Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.
House Moves for More Asbestos Transparency
By Jessica Tyner
In November 2013, the House of Representatives moved to pass legislation that will not require “asbestos trusts” to deliver quarterly reports on asbestos exposure cases. Republicans claim that these changes will help to bring down fraudulent claims, a statement in itself that has drummed up plenty of controversy in recent months.
The Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency (FACT) Act just barely slid into existence, since Democrats strongly rallied against FACT during debates, with only five Democrats voting in its favor. According to the majority of House Republicans, the bill is nearly a necessity since 60 fraudulent asbestos trust cases have been unveiled around America.
Asbestos was first celebrated in the 1930s when New York firefighters encouraged everyone to use asbestos as insulation — after all, it was nearly fireproof. Judy Garland breathed in asbestos during the snowflake scene in “The Wizard of Oz.” Asbestos was sold as fake snow during the holiday season in the 1950s in every department store.
According to the Republicans, the media has revealed people who are filing fraudulent and duplicate claims as a means to make some quick cash off of a very real problem. They say that reporting on who’s behind these filings and the details of the claim will help reduce fraud while simultaneously helping to optimize funds for legitimate claims for many more years.
Democrats say that there’s no solid evidence of “rampant fraud” within the trust system. House Minoriy Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) notes that “there is no evidence of systemic fraud in the asbestos trust system. In short, this bill is unnecessary, it is mean-spirited, and it will never become the law of the land.”
A Foggy Future
There’s no telling how the future of FACT will play out. However, Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-Texas), one of the bill’s sponsors, says he was offended when murmurings began that the bill will hurt people “This is for the victims,” he said, pointing to the fact that keeping fraud to a minimum will increase funds available for real victims. There are also some Democrats who say the bill is designed to help companies who are facing asbestos claims. Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) said during the debates that if the bill is for real sufferers, they should be able to testify — however, that idea was put to bed by Republicans.
In the end, FACT was supported by numerous business groups and opposed by victim right groups as well as the Obama administration. The US Chamber of Commerce’s Institute for Legal Reform (ILR) was a big supporter, noting that “Fraud and abuse in the asbestos compensation system drain the funds available to deserving claimants and force solvent companies, as well as their shareholders and employees, to pay unjust claims.”
Three Democratic amendments were requested before the final bill was passed, two of which were to force manufacturers to make their own asbestos threats transparent. All amendments were rejected.
Do You Have Mesothelioma?
Since mesothelioma is almost always caused by asbestos exposure, if you’ve been diagnosed with the cancer you likely has an asbestos legal claim. Learn more about what you can do at the Mesothelioma Asbestos Class Action Lawsuit Settlement Investigation right now. You’ll be able to submit your information and an attorney will contact you if you have a case for a free asbestos claim review.
All medical device, dangerous drug and medical class action and lawsuit news updates are listed in the Drug and Medical Device section of Top Class Actions.
Top Class Actions Legal Statement
