ChicSunTimes

Victims fund raises ire Backlash hits victims' kin

January 24, 2002

BY ART GOLAB STAFF REPORTER

A push by families of the people killed in the Sept. 11 attacks for more generous government compensation has prompted some Americans to push back--hard.

In what has become a sometimes ugly backlash, taxpayers in Chicago and across the nation are balking at demands from victims' advocates to pay survivors more money.

''If $1.6 million isn't enough for you, then I hope you rot in hell,'' a television viewer wrote Stephen Push, treasurer of Families of September 11 Inc., after he appeared on CNN last week.

Push was among the advocates who appeared at rallies and on radio and television talk shows last week, hoping to mobilize public support to make the government fund more generous.

It didn't get the hoped-for response.

At Give Your Voice, a victims' group in New York, more than 800 e-mails flooded in last week, all of them critical of victims, said co-founder Michael Cartier.

And flush from a well-attended protest rally last Thursday at the New York Armory, organizers were stunned by an editorial cartoon in the New York Daily News on Sunday depicting the World Trade Center's crater as a money pit for victims, with a construction crane scooping up buckets full of cash.

In Chicago, callers burned up the lines to talk-radio stations.

"I also wonder if I'm the only one politically incorrect enough to be vocal about my growing disgust about the victims' families of 9-11," a listener named Karen e-mailed WLS Newstalk 890 host Eileen Byrne. "Where do these victims get off by saying the average payoff of $1.65 million isn't enough? How much would be enough?" the listener wrote.

"To me, a little bit of this is becoming a money grab," said Chicago computer consultant Jim Anderson, questioned by a reporter on State Street on Wednesday. "How you die and when you die is somehow becoming worth more money. I don't think we're giving $1.6 million to the families of soldiers killed in Afghanistan."

Chicago musician Christian Briar, 27, said victims' complaints that they would make more money by filing lawsuits instead of taking the federal handout don't make sense.

"The $1.6 million is a lot of money; you can live on that for a long time," Briar said. "Anybody who sues over this situation, something's wrong with them. Who are you going to sue, Osama bin Laden?"

Such statements only make the pain worse, said victims' advocates.

"There's a very hurtful backlash going on that is causing a lot of additional emotional distress for the families," said Push, whose wife was aboard American Airlines Flight 77, which crashed into the Pentagon.

What the public doesn't understand, he said, is that insurance payments will be deducted from any federal payouts and in some cases will wipe them out entirely.

Congress enacted the victims' fund as part of a $15 billion bailout bill for the airline industry. Among other things, it capped liability for the two carriers whose planes were hijacked at their insurance limits--far too little to pay the tens of billions of dollars in property-loss and business-interruption claims expected from the attacks, let alone injury and death claims.

The fund, which will pay out more than $4 billion, was intended to steer victims' families away from court by offering fair compensation through mediation. The only caveat is that they must waive their right to sue before they can participate.

WLS Talkradio host Jay Marvin said most of his callers are opposed to victims' families getting money from both the taxpayers and insurance.

"People still favor some kind of compensation," Marvin said. "The only objection people have to it is that they wonder if people are double-dipping--taking both insurance money and money from the government--they don't believe it's fair to take both."

Survivors of attack victims are said to be upset with limits the government plan imposes for benefits.

But trying to get that message across in a way that builds public support has proved more daunting than victims' families expected.

"Whenever I do one of these TV appearances criticizing the compensation plan, I get hate mail," Push said. "They call me a greedy bastard and say I want to profit from my wife's death."

Contributing: Wall Street Journal

-- Anonymous, January 24, 2002

Answers

"What the public doesn't understand, he said, is that insurance payments will be deducted from any federal payouts and in some cases will wipe them out entirely."

I think this fiasco will turn out to be a public referendum on personal responsibility, except that it could go either way. Right now, we are saying we will reward those who didn't prepare for their future. What particularly bothers me is that there appear to be so many.

Hope it doesn't take a few more major domestic attacks before we have to rein things in.

-- Anonymous, January 24, 2002

So, we have all those charity events that raised money to help the survivors, insurance payouts that the survivors have, and government payouts, too? And they're bitching about it?

If they don't like the money they are getting for free then don't give it to them.

If they didn't plan ahead for emergencies and accidental deaths and such, then 'too bad, so sad.'

Anything they get after whatever insurance settlement they have, is basically found money. I can't imagine suing a city because you only found a five dollar bill on the sidewalk and not a twenty. That's what this boils down to, basically.

As for the passengers on the planes, we only have about four who did anything constructive to try and save themselves that we know of, the others that we know of made phone calls, many of which served no greater purpose than to allow them to say goodbye to their loved one.

Suing for a bigger handout. Sounds like the lawyers are going to get most of it.

-- Anonymous, January 24, 2002

The average payout of $1.65mil but insurance will be deducted from this. I don't care $1.65 mil is a lot of money and can last a long time if not the rest of your life. It doesn't matter to me if it comes from your insurance - you should be thankful that someone thought to provide for you. Geez, they could have been hit crossing the street instead.

As for the families that weren't provided for by adequate insurance - I have been there, the company doesn't provide it or not enough and you can't afford to buy more. It is costly to bury someone and to maybe lose the whole family income. I have no objections to their getting money - it will keep them off of welfare which is more costly in the long run.

-- Anonymous, January 24, 2002