Senate Asbestos Bill Expands to Include Hurricane, 9/11 Victims

As the U.S. Senate debates asbestos poisoning and what to do to curtail it, a rather large pachyderm lurks in the room. The massive cloud of dust that blanketed New York when the World Trade Center collapsed in 2001 has been, until recently, on the back burner. Now, it's coming to the forefront.

Senators have spent years working on a plan to set up a $140 billion fund for the purpose of processing thousands of personal injury claims from people sickened by asbestos. While there has been little talk of a wave of claims arising from the September 11 attacks, a new  Senate proposal has raised the subject.

Official language allowing New York City residents, as well as victims of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, to file claims may attract more support for legislation to create the fund -- but at the same time, it raises new questions about whether the fund will be promptly depleted.

"You have an awful lot of people whose lungs are exposed to this material," Dr. Stephen Levin, of Mount Sinai Medical Center in New 
York City, said. "Asbestos has been found in bulk samples, both on the pile at Ground Zero, as well as in settled dust in buildings and offices. It's surely around."

In an interview, Levin said he has been monitoring the health of thousands of rescue workers from the September 11 disaster.

Asbestos is a potentially hazardous, fire-retardant mineral used widely in building insulation and other products until the mid-1970s, when its side effects became better known. Inhalation of asbestos fibers is linked to cancer and other diseases, which usually take years to develop. Victims' groups say the World Trade Center had tons of it.

A bill by Sen. Arlen Specter (R-Pennsylvania) and Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont) would establish a $140 billion fund to pay individual asbestos victims up to $1.1 million. The account would be financed by companies that manufactured and/or sold asbestos products and their insurers. In turn, those companies would be protected from liability.

The senators' aim is to unclog courts, stop abusive lawsuits and process claims of those who are truly ill. Primarily, the fund would 
pay claims of people exposed to asbestos at work, such as construction workers. Others who believe their illness was caused by asbestos could seek compensation, and per the bill's language, a panel of physicians would decide whether they qualify.

In recent days, the Senate bill was restructured to enable New Yorkers exposed to asbestos in the September 11 attacks to file claims along with people exposed to building debris from the 2005 Gulf Coast hurricanes. In February, the bill failed by a single vote to clear a procedural hurdle in the Senate. Some experts believe the recent amendments are an attempt for the bill's backers to build broader support.

"More than anything, it's a political tactic, to increase Democratic support for the fund," said Andrew Parmentier, an analyst at Friedman Billings Ramsey in Arlington, Virginia.

Earlier this year, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-New York) had sought to add a similar World Trade Center provision to the asbestos bill. Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-Louisiana) then proposed the inclusion of  hurricane language. But the bill's future remains uncertain, as the possibility of more claims could scare off fiscal conservatives who already worry about the fund's solvency.

Skeptics fear the $140 billion fund could run out of money, leaving the federal government on the hook for the unpaid claims. Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) is already a critic of the Specter-Leahy bill and wary of adding to the fund's burden. Cornyn and others feel that any provision enabling large numbers of claims without proof of occupational exposure will exponentially increase the cost of the fund.

Senate Judiciary Committee staff said the provisions were added to make it clear that 9/11 and hurricane victims could apply for compensation.

It will be difficult for anyone to project how many claims it would add to the fund, however, and the financial impact thereof. In a city as crowded as Manhattan, hundreds of thousands of people could seek recourse via this provision. Different concerns have been voiced by environmentalists, who worry that the provision says nothing about claims actually being paid.

"This is window dressing to get people on board to support the bill, but it won't do anything to help the victims of the World Trade Center and Katrina," said Richard Wiles, Senior V.P. of the Environmental Working Group, who noted that some claims resulting from the World Trade Center collapse are already in the courts, and the bill would take away their option of suing for exposure to asbestos.