93d Congress, 2c1 Session House Document No. 93-378

VETOING H.R. 6624, RELIEF OF

BURT, POPE, AND KENNEDY

MESSAGE

FRO5M

THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

VETOING

H.R. 6624, AN ACT FOR THE RELIEF OF ALVIN V. BURT, JR.,

EILEEN WALLACE KENNEDY POPE, AND DAVID DOUGLAS

KENNEDY, A MINOR

NOVEMBER 18, 1974.-Message and accompanying act ordered to be printed

as a House document

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

93d Congress, 2d Session House Document No. 93-378

38-011 0 WASHINGTON - 1974
To the House of Representatives:

I am today withholding my approval from H.R. 6624, a bill "For

the relief of Alvin V. Burt, Junior, Eileen Wallace Kennedy Pope,

and David Douglas Kennedy, a minor." I am advised by the Attorney

General and I have determined that the absence of my signature from

this bill prevents it from becoming law. Without in any way qualifying this determination, I am also returning it without my approval

to those designated by Congress to receive messages at this time.

This bill would provide for payment, "as a gratuity," of $45,482

to Mr. Burt and for similar payments of $36,750 each to the widow

and son of Douglas E. Kennedy for injuries and other damages Mr.

Burt and Mr. Kennedy sustained as a result of gunshot wounds inflicted by U.S. military personnel in the Dominican Republic in 1965.

The amounts in the bill were recommended in a congressional reference case opinion by a review panel of the Court of Claims.

The claims presented in this bill arise from an admittedly tragic

and unfortunate incident. On May 6, 1965, Mr. Burt and Mr. Kennedy,

two newspapermen who were covering the civil upheaval in the

Dominican Republic and the peacekeeping operation in that country

of U.S. military forces, attempted to drive through a U.S. checkpoint

in Santo Domingo en route from rebel-held territory in the city.

The Marines manning the checkpoint opened fire on their car when the

men failed to get out as ordered and when it accelerated violently in

reverse at the same time that the Marines were fired upon by snipers

from an area behind the car. Both Mr. Burt and Mr. Kennedy were

seriously injured as a result of the Marines' actions.

After the incident, both men received, without charge, extensive

medical care and treatment from U.S. personnel in the field and later

in U.S. military facilities. Their employer, the Miami Herald, paid

their salaries while they were hospitalized, and guaranteed them continued employment. They also received workmen's compensation benefits during hospitalization, including prescribed lump-sum payments.

A majority of the members on a Court of Claims' review panel,

which considered the present claims, held that the claimants had not

established a "legal" or "equitable" claim within the meaning of the

congressional reference statute. In fact, their opinion strongly suggests that the claimants' own negligence contributed to the injuries

they received and further suggests that in pursuing their professions

in the face of known hazards, the claimants assumed the risk of personal injury.

Notwithstanding these findings, however, the majority concluded

that payment of reasonable compensation in this case was justified on

"broad moral considerations" as a matter of "good conscience." Accordingly, they recommended awards in the amounts contained in the

current bill.

(Mn)

H.D. 37I
I have considered carefully the merits of this case, and can find no

reason to approve H.R. 6624. Equitable considerations growing out of

Governmental actions have traditionally been the basis for private relief awards where no legal remedy is available. But the record

clearly establishes that no such considerations are present in this case.

Approval of H.R. 6624 cannot, in my view, be justified by invoking

terms such as "gratuity," as the awards are characterized in the bill,

or "broad moral considerations," the basis used by the Court of Claims

panel. To adopt such an approach could easily set a precedent for the

payment of a myriad of claims involving financial hardship to selected

individuals simply on the grounds that they lack legal redress. Once

we start down this road, it will be difficult, if not impossible, to turn

back.

I urge that in the future Congress adhere to the traditional equity

basis for awards, whether or not they have been recommended by the

Court of Claims under congressional reference procedures.

GERALD R. FoRw.

THE WHITE HousE, October 29, 1974.

H.D. 378