Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Department of Justice Emails Description An account of the resource The Department of Justice received more than 11,000 e-mails in response to the agency's public solicitation for comments upon its plans to distribute the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001 established by Congress to benefit the victims of September 11 and their families. These e-mails have been organized here by date. September 11 Email September 11 Email: Body The basic content, as unstructured text; sometimes containing a signature block at the end. Thursday, January 17, 2002 10:11 AM Victim's Fund Comment Kenneth L. Zwick, Director Office of Management Programs Civil Division U.S. Department of Justice Main Building, Room 3140 950 Pennsylvania Avenue Washington, DC 20530 Ref: Presumed Economic and Non-Economic Loss Tables After reading the above reference explanation and tables, I hereby submit my comments for your consideration and hopefully incorporation into any changes that you are considering: a.) The matrix does not appear to be correct in determining the total compensation due a decedent?s family, example: Category Age Income Matrix Value Non-Economic Loss Net After Non-Economic Loss Single / No Dependents 25 $35,000 673,043 $250,000 $423,043 Married / No Dependents 25 $35,000 $1,296,190 $300,000 $996,190 The calculation is saying that two individuals making the same amount of money and the same age, one?s family will receive more than twice as much money as the single person, yet there is no reason given as to why. What is the logic? Is the married person the primary income producer, if so, then that person should be receiving less than the single person. What about the single person being engaged, therefore wouldn?t that mean that the single person?s amount would increase. The disparity is far too great without a reasonable explanation. It would appear that the single person is being discriminated against. b.) Other source compensation ? Based upon the explanation given in the above reference and what has been stated in the newspaper, employer-provided benefits would be deducted from the tables. What about employer provided 401(k) plans and profit sharing plans. These plans are in fact assets of the decedent not the employer. Although provided by the employer, if the employee was to have terminated the funds would have followed the employee. Is it the intent of the government to take away assets of the employee? c.) Present value calculation ? The factor given is 5.13% over a risk free interest rate. I am under the assumption that investments of this type do not allow for principal reductions, annuity payments. In fact current annuity rates are nearer 4.5%. If this is correct you are deducting a significant amount from the families. d.) It has been stated that the average family will receive 1.6 million dollars. That is the gross amount, not the net amount. Assume that your estimate is correct at a GROSS amount of 1.6 million dollars, then you subtract out social security benefits, benefits for spouses and children under the age of 18 (government programs), pension benefits (including employer and employee contributions to a 401(k) retirement plan, IRAs, Roth accounts, SEP etc.), life insurance employer and employee paid for including term and cash value, if in a policy, (assets of the decedent), my estimate would put the net actual compensation paid to a family from the government to be nearer 400,000 to 600,000 or based upon the 3,000 decedents only 1.2 billion to 1.8 billion dollars a far cry to the amount being stated in the newspapers and only about 25% of the airlines capped liability. It would appear that your calculation maybe very conservative, f.) The consumption factor appears to be incorrect. If one reviews the matrix for a single person no dependents and compares it to a single person with one dependent, the table indicates that for the same age and income a single person with a dependent receives a large amount of money, yet based upon the ?consumption factor? the cost to support the dependent should be deducted leaving less money for that group, not more money for the dependent. g.) Did the government compare what similar airline accident insurance suits are worth? The law, in which the settlements are determined, does NOT state that the government should reduce for consumption factor, use present value factors, use inflation factors for wages and clearly does not limit the income at the top two percent. It only addresses the issue of collateral source recovery. The public should be made aware of the differences and why you are selecting the current method. The law was NOT enacted for the victims, but rather for the airline industry and a way to limit the costly legal and financial exposure that the airline industry and others would be exposed too. Clearly the government would rather be look as the great hand of giving to the widow and orphans of this very tragic event in our nation?s history, but instead, the government is appearing to be a defender of big business and giving ?short-shrift? to those in tears and sorrow. Clearly, the government need not give away the store, for a bird in hand is in fact greater than two in the bush. The government is not paying the legal expenses for the decedent?s family. The trial lawyers? organization has agreed not to charge the families. So the settlements can be 1/3rd lower. Yes the law must be adhere to, unless of course, you wish to take a stand and tell of the unfairness in the law and what changes should be made and why. Even if you do not want to change the law, at least you can increase the compensation stated in the tables. Hopefully you are looking to be fair and reasonable with those who are in emotional and physical pain. Ask yourself one very important question. ?If you were the one who perished, would you want your wife and children to accept the offer being made? I appreciate the opportunity to submit these comments and look forward in reading your final rules. Regards, Individual Comment Avon, CT September 11 Email: Date The local time and date when the message was written. 2002-01-17 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource dojN001927.xml 911DA Item Elements describing a September 11 Digital Archive item. Status The process status of this item. approved Consent Whether September 11 Digital Archive has permission to possess this item. full Posting Whether the contributor gave permission to post this item. yes Copyright Whether the contributor holds copyright to this item. yes Source The source of this item. born-digital Media Type The media type of this item. email Created by Author Whether the author created this item. yes Described by Author Whether the description of this item was submitted by the author. no Date Entered The date this item was entered into the archive. 2002-01-17