Where is the Brownwood Press on this issue and pending Legislation ?

Vets, victims swarm US Capitol before asbestos vote

By Susan Cornwell

WASHINGTON, Feb 7 (Reuters) - Military veterans and victims of asbestos-related diseases fanned out in the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday to plead for and against an asbestos compensation bill ahead of a Senate vote that aides said was too close to call.
For years, asbestos fibers were widely used for their insulating and fire-retardant capabilities, but they are linked to lung-scarring diseases, including cancer.
Hundreds of thousands of asbestos injury claims have been filed, helping push into bankruptcy more than 70 U.S. companies, including W.R. Grace & Co. and USG Corp. .
A sponsor of the controversial Senate measure, Arlen Specter, appealed to colleagues not to kill the bill to halt asbestos lawsuits and create a $140 billion fund for compensating asbestos victims. A key procedural vote in the Senate was set for 6 p.m ET (2300 GMT).
"I think it is an unconscionable vote to vote no," Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, declared on the Senate floor.
Aides to senators on both sides of the issue declined to predict the outcome of the vote, saying it was too close to call.
Representatives of veterans' groups told reporters that they cannot sue their former employer -- the federal government
-- over asbestos exposure that happened in military facilities. This, they said, was why they in particular needed a compensation fund.
"Veterans account for 25 percent of all current asbestos-related claims and have been waiting years in the court system for some sort of settlement," said Tom Zampieri, a member of the Blinded Veterans Association.
Elsewhere in the Capitol, victims of asbestos-related diseases said they had collected 150,000 signatures, including those of many veterans, against the bill. At a news conference organized by plaintiffs' lawyers, these victims said the fund was designed to write down the liabilities of big companies while discouraging victims from filing claims with complicated exposure requirements.
"This bill is a bail-out for greedy, irresponsible corporations, and it's the ultimate insult to their victims, who will lose their right to sue for damages," said Paul Zygielbaum, who has mesothelioma, a lethal form of cancer.
Under the bill, sponsored by Specter and Vermont Democrat Sen. Patrick Leahy, asbestos victims would be paid from a fund financed by asbestos defendant companies and their insurers. In exchange, the companies would no longer have to face asbestos lawsuits in court.
The measure passed the Senate Judiciary Committee in May, but it has divided lawmakers from both parties, split industry groups and struggled to gain momentum.
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, a Tennessee Republican, wanted the Senate to consider the asbestos bill this week, but Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, objected, forcing a procedural vote on Tuesday evening.
At least 60 votes are needed to go ahead with the debate, or the bill will be withdrawn. If Specter and Leahy muster the necessary support, however, the bill could still face other procedural hurdles.
In the House of Representatives, a different approach to asbestos claims is under consideration. The House bill would allow asbestos lawsuits to go forward, but only if claimants meet certain medical criteria.
Joan Claybrook, director of consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, expected the Senate bill to survive the Tuesday evening vote.
"But whether the bill will pass is highly questionable," she said. "There are both Republicans and Democrats in favor and opposed."

source: http://today.reuters.com/business/newsarticle.aspx?type=tnBusinessNews&storyID=nN07239821
----------------
Senate may halt asbestos lawsuits

Bill would set up corporate-financed fund of $140B to compensate victims; 'I can't stand this legislation,' Senate Democratic leader says.
February 7, 2006: 8:49 AM EST

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Senate set a vote for Tuesday on whether to consider a bill to halt asbestos lawsuits as senators hurled verbal brickbats over the legislation and the intense lobbying it has engendered.
"I can't stand this legislation," fumed Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat who opposed Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist's attempt to bring the bill up for debate Monday.
Asbestos fibers are linked to lung-scarring diseases, including cancer. Hundreds of thousands of injury claims have clogged courtroom dockets and helped push into bankruptcy proceedings more than 70 U.S. companies, including W.R. Grace & Co. and USG Corp.
Reid called the plan to create a $140 billion fund to compensate victims of asbestos-related diseases a "terrible" proposal.

He said the bill was on the Senate floor only because lobbyists representing some companies that would benefit had spent more than $144 million "lobbying to get it here."

His comments incensed the legislation's Republican sponsor, Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter.
"To accuse us to have been pawns in the hands of lobbyists is beyond slander, beyond insult, beyond outrage," Specter said.
The bill, sponsored by Specter and Vermont Democrat Sen. Patrick Leahy, would pay victims from a $140 billion fund financed by asbestos defendant companies and their insurers.
Frist wants the Senate to consider the bill this week, but under Senate rules, if a senator objects to a bill coming up, there must be a procedural vote. At least 60 votes will be needed to go ahead with the debate. The vote was set for 6 p.m. ET Tuesday, Frist said.
Reid said the legislation did not do enough to provide for victims of asbestos-related diseases, while limiting the asbestos liabilities of a number of large corporations.
He said he does not know if he has enough votes to stop the bill, but that five Republicans have told him they would side with him. There are 55 Republicans in the 100-seat Senate.
Specter countered that a fund would help asbestos victims who were unable to collect from bankrupt companies or forced to wait months to have cases heard in court.
Specter did not say whether he thought he could muster 60 votes to keep the bill on the floor. But his Democratic co-sponsor, Leahy, urged colleagues to support the bill.
"What we have achieved is a significant and needed step toward a more efficient and more equitable method to compensate asbestos victims," Leahy said.
After speaking, Leahy left the Senate to visit a new grandchild, but an aide said he would be back for the vote Tuesday evening.
The measure passed the Senate Judiciary Committee in May with three Democratic votes among its backers, but it has divided lawmakers from both parties, split industry groups and struggled to gain momentum.
Stocks of companies with asbestos liabilities closed lower Monday afternoon. W.R. Grace (Research) shares were down 5.41 percent to $12.77 each. USG (Research) was down 5.36 percent to $91.20.

source: http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/07/news/economy/congress_asbestos.reut/
---------
read below as it relates to The Brownwood Asbestos Connection..........

Lying to workers and withholding critical health information from customers, communities, and federal health officials was not limited to W.R. Grace, it was standard asbestos industry practice. Indeed, it took similar behavior at Exxon, Dow (Union Carbide), DuPont, Bendix (now Honeywell), The Travelers, Metropolitan Life, Dresser Industries (now Halliburton), National Gypsum, Owens-Corning, General Electric, Ford, and General Motors, just to name a few, to produce the ten thousand Americans currently dying each year of asbestos diseases. The list of companies that knowingly exposed their workers to deadly amounts of asbestos is a roll call of major American corporations.

No company, not a single one, acted responsibly and informed workers of the deadly hazards of asbestos at any time. Not when the first information became available beginning in the 1930's, tying asbestos to fatal and debilitating lung disease. Not in the 1940's and 50's when asbestos exposure was unambiguously linked with lung cancer, and the signature asbestos cancer of the chest lining, mesothelioma. And not in the 60's, 70's, or 80's when thousands of workers a year began to die of asbestos-caused diseases.

This deliberate concealment of critical information led to the debacle we face today, where 10,000 people a year die from asbestos disease, and thousands more are seriously disabled. This pattern of outrageous corporate misconduct is at the core of whatever success people injured by asbestos have had in the courtroom to date.

http://www.ewg.org/reports/slowdeath/part2.php

above info available at http://stevesmarketanddeli.com/2005/11/abcs-nightline-asbestos-special_04.htm
--------------
Cheney's firm backed bill to limit asbestos liability

Friday, August 4, 2000
By ANDREW SCHNEIDER AND LISE OLSEN
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTERS
© 2000 Seattle Post-Intelligencer. All rights reserved.

Dick Cheney and the giant energy company he will leave to run for vice president have contributed more than $150,000 to members of Congress who sponsored legislation that would limit the ability of workers to sue companies for asbestos exposure.

The Halliburton Co., an oil-field services company based in Dallas, and its subsidiaries have had about 273,300 suits filed against them since 1976 by workers suffering from asbestos-related disease. Many of those suits were filed before Cheney became chairman of the board and chief executive officer in 1995.

At the end of 1999, 107,650 suits for damages were still pending, including 46,400 new suits filed against the corporation last year, according to the firm's annual report filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Cheney, 59, says he will resign Aug. 16 to concentrate on the Republican campaign.

Halliburton's political action committees and Cheney contributed $494,452 to congressional candidates from 1997 through mid-2000. Of that, $157,500 went to members of Congress who co-sponsored the asbestos legislation -- 59 Republicans and four Democrats. (See list of contributions)

Cheney, as an individual, donated $12,500 to members who sponsored or co-sponsored the asbestos bills.

The contributions from Cheney and the political action committees of Halliburton and its subsidiaries went to 49 of the 77 lawmakers who co-sponsored the Fairness in Asbestos Compensation Act in the House of Representatives and 14 of 29 co-sponsors of similar legislation in the Senate.

Halliburton defended their contributions and noted that they were made in full compliance with campaign laws.

"Our PAC has made contributions without regard to the pending asbestos legislation. Any similarities between the supporters of such legislation and the recipients of contributions from our PAC is purely coincidental," Zelma Branch, a company spokeswoman, said today.

Dave Gribbins, Halliburton's vice president for government affairs, added, "We give money to candidates for a variety of reasons, usually to those who are supportive of the business agenda, the things that are important to us, like taxes, trade or something specific like this asbestos issue."

A controversial bill

The legislation is a highly controversial package promoted and financed by the GAF Corp. and others in the asbestos industry. This year, for the third straight year, the bill didn't make it to the floor for a vote.
In March, the House Judiciary Committee narrowly approved the legislation by a vote of 18-15, with most Republicans supporting it and most Democrats opposed.
But seeing dwindling support, Illinois Republican Henry Hyde, the Judiciary Committee chairman, did not send the bill to the full House for a vote.
Had the bill passed, few believed that President Clinton would have signed it.
Of the 11 committee members who received the contributions from Halliburton, 10 voted in favor of the bill. The 11th member missed the vote.
The bill calls for the establishment of an Office of Asbestos Compensation under the Justice Department. Government-approved doctors, using criteria defined in the law, would be gatekeepers, issuing a pass to qualifying victims who wished to sue or seek a government-determined settlement.
Neither side disputes there is a problem that needs to be addressed.
Public-interest groups estimate that over the past 25 years, settlements have been made in more than 1 million asbestos cases industrywide, and 450,000 more may be pending.

$99 million for suits

Although Halliburton is an enormous operation with more than 100,000 employees in 120 countries, it is a relatively small player when it comes to asbestos litigation, at least when compared with W.R. Grace & Co., GAF and the Johns Manville Corp. Nevertheless, Halliburton has spent $99 million to settle or dispose of 129,650 asbestos suits, according to company records.
Asbestos was used for decades in protective clothing, insulations, pipe coatings, fireproofing and many other industrial uses. Millions of workers in hundreds of industries, including the oil business, were exposed to the deadly fibers. Fatal asbestos-related diseases often take more than 20 years after exposure to manifest themselves.
Some citizens groups were critical of the industry's efforts to push the legislation.
USAction, a health care consumer group affiliated with organizations including the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees; the Communication Workers of America; and the Service Employees International Union, opposes the legislation and didn't mince words when asked for its view.
"The Cheney-led Halliburton Co. has been an integral part of an asbestos industry which knowingly poisoned its own workers for years and is still trying to get off the hook. That industry -- which is counting on special treatment from a Bush-Cheney administration -- has publicly vowed that it will be bringing its bailout legislation back to Congress next year," said William McNary, president of USAction.
McNary said Halliburton should have settled its claims with the workers. "Instead, Cheney chose to gamble that federal legislation could be passed to allow his company to escape its responsibility to the people it harmed," McNary said.

A blizzard of suits

Last year, the U.S. Supreme Court said something had to be done to break the logjam of asbestos cases clogging the court system.
Chief Justice William Rehnquist said the situation cries out for a legislative solution.
The bill's sponsors insist it will end the backup of hundreds of thousands of victims waiting for their day in court and prevent personal-injury lawyers from pocketing large chunks of the settlements.
The opposition -- mostly unions, victim groups, consumer coalitions and personal-injury lawyers -- called the legislation the "Asbestos Industry Relief Act" because it will prevent thousands of terminally ill victims from filing suit or holding the industry accountable for their asbestos-related disease.
The committee debates often turned into an angry circus, with asbestos-industry lawyers accusing the attorneys for those with asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma with being ambulance chasers who oppose the legislation because it will eliminate millions of dollars in legal fees.
The heart of the battle centered on the medical criteria that the government would use to screen applicants.
The criteria, developed for the most part by asbestos-industry consultants, was soundly criticized by nationally recognized pulmonary and cancer specialists, who called the proposed standards "antiquated," "exclusionary" and "barbaric."
Tears were shed in the committee hearing room as asbestos victims from Libby, Mont., some clutching tanks of oxygen, told how hundreds in their tiny town were killed or sickened from asbestos that contaminated the vermiculite dug from a mine owned by Grace.
Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen, denounced the legislation, saying it would relieve corporations of their responsibilities to fairly compensate workers injured by their wrongdoing.
"Wait 'til next year," was the headline of a full-page ad in a Capitol Hill newspaper for lawmakers. The ad was bought by the Coalition for Asbestos Resolution, a Washington-based lobbying group supporting the bill.
Borrowing the old Brooklyn Dodgers' battle cry, the coalition told lawmakers reading Roll Call last week that the industry-funded group would be back next year to push for passage of the bill.
The coalition is funded by the asbestos and construction industries, with most of its money coming from the GAF Corp., a private company owned almost entirely by Sam Heyman of Westport, Conn.
GAF Corp., which is leading the lobbying effort against the bill, has made about $178,500 through its PAC and its employees in donations to federal candidates from 1997 to the present, of which about $66,250 went to co-sponsors of the asbestos legislation. Although Grace has been the target of hundreds of thousands of suits, its political action committee donated nothing to the bill's supporters, according to Federal Elections Commission documents.
Millions were spent by both sides -- the asbestos industry and the trial lawyers -- in lobbying for and against the bill.
(For more background material, see previous P-I reports on the ongoing asbestos risk.)

TV ad campaign

The battle got down to the glitzy television ads saturating the home states of key members of Congress.
"This has been a high-profile, prolonged legislative face-off over the past year, not only in the Congress but on the airwaves in Montana, Minnesota and the metropolitan Washington area," said John Bell, a spokesman for the Association of Trial Lawyers of America. "We've calculated that Sam Heyman and the asbestos industry have invested some $20 million in their campaign -- and although unsuccessful so far, they've outspent us and our allies by more than 10-to-1."
Direct donations to the bill's sponsors represent only a part of the effort to influence Congress. Far more dollars are given for lobbying expenses, and in "soft money" -- donations to party political action committees that are often funneled to campaigns. Halliburton has donated at least $282,050 in "soft money," mostly to state and federal Republican Party committees.
source: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/hall04.shtml
---------------
Asbestos fund will be $150 bln short: analysis

Reuters Wed Feb 8, 3:21 PM ET

A proposed fund to compensate people suffering from asbestos-related diseases would have at least a $150 billion shortfall, according to an analysis by Senate Budget Committee Democrats made public on Wednesday.

The committee's ranking Democrat, Kent Conrad of North Dakota, said he feared taxpayers would have to pay the shortfall if the legislation to create the fund, now pending in the Senate, is passed.

The bill calls for collecting $140 billion from asbestos defendant companies and their insurers for the proposed trust fund. But the Budget Committee's Democratic analysis said that the amount of asbestos injury claims and cost to run the fund would far exceed that amount, Conrad told reporters.