Could CA Governor Schwarzenegger's lengthy reign of fear over California in-home care givers--and those they care for--finally be coming to an end?
In today's 9th Circuit Supreme Court of Appeals decision (Dominguez v. Schwarzenegger), SEIU Locals in California were successful in halting the Governor's budget cuts that would have put seniors and people with disabilities at risk of losing the home care services they rely on.
The Governor's "look-on-the-bright-side" talking point throughout this whole process has been to emphasize that only 'some' of the state's most vulnerable and helpless members of society would have their services cut. But in February, a report by the UCLA Center for Health Policy Research blew that justification right out of the water, laying out the the debilitating effects the cuts would have on 465,000 low-income senior and disabled citizens, as well as the 350,000 caregivers who provide it.
Thousands of home workers' wages would also have been cut by $2.00/hour, including caregivers like Pauline Beck, an Oakland home care worker Barack Obama walked a day in the shoes of. And even though $2.00 may not sound like a lot of money to some, when you're making less than $12 to start with, it's the difference between barely surviving vs. poverty.
It's (very) doubtful the Governor will admit it, but this court ruling is a common-sense decision that benefits not only caregivers and the people they care for, but also the state of California. If enacted, the IHSS cuts would've resulted in many more people having to resort to institutional care (nursing homes or other residential institutions)--at a cost that is roughly 4x more costly for the State than home-based care.
A recent report surveying the impact of the cuts found that California nursing homes only have the capacity to absorb 5% of the IHSS population. Only 5%! Where would these people have lived after losing the ability to stay in their homes due to lack of care? Did Schwarzenegger even bother to consider these factors when standing behind these cuts? Was he so willing to shave costs he was willing to render thousands of disadvantaged seniors and people with disabilities virtually homeless to reduce CA's $20 billion deficit?
What do you think? I'd love to hear readers' opinions of Schwarzenegger's budget-cutting tactics.
