JFActivist

Action Alert: Strengthen Social Security for Those That Serve our Nation

via StrengthenSocialSecurity.org (5.30.11):  

Action Alert

Strengthen Social Security for Those that Serve our Nation!

Memorial Day is more than a three-day weekend to celebrate the unofficial start of summer with a BBQ.  It’s a day when we remember the service and sacrifice of the men and women who have served in our nation’s military.  

Military men and women contribute to Social Security just like other working Americans, from their first paycheck at boot camp, to their last paycheck at the end of their career. As for any other working American who contributes, Social Security needs to be there for veterans and their families. For example:

● More than 771,000 veterans receive Social Security disability benefits.

● Most of the more than 4,000 children who lost a parent since the beginning of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars now receive Social Security survivors benefits.   

● Social Security currently pays benefits to over 9 million veterans—about 4 in 10 veterans today—and the vast majority of veterans will become Social Security beneficiaries in the future.

Take Action Here! Strengthen Social Security Now!

Veterans and military families gave their all for our country.  It is our obligation to fight to ensure that they receive every benefit they deserve.  This means reminding Congress that those who serve our nation, should never have to worry about any benefit cuts. After all, Social Security belongs to them – and to all of us.

>>>To See a Copy of the Veteran's Report

 

DOJ Files Lawsuit Alleging Disability-Based Housing Discrimination at MS, LA, TN Apartment Complexes

via the Department of Justice (5.19.11): 

Justice Department Files Lawsuit Alleging Disability-Based Housing Discrimination at Nine Apartment Complexes in Three States

The Justice Department today filed a lawsuit against the owners, developers and design professionals involved in the design and construction of nine multi-family housing complexes in Mississippi, Louisiana and Tennessee.   The nine complexes comprise more than 2,000 apartments with more than 800 ground-floor units that are required by the Fair Housing Act to contain accessible features.   Eight of the complexes contain leasing offices that are required by the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to contain accessible features...

>>>To Read the Full Press Release

Do you have personal experiences with disability-based housing discrimination? Please share those experiences in comments below.

Democratic-led Senate Votes Down Ryan Budget

via The National Journal (5.26.11):

Democratic-led Senate Votes Down Ryan Budget

The Senate on Wednesday voted down House Budget Chairman Paul Ryan’s controversial budget blueprint, 57 to 40, in a Democratic effort to win advantage in continuing deficit talks and in the 2012 election season.

The vote marked an effort by Democrats to exploit public opposition to the Wisconsin Republican’s plan to shift Medicare to a subsidy system. A special election in New York’s 26th Congressional District on Tuesday, won by a Democratic underdog, became something of a referendum on the Ryan plan, and Democrats see opposition to it as a potent political weapon in 2012.

Democrats have yet to offer their fiscal 2012 budget resolution. In forcing a vote on Ryan’s plan, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., took what Republicans called an unprecedented step of forcing a vote on a budget that he opposes without offering one he supports. The maneuver highlighted Senate Democrats’ decision to mostly abandon an affirmative legislative agenda and instead highlight opposition to GOP plans. Democrats can argue they are acting out of necessity because they cannot pass—in either the Senate or the House—most of their preferred legislation.

>>>To Read the Full Article

For more coverage on the Senate's Budget Resolution vote...

Republican Debt-Reduction Plan Fails in Senate

Senate Republicans Get 40 Votes for Paul Ryan Medicare Plan

 

Disability in the Budget: Why it Matters

via AAPD (5.26.11):

Disability in the Budget: Why It Matters

By David Heymsfeld, Policy Advisor, AAPD

On May 12, 2011, AAPD staff attended a field hearing of the National Council on Disability (NCD) focusing on how the projected deficits in the federal budget will affect people with disabilities.  NCD is a small independent federal government agency that advises the Congress and the President about federal disabilities policies, programs, practices and procedures.  In his opening statement, NCD Chairman Jonathan Young said that the federal government’s current fiscal path is unsustainable, and that a failure to deal with the problem now will ultimately force draconian actions that will harm all Americans, including people with disabilities. The focus of the hearing was maintaining supports for the independent living of people with disabilities in the community.

 Disability Community Testimony

 The first was Kelly Stuart Woodall, Executive Director, Association of Self-Advocates of North Carolina. She testified about her personal experiences with the Medicaid program known as Community Alternatives Program (CAP) for Developmental Disabilities. CAP workers come to her home to help her dress, eat and get to work, medical appointments, and community and social activities. Without these services she would have to live in an institution, and would not be able to get to a job. The CAP services cost $27,000 a year, while an intermediate care facility would cost $75,000.

Also speaking was Bonnie Miller, Coordinator of the Pennsylvania Self-Determination Consumer and Family Group. She spoke about her experience with CAP services for her daughter who has intellectual disabilities. Her daughter was not thriving under programs that required her to live or spend days in confined settings. Ms. Miller has insisted upon exercising her right to direct services for her daughter, including hiring, managing and training support staff.  She reported that these services cost less than a sheltered workshop or group home.

 Federal Testimonies

Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), co-chair of the Congressional Bipartisan Disabilities Caucus, emphasized that having a disability should not mean automatic confinement or institutionalization, or a life of government dependence. She stated that government policies should enhance help for people with disabilities to enhance their abilities and ambitions to the fullest extent possible.

 Rep. James Langevin (D-RI), co-chair of the Congressional Bipartisan Disabilities Caucus, emphasized that the recession has had a severe impact on people with disabilities. As of April 2011, the percentage of persons with disabilities in the work force was 20.6%, as compared to 69.6% for persons without disabilities. He urged that budget cutting measures not cut programs that will enable individuals with disabilities to achieve a higher level of independence, productivity and inclusion within society.  He supports reforms in Social Security and Medicaid to relieve concerns of individuals that if they return to work they will lose their health coverage.

The final government witness was Kevin Concannon, Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, U.S. Department of Agriculture. He emphasized the importance to people with disabilities of the fifteen government nutrition assistance programs. He discussed the Supplemental Nutrition Program (SNAP-formerly known as food stamps), which is currently utilized by 3.2 million households that have at least one person with a disability.

 For copies of the witnesses’ full statements, please contact Anne Sommers via E-mail asommers@ncd.org.  Read NCD press release about the event at http://www.ncd.gov/newsroom/05112011

 Advocacy Measures

1. Write to the National Council on Disability urging them to oppose actively any reductions in funding for Medicaid that will result in limitations in eligibility or the services provided.
2. Monitor the Council’s website for future field hearings at www.cd.gov and for other events at which you may want to appear.
3. Be ready for the next round of Action Alerts in regard to Medicaid proposals.
4. To respond, please comment below or send email to policy@aapd.com

Medicaid Bed Taxes and Institutional Bias: Where Does Your State Stand?

via SteveGoldADA.blogspot.com (5.23.11):

Medicaid Bed Taxes and Institutional Bias.

Information Bulletin #333

by Steve Gold

In FY 2010, nearly $13.5 billion dollars were generated in 37 States as Medicaid “Provider Taxes,” a/k/a, Bed Taxes, Fees, and/or Assessments. At a minimum, these bed taxes generated another $13.5 billion federal match and more that States received.

What are Medicaid Bed Taxes and why should advocates for older and disabled Americans care?

37 States levy Medicaid provider/bed taxes against nursing homes (they can also be levied on hospitals or ICF beds). The $13.5 billion broken at the end of this Bulletin does not distinguish among NH, ICF or hospitals.

Often, bed taxes are based on, for example, the total number of nursing home beds in a nursing home. That is, a State requires each nursing home to pay the State a specific amount of money for each nursing home bed per day. We heard recently that one State taxed nursing homes $10 per nursing home bed per day whether or not the bed was even occupied.

The State then uses revenues generated from these “bed taxes” to bring down federal Medicaid funds, i.e., the federal match.

Here’s what happens over time. After a few years of these bed taxes, the federal reimbursement generated from nursing home bed taxes are then used to draw down more federal funds. (A type of Ponzi scheme?)

>>>For the Full Article and To See a List of 2010 Bed Taxes

What implications do you feel bed taxes have for the future of Medicaid?

Please share your thoughts in comments below...

Cutting Medicaid Would Put 285,000 VA Seniors and PWD At Risk, FamiliesUSA Reports

Via DailyPress.com (5.13.11):

Report: Cutting Medicaid would hurt 285,000 VA seniors, people with disabilities

By Veronica Chufo

 

 

With some policy makers looking to cut Medicaid to close budget gaps, Families USA, a nonprofit that advocates for health care consumers, came out with a report showing the impact to Virginians. Cuts would hurt 285,000 seniors and people with disabilities who rely on Medicaid, the report said.

Medicaid is critical for Virginia seniors and people with disabilities who need long-term care, the report said. Few people have insurance that covers long-term care, which can be expensive. Nursing home stays in Virginia average $69,700 a year, and 61 percent of nursing home residents depend on Medicaid to pay for it.

Plus, 45.6 percent of Medicaid spending on long-term care in Virginia helps keep people out of nursing homes. It pays for care that helps 25,000 Virginians stay in their homes. Keeping people in their homes is cheaper than caring for them in nursing homes.

Medicaid also provides jobs. More than 55,000 direct care workers provide care to state residents who need long-term services, with funding coming from Medicaid and other sources. That workforce will increase by 46.7 percent by 2016 in order to meet anticipated demand, the report said. Cuts to Medicaid may mean reductions in those workers' pay, which may shrink the workforce and lead to a lower quality of care, the report said.

>>>To View the Full Article...

How can the results of this report be used an effective advocacy tool? Please share your thoughts in the comments below.

Roadmap to Prosperity or Path to Poverty? IL Protestors Rally Against Ryan's Cuts

Via Healthcare Finance News (5.17.11): 

Protesters rally against Ryan's Medicare cuts

by Diana Manos, Senior Editor

CHICAGO – Chicago-area and Wisconsin residents are protesting Rep. Paul Ryan’s (R-Wisc.) plan to cut Medicare and Medicaid benefits.

Some 225 senior citizens, disabled residents and citizens from various organizations gathered outside the Economic Club of Chicago on May 16 while Ryan was presenting a plan that he has called  "a roadmap to prosperity," according to Emily Stuart, a spokeswoman for the Illinois Alliance for Retired Americans.

The protesters, members of the Illinois Alliance for Retired Americans, Illinois Main Street Alliance, MoveOn, Access Living, ADAPT, SEIU HC and Citizen Action/Illinois, called Ryan's plan "a roadmap to ruin," Stuart said.

"It is irresponsible and unnecessary to talk about radically changing Social Security and Medicare," said Katie Jordan of the Illinois Alliance for Retired Americans. "These programs keep our most vulnerable people from falling into poverty. It is not another stock in your portfolio."

>>>For the Full Article

At the May 16th rally, protesters stated, "efforts to privatize Medicare and defund Medicaid will dramatically impact local economies, cost millions of jobs and leave countless senior citizens and disabled Americans with no safety net." How do you feel Congress can create jobs and stimulate real economic growth without leaving seniors and people with disabilities with the short end of the stick?

Please share your thoughts below.

Neglected to Death in Florida

via The Miami Herald (5.8.11):

At Homes for the Mentally Ill, a Sweeping Breakdown in Care

The Miami Herald found that special homes for people with mental illness are often shoddily run, with residents left without critical psychiatric and medical help.  

By Carol Marbin Miller, Rob Barry and Michael Sallah

For the residents of Hillandale, punishment was swift and painful: violent takedowns, powerful tranquilizers that made them stumble and drool, and staffers who would scream and tackle them when they misbehaved.

Last April, the staff protested the removal of a 47-year-old man — frail and mentally retarded — who said he wanted to move, while residents shouted and blocked the path of state workers trying to safely escort him from the home.

While most assisted-living facilities (ALFs) are designed to care for the elderly — providing help with everyday tasks — Florida licenses facilities like Hillandale to also care for people with severe mental illness. Created a generation ago, the special homes were the state’s answer to providing housing for thousands left in the streets after the historic closings of Florida’s psychiatric institutions.

But The Miami Herald found dozens of the homes are so poorly run that residents are forced to languish without crucial needs — including medication and psychiatric help — leaving their care to police and rescue workers.

The Herald’s examination of Florida’s 1,083 homes for people with mental illness, including a review of state inspection reports, police investigations, court records and interviews with mental health experts, found:

•  Regulators find nearly twice the rate of abuse and neglect at the special homes, including caretakers beating and sexually molesting residents.

•  State agents have caught nearly 100 homes using illegal restraints since 2002 — including doping residents with tranquilizers without doctor’s approval, tying them with ropes and locking them in isolation rooms — only to catch them doing it again.

•  Florida’s requirements to run a home for people with mental illnesses are among the lowest in the nation: a high school diploma and 26 hours of training — less than the state requirements for barbers, cosmetologists and auctioneers.

•  Caretakers are routinely caught intoxicated, asleep and even abandoning their posts entirely — often with severe consequences to residents, but rarely to the operators.

>>>For the Full Article

What steps do you feel should be taken to bring these facilities to justice and offer mentally ill Florida residents the care they deserve? Please share your thoughts below.

 

Nursing Homes Seek Exemptions From Health Law

From the New York Times (5.15.11):

Nursing Homes Seek Exemptions From Health Law

by Rober Pear

It is an oddity of American health care: Many nursing homes and home care agencies do not provide health insurance to their workers, or they pay wages so low that employees cannot afford the coverage that is offered.

The numbers are stark. Among workers who provide hands-on care to nursing home residents, one in four has no health insurance. Among those who provide care to people living at home, one in three is uninsured.

The new health care law is supposed to fix the problem by guaranteeing access to affordable coverage for all. But many nursing homes and home care agencies, alarmed at the cost of providing health insurance to hundreds of thousands of health care workers, have started a lobbying effort seeking some kind of exemption or special treatment...

>>> For the Full Article

Why should we care?

As much as we fight for freedom from institutionalization, the fact remains the there are a large number of people with disabilities receiving services in nursing homes.   Our brothers and sisters confined to nursing homes will receive better quality care if their service providers are healthy and happy with their jobs.  We don't want nursing home staff forced to come to work sick because they can't afford health care, nor do we want nursing home staff to continue to cycle through the system as they burn out.

Additionally, the reason that nursing homes are using to seek this exemption is that Medicaid reimbursement rates are too low to allow them to pay for health care for their employees.  This concern is an opportunity for us to work with the nursing home industry in advocating for higher reimbursement rates.

Do you see this issue differently? Please comment below. 

Natural Supports: They're Needed and the Debate is Heated

From AAPD's Associate JFA Moderator (5.10.11):

Natural Supports: They're Needed and the Debate is Heated

“Should natural supports fill in the gaps, or perhaps even take the place of, paid services for individuals with disabilities? With waitlists for services being longer than ever, what role can natural supports play in improving the quality of life for people with disabilities?”

A matter of on-going debate, natural supports spark the interest of many in the disability community, including disability advocate Denver C. Fox. On April 13^th, 2011, Fox sought out to discover what folks really thought about this controversial issue. He developed a simple, eight question survey, e-mailed it to various listservs across the country and, with the help of his “viral technique”, received almost 500 responses.

What did Fox find? While 34% of those surveyed felt they had strong or moderate natural supports, 66% felt they had little, minuscule or no natural supports. Further, not only did a disappointing 62.5% feel they had "sometimes", "frequently" or "a lot" been made to feel guilty by other parents, professionals, service folks, articles in magazines/bulletins, the "system," and/or others regarding their level of having "natural supports," a dismal 71% have received no training in gaining and using natural supports.

What next? Fox indicates that more research is necessary to understand how this important factor plays into PWD's access to independence.  Hopefully, with further research into this area, advocates can help shape policy which will maximize the strengths of PWDs and their communities.   Specifically, Fox says that future research should include:

* Studies which involve parents, families, individuals with disabilities and others who represent ALL perspectives on "natural supports"

* Further refinement in the definition and characteristics of "natural supports" - a term bandied about, but which has unclear and multiple meanings dependent upon the context of the situation and differing individual interpretations.  

 * Emphasis on the effects of aging of the individual with a disability and their family/parents,  as related to access to "natural supports."

* Researching how and if the nature and profoundness of the disability affects access to "natural supports.".  In other words, is it increasingly difficult to gain "natural supports" as  one's disability is more profound, and perhaps incorporates more behavioral and intense needs such as 24/7 supervision, tube-feeding, potential injury to others and self, etc.  What is the effect of the isolation often caused by the intense care of an individual with a disability on opportunities for the caregiver to form natural supports?

* Discovering the factors which increase and decrease access to, and utilization of, "natural supports" as a service delivery system.

* Formulating how realistic it is to consider "natural supports" as a service delivery model or as an adjunct to service delivery.

For more information on the study: http://www.ourwebs.info/naturalsupportmain.htm

Comment Below:

How can these findings be used to provoke greater and more productive conversation regarding natural supports?

How do the results of Fox’s study relate to your own experience with natural supports?