Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Department of Justice Emails Description An account of the resource The Department of Justice received more than 11,000 e-mails in response to the agency's public solicitation for comments upon its plans to distribute the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund of 2001 established by Congress to benefit the victims of September 11 and their families. These e-mails have been organized here by date. September 11 Email September 11 Email: Body The basic content, as unstructured text; sometimes containing a signature block at the end. Thursday, January 10, 2002 10:53 AM Comments regarding Legislation, PL 107-42 (HR 2926) My name is &nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp &nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp and as father, surviving family member and duly appointed administrator of the Estate of &nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp &nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp offer these comments to the interim final rules published on December 21, 2001. The Legislation, PL 107-42 (HR2926) dated September 22, 2001 was created to protect the airline industry and, I believe, the United States Government by substantially compelling the victims and their families to accept the monetary compensation offered pursuant to the Fund set up by the Act and thereby forestalling the possibility of mass litigation against those found responsible for allowing these terrorist crimes to occur. The regulations proposed on December 21, 2001, while setting forth a procedure for compensating victims and their families, certainly ignore the spirit and mandate of the Act to seek in some measure to provide fair and reasonable economic recompense for those lost or seriously injured. For me and my family, only &nbsp&nbsp&nbsp&nbsp return to life will make us whole. Recognizing that not to be possible, the Special Master's refusal to even recognize my son's (and those similarly situated) full economic potential is insulting, painful and, if left uncorrected, will cause the families of those adversely affected to seriously contemplate what the Act expressly wants avoided, the commencement of litigation against those responsible for this tragedy. To set the record straight, what I am suggesting does not grow out of greed, but out of a sense of obligation to show the world in the only way afforded to us by the Act how special our lost loved ones were. If the spirit of the Act is intended to recognize the economic loss of the decedents, a significant group of them should not be singled out and treated differently. By choosing to cap earnings at up to 98%, which, by the way, is nowhere found in the Act, the Special Master would fully recognize the economic loss of all families of victims earning less than $231,000 per year, while in a significant number of cases severely penalizing, if not belittling, the achievements of those whose financial remuneration on average exceeded this arbitrary cap. Elsewhere in the regulation, the Special Master advises that on issues like deductions for Collateral Sources, his hands are tied by the mandate of the Act. While one could argue the unfairness, for example, to a victim who prudently provided substantial life insurance, the Special Master is correct that the legislation requires, in some cases, massive deductions for life insurance. By capping income at 98%, for many of the same families, it results in doubling the adverse impact and for many, substantially eliminating any Fund compensation. There is no justice under the Act unless all families suffering an identical loss are treated the same. If a victim earned $20,000, that family should receive the full economic benefit of 100% of those earnings calculated out over the economic life of the individual and brought to present value. Likewise, if a victim made a million dollars a year, that family should receive the same treatment. Anything less constitutes unfairness, injustice and ample reason for rejecting the Fund and seeking one's day in Court. This is especially true where the family has nothing to lose because the Special Master's unwarranted 98% cap when coupled with the Act's discount for Collateral Sources reduction results in little or no benefit under the Fund. I submit that is not what the Act intended. The Special Master should amend the rules to allow the derivation of economic loss based on earnings up to 100%. Regarding non-economic loss, the Act's only mandate to the Special Master was to follow what the State courts would allow in determining such losses. State courts in New York, for example, award hefty damages upon showings of pain and suffering. With the catastrophic incident that occurred, the lack of individual credible evidence to discern the facts of each case and the sheer number of cases involved, one can readily understand the logic the Special Master employed in concluding flat sums for victims and their dependents. I would submit however, that in his zeal to implement this concept he has over simplified it and given no credence for palpable pain and suffering where it can easily be demonstrated. I would suggest the creation of a separate flat sum category differentiating the physical and emotional pain and suffering for those trapped above the impact area of each of the World Trade Center buildings from those who were physically located below it, and that the amounts to be awarded to each class be increased. was a trader for Cantor Fitzgerald* on the 104th floor of Tower One. The airliner hit his building at the 90th floor, instantly and completely cutting off all means of escape for the over 1300 people located above the 90th floor. None of them escaped or survived and for a period of up to one and one-half hours after impact, and the others vainly attempted to find a way out and at some point came to realize their ultimate fate. I would submit that their pain and suffering was substantially different and greater than, say, a worker on the 72nd floor of the same building who after the impact, continued working or delayed departure and ultimately was trapped in the eight seconds it took for the building to collapse. A separate category should be established to recognize the pain and suffering of all those who spent up to one and a half hours without hope and those who died in the eight seconds period of collapse. I would also propose that the flat sum be set at $1,000,000 for those above the impact area and $500,000 for those below. If the Special Master heeds these comments and adjusts economic and non- economic losses accordingly, it will result in fair and equitable compensation for all the victims' families and truly encourage all of these families to avail themselves of the Fund and not consider costly and time consuming litigation. Thank you for the opportunity to make these comments. Individual Comment East Norwich, New York September 11 Email: Date The local time and date when the message was written. 2002-01-10 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource dojN001496.xml 911DA Item Elements describing a September 11 Digital Archive item. Status The process status of this item. approved Consent Whether September 11 Digital Archive has permission to possess this item. full Posting Whether the contributor gave permission to post this item. yes Copyright Whether the contributor holds copyright to this item. yes Source The source of this item. born-digital Media Type The media type of this item. email Created by Author Whether the author created this item. yes Described by Author Whether the description of this item was submitted by the author. no Date Entered The date this item was entered into the archive. 2002-01-10