Abstract
Congress has demonstrated interest in toxic compensation legislation, but not enough agreement to make significant progress. Advocates of reform claim that the legal system is heavily weighed against victims who seek compensation through the courts. Proposed reforms include a compensation fund and a cause of action in federal court. Critics have questioned whether these changes in the law would represent an improvement. Existing income replacement, medical cost reimbursement, and survivor insurance programs largely cover the losses of individuals with chronic disease. Thus, the need for an additional compensation is not clear. Furthermore, experience with compensation funds such as the Black Lung Fund suggests that political rather than scientific criteria may be used to determine eligibility. Finally, under the proposed financing mechanisms the compensation funds that are being debated would not increase incentives for care in the handling of hazardous wastes or toxic substances.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
