| Back to Table of Contents | |
Back to Partisan Home |
| Previous Section | Next Section |
SACRAMENTO, CA. Colleen Fernandez was among the 1,000 people who came to the capitol on January 6th to protest Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposed cuts in services to the elderly, poor, and disabled. "I am a mother of six kids, two have severe autism that requires 24-hour care. To take away from IHSS [In Home Support Services] I don't think is the way to take care of the budget deficit, especially for people who are in need of these services for their very survival. There are a lot of moms out here."
Chanting: "No more cuts!" "Tax the rich, don't touch the poor!" "Hasta La Vista Baby!" and "Si se puede!" the protesters had come to the capitol to make their demands outside of Governor Schwarzenegger's State of the State address. Those present to make the demands included the elderly, the disabled, their relatives, and union home care workers from the SEIU and AFSCME.
The protest was organized by the California Disability Community Action Network (CDCAN), responding to the Schwarzenegger administration's release on November 24th of a plan to slash 2 billion dollars from the state budget, with a big chunk coming from health and other services to the disabled and poor.
Speaking for the CDCAN was protest organizer Marty Omoto. "The State of the State is not just dollars, it is also the health of the children and elderly." He went on to explain that his sister Hope had died due to earlier state cuts in services. Speaking against further deaths that would be caused by the cuts proposed by Schwarzenegger he initiated the chilling yet optimistic chant, "Hope died last!"
Schwarzenegger's November 24th plan stated, "In order to achieve savings in these programs, legislation must be enacted in the current year to include suspending the Lanterman Act, which provides an entitlement to services for the developmentally disabled." Legal protections would be removed from young children and others with mental retardation and other conditions to make way for the proposed cuts.
A cap would be put on many essential services "at the January 2004 estimated level of caseload. Waiting lists would be established, and as attrition occurs, new enrollments would be permitted up to the capped level." A broad list of programs would be hit including: rehabilitation, health insurance for low-income families, help provided to cover the cost of AIDs medications, and many services provided for children and adults with disabilities.
Long term care facilities that increased the salaries and benefits of caregivers would also have their state payments cut.
Schwarzenegger's plan would also gut Medi-Cal. It would tack another 10% cut on the provider rate on top of last years 5% cut. This 15% cut from the provider rate would effectively cut off Medi-Cal patients from many essential services that include physician care, medical transportation, and home health care.
California Medical Association (CMA) President Ronald Bangasser, M.D. has pointed out that these Medi-Cal cuts are not only dangerous, but actually cost more money in the long run by forcing patients into the more expensive care of the emergency rooms. "Patients who cannot find care will increasingly turn to emergency rooms for basic care or ignore problems and see their health conditions turn into emergencies. This is an inefficient and expensive way to provide health care." Additional federal matching funds would also be lost from these cuts.
In addition Schwarzenegger's plan would also prohibit payment to relatives for the In Home Support Services (IHSS) that they give. All IHSS recipients are low income and are not allowed to have assets over $2,000.
In response to this proposed elimination of the family IHSS program the California Autism Coalition has pointed out, "Many parents, grandparents and relatives of people with disabilities have given up their livelihood to care for a child with a disability. It is difficult to hire a non-relative to care for a person with a disability on IHSS wages. ... If family caregivers no longer receive IHSS they will be forced to place their child or family member with a disability in a group home or an institution. This will result in families breaking apart ... a much more costly alternative to retaining IHSS."
This family care is one of what are called the "residual programs" (IHSS programs not covered by federal money). All of the residual programs would be chopped under Schwarzenegger's plan, disrupting or eliminating the care of 75,000 people in California.
Speaking against the cuts to IHSS, Sal Rosselli, President of SEIU 250, (a union representing 90,000 caregivers in northern California) pledged resistance to Schwarzenegger's proposed cuts saying, "We are not going to let him cut the care of 75,000 seniors, poor, and disabled people in the state!"
Yet Schwarzenegger's State of the State speech was followed by a proposed budget balanced on the backs of the disabled, elderly, sick, and poorest of the poor, with no new taxes for the rich. The speech was meant to prepare working people for more hardships and attacks through austerity, the gutting of worker's compensation, and the privatization of bussing and maintenance services at schools.
Stating, "We do not have a budget crisis, we have a spending crisis." Schwarzenegger went on to state, "We have no choice but to cut spending, if not we will be bankrupt."
While many would pin our hopes on stopping Schwarzenegger's plans through the Democrat majority that sits in the California Assembly, we should all be reminded of their 5% cut to Medi-Cal last year. That cut was not only passed by the Democrat majority, it was also signed into law by Governor Davis as a budget compromise after he had originally proposed a 15% cut. This is a clear indication that it will take a strong response from labor, the disabled, elderly, poor, and all other concerned people to defeat these cuts by educating the public, exposing the politicians, marching, and taking direct action.
Due to earlier action in response to the proposed cuts Schwarzenegger has backed off of his plan to cut recreational therapy to disabled children.
Protest organizer Marty Omoto responded to this change saying, "The fact that he rescinded that was very, very critical and very important, but there are so many cuts that are being contemplated or are on the table now that that's what really concerns us."
In addition to Schwarzenegger backing down from part of his plan, a lawsuit by the California Medical Association has forced a partial temporary injunction against Davis's 5% cut to Medi-Cal, calling into question Schwarzenegger's ability to implement his proposed additional 10% cut to Medi-Cal.
The temporary court order by Judge David Levi states, "Medi-Cal recipients who must wait until after trial to receive appropriate services may well sustain irreparable injury, whether in pain suffered or irremediable worsening of a condition." Yet Levi's temporary injunction applies only to fee-for-services patients, and does not apply to those who have managed care plans.
This is an emergency temporary order pending a decision on CMA charges that the Davis's 5% cut denies patients equal access to care. In making his injunction Levi cited federal appellate precedent saying that federal statute guarantees beneficiaries "a rate-setting decision by the state that is not arbitrary and that takes into account provider costs, quality service, and equal access to medical services."
The order has helped to preserve health care for 6 million Medi-Cal patients. Democrat Assemblyman Darrell Steinberg expressed his concern that the ruling will place additional strains on legislators who are already facing tough budget decisions, but what about the strains on Medi-Cal patients?
While some Assembly members have spoken out strongly against Schwarzenegger's proposed budget, past cuts and voting records make clear that continued pressure will necessary to save the lives and quality of life of those threatened by the Terminator's axe.
[Steve Argue sits on the Executive Committee of SEIU Local 415 and is a member of the Peace and Freedom Party state central committee.]
| Back to Table of Contents | |
Back to Partisan Home |
| Previous Section | Next Section |