Legislation aimed at resolving a rising tide of litigation over health problems caused by asbestos ought to live up to its name - “Fairness in Asbestos Compensation Act.” It ought to be fair.
As the U.S. Senate prepares to take up that bill, Montana's two senators voice disagreement about how fairly it will treat the people of Libby, the northwestern Montana community where many residents have been sickened or killed by asbestos unearthed for decades at a nearby mine, and many others have been exposed to asbestos fibers, creating the likelihood that many of them will sicken and die over time.
Asbestos is a mineral with heat-resistant properties that has been widely used for all manner of industrial and commercial purposes. Microscopic asbestos fibers are dangerous, however. When inhaled, they can imbed in the lungs and cause several debilitating, often fatal diseases, including asbestosis and a type of cancer. It can take 20 years or more after exposure to asbestos for the diseases to occur.
Thousands of people nationwide have been harmed or killed by asbestos, and many thousands of others who have been exposed to asbestos live with the potential that they, too, eventually will contract lung disease from that exposure. So many lawsuits have been filed against companies that produced asbestos or used asbestos in products that some companies have filed bankruptcy and many others face potential bankruptcy. A very real possibility exists that litigation will produce such widespread bankruptcy that the resources to compensate many of today's asbestos victims and all of the future ones will be drained away. What's more, the cost of lawyers and litigation promises to reduce the amount of money actually received by the asbestos victims lucky enough to win compensation.
The proposed solution involves the legislation now pending in Congress. The asbestos compensation act would create a large fund paid for by asbestos-producing and consuming industries. Money from the fund would be used to compensate the people harmed by asbestos.
This is a huge, complex piece of legislation, nearly a decade in the making, one that must balance diverse and conflicting interests. Addressing the needs of Libby's residents may be even more complicated. The type of asbestos fiber produced at the W.R. Grace vermiculite mine near Libby differs from the more common form found elsewhere. Debate swirls about how much more dangerous the Libby-variety fibers might be. As a Jan. 6 Missoulian article detailed, there hasn't been enough research done to resolve the question of how many Libby residents likely are to suffer health effects, which could differ from diseases resulting from exposure to the more common form of asbestos. Surely it's possible through additional research to provide greater medical clarity, and surely it's possible to ensure that legislation enacted to address the overall asbestos issue contains adequate provision for people in Libby whose current health status may be debatable as a result of inadequate scientific knowledge.
Businesses and individuals have different sorts of asbestos “exposure” - the former have uncertain liability from deadly products sold, the latter have breathed in potential time bombs. In both cases, the exposure can be fatal. A legislative approach promises to be the only workable way to address the massive problems associated with asbestos - although, for many individuals, the results still will be fatal.
It's not enough to merely end litigation and create a fund for many or most victims. The end result must also be fair - for starters, fair to the people of Libby - or it's not worth doing.
|
 |
 |
Add your comment now! Write your comment in the form below.
(Email address is for verification only. If you'd like to email a story, look for the link above)