Independent-living bill stalls

The following is a story written by Scott Finn, Staff writer about "Independent-living bill stalls" that appeared in the Charleston Gazette on Wednesday, March 8, 2006.

Nursing homes would quickly fill up, agency says

Supporters say a bill designed to help disabled people live independently is in trouble after the state Division of Health and Human Resources issued a last-minute letter objecting to the proposal.

The bill (HB4473) is called the Money Follows the Person Act. It would allow disabled people to take the estimated $55,000 a year Medicaid spends on their nursing home care and use it to help them live in their own homes.

The bill would actually save the state money, says Ann Meadows, director of the Statewide Independent Living Council. The federal government provides a better match rate for participants in this program, she said, and many people could live on their own for less than the state pays for care in state institutions or nursing homes.

But DHHR officials disagree, according to a letter sent Monday to Sen. Roman Prezioso, D-Marion, chairman of the Senate Health and Human Resources Committee.

Any nursing home beds vacated by disabled people would then be filled by other West Virginians, wrote John Bianconi, acting commissioner for the state Bureau for Behavioral Health and Health Facilities.

The federal/state Medicaid program pays for much of the state's nursing home care, so taxpayers would end up spending more, he argued.

"Diversion of funds to community support services can only hamper efforts to provide adequate care for individuals requiring skilled nursing and rehabilitative efforts," Bianconi wrote, "when it is highly unlikely that the need for institutional beds will go away, thus freeing funding."

That's hogwash, Meadows said. Besides, the 1999 U.S. Supreme Court Olmstead decision says the state must provide care in the least restrictive environment possible.

"For seven years, state officials have studied and planned, planned and studied how to comply with the Olmstead decision," she said. "Our patience is wearing thin."

Meadows said that if the bill is not passed, "the likelihood of a lawsuit is very great." In other states, such as Pennsylvania, federal lawsuits have forced state officials to implement the Olmstead decision.

Also, she questioned why DHHR waited until the last week of the session to raise its objections about the bill. She said DHHR officials have known about the bill for more than a month and never voiced any complaints until now.

Last week, the bill passed the House of Delegates unanimously. It must pass through both the Senate Finance and Health and Human Resources Committees before the full Senate can vote on it.

Prezioso had the bill on his committee agenda Tuesday, but did not take it up, even though he adjourned the meeting 15 minutes early.

Prezioso said the committee would take up the bill Thursday. That leaves little time for the bill to pass. The Senate Finance Committee would have to take up and approve the bill that same day. It would also need to be read for the first time on the Senate floor Thursday to meet the requirement a bill be read on three separate days before the last day of the session Saturday. The only way to circumvent this process is if four-fifths of senators agree to suspend the rule that a bill be read on three separate days.

Prezioso said he hoped to avoid a lawsuit with disabilities advocates. He agreed to allow DHHR and a supporter of the bill to answer questions from lawmakers Thursday in his committee.

"At first blush, this is a great idea," Prezioso said. "But DHHR has raised some concerns about the cost. I think all of us need more education about what ramifications this might have for the department."

Posted: March 8, 2006