NU Online News Service, May 13, 7:06 p.m. EDT, Washington–Democratic House Judiciary Committee members have asked the Government Accountability Office to report on possible problems with an asbestos injury trust fund that forms an integral part of a proposal the Senate is crafting to deal with asbestos litigation.
In a letter to Comptroller General David M. Walker, Democratic members of the House Judiciary Committee asked the GAO "study the efficacy, fairness, and solvency of various trust funds and programs established to compensate individuals for harm caused by mass torts and other exposure to dangerous materials and products."
Specifically, the letter asks the GAO to review other similar programs created by Congress to compensate victims, such as the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act and the Radiation Compensation Act.
It also asks for an examination of other trust funds facilitated by legislative acts or bankruptcy court orders like the Johns-Manville Personal Injury Settlement Trust.
In its review, the committee members ask the GAO to report on any instances where these programs failed to pay beneficiaries their full compensation or delayed payments, and to report on both the startup and ongoing administrative costs of such programs.
Additionally, the Democrats' letter asks the GAO to examine, "whether any beneficiaries have been denied claims who would have otherwise been eligible to receive payment under the tort system or other applicable law," and also for any evidence of discrimination in the compensation systems.
A study similar to what the Democratic members are seeking was released last month by USAction, a progressive advocacy group.
USAction's study examined three programs, the Black Lung program paying benefits to miners with injuries from coal dust exposure, the Radiation Exposure Compensation Act (RECA) program for veterans exposed to atomic radiation and Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program (EEOICPA).
It found that in each case, beneficiaries faced delays in receiving payment, often because lawmakers underestimated the expense of starting and maintaining the programs, or made their decisions based on inaccurate information supplied by supporters of such programs.
"Forecasting the utilization of compensation programs is difficult at best even for established ones with a stable record of benefits and compensability conditions," said the USAction study.
The report, written by University of Connecticut Professor Emeritus Peter S. Barth, found "The track record for forecasting the utilization and costs of newly established programs tends to be very poor."
© Arc, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to TMSalesOperations@arc-network.com. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.