Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Press Conference: Think Before You Click! Don't Help Amazon Cheat California
Multi-billion dollar corporations like Amazon.com have long taken advantage of tax breaks and loopholes that deprive California of the revenue needed to provide vital public services programs. Amazon.com has made billions by doing business in California. Now they want to overturn legislation passed at a time of unprecedented fiscal crisis, after California cut $14.6 billion from basic public services ranging from schools and parks to health care for children, seniors and people with disabilities. Amazon’s repeal effort threatens to force even deeper cuts to services for seniors and people with disabilities. Please join us on August 31st at 11:45am at Skylight Books to ask Amazon.com to do the right thing!
Monday, August 29, 2011
Americans need Jobs, not Cuts! Sign "Emergency Jobs to Restore the American Dream Act" Petition
Dear members,
We have a jobs crisis in this country, and we know we can't cut our way to prosperity. Yet for too long, some members of Congress have pretended that brutally cutting the budget and irresponsibly cutting taxes for corporations and the wealthy will get people back to work.
The private sector will not create the jobs we need in this country any time soon, so it's up to the federal government to step in. Rep. Jan Schakowsky has introduced the "Emergency Jobs to Restore the American Dream Act" that would put over 2 million people back to work and reduce unemployment by an estimated 1.3%. It's exactly the type of ambitious and aggressive response to the jobs crisis that we need.
Tell Congress: We don't need cuts, we need jobs. Click here to automatically sign the petition telling Congress to support the "Emergency Jobs to Restore the American Dream Act."
There's nothing mysterious or hard to understand about the bill. Tens of millions of Americans are either unemployed or under-employed. Besides the personal pain this causes, the impact of legions of unemployed Americans on our economy is staggering.
At the same time, there's a huge need in our communities for more teachers, firefighters, health care workers and police officers. Many of our public schools are rundown and need to be repaired and upgraded. And there are all sorts of unmet community needs, like maintaining our public parks, that could be addressed by paying people to take them on.
The "Emergency Jobs to Restore the American Dream Act" would fund jobs programs to put millions of Americans back to work in these areas.
Large-scale federal jobs programs worked during the Great Depression, and they'll work now.
It's time for Congress to stop using the jobs crisis as a pretext for even more corporate welfare and go big on the jobs front. The best way we can lower the federal deficit and get our economy moving again is getting people back to work.
Thank you for speaking out for an aggressive plan to get Americans back to work.
Matt Lockshin, Campaign Manager
CREDO Action from Working Assets
We have a jobs crisis in this country, and we know we can't cut our way to prosperity. Yet for too long, some members of Congress have pretended that brutally cutting the budget and irresponsibly cutting taxes for corporations and the wealthy will get people back to work.
The private sector will not create the jobs we need in this country any time soon, so it's up to the federal government to step in. Rep. Jan Schakowsky has introduced the "Emergency Jobs to Restore the American Dream Act" that would put over 2 million people back to work and reduce unemployment by an estimated 1.3%. It's exactly the type of ambitious and aggressive response to the jobs crisis that we need.
Tell Congress: We don't need cuts, we need jobs. Click here to automatically sign the petition telling Congress to support the "Emergency Jobs to Restore the American Dream Act."
There's nothing mysterious or hard to understand about the bill. Tens of millions of Americans are either unemployed or under-employed. Besides the personal pain this causes, the impact of legions of unemployed Americans on our economy is staggering.
At the same time, there's a huge need in our communities for more teachers, firefighters, health care workers and police officers. Many of our public schools are rundown and need to be repaired and upgraded. And there are all sorts of unmet community needs, like maintaining our public parks, that could be addressed by paying people to take them on.
The "Emergency Jobs to Restore the American Dream Act" would fund jobs programs to put millions of Americans back to work in these areas.
Large-scale federal jobs programs worked during the Great Depression, and they'll work now.
It's time for Congress to stop using the jobs crisis as a pretext for even more corporate welfare and go big on the jobs front. The best way we can lower the federal deficit and get our economy moving again is getting people back to work.
Thank you for speaking out for an aggressive plan to get Americans back to work.
Matt Lockshin, Campaign Manager
CREDO Action from Working Assets
Friday, August 26, 2011
Peter V. Lee named first Executive Director of the California Health Benefit Exchange
Pat Powers to continue as Acting Administrative Officer through the end of December.
SACRAMENTO – The California Health Benefit Exchange Board unanimously approved the appointment of Peter V. Lee as its first Executive Director, Chair Diana Dooley announced today.
"Peter is a nationally respected leader in health care who has led innovative projects aimed at promoting health, improving care quality and reducing cost in the health care delivery system," said Dooley, who is also California Health and Human Services Secretary. "His more than 25 years of health policy experience and deep understanding of California 's challenges and opportunities make him the right leader to ensure the success of our new health insurance marketplace."
As Executive Director, Lee will oversee the planning, development and ongoing administration and evaluation of the California Health Benefit Exchange. He will join the Health Benefit Exchange on October 17, 2011.
"I am honored, humbled and excited by the opportunity to lead the California Health Benefit Exchange," said Lee. "It is an historic time in reforming our health care system and the California Health Benefit Exchange will serve as a national trailblazer toward establishing new consumer-oriented health insurance marketplaces to help more people have access to quality affordable health care."
Lee currently serves as the Deputy Director for the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in Washington DC where he has helped shape initiatives to identify, test, and support new models of care in Medicare and Medicaid that can result in higher quality care while reducing costs. Previously he served as the Director of Delivery System Reform at the federal Health and Human Services' Office of Health Reform.
"Peter's leadership has helped to chart a course toward a patient-centered, value-based health care system,” said Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services. "I'm encouraged that we will be able to keep working with him as he applies his talents to launching the Exchange in his home state of California."
From 2000-2008, he served as the Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer of the Pacific Business Group on Health in San Francisco. From 1995-2000, Lee served as the Executive Director of the Center for Health Care Rights and from 1993-1995, he practiced law at Tuttle and Taylor in Los Angeles. From 1984-1993, he served in a variety of leadership positions in Washington DC , including the Director of Programs for the National AIDS Network. Lee holds a Juris Doctorate from the University of Southern California and a Bachelor of Arts from the University of California at Berkeley.
California was the first state to create a Health Benefit Exchange following the passage of federal health care reform. It is charged with creating a new insurance marketplace in which individuals and small businesses will be able to purchase competitively priced health plans using federal tax subsidies and credits beginning in 2014.
The Exchange is overseen by a five-member board appointed by the Governor and Legislature; the California Health and Human Services Secretary serves as an ex official voting member and its current Chair.
For more information on the Exchange including meeting calendar, visit www.healthexchange.ca.gov/
SACRAMENTO – The California Health Benefit Exchange Board unanimously approved the appointment of Peter V. Lee as its first Executive Director, Chair Diana Dooley announced today.
"Peter is a nationally respected leader in health care who has led innovative projects aimed at promoting health, improving care quality and reducing cost in the health care delivery system," said Dooley, who is also California Health and Human Services Secretary. "His more than 25 years of health policy experience and deep understanding of California 's challenges and opportunities make him the right leader to ensure the success of our new health insurance marketplace."
As Executive Director, Lee will oversee the planning, development and ongoing administration and evaluation of the California Health Benefit Exchange. He will join the Health Benefit Exchange on October 17, 2011.
"I am honored, humbled and excited by the opportunity to lead the California Health Benefit Exchange," said Lee. "It is an historic time in reforming our health care system and the California Health Benefit Exchange will serve as a national trailblazer toward establishing new consumer-oriented health insurance marketplaces to help more people have access to quality affordable health care."
Lee currently serves as the Deputy Director for the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation at the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) in Washington DC where he has helped shape initiatives to identify, test, and support new models of care in Medicare and Medicaid that can result in higher quality care while reducing costs. Previously he served as the Director of Delivery System Reform at the federal Health and Human Services' Office of Health Reform.
"Peter's leadership has helped to chart a course toward a patient-centered, value-based health care system,” said Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services. "I'm encouraged that we will be able to keep working with him as he applies his talents to launching the Exchange in his home state of California."
From 2000-2008, he served as the Executive Director and Chief Executive Officer of the Pacific Business Group on Health in San Francisco. From 1995-2000, Lee served as the Executive Director of the Center for Health Care Rights and from 1993-1995, he practiced law at Tuttle and Taylor in Los Angeles. From 1984-1993, he served in a variety of leadership positions in Washington DC , including the Director of Programs for the National AIDS Network. Lee holds a Juris Doctorate from the University of Southern California and a Bachelor of Arts from the University of California at Berkeley.
California was the first state to create a Health Benefit Exchange following the passage of federal health care reform. It is charged with creating a new insurance marketplace in which individuals and small businesses will be able to purchase competitively priced health plans using federal tax subsidies and credits beginning in 2014.
The Exchange is overseen by a five-member board appointed by the Governor and Legislature; the California Health and Human Services Secretary serves as an ex official voting member and its current Chair.
For more information on the Exchange including meeting calendar, visit www.healthexchange.ca.gov/
Wednesday, August 24, 2011
End Abuse in California's Youth Prisons
Over the last several months, members of Families for Books Not Bars have shared horror stories of violence and extreme isolation within California's youth prison system. Demand that Secretary Cate, the head of California’s prison system, immediately guarantee an end to all of these abuses. Our youth and their families cannot wait!
We have three common sense demands:
https://secure3.convio.net/ebc/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=199
We have three common sense demands:
- End Solitary Confinement: Provide at least 8 hours of quality educational and rehabilitative programming outside of cells for all youth.
- Stop the violence: Ensure youths' safety, particularly mentally ill and disabled youth, from fights and chemical spraying. Guards who abuse youth, instigate or fail to prevent violence must be held accountable.
- provide adequate food: Denying people, especially growing youth, adequate food is antithetical to rehabilitation. Depriving youth of meals is outright abusive.
https://secure3.convio.net/ebc/site/Advocacy?cmd=display&page=UserAction&id=199
Monday, August 22, 2011
HHS, Treasury take new steps to help states build Affordable Insurance Exchanges!
Tax credits to help millions of middle-class families
The Departments of Health and Human Services and Treasury today took the next steps to establish Affordable Insurance Exchanges – one-stop marketplaces where consumers can choose a private health insurance plan that fits their health needs and have the same kind of insurance choices as members of Congress. Among other policies, the proposed rules describe how middle-class families will gain access to unprecedented tax relief that will dramatically reduce the cost of coverage.
Since President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act on March 23, 2010, over half of states have taken actions to build an Exchange. Today, HHS awarded $185 million to 13 states and the District of Columbia to help them build Affordable Insurance Exchanges and, with Treasury, posted three proposed rules that will provide a simple, streamlined, and affordable path for consumers to use the Exchanges to purchase private health insurance. Additionally, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sent a letter to governors laying out options and resources available to states to set up their Exchanges.
Too many American families have been priced out or locked out of the health insurance market. Exchanges will give them control and could save them thousands of dollars a year,” said Secretary Sebelius. “I am encouraged by the progress states have made to date and am excited to give them more resources to continue their work.”
“Today we’re laying the foundation to provide tax incentives to help working families purchase health insurance,” said Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner. “This new tax credit brings us a big step closer to achieving one of the signature goals of the Affordable Care Act – to provide tens of millions of Americans with access to affordable health insurance coverage.”
The Affordable Care Act creates Affordable Insurance Exchanges that will allow eligible individuals, families, and small businesses to shop for coverage starting in 2014. More than half the states have already taken action to begin building an Exchange and the new grant awards will accelerate that progress. The Exchange Establishment grants awarded today build on earlier investments in states. In 2010, HHS awarded 49 states and the District of Columbia $50 million to begin planning their Exchanges. HHS expects to make more grant awards in coming months.
The three proposed rules released by HHS and Treasury focus on the following:
In the weeks ahead, the Administration will conduct an aggressive outreach campaign and ask for public comment on the three proposed rules from employers, consumers, state leaders, health care providers and insurers, and the American people. In addition to accepting written public comments for the next 75 days, the departments will hold forums. These forums will help ensure more Americans have the opportunity to share their views regarding the establishment of Affordable Insurance Exchanges. Forums will be held in:
Atlanta, GA
Chicago, IL
Denver, CO
New York, NY
Portland, OR
Sacramento, CA
The departments expect to modify the proposed rules issued today based on the feedback we receive from the American people.
To view a detailed list of states that received grants visit: www.HealthCare.gov/news/factsheets/exchanges05232011a.html.
For more information about the proposed rules, visit:
Overview: www.HealthCare.gov/news/factsheets/exchanges08122011a.html;
Easy, Simple Access to Coverage for Consumers and Small Businesses: www.HealthCare.gov/news/factsheets/exchanges08122011b.html
Health Insurance Premium Tax Credit: www.treasury.gov/press-center/Documents/36BFactSheet.PDF
http://www.healthcare.gov/news/factsheets/exchanges08122011c.html
Medicaid Eligibility: www.HealthCare.gov/news/factsheets/exchanges08122011c.html
A copy of the letter is available here: www.healthcare.gov/center/letters/exchanges08122011a.html
The Departments of Health and Human Services and Treasury today took the next steps to establish Affordable Insurance Exchanges – one-stop marketplaces where consumers can choose a private health insurance plan that fits their health needs and have the same kind of insurance choices as members of Congress. Among other policies, the proposed rules describe how middle-class families will gain access to unprecedented tax relief that will dramatically reduce the cost of coverage.
Since President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act on March 23, 2010, over half of states have taken actions to build an Exchange. Today, HHS awarded $185 million to 13 states and the District of Columbia to help them build Affordable Insurance Exchanges and, with Treasury, posted three proposed rules that will provide a simple, streamlined, and affordable path for consumers to use the Exchanges to purchase private health insurance. Additionally, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius sent a letter to governors laying out options and resources available to states to set up their Exchanges.
Too many American families have been priced out or locked out of the health insurance market. Exchanges will give them control and could save them thousands of dollars a year,” said Secretary Sebelius. “I am encouraged by the progress states have made to date and am excited to give them more resources to continue their work.”
“Today we’re laying the foundation to provide tax incentives to help working families purchase health insurance,” said Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner. “This new tax credit brings us a big step closer to achieving one of the signature goals of the Affordable Care Act – to provide tens of millions of Americans with access to affordable health insurance coverage.”
The Affordable Care Act creates Affordable Insurance Exchanges that will allow eligible individuals, families, and small businesses to shop for coverage starting in 2014. More than half the states have already taken action to begin building an Exchange and the new grant awards will accelerate that progress. The Exchange Establishment grants awarded today build on earlier investments in states. In 2010, HHS awarded 49 states and the District of Columbia $50 million to begin planning their Exchanges. HHS expects to make more grant awards in coming months.
The three proposed rules released by HHS and Treasury focus on the following:
- · Easy, Simple Access to Coverage for Consumers and Small Businesses: New rules will make it easy for consumers to enroll in high-quality health plans and get help paying for health coverage through premium tax credits and cost sharing reductions. Small employers participating in the Small Business Health Options Program will be able to offer their employees a choice of health plans and cut their costs with new tax credits.
- Health Insurance Premium Tax Credit: Individuals and families will receive premium tax credits to help defray insurance costs, increasing access to health coverage for millions of middle class American families.
- Medicaid Eligibility: Coordinating the Exchange with Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program eligibility will make enrollment seamless for qualified Americans and reduce the administrative burden on states.
In the weeks ahead, the Administration will conduct an aggressive outreach campaign and ask for public comment on the three proposed rules from employers, consumers, state leaders, health care providers and insurers, and the American people. In addition to accepting written public comments for the next 75 days, the departments will hold forums. These forums will help ensure more Americans have the opportunity to share their views regarding the establishment of Affordable Insurance Exchanges. Forums will be held in:
Atlanta, GA
Chicago, IL
Denver, CO
New York, NY
Portland, OR
Sacramento, CA
The departments expect to modify the proposed rules issued today based on the feedback we receive from the American people.
To view a detailed list of states that received grants visit: www.HealthCare.gov/news/factsheets/exchanges05232011a.html.
For more information about the proposed rules, visit:
Overview: www.HealthCare.gov/news/factsheets/exchanges08122011a.html;
Easy, Simple Access to Coverage for Consumers and Small Businesses: www.HealthCare.gov/news/factsheets/exchanges08122011b.html
Health Insurance Premium Tax Credit: www.treasury.gov/press-center/Documents/36BFactSheet.PDF
http://www.healthcare.gov/news/factsheets/exchanges08122011c.html
Medicaid Eligibility: www.HealthCare.gov/news/factsheets/exchanges08122011c.html
A copy of the letter is available here: www.healthcare.gov/center/letters/exchanges08122011a.html
Don’t let Amazon.com cheat California! Tell Amazon.com it’s time to “pay your fair share!”
Dearest Friends and Allies,
Think Before You Click!
There’s no denying the reality that California is in desperate need of real, sustainable revenue solutions. Without those revenues in place, California has subsequently been forced year after year to impose devastating cuts to our schools, our health care, our human services, and the very core of our public infrastructure. Over the last four fiscal years, total cuts to our health care and human services programs have totaled in at more than $15 billion.
Yet, despite consecutive years of endless budget cuts -- Amazon.com, one of just a handful of the wealthiest corporations benefiting from outrageous tax breaks and loopholes in California, is now asking Californians to pay for an election to overturn our state tax code.
Don’t let Amazon.com cheat California! Click here to tell Amazon.com it’s time to “pay your fair share!”
Amazon.com has made billions by doing business in California. Now they want to overturn a recently passed law that would require sales tax to be applied to online transactions – while at the same time shifting the burden onto the shoulders of California’s seniors, struggling families, low-income kids and people with disabilities.
Supported by Governor Jerry Brown, and signed into law last month, ABx1 28 stipulates that out-of-state Internet retailers must collect sales tax from Californians if they have a physical presence in the state. This new policy would generate roughly $200 million in additional sales tax annually, but would also remove an unfair advantage for online retailers like Amazon.com competing with traditional small and family owned businesses.
Don’t let Amazon.com off the hook! Click here to tell Amazon.com it’s time to take responsibility and “pay your fair share!”
Multi-billion dollar companies like Amazon.com have long taken advantage of overly generous tax breaks and loopholes that deprive our families, our communities, our seniors, and all Californians of the necessary resources needed to make sure we all enjoy a bright, prosperous future. But now they want to go even further and completely overturn the state’s tax code in order to reverse a recently passed law while asking California to foot the bill!
Amazon.com is willing to spend millions to try and manipulate the polls in order to protect their profit margins. If Amazon.com succeeds in overturning our state tax code, that means more seniors, more families, and more children will be forced to endure even more life-threatening cuts down the road.
Let your voice be heard today! Don’t help Amazon.com cheat California -- Click here to tell Amazon.com to “pay your fair share!”
Our goal is to get 2,000 signatures by August 30th! But we need your help! After you’ve signed the petition, PLEASE forward it on to at least 10 of your friends, family members, or coworkers and ask them to take a minute to sign the petition for economic justice in California!
Visit us online at HHS Network of California
"Like Us" on Facebook!
Follow Us on Twitter!
www.hhsnetworkca.org
Think Before You Click!
There’s no denying the reality that California is in desperate need of real, sustainable revenue solutions. Without those revenues in place, California has subsequently been forced year after year to impose devastating cuts to our schools, our health care, our human services, and the very core of our public infrastructure. Over the last four fiscal years, total cuts to our health care and human services programs have totaled in at more than $15 billion.
Yet, despite consecutive years of endless budget cuts -- Amazon.com, one of just a handful of the wealthiest corporations benefiting from outrageous tax breaks and loopholes in California, is now asking Californians to pay for an election to overturn our state tax code.
Don’t let Amazon.com cheat California! Click here to tell Amazon.com it’s time to “pay your fair share!”
Amazon.com has made billions by doing business in California. Now they want to overturn a recently passed law that would require sales tax to be applied to online transactions – while at the same time shifting the burden onto the shoulders of California’s seniors, struggling families, low-income kids and people with disabilities.
Supported by Governor Jerry Brown, and signed into law last month, ABx1 28 stipulates that out-of-state Internet retailers must collect sales tax from Californians if they have a physical presence in the state. This new policy would generate roughly $200 million in additional sales tax annually, but would also remove an unfair advantage for online retailers like Amazon.com competing with traditional small and family owned businesses.
Don’t let Amazon.com off the hook! Click here to tell Amazon.com it’s time to take responsibility and “pay your fair share!”
Multi-billion dollar companies like Amazon.com have long taken advantage of overly generous tax breaks and loopholes that deprive our families, our communities, our seniors, and all Californians of the necessary resources needed to make sure we all enjoy a bright, prosperous future. But now they want to go even further and completely overturn the state’s tax code in order to reverse a recently passed law while asking California to foot the bill!
Amazon.com is willing to spend millions to try and manipulate the polls in order to protect their profit margins. If Amazon.com succeeds in overturning our state tax code, that means more seniors, more families, and more children will be forced to endure even more life-threatening cuts down the road.
Let your voice be heard today! Don’t help Amazon.com cheat California -- Click here to tell Amazon.com to “pay your fair share!”
Our goal is to get 2,000 signatures by August 30th! But we need your help! After you’ve signed the petition, PLEASE forward it on to at least 10 of your friends, family members, or coworkers and ask them to take a minute to sign the petition for economic justice in California!
Visit us online at HHS Network of California
"Like Us" on Facebook!
Follow Us on Twitter!
www.hhsnetworkca.org
Major rally in support of Prison Hunger Strikers - August 23rd, Sacramento
Greetings CURB and allies,
CURB's Policy Advocacy group is coordinating lobbying on Tuesday morning to
urge legislators and their staff to attend the hearing. Please see below to
sign-up, please forward to your lists and post the link to the sign-up form
on facebook, websites etc.
Link to form:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dHQ0TzVNcWlWUGNWUmZjQnVxTHRpUHc6MQ
Sign-up for Lobbying before Leg. Hearing on SHU 8/23 on Tuesday, August 23rd the Assembly Public Safety Committee will be holding a public hearing on the conditions and policies of the Secured Housing Units in California's prisons. If you are planning to attend the hearing (1:30pm)
and rally (11:30am) PLEASE join us beforehand to lobby key legislators (9:00-11:30am).
We are planning to target legislators in the Public Safety Committee, and the Black and Latino Caucuses. We'll remind them of the importance of the hearing and urging them to attend to hear from family members, former SHU prisoners and advocates about the conditions in the SHU. To join us for
lobbying please meet in the Basement Cafe of the State Building for prep at 9:00 am, lobbying begins at 9:30 am.
*Planning to join us?*
Please SIGN-UP by filling out the form below by Sunday, August 21st! We will contact you with additional information about lobbying on Monday, August 22nd. If you have any questions about lobbying, please contact Emily at emily@curbprisonspending.org or 510-435-1176. If you
have questions about the rally or hearing, please contact prisonhungerstrikesolidarity@gmail.com.
How are you getting to Sacramento? For carpooling, please contact: Bay Area 415.637.8195 or prisonhungerstrikesolidarity@gmail.com.com - Los Angeles 714-290-9077 or dolorescanales@hotmail.com
CURB's Policy Advocacy group is coordinating lobbying on Tuesday morning to
urge legislators and their staff to attend the hearing. Please see below to
sign-up, please forward to your lists and post the link to the sign-up form
on facebook, websites etc.
Link to form:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/viewform?formkey=dHQ0TzVNcWlWUGNWUmZjQnVxTHRpUHc6MQ
Sign-up for Lobbying before Leg. Hearing on SHU 8/23 on Tuesday, August 23rd the Assembly Public Safety Committee will be holding a public hearing on the conditions and policies of the Secured Housing Units in California's prisons. If you are planning to attend the hearing (1:30pm)
and rally (11:30am) PLEASE join us beforehand to lobby key legislators (9:00-11:30am).
We are planning to target legislators in the Public Safety Committee, and the Black and Latino Caucuses. We'll remind them of the importance of the hearing and urging them to attend to hear from family members, former SHU prisoners and advocates about the conditions in the SHU. To join us for
lobbying please meet in the Basement Cafe of the State Building for prep at 9:00 am, lobbying begins at 9:30 am.
*Planning to join us?*
Please SIGN-UP by filling out the form below by Sunday, August 21st! We will contact you with additional information about lobbying on Monday, August 22nd. If you have any questions about lobbying, please contact Emily at emily@curbprisonspending.org or 510-435-1176. If you
have questions about the rally or hearing, please contact prisonhungerstrikesolidarity@gmail.com.
How are you getting to Sacramento? For carpooling, please contact: Bay Area 415.637.8195 or prisonhungerstrikesolidarity@gmail.com.com - Los Angeles 714-290-9077 or dolorescanales@hotmail.com
Could California close a women’s prison?
At the end of the month, the state of Texas will do something it’s never done before–it will close down a prison. Spurred by budget cuts and a shrinking prison population, Texas will close its second oldest prison, Central Unit in Houston. Thirteen other states are also in the process of shutting down prisons for similar reasons.
In California, we’re also feeling the pressures of budget problems – but prisons here aren’t empty; they’re chock full. So is it possible that prison closure is in California’s future? KALW’s criminal justice reporter Rina Palta reports.
* * *
HOLLY KERNAN: So Rina, let’s talk first about the national context. Is closing prisons relatively new for the U.S.?
RINA PALTA: There’s no doubt that for the last few decades, the U.S. has been in the mode of building prisons to house a rapidly growing prison population. Some of that has to do with crime rates. A lot has to do with harsh penalties for drug-related crimes and longer prison sentences in general. California has been something of a leader in this department. A rather telling fact is that in the first century or so of its existence, the state of California built 12 prisons. In the last three decades, the state
has built 43 prisons and prison camps. Now, we’re starting to see that building boom start to wind down nationwide. Violent crime is down, prison populations are shrinking through reforms, and states are looking to save money by shutting down these really expensive facilities that they no longer need.
KERNAN: So where is California in that? Obviously we’re experiencing budget cuts and we’re experiencing prison overcrowding, so it seems like we’re already short on space to house offenders. Is it possible that the state might close a prison?
PALTA: That’s true, we are in an overcrowded state in our prisons and we’re under a federal order to reduce our prisons by about 30,000 inmates over the next few years. But, the state is planning on doing that through a process that they call “realignment.” I asked David Muhammad, the Chief of Probation in Alameda County to explain realignment:
DAVID MUHAMMAD: Starting October 1, people newly convicted of a non-serious, non-violent, non-sexual offense can never go to state prison. That means that about 30,000 people, over the next three years, who would have gone to prison, will now serve their time in county jails. That’ll free
up prison space in the state system, and men’s prisons particularly will slowly become less crowded. What’s really interesting is that this reform could have a dramatic effect on women’s prisons – they could be left half empty. Here’s San Francisco’s Chief of Adult Probation, Wendy Still.
WENDY STILL: There will absolutely be a higher percentage of women that will be impacted by this reform and the reason is there’s a higher percentage of women who are incarcerated for these low-level crimes. So I’d venture to say that there’s probably going to be a minimum of 45% to 50% of their population that would decrease. They certainly will decrease enough to close a prison.
KERNAN: So Rina, does that mean it’ll happen?
PALTA: It’s not clear yet. Representatives from the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation have been talking with local officials down in Chowchilla, a Central Valley town that houses two of the state’s three women’s prisons. Those local officials say that CDCR has given them two
options: they can either convert a prison to a men’s facility, or they can shut down a prison. The community is not really excited about either option.
But reformers are really starting to latch onto the possibility of closure. Tim Silard, the president of the Rosenburg Foundation in San Francisco, is helping lead the charge.
TIM SILARD: California has more than 30 adult prisons across the state and spends an enormous amounts of money to keep those prison systems going, so our hope is that the combined impact of realignment and some other reasonable reforms, taking on what has been done to great effect in other
states, can mean we can start shutting down prisons permanently in California. And start with those two women’s facilities.
KERNAN: So, Rina, we’ve talked before about how counties are scrambling to absorb these prisoners, and it’s still unclear how some will manage. But putting the county concerns aside, it seems that a potential benefit of realignment for reformers like Silard is the closure of a women’s prison.
PALTA: Yes, because for one, it would mean putting a damper on the fastest growing prison population in the state.
KERNAN: Women PALTA: Women. Women are the fastest growing prison population in the California and as Silard points out, a large percentage of women in prison are mothers of young children. Making a commitment to keeping these women, if they’re non-violent drug and property offenders, which they mostly are, on the local level also means keeping them closer to their kids and maybe keeps some of these kids out of foster care. Silard says there are also major financial savings.
SILARD: If we could close those down, we’d see a savings of close to $300 million a year. So we’re talking about a savings of $300 billion over the next 10 years.
KERNAN: So is there any opposition to shutting down a prison in the community of Chowchilla?
PALTA: Absolutely. We’re talking about 1,000 jobs in a rural community that’s highly dependent on prisons for the local economy. The truth is, the state has primarily built prisons in rural areas, where there really aren’t that many other jobs. And if those prisons go away, it could be devastating for a place like Chowchilla. New York actually is having similar issues right now. They cut their prison population heavily and have been trying to close unused prisons for years. Only recently, Governor Cuomo there was able to push through some closures. And part of the reason is he’s offering
economic development grants to towns with closing prisons. I asked Silard about this economic issue and here’s what he had to say.
SILARD: But we know that taking that same $300 million and investing that in other areas of our state budget, can and will produce far more jobs than what are produced through the prison system. The prison system is an enormously costly way of doing business and actually not a terrific job creator. So there are a lot of other ways of doing that.
KERNAN: So when will we know what CDCR decides?
PALTA: According to local officials, there’s a sort of ultimatum on the table: convert or close. But at the moment, there’s no firm timetable. So we’ll see, going forward, as this issue gains a little more momentum, what the public reaction is. At the very least, this is going to be a referendum on where the California public stands on the issue of truly downscaling the prison system.
*For more on the state’s plans to reduce the prison population, visit KALW’s criminal justice blog, the
Informant. And we want to hear your thoughts – how do you think California should go about reducing its prison population? Give us a call at 415-264-7106. *
--
Emily Harris
Statewide Coordinator
1322 Webster St. #210
Oakland, CA 94612
510-435-1176
Californians United for a Responsible Budget
In California, we’re also feeling the pressures of budget problems – but prisons here aren’t empty; they’re chock full. So is it possible that prison closure is in California’s future? KALW’s criminal justice reporter Rina Palta reports.
* * *
HOLLY KERNAN: So Rina, let’s talk first about the national context. Is closing prisons relatively new for the U.S.?
RINA PALTA: There’s no doubt that for the last few decades, the U.S. has been in the mode of building prisons to house a rapidly growing prison population. Some of that has to do with crime rates. A lot has to do with harsh penalties for drug-related crimes and longer prison sentences in general. California has been something of a leader in this department. A rather telling fact is that in the first century or so of its existence, the state of California built 12 prisons. In the last three decades, the state
has built 43 prisons and prison camps. Now, we’re starting to see that building boom start to wind down nationwide. Violent crime is down, prison populations are shrinking through reforms, and states are looking to save money by shutting down these really expensive facilities that they no longer need.
KERNAN: So where is California in that? Obviously we’re experiencing budget cuts and we’re experiencing prison overcrowding, so it seems like we’re already short on space to house offenders. Is it possible that the state might close a prison?
PALTA: That’s true, we are in an overcrowded state in our prisons and we’re under a federal order to reduce our prisons by about 30,000 inmates over the next few years. But, the state is planning on doing that through a process that they call “realignment.” I asked David Muhammad, the Chief of Probation in Alameda County to explain realignment:
DAVID MUHAMMAD: Starting October 1, people newly convicted of a non-serious, non-violent, non-sexual offense can never go to state prison. That means that about 30,000 people, over the next three years, who would have gone to prison, will now serve their time in county jails. That’ll free
up prison space in the state system, and men’s prisons particularly will slowly become less crowded. What’s really interesting is that this reform could have a dramatic effect on women’s prisons – they could be left half empty. Here’s San Francisco’s Chief of Adult Probation, Wendy Still.
WENDY STILL: There will absolutely be a higher percentage of women that will be impacted by this reform and the reason is there’s a higher percentage of women who are incarcerated for these low-level crimes. So I’d venture to say that there’s probably going to be a minimum of 45% to 50% of their population that would decrease. They certainly will decrease enough to close a prison.
KERNAN: So Rina, does that mean it’ll happen?
PALTA: It’s not clear yet. Representatives from the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation have been talking with local officials down in Chowchilla, a Central Valley town that houses two of the state’s three women’s prisons. Those local officials say that CDCR has given them two
options: they can either convert a prison to a men’s facility, or they can shut down a prison. The community is not really excited about either option.
But reformers are really starting to latch onto the possibility of closure. Tim Silard, the president of the Rosenburg Foundation in San Francisco, is helping lead the charge.
TIM SILARD: California has more than 30 adult prisons across the state and spends an enormous amounts of money to keep those prison systems going, so our hope is that the combined impact of realignment and some other reasonable reforms, taking on what has been done to great effect in other
states, can mean we can start shutting down prisons permanently in California. And start with those two women’s facilities.
KERNAN: So, Rina, we’ve talked before about how counties are scrambling to absorb these prisoners, and it’s still unclear how some will manage. But putting the county concerns aside, it seems that a potential benefit of realignment for reformers like Silard is the closure of a women’s prison.
PALTA: Yes, because for one, it would mean putting a damper on the fastest growing prison population in the state.
KERNAN: Women PALTA: Women. Women are the fastest growing prison population in the California and as Silard points out, a large percentage of women in prison are mothers of young children. Making a commitment to keeping these women, if they’re non-violent drug and property offenders, which they mostly are, on the local level also means keeping them closer to their kids and maybe keeps some of these kids out of foster care. Silard says there are also major financial savings.
SILARD: If we could close those down, we’d see a savings of close to $300 million a year. So we’re talking about a savings of $300 billion over the next 10 years.
KERNAN: So is there any opposition to shutting down a prison in the community of Chowchilla?
PALTA: Absolutely. We’re talking about 1,000 jobs in a rural community that’s highly dependent on prisons for the local economy. The truth is, the state has primarily built prisons in rural areas, where there really aren’t that many other jobs. And if those prisons go away, it could be devastating for a place like Chowchilla. New York actually is having similar issues right now. They cut their prison population heavily and have been trying to close unused prisons for years. Only recently, Governor Cuomo there was able to push through some closures. And part of the reason is he’s offering
economic development grants to towns with closing prisons. I asked Silard about this economic issue and here’s what he had to say.
SILARD: But we know that taking that same $300 million and investing that in other areas of our state budget, can and will produce far more jobs than what are produced through the prison system. The prison system is an enormously costly way of doing business and actually not a terrific job creator. So there are a lot of other ways of doing that.
KERNAN: So when will we know what CDCR decides?
PALTA: According to local officials, there’s a sort of ultimatum on the table: convert or close. But at the moment, there’s no firm timetable. So we’ll see, going forward, as this issue gains a little more momentum, what the public reaction is. At the very least, this is going to be a referendum on where the California public stands on the issue of truly downscaling the prison system.
*For more on the state’s plans to reduce the prison population, visit KALW’s criminal justice blog, the
Informant
--
Emily Harris
Statewide Coordinator
1322 Webster St. #210
Oakland, CA 94612
510-435-1176
Californians United for a Responsible Budget
California's Health Benefit Exchange Receives $39 Million to Help Insure Millions of Californians!
SACRAMENTO – The California Health Benefit Exchange received a $39 million federal Level 1 Establishment grant that will help the state plan for and design a new health insurance marketplace to cover millions of Californians, Board Chair Diana Dooley announced today. Specifically, the federal funds will be used to create a three-year business and operational plan, begin development of an information technology infrastructure, and conduct other start-up activities including consumer outreach.
“These federal funds will enable California to build a successful Health Benefit Exchange program,” said Dooley, who is California ’s Health and Human Services Secretary. “California continues to be a leader in the development of a Health Benefit Exchange that will provide access to affordable, quality health care.”
California was the first state to create a Health Benefit Exchange following the passage of federal health care reform. It is charged with creating a new insurance marketplace in which individuals and small businesses will be able to purchase competitively priced health plans using federal tax subsidies and credits beginning in 2014.
The Level I grant funding will be used to recruit necessary technical and support staff, and to contract for specific subject matter experts. The funds will also support the active engagement of stakeholders in planning and implementation activities.
The grant period is August 15, 2011 to August 15, 2012. By June of 2012, the Exchange will apply for a Level II grant to fund the final phase of development and its first year of operation through 2014. Once the Exchange is fully operational in 2015, it must be self supporting.
The Exchange is overseen by a five-member board appointed by the Governor and Legislature; the California Health and Human Services Secretary serves as an ex officio voting member and is its current Chair.
For more information on the Exchange including meeting calendar, visit http://www.healthexchange.ca.gov/
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Please Call Now! Get Out the Jail Vote Campaign
CCR Title 15, Division 1
2011 Biennial Regulations Review/Change
By CA CORRECTIONS STANDARDS AUTHORITY (CSA)
Exercise your right as "the public" and/or the "Most Affected", by participating in the CA’s CCR Title 15 Div.1 Biennial Regulations Review/Change.
YOU can ensure that people in all CA jails can access and exercise their right to register and their right to Vote.
Call upon CSA to modify and amend §1071. Voting, plus pertinent regulations*, with adequate & explicit language to ensure (not just allow) timely, confidential and meaningful access to voter registration and voting plus ensure that corrections voting policies throughout CA jails reflect the CA Elections Code; including the Voter Bill of Rights, so these are accessible & relevant to citizens in CA jails and also comply with Article 2 Section 4 of CA. Constitution, as most recently clarified by League of Women Voters vs. McPherson (2006) 145 Cal.App.4th 1469.
*§1063. Correspondence; §1067. Access to the Telephone; §1068. Access to Courts and Counsel; §1069. Orientation, and; §1045. Public Information Plan.
TODAY PLEASE ACT & CALL OR WRITE TODAY!!** ... TODAY! to make a difference to INCARCERATED CITIZENS throughout California’s local detention facilities: i.e. JAILS.
**2011 CSA Biennial Review Contacts on back!
GET OUT THE JAIL VOTE CAMPAIGN 2011
CSA 2011 BIENNIAL REGULATIONS REVIEW CONTACTS:
CDCR Secretary, CSA Chairman Matthew Cate: ph: 916.445.7683 matthew.cate@cdcr.ca.gov
Executive Steering Committee:
John Ingrassia, Commander/Chair:
john.ingrassia@sdsheriff.org
ph: 858-974-2240
fax: 858.974-2244
Steve Moore, San Joaquin Sheriff:
sjsheriff@sjgov.org
ph: 209.468.4310
fax: 209.468.4597
Joe Leonardi, Redondo Beach Chief of Police:
ph: 310.379-2477
Ellen Brin, San Francisco Sheriff Department, Chief Deputy:
ellen.brin@sfgov.org
ph: 415.575.4392
Tim Pearce, Captain, Mendocino Sheriff Department:
pearcet@co.mendocino.ca.us
ph: 707.463.5657
Kelly Scott, Deputy County Cousel, Santa Barbara County
kscott@co.santa-barbara.ca.us
ph: 805.568.2950
fax: 805.568.2982
Esther Lim, Jails Project Coordinator, ACLU-So.CA
elim@aclusc.org
ph: 213-977-9500
fax: 213.977.5299
Gary Stanton, Solano County Sheriff's Office
sheriffadmin@solanocounty.com
ph: 707.784.7030
fax: 707.421.7023
Martin Ryan, Amador County Sheriff
sheriff@amadorsheriff.com
ph: 209.223-6500
fax: 209.223.1609
Linda Suvoy, Sonoma County Asst. Sheriff
tlewis@sonoma-county.org
ph: 707.565-1422
fax: 707.565.1442
Jerry Gutierrez, Deputy Chief, Riverside County Sheriff's Department
ph: 951-955-2400
fax: 951.955.2428
Mark McCorkle, Lieutenant, LA County Sheriff's Dept
mamccork@lasd.org
ph: 213.893.5884
fax: 213.893.5884
Henry Perea, District 3 Supervisor, Fresno County
ppinedo@co.fresno.ca.us
ph: 559.600-3000
fax: 559.455-4704
Karen Tait, County of Lake Health Officer
karent@co.lake.ca.us
ph: 707.263-1090
fax: 707.262-4280
Monday, August 8, 2011
Federal Budget Updates!
Federal budget:
The President and Legislators agreed to a debt deal. The deal includes:
o Immediately enacted 10-year discretionary spending caps generating nearly $1 trillion in deficit reduction; balanced between defense and non-defense spending.
o President authorized to increase the debt limit by at least $2.1 trillion, eliminating the need for further increases until 2013.
o Bipartisan committee process tasked with identifying an additional $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction, including from entitlement and tax reform. Committee is required to report legislation by November 23, 2011, which receives fast-track protections. Congress is required to vote on Committee recommendations by December 23, 2011.
o Enforcement mechanism established to force all parties – Republican and Democrat – to agree to balanced deficit reduction. If Committee fails, enforcement mechanism will trigger spending reductions beginning in 2013 – split 50/50 between domestic and defense spending. Enforcement protects Social Security, Medicare beneficiaries, and low-income programs from any cuts.
The President and Legislators agreed to a debt deal. The deal includes:
o Immediately enacted 10-year discretionary spending caps generating nearly $1 trillion in deficit reduction; balanced between defense and non-defense spending.
o President authorized to increase the debt limit by at least $2.1 trillion, eliminating the need for further increases until 2013.
o Bipartisan committee process tasked with identifying an additional $1.5 trillion in deficit reduction, including from entitlement and tax reform. Committee is required to report legislation by November 23, 2011, which receives fast-track protections. Congress is required to vote on Committee recommendations by December 23, 2011.
o Enforcement mechanism established to force all parties – Republican and Democrat – to agree to balanced deficit reduction. If Committee fails, enforcement mechanism will trigger spending reductions beginning in 2013 – split 50/50 between domestic and defense spending. Enforcement protects Social Security, Medicare beneficiaries, and low-income programs from any cuts.
Friday, August 5, 2011
California Legislature: Pass SB 490 to replace the death penalty!
The death penalty in California is a dysfunctional failure that risks killing innocent people and costs taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars. SB 490 will give voters the option to replace the death penalty with life without parole, saving Californians $1 billion over five years.
The death penalty costs $184 million each year in California, according to a new report by a federal judge and a law professor. A single execution costs $308 million above the cost of life without parole. Meanwhile education, health care, and law enforcement are drastically underfunded.
Life without parole is a better alternative that saves funds to keep our communities safe, provides swift and certain justice for victim's family members, and does not run the risk of killing an innocent person. We can save $1 billion over the next five years without releasing a single prisoner. Support SB 490 for real justice and public safety.
Please go HERE to read and sign petition.
The death penalty costs $184 million each year in California, according to a new report by a federal judge and a law professor. A single execution costs $308 million above the cost of life without parole. Meanwhile education, health care, and law enforcement are drastically underfunded.
Life without parole is a better alternative that saves funds to keep our communities safe, provides swift and certain justice for victim's family members, and does not run the risk of killing an innocent person. We can save $1 billion over the next five years without releasing a single prisoner. Support SB 490 for real justice and public safety.
Please go HERE to read and sign petition.
Thursday, August 4, 2011
Debt-Ceiling Compromise Cancels Medicaid Fight!
Yesterday, the President signed a bill that ended months of intense negotiations over lifting the country’s debt-ceiling. But for the fate of Medicaid – and the millions of seniors, people living with disabilities, and low-income children who rely on the program – the negotiations are just beginning.
What’s the deal?
In short, the final compromise lifts the debt ceiling enough to last until after the 2012 election and puts in place two stages of cuts in government spending.
In the first stage, caps are immediately placed on discretionary spending, saving $917 billion over 10 years.
In the second stage, a bipartisan joint committee is tasked with developing legislation to reduce the deficit by another $1.2 – $1.5 trillion over 10 years. Failure by the committee to produce an agreement by Thanksgiving or by Congress to enact their plan by December 23 would trigger automatic across-the-board cuts in federal spending to achieve $1.2 trillion in savings. If the Committee agrees on – and Congress enacts – less than $1.2 trillion in deficit-reduction, the across-the-board cuts will be triggered to make up the difference.
Let’s start with some good news:
Medicaid and Medicare were spared any immediate cuts in the first stage. That said, the first stage cuts include significant short-run spending reductions; any serious economist will tell you that cutting federal spending in the midst of an economic downturn will only worsen the nation’s employment outlook. These larger economic forces certainly have implications for state budgets and Medicaid, but that’s a blog for another day.
The picture is murkier in the second stage. While Medicaid and Medicare are very much at risk for major cuts in a compromise that the joint committee might broker (more on that below), Medicaid is completely exempt from the automatic across-the-board cuts that would be triggered if the committee fails to achieve $1.2 trillion in deficit-reduction. Medicare benefits are also largely protected: across-the-board cuts to Medicare are limited to 2 percent of the programs’ costs and can only come from cuts to providers and insurers.
This is an important victory. Inside reports suggest that Republican negotiators demanded that Medicaid be added to the mix of programs that could face cuts in the event of the trigger, but the Obama administration refused to budge on this point. Consumer advocates deserve credit: they worked tirelessly over the past few months to send a strong message to Congress and to the White House that Medicaid matters. It’s clear that Obama took that message to heart.
Now the bad news – we’re not even close to out of the woods
Relief that Medicaid will escape unscathed should across-the-board cuts be triggered must be tempered by the understanding that the trigger may not be pulled, and that committee members will consider deep cuts to Medicaid in their efforts to broker a deal.
It is difficult to predict whether the committee will succeed. On the one hand, the terms of the process were constructed specifically to put immense pressure on both parties to avoid the across-the-board cuts. If committee fails to reach a compromise, all $1.2 trillion in deficit-reduction would come from program cuts – violating Democrats’ vows to ensure revenue increases are part of any deficit-reduction package. And 50 percent of the triggered across-the-board cuts must come from the defense budget – a painful prospect for Republicans.
On the other hand, competing pressures may prevent the committee from reaching a compromise. Republicans may prefer cuts in military spending to a compromise that includes tax-increases. And if they can’t broker a deal that includes tax-increases, Democrats may prefer to allow the across-the-board cuts to be triggered since at least Medicaid and Medicare benefits are protected from those cuts.
While there is considerable debate about the likelihood that the committee will succeed, the prospects for Medicaid are grim if a deal is brokered. Having already slashed discretionary spending by nearly a trillion dollars in the first stage, it will be difficult for the committee to find more savings in those programs. That leaves revenue increases and entitlement spending as the only real options for significant deficit-reduction.
Both parties have already drawn lines in the sand around revenue increases, with Democrats insisting on including them as part of a final deal, and Republicans vowing to vote against any package that includes them. But if significant revenue increases are not part of the solution, for the committee to succeed the cuts required to Medicaid and Medicare would absolutely devastate these programs. According to a statement by Robert Greenstein, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: “The deal that President Obama and Speaker Boehner were negotiating several weeks ago would have raised Medicare’s eligibility age, raised Medicare cost-sharing charges, shifted significant Medicaid costs to states, modified cost-of-living adjustments in Social Security and other be nefit programs (and in the tax code), and instituted other entitlement savings. Those steps would have saved $650 billion to $700 billion over ten years. The joint committee would have to produce cuts twice as deep.”
And even if Democrats succeed at ensuring revenues are part of a deal, Medicaid would still likely sustain very significant cuts, such as the ones that were already on the table during earlier negotiations. Those cuts would jeopardize the health and financial security of millions of seniors, people living with disabilities, and low-income children who rely on Medicaid, and they would shift new cost burdens onto already-strained state budgets.
Making a dark picture worse, Congress needs to act this December to avert an automatic cut in Medicare doctor reimbursement rates (the “doc-fix”). While this is unrelated to the debt-ceiling negotiations, Congress will need to offset the costs of the doc-fix – about $300 billion for a 10-year fix – and they will likely look to find these savings in Medicaid and Medicare. These savings would be in addition to whatever cuts the deficit-reduction committee enacts.
Where does that leave us?
Medicaid lives to fight another day, and we should celebrate this success. But let’s celebrate while we roll up our sleeves. The fight starts anew today, and it’s not going to be easy.
What’s the deal?
In short, the final compromise lifts the debt ceiling enough to last until after the 2012 election and puts in place two stages of cuts in government spending.
In the first stage, caps are immediately placed on discretionary spending, saving $917 billion over 10 years.
In the second stage, a bipartisan joint committee is tasked with developing legislation to reduce the deficit by another $1.2 – $1.5 trillion over 10 years. Failure by the committee to produce an agreement by Thanksgiving or by Congress to enact their plan by December 23 would trigger automatic across-the-board cuts in federal spending to achieve $1.2 trillion in savings. If the Committee agrees on – and Congress enacts – less than $1.2 trillion in deficit-reduction, the across-the-board cuts will be triggered to make up the difference.
Let’s start with some good news:
Medicaid and Medicare were spared any immediate cuts in the first stage. That said, the first stage cuts include significant short-run spending reductions; any serious economist will tell you that cutting federal spending in the midst of an economic downturn will only worsen the nation’s employment outlook. These larger economic forces certainly have implications for state budgets and Medicaid, but that’s a blog for another day.
The picture is murkier in the second stage. While Medicaid and Medicare are very much at risk for major cuts in a compromise that the joint committee might broker (more on that below), Medicaid is completely exempt from the automatic across-the-board cuts that would be triggered if the committee fails to achieve $1.2 trillion in deficit-reduction. Medicare benefits are also largely protected: across-the-board cuts to Medicare are limited to 2 percent of the programs’ costs and can only come from cuts to providers and insurers.
This is an important victory. Inside reports suggest that Republican negotiators demanded that Medicaid be added to the mix of programs that could face cuts in the event of the trigger, but the Obama administration refused to budge on this point. Consumer advocates deserve credit: they worked tirelessly over the past few months to send a strong message to Congress and to the White House that Medicaid matters. It’s clear that Obama took that message to heart.
Now the bad news – we’re not even close to out of the woods
Relief that Medicaid will escape unscathed should across-the-board cuts be triggered must be tempered by the understanding that the trigger may not be pulled, and that committee members will consider deep cuts to Medicaid in their efforts to broker a deal.
It is difficult to predict whether the committee will succeed. On the one hand, the terms of the process were constructed specifically to put immense pressure on both parties to avoid the across-the-board cuts. If committee fails to reach a compromise, all $1.2 trillion in deficit-reduction would come from program cuts – violating Democrats’ vows to ensure revenue increases are part of any deficit-reduction package. And 50 percent of the triggered across-the-board cuts must come from the defense budget – a painful prospect for Republicans.
On the other hand, competing pressures may prevent the committee from reaching a compromise. Republicans may prefer cuts in military spending to a compromise that includes tax-increases. And if they can’t broker a deal that includes tax-increases, Democrats may prefer to allow the across-the-board cuts to be triggered since at least Medicaid and Medicare benefits are protected from those cuts.
While there is considerable debate about the likelihood that the committee will succeed, the prospects for Medicaid are grim if a deal is brokered. Having already slashed discretionary spending by nearly a trillion dollars in the first stage, it will be difficult for the committee to find more savings in those programs. That leaves revenue increases and entitlement spending as the only real options for significant deficit-reduction.
Both parties have already drawn lines in the sand around revenue increases, with Democrats insisting on including them as part of a final deal, and Republicans vowing to vote against any package that includes them. But if significant revenue increases are not part of the solution, for the committee to succeed the cuts required to Medicaid and Medicare would absolutely devastate these programs. According to a statement by Robert Greenstein, president of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: “The deal that President Obama and Speaker Boehner were negotiating several weeks ago would have raised Medicare’s eligibility age, raised Medicare cost-sharing charges, shifted significant Medicaid costs to states, modified cost-of-living adjustments in Social Security and other be nefit programs (and in the tax code), and instituted other entitlement savings. Those steps would have saved $650 billion to $700 billion over ten years. The joint committee would have to produce cuts twice as deep.”
And even if Democrats succeed at ensuring revenues are part of a deal, Medicaid would still likely sustain very significant cuts, such as the ones that were already on the table during earlier negotiations. Those cuts would jeopardize the health and financial security of millions of seniors, people living with disabilities, and low-income children who rely on Medicaid, and they would shift new cost burdens onto already-strained state budgets.
Making a dark picture worse, Congress needs to act this December to avert an automatic cut in Medicare doctor reimbursement rates (the “doc-fix”). While this is unrelated to the debt-ceiling negotiations, Congress will need to offset the costs of the doc-fix – about $300 billion for a 10-year fix – and they will likely look to find these savings in Medicaid and Medicare. These savings would be in addition to whatever cuts the deficit-reduction committee enacts.
Where does that leave us?
Medicaid lives to fight another day, and we should celebrate this success. But let’s celebrate while we roll up our sleeves. The fight starts anew today, and it’s not going to be easy.
Tuesday, August 2, 2011
Affordable Care Act Ensures Women Receive Preventive Services at No Additional Cost
Historic new guidelines that will ensure women receive preventive health services at no additional cost were announced today by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Developed by the independent Institute of Medicine, the new guidelines require new health insurance plans to cover women’s preventive services such as well-woman visits, breastfeeding support, domestic violence screening, and contraception without charging a co-payment, co-insurance or a deductible.
“The Affordable Care Act helps stop health problems before they start,” said HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. “These historic guidelines are based on science and existing literature and will help ensure women get the preventive health benefits they need.”
Before health reform, too many Americans didn’t get the preventive health care they need to stay healthy, avoid or delay the onset of disease, lead productive lives, and reduce health care costs. Often because of cost, Americans used preventive services at about half the recommended rate.
Last summer, HHS released new insurance market rules under the Affordable Care Act requiring all new private health plans to cover several evidence-based preventive services like mammograms, colonoscopies, blood pressure checks, and childhood immunizations without charging a copayment, deductible or coinsurance. The Affordable Care Act also made recommended preventive services free for people on Medicare.
Today’s announcement builds on that progress by making sure women have access to a full range of recommended preventive services without cost sharing, including:
- well-woman visits;
- screening for gestational diabetes;
- human papillomavirus (HPV) DNA testing for women 30 years and older;
- sexually-transmitted infection counseling;
- human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) screening and counseling;
- FDA-approved contraception methods and contraceptive counseling;
- breastfeeding support, supplies, and counseling; and
- domestic violence screening and counseling.
New health plans will need to include these services without cost sharing for insurance policies with plan years beginning on or after August 1, 2012. The rules governing coverage of preventive services which allow plans to use reasonable medical management to help define the nature of the covered service apply to women’s preventive services. Plans will retain the flexibility to control costs and promote efficient delivery of care by, for example, continuing to charge cost-sharing for branded drugs if a generic version is available and is just as effective and safe for the patient to use.
The administration also released an amendment to the prevention regulation that allows religious institutions that offer insurance to their employees the choice of whether or not to cover contraception services. This regulation is modeled on the most common accommodation for churches available in the majority of the 28 states that already require insurance companies to cover contraception. HHS welcomes comment on this policy.
Previously, preventive services for women had been recommended one-by-one or as part of guidelines targeted at men as well. As such, the HHS directed the independent Institute of Medicine to, for the first time ever, conduct a scientific review and provide recommendations on specific preventive measures that meet women’s unique health needs and help keep women healthy. HHS’ Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) used the IOM report issued July 19, when developing the guidelines that are being issued today. The IOM’s report relied on independent physicians, nurses, scientists, and other experts to make these determinations based on scientific evidence.
Today’s announcement is another part of the Obama Administration’s broader effort to address the health and well-being of our communities through initiatives such as the President’s Childhood Obesity Task Force, the First Lady’s Let’s Move! campaign, the National Quality Strategy, and the National Prevention Strategy.
For more information on the HHS guidelines for expanding women’s preventive services, please visit: http://www.healthcare.gov/news/factsheets/womensprevention08012011a.html. The guidelines can be found at: http://www.hrsa.gov/womensguidelines/
To learn more about the Affordable Care Act, please visit http://www.healthcare.gov/
Cruel Isolation—California’s Prison System!!
NY Times Editorial
For many decades, the civilized world has recognized prolonged isolation of prisoners in cruel conditions to be inhumane, even torture. The Geneva Conventions forbid it. Even at Abu Ghraib in Iraq, where prisoners were sexually humiliated and physically abused systematically and with official sanction, the jailers had to get permission of their commanding general to keep someone in isolation for more than 30 days.
So Americans should be disgusted and outraged that prolonged solitary confinement, sometimes for months or even years, has become a routine form of prison management. It is inflicting unnecessary, indecent and inhumane suffering on tens of thousands of prisoners.
The issue came to the fore most recently because of a three-week hunger strike by inmates at Pelican Bay State Prison in California near the Oregon border that began on July 1 in the Orwellian Security Housing Unit, where inmates are held in wretched isolation in small windowless cells for more than 22 hours a day, some for many years.
Possessions, reading material, exercise and exposure to natural light and the outside are severely restricted. Meals are served through slots in steel cell doors. There is little in the way of human interaction. Returning to the general prison population is often conditioned on inmates divulging information on other gang members, putting themselves in jeopardy.
How inmates in these circumstances communicated to organize the protest is unclear, but it quickly spread to other California prisons. About 6,600 inmates participated at its peak. California’s huge prison system is dysfunctional in so many ways. In May, the Supreme Court found conditions at the overcrowded prisons so egregious that they violated the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment and ordered the state to cut its prison population by more than 30,000 inmates. The case did not address the issue of long-term solitary confinement.
With their health deteriorating, those inmates continuing to fast resumed eating after state prison officials met a few modest demands. Inmates in Pelican Bay’s isolation unit will get wool caps for cold weather, wall calendars to mark the passing time and some educational programming. Prison officials said current isolation and gang management policies are under review. But the protest has raised awareness about the national shame of extended solitary confinement at Pelican Bay and at high-security, “supermax” prisons all around the country.
Once used occasionally as a short-term punishment for violating prison rules, solitary confinement’s prevalent use as a long-term prison management strategy is a fairly recent development, Colin Dayan, a professor at Vanderbilt University, said in a recent Op-Ed article in The Times. Nationally, more than 20,000 inmates are confined in “supermax” facilities in horrid conditions.
Prison officials claim the treatment is necessary for combating gang activity and other threats to prison order. It is possible to maintain physical separation of prisoners without ultra harsh levels of deprivation and isolation. Mississippi, which once set the low bar for terrible prison practices, saw a steep reduction of prison violence and ample monetary savings when it dramatically cut back on long-term solitary several years ago.
Holding prisoners in solitary also is very expensive, and several other states have begun to make reductions. In any case, decency requires limits. Resorting to a dehumanizing form of punishment well known to induce suffering and drive people into mental illness is beyond them.
For more on the Hunger Strike go to: http://www.prisons.org/hungerstrike.htm
For many decades, the civilized world has recognized prolonged isolation of prisoners in cruel conditions to be inhumane, even torture. The Geneva Conventions forbid it. Even at Abu Ghraib in Iraq, where prisoners were sexually humiliated and physically abused systematically and with official sanction, the jailers had to get permission of their commanding general to keep someone in isolation for more than 30 days.
So Americans should be disgusted and outraged that prolonged solitary confinement, sometimes for months or even years, has become a routine form of prison management. It is inflicting unnecessary, indecent and inhumane suffering on tens of thousands of prisoners.
The issue came to the fore most recently because of a three-week hunger strike by inmates at Pelican Bay State Prison in California near the Oregon border that began on July 1 in the Orwellian Security Housing Unit, where inmates are held in wretched isolation in small windowless cells for more than 22 hours a day, some for many years.
Possessions, reading material, exercise and exposure to natural light and the outside are severely restricted. Meals are served through slots in steel cell doors. There is little in the way of human interaction. Returning to the general prison population is often conditioned on inmates divulging information on other gang members, putting themselves in jeopardy.
How inmates in these circumstances communicated to organize the protest is unclear, but it quickly spread to other California prisons. About 6,600 inmates participated at its peak. California’s huge prison system is dysfunctional in so many ways. In May, the Supreme Court found conditions at the overcrowded prisons so egregious that they violated the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment and ordered the state to cut its prison population by more than 30,000 inmates. The case did not address the issue of long-term solitary confinement.
With their health deteriorating, those inmates continuing to fast resumed eating after state prison officials met a few modest demands. Inmates in Pelican Bay’s isolation unit will get wool caps for cold weather, wall calendars to mark the passing time and some educational programming. Prison officials said current isolation and gang management policies are under review. But the protest has raised awareness about the national shame of extended solitary confinement at Pelican Bay and at high-security, “supermax” prisons all around the country.
Once used occasionally as a short-term punishment for violating prison rules, solitary confinement’s prevalent use as a long-term prison management strategy is a fairly recent development, Colin Dayan, a professor at Vanderbilt University, said in a recent Op-Ed article in The Times. Nationally, more than 20,000 inmates are confined in “supermax” facilities in horrid conditions.
Prison officials claim the treatment is necessary for combating gang activity and other threats to prison order. It is possible to maintain physical separation of prisoners without ultra harsh levels of deprivation and isolation. Mississippi, which once set the low bar for terrible prison practices, saw a steep reduction of prison violence and ample monetary savings when it dramatically cut back on long-term solitary several years ago.
Holding prisoners in solitary also is very expensive, and several other states have begun to make reductions. In any case, decency requires limits. Resorting to a dehumanizing form of punishment well known to induce suffering and drive people into mental illness is beyond them.
For more on the Hunger Strike go to: http://www.prisons.org/hungerstrike.htm
Monday, August 1, 2011
HHS Awards $71.3 Million to Strengthen Nursing Workforce!!
Grants Will Support Nursing Training, Nursing Diversity and Increasing Nursing Faculty
HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius today announced $71.3 million in grants to expand nursing education, training and diversity.
Nursing workforce development programs, reauthorized by the Affordable Care Act and administered by HHS' Health Resources and Services Administration, are the primary source of federal funding for nursing education and workforce development. These programs bolster nursing education at all levels, from entry-level preparation through the development of advanced practice nurses. They also prepare faculty to teach the nation’s future nursing workforce.
“These awards reflect the critical role of nurses in our healthcare system, and our ongoing commitment to attract and retain highly-skilled nurses in the profession,” said Secretary Sebelius.
Awards include:
• Nurse Education, Practice, Quality and Retention ($10.9 million – 33 awards) Strengthens nursing education and practice capacity by supporting initiatives that expand the nursing pipeline, promote career mobility for nurses, prepare more nurses at the baccalaureate level, and provide continuing education training to enhance the quality of patient care. The Affordable Care Act modified the program to enhance its focus on activities that help improve nurse retention.
• Nursing Workforce Diversity ($3.6 million – 11 awards) Increases nursing education opportunities for individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds, including racial and ethnic minorities underrepresented among registered nurses. Grants support educational opportunities for students to become registered nurses and opportunities for practicing registered nurses to pursue a baccalaureate degree in nursing. The Affordable Care Act amended the program to include support for advanced nursing education preparation, diploma and associate degree nurses entering bridge or degree completion programs and accelerated nursing degree program students.
• Nurse Faculty Loan Program ($23.4 million – 109 awards) Assists registered nurses in completing their graduate education to become qualified nurse faculty. Through grants to eligible entities, offers partial loan forgiveness for borrowers that graduate and serve as full-time nursing faculty for the prescribed period of time. The Affordable Care Act increased the annual loan limit to $35,500 from $30,000 and established a priority for doctoral nursing students.
• Advanced Nursing Education Program ($16.1 million – 55 awards) Supports advanced nursing education specialty programs that educate registered nurses to become nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, nurse anesthetists, nurse-midwives, nurse educators, nurse researchers/scientists, public health nurses and other advanced nurse specialists.
• Advanced Education Nursing Traineeships ($16 million – 349 awards) Funds traineeships at eligible institutions for registered nurses enrolled in advanced education nursing programs. Traineeships prepare nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, nurse-midwives, nurse anesthetists, nurse administrators, nurse educators, public health nurses and nurses in other specialties requiring advanced education. The Affordable Care Act removed the 10 percent cap in this program that limited the amount of support that could go to nursing students pursuing doctoral degrees.
• Nurse Anesthetist Traineeships ($1.3 million – 76 awards) Supports traineeships at eligible institutions for licensed registered nurses enrolled as full-time students in their second year of a two-year nurse anesthetist master's program.
“A well-educated, highly-skilled, and diverse nurse workforce is critical to meeting future healthcare needs,” said HRSA Administrator Mary K. Wakefield, Ph.D., R.N. “These awards expand our efforts to grow a high-quality health workforce.”
Nursing workforce grants, listed by state and organization, are available at http://www.hrsa.gov/about/news/2011tables/nursingbyrecipient.html. Totals of grant awards, listed by State, are available at http://www.hrsa.gov/about/news/2011tables/nursingbystate.html. Individual grantees may receive multiple awards for different projects. For more information on HRSA’s nursing programs, visit http://bhpr.hrsa.gov/grants/nursing/index.html
The Health Resources and Services Administration is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. HRSA is the primary Federal agency responsible for improving access to health care services for people who are uninsured, isolated, or medically vulnerable. For more information about HRSA and its programs, visit www.hrsa.gov.
HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius today announced $71.3 million in grants to expand nursing education, training and diversity.
Nursing workforce development programs, reauthorized by the Affordable Care Act and administered by HHS' Health Resources and Services Administration, are the primary source of federal funding for nursing education and workforce development. These programs bolster nursing education at all levels, from entry-level preparation through the development of advanced practice nurses. They also prepare faculty to teach the nation’s future nursing workforce.
“These awards reflect the critical role of nurses in our healthcare system, and our ongoing commitment to attract and retain highly-skilled nurses in the profession,” said Secretary Sebelius.
Awards include:
• Nurse Education, Practice, Quality and Retention ($10.9 million – 33 awards) Strengthens nursing education and practice capacity by supporting initiatives that expand the nursing pipeline, promote career mobility for nurses, prepare more nurses at the baccalaureate level, and provide continuing education training to enhance the quality of patient care. The Affordable Care Act modified the program to enhance its focus on activities that help improve nurse retention.
• Nursing Workforce Diversity ($3.6 million – 11 awards) Increases nursing education opportunities for individuals from disadvantaged backgrounds, including racial and ethnic minorities underrepresented among registered nurses. Grants support educational opportunities for students to become registered nurses and opportunities for practicing registered nurses to pursue a baccalaureate degree in nursing. The Affordable Care Act amended the program to include support for advanced nursing education preparation, diploma and associate degree nurses entering bridge or degree completion programs and accelerated nursing degree program students.
• Nurse Faculty Loan Program ($23.4 million – 109 awards) Assists registered nurses in completing their graduate education to become qualified nurse faculty. Through grants to eligible entities, offers partial loan forgiveness for borrowers that graduate and serve as full-time nursing faculty for the prescribed period of time. The Affordable Care Act increased the annual loan limit to $35,500 from $30,000 and established a priority for doctoral nursing students.
• Advanced Nursing Education Program ($16.1 million – 55 awards) Supports advanced nursing education specialty programs that educate registered nurses to become nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, nurse anesthetists, nurse-midwives, nurse educators, nurse researchers/scientists, public health nurses and other advanced nurse specialists.
• Advanced Education Nursing Traineeships ($16 million – 349 awards) Funds traineeships at eligible institutions for registered nurses enrolled in advanced education nursing programs. Traineeships prepare nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, nurse-midwives, nurse anesthetists, nurse administrators, nurse educators, public health nurses and nurses in other specialties requiring advanced education. The Affordable Care Act removed the 10 percent cap in this program that limited the amount of support that could go to nursing students pursuing doctoral degrees.
• Nurse Anesthetist Traineeships ($1.3 million – 76 awards) Supports traineeships at eligible institutions for licensed registered nurses enrolled as full-time students in their second year of a two-year nurse anesthetist master's program.
“A well-educated, highly-skilled, and diverse nurse workforce is critical to meeting future healthcare needs,” said HRSA Administrator Mary K. Wakefield, Ph.D., R.N. “These awards expand our efforts to grow a high-quality health workforce.”
Nursing workforce grants, listed by state and organization, are available at http://www.hrsa.gov/about/news/2011tables/nursingbyrecipient.html. Totals of grant awards, listed by State, are available at http://www.hrsa.gov/about/news/2011tables/nursingbystate.html. Individual grantees may receive multiple awards for different projects. For more information on HRSA’s nursing programs, visit http://bhpr.hrsa.gov/grants/nursing/index.html
The Health Resources and Services Administration is part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. HRSA is the primary Federal agency responsible for improving access to health care services for people who are uninsured, isolated, or medically vulnerable. For more information about HRSA and its programs, visit www.hrsa.gov.
County Shuts down Sheriff's Baca's Bid to Manage Parolee
LOS ANGELES - The Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors today chose the Probation Department to supervise state parolees instead of the Sheriff's Department.
The board turned down a proposal by the county's chief executive officer to create a hybrid agency that would draw on both departments. The state plans to begin releasing parolees Oct. 1 in jurisdictions where they were prosecuted.
The transfer of thousands of nonviolent parolees to counties is part of Gov. Jerry Brown's effort to shift some state obligations to local governments to save money.
Existing county probation officers were expected to take on the task in 57of 58 counties. But Sheriff Lee Baca argued two weeks ago that his department is already working to reduce recidivism by educating inmates in county jails and could more effectively take on the job of supervising parolees in Los Angeles County.
The board, in turn, asked the county's CEO to come up with a plan for a hybrid agency. That plan was rejected today, and the board put the Chief Probation Officer Donald Blevins in charge, even though his department has yet to develop a detailed plan for dealing with parolees.
The supervisors, required to submit a plan to the state by Sept. 1, pushed Blevins to lay out the details for them no later than Aug. 23.Starting Aug. 15, state prison officials will release packets of information on the people it plans to release.
"The state has made errors in the past and may be sending individuals to us that don't meet the `non, non, non' designation," CEO William Fujioka said. State officials have said only non-violent, non-sex offenders convicted of non-serious crimes would be paroled.
Fujioka urged Blevins to have his probation officers review the parolee information from the state as soon as possible when it is released. Supervisor Michael Antonovich suggested dropping the idea of having a hybrid agency oversee parolees.
"The Probation Department has been providing supervision and rehabilitative services to adult probationers for over a century," Antonovich said. "The department's existing infrastructure and internal expertise renders it the most suitable county agency to assume the responsibility."
The amendment would allow sheriff's deputies to work with probation officers only to identify and arrest wanted parolees. Sheriff Lee Baca said he would continue to keep the public safe from high-risk parolees. "I'm not going to ask the chief probation officer's permission, I'm just going to do it."
He also said he felt Blevins "looks upon me and my department as some kind of threat to the traditions of rehabilitation." He accused Blevins of failing to cooperate and talking behind Baca's back. Baca took his own shot at the probation chief's ability to meet deadlines, saying, "in my organization...when we say we have an emergency, that is in fact what it is."
On Thursday, union leaders representing the majority of Los Angeles County probation officers delivered a letter with a "no confidence" vote to Blevins, contending that the department is in danger of violating its agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice regarding oversight of juvenile probationers.
Two weeks ago, Supervisor Gloria Molina also raised concerns about progress on the Department of Justice agreement and said she was concerned about giving more work to a department that was already overloaded. The board unanimously agreed in a 5-0 vote to have the Probation Department take the lead.
The board turned down a proposal by the county's chief executive officer to create a hybrid agency that would draw on both departments. The state plans to begin releasing parolees Oct. 1 in jurisdictions where they were prosecuted.
The transfer of thousands of nonviolent parolees to counties is part of Gov. Jerry Brown's effort to shift some state obligations to local governments to save money.
Existing county probation officers were expected to take on the task in 57of 58 counties. But Sheriff Lee Baca argued two weeks ago that his department is already working to reduce recidivism by educating inmates in county jails and could more effectively take on the job of supervising parolees in Los Angeles County.
The board, in turn, asked the county's CEO to come up with a plan for a hybrid agency. That plan was rejected today, and the board put the Chief Probation Officer Donald Blevins in charge, even though his department has yet to develop a detailed plan for dealing with parolees.
The supervisors, required to submit a plan to the state by Sept. 1, pushed Blevins to lay out the details for them no later than Aug. 23.Starting Aug. 15, state prison officials will release packets of information on the people it plans to release.
"The state has made errors in the past and may be sending individuals to us that don't meet the `non, non, non' designation," CEO William Fujioka said. State officials have said only non-violent, non-sex offenders convicted of non-serious crimes would be paroled.
Fujioka urged Blevins to have his probation officers review the parolee information from the state as soon as possible when it is released. Supervisor Michael Antonovich suggested dropping the idea of having a hybrid agency oversee parolees.
"The Probation Department has been providing supervision and rehabilitative services to adult probationers for over a century," Antonovich said. "The department's existing infrastructure and internal expertise renders it the most suitable county agency to assume the responsibility."
The amendment would allow sheriff's deputies to work with probation officers only to identify and arrest wanted parolees. Sheriff Lee Baca said he would continue to keep the public safe from high-risk parolees. "I'm not going to ask the chief probation officer's permission, I'm just going to do it."
He also said he felt Blevins "looks upon me and my department as some kind of threat to the traditions of rehabilitation." He accused Blevins of failing to cooperate and talking behind Baca's back. Baca took his own shot at the probation chief's ability to meet deadlines, saying, "in my organization...when we say we have an emergency, that is in fact what it is."
On Thursday, union leaders representing the majority of Los Angeles County probation officers delivered a letter with a "no confidence" vote to Blevins, contending that the department is in danger of violating its agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice regarding oversight of juvenile probationers.
Two weeks ago, Supervisor Gloria Molina also raised concerns about progress on the Department of Justice agreement and said she was concerned about giving more work to a department that was already overloaded. The board unanimously agreed in a 5-0 vote to have the Probation Department take the lead.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)