How Much Is a Life Worth?
Question?
问题？
Call us at 800-207-8001 | Sign In | Learn About Membership
请致电 800-207-8001 | 联系我们登录 |了解会员资格
(Left to right) Martin Richard, 8, was killed in the Boston Marathon bombings in April; Avielle Richman, 6, was a victim of the gunman at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn last December; Heaven Sutton, 7, was killed by a stray bullet on a Chicago street in June 2012.
（从左到右）8 岁的马丁·理查德 (Martin Richard) 在 4 月份的波士顿马拉松爆炸案中丧生；去年 12 月，6 岁的阿维尔·里奇曼 (Avielle Richman) 在康涅狄格州纽敦桑迪胡克小学 (Sandy Hook Elementary) 被枪手杀害。 2012 年 6 月，7 岁的海文·萨顿 (Heaven Sutton) 在芝加哥街头被流弹身亡。
To Ken Feinberg, if you lose both your legs, youâre as good as dead.
对肯·范伯格来说，如果你失去了双腿，那你就等于死了。
Here, in the world of the living, inspirational media stories after the Boston Marathon bombings featured survivors who persevered, grittily relearning to walk atop state-of-the-art prosthetic limbs, fighting for normalcy with each new step.
在现实世界中，波士顿马拉松爆炸案发生后，媒体报道了鼓舞人心的故事，讲述了幸存者坚持不懈、坚韧不拔地重新学习如何在最先进的假肢上行走，每迈出新的一步，都在为恢复正常而奋斗。
But in Feinbergâs world, it made no difference whether a person could still live a rewarding life or never left the raceâs finish line.
但在范伯格的世界里，一个人是否仍然可以过上有意义的生活，或者是否从未离开过终点线，并没有什么区别。
That didnât enter the equationâ his equation.
这并没有进入他的方程式。
His choice.
他的选择。
His rules.
他的规则。
Whether you died at the scene or you lost both your legs, you received the same amount of moneyâ$2.2 millionâfrom the victim fund established in the wake of the attack.
无论您当场死亡还是失去双腿，您都会从袭击发生后设立的受害者基金中获得相同金额的资金（220 万美元）。
If you lost one limb, you received considerably less.
如果你失去了一条肢体，你得到的钱就会少得多。
If you were hospitalized but kept your limbs, then still less.
如果您住院但保留了四肢，那就更不用说了。
Feinberg is the nearly ubiquitous expert who has been called in to divvy up funds for the fallen and the injured in a stomach-churning sequence of tragedies, from the Sept.
范伯格是一位几乎无处不在的专家，从九月二十二日起，他就被请来为一系列令人反胃的悲剧中的倒下和受伤者分配资金。
11 attacks to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, from the Virginia Tech shootings to the Boston bombings.
从弗吉尼亚理工大学枪击案到波士顿爆炸案，墨西哥湾漏油事件发生了 11 起袭击事件。
Heâs Deathâs accountant.
他是死亡的会计师。
When the stands collapsed at the Indiana State Fair in 2011, killing seven, they called Ken Feinberg.
2011 年印第安纳州博览会上的看台倒塌并造成 7 人死亡，他们给肯·范伯格 (Ken Feinberg) 打电话。
When a gunman murdered 27 children at Sandy Hook Elementary in Connecticut, they called Ken Feinberg.
当一名枪手在康涅狄格州桑迪胡克小学杀害 27 名儿童时，他们打电话给肯·范伯格。
His is the grimmest of specialties.
他的专业是最严峻的。
âYouâll never make these people whole,â Feinberg says, sitting in his Washington law office as the city below baked in the summerâs heat.
“你永远无法让这些人痊愈，”范伯格坐在他位于华盛顿的律师事务所里说道，而下面的城市正处于夏季的炎热之中。
Befitting a career lived under klieg lights, one wall is dedicated to press clippings.
为了适应在灯光下生活的职业，有一堵墙专门用来展示新闻剪报。
But here, dread and devastation run though the framed articles, a sorrowful wall of fame.
但在这里，恐惧和毁灭贯穿着装框的文章，这是一堵悲伤的名誉之墙。
On the coffee table are we-couldnât-have-done-it-without-you letters from Presidents Bush and Obama, along with a picture of Feinberg and family in the Oval Office.
咖啡桌上放着布什总统和奥巴马总统的来信，以及范伯格和家人在椭圆形办公室的照片，“没有你们，我们就不可能做到这一点”。
Opera, Feinbergâs passion, is piped into the room continuously.
范伯格的激情——歌剧——不断地通过管道传进房间。
And characteristic of a man who has waded repeatedly into tragedyâs wake, who has been praised and flayed, who has sent millions of dollars to some victims and told thousands of others theyâll see nothing, and who is viewed as the unparalleled expert in his field, Feinberg is alternately boastful and defensive, contemplative and bombastic.
范伯格时而自夸，时而自卫，时而沉思，时而夸夸其谈，这是一个多次涉足悲剧的人的特征，他曾被赞扬和剥削，他曾向一些受害者发送了数百万美元，但又告诉成千上万的其他人他们不会看到任何东西，他被视为他所在领域的无与伦比的专家。
Heâs done this so long now, he knows the questions before they come, addresses the criticisms before theyâre raised, and stands by his record to the end.
他已经这样做了很长时间了，他在问题出现之前就知道了，在批评提出之前就对其进行了回应，并坚持自己的记录到底。
With this vocation, it seems, comes a nearly bottomless capacity for self-examination.
这份职业似乎带来了近乎无底的自我审视能力。
Feinberg has written books and delivered commencement speeches on the principles of victim compensation, on the value of a life.
范伯格撰写了有关受害者赔偿原则和生命价值的书籍并发表了毕业典礼演讲。
He has a singular perspective on how our society choosesâor declinesâto take care of its own.
对于我们的社会如何选择（或拒绝）照顾自己的社会，他有着独特的视角。
And it has left him troubled.
这让他很困扰。
âBad things happen to good people each day in this country,â he says.
“在这个国家，坏事每天都会发生在好人身上，”他说。
That is to say, not everyone gets a million dollars when tragedy calls.
也就是说，当悲剧来临时，并不是每个人都能得到一百万美元。
And by ânot everyone,â that is to say just about no one.
而且“不是所有人”，也就是说几乎没有人。
Feinbergâs entire public career is about the outliersâthe handful of moments when the government, or a corporation, or a bevy of private citizens determines that a tragic event somehow merited a pecuniary response.
范伯格的整个公共生涯都是关于异常值的——当政府、一家公司或一群私人公民认为一场悲剧事件在某种程度上值得金钱回应时的少数时刻。
Until 9/11, the government was not in the business of remunerating victims of terrorism; the closest it came to compensating on a mass scale was natural-disaster relief.
9/11 事件之前，政府不负责赔偿恐怖主义受害者；最接近大规模补偿的是自然灾害救济。
But families of those murdered on that September day ended up with more than $2 million each, tax free.
但在 9 月的那天被谋杀的人的家人最终每人获得了超过 200 万美元的免税收入。
Feinberg says such an effort, funded by taxpayer dollars, will never happen again.
范伯格表示，这种由纳税人的钱资助的努力永远不会再发生。
âItâs against our heritage and character as a nation, frankly, to be establishing government funds to compensate for loss,â he says.
“坦率地说，建立政府基金来补偿损失有悖于我们作为一个国家的传统和性格，”他说。
Indeed, victims of the first World Trade Center bombings in 1993 never saw any money, nor did the 168 killed and 680 injured in the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing.
事实上，1993 年第一起世界贸易中心爆炸案的受害者从未见过一分钱，1995 年俄克拉荷马城爆炸案中的 168 人死亡和 680 人受伤也没有得到任何钱。
Nor did the 13 troops killed and 30 wounded by a gunman at Fort Hood, Texas, in 2009.
2009 年德克萨斯州胡德堡的一名枪手造成 13 名士兵死亡、30 人受伤的事件也没有发生。
The Boston Marathon bombing, which killed three and injured more than 260 others, can be viewed as a test of whether Congress still wants to redress personal injuries caused by a terrorist attack.
造成3人死亡、260多人受伤的波士顿马拉松爆炸事件可以被视为国会是否仍愿意赔偿恐怖袭击造成的人身伤害的考验。
It doesnât.
事实并非如此。
But if the government is out, everyday donors arenât.
但如果政府退出，日常捐助者就不会退出。
The $60 million that Feinberg administered in Boston was all private money, which gave him license to disperse it any way he saw fit.
范伯格在波士顿管理的 6000 万美元都是私人资金，这使他有权以任何他认为合适的方式分配这些资金。
Funds sprung up to assist victims of the shootings at Virginia Tech, Aurora, Colo., and Newtown, Conn.
为援助弗吉尼亚理工大学、科罗拉多州奥罗拉和康涅狄格州纽敦枪击事件受害者的资金如雨后春笋般涌现。
Obama persuaded BP to set aside $20 billion for businesses and communities harmed by the oil spill after its Deepwater Horizon rig exploded in 2010.
2010 年深水地平线钻井平台爆炸后，奥巴马说服英国石油公司拨出 200 亿美元，用于救助因漏油事件而受到损害的企业和社区。
Feinberg was involved in each of those efforts.
范伯格参与了所有这些努力。
All of this raises fundamental questions of fairness, he says.
他说，所有这些都引发了公平的基本问题。
On one hand, the 9/11 payout was an expression of political sentiment; few Americans objected.
一方面，9/11 事件的赔偿是政治情绪的表达；很少有美国人反对。
And as far as private money goes, well, thatâs the marketplace in action.
就私人资金而言，这就是市场在起作用。
Donors are free to send checks in one case and not another, just like theyâre free to choose between the Jerry Lewis telethon and the March of Dimes.
捐助者可以自由地在一种情况下寄出支票，而不能在另一种情况下寄出支票，就像他们可以在杰里刘易斯电视马拉松和一毛钱游行之间自由选择一样。
On the other hand is the unsettling feeling that human life ends up being valued in all manner of disparate ways, based on publicity, geography, the nature of the crime, and the identities of the victims.
另一方面，令人不安的感觉是，人的生命最终会根据宣传、地理位置、犯罪性质和受害者的身份，以各种不同的方式受到重视。
âItâs horrible,â Feinberg says.
“这太可怕了，”范伯格说。
A woman who lost a spouse in the Boston bombings will receive more than $2 million.
一名在波士顿爆炸案中失去配偶的妇女将获得超过 200 万美元的赔偿。
A family who lost a child at Sandy Hook Elementary will see less than $300,000.
在桑迪胡克小学失去孩子的家庭将获得不到 30 万美元的赔偿。
Meanwhile, the families of African-American children killed by stray bullets on the streets of Chicago, Washington, New Orleans, and elsewhere may not be able to cover the cost of the funeral.
与此同时，在芝加哥、华盛顿、新奥尔良和其他地方的街道上被流弹杀害的非裔美国儿童的家人可能无法支付葬礼费用。
There are many reasons why the private victim fund has become the favored means to compensate victims of mass tragedy.
私人受害者基金成为赔偿大规模悲剧受害者的首选手段有很多原因。
Certainly, the 9/11 fund created a model in the public consciousness; it reemphasized the principle of a society collectively responding to disasterâand, more than that, it showed, largely thanks to Feinbergâs work, that compensation could be paid in a humane, effective, and efficient way.
当然，9/11 基金在公众意识中树立了一个典范；它重新强调了社会集体应对灾难的原则，而且，它还表明，很大程度上得益于范伯格的工作，赔偿可以以人道、有效和高效的方式支付。
Other factors also play in: Technology has made donating easier than ever, while cable networksâ thirst for narrative can drive donations.
其他因素也发挥了作用：技术使捐赠比以往任何时候都更容易，而有线网络对叙事的渴望可以推动捐赠。
Victims in some cases are elevated to the status of martyrs or even angels.
在某些情况下，受害者会被提升为烈士甚至天使。
Tragedies are lingered over for days at a time.
悲剧有时会持续数天。
In some ways, it can feel like a telethon.
在某些方面，它感觉就像一场电视马拉松。
âYouâre totally at the mercy of what people have an emotional reaction to, what gets the most visibility, what plays out well as a story,â says Edward Lascher, a social-sciences professor at California State University (Sacramento) who has written about victim funds.
加利福尼亚州立大学（萨克拉门托）社会科学教授爱德华·拉舍尔 (Edward Lascher) 曾撰写过有关受害者基金的文章，他表示，“你完全受制于人们对什么内容的情感反应、什么内容最受关注、什么内容能很好地演绎故事”。
âThe potential for arbitrariness is pretty high.â
“任意性的可能性相当高。”
By and large, however, Americans have never made compensating victims of crime or tragedy a societal priority.
然而，总的来说，美国人从未将赔偿犯罪或悲剧受害者作为社会优先事项。
It was, rather, a matter for criminal law, which provides for restitution in most cases.
相反，这是刑法的问题，刑法在大多数情况下都规定了赔偿。
A perpetrator in an assault case, for example, is ordered to pay the victimâs medical expenses and lost wages as part of his punishment.
例如，作为惩罚的一部分，袭击案件中的肇事者被责令支付受害者的医疗费用和工资损失。
The aim is to stave off another lawsuit to recover damages.
目的是避免再次提起赔偿损失诉讼。
âYou donât want the victim to have to navigate the civil system,â says Meg Garvin, executive director of the National Crime Victim Law Institute in Portland, Ore.âa goal that Feinberg has long shared.
俄勒冈州波特兰市国家犯罪受害者法律研究所执行主任梅格·加文 (Meg Garvin) 表示，“你不希望受害者必须应对民事系统。”这是范伯格长期以来的共同目标。
Except that, often, the perp pays nothing; and when he does, it only trickles out.
但罪犯通常无需支付任何费用；当他这样做时，它只会慢慢流出。
Convicted swindler Bernie Madoff was ordered to pay $17 billion to his victims, but he was bankrupted by the same crash that evaporated his clientsâ money.
被定罪的诈骗犯伯尼·麦道夫被勒令向受害者支付 170 亿美元，但他也因那场让他客户的钱蒸发的事故而破产。
Some are just beginning to see partial payments.
有些人刚刚开始看到部分付款。
A victims-rights movement that sprung out of the progressive criminal-justice reforms of the 1960s and â70s led to state and federal programs intended to assist crime victims in the same manner as restitution, with basic payments to cover economic losses.
20 世纪 60 年代和 70 年代渐进式刑事司法改革中兴起的受害者权利运动催生了州和联邦计划，旨在以与赔偿相同的方式帮助犯罪受害者，并通过基本付款来弥补经济损失。
But they are chronically underfunded (they draw money from fees and fines rather than from tax dollars) and often underused.
但它们长期资金不足（它们从费用和罚款中获取资金，而不是从税款中获取资金），并且经常未得到充分利用。
They pay nothing on the order of the Boston fund or even the Newtown fund, because most states cap victim awards at $25,000.
他们不像波士顿基金甚至纽敦基金那样支付任何费用，因为大多数州的受害者赔偿上限为 25,000 美元。
According to the National Association of Crime Victim Compensation Boards, less than $500 million is paid out annually to about 200,000 crime victims nationwide, an average of close to $2,500âalmost 100 times less than the average Boston Marathon award.
根据全国犯罪受害者赔偿委员会协会的数据，每年向全国约 200,000 名犯罪受害者支付的金额不到 5 亿美元，平均接近 2,500 美元，几乎比波士顿马拉松平均奖金少了 100 倍。
In 2004, after Feinberg wrapped up the 9/11 fund, Julie Goldscheid, a professor at the City University of New York School of Law, compared the compensation given to three groupsâterrorism victims, the more than 1,000 women killed that year as a result of domestic violence, and the 40,000 to 60,000 women who were sexually assaulted.
2004年，范伯格结束9/11基金后，纽约市立大学法学院教授朱莉·戈德沙伊德比较了对三个群体的赔偿——恐怖主义受害者、当年因家庭暴力而丧生的1000多名女性，以及遭受性侵犯的40,000至60,000名女性。
The average 9/11 fund award, she noted, was $2 million, with payments ranging from $500 to $8.6 million.
她指出，9/11 基金的平均奖金为 200 万美元，支付金额从 500 美元到 860 万美元不等。
In 2001, the average award to crime victims through state victim-compensation programs was $2,400.
2001 年，国家受害者赔偿计划向犯罪受害者提供的平均赔偿金额为 2,400 美元。
âThe contrast was just stark,â Goldscheid says, calling it part of an âunfortunate history of a narrative about deserving and undeserving victims.â
“对比非常鲜明，”戈德沙伊德说，并称其为“关于值得和不值得的受害者的不幸叙述历史”的一部分。
Private fundraising for certain classes of victims, she says, âopens the door to long-standing biases.â Nowhere might this be more true than in Chicago.
她说，为某些类别的受害者进行私人筹款“为长期存在的偏见打开了大门。”没有什么地方比芝加哥更能体现这一点了。
At the time of the Newtown tragedy last December, 270 children under 18 had been gunned down on Chicagoâs streets during the previous three years.
去年 12 月纽敦惨案发生时，过去三年已有 270 名 18 岁以下儿童在芝加哥街头被枪杀。
One was 7-year-old Heaven Sutton, who was hit by a stray bullet while selling candy outdoors a few months before Newtown.
其中一位是7岁的Heaven Sutton，他在纽敦前几个月在户外卖糖果时被流弹击中。
Her family asked for donations to cover the cost of the burial and even setting up a table at her memorial service.
她的家人请求捐款来支付埋葬费用，甚至在她的追悼会上设置了一张桌子。
âIf you think about a victim of gang violence, they do tend to be kids of color,â Goldscheid says.
“如果你想到帮派暴力的受害者，他们确实往往是有色人种的孩子，”戈德沙伊德说。
âIs there a sensibility that they are somehow at fault?â According to the Illinois attorney generalâs office, the maximum a murder victim or the family can receive from the state compensation fund is $27,000.
“是否感觉他们在某种程度上有过错？”根据伊利诺伊州总检察长办公室的说法，谋杀受害者或其家人可以从州赔偿基金中获得的最高金额为 27,000 美元。
(Litigating en masse against the gun industry is no longer a realistic option since Congress passed a law in 2005 granting broad immunity to firearms manufacturers.)
（自从国会于 2005 年通过一项法律，给予枪支制造商广泛的豁免权以来，针对枪支行业集体提起诉讼已不再是一个现实的选择。）
Lascher says a valid argument can be made for treating terrorism victims differently than everyone else because of the âpsychic damage.â âThe community really does suffer from some instances more than others,â he says.
拉舍尔说，由于“精神损害”，我们可以采取与其他人不同的方式对待恐怖主义受害者，这是有道理的。“社区确实在某些情况下遭受的痛苦比其他情况更多，”他说。
He adds, however, that itâs tough to draw a line between the Boston bombings and the Sandy Hook shooting.
不过，他补充说，很难在波士顿爆炸案和桑迪胡克枪击案之间划清界限。
âIf you are ever going to make a case for third-party trauma, itâs probably Newtown.â
“如果你要为第三方创伤辩护，那可能就是纽敦。”
But Newtown is also an example of the problematic nature of private victim funds, which can become politicized.
但纽敦也是私人受害者基金存在问题的一个例子，这些基金可能会被政治化。
Connecticut Gov.
康涅狄格州州长
Dannel Malloy last month criticized the administrator of the fund, a foundation, for dispersing only $7.7 million of the $11.4 million to the families.
丹内尔·马洛伊 (Dannel Malloy) 上个月批评该基金（一家基金会）的管理人只将 1,140 万美元中的 770 万美元分配给了这些家庭。
It will use the rest to assist the Newtown community in unspecified ways.
它将利用剩余的资金以未指定的方式帮助纽敦社区。
That means each family who lost a child will receive only $281,000 from the fund.
这意味着每个失去孩子的家庭只能从该基金获得 281,000 美元。
âI was amazed,â says Feinberg, shaking his head.
“我很惊讶，”范伯格摇摇头说道。
He was a consultant to the fund but not its administrator.
他是该基金的顾问，但不是其管理人。
I first met Ken Feinberg 11 years ago at a claims hearings for the 9/11 fund.
我第一次见到 Ken Feinberg 是在 11 年前的一次 9/11 基金索赔听证会上。
It was for Juan Cruz-Santiago, a Pentagon accountant who had somehow survived when American Airlines Flight 77 smashed into the buildingâs outer ring, where he was working.
这是为胡安·克鲁兹-圣地亚哥 (Juan Cruz-Santiago) 写的，他是五角大楼的一名会计师，当美国航空 77 号航班撞上他工作的大楼外环时，他以某种方式幸存下来。
The inferno burned over 70 percent of Cruz-Santiagoâs body and seared off his eyelids.
大火烧毁了克鲁兹-圣地亚哥 70% 以上的身体，并烧焦了他的眼睑。
He endured 30 surgeries and spent 12 weeks in the hospital, where doctors amputated his fingers.
他经历了 30 次手术，在医院住了 12 周，医生截掉了他的手指。
Cruz-Santiago came with an attorney to ask Feinberg for an award akin to or greater than that given to a victim who had died in the attacks.
克鲁兹-圣地亚哥带着一名律师前来，要求范伯格获得相当于或高于袭击中死亡受害者的赔偿金。
Even then, Feinberg exhibited the mix of warmth and implacability that defines him, on one hand sympathizing with the victimâs suffering and on the other rejecting outright his lawyerâs efforts to inflate the award toward $3 million.
即使在那时，范伯格也表现出了他所特有的温暖和不可调和的性格，一方面同情受害者的痛苦，另一方面断然拒绝他的律师将赔偿金提高到 300 万美元的努力。
Feinberg has written that he takes inspiration from the seated pose of Abraham Lincoln at the memorial on the National Mall.
范伯格写道，他的灵感来自亚伯拉罕·林肯在国家广场纪念碑上的坐姿。
One hand is relaxed, showing his compassion toward the disloyal South; the other hand is clinched with determination to keep the Union together.
一只手放松，表达了他对不忠的南方的同情；另一只手则放松了。另一只手紧握着维持联邦团结的决心。
Feinberg works hard not to be swayed by emotional appealsâand he tries as best he can to keep some distance.
范伯格努力不被情感诉求所左右，并尽力保持一定的距离。
âYou sob in private,â he says.
“你私下里哭泣，”他说。
âNever in front of a victim.â As a rule, he does not visit the sites of the tragedies to which he has been connected.
“永远不要在受害者面前。”通常，他不会参观与他有关的悲剧现场。
He avoided the marathon finish line and the Sandy Hook campus.
他避开了马拉松终点线和桑迪胡克校园。
He didnât inspect Ground Zero in Manhattan until after the claims process was finished, and he never returned.
直到索赔程序完成后，他才检查曼哈顿的“归零地”，并且再也没有回来。
Nor does he make a habit of visiting claimants in the hospital; he makes them come to an office, to keep himself from becoming entangled in their despair.
他也没有去医院探望索赔人的习惯；他让他们来到办公室，以免自己陷入他们的绝望之中。
He broke his rule in Boston when he visited two victims at a rehabilitation facilityâand he regrets it now.
当他在波士顿一家康复机构探望两名受害者时，他违反了自己的规定——现在他对此感到后悔。
The first man, he says, greeted Feinberg with bitterness: âYouâre going to give me a million dollars or more,â he said.
他说，第一个人苦涩地向范伯格打招呼：“你要给我一百万美元或更多，”他说。
âIâve got a better idea.
——我有一个更好的主意。
Give me my leg back.â The second victimâs legs were stippled by shrapnel and gangrene, but he still had them.
把我的腿还给我。第二个受害者的腿上布满了弹片和坏疽，但他的腿上仍然留着。
He had been lying in bed doing the math, and he had a simple question for Feinberg.
他躺在床上做数学题，向范伯格提出了一个简单的问题。
Should he have his legs amputated before the July 1 deadline for determining his award?
他是否应该在 7 月 1 日裁决截止日期之前截肢？
The difference in his payout would have been more than $1 million, tax free.
他的支出差额将超过 100 万美元（不含税）。
Feinberg didnât know what to say.
范伯格不知道该说什么。
The man decided to keep his legsâand received $948,300.
该男子决定保留自己的双腿，并获得了 948,300 美元的赔偿。
The first man, who lost one leg, received $1,195,000.
第一个失去一条腿的男子获得了 1,195,000 美元。
Feinberg walked out of the facility that day and vowed: Never again.
那天范伯格走出工厂并发誓：再也不会这样了。
âThere have to be limits,â he says.
“必须有限制，”他说。
The Bush administration tapped Feinberg for the 9/11 assignment largely because of his work assessing claims that arose from the 1984 Agent Orange settlement, which was then the largest mass tort deal in U.S. history.
布什政府任命范伯格负责 9/11 事件，主要是因为他对 1984 年橙剂和解协议中提出的索赔进行了评估，该协议是当时美国历史上最大的大规模侵权交易。
Brokered by legendary federal Judge Jack Weinstein, a mentor of Feinbergâs, the settlement fund paid $197 million to about 52,000 veterans exposed to the toxin during the Vietnam War, and to their families.
在范伯格的导师、传奇联邦法官杰克·韦恩斯坦的斡旋下，和解基金向大约 52,000 名在越南战争期间接触过这种毒素的退伍军人及其家人支付了 1.97 亿美元。
The top payment was $12,800.
最高付款额为 12,800 美元。
But the 9/11 fund was unlike any previous settlement.
但 9/11 基金与之前的任何和解协议都不同。
Passed by Congress almost as an afterthought in the rush to ensure that the domestic airline industry didnât collapse in the wake of the attacks, the statute handed Feinberg a blank check and a fair amount of discretionâalthough nothing like he enjoys when he administers private money.
为了确保国内航空业不会因袭击事件而崩溃，国会几乎是在事后才通过了该法规，该法规给了范伯格一张空白支票和相当大的自由裁量权，尽管与他管理私人资金时所享受的完全不同。
âCongress didnât know what a life was worth,â Feinberg says.
“国会不知道生命的价值，”范伯格说。
âSo it said, âWell, Ken will take care of it.â â After Feinberg accepted the job, another mentor, Sen.
——所以它说，“好吧，肯会处理这件事。”——范伯格接受这份工作后，另一位导师参议员参议员。
Edward Kennedy, for whom he had served as chief of staff, gave him some advice.
他曾担任幕僚长的爱德华·肯尼迪给了他一些建议。
âYou make sure that 10 percent of the people donât get 90 percent of the taxpayersâ money,â Kennedy said.
“你要确保 10% 的人得不到 90% 的纳税人的钱，”肯尼迪说。
âBe careful.â
– 小心。 –
Out of his 9/11 experience, which had its share of rocky moments, Feinberg developed a set of principles heâs used ever since: Be fair.
范伯格在 9/11 事件中经历了一些坎坷的时刻，在这段经历中，他制定了一套他一直沿用的原则：公平。
Be up-front about the process.
提前了解整个流程。
Give victims and their families a chance to vent.
给受害者及其家人一个发泄的机会。
Try to evaluate applications with a minimum of paperwork.
尝试用最少的文书工作来评估申请。
Donât get bogged down assessing each claim like an insurance company or a court would.
不要像保险公司或法院那样陷入评估每项索赔的困境。
Donât try to figure out someoneâs future earnings.
不要试图计算某人未来的收入。
Or how long theyâre going to live.
或者他们还能活多久。
Or the extent that one victim is more injured than another.
或者一名受害者比另一名受害者受伤更严重的程度。
âIf I took time to examine everybodyâs medical records, how can I get money out the door?â he says of his Boston work.
“如果我花时间检查每个人的医疗记录，我怎样才能赚钱呢？”他谈到他在波士顿的工作时说道。
âIâd be swamped.
——我会被淹没。
It would be New Yearâs before the money would get out.â
到了新年，钱才会发出来。”
To Feinberg, who takes jobs like the Boston fund pro bono, thatâs the most basic tenet of all: Victims, he says, donât believe a compensation process will work until the checks move.
对于无偿接受波士顿基金等工作的范伯格来说，这是最基本的原则：他说，在支票转移之前，受害者不相信赔偿程序会起作用。
âNothing is more important than getting money out the door,â he says.
“没有什么比把钱送出去更重要的了，”他说。
The Boston attack took place on April 15.
波士顿袭击事件发生在4月15日。
In May, Feinberg stood before a crowd at the Boston Public Library and explained the uncomplicated criteria he would use for distributing money: Death and double amputation, single amputation, hospital stay, outpatient care.
五月，范伯格站在波士顿公共图书馆的人群面前，解释了他用于分配资金的简单标准：死亡和双截肢、单截肢、住院、门诊护理。
That was it, and that was the hierarchy.
就是这样，这就是等级制度。
A month later, he held claims hearings.
一个月后，他举行了索赔听证会。
The first checks went out within 60 days of the bombing.
第一批检查在爆炸发生后 60 天内完成。
There were a few hiccups: One man sought $2 million for an aunt who had been dead for a decade.
其中出现了一些小问题：一名男子为一位去世十年的阿姨索要 200 万美元。
Another woman faked the documentation of a traumatic brain injury, won a $484,000 award, and was then caught and arrested.
另一名妇女伪造了脑外伤的文件，赢得了 484,000 美元的奖金，然后被抓获并逮捕。
But only one victim, Feinberg says, wrote him to complain about his award, a man who lost an arm.
但范伯格说，只有一名受害者写信给他抱怨他的奖项，他是一名失去了手臂的男子。
He said that $1 million simply wasnât going to cut it.
他说 100 万美元根本不够用。
Feinberg had long ago decided not to distinguish between a lost arm and a lost leg.
范伯格很久以前就决定不区分失去的手臂和失去的腿。
And not to give a wealthy victim any less than the one who makes $68,000 per year and has to support five kids.
而且，对于那些年收入 68,000 美元、需要抚养 5 个孩子的富有的受害者来说，给予的赔偿也不会少于受害者。
âMost tort lawyers would say, âKen, donât you dare give both of those victims the same amount.â I disagree,â he says.
“大多数侵权律师会说，‘肯，你不敢给这两位受害者同等的赔偿吗？’我不同意，”他说。
âIâm not prepared to say to someone they donât need a million dollars.â
“我不准备对某人说他们不需要一百万美元。”
Plenty of people didnât see a dime.
很多人一毛钱都没看到。
Feinberg immediately ruled out compensation for mental distressânothing for those who witnessed the explosions or who were showered with the blood of victims; nothing for the first responders who had to treat the shattered bodies.
范伯格立即排除了对精神痛苦的赔偿——对于那些目睹爆炸或沾满受害者鲜血的人来说，没有任何赔偿；对于必须处理破碎尸体的急救人员来说，没有任何帮助。
âStart paying everyone who has mental trauma?â he asks.
“开始向所有遭受精神创伤的人支付费用吗？”他问道。
âI got trauma watching on CNN.â Property damage, no. Economic losses, no. Forget that Boylston Street was shut down for the investigation and cleanup.
– 我在 CNN 上观看了创伤事件。 – 财产损失，没有。经济损失，没有。别忘了博伊斯顿街因调查和清理而被关闭。
Forget about the city being on lockdown while the Tsarnaevs were pursued.
忘记查尔纳耶夫一家被追捕时这座城市处于封锁状态吧。
Boston was as simple as anything like this was going to be.
波士顿就像这样的事情一样简单。
Money was plentiful, and Feinberg had grown up in nearby Brockton.
范伯格在附近的布罗克顿长大，资金充裕。
(His accent makes it sound like he never left.) Still, the carnage, the amputated arms and legs, will linger with him.
（他的口音听起来就像他从未离开过。）尽管如此，大屠杀、被截肢的胳膊和腿仍将伴随着他。
âThis was the worst experience Iâve had,â he says.
“这是我经历过的最糟糕的经历，”他说。
âIn 9/11, you either got out of the buildings or you didnât.â
“在 9/11 事件中，你要么逃出建筑物，要么没有逃出。”
I tell Feinberg that I canât help but think of the waves of young soldiers whoâve returned from Iraq and Afghanistan with missing limbs.
我告诉范伯格，我情不自禁地想起了从伊拉克和阿富汗归来的一波又一波肢体缺失的年轻士兵。
He nods.
他点点头。
âThey didnât get a million dollars.â And they canât.
“他们没有得到一百万美元。”而且他们也不能。
(Disability benefits for military amputees top out at around $7,800 per month.) We place soldiers in a different category than innocent victims, because they signed up to put their lives on the line.
（军事截肢者的残疾福利最高约为每月 7,800 美元。）我们将士兵与无辜受害者放在不同的类别，因为他们报名参加是为了冒着生命危险。
They undertookâand are paid forâthe risk.
他们承担了风险，并获得了报酬。
But what if the risk they assumed doesnât cover being gunned down away from the battlefield, within the confines of their own military base?
但如果他们承担的风险不包括在远离战场、在自己的军事基地范围内被枪杀的情况呢？
On Nov.
十一月一日
5, 2009, Maj.
2009 年 5 月，少校。
Nidal Hasan, an Army psychiatrist, opened fire with a semiautomatic pistol at Ford Hood, killing 13 and wounding 32 more before he was subdued.
陆军精神病学家尼达尔·哈桑 (Nidal Hasan) 用半自动手枪向福特胡德 (Ford Hood) 开枪，造成 13 人死亡、32 人受伤，随后被制服。
He now faces court-martial on murder charges.
他现在因谋杀罪面临军事法庭审判。
Since the attack, the Obama administration has been locked in a debate with the victims over whether Hasan, a Muslim radicalized by a Qaida cleric while America was at war, committed an act of terrorism.
自袭击事件发生以来，奥巴马政府一直与受害者就哈桑这个在美国战争期间被基地组织神职人员激化的穆斯林是否犯有恐怖主义行为进行了争论。
The White House and the Defense Department call it âworkplace violence,â since Hasan is not technically considered an enemy, despite arguments to the contrary from members of the Texas congressional delegation and other politicians.
白宫和国防部称其为“工作场所暴力”，因为从技术上讲，哈桑并不被视为敌人，尽管得克萨斯州国会代表团成员和其他政界人士提出了相反的论点。
In a statement to Fox News last week, Hasan said the U.S. is âat warâ with Islam.
哈桑上周在给福克斯新闻的一份声明中表示，美国正在与伊斯兰教“交战”。
The victimsâ families and the survivors of the attack have taken the unusual step of suing the federal government for damages, alleging that the administrationâs failure to label the attack as terrorism has resulted in reduced levels of financial and medical benefits because their injuries have been deemed unrelated to combat; they also charge that the FBI and the Pentagon failed to identify Hasan as a threat.
袭击事件的受害者家属和幸存者采取了不同寻常的措施，起诉联邦政府要求赔偿，声称政府未能将这次袭击定性为恐怖主义，导致经济和医疗福利水平下降，因为他们的受伤被认为与战斗无关；他们还指控联邦调查局和五角大楼未能将哈桑识别为威胁。
The government has asked the court to delay the suit until after Hasanâs trial.
政府已要求法院将诉讼推迟到哈桑受审之后。
Kimberly Munley, a civilian police sergeant who was wounded when she tried to stop Hasan and who was seated next to Michelle Obama at the 2010 State of the Union, told ABC earlier this year that the president had broken his promise to help the shooting victims.
民警金伯利·蒙利 (Kimberly Munley) 在试图阻止哈桑时受伤，在 2010 年国情咨文中坐在米歇尔·奥巴马 (Michelle Obama) 旁边。今年早些时候，她告诉美国广播公司 (ABC)，总统违背了帮助枪击受害者的承诺。
âWe got tired of being neglected,â she said of the lawsuit.
“我们厌倦了被忽视，”她谈到这起诉讼时说道。
Munleyâs lawyer, Reed Rubinstein, wonders why the government was so quick to compensate the Pentagon victims of the 9/11 attacks and hasnât showed the same generosity with the Fort Hood victims.
蒙利的律师里德·鲁宾斯坦（Reed Rubinstein）想知道为什么政府如此迅速地向五角大楼的 9/11 袭击受害者提供赔偿，却没有对胡德堡的受害者表现出同样的慷慨。
âFrom a public standpoint,â he says, âpeople assumed the government was going to take care of its own.â Rubinstein, who practices in Washington, says his plaintiffs have noticed the millions, too, that poured into the Boston Marathon fund.
“从公众的角度来看，”他说，“人们认为政府会照顾好自己的事情。”在华盛顿执业的鲁宾斯坦说，他的原告也注意到了数百万美元涌入波士顿马拉松基金。
What, after all, is the difference between that terrorist attack and this one?
毕竟，那次恐怖袭击和这次恐怖袭击有什么区别呢？
The lawsuit faces serious and perhaps insurmountable obstacles in court; the government is likely immune.
该诉讼在法庭上面临严重且可能难以克服的障碍；政府可能不会受到影响。
But Rubinstein could find encouragement in a June ruling by the British Supreme Court, which held that families of British soldiers killed in Iraq could sue the U.K. government for negligence if the soldiers received improper equipment and training.
但鲁宾斯坦可能会从英国最高法院 6 月份的一项裁决中得到鼓舞，该裁决认为，如果士兵接受了不当的装备和训练，在伊拉克阵亡的英国士兵的家属可以起诉英国政府的疏忽。
The ruling has no applicability to U.S. troops, but it could represent a trend toward holding the military accountable for negligence in ways courts havenât before.
该裁决不适用于美国军队，但它可能代表了一种趋势，即以法院从未有过的方式追究军队的过失责任。
In the meantime, Rubinstein, mindful of the long road ahead, has been considering other ways to help his clients.
与此同时，鲁宾斯坦考虑到前面的路还很长，一直在考虑其他方式来帮助他的客户。
âIâve been thinking about starting up a nonprofit fund,â he says.
“我一直在考虑创办一个非营利基金，”他说。
Feinberg has always worried that the 9/11 fund set a bad precedent.
范伯格一直担心 9/11 基金开了一个不好的先例。
âIf Congress had thought about it a couple of more weeks, they probably wouldnât have passed it,â he says.
“如果国会再考虑几周，他们可能就不会通过它，”他说。
He frets about creating a culture of victim entitlement, which is why he thinks nothing like the fund will ever exist again.
他对创造一种受害者权利文化感到担忧，这就是为什么他认为像该基金这样的东西不会再存在。
Others arenât so sure.
其他人则不太确定。
Lascher, the Cal State professor, says government may have to step in if thereâs another large-scale terrorist attack.
加州州立大学教授拉舍尔表示，如果再次发生大规模恐怖袭击，政府可能必须介入。
âWe really do recognize that people suffer disproportionately, and we have an obligation to take care of them,â he says.
“我们确实认识到人们承受着不成比例的痛苦，我们有义务照顾他们，”他说。
But another part of Feinbergâs legacy, his work on the BP oil spill, may last the longest.
但范伯格遗产的另一部分，即他在英国石油公司漏油事件中的工作，可能会持续最长时间。
In a sense, what the company did was more radical than Congressâs creation of the 9/11 fundâdeciding to set aside $20 billion to avoid protracted litigation.
从某种意义上说，该公司的做法比国会设立 9/11 基金更为激进，该基金决定拨出 200 亿美元以避免旷日持久的诉讼。
Nothing, not even 9/11, created more headaches for Feinberg than the spill.
没有什么比漏油事件更让范伯格头疼的了，即使是 9/11。
Claimants all along the Gulf Coast grumbled that he was moving too slowly.
墨西哥湾沿岸的索赔人都抱怨他行动太慢。
Local politicians griped about his methodology.
当地政客对他的方法论颇有微词。
Trial lawyers felt aced out of the action after victims waived their right to sue.
在受害人放弃起诉权利后，出庭律师感到很不高兴。
And it didnât entirely work: BP remains locked in a lawsuit against other claimants in New Orleans.
但这并没有完全奏效：英国石油公司仍陷入对新奥尔良其他索赔人的诉讼中。
The BP fund put Feinberg in an odd position.
BP 基金让范伯格处于一个奇怪的境地。
He has maintained throughout his career (and in his private work settling claims for corporations) that there are better alternatives to a trial.
在他的整个职业生涯中（以及在他为公司解决索赔的私人工作中），他一直坚持认为除了审判之外还有更好的选择。
He rankled some in the plaintiffsâ bar when he explained to claimants why they should waive their right to sue: They got their money from the fund quickly, and no lawyer would take a cut.
当他向原告解释为什么他们应该放弃起诉权时，他激怒了原告律师事务所中的一些人：他们很快就从基金中拿到了钱，而且没有律师愿意从中提成。
But he also resisted attempts by pro-business forces such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to hold up his efforts as an example of a reshaped American legal system.
但他也抵制了美国商会等亲商业力量将他的努力作为重塑美国法律体系的典范的尝试。
âIâm a lawyer,â Feinberg said in a speech to the chamber three years ago.
“我是一名律师，”范伯格三年前在众议院的一次演讲中说道。
âI happen to believe, in the run-of-the-mill, everyday life in America, the legal system works pretty well.â
“我碰巧相信，在美国的普通日常生活中，法律体系运作得很好。”
At the same time, he recognizes that the environment for litigationâand particularly mass class-action suitsâhas worsened dramatically since his Agent Orange days, because of hostility from the courts, Congress, and state legislatures.
与此同时，他认识到，自他的橙剂时代以来，由于法院、国会和州立法机构的敌意，诉讼环境，尤其是大规模集体诉讼，已经急剧恶化。
Cases must more often be heard individually (if at all), which can clog court dockets.
案件必须更经常地单独审理（如果有的话），这可能会阻碍法庭审理。
As an alternative, in situations where liability seems clear, âone has to look toward some sort of an informal processâ other than litigation, says Robert Rabin, a professor at Stanford Law School.
斯坦福大学法学院教授罗伯特·拉宾表示，作为替代方案，在责任似乎很明确的情况下，“人们必须寻求除诉讼之外的某种非正式程序”。
âThe tort system was never superefficient.
– 侵权制度从来都不是高效的。
The question is whether the tort system is still the way to goâ when 90 percent of all cases end up settling.
问题是，当 90% 的案件最终都以和解告终时，侵权制度是否仍然是正确的道路。
Itâs something that airlinesâwhich can be quick to settle claims after a crashâhave known for years.
航空公司多年来都知道这一点，它们可以在坠机事件后迅速解决索赔。
Hospitals, too, are realizing that admitting to medical error, engaging the patient quickly, and disbursing money results in far fewer malpractice suits.
医院也意识到，承认医疗错误、迅速与患者接触并支付费用可以大大减少医疗事故诉讼。
Thatâs the Feinberg Way.
这就是范伯格之道。
Feinberg has seen it himself, beyond BP, which he calls a tremendous success story, because the vast majority of claimants avoided the courts.
除了英国石油公司之外，范伯格自己也看到了这一点，他称英国石油公司是一个巨大的成功故事，因为绝大多数索赔人都避开了法庭。
The Virginia Tech shootings served as another model.
弗吉尼亚理工大学的枪击事件是另一个典范。
Because that fund was private, the 200-plus applicants didnât have to surrender the right to sue the university.
由于该基金是私人基金，因此 200 多名申请者不必放弃起诉大学的权利。
Still, only two did.
尽管如此，只有两个人这样做了。
Feinberg credits the lessons he learned from the 9/11 fund: Treat people well, give them some money, and they donât sue.
范伯格将他从 9/11 基金中学到的教训归功于：善待人们，给他们一些钱，他们就不会起诉。
To that end, Penn State University brought him in last year to quickly (and quietly) settle claims relating to the Jerry Sandusky sexual-abuse scandal, where, again, liability isnât the issue.
为此，宾夕法尼亚州立大学去年请他来快速（悄悄地）解决与杰里·桑达斯基性虐待丑闻有关的索赔，而责任又不是问题所在。
Even the 9/11 fund has been revived in an effort to ward off litigation from first responders who say they suffered health problems from exposure at Ground Zero.
就连 9/11 基金也被重新启动，以防止急救人员提起诉讼，这些急救人员声称自己因暴露在“归零地”而遭受健康问题。
Now they can apply to the fund for compensation, though the job will be tougher because the amount of money that can be awarded is capped.
现在他们可以向该基金申请赔偿，不过这项工作会更加困难，因为可以获得的金额是有上限的。
Feinberg had unlimited government funds the first time around.
范伯格第一次拥有无限的政府资金。
(He isnât involved this time.)
（这次他没有参与。）
But thereâs the legacy, and thereâs the man himself.
但这里有遗产，还有他本人。
And the need for his special expertise shows no signs of abating.
对他的特殊专业知识的需求丝毫没有减弱的迹象。
After my second interview with Feinberg, he went to Capitol Hill to give advice about how to distribute money collected after 19 firefighters were killed battling Arizona wildfires.
在我第二次采访 Feinberg 后，他前往国会山就如何分配 19 名消防员在与亚利桑那州野火战斗中牺牲后筹集到的资金提供建议。
(What would he tell lawmakers?
（他会告诉立法者什么？
âTake the money.
——拿走钱。
Divide it by 19.
除以 19。
And get it out.â) Life, Feinberg says, guarantees misfortune.
然后把它拿出来。–)范伯格说，生活注定会遭遇不幸。
The wolf is always at the door.
狼总是在门口。
The work has taken a toll.
这项工作造成了损失。
When it gets bad, Feinberg retreats to a soundproof room in his home and cranks up Wagner or Verdi.
当情况变得糟糕时，范伯格会躲到家里的一个隔音房间里，打开瓦格纳或威尔第的音乐。
Itâs been his curative since he was a child.
从他还是个孩子的时候起，这就是他的治疗方法。
âShut that door, and you escape.â Opera, he says, is the height of civilization, but âcivilization is no guarantee against these horrors that we go through.
“关上那扇门，你就逃脱了。”他说，歌剧是文明的顶峰，但是“文明并不能保证我们不会经历这些恐怖。”
Just because we live in a civilized society doesnât mean we arenât going to have these tragedies.â
我们生活在文明社会并不意味着我们不会发生这些悲剧。”
You can stop whenever you want, I tell him.
我告诉他，你想什么时候停下来都可以。
The next time a president, or a governor, or a mayor calls, you can turn it down.
下次总统、州长或市长打电话时，你可以拒绝。
âNo one would blame you if you said, âIâve had enough tragedy for 20 lifetimes,â â I say.
“如果你说，‘我已经经历了 20 辈子的悲剧了’，没有人会责怪你。”我说。
âIâm not going to say no,â Feinberg replies.
“我不会拒绝，”范伯格回答道。
âIâm not going to say no.â And, to be sure, that call will come.
– 我不会拒绝。 – 并且，可以肯定的是，这个电话将会到来。
It always does.
总是如此。
This article appears in the Aug.
这篇文章出现在八月份。
3, 2013, edition of National Journal as Deathâs Accountant .
2013 年 2 月 3 日，《国家杂志作为死亡会计师》版。
Get the latest news and analysis delivered to your inbox.
将最新新闻和分析发送到您的收件箱。
Sign up for National Journal's morning alert, Wake-Up Call , and afternoon newsletter, The Edge .
订阅《国家日报》的早间提醒、叫醒服务和下午时事通讯、The Edge。
Subscribe here .
在这里订阅。
A five-day journey through the Bakken oil fields of Western North Dakota, the heart of America's quiet domestic-energy revolution.
为期五天的旅程将穿越北达科他州西部的巴肯油田，那里是美国悄然发生的国内能源革命的中心。
With Congress away for the next month, it gives us time to pause and consider the various train wrecks that lie ahead when the members return Sept.
国会下个月将缺席，这让我们有时间停下来思考议员们九月返回时即将面临的各种火车残骸。
9âand we are talking train wrecks of the deadly variety.
9——我们正在谈论致命的火车残骸。
Three weeks after Congress returns, the new fiscal year will start; most of government as we know it will shut down unless both chambers can agree on a continuing resolution to keep government funded until they can finish their appropriations work and/or settle their differences over spending priorities.
国会返回后三周，新财政年度将开始；据我们所知，除非参众两院能够就一项持续的决议达成一致，以继续为政府提供资金，直到他们能够完成拨款工作和/或解决在支出优先事项上的分歧，否则大多数政府都将关闭。