Some of the debates, and much of the misinformation, have been about how the US system of health-care delivery compares to systems used in other countries; particularly those which are modern industrialized democracies like our own.  In August of last Summer an article published in The Washington Post did a good job of exploding many of the myths about health-care delivery in countries similar to ours.  I did not see the article when it first came out and I’m sure many others did not either.  So I’m sharing it here in its entirety.

The article was authored by T.R. (Thomas) Reid, a reporter, documentary film correspondent, and author. He is also a frequent guest on National Public Radio’s (NPR’s) Morning Edition.  Which is where I first listened to, and grew to immensely enjoy, his commentaries about life in Japan, the Far East, England, Europe, and the USA.  I’ve added emphasis (using bold or underlining) to those items in the original article I feel are of particular importance to the US debate.

5 Myths About Health-care Around the World

By T.R. Reid
Sunday, August 23, 2009

As Americans search for the cure to what ails our health-care system, we’ve overlooked an invaluable source of ideas and solutions: the rest of the world. All the other industrialized democracies have faced problems like ours, yet they’ve found ways to cover everybody — and still spend far less than we do.

I’ve traveled the world from Oslo to Osaka to see how other developed democracies provide health-care. Instead of dismissing these models as “socialist,” we could adapt their solutions to fix our problems. To do that, we first have to dispel a few myths about health-care abroad:

1. It’s all socialized medicine out there.

Not so. Some countries, such as Britain, New Zealand and Cuba, do provide health-care in government hospitals, with the government paying the bills. Others — for instance, Canada and Taiwan — rely on private-sector providers, paid for by government-run insurance. But many wealthy countries — including Germany, the Netherlands, Japan and Switzerland — provide universal coverage using private doctors, private hospitals and private insurance plans.

In some ways, health-care is less “socialized” overseas than in the United States. Almost all Americans sign up for government insurance (Medicare) at age 65. In Germany, Switzerland and the Netherlands, seniors stick with private insurance plans for life. Meanwhile, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs is one of the planet’s purest examples of government-run health-care.

2. Overseas, care is rationed through limited choices or long lines.

Generally, no. Germans can sign up for any of the nation’s 200 private health insurance plans — a broader choice than any American has. If a German doesn’t like her insurance company, she can switch to another, with no increase in premium. The Swiss, too, can choose any insurance plan in the country.

In France and Japan, you don’t get a choice of insurance provider; you have to use the one designated for your company or your industry. But patients can go to any doctor, any hospital, any traditional healer. There are no U.S.-style limits such as “in-network” lists of doctors or “pre-authorization” for surgery. You pick any doctor, you get treatment — and insurance has to pay.

Canadians have their choice of providers. In Austria and Germany, if a doctor diagnoses a person as “stressed,” medical insurance pays for weekends at a health spa.

As for those notorious waiting lists, some countries are indeed plagued by them. Canada makes patients wait weeks or months for nonemergency care, as a way to keep costs down. But studies by the Commonwealth Fund and others report that many nations — Germany, Britain, Austria — outperform the United States on measures such as waiting times for appointments and for elective surgeries.

In Japan, waiting times are so short that most patients don’t bother to make an appointment. One Thursday morning in Tokyo, I called the prestigious orthopedic clinic at Keio University Hospital to schedule a consultation about my aching shoulder. “Why don’t you just drop by?” the receptionist said. That same afternoon, I was in the surgeon’s office. Dr. Nakamichi recommended an operation. “When could we do it?” I asked. The doctor checked his computer and said, “Tomorrow would be pretty difficult. Perhaps some day next week?”

3. Foreign health-care systems are inefficient, bloated bureaucracies.

Much less so than here. It may seem to Americans that U.S.-style free enterprise — private-sector, for-profit health insurance — is naturally the most cost-effective way to pay for health-care. But in fact, all the other payment systems are more efficient than ours.

U.S. health insurance companies have the highest administrative costs in the world; they spend roughly 20 cents of every dollar for non-medical costs, such as paperwork, reviewing claims and marketing. France’s health insurance industry, in contrast, covers everybody and spends about 4 percent on administration. Canada’s universal insurance system, run by government bureaucrats, spends 6 percent on administration. In Taiwan, a leaner version of the Canadian model has administrative costs of 1.5 percent; one year, this figure ballooned to 2 percent, and the opposition parties savaged the government for wasting money.

The world champion at controlling medical costs is Japan, even though its aging population is a profligate consumer of medical care. On average, the Japanese go to the doctor 15 times a year, three times the U.S. rate. They have twice as many MRI scans and X-rays. Quality is high; life expectancy and recovery rates for major diseases are better than in the United States. And yet Japan spends about $3,400 per person annually on health-care; the United States spends more than $7,000.

4. Cost controls stifle innovation.

False. The United States is home to groundbreaking medical research, but so are other countries with much lower cost structures. Any American who’s had a hip or knee replacement is standing on French innovation. Deep-brain stimulation to treat depression is a Canadian breakthrough. Many of the wonder drugs promoted endlessly on American television, including Viagra, come from British, Swiss or Japanese labs.

Overseas, strict cost controls actually drive innovation. In the United States, an MRI scan of the neck region costs about $1,500. In Japan, the identical scan costs $98. Under the pressure of cost controls, Japanese researchers found ways to perform the same diagnostic technique for one-fifteenth the American price. (And Japanese labs still make a profit.)

5. Health insurance has to be cruel.

Not really. American health insurance companies routinely reject applicants with a “preexisting condition” — precisely the people most likely to need the insurers』 service. They employ armies of adjusters to deny claims. If a customer is hit by a truck and faces big medical bills, the insurer’s “rescission department” digs through the records looking for grounds to cancel the policy, often while the victim is still in the hospital. The companies say they have to do this stuff to survive in a tough business.

Foreign health insurance companies, in contrast, must accept all applicants, and they can’t cancel as long as you pay your premiums. The plans are required to pay any claim submitted by a doctor or hospital (or health spa), usually within tight time limits. The big Swiss insurer Groupe Mutuel promises to pay all claims within five days. “Our customers love it,” the group’s chief executive told me. The corollary is that everyone is mandated to buy insurance, to give the plans an adequate pool of rate-payers.

The key difference is that foreign health insurance plans exist only to pay people’s medical bills, not to make a profit. The United States is the only developed country that lets insurance companies profit from basic health coverage.

In many ways, foreign health-care models are not really “foreign” to America, because our crazy-quilt health-care system uses elements of all of them. For Native Americans or veterans, we’re Britain: The government provides health-care, funding it through general taxes, and patients get no bills. For people who get insurance through their jobs, we’re Germany: Premiums are split between workers and employers, and private insurance plans pay private doctors and hospitals. For people over 65, we’re Canada: Everyone pays premiums for an insurance plan run by the government, and the public plan pays private doctors and hospitals according to a set fee schedule. And for the tens of millions without insurance coverage, we’re Burundi or Burma: In the world’s poor nations, sick people pay out of pocket for medical care; those who can’t pay stay sick or die.

This fragmentation is another reason that we spend more than anybody else and still leave millions without coverage. All the other developed countries have settled on one model for health-care delivery and finance; we’ve blended them all into a costly, confusing bureaucratic mess.

Which, in turn, punctures the most persistent myth of all: that America has “the finest health-care” in the world. We don’t. In terms of results, almost all advanced countries have better national health statistics than the United States does. In terms of finance, we force 700,000 Americans into bankruptcy each year because of medical bills. In France, the number of medical bankruptcies is zero. Britain: zero. Japan: zero. Germany: zero.

Given our remarkable medical assets — the best-educated doctors and nurses, the most advanced hospitals, world-class research — the United States could be, and should be, the best in the world. To get there, though, we have to be willing to learn some lessons about health-care administration from the other industrialized democracies.

T.R. Reid, a former Washington Post reporter, is the author of The Healing of America: A Global Quest for Better, Cheaper, and Fairer Health-care.  His piece above originally appeared in Washingtonpost.com here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/21/AR2009082101778.html on Sunday, August 23, 2009.  His book can be purchased at Amazon.com here in either hardcover, large print hardcover, or Kindle formats. You can read more about T.R. Reid at wikipedia.

Opinion

Here is what I think:

• A modern, successful society would be one which provided the best health-care for each and every one of its citizens at the lowest cost possible.  That is the kind of society I want to live in.  There is no good reason why the US could not have that kind of society now.
• The current proposals before Congress now should be adopted now.  Problems with details can and should be resolved in follow-up legislation.
• The examples of successful health-care delivery systems and practices in the countries cited above put the US system to shame.  We can and must do better.  We can begin by adopting many of the practices outlined.

Question(s) For You

What do you think?

Is the current US system of health-care delivery acceptable?

Given what you believe you know of the current reform proposals before Congress, should they be adopted now?

Or do you support the idea put forth by many Republicans that the whole plan up for a vote be discarded and a new plan negotiated?

Are there things we can and should learn from the other countries cited above?

Thank you for reading.

Tim

—–

Exposing Some Health-care Lies is a post from: Tim’s California Views @ Oflanagan’s Net

The announcement had been expected for some time.  There are no other politically significant Democratic candidates running.   (The website Politics1 currently lists three others: retired businessman, real estate investor, and San Diego economist Richard Aguirre; non-profit group founder and Pastor Joe Symmon; and Fred Medill, a college student and founder-operator of Fred TV.)

Why He’s Running
Prior Accomplishments Highlighted
On Gridlock And Governance
Experience
Opinion
Question(s) For You

Why He’s Running

In his March 2^nd declaration Brown said, “The political breakdown in Sacramento is threatening(:) …”

• Jobs,
• Our schools and the
• State’s credit rating.

“… which is the worst in the country … Our state is in serious trouble and the next governor must have the preparation, the knowledge and the know-how to get California working again. That is what I offer and that’s why I’m declaring my candidacy for governor.”

“These are really serious times, but our state is still the best place on earth to live and to raise a family,” Brown said. “Our businesses lead the world in technology and innovation. Our natural environment is second to none. By making the tough decisions now, we can get through this crisis leaner and more efficient, poised for a comeback that will lead to a whole new period of prosperity. That’s what drives my candidacy. But it’s not going to happen overnight or with empty promises and photo ops. It takes patience and courage. But, together, we can all get California working again.”

Brown said that if elected he will be guided by three “governing principles.”

1. “First, I‘ll tell you the truth. No more smoke and mirrors on the budget. No more puffy slogans and platitudes. You deserve the truth and that’s what you’ll get from me.”
2. “Second, in this time of recession when people are financially strapped, there will be no new taxes unless you the people vote for them.”
3. “Third, we have to downsize state government from Sacramento and return decisions and authority to the cities, to the counties and to local schools.”

On Gridlock And Governance

Taking a subtle swipe at current Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and Republican contender Meg Whitman, Brown said the key to ending the state’s partisan gridlock is a Governor with in-depth knowledge of how government and Sacramento politics actually function.

“Some people say that if you’ve been around the process you can’t handle the job, that we need to go out and find an outsider who knows virtually nothing about state government. Well, we tried that and it doesn’t work. We found out that not knowing is not good.”

Brown said the answer to Sacramento’s problems “is not a scripted plan cooked up by consultants or mere ambition to be governor… We need someone with insider’s knowledge, but an outsider’s mind,” Brown added, “a leader who can pull people together — Republicans and Democrats, oil companies and environmentalists, unions and businesses. We need to work together as Californians first. And at this stage in my life, I’m prepared to focus on nothing else but fixing this state I love.”

Brown explained that he has seen state government “from every angle.”  “I’ve seen our government…when it works and when it doesn’t work. And it’s no secret that Sacramento isn’t working today. The partisanship is poisonous. Political posturing has replaced leadership. And the budget, it’s always late, always in the red and always wrong.”

Prior Accomplishments Highlighted

In making his declaration of candidacy Brown and his staff cited many accomplishments during his previous tenure as Governor:

“When I was governor, California added 1.9 million new jobs in eight years,” Brown said. “I know we can do it again and be the leader in renewable energy, good jobs and quality schools.”

Brown was California’s governor from 1975 to 1983. During those years he says he marshaled both Democrats and Republicans in the legislature to slow the growth of state government, eliminate capital gains taxes for many small businesses, abolish the business inventory tax, index personal income taxes, adopt the nation’s first energy efficiency standards, and make California the leader in co-generation, solar and wind energy. Private-sector jobs grew at almost double the national rate.

Brown says he consistently had budgets approved on time and built a prudent budget surplus to serve as a “rainy day fund”. He reduced the number of state employees per 1,000 Californians from 9.6 in 1975 to 9.2 in 1982. The tax burden for California residents declined from $6.90 per $100 of income in 1975 to $6.72 in 1982.

Following the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978, which cut property taxes collected by local governments by 2/3, Brown claims he used the state’s “rainy day fund” to help local school districts, police and fire departments, cities and counties maintain essential services. Proposition 13 author Howard Jarvis said, “I knew Gov. Brown was the man who could make it work.”

While curbing the growth of state government, Brown instituted cutting-edge environmental protections that became guidelines for the nation to follow. He strengthened the California Coastal Commission and established comprehensive policies governing development along the coast. He signed the nation’s first legislation requiring high school students to demonstrate basic proficiency before graduation. State funding for higher education, including community colleges, more than doubled during Brown’s eight years as governor.

His terms as Mayor of Oakland, from 1999 to 2007, were also positively cited. Brown’s declaration claimed he recruited 10,000 new residents to the city, attracting more than 200 new businesses to Oakland, and cutting the number of serious crimes by over 30 percent.

Experience

Here is a brief listing of Jerry Brown’s electoral history:

1969 — Elected to Los Angeles Community Board of Trustees

1974 — Runs for Governor of California

1975 — Inaugurated as the 34th Governor of California

1976 — Runs unsuccessfully for President, but does best President Carter in five primaries

1983 — Ends two terms as Governor

1989 — Elected State Democratic Party Chairman

1992 — Runs unsuccessfully for Democratic Presidential nomination, bests Bill Clinton in six states

1998 — Elected Mayor of Oakland California with 59% of the vote

2002 — Re-elected Mayor of Oakland, receives 64% of the vote

2006 — Elected Attorney General of California

2007 — Ends second term as Oakland Mayor, assumes Office of California Attorney General

2010 — March 2, Announces candidacy for California Governor

Opinion

I have been a Democrat in California since I was first able to register as a voter some 40 years ago.  And I was an active young Democrat in my late teens through late 20s.  But I have never voted for Jerry Brown in any gubernatorial or presidential primary.  I just didn’t consider him “my kind of Democrat”.  There was always another candidate I preferred more.

I will, however, vote for him in this year’s primary and general elections.  This despite the fact that I was really hoping a younger, vibrant, and well-know Democrat would emerge.

And I will be encouraging California voters to support Jerry Brown as well.  I think his many years of successful experience with a wide body of individuals and groups are just what we need.  He knows how to work effectively with business, labor, managers, workers, and independent entrepreneurs to build communities, provide jobs, and enact fair and equitable policies.

Above all he has demonstrated compassion and commitment to providing the tools and conditions under which people from all walks of life and abilities can work to improve their individual circumstances.

Compassion and fairness don’t get much attention, weight, or importance it seems in today’s electoral contests.  Between now and June 8 we will be entertained by Republican gubernatorial rivals Meg Ryan and Steve Poizner bashing each other over who can be the bigger heartless right-wing monster.  They will be attacking labor unions, government employees, folks on public assistance, so-called “illegal aliens”, and anybody else considered different and out of place in a well-off able-bodied white conservative’s view of what the world should be like.

I doubt we will hear either Poizner or Whitman say one thing, for example, about how they are going to help low-income folks with disabilities continue to live in their own homes when their in-home care workers are laid off as a result of Schwarzenegger’s budget cutbacks.

No, those two will instead be preaching the conservative narrow-minded fantasy that since they have run successful businesses they can run state government successfully.

But running a government requires an almost completely different set of goals and skills than running a business.  As Brown said in an interview the day after his announcement, “… government is not about selling products or slashing payroll or meeting Wall Street metrics.  It’s about civic engagement.”

Go, Jerry, go.

Question(s) For You

Do you think you will be voting for Jerry Brown for Governor of California?
Do you have a favored candidate yet?
If not Brown, who would you prefer? (Or should that be “whom would you prefer?”)

–

Jerry Brown For Governor: My Take is a post from: Tim’s California Views @ Oflanagan’s Net

In the last few months Facebook has made a number of changes to its user interface.  Some folks like the changes and some folks don’t.  That debate does and will continue.

During the same period Facebook has also made important changes to how secure it keeps the information people post on the site.  Things like your personal e-mail address, what online groups you belong to, and so on.

In making those changes to a user’s security levels Facebook has sometimes clearly explained what has been changed and what steps you might want to take to make your information more (or perhaps less) secure.  But it hasn’t always done so.  Nor has it highlighted other steps a user might want to take to further secure their information, what other groups or companies might be highly interested in a user’s posted information, or what others might do with a user’s information.

Last December the New York Times newspaper published an article highlighting three Facebook settings every user might want to double check.  If you did not see that article you can read it by following this link, The 3 Facebook Settings Every User Should Check Now — NYTimes.com.

Even better, the last paragraph of the article has some links which go into more detail about what security threats a Facebook (or any other social networking site) user might want to be aware of and what a person can do to protect themselves.  I particularly like and appreciate the information available through this link,  http://dotrights.org/what-does-facebooks-privacy-transition-mean-you .

3 Facebook Settings Every User Should Check Now is a post from: Tim’s California Views @ Oflanagan’s Net

Friday, May 21, 2010, will be the 32nd edition of the Kiwanis Special Games.  The Games are perhaps the Los Altos Kiwanis Club’s most important community service project.

Established by the Los Altos Kiwanis Club, the games are now produced by all of the Kiwanis Clubs of  Kiwanis Division 34.  Well over 900 severely challenged kids from more than 50 area schools participate.  The games are simple, but competitive, and carefully matched to the abilities of the participants.

The children look forward to our Kiwanis Special Games all year.  It’s one of those occasions when they are able to excel and find themselves at the center of attention because of their positive accomplishments.  It takes about 800 volunteers to run the games, including Kiwanians, Key  and Circle K Club, teachers, and volunteers from the community.

The videos tell the story.

Making a Difference, Kiwanis and Special Games is a post from: Tim’s California Views @ Oflanagan’s Net

Washington, DC (January 27, 2010): Representative Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) today introduced the Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind (H.R. 4533), which will mandate that all consumer electronics, home appliances, kiosks, and electronic office technology provide user interfaces that are accessible to the blind.

Dr. Marc Maurer, President of the National Federation of the Blind, said: “The National Federation of the Blind appreciates the wise and decisive action taken today by Representative Schakowsky.  In recent years, advances in microchip and digital technology have led to the proliferation of everyday products–such as dishwashers or copy machines–that have visual displays and other user interfaces that are inaccessible to individuals who are blind or have low vision.  Inaccessibility of these devices is a major barrier to a blind person’s independence and productivity.  The Technology Bill of Rights will ensure that manufacturers make their products accessible to all consumers, and that blind people will not be left behind as technology continues to advance.”

“The importance of access to technology in today’s society cannot be overstated.  In many cases, a person’s livelihood depends upon the ability to use technology,” said Representative Schakowsky.  “This bill will allow people who are blind or have low vision to compete on a level playing field with their sighted peers and remain productive members of society.”

For more information contact:

Chris Danielsen
Director of Public Relations
National Federation of the Blind
(410) 659‑9314, extension 2330
(410) 262‑1281 (Cell)
cdanielsen@nfb.org

Trevor Kincaid
Communications Director
Office of Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky
(202) 225‑2111

Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind Introduced is a post from: Tim’s California Views @ Oflanagan’s Net

UDFERR3Z8AMB

Sometimes, when I’m searching for the right words to express all my feelings about the current state of affairs, I get slapped in the head with something written by someone else who does it much better than I would have.

This can be very frustrating.  Particularly when I’m trying to distinguish my developing blog here with new and insightful observations of my own.

In this case I wanted to write about my feelings and thoughts about President Obama’s recent State of the Union address.  But this morning I found the venerable New York Times had beaten me to the punch.  And they also had some additional information I did not have.  Here is the link to the story:

On Washington — Clinton Turned Right in ’96 Speech, While Obama Plowed Ahead — NYTimes.com.

For myself, I think the President’s speech was right on track.  I like what he said and the new initiatives he proposed.  I hope him every success as we move forward.

I Cannot Say It Better is a post from: Tim’s California Views @ Oflanagan’s Net

OAKLAND, Calif. – In a settlement announced January 21, 2010, by Disability Rights Advocates (DRA) and the City of Oakland, Oakland has agreed to adopt an emergency plan which incorporates the needs of people with all types of disabilities.

History and Need

The suit was filed in 2007 against the City of Oakland to remedy the lack of consideration of people with disabilities in its emergency preparation plan.  Plaintiffs – the California Foundation for Independent Living Centers (“CFILC”), Californians for Disability Rights, Inc. (“CDR”), and Marian Gray (an Oakland taxpayer) were represented by Disability Rights Advocates (DRA), a non-profit law center that specializes in civil rights cases on behalf of persons with disabilities in Berkeley, California.

Bird’s eye view of Oakland freeway which collapsed during 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake.

After the lawsuit was filed, Oakland immediately began to work with DRA in cooperative negotiations. The City then hired a consultant to evaluate its existing plans and to recommend improvements that would make the City more responsive to its disabled and elderly residents. These recommendations became the foundation of the new plan, known as the Functional Needs Annex for Mass Care and Shelter.

The recent anniversary of the Loma Prieta earthquake was a reminder to Oakland residents of Oakland’s susceptibility to a disaster. Since 1983, the City of Oakland has experienced eight Presidential-declared disasters, including the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, 1991 Oakland Hills Firestorm, the 1997 El Nino winter storms, and the 1998 La Nina winter storms.

During many of these disasters, the homes of Oakland residents were destroyed, requiring mass evacuations and the provision of emergency shelter services. Oakland’s record of disasters compounded by its proportion of people with disabilities — estimated at 15–20% of the City’s population — highlight the severity of this issue and the importance of its awaited settlement.

Settlement highlights of the Functional Needs Annex include:

• Oakland has identified 20 accessible emergency shelters that will accommodate people with mobility disabilities and is working with other entities to identify additional accessible shelter locations.
• Each emergency shelter will have a designated Shelter Functional Needs Coordinator responsible for assisting persons with disabilities. The coordinator will identify and request durable medical equipment, consumable medical supplies and reasonable accommodations.
• The City’s emergency notification system, which contacts people to alert them of an emergency situation in their area, will interface with various electronic and wireless devices used by people with hearing, mobility and vision disabilities in addition to standard telephones. Specific information during times of emergency, including locations of open shelters and information on which of those shelters are accessible to people with mobility impairments, will be available through Eden Information and Referral Services. People can access this information by calling 2–1-1 on a voice telephone or TTY machine, a communications device used by people who are deaf or hard of hearing.
• A Geographic Information System (GIS) has been created to assist City first responders with identifying the location of persons who may require accessible transportation services. The GIS has mapped the home addresses of individuals who have voluntarily registered for the City’s 9–1-1 Registry Program, residential care facilities for the elderly and nursing homes, and Oakland Housing Authority public housing facilities. The City continues to work with local organizations for people with disabilities and older adults to encourage their clientele to participate in the 9–1-1 Registry Program.

Comments

“We would like to commend the City of Oakland for its model emergency plan. We believe the Oakland settlement can act as a roadmap for municipalities across California to ensure the safety of all residents, including those with disabilities,” said Sid Wolinsky of Disability Rights Advocates, an attorney representing the plaintiffs.

Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums

“This settlement is a victory for all Oaklanders – residents and the disability community who have a right to equal access to mass care and shelter programs,” said Oakland Mayor Ron Dellums. “It would be indefensible to delay improving disability access to our emergency services programs. Instead of debating this through the legal process, costing hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars, we are taking immediate action to adopt cutting edge disaster readiness initiatives for people with disabilities.”

Judith Smith, an Oakland resident who is a wheelchair user, expressed her satisfaction with the settlement. “Prior to the settlement, I feared that I would be stranded in my home during a disaster or turned away from a shelter because of my wheelchair. As a result of collaborative efforts between DRA and Oakland, I am relieved that an emergency plan exists for people with disabilities.”

“With this plan Oakland is committing to address the needs of people with disabilities at every stage of emergency response, from communicating information about the disaster to evacuating residents to providing shelter to preparing for long-term recovery,” said Karla Gilbride of Disability Rights Advocates, an attorney representing the plaintiffs. “This sort of comprehensive approach is the best way to ensure that people with disabilities aren’t left behind the way they were after Hurricane Katrina.”

Future Steps

Under the terms of the settlement, which was approved by the Oakland City Council, the new plan will be periodically updated and Disability Rights Advocates (DRA) will monitor Oakland’s progress in implementing the plan over the next four and a half years.

To read the settlement agreement, visit: www.dralegal.org.

Additional Information Contacts
Karla Gilbride, Disability Rights Advocates, (510) 665‑8644
Sid Wolinsky, Disability Rights Advocates, (510) 665‑8644
Karen Boyd, Oakland Public Information Officer, (510) 238‑6365

CALIFORNIANS FOR DISABILITY RIGHTS, INC.
To Improve the Quality of Life for All Persons with any Disability Through Education and Training By Working to Remove Barriers Through Advocacy and Change in Public Policy

Visit the CDR Web at: http://www.disabilityrights-cdr.org
JOIN CDR  — http://disabilityrights-cdr.org/aboutcdr/membership.html
CDR is wholly supported through member dues and donations

<script type=“text/javascript” src=“http://www.onlywire.com/btn/button_3793”></script>

Oakland Settlement Includes People With Disabilities In Disaster Planning is a post from: Tim’s California Views @ Oflanagan’s Net

Contribute online to the Red Cross,

Find more ways to help through the Center for International Disaster Information.

Families of Americans living in Haiti should contact the State Department at 888–407-4747.

For the latest official news from the White House go here: http://www.whitehouse.gov

From NBC News:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

From CBS News:

Watch CBS News Videos Online

200,000 Feared Dead

(CBS) A senior Haitian official said Friday that the death toll from the earthquake that flattened the country Tuesday could reach 200,000, the Reuters news agency reports. Interior Minister Paul Antoine Bien-Aime gave the news agency that estimate Friday. It’s the latest in a series of fluctuating estimates that hit as high as 500,000 in the earthquake’s immediate aftermath.
“We have already collected around 50,000 dead bodies; we anticipate there will be between 100,000 and 200,000 dead in total although we will never know the exact number,” Bien-Aime told Reuters. Earlier Friday, Aramick Louis, the secretary of state for public safety, told the news agency that 40,000 bodies have been buried and another 100,000 people probably died in the earthquake.“We have already collected around 50,000 dead bodies; we anticipate there will be between 100,000 and 200,000 dead in total although we will never know the exact number,” Bien-Aime told Reuters.

From The White House Thursday, January 14, 2010

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nieQJrP6CnA

Once again, to Help Haiti:

Donate $10 to the Red Cross to be charged to your cell phone bill by texting “HAITI” to “90999.”

Contribute online to the Red Cross,

Find more ways to help through the Center for International Disaster Information.

Help Haiti is a post from: Tim’s California Views @ Oflanagan’s Net

Today marks the opening of a new federal case which, if successful, would overturn California’s 2008 ban on such marriages.  I was eagerly looking forward to being able to follow the arguments of both sides in this trial, particularly when it looked as if the proceedings were going to be videoed and distributed via YouTube.   But that option has been blocked for now.   So, if you have not seen any press reports yet, here’s a good summation from the New York Times:

Sharp Words Open California Same-Sex Marriage Case

Prop 8 Trial Started Today! is a post from: Tim’s California Views @ Oflanagan’s Net

What impressed me almost right away was how much his experiences and opinions matched mine and those I have previously heard from several of my friends and colleagues with disabilities.

I tracked Ben’s essay down through NPR.org and discovered he was accessible through Facebook.com.  I’m glad to say we have since become “friends” through that medium.  I’m looking to hearing more of him and his viewpoints in the future.

If you would like to read or listen to Ben’s essay you can do so by following this link:  http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=122066678 .

A Voice I Respect is a post from: Tim’s California Views @ Oflanagan’s Net