[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 4]
[House]
[Page 5366]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




             ASBESTOS LITIGATION INUNDATES THE COURT SYSTEM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Illinois (Mr. Kirk) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. KIRK. Mr. Speaker, yesterday Steven Kazan, the prominent asbestos 
victims lawyer, informed the Congress: ``Asbestos litigation has become 
a nightmare because the courts have been inundated by the claims of 
people who may have been exposed to asbestos but who are not sick, who 
have no lung function deficit. This flood is conjured up through 
systematic, for-profit screening programs designed to find potential 
plaintiffs with some x-ray evidence `consistent with' asbestosis. 
Ironically, and tragically, in many States that x-ray evidence triggers 
the statute of limitations, literally forcing the filing of premature 
claims. These claims are choking the asbestos litigation system and 
keeping the courts from doing their real job, providing compensation 
for people who are genuinely injured by asbestos diseases.''
  Mr. Speaker, the current state of asbestos litigation is a public 
health tragedy in which the claims of truly ill, terminally ill cancer 
patients and others who struggle to breathe are mixed together with 
those plaintiffs who suffer no impairments. In 2001, almost 90,000 
individuals joined in asbestos-related personal injury suits against 
6,000 entities, but only 10 percent of those claimants have any 
symptoms of asbestos-related illnesses. These legal tactics force 
defendants into settlements because they cannot take the risk of 
``betting the company'' on pronouncements of a judge and jury. This 
first happened in 1982 when 16,000 asbestos personal injury suits 
forced Johns Manville Corporation into bankruptcy. Since then, the 
uncertainty of asbestos litigation has driven nearly 70 major American 
companies into bankruptcy.
  During the past 20 years, 2,100 asbestos cases have been tried or 
settled at a total cost of $54 billion, with over half of the money 
used to pay lawyers. As the Wall Street Journal points out, that is 
more money than the cost of 9-11, Enron and WorldCom put together.

                              {time}  1400

  It certainly is a lot of money, but sick plaintiffs are not getting 
their fair share. The Manville Asbestos Claim Trust created by the 
bankruptcy court started paying claims in 1988 and was depleted in just 
2 years. Today Manville pays just 5 cents on the dollar to claimants, 
and more money flows out to individuals with no impairments than to 
people who are truly sick. The truest victims of this tragedy are those 
who deserve quick and fair compensation for the illnesses they suffer.
  However, this problem has more victims. The long-term economic cost 
paid by all Americans is staggering. According to the RAND Corporation, 
another $150 billion to $200 billion will be spent on asbestos 
litigation if nothing is done. To date, $54 billion has been expended. 
Without reform 423,000 American jobs will be lost. Local governments 
will spend millions on unemployment benefits, job retraining, and 
medical coverage for displaced workers and their families. Workers in 
bankrupt firms will not only lose their jobs, but their retirement 
security will slip away as they watch the value of their 401(k) 
accounts drop by 25 percent.
  The ever-burgeoning caseload has spawned criticism even from Supreme 
Court justices who warn that the asbestos litigation crisis is slowing 
the administration of justice nationwide, and therefore, Congress must 
act. These complaints span the idealogical spectrum of the Supreme 
Court, including court liberals like Ruth Bader Ginsberg and moderates 
like David Souter. In 1999, Souter wrote: ``The elephantine mass of 
asbestos cases . . . defies customary judicial administration and calls 
for national legislation.'' Opining on the same case, Rehnquist, 
Scalia, and Kennedy also begged Congress to act. Others are joining the 
chorus.
  Both the Washington Times and the Washington Post called on Congress 
to move asbestos litigation reform. Just 2 weeks ago, even the American 
Bar Association voted to support medical standards that would bring the 
cases of truly sick asbestos plaintiffs to the front of the docket.
  Asbestos victims, business leaders, lawyers, and opinion leaders all 
agree. The need for reform is clear. Therefore, today I am introducing 
the Asbestos Compensation Act of 2003. This bill establishes medical 
criteria to expedite the claims of the truly ill and gives these 
victims access to quick and fair compensation. Any worker who feared he 
was exposed to asbestos could be tested by a qualified doctor in his 
area identified by the Justice Department. Those found to be injured 
would have the value of their impairments determined in accordance with 
a fair formula, and the worried well would retain the right to return 
at a later date if they developed symptoms of asbestos-related illness.
  The Justice Department would contact corporations named by the 
workers as responsible for injuries, apportioning liability in 
accordance with the facts and a set liability formula. Many contacted 
corporations would accept these settlement offers since they would 
avoid the expensive legal battles of staying in court.
  Mr. Speaker, this is a cloud on our entire economy, affecting 900 
stocks in the stock market and the 401(k) and other retirement savings 
of all of our constituents. I ask for rapid support of this 
legislation. This is the most important legislation after the 
President's tax package that this Congress will consider this year.

                          ____________________