Workers Urge 'No' Vote On National Asbestos Compensation Bill

By KAREN HERZOG, Bismarck Tribune

January 15, 2004

http://www.bismarcktribune.com/articles/2004/01/15/news/state/sta04.txt

North Dakota workers who say they have suffered health problems from asbestos exposure in the workplace met Tuesday to urge North Dakota's senators to vote "no" on a bill that they say would delay and drastically cut compensation for workers and families of those hurt or killed by asbestos exposure.

Asbestos has been used since the 1880s for a myriad of purpose. By the 1950s, the link had been made from asbestos to various lung conditions and cancers. Those speaking against the Frist-Hatch asbestos bill (S. 1125) worked in a variety of jobs, from construction to electrical to refinery, handling insulations, floor and ceiling tiles and many other materials containing asbestos.

Don Morrison, executive director of the North Dakota Progressive Coalition, called the underlying issue "what is happening to people who were poisoned in the workplace."

The bill would bail out asbestos companies, Morrison said, urging North Dakota's two Democratic senators, Byron Dorgan and Kent Conrad, to vote against the bill.

Mesothelioma, a fatal cancer associated with asbestos, usually kills victims in a year or less, said Paula Grosinger, a nurse and executive director of the North Dakota Trial Lawyers Association.

Three thousand people a year in the U.S. die of this cancer, she said. North Dakota sees about 10 deaths a year from mesothelioma, Grosinger said. About 500 people in the state have clinical symptoms and pursued claims; she guesses there are more with symptoms who haven't pursued claims.

Lung scarring and other disabling conditions are lifelong; once asbestos is absorbed into the lungs, it never goes away, said David Kemnitz, of Mandan.

The Frist-Hatch bill essentially would limit the liability of companies who manufactured asbestos and their insurers, said Kemnitz, who said he suffers lung damage and scarring from asbestos exposure.

According to Morrison, the Frist-Hatch bill would eliminate all current and future asbestos jury trials, cancel thousands of existing settlements between companies and asbestos victims, and void all jury verdicts unless a final judgment has been entered and paid and all appeals are over.

"Pending cases and settlements would be wiped out, and because of a logjam of at least 425,000 claims, victims would have to wait as long as 10 years for compensation they have already been promised," Morrison said.

That compension, in the form of pending settlements and trust funds, sits at at least $21.4 billion right now; under the Senate bill, asbestos companies would take back three-quarters, or $15.5 billion of that fund, leaving only $5.8 billion for the victims.

Morrison said the bill "gives a windfall to the corporations who poisoned them in the first place," replacing victims' legal rights with "a new untested national trust fund," which is woefully underfunded, he said. He said companies favoring this bill hope the federal government will then step in and provide the difference.

Dorgan said Wednesday he would not support the Hatch bill as presently written.

"The asbestos problem needs fixing," he said, "but the Hatch bill does not address it in a satisfactory way."

However, he is doubtful that this version will come up for vote, he said; bipartisan negotiations are currently under way on the issue.

"I hope for a compromise that I would be able to support."

Two factors will be important in any bill -- setting medical criteria for asbestos-related illnesses and deciding how much total money will be available for settlements.

"Most negotiations will be around those issues," Dorgan said.

*** POSTED JANUARY 15, 2004 ***