Day in Washington

NTRODUCTION

Hello and welcome to Day in Washington, your disability policy podcast. I’m your host Day Al-Mohamed working to make sure you stay informed.

BACKGROUND

For those of you who may not know, the Farm Bill is one of the largest and most complex statues we have. It is reauthorized every 5 years. This year, the Farm Bill and all of its programs expire on September 30. It covers food safety and production; it covers crop subsidies, agricultural research, rural development, farm credit, conservation, and nutrition assistance – what we used to call Food Stamps and is now called SNAP the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program – which is the focus of this podcast.

HISTORY & DETAILS

The first ever food stamp program in America began in 1939. The idea was to bridge the gap between the farm surpluses and the hungry, unemployed Americans who were suffering as a result of the Depression. Sounds like a great idea, right?

I’m going to pause a moment to personalize the history a bit. The very first person to use these original food stamps, and is a good example of the reasoning behind the program, was Mabel McFiggin. Mabel was an unemployed factory worker from Rochester, New York. She used her stamps to buy surplus butter, eggs and prunes.

Over the years, the program has grown and shrunk several times. When there were more people out of work and/or the economy was struggling, more people, including many who were still working (just not making enough), would qualify for Food Stamps. When times are good, fewer people applied to the program. It has changed in format and nomenclature. In 2008 it was renamed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and all mention of coupons and stamps was removed as it had now transitioned to Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) cards that operate rather like debit cards. Its idea was to increase the food assistance available to impoverished Americans in the wake of the great recession of 2007.

So let me take a minute to throw some numbers at you:

More than 44 million Americans cannot afford basic food necessities. To put that in terms that are a bit more tangible, that rounds out to about one in eight. Think about that, 1 in 8 people rely on the SNAP program to eat.

About 16 percent of households in rural areas participate in SNAP. But the numbers are more than 20% in Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oregon and Tennessee – so in those states, it isn’t 1 in 8 but one in five

The vast majority of SNAP recipients are either children, seniors, or people with disabilities. While children make up about 50% of recipients overall, six million people with disabilities, many of whom are Medicaid recipients, rely on SNAP.

And, just to highlight some of the economic impact of the program – SNAP boosts investment in the food industry. It generated more than half a million jobs in 2017 alone.

There’s a great example of this from the Union of Concerned Scientists:

“Suppose the economy in Anytown, USA takes a turn for the worse. A factory relocates, or maybe a natural disaster shuts down the town’s major industry for an extended period of time. Many households find that they have less money to spend, and business at local establishments slows. Because of hardships resulting from the economic downturn—perhaps job loss, or reduced hours—some families apply for SNAP benefits.

"As those families use SNAP dollars to help put food on their tables, the grocery stores they shop at begin to recover. With more revenue, these stores can hire back staff; resume full operation and pay for operational costs like lighting and refrigeration; and, of course, purchase more food from farmers and distributors to meet growing demand. And as SNAP spending is propagated through the supply chain, each sector that gets a share of that additional money is able t..

Today's DIW interview is with Vilissa Thompson, LMSW, and creator of Ramp Your Voice! and #DisabilityTooWhite. She is an amazing writer and activist. Join us as we talk about living a "crippled and intersectional life," what disability means in different communities, her policy passion - black disabled women's health, and how she gets into "good trouble."

To learn more about Vilissa, check out her website at: Ramp Your Voice or connect with her on Twitter @VilissaThompson. Bonus! Vilissa just started a Patreon! If you want to support disability activism at the intersection of race and disability and health, here is your opportunity - Ramp Your Voice Patreon

CLICK HEE FOR TRANSCRIPT

Today’s show is about Competitive Integrated Employment. What is it? What does the term mean? Where did it come from? And how does it all intersect with the new Workplace Choice and Flexibility for Individuals with Disabilities Act (HR 5658)?

INTRODUCTION

Hello and welcome to Day in Washington, your disability policy podcast. I’m your host Day Al-Mohamed working to make sure you stay informed.  Recently, there has been a lot of discussion around the Workplace Choice and Flexibility for Individuals with Disabilities Act and competitive integrated employment. Including a massive protest on the Hill by disability group ADAPT.  What is competitive integrated employment? And why all the fuss?

BACKGROUND

This issue actually has a fairly long history and involves more than one law so bear with me as I try to give a bit of context. This is about disability employment and it goes all the way back to the early 1930s. During those years, as a way to encourage employment for as many people as possible, the National Industrial Recover Act (NIRA) created a system of certificates that allowed for productivity-based wages for people with disabilities. Basically, if a person with a disability couldn’t make widgets as fast as the non-disabled guy, the company was allowed to pay him less. Sounds like that makes sense, right? Especially, in a country trying to recover from the Great Depression. It gets as many people jobs as possible. This was made permanent in the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938. It is Section 14(c) and formally allows employers to pay wages below the federal minimum to employees who have disabilities.

That same year, the Wagner O’Day Act was passed requiring that all federal agencies purchase certain supplies and services from nonprofit agencies who employed people who are blind. Basically, the government HAD to buy the mops and brooms, made by blind people, in these non-profits. The program was expanded in 1971 to include people who have other significant disabilities and renamed the Javits-Wagner O’Day Act (JWOD). It was renamed again in 2006 as AbilityOne.

So, let me give you a little idea about how big this industry is. Currently, there are more than 600 of these non-profits who produce products and services under the AbilityOne Program and the Federal government MUST buy these products from them. More than mops and brooms, it is now pencils and paper, military uniforms, and beyond physical products, there are contracts for services like cleaning and cafeteria and commissary work.  In FY2015 alone, the Federal Government purchased more $3.2 billion of products and services.

The laws about disability employment start to intersect with the general perception that many of the AbilityOne non-profits use Section 14(c) in segregated work centers aka sheltered workshops. To qualify to an AbilityOne non-profit, at least 75% of the work must be done by people who are blind or have other significant disabilities. By using Section 14(c), the labor cost for these companies is significantly lower than comparable private companies who pay “regular rates” for labor.

I keep talking about AbilityOne and their non-profits and it seems kind of large and amorphous. To bring this down to reality and to an entity you might be familiar with – Goodwill Industries. Goodwill, you know, where you donate all your old clothes and children’s outgrown toys…they are an AbilityOne non-profit.

So now, let me get to the nitty-gritty details of the issue...and a third piece of legislation. The Workforce Innovation and Opportunities Act (WIOA), was signed into law in 2014. I won’t drown you in all the details but let me highlight a couple of “biggies.” WIOA updates the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. The part we are specifically interested in is where it oversees the vocational rehabilitation system which helps peo

On this episode, we speak with Lainey Feingold about structured negotiation.

Lainey Feingold is a disability rights lawyer focusing on digital access, an international speaker, and the author of Structured Negotiation, A Winning Alternative to Lawsuits.

Structured Negotiation is a collaborative problem-solving strategy with a twenty year track record of resolving complex disability civil rights claims without lawsuits.  Lainey's Structured Negotiation negotiating partners include Bank of America, The City of San Francisco, Walmart, CVS and dozens of other public and private organizations. 

Lainey's book is packed with win-win stories of accessibility advocacy, all without lawsuits.  In 2017 Lainey was named one of the 13 Legal Rebels by the ABA Journal, the national magazine of the American Bar Association.  That year she was also named the individual recipient of the John W. Cooley Lawyer as Problem Solver award, given annually by the Dispute Resolution Section of the ABA. Lainey has twice been recognized with a California Lawyer Attorney of the Year (CLAY) award (2000 and 2014) for her digital accessibility and Structured Negotiation legal work.   

Hello and welcome to Q&A day here at  Day in Washington. Today’s question comes from a panel I was on as a part of  a Disability session for the State Department. I thought it was a fantastic question so am including it in here. 

QUESTION:

I was wondering if you were comfortable addressing the difference between service animals and support animals and kind of elaborate on the topic of service animals in the workplace.

ANSWER:

Nowadays there are a lot of questions about service animals, service dogs, psychiatric service animals, emotional support animals - I could go on and on - what is the difference and what does the law say. There is a lot of confusion, in part, because there are multiple laws that cover service animals. Even the terminology differs!

Let me start with the Americans with Disabilities Act. That is the law that people are most familiar with. The ADA and its regulations are under the purview of the Department of Justice. Laws are usually pretty vague. Think along the lines such as “thou shalt not discriminate against some with a disability”.  Regulations, written by Federal Agencies flesh that out into the rules of access. So the Department of Justice has detailed out the rules around service animals under the ADA. They just rewrote their regulations on service animals in 2010.

In it they defined a service animal as a, “dog that has been individually trained to do work or perform tasks for an individual with a disability.  The task(s) performed by the dog must be directly related to the person's disability.” These dogs are allowed out in public spaces because they assist the person to actually manage their disability and BE out in these “places of public accommodation.”

Note they specifically only refer to dogs. The original regulations just said “animal” but it is now dogs only.

So….does this count if the dog is for a mental health condition? Yes. If the dog is trained to perform a task that helps mitigate the individual’s disability. So the dog is actually DOING something. A psychiatric service dog, if you will.

Also, let me just add, under the ADA you are NOT required to provide any paperwork or “proof” that the animal is a service animal. You can be asked “Is that a service animal?” and “What task does he/she do for you?” and that is it.

So……..how is this different from an Emotional Support Animal (ESA)?

Well, remember how we were talking about service animals under the Americans with Disabilities Act? And how it is managed by the Department of Justice? Well, the Fair Housing Act deals with discrimination in housing and falls under the purview of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. So this relates to animals and housing NOT out in public (although some folks will try to take ESAs out in public and argue that it is acceptable. Short answer - no it is not).

Their definition includes “Emotional Support Animals” that provide support and help to ameliorate the symptoms of disabilities such as depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress disorder. Note, unlike DOJ’s definition where the dog is trained to do specific tasks (including to assist with psychiatric health conditions), the emotional support animal helps an individual’s mental health by its companionship alone. It isn’t necessarily trained to do anything. Also note, the Fair Housing Act uses the term “animal” so it not restricted to dogs. There have been cats, birds, reptiles, and many other species. For the Fair Housing Act, all an individual needs to do is provide a letter from their physician stating their need for an emotional support animal.

So now, let’s go to the most recent of laws that talks about service animals – the Air Carrier Access Act (ACAA).  Rather than choosing to follow the DOJ or HUD, they created their own definition that is a