P000370
Sunday, February 03, 2002 2:46 PM
(no subject)
Dear Mr. Ashcroft,
I am writing to you to let you know that I OBJECT to the Victim's
Compensation Fund for the following reasons: There are many of us victims
who feel the fund is WOEFULLY INADEQUATE as it stands now. The DOJ has
ignored the fundamental mandate of the act to provide FULL and FAIR
compensation to victims and their families, and instead created a formulaic
federal program based on irrelevant concepts more familiar to the
bureaucracy. The DOJ's proposed awards for noneconomic damages are only
1/10th the level paid in comparable cases such as Lockerbie. Congress
explicitly enumerated a broad range of non-economic damages for which the
victims and their families shall be compensated. The DOJ ignored this, and
based its presumed awards on a military gropu life insurance program (SGLI)
with a maximum of 250K, and a federal statue providing 250K to families of
fallen public safetly officers - on top of other amounts they may receive.
The DOJ's approach assumes that Congress intended the non-economic damages
to be illusory, because a 250K SGLI payment would, for a serviceman killed at
the Pentagon, would wipe out those damages under the collateral offset
requirements. The DOJ's proposed awards for economic damages GROSSLY
undersetimates the actual losses. Forensic economists have discovered other
SERIOUS flaws in the DOJ's methodology. The DOJ underestimates promotions
and other increases in earnings for victims. It relied on federal civil
service and military retirement system boards that track federal worker
incomes and pensions requirements, not the higher-paying private sector
career paths. My husband was a CIVILIAN not a federal employee and this
should not be used to calculate my ACTUAL losses!! The DOJ's reliance on
past 3 years of income, looks SUSPICIOUSLY like a federal pension approach,
rather than considering the likely income earning potential of the decedent,
as is routinely done in wrongful death cases. The regulations ARBITRARLIY
cap the victim's income, potentially cutting the comnpensation amount by 50%.
As a result, many widows will have to sell their homes, deplete their
children's college savings accounts, and give up their plans of being
full-time parents while their children are young. I seriously doubt this is
what Congress intended! The low level of presumtive awards will result in
MANY families receiving little or nothing from the fund, once the collateral
source deductions are made. Please note in a court case this "rule" would
not apply! A families award may be increased above the "presumptive" award
only by a showing of "extraordinary circumstances, beyond those suffered by
other victims or their families. This makes the hearing or appeal to the
Special Master a mere CHARADE! The DOJ should fulfill, rather than flout,
the act's INTENT by REVISING its rules to compensate victims and their
families for the types of damages SPECIFIED by CONGRESS, at levels comparable
to those provided in the tort system the fund was designed to replace.
Mr. Ashcroft, I fully support and appreciate the War on Terrorism. I am
imploring you to do the right thing by the families, all 2800+ of us, who
lost their husbands, fathers, sons, daughters and plans for their families
future on September 11, 2001. Please do me one favor and put yourself in my
place for one minute. Suppose it was your wife, son or daughter who was
murdered in the terrorist attacks, would you be pleased with the DOJ's
implimentation of Congress' airline bailout act? This act gave the airlines
15 billion dollars of taxpayers' money and capped the airlines liability at
the limits of their insurance coverage. It set up the fund so the airlines'
bailout would not come at the expense of the victims' families. Why are we
so quick to help the airlines and yet try to nickle and dime the American
people, who are taxpayers and voters? Please do the RIGHT THING and stop
victimizing us with this charade of a fund called the Victim's Compensation
Fund, it really should be called the Victim's NON-Compensation Fund, as I a
mother of 5 young children ages 9,8,6,5 and 2 will wind up with little or
NOTHING if the rules are not changed. Does that seem like justice to you?
Sincerely,
Individual Comment