N002146

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

Previous Next Back to Comments by Date Back to Comments by Date
(Graphical Version) (Text Only Version)