Press Release

C.P.M.V. Letter to Sen. Specter on New Bill

Unfairness to Victims Cited

WASHINGTON D.C. — Susan Vento, Chairperson of the Committee to Protect Mesothelioma Victims, today issued the following letter to Senate Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter (R-RA).

******************

Dear Chairman Specter:

I am writing on behalf of the Committee to Protect Mesothelioma Victims (CPMV) regarding the draft asbestos reform legislation that you introduced into the Record. CPMV represents the tens of thousands of Americans who have contracted and are suffering from mesothelioma, the most severe disease caused by asbestos.

The CPMV believes that asbestos litigation warrants a federal solution. However, we have strong concerns about your legislation. We believe that it is unfair to victims in a number of areas, including the following:

Funding. We believe that the proposed funding of $140 billion is insufficient to guarantee that victims will be fairly compensated. The predicted medical cost of asbestos diseases alone is expected to be several times this number over the next couple of decades. Moreover, we do not believe that it is consistent with the designated awards in the bill based on the number of asbestos victims and the number that are likely to file claims. This figure obviously is based on the most minimal prediction of those who might seek compensation from the fund. We do not believe, however, that this is a rational projection. Clearly, if the estimate is wrong — as we are confident that it is — it is the victims who will suffer, as they will be denied adequate recovery if the system remains intact, and assured of severe delays and confusion, and possibly no recovery, if the system folds, as the legislation anticipates with the sunset provision.
Pending Claims. We are concerned about preemption of pending claims. Pending claims involve persons who have duly filed claims in the court system and who have invested substantial time and funds relative to such claims. Your legislation, however, would preempt these actions and subject them to the trust fund immediately upon enactment. At that point, those persons will have to start over and shift their efforts to seek recovery from the new federal program. Although the legislation provides certain exemptions on pending claims — in the event the new system is not operational after 180 days for mesothelioma victims — we believe that there are two major problems with the exception. First, the threshold for meeting the operational requirements are very minimal and the time period given to accomplish them, six months, is too extensive for persons with mesothelioma who may not have that long to live. Second, even if a claim meets the exemption, it is returned to the tort system as a new claim, meaning the litigant has to go to the back of the line and start the litigation process all over again, absent any recovery for the costs and delays that the trust fund system would have imposed on them.
Sunset Provision. We also have concerns about the sunset provision. We recognize that a sunset provision is necessary as a safeguard in the event the trust fund system fails. We believe that the myriad of problems associated with the legislation in its current form is a guarantee that a sunset will occur. Obviously, a sunset of the program would be the worst outcome of all the options before the Congress, including maintaining the current litigation system. Essentially, the Congress not only would have failed to solve the problem but also, without question, would have made it worse for all parties - victims, defendants and the courts.

The problems with your legislation represent the difficulties with the trust fund approach. It is an attempt to transform a complex judicial system, historically implemented by the states, into a singular federal bureaucracy. Of course, one of the main goals of the judicial system is to ensure fairness for all persons. The trust fund approach, as it has been constructed relative to legislation considered in the last Congress and regarding your present bill, and the manner these measures have treated victims, has failed to satisfy this important principle. Moreover, given the positions of the affected interests, we believe that it will be impossible to meet this principle through a national trust fund policy.

Accordingly, the CPMV believes that the Congress should consider other policy options. A policy option that we believe should be given strong consideration is the medical criteria/pleural registry system. Similar to your legislation, a medical criteria/pleural registry system would require individuals to meet an injury threshold to be eligible for receiving compensation; however, unlike the trust fund program, it would preserve the state tort system. Claims that fail to meet the required thresholds would be placed on a formal registry and remain there until the claimant's condition and impairment advance to a degree of satisfying the qualifications for seeking compensation through the litigation tort system. Studies by the Rand Institute, and other independent groups, reveal such claims comprise 90% of current asbestos claims.

I would like to make clear that the CPMV greatly respects the incredible work you personally, and the Committee as a whole, have done on this issue. We understand the difficulty that you face in trying to resolve this complex issue. However, we do not believe that the present legislation will be fair to victims or serve as an appropriate resolution. In this regard, we propose that you, and the Committee as a whole, consider the alternative approach concerning a medical criteria/pleural registry system. We welcome the opportunity to work with you and all Committee members on the issue.

Sincerely,

Susan Vento
Chairperson