(Cross-posted from The COFAR Blog)
Have our legislators forgotten about the most vulnerable people in our society?
Unfortunately, that’s the message we’ve taken away from last week’s actions by the House on the state budget.
First, we urged legislators to approve an amendment calling for a comprehensive, independent study of the Department of Developmental Services system, along the lines of a similar study that was approved last year of the Department of Mental Health system.
Among the questions we think need to be examined are whether the ongoing privatization of services to people with developmental disabilities is really resulting in improved care. Or is this trend simply padding the ample salaries of the executives of the hundreds of corporate providers that contract with DDS?
We also urged legislators to approve additional funding to prevent the layoffs of state service coordinators, who make sure that people in the DDS system are getting the services they need. And we asked for additional funding to prevent the possible closures of state-operated group homes, to which many former residents of state developmental centers are being sent as those centers are closed down.
The House rejected all of those amendments. But they did pass an amendment that provides all kinds of goodies to the corporate providers, including a state subsidy if residents of their group homes opt to leave those homes. That amendment will implement the so-called ‘Real Lives’ bill, without bothering with the need for a public hearing.
Could all this have anything to do with the fact that legislators nowdays seem to act solely in the interest of those who contribute the most to their political campaigns? Is there anyone out there who still doesn’t believe that’s the way our modern “representative” system of government works?
Apparently, lawmakers don’t feel under much of an obligation anymore even to fulfill promises made to those who don’t have political clout on Beacon Hill, or Capitol Hill for that matter.
What else are we to make of the virtual promise that state Representative Patricia Haddad, a leader in the House, who spearheaded last year’s legislation to study DMH, made to support the DDS study?
In a meeting with families of residents of the state-run Glavin Regional Center in September, Haddad had this to say about the proposed DDS study, which would have included a study of the closure of Glavin itself:
“Someone has to be the first to say we’re not afraid to have an outside study done to tell us what’s wrong and what’s right,” she said. That day, she also said a number of other things that the Glavin families desperately wanted to hear from her, including the statement that “there are more horror stories than good stories” in the privatized system of DDS care.
It initially came as a shock to us, therefore, when we found out just before the budget debate last week that Haddad had declined even to co-sponsor the amendment to undertake that outside study of DDS. Maybe she truly feels that someone has to be the first to say we’re not afraid to have the study, but it wasn’t going to be her.
Why won’t legislators like Haddad support these critically important initiatives for our most vulnerable residents when push comes to shove? Is there anyone who doubts that we need to re-examine the DDS system? It is a system in which, as Haddad herself said, there are often more horror stories than good stories.
As the state has increasingly come to rely on corporate-controlled care for people with developmental disabilities, the waiting list for services only appears to be growing longer. It’s a system in which the state does a mediocre job at best in monitoring the care provided in thousands of dispersed residences whose staff are largely poorly paid and do not receive adequate training.
It’s a system that is beginning to resemble the “warehouses” of yesteryear, when thousands of people with developmental disabilities were packed into institutions that did not have the staff or resources to care for them. Now, they’re simply packed into corporate-run group homes, which don’t have the staff or resources to care for them.
When will our elected leaders wake up to this and care enough to do something about it?
This is those at the state house, who should be willing to stand up and do the right thing, instead catering to the one-size-fits-all and the we-can-do-it-all-in-the-community proponents. But that is all a myth.
I don’t know about you, but I want my representative outta there.
Furthermore, we don’t need more laws when the ones we have are ignored, or should I say picked over for chosen parts.
For all the lip service and PC name changes and other propadanga about community first, blah, blah blah, clearly the basic mentality of our legislators has not changed. A few decades ago the warehouses were large and we at least knew where they were (not that that made any difference). Now they are scattered throughout the state, under the radar so to speak, with little to no oversight and nobody knows and more importantly nobody cares–least of all our gutless, totally compassionless legislators. Many of whom are spending most of their time trying to figure out how keep there sorry behinds out of the slammer to give a thought of protecting the people they are elected to protect.
All you need to do is watch the news once in a while to know that EHHS is a total shambles (drug lab scandals, pharmacy (mixing) scandal, early education commission (who even knew we had one) welfare & EBT scandals every other day, (we learned in the past few days that the taxpayers were bank rolling the terrorists that bombed the marathon via welfare, subsidized housing, EBT card, scholarships, etc. etc. etc.) Seriously, with just about every Department of HHS in shambles, can anyone possibly really believe that DDS is the one true bastian of bureacratic excellence–the lone Department that is running like a well-oiled machine…..the one Department that the individuals its is supposed to protect are totally vulnerable and therefore the easiest to take complete advantage of?
Perhaps they were just to gutless to stand up to one more scandal on their watch. I agree with truthaboutdmr—I’m disgusted and sick of my representatives and want them out of here–starting at the top.
Does Dave-from-hvad alert his yespeople when he posts? Whenever he posts on something like this ssurette and truthaboutdmr, who never otherwise participate on BMG, come out of the woodwork to proclaim how great and correct dave is. It’s predictable and so disconnected from the rest of our conversations.
I’ve noticed that Christopher steps in every now and then to make this sort of comment about my posts. Funny, I thought this site was about government and politics. My posts tend to be about a particular aspect of government (although I have posted and commented on many other topics as well).
I’m sorry to hear that discussing the state budget and the care that our government provides to some of the most vulnerable members of our society is disconnected from your conversations.
Christopher’s account. You’re usually a voice for civility here. I think Dave’s posts are valuable; they give some insight about aspects of state government some of us don’t see firsthand. It doesn’t matter who comes on to agree. If you have a beef with the substance, raise it and debate the point.
My (minor) quibble is that I think Dave gave me a downrate for saying some of our legislators, Democrats in theory, have to go. But I think some of them do have to go and things like this post show why.
…though it does seem repetitive and i’m not aware of others except maybe occasionally campaign staff who post as mouthpieces for their employers. I’m not even necessarily saying the perspective isn’t valuable though I believe i’ve said on other posts that I lean toward the state side to this story. It’s just when I saw the diary with two comments listed I knew right away whom the were from and all they do is reaffirm the diary. Dave does comment on other matters from time to time, but these COFAR, and previously Fernald, diaries make me feel like I’m reading a different blog all of a sudden. They strike me as a tiny single-issue minority with an agenda and I’d prefer them participate on more threads on BMG rather than being so predictably stuck in a single issue rut.
because the problems they are concerned with haven’t gone away? What difference does it make to you if they don’t make more random comments? They’re obliviously most concerned about these care issues, which are thorny long term, & I’m guessing some may have a personal connection to. You don’t have to read it. One can’t be in depth on everything, and if no one was ultra-focused on anything nothing would be improved. There’s no litmus test you have to make a minimum # of comments on random subjects.
I think you’ll realize I’m not writing about a “tiny minority” of people or a single issue. The care of people with developmental disabilities is — or should be — a core function of our government.
The organization I work for is concerned about all people with developmental disabilities in the state. We’re particularly concerned about the impact of the privatization of services and its impact on all people with disabilities, not just people living in the developmental centers. This is all inter-connected.
Right now, there is a waiting list of thousands of people in the DDS system who cannot access residential or other services. The argument I’ve been trying to make is that outsourcing more and more services to corporate providers while at the same time cutting the DDS budget is only making this situation worse for everyone.
You’re free of course to disagree with our point of view. But I hope you can appreciate that this is a big issue. Also, as fenway49 pointed out, a tone of civility in this discussion would be appreciated. I don’t think calling me a “mouthpiece” etc. contributes much to the discussion. If I didn’t believe in what I was writing, I wouldn’t be writing it.
It wasn’t me who gave you a downrate. I agree with you that come of our legislators have to go.
I’m pretty sure you gave me a down-rate sometime recently, but it might have been about something else. Doesn’t matter anyway.
so, if it happened, it was probably by mistake.
I’m sorry I mentioned it at all, it was more tongue-in-cheek.
about my participation on BMG. I wasn’t aware that I was required to comment on every topic discussed in this forum in order to make a comment on a particular topic that interests me. Frankly I couldn’t care less about most of the stuff (the only word I can use here) that is discussed. And I’m really sorry that my passion and compassion for our most vulnerable citizens (the developmentally disabled) and my willingness to voice my opinion here offends you. Its an issue that affects tens of thousands of people, billions of dollars, and obviously–and as your comment more than adequately demonstrates–you’re more focused on when I (and few others) “come out of the woodwork” to make a comment rather than the substance of the post.
This really isn’t supposed to be a forum for attacking commentors–but I too was insulted and this is not the first time I’ve been insulted, not because of what I said but because I only make comments on what interests me–why would I comment on anything else?
Its not the first time that dave-from harvard has been insulted as well.
And, as I wrote, I don’t condone insulting any of you and it’s clearly your right to comment on what you find relevant, with no obligation to so much as read the rest. It just seemed you were making a (strongly negative) statement about the rest of the content here. I get that you might have responded in anger to what I see as an unjustified attack.
You follow the COFAR blog regularly and come here when there’s a cross-post. No problem with that.
To bring it back on topic, let me say that I for one am grateful we Dave and others give attention to this crucial issue. It is incredibly important and the cuts to services often fall on these populations first and they are arguably some of the most vulnerable. Glad to see people raising awareness and putting pressure on policy makers for this issue. And BMG is a great way to link this single issue to a well connected internet savvy grassroots that is willing to go to bat for a broad spectrum of social justice policy related issues, including this one. I encourage the posters to maintain their presence here and continue these posts.