Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Extras | All Access e-Edition | Home RSS

‘Nonsensical’ cuts for disabled

March 10, 2013

By RHONDA FREDERICK It’s no secret that state governments throughout the United States are experiencing significant budget challenges and deficits....

« Back to Article

sort: oldest | newest




Mar-10-13 9:07 AM

I had to look up what cuts this letter was talking about...found it.."Mr. Cuomo is seeking to reduce the reimbursement rate for nonprofit providers by 6 percent, which would save the state $120 million."

This is an outrage. Maybe because I am a parent of an individual with developmental disabilities...Maybe because I have worked in this field for twenty years before moving to this area...Or maybe because it simply is immoral, unfair, and downright just wrong...I oppose these cuts as well.

These cuts would be devastating to most not for profit agencies who provide direct care to the DD population. There is NO fat in those programs. Most are working on a very tight budget, squeezing as much as they can out of a small budget to provide the care and services that those who depend on the care need...and deserve.

Although many who have DD are unable to vote...the families, the friends, those in our community who care...can, and will.

We need to stop these cuts.

3 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-10-13 9:26 AM

I can't speak for the "non-profits", but my own experience with the care of the disabled is that the upper level bureaucratic bloat in that agency could be cut by at least 30% and you'd never miss the political hacks effected. What I read about most non-profits is that those running those organizations do VERY well. 6% isn't devastating, 6% requires prioritization. There's a difference. That rule also applies to every agency or program effected by "The Sequester".

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-10-13 3:31 PM

The moment cuts are mentioned the big black brush comes out to start painting the picture of devasation and distruction. The taxpayer lives everyday learning to cope with less disposable income so should all government and not for profits who recieve tax dollars! Some nonprofit agencies are just as top heavy as the government!

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-10-13 3:44 PM

Christopher..the non profit agencies I have worked with...two ARCs, one in Pa and one in well as the Assoc of Learning Disabled here, and PIC here..NONE of them were those at the top making big bucks. Not nearly what state or federal workers may make for doing essentially the same job.

Most not for profits truly work on a shoe string..with little to nothing to cut that will not affect direct services to the target population. It is the worker's dedication and care that has them stay working for a not for profit...not the money. Trust me...

2 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-10-13 6:11 PM

Disabled people are pretty much useless. Sure, they are fun to watch at work, but are they really contributing to society? We can no longer afford to pay the takers way, any of them. Old, sick, lazy veterans who claim "PTSD"...they all have to go.

0 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-12-13 7:05 AM

ProudToBeUnamerican-Your slap at Veterans certainly reinforces your user name. Be careful saying that in public,never know who might overhear you.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-12-13 7:46 AM


Don't feed the trolls.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-12-13 4:52 PM

The cost of salaries and benefits of taxpayer funded programs (all government employment) is going to require that services provided are reduced. It doesn’t matter that these may or may not be good programs. We will end up like Greece if our budgets continue current growth rates. Unless the cost of the ever increasing government workforce can be reduced, the actual services provided will be reduced in order to cover the payroll.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-12-13 5:34 PM

My sister is severely disabled and in a home in upstate New York. Due to previous budget cuts, they no longer have a secretary. The mail goes out when someone can get to it. The people I've talked to there seem to really care about their clients, and not to be there just for the money. Taking care of the disabled is a lot of work. My sister gets to go swimming about twice a month. She and others like her have hard enough lives and little enough as it is. Where she lived before, they were barely getting enough to eat. They did not ask to be disabled. Unless we want to become like Nazi Germany and just let all the so-called useless eaters die, I agree that these cuts should be stopped.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-13-13 7:25 AM


While I am sympathetic I also have to be realistic and if the only difference in resident care due to elimination of the secretary position is that mail is a little slower to go out then I really don't see the issue.

The problem is, as Escapee points out, that The NYS and the US can not continue with it's out of control government spending.

And of course anytime anyone tries to cut spending we are treated to sob stories of how it's going to kill the poor, the elderly, the disabled, etc...

Watch these very comment sections and see how much venom is directed at anyone who mentions cutting government spending.

1 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-13-13 10:53 AM


The mail being a little slower to go out is only one effect of the cuts, and it is the effect of previous cuts. If there are more cuts, who knows what will be cut next? Will it go back to residents not getting enough food, like it was at the last place my sister lived? No medical care? Being strapped to a bed all day because there are no medicines to control symptoms, there is not enough help to watch the patients, and there are no activities or outings? I agree that New York State and the U.S. cannot continue with their out-of-control spending. But I think the spending needs to be controlled more at the top, and less at the expense of our poorest and most vulnerable citizens.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-14-13 8:15 AM


I would tend to agree, but sadly our politicians, and public employees, are not willing to give up their gravy train just to save a disabled person some suffering.

A related problem is that we've "watered down" what disabled means. For example, when I worked in an ER I saw more then a few patients who were "disabled" and unable to work due to asthma, but the medical history for their complaint was "I've been playing in a baseketball tournament all day and after playing for serveral hours I got short of breath. Seriously?!?!?!

Don't even get me started people getting SSDI because they are addicted to ******.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-14-13 8:17 AM

Why is the word "h eroin" censored?

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »


Mar-15-13 1:25 PM


Yahoo censors the words a sses and racc oon. LOL!

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 14 of 14 comments

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
Remember my email address.


I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web