Another Try at a Parents' Rights Amendment to the Constitution

On August 1, 2017 Senator Lindsey Graham (SC) (with Senators Blunt, Isakson, Risch, Grassley, and Rubio) introduced S.J. Res. 48, an amendment to the Constitution on parents’ rights. Here is the text:

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

“Article  —

“ Section 1. The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing, education, and care of their children is a fundamental right.

“ Section 2. The parental right to direct education includes the right to choose, as an alternative to public education, private, religious, or home schools, and the right to make reasonable choices within public schools for one’s child.

“ Section 3. Neither the United States nor any State shall infringe these rights without demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.

“ Section 4. The parental rights guaranteed by this article shall not be denied or abridged on account of disability.

“ Section 5. This article shall not be construed to apply to a parental action or decision that would end life.

“ Section 6. No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.”.

On November 8, 2013, in this blog I wrote a post about another version of this proposed amendment. Its text was similar in intent, but emphasized educational settings and did not specifically reference disabilities (section 4 above.) Here it is:

The 2013 Proposed Parental Rights Amendment to the U.S. Constitution

SECTION 1

The liberty of parents to direct the upbringing, education, and care of their children is a fundamental right. 

SECTION 2

The parental right to direct education includes the right to choose public, private, religious, or home schools, and the right to make reasonable choices within public schools for one's child.

SECTION 3

Neither the United States nor any State shall infringe these rights without demonstrating that its governmental interest as applied to the person is of the highest order and not otherwise served.

SECTION 4

This article shall not be construed to apply to a parental action or decision that would end life.

SECTION 5

No treaty may be adopted nor shall any source of international law be employed to supersede, modify, interpret, or apply to the rights guaranteed by this article.

With regard to both the 2013 version and 2017 version of the parental rights amendment to the Constitution, 38 state legislatures would need to approve the amendment before it would become a Constitutional amendment. That could take a long time. The language in the 2017 proposed amendment is very broad. If it were voted into effect, there would probably be a ton of litigation to clarify things in education and health matters, as well as other things. The U.S. educational community is diverse, in some places struggling, and needs time and funding to implement evidence-based reforms. What would happen to the Individuals with Disabilities Act if this amendment were to become law?

Educators need to strengthen and expand their partnerships with parents. The impasse on health care is creating uncertainty in the healthcare market, 1/6 of our economy. S.J. Res. 48 would do the same thing to our education system, creating uncertainty. It would possibly pit parents against educators, instead of fostering partnerships. We are exposed to one statement after another, saying states and local communities know what to do and need more flexibility and the federal government needs to get out of the way. This amendment would be counter to that proposition, undermine the fabric of communities, and create legal tensions where there are none. Senator Graham surely has other more productive ways to spend his time.

Thank you.

Common Grounder

The Senate and Health Care Reform

Today, the Republicans in the House of Representatives had a win. They passed the American Health Care Act (AHCA). Now the Senate needs to act. 

First, thoughtful, reasonable people, regardless of political persuasion, need to read the AHCA, or at least objective summaries written in plain English. Then, they need to decide how the legislation affects them or people they know. And, finally they need to write that up and send it to their Senators. Only by sending thousands of stories about impact will we be able to affect the Senate's approach to health care reform.

Second, people who know how health care is or is not working in specific states need to prepare state profiles and share them widely, but especially with Senators.

Third, state profiles need to drive solutions. One solution will never fix everything.

Fourth, Senators need to set priorities. What needs to be guaranteed? What needs to be optional? How do we attract people, from different demographic groups, to secure health care? Fundamentals like this need to be discussed, addressed, and agreed to across party lines first.

Fifth, the Senate needs to attend to and respect stakeholder input, be transparent and clear about points of disagreement and points on which there is consensus, and especially listen to governors AND state Medicaid directors.

There is no doubt that Obamacare needs to be fixed. Democrats may think that the House passage of AHCA gives them a political sledge hammer to go after Republicans in swing districts in 2018. Who is to say? But I for one, want our Senators to act like statesmen and engage, and solve the mess we are in now. Health care represents one fifth of our economy. It needs predictability and certainty. It does not know how to interpret political brinksmanship.

If we consider and take the steps outlined here maybe we can get to something that makes sense. I certainly hope so. So many lives are hanging in the balance, as well as a significant part of our economy.

Thank you.

Common Grounder

Faith McCormick

Today my friend, Faith McCormick, of 42 years passed away from cancer. She was the healthiest, most disciplined person I have known. She ate right; exercised daily; kept her mind active; and was a champion in a behind-the-scenes way for self-advocates.

It was quick. Her world and that of those around her changed in six short weeks. She and her husband returned from a short vacation to Barcelona one day. The next day she began her first of two rounds of chemotherapy.

I have a theory. God takes the good people early and quick to force the rest of us, less than perfect mortals, to take stock and reshape our priorities,

Faith spent her days helping others. She would do anything that needed doing. She provided delivery of meals to the less fortunate. She worked with self-advocates to develop expertise on emergency preparedness. She did research on international companies and their approaches to hiring people with disabilities for the U.S. International Council on Disabilities, where she was a member of the board of directors. She traveled to Istanbul with me twice in 2015 to train CEOs from disabled persons organizations from Iran on the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. She traveled with me to China and presented on the important role of persons with disabilities in emergency preparedness. She served as a senior, nonpolical, administrator in the Administration on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services for over eight years. She was sous chef to her husband, a five-star chef. She helped me pack my suitcase and put on my socks and shoes when we traveled together. Once in Istanbul she pushed me up and down a 60 degree incline in my wheelchair, and we both lived to tell about it.

Faith was organized and purpose-driven. She had a passion for politics, the right kind, and reading James Patterson. Her heart was open to all. Her spirit was infectious. I spoke to her via FaceTime last Sunday. She was strong, optimistic, and gave me and Donald Trump an ear full on what to do and how to do it. She loved LaMarca prosecco and our many trips to Hawaii.

I am sure many of us have friends like Faith. We are the lucky ones. Cherish those friends. Let them know how much you value them.

Thank you.

Common Grounder

Medicaid Is on the Chopping Block

I have heard that the House of Representatives will take action to repeal Obamacare, the Affordable Care Act, on March 8, 2017 through reconciliation legislation. Reconciliation is a process by which the House can put a lot of stuff in one bill without hearings and act speedily in the name of saving money.

I have read summary documents from the House and from disability organizations. The bottom line is that money that has been available for people newly covered under Medicaid expansion in some states and money for community-based services and supports will shrink and then disappear. If states want to continue these services, they will need to find money elsewhere. A lot of people with disabilities will either need to rely on their families for support or enter institutions. People that could have benefitted from Medicaid expansion may need to find their health coverage elsewhere. People that already have coverage may see it change in a bad way.

One of the things I read suggested to me that if a state has a robust lottery program, that could affect their Medicaid allotments, that is could result in a reduction in their Medicaid allotment.

There are plenty of places to go to get more details on the pending House reconciliation bill (http://www.c-c-d.org/fichiers/CCD-MedicaidLeaveBehind_Final03012017.pdf; http://www.c-c-d.org/fichiers/CCD_ProtectACA_03012017.pdf).

At a minimum contact your governor, Democrat or Republican, and let them know they will be left holding the bag if this reconciliation bill becomes law. They won’t like it.

Also, let your elected representative in the House know that this proposed legislation has a ton of unknown consequences on the economy –

·      Family members leaving jobs to stay home to take care of a love one with a disability

·      Emergency room costs going up exponentially

·      New or increased costs for maintaining institutions

There are smart governors and members of the House of Representatives. Urge everyone to slow down, hold hearings, and give thoughtful, measured attention to how to amend the Affordable Care Act.

Thank you.

Common Grounder

Health Care, a Process That Might Work to Get to a Bi-Partisan Solution

Republicans have the votes to pass a uni-party solution. Democrats see the Republican repeal and replace strategy as a way to bring their supporters to a disruptive frenzy in town halls. Both sides have a lot to lose if they can't reach a consensus-driven solution. The health care market is a major factor in the economy. Having access to affordable health care is a major factor for each family and many single people. The current strategies used by both sides do not guarantee a particular outcome, a sure winner.

Twenty years ago this month an unorthodox strategy was tried to reach consensus on the reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Republicans and Democrat members of the House and Senate and the Clinton Administration agreed to have the appropriate staff meet and draft a bill to be considered by both the House Education and Workforce Committee and the full House, and the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee and the full Senate. In late May 1997 that happened. The House and Senate passed the same bill. Two weeks later President Clinton signed it.

The process used to achieve this miraculous conclusion was the following:

1. Staff meetings on Monday through Wednesday for 4-6 hours a day through mid-April.
2. Notes from negotiations shared with staff in a chart every Thursday by noon every week.
3. An edited version (reflecting clarifications from staff who read the Wednesday chart) was shared with stakeholders around the country by email every Thursday night.
4. On every Friday an open mike meeting was held by staff with stakeholders from throughout the country. This input was considered the following Monday.
5. The staff started negotiations with text that was easier on which to agree. Then the staff took on the tougher issues. By then, they respected each other and saw that the process was working. Everyone -- staff, their bosses, and stakeholders were operating in good faith.

Perhaps a process like this could work to develop consensus on health care policy. I was the note taker in 1997.  David Hoppe, who was then Chief of Staff for Trent Lott, was the convenor in chief for and the architect of the process I just described. Until recently he was Speaker Paul Ryan's Chief of Staff. Perhaps he would elect to help once again.

Something to think about.

Thank you.
Common Grounder

Health Care, Where Do You Stand?

There are two things that I have chosen to avoid in my professional life — trying to figure you how to make sure people with mental health challenges are fairly and adequately treated by society, especially with regard to making choices about what happens to them; and trying to develop smart health care policies. Why? Because, doing either is very complicated and there are tons of better equipped people to tackle these challenges.

That said, I must weigh in on the health care debate. I have read the 19-page paper the House Republicans have put out ( https://gallery.mailchimp.com/301a28247b80ab82279e92afb/files/5c7c3226-a149-4842-ab43-707b7b4720fc/Healthcare_Policy_Brief.pdf), two articles from the New York Times (https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/us/politics/affordable-care-act-congress.html?action=click&contentCollection=The%20Upshot&module=RelatedCoverage&region=Marginalia&pgtype=article; https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/16/upshot/republican-health-proposal-would-redirect-money-from-poor-to-rich.html?smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=1), and talking points put together by the Association of University Centers on Disabilities (http://www.aucd.org/docs/talking%20points%20and%20things%20to%20consider%20regarding%20Medicaid.pdf).

Here’s what I have deciphered: Republicans know how to make the case for change without giving you all the facts. The New York Times points out what is missing in the Republican plans and what the adverse effects will be if their plan were enacted. AUCD points out that Medicaid is the vital resource that allows many people with significant disabilities to live and work in the community.

From other sources I learned that: Republicans are waiting for the Congressional Budget Office to say how much their plan would cost (outside sources estimate the Republican plan will cut Medicaid $1 billion a year for 10 years); putting people with catastrophic conditions in risk pools will cost 10 times what Republican project; and if Medicaid is given to states as block grants or with limits on per-person coverage, states are screwed.

So, the smart thing to do is to contact our governors (https://www.usa.gov/state-governor) and tell them not to accept a lemon.

Do we need to repair Obama care (the Affordable Care Act)? Absolutely. Some of the facts the House Republicans share are down right depressing. But, we have to consider carefully how we go about it, because everything is connected.

What do I suggest?

1. Survey young people about how much and for what they would be willing to buy health care if they were required to.
2. Let people design their own packages of services.
3. Ask health insurance companies to share their data with Congress on services and costs.
4. Put a freeze on everything and anything in health care for 18 months.
5. Create a bicameral bipartisan commission to develop amendments to the existing approach to health care, considering both public and private health insurance plans.
6. Give the package of amendments to Congress before the federal elections in 2018.

If we don’t do something like I just described to calm things down and move Congress on to topics on which there may be a reason for bipartisan consensus (e.g., tax reform, and rebuilding our infrastructure), this country may unravel and have massive unrest. Who the heck wants that?

Thank you,

Common Grounder