Favors Compensation Fund Over Civil Litigation

Underlying the Act is an essential, fundamental premise over which there is a broad consensus: that civil lawsuits are no longer an appropriate way to provide compensation to individuals suffering from asbestos-related injuries. In fact, the civil litigation system has created a "crisis" that has been bad for victims of asbestos, bad – and in some cases devastating – for businesses, and bad for the nation’s economy.

The solution offered by the Act would provide those who have been injured by asbestos with quick and sure payment without the need for showing specific defendants to be at fault.

A compensation fund financed by defendants and insurers would replace a system that relies on courtroom battles over theories of product liability or negligence, statutes of limitations, causation, damages and other issues. Compensation from the fund would be based on sound medical criteria, with the most severely injured receiving the largest payments.

The concept behind the Act is to provide compensation to those who are truly ill or injured and to eliminate a system where much of the compensation that is finally paid is siphoned off to transaction costs, primarily attorneys fees, rather than going to the victims of asbestos exposure.

see also:

The Railroad's Defense To defend the railroad, it was stated that they did not make asbestos
Defending, Hoferer said, railroads did not manufacture asbestos.

Inclusion of FELA Rail labor protests FELA's inclusion due to its effect on asbestos law
FELA's inclusion in act protested due to effect on Asbestos Law

Report of Testimony re: FAIR Act Read Hoferer's testimony to the U.S. Judiciary on behalf of BNSF
More about BNSF's attorney Hoferer's testimony to the Judiciary