The legislation, which has been endorsed by the Alliance, needs to gather a two-thirds majority approval--21 votes among 31 senators--to come to the floor of the Senate.

The bill (SB 496), Mr. Woods explained, would raise the bar for the standard necessary to bring asbestos personal injury lawsuits, so that those suffering from serious asbestos illnesses could be compensated more quickly.

The Texas Trial Lawyers Association, however, is currently lobbying to block the bill from getting to the Senate floor by gathering at least 11 opposing votes. But Mr. Woods added the bill is very close right now to getting the needed 21 procedural votes.

The bill, he said, establishes medical criteria for asbestos claims, including chest x-rays and pulmonary function tests that demonstrate asbestos-related afflictions such as pleural encasement--hardening of the lining in the lung that results from asbestos exposures--or reduced lung capacity. If these criteria aren't met, claimants would be listed on an inactive court docket until the requisite level of impairment is shown.

The legislation would also ban the filing of asbestos claims on behalf of a group or class.

Commenting on Texas' current legal system, Mr. Woods said the state remains a "magnet jurisdiction" for the filing of asbestos personal injury cases.

"While the legislature previously amended the state's venue law to restrict the filing of cases by non-residents and took steps to prevent venue shopping within the state, much still needs to be done to stem the growing tide of claims filed by non-impaired claimants," Mr. Woods said.

"Texas is infamous for its broker-lawyers who solicit plaintiffs through advertising and questionable mass medical screenings," he said.

John Lobert, senior vice president of state government affairs at the Alliance, also argued that in Texas, questionable diagnosis methods have resulted in "a flood of new claims costing billions of dollars from people who aren't sick from asbestos and likely never will be." The changes proposed in the new bill, Mr. Lobert added, would put a stop to these cases that are taking money away from true victims of asbestos.

But the Texas Trial Lawyers Association offered a different take on the legislation. While declining to comment on how many opposing votes it has garnered so far, the group said it will continue to oppose the bill in the coming days.

"We are certainly in favor of compensating the truly sick quickly, but this bill seems designed to protect wrongdoers," said John E. Williams, president-elect for the Austin, Texas-based association. "It seems like the bill is designed to create an immunity for employers who knowingly exposed their workers to products that cause cancer," Mr. Williams told National Underwriter.

Mr. Williams also strongly disagreed with insurers' charge that his state is a "magnet jurisdiction" for asbestos personal injury cases, noting that Texas is an industrialized state with an unusually large workforce in the petrochemical business which was exposed to asbestos.

"And because we have such a large population that was exposed to asbestos, we also have a large number of lawsuits because of these exposures. It has nothing to do with our legal system. And all the cases that are filed in Texas are now cases for those who are residents of Texas," Mr. Williams said.

Proponents of the bill argue that requiring proof of illness from tests would allow those who are truly suffering to be compensated more quickly, Mr. Williams added, "but actually, this bill would mean victims would have to prove their case even before going to trial. In effect, victims would have their cases tried twice, and it would take longer than the current system."