Why the 9/11 fund was a mistakePage 2 of 2 -- "You would get situations like this," Feinberg said. " `Mr. Feinberg, I'm the brother of the victim. Don't let my sister get a nickel. The victim hated his sister, trust me.' Then the sister comes in. `Is my brother spreading rumors. . .? My [deceased] brother and I loved each other.'
"Or: `Mr. Feinberg, I'm the biological parent of my son who was killed. Don't you dare give the fiancee any money. That marriage was never going to take place.' Then the fiancee comes in. `We were going to be married on October 11th.' And you go back to the biological parent. `They were going to be married October 11th. You threw a shower for them. You said you were gaining a daughter, not losing a son.' `Yeah, but on Sept. 10, my son told me it was off.' " Then there was the issue of private charity. Awards from the federal compensation fund were reduced by the amount of any insurance proceeds the families received (in effect punishing the relatives of victims who had been responsible enough to plan ahead). Yet they were not reduced to offset any charity the survivors collected. Which meant, in many cases, that the government ended up paying a fortune to people who had already collected a fortune from private donors. USA Today reported in 2002 that relatives of New York police officers received an average of $929,000 in charitable funds. The families of firefighters and ambulance crews got $1,037,000. Those gifts, too, were tax-free. An estimated $2.8 billion was donated by millions of Americans following the 9/11 attacks. Billions more came pouring in as in-kind goods and services -- everything from food and air travel to financial planning and slots at children's camps. Well before Congress created the federal compensation fund, individual donors and private charities were stepping up to the plate, demonstrating their compassion with the extraordinary generosity that is so often the hallmark of ordinary Americans. There was no reason for the government to get involved. "When you really look at all the problems you confront with a program like this," Feinberg said in Boston, it's "a fair question whether any of this is a good idea. . . . I don't think people should . . . assume that this is a precedent that we're going to repeat." Let's hope he's right.
Jeff Jacoby's e-mail address is jacoby@globe.com. © Copyright 2004 Globe Newspaper Company.
|
