Ryan Winkler: 9/11 can be a guide through legal thicket

The state should consider a victims' compensation fund and a special investigator.

By Ryan Winkler

Last update: August 20, 2007 - 11:36 PM

Like the victims of 9/11, the roughly 200 people harmed by the Interstate 35W bridge collapse have a fundamental interest in prompt and certain compensation for the injuries they suffered through no fault of their own. To obtain compensation, however, they will have to show that the collapse was caused by the negligence of others. To make such a showing, even in Minnesota's efficient civil tort system, will result in significant attorneys' fees and could take years.

My hope is that Minnesota will choose better alternatives, examples that can be found in the federal government's response to 9/11: a special victim-compensation fund and a special investigation committee formed by the Legislature.

One set of likely defendants in any litigation are the many companies that touched the bridge over the years, such as engineers and construction contractors. Millions in legal fees will be spent by such companies and their insurers even if their defense is successful. Such costs will be passed on to all insured Minnesota corporations. This could well lead to bankruptcy for many of these Minnesota businesses.

Worse, complex "bet the company" litigation may cause even the largest infrastructure restoration firms to question whether they wish to work on Minnesota's riskiest projects: repairs to crumbling infrastructure. If engineers and constructors are scared away from bidding, it will be a long time before our infrastructure is adequate and safe.

But the likeliest defendant will be the state of Minnesota, which built the bridge, maintained it, inspected it and supervised a series of repairs. Victims will face numerous hurdles in recovering from the state, which has various technical legal defenses and a statutory cap on the amount of damages it must pay. Further, litigation will put the state in the position of defending its actions, rather than investigating the causes of the collapse and making changes to prevent future disasters.

In my view, we should act to resolve this conflict between the public's safety interest and the state's legal interest.

First, the state should act to provide a prompt, fair compensation system for its citizens. Gov. Tim Pawlenty is already exploring this concept, and if the Legislature meets in special session, it should establish a bridge-collapse victims' compensation fund. A similar, much larger, fund was created by Congress shortly after 9/11. That fund was extremely successful -- 97 percent of the families of those killed in the World Trade Center chose to participate. In exchange for their agreement not to sue, the victims of the attack or their families received prompt, fair compensation. In Minnesota's case, the state and insurance companies representing the engineers and construction companies that worked on the bridge should split the contribution to this fund.

Second, the Legislature should appoint a special counsel for its joint committee to investigate the bridge collapse. The mission of the joint committees is to seek the truth and to establish who had any responsibility for the collapse, regardless of political party, branch of government or limits of liability insurance. To deliver on this mission, the joint committee will need a special counsel to perform the investigation in a way that only a prosecutor knows how to do, and the committee must stand ready with the Legislature's subpoena power to back up that investigation.

The benefits of a bridge-collapse fund and a special counsel would flow to victims, their families, the state itself and the public. If we take these steps now, we can focus on caring for the victims and learning the lessons taught to us so terribly on Aug. 1.

Ryan Winkler, a DFLer from Golden Valley, represents District 44B in the Minnesota House.

Comment on this story | Be the first to comment | Hide reader comments

New ideas for the public sector

THERE'S NEVER BEEN A BETTER TIME to create a more efficient Minnesota. Facing large budget deficits at the state, county and local levels, Minnesotans are seeing with new clarity that the public sector must adapt to new economic realities. Only the smartest, most strategic reinvention will ensure that our tax dollars are spent on the best programs and services. Read more

About Opinion Exchange

Opinion Exchange is produced by the Editorial Department, which is dedicated to hosting the discussion on a range of issues of interest to Star Tribune readers online and in print. In its new format, it's our hope that Opinion Exhange will create a more dynamic dialogue between Star Tribune readers and the Editorial Board. Many individual posts will be written and signed by members of the Editorial Board and will reflect their own opinions. Daily editorials will continue to represent the institutional voice of the newspaper and be researched and written by the Editorial Department, which is independent of the newsroom.

Subscribe to RSS|Learn more about RSS