I’m all for a balanced budget and seeing our deficit balloon over $1T is entirely unacceptable to this fiscally conservative citizen, but ensuring 9/11 first responders are properly covered is not the hill I wish to die upon. They sacrificed their own well-being to help others in one of the worst moments in our nation’s recent history and (like the rest of our military), we shouldn’t be playing games with their health and livelihoods. We already cut their benefits by 70% … we shouldn’t be squabbling over an extra $1B a year for 10 years for these heroes.
I’m embarrassed that this whole thing has become a political football. My only “boondoggle” question on this legislation is why does it go to 2092?
Actuarially speaking, few 9/11 first responders would have a life expectancy into 2090s without the health ailments they’ve been subjected to that this legislation pays for. (Assume youngest were 20 in 2001. They’d be over 100 in 2090).
There are other government benefits that already exist for older Americans.
I can only say what my gut is telling me since I have no evidence to support an actual answer — extending it through 2092 would stop this nonsense of having to have the fund renewed every 5-10 years (or whatever time frame would apply with a shorter end date).
Like you said, this should not be a political football and extending it well past the next 30+ election cycles ensures the victims can safely plan for their future treatment without having to worry if/when funds may be cut off.
wonder if it would include the descendants of the 9/11 victims?
It’s a bit unrelated, but did you know there’s still someone out there receiving Civil War pension benefits? Her dad fought in the Civil War and was in his late 80’s when she was born and now she’s in her 90’s.
I haven’t followed this very closely and I don’t fully understand what it is that Congress is funding. A 9/11 Victim’s fund would pay for ….what ? Wouldn’t first responders be covered by workers compensation and/or other programs in place ?
First responders put their lives on the line every day all over the country, but we need BILLIONS
I haven’t followed this very closely and I don’t fully understand what it is that Congress is funding. A 9/11 Victim’s fund would pay for ….what ? Wouldn’t first responders be covered by workers compensation and/or other programs that are in place ?
First responders put their lives on the line every day all over the country, but we need BILLIONS of dollars set aside to insure what ? I’m not being callous, I honestly don’t know what the fund is supposed to do and I don’t understand why, if it’s tied to the terrorist attacks of 9/11/2001, would we be doing this 18 years later ?
At the very least, I applaud the senators for wanting to make sure that there will be oversight into the who and the how these funds are used. When you take BILLIONS of tax payers dollars to establish any kind of fund (see: FEMA for examples), rampant abuse, mismanagement and fraud will be circling, waiting for their share of the prize. Always happens.
Roughly 70,000 first responders – about half have some sort of disease from their exposure at the attack site… average annual medical expenses for an average american is roughly $10,000 – 35,000 people X 10,000 = 350million.. multiplied by 10 is 3.5 Billion… Take into account that the average annual medical expenses for someone with pre existing conditions or inherently sick at this point – the average cost per person could be significantly more… It’s not a far stretch to find yourself at those numbers
Thank you, ??? for your reply. I wondered if the problem might have had something to do with airborne contaminates & it sounds like that must be the case.
The “journalists” at IJ deleted my previous comment, which was completely on point (but hey, truth? for a Liberal? HA!)
Here goes again: Anyone who knows how negotiations work – and insurance people should be super good at this one – knows that you use every minute you can to get as much as you can. Whoever has more time wins. Everyone knew this would get done a month ago, including the perpetually outraged Jon Stewart (YAY! We don’t have to see his phony outrage anymore!)
And where was all the Jon Stewart outrage at Islamic Radicals who killed innocents around the world? Nowhere. Only Republicans get his grandstanding hissy fits.
Newsflash: it is possible to make 2 comments on 2 separate articles, have one deleted, and trick Laughing into thinking it never existed in the first place . . .
I haven’t really been able to find out too terrible much and honestly I have been so busy I haven’t been able to watch or read news like normal. I think the fund was becoming depleted so they had to bring this back to be reauthorized so more funding could be given. If memory serves me correctly as well some of those that are sick or having issues technically were not working but acting as volunteers during that time so possibly that is why they couldn’t claim work comp. Also I think anyone affected can make a claim so the person that was just walking down the street when it occurred and then rushed to help save people and with clean up efforts again wouldn’t have any work comp cause as they weren’t working. This is all just a guess so obviously don’t quote me on this.
I’m all for a balanced budget and seeing our deficit balloon over $1T is entirely unacceptable to this fiscally conservative citizen, but ensuring 9/11 first responders are properly covered is not the hill I wish to die upon. They sacrificed their own well-being to help others in one of the worst moments in our nation’s recent history and (like the rest of our military), we shouldn’t be playing games with their health and livelihoods. We already cut their benefits by 70% … we shouldn’t be squabbling over an extra $1B a year for 10 years for these heroes.
absolutely 100% agree. This shouldn’t even need to go to a vote, it should just be automatic. This issue transcends all party lines.
I’m embarrassed that this whole thing has become a political football. My only “boondoggle” question on this legislation is why does it go to 2092?
Actuarially speaking, few 9/11 first responders would have a life expectancy into 2090s without the health ailments they’ve been subjected to that this legislation pays for. (Assume youngest were 20 in 2001. They’d be over 100 in 2090).
There are other government benefits that already exist for older Americans.
I can only say what my gut is telling me since I have no evidence to support an actual answer — extending it through 2092 would stop this nonsense of having to have the fund renewed every 5-10 years (or whatever time frame would apply with a shorter end date).
Like you said, this should not be a political football and extending it well past the next 30+ election cycles ensures the victims can safely plan for their future treatment without having to worry if/when funds may be cut off.
wonder if it would include the descendants of the 9/11 victims?
It’s a bit unrelated, but did you know there’s still someone out there receiving Civil War pension benefits? Her dad fought in the Civil War and was in his late 80’s when she was born and now she’s in her 90’s.
very interesting story about the Civil War descendant.
I haven’t followed this very closely and I don’t fully understand what it is that Congress is funding. A 9/11 Victim’s fund would pay for ….what ? Wouldn’t first responders be covered by workers compensation and/or other programs in place ?
First responders put their lives on the line every day all over the country, but we need BILLIONS
I haven’t followed this very closely and I don’t fully understand what it is that Congress is funding. A 9/11 Victim’s fund would pay for ….what ? Wouldn’t first responders be covered by workers compensation and/or other programs that are in place ?
First responders put their lives on the line every day all over the country, but we need BILLIONS of dollars set aside to insure what ? I’m not being callous, I honestly don’t know what the fund is supposed to do and I don’t understand why, if it’s tied to the terrorist attacks of 9/11/2001, would we be doing this 18 years later ?
At the very least, I applaud the senators for wanting to make sure that there will be oversight into the who and the how these funds are used. When you take BILLIONS of tax payers dollars to establish any kind of fund (see: FEMA for examples), rampant abuse, mismanagement and fraud will be circling, waiting for their share of the prize. Always happens.
Make an attempt at using google accompanied by reading comprehension before making such a post
Roughly 70,000 first responders – about half have some sort of disease from their exposure at the attack site… average annual medical expenses for an average american is roughly $10,000 – 35,000 people X 10,000 = 350million.. multiplied by 10 is 3.5 Billion… Take into account that the average annual medical expenses for someone with pre existing conditions or inherently sick at this point – the average cost per person could be significantly more… It’s not a far stretch to find yourself at those numbers
Thank you, ??? for your reply. I wondered if the problem might have had something to do with airborne contaminates & it sounds like that must be the case.
Thanks again.
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
No Craig, they didn’t delete your post. It’s under “Congress Passes Sept. 11 Victims Compensation Fund”.
Can’t you even keep up on which story you’re commenting on?
Newsflash: it is possible to make 2 comments on 2 separate articles, have one deleted, and trick Laughing into thinking it never existed in the first place . . .
Come on Laughing, Craig is never wrong.
I haven’t really been able to find out too terrible much and honestly I have been so busy I haven’t been able to watch or read news like normal. I think the fund was becoming depleted so they had to bring this back to be reauthorized so more funding could be given. If memory serves me correctly as well some of those that are sick or having issues technically were not working but acting as volunteers during that time so possibly that is why they couldn’t claim work comp. Also I think anyone affected can make a claim so the person that was just walking down the street when it occurred and then rushed to help save people and with clean up efforts again wouldn’t have any work comp cause as they weren’t working. This is all just a guess so obviously don’t quote me on this.