INSURERS SEEK CHANGES TO ASBESTOS BILL
April 19, 2005 10:28

The insurance industry fired off letters criticizing legislation being drafted by the Senate Judiciary
Committee that would create an insurers' fund to pay
asbestos injury claimants. The draft bill "does not
adequately address all of our concerns," said one
coalition of trade groups. Specifically, the letter,
signed by officials of the American Insurance
Association, the Reinsurance Association of America
and the National Association of Mutual Insurance
Companies (NAMIC), explained that "it is imperative
that any trust fund provide insurers with both
certainty and finality for our asbestos exposure."
The bill also was criticized by the AFL-CIO, implying
that the draft is likely to undergo more revisions
before it is introduced by Sen. Arlen Specter,
chairman of the Judiciary Committee. Sen. Specter
introduced the bill and said he plans to move it
through committee.
For complete story

SPECTER ADVANCES MEASURE TO SETTLE ASBESTOS CLAIMS


Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter
moved ahead with his effort to resolve the national
asbestos litigation tangle, introducing a bill that
would create a $140 billion trust fund to pay victims'
claims while barring some smokers from benefits and
curbing payouts to trial lawyers. The measure, which
had been circulating in draft form, remains strongly
opposed by insurers and some victim groups. Also,
some members of Specter's own party are unhappy with
the proposal, indicating they think it is too
generous. Specter, after a private door meeting with
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist and Republican
Judiciary Committee members, said he expected the
panel to take up the measure within two weeks. The
bill promises funding of $40 billion in the first
five years from asbestos producers and users and
their insurers, and an additional $20 billion of
borrowing authority. Additional funding would be
provided later; the trust fund would be scheduled to
last 30 years. It also promises prompt payment of
"exigent" claims (those in which the victim has a
life expectancy of less than a year), and two years
for others, or victims would be allowed to return to
the courts. It also would allow victims to returns to
the courts should total funding prove inadequate. And
the measure would exclude people with lung cancer who
also were smokers unless they can show a connection
between their cancer and asbestos.
*****
Albert B. Crenshaw, The Washington Post, 04/20/2005

U.S. insurers said they will not be able to support
draft legislation for a $140 billion asbestos
compensation fund without substantial modifications.
"While the latest draft represents improvements over
earlier proposals in some areas, we continue to have
serious reservations about key provisions, and
without substantial modifications insurers will not
be able to support the legislation," said the letter
sent to Sen. Arlen Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican
and author of the draft bill. The letter, dated April
18, said this was a "unified insurance industry
position" and was signed by three trade groups: the
American Insurance Association, the National
Association of Mutual Insurance Companies and
Reinsurance Association of America.
*****
Reuters, 02/19/2005
For complete stor

In advance of a Capitol Hill rally by thousands of
doctors protesting rising malpractice premiums, a
consumer advocacy group said that the number and
value of malpractice payments is dropping, indicating
there is no medical liability crisis. Public Citizen
said the number of medical malpractice payments has
dropped nearly 14 percent from 2001 to 2004, and that
the amount of those payments also declined during
that same period - from $4.4 billion to $4.2 billion. "Insurance companies may be padding their bottom
lines by jacking up rates on doctors, but it is not
because of patients seeking relief for medical care
through our courts," said Joan Claybrook, president
of Public Citizen.
*****
Kevin Freking, The Associated Press, 04/19/2005
For complete story, search
http://www.ap.org/index.html
*****