|
|
The Council for Disability Rights |
| Advancing rights and enhancing lives of people with disabilities |
|
CDR HOME NEWS BOOKS VIDEO USEFUL LINKS ABOUT CDR HOW TO HELP |
March 2004
Heroes Wanted: Nominations open for 2004 Gargoyle Awards Save the date: Awards banquet will be held October 1 CDR's 14th annual celebration will be held at the Chicago Hilton and Towers on the first Friday evening in October. We need to receive lots of nominations from you. Who is the best advocate you know? Who has stuck their neck out for people with disabilities? Who has spoken up for the rights of children with disabilities? Who has stood up at a public meeting, or written a strong letter to a public Board or the local newspaper? 
Nominate an advocate
Let's hear from you! State of US Health Care : The Health of Nations OpEd by Paul Krugman The Economic Report of the President, released last week, has drawn criticism on several fronts. Let me open a new one: the report's discussion of health care, which shows a remarkable indifference to the concerns of ordinary Americans — and suggests a major political opening for the Democrats. According to a recent Gallup poll, 82 percent of Americans rank health care among their top issues. People are happy with the quality of health care, if they can afford it, but they're afraid that they might not be able to afford it. Unlike other wealthy countries, America doesn't have universal health insurance, and it's all too easy to fall through the cracks in our system. When I saw that the president's economic report devoted a whole chapter to health care, I assumed that it would make some attempt to address these public concerns. Instead, the report pooh-poohs the problem. Although more than 40 million people lack health insurance, this doesn't matter too much because "the uninsured are a diverse and perpetually changing group." This is good news? At any given time about one in seven Americans is uninsured, which is bad enough. Because the uninsured are a "perpetually changing group," however, a much larger fraction of the population suffers periodic, terrifying spells of being uninsured, and an even larger fraction lives with the fear of losing insurance if anything goes wrong at work or at home. The report also seems to have missed the point of health insurance. It argues that it would be a good thing if insurance companies had more information about the health prospects of clients so "policies could be tailored to different types and priced accordingly." So if insurance companies develop a new way to identify people who are likely to have kidney problems later in life, and use this information to deny such people policies that cover dialysis, that's a positive step? Having brushed off the plight of those who, for economic or health reasons, cannot get insurance, the report turns to a criticism of health insurance in general, which it blames for excessive health care spending. Is this really the crucial issue? It's true that the US spends far more on health care than any other country, but this wouldn't be a bad thing if the spending got results. The real question is why, despite all that spending, many Americans aren't assured of the health care they need, and American life expectancy is near the bottom for advanced countries. Where is the money going? A lot of it goes to overhead. A recent study found that private insurance companies spend 11.7 cents of every health care dollar on administrative costs, mainly advertising and underwriting, compared with 3.6 cents for Medicare and 1.3 cents for Canada's government-run system. Also, our system is very generous to drug companies and other medical suppliers, because — unlike other countries' systems — it doesn't bargain for lower prices. The result is that American health care, which at its best is the best in the world, offers much of the population a worst-of-all-worlds combination of insecurity and high costs. And that combination is getting worse: insurance premiums are rising, and companies are becoming increasingly unwilling to offer insurance to their employees. What would an answer to the growing health care crisis look like? It would surely involve extending coverage to those now uninsured. To keep costs down, it would crack down both on drug prices and on administrative costs. And it might well cut private insurance companies out of the loop for some, if not all, coverage. But the administration can't offer such an answer, both because of its ideological blinders and because of its special interest ties. The Economic Report of the President has only negative things to say about efforts to hold down drug prices. It talks at length about insurance reform, but it mainly complains that we rely too much on insurance; it says nothing about either expanding coverage or reducing insurance-company overhead. Its main concrete policy suggestion is a plan for tax-deductible health savings accounts, which would be worth little or nothing to a vast majority of the uninsured. I'll talk more about alternatives for health care in future columns. But for now, let's just note that this is an issue the public cares about — an issue the administration can't address, but a bold Democrat can. Source: The New York Times, 2/17/04 Research and Vote! By Linda Bennett A war has been waged against the disability community, and it continues to this day. Over the past four years the basic rights of people with disabilities have been challenged time and time again, and slowly and insidiously chiseled away at by the judicial system and the federal government. This situation is so serious that Tony Coelho, former congressman and co-author of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), has called on the disability community and the presidential candidates to ensure that "this election will emphasize — simply and directly — the [disability community's] right to work." Coelho issued this "challenge" in his October 24, 2003, speech to New York Law School entitled "Our Right to Work, Our Demand to be Heard: People with Disabilities, the 2004 Election, and Beyond." In this speech Coelho powerfully addressed the fact that "over the past four years the Supreme Court has issued a half-dozen decisions that have radically narrowed the scope of [the] ADA's coverage." In addition, Coelho pointed out the federal government has failed to use its "purchasing and hiring power"to promote the right to work for the disabled, nor has the federal government adequately financed programs that lead to work opportunities. Coelho also specifically addressed the following decisions by President Bush that have been greatly adverse to the disability community:
1. Appointing judges who will uphold the ADA; 2. Restoring the ADA and revising the damage inflicted on it by recent judicial decisions; 3. Increasing the employment of people with disabilities in the private sector through the use of the resources and power of the federal government; 4. Increasing the number of people with disabilities employed by the federal government, in accordance with the July 2000 Executive Order mandating that the executive branch employ 100,000 people with disabilities before the 15 year anniversary of the signing of the ADA in 2005; and 5. Changing federal policies that exclude people with disabilities from the workforce. This election is crucial to the disability community. We have the chance to change the backward course that has been imposed on the ADA, restore the civil rights that are being whittled away, and, furthermore, increase civil rights for the disabled. Our chance is in the presidential election, as we choose who will lead our country for the next four years. It is a chance that we cannot afford to ignore, because the stakes are far too high. The next obvious question is: How do the two leading Democratic candidates for President, Senator John Edwards and Senator John Kerry, measure up to Coelho's "five point agenda"and what are their agendas and views on disability issues as a whole? Another crucial question is: Where do the candidates stand on MiCASSA (The Medicaid Community Attendant Services and Supports Act)? This Act would require states to provide community based attendant services to people with disabilities and senior citizens. (Please refer to the CDR MiCASSA ALERT for further information on this important issue.) Senator John Edwards - Senator Edwards has stated his support of Coelho's "five point agenda"and Edward's "Breaking Down Barriers to Work for American's with Disabilities" displays an agenda that promotes all five points of the Coelho agenda. While Edwards does not list disability rights as the centerpiece of his campaign, he clearly does present a disability platform that is very conducive to the civil rights of the disability community. In addition, Edwards is a co-sponsor of MiCASSA. Senator John Kerry - Senator Kerry also supports Coelho's "five point agenda" and his "Freedom, Independence, and Choices for Americans with Disabilities" shows an agenda that promotes all five points of the Coelho agenda. While Kerry also does not state disability rights as the centerpiece of his campaign, his disability platform is clearly very supportive of the civil rights of the disability community. Additionally, Kerry is an original cosponsor of MiCASSA. Summary The fact that the two leading Democratic Presidential Candidates, John Edwards and John Kerry, both support disability rights, Coelho's "five point agenda", and MiCASSA, is very encouraging news for the disability community. Since there are many similarities between Edwards' and Kerry's disability platforms, it is especially important that each and every voter fully research the candidates to determine who is the best candidate to represent the disability community, and the nation at large. Researching the candidates' political views is crucial, not only on the very pressing issue of disability rights, but also on the totality of all of the important issues facing our country (i.e., economic issues, foreign policy issues, electability issues, other social issues, etc). This is crucial, because there is one fact that is clearly certain: The rights of the disability community will be under further and continued assault if the current Administration remains in office. 
Coelho speech: "Our Right to Work, Our Demand to be Heard: People with Disabilities, the 2004 Election, and Beyond"
ADAPT Candidate Questionnaire
John Edwards Unveils Disability Policy Initiative
John Kerry's Disability Platform
Accessible Voting Victory in Florida By Jim Dickson On Wednesday, January 14, 2004, Judge Wayne Alley of US Federal Court of Central Florida ordered the State of Florida and the city of Jacksonville to have accessible voting machines in place for this year's August primary and November general election (AAPD v. Hood). ... This is the third federal district court that has made a similar ruling. Jacksonville, Washington, DC, and Philadelphia all purchased and installed new voting systems that were not accessible, actions which multiple federal courts have subsequently struck down. The State of Florida and the city of Jacksonville were found to have violated the ADA and the Rehab Act. The judge is requiring both the state and the city to report their progress to the court regularly over the next few months. This ruling should apply to 29 of the Florida counties with similar facts, as well as states and counties across the nation. Source: AAPD (American Association of People with Disabilities), 1629 K Street, NW, Suite 503, Washington, DC20006, 800/840.8844 (V/TTY) VOTE AS IF YOUR LIFE DEPENDS ON IT, BECAUSE IT DOES. Florida Vows to Appeal By Nancy Cook Lauer, Democrat Capitol Bureau Worried that it will set a precedent, Florida's supervisors of elections plan to appeal a federal ruling requiring Duval County to provide voting machines for the disabled by the Aug. 31 primary. The tentative ruling Thursday, by US District Judge Wayne Alley, found that counties must comply not only with the new Help America Vote Act [HAVA], but also the more stringent Americans with Disabilities Act when holding elections. The Florida State Association of Supervisors of Elections, upon hearing of the ruling while at a conference, immediately voted unanimously to fight it, Leon County Supervisor of Elections Ion Sancho said Friday. If the ruling is applied statewide as the state Division of Elections fears, it will affect 52 of Florida's 67 counties. Leon County is one of them. Sancho said he is planning to install an audio voting machine in the Leon County Courthouse in time for early voting for the Nov. 2 general election, but he simply wouldn't be able to have such machines in every precinct by the primary. Instead, he plans to ask for $800,000 to install them for the 2006 elections, as required by HAVA. Installing a single machine will increase accessibility for disabled voters while giving the county time to educate voters and train poll workers on their use, he said. Sancho said it takes 18 months to implement new voting technology properly on a countywide basis. ... It's unclear whether the judge will require machines in each precinct this year, or in a central location. He gave each side 10 days to reply to his tentative ruling but indicated he would make it permanent. The lawsuit against Duval County and the state Division of Elections was filed by the American Association of People with Disabilities, which says the county was required to put in the accessible machines under the ADA when it upgraded from a punch-card to an optical-scan system. Duval County contends HAVA took precedence over the Americans with Disabilities Act, a stance Sancho takes as well. But James Dickson, vice president of governmental affairs for the national disabled group, says HAVA clearly spells out that other federal laws also apply. 
For more information, write Capitol Bureau, Chief Nancy Cook Lauer [ 850/222.6729 ].
Engaging the Low-Income Voter According to the Campaign for Community Change, there are currently 23 million low-income voters in the US. By and large, these voters are less engaged in the political realm than their higher income counterparts. In its new publication, The New Power Broker: Why Low-Income Voters Matter, the Campaign asserts that the 2004 election cycle provides a significant opportunity to get low-income issues on the political agenda and to get more low-income Americans into the voting booths. The results of this analysis show that there is a roadmap for low-income voters to change the face of the election in 2004. If low-income voters are mobilized and turnout rates among this population are increased in strategic locations, it is possible for this demographic to alter the outcome of marginal elections in favor of officials and policies that will substantially improve their lives in this country, says the Campaign. The conclusions in this report are based on an analysis of voting patterns and demographics from 2000 and 2002, as well as publicly available data on low-income voters, the Census, and public opinion research. Key findings include:
Source: CLASP Update, (Center for Law and Social Policy), February 2004 In Memoriam: R. Kent Jones Kent Jones was an early hero of the disability rights movement. A civil engineer for the City of Chicago who used a wheelchair, he filed a suit with the Chicago Human Relations Commission against the Chicago Transit Authority because it was not accessible to people who use wheelchairs. Thanks to the tenacious persistence of Kate Yannias, then an attorney at the Chicago Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights who managed the suit for its ten years, he won. The presiding judge ordered the CTA to put lifts on its buses. Jones' other passions were his family (including eight children) and Esperanto, which he pursued as fervently and diligently as he had the CTA lawsuit. To the end of his life Jones continued his advocacy for the rights of people with disabilities — in all spheres of life — and always exhibited a self-deprecatory sense of humor about 'the disability condition' that was disarming to people on the other side of the argument. His great sense of humanity benefited all of us. Health Care Justice Act The Health Care Justice Act of 2004 is a process plan to achieve universal health care by 2007. It is not one specific plan to achieve universal health care. The implementation of this Act will be July 1, 2004. It requires the creation of a Health Care Task Force within 30 days of its enactment to oversee the gathering of public input and recommendations for a universal access health care plan. The Act does not mandate one plan over another plan, but develops a process to assess which plan or plans would work for the State of Illinois. The plan or plans debated and implemented may deal with those currently uninsured and/or other Illinois populations. The Task Force will operate under the Illinois Department of Public Health. On or before July 1, 2007 the State of Illinois shall implement a plan to provide access to health care. Components A Representative Task Force The Task Force shall consist of 24 members including the Directors of the Departments of: Public Health, Aging, Public Aid, Insurance, and Human Services — all of whom shall be ex officio non-voting members. The Governor will appoint 19 voting members. One member will be chosen from each congressional district to ensure proportional representation with respect to geography, ethnicity, race, gender and age. These 19 members shall include: health care consumers, advocates for health care consumers, health care providers, health policy analysts, organized labor, business or business trade association, hospital or hospital network or association, insurer or insurer association, economists and disability rights organization. Physicians, nurses, social workers and health care administrators shall also have representation on the Task Force. Public Hearings/Input The Task Force shall seek public input on the development of the Health Care Justice Act of 2003 by holding at least 19 public hearings, one in each congressional district, beginning no later than January 1, 2005, and concluding on November 30, 2005. State Representatives and State Senators located in each of these congressional districts should host and/or involve themselves in these hearings and help gather input. The Task Force may consult with health care providers, health care consumers and others to assist in the development of the Illinois Health Care Plan. The Department, subject to appropriation or the availability of other funds, will contract with an independent research entity experienced in assessing health care reforms, health care financing, and health care delivery models. This research entity will work directly with the staff and members of the Task Force in the assessment of the different options and questions being debated. A final report will be presented to the Governor and General Assembly on March 15, 2006. The report shall be based upon the public meetings and shall include a recommendation(s) on how the State of Illinois should proceed. Illinois General Assembly by no later than December 31, 2006, shall vote on the enactment of the plan created by the Task Force and has the option of voting on another plan no later than December 31, 2006. Implementation of this plan must occur by July 1, 2007. Some of the key components of the Plan will
All Departments represented on the Task Force shall work cooperatively to provide administrative support for the commission. A web site will be developed for the public to access all the meetings information and the research entity's assessments. Costs A fiscal note regarding the cost to implement this process is projected to cost $500,000. The central costs will be that of a research entity. For more information, contact the IL Campaign for Better Health Care: 44 E. Main St., #414 Champaign, IL 61820 (v)217/352-5600 / (f) 217/352-5688 1325 S. Wabash, Suite #305, Chicago, IL 60605 (v) 312/913-9449 / (f) 312/913-9559 / cbhc-cu@cbhconline.org The Illinois Campaign for Better Health Care is Illinois' largest grassroots health care coalition representing 321 local and statewide organizations who represent consumers, health care workers, and disability rights organizations, labor, community based organizations, seniors, community of faith, and other citizens concerned about health care and wellness. The Campaign is Illinois' health care consumer catalyst committed to grassroots organizing efforts to ensure public input in the creation and ongoing oversight of a health care system that responds to the health care needs of all people in our state. Update: The Senate Insurance Committee passed the HCJA today. It was a partisan vote, but read on. This morning we found out that initially the Senate Insurance Committee was going to gut SB 2581 (HCJA), but we were able to stop that from happening and address two issues that the Senate Insurance Committee Chairman (Denny Jacobs) and Democratic Committee member Senator George Shadid had. These are two issues that the insurance industry has been spinning. Basically, assigning this bill to the Insurance Committee was to kill the bill. Both issues are without merit -- but a political reality that needed to be dealt with: 1) Mandating that the General Assembly actually do what legislators should do -- pass legislation to help the people of Illinois -- the shall versus may debate; and 2) That one General Assembly can not mandate a future General Assembly to do something. (Figure that one out!) The Amendment that was agreed upon was:"Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the General Assembly may vote by joint resolution approved by both the Senate and the House of Representatives by May 1, 2006 to continue, delay or end any further implementation of this Act." This Amendment was agreed upon with key Senate Democratic staff and then agreed upon by the Chairman of the Committee, Senator Jacobs. Committee Politics: For the longest period of time the Committee did not have enough Democrats present for a vote to happen. There were three GOP and five Democrats. One of the Democrats, George Shadid (Peoria) was working with Larry Barry (Insurance Industry) to try to convince the Chairman and Chief Sponsor Barack Obama to gut the bill. Thanks to Frank Cavarretta, IL Legislative Coordinator for the United Steelworkers of American, District 7, who tracked down Senator Clayborne (6th Democrat on the Committee) who came in and the vote happened. Senator Obama did a great job in moving this bill ahead. Vote: All three GOP membersvoted no. Democrats voting yes: Jacobs, Martinez, Clayborne Jr., Cullerton, and Harmon. Senator Obama assured the Committee the following would happen: - SB 2581 would pass out of Committee in its original form, with the agreement that before the full Senate would vote on the bill, the above amendment language would be added to the bill. Also the proponents will meet with the insurance industry to try to resolve some of the amendment wording. - Basically we will have to have another Committee vote before the full Senate can here this bill again. Senator Shadid then voted yes. Next Steps: We need to get as many State Senators to co-sponsor SB 2581 and agree to the proposed amendment. The insurance industry (Larry Barry) will never be happy. They will continue to pick away at this or that. CALL YOUR SENATOR TODAY. Call all your members in Shadid's (Peoria) and Jacob's (Moline/Rock Island) and tell them that you agree to the language of the proposed amendment to the Health Care Justice Act that passed and was discussed at the recent Senate Insurance Committee and they need to support that language again. GREAT NEWS: The Chicagoland Chamber of Commerce has announced their support for the Health Care Justice Act. They are working to get other business associations on board. Source: cbhconline2, 2/26/04 Harvard Forums On Health To Hold Chicago Forum On Health Care Access and the Uninsured Tuesday, March 30, 2004 9:00 a.m. — 1:00 p.m. (Continental breakfast will be served starting at 8:30 a.m.) Gleacher Center, 450 North Cityfront Plaza Drive, Chicago The event is free and open to the public. The number of Americans without health insurance stands at 43 million and rising, yet national policymakers can't seem to agree on a solution to expand coverage to more people. What will it take to provide affordable health insurance to the tens of millions of people who now lack protection? Where does public opinion stand on financing? What are policymakers doing to break down access barriers? How will the uninsured issue play in the 2004 presidential elections? These and other questions will be examined at a half-day forum, moderated by journalist and Harvard University professor David Gergen, in Chicago on Tuesday, March 30, 2004. In addition, regional results from a new survey by The Commonwealth Fund will be released that shed light on public attitudes toward the uninsured problem and highlight specific challenges facing Illinois and the Midwest. Local, state, and national health care leaders, including the co-chair of the Institute of Medicine's committee on the uninsured; nationally known pollsters; the director of the IL Department of Public Health; a leading local physician from Cook County hospital; and a Chicago business leader, will share their perspectives on a range of issues related to expanded coverage. Leaders from California, Illinois, and Maine will discuss state strategies for covering more uninsured. The Harvard Forums on Health, a project of the Harvard Interfaculty Program for Health Systems Improvement and the Harvard School of Public Health, is co-sponsored locally by Northwestern University Medical School, Michael Reese Health Trust, Health Research and Educational Trust, the University of Illinois at Chicago, and the University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health. National co-sponsors for this event are the Commonwealth Fund, the journal Health Affairs and the New America Foundation. Support for the forum has been provided by an education grant from Eli Lilly and Company. Speakers:
To reserve a seat or for more information, write Laura Somel [ 301/652.1558, ext. 121 ]
Source: Laura Somel | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
