Long-term funding for first responders with lingering health issues from the 9/11 terror attacks was dropped from the federal budget to avoid a government shutdown last week, prompting criticism from the workers and their unions.
“Obviously we are not against smarter spending and we’re not against cutting wasteful spending,” James Brosi, president of the Uniformed Fire Officers Association, told The New York Times. “What we are against is universal killing of a bill without looking deeper into individual parts of it that have merit and are not wasteful spending.”
Over 130,000 people are still suffering from respiratory ailments and other illnesses from 9/11 and over 35,000 people in the healthcare program have been diagnosed with cancer, Brosi told The Times.
The bi-partisan bill would have provided the 120,000 first responders who contracted illnesses and health complications with health care through 2040, but the broader spending package was heavily criticized by President-elect Donald Trump and Elon Musk.
After two failed votes, the House and Senate approved stripped down government funding to just enough to fund its operations through March 2025, narrowly avoiding a government shutdown. But the legislation did not include any health care funding for 9/11 survivors.
“We have people who, again, ran towards danger, who ran towards what could have been death, and were told the air was safe when they continue to die,” one of the bills sponsors, Rep. Anthony D’Esposito, R-N.Y., told Politico. “There is no reason that those people should continue to have to come to Capitol Hill to beg for funding.”
D’Esposito voted to pass the government’s spending plan, despite the 9/11 funding being left out. “It’s paramount that we keep the government open. I don’t think this nation can stand a government shutdown over the next few weeks,” he told Politico, adding that he had “no choice” but to vote yes.
Read more
about federal spending battles
