Scott Moser, Equitas chief executive officer voiced opposition to the measure in anticipation that Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee would introduce his bill this week.

A provision in a draft of the bill Mr. Specter wants to introduce says that all insurers and reinsurers except Equitas would be given the right to either reduce or defer the amount they must pay to the fund if they can demonstrate it is unfair or that it would force them into bankruptcy.

The senator had planned to link his controversial bill, which has no industry and little insurer support to class action reform legislation that the Senate Republican leadership has established as a priority.

But that strategy was apparently premature, because Sen. Specter announced today after a meeting with his committee that he will delay introduction of his asbestos mitigation legislation until next week.

He said he plans to vote the class action reform legislation from committee Feb. 3 and report it to the Senate floor that day.

After Equitas voiced concerns that Mr. Specter's bill to create a $140 billion asbestos injury fund could bankrupt his operation, Equitas issued a statement seeking to sooth analysts' fears.

That damage control effort was prompted by a press release from The Lloyd's Names Association, which represents some former individual investors in Lloyd's -- whose liabilities were covered by Equitas ? that suggested Equitas may have to contribute up to $10 billion to the proposed U.S. fund.

In its latest comments, the company played down reports that it could be stuck with such a massive bill for a contribution to the fund, well over $2 billion more than it has set aside to pay such claims.

An Equitas staff official also said a representative testified at a recent hearing Sen. Specter held on his proposed legislation, and, as a result, Sen. Specter agreed to review the provision affecting Equitas.

Jeffrey Robinson, of the law firm of Baach, Robinson & Lewis in Washington, D.C., the Equitas representative, confirmed that talks with Sen. Specter are ongoing. "We will have to see what happens," he said, implying that Mr. Specter is reconsidering the provision.

Mr. Moser said in an interview with a British newspaper confirmed by his staff that Equitas is being excluded because the bill's supporters contend that Equitas can go back to the Names whose liabilities it reinsures to claim back any shortfall.

Mr. Moser said in an interview published earlier this week that, "What we object to is the idea that this should be done for literally every other insurance company in the world except Equitas.

"U.S. insurers and reinsurers, quite frankly, would prefer money to come from London than to come from them and they have more votes than Londoners."

Mr. Moser added. "It is not as grandiose as nationalistic. It is naked commercialism. If you pay instead of me, I get a competitive advantage over you. If the London market is disrupted, that is in the interests of U.S. insurers and reinsurers who are competing with it."

An Equitas staff official was quoted as saying, "We believe our reserves are adequate and appropriate. If there is a fair and impartial commission [to decide its contribution to the proposed fund] Equitas expects to have sufficient funds to pay its share."