Statement Of Sen. Patrick
Leahy,
Ranking Member, Committee On The Judiciary,
Hearing On Asbestos Legislation
June 7, 2006
By calling this hearing, Chairman
Specter has once again demonstrated his commitment to making
constructive changes to the current broken system of asbestos
litigation. Today we renew our discussion about legislation
that will provide fair and quick compensation to asbestos
victims and their families. Unfortunately, this bill fell last
February on a procedural maneuver without getting the
consideration it deserved. I hope this time around we can put
this bill to a vote on its merits, because millions of Americans
who suffer or have suffered from asbestos disease need our
help. I thank the
Chairman for this hearing, and I thank our distinguished
witnesses for their willingness to discuss such an important
issue with the Committee.
I want to mention the recent
passing of Judge Edward R. Becker. Judge Becker was a
distinguished Federal jurist and member of the United States
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, where he served as Chief
Judge from 1998 to 2003. Without Judge Becker’s extraordinary
efforts in helping us to develop this legislation – at the
invitation of Senator Specter -- we would not be where we are
today with an asbestos reform bill pending before the Senate,
and we would not have a bipartisan bill that balances the
equities as skillfully as this one does. Judge Becker brought
numerous stakeholders to the table, and through his efforts he
helped us accomplish a truly monumental task. We are deeply
indebted to Judge Becker for his selfless work on behalf of so
many Americans affected by asbestos-related illness, and on
behalf of the judicial system to which he contributed
significantly. We are grateful for his efforts, and our best
wishes go to his family.
Tort reform has been a popular
political issue to some, but too often we find ourselves
considering bills that attempt to force a partisan solution on a
non-existent problem. We have recently seen unsuccessful
efforts to cap liability in medical malpractice lawsuits, and we
are likely to deal with proposals to unnecessarily insulate the
makers of food products from accountability as well. But unlike
some of the politically expedient efforts at litigation reform
that we have seen in the past, today we discuss a real problem,
which desperately needs to be addressed. The Supreme Court has
declared that the current system of asbestos litigation “cries
out for a legislative solution.” Chairman Specter and I and
others on this Committee have answered the call, and I hope that
Senators will look at this improved bill long and hard and
carefully compare it to the status quo.
Today we discuss an improved
bill. The Chairman and I have been responsive to concerns from
many interested parties, and we have refined the bill to
accommodate many of these concerns. These changes reflect the
bipartisan nature of this process, as well as our desire to do
the right thing for the victims of asbestos exposure. We must
not lose focus of what we want to accomplish, which first and
foremost is the fair compensation for those who have been
injured or killed from exposure to asbestos. While some changes
attempt to further balance the equities among the companies
required to contribute to the Fund, the majority of the
improvements are geared towards improving the system of victim
compensation in the bill.
I want to make clear that the
medical criteria in the bill remain unchanged. But additional
safeguards have been put in place to ensure the integrity of the
claims process. For example, the bill now includes a provision
for random audits of both medical and exposure evidence
submitted by claimants, as well as a provision requiring a
detailed and specific affidavit from a claimant attesting to
their exposure. This will prevent fraud in the claims process,
thereby ensuring that compensation gets to those who need it.
The bill now ensures that veterans
who contracted an asbestos-related illness during their service
can claim against the Fund. By providing a special statute of
limitations for veterans who have received government benefits
for their illness, the bill remedies the injustice of veterans
being shut out of the tort system by virtue of their government
employment. I am especially pleased to be able to report this
improvement, as it respects those veterans who have been unable
to get the compensation they deserve simply because they were
injured during their service to our country.
Additionally, the improved bill
will preserve more preexisting legal settlements between
plaintiffs and defendants by allowing a plaintiff’s
representative or an authorized corporate attorney to sign an
agreement. The new bill allows asbestos victims to claim
against existing bankruptcy trusts during the startup period,
which will now withhold some resources for this purpose but will
exclude claims by unimpaired claimants. The new bill also makes
clear that civil rights suits and disability claims are not
preempted by the legislation. All of these changes were
considered with an eye towards creating a bill that will help
those people who suffer disease as the result of asbestos
exposure, and which has a chance of passage in the Senate.
At a time when the Senate seems to
be taking up one partisan political issue after another -- for
show, and not for real solutions to the real priorities of the
American people – here we have an historic chance to make a
difference in the lives of many Americans who suffer so
tragically. We also have a chance to relieve our Federal and
State judicial systems from the crushing weight of what the
Supreme Court has described as an “elephantine mass” of
litigation. Let us compensate asbestos victims without delay,
and equitably.
I want to thank all of our
distinguished witnesses. I look forward to hearing their
insights into the latest changes to this critically important
piece of legislation.
# # # # #