legislation.

Senator Edward Kennedy issued a key statement regarding Bill S.852 the Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act of 2005. Kennedy's statements coincide with our previous opinion regarding the pending bill.The real crisis regarding asbestos exposure in the workplace is not potential litigation but the number of victims who contract the deadly disease Mesothelioma.Supporters of the bill propose to set up a $140 billion dollar asbestos compensation fund, but it is doubtful if even an all out effort this week will bring the bill to a vote on the floor of the US Senate. As Kennedy states victims suing the companies who exposed their loved ones to this disease did not create the costs. The costs, which include lost productivity, medical, care, along with payments to provide basic living needs for family members who died years before their time.A shifting of financial burden to the victims and their families is, according to Kennedy unacceptable. Kennedy recognizes the efforts by Senators Specter and Leahy who are in favor of passage of the bill. That said it has several fundamental flaws, which make it an unreasonable solution to the pending crisis. Kennedy states our first obligation is to do no harm. Argument that there are certain inadequacies regarding how current asbestos litigation is handled should not be the major thrust toward passage of this bill.Government intervention is the concern voiced across the nation by potential victims of this deadly disease. If the fund were to liquidate over time all potential damages would be in question. What rights would victims have in a legal setting to seek compensation from the offending companies?Individuals concerned about their risks of legal passage of Bill S.852 can use the www.mesothelioma-attorney-case.comLegal Information page ( http://www.mesothelioma-attorney-case.com/legalissues.html ) to better understand the ramifications of the legal act. To gain more knowledge regarding the use of asbestos and the contraction of the disease see our research of Asbestos page ( http://www.mesothelioma-attorney-case.com/research.html ). www.mesothelioma-attorney-case.com is based in the United States. Visit http://www.mesothelioma-attorney-case.com to learn more.

Mesothelioma Medical Experts Oppose Asbestos Trust Fund, Saying FAIR Act Hurts More than Helps

The Doctor-Patient Alliance forResponsible Asbestos Policy today repeated its call on the U.S. Senate to curefatal flaws in the proposed Asbestos Trust Fund bill (SB 852). Last July, the nationwide group of 34 doctors who treat mesotheliomapatients urged the U.S. Senate to remove the "one-size-fits-all" cap on awardsand install a due process hearing, at which patients could prove their specialmedical and financial hardship damages and have their award tailoredaccordingly. The claims review system would be modeled after the 9/11 VictimsCompensation Fund. In addition, the Doctor-Patient Alliance asked for assurances that dyingmesothelioma patients would be fairly compensated during their shortened lifespan. The detailed letter was sent to all 100 U.S. Senators. "We are disappointed that our suggestions were ignored," said Dr. HarveyPass, Chief of Thoracic Surgery at New York University Medical School. "Thisbill presented an historic opportunity to enact legitimate reforms that woulddirectly benefit present and future meso patients. Regrettably, the billactually hurts more than helps meso patients." "The $1.1 million cap is insufficient to meet the medical, hospital,travel, lodging and other costs of mesothelioma patients who pursue the besttreatments, which include surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, or a combinationof therapies," said Dr. Robert Cameron, Chief of Thoracic Surgery at UCLAMedical School. "The inflexible cap fails to address the ongoing medical costsof patients who survive long enough to outlive the median survival time butwho remain disabled and unable to earn a living. The bill ends updiscriminating against the early stage, usually younger, patients whose life-long medical costs are certain to exceed their award. "Mesothelioma must be treated as a chronic disease that requires alifetime of care and treatment," said Dr. Cameron. "The costs of stayingalive will far surpass the bill's arbitrary cap. Worse, some patients maydecide against expensive novel treatments to stockpile the meager'compensation' for their family." In addition, the Alliance argues that any awards should be made while themoney can be effectively invested in life-extending cures. "I doubt very muchthat the new bureaucracy will be up and running within my life time," predictsDr. Bret Williams, age 52, a two year meso survivor who has incurred over$600,000 in medical bills. "It will take at least two years for the newfederal agency to start paying out claims, while the median survival formesothelioma patients is about nine months." Dr. Williams, who has resolved his third-party civil claim, noted thatmost states have laws that allow in extremis meso patients to obtainpreferential trial settings. For example, in Colorado and California, courtsare required to set hardship meso cases for trial within 120 days. "I don'tbuy the rhetoric that an untested, under funded and at this point non-existentfederal agency will pay out fair compensation faster than the court system,"said Dr. Williams. The Doctor-Patient Alliance has concerns that the bill will undulyrestrict access to the Fund based on industry-friendly exposure criteria. "TheBill provides only for those with prolonged, occupational exposure. Itexcludes those with neighborhood exposure, or exposure only in schools orhomes or while doing 'shade tree mechanic' work. It completely knocks out thefirst responders to the World Trade Center collapse," said Dr. Williams. "My family would not have been compensated under the Trust Fund, since Iwas exposed while doing sporadic home repairs and while working withvermiculite potting soil," noted Dr. Williams. "The U.S. Senate should correct these serious flaws or start over," saidDr. Pass. "Our government must do better when it comes to federal compensationinitiatives. Recent studies of similar programs, like the Black Lung fund,make me skeptical that the asbestos trust fund will work. The motives may havebeen noble, but every federal compensation program to date has been marred bymuch higher costs, more claims than predicted, serious delays in meeting thedemand and long intervals between the date the bill became law and the day thegovernment started writing checks." "I have a message for Dr. Frist," said Dr. Williams. "We belong to aprivileged profession. Years ago, we dedicated ourselves to healing the sick,to caring for people from all occupations. It's been said that politics is'medicine on a grand scale.' The principles guiding patient care should informyour decisions today. Let's ban asbestos. Let's fund research on effectivetreatments to stave off the asbestos health crisis. But let's not bail outindustry at the expense of victims. Dr. Frist, do no harm." For more information, see http://www.drpatientalliance.org .

Battle over asbestos lawsuit bill heats up

Backers of legislation to end the nation's flood of asbestos injury suits call it a desperately needed cure to a broken court system that is bankrupting businesses and getting too little money to the truly ill.
But opponents say the bill is nothing more than a "corporate bailout" that would save defendant companies tens of billions of dollars and leave thousands of sick people empty-handed.
Lobbying and shrill rhetoric have intensified on both sides of the controversial proposal with the bill due to come up on the Senate floor beginning this week for as much as two weeks of debate. The measure would take away victims' rights to sue and compensate them over the next 30 years through a $140 billion, privately financed trust fund.
More than 700,000 asbestos victims have filed suits against companies that made or sold such asbestos-containing products as insulation, roofing materials and fire retardant sprays. But much of the awarded in court settlements and jury awards has gone to lawyers' fees and claimants who are not yet seriously ill.
With Republicans fearing they will lose seats in next fall's mid-term elections, some supporters see this as the last, best chance for congressional passage of legislation that has taken years to negotiate among businesses, insurers, labor unions and trial lawyers.
"If this bill goes down, I think there is not going to be another bill," said Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Stakeholders include trade workers exposed on the job to tiny asbestos fibers and families who have lived near and breathed dust from plants that processed asbestos-tainted material like vermiculite.
Visiting 3M in Maplewood, Minn., last week, President Bush appealed to Congress to act on the measure, a top priority of some of the biggest companies in America. That company has faced more than 400,000 suits alleging defects in its disposable respirators.
"It's time to send a clear message to investors and markets and employees that we've got to have a legal system in regards to asbestos that's fair to those who have actually been harmed, and reasonable for those who need to pay," Bush said.
But on the Senate floor, fights are expected on myriad issues, including the adequacy of the funding and protections for victims whose asbestos exposures were not job-related.
Supporters of the bill include major insurance companies and corporate giants such as General Electric Co., General Motors Corp. and Pfizer, Inc., but fissures have developed between big and small businesses and among insurers; the American Insurance Association recently registered its opposition. Most, but not all labor unions oppose the bill, though the AFL-CIO favors the trust fund concept. Disease victims are divided.
The chief opponent, the Association of Trial Lawyers of America representing attorneys specializing in asbestos litigation, has mounted a multi-pronged effort to kill it.
The massive bill would set a compensation scale for as many as 2 million more workers projected to contract asbestos-related diseases, paying $25,000 to those with mild breathing impairments and $1.1 million to victims of a rare and deadly form of cancer known as mesothelioma.
It also would cover people exposed because a family member brought the deadly dust home on his clothes. And it could wind up covering people if they eventually contract asbestos illnesses as a result of breathing contaminated dust in New York in the days after the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks, said a Senate aide who has worked on the measure.
Few argue that the current system has been inequitable and less than efficient. The RAND Corp.'s Institute for Civil Justice estimates that 730,000 asbestos-related claims were filed through 2002, costing $70 billion - 60 percent of it going to defense and plaintiffs' attorneys. A sizeable share of the victims' money has gone to claimants with minor lung impairments. RAND also points to 77 corporate bankruptcies stemming from soaring asbestos liabilities, though they include firms that sold asbestos products despite knowing of their potential harm.
Meantime, while many people dying or dead of mesothelioma have won multimillion-dollar court settlements and jury awards, others have collected little or no compensation.
Critics of the bill note that bankrupt drywall industry giant USG Corp. just negotiated an asbestos settlement under which it would pay $900 million to the trust fund over three decades if the bill passes, or $4 billion into its own asbestos trust fund if the measure fails. Backers say those figures distort the true picture, because attorneys' fees represent a big share of the negotiated settlement, and USG's outlays would be offset by insurance recoveries.
A Democratic filibuster in the spring of 2004 killed a proposal for a $124 billion asbestos trust fund.
The latest bill cleared the Judiciary Committee last year by a 13-5 vote. Its chief sponsors, Specter and Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy, the panel's ranking Democrat, are confident they have enough votes to stop a filibuster attempt expected from Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., but are uncertain if they have enough to support to win passage.
Specter and Leahy trumpeted a list of 155 groups supporting the bill last week, including businesses, insurers, victims and military veterans.
But five victims' groups, some with trial lawyers' funding, sent the two senators a letter expressing strong opposition.
Christine Lowery, 52, of New Ulm, Minn., whose husband Frank worked in construction for 30 years and died of mesothelioma two years ago, flew to Washington last week with one of her sons at the behest of her Texas-based lawyers. She said she would visit several senators, to voice her opposition.
Before he died, she said, "I promised my husband I'd fight the companies that made him sick."

Pageant winner selects personal cause

SALEM -- World Peace?
Nah.
Pass.
Asbestos awareness?
Now you're talking.
In an era of beauty queens and pageant winners inevitably running on a platform of world peace or other overly utopian ideals, Sarah Biddle, the 2006 Miss Salem County, has chosen a platform that separates her from the pack.
"My platform is 'Breath of Hope,'" said Biddle. "It's a program designed to raise awareness about Mesothelioma, a cancer caused by over-exposure to asbestos."
Biddle resisted the urge to choose something more well known, and instead focus on something that had affected her life and something that would bring attention to a relatively unknown problem in Salem County.
Biddle's grandfather, Ike Kline, owned a prominent heating and plumbing business in Salem County. Because of overexposure to asbestos on the job, Kline contracted Mesothelioma and died in November 2003.
Biddle wants people to know she will use the title of Miss Salem County 2006 to bring awareness to a disease that many people have never even heard of in the Salem community.
"I wanted to take the title I have and actually use it for something," said Biddle. "I want people to come away with information about the symptoms of Mesothelioma and the tests they can have done to detect it."
Biddle has organized a benefit dinner in April for the memory of her grandfather. All proceeds from the event will be donated to the Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation, of which Biddle is a volunteer.
"Hopefully a few local businesses and business owners will give their support to the benefit dinner," said Biddle.
Biddle will compete in the Miss New Jersey pageant from June 13 to 17 in Ocean City. She will compete against 32 other pageant winners.
The winner will be crowned Miss New Jersey and go on to compete for the title of Miss America 2007.