New York’s unions, which spend fortunes on pols, sure get their money’s worth; taxpayers, not so much — as a top-court ruling on benefits for 9/11 first responders made clear this month.
The court ruled that three cops who spent time at Ground Zero deserve extra pension pay because they later got cancer.
And never mind that a new study by the city’s Health Department — the largest study of its kind — just found no clear link between 9/11 and cancer.
The justices cited a 2005 law granting 9/11 first responders a “presumption” that any illness they later suffered was caused by their Ground Zero exposure.
Under the law, pension boards could only deny extra benefits if they could prove a cop or firefighter’s illness is unrelated to his or her 9/11 work.
That is, the boards have the burden of proof — and, indeed, must prove a negative: that a cop or firefighter’s Ground Zero work did not cause the illness at issue.
The court’s Dec. 13 ruling shows just how hard that can be, particularly given New York’s ultra-liberal justices.
All three cops, for starters, got cancer within a year of 9/11 — not enough time, most experts believe, to trigger the disease (which is generally slow to develop).
Plus, 20 years earlier, one of the cops had ulcerative colitis, which is associated with a higher cancer risk.
Another noticed a “walnut-sized lump” on his thigh shortly before 9/11.
It’s all pretty strong evidence that something other than 9/11 toxins precipitated their cancers — and the police pension fund’s medical board understandably rejected their applications for better benefits.
But now the court says the board’s evidence isn’t enough.
Anyone else see a stacked deck here?
Fact is, it’s often extremely tough to prove or disprove the precise cause of an illness — especially cancer.
That’s why first-responders’ unions sought the law granting the presumption.
And why, in turn, the pols — always eager to please labor, which supplies plenty of cash to their campaigns — were only too happy to pass it.
(Never mind taxpayers, who foot the bill for the pricier pension pay, whether deserved or not.)
Yet now pension boards and taxpayers face another obstacle: a liberal New York bench ready to go beyond a presumption, and even beyond sound science.
No decent person, of course, would object to added benefits for heroic first responders sickened by their service at Ground Zero.
We certainly don’t.
But with pension costs skyrocketing — sucking up cash that could be used for schools, parks or even more first responders — shouldn’t New York’s courts and lawmakers show some concern for taxpayers once in a while?
Fat chance of that.