Suitably Flip

John E'wards Just Died a Little Inside

Sometimes obstruction can be a lonely game.

Harry Reid learned as much in his bid to block debate on a Senate Bill that could settle (and thus do away with) thousands of pending asbestos lawsuits, one of the holy grails for hungry, hungry trial lawyers.

The bill would create a $140 billion trust fund to compensate victims for asbestos-related medical problems, financed by asbestos manufacturers and their insurers, who could no longer be sued in court. Attorneys' fees would be capped, and payments to victims would be based on the level of exposure and type of disease.

Despite its vast complexities and narrow focus, the bill is politically charged because so many special interests have a stake in it. Major manufacturers, unions, insurance companies and trial lawyers are bitterly divided over whether the fund is fair and workable -- creating conflicting pressures on lawmakers and making the outcome difficult to predict.

Illustrating the efficacy of Reid's leadership, the Senate voted 98-1 in favor of moving forward with the bill.  (Reid couldn't even convince himself; Senators Inhofe and Coburn, both Oklahoma Republicans, were the Nay and non-vote, respectively.)

"This bill has been subjected to more analysis and more investigation and more consideration" than any other in Senate history, Specter said.

Reid countered that the fund was "doomed to failure" and said "one would have to search far and wide to find a bill as bad as this."

Why does the Democratic leader find the bill (whose most ill-affected group is far and away the trial lawyers) so singularly bad?

I wonder.

Lawyers & Lobbyists: Long-Term Contribution Trends

More at GOP Bloggers

Comments

John E'wards Just Died a Little Inside

Sometimes obstruction can be a lonely game.

Harry Reid learned as much in his bid to block debate on a Senate Bill that could settle (and thus do away with) thousands of pending asbestos lawsuits, one of the holy grails for hungry, hungry trial lawyers.

The bill would create a $140 billion trust fund to compensate victims for asbestos-related medical problems, financed by asbestos manufacturers and their insurers, who could no longer be sued in court. Attorneys' fees would be capped, and payments to victims would be based on the level of exposure and type of disease.

Despite its vast complexities and narrow focus, the bill is politically charged because so many special interests have a stake in it. Major manufacturers, unions, insurance companies and trial lawyers are bitterly divided over whether the fund is fair and workable -- creating conflicting pressures on lawmakers and making the outcome difficult to predict.

Illustrating the efficacy of Reid's leadership, the Senate voted 98-1 in favor of moving forward with the bill.  (Reid couldn't even convince himself; Senators Inhofe and Coburn, both Oklahoma Republicans, were the Nay and non-vote, respectively.)

"This bill has been subjected to more analysis and more investigation and more consideration" than any other in Senate history, Specter said.

Reid countered that the fund was "doomed to failure" and said "one would have to search far and wide to find a bill as bad as this."

Why does the Democratic leader find the bill (whose most ill-affected group is far and away the trial lawyers) so singularly bad?

I wonder.

Lawyers & Lobbyists: Long-Term Contribution Trends

More at GOP Bloggers