SRES-140-119
Submitted in the Senate, considered, and agreed to without amendment and with a preamble by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S1864; text: CR S1875)
Sponsored by Jeff Merkley (D-OR)
What it does
This resolution designates the first week of April 2025 as "National Asbestos Awareness Week." It urges the Surgeon General to warn and educate the public about the health risks of asbestos exposure. It also directs the Secretary of the Senate to transmit a copy of the resolution to the Office of the Surgeon General. The resolution carries no binding legal force, creates no new programs, and appropriates no funds.
Who benefits
Workers in industries with known asbestos exposure risks (construction, shipbuilding, manufacturing, mining). Residents of communities with historically high asbestos exposure, such as Libby, Montana. People living or working in pre-1975 buildings that may contain asbestos. Veterans who served on naval ships or in shipyards. Patients with asbestos-related diseases who may benefit from earlier detection prompted by increased public awareness. Public health organizations and advocacy groups focused on asbestos-related diseases.
Who is hurt
No group faces a direct material harm from a purely commemorative resolution. Industries that import or use asbestos-containing products could face indirect reputational pressure if heightened public awareness increases scrutiny of continued asbestos use in the United States, though this effect would be speculative and non-binding.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that asbestos-related diseases — including mesothelioma, which carries a projected life expectancy of only 6 to 24 months after diagnosis — continue to kill thousands of Americans each year despite decades of awareness efforts. They contend that early detection can meaningfully expand treatment options, and that a dedicated awareness week, now in its 20th year, provides a consistent, low-cost mechanism to prompt public health outreach by the Surgeon General and other agencies.
Opponents argue
Opponents could argue that a non-binding Senate resolution has no measurable public health impact and that 20 years of annual designations have not produced a federal ban on asbestos, which the United States continues to import and use — unlike most other developed nations. They contend that symbolic resolutions may substitute for substantive regulatory or legislative action, and that directing the Surgeon General to "urge and educate" without any accompanying funding or mandate is unlikely to change health outcomes.