Senate Kills Fund for Asbestos Victims

The Senate rejected a new plan Tuesday to compensate asbestos victims, apparently dooming a proposed $140-billion fund that would have handled claims now battled out in court.

Under the legislation, asbestos makers and their insurers would have contributed to a trust fund to pay claims for illnesses in amounts from $25,000 to $1.1 million. But the measure faced attacks on several fronts.

Trial lawyers and their Democratic allies argued that efforts to take claims out of the courts threatened the ability of victims to obtain sufficient restitution.

Fiscal conservatives feared that the approach would set up a federal entitlement program, along the lines of “black lung” compensation, with insufficient limits on payments and a growing bill for taxpayers.

The final vote was 58 to 41, with advocates of the asbestos legislation failing to get the 60 votes needed to beat back a procedural challenge. Proponents of the bill, who initially had 59 votes, said they might try again, but they were sobered by a defeat that included votes of Democrats and Republicans.

“The consequence of the vote tonight is that victims who are in need are not going to receive fair and just compensation,” Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) said after the vote. “They deserve it. They need it.”

At the end, Frist shifted his vote from yes to no, a parliamentary maneuver that he said would enable him to bring the matter up again if he chose.

By all accounts, the outcome was a stinging defeat for advocates of the plan and raised questions about the approach that had been painstakingly established by a coalition of Republicans and Democrats in the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The vote was over a technical issue -- whether the proposed $140-billion fund would exceed budgetary limits. Proponents argued it would not, noting the fund was to be financed by private companies and insurance firms. They also cited a recent analysis by the Congressional Budget Office that the fund would not expand the federal deficit over the long haul.

“It’s abundantly clear that this legislation will not be a burden on the United States Treasury,” Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) said.

Opponents maintained that the fund was insufficient for long-term asbestos claims and could ultimately saddle taxpayers with new costs or leave claimants in limbo if the money ran out.

“In addition to being unfair to victims, the bill is unfair to the federal taxpayer,” said Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), the Senate minority leader, who led the opposition. The bill, he added, “may be well-intentioned, but it is ill-conceived.”

Supporters sought to establish a system for asbestos claims that would be similar to the workers’ compensation program for workplace injuries. Workers would not have to prove that their symptoms were caused by a particular exposure to asbestos.

Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), chairman of the Judiciary Committee, had urged senators to keep the bill alive and invited colleagues to address their concerns by amending the measure in the coming days.

“To have it rejected on a technicality is just a terrible waste of so much time and effort,” Specter said of the bill that had passed in committee in May.

Afterward, Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.), an opponent of the measure, tried to sound a conciliatory tone.

“We have to find a reasonable way to help these victims,” he said. “I don’t know if we can reach an agreement, but I sure want to try.”