From bomalley at mhanys.org Fri Jun 18 17:36:46 2004 From: bomalley at mhanys.org (Bryan O'Malley) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2004 17:36:46 -0400 Subject: [Timothy's Team] 2 Days to Pass Timothy's Law Message-ID: <003b01c4557c$5b2ce0f0$8901a8c0@MHA> Time Keeps on Ticking: There are only two session days left in this year?s regular Legislative Session, and Timothy?s Law has moved its way into the limelight. Discussions are proceeding between the two houses at a fast and furious pace, and both sides have expressed a desire to come to an agreement on Timothy?s Law this year. The Assembly has already passed Timothy?s Law (A.8301/S.5329). As was reported last week, the Senate has expressed an unwillingness to pass Timothy?s Law (S.5329), and has instead introduced another version of mental health parity (S.7296-a) that would exempt business with 50 or fewer employees, cover a very limited number of illnesses, and exclude parity based coverage for chemical dependency. One of the numerous illnesses that the Senate bill (S.7296-a) excludes is Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), which means that it would not cover survivors of September 11, among others. Although Tom O?Clair has declared that the Senate bill (S.7296-a) is not Timothy?s Law, it was reported in last week?s Albany Times Union that Senator Joseph Bruno was calling the Senate?s version of the bill Timothy?s Law in a letter to his constituents (see article below). When asked about this incident, his colleague, Senator Tom Libous, the sponsor of both the new bill (S.7296-a) and Timothy?s Law (S.5329), said, "In the generic, everyone is calling it Timothy's Law. It's a mental health parity bill. Unfortunately, that is what happens when you name laws after individuals." Despite last week?s article, it was reported by CapitolWire today that Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno has identified Timothy?s Law as among the many pieces of legislation that he would like to see resolved. However, he went on to note that if negotiations do not result in action, ? we're going to pass a number of these bills so the constituency knows where we stand." As is evidenced by the O?Clair family?s refusal to identify S.7296-a as Timothy?s Law and their comments in last week?s article, it is clear that there is no ?generic? version of Timothy?s Law, and advocates and the O?Clair?s continue to maintain that Timothy?s Law is A.8301/ S.5329. We now need to send a message to Senator Bruno that we want him to pass Timothy?s Law (S.5329), not a watered down version that does not cover 80% of New Yorkers. Tom O?Clair has made it clear that the Senate?s current stance on mental health parity is ?a far cry from Timothy?s Law?, and after last week?s incident with the Senate choosing to call their bill Timothy?s Law, it is more important than ever that we send the message that they need to pass, S5329. Anything else is just smoke and mirrors. ACTION NEEDED!!! ? Call Senator Bruno?s today, Monday and Tuesday ? 518-455-3191. ? Call Senator Libous? today, Monday and Tuesday ? 518-455-2677. ? Call your Senator today, Monday and Tuesday using the Senate switchboard ? 518-455-2800 ? E-mail these same Senators ? http://www.mhanys.org/policy/advtlc.php Demand that the Senate not come home without passing Timothy?s Law (S.5329)!! Please, Do it for Timothy In the News: 'Timothy's Law' mailing criticized Parents protest use of son's name in GOP letter touting Senate version of bill By James M. Odato Capitol Bureau First published: Friday, June 11, 2004 Albany-- The parents of Timothy O'Clair say they're offended that state Senate Republicans are using their son's name on a revised mental health bill they don't support. The O'Clairs, who back an Assembly bill that would require insurers to pick up costs of mental health and substance abuse treatments, objected Thursday to letters sent out by Senate Republicans to constituents touting their "Timothy's Law" legislation. Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno used the boy's name twice in a June 7 letter to a Ballston Spa constituent. The letters say the Senate version "would provide parity in insurance coverage for mental illnesses." "They do not have my or my wife's blessing in referring to it as Timothy's Law," said Tom O'Clair, of Rotterdam. He said it appears Republicans are trying to gain approval from their constituents. O'Clair and other advocates of the measure that was passed the last two years in the Assembly do not consider the Senate version worthy of Timothy's name. Under the Senate version, only "biologically based mental illnesses" and children with attention deficit or disruptive behavior disorder would have to be covered by employer health plans. Letter recipient Mary Jean Coleman, who is executive director of Samaritan Suicide Prevention Center, was also upset. ?I was infuriated because not only does it refer to Timothy's Law, but as a constituent ... if I was an average citizen, I would view it as Senator Bruno putting out a letter to his constituents that the Senate is doing some wonderful thing." "I do not view this as Timothy's Law," she said, adding that she was also distressed that the O'Clairs' last name was misspelled. Assembly sponsor Paul Tonko, D-Amsterdam, said the Senate's bill "is their version of parity, but it's not Timothy's Law." He and Sen. Thomas Libous, R-Binghamton, have been working on ways to address the parity issue for two years. Libous said Thursday he is confident an agreement will be reached because talks are going on at high levels of both chambers. As for Bruno's use of Timothy's name, he said: "In the generic, everyone is calling it Timothy's Law. It's a mental health parity bill. Unfortunately, that is what happens when you name laws after individuals." A spokesman for Bruno said the Senate "is very sensitive to the concerns raised in this issue; it's something we are committed to addressing." The Senate has been trying to avoid a sweeping measure that would cause insurance premiums to rise substantially. The Senate would allow exemptions, including one for employers with fewer than 51 employees. The Assembly's "Timothy's Law" would mandate coverage for substance abusers as well as mentally ill. Pataki, Leaders Say They Want to Pass a Few Important Bills by Tuesday. No deal on budget, CFE By Kyle Hughes Capitol Wire June 17, 2004 Gov. George Pataki and legislative leaders declared today they would try to pass at least a few important bills before adjourning on June 22. They said they remain deadlocked over the budget and CFE. Following the second leaders meeting in three days, they said they still cannot reach three-way deals on a $100 million state budget or a unified response to the July 30 court-imposed deadline for fixing the school funding formula. When Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver announced they hoped to pass a few bills of substance by Tuesday, reporters concluded that they were anxious to avoid leaving town without acting on any major legislation this session. Pataki is sending the Senate and Assembly emergency spending bill to keep government operating until Aug. 1, and no return for session is contemplated until the July 30 Campaign for Fiscal Equity CFE court decision deadline looms. Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno said the bills he was focusing on for passage before the final gavel falls Tuesday were Rockefeller Drug Laws, HAVA voting reform, Timothy's Law, power plant siting, Patriot Act II, Anti-Terrorism II, and money laundering. The drug laws reform measure was the biggest item on the agenda. Legislators have been trying without success for years to change the laws, and convened a conference committee that worked fruitlessly on the issue this session. But Bruno said now "we think we're close enough so that we can conclude three ways and do it by Tuesday. That would be historic." Bruno said reaching agreements on bills that until now have remained side issues in the budget, healthcare and education debate may be difficult. "Frankly if we can't agree three ways we're going to pass a number of these bills so the constituency knows where we stand." On another big issue that was in play until this week, Bruno said he would not support weakening the indoor smoking ban law. "We did the smoking bill to begin with because about 430,000 people a year die from smoking & smoking kills," Bruno said. Bruno had little to say about a stem cell research bill such as the one that passed the Assembly Thursday. "We don't want to inhibit what's going on," he said. Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver told reporters that his list of bill to do before Tuesday was Rockefeller Drug Laws, HAVA and Timothy's Law. "I'm confident we can get a lot of the substance done by the close of business next Tuesday," he said. He blamed Pataki for the nonproductive nature of the 2004 session. He described the atmosphere as "contentious, politically partisan from the second floor, specifically. Some of the rhetoric has been more partisan than it has ever been before." Pataki called the session "abysmal. Simple basic proposals that are uncontroversial have lapsed and lingered in the Assembly." "I would just hope over the course of the next five days, we will be able to shut down a lot of these discussions and see results," Pataki said. He said about two dozen non-controversial but important bills are awaiting passage in the Assembly. Press secretary Joe Conway later handed out to reporters a list of 15 bills that passed the Senate this year with no Assembly action to date: * Patriot Plan II (S.6464) * Anti-terrorism II (S.3-A) * Expanded DNA database (S.5554) * Eliminating statute of limitations for rape and violent felonies (S.5554) * Gun trafficking S.3508-A) * Pena-Herrera DWI reform (S.4869-A) * Deadly drivers (S.6541) * Tamiqua's Law (life without parole for child murder S.5388-A) * Civil commitment of sex offenders (S.5556) * Megan's Law enhancements (S.6624) * Gang rape (S.5396-A) * Repeat misdemeanors (S.5555) * Child pornography (S.5707-A). Refer A Friend Friend's Name: Friend's Email: Your Name: Your Email: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: clip_image002.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 3095 bytes Desc: not available URL: From bomalley at mhanys.org Tue Jun 22 23:44:02 2004 From: bomalley at mhanys.org (Bryan O'Malley) Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 23:44:02 -0400 Subject: [Timothy's Team] Senate Republicans Defeat Timothy's Law on Last Night of Session Message-ID: <002c01c458d4$53614090$8901a8c0@MHA> Senate Majority Defeats Timothy's Law: After several days of non-stop negotiations around parity legislation, the Senate leadership ended discussions earlier this evening, choosing to pass S.7296-A rather than Timothy's Law. The O'Clair's have rejected that controversial bill (saying "It isn't Timothy's Law"), as it represents what would be the weakest parity law in the nation. A collection of carve-out and exemption language from states like Arkansas and Mississippi, the bill excludes chemical dependency, employers with 50 or fewer employees, and the vast majority of mental health diagnoses. Over the past few days, there has been substantial movement towards a new Assembly version of Timothy's Law, A.11694. Quite similar to the original Timothy's Law, the new bill differs in two ways. First, it would exempt sole proprietors from mandatory coverage, so that people who pay for only their own insurance, and have no employees, would not have to take parity-based coverage if they did not want it. Secondly, and more importantly, the bill created a tax relief provision for all small businesses that provide health insurance to their employees. Addressing the concerns of small businesses, the Assembly offered $50 million in tax relief to resolve the perceived, albeit unproven, issue. With the right kind of coverage attached to the right kind of protection for employers, activity around the bill was fast and furious. But, by the time the issue reached the floor of the Senate, the final vote was quick and infuriating. As debate on S.7296-A began, long-time friend and Timothy's Law supporter Senator Tom Duane made a motion to amend the bill, replacing the contents of that bill with the original Timothy's Law bill, A.8301/S.5329, which passed the Assembly in March. As noted below, the debate was as passionate as it was painful. With Donna and Tom O'Clair, joined by mental health advocates and Assembly sponsor Paul Tonko watching from the Senate Gallery, several original Senate co-sponsors of Timothy's Law took to the microphone to bash their own bill. Democratic Senators turned towards the gallery and apologized to the O'Clairs for the Senate's collective failure to pass Timothy's Law. But at the end of the day, session will end without Timothy's Law. Even though the bill the Senate passed fails to serve about 70% of the people who would be reached by Timothy's Law, and doesn't even cover PTSD (so survivors of September 11th, as well as victims of sexual predators would not get the help they need), leaders have deemed their work to be done. "I'm Sorry. I'm very sorry." - At approximately 8:15 p.m., on the last night of the Regular Legislative Session, Senator Eric Schneiderman, Deputy Minority Leader in the New York State Senate, turned to Tom and Donna O'Clair, who were seated in the Senate Gallery and said, "I'm sorry. I'm very sorry." Senator Schneiderman and his colleagues in the Senate Minority, led by Senate Minority Leader David Paterson, had just unsuccessfully tried to prevent the Senate from ensuring that no action would be taken on Timothy's Law this year. In a spirited debate, despite the best attempts of Senate Democrats, this vote failed, along strict party lines. Although we cannot provide you with an exact list of those who voted in favor or in opposition to this amendment at this time, the information will be forthcoming shortly. We can, however, share with you some excerpts from the debate. Senator Libous began the debate by explaining his legislation, S.7296-a, on the floor, by noting that the Senate had promised to pass mental health parity legislation this Session, and promising that the Senate would indeed pass it tonight. He noted, incorrectly, that this bill (S.7296-a) covers children with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). He went on to say that his legislation (S.7296-a, not S.5329, which is also his legislation) would "protect the rights of small businesses" by exempting employers with 50 or fewer employees. Shortly after that, Senator Duane rose to introduce his amendment, amending S.7296-a with Senator Libous' other legislation, S.5329, or Timothy's Law. In an impassioned speech on the matter, Senator Duane summed the entire debate up in one simple phrase when he noted, "This is a life and death issue. It was a life or death issue for Timothy, it ruined the life of his family." Senator Schneiderman continued where Senator Duane stopped, commenting on the fact that S.7296-a allows an insurance company to nullify such a law merely by having an actuary issue a report saying that mental health parity would increase premiums by 2% or more. To this, he stated, "We're passing a law that, I assure you, will never apply to one person in the state." Senator Liz Krueger also spoke on the amendment, imploring her colleagues to support it, noting that the legislation which served as the amendment (S.5329, Timothy's Law) had already been introduced, and that, "54 members of this chamber are already on record, committed to the bill that is now Senator Duane's amendment before us." At this point, debate on the amendment ceased, the vote was taken, and in the end, the Senate Majority voted against Timothy's Law, ensuring that the bill would not be passed during the Regular Legislative Session. Senator Libous himself voted against the amendment, in essence, voting against his own bill. Almost every member of the Senate Minority voted in favor of this amendment, in essence, voting for Timothy's Law. A full list of the vote will be provided as soon as MHANYS can obtain it. It was then that debate on S.7296-a began. In his remarks on the bill, Senate Minority Leader David Paterson noted that, "It is almost as if we are going back 30 years and questioning if mental illness exists at all." He went on to note that, "I think, in many ways, in this legislation (S.7296-a), we are blaming the victim." When Senate Minority Leader David Paterson finished his eloquent address, the true importance of the matter being discussed in the Senate Chamber came to light. In a rare move, Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno offered debate on a bill on the floor. After noting that, "This is not political grandstanding in any way.This is about taking a giant step forward to create parity for those who have a mental illness of any kind," Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno defended this legislation that would discriminate against the majority of New Yorker's living with mental illness. Senator Bruno made mention of compromise legislation that had been offered by the Assembly, and endorsed by the O'Clair family, which would have enacted Timothy's Law and provided small businesses with up to a 3% tax credit to offset any premium increases which they may experience. In response to this, he stated emphatically that the Senate would not do a bill that had tax credits in it. He went on to note that they would not do it tonight, or over the summer, or next year, due to the fact that it was irresponsible to pass tax credits while the state was facing such a large budget deficit. Later, while explaining her vote against S.7296-a, Senator Liz Krueger made mention of the fact that the Senate Majority had recently introduced and passed legislation that would have provided a $665 million tax credit to small businesses. The tax credit being discussed in the compromise version of Timothy's Law was estimated to be between $47 and $96 million. In explaining his vote in support of S.7296-a, Senator John DeFrancisco stated that to have passed the amendment (S.5329, Timothy's Law), "would be irresponsible." Senator DeFrancisco remains to this day a co-sponsor of S.5329, and has spoken in support of the measure to advocates on multiple occasions. Senator Libous, who felt compelled to explain his vote in support of S.7296-a and against the amendment, his own piece of legislation, S.5329, stated, "The amendment is fuzzy." During his explanation, Senator Libous also confused an earlier statement he had made, that this legislation was not political and should not be partisan, by comparing Timothy's Law and mental health and substance abuse parity to two of the most controversial, partisan, and strictly political issues of our day. Senator Libous noted quite clearly that mental health parity, ". is an issue similar to abortion, the death penalty and others." However, upon explaining his vote in support of the amendment, while at the same time echoing a number of his colleagues on both sides of the aisle in saying that S.7296-a will not pass the Assembly, Senator John Bonacic made possibly the most prescient statement of the evening when he made one simple observation. Senator Bonacic said, "It's not over yet." And it is not over, please continue to watch as MHANYS promises to keep you updated in the upcoming days and weeks about what you can do to help make Timothy's Law a reality this year. We thank all of you for helping us get to this point. We thank Senate Minority Leader David Paterson, Senator Thomas Duane, Senator Liz Krueger and Senator Eric Schneiderman and their colleagues for their comments on the floor and their continued support of Timothy's Law. We thank Assemblyman Paul Tonko, Assemblyman Peter Rivera, Assemblyman Pete Grannis and their colleagues in the Assembly for all of their hard work. Refer A Friend Friend's Name: Friend's Email: Your Name: Your Email: -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: