Posted on 12/04/2003 7:47:02 PM PST by pollywog
From: Marty Omoto, Legislative Director Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2003 5:06 PM Subject: CA UCP CAPITOL REPORT #176-2003: Senate Budget Subcommittee Hearing Rescheduled for 12/10
CALIFORNIA UCP CAPITOL REPORT #176-2003 DECEMBER 3, 2003 - Wednesday Senate Budget Subcommittee Hearing on Governor's Spending Cuts Including Lanterman Suspension, IHSS and Respite Program Elimination Scheduled for 12/10 Wednesday 11:00 AM - Protest Rally Set for 10 AM
The Senate Budget Subcommittee #3 on Health and Human Services, chaired by Sen. Wes Chesbro (D-Arcata) has rescheduled the informational hearing on Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's current year budget cuts for December 10, Wednesday morning at 11:00 AM in the State Capitol, Room 4203. The hearing will cover the Governor's health and human services related cuts proposed by the Governor, including suspension of the landmark Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act - the civil rights act that protects people with developmental disabilities, proposed elimination of many programs including respite (for people with developmental disabilities), enrollment caps and waiting lists for a wide range of health programs - including regional center services, elimination of the In-Home Supportive Services residual program which employs parents and other family members to provide assistance to family members with disabilities.
Advocates for people with developmental and other disabilities and others - furious with the proposed cuts and suspension of the Lanterman Act, are mobilizing across the state, with protests and rallies. A large protest rally, planned for today (Dec 3) to coincide with hearings that were scheduled for today but postponed, is now planned for December 10, Wednesday morning at 10 AM on the North Steps of the State Capitol. For more information contact Marty Omoto at 916/446-0013 for more details (or send email to address below).
Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's Department of Finance released Tuesday late afternoon actual draft legislation (referred to as "trailer bills") that details his proposals announced last week to suspend the landmark Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act - the civil rights act that protects people with developmental disabilities in California, along with draft language covering proposed massive cuts to Medi-Cal, regional center funded services, In-Home Supportive Services and other programs. These cuts, proposed for the current year budget that California is now operating under, were announced last week as part of the Governor's package of proposals to address the state's fiscal crisis.
The Governor's proposals all require approval of both houses of the Legislature. The Senate Budget subcommittees - including the subcommittee that deals with health and human service programs were all scheduled to hold initial hearings Wednesday, December 3 on the Governor's spending cut proposals, however due to the urgency to pass the proposed bond and spending cap measures, those hearings were postponed, possibly until next week.
The draft legislation from the Governor stunned advocates for people with developmental and other disabilities, already reeling from what one parent called an absolutely "devastating" proposal to suspend the historic Lanterman Act and includes the following: * Would make drastic changes to the authority of a person's "individual program plan" by allowing regional centers to ignore any requirements in order to keep within their individual budgets. * In addition, the draft language proposes even tighter restrictions on spending for individual regional centers that fund services provided by community based organizations and others by prohibiting any overspending of their individual budgets for any reason. * It also appears that this draft language would propose to limit who could receive regional center services to the caseload of individual regional centers as of December 31, 2003 - and just a statewide caseload total.
DRAFT LANGUAGE TO SUSPEND THE LANTERMAN DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES SERVICES ACT AND LIMIT THE NUMBER OF CONSUMERS SERVED BY REGIONAL CENTERS (Draft submitted to Legislature 12/2/03) Welfare and Institutions Code Section 1. Section 4631.6 of the Welfare and Institutions Code is added to read:
(a) (1) It is the intent of the Legislature to limit the caseload of the regional centers to the total number of individuals served by regional centers as of December 31, 2003. (2) Effective January 1, 2004, notwithstanding any provision of law or regulation, including but not limited to, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act and the California Early Intervention Services Act, the total number of consumers for whom each regional center provides service coordination, develops an individual program plan or purchase of services or supports may not exceed the total number of consumers who were served by that regional center on December 31, 2003. However, regional centers shall continue to provide each individual with intake and assessment and shall determine whether each individual would be eligible for services if the caseload were not limited. (3) Effective January 1, 2004, no regional center may make new consumers eligible for services unless and until attrition occurs at that regional center. In determining which consumers are to be added to the regional center's caseload, the regional centers shall give priority to those consumers whose health or safety is jeopardized.
(b) The prohibitions contained in subdivision (a) shall not apply to consumers transitioning from a developmental center or state- operated facility pursuant to a community placement plan.
(c) (1) It is the intent of the Legislature that regional centers shall not exceed the amount appropriated for regional center services in the annual Budget Act, even if the result is that consumers with developmental disabilities are denied services or supports that have been included in the consumer's individual program plan. (2) Notwithstanding any provision of law or regulation, including, but not limited to, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act and the California Early Intervention Services Act, no regional center may expend more than the amount allocated in that center's contract with the State Department of Developmental Services for that fiscal year. (3) Each regional center shall have the authority to deny, modify, reduce or terminate services to any consumer, including, but not limited to, those services and supports identified in the consumer's individual program plan. (4) Unless required by the Social Security Act or Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, none of the provisions of Chapter 7, section 4700 et seq., including the right to fair hearing, shall apply to any consumer whose services or supports have been denied, modified, reduced or terminated pursuant to this section.
Section 2. Section 4631.7 of the Welfare and Institutions Code is added to read:
Unless required by the Social Security Act or Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, effective January 1, 2004, notwithstanding any provision or law or regulation, including but not limited to, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act, consumers receiving services through the Habilitation Services Program may not transition to a day program with an employment component or to service codes 055 and 063, unless the consumer is unsuccessful in the Habilitation Services Program.
Section 3. This act is an urgency statute necessary for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within the meaning of Article IV of the Constitution and shall go into immediate effect. The facts constituting the necessity are: In order to make the necessary statutory changes to implement budget reductions relating to public social services during the 2003- 04 fiscal year, it is necessary that this bill take effect immediately.
DRAFT LANGUAGE ON REGIONAL CENTER SERVICE ELIMINATIONS (Draft submitted to Legislature 12/2/03) Welfare and Institutions Code Add Section 4659.1 (a) Effective January 1, 2004, notwithstanding any provision of law or regulation, including but not limited to, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act and the California Early Intervention Services Act, no regional center may expend purchase of service funds for any existing or new consumer for any of the following services or supports: respite, social recreation activity, social recreation program, camp, or non-medical therapy.
(b) The services and supports identified in subsection (a) include the following service codes as contained in or established pursuant to Title 17, California Code of Regulations, sections 54340 through 54356: 008, 028, 072, 084, 106, 525, 625, 690, 691, 692, 693, 694, and 850; and, to the extent that the service is for the purpose of providing respite, the following service codes: 074, 405, 415, 420, 707, 740, 742, 743, 744, 760, 851, 854, 856, 858, 860, 862, 864, 868, 869, 905, 910, 915, 920, 925, 930, 935, and 940.
(c) Unless required by the Social Security Act or Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, no consumer whose services or supports have been denied, modified, reduced or terminated pursuant to this section shall have a right to a fair hearing as described in Chapter 7, section 4700 et seq., and the regional center shall not comply with Chapter 7, section 4700 et seq. if it denies, modifies, reduces or terminates a service or support pursuant to this section.
NEXT STEPS * SENATE: postponed budget subcommittee hearings scheduled for 12/3 but may reschedule for next week to consider the Governor's proposals. Passage of many of the Governor's proposals are very uncertain. * ASSEMBLY: the Assembly budget subcommittees did not schedule hearings this week - and may meet next week, and as in the Senate - passage of many of the Governor's proposals is very uncertain. * GOVERNOR - Schwarzenegger is hoping for swift passage not only of his proposed spending cap and bond measures (the deadline for that is December 5 in order to qualify for the March 2004 primary ballot) but for his spending reduction proposals - many of which assume passage by January 2004. The Governor's Department of Finance is urging quick passage in order to achieve the greatest savings for the current year budget.
FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THIS CA UCP CAPITOL REPORT * This is a online report for all Californians with developmental (& other disabilities), families, providers and other advocates, from the California Coalition of United Cerebral Palsy Associations a link to the California Community Advocacy Network. * If you would like to get on this distribution (and conversely, get off of it) please send an email with that request to: martyomoto@r... Sharing information is part of our organizing effort. Please feel free to forward or copy this (attribution is nice). We're all in this together! Marty Omoto, Legislative Director - CA Coalition of United Cerebral Palsy Associations 1225 8th Street Suite 480 Sacramento, CA 95814 VOICE PHONE: 916/446-0013 FAX number: 916/446-0026 email: martyomoto@r... Coalition Chair: Philip Ksarjian (UCP of Greater Sacramento) Past Chair: Ron Cohen (UCP of LA and Ventura Counties)
PROTEST RALLY NOW SCHEDULED FOR: 12/10/03 10:00 AM NORTH STEPS OF STATE CAPITOL "FIGHT FOR THE PROMISE FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES AND SENIORS!" and then come and attend and testify at the Senate Budget Subcommittee hearing that will consider the Governor's spending cut proposals at 11:00 AM.
Pollywog flat out refuses to answer that question.
First- If I understand this right, the proposed cuts are going to effect many children with varying degrees of disability-not just Autism
Next-It's all fine and good to tell people to "go to the Church" to get help. Problem is , alot of the disabled require caregivers to have specialized training. And another thing- just because someone "goes to Church" doesn't mean they are willing to volunteer. Many people are afraid of the disabled. Pollywogs' 180 lb child who has "tantrums" is a perfect example-where special training would be required to help out.
I'll get to the point. Basically the word disabled means "not able" or not able-bodied.
Put it this way- If you make cuts in the education system- the students will still be able to get an education. If you lay off excess government workers they can go out and get another job. If you take cable away from a prisoner, he can still watch regular TV. Even someone on Welfare has a healthy, fuctioning ,body. He/She can "go to the Church" and get help alot easier than a disabled person can.( Most Chuches have some kind of food pantry exc.. to help this person.)
But what about the case of a medically fragile child who lives with her family? Say, she's a very sick little girl who probally will not make it to the teen years. Her mother does not want her daughter to go to the convalescent home so she learns all the procedures and how to care for her at home. The problem is the child requires constant supervision and medical attention- while the mother is trained to do the procedures, she does not sleep at night, because the child must be cared for at all hours. The state provides this mom with a nurse for the morning hours. This is a "break" for the mother and allows the child to spend whatever time she has left , with her family- instead of being warehoused in a convalescent home. ( I can hear you compassionate conservatives saying "its not our problem, so what"-If this is how you feel, there's no point in arguing with you- but for those of us who like our "conservative" mixed with a large dose of "compassionate" this is a good, and worthy program. It also saves the state money in the long run- but by far the biggest benefit is that it allows these children to stay with their families)
My final point is this : Why is Arnold starting with cuts to programs for the disabled? If anything - these programs should be considered last. The disabled and sick children are least equipped to deal with cuts to their services. I mean, if, after he's looked at all the other goverment programs- he says these cuts still need to be made - then they need to made- I won't argue. But, I resent that they are starting here.
As I've said-there must be some "sensitivity" and "multi-cultural" programs we could do without or some government workers we don't need-like the Environmental agency people who said "no" to clearing our forrests- wich caused 1/2 the state to burn down.- (not to mention cable TV and weight rooms for prisonsers) before we start taking away programs for the disabled/sick children.
FreedomCalls, I did answer. Read post # 137-138. We HAVE tried. For the first 10 years of our sons life we had help from the church. It was when he got older and started tantruming and was too hard PHYSICALLY to handle that people backed off. It takes a trained individual to work with a lot of autistic adults.
fly_so_free, you hit a " home run"!! This post brought tears to my eyes.You have said so well what the plight is for so many of us. Thank you , thank you!!
I dont blame you at all, and I am very happy I do not live in Ca right now. Take the money from the stinkin illegals that keep coming from the mexican border. Good luck, have an autistic daughter here.
But the state can't afford it! I am sorry that it will affect you, but everyone is going to have to share some of the load if you guys are going to work your way out of the mess you (the state I mean) got yourselves into.
I agree, very disheartened here to read some of these posts from fellow FReepers:(. If you click on my profile, you will see my very innocent little girl who is mildy affected with autism. There is a whole lot of government waste going on but don't insinuate that it should be taken away from my baby or anyone else's that is affected with this. This is where the liberals arguement comes in, "you only care about the children when they are INSIDE the womb". We are a dual income family here and pay taxes as well. The IDEA states that we are allowed "free and appropriate services" however, somehow the good state of NJ decided that because this household makes above $64,000, we must also pay a co pay of a few hundred dollars per month to the government, along with paying my taxes to obtain these services. ( and yes we have private insurance that we also pay into but that alone simply does not cover my daughter's needs, trust me we are getting hit on all ends with this). So before you get angry say, "I don't want my tax money funding services for your kids" why don't you get angry the millions of perfectly willing and abled adults that go to the hospital with no job, no insurance and they bill is paid for by you. I'm an RN and the number of "self pay"s for otherwise abled bodied is staggering. I know many many middle class families that go bankrupted trying to get appropriate services for their children. Some of the remarks within this thread are highly unfair.
Life itself is unfair. You cannot remove "unfairness" from life and freedom. The communists wanted everybody to be treated equally: "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need." In the end we ended up with 85-100 million people killed directly by communist governments in the 20th Century in an attempt to ensure "fairness."
Forgive me, but you "life is unfair" speil is silly and is pretty much irrelevant to this entire thread when you start blathering about Communism. So I will ask you how you feel about your tax dollars also pay for public ed? They also go to special ed. Have a problem with either or just one of the above? Well, noone said life is fair.
yep....I've noticed!!! sad eh!
you are SO RIGHT RepubMommy. Hugs to that sweet girl of yours too.!!!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.