dojN000216.xml

dojN000216.xml

born-digital

email

yes

no

2001-12-21

Friday, December 21, 2001 5:24 AM
Comment on the Interim Final Rule on the September 11th Victim
Compensation Fund

I for one feel that the fund should be as restrictive or should attempt to minimize the amount that the government disburses to the victims as much as possible. While the incident sparking this was a horrific act, so was the Oklahoma City bombing, so was many other attacks and natural or accidental events. While the idea that the government is the life insurer of last resort in this case, allowing families of 9-11 victims to benefit excessively (once you add the charitable contributions that the rule ignores) is unfair to all those other victims from other events.

Why should the family of a 9-11 victim, in addition to generous death benefits that occur in some cases (such as what I have read about NYC firefighters), and / or in addition to generous charitable contributions that will likely be disbursed, also receive hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars from the government? While no amount of money can make the family whole again due to the loss of life, it seems unjust to victims that came before and after 9-11 seem less important, it sets a bad precedent that you don't have to plan your family's finances yourself - the government will help them out, and puts an unfair burden on the citizens of the United States.

I read that some families of victims that were making large incomes are upset because of a salary cap. If the victim was making millions of dollars, I would hope they put some of that away for a rainy day. The burden of their poor financial planning should NOT be borne by average Americans that can only imagine that type of lifestyle.

Individual Comment
Basking Ridge, NJ

2001-12-21