The majority of the Officials have failed to explain to their constituents why they assigned the department “defendants” to administer their own adjudication process: (1) the US Department of Labor (USDOL); (2) the US Health and Human Services (USHHS); and (3) the “ousted” US Department of Energy. It wasn’t until October 2004, that the members of Congress
“ousted” the USDOE from the EEOICP process due to the department’s numerous scandals. See details regarding the reasons for the “ousting” of the USDOE from the EEOICP process. See EXHIBIT 13.
EXCERPT: REFERENCE — Senator Chuck Grassley’s (R-IOWA)
letter to US Attorney General. “9) What steps, if any, are each of you taking to ensure the problem uncovered by the GSA OIG does not happen again, and to hold the responsible officials accountable?. . . And most importantly, this scheme was of no help to those people for whom the entire EEOICPA program was created: sick former nuclear weapons plant workers.” --------------- “Grassley and certain of his peers often state that, ‘These patriotic Americans deserve the admiration of all of us for not only working in hazardous conditions for the safety of our nation, but also for their fight to get the compensation they are owed.’ "* * * * * * * * * *
REFERENCE: Senator Chuck Grassley’s testimony before the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources March 30, 2004. See EXHIBIT 14. URL internet address:
---------------
Why did the Officials “pit” the sick victims or their survivors against the department “defendants?” For decades, the “defendants” have functioned to suppress, torture, and punish their victims, especially the conscientious whistleblowers.
Obviously, certain members of Congress seem to fear that multiple other torts shall be cited by the victims in a lawsuit such as: (1) breach of the Officials’ fiduciary duties; obstruction of justice; abuse of discretion; malpractice; perjury; withholding of crucial need to know public information; misrepresentation; misappropriation of government funding; promoting deliberate government errors / inaccuracies; other; and/or (2) the claimants’ personal torts such as discrimination; emotional distress; lost wages; loss of personal property; the “at risk” factor; wrongful death; permanent personal injury; survival risks; trauma; fraud; abuse; negligence; loss of companionship; survivor’s right; other.
