24 July 2009 --
http://www.mindfreedom.org
MINDFREEDOM INTERNATIONAL NEWS RELEASE:
MindFreedom International Thanks President Obama for Support of UN Treaty on Disability and Human Rights
President Obama marked the 19th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act by instructing UN Ambassador Susan Rice to sign an historic United Nations
"convention" or treaty next week on disability and human rights, joining 140 other nations.
"It's the first new human rights convention of the 21st century,"
Obama said at in the White House East Room.
MindFreedom International -- uniting a broad constituency of mental health consumers, psychiatric survivors, mental health professionals, advocates and
others concerned with fighting for human rights in the mental health system -- praised President Barack Obama's announcement about signing the UN International
Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).
Celia Brown, MFI Board president, led a team of MindFreedom members inside the United Nations during years of meetings to create the treaty. Celia has been
widely praised by cross-disability leaders for her warm and inclusive community-building at the UN.
Said Celia, "We appreciate that the President is fulfilling the commitment he made to the Convention during his campaign. His leadership indicates that
human rights can be a cornerstone for people with disabilities in the United States and around the world.
"The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities represents a paradigm shift of understanding disability from a medical model to a social model.
The CRPD recognizes the key principles of non- discrimination, freedom to make one's own decisions, and to have the opportunity to be actively involved
in policies that effect our lives."
The MindFreedom International UN Team participated in UN meetings with a diverse alliance of leaders from disability organizations including the International
Disability Caucus (now the International Disability Alliance), CRPD Forum and World Network of Users and Survivors of Psychiatry.
MindFreedom International was instrumental in conducting workshops during the UN convention negotiations to educate people with disabilities and governments
on the perspectives of human rights of users/survivors of psychiatry.
David Oaks, Director of MindFreedom International, and a board member of the United States International Council on Disability (USICD), said, "We look forward
to the Senate reviewing the treaty for ratification as a significant step to winning human rights for the 650 million people in the worldwide disability
community."
Judy Heumann, former Clinton Administration appointee, board member of USICD, and participant in the negotiations to draft the treaty, said, "This treaty
reflects the unique insights of disabled people from around the world. The participation of disabled people in decision- making about policies affecting
our lives is changing the way we are regarded in our communities and by our governments,"
Susan Rice, the United States State Ambassador to the UN, will officially sign the Convention on the Rights of Persons wih Disabilities on July 30, 2009
at the UN Headquarters on July 30, 2009 in New York City.
For further information, please contact :
office@mindfreedom.org
or Celia Brown at
Cksean@aol.com
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Monday, July 20, 2009
GOOD NEWS!We’ve got some good news. The Senate was back in session last week and passed over 200 bills, including two from our 2009 Disability Priori
We’ve got some good news. The Senate was back in session last week and passed over 200 bills, including two from our 2009 Disability Priority Agenda!
S.5396 (Huntley) Incorporate Title II of ADA into NYS Human Rights Law
Title II provides protections against discrimination on the basis of disability in services provided by public entities, including state and local governments.
This bill clarifies the scope of protections against discrimination on the basis of disability by these entities, including in the provision of services,
programs and activities. The Assembly version of this bill, A.781-B (Paulin) passed the Assembly on May 11th as part of the Disability Awareness Day package.
S.1058 (Addabbo) – Poll Site Access Bill will require all poll sites to comply with the accessibility guidelines of the ADA. It also eliminates the practice
of granting waivers for inaccessible sites. The Assembly version of this bill, A. 584 (Cahill), also passed the Assembly on May 11th as part of the Disability
Awareness Day package.
Also of importance to the network, the legislation to make Timothy's Law permanent, S.5672/ A.8611, passed the Senate on July 10th and was signed into law
by Governor Paterson. This law mandates private insurance parity for mental health services and is a major victory for the mental health community!
Special thanks to the NYAIL Subcommittees for their hard work in pushing these bills through, and to the entire network for your endless calls, letters,
faxes and emails! We’ll keep you posted as more unfolds in Albany.
S.5396 (Huntley) Incorporate Title II of ADA into NYS Human Rights Law
Title II provides protections against discrimination on the basis of disability in services provided by public entities, including state and local governments.
This bill clarifies the scope of protections against discrimination on the basis of disability by these entities, including in the provision of services,
programs and activities. The Assembly version of this bill, A.781-B (Paulin) passed the Assembly on May 11th as part of the Disability Awareness Day package.
S.1058 (Addabbo) – Poll Site Access Bill will require all poll sites to comply with the accessibility guidelines of the ADA. It also eliminates the practice
of granting waivers for inaccessible sites. The Assembly version of this bill, A. 584 (Cahill), also passed the Assembly on May 11th as part of the Disability
Awareness Day package.
Also of importance to the network, the legislation to make Timothy's Law permanent, S.5672/ A.8611, passed the Senate on July 10th and was signed into law
by Governor Paterson. This law mandates private insurance parity for mental health services and is a major victory for the mental health community!
Special thanks to the NYAIL Subcommittees for their hard work in pushing these bills through, and to the entire network for your endless calls, letters,
faxes and emails! We’ll keep you posted as more unfolds in Albany.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Obama Backss Helping Hands For Long-Term Care
Obama Backs Helping Hand For Long-Term Care
by
Joseph Shapiro
All Things Considered,
July 7, 2009 · Until recently, it looked like long-term care was not going to be a serious part of any potential health care overhaul. But that changed
when the Obama administration this week endorsed a new government social insurance program that would help people put aside money to pay for the high costs
of going to a nursing home, assisted living or getting services needed to live at home as they age.
As the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee marked up the long-term care part of a health care change bill Tuesday, Health and
Humans Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sent a letter to committee Chairman Ted Kennedy with an endorsement. She signaled the Obama administration's
support for something called the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act (CLASS Act).
That legislation, which is part of the committee's health bill, would let workers choose to have government deduct money from their paychecks — maybe $65
to $100 a month — and put it in a savings account. When they get old or disabled and need care, they could then use that money.
President Obama, the health secretary wrote to Kennedy, a key author of the long-term care provision, "believes it is appropriate to include the CLASS Act
as part of health reform because enactment of this important legislation would expand resources available to individuals and families to purchase long-term
services and supports to enable them to remain in their own homes in the community. The CLASS Act is an innovative voluntary program that will provide
important benefits to people who need them."
Supporting Long-Term Care Could Mean Long-Term Savings
But just days ago, the conventional wisdom in Washington was that long-term care was too expensive.
That changed when a Congressional Budget Office analysis said the CLASS Act would actually save money: Because if people delayed going into a nursing home
or got home care that kept them out of the hospital, there would be a net savings for government.
The projected savings of $58 billion over 10 years, proponents said, could then help pay for expensive health care expansion.
Larry Minnix, of the American Association of Homes and Services for the Aging, the trade group for not-for-profit providers of care to the elderly and disabled,
says the Sebelius letter is a big step. "It recognizes for the first time that insuring for the need for long-term services and supports is a vital part
of health care reform. Seventy percent of American families will face some kind of disabling situation, and we're not insured for it."
Some Question Savings, Inclusiveness
But Republicans said adding long-term care would create a costly new program for years to come. Sen. Mike Enzi of Wyoming questioned the CBO's analysis.
He says the real costs would come later. "Only in Washington could someone develop a policy that costs the taxpayers $2 trillion and call that a savings,
and then use it to pay for more federal spending," he said during the hearing Tuesday.
Another Republican, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, added an amendment that would require that the secretary of health and human services determine the monthly
premium based on an actuarial analysis of what it would take to keep the program solvent over 75 years. The original legislation says the monthly premium
would average $65 a month. But the CBO estimates that, even over the first 10 years of the program, a more realistic number might be $100.
It wasn't just Republicans who voiced skepticism. Some groups that represent people with disabilities are also angry. Bob Kafka, of the disability civil
rights group ADAPT, said not enough is done for poor people who can't afford to have the money deducted from their weekly paychecks — or who, because of
their illness or disability, may not be able to work at all. "Secretary Sebelius' letter adds insult to injury," said Kafka. "This administration has totally
said to low income people with disabilities, 'You do not count.' "
Kafka's group endorsed the CLASS Act but wants it paired with passage of another bill called the Community Choice Act. That would allow people who get long-term
care services through Medicaid to use that money for help to stay at home. Now, the only thing they are guaranteed is that Medicaid will pay for them to
live in a nursing home — and home services are limited, require being on yearlong waiting lists, or are unavailable.
by
Joseph Shapiro
All Things Considered,
July 7, 2009 · Until recently, it looked like long-term care was not going to be a serious part of any potential health care overhaul. But that changed
when the Obama administration this week endorsed a new government social insurance program that would help people put aside money to pay for the high costs
of going to a nursing home, assisted living or getting services needed to live at home as they age.
As the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee marked up the long-term care part of a health care change bill Tuesday, Health and
Humans Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sent a letter to committee Chairman Ted Kennedy with an endorsement. She signaled the Obama administration's
support for something called the Community Living Assistance Services and Supports Act (CLASS Act).
That legislation, which is part of the committee's health bill, would let workers choose to have government deduct money from their paychecks — maybe $65
to $100 a month — and put it in a savings account. When they get old or disabled and need care, they could then use that money.
President Obama, the health secretary wrote to Kennedy, a key author of the long-term care provision, "believes it is appropriate to include the CLASS Act
as part of health reform because enactment of this important legislation would expand resources available to individuals and families to purchase long-term
services and supports to enable them to remain in their own homes in the community. The CLASS Act is an innovative voluntary program that will provide
important benefits to people who need them."
Supporting Long-Term Care Could Mean Long-Term Savings
But just days ago, the conventional wisdom in Washington was that long-term care was too expensive.
That changed when a Congressional Budget Office analysis said the CLASS Act would actually save money: Because if people delayed going into a nursing home
or got home care that kept them out of the hospital, there would be a net savings for government.
The projected savings of $58 billion over 10 years, proponents said, could then help pay for expensive health care expansion.
Larry Minnix, of the American Association of Homes and Services for the Aging, the trade group for not-for-profit providers of care to the elderly and disabled,
says the Sebelius letter is a big step. "It recognizes for the first time that insuring for the need for long-term services and supports is a vital part
of health care reform. Seventy percent of American families will face some kind of disabling situation, and we're not insured for it."
Some Question Savings, Inclusiveness
But Republicans said adding long-term care would create a costly new program for years to come. Sen. Mike Enzi of Wyoming questioned the CBO's analysis.
He says the real costs would come later. "Only in Washington could someone develop a policy that costs the taxpayers $2 trillion and call that a savings,
and then use it to pay for more federal spending," he said during the hearing Tuesday.
Another Republican, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, added an amendment that would require that the secretary of health and human services determine the monthly
premium based on an actuarial analysis of what it would take to keep the program solvent over 75 years. The original legislation says the monthly premium
would average $65 a month. But the CBO estimates that, even over the first 10 years of the program, a more realistic number might be $100.
It wasn't just Republicans who voiced skepticism. Some groups that represent people with disabilities are also angry. Bob Kafka, of the disability civil
rights group ADAPT, said not enough is done for poor people who can't afford to have the money deducted from their weekly paychecks — or who, because of
their illness or disability, may not be able to work at all. "Secretary Sebelius' letter adds insult to injury," said Kafka. "This administration has totally
said to low income people with disabilities, 'You do not count.' "
Kafka's group endorsed the CLASS Act but wants it paired with passage of another bill called the Community Choice Act. That would allow people who get long-term
care services through Medicaid to use that money for help to stay at home. Now, the only thing they are guaranteed is that Medicaid will pay for them to
live in a nursing home — and home services are limited, require being on yearlong waiting lists, or are unavailable.
Thursday, July 2, 2009
Where Things Currently Stand In Albany
Earlier today, NYAPRS provided a helpful summary on where things stand in Albany these days. At this time, it is unclear when the Senate will be fully functioning and passing legislation. Other than Timothy’s Law, which has been considered a priority bill for the Senate to pass before its December 31st expiration, it is unlikely that any of NYAIL’s priority bills will be acted upon this session. The NYAIL subcommittees have already begun to strategize on ways to push their bills through next year. We have also received word that we can expect at least one, if not multiple, fall special sessions to deal with the state’s economic crisis. As we hear more on that end, we will keep you posted and advise on how best the centers can strategize to avoid cuts to IL funding and other crucial programs for people with disabilities. Stay tuned for continued updates and actions on the Community Choice Act, as we continue to support ADAPT’s efforts in getting this bill included in any federal health care reform.
Thanks again to NYAPRS for the summary provided below.
Given the terrible fallout from this delay of the ‘people’s business’ and all of the bad publicity the Senators are getting, why would the parties tie up Albany this way?
Control of a house in the NYS Legislature has great advantages: the party in power has historically gotten to pick all of the committee chairs and control which legislation gets advanced let alone passed. Senators from that party have gotten higher pay, the largest offices and the ability to hire 3 times as many staff than their minority counterparts. Further, the party in power will soon get to draw the boundaries of each Congressional district and influence that party’s standing in NY’s Washington delegation.
What allowed this standoff to take place?
After years of Senate Republican rule, the Democrats won a scant 2 seat majority last year. They appeared to lose that control back to the Republicans when two NYC Democrats (Espada and Monserratte) switched sides and backed a Republican return to power. Then, Monserrate switched back and the two parties are deadlocked at 31-31. Neither party has conceded control to the other or has agreed to various power sharing proposals.
Have any bills been passed?
In Albany, both houses have to pass identical bills and those bills have to be approved or allowed by the Governor to become law. The Assembly left town after passing a host of legislation and several of these bills, including the one making NY’s mental health parity law permanent (Timothy’s Law) were passed by the Senate Democrats this past Monday when they claimed a 32 seat majority after a Republican Senator walked through the chamber when they were convening.
Will any of these bills become law?
It’s hard to say. While Governor Paterson has said he won’t sign any bills until the two parties come to an agreement, they could passively become law if he does not veto them. However, these bills would have to be formally sent to him by the Assembly which has declined to do so at the current time.
Thanks again to NYAPRS for the summary provided below.
Given the terrible fallout from this delay of the ‘people’s business’ and all of the bad publicity the Senators are getting, why would the parties tie up Albany this way?
Control of a house in the NYS Legislature has great advantages: the party in power has historically gotten to pick all of the committee chairs and control which legislation gets advanced let alone passed. Senators from that party have gotten higher pay, the largest offices and the ability to hire 3 times as many staff than their minority counterparts. Further, the party in power will soon get to draw the boundaries of each Congressional district and influence that party’s standing in NY’s Washington delegation.
What allowed this standoff to take place?
After years of Senate Republican rule, the Democrats won a scant 2 seat majority last year. They appeared to lose that control back to the Republicans when two NYC Democrats (Espada and Monserratte) switched sides and backed a Republican return to power. Then, Monserrate switched back and the two parties are deadlocked at 31-31. Neither party has conceded control to the other or has agreed to various power sharing proposals.
Have any bills been passed?
In Albany, both houses have to pass identical bills and those bills have to be approved or allowed by the Governor to become law. The Assembly left town after passing a host of legislation and several of these bills, including the one making NY’s mental health parity law permanent (Timothy’s Law) were passed by the Senate Democrats this past Monday when they claimed a 32 seat majority after a Republican Senator walked through the chamber when they were convening.
Will any of these bills become law?
It’s hard to say. While Governor Paterson has said he won’t sign any bills until the two parties come to an agreement, they could passively become law if he does not veto them. However, these bills would have to be formally sent to him by the Assembly which has declined to do so at the current time.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
