PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Apr 3, 2003
Asbestos Compensation Fairness Act of 2003 - Requires as an essential element of a nonmalignant asbestos claim that there be physical impairment to which asbestos exposure was a substantial contributing factor. Sets forth prima facie evidence of that impairment, including as a minimum, that the exposed person have: (1) both a detailed occupational and exposure history and a medical and smoking history; (2) at least a Class 2 permanent respiratory impairment rating; (3) asbestosis or diffuse pleural thickening; and (4) total lung capacity below the lower limit of normal along with either a determination of exposure at or above specified levels concerning ratios of FEV1 to FVS or a chest x-ray showing opacities graded at or above specified levels on the ILO scale.Prohibits any civil action alleging an asbestos claim based upon lung cancer without prima facie evidence which shall include specified minimum requirements. Prohibits claims involving other cancers without prima facie evidence which shall include specified minimum requirements. Declares that no prima facie evidence is necessary in a civil action alleging an asbestos claim based upon mesothelioma.Requires the use of AMA guidelines or other authoritative standards.Sets forth requirements concerning claim consolidation (with consent only if not members of the same household), venue, preliminary proceedings, and removal.Delineates the statute of limitations for claims for asbestos conditions.Sets forth certain requirements for the scope of liability and damages involving civil actions under this Act, including that: (1) a defendant shall be liable only for that portion of a judgment that the defendant has responsibility for; and (2) no punitive damages may be awarded.Sets forth liability rules applicable to product sellers, renters, and lessors.
People & committees
Rep. Cannon, Chris [R-UT-3] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 18, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1586 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1586 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1586 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1586 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.