9/11 Health Bill Denied?

[EvilMonk]

I am writing you today to present a most interesting story.

I am not interested in “slamming” anyone or their party, but rather in finding out the “Why” of such.

Recently, the Obama Administration turned down a bill (9/11 Health Bill) that would assist not only the residents of NYC who have contracted various illnesses including specific varieties of cancer from the disaster of 9/11, but also the numerous individuals who came to Ground Zero to help with the Search/Rescue and clean-up.

On January 27, 2010, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius was the go-between for the President and the NY Democratic Caucus (gathered specifically for this initiative) who ultimately had the duty of informing that group that the issue was to be shelved.

Explanations are few and sketchy as to why such a bi-partisan softball was ditched.

Some have cited the fact that the present incarnation of the House Bill would not cover enough (a matter to be easily handled later in the legislative process), and others point out the fact that currently such matters (specific to this case, among others) are handled through Discretionary Spending (a process that needs annual review and votes).

The bill has solved this last problem with the inclusion of language that would make it a permanent (and more established) expenditure.

The bill’s price tag is $11BUSD over the course of 30 years, hardly a bank-breaking effort. I have not done the research on it, but I am willing to bet that we pay more through the Department of Transportation in Federal Subsidies for toilets in Rest Stops than these people are asking.

I am mystified as to the reasons for no one wanting this thing to go through.

Even the Honorable Mike Bloomberg, (Mayor of NYC) is opposed to this. I can understand if his opposition stems from the lack of coverage, but that can be fixed in process, as stated above.

I have included site addresses that establish the origin, background, and current state of this puzzling affair. If there was ever an issue to make both parties stand together, this should have been it.

I am also wondering why the media has not been more vocal about this. I am not particularly outraged, as much as I am stunned. The whole thing has to have some kind of logical reason, but no one has been very forthcoming in announcing such.

If enough people start asking about this, maybe we can get to the right sources, and find out what in the blazes is going on?

Original Story:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/01/28/2010-01-28_ny_pols_stunned_to_learn_obama_administration_opposes_funding_for_911_health_bil.html

Proof that this isn't a "fistgate" hit piece (Same Author, one or two days later):
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/01/30/2010-01-30_baltimore_chop_for_gop_president_slams_obstructionist_republicans_on_their_home_.html

Bill Background:
http://www.downtownexpress.com/de_284/obamabacks.html

Further Exposure:
http://www.infowars.com/911-health-bill-opposed-by-ny-mayor-is-shelved/

http://www.newser.com/story/79513/ny-politicians-enraged-that-obama-opposes-911-health-bill.html


James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act

http://maloney.house.gov/documents/911recovery/20070322_HR1638_summary.pdf

Smoking Gun:
http://maloney.house.gov/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=2013&Itemid=61

Reasons For Not Passing?:
http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/health/20100119/9/3155

[uppityperson]

1. Team Obama to double budget for treating 9/11 responders

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2010/01/28/2010-01-28_team_obama_to_double_budget_for_treating_911_responders_in_an_amazing_sameday_ut.html

The White House revealed Thursday night it boosted funding for ailing 9/11 responders - pumping more money into the treatment program than ever before.

Team Obama disclosed the cash only after outraging New York lawmakers with the news that the administration won't back a permanent plan to help the dying Ground Zero responders.

The White House confirmed it will more than double the budget for treating ill responders to $150 million in 2011.

Aside from it being false, how about a link from a reputable website?

[EvilMonk]

4. A .gov is not a reputable website?

http://maloney.house.gov/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=2013&Itemid=61

?

[Bluebear]

2. Nope. But Senator-elect Scott Brown told 9/11 rescuers to drop dead.

One month after the September 11th attacks, Scott Brown was one of only three Massachusetts State Representatives to vote against a bill to provide financial assistance to Red Cross workers who had volunteered with 9/11 recovery efforts, we’ve learned.

The Brown campaign acknowledged the vote to us, claiming the measure would have taxed already-strained state finances.

http://www.thepoliticalcarnival.net/2010/01/scott-brown-voted-against-giving-help.html

[TheMadMonk]

3. I can think of one reasonably simple explanation.

The precedent it would establish. Quite possibly they'd ultimately lose, but I could see some states in a disaster situation using this as an excuse to try dumping their first responders medical expenses on the Federal govt. And while it was playing out in the courts those first responders would be left in medical limbo.

[murieltulip]

5. 9/11 Health Bill

One major problem with the 9/11 Health Bill has been the has
exclusion of input  by  the very community it seeks to serve. 
As someone who lived in the neighborhood and volunteered for
months at GZ, I find myself now totally disabled and
essentially told to 'put up or shut up'  at a Congressional
Hearing when I attempted to discuss the bill with it's
"sponsor".

Just in this thread, it seems people think, the injured are
NYC's traditional responders: NYPD and  FDNY. While
traditional responders are effected, this bill covers many 
volunteers... men and WOMEN now permanently disabled.  People
who gave of themselves for months, for free. Those volunteers
include people who worked for The Red Cross, the Salvation
Army, etc. as well as people like me, who lived in the
neighborhood and were compelled to act.

They call us all "Responders" which I now think has
been a disservice to this issue, and ultimately to this Bill. 

Whatever we are...850 of us,  are dead, post 9/11,  from 
serving their city and their country. 

We were lied to about the toxicity of the WTC site, to ensure
that Wall Street would open and that real estate would
rebound.

Due in part to the fact that the "Centers of
Excellence" are not so excellent. 

No member of the NY Congressional Delegation would take a sick
family member to any of the hospitals delegated "WTC
Centers of Excellence".  Some of these
"centers" don't even have  a CAT Scan machine (Stony
Brook).  How does one one accurately diagnose diseased lungs
with an ancient x-ray machine? The medical care we receive
offers MEDICAID rate services that will be paid out at NY
State Workers Compensation rates i.e. Medicaid rates. Thus,
the "Centers of Excellence" are not so excellent;
they are merely cheap and often well meaning. They offer
Occupational Medicine doctors who are  GP's with a semester or
two in workplace hazards. By no means should they be confused
with "specialists."  This was set up by Bush and
NYOSH. Not by doctors at top hospitals.

This Bill has not been thought through- It's just been
negotiated. I've lived with what's in place now, since 2003. I
would be dead, were it not for access to medical resources
outside the WTC system. This is not "sour grapes." I
love my WTC doctor at Mount Sinai. Our legislators carved the
body up and figured, lungs were easy to understand, even
Republicans would pass care for lungs.  I suggest you read
Fallout for some commentary on the toxins at the WTC and cross
reference them with "Rapid Guide to Hazardous Chemicals
in the Work Place."

The PR of the issue was totally mishandled by those presenting
this Bill to the WH, Congress and ultimately, America.