R002444
Wednesday, March 20, 2002 10:32 PM
Discriminating against gays in multiple ways
Here is some more thoughts on how gay partners are being discriminated against:
All this talk of "personal representatives" is only half of the problem.
If Feinberg or the DOJ do not recognize that the deceased was part of
a domestic partnership, then his monetary "value" is significantly reduced.
Under Feinberg's "rules", a gay man will be considered single regardless
of whether he was in a long term relationship or not.
According to the compensation tables for the fund, The dollar amount awarded
to the victims beneficiaries is less when single than when married. The reason given
for this is because virtually all of a single person's income is used on himself
(personal spending), whereas most of a married person's income is used to
support his spouse. This "personal" spending is deducted from his income and only
what's left is considered lost income. As an example, for an income of $10,000
a single man's personal income is $7600, while a married man's is $3000
(This ratio get worse as the income increases). Therfore the yearly value of
lost wages is $2400 for a single man, and $7000 for a married man.
So even if an individual state recognizes a domestic partner, the amount of
compensation he receives is significantly reduced.
My understanding of this congressional Act was to provide releif for ALL victims
and their families. Congress made no restrictions on how Feinberg was to choose
eligble victims and representatives, and to determine the compensation.
Mr Fienberg has the power to make any assignments he wants. The goal of the Act
is to help dependants of those lost on 9/11 survive financially, not to be a windfall
for some distant relative.
Mr Fienberg is treating this money as if it is part of the deceased's estate, and thus
applying estate laws for dispusement. Instead he needs to treat this as releif
for survivors as congress intended.
Individual Comment
Nipomo, CA