9/11 Victims compensation fund and what you don’t know about it

Inclusions in the Victims compensation fund bill you should hear about. First, this bill compensates victims until 2092. It is not limited to First Responders and crash site workers, “Passersby” now qualify.

I am not a wizard at math but 9/11 occurred in 2001. We are talking 90 years.

In an unheard of action, there are simply no limitations placed on any amount of money to be paid. This boondoggle is not limited to First responders and those who worked the clean up sites even now.

Claims can be filed by responders and survivors affected by the aftermath of 9/11 near the World Trade Center site, the Pentagon site, and the Shanksville, Pennsylvania site. Responders include those who performed rescue or recovery services, volunteers, cleanup workers, construction, and sanitation personnel; while survivors, also known as non-responders, include area residents, workers, students, and passersby. The VCF does not distinguish between responders and survivors (non-responders) when evaluating eligibility and calculating awards.


There is already a program in place which has received no attention and apart from the VCF that already covers healthcare: WTC  Health Program.

New York City Survivors:

Certain groups are eligible for enrollment into the World Trade Center (WTC) Health Program if the individual meets all four requirements: activity, location, time period, and hours.

Worked, lived, attended school, child care, or adult day care

September 11, 2001 to January 10, 2002 4 days – 1 day must equal at least 4 hours
September 11, 2001 to July 31, 2002 30 days


Present in the dust or dust cloud NYC Disaster Area September 11, 2001

Above are several categories listed as well as others.


Any cancer death by a 9/11 area resident is now prefaced automatically with “9/11 related.”  But what about the inclusion of conditions  “and other health problems.”

Do I want to be a scrooge and deny healthcare due to first responders? No, but I do want to state that almost everyone now involved will die before 2090 of something. That the majority will not be First Responders or Clean Up crews. Up to now, it was heresy to even question what could be deemed to be the so called “cancer related” death. What is the limitation? Illness could be deemed 9/11 related up to and until the time of death.

But this is what we bloggers do. We go where no MSM dares to go.

Take for example the emotionally charged case with Jon Stewart. Luis Alvarez, the retired police officer who along with Jon Stewart appeared before Congress earlier this month to plead his case for more money.

Wrenching. As we were privy to his last words and breath here on earth.

But what did he die of?

He was not diagnosed with colorectal cancer until 2016, but doctors linked to the three months he spent at the destroyed World Trade Center. New York Post


Of cancers that affect both men and women, colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. It is the third most common cancer in men and in women.

Colorectal cancer is one of the easiest curable cancers if diagnosed early. Of course it requires a preventive colonoscopy which sadly too many fail to do due to its unpleasantness. In 2016 only 67 percent were compliant.

Source: CDC

Now on to Rand Paul, who dared even to question how this unlimited amount of money was going to be paid. Was his ox ever gored:

Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) is catching a lot of flak for demanding that the Senate actually debate an open-ended extension of the September 11 Victims Compensation Fund.

On Wednesday afternoon, Paul objected when Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D–N.Y.) attempted to pass the bill by unanimous consent—an expedited process that does not require each senator to record his or her vote.

“Any new spending that we are approaching, any new program that’s going to have the longevity of 70, 80 years, should be offset by cutting spending that’s less valuable,” said Paul on the Senate floor. “We need to at the very least have this debate. I will be offering up an amendment if this bill should come to the floor, but until then I will object.”

The bill, H.R. 1327, would extend the life of the Victims Compensation Fund to 2090. (The fund is currently set to stop accepting claims by the end of next year.) It would also do away with any limited appropriations for the fund, instead paying out however much is necessary to cover eligible claims through 2092.

The first 9/11 Victims Compensation Fund operated from 2001 to 2003, and awarded $7 billion to the families of the 2,880 people killed in the attacks on that day, plus another 2,680 who were injured.

In 2011 the fund was renewed and expanded to cover anyone injured during the rescue and recovery efforts at the targeted World Trade Center, as well as those in proximity to the attacks who were injured or came down with other health problems, including cancer. Ed: On what medical correlation for every type of cancer?

(So as long as one was in proximity and have cancer and/or “other health problems” for that matter now receives healthcare for their entire life as well as a financial award.)

Since 2011, the fund has since given out $5.2 billion to nearly 29,000 claimants. Keep reading

In conclusion. First Responders to 9/11 should have all the financial support in the world. But was it wrong for Rand Paul to bring up the price of it? Is it wrong to ask if we as a Nation wish to cover healthcare for all cancers and other determined health conditions for those as they get older, who may have been “Passersby” on 9/11? Should all of these people qualify for “cash awards” for economic loss and pain and suffering in addition to healthcare?

And perhaps their children, since we are now out to 2092. Should there be no vetting of the medical condition and can we not ask for some correlation if it is 9/11 related?

Once this law passes there is no recision. We may be in agreement that victims should be taken care of for the rest of their lives, and thus let it be so. I for one have no problem with true first responders. But we have already spent billions. Are we obligated to care in the future for possibly thousands more of illnesses of unknown origin? We have already “awarded” over 12 Billion Dollars.

I think it was worth having this conversation.

As I was researching this I found numerous ads by Attorneys:

See Ad

“I was a cleaner of downtown offices after 9/11. I was just diagnosed with stage 4 breast cancer this year. I had to have a double mastectomy in June 2016. After I spoke to an attorney Turley Hansen, they had me in the office within a few days. I am so happy they took this claim filing off my plate so I can continue my treatments. They are very kind.”– M.J., Manhattan

BONUS: From a post done back in 2010. Yep. You guessed it.

Trial Lawyers Benefit The Most From 9/11 Health Care Bill

Ads began popping up touting Zadroga-Act.com with the tease: “WTC Compensation Fund: Free Consultation. Call Us Today.” Clicking on that link, though, doesn’t take you to a do-gooder advice site. It leads to the website of Worby Groner Edelman & Napoli Bern, the lawyers who represented most of the 10,000 9/11 plaintiffs and grabbed the bulk of the $150 million in contingency fees – about 25% – from the $625 million settlement.

Other than this, all is well in the swamp.

Thanks to  Doug Ross  for the link and welcome readers as well as WhatfingerNews for the links.
For the best aggregator of conservative news click below.

30 Responses to “9/11 Victims compensation fund and what you don’t know about it”

  1. Sunday Respite – The Heart Blinds | BUNKERVILLE | God, Guns and Guts Comrades! Says:

    […] 9/11 Victims compensation fund and what you don’t know about it […]


  2. Karen a Survivor Says:

    There allot of inaccuracies in your article. I lived about 10 blocks away from the towers and lived there until Feb of 2002. I had a sinus headache every day until we moved. I was diagnosed with beast cancer on 2012. Due to many complications and PTSD from living through that day my life is changed and very difficult due to complications from cancer. The screening process for the WTC health program is extremely careful and extensive. Only cancer treatment is covered. Lawyers are not Makis no sllt of money they are restricted to only allowed 10% of any award and no expenses. I would gladly not receive benefits or money to get my life back. I know many on my neighborhood who got sick and many others are still getting sick with extremely rare cancers, such as male breast cancer of which there is a cluster. The air was bad for many months. Images hundreds of thousands of pulverized computers, Fluorescent bulbs and all the toxins flowing through the air. Many are so ignorant of these facts!

    Liked by 1 person

    • bunkerville Says:

      Thank you for your response… According to the “updated” list, there are additional illnesses covered. Various digestive disorders including sleep apnea. This list can be expanded further at a future time as well as new claimaints.
      The point is that billions have been spent, and as I understand it, you will continued to be covered. At any time in the next 90 years you can make additional claims as well as new claimants may apply for benefits.
      The point was to explain that this was an unlimited commitment with potentially little oversight in the next 90 years. I question that.
      Those that should get the funding should get the funding. The government being what it is, is known for often becoming out of control. I see nothing wrong with a review and approvals every 5 years or so.


  3. william chandler Says:

    Sounds like the generosity of someone who wishes to sooth away all questions and suspicions …..
    Pour money on them and they will not question the “Official Story”


  4. william chandler Says:

    W-rong Bush MURDERED the First Responders who answered the call at Ground Zero. BABYBush knew the air was toxic but he sent that Whitman woman, head of the EPA out to tell them the air was SAFE.
    http://www.propublica.org/article/new-docs-detail-how-feds-downplayed-ground-zero-health-risks, http://www.democracynow.org/2011/9/9/as_study_links_9_11_debris
    Now they are all dying of cancer after HE “used” them for photo-ops and to get rid of the evidence – quickly.
    These were “Highly Trained Professionals” who should have known better and should have demanded protective gear. Also, they were already getting the World’s best medical benefits around under their Union Contracts … on top of 9/11 benefits ….
    ponder this ….. the 1st Responders are the “Highly Trained Professionals” who should have been well aware of the toxins and worn or demanded protective gear.


    • bunkerville Says:

      In the end, we will be paying the healthcare bills, plus pain and suffering, and economic losses to about a 40 block area and any “passersby.” for the rest of their lives. Done, Complete. and the end of the story. The purpose of this post was to describe exactly what will be taking place.


  5. Steve Dennis Says:

    Just like everything else they do, they take something good and take advantage of it and expand it beyond what it was intended. Then they pull on the heartstrings and guilt or scare people into supporting it.

    Liked by 1 person

    • bunkerville Says:

      You sure nailed it to exactly what I am thinking.. We can only guess what this will turn into over the next 90 years as it expands into the great boondoggle of the century and into the 22nd century.


  6. Linda Says:

    I am standing with Rand Paul on this…look, I certainty think folks ought to be compensated–but at what cost? I agree–get Saudi Arabia to chip in. smiles

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Kid Says:

    How about this simple solution? Confiscate Saudi Arabian funds and assets to pay for all of this. A federal court has already ruled that SA can be sued by victims on 9/11.

    Liked by 3 people

  8. Deserttrek Says:

    a scam from the first day
    any sane person with emergency response or haz mat training would have gone in without the proper gear
    yes there are real issues, but a massive taxpayer funded slush fund is not it

    Liked by 3 people

    • bunkerville Says:

      Exactly.. a boondoggle for the lawyers..it has very little to do with first responders…. the reason the fund was running low was because everyone was dipping into the pot an more and more people were qualified as they expanded the claim entitlements.

      Liked by 2 people

  9. JCscuba Says:

    This should come as no shock. It’s not their money and when lawyers are involved quite simply follow the money into their investment portfolios. Thanks great read. J.C.

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Mustang Says:

    Well, I did watch what happened on television. Surely, I must be entitled to some federal benefit.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. peter3nj Says:

    Another thought: How long before congress breaks open the VCF lockbox and appropriates the funds not unlike they did with SS, The Highway Trust Fund, etc etc. The victims will be long gone and forgotten before 90 years are up with the fund ripe for the picking and of course the scavenger Congress will still be around unless of course the left …. fill in the blanks.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. peter3nj Says:

    Lets look at the bright side: There are no reparations for the families of the 19 hi-jackers. Think of their poor families having to survive without the years of lost wages. Sounds trite but had CAIR been up on its game… who can tell?
    Meanwhile our injured and maimed veterans have to look to private charities for things such as special wheelchairs and other assorted care while we continue giving foreign aid to our enemies, Obama billions to Iran, Moosh’s taking 60-70 of her closest friends on various overseas junkets running into the hundreds of millions of tax payers dollars, hundreds of millions to the baby killers- Unplanned Parenthood. The list is endless.
    As for this fund why aren’t the trial lawyers made to work pro bono for these “victims” as that must do for the most evil, vile and virulent criminals in our midst? Que domage….

    Liked by 3 people

  13. Ed Bonderenka Says:

    Yes. I was very much surprised to learn these details.
    I looked into it after hearing Rand Paul (who i normally have little use for) voted no.
    Since it didn’t involve Middle East policy, I wondered what motivated him to vote no.
    The other issues you brought up, are eye openers also.
    Thank you.

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: