Done!
With Love,
CtrlAltDel aka Dave
C4/5 Complete - 29 Years Post
Texas, USA
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please contact your representative or senator on this committee.From: "Stephanie Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Dana
To: "micassa list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: House Energy and Commerce Committee & MiCASSA
Date: Mon, 6 Jun 2005 16:30:31 -0500
----- Original Message -----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, June 06, 2005 3:33 PM
Subject: House Energy and Commerce Committee
Dear MiCASSA Supporter:
Below are the members of the House Energy
and Commerce Committee by state.
The Health SubCommittee hears all Medicaid related bills
before it goes to the full Energy and Commerce Committee.
If you have a member on the full or subcommittee from your state please
contact them and ask them to co-sponsor MiCASSA (H. 910).
Though MiCASSA will be politically tough to pass this year,
through our continuous advocacy for MiCASSA, we have made
changes in the institutionally biased system through the
Real Choice System Change grants, Money Follows the Person concept,
and grassroots advocacy at the state level. We have seen major shifts
in the institution to community funding ratio which converts in REAL PEOPLE
GETTING/STAYING OUT OF NURSING HOMES AND OTHER INSTITUTIONS. We need to
continue our advocacy at the state level.
If you have questions: 512/442-0252
www.adapt.org [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For an Institution Free America,
The ADAPT Community
HOUSE ENERGY AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE MEMBERS
*** Members of the Health SubCommittee
ARIZONA
John B. Shadegg ( R ) ***
ARKANSAS
Mike Ross ( D )
CALIFORNIA
George P. Radanovich ( R )
Mary Bono ( R ) ***
Henry A. W! axman ( D ) ***
Anna Eshoo( D ) ***
Lois Capps ( D ) ***
Hilda L. Solis ( D )
COLORADO
Diana L. DeGette ( D ) ***
FLORIDA
Michael Bilirakis ( R ) ***
Cliff Stearns ( R )
Jim Davis ( D ) ***
GEORGIA
Nathan Deal ( R ) *** Chairperson, Health SubCommittee
Charles Norwood ( R ) ***
IDAHO
C.L. Otter ( R )
ILLINOIS
John M. Shimkus ( R ) ***
Bobby Rush ( D ) ***
Janice D. Schakowsky ( D )
INDIANA
Steve Buyer ( R ) ***
KENTUCKY
Edward Whitfield ( R )
MAINE
Thomas H. Allen ( D ) ***
MARYLAND
Albert Wynn ( D )
MASSECHUSETTS
Edward J. Markey ( D )
MICHIGAN
Fred Upton ( R ) ***
Michael J. Rogers ( R ) ***
John D. Dingell (! D ) Ranking Member, Energy and Commerce Committee
Bart Stupak ( D )
MISSISSIPPI
Charles Pickering,Jr. ( R ) ***
MISSOURI
Roy Blunt ( R )
NEBRASKA
Lee Terry ( R )
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Charles Bass ( R )
NEW JERSEY
Michael A.Ferguson ( R ) ***
Frank Pallone, Jr. ( D ) ***
NEW MEXICO
Heather A. Wilson ( R )
NEW YORK
Vito Fossella ( R )
Edolphus Towns ( D ) ***
Eliot Engel ( D )
NORTH CAROLINA
Sue Myrick ( R ) ***
OHIO
Paul E. Gilmor ( R ) ***
Sherrod Brown ( D ) *** Ranking Member, Health SubCommittee
Ted Strickland ( D ) ***
OKLAHOMA
John Sullivan ( R )
OREGON
Greg Walden ( R )
PENNSYLVANIA
Joseph R. Pitts ( R ) ***
Timothy F. Murphy ( R )
Mike Doyle ( D )
TENNESSEE
Marsha Blackburn ( R )
Bart Gordon ( D ) ***
TEXAS
Joe Barton ( R ) Chairperson, Energy and Commerce Committee
Ralph M. Hall ( R ) ***
Michael C. Burgess ( R ) ***
Gene Green ( D ) ***
Charles A. Gonzalez ( D )
VIRGINIA
Rick Boucher ( D )
WASHINGTON
Jay Inslee ( D )
WISCONSIN
Tammy Baldwin ( D ) ***
WYOMING
Barbara Cubin ( R ) ***
MiCASSA Talking Points
S. 401 - H 910
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
1. Our long term service system is broken and must change. It was
created 40 years ago funded by Medicare and Medicaid dollars. T! hese are
medically oriented funded services, with little or no consumer-direction,
which were not originally developed to meet people's long term ongoing needs
in the community. We must think out of the box and build the political
consensus to reform the current system to one that empowers people and
allows REAL choices.
o Money should follow the individual not the facility or provider.
o National long term service policy should not favor any setting over
another. It should be neutral and let the users choose where services are
delivered. Current system is institutionally biased.
o 65% of Medicaid dollars are spent on long term care is spent on
nursing homes and other institutional services. This leaves only 35% for
all home and community services which includes all Medicaid waivers, the
Personal Care Option and Home Health services.
o Current system is expensive, bureaucratic and overwhelmingly
disliked by recipients, providers and politicians.
o Community services, on average, are less expensive then
institutional services and better liked by individuals.
o Home and Community Based Services (HCBS) should be the focus of all
long term services. Institutional services should be the service of last
resort.
2. Demographics of our country are changing:
a) Population is growing older;
b) Children being born with disabilities;
c) Young adults - Medical technology keeping people alive who would have
previously died.
3. People with disabilities and older Americans, even those with severe
mental and/or physical disabilities, want services in their own homes and
communities. Families must have REAL choices where services are provided.
4. People with disabilities and their families want REAL choice which
means:
a) Equitable funding opportunities; Currently nursing home services are an
entitlement, community services optional;
b) No programmatic or rule disincentives to community services;
c) Options for consumer-directed community services must include agency,
vouchers and fiscal intermediaries. People with disabilities, older
Americans and families should have the right to consumer-directed/self
determined services.
5. Family values:
a) Keep families together.
b) Communities taking care of their own.
c) Children belong in families.
d) Mom and Dad together with their grandkids.
6. Money following the individual can eliminate bureaucratic rules and
regulations by government regulators.
7. Functional system based on need instead of medical diagnosis could end
FRAGMENTATION of service delivery system.
8. Maintaining people in the community allows for employment, education and
social/recreational opportunities. Individuals have potential to be Tax
Payers instead of Tax Users .
9. Community services are OVERWHELMINGLY preferred.
10. Federal government needs to work in partnership with the states to
create flexible delivery systems that gives people with disabilities REAL
choice.
There's No Place Like Home!
Medicaid Community-based Attendant Services And Supports Act
of 2005
MiCASSA (S. 401 - H 910): A Summary
MiCASSA gives people real choice in long term care options by reforming
Title XIX of the Social Security Act (Medicaid) by ending the institutional
bias. MiCASSA allows individuals eligible for Nursing Facility Services or
Intermediate Care Facility Services for the Mentally Retarded (ICF-MR) the
opportunity to choose instead a new alternative, "Community-based Attendant
Services and Supports." The money follows the individual!
In addition, by providing an enhanced match and grants for the transition to
Real Choice before October 2010 when the benefit becomes permanent, MiCASSA
offers states f! inancial assistance to reform their long term service and
support system to provide services in the most integrated setting.
Specifically what does this bill do?
1) Provides community-based attendant services and supports ranging from
assistance with:
. activities of daily living (eating, toileting, grooming, dressing,
bathing, transferring),
. instrumental activities of daily living (meal planning and preparation,
managing finances, shopping, household chores, phoning, participating in the
community),
. and health-related functions.
2) Includes hands-on assistance, supervision and/or cueing, as well as help
to learn, keep and enhance skills to accomplish such activities.
3) Requires services be provided in THE MOST INTEGRATED SETTING appropriate
to the needs of the individual.
4) Provides Community-based Attendant Services and Supports that are:
. based on functional need, rather than diagnosis or age;
. provided in home or community settings like -- school, work, recreation or
religious facility;
. selected, managed and controlled by the consumer of the services;
. supplemented with backup and emergency attendant services;
. furnished according to a service plan agreed to by the consumer; and that
include voluntary training on selecting, managing and dismissing attendants.
5) Allows consumers to choose among various service delivery models
including vouchers, direct cash payments, fiscal agents and agency
providers. All of these models are required to be consumer controlled.
6) For consumers who are not able to direct their own care independently,
MiCASSA allows for "individual's representative" to be authorized by the
consumer to assist. A representative might be a friend, family member,
guardian, or advocate.
7) Allows health-related functions or tasks to be assigned to, delegated to,
or perf! ormed by unlicensed personal attendants, according to state laws.
8) Covers individuals' transition costs from a nursing facility or ICF-MR to
a home setting, for example: rent and utility deposits, bedding, basic
kitchen supplies and other necessities required for the transition.
9) Serves individuals with incomes above the current institutional income
limitation -- if a state chooses to waive this limitation to enhance the
potential for employment.
10) Provides for quality assurance programs which promote consumer control
and satisfaction.
11) Provides a maintenance of effort requirement so that states can not
diminish more enriched programs already being provided.
12) Allows enhanced match (up to 90% Federal funding) for individuals whose
costs exceed 150% of average nursing home costs.
13) Between 2005 and 2010, after which the services become permanent,
provides enhanced matches (10% more federal funds each) for ! states which:
. begin planning activities for changing their long term care systems,
and/or
. include Community-based Attendant Services and Supports in their Medicaid
State Plan.
SYSTEMS CHANGE
14) Provides grants for Systems Change Initiatives to help the states
transition from current institutionally dominated service systems to ones
more focused on community based services and supports, guided by a Consumer
Task Force.
15) Calls for national 5 to 10 year demonstration project in 5 states to
enhance coordination of services for non-elderly individuals dually eligible
for Medicaid AND Medicare.
NATIONAL ADAPT MAILING LIST - Adapt MiCASA List http://www.adapt.org
