Posted on 02/01/2006 6:09:12 AM PST by OXENinFLA
Since "Free Republic is an online gathering place for independent, grass-roots conservatism on the web. We're working to roll back decades of governmental largesse, to root out political fraud and corruption, and to champion causes which further conservatism in America.", I and others think it's a good idea to centralize what the goes on in the Senate (or House).
So if you see something happening on the Senate/House floor and you don't want to start a new thread to ask if anyone else just heard what you heard, you can leave a short note on who said what and about what and I'll try and find it the next day in THE RECORD. Or if you see a thread that pertains to the Senate, House, or pretty much any GOV'T agency please link your thread here.
If you have any suggestions for this thread please feel free to let me know.
Here's a few helpful links.
C-SPAN what a great thing. Where you can watch or listen live to most Government happenings.
C-SPAN 1 carries the HOUSE.
C-SPAN 2 carries the SENATE.
C-SPAN 3 (most places web only) carries a variety of committee meetings live or other past programming.
OR FEDNET has online feed also.
A great thing about our Government is they make it really easy for the public to research what the Politicians are doing and saying (on the floor anyway).
THOMAS where you can see a RECORD of what Congress is doing each day. You can also search/read a verbatim text of what each Congressmen/women or Senator has said on the floor or submitted 'for the record.' [This is where the real juicy stuff can be found.]
Also found at Thomas are Monthly Calendars for the Senate Majority and Senate Minority
And Monthly Calendars for the House Majority and Roll Call Votes can be found here.
THE WAR DEPARTMENT (aka The Dept. of Defense)
Yes he does make good points about how very much this issue needs to be addressed. However, after reading O'Beirne and listening to Cornyn (I dismiss Durbin's remarks about lobbyists writing the bill as both sides have had a hand in this), I think what I am seeing is another big, expensive government mess. And if we think this is bad, envision single payer health care. Oy!
Similar to the silicone litigation that threatened to take Dow Corning out of business. All the current proposal aims to do is arrive at a legislated settlement, to substitute for a litigated one.
In other words, it aims to cut off certain judicial remedies, and all the baggage that comes with them. I'm not clear on what drives the legislation, if it's the manufacturer defendants (who cares about them anyway? Bankrupt the whole lot of them and other companies would take over); or the courts for being overloaded. Sessions said something like 30 thousand cases were pending.
It's tobacco settlement like - except instead of being done by courts, it's being done by the Congress. I don't know if the House has taken this up yet.
Interesting though, that this is a higher priority than debate, negotiation and renewal of the USA PATRIOT Act.
I agree with you about why does this have such high priority..
One thing I have noticed about Frist, (don't know how much better Lott was--I didn't watch the Senate back then)..he doesn't seem like he prioritizes or pushes stuff very well.
I don't know the protocol for putting these things on the calendar...but, like you said, the Patriot Act is much more important than this...
I agree....and like I posted before...I wish they would just table for a while...
BTW...regarding what is going on now..with Domenici...I bet Sen. Nelson of Florida is about to bust an artery over this drilling bill...LOL<
Friday, April 23, 2004
Asbestos legislation falls apart in the Senate
By CHARLES POPE - SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENTWASHINGTON -- Once-promising legislation to compensate asbestos victims while shielding companies from crippling jury awards collapsed yesterday in the Senate amid charges of election-year gamesmanship.
The $124 billion bill, which was written by Senate Republicans with comment from the asbestos and insurance industries, fell far short of the 60 votes needed to end the debate. The vote was 50-47.
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/170370_asbestos23.html
Update on Asbestos Legislation (10-23-00)
Several actions over the past year have been responsible for a renewed public and legislative interest in the health dangers of asbestos. In a 1999 Supreme Court ruling against a $1.5 billion class action settlement, the justices ruled that the settlement had compromised the rights of the victims and that it was up to Congress to develop legislation to help move the numerous asbestos lawsuits through the court system at a faster pace. The second action was a series of Seattle Post-Intelligencer articles beginning in November 1999 about the Libby, MT, vermiculite mine and the 192 asbestos-related deaths there over the last 40 years. The newspaper articles prompted a public outcry, and two federal investigations into government agencies' failure to warn Libby residents and workers. Small amounts of asbestos from talc were also found in three major brands of crayons this summer. These events may influence the federal government to reevaluate the way they regulate these fibers.
Most Recent Action
In March 1999, Rep. Henry Hyde (R-IL) introduced H.R. 1283, a companion bill to S. 758 that would create a formal procedure for federal asbestos cases. This bill, the Asbestos Compensation Act of 2000, would establish the Office of Asbestos Compensation within the Department of Justice as well as authorize the formation of the Asbestos Compensation Fund that would provide payments to claimants under this act. A Congressional Research Service report on H.R. 1283, available at the National Library for the Environment, contains details about the proposals in the bill.
http://www.agiweb.org/gap/legis106/asbestos.html
By Christopher Tidmore, Political Columnist
January 23, 2006In the last few decades, nearly 123,158 tons of asbestos has been shipped into Orleans Parish, some only blocks from where school children play. Twenty-six tons arrived in the 200 block of Camp Street just days prior to Hurricane Katrina, an area surrounded by neighborhoods and restaurants frequented by many.
Post-storm rehabilitations of homes, the related large scale demolitions, or even ubiquitous roofing jobs currently underway on Orleans Parish houses are and will expose thousands of people to asbestos in ways unprecedented in urban American history.
Despite these dangers, a new bill now before Congress would prevent someone who gets cancer due to asbestos exposure post-Katrina from getting relief from the Asbestos Trust Fund.
http://www.louisianaweekly.com/weekly/news/articlegate.pl?20060124e
I just ran into this while reading various routine statements that don't or haven't made prominent news:
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
February 2, 2006Press Gaggle by Scott McClellan, John Marburger, Director of Office of Science & Technology Policy and Claude Allen, Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy
Aboard Air Force One
En route Maplewood, Minnesota11:01 A.M. EST
MR. McCLELLAN: All right. Good morning, everybody. I've got two distinguished guests with me who will talk to you all in a minute. But, first, I want to bring one item to your attention, and then I'm going to go through the President's day.
The Senate is getting ready to move forward and act on asbestos reform. Asbestos reform has been a high priority for this administration and we're encouraged that the Senate may be taking this up as early as next week. Asbestos litigation has clogged our courts, preventing people with legitimate claims from being compensated. It's led to the bankruptcy of a number of businesses and it's cost our economy an estimated -- more than $300 billion. And the President strongly supports a legislative solution that is based on three principles. We've talked about this before, but let me just refresh you.
First of all, a solution that targets the funds to those who are genuinely injured. Secondly, those who are genuinely sick -- secondly, it speeds up the process for compensating those who are injured. And, thirdly, that it provides certainty in the system. So I just wanted to bring that to yr attention, first of all. ...
Q Is he going to talk about the asbestos subject in his speech today?
MR. McCLELLAN: No, I don't think he'll have* -- because today's speech is really on the areas that Dr. Marburger and Claude Allen outlined to you all. But I just wanted to bring it up, because the Senate is looking at moving forward on it. It's a high priority for us, and it's something that's been -- that the Congress has been working on over the last few years, and we hope they can move forward on it and get it done.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060202-2.html
On a different subject, judicial nominations, the President nominated two Circuit Court candidates yesterday.
Sandra Segal Ikuta, of California, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth Circuit, vice James R. Browning, retired.A FR thread at http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1574863/posts is on the subject of the Wallace nomination. It also contains a few bits of information relating to Ikuta.Michael Brunson Wallace, of Mississippi, to be United States Circuit Judge for the Fifth Circuit, vice Charles W. Pickering, Sr., retired.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2006/02/20060208-11.html
High Court Overturns Asbestos SettlementThe case is Ortiz v. Fibreboard Corp., 527 US 815 (1999), briefly summarized at http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/815/. A "big-picture" lesson from the case is that Rules of Civil Procedure and the very existence of class action lawsuits are largely (albeit, not entirely) creations of Congress. This Congress/Civil Law relationship has broad ramifications and power, as I pointed out in the context of the Schiavo incident.
By Sharon Walsh - Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, June 24, 1999; Page A1The Supreme Court overturned a $1.5 billion asbestos settlement yesterday in a decision that on two fronts makes it more difficult for companies to resolve thousands of lawsuits through a single settlement. The justices ruled, 7 to 2, that a company cannot limit the amount it is willing to pay and that people in the group with conflicting interests must have separate lawyers. ...
While various courts have been extensively involved in crafting global settlements in these massive cases, the justices noted that only Congress can change the law that defines the limits of class actions. Justice David H. Souter, writing for the majority, pleaded with Congress to address the "elephantine mass" of asbestos claims legislatively.
"This litigation defies customary judicial administration and calls for national legislation," Souter wrote at the outset of his decision. In a footnote, he added: "To date, Congress has not responded." Yesterday was the third time in a decade the court has asked for the help of Congress in dealing with the issue. ...
Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist - along with Justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony M. Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sandra Day O'Connor - joined Souter in the decision.
Stephen G. Breyer and John Paul Stevens dissented. Breyer wrote for the two that in such complex cases, the district court should be given the discretion to reach an equitable resolution.
Although there have been various legislative proposals over the years regarding asbestos claims, none has ever made it to the floor of Congress.
"The majority of the Supreme Court is saying that if asbestos is going to be solved, Congress has to solve it," said one lawyer who is not involved in this case. But, he added: "Congress will never touch this with a 10-foot pole. The trial lawyers are too entrenched."
Back to the special legislation proposed for the asbestos issue, here are some other links, most of them being easy reading ...
http://www.agiweb.org/gap/legis106/asbestos.html
http://library.findlaw.com/1999/Jul/1/126075.html
http://www.senate.gov/~grassley/releases/1999/p9r10-05.htm
http://www.ocplan.com/ocplan_timeline.htm <- Timeline back to 1953
http://www.junkscience.com/july99/asbestos.htm
http://www.businessweek.com/... <- Defendant Co. thinks the 2006 bill will not pass
http://www.iii.org/media/hottopics/insurance/asbestos/ <- Good detail summary
SENATE Thursday, Feb 9, 2006
9:30 a.m.: Convene and begin a period of morning business.
Thereafter, resume consideration of S. 852, the Asbestos Claims bill.
Previous Meeting
Wednesday, Feb 8, 2006
The Senate convened at 9:45 a.m. and adjourned at 7:53 p.m. No record votes were taken.
bump! ;-)
Thanks, Cboldt. I will be interested to read that. As an aside, I am listening to Reid and I cannot believe that the dems have such an inarticulate leader. He stumbles, he fumbles and rambles along.
Reid was painful today, I agree, and when he is discussing something that is complicated...one's head spins!
Just saw a new thread...Cindy Sheehan is going to announce at 11 today if she is going to run for the Senate...
Sessions up for morning business talking about last night nerve gas scare
Yup, he's a little mad..
So am I
I missed the first part of Sessions...what did he say about last night?
that it was a reminder that we are in a WOT
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.