Myths and Facts About the Hyde "Fairness" Bill

MYTH: Asbestos litigation is clogging the courts.

FACT: There is no litigation crisis. Last year, fewer than 100 asbestos cases reached juries. And while many asbestos-exposed workers file cases in state court to prevent the statute of limitations from running, the vast majority of these cases were placed on inactive dockets at no cost to the manufacturers. For example, Owens-Corning recently announced a national settlement plan to resolve 176,000 asbestos claims. Passage of asbestos bill H.R. 1283/S. 758 would disrupt these voluntary efforts by encouraging delay.

MYTH: Asbestos legislation would expedite recoveries for workers.

FACT: Nowhere is this required. The Hyde Bill does not require asbestos manufacturers to pay any money to injured workers, even those who meet the restrictive medical criteria. It fails to establish a mechanism to fund benefits. If enacted, the bill would delay payment of compensation -- including payments for all pending claims that have not gone to final judgement -- for at least two years. For those who do not receive a certificate of medical eligibility -- estimated at 80 percent of current claimants -- access to the courts is completely foreclosed.

MYTH: Asbestos has not been used for 20 years, so Americans are safe from danger.

FACT: No, they're not! Asbestos manufacture, importation and use is not banned in the U.S. Over one million tons of "friable" (easily crumbled) asbestos are in place in buildings, ships, factories, refineries, power plants and other facilities. Between 1940-1979, 27.5 million workers were exposed to asbestos. These past exposures are predicted to cause 9,700 cancer cases in the year 2000. Cancer incidence will decline slightly thereafter, but continue for another 30 years. Further, over one million workers are currently being exposed to asbestos installed years ago as it disintegrates, or is demolished, removed or repaired.

MYTH: This bill would speed resolution of claims.

FACT: There are no time limits. The Hyde Bill contains no time limits for deciding which claims can proceed. Currently, most new claimants received partial compensation within one year of filing a complain. Under the asbestos bill, the administrative qualification process will take at least two years to complete -- before injured claimants can even file their complaint in court. Because certain non-economic damages are no awarded after the claimant dies. No asbestos companies will settle claims until this two year period ends.

MYTH: The bill would relieve the burden of asbestos litigation on courts.

FACT: False! The Hyde Bill prevents courts from consolidating claims and relying on innovative case processing techniques. Every claimant who successfully qualifies to file a lawsuit must try their claim individually. The inability of courts to aggregate claims will actually increase the burden of asbestos litigation on the judiciary. This is patently absurd.

MYTH: The asbestos industry uniformly supports H.R. 1283S. 758.

FACT: Not at all. Several asbestos defendants, notably Owens-Corning and Owens-Illinois, oppose this asbestos bill. So does W.R. Grace & Co-Conn.

MYTH: H.R. 1283/S. 758 will reduce transaction costs.

FACT: The opposite is true. Existing voluntary settlement agreements already substantially reduce transaction costs, particularly defense costs of the asbestos industry. The time-consuming, adversarial medical eligibility and administrative qualifications process established by the bill will have the opposite effect: It will increase transaction costs. That is why a number of asbestos manufactures oppose the bills. It's not fair and it's not efficient and it creates another federal bureacracy.

MYTH: H.R. 1283/S. 758 provides fair compensation to asbestos victims.

FACT: Not True! The asbestos bill provides a windfall to asbestos manufacturers at the expense of victims. It unfairly limits the total number of claims to hose meeting arbitrary medical criteria. Under its provisions, 80 percent of current claimants would be denied any legal remedy. For example, a lung cancer victim would be barred from filing suit without proof of 15 years asbestos exposure, even though asbestos is known to cause cancer after much shorter exposures and no state imposes such strict medical criteria for recovery.

*** POSTED JUNE 21, 1999 ***