US Senate passes health bill for Ground Zero workers

EnglishLady

Veteran Expediter
BBC News Dec 22

The US Senate has passed a bill to fund healthcare for workers involved in rescue and clean-up efforts after the 9/11 attacks on New York City.

The bill, expected to pass in the House later on Wednesday, would also compensate survivors of the attacks.

Republicans who had initially opposed the bill's cost agreed to a smaller deal amid pressure from television personalities and New York Democrats.

The bill is one of the last remaining items before the US Congress adjourns.

'A national duty'

New York City Mayor Mike Bloomberg said the bill's unanimous passage in the Senate "affirms our nation's commitment to protecting those who protect us all".

"The events of that day were an attack on America by a foreign enemy, and addressing its health impacts is a national duty," he said.

After a high-profile campaign by television personalities - including Comedy Central presenter Jon Stewart and Fox News presenter Shepard Smith - as well as former Republican New York City Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, the bill won the backing of Republicans who had opposed on cost grounds.

To win passage, Democratic negotiators led by New York Senators Kirsten Gilibrand and Charles Schumer agreed to lower to $4.2bn (£2.7bn) healthcare aid to Ground Zero workers, from the initial $6.2bn, and other concessions.

"Every American recognises the heroism of the 9/11 first responders, but it is not compassionate to help one group while robbing future generation of opportunity," said Republican Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, who had led Republican opposition.

"This agreement strikes a fair balance."

The legislation agreed on Wednesday also keeps a compensation fund open for victims of the attacks for another five years to cover economic losses of ill workers, and provides about $4bn (£2.6bn) for monitoring and treating illnesses caused by 9/11
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
IT is not a national duty, it does not affirm our nation's commitment to protecting those who protect us, it is not it is not something that the federal government should spend a dime on.

The problem is New York, New York City and their insurance companies, not the US taxpayers - period.

If Bloomberg and all those who think there should be money spent, then they can reach into the funds that exist to help NYC and the 9/11 fund or Bloomberg can himself pull the money out of his fortune.

The next step from what I understand is a reconciliation of the two bills that have been passed, and if the new congress is worth anything, they will not reconcile the bills and let it pass.
 

witness23

Veteran Expediter
IT is not a national duty, it does not affirm our nation's commitment to protecting those who protect us, it is not it is not something that the federal government should spend a dime on.

The problem is New York, New York City and their insurance companies, not the US taxpayers - period.

If Bloomberg and all those who think there should be money spent, then they can reach into the funds that exist to help NYC and the 9/11 fund or Bloomberg can himself pull the money out of his fortune.

The next step from what I understand is a reconciliation of the two bills that have been passed, and if the new congress is worth anything, they will not reconcile the bills and let it pass.

I'm sorry greg, did I hear you say you went and volunteered at groung zero after 9/11?
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
I was there as were many who were not affected but that doesn't matter. I'm not trying to say they can't have help just trying to point out the hypocrisy of the entire issue when it comes down to the event and the feds being involved.

The point I am trying to make is that this is the responsibility of the people of New York, the city of New York and their insurance companies not the people of the country.

The people where this happened, who owned the building and who have insurance (city, building owners, lease holder) have a burden to provide medical care and any compensation for the illness of those who worked on site.

As cruel as you can make me out as, the problem is that the feds dumped too much money into these things and many seem not to understand that they can't b*tch about the deficit, the national debt and so on without saying anything about all these programs that throw a few billion here or there.
 

witness23

Veteran Expediter
I was there as were many who were not affected but that doesn't matter.

The contrary my friend, it does matter, it matters a lot. You were there as a volunteer? I had know idea. Hat's off to you my friend. What did you do while you there?
 

14Wheeler

Seasoned Expediter
What did you do while you there?

Great question Witness. Certainly someone who was there would have no problem sharing the pictures they took while there. In this modern age of tech stuff, no way in the world you'd show up at an event like this without a camera.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
There is no reason to think I did something special, I like 355 others drove trucks and unloaded them. I was there but didn't actually do much compared to others.

As far as the issue of paying for the health care of others, I would normally say it should be done but with this event, there has been a need for the feds to pay for everything, while it isn't the place for the feds to pay in the first place. Like other disasters, we tend to think they need to dump money for clean up and rebuilding but when that happens, it turns into a mess.

There is a system that works for all of us, it is part of the market, and this system is part of the city's, state's, building owner's and insurance companies' liability to pay for those who are damaged by the building design, materials used and the aftermath of the attack. Because people are quick to b*tch about the feds meddling in health care, companies and throwing money around that increases the debt, there is no clear reason why this shouldn't be part of the concern.

Especially with 9.11, we are selective in what we want to complain about and be compasionate about. Many view it as a national tradegy, as I do, but others view it as NYC has the right to claim it as their own and many demand that they are special. We forgot what caused it in the first place, a lot of hate is brewed over the misrepresentation of the event but more importantly, we have fallen for the idea that federal involvement will keep us safe. We now have a bloated government who is slower to react and when they do react, it seems to step all over the citizens and no where more safe than we could be. We as a population forgot the lessons of 9.11 and become more complacent and willing to give the feds the power to change what they need to change under the guise of protecting us. All of which is one reason why I am consistent with the freedom towers, this bill and a number of other things - the terrorist won, we lost.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Here we go with the f*cking picture thing again.

Not everyone carries a camera around with them and many who may have a chance to snap a few Kodak moments doesn't mean they do or can. I was there to help with a very limited time to mess around not be a photographer.

Even IF I did, I would not share them on line.
 

witness23

Veteran Expediter
There is no reason to think I did something special, I like 355 others drove trucks and unloaded them. I was there but didn't actually do much compared to others.

Your humbleness is truly admirable greg. Volunteering to take your truck to Ground Zero to help out is something. How long did you spend at Ground Zero volunteering your services? I hope you are not feeling any of the ill effects of this disaster.
 
Last edited:

witness23

Veteran Expediter
Here we go with the f*cking picture thing again.

Why are you upset to the point of using the "F" word? I was also going to ask if you had any pictures to share. Seems like a logical question to ask of someone who was at Ground Zero during that time.

Not everyone carries a camera around with them and many who may have a chance to snap a few Kodak moments doesn't mean they do or can.

Are you one of those unfortunate souls without a camera phone? Knowing I was going to Ground Zero to volunteer, I surely would've made sure I had a camera of sort. Heck, I would've used the one your company gives you in the accident report kit, or stopped and picked up a disposable.

I was there to help with a very limited time to mess around not be a photographer.

Again, thank you for your service and kindness to volunteer your time and effort during such dangerous times. I am bit surprised you wouldn't have taken a few snapshots though.

Even IF I did, I would not share them on line.

May I ask why?
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Why no pictures?

Because it was a disaster, not a caravel.

If I needed to record some sort of history in my life, it wasn't going to be a disaster where people lost their lives.

Why not post them on-line?

The same reason I won't post my credit card numbers on-line.

Here is my point of view.

Our society used to use our imagination, we used to understand events through the printed word but that is pretty much worthless. We now demand to see things in High Def, to prove they happened, to prove someone was right or to satisfy some of our animal desires to see carnage or death - "look dear, see there is the guy's eyeball hanging by the nerve on the mirror".

I didn't snap pictures of the accident I saw in Cleveland, even though it would have been used to prove my point. Neither did I snap a bunch of pictures of the car accident I saw over the weekend where blood was everywhere.

Shouldn't I respect others over the need to prove something when someone tries to call me out?
 

14Wheeler

Seasoned Expediter
we used to understand events through the printed word but that is pretty much worthless.

out?


I very much can comprehend things I read from credible sources.
To understand the events I read is the easy part. No one was asking for morbid views you've seen. There's some of us that have seen things you won't in three life times.
It does get to the point with some, especially those whose claims
are SO often obvious works of fiction, a picture is worth way more than words.
 

EnglishLady

Veteran Expediter
My son was a firefighter before he became a policeman - should he have taken photo's of every incident he was called to?

What is this infactuation with ppl wanting to see someone's last moments before death, or seeing someone terribly maimed?

If someone was taking pics at this disaster, I ask WHY?

Why didn't they stop taking pics and help out too?

I guess some ppl like morbid :(
 

EnglishLady

Veteran Expediter
Sue
His point is I am full of sh*t and need to prove myself to him.


You know what you did on that day Greg - don't mind other ppl.

I stand by my post - ppl who have to see such painful pic's are very sad ppl indeed.

They were probably the one's that went searching the internet to see the last pic's of Princess Diana dying in the car, or Steve Irwin being stabbed by the stingray - morbid to say the least :(
 
Top