dojN002650.xml

dojN002650.xml

born-digital

email

yes

no

2002-01-18

STATE OF CONNECTICUT


JOHN G. ROWLAND
GOVERNOR
January 18, 2002

Kenneth L. Zwick, Director
Office of Management Programs
Civil Division, U.S. Department of Justice
Main Building, Room 3140
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20530

Re: Response to DOJ Request to Comment


Dear Mr. Zwick:

The creation by Congress of the Victim Compensation Fund (Fund) stands as a
fundamentally important, compassionate and timely response to those individuals and families
directly affected by the terrorist attacks on this country on September 11th. I sincerely commend you, Congress, and the President on this enormous and unprecedented undertaking.

I also appreciate that the process and climate for regulation review and comment has sincerely invited public input and been receptive to making adjustments. It is in the spirit of our mutual and heartfelt desire to help affected individuals and families rebuild their lives in the wake of the events of September 11th that I provide the following comments on the Interim Final Rules.

As I know you will agree, in the minutes, hours, weeks and months following the terrorist attacks, government at all levels purposefully, but with some uncertainty and humility, attempted to address the many challenges associated with these unanticipated and horrific acts of violence and destruction. In most instances, and in most places, government has risen to the occasion, whether it is on safety and security measures, related health and human service initiatives, or in other activities aimed directly at victims and their families.

Still, there have been many lessons learned since September 11th, and new experiences will serve as valuable guideposts for future planning and activity. These findings should also apply to the Fund, and be the core source of influence in the rule-making process and in the implementation of the compensation program.

Chief among these lessons is the indispensable need for cultivating communication and cooperation between and among federal, state and municipal government entities, volunteer organizations and charities. As you proceed to implement the Victim Compensation Fund, to best assure that the needs and interests of the affected individuals and families are well served, I urge you to coordinate your work with all state and local efforts that directly involve victims' families. Rule-making communication and initial direct family contact should allow and invite maximum participation by state government officials also engaged in supporting families.

Another valuable lesson guiding me as Connecticut continues to unfold its services to families, is that the application and appeal process for this Fund, or any other of a similar nature, should be simple and well communicated. Family members have intimately shared with me their feelings of being overwhelmed by disjointed and random compensation opportunities. And, although some funds have been received, they have by and large not flowed in significant amounts or in any systematic way. These circumstances have easily translated into frustration and despair for families, and are retrograding to their healing process.

Also, based on experiences shared by families, the criteria for awards and the process by which they are determined, needs to be flexible enough to reflect and accommodate the varied individual circumstances that exist. They also need to be grounded in the basic assumption that pain and suffering, along with financial worries, know no economic or class boundaries. If guidelines are to be flexible, as press accounts indicate your willingness to do so, then the regulations should be explicit about the terms of the flexibility, and unambiguously allow for claimants to be heard as individuals.

Consistent with this, the level of compensation then should enable individuals and families to experience minimal disruption in their lives. Retaining homes and assuring a certain amount of environmental stability, especially for children, is a just and fair premise to the Fund. But more than that, leaving unattended a sense of arbitrariness about awards, and a disallowance in addressing individual circumstances, diminishes the promise of the Fund and the spirit of those it intends to serve.

Finally, an important lesson for Connecticut and this Fund, is that often the web of relationships associated with victims, and all their attending needs, are complex and varied. Any restrictive definition of who should be recognized in the process will inevitably lead to inadequate protections of groups of victims. The documentation supporting a relationship with a victim, or lack thereof, should be weighed carefully against the presenting needs of individuals and the victim's pre-death financial and emotional commitments.

More specifically in applying these lessons and experiences, provided below are four particular issues and inequities with the Fund that have been widely identified, and for which I make clear my position on. After careful review, I join some very important voices in urging you to address these concerns to the full extent of your authority through the Interim Final Rules. They are as follows:


1. I strongly encourage that the loss of earnings table reflects regional differences, and when available, occupational specific differences.

2. To the full extent allowed by regulation, I believe that maximum discretion should be allowed to assure that individuals are not penalized unfairly by the provision of collateral resources, in particular life insurance policies. Though Congress insisted that the awards bear some relationship with need, the wholesale blunting of responsible future planning is discouraging.

3. I implore that the cap on 'pain and suffering' awards be revisited and revised upward. In part as an effort to assure the solvency of the Airline industry, and the concomitant harmful affects on our economy, if this institutional diversion from lawsuits is to be effective, then it must offer a reasonable and adequate alternative.

4. The Fund must assure that individuals appealing their awards have sufficient opportunity and time at their hearing to fully represent their circumstances. The limitations currently proposed in this regard are disconnected with reality, and this purported efficiency, unless changed, will prove to be detrimental to the Fund's stated goal of "maximizing the dollar awards".

Again, I appreciate this opportunity to comment on the final rules for the Fund, and am confident that ultimately this will be a process that will support the recovery and healing of victims and their families. This is an extraordinary effort, under extraordinary circumstances, and it is my hope that it will result in an extraordinary expression on the part of government as it attempts to bring a modest measure of comfort to those whose lives have been so closely and profoundly touched by the events of September 11th.




Sincerely,


Comment by:
JOHN G. ROWLAND
Governor of Connecticut
Hartford, CT

2002-01-18