dojN002146.xml

dojN002146.xml

born-digital

email

yes

no

2002-01-20

Sunday, January 20, 2002 11:27 PM
widow will receive no benefit from the fund

Dear Sirs:

With my son sleeping peacefully in my arms, I watched as a plane hit
2WTC. I knew that I had just witnessed my husband's murder and I could do
nothing about it. I lost my soul-mate, my best friend, partner and
confidante. He was young, handsome and vibrant. He was outgoing and hard
working. He played every sport, he helped every neighbor.
Every aspect of my life has changed since September 11... People tell
me that once you get back into your routine it will be easier. My routine is
no longer possible. We cannot wave "Bye, bye" in the wee hours of the
morning and we cannot "Clap hands until Daddy comes home."
The widows and families have endured devastation, tragic loss,
frustration and repeated and careless reminders of September 11th every day.
The term "September 11th" is used flippantly by media, advertisers and
economists. We have spent endless hours dealing with paperwork, red tape and
poorly regulated charities. We have received he dreaded knock on he door in
the middle of the night, the police telling us that bone fragments have been
recovered.
I am a 31 year old full time mother of a one year old child who will
have no memory of his father. I am not "well off," I am not destitute. We
have worked hard, planned carefully and lived within our means to try to
ensure that we would never become destitute. I consider myself to be
"average." According to the interim rules, I will receive no benefit from
the Victims Compensation Fund.
We did not ask for this fund. But we must deal with it. The option to
sue has been made not viable. The reason "The Fund" exists is that our right
to litigate has been severely restricted. Congress' intent was to fairly
compensate the families in return for their loss. We are not greedy. We wish
to fairly and accurately be made whole for what we have lost.
In order to be fair and more accurate, the following concepts need to
be taken into consideration:

- Use the decedent's most recent salary. The interim rule ignores
2001. Many young professionals have significantly increased their wages in
the past year- do not minimize their hard work and accomplishments.
- Averaging the three prior years salary will result in significantly
reducing economic damage estimates-and penalize the victims for being young
and successful- consider using the best of three years income to more
accurately reflect the individual's earning potential
- Use statistical data that is more relevant to the population
effected- i.e.,- company and industry in which the decedent worked;
local/city/state averages vs national.
- Earnings potential should also factor in any eminent college degrees,
professional designations, etc., on a case by case basis. Such
accomplishments generally will dictate earnings beyond the formulas used.
- Collateral sources-Should not be deducted- I know...we need to fight
that with legislation but it is worth mentioning. Families should not be
penalized for responsible financial planning or being successful. The DOJ
and special master should seek to minimize any deductions that are mandated.
Social Security alone would reduce my benefit by half.
- Collateral sources- should be more clearly defined as to what is and
is not a deductible offset. To be considered a deductible offset, the amount
has to be identifiable. How can social security be accurately deducted? How
soon will I get a job? die? remarry? How long will social security actually
be paying these benefits? ; How can workers comp be deducted fairly? Will
families have to return workers comp payments?
-Collateral Sources- should it only include compensation that is
government funded? I can understand the government wanting to avoid "double
dipping" in the case of other government programs. Life insurance, company
benefits, etc., are not government funded. They are a product of the
individual's good financial planning and the contract they entered into when
accepting a position at their workplace. Those benefits were earned.
- As has been stated numerous times by TLC and many others, the
non-economic damages are too low.

This legislation was passed 11 days after the attacks to save the
airline industry and our economy. In doing so it diminished my rights. The
fund was established to make up for that loss. At the time it was
established, it was estimated that there were 6,000 victims. Congress was
prepared to set this fund up to compensate 6,000 families. Thankfully that
figure has been cut in half...The government will have to pay out less than
half of what they were originally preparing to pay.
The media is reporting that the average award from this fund will be
1.65 million dollars. They forget to mention that there are huge deductions
that will be taken from this amount. As a result the ill-informed public
think that the "average" widow will be made a millionaire and is greedily
looking for more.
I attended a meeting with Mr. At the meeting, said
that no one likes to admit it but our government puts a price on the value of
a life every day. He said that the price was a couple of million dollars.
If these perceptions were actually correct, I would not be writing
this letter.

Thank you for your consideration.
Individual Comment
Edison NJ

2002-01-20