[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 14 (Wednesday, February 8, 2006)]
[Senate]
[Pages S781-S782]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
ASBESTOS VICTIMS
Mr. REID. Mr. President, as of this morning, 2,262 American soldiers
have died in Iraq and 17,000, 18,000 have been injured, wounded; over
16,000 have been wounded so seriously that they could not return to
battle. Each of these deaths and every one of these individuals who
have been wounded, many of whom have been maimed, is a national
tragedy. Yesterday, I was speaking to one of my friends with whom I
came to Washington in 1982. We keep in touch with each other. He now
lives in Santa Rosa, CA. He said, ``Harry, you know, we just lost our
sixth soldier in this little community.''
I have attended funerals of Nevada servicemen who have been killed. I
want to make sure we do everything we can so that fewer of our loyal,
patriotic men and women are not killed in Iraq. I want to make sure
they have all the equipment--anything they need.
As we speak, there are other tragedies in America, one of which deals
with the legislation that is on the floor today. This year, 2006,
10,000 people will die from asbestos-related diseases. That is the case
every year. These people did nothing wrong. They were simply exposed to
a substance that corporate America knew would make them sick and cause
them to die. But because of corporate America's willingness to exchange
the lives of these men and women, they went ahead and did this. People
were exposed to this at work, at home by hugging their father or
husband when he came home from work, or in a schoolyard where asbestos
equipment was, in their neighborhoods, in trucks hauling this substance
all over America, and people got sick. They die painful, slow, horrible
deaths. So there is a debate going on today dealing with asbestos.
This is not a fair bill. Look, I believe we need legislation to
compensate the victims, but this is not it. I have said--and I don't
have the experience in the legislature of the President pro tempore,
but I have been in legislative bodies a long time; more than 30 years I
have served in legislatures. This is the worst piece of legislation I
have ever seen in the 30-plus years I have been serving in
legislatures.
I don't doubt how hard Senator Specter has worked and how badly he
wants this done, but that doesn't make the legislation good; it is bad.
Perhaps because he has tried so hard, he doesn't see the trees for the
forest, as they say.
To show the strength of corporate America, 13 companies that will
benefit greatly from this legislation have paid lobbyists, within a 2-
year period of time, $144.5 million. That should send a message to
everyone. This legislation is not good for asbestos victims. It
[[Page S782]]
strips victims of their legal right to obtain compensation in the court
system and puts them in an administrative trust fund that is
underfunded and doomed to fail. That is why all the leading asbestos
victims organizations oppose this bill.
Here is a letter from the Asbestos Victims Group United, dated
February 1, 2006, written to me and to Senator Frist. I will read parts
of it:
We represent a diverse group of national asbestos victims'
groups. We are writing this letter as a matter of urgency to
ask Members to vote against S. 852. This legislation is not
primarily intended, nor is it good, for victims. In fact, in
its current form, the legislation would make recovery of
compensation dramatically worse for victims. It would deny
whole classes of cancer-ridden victims, who, today, are able
to recover compensation for their injuries, any ability to be
compensated.
. . . We oppose this legislation. We do not want this
proposed government policy forced upon us. We believe the
program will fail to treat victims fairly, while benefiting
the very companies that caused the problem. We have said it
before and now we say it louder.
. . . We have said it before and now we say it louder: We
believe it would be wholly irresponsible for Congress to
proceed with consideration and passage of this legislation.
Please do not allow the families who already have lost so
much to be victimized once again.
The first signatory on this letter is Susan Vento, the wife of a man
I served in Congress with, who never worked around asbestos--or so he
thought. But he did work around it as a young man during a summer job
while in school, and he got this disease. He was a big, strong man who
worked out in the gym every day, and he died within a year, a slow,
agonizing death. So the first signatory on this letter is Susan Vento,
Chairperson, Committee to Protect Mesothelioma Victims.
I ask unanimous consent that this letter be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Asbestos Victims Groups United,
February 1, 2006.
Hon. William Frist,
Majority Leader, U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
Hon. Harry Reid,
Democratic Leader, U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Leaders Frist and Reid: We represent a diverse group
of national asbestos victims' groups. We are writing this
letter as a matter of urgency to ask Members to vote against
S. 852. This legislation is not primarily intended, nor is it
good, for victims. In fact, in its current form, the
legislation would make recovery of compensation dramatically
worse for victims. It would deny whole classes of cancer-
ridden victims, who, today, are able to recover compensation
for their injuries, any ability to be compensated.
If we have not made our position clear in our previous
letters, we would like to make it very clear here: We oppose
this legislation. We do not want this proposed government
policy forced upon us. We believe the program will fail to
treat victims fairly, while benefiting the very companies
that caused the problem. We may not have the power of these
corporations, but we have a voice, and we intend to use our
voice to its maximum volume to defeat this bill.
And, if it passes, we plan to use our voice to inform the
American people in every state and every district of this
tragic fate of justice and to urge every victim to demand
their right of compensation from the federal government.
We have listed below the specific substantive reasons we
oppose S. 852:
It removes the fundamental right to a trial by jury and
replaces it with an untried and unsound entitlement program
that, we believe, is set to fail on day one.
Victims will face long delays in receiving compensation
while the fund is set up and the bill is challenged on
constitutional grounds. Many victims, especially those with
mesothelioma, will die during that time period.
$140 billion is too low and has been, at best, deemed a
questionable minimum by the CBO. For the victim, this means
the fund could leave them empty-handed. (For the taxpayer, it
could mean excessive Federal borrowing).
Thousands of victims will fail to qualify because of newer
more restrictive legal and medical standards--this is not a
``no-fault'' system. Despite not being allowed into the
system, victims will likely be locked out of the trial
system.
The bill excludes thousands who worked at, or lived near,
hundreds of addresses around the country where Libby
vermiculite was shipped.
The bill is structured to make it nearly impossible for
victims who were exposed to asbestos in their own homes, and
who did not live with an asbestos worker, to prove their
exposure and eligibility for compensation. Assurances that
these people will be taken care of via the ``medical
exceptions panel'' are false promises given thousands would
fall into this category and the fund will not be able to
handle that many cases.
Trust funds have a dismal history: most have failed, all
have been bogged down at the start-up and all have
underestimated the amount of claims by large margins, as was
shown in the recent GAO Report: Federal Compensation
Programs.
Future victims of asbestos exposure, notably those exposed
during 9/11 and Hurricanes Rita and Katrina, will receive no
compensation and have no access to the court system.
Many asbestos victims with lung cancer, particularly
smokers, are excluded despite the medical consensus that
people with heavy asbestos exposure are at a substantially
increased risk of cancer.
There is no automatic sunset provision--if the fund is not
paying claims, victims must be able to gain access back into
the courts without relying on the administrator's discretion.
The bill does not account for those who may have been
exposed to naturally occurring asbestos.
Before allowing this legislation to move to the floor,
please consider these questions:
Will the proposed funding be sufficient to compensate all
victims?
How many victims will be left out from being compensated
for asbestos injuries?
How much will the fund be forced to borrow from the federal
government?
How many companies will contribute and how much will each
be assessed?
Can the bill, if enacted, withstand the numerous legal and
constitutional challenges already threatened by a wide range
of parties?
We have said it before and now we say it louder: We believe
it would be wholly irresponsible for Congress to proceed with
consideration and passage of this legislation. Please do not
allow the families who already have lost so much to be
victimized once again.
Sincerely,
Susan Vento, Chairperson, Committee to Protect Mesothelioma
Victims, Washington, DC.
Linda Reinstein, Co-Founder and Executive Director,
Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization, Redondo Beach, CA.
Michael Bowker, Founder and Executive Director, Asbestos
Victims Organization; Author, Fatal Deception: The Untold
Story of Asbestos: Why It Is Still Legal and Why It Is Still
Killing Us, Placerville, CA.
Jim Fite, National Secretary, White Lung Association,
Baltimore, MD.
Barbara Zeluck, Secretary, White Lung Asbestos Information
Center, New York, NY.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, I had placed in the Record yesterday one of
the petitions. We have 150,000 signatures on that--150,000 signatures
here in the Capitol in boxes. We debate this bill. There is a lot of
technical talk about startups, sunsets, and payment tiers. But let's
not lose sight of what this debate is about. It is about whether the
Senate will keep faith with the victims of a disease which they had no
opportunity to avoid.
The problem in America today, as it relates to what is going on on
the Senate floor, is not a crisis created by the legal system; it is a
crisis created by the people who expose these people to asbestos. If
there were ever a cry for fairness and equity and justice, it is this.
We cannot let corporate America do what they are trying to do to these
innocent men and women.
____________________