Bill Overview
Title: Camp Lejeune Justice Act of 2022
Description: 2022 This bill allows certain individuals to sue and recover damages for harm from exposure to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina between August 1, 1953, and December 31, 1987. This action is available only to individuals who were exposed to contaminated water for at least 30 days. The bill prohibits the U.S. government from asserting specified immunity from litigation in response to such a lawsuit. The bill also prohibits an individual who brings such an action from bringing a separate tort action against the United States based on the same harm.
Sponsors: Rep. Cartwright, Matt [D-PA-8]
Target Audience
Population: Individuals exposed to contaminated water at Camp Lejeune
Estimated Size: 950000
- Camp Lejeune was a U.S. military training facility, which means primarily military personnel and their families were stationed there.
- Civilian employees and contractors who worked on the base may also have been exposed to the contaminated water.
- The exposure window is over a 34-year period; many people may have lived or worked at Camp Lejeune during that time.
- The requirement of a minimum of 30 days exposure limits the number of transient individuals affected, focusing on those who actually resided or were stationed there for extended periods.
- The population includes both individuals affected who are still living and potentially the estates of deceased individuals who were affected.
Reasoning
- The Camp Lejeune Justice Act primarily affects military personnel, veterans, and their families who lived or worked at Camp Lejeune during the specified period.
- Civilians and contractors who had contracts with the military and worked at the base might also be eligible.
- The policy does not affect the general population — only a subset of military-connected or veteran respondents are expected to be impacted.
- The budget limits suggest that while compensation will be available, it must be divided among many claimants, possibly reducing the per capita payout or prolonging the distribution timeline.
- Estimates suggest that the affected population is large but concentrated to those with significant historical military service linkage.
Simulated Interviews
retired military officer (Florida)
Age: 65 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe the policy is a positive step towards acknowledging and compensating the harm caused by the water contamination.
- The payouts, however, might take a long time to distribute given the number of affected people.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 1 |
civilian contractor (North Carolina)
Age: 54 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope the compensation can help cover some of the medical bills I have.
- It's reassuring that the government has chosen to acknowledge this issue after so many years.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 2 |
teacher (California)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm concerned about what long-term effects might surface.
- The policy gives me some peace of mind if future medical issues arise.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 3 |
veteran's advocate (Texas)
Age: 70 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More veterans know they need to and can take action now.
- It's a step towards justice, but the government response time is crucial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
lawyer (Virginia)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- There's a lot of work ahead to get compensation for all who deserve it.
- Legal proceedings are complicated by the number of claimants.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
healthcare worker (Georgia)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Relief is on the horizon, but there are still financial and emotional hurdles.
- We need this to aid in my husband's daily medical needs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
retired contractor (South Carolina)
Age: 75 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This helps acknowledge the pains many of us have carried for decades.
- The hope is that compensation leads to better care.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 1 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 1 |
widowed, stay-at-home parent then (New York)
Age: 68 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Finally, some justice for families who paid the ultimate price.
- Hopeful that the settlement will facilitate better living going forward.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 1 |
advocate for military families (Ohio)
Age: 58 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's a victory for awareness and a stepping stone for helping affected veterans.
- There will be challenges, but the acknowledgment is powerful.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
nurse (Illinois)
Age: 62 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy signifies hope in ensuring better healthcare for victims.
- Understandably, outcomes depend considerably on effective distribution.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 2 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1500000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $2200000000)
Year 2: $1700000000 (Low: $1200000000, High: $2300000000)
Year 3: $1800000000 (Low: $1300000000, High: $2500000000)
Year 5: $1900000000 (Low: $1400000000, High: $2600000000)
Year 10: $2000000000 (Low: $1500000000, High: $2700000000)
Year 100: $2200000000 (Low: $1600000000, High: $2800000000)
Key Considerations
- The exact number of claims and per-claim payments are uncertain, leading to wide potential variance in costs.
- Previous cases of large-scale tort litigation against the government might serve as a benchmark for settlements.
- Administrative and legal costs will be significant and difficult to predict accurately.
- There's no counterbalancing savings from this act as it's primarily a compensatory measure.