In 2010, Washington State’s then-governor Christine Gregoire made a decision that could potentially affect the self-determination of thousands of people in her state: she ordered the slashingof social service budgets by 10 percent across theboard. Disability justice groups around the country quickly mobilized against the cuts. For many disabled people, the loss in funding meant the difference betweenkeeping their home care assistants or being sentenced to nursing homes and effectively losing their independence.
Federallaw says states must fund facilities like nursing homes, but whether they fund at-home care isleft up to state governments. “While my heart is there, my pocketbook is empty,” Governor Gregoire explained. As she would have had it, the forced ghettoization of thousands of disabled people was a sad but inevitable result of the recession.
Washingtonians with disabilities like Aditya Ganapathiraju were anxious. Prior to his spinal cord injury in 2002, he says, “I had a fairly typical life. I was really independent and whatnot.” A motorcycle accident left the 18-year-old college student with mobility impairments. Unfortunately, “both my parents were deceased. I didn’t have family that I could really go back to, and as a result, I had to go to the nursing homes.”
Ganapathiraju’s adjustment from able-bodied campus life to a highly regimented nursing home was rough. Like many facilities, his was run in a “one-size-fits-all” manner, even though people there had all sorts of disabilities. It was also isolated, far out in the suburbs of Snohomish County. “I couldn’t just go down the street and go to the library or something. And so I really just craved interaction with someone.” Even going to the hospital and chit-chatting with the doctors and nurses there became a treat. “More or less, when you’re in a home [there aren’t] people with whom you [can] converse with. It wasn’t a great place for a 20-year-old, who was formerly fairly social, to find themselves in.” The patient-to-doctor-and-nurse ratio was high, and most caretakers didn’t have the specialized training to work with someone with a spinal injury. That made basic, daily functioning difficult.
Not long after entering the facility, Ganapathiraju wanted out and sought to live in the outside community with an assistant. But leaving proved difficult. “There’s this institutional inertia where workers would kind of give you the pessimistic side of moving out into the community,” he explains. His caseworker did little to facilitate the process (“It could have just been the thought of extra work that prevented him from being helpful,” he speculates), but his persistence worked: he managed to find a family that invited him to come live with them, and he was paired with a more competent caseworker in neighboring King County. The new caseworker got the state to transfer funds that were going to the group home to a personal caretaker who could learn the specific needs of someone with a spinal injury. “It was liberating,” he recalls. “It facilitated me re-entering school, because I couldn’t have done that from a group home.” Things were looking good, until Gregoire announced her cuts amidst the 2010 December holidays.
Around that time, disability justice activists, including Carl Peterson of the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network (ASAN), had what Peterson describes as a “really, really disconcerting call” with Gregoire’s people. “They basically said, ‘This is her budget, she’s not going to make any changes to it.’ It was horrible,” he remembers. “It was her budget, and she felt very entitled that she had that power.” The district attorney’s office made the situation worse, according to Ganapathiraju, by trying “to convince the governor that if you back down on this issue, you’ll never be able to make any cuts on any of your programs ever again. Which is not true, but that’s the kind of message the governor was getting,” he says.
And there’s more trouble with Gregoire’s “budget shortfall” argument: at-home “community care”is actually considerably cheaper than nursinghomes and similar facilities. But the assisted-living industry is sinking billions intopublic relations and lobbying to make sure that state money isdirected into their own wallets. Between 2011-2012, one company,Kindred Healthcare, spent over $3 million on lobbying, anddonated more than $2 million to both Democrat and Republican party coffers. The lobbying seems to be working out for them: the $116 billion nursing-home industry gets between 60 and 70 percent of its funding from stategovernments, mostly through Medicaid.
According to an industry magazine that ranks nursing home companies bynumber of beds, in 2012, the top ten were proprietors of over 235,000 beds.Beds that are a money suck if they’re empty but a potential goldmine whenfilled, particularly for the executives on top. Directors regularly make seven or eight figures off of facilities where a private room costs an average of about $87,000 peryear. Compare that to the average wages of health aides, whomake around $20,000 per year. Add to that homepayments or rent, and even if those aides made a more livable wage, the cost difference is in the tens of thousands of dollars.
Pennsylvanian Jeff Petty got into the business 20 years ago. “Iwas just looking for a job,” he explains frankly. “A lot of people inour industry have a passion; you know, ‘I took care of grandma growingup; that left a searing kind of memory for me, so I went into thefield.’ That wasn’t me. I was in big, corporate America, looking foran opportunity. I found one, and it happened to be in this business.”Today, Petty heads up Wesley Enhanced Living, operating fivefacilities across Pennsylvania, which he calls “the Silicon Valley”of care facilities.
Petty, whose business caters mostly to seniors, believes the socialization offered by his “continuing care retirementcommunities” (CCRCs) helps combat depression. And even Ganapathiraju, who now sits on the Governor’s Committee on Disability Issues and Employment, admits that often nursing homes are “Sometimes the only option, or the best option, especially for folks, say, with special needs, that need an extra kind of guide throughout the day.” Still, the majority of disabledpeople (and seniors) would rather live outside of suchfacilities – even a place like Wesley, with its game rooms outfittedwith Nintendo Wii systems, shuttles to the mall and concierge services. In fact, when asked whether or not he sees himself ever living in a CCRC, Petty laughs: “That’s a great question. Everybody in the field, when they’re my age, go, ‘No.’ As does everybody else. I have no idea, to be honest with you.” So it shouldn’t come as a surprise that in 2011, there were 511,000 people in the United States onwaiting lists for waivers for home care services. Likewise, an AARP study from 2012 found that 64 percent ofMedicaid long-term service dollars for older people and adults withphysical disabilities went to nursing facilities, the study’s authors noted, “even though most people prefer to live at home.” (Meanwhile, the most recent Congressional report on the subject found that 9 out of 10 nursing homes were understaffed over a two-year period from 1999-2001.)
Jennifer McPhail, an organizer with the disability rights group ADAPT,believes that “there’s an institutional bias within the system”against home care. “We’ve been trying to change the funding streamsand policy decisions that lawmakers put in place,” a process thatrequires negotiations and sometimes public protest or embarrassment ofthose lawmakers. In 1991, McPhail was one of 40 disabled people,many in wheelchairs, who refused to leave Texas’ then-governor Ann Richards’office. Two days later, Richards agreed to move toward offeringcommunity-based care.
A senior legal counselor at the Department of Justice’s (DOJ)Civil Rights Division, Eve Hill, is more optimistic: “Traditionally, states have made peoplewith disabilities go into institutions like psychiatric hospitals ordevelopmental disability centers or nursing homes to get theirhealth care and other services, and over time we’ve come to realizethat we don’t have to gather all of the people with disabilitiestogether” into these institutions. The segregation, she notes, “hasled to sometimes problematic conditions for people when they’re set aside, in a way, from the rest of the community” – conditions that include thedepression Petty claims his facilities decrease. Some states,such as Nevada and North Carolina, “have been able to re-balance their programs, provide the services at often the same or lesser cost, andit works in every aspect.” But other states are hedging on the issue. A Kaiser Family Foundation report released in December 2012 found that in 2009, Texas alone had nearly 100,000 people on its waiting list, more than double the number of people in its community care program.
On paper, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) provides that disabledpeople are entitled to the “most integrated” setting and the SupremeCourt’s 1999 decision in Olmstead v. L.C. (known in disabled activist circles as disability’s Brown v. Board of Education) found that peoplewith mental disabilities should be allowed to live in the community,not institutions, on the condition that states have the resources to provide community care. In 2011, Governor Gregoire’s cuts led to another case that was based around Olmstead, a case called M.R. v. Dreyfus. In Dreyfus, 12 disabled plaintiffs successfully argued that Washington’s budgetcuts would mean they wouldn’t be able to get the hours with a care assistant they needed for basics like bathing, eating and going to the doctor. Their health would deteriorate, and they’d inevitably be sent to nursing homes. The plaintiffs won, but the fight wasn’t over. Gregoire filed to extend the deadline for appealing the decision. Disability justice activists went into overdrive, calling in organizers from as far away as DC, New York and Texas.
In the case of Washington State, the pushback worked. After several protests, press conferences and petitions, Gregoire re-checked her pocketbook. In October 2012, Gregoire released an official statement: she would not challenge M.R. v. Dreyfus. It was a big win for disability rights advocates. ASAN’s Peterson believes the national organizing made a “huge” difference. Without it, “honestly, we wouldn’t have been able to pull this off,” he says. “If we didn’t organize, if that protest didn’t happen” at the state capitol, “if those op-eds didn’t get written, and what have you, I think she probably would have sent [the original budget] out.”
In some states, nursing homes are already in decline.Minnesota, Tennessee and West Virginia decommissioned hundreds ofbeds between 2006 and 2010, while many others stayed static after aboom in assisted living facilities in the late 1990s. ADAPT and othersare pushing for their Community Choice Act, which would make it easier to divert Medicaid funding from nursing homes to at-home care. The White House,the American Medical Association, and many in Congress are on board, though the Act was left out of the last round of federal health care reform. Taking notice, some nursing home conglomerates are expanding into home care. The second largest in the industry, Golden Living, got into the business in 2004 through its AseraCare offshoot. “When you go in the hospital, the first thing you do is, you get a wristband slapped on you, or a name on a door, and that means you’re a patient. You’ve lost the ability to be a person,” explains AseraCare’s President Angie Hollis-Sells. “In home care, you can maintain personhood. And we want to be people, we don’t want to be a wristband.” Her company, which is being sued by DOJ after former employees alleged that it was defrauding Medicare out of millions of dollars, is paying close attention to the question of government funding. “Where is the dollar for health care gonna go? Is it going to reside with the patient? Is it going to reside with the payer? Is it going to reside with the physician, or with the hospital?” Hollis-Sells says the question is not going to go away.
It’s one point that industry, activists and government agree on. “This is an issue that will deserve our attention well into the future, especially as more people live longer,” says Ganapathiraju. Politicians like Wisconsin’s Paul Ryan and Tennessee’s Rand Paul keep eyeing home care programs as an area to cut, even if, as disability justice activists are well aware, thosecuts will be more expensive in the long run. “This type of challenge to the reduction of benefits, or the reduction in looking after folks with impairments, is not going to go away anytime soon.”
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
Last week, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment. We are presently looking for 231 new monthly donors in the next 2 days.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
