Candidate for a veto

Firefighters bill sets atrocious precedent

Published May 16, 2007 at midnight

Text size

More Editorials

The state legislature may have ridden off into the sunset, but Gov. Bill Ritter has to follow along with his broom for another month in order to sweep up behind its horse.

He has 30 days from its May 4 adjournment to accept or reject the dozens of bills that were deposited on his desk during and after the final days. So far, he appears inclined to accept the vast majority of them. But we hope he makes an exception now and then. His next veto target should be House Bill 1008, both for what it does and what it might portend.

The measure would make it much easier for firefighters, paid or volunteer, to collect for the treatment of most cancers from the workers compensation system.

To collect under current law they have to demonstrate that the cancer is work-related, just as they would for any other injury.

But HB 1008 shifts the burden of proof. It says that most cancers (lung cancer, usually caused by smoking, is an exception) "shall be presumed to result from a firefighter's employment."

Employers would have to show by "a preponderance of the medical evidence" that it was not. Proving a negative is no easy task. To be sure, the original bill was even worse; it would have required the employer to show by "clear and convincing evidence" the cancer didn't occur on the job. But the burden is still shifted.

Proponents have cited no studies linking firefighting to elevated cancer risk in Colorado. Indeed there is little objective medical evidence anywhere making the connection. What's more, there are far fewer fires to fight than in the old days.

Pinnacol Assurance, which provides most workers comp coverage in the state, maintains that it covers small fire protection districts for about a quarter of its actual costs. Benefits are partly based on salary, but since volunteers earn nothing, Pinnacol agreed a few years ago, in a seizure of charity, to pay them the maximum allowable benefit. That policy, which Pinnacol has no obligation to maintain, could go by the board if HB 1008 is signed. Premiums paid by the districts could triple or quadruple.

The Colorado Municipal League, another strong enemy of the bill, notes that the bill violates the law against unfunded mandates. The bill provides no state money to the municipalities and fire districts that must pay the premiums.

There are no other presumptive eligibility laws in Colorado workers comp, with the possible exception for emergency medical technicians who contract hepatitis C from needle punctures in the line of duty. But the connection between that disease and work is easily made once technicians pass a baseline test.

If this bill passes, it opens the floodgates to all sorts of similar bills in future sessions. Look for police unions and sheriff's departments to seek presumptive workers comp coverage for hypertension, say, or heart disease.

There are a lot of stressful jobs in this state, and many employees in many occupations end up with cancer. But the workers comp system shouldn't have to prove that all that stress and cancers aren't job related.

Subscribe to the Rocky Mountain News