The Bush Nine

A five day vigil will be held in support of the "Bush Nine," a group of ADAPT “Campaign for Real Choice” protesters who will be incarcerated in the Del Valle Jail in Texas from January 16-20. The nine were arrested for their crime of civil disobedience in 1999 at W.'s residence, the Governor's Mansion in Austin. They were found guilty of protesting W.'s and the Texas Attorney General's support for states rights and opposition to the civil rights of disabled persons in the Olmstead vs. L.C. & E.W. case brought before the Supreme Court by the state of Georgia. Texas, siding with Georgia, took a regressive position that would continue to force disabled persons into nursing homes and other institutions -- that is, to segregate the disabled population rather than provide the option of community in-home services.

22 other Governors across the nation originally signed onto a brief asking the court to find that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) does not apply to services like long term care. When the Supremes granted certiori, however, activists convinced a number of those states which had started out in support of Georgia's Olmstead position, to not take a states rights stance and support the civil rights of disabled people.  Only seven states in the entire nation refused to budge; the strongest among them was Texas under the leadership of George W Bush. Like Gov. George Wallace in the 60s, W. does not believe that federal 90s civil rights laws should be binding on the sovereign state of Texas.

Departing from their states right ideology, the Rehnquist Supreme Court, ruled unnecessary institutionalization *is* discrimination. The Olmstead decision, as it has come to be called, is considered by many the Brown vs. Board of Education for the millions of Americans who are unnecessarily segregated in institutions, nursing homes and similar large congregate facilities.

Yet despite Olmstead's “most integrated setting rule” which stated that disabled persons have a right to choose to receive support services at home rather than be incarcerated in an institution over a year and a half later some 100,000 Texans are still stuck in nursing homes and other institutions due to lack of state action. Many see the regressive Texas model as a precursor to what W. has in store for the entire nation -- and unlike Wallace, W. has not reversed his position.

Instead, W. totally refused to meet with any disability group during his run for the presidency. 500 ADAPT activists filled and surrounded the Republican Party National Headquarters in October in order to gain a meeting with the elusive W. Dozens of wheelchair users blocked entrances to the Republican Party's headquarters for five hours. They forced the cancellation of a fund- raiser and kept party employees from leaving the building, although some staffers climbed out of first-floor windows.

ADAPT, along with allies from other organizations who were in Washington for the "March for Justice" rally and march to the Supreme Court, took on the Republicans and W. for spouting disability policy and putting forth disability agenda without having first consulted the disability community.

“We want Bush and the Republican Party to know that we will not tolerate anyone's patronizing us by deciding in a vacuum what's in our 'best interest'“. Said Marva Ways, ADAPT Organizer from Detroit, Michigan, "The bottom line is 'Nothing About Us Without Us'!"

So often social policy is done to us rather than for us. Activists insistance on deinstitutionalization is a social movement about taking power from the paternalistic professionals to direct disabled persons' lives simply because one needs assistance with the tasks of everyday living. It is about gaining self-determination and self-preservation amidst a system that is mostly unaccountable and too often abusive towards those under “care.” To often policies are developed and done “to” us rather than with us.

The same went for the Clinton administration which angered activists when it supported $50 million for Section 4 of MiCASSA (the in home services bill pending in congress) and a few hundred HUD vouchers for accessible housing but came up with billions for the nursing home industry that has literally killed people and squandered public money to make its profits.

It is certain that the nursing home industry contributes huge amounts of money to candidates on both sides of the aisle and in return, government long-term care policy remains institutionally biased. Nursing home funding rises while attendant care service budgets see little or no increase. But the drive for profit contributes to this form of oppression of disabled persons as well.

Under what I call the Money Model of disability, for instance, the disabled human being is a commodity around which social policies are created or rejected based on their market value. The corporate solution to disablement-institutionalization in a nursing home-evolved from the cold realization that disabled people could be commodified; we could be made to serve profit because federal financing (Medicaid funds 60%, Medicare 15%, private insurance 25%) guarantees an endless source of entrepreneurial revenue. Disabled people are worth more to the Gross Domestic Product when we occupy a "bed" instead of a home.  When we individually generate $30,000 - $82,000 in annual revenues the electronic brokers on Wall Street count us as assets and we contribute to companies' net worth. Corporate dominion over disability policy-measures a person's "worth" by its dollar value to the economy. That is the real crime here.

There is no doubt that the nursing home industry is a hotbed of corruption. Horrific stories detailing negligent “caregiving” have been exposed all over the nation. The question, it seems, is whether in home services can be developed to replace institutionalization without similarly commodifying disabled persons bodies and perpetuating the same problems?

Why worry, some might say -- after all people will be in their own homes -- they will not be forced to live in an institution.

It is most likely that what will occur is that corporations will take over the in home services business, indeed promote in home services model as they build their empires, and the value of the disabled body will continue to reside in corporate hands. “Consumers” will likely be as powerless to direct their own attendants in the reformed in home services scenario as they are today in segregated institutions. There are several reasons for this. Home care corporations will have the same profiteering drive as institutions. Well-paid workers are key to quality services but these businesses will likely to pay in home workers low salaries and offer few benefits (as they do now) to satisfy their bottom lines. What's more they are likely to medicalize in home services under a corporate model. Will the disabled person truly be able to direct their attendant services under a social model where the disabled individual determines when what who and where? Will one be free to decide who is their attendant, who will work out for them? Attendant services are a very personal matter for both a disabled person and a worker.  Will one be able to decide when and how tasks are completed? These are not "efficient" terms under which businesses usually operate.

It is even possible that the crafty dishonest companies may cut hours but still find ways to make money doing that. Columbia HCA, for instance, recently made a multi-million dollar settlement with the government over charges that HCA had billed Medicare for home care services it never provided. Seems this happened in so many instances to varying degrees that the Clinton administration's reaction was to cut back on Medicare home care funding to dissuade fraud.

In home services under a corporate model will likely mean that disabled persons will see their “choices” and “freedom” overpowered by an industry that is looking at the value of its stocks on Wall Street and investor dividends. We must take a critical view of market driven policies no matter if they do contain language like “choice” and develop a better delivery model for services.

The broader Pro-Democracy inaugural demonstrations provide direction. Without democratic controls that force accountability, W., the nursing homes and the developing in home services industry's interests will run rough shod over the peoples' interests. Only an organized democratic movement composed of all the social movements can offer any hope of turning the tide of corporate dominion over our lives. Are we listening to one another?

 The schedule for the ADAPT vigils:

Tuesday, January 16th at noon 11th and Congress Streets in front of the State Capitol Press Conference announcing the vigil and its purpose,

Wednesday, January 17th at noon 11th and Congress Legislators will speak out on the need to focus on the Supreme Courts Olmstead decision, and what this means for Texas,

Thursday, January 18th at noon 11th and Congress Speak Out from members of the public on the need to prioritize community based support services, family members and people using services will speak on the impact on their lives,

Friday, January 19th at noon Start from 11th and Congress Canvass the City to get signatures on petitions in support of community based services,

Saturday, January 20th at noon 11th and Congress Celebration and announcement of the end of the vigil.