N002674
Congress of the United States
House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515-3004
January 17, 2002
The Honorable John Ashcroft
Office of the Attorney General
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, Northwest
U.S. Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530
FAX: (202)514-4482
Dear Attorney General:
I am writing to request a meeting with you and several of my constituents who are
surviving widows of the horrendous attacks of September 11th. They are particularly interested
in
meeting with you to express their grave concerns about the September 11th Victim's
Compensation Fund.
As you know, the Special Master for the September 11th Victims Compensation Fund,
Ken Feinberg, has been meeting both privately and publicly with those expected to be eligible for
compensation through the fund. Still, I believe it is critical that you meet personally with the
victims
as there is widespread dissatisfaction regarding the limitations set in the proposed rules for the
fund.
For instance, at a meeting this week Mr. Feinberg explained that the inadequate amount
proposed for non-economic compensation for surviving widows ($250,000) and children
($50,000 per child) for pain and suffering was reached in consultation with you and top officials
at the Office of Management and Budget. Mr. Feinberg said he would like to see the non-
economic compensation amount universally increased. We are hoping you can agree with him.
Similarly, there is confusion and concern about the proposed regulations as they pertain to
the offset required for life insurance payments made to some of the victims. It seems grossly
unfair
to penalize those who tried to act responsibly for their families by purchasing life insurance. As
yo
may know, I have drafted legislation to repeal the collateral offset provision of the fund. In the
meantime, however, Mr. Feinberg stated that he is committed to finding ways to
minimize the "harshness of the collateral offsets." We would like to sit down with you to
discuss
some creative proposals that we believe meet the current requirements of the statute, without
harshly
punishing the victims' families.
I have enclosed, for your review, a letter written by whose husband,
, a portfolio manager, was murdered in 2 WTC on September 11th.
thoughtful letter articulately expresses the views and concerns of many of the widows who have
attended and spoken out at the meetings in New York and New Jersey.
I know you agree that those who lost loved ones on September 11th have suffered
enormously. Sadly, there is a growing sentiment among the victims that the Department of
Justice
and the Bush Administration do not yet fully appreciate the pain these widows endure and the
overwhelming personal and economic challenges they now face - many as single parents. I am
confident that after meeting with you, the victims will know that their government is listening, is
responsive, and working to establish a fair and equitable program to help them.
Sincerely,
Comment By:
CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH
Member of Congress
Washington, DC
enclosure
January 15, 2002
Dear Attorney General Ashcroft,
I am a widow at the age of 30, left alone to raise my 2-1/2 year old daughter. On
the morning of September 11, 2001, my husband left for work as a portfolio manager for
on the floor of 2 WTC. Six minutes before the second plane
hit his building, he phoned me to tell me of the horror he was witnessing outside his
window. He told me that he was ok, that he had been told to stay at his desk and not
evacuate, and that he loved me. I never spoke to him again.
It has been over four months since September 11th, and my daughter no longer
walks around the house asking for her "daddy". She smiles and points to him in
photographs, but the word "daddy" has all but left her daily vocabulary. Any shred of her
dad and who and what a "daddy" is has been erased from her memory and her mind
forever.
Because of my daughter's tender age, I am fortunate in that I don't have to
explain to her the "why" and "how" of September 11th. Many of my widow friends do
not have that luxury. Somehow they must come up with answers and explanations on a
daily basis. They have to talk to their 5, 7, and 10 year olds. They have to try to make
them feel safe and secure. They have to hold them and rock them back to sleep when they
wake up in the middle of the night screaming for their dads. This is the legacy my friends
and I are left.
I am writing to you because I do not think that you have heard our voice. I do not
think that you have even attempted to walk in our shoes. And I think that it is time that
you do listen to our voices, hear our needs, and understand our nightmare. I think that
you need to do all of these things so that you can more fairly address the Victim's
Compensation Fund.
This country failed each and every one of our children, our spouses, and us on the
morning of September 11th. Quite simply, September 11th should have never happened.
I often ask myself where our government was that morning. I know that President
Bush was reading to a group of kindergartners both before and after the first plane hit.
And, with the fact well known that there was a place bearing down on the White House, I
can all but imagine what the remaining governmental officials were doing that fateful
morning. Its unfortunate that my husband and the thousands like him were not given the
same warning or the same opportunity to run.
These are some facts that bother me:
1. In August 2001, the FBI was given tips from two flight schools
about the possibility of terrorist using American airplanes as
trajectory missiles. They were told that foreign men were taking
flight lessons, did not speak English, could not pilot even a
small place, and only wanted to learn how to pilot a large plane
mid-flight.
2. In August of 2001, Zacarias Moussaoui was arrested and held in
custody under some degree of probable cause.
3. On the morning of September 11th, a flight attendant from the
first airplane was on the phone with her supervisor for 45
minutes prior to that plane crashing into Tower 1. Her
supervisor knew that the plane was hijacked, knew that they
were flying above water, and knew that the men on board were
particularly ruthless. That phone call equates to 45 minutes of
notice with regard to both Towers. The flight attendant's final
words were, "my god, we are way too low, we are way too low."
4. After the first plane barreled into building 1, my husband was
told by the Port Authority and his company to not evacuate his
building. Sixteen minutes later, the second place barreled
through the floors immediately below him. (Sixteen minutes on
an express elevator would have put him below the floors of
impact.)
5. Less than 3 days after September 11th a videotape of
Mohammed Atta was released to the press showing him at an
ATM machine in Maine and at the airport check-in at Logan
Airport. It took the NJ state police 4 months to locate a video of
one of the hijackers who actually received a written citation on
the NJ turnpike, and yet the FBI quite miraculously produced a
video of Mohammed Atta at an ATM machine in Maine less
than 48 hours after September 11th. )With all of the millions of
ATM machines in the country, how could you locate such a
video in such a short time? Could a possible explanation be that
Atta was already under FBI surveillance, and the FBI watched
him get on that plane?)
The fact is that those murderers should have never been allowed to get on those
planes. Furthermore, the Twin Towers should have been evacuated 45 minutes before
that first plane plowed into Tower 1. The FAA should have been promptly notified by
that supervisor who was on the phone with that flight attendant, and the FAA should have
alerted the Twin Towers to evacuate immediately. And, any death caused as a result of
the plane hitting Tower 2 is absolutely and wholly unacceptable since there
was even more notice and time provided to evacuate the building. There is simply no
excuse for it.
And what is this government's response? Three days after the 11th, the airline
industry lobbies Congress who turns around and shields them and their fault. Congress
enacted the Airline Bailout Bill that capped the airline's liability at its insurance levels.
As an outgrowth of the Bailout Bill, the Victim's Compensation Fund was created.
Reading the Congressional Record from that day, some comments that were made about
the Victim's Compensation Fund are the following:
1. It is paradoxical to fully support the airline industry by
limiting their liability to their insurance levels, and yet
reduce support for the families by requiring collateral
deductions. (Jones)
2. Congress has provided a method whereby the victims of
those who have died will have full recovery for their
economic and non-economic damages. the Treasury of the
United States has been opened by the members of Congress
to ensure that every family will receive just
recovery. (Turner)
3. The families deserve everything we can do for
them. (Delahunt)
My husband's life, liberty and pursuit of happiness were taken from him on the
morning of September 11th. All I am asking for is justice fair and equitable justice. And,
the Victim's Compensation Fund is not providing it.
While I know that Congress enacted the Victim's Compensation Fund (hereinafter,
the "Fund"), with the collateral deductions attached, I think you must strongly reconsider
them. It is completely unprecedented in any personal injury case to require such
deductions.
The Fund's collateral deduction rewards those for irresponsibility and penalizes
those for responsibility. People like my husband paid into life insurance policies, pension
plans, 401k's, and social security because they were responsible men. They were
fathers who had children and wives. They planned for their future and wanted to ensure
their family's financial security within that future. My husband and all of those beside
him were brutally targeted and murdered on September 11th and now you, or own
government, is stealing one of the few pieces that remain of these family men the
financial security that they left for the ones they loved.
We have been wronged enough, through enough, and had enough. The collateral
deduction's impact must be softened. This government has done enough taking away
from our families. It is time to talk about giving back.
Clearly, this entire nation recognizes the unfairness of the collateral source
deduction. Quite frankly, it is precisely why many of us will not even consider entering
the Fund. So, why not lessen the impact of the collateral source deduction. I know that
you cannot eliminate it (Ken Feinberg has made that abundantly clear), but how about
softening its edge by capping it at $250,000, the value Mr. Feinberg has placed on each
human life.
Playing the devil's advocate, I am sure your argument against this will be that in
doing so the government will yield a much lower return, and, therefore, the actual cost of
the Fund will be raised. My response is two-fold. First, I have read the Congressional
Record. There is no cap on this Fund, and there was never any Congressional intent to
cap this Fund. Recall from the floor of Congress that, "the United States Treasury has
been opened to ensure that every family receives a just recovery." Hence, saving money
should not be one of your goals in carrying out the rules and regulations of this Fund.
Secondly, if the non-economic number (set at $250,000) provided by the Fund is
deemed by you to be sufficient enough to compensate me for my husband's pain and
suffering while he burned alive for 45 minutes, then certainly, it should be enough for the
government as a collateral source deduction. After all, this was the most unprecedented
attack in US history.
The families would like you to set the collateral source deduction to a limit no
higher than $250,000. This limit should be applied across the board, to every party
involved. In doing so, you are not only providing an incentive for families to enter the
fund, but you are also alleviating some of the unfairness that lurks behind the rules and
regulations of this Fund. Our Senators, Congressmen, and the Special Master, himself,
have commented about this unfairness. We think you should do something about it.
Limiting the collateral deduction to a maximum of $250,000 is that particular
something.
Another topic that the families would like to address with you, President Bush and
the Office of Management and Budget is the non-economic recovery. We have been told
by the Special Master that this number was chosen since the men and women who were
killed on September 11th are being likened to military men killed in the line of duty.
Understand this, our husband's and wives in no way, shape, or form "signed up"
for the morning of September 11th. Our husband's worked in finance; they were not
federal employees, civil servants, or members of our armed forces. They were stock
brokers, stock traders, portfolio managers, etc. In short, they were businessmen, not
servicemen. They were innocently murdered when an airplane crashed into their civilian
office building and to apply a military award to this case is absolutely and utterly wrong.
We would suggest that in setting the amount for the non-economic recovery
provided by the fund, you look towards personal injury recoveries in airline crashes.
These victims were civilian men and women who went to their office building on the
morning of September 11th. They did not knowingly assume any risk that fateful
morning. When we married our spouses we were not knowingly assuming any risk of
them being killed. We were not marrying a fighter pilot, a navy SEAL or even a fireman.
We were marrying a broker, a trader, or a portfolio manager. We were not given the
luxury of ever planning for our husband's to be killed, because the worst-case scenario
for a trader, a broker, or a money manager does not include a plane flying into their office
building.
Moreover, the non-economic recovery must be raised to a more respectful
number. To be offering $50,000 for each dependent child is essentially telling an entire
generation of children that their entire life without their parent is worth less money than
their therapy bills, alone. These children will grow up with the raw horror of September
11th on their face every single day. They will, much like the Kennedy children, have to
witness the exact moment of their parent's death over and over and over again. They will
see it on television shows, learn it in history class, and read about it in books sold at
Barnes & noble.
Americans across this country, who are not even directly affected by September
11th are claiming post-traumatic stress disorder; all of these people talk about how their
lives have irrevocably changed. Think about these children and what they will have to
endure over their lifetime, the pain and suffering they will endure day in and day out.
think about the older children who walked out their back doors for 10 days following
September 11th and actually had to smell Ground Zero burning. Think about the children
waking up in the middle of the night screaming for their fathers the burning birds
falling to the ground. Just think about these things, and know that I cannot even begin to
explain the absolute horror these kids must endure. And, $50,000 is what they get
$50,000, less money than a luxury SUV. It is wrong. It is unconscionable. And, for the
sake of these children, you must prove to them that their life and their pain and suffering
is worth more than $50,000.
Another issue that I would like to address is the top 2% money earners; those
individuals who earned more than $225,000 per year. We have been assured by the
Special Master that individuals who made above this amount will be entitled to their full
economic recovery. I trust the Special Master, and I believe that he does speak the truth
when he says that there is no $6 billion dollar cp on this fund. However, I would like to
note some comments that can be lifted from the floor of Congress the day the Airline
Bailout Bill was passed. There was much debate when apparently confusion arose as to
whether or not the airline executive's salaries would be "capped" at $225,000. Various
Congressmen spoke and the end result was that it was made clear that if an airline
executive made $3, 5 or 15 million dollars in 2001, he will be entitled to earn that
income in 2002, he just could not earn any more than that amount.
I would suggest to you Mr. Attorney General, that if it is "ok" for the airline
executives to be compensated up to and beyond $15 million per year by the American
taxpayers, when these men are at fault for my husband's death, then the Compensation
Fund should best not "cap" my husband's or any other victim's income, regardless of
how high that income may prove to be.
In closing, I would welcome the opportunity to speak with either you or President
Bush. It would be extremely nice to know that you care about people like myself. We
have requested numerous meetings with each of you and have been repeatedly told that
you are unwilling to meet with us. Please keep my daughter and myself and the
thousands of others like us in your thoughts. And again, I implore you to listen to our
voices, hear our needs, and understand our nightmare so that you can better understand
why we so desperately need the Victim's Compensation Fund to work for us.
Sincerely,
Individual Comment
Attachment: 107th Congress 2D Session H.R. 3665
To amend the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001 to ensure equity for victims.