Still More To Do on Health and Environment for 9/11 Victims by Jerrold Nadler
April 14th, 2008
Earlier this month, Congress, for the first time ever, examined the issue of compensation for those individuals whose health was adversely impacted by the effects of the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center. At a hearing I chaired along with Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-California), we looked at the economic losses of those individuals. Many people incurred such economic losses when they became too sick to work and lost their jobs, while others have inadequate health insurance and are struggling with exorbitant medical bills.
After the collapse of the Twin Towers on 9/11, tens of thousands of first responders, local residents, area workers and students were exposed to a cocktail of toxic substances said to be worse than the Kuwaiti oil fires. They are now coming down with diseases like sarcoidosis, asthma and RADS (reactive airways dysfunction syndrome). And it was the actions of federal agencies, like the Environmental Protection Administration and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, that led to so many being unnecessarily exposed to this toxic environment.
Last June, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D) and I held companion hearings on the actions of the EPA and other federal agencies that allowed workers to work in a toxic environment without proper protection and gave them false assurances as to their safety. At the House hearing, former EPA Administrator Christie Todd Whitman tried to explain why she told New Yorkers that the “air was safe to breathe” when, in fact, she had evidence to the contrary. Indeed, the EPA’s own inspector general found that her statements “were falsely reassuring, lacked a scientific basis, and were politically motivated.” And we now know that the White House changed EPA press releases, “to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones.” OSHA failed to enforce safety regulations at Ground Zero—but did at the Pentagon, where no one has developed respiratory problems.
Obviously, none of these injuries would have occurred were it not for the terrorists, who are ultimately to blame, but many would have been avoided if the federal government had acted in a responsible manner. The federal government, therefore, has a moral and legal obligation to compensate the victims of 9/11 and to provide for their health. Indeed, it was outrageous when Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California) at the hearing called the attacks “simply” aircraft hitting New York, and not an attack on America.
In the immediate aftermath, the federal government did take some steps to address this issue. For example, Congress created the Victim Compensation Fund (VCF), a program designed to compensate people for losses sustained as a result of the attacks on the World Trade Center, and to limit litigation against the airline industry. The fund provided aid to the families of 9/11 victims and to individuals who suffered personal injury in the immediate aftermath of the attacks. In return for accepting these funds, recipients waived their right to sue. By the time the fund expired at the end of 2003, over $7 billion was distributed to survivors of 2,880 people killed on 9/11, and to 2,680 people who were injured in the attacks or the immediate rescue efforts.
The VCF is widely considered to have been a success. Most families of deceased victims chose to participate in the Fund, and 97 percent of those who submitted claims received compensation. However, while the VCF did an excellent job of handling claims involving people who died or had an immediate and easily diagnosable ailment, like a broken leg, the fund had closed by the time many of the latent ailments we are now clearly seeing began to manifest.
To address the increasing number of the sick, Congress in 2003 provided $1 billion in 9/11 disaster assistance to the Federal Emergency Management Agency to create an appropriate “mechanism for claims arising from debris removal.” FEMA, in a grant agreement with New York City, established the World Trade Center Captive Insurance Company to handle 9/11 claims. However, instead of distributing these funds, the Captive Fund has litigated nearly every claim, spending millions of dollars on legal fees. Although Congressional intent was to pay claims, only a handful of claims have been paid out, and none for respiratory injuries. That may be why nearly 10,000 people have filed suit against the City of New York and several contractors who continue to suffer from 9/11-related health effects.
We must assume that in addition to those that are already sick, many more will become sick in the future. That is why I, along with Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-Manhattan/Queens) and Rep. Vito Fossella (R-Staten Island/Brooklyn) have introduced the 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, which would provide comprehensive medical treatment to any person whose health was affected, and reopen the Victim Compensation Fund so that affected people can be compensated for their economic losses.
Indeed, after the hearing, I met with some of the living victims of 9/11 that had come down to attend. One thing is clear—their pain and suffering is real and cannot be ignored. We can never fully repay the debt that this nation owes them; we can never fully alleviate their anguish—but we must try. As the nation continues to heal and rebuild, we must do better by the living victims and heroes of 9/11.
After the collapse of the Twin Towers on 9/11, tens of thousands of first responders, local residents, area workers and students were exposed to a cocktail of toxic substances said to be worse than the Kuwaiti oil fires. They are now coming down with diseases like sarcoidosis, asthma and RADS (reactive airways dysfunction syndrome). And it was the actions of federal agencies, like the Environmental Protection Administration and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, that led to so many being unnecessarily exposed to this toxic environment.
Last June, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D) and I held companion hearings on the actions of the EPA and other federal agencies that allowed workers to work in a toxic environment without proper protection and gave them false assurances as to their safety. At the House hearing, former EPA Administrator Christie Todd Whitman tried to explain why she told New Yorkers that the “air was safe to breathe” when, in fact, she had evidence to the contrary. Indeed, the EPA’s own inspector general found that her statements “were falsely reassuring, lacked a scientific basis, and were politically motivated.” And we now know that the White House changed EPA press releases, “to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones.” OSHA failed to enforce safety regulations at Ground Zero—but did at the Pentagon, where no one has developed respiratory problems.
Obviously, none of these injuries would have occurred were it not for the terrorists, who are ultimately to blame, but many would have been avoided if the federal government had acted in a responsible manner. The federal government, therefore, has a moral and legal obligation to compensate the victims of 9/11 and to provide for their health. Indeed, it was outrageous when Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California) at the hearing called the attacks “simply” aircraft hitting New York, and not an attack on America.
In the immediate aftermath, the federal government did take some steps to address this issue. For example, Congress created the Victim Compensation Fund (VCF), a program designed to compensate people for losses sustained as a result of the attacks on the World Trade Center, and to limit litigation against the airline industry. The fund provided aid to the families of 9/11 victims and to individuals who suffered personal injury in the immediate aftermath of the attacks. In return for accepting these funds, recipients waived their right to sue. By the time the fund expired at the end of 2003, over $7 billion was distributed to survivors of 2,880 people killed on 9/11, and to 2,680 people who were injured in the attacks or the immediate rescue efforts.
The VCF is widely considered to have been a success. Most families of deceased victims chose to participate in the Fund, and 97 percent of those who submitted claims received compensation. However, while the VCF did an excellent job of handling claims involving people who died or had an immediate and easily diagnosable ailment, like a broken leg, the fund had closed by the time many of the latent ailments we are now clearly seeing began to manifest.
To address the increasing number of the sick, Congress in 2003 provided $1 billion in 9/11 disaster assistance to the Federal Emergency Management Agency to create an appropriate “mechanism for claims arising from debris removal.” FEMA, in a grant agreement with New York City, established the World Trade Center Captive Insurance Company to handle 9/11 claims. However, instead of distributing these funds, the Captive Fund has litigated nearly every claim, spending millions of dollars on legal fees. Although Congressional intent was to pay claims, only a handful of claims have been paid out, and none for respiratory injuries. That may be why nearly 10,000 people have filed suit against the City of New York and several contractors who continue to suffer from 9/11-related health effects.
We must assume that in addition to those that are already sick, many more will become sick in the future. That is why I, along with Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-Manhattan/Queens) and Rep. Vito Fossella (R-Staten Island/Brooklyn) have introduced the 9/11 Health and Compensation Act, which would provide comprehensive medical treatment to any person whose health was affected, and reopen the Victim Compensation Fund so that affected people can be compensated for their economic losses.
Indeed, after the hearing, I met with some of the living victims of 9/11 that had come down to attend. One thing is clear—their pain and suffering is real and cannot be ignored. We can never fully repay the debt that this nation owes them; we can never fully alleviate their anguish—but we must try. As the nation continues to heal and rebuild, we must do better by the living victims and heroes of 9/11.
