It is go time, friends. Not just because things are starting to pick up speed at Cordell Hull, but also because they need to. Believe it or not, we’re at about the halfway point of the session. The Senate has set a hard stop date of April 17th, and this time I believe them. That means that the last week (or 2) are likely in flow-motion, where legislators alternate between finance committees and their respective floors to finalize the budget. At the point of flow-motion, most bill fates have been sealed by the finance committees – thumbs up if it’s getting funded, thumbs down if it’s not. That also means we likely have only 4-5 weeks to get to finance and make our case. Doable, yes, but not without our GRASSROOTS, and not without some good luck here or there. So strap in, dear reader, it’s time to hit the gas.
- HB712/SB1178 - Freedom for Family Care Act – (aka Paid Family Caregiving: Part 1) this bill would prohibit TennCare from developing or implementing policies that discriminate against family caregivers in the provider-based employment
- We are set to go in the House TennCare subcommittee for next Tuesday
- Reminder, the new TennCare subcommittee is chaired by good friend, good guy and FFCA sponsor Rep Michael Hale
- We also go the fiscal note back, and in what’s bound to be the biggest shocker of the session is:
- The fiscal note says “not significant”
- Which, actually is, a huge surprise, but a good one
- This is a boon to our efforts, because in bills like this, TennCare (or other state agencies, will weaponize the fiscal note
- When the Office of Fiscal Review, which is responsible for fiscal noting, writes these notes, they most often ask state agencies for the details
- Like how many people would be affected, what do you spend on this now, what sort of things would you need to spend to make it happen, etc.
- When the Office of Fiscal Review, which is responsible for fiscal noting, writes these notes, they most often ask state agencies for the details
- This is not an all-clear signal (there’s never one with TennCare), but it’s a good sign that there may be fewer road blocks to passage than I thought
- And that’s a good thing
- The fiscal note says “not significant”
- But we’re not letting our guard down – TennCare sub is a friendly committee (I think, it’s brand new)
- But as we get closer and closer to the floor, I’ll be sure to let you know how to GRASSROOTS on this one
- But that’s just the House side – on the Senate side, our bill is calendared for….
- Disability Day on the Hill 2025! (aka March 12th in Senate Health and Welfare)
- So if you’re joining us for DDH, and your legislative meetings don’t impede, PLEASE consider joining us in Senate Health to demonstrate support for the bill and our strength as an advocacy community
- You may even see me testify!
- Of if one of you wants to, I can arrange that too!
- You may even see me testify!
- So if you’re joining us for DDH, and your legislative meetings don’t impede, PLEASE consider joining us in Senate Health to demonstrate support for the bill and our strength as an advocacy community
- Disability Day on the Hill 2025! (aka March 12th in Senate Health and Welfare)
- Next up:
- We are set to go in the House TennCare subcommittee for next Tuesday
- HB711/SB706 – TennCare Network Reporting Reform – this bill would require TennCare to collect and publish data about percent service utilization, appointment wait times and time between approval for a service and start of the service, broken down by county and waiver program
- So, this one is proving to be some work – TennCare hates it, and that, for us, is a good sign
- But we’ve had to slightly narrow, and accommodate some amendments
- Including limiting the scope to LTSS and 6 medical categories, moving the report date to midsummer, and cleaning up some language
- But the bill still does what it is intended to do: demonstrate TennCare’s Medicaid provider network is inadequate to meet our community’s needs
- But we’ve had to slightly narrow, and accommodate some amendments
- It’s set to be heard in TennCare Sub and Senate Health next Tuesday and Wednesday (3/4 and 3/5) respectively
- In anticipation of those dates, I want to run through some talking points and arguments
- The purpose of the bill is to identify what services are inaccessible, where they are inaccessible and for whom
- And the line is: “so that TennCare and the state can use limited resources to make specific improvements to the provider network in a targeted, cost-efficient manner”
- Yuck, but sometimes you gotta eat the sandwich
- These supports and services are often inaccessible to Tennesseans with disabilities because of the inadequate provider network
- And this is bad for people with disabilities and their families
- Duh
- And this is bad for people with disabilities and their families
- We are only asking for some data, we’re not asking the State or TennCare to do anything specific or spend any money with this bill
- Well, not yet
- In anticipation of those dates, I want to run through some talking points and arguments
- And in anticipation of our day in committee, let’s counter TennCare’s talking points
- TennCare: “This presents some difficulty in operationalizing the bill”
- Us: that’s what the $4.5 million fiscal note is for – if you needed more to make this happen, it would be a larger note
- Us: we believe in you TennCare!
- TennCare: “We are hesitant to get out in front of federal regulation”
- Us: this has nothing to do with federal regulation, it is simply publishing 3 data points on their website for public viewing
- Us: TennCare is not sending this information to CMS or DC, and it is does not supplant any regulation or our state’s compliance with that regulation
- TennCare: “We are concerned with the proposed timeline for implementation”
- Us: the timeline proposed by this legislation reflects the urgency in our community
- Us: Waiting for services does irreparable harm to Tennesseans with disabilities, and we can only do something about the provider network if we have the right information – that’s what this bill does
- TennCare: “This presents some difficulty in operationalizing the bill”
- This is proving to be maybe the biggest lift of the session for our community
- We have been asked NOT to use our messaging tool for this specific bill, so we’ll have to get creative in showing our support
- And here’s the plan, if you would like to write a personal message about:
- What TennCare promised you vs what TennCare is delivering
- How difficult it is to find providers
- Why the provider network is important
- Or other, personal reasons to get the information and improve the provider network
- Here is the list of committee member emails
- Please please please note:
- Use BCC when sending to hide the recipients
- Make the message personal to you and your story
- I’m sorry – I know this is way more work for busy Tennessee family, so I’m not asking lightly
- And if you don’t have the time for this, please don’t try to find the time – you’ve got more important ways to spend your time than this bill in its first committee
- And here’s the plan, if you would like to write a personal message about:
- We have been asked NOT to use our messaging tool for this specific bill, so we’ll have to get creative in showing our support
- The only other thing I’ll ask on this one is, if you have the time and the motive, consider recording a short video describing your experience with the TennCare provider network
- Again, if this isn’t in the cards, please don’t try to squeeze it in
- Here is a link to record a video
- Disclaimer: we’ll only use the video for advocacy on this issue, we won’t keep it past the end of this advocacy campaign and I’ll do everything in my power to reach out to get permission to use it before we don anything with it
- Next up:
- So, this one is proving to be some work – TennCare hates it, and that, for us, is a good sign
- HB1158/SB1053 – Katie Beckett Part A Wraparound Improvement Act – this bill would permit Part A families to utilize HCBS wraparound services funds using an HRA, similar to that in Katie Beckett Part B
- Still on hold here, so nothing new to really update
- BUT, we will likely have to get this on the calendar for the week of March 10th (DDH week!) if we’re gonna be able to pass it this year
- Our advocacy will be most impactful if we can get some KB Part A families to be able to describe this issue in personal terms and details
- So if that’s you, and you might be available in the coming weeks, let me know!
- Next up:
- Calendaring
- Still on hold here, so nothing new to really update
- HB1273/SB591 – Threats of Mass Violence Expansion – this bill would expand the types of facilities that would be subject to the enhanced felony penalty for a threat of mass violence
- It’s important to note why this is important for our community:
- This bill, especially as applied to schools, is disproportionately wrapping children with disabilities up in the legal system
- Which, by all measures, is bad for them and leads to worse outcomes
- See: ProPublica’s work
- This bill, especially as applied to schools, is disproportionately wrapping children with disabilities up in the legal system
- This one passed through Senate Judiciary last week, with some substantial discussion
- Including an “unfriendly amendment”, which is an amendment brought by somebody other than the sponsor, often without an agreement with the sponsor
- Senator Kyle’s proposed amendment would have added “intent” language, which would have meant that anybody who makes the threat would have to have the capacity or taken steps to act upon the threat
- Senator Haile declined to accept the amendment, arguing that prosecutors and district attorneys are better suited to determine “intent” than teachers and principals
- I disagree, I’d think those that see these kids (or whomever is threatening) every day have the best perspective from which to determine “intent”
- Threats coming from outside the school (or daycare or pre-k) are indeed probably best be determined by police and prosecutors though
- I disagree, I’d think those that see these kids (or whomever is threatening) every day have the best perspective from which to determine “intent”
- Including an “unfriendly amendment”, which is an amendment brought by somebody other than the sponsor, often without an agreement with the sponsor
- The DA’s Conference testified, arguing that they support the bill because they believe that front-line discretion, like teachers, is dangerous
- “You can never be wrong”
- Which is just a problematic argument: we shouldn’t make policy as impactful as this based on outliers – there are other ways we can do this
- “You can never be wrong”
- Ultimately, the amendment failed, and the bill passed on a 5-4 vote.
- And as an aside, I always appreciate the respect and decorum of Senate committees (which isn’t always, but usually, the case)
- It was a good and in-depth discussion, and one worthy of being had
- Next up:
- Senate Floor – TBD
- Yet to be calendared in the House
- It’s important to note why this is important for our community:
- 5th Priority Bill
Other stuff:
- HB793/SB836 – Plyler v Doe Challenge Bill – this bill would allow school districts to implement policies that allow them to decline to enroll students who are undocumented immigrants
- Ok, first things first – I am not discussing anything related to immigration policy
- We have a lane in this, but a stance on immigration policy is not it, and thus, I will focus on why this matters to the disability community.
- And some background: Plyler v Doe is a 1982 Supreme Court decision that says public schools cannot prevent undocumented students from attending because they are undocumented students
- And this decision has long-been in the sights of the Conservative legal movement
- For us, it appears as if implementation of this bill, should it pass, could lead schools to violate their child find obligations under in IDEA
- The child find clause in IDEA says that all public schools must affirmatively go out into their communities, look for kids suspected of having a disability, evaluate them for a disability, and if they do have a disability, offer them services through the school district
- It does not matter if they are or intend to enroll in the district, the important thing here is geography
- If they live within the bounds of the district, the school is on the hook to find and evaluate them, and potentially offer them services
- It does not matter if they are or intend to enroll in the district, the important thing here is geography
- The child find clause in IDEA says that all public schools must affirmatively go out into their communities, look for kids suspected of having a disability, evaluate them for a disability, and if they do have a disability, offer them services through the school district
- The child find clause also says this:
- “Other children in child find. Child find also must include-
- Children who are suspected of being a child with a disability under §300.8 and in need of special education, even though they are advancing from grade to grade; and
- Highly mobile children, including migrant children
- “Other children in child find. Child find also must include-
- I highlight this is not to debate the merits of offering services to undocumented immigrant children
- The point here is that a district would face legal questions about declining to enroll undocumented children while implementing their obligations under child find
- To me, a non-lawyer, it seems difficult to do both and could easily to lead to violations of IDEA
- The point here is that a district would face legal questions about declining to enroll undocumented children while implementing their obligations under child find
- There is little literature or research on the implications of overturning Plyler v Doe as it relates to students with disabilities, IDEA and child find
- Which makes this a legal question, and not a friendly one
- If it were be to determined that schools, in some cases, do not have to follow IDEA, that could threaten IDEA as a whole
- But it could also be the case that public schools, as they do private school students, could offer services without enrolling the student
- And federalism demands that if it were to come down to HB793/SB836 and the federal IDEA law, IDEA wins
- Which makes this a legal question, and not a friendly one
- But what’s important here and now is that nobody can square this circle – how will this law, if passed and implemented, impact IDEA and child find
- And we need an answer to that question before it can pass
- It is the stated intention of members of the General Assembly to pass this bill and take inevitable impending legal challenges to the Supreme Court
- It has not been heard in committee yet, but it has been sent to the Senate Education committee for next week
- Next up:
- House – TBD
- Senate Education Committee – 3/5 @ 4pm CST
- Ok, first things first – I am not discussing anything related to immigration policy
- HB932/SB897 – School Cell Phone Ban – this bill would prohibit students from accessing or using wireless communication devices during instructional time, unless related to instruction
- This one is headed for the House and Senate floor
- With the House set to vote next Monday
- For us, this one is about ensuring students with disabilities who use wireless communication devices have access to them
- The bill that passed through the House has language that says a student with a disability can use devices if they are in the IEP or 504 plan, or individual learning plan
- The bill from the Senate says the same, but also adding in devices used as assistive technology
- Which makes those protections a bit more comprehensive
- Neither amendment fully accounts for the extent of circumstances in which a student with a disability would use a wireless communication device, however
- Including those awaiting new evaluations or IEP’s
- It seems like it’ll pass – I do not envy the teachers and administrators set to have to enforce it though
- But I – as a cell phone ban convert – think that the concept is likely a good one
- I just wish it had better protections for students with disabilities – I hope teachers and admins feel empowered to use their discretion in those unprotected circumstances
- But I – as a cell phone ban convert – think that the concept is likely a good one
- Next up:
- House floor – 3/3 @ 2pm CST
- Senate floor – TBD
- This one is headed for the House and Senate floor
- Other other stuff:
Federal Update
- The House Republican majority in DC started the budget reconciliation process in January, and they finally cleared its first hurdle
- Reminder, budget reconciliation is a process by which federal lawmakers can enact legislation while bypassing the Senate filibuster
- Also reminder, the Senate filibuster necessitates that for almost every piece of legislation – budget reconciliation excluded – passage requires 60 votes
- In budget reconciliation, it requires 51
- Also reminder, the Senate filibuster necessitates that for almost every piece of legislation – budget reconciliation excluded – passage requires 60 votes
- Budget reconciliation has been increasingly used by both parties to enact their agendas in what is otherwise a paralyzed lawmaking institution
- The first hurdle it cleared was essentially passage of a draft outline, or “blueprint” as they call it
- It lacks a lot of specifics, but outlines where spending will change
- And in this “blueprint” is a proposal to cut $880 million from Medicaid
- Again, no specifics on what specifically in Medicaid will get cut, but cutting Medicaid is now officially “The Plan”
- These cuts are rumored to most likely be:
- Cutting the federal matching rate (FMAP)
- Capping Medicaid payments to states
- As in a flat fee per enrollee rather than based on paying a percent of each Medicaid dollar spent by the state
- Enacting work requirements for some
- Defunding Medicaid expansion in expansion states
- It’s all bad
- Statements from House Speaker Mike Johnson and President Donald Trump have been unclear, if not ever-changing and contradictory
- At times, they have said Medicaid is off limits, and at times intimated that it must be cut
- But this much is clear, federal spending cuts will be part of the budget reconciliation bill
- There is not a ton of information coming out yet beyond the blueprint
- Now Republicans go into negotiations amongst themselves about the details of how to enact the blueprint
- What can you do?
- Tennessee Justice Center has a portal by which you can reach out to the federal Tennessee delegation
- When you see your state level lawmakers at DDH (you’re all coming, right?), let them know that if they have the power to do something about it, think of you and the importance of Medicaid when they do it
- So, sorry to leave you with that (and this), but stay tuned
- Reminder, budget reconciliation is a process by which federal lawmakers can enact legislation while bypassing the Senate filibuster
GRASSROOTS Update
- Consider reaching out to Senate Health and House TennCare Sub and letting them know the importance of transparency in TennCare’s network adequacy reporting
- And/or record a video of yourself talking about your experience with the TennCare network and finding care, supports and services for you or a loved one
- Start calling your Representative and Senator to set up your DDH meetings
- Are you a Katie Beckett Part A family and want to advocate in-person for our HRA bill?
- Give me an email! jeff_s@tndisability.org
Media Update
- Smithsonian Magazine – the European Space Agency has cleared the first astronaut with a disability for a long-term mission in space. The orthopedic surgeon and Paralympics bronze medalist doesn’t yet have a flight date, but word is it will before the International Space Station is decommissioned in 2030.
- PBS – Judy Woodruff writes about reports that Linda McMahon, President Trump’s pick to lead the federal Department of Education, means to shift core responsibilities away from the agency. Woodruff highlights the devastating impact this could have to the education of children with disabilities.
- BBC – Egyptologists and Archaeologists found the first undiscovered tomb of a Pharaoh in over 100 years. Reports say the tomb was found to be empty, not because it had been raided, but because the contents had been moved shortly after King Thutmose II because it had flooded (but also probably because of ghosts).
That’s a long one, dear reader, sorry about that. But there’s a lot going on, and I’m gonna need you, so I figured you might as well get the big picture. I look forward to seeing a lot of you at DDH in a week and a half, and hopefully I’ve got some good news for you. In the meantime – onward!