A Corner special: a preview of the issue of NRODT going to bed RIGHT NOW. Here’s Kate explaining everything you ever needed to know about the asbestos bill, from the February 27th issue of National Review:

Claims to compensation for alleged asbestos-related illnesses prompted the Supreme Court to call for congressional action to deal with the “elephantine mass” of litigation. Six years later, Republicans are poised to pass an elephantine mess of legislation. Many Republican senators don’t wish to see this bill — which they have roundly criticized — become law. But the need they feel to “move the process along,” an intense multi-million-dollar lobbying campaign, a desire to help victims and corporate defendants while reining in plaintiffs’ attorneys, and widespread misinformation may cause them to vote for the bill anyway. The result could be a costly asbestos-liability reform that leaves taxpayers holding the bag for tens of thousands of dubious claims.
Asbestos litigation over the past 20 years has been abusive to both victims and businesses. Lawmakers recognize the significant drain on the economy, and the hindrance to American competitiveness, when scores of corporations face unlimited liability to questionable claims arising from asbestos exposure. Corporate defendants have already paid out $70 billion, and 80 companies have gone into bankruptcy. Plaintiffs with no asbestos-related illnesses have won compensation, and trial attorneys’ fees have eaten up as much as 40 percent of recoveries while worthy plaintiffs wait years and collect only pennies on every dollar awarded. Although state reforms have ended some of the abuse, and investigations of doctors who have allegedly made thousands of fraudulent diagnoses are underway, there is still no clear end in sight. Cancer rates from asbestos exposure are down, but there were still 100,000 new claims last year. Over 600,000 claims are currently pending. Congressional action in behalf of deserving plaintiffs and beleaguered defendants would be appropriate.
Sen. Arlen Specter took it upon himself to design the solution that had eluded Congress. Previous efforts had failed to satisfy the competing demands of plaintiffs, defendants, and trial lawyers. As chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Specter had a choice. The bill could be a GOP product in need of a handful of Democratic supporters, or a collaborative effort with the ranking Democrat on his committee. He chose the second option, and the result is the Specter-Leahy reform, “anchored on the left” by its Democratic cosponsor, as one Senate critic of the legislation puts it. Even so, its passage has been a top priority for majority leader Bill Frist because it’s on his “to do” list, and both Senate Republicans and the White House are wary of crossing Specter, whose cooperation is crucial in judicial-confirmation battles.

Read the whole piece here.

And because we don’t give away whole articles from NRODT for free often, subscribe here.