Armstrong Watching Progress Of Asbestos Bill

Macon, GA, July 16--As Armstrong World Industries attempts to surface from Chapter 11 bankruptcy, some say a proposal to create a separate court for asbestos litigation may offer relief, according to the Macon Telegraph. Lancaster, PA based Armstrong, which entered bankruptcy in December 2000, hopes to emerge from Chapter 11 by November, with permission from creditors and more importantly, with a large asbestos trust fund created to handle mountains of litigation. Asbestos is a material that was historically used in fireproofing, but was found to cause cancer and other life-threatening illnesses. Lawsuits regarding asbestos exposure have caused more than 60 companies to file for bankruptcy, according to the Congressional Research Service. Armstrong has a plant that manufactures acoustical ceiling tiles and employs 500. Plant manager Jim Bosserman said he didn't expect any changes once Armstrong emerges from bankruptcy, but he wasn't certain what the outcome would be. "What we don't know is, are we likely to be sold or not? Not knowing that makes it difficult to make decisions in the long run," Bosserman said. Bosserman and other industry advocates say the proposed formation of a federal asbestos court, including a more than $100 billion trust fund for asbestos victims, will stop more companies from sliding into bankruptcy. Georgia senators Saxby Chambliss and Zell Miller co-sponsored the proposed Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act of 2003 (FAIR Act of 2003), currently before the full Senate. In an undated op-ed piece, Chambliss, a member of the Senate judiciary committee, wrote that the goal was to "establish a system that compensates those victims suffering from debilitating diseases and cancer, and ensures funds will be available for future victims without forcing many more businesses into bankruptcy." Miller's press secretary Anthony Coley said in a written statement that the FAIR Act is "true to its meaning. It strikes a good balance between what is fair and reasonable in terms of consumer compensation and corporate responsibility." But not everyone is happy with the proposal, which calls for the creation of a separate judiciary to handle asbestos cases, limits the amount of money victims can seek and restricts by type of illness and exposure who may sue for compensation. A report in the insurance trade publication Insurance Day said insurers were not certain to back the latest version of the bill, and that it will likely see a "rough ride in the Senate" as trial lawyers, consumer advocates and union interests weigh in. Helen Gonzales, policy director for the consumer umbrella group USAction in Washington, D.C. said as a consumer advocate, she did not think the FAIR Act would treat victims fairly. "The real concern that we have is that the trust fund that they have will not be enough to compensate victims," Gonzales said. Gonzales was concerned that people who are ill from asbestos but don't have the most deadly diseases will be barred from seeking compensation at all. "People who have (asbestos-related) illnesses that prevent them from getting health insurance or doing the jobs they used to do, they're in a double-bind," Gonzales said. Other concerns include the possibility of folding existing cases into the new system, the difficulty and expense of setting up a new bureaucracy, and the way the trust fund would be funded, Gonzales said. "It's about corporate accountability. These (victims) are people who, day to day, went to work and were poisoned by asbestos," Gonzales said. "Companies that go through bankruptcy can still come back as healthy companies."