Fwd: Re: [IHSS Consumers Union] Bob Kafka. sbc ; Bruce...

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- mQQBBGBjDtIBH6DJa80zDBgR+VqlYGaXu5bEJg9HEgAtJeCLuThdhXfl5Zs32RyB I1QjIlttvngepHQozmglBDmi2FZ4S+wWhZv10bZCoyXPIPwwq6TylwPv8+buxuff B6tYil3VAB9XKGPyPjKrlXn1fz76VMpuTOs7OGYR8xDidw9EHfBvmb+sQyrU1FOW aPHxba5lK6hAo/KYFpTnimsmsz0Cvo1sZAV/EFIkfagiGTL2J/NhINfGPScpj8LB bYelVN/NU4c6Ws1ivWbfcGvqU4lymoJgJo/l9HiV6X2bdVyuB24O3xeyhTnD7laf epykwxODVfAt4qLC3J478MSSmTXS8zMumaQMNR1tUUYtHCJC0xAKbsFukzbfoRDv m2zFCCVxeYHvByxstuzg0SurlPyuiFiy2cENek5+W8Sjt95nEiQ4suBldswpz1Kv n71t7vd7zst49xxExB+tD+vmY7GXIds43Rb05dqksQuo2yCeuCbY5RBiMHX3d4nU 041jHBsv5wY24j0N6bpAsm/s0T0Mt7IO6UaN33I712oPlclTweYTAesW3jDpeQ7A ioi0CMjWZnRpUxorcFmzL/Cc/fPqgAtnAL5GIUuEOqUf8AlKmzsKcnKZ7L2d8mxG QqN16nlAiUuUpchQNMr+tAa1L5S1uK/fu6thVlSSk7KMQyJfVpwLy6068a1WmNj4 yxo9HaSeQNXh3cui+61qb9wlrkwlaiouw9+bpCmR0V8+XpWma/D/TEz9tg5vkfNo eG4t+FUQ7QgrrvIkDNFcRyTUO9cJHB+kcp2NgCcpCwan3wnuzKka9AWFAitpoAwx L6BX0L8kg/LzRPhkQnMOrj/tuu9hZrui4woqURhWLiYi2aZe7WCkuoqR/qMGP6qP EQRcvndTWkQo6K9BdCH4ZjRqcGbY1wFt/qgAxhi+uSo2IWiM1fRI4eRCGifpBtYK Dw44W9uPAu4cgVnAUzESEeW0bft5XXxAqpvyMBIdv3YqfVfOElZdKbteEu4YuOao FLpbk4ajCxO4Fzc9AugJ8iQOAoaekJWA7TjWJ6CbJe8w3thpznP0w6jNG8ZleZ6a jHckyGlx5wzQTRLVT5+wK6edFlxKmSd93jkLWWCbrc0Dsa39OkSTDmZPoZgKGRhp Yc0C4jePYreTGI6p7/H3AFv84o0fjHt5fn4GpT1Xgfg+1X/wmIv7iNQtljCjAqhD 6XN+QiOAYAloAym8lOm9zOoCDv1TSDpmeyeP0rNV95OozsmFAUaKSUcUFBUfq9FL uyr+rJZQw2DPfq2wE75PtOyJiZH7zljCh12fp5yrNx6L7HSqwwuG7vGO4f0ltYOZ dPKzaEhCOO7o108RexdNABEBAAG0Rldpa2lMZWFrcyBFZGl0b3JpYWwgT2ZmaWNl IEhpZ2ggU2VjdXJpdHkgQ29tbXVuaWNhdGlvbiBLZXkgKDIwMjEtMjAyNCmJBDEE EwEKACcFAmBjDtICGwMFCQWjmoAFCwkIBwMFFQoJCAsFFgIDAQACHgECF4AACgkQ nG3NFyg+RUzRbh+eMSKgMYOdoz70u4RKTvev4KyqCAlwji+1RomnW7qsAK+l1s6b ugOhOs8zYv2ZSy6lv5JgWITRZogvB69JP94+Juphol6LIImC9X3P/bcBLw7VCdNA mP0XQ4OlleLZWXUEW9EqR4QyM0RkPMoxXObfRgtGHKIkjZYXyGhUOd7MxRM8DBzN yieFf3CjZNADQnNBk/ZWRdJrpq8J1W0dNKI7IUW2yCyfdgnPAkX/lyIqw4ht5UxF VGrva3PoepPir0TeKP3M0BMxpsxYSVOdwcsnkMzMlQ7TOJlsEdtKQwxjV6a1vH+t k4TpR4aG8fS7ZtGzxcxPylhndiiRVwdYitr5nKeBP69aWH9uLcpIzplXm4DcusUc Bo8KHz+qlIjs03k8hRfqYhUGB96nK6TJ0xS7tN83WUFQXk29fWkXjQSp1Z5dNCcT sWQBTxWxwYyEI8iGErH2xnok3HTyMItdCGEVBBhGOs1uCHX3W3yW2CooWLC/8Pia qgss3V7m4SHSfl4pDeZJcAPiH3Fm00wlGUslVSziatXW3499f2QdSyNDw6Qc+chK hUFflmAaavtpTqXPk+Lzvtw5SSW+iRGmEQICKzD2chpy05mW5v6QUy+G29nchGDD rrfpId2Gy1VoyBx8FAto4+6BOWVijrOj9Boz7098huotDQgNoEnidvVdsqP+P1RR QJekr97idAV28i7iEOLd99d6qI5xRqc3/QsV+y2ZnnyKB10uQNVPLgUkQljqN0wP XmdVer+0X+aeTHUd1d64fcc6M0cpYefNNRCsTsgbnWD+x0rjS9RMo+Uosy41+IxJ 6qIBhNrMK6fEmQoZG3qTRPYYrDoaJdDJERN2E5yLxP2SPI0rWNjMSoPEA/gk5L91 m6bToM/0VkEJNJkpxU5fq5834s3PleW39ZdpI0HpBDGeEypo/t9oGDY3Pd7JrMOF zOTohxTyu4w2Ql7jgs+7KbO9PH0Fx5dTDmDq66jKIkkC7DI0QtMQclnmWWtn14BS KTSZoZekWESVYhORwmPEf32EPiC9t8zDRglXzPGmJAPISSQz+Cc9o1ipoSIkoCCh 2MWoSbn3KFA53vgsYd0vS/+Nw5aUksSleorFns2yFgp/w5Ygv0D007k6u3DqyRLB W5y6tJLvbC1ME7jCBoLW6nFEVxgDo727pqOpMVjGGx5zcEokPIRDMkW/lXjw+fTy c6misESDCAWbgzniG/iyt77Kz711unpOhw5aemI9LpOq17AiIbjzSZYt6b1Aq7Wr aB+C1yws2ivIl9ZYK911A1m69yuUg0DPK+uyL7Z86XC7hI8B0IY1MM/MbmFiDo6H dkfwUckE74sxxeJrFZKkBbkEAQRgYw7SAR+gvktRnaUrj/84Pu0oYVe49nPEcy/7 5Fs6LvAwAj+JcAQPW3uy7D7fuGFEQguasfRrhWY5R87+g5ria6qQT2/Sf19Tpngs d0Dd9DJ1MMTaA1pc5F7PQgoOVKo68fDXfjr76n1NchfCzQbozS1HoM8ys3WnKAw+ Neae9oymp2t9FB3B+To4nsvsOM9KM06ZfBILO9NtzbWhzaAyWwSrMOFFJfpyxZAQ 8VbucNDHkPJjhxuafreC9q2f316RlwdS+XjDggRY6xD77fHtzYea04UWuZidc5zL VpsuZR1nObXOgE+4s8LU5p6fo7jL0CRxvfFnDhSQg2Z617flsdjYAJ2JR4apg3Es G46xWl8xf7t227/0nXaCIMJI7g09FeOOsfCmBaf/ebfiXXnQbK2zCbbDYXbrYgw6 ESkSTt940lHtynnVmQBvZqSXY93MeKjSaQk1VKyobngqaDAIIzHxNCR941McGD7F qHHM2YMTgi6XXaDThNC6u5msI1l/24PPvrxkJxjPSGsNlCbXL2wqaDgrP6LvCP9O uooR9dVRxaZXcKQjeVGxrcRtoTSSyZimfjEercwi9RKHt42O5akPsXaOzeVjmvD9 EB5jrKBe/aAOHgHJEIgJhUNARJ9+dXm7GofpvtN/5RE6qlx11QGvoENHIgawGjGX Jy5oyRBS+e+KHcgVqbmV9bvIXdwiC4BDGxkXtjc75hTaGhnDpu69+Cq016cfsh+0 XaRnHRdh0SZfcYdEqqjn9CTILfNuiEpZm6hYOlrfgYQe1I13rgrnSV+EfVCOLF4L P9ejcf3eCvNhIhEjsBNEUDOFAA6J5+YqZvFYtjk3efpM2jCg6XTLZWaI8kCuADMu yrQxGrM8yIGvBndrlmmljUqlc8/Nq9rcLVFDsVqb9wOZjrCIJ7GEUD6bRuolmRPE SLrpP5mDS+wetdhLn5ME1e9JeVkiSVSFIGsumZTNUaT0a90L4yNj5gBE40dvFplW 7TLeNE/ewDQk5LiIrfWuTUn3CqpjIOXxsZFLjieNgofX1nSeLjy3tnJwuTYQlVJO 3CbqH1k6cOIvE9XShnnuxmiSoav4uZIXnLZFQRT9v8UPIuedp7TO8Vjl0xRTajCL PdTk21e7fYriax62IssYcsbbo5G5auEdPO04H/+v/hxmRsGIr3XYvSi4ZWXKASxy a/jHFu9zEqmy0EBzFzpmSx+FrzpMKPkoU7RbxzMgZwIYEBk66Hh6gxllL0JmWjV0 iqmJMtOERE4NgYgumQT3dTxKuFtywmFxBTe80BhGlfUbjBtiSrULq59np4ztwlRT wDEAVDoZbN57aEXhQ8jjF2RlHtqGXhFMrg9fALHaRQARAQABiQQZBBgBCgAPBQJg Yw7SAhsMBQkFo5qAAAoJEJxtzRcoPkVMdigfoK4oBYoxVoWUBCUekCg/alVGyEHa ekvFmd3LYSKX/WklAY7cAgL/1UlLIFXbq9jpGXJUmLZBkzXkOylF9FIXNNTFAmBM 3TRjfPv91D8EhrHJW0SlECN+riBLtfIQV9Y1BUlQthxFPtB1G1fGrv4XR9Y4TsRj VSo78cNMQY6/89Kc00ip7tdLeFUHtKcJs+5EfDQgagf8pSfF/TWnYZOMN2mAPRRf fh3SkFXeuM7PU/X0B6FJNXefGJbmfJBOXFbaSRnkacTOE9caftRKN1LHBAr8/RPk pc9p6y9RBc/+6rLuLRZpn2W3m3kwzb4scDtHHFXXQBNC1ytrqdwxU7kcaJEPOFfC XIdKfXw9AQll620qPFmVIPH5qfoZzjk4iTH06Yiq7PI4OgDis6bZKHKyyzFisOkh DXiTuuDnzgcu0U4gzL+bkxJ2QRdiyZdKJJMswbm5JDpX6PLsrzPmN314lKIHQx3t NNXkbfHL/PxuoUtWLKg7/I3PNnOgNnDqCgqpHJuhU1AZeIkvewHsYu+urT67tnpJ AK1Z4CgRxpgbYA4YEV1rWVAPHX1u1okcg85rc5FHK8zh46zQY1wzUTWubAcxqp9K 1IqjXDDkMgIX2Z2fOA1plJSwugUCbFjn4sbT0t0YuiEFMPMB42ZCjcCyA1yysfAd DYAmSer1bq47tyTFQwP+2ZnvW/9p3yJ4oYWzwMzadR3T0K4sgXRC2Us9nPL9k2K5 TRwZ07wE2CyMpUv+hZ4ja13A/1ynJZDZGKys+pmBNrO6abxTGohM8LIWjS+YBPIq trxh8jxzgLazKvMGmaA6KaOGwS8vhfPfxZsu2TJaRPrZMa/HpZ2aEHwxXRy4nm9G Kx1eFNJO6Ues5T7KlRtl8gflI5wZCCD/4T5rto3SfG0s0jr3iAVb3NCn9Q73kiph PSwHuRxcm+hWNszjJg3/W+Fr8fdXAh5i0JzMNscuFAQNHgfhLigenq+BpCnZzXya 01kqX24AdoSIbH++vvgE0Bjj6mzuRrH5VJ1Qg9nQ+yMjBWZADljtp3CARUbNkiIg tUJ8IJHCGVwXZBqY4qeJc3h/RiwWM2UIFfBZ+E06QPznmVLSkwvvop3zkr4eYNez cIKUju8vRdW6sxaaxC/GECDlP0Wo6lH0uChpE3NJ1daoXIeymajmYxNt+drz7+pd jMqjDtNA2rgUrjptUgJK8ZLdOQ4WCrPY5pP9ZXAO7+mK7S3u9CTywSJmQpypd8hv 8Bu8jKZdoxOJXxj8CphK951eNOLYxTOxBUNB8J2lgKbmLIyPvBvbS1l1lCM5oHlw WXGlp70pspj3kaX4mOiFaWMKHhOLb+er8yh8jspM184= =5a6T -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- -----Original Message----- From: Bob Kafka <[email protected]> To: IHSS Consumers Union <[email protected]> Sent: Sun, Sep 2, 2012 2:19 pm Subject: Re: [IHSS Consumers Union] Bob Kafka. sbc <[email protected]>; Bruce... Bob Kafka commented on your post in IHSS Consumers Union. Bob Kafka 2:19pm Sep 2 Next week the focus is on the Convention. There are two deadlines. Sept 7th is the deadline for the Gov to ask for an extension of the appeal date. If they don't ask for an extension of the deadline to appeal the case to the Supreme Court they have till Sept 17th to file an appeal. Two things: 1. If you know any delegates in Charlotte that might go up to the Gov and say "Don't Appeal - Negotiate" that would send a message this of national concern 2. Bruce Darling of ADAPT is developing a call in day as well as other things we can do nationally so STAY TUNED. FYI. We have spoken to national disability lawyers as well as lawyers from DoJ and there is total consensus on the damage that can be done if the case is appealed. Onward Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T Comment History Nancy Becker Kennedy12:55pm Sep 2OMG. This could uravel all we've fought for. What do you suggest we do,Bob? Bob Kafka12:18pm Sep 2FacebookM.R., et.al. v. Dreyfus An Olmstead Challenge to WA State’s 10% Across the Board Personal Care Hours Reduction The U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Olmstead v. L.C. , 527 U.S. 581 (1999), established that the unjustified institutional isolation of people with disabilities is a form of unlawful discrimination that violates the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Rehabilitation Act. That groundbreaking civil rights ruling has resulted in the deinstitutionalization of many thousands of individuals with disabilities, who now receive services in their homes instead of in nursing homes or other institutions as a result. But Olmstead may be in jeopardy. States facing legal pressure to continue funding for community based programs may seek U.S. Supreme Court review of lower court decisions applying the Olmstead decision. Such review could result in the dramatic undermining, or even the complete evisceration, of the Olmstead ruling and its attendant protections for people with disabilities. Specifically, in M.R. v. Dreyfus, Plaintiffs[1] brought an Olmstead suit challenging reductions to in-home personal care services for approximately 45,000 Medicaid recipients. The reductions, which were the result of a budget crisis facing Washington State, averaged 10%, with smaller percentage reductions for recipients with greater levels of disability and much larger percentage cuts for recipients who were identified as having fewer needs. The Plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction on the ground that the 10% cut would violate the antidiscrimination provisions of the ADA and Rehabilitation Act by substantially increasing the risk that they would be institutionalized in order to receive care adequate to maintain their mental and physical health. The federal district court denied preliminary relief, but the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed and granted a preliminary injunction for the twelve individual named plaintiffs. The Ninth Circuit rejected the argument that individuals with disabilities must be already institutionalized in order to invoke the protections of the ADA, and held that a “serious risk” of unnecessary institutionalization is enough to obtain injunctive relief. Washington state has indicated that it may seek U.S. Supreme Court review of this decision. In the lower courts, Washington argued that it would violate the U.S. Constitution for the ADA to prevent states from cutting services, even when those cuts will cause unnecessary institutionalization. But regardless of how narrowly or broadly Washington frames its challenge, Supreme Court review could put the Olmstead precedent in great jeopardy. In a number of recent cases, the Supreme Court has reached out to deliver far broader and more sweeping revisions of prior law than the parties actually sought or suggested, including reaching out to overturn or question major precedents. Olmstead itself was a divided decision, and might not come out the same way if it were in front of the current Supreme Court. Moreover, since Olmstead, the conservative Supreme Court majority has narrowed, and in some cases even struck down as unconstitutional, many important civil rights protections, including provisions of the ADA. In particular, the Court has been hostile to Congress’ authority to impose obligations upon states – most recently as shown in the Supreme Court decision striking down the Affordable Care Act’s mandate that states receiving Medicaid funds expand Medicaid enrollment as part of national health care reform. This Supreme Court’s hostility toward civil rights protections and friendliness to state challenges to federal authority do not bode well for how an Olmstead case would come out today. Washington’s certiorari petition would thus put at risk the major 20th Century landmark disability rights decision. Washington should not seek Supreme Court review. Nancy Becker Kennedy12:04pm Sep 2Bob, can you flesh this out a bit for us re Karen's request for more background? Karen Duncanwood11:56am Sep 2Thanks Nancy for forwarding this from Bob. But I don't really understand it. Seems he didn't give enough facts to understand what's going on. What is the case M.R. vs. Dreyfus? Who are those named? What is the case about? What's the legal history? Did it get decided one way in a lower court? Why? Did it get then appealed? By who? And the result (ruling of the appeal court) was? Why might or might not the Gov. take it to the Supreme Court? And how is it linked to Olmstead? What freedom would we lose, why? How? Please try to get him or you to state the facts & a brief history of the case. I get the sense of urgency he feels, but not why. He says "If you haven't heard about the litigation of M.R. vs. Dreyfus, don't feel bad - either did the vast majority of people in the disability and aging communities." And then he doesn't inform us. Kind of strange don't you think? Unless I totally missed something, or the case description has been around and I just missed it (if so, sorry). I am cc'ing this to the address listed for Bob too, so hopefully he can respond directly with information about this case. So we all know why he wants us to act. Thanks, Karen Karen Duncanwood 6656 Pentz Rd. #56 Paradise, CA 95969 (530) 877-1878 [email protected] Cheryl Rose11:55am Sep 2In reality, the democrats are no friends to the disabled. They like people to think they are. View All CommentsOriginal Post Nancy Becker Kennedy10:44pm Sep 1Bob Kafka. sbc <[email protected]>; Bruce Darling <[email protected]> Sent: Sat, Sep 1, 2012 2:05 pm Subject: Olmstead Decision Threatened!! Advocates: If you haven't heard about the litigation M.R. vs Dreyfus don't feel bad - either did the vast majority of people in the disability and aging communities. The legal issues are somewhat complicated however if the Governor of Washington State appeals the case to the Supreme Court, most legal experts in our Community believe Olmstead could be overturned. YES OVERTURNED! To say this is critical is an understatement!! Did I mention that the Governor is a Democrat!! She will be in North Carolina next week at the Democratic Convention. She needs to hear from folks attending the Convention on the importance of Olmstead. Please read the Alert below and Act. For more info contact Bruce Darling of ADAPT. Onward ##### Subject: The most IMMEDIATE threat to Olmstead is a Democrat! We are being attacked on ALL sides, but the most IMMEDIATE threat to Olmstead is a Democrat! We need folks going to the Democratic National Convention to PERSONALLY urge Governor Gregoire to NOT to appeal MR v Dreyfus to the Supreme Court! RIGHT NOW Governor Gregoire (Washington State) is deciding if she will appeal the MR v Dreyfus case to the Supreme Court. (She has until 9/17 if she doesn't ask for an extension by 9/7.) It's an ADA/Olstead case and an appeal to the Supreme Court has widespread implications for Americans with disabilities around the country! Our civil rights and LITERALLY our freedom are at risk! With the Democratic party's commitment to civil rights, which includes people with disabilities, the idea that a DEMOCRAT would take the lead in undoing our civil right to live in freedom is absolutely appalling. How would the Dems respond if she was attacking the Civil Rights Act or Title IX? Or appealing a case that could potentially overturn Brown v Board of Ed? We know other Dems are weighing in (everyone knows who they are and we THANK them), but we are also hearing that some, including Gov Brown of California, is pushing her to appeal. The timing of this is striking! As a Dem delegate and Dem Gov, Gregoire is going to be at the Dem convention. With their rhetoric about being defenders of civil rights, do they realize how hypocritical this looks? Wouldn't the Dems rather let us focus on Romney and Ryan instead of painting huge targets on themselves right now? We need folks who are going to the convention to PERSONALLY urge Governor Gregoire NOT to appeal MR v Dreyfus! Please share this and urge folks to use this opportunity! IT'S TIME TO DEFEND OUR FREEDOM... or we will LOSE it! Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T View Post on Facebook · Edit Email Settings · Reply to this email to add a comment.