Disabled groups press agenda


By ERIKA ROSENBERG 

Utica Observer Dispatch Albany bureau  (Gannett)  

March 10, 2003

As a half-dozen people in wheelchairs rolled into a second-floor office of
the state Capitol, the receptionist behind the desk stiffened.

"Do you think you could move back into the hallway? It's a little crowded,"
she said to activists from Rochester and New York City here to protest
policies of Gov. George Pataki.

"We're fine," said Bruce Darling, a leader of the group, whose members
insisted upon a meeting with a Pataki administration official.

"Mark will meet with you, but he can't meet with you right now," said the
receptionist, who would not give her name. "You're giving me a hard time.
You're trying to intimidate me. We went through this last year."

Then, the protesters turned up their volume. "What do you want?" they
shouted. "A meeting. When do you want it? Now."

Within 20 minutes, the protesters got what they came for -- a meeting with
Mark Kissinger from Pataki's staff.

That story has played out several times over the past two years, as disabled
people have banded together with people with AIDS and mental illness and used
confrontational tactics rare in Albany.

The unusually tight coalition has won not only attention to its causes but
also legislative victories, securing a new program to help disabled people
work without losing their government health benefits, for example.

Now, members of the groups are angry that their successes seem to be slipping
away. The start of the new health program has been delayed indefinitely.
Pataki proposed changes they say would weaken a law the groups successfully
pushed for in 2002 to get more disabled people out of institutions and into
homes and apartments.

And, in what many take as a particular affront, Pataki wants to cut cash
benefits to about 600,000 disabled and elderly people to save $26 million
toward closing an $11.5 billion budget deficit.

Utica's Resource Center for Independent Living Executive Director Burt
Danovitz said he isn't concerned about the agency's funding as much as he is
concerned about funding for people with disabilities.

"Taking away money from people with supplemental security income is one of
the worst budget proposals I can imagine," Danovitz said. "This just has to
be reversed."

Most of the people who use RCIL's services are living below poverty level and
can't afford additional cuts.

"The disability community feels under attack," said Michael Kink, organizer
for Housing Works, which serves people with AIDS and HIV. "They're taking
money away from our folks, not providing health-care security and weakening
plans to get people of nursing homes and adult homes."

So the groups, some of whose members have been arrested in past protests, are
preparing for an active spring.

"I don't think this community will allow this to be much more delayed," said
Harvey Rosenthal, head of a mental-health group, referring to the new health
program. "If it's not up by (June), I think all hell will break loose."

Before 2000, the groups for people with AIDS, the mentally ill and the
disabled worked separately on their issues.

That year, the organizations realized they had a common interest in seeing
the Medicaid government health-insurance program expanded to allow disabled
people to pay premiums to keep their insurance even if they worked full-time
and exceeded the program's income limits, an effort called "Medicaid buy-in."

So they started working together. One of the first big events was a protest
outside Pataki's offices on the second floor of the Capitol. Some 100 people
attended, and several were arrested for chaining themselves to the door,
guarded by state troopers, to Pataki's inner sanctum.

"At the door were people with psychiatric disabilities chained to people with
AIDS chained to people in wheelchairs," Kink said.

It took more work over the next 18 months, but the groups won the buy-in
program in January 2002.

Kink said the confrontation in the Capitol was crucial to the eventual
victory.

"At that point we weren't getting listened to," he said. Civil disobedience
is "about making the people who think they have all the power and make all
the decisions recognize that they can't exclude people."

But those tactics aren't embraced by all the groups. Two have a long history
of public protest: Housing Works, an outgrowth of the aggressive AIDS group
ACT-UP, and ADAPT, a national disability-rights organization with an
especially active Rochester chapter of more than 100 members.

Lawmakers say the groups have been successful but are mixed on their use of
civil disobedience.

"They're particularly effective in pressing very hard-nose, pragmatic
arguments," said Sen. Raymond Meier, R-Western, Oneida County. They stress,
for example, that getting disabled people out of institutions is not only
humane but also cost-effective for the state, he said.

"I think civil disobedience really detracts from their arguments," Meier
said. "They had my attention" before the protests.

But Assemblyman Kevin Cahill, D-Kingston, Ulster County, sees it differently.

"The disobedience came when people were confronted with improper resistance,"
such as shutting off Capitol elevators, Cahill said.

"For a group that doesn't have a lot of money to give in campaign
contributions and isn't able to grease the skids in the traditional way,
we've gotten a lot done," he added.

Source:  http://www.uticaod.com/archive/2003/03/10/news/18146.html
-----------------------------
Albany Angle: New York's choices: bad, worse, worst
JAY GALLAGHER   Gannett News  Binghamton Press and Sun-Bulletin    March 9,
2003 

ALBANY -- Of course, Gov. George Pataki and Senate Majority Leader Joseph
Bruno don't like the idea, brought forth by big-city mayors last week, that
the state raise its sales tax by a penny. 

That would bring the total to 9 cents in most parts of New York (a nickel to
the state and four cents to most big counties), the highest of any state.

It's what's known as a "regressive" tax, meaning it takes money from those
least able to afford it. And unlike the state income tax, sales-tax payments
aren't deductible from federal income taxes for the quarter of New York
taxpayers who file itemized returns, so there's no subsidy from Washington.

Hiking the levy would also hurt retail sales, and increase the number of
shoppers who go over the borders to shop in neighboring states that have
lower rates.

But, of course, the key question is, what is the alternative?

One that Pataki has hit on is to take $26 million away from disabled people.

People in wheelchairs, AIDS patients and others would lose $13 a month, under
Pataki's plan to reduce state payments to them. The state cut would offset a
scheduled increase in payments from the federal government, leaving their
payments unchanged at $639 per month.

Some of those who would lose those payments came to the Capitol last week,
too.

"To take this away from the poorest of our community shows Gov. Pataki has
callous indifference, even animosity, toward people with disabilities," said
one of the protesters, Barbara Knowlen of Madison County, who uses a
wheelchair.

That's a powerful charge, and a Pataki spokesman countered that the payments
were not being cut, and that New York contributes more to the federal program
than most other states.

But the state savings from that cut is so puny compared to the $11.5 billion
budget hole that has to be filled that it seems unlikely to stand.

The mayor's sales-tax-hike plan would do a lot more to close the gap as well
as help local governments that find themselves faced with a new
billion-dollar bill for pension costs at a time when their revenues are down
and expenses rising.

The plan would raise about $1.5 billion a year. The state, counties and
municipalities (cities, towns and villages) would each get $500 million.

What's becoming clearer as the debate continues over the budget is that there
are no good choices facing Pataki and lawmakers. It's not a matter of
deciding among spending cuts, higher taxes and borrowing. Any final plan will
include all three.

From Pataki's perspective, spending cuts should be emphasized, since in the
long term he thinks keeping taxes flat will spur an economic rebound.

So he wants the state and its agencies getting money instead from New Yorkers
in some ways, like higher subway and commuter-rail charges, a 35 percent hike
in SUNY tuition, higher fees for car and boat registrations and for camping.

Bruno is less of a hawk on spending cuts, saying that the ones Pataki has
proposed in health care ($1 billion) and education ($1.2 billion) are too
steep. He likes the idea of selling state assets, like possibly airports and
golf courses, as a potential way out.

Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, D-Manhattan, wants to avoid big spending
cuts. And although he hasn't said yet that he favors a temporary income-tax
surcharge on wealthy New Yorkers, many expect that's where he'll come out
eventually.

The downsides to all of their positions are obvious. Pataki may be right that
holding down the lid on taxes eventually will generate jobs. But in the
meantime people dependent on the government, like the disabled who protested
here last week, will suffer.

Bruno's plan is the easiest in the short term, but will just make problems
worse next year when expenses continue but the one-shot revenues are gone.

If Silver does eventually opt for the higher taxes, it would alleviate
short-term pain, but may be the most damaging to the state economy in the
long run.

But the choice won't be that stark, since none of the approaches alone will
be enough to close the gap.

We don't get to choose our own poison -- we have to take all three: higher
taxes, spending cuts and more borrowing and gimmicks.

Source: http://www.pressconnects.com/today/opinion/stories/op030903s53731.shtml