The Center for Disability Rights is under attack by the Monroe County Executive, Maggie Brooks. Without warning, on July 22nd, CDR received a terse, 5 sentence letter informing us of the contract termination with no explanation included. All of our CDPAS consumers received a letter the same day telling them that the county is terminating its contract with CDR and that they have until just August 1st to choose from one of five for-profit agencies for their Consumer Directed Personal Assistance.
The next day, we received from a friend in the local media, a copy of a three page letter from the County Executive to the media. The letter was filled with blatant falsehoods mixed with misunderstandings of the roles of CDR and the county in the CDPAS program. Here is CDR's letter to Maggie Brooks debunking her allegations against CDR: http://www.whec.com/whecimages/cdr_letter-to-county.pdf. Videos of consumers refuting the county's charges are here: http://www.youtube.com/user/cdrnys. Share these; make them go viral as meanwhile, Brooks continues to use the media as a buffer to not have to talk with us. Many more documents available on CDR's website at www.cdrnys.org
Our consumers and their attendants have been thrown into chaos and Ms. Brooks refuses to talk to them. Nearly 300 consumers are in danger of losing their attendants and possibly their services outright.
Currently consumers, supporters and staff have camped out in front of the County Building on Main Street in Rochester. We have been out there 24/7 since Monday and will continue until this is over.
We need your help.
Please call Maggie Brooks and urge her to restore CDR's contract for the sake of the hundreds of people who like their services and want to continue them. Then ask at least two friends to do the same. Be respectful, but be firm. Her phone should not stop ringing!
County Executive Maggie Brooks: (585) 753-1000
Friday, July 30, 2010
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
Visitability bill
Hi, the Assembly is in Albany for a session today. Please make calls to Sheldon Silver on his Albany number at 518-455-3791 to urge him to push Visitability bill A. 9409 out of the Rules Committee onto the Assembly Floor.
Let's make as many calls as we can. His office is currently taking names and addresses.
Let's make as many calls as we can. His office is currently taking names and addresses.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Urge Governor Paterson to sign the Title II bill into law!
Action: A.10676 (Paulin) / S.7482 (Huntley), which would add Title II language from the ADA into NYS Human Rights Law, has been delivered to the Governor's desk for signature. He has until July 30th to sign it. An identical bill passed both the Assembly and the Senate last year and was vetoed by Governor Paterson. The Governor's office needs to hear from us NOW!
Call the Governor's office at 518-474-8390 and leave the following message:
"I'm calling to urge Governor Paterson to sign A.10676 / S.7482 into law, which would incorporate the provisions of Title II of the American Disabilities Act into state law
Statewide Systems Advocacy Network (SSAN)
ACTION ALERT
July 21, 2010
Issue: Urge Governor Paterson to sign the Title II bill into law!
Action: A.10676 (Paulin) / S.7482 (Huntley), which would add Title II language from the ADA into NYS Human Rights Law, has been delivered to the Governor's desk for signature. He has until July 30th to sign it. An identical bill passed both the Assembly and the Senate last year and was vetoed by Governor Paterson. The Governor's office needs to hear from us NOW!
Call the Governor's office at 518-474-8390 and leave the following message:
"I'm calling to urge Governor Paterson to sign A.10676 / S.7482 into law, which would incorporate the provisions of Title II of the American Disabilities Act into state law and strengthen protections for people with disabilities against discrimination in New York State. It would be particularly symbolic to do so in honor of the 20th anniversary of the ADA this Monday."
Additional talking points:
• 32 other states have adopted Title II into state law. It has not cost them money or resulted in an increase in lawsuits.
• The state has already adopted Title I (1997) and Title III (2007) in state law. The expected flood of complaints to Division of Human Rights after these bills passed never materialized, so no stretch of their resources occurred as a result. It would be particularly symbolic to now adopt Title II into state law with the 20th anniversary of ADA being next Monday.
• This is already federal law that the state must comply with. It's nothing new, confers no new responsibilities on the state, and will not cost anything.
• If the state is in compliance (which technically they should have been since the Regulations for Section 504 were released in 1977, as Title II essentially reiterates 504), they have no need to fear lawsuits.
Background: The New York State Human Rights Law includes some, but not all, of the ADA's protections for people with disabilities. This causes needless confusion for government officials in attempting to comply with both laws. A.10676 (Paulin)/S.7482 (Huntley) adds ADA Title II language to state statute, clarifying the obligations of government officials and strengthening the civil rights protections for people with disabilities. This bill imposes no new or additional requirements upon local governments or businesses.
Call the Governor's office at 518-474-8390 and leave the following message:
"I'm calling to urge Governor Paterson to sign A.10676 / S.7482 into law, which would incorporate the provisions of Title II of the American Disabilities Act into state law
Statewide Systems Advocacy Network (SSAN)
ACTION ALERT
July 21, 2010
Issue: Urge Governor Paterson to sign the Title II bill into law!
Action: A.10676 (Paulin) / S.7482 (Huntley), which would add Title II language from the ADA into NYS Human Rights Law, has been delivered to the Governor's desk for signature. He has until July 30th to sign it. An identical bill passed both the Assembly and the Senate last year and was vetoed by Governor Paterson. The Governor's office needs to hear from us NOW!
Call the Governor's office at 518-474-8390 and leave the following message:
"I'm calling to urge Governor Paterson to sign A.10676 / S.7482 into law, which would incorporate the provisions of Title II of the American Disabilities Act into state law and strengthen protections for people with disabilities against discrimination in New York State. It would be particularly symbolic to do so in honor of the 20th anniversary of the ADA this Monday."
Additional talking points:
• 32 other states have adopted Title II into state law. It has not cost them money or resulted in an increase in lawsuits.
• The state has already adopted Title I (1997) and Title III (2007) in state law. The expected flood of complaints to Division of Human Rights after these bills passed never materialized, so no stretch of their resources occurred as a result. It would be particularly symbolic to now adopt Title II into state law with the 20th anniversary of ADA being next Monday.
• This is already federal law that the state must comply with. It's nothing new, confers no new responsibilities on the state, and will not cost anything.
• If the state is in compliance (which technically they should have been since the Regulations for Section 504 were released in 1977, as Title II essentially reiterates 504), they have no need to fear lawsuits.
Background: The New York State Human Rights Law includes some, but not all, of the ADA's protections for people with disabilities. This causes needless confusion for government officials in attempting to comply with both laws. A.10676 (Paulin)/S.7482 (Huntley) adds ADA Title II language to state statute, clarifying the obligations of government officials and strengthening the civil rights protections for people with disabilities. This bill imposes no new or additional requirements upon local governments or businesses.
Cuts in Home Care Put Elderly and Disabled at Risk
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/21/us/21aging.html?th&emc=th
Cuts in Home Care Put Elderly and Disabled at Risk
By JOHN LELAND
HILLSBORO, Ore. — As states face severe budget shortfalls, many have cut home-care services for the elderly or the disabled, programs that have been shown to save states money in the long run because they keep people out of nursing homes.
Since the start of the recession, at least 25 states and the District of Columbia have curtailed programs that include meal deliveries, housekeeping aid and assistance for family caregivers, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a research organization. That threatens to reverse a long-term trend of enabling people to stay in their homes longer.
For Afton England, who lives in a trailer home here, the news came in a letter last week: Oregon, facing a $577 million deficit, was cutting home aides to more than 4,500 low-income residents, including her. Ms. England, 65, has diabetes, spinal stenosis, degenerative disc disease, arthritis and other health problems that prevent her from walking or standing for more than a few minutes at a time.
Through a state program, she has received 45 hours of assistance a month to help her bathe, prepare meals, clean her house and shop. The program had helped make Oregon a model for helping older and disabled people remain in their homes.
But state legislators say home care is a service the state can no longer afford. Cuts affecting an additional 10,500 people are scheduled for Oct. 1.
“They yanked the rug out from underneath us,” said Ms. England, who lives on $802 a month from Social Security. “I’m scared. I’m petrified. I can’t function on my own. I took care of my husband for eight years. Already I’ve given up many of my freedoms. Now they’ve taken our dignity. I’d like them to try living in my body for a week.”
Her case manager, Brandi Lemke, shook her head. “This is not saving any money,” she said.
Ms. Lemke said she feared that Ms. England would “end up in the hospital because of the diabetes” and be in assisted living by the end of the year. “If she takes a fall,” Ms. Lemke said, “she may require more than assisted living can handle.”
Nursing homes here cost the state an average of $5,900 a month; home and community-based services cost $1,500 a month.
Other states have made similar cuts:
¶Florida placed 69,000 people on waiting lists for home or community services last year, and more than 5,700 of them ended up in Medicaid nursing homes.
¶Alabama cut housekeeping services — useful for people who can no longer do some cleaning tasks — for more than 1,000 elderly residents.
¶Arizona sliced independent living supports and respite programs for family caregivers.
¶Kansas, with a $131 million shortfall, will cut independent-living services for 2,800 people with disabilities in the next year.
In Illinois, providers of Meals on Wheels have stopped adding clients because the state was not reimbursing them.
“I’m not getting a cost-of-living adjustment, and now I’m not getting food,” said Joyce Plennert, 83, who is on a waiting list for Meals on Wheels in Palatine, Ill. “Now I’m worried my home services will be cut. Without that, I’d be in a nursing home, if I could find one with room.”
Colorado, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New York and Texas have all made cuts or frozen spending at a time when the elderly population — and the need for services — is growing.
In California, which faces a budget shortfall of $19.1 billion for the 2010-11 fiscal year, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s office proposed eliminating adult day health care centers that serve 45,000 people and in-home supportive services that help more than 400,000 elderly, disabled or blind residents. The Legislature rejected these cuts but has not yet produced an alternative budget. The state already cut Alzheimer’s day care centers and assistance for caregivers.
Because Medicaid regulations require states to provide nursing home care to receive federal Medicaid money, legislators often have more leeway to cut from home services. Advocates for the elderly and the disabled worry that these cuts are just the beginning, because state ledgers tend to recover more slowly than the national economy.
“The situation is grim, and it’s safe to say that present trends are expected to continue,” said JoAnn Lamphere, the director of state government relations for health and long-term care for AARP. “Nearly every state has proposed cuts of some sort to Medicaid. Some might seem small, but it’s death by a thousand slashes.”
The cuts in Oregon have been particularly painful to people who work with the elderly, because for more than three decades the state has been a leader in rebalancing long-term care away from nursing facilities and toward the home. The cuts here indicate how fragile these services can be against states’ needs to reduce spending.
“I’m seeing in a matter of months 30 years of work go down the drain,” said Donald Bruland, the director of senior and disability services for the Rogue Valley Council of Governments.
The state spends more than half its Medicaid long-term-care dollars on home care and has a separate $13 million program for people who do not qualify for Medicaid; on average, states spend just 25 percent of their long-term-care budgets on home and community-based care.
Bruce Goldberg, director of the Oregon Department of Human Services, said the agency did not have an estimate for how many of the people losing home care would end up in assisted-living facilities or in nursing homes — or, if they did, how the state would pay for them.
“We’re in new territory,” Dr. Goldberg said. “Long-term care is a cobbled-together system with many holes, and they just got deeper.”
Last week, the Oregon legislature’s emergency board scheduled a session for Thursday to reconsider some of the cuts.
In Portland, Ken Poe, 66, requires assistance because of polio, which he got when he was 9. He has little muscle strength and requires oxygen constantly. The state provides 20 hours of care a month in his home.
Mr. Poe, a former pilot and flight instructor, lives as independently as he can, he said — he still drives, though he needs help getting to and from his car — but said he could not afford to pay his aides on the $1,300 a month he gets from Social Security. He often borrows money from a home credit line at the end of the month. Because of severe osteoporosis, he worries about falling in the shower without an aide.
“There are times when I’m struggling to get to the kitchen when I wonder how much longer I can do this,” he said. “But this is my comfort zone. It may look like a mess” — he gestured to cardboard boxes filling the living room — “but the boxes are my system for getting around. Moving to an assisted-living facility would bring on a depression.”
For states, having to cut the Medicaid programs is a double loss, because they come with matching dollars from the federal government. This creates state jobs and much-needed revenue.
Without these, said James A. Davis, a gerontologist at Marylhurst University and executive director of United Seniors of Oregon, “it really is a death spiral.”
“So often the programs to go are the early interventions that save money and keep people healthy,” Professor Davis said. “That comes back to bite you.”
Cuts in Home Care Put Elderly and Disabled at Risk
By JOHN LELAND
HILLSBORO, Ore. — As states face severe budget shortfalls, many have cut home-care services for the elderly or the disabled, programs that have been shown to save states money in the long run because they keep people out of nursing homes.
Since the start of the recession, at least 25 states and the District of Columbia have curtailed programs that include meal deliveries, housekeeping aid and assistance for family caregivers, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a research organization. That threatens to reverse a long-term trend of enabling people to stay in their homes longer.
For Afton England, who lives in a trailer home here, the news came in a letter last week: Oregon, facing a $577 million deficit, was cutting home aides to more than 4,500 low-income residents, including her. Ms. England, 65, has diabetes, spinal stenosis, degenerative disc disease, arthritis and other health problems that prevent her from walking or standing for more than a few minutes at a time.
Through a state program, she has received 45 hours of assistance a month to help her bathe, prepare meals, clean her house and shop. The program had helped make Oregon a model for helping older and disabled people remain in their homes.
But state legislators say home care is a service the state can no longer afford. Cuts affecting an additional 10,500 people are scheduled for Oct. 1.
“They yanked the rug out from underneath us,” said Ms. England, who lives on $802 a month from Social Security. “I’m scared. I’m petrified. I can’t function on my own. I took care of my husband for eight years. Already I’ve given up many of my freedoms. Now they’ve taken our dignity. I’d like them to try living in my body for a week.”
Her case manager, Brandi Lemke, shook her head. “This is not saving any money,” she said.
Ms. Lemke said she feared that Ms. England would “end up in the hospital because of the diabetes” and be in assisted living by the end of the year. “If she takes a fall,” Ms. Lemke said, “she may require more than assisted living can handle.”
Nursing homes here cost the state an average of $5,900 a month; home and community-based services cost $1,500 a month.
Other states have made similar cuts:
¶Florida placed 69,000 people on waiting lists for home or community services last year, and more than 5,700 of them ended up in Medicaid nursing homes.
¶Alabama cut housekeeping services — useful for people who can no longer do some cleaning tasks — for more than 1,000 elderly residents.
¶Arizona sliced independent living supports and respite programs for family caregivers.
¶Kansas, with a $131 million shortfall, will cut independent-living services for 2,800 people with disabilities in the next year.
In Illinois, providers of Meals on Wheels have stopped adding clients because the state was not reimbursing them.
“I’m not getting a cost-of-living adjustment, and now I’m not getting food,” said Joyce Plennert, 83, who is on a waiting list for Meals on Wheels in Palatine, Ill. “Now I’m worried my home services will be cut. Without that, I’d be in a nursing home, if I could find one with room.”
Colorado, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Jersey, New York and Texas have all made cuts or frozen spending at a time when the elderly population — and the need for services — is growing.
In California, which faces a budget shortfall of $19.1 billion for the 2010-11 fiscal year, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger’s office proposed eliminating adult day health care centers that serve 45,000 people and in-home supportive services that help more than 400,000 elderly, disabled or blind residents. The Legislature rejected these cuts but has not yet produced an alternative budget. The state already cut Alzheimer’s day care centers and assistance for caregivers.
Because Medicaid regulations require states to provide nursing home care to receive federal Medicaid money, legislators often have more leeway to cut from home services. Advocates for the elderly and the disabled worry that these cuts are just the beginning, because state ledgers tend to recover more slowly than the national economy.
“The situation is grim, and it’s safe to say that present trends are expected to continue,” said JoAnn Lamphere, the director of state government relations for health and long-term care for AARP. “Nearly every state has proposed cuts of some sort to Medicaid. Some might seem small, but it’s death by a thousand slashes.”
The cuts in Oregon have been particularly painful to people who work with the elderly, because for more than three decades the state has been a leader in rebalancing long-term care away from nursing facilities and toward the home. The cuts here indicate how fragile these services can be against states’ needs to reduce spending.
“I’m seeing in a matter of months 30 years of work go down the drain,” said Donald Bruland, the director of senior and disability services for the Rogue Valley Council of Governments.
The state spends more than half its Medicaid long-term-care dollars on home care and has a separate $13 million program for people who do not qualify for Medicaid; on average, states spend just 25 percent of their long-term-care budgets on home and community-based care.
Bruce Goldberg, director of the Oregon Department of Human Services, said the agency did not have an estimate for how many of the people losing home care would end up in assisted-living facilities or in nursing homes — or, if they did, how the state would pay for them.
“We’re in new territory,” Dr. Goldberg said. “Long-term care is a cobbled-together system with many holes, and they just got deeper.”
Last week, the Oregon legislature’s emergency board scheduled a session for Thursday to reconsider some of the cuts.
In Portland, Ken Poe, 66, requires assistance because of polio, which he got when he was 9. He has little muscle strength and requires oxygen constantly. The state provides 20 hours of care a month in his home.
Mr. Poe, a former pilot and flight instructor, lives as independently as he can, he said — he still drives, though he needs help getting to and from his car — but said he could not afford to pay his aides on the $1,300 a month he gets from Social Security. He often borrows money from a home credit line at the end of the month. Because of severe osteoporosis, he worries about falling in the shower without an aide.
“There are times when I’m struggling to get to the kitchen when I wonder how much longer I can do this,” he said. “But this is my comfort zone. It may look like a mess” — he gestured to cardboard boxes filling the living room — “but the boxes are my system for getting around. Moving to an assisted-living facility would bring on a depression.”
For states, having to cut the Medicaid programs is a double loss, because they come with matching dollars from the federal government. This creates state jobs and much-needed revenue.
Without these, said James A. Davis, a gerontologist at Marylhurst University and executive director of United Seniors of Oregon, “it really is a death spiral.”
“So often the programs to go are the early interventions that save money and keep people healthy,” Professor Davis said. “That comes back to bite you.”
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Urge Governor Paterson to sign A.629/S.2752 in to law!
Statewide Systems Advocacy Network (SSAN)
ACTION ALERT
July 20, 2010
Issue: Urge Governor Paterson to sign A.629/S.2752 in to law!
Action: Call Governor Paterson at (518) 474-8390 and urge him to sign into law A.629/S.2752, a bill that would require self-serve gas stations to pump gas for people with disabilities who have a parking permit for handicapped persons.
Background: A.629 (Paulin) /S.2752 (Johnson) changes the general business law, which requires self-serve gas stations to pump gas for people with disabilities that have handicapped license plates, to also include people with disabilities with a valid parking permit for handicapped persons. This addition is necessary as gas stations have been interpreting the bill literally and refusing to pump gas for individuals with hang tag handicapped parking permits. This bill was delivered to Governor Paterson yesterday for signature.
ACTION ALERT
July 20, 2010
Issue: Urge Governor Paterson to sign A.629/S.2752 in to law!
Action: Call Governor Paterson at (518) 474-8390 and urge him to sign into law A.629/S.2752, a bill that would require self-serve gas stations to pump gas for people with disabilities who have a parking permit for handicapped persons.
Background: A.629 (Paulin) /S.2752 (Johnson) changes the general business law, which requires self-serve gas stations to pump gas for people with disabilities that have handicapped license plates, to also include people with disabilities with a valid parking permit for handicapped persons. This addition is necessary as gas stations have been interpreting the bill literally and refusing to pump gas for individuals with hang tag handicapped parking permits. This bill was delivered to Governor Paterson yesterday for signature.
An Open Letter from ADAPT to the Disability Community on the
Sisters and Brothers in the Disability Community:
As the 20th anniversary of the signing of the Americans with
Disabilities Act draws near, we approach the milestone with mixed emotions. Securing
national civil rights legislation, protecting the rights of people with disabilities, was truly historic. It is important that we recognize the incredible nature
of this accomplishment and the hard work of those that made this happen, but
20 years after President George H. W. Bush signed this civil rights legislation into law and as our community is preparing for the celebrations, we pause in disappointment that the promise of freedom has still not reached our sisters and brothers in nursing facilities and other institutions.
Our sisters and brothers remain locked away, unseen and unheard. For them, the act is just words on paper. They are not given the opportunity to exercise their civil rights under this law because they still do not have the basic freedoms that other Americans enjoy.
As the Anniversary date draws closer, they may hear about the progress our community has made over the past 20 years, but knowing that you are protected against discrimination in employment means nothing when the hub of your life is a bedroom you share with a stranger. Knowing that buildings and public accommodations are accessible means nothing when the facility staff won't let you leave; and even having access to lifts on buses - as dear to our hearts as that is - means nothing when you cannot afford to go anywhere on the allowance that is left over after the institution has taken its share of your money.
When we gather together as a community, we must remember that our sisters and brothers in institutions will not be toasting those that authored or advocated for the Act. They will not be celebrating independent living, either as a movement or personal achievement, and they certainly won't share in the power or pride of the disability community. For them, July 26th will be the same as every other day in the institution.
Recently, ADAPT has been criticized by some of the provider-based advocates in our community because we are publicly demanding that Speaker Pelosi sign onto the Community Choice Act and agree to eliminate the institutional bias once and for all. They tell us that publicly questioning "our friends" is inappropriate. We are told we should be grateful for the efforts that have been made so far, and that we must be patient because change takes time.
We will not apologize for our impatience. We do this because our brothers and sisters have waited long enough for their freedom. We cannot sit by, patiently and quietly waiting for our government to give our people the freedom which should be our birthright.
We had great hopes for President Obama and this Congress. Many of us believed that his promise for change included the promise of freedom. When President Obama was taking the oath of office with his hand on Lincoln's bible, it seemed like fate was telling us that he would free our people. When the President and Congress took up health care reform, we were sure that they would finally eliminate the institutional bias, and we hoped that this historic anniversary in the disability community would be celebrated with historic change. Unfortunately, the President and Congress did not have the political will to make this happen. While we recognize that some gains were made, unlike any other class of Americans, our freedom remains a state option. It is, indeed, true that one of the tools we are using to help people leave institutions and move into the community is the Supreme Court's Olmstead decision, which is based on the requirements of the ADA, and it is true that President Obama's administration has demonstrated an unprecedented commitment to enforcing the Olmstead decision. But such efforts are transitory. We have seen, during the last 20 years, that new administrations have their own priorities, and although there may now be a commitment to enforce the Olmstead decision, the pendulum will ultimately swing back in the other direction. We
also know that the gains we may make in the courts are hard-fought, slow, and constantly subject to attack. Even right now, as many in the disability community commemorate the ADA's anniversary, the Attorney General in Connecticut is coordinating legal efforts by the states to fight against some of the recent gains we have made in court which will allow more of our people to live in freedom. Ironically, the deadline for states to join the effort is just one day after the anniversary, July 27th.
In America, freedom shouldn't ever be optional, but - in fact - for us it is. While federal Medicaid rules require states to pay for institutional placement, community-based alternatives are state options and continually subject to elimination in state budget cuts. It is ironic that as we celebrate a civil rights victory that is 20 years old, our freedom is becoming even more precarious and the situation becoming more dire. States, facing record budget shortfalls, are cutting the services that support community living options for seniors and persons with disabilities. These budget cuts force people into unwanted placement, stealing from them much of what is most precious: their homes, their families and their freedom.
Some people have moved across the country to a different state to get supports and services to live outside of the institution. There, they have been able to share in the promise of the ADA, but many people don't know about the services available in other states or simply might not be able to make the journey on this modern underground railroad.
But as long as community services are only an option, those who have escaped to freedom cannot escape the fear. No place is safe because their freedom can easily disappear at the whim of state policy makers. They will be called upon to help solve their state's budget crisis by sacrificing their freedom, home and lives.
We all need to recognize that through personal circumstance or state policy change any of us can lose our freedom. No one in our community is exempt. No one is safe. No one in our community can afford to be comfortable, but it is also our hope that - from this discomfort - the disability community will be mobilized to take action and, together, we will build on a 20-year legacy to address this injustice. Our movement isn't about the civil rights for some of us; it is about the freedom of all of us.
We cannot wait any longer. ADAPT asks you, during this ADA 20th anniversary celebration, to recommit your energy to ending the institutional bias during the next Congress. The time is now to end the institutional bias and FREE OUR PEOPLE!
Sincerely,
The ADAPT Community
NATIONAL ADAPT MAILING LIST - Adapt Community Choice Act List
http://www.adapt.org
As the 20th anniversary of the signing of the Americans with
Disabilities Act draws near, we approach the milestone with mixed emotions. Securing
national civil rights legislation, protecting the rights of people with disabilities, was truly historic. It is important that we recognize the incredible nature
of this accomplishment and the hard work of those that made this happen, but
20 years after President George H. W. Bush signed this civil rights legislation into law and as our community is preparing for the celebrations, we pause in disappointment that the promise of freedom has still not reached our sisters and brothers in nursing facilities and other institutions.
Our sisters and brothers remain locked away, unseen and unheard. For them, the act is just words on paper. They are not given the opportunity to exercise their civil rights under this law because they still do not have the basic freedoms that other Americans enjoy.
As the Anniversary date draws closer, they may hear about the progress our community has made over the past 20 years, but knowing that you are protected against discrimination in employment means nothing when the hub of your life is a bedroom you share with a stranger. Knowing that buildings and public accommodations are accessible means nothing when the facility staff won't let you leave; and even having access to lifts on buses - as dear to our hearts as that is - means nothing when you cannot afford to go anywhere on the allowance that is left over after the institution has taken its share of your money.
When we gather together as a community, we must remember that our sisters and brothers in institutions will not be toasting those that authored or advocated for the Act. They will not be celebrating independent living, either as a movement or personal achievement, and they certainly won't share in the power or pride of the disability community. For them, July 26th will be the same as every other day in the institution.
Recently, ADAPT has been criticized by some of the provider-based advocates in our community because we are publicly demanding that Speaker Pelosi sign onto the Community Choice Act and agree to eliminate the institutional bias once and for all. They tell us that publicly questioning "our friends" is inappropriate. We are told we should be grateful for the efforts that have been made so far, and that we must be patient because change takes time.
We will not apologize for our impatience. We do this because our brothers and sisters have waited long enough for their freedom. We cannot sit by, patiently and quietly waiting for our government to give our people the freedom which should be our birthright.
We had great hopes for President Obama and this Congress. Many of us believed that his promise for change included the promise of freedom. When President Obama was taking the oath of office with his hand on Lincoln's bible, it seemed like fate was telling us that he would free our people. When the President and Congress took up health care reform, we were sure that they would finally eliminate the institutional bias, and we hoped that this historic anniversary in the disability community would be celebrated with historic change. Unfortunately, the President and Congress did not have the political will to make this happen. While we recognize that some gains were made, unlike any other class of Americans, our freedom remains a state option. It is, indeed, true that one of the tools we are using to help people leave institutions and move into the community is the Supreme Court's Olmstead decision, which is based on the requirements of the ADA, and it is true that President Obama's administration has demonstrated an unprecedented commitment to enforcing the Olmstead decision. But such efforts are transitory. We have seen, during the last 20 years, that new administrations have their own priorities, and although there may now be a commitment to enforce the Olmstead decision, the pendulum will ultimately swing back in the other direction. We
also know that the gains we may make in the courts are hard-fought, slow, and constantly subject to attack. Even right now, as many in the disability community commemorate the ADA's anniversary, the Attorney General in Connecticut is coordinating legal efforts by the states to fight against some of the recent gains we have made in court which will allow more of our people to live in freedom. Ironically, the deadline for states to join the effort is just one day after the anniversary, July 27th.
In America, freedom shouldn't ever be optional, but - in fact - for us it is. While federal Medicaid rules require states to pay for institutional placement, community-based alternatives are state options and continually subject to elimination in state budget cuts. It is ironic that as we celebrate a civil rights victory that is 20 years old, our freedom is becoming even more precarious and the situation becoming more dire. States, facing record budget shortfalls, are cutting the services that support community living options for seniors and persons with disabilities. These budget cuts force people into unwanted placement, stealing from them much of what is most precious: their homes, their families and their freedom.
Some people have moved across the country to a different state to get supports and services to live outside of the institution. There, they have been able to share in the promise of the ADA, but many people don't know about the services available in other states or simply might not be able to make the journey on this modern underground railroad.
But as long as community services are only an option, those who have escaped to freedom cannot escape the fear. No place is safe because their freedom can easily disappear at the whim of state policy makers. They will be called upon to help solve their state's budget crisis by sacrificing their freedom, home and lives.
We all need to recognize that through personal circumstance or state policy change any of us can lose our freedom. No one in our community is exempt. No one is safe. No one in our community can afford to be comfortable, but it is also our hope that - from this discomfort - the disability community will be mobilized to take action and, together, we will build on a 20-year legacy to address this injustice. Our movement isn't about the civil rights for some of us; it is about the freedom of all of us.
We cannot wait any longer. ADAPT asks you, during this ADA 20th anniversary celebration, to recommit your energy to ending the institutional bias during the next Congress. The time is now to end the institutional bias and FREE OUR PEOPLE!
Sincerely,
The ADAPT Community
NATIONAL ADAPT MAILING LIST - Adapt Community Choice Act List
http://www.adapt.org
Monday, July 19, 2010
Urge Assembly Speaker Silver to Take Action on Visitability
Statewide Systems Advocacy Network (SSAN)
ACTION ALERT
July 19, 2010
Issue: Urge Speaker Silver to take action on Visitability.
Action: The Senate passed the Visitability bill (S.8150) on June 18th, but the Assembly left town without doing the same. In order to get it to the Assembly floor for a vote, it still has to go through the Assembly Committee on Rules.
Contact Speaker Silver, Chair of the Assembly's Committee on Rules, in his district office at 212-312-1420 or via email and urge him to take action on the Visitability bill (A.9409) immediately following the Assembly's return to Albany by bringing it to the floor for a vote.
Talking points:
• The Visitability bill (S.8150/A.9409) will ensure that people with disabilities are no longer excluded from new home construction sponsored by government funding.
• This bill will save NYS money because it is much more expensive to renovate new homes for access, after they have been already built, rather than include access features from the beginning. Everyone will benefit from those basic access features like no-step entrance and wider hallways and doorways.
• The demand for access to housing is growing drastically with baby boomer and senior population and visitability will help meet that need in a cost effective way in our local communities across the state.
Background: "Visitability" is a movement to change home construction practices so that new homes offer specific features that would make it easier for people with a mobility impairment to occupy and visit. The spirit of "Visitability" is the belief that it is unacceptable that new homes continue to be built with gross barriers, given the ease and low cost of building basic access into the majority of new homes and the harsh effects major barriers have on people's lives, including physically unsafe conditions, social isolation and unwanted institutionalization.
Visitability requires only those accessibility features needed to allow a person with a mobility impairment to comfortably visit a home, not the full range of features that make a building "accessible."
The purpose of the visitability bill, S.8150/A.9409, is to establish minimum regulations for the design and construction of new single family homes, townhouses or the ground unit of a building with three or less units. This bill only affects new homes that are built using state or federal funds and subsidies.
The bill establishes minimum standards in every home for accessibility for the mobility impaired:
o At least one no-step entrance to the home from the public street or driveway to the exterior door
o All interior doorways at least 36 inches wide
o All environmental controls on the ground level at accessible heights, between 15 " and 48" from the ground
o One accessible bathroom on the ground level
ACTION ALERT
July 19, 2010
Issue: Urge Speaker Silver to take action on Visitability.
Action: The Senate passed the Visitability bill (S.8150) on June 18th, but the Assembly left town without doing the same. In order to get it to the Assembly floor for a vote, it still has to go through the Assembly Committee on Rules.
Contact Speaker Silver, Chair of the Assembly's Committee on Rules, in his district office at 212-312-1420 or via email and urge him to take action on the Visitability bill (A.9409) immediately following the Assembly's return to Albany by bringing it to the floor for a vote.
Talking points:
• The Visitability bill (S.8150/A.9409) will ensure that people with disabilities are no longer excluded from new home construction sponsored by government funding.
• This bill will save NYS money because it is much more expensive to renovate new homes for access, after they have been already built, rather than include access features from the beginning. Everyone will benefit from those basic access features like no-step entrance and wider hallways and doorways.
• The demand for access to housing is growing drastically with baby boomer and senior population and visitability will help meet that need in a cost effective way in our local communities across the state.
Background: "Visitability" is a movement to change home construction practices so that new homes offer specific features that would make it easier for people with a mobility impairment to occupy and visit. The spirit of "Visitability" is the belief that it is unacceptable that new homes continue to be built with gross barriers, given the ease and low cost of building basic access into the majority of new homes and the harsh effects major barriers have on people's lives, including physically unsafe conditions, social isolation and unwanted institutionalization.
Visitability requires only those accessibility features needed to allow a person with a mobility impairment to comfortably visit a home, not the full range of features that make a building "accessible."
The purpose of the visitability bill, S.8150/A.9409, is to establish minimum regulations for the design and construction of new single family homes, townhouses or the ground unit of a building with three or less units. This bill only affects new homes that are built using state or federal funds and subsidies.
The bill establishes minimum standards in every home for accessibility for the mobility impaired:
o At least one no-step entrance to the home from the public street or driveway to the exterior door
o All interior doorways at least 36 inches wide
o All environmental controls on the ground level at accessible heights, between 15 " and 48" from the ground
o One accessible bathroom on the ground level
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
