Destroyed homes in Sea Gate after Hurricane Sandy. (Photo: Hunter Walker)

Two days after Hurricane Sandy hit New York, Barbara Garofalo, a lifelong Sea Gate resident, stood in front of the community’s chapel, which had been turned into a makeshift headquarters for emergency personnel.

She watched bulldozers work their way through the ruins of the neighborhood’s private beach club, surveying the piles of rubble and twisted metal and the uprooted cabanas that littered the streets after the storm sent waves crashing through the neighborhood’s beachfront homes, ripping several off their foundations. Eyeing the damage, Ms. Garofalo couldn’t help but wonder whether some of the houses could have been saved if a planned government project to reinforce the community’s beaches had started sooner.

“They have the money in process, but they haven’t started it yet,” said Ms. Garofalo. “Maybe we would have had water damage, but maybe would have—could have saved the homes. Every home on the beach is gone. It breaks my heart.” 

For at least two decades, there has been an effort to reinforce Sea Gate’s beach with a multimillion-dollar array of what is known in the parlance of coastal engineers as “heavy armoring”: walls, jetties and rock barriers known as “t-groins” built to stop and absorb energy from waves before they batter the shore.

In April, after a long series of delays due to bureaucratic and political factors, more than $26 million in federal, city and state funds was finally secured to install a storm protection system in Sea Gate. Construction was slated to begin late this year, but it clearly wasn’t fast enough to fight the hurricane.

Even if the storm protection planned for Sea Gate had been in place before the waves crashed through the neighborhood last month, it probably wouldn’t have been sufficient to withstand a storm of Sandy’s magnitude. But with growing acknowledgment that climate change is leading to fiercer weather patterns, the decades-long saga to shore up Sea Gate is a dramatic illustration of how potentially lifesaving civil engineering measures are being outpaced by the forces of nature.

Congressman Jerrold Nadler was elected in 1992 to represent a seat that includes parts of Manhattan as well as Sea Gate and Coney Island on the southwestern tip of Brooklyn. Less than two weeks after he arrived in Washington for Congress’s freshman orientation, Sea Gate was hit hard by a nor’easter, and Mr. Nadler received a call from an aide who said, “Congressman, I think you better get back, your district is being washed to sea.”

Since then, Mr. Nadler has been heavily involved in the push to install t-groins and other storm armoring in the area. In the wake of Hurricane Sandy, he hopes construction will begin “without further delay” on the storm protection barriers for Sea Gate.

“Shorefront protection must be our priority, now more than ever, on New York’s coastline. We don’t know when the next major storm will arrive, but we do know that it will come. T-groins are a common-sense measure for Coney Island and Sea Gate—one that we have already fully funded—and we need to construct them without further delay,” he said. “I hope the U.S. Army Corps will act with urgency to correct the mistake that left the Sea Gate community without beachfront protection.”

Developed as a private beach community in the late 19th century, Sea Gate sits on the western tip of Coney Island behind gates patrolled by the community’s private police force. Residents divide the world into two parts, “in the gate” and “out of the gate.” Inside, there are quiet streets and beachfront homes with ornate balconies and living rooms that open onto the beach. Outside, the boardwalk and amusement park rides became surrounded by housing projects as Coney Island slipped into decline in the latter half of the last century.

The push to protect both areas from storms began as far back as 1969, when the government became aware of the beach erosion that was eating away at the Coney Island shoreline.

Three years later, the Army Corps of Engineers unveiled a $27.5 million plan to secure the area, a project that included a 15-foot seawall that would have extended from Manhattan Beach to Sea Gate, causing an uproar among locals who did not want their cherished beach views obstructed.

Local leadership instead backed a plan to extend the beach 250 feet beyond its original boundaries. This created another obstacle to the storm protection plan; at the time, federal guidelines mandated that any project to extend beaches must be funded locally rather than with federal money.

Sea Gate residents turned to the feds. In 1986, Congress authorized extending the Coney Island beaches under something called the Water Resources Development Act, with the project’s approval hinging on the increased recreational use that wider beaches would afford.

But that same year, in an instance of could-not-be-worse timing, President Ronald Reagan began an effort to cut the Army Corps of Engineers’ budgets and increase the amount of local funds used on projects relative to federal monies. This push deprioritized projects approved for their recreational benefits, and the Coney Island plan was scrapped.

So it was back to square one for Brooklyn’s oceanfront dwellers; the Army Corps of Engineers came up with another shore-protection plan, this one based on protecting the government’s investments in Coney Island’s many units of public housing.

Three years later, with the support of Mr. Nadler and other local leaders, construction on the Coney Island beach replenishment and storm protection project finally began. However, once the project was complete, it proved to have an entirely unexpected negative side effect: even more beach erosion for Sea Gate.

The changed contours of the shoreline shifted the surrounding waters, depleting sand from one of the beaches in Sea Gate and actually leaving the area even more vulnerable to storms.

Because of this, in 1996, the Army Corps of Engineers took interim steps to, quite literally, shore up the area and began researching a long-term solution. A plan to install t-groins was finally devised between 1998 and 2000, but, due to tight federal and local budgets, finding funding took more than a decade.

By 2010, Congressman Nadler had secured $18.9 million in federal funds for heavy storm armoring in Sea Gate. In April of this year, the city and state allocated another $7.3 million for the project. As all of the money fell into place, the Army Corps of Engineers began seeking contractors for the project in the hope that they would be able to begin construction late this year. Then Hurricane Sandy arrived, ahead of the project’s schedule.

After the storm, the project’s fate remains unclear. The Observer spent several days calling the Army Corps of Engineers, which is overseeing the project, but as of this writing, they have not responded to our requests for comment on this story.

Though the hurricane has led to federal emergency designations and increased awareness of the neighborhood’s plight, which might help expedite construction, it has also brought raised awareness that the New York area is in for increasingly powerful storms, for which the planned t-groins are no match.

As she stood among the wreckage, Ms. Garofalo wondered which would come first: adequate protections for Sea Gate or another Sandy.

“The homeowners can’t do it their own anymore,” she said. “The next time we get a bad storm, or even just high tide, the water is coming right over again. We have nothing to protect us.”

Former Mayor Ed Koch and Congressman Jerrold Nadler denouncing Charles Barron in front of the Museum of Jewish Heritage.

Former Mayor Ed Koch, Congressman Jerrold Nadler, Councilman David Greenfield, Assemblyman Dov Hikind gathered with several other elected officials in front of the Museum of Jewish Heritage in Battery Park this morning for a press conference billed as an effort " to Denounce Charles Barron as Enemy of the State of Israel" and the Jewish community. The politicos who showed up at the event where longtime councilman Mr. Barron was branded "hateful," a "scary monster," "anti-Semite" and "bigot" also expressed their support for his rival in the congressional race, Hakeem Jeffries.

"What prompted me ... speaking of people that just are not familiar with Charles' record and they just dont know who Charles Barron is, that's a very scary thing. Right?" asked Councilman Greenfield, who organized the event. "People are not familiar that there's an individual who's running, who we all know very well, who is an anti-Semite, who's a hate-monger and who's a bigot. I think it's very important for us to educate the public and let them know who this individual is."

Like Mr. Greenfield, the other elected officials at the press conference said they felt it was important to make people aware of controversial statements Mr. Barron has made about Jews, in support of foreign dictators and comments critical of Israel.

"We usually have elections in this country, in this city where the differences are differences of degree, you like this one better than that one, this one is more effective, this one is a little more liberal, that one is a little more conservative. And sometimes, there's real rhetoric about this one is terrible. Usually, that's not true," Mr. Nadler said. "This time it is true. You've got a reasonable candidate and a digraceful, dangerous candidate. That is very rare and we have to make sure people understand that."

Mr. Nadler was specifically concerned by Mr. Barron's statements comparing the Israeli government's treatment of Palestinians to the holocaust. He carried a few selected quotes made by Mr. Barron on a small slip of paper.

"When he compared what the Israelis are doing in Gaza to the conditions Nazis imposed on the Jews. Where is the Auchswitz? I mean, come on. That is so irresponsible, and so libelous and so disgusting," said Mr. Nadler. "To compare Israel to Nazis, calling what Israel's doing genocide? Israel's trying to survive in a tough neighborhood....They're not doing anything like Nazis. To even put them in the same universe is a disgrace to the English language....His election to Congress, to some extent, would legitimize this kind of anti-Semitic discourse and we don't need that."

In addition to Mr. Barron's criticisms of Israel for its treatment of Palestinians, the elected officials also referenced statements he has made praising the foreign dictators Mummar Qadaffi and Robert Mugabe, and a remark he made implying blacks are the "Semitic people" rather than Jews. The participants at the press conference said they felt it was especially important to raise awareness about Mr. Barron's record because the race for the congressional seat being vacated by Ed Towns is the only contest in the upcoming June 26 election.

Mr. Koch, who described Mr. Barron's past remarks as "vicious"  explained that it was an "unusual election" that might not has "as high a turnout" as a vote with more offices on the table. The ex-mayor said he expected Mr. Barron's supporters would get to the polls, but he believed others would "rush to the polls" to vote for Mr. Jeffries if they were aware of Mr. Barron's history.

"That's why we're here. We're saying Barron is no good. I can tell you. I knew him," Mr. Koch said. "Now Hakeem Jeffries is a unique guy. He's a star....I admire him. He's a first class guy who would represent this district in a first class way."

Mr. Nadler clarified that they saw no indication Mr. Barron was likely to win, but they want to make sure he has no chance in a low interest, low turnout race.

"If you have a demagogue like Charles Barron, he's got his little group. They will come out to vote because they're his group and everybody else, very few might come out to vote. So, we're here to warn people that this is a very important election," said Mr. Nadler. "We're not here to say that we particularly see a great outswelling of support, God forbid, for Charles Barron. But he's got his group, they will vote."

All of the politicians in attendance said they would be endorsing Mr. Jeffries and would give him their support. Mr. Hikind, who said he had not spoken to Mr. Jeffries about the event, described the race as a "no brainer" for local leaders and voters.

It is worth noting here that Mr. Jeffries did not attend the event, and it is unclear how the support of a handful of Jewish pols will help him in a district that remains majority African-American and decidedly liberal.

"I really feel that Hakeem Jeffries is a superstar. He's really a solid political figure, a community leader, articulate, you name it," Mr. Hikind said. "The people need to look at the entire picture....I think if they look at everything, they will see, hey, you can get a superstar, or you can get somebody who's a racist. Make your pick, make your choice."

Ms. Pelosi was billed as a "special guest" at the reception, which was a celebration of Mr. Nadler's 20th year in Congress. The event was held at the Bryant Park Grill.

Mr. Nadler doesn't have anyone running against him this year and he scheduled his fundraising bash the same night President Barack Obama had a trio of Manhattan fundraisers, but our sources said the congressman still managed to draw about 200 supporters including several prominent elected officials. In addition to Ms. Pelosi and Ms. Quinn our tipster said Congressman Eliot Engel and Public Advocate Bill de Blasio were also in attendance.

Bill de Blasio (Photo: Facebook)

Public advocate and likely 2013 mayoral candidate Bill de Blasio jumped headfirst into Mayor Bloomberg and Congressman Jerry Nadler's Occupy Wall Street spat. The testy tit for tat, which began at a press conference yesterday when Politicker asked Mayor Bloomberg about the congressman's call for a federal investigation into police conduct in the Occupy Wall Street raid last month. ”Representative Nadler I know very well and, in most things, I agree with him. I think this case–that’s ridiculous,” Mayor Bloomberg said. Congressman Nadler responded with a statement of his own in which he urged the mayor to stop "spewing nonsense and so wildly contradicting himself." Mr. de Blasio took Congressman Nadler's side in the quarrel. 

Mr. de Blasio posted our post about the exchange on his Facebook page yesterday along with a note referencing the infamous Awl story about reporters being arrested while covering the raid.

"No, Mayor Bloomberg. What’s ridiculous is arresting 26 members of the press for doing their job. Congressman Nadler is right," Mr. de Blasio wrote.

Spokesmen for the mayor's office maintain "just five of the '26 arrested reporters' are actually credentialed reporters."

Mr. de Blasio's slap at City Hall is unsurprising. In the aftermath of the controversial Occupy Wall Street raid, Mr. de Blasio and the other likely mayoral hopefuls all piled on with criticisms of police handling of the eviction. Howard Wolfson, Mayor Bloomberg's deputy for communications, subsequently slammed City Hall's critics as "overblown and outrageous."

Update (10:15 a.m.): A tipster informed Politicker that Mr. de Blasio isn't the only likely mayoral candidate who responded to Mayor Bloomberg's tiff with Congressman Nadler. Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer issued a series of Tweets yesterday blasting the mayor for his comments about the call for an Occupy Wall Street investigation.

"It's outrageous to attack Rep. Jerry Nadler nationally respected lawmaker, because he defends the civil rights of New Yorkers. These comments only underscore the city's failure to establish a coherent funding strategy for homeland security programs," Borough President Stringer wrote. "While we're at it, I'm renewing my call for a federal probe of the city's misguided stop and frisk program."

Mayor Bloomberg (Getty)

Politicker asked Mayor Michael Bloomberg about Congressman Jerrold Nadler's call for a federal investigation into the NYPD raid on Occupy Wall Street at a press conference for the opening of a new probation office in Brownsville. "Representative Nadler I know very well and, in most things, I agree with him. I think this case--that's ridiculous," Mayor Bloomberg said.

The Mayor went on to suggest Congressman Nadler's time and energy would be better served pursuing other endeavors.

"If he would spend more time getting us homeland security money, maybe he'd make the streets safer. If he could get us more federal monies, maybe we could make our schools better and we wouldn't have some of the things people are protesting against," Mayor Bloomberg said. "I think there's plenty of--this is not a federal issue and there's plenty of investigations going on."

Mayor Bloomberg also reiterated his view that his administration and the NYPD handled the raid on Zuccotti Park quite well.

"In terms of the Occupy Wall Street and removing people from Zuccotti Park, your right to protest is protected by the first amendment, and in fact, for the exception of about eight hours, I think it was, with the exception of that right through this minute it is protected and we will keep it protected. I've said that's my first priority. Having said that, the right to set up a tent, the right to sleep in the--keep other people from coming into the park is not constitutionally protected," Mayor Bloomberg said. "People they have to be able to go about their business, people that want to protest have to be able to do it. This is the way to do it and the police department acted, I think given the fact that you had lots of people, they did a pretty good job. They're well trained and they know what theyre doing."

Congressman Nadler quickly issued a response describing the Mayor's remarks as "nonsense."

“Perhaps the Mayor should review his own past comments lauding my success in securing needed federal funds for our city – from the $20 billion post-9/11 monies to the Zadroga Act to critical transportation funding – before spewing nonsense and so wildly contradicting himself," Congressman Nadler said. "As the Mayor should well know, it is precisely my job – as the ranking member on the House Judiciary’s Constitution Subcommittee – to ensure that the constitutional rights of all Americans are respected, and it is precisely the job of the U.S. Department of Justice to ensure that alleged violations of those rights are investigated, and that federal civil rights laws are vigorously enforced.  It is the Mayor’s job, I might point out, to ensure that the police department, under his command, obeys the laws and respects the rights of all New Yorkers.”

Congressman Nadler also encouraged the mayor to "have a heart-to-heart chat with the many congressional Republicans who he has actively supported, to urge them to stop starving the programs critical to our cities and to desist from further destroying the economy for the middle class."

Steve Ballone, a Democratic candidate for Suffolk County executive, saved Santa.

U.S. Rep. Jerrold Nadler, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, State Senator Daniel Squadron, and Councilwoman Margaret Chin are thankful for the port-o-potties in Zuccotti Park.

According to new poll numbers, Governor Cuomo is surprisingly popular.

Some constituents wonder why Albany Mayor Jerry Jennings hasn't gotten rid of the Occupy Albany protesters.

Mississippi will vote on a "personhood" amendment that would criminalize abortion Tuesday.

New details continue to emerge about the sexual harassment allegations made against Herman Cain in the late 1990's.

Does Rick Perry need Sarah Palin to win?

Henry Kissinger thinks the Cain campaign's infamous cigarette smoking commercial was "brilliant."

“I really think there’s a very high likelihood of a total impasse here, which would be catastrophic," Nadler told me this morning. "And so we have to push the 14^th Amendment, and make room for the 14^th Amendment.”

Some Democrats have argued that the 14th Amendment gives the president the authority to raise the debt ceiling without Congressional approval, but Obama has so far ruled it out as an option, even after his attempt to forge a "grand bargain " was rejected by Boehner.

House Republicans are set to vote on Boehner's proposal this afternoon, with Senate Democrats waiting to see how the House votes before they advance a more modest package of cuts designed by Majority Leader Harry Reid.

He characterized the mood in this morning's Democratic caucus meeting as “very upset, very angry and very frustrated."

“Nancy [Pelosi] got up and said, nothing new," he recalled. "That was the extent of her comments on this. Except she said the Exxon earning reports are out: huge profits.”

Nadler said the in-fighting in the Republican caucus was not good news for Democrats, or anyone, really.

“If [Republicans] can’t get this bill passed, I don’t know how you talk to them, because this bill is 20 degrees beyond terrible," Nadler said. "If they get this bill passed, then the question is: Can they deliver their caucus for some deal that’s better than this but worse than Reid? If they can’t, then there can be no deal.

“And that’s why a lot of us are saying the president – once he’s gone to the last resort, and I think we’re at that stage – the president should use the 14^th Amendment option.”

The 14th Amendment states, in Section 4: "The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned." Whether that provision gives president executive authority to raise the debt ceiling, without requiring the approval of Congress, remains an open question.

Nadler said he contacted the Justice Department before Memorial Day, suggesting this approach, and sent them a 1997 Tulsa Law Review article that asserted its legality.

But would sending the problem to the courts calm the jittery financial markets?

“I think it would," Nadler said. "I think the president, if he asserted that authority and spent the money, and said he’s paying the debts, that would calm the markets. Let someone try to go to court, it would take years.”

From a bargaining perspective, Nadler said the administration had been right, so far, not to push the 14th Amendment, which could distract from forging a deal, and risk raising the ire of Republicans who would accuse the president of circumventing congressional authority.

“They want to avoid that," he said. "And they should avoid that. Until they can’t.”

Nadler has carved out a role for himself as a voice of the minority caucus' liberal conscience, pushing the president to stake out a harder line in negotiating against Republicans.

"The president has totally allowed the Republicans to miscast the entire debate," Nadler lamented this morning, saying the country isn't broke and Congress shouldn't be cutting in the midst of a bad economy. “We’re playing the entire game within our 20 yard line, because we conceded everything rhetorically.”

As to whether he could support a compromise between the Boehner and Reid plans -- should one somehow emerge -- Nadler said: “I don’t know if I can vote for the Reid Plan.”

"That's exactly what it sounded like when I went to church on Sunday," he said. The audience burst into laughter.

Alesi didn't need to explain the joke.

Click for slideshow >

Religious organizations had opposed the passage of the bill, as did most of his Republican colleagues. But nowadays, the adulations he receives are overwhelming, with many crediting him with breaking the seal -- and signaling it's okay for other moderate Republicans to come out (yes, pun intended) for same-sex marriage.

"The best story is the reverend on the right that was praying for marriage equality, and the reverend on the right who was praying against gay marriage. They're praying to the same God," said Alesi. "That created a dilemma for God and it created a dilemma for me," he said, joking slightly.

Marriage advocates had gathered inside the basement of a swanky bar in Chelsea, hundreds of miles away from the rural Monroe County district Alesi has represented for years. A giant disco ball turned slowly. The word "Hiro" was etched into  a chunky piece of wood over the stage.

The party was a who's who of celebrities and advocates.

Russell Simmons, wearing a blue baseball hat and white sneakers, said he saw marriage advocates rolling out videos and pressing the case publicly, and decided to reach out to them.

"Why haven't you called me?" Simmons recalled asking one of HRC's campaign operatives, Brian Ellner. "I had been a long-time supporter and I felt excluded for a minute." Simmons called the victory in New York "a great start" and "we're on to Maryland next."

Simmons poses for a few pictures with legislators before leaving.

Sean Avery of the Rangers, wearing a gray blazer, white t-shirt, silky blue pants and sunglasses, said that since his advocacy for same-sex marriage, "I've become extremely popular in Chelsea."

Congressmembers Joe Crowley and Jerry Nadler loitered near the stage. Organizers kept a look out for the younger Barbara Bush -- not only a supporter, but the star of the most-watched HRC video in a series they released on the issue. Nassau D.A. Kathleen Rice and her aide, Eric Phillips, were eager to shake as many hands as possible. Jennifer Cunningham, the political operative who orchestrated the effort among the various advocacy groups, slung a black book pack over her shoulders and left early.

But one of the evening's biggest stars, Governor Andrew Cuomo, was still in Albany, working.

"I think he definitely has his eye on a bid for the White House," said actor Mark Ruffalo, who has spoken out in favor of same-sex marriage. When I asked about Cuomo's record on hydrofracking--another issue on which Ruffalo has spoken out--his wife, Sunrise, said, "Oh, you know about our other [issue]."

"I feel like these two are oddly connected to each other," said Ruffalo.

"They're so progressive, both of them," said Sunrise. "It's forward thinking."

Ruffalo praised Cuomo's ability to marshall the various marriage advocacy groups and said he hoped the governor would do the same thing with environment groups opposed to hydrofracking.

"I'm using this as a model," said Ruffalo. "He reached out to me early on to ask me about energy policy in New York State. And if he was really smart, he would use this hydrofracking to pivot into a real energy policy for New York State, one that is leading the nation, just like he did with gay marriage."

Now add to the chorus of complaint Upper West Side Congressman Jerrold Nadler, who calls the plan "simply unconscionable."

Congressman Nadler has been a long-time dove on foreign policy issues, and so his objection to the plan is not all that surprising, but his willingness to knock the president the day after it was released is.

Below are his full remarks delivered at a press conference earlier today:

“The President came out last night for three and a half more years of war in Afghanistan.  And for what?  In those three and a half years, more of our soldiers will die, more of our treasure will be spent, and in the end we will not be any closer to creating a stable Afghanistan or to enhancing our safety.

“The whole premise of this war is wrong.  Fighting in Afghanistan does not enhance the security of the United States.  We were attacked on 9/11 by Al Qaeda.  Al Qaeda had bases in Afghanistan, and, at that time, it made sense to go in and destroy those bases, and we did.  But the CIA tells us that there are now fewer than one hundred Al Qaeda personnel in all of Afghanistan. So why are we still fighting there?  Why will we still have 70,000 troops in Afghanistan at the end of 2012? – troops who will continue to risk their lives every day in a war that has already claimed too many American lives.  And we will continue pouring billions of dollars into an intractable mess when we should be devoting taxpayer funds to our own economy, to our own jobs, our own housing, social programs, and education.

“Afghanistan is in the middle of what is, so far, a 35 year civil war.  If we continue on this course, in three years, there will be several thousand more dead American soldiers, several hundred billion more dollars wasted, and two or three more provinces labeled “pacified.”  But as soon as we leave, now or in 2014 or 2016 or whenever, those provinces will become “unpacified,” the Taliban and the warlords will step up the fighting, and the Afghan civil war will resume its natural course.

“Our troops are fighting valiantly, but they are on the wrong mission.  We should recognize that rebuilding Afghanistan is both beyond our ability and beyond our mandate to prevent terrorists from attacking the United States.

“To delay the withdrawal of our forces and continue this terrible policy at so high a cost is quite simply unconscionable.  It is unjustifiable to sacrifice more lives and more money this way.

“We should withdraw our troops now – all of them – as rapidly as physically possible.”

The front of the silver medal -- which is not technically a coin, since it's not legal tender -- bears the image of lady liberty and the inscription ‘Always Remember,’ and was minted on Congressional mandate as part of an effort to fund the World Trade Center Memorial and Museum.

“It’s important as a commemoration,” said Nadler, who represents the World Trade Center site.  “You have to honor the dead and honor everything that happened. And this is one of those rare events that deserves it. And second, the potentially $20 million of proceeds of the sale of these medals will go to supporting the museum.”

Each medal costs $56.95 --  with $10 going to the memorial and museum-- and the mint is authorized to print up to 2 million, depending on demand.

According to United States Treasurer Rosie Rios, who joined Nadler at the ceremony, about12,000 medals were sold in their first 90 minutes on the market, which amounts to $120,000 for the memorial.

"This medal's design is intended to exalt the memory of those who sacrificed their lives or were injured and the families who continue to show dignity and strength in the face of terrible loss,” Rios said.

Nadler and Senator Chuck Schumer, who did not attend, jointly introduced the bill authorizing the medal, which passed last August. According to Mr. Nadler, “the rules [in Congress] disfavor commemorations, and only the strongest and most heartfelt ones have a chance.”

(Earlier this year, the two legislators fought off an impostor 9/11 coin that was being sold by a Pennsylvania company.)

Joe Daniels, the president of the 9/11 memorial, told The Observer that the partnership with the Mint is crucial in developing broader national support for the memorial, which is estimated to cost $50 million per year.

"We will never ask visitors who wish to pay their respects to the nearly 3,000 victims of 9/11 to pay an admissions charge," Daniels said.  "The evidence of this revitalization shines a spotlight on the failure of Osama bin Laden's murderous attack on this city. It shows that New York's future is bright and its best days are still to come.”

The medal is being advertised in coin collecting trade magazines and is available through the mint’s website.