AGING AGING Senate Bill 38: Home and Community Care Block Grant (HCCBG) Funds Sponsors: Sen. A. B. Swindell (D-Nash,Wilson) House Bill 43: Home and Community Care Block Grant (HCCBG) Funds Sponsors: Rep. Edd Nye (D-Bladen, Cumberland) and Rep. Debbie Clary (R-Cleveland, Gaston) House Bill 119: Wage Enhancement Funds Sponsors: Rep. Debbie Clary (R-Cleveland, Gaston) and Rep. Edd Nye (D-Bladen, Cumberland) 1. Ask for full support of Medicaid funding After public education, Medicaid is the state's biggest expense, around $2.7 billion, and therefore always a target for cuts. Since Medicaid supports health care for the needy, primarily the elderly and children, cuts don't save money because sick elderly people and children will apply for health care through the expensive hospital system. The largest amount of Medicaid expense supports elderly persons in nursing homes. Many of these residents were not needy when they entered but have exhausted their resources. 2. Ask for support of S38 (Swindell; companion bill H43, Nye and Clary) to increase funds for the Home and Community Care Block Grant by $4 million each year. This block grant can fund 18 different services such as adult day care, home-delivered meals, and home health services. The waiting list for services (based on responses to a survey from 55 percent of providers) consists of more than 8000 persons. 3. Ask for support of H119 (Clary and Nye) Wage Enhancement Funds. This bill would appropriate funding for increased wages or benefits for in-home aides through Medicaid funding. Home care aides are paid less than nurse aides in institutions. They are also paid less than dental assistants, manicurists, school bus drivers, file clerks or hairdressers. Their work is demanding and is important in providing good care to the elderly in their homes. These are only some of the most important bills supporting services to the elderly. ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE Bill: Sponsors: EQUAL POLITICAL REPRESENTATION Senate Bill 1042: Voter Owned Elections Act of 2005 Sponsors: Sen. Dan Clodfelter (D-Mecklenburg) and Sen. Stan Bingham (R-Davidson) We want to increase the participation of women as voters, leaders, and decision-makers in the political process. Public financing provides candidates who choose to participate with an alternative to the constant money chase that dominates our elections and is particularly helpful to women, people of color, and people from low income communities who have historically found themselves at a disadvantage in raising the money it takes to run a successful campaign. NC made history in 2004 by becoming the first state to provide a full public financing alternative for candidates for the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court When states all over the country are seeing more money pouring into their judicial elections from special interest groups, NC had 12 of the 16 candidates running for office taking only public financing, including 4 of the 5 candidates who won. This program should be expanded to include the 8 offices of the Council of State. These Council of State officials get most of their campaign money from the businesses/people they regulate or do business with -- very similar to judges getting most of their money from attorneys. It's an awkward conflict and bad system, as we saw in the case of Meg Scott Phipps and State Fair vendors. Bill details: The Voter-Owned Elections Act will provide a public-financing program for candidates seeking election to head the eight Council of State agencies (Sec. of State, Auditor, Attorney General, Supt of Public Instruction, Treasurer, Commissioners of Agriculture, Labor, and Insurance) Under this program, the candidates and the public benefit from an alternative to the money chase -- a voluntary, public financing option. In order to participate, the candidates must first raise 2,000 small donations from registered voters to prove they have broad public support and deserve public funding. This is a "sweat equity" program for worthy politicians. The public funding comes from a Voter-Owned Elections Fund that gets its money from a small surcharge on regulatory fees collected by these agencies. The Fund does NOT take money away from the General Fund. House Bill 851: Same Day Voter Registration at One-Stop Sites Bill Sponsors: Rep. Deborah Ross (D-Wake), Rep. Danny McComas (R-New Hanover), Rep. Earline Parmon (D-Forsyth), and Rep. Hugh Holliman (D-Davidson) We want to increase the participation of women as voters in the political process. In order to do this, we support removing barriers to voting for all eligible citizens. NC ranks 44th in the country in voter turnout out for the past six presidential elections (1980 to 2000). More than half of NC adults do not participate in elections. Over 1,000,000 eligible NC adults are not registered to vote, 400,000 of whom are 18-34 The six states that allow Same-Day Registration have an average turnout rate of 61.0% in the past two presidential elections (1996 and 2000), compared to 46.8% for NC. (The six states are Minnesota, Maine, Wisconsin, Idaho, New Hampshire and Wyoming.) Bill details: HB 851 is designed (a) to give people who get interested in elections late a chance to vote and (b) to address the fraud paranoia regarding allowing people to register and vote at the same time. (This is a myth, because experience in the 6 states with Election-Day registration shows they have no more fraud than any other state.) If a person misses the cutoff to register (25 days before Election Day), they can go to one of the one-stop early voting locations during the early voting period and show a current ID, swear they live at the address given, and vote. Giving false information is a felony. Citizens whose valid NC license can be confirmed through a check of the NC driver's license database will vote an absentee ballot. If the ID is another approved form besides a driver's license, they will vote using a provisional ballot which won't count unless the verification process is successfully completed. The ballot is retrievable, which protects against fraud if it turns out the person doesn't live at the address or gave false information. State elections officials plan to use some federal funds from the Help America Vote Act to provide computers and databases in the early voting sites, so officials can do the immediate database check to ensure that (1) they do have a valid driver's license and (2) they have not voted or registered anywhere else. EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION Bill: Sponsors: How does NC's State Personnel Act address discrimination? Under state personnel law, all state departments and agencies and all local political subdivisions are prohibited from discriminating in employment and compensation on the basis of race, religion, color, creed, national origin, sex, age, or handicapping condition (NCGS §126-16). However, the current law does not include protections on the basis of sexual orientation, leaving an entire class of government employees open to unfair treatment. Why do we need to expand the State Personnel Act? North Carolinians hold their government to a higher standard. They expect the State to treat its employees fairly. They expect the government to hire the most qualified candidates without regard to irrelevant characteristics like race, religion, sex, disability, and sexual orientation. The Numbers 74% of North Carolinians oppose discrimination by public employers on the basis of sexual orientation, including 83% of Democrats and 61% of Republicans. 58% of North Carolinians would be more likely to support a legislator who voted for a bill prohibiting job discrimination for public employees on the basis of sexual orientation. Source: Portrait of America North Carolina poll, Fall 2002. Conducted by the Lucas Group. Sexual orientation must be included in the list of protected classes, with a clear definition to ensure that gender expression is included. North Carolinians face discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and every day, even though most North Carolinians believe this category should receive the same protections as already protected categories like race and religion. More than half of Americans live in jurisdictions that have prohibited discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in both public and private employment, including 15 states and the District of Columbia. An additional 10 states prohibit discrimination against public employees based on sexual orientation. Here in North Carolina, the cities of Raleigh, Durham, Chapel Hill, and Carrboro, and Durham and Orange County have already taken action to prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation. Discriminating is simply a bad way to run a business. That's why large and small businesses have implemented inclusive non-discrimination policies, including 415 of the Fortune 500 Companies. That list includes North Carolina-based Duke Energy, Bank of America, Wachovia, Lowe's, RJ Reynolds Tobacco, and Progress Energy. Other major North Carolina employers with such policies include: IBM, BellSouth, Cigna, Cisco Systems, US Airways, and Corning. By failing to include sexual orientation, the State makes it less likely that qualified workers who value fairness and diversity will apply for jobs, reducing the quality and effectiveness of the state workforce. How should the State Personnel Act be changed? Equality NC supports which seeks the addition of sexual orientation to the list of classes included in the State Personnel Act's Equal Employment and Compensation Opportunity section (NCGS §126-16). Sexual orientation is defined to make sure it protects the entire LGBT community. HATE CRIMES Senate Bill 485: Hate Crimes/Matthew Sheppard Sponsors: Rep. Jeanne Lucas (D-Durham) What does North Carolina's existing Hate Crime Law do? In 1991, North Carolina adopted the Ethnic Intimidation Act to provide penalty enhancement for crimes committed because of the victim's race, color, religion, nationality, or country of origin (NCGS 14-3(c)), and made it illegal to assault someone or damage property because of the victim's membership in the above categories (NCGS 14-401.14). This law accomplishes several things: It recognizes that hate violence has an impact on an entire class, not just an individual victim. It sends a message that bias-related violence is wrong and that North Carolina will not tolerate it. It is tough on crime because it allows hate motivation to be considered in sentencing decisions. The Numbers: According to voluntary reporting to the National Coalition of Anti-Violence Projects: 8% Increase in number of anti-gay attacks from 2002 to 2003 according to the National Coalition of Antiviolence Projects 2384 Victims of crimes motivated by real or perceived sexual orientation in 2003. Many More Because reporting is voluntary, and many areas do not have an anti-violence program, the real number of hate crimes is higher. The current law, however, does not provide for prosecution of crimes committed because of bias against the victim's sexual orientation, gender, gender expression, age, or disability. Why do we need to expand North Carolina's Hate Crime Law? Lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender North Carolinians are harassed and assaulted because of their sexual orientation every year. In February of this year, Thomas Stockwell was assaulted because of his sexual orientation in Chapel Hill. Although police recognized it as a hate crime, they cannot prosecute it as such under NC law. Hate crimes are different from other crimes. In a regular crime, the victim is the target; in a hate crime, the entire community the victim represents is the target. Hate crimes are meant to terrorize entire groups of people by sending a message that they are not welcome in that community. Amending North Carolina's hate crimes law will encourage victims to report crimes because lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people will know that their allegations will be taken seriously. Increased reporting of hate crimes can aid law enforcement in finding and convicting perpetrators. ﾿ Amending North Carolina's Hate Crimes law will bolster the efforts of federal, state, and local officials to collect and maintain accurate crime statistics. Failure to address the critical problem of bias-related violence sends a dangerous message to the public and to the law enforcement community that anti-gay violence does not exist, or worse, that it is tolerated. How should the Hate Crime Law be changed? Equality NC supports Senate Bill 485, which would add sexual orientation to the list of classes included in the Ethnic Intimidation Act, as well as gender, age, and disability status. Sexual orientation is clearly defined to ensure that gender expression is included. MARRIAGE AND FAMILY Senate Bill 8/House Bill 55: Defense of Marriage Sponsors: Sen. James Forrester (R-Gaston, Iredell, Lincoln) Discrimination has no place in our Constitution. Senate Bill 8 and House Bill 55, so-called "Defense of Marriage," are attempts to write discrimination into our State's most important document: our Constitution. The State Constitution is a document that enshrines and protects the rights of individuals. The proposed amendment would tarnish this sacred document by explicitly denying basic civil rights to a group of citizens in our state. It's about more than marriage. The bill would not only deny equal marriage rights, which are already de-nied lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender North Carolinians, but would also prohibit any recognition of civil unions, domestic partnerships, or similar relationships in the state. The language of the bill is so broad it could prevent private companies from extending domestic partner benefits to their employees. The amendment deceives North Carolina voters. All voters would see on the ballot was an up or down vote on limiting marriage to one man and one woman. They wouldn't be informed that the amendment also bans any form of relationship recognition for same-sex couples, and could limit the rights of unmarried opposite-sex couples. The amendment would have unintended consequences. Since the passage of 13 state constitutional amendments in 2004, we have already seen this kind of vague and undefined language used in broad sweeping stokes. In Ohio, the public defender in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) is dismissing domestic violence charges against unmarried defendants, domestic partner benefits have been limited in Ohio and Michigan, and a Utah attorney is claiming the constitutional amendment there invalidates a protective order taken out against a man by his ex-girlfriend. The proposed amendment has broad language that would lead to similar problems here in North Carolina. The amendment does nothing to address the state's real problems. Our state faces a major budget shortfall. Nearly 1 in 6 North Carolinians has no health care coverage. 1.5 Million North Carolinians are poor. The state legislature has numerous pressing issues that need to be addressed; spending time on writing discrimi-nation into our state constitution is not one of these pressing issues. The amendment is bad for the economy. Research has shown that innovative companies prefer to locate in areas that are welcoming to their gay employees. As we try to create new jobs and industry across the state, the amendment would send the wrong signal to major employers. PAY EQUITY Bill: Sponsors: Ask your legislators to support two bills that would work towards pay equity for women in state employment. The first bill (Representatives Martha Alexander and Deborah Ross—and companion bill by Senator Katie Dorsett) would set a floor for the lowest wage for state employees at 125 percent of Federal Poverty Level. This wage, of $20,112, is Federal Poverty Level (FPL) for a family of 3 (average family size in NC is 2.5). It represents a gain of about $2000 over the present wage floor of $18,312, set at 120% of FPL. This would represent an incremental improvement towards a real living wage for state employees. But it is not high enough to make a family ineligible for food stamps and children's health insurance. Of the 1720 employees immediately affected by this change, 937 are women. Another section of the bill would provide for a study commission to examine disparities in wages between men and women in state employment and make recommendations to eliminate and prevent them. The second bill (Representative Deborah Ross) would be address accountability of managers for wage disparities and provide methods to aid supervisors in making wage adjustments. Reasons to support these bills: Women make up 48.9 percent of all state employees but are 71.5 percent of low-wage employees. Men are 28 percent of those earning low wages but are 75 percent of those in the top 15 grades of state employment. This disparity is too great to be acceptable. The first pay equity study appeared in 1982 and showed substantial disparities in wages between men and women. Women had more education but earned lower pay. Subsequent studies have provided the same information, without real improvement. Action by the legislature is necessary to bring about change. As North Carolina's largest employer, state government should lead the way in fairness in pay. Since the 1980's, 24 states have created state-level study commissions, and 10 states have implemented measures to correct race- and gender-based pay inequities. These measures can be phased in over time at a surprisingly low cost, with states like Michigan, Minnesota, and Washington spending less than four percent of total personnel costs to implement pay equity measures. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE House Bill 569: DV Recommendations Sponsors: Rep. Wilma Sherrill (R-Buncombe) and Rep. Marian McLawhorn (D-Pitt) Senate Bill 330: Increase NC Housing Trust Fund Sponsors: Sen. Tony Rand (D-Bladen, Cumberland) House Bill 435: Increase NC Housing Trust Fund Sponsors: Rep. Deborah Ross (D-Wake), Rep. Harold Brubaker (R-Randolph), Sen. Beverly Earle (D-Mecklenburg), and Rep. Bruce Goforth (D-Buncombe) Support the recommendations of the House Select Committee on Domestic Violence, including the creation of a joint statutory committee to examine, on a continuing basis, the issues related to domestic violence in NC (H569). Increase the availability of affordable housing and transitional housing. NCCADV supports the Campaign for Housing Carolina (S330/H435). Improve landlord-tenant laws to protect victims of domestic violence. Clarify and enhance Chapter 50B through various provisions, including: o Providing equal protection for all victims of domestic violence. o Allowing for the extension of protective orders for 2 years at a time. o Requiring the court to notify schools of the existence of a DVPO. Ensure that domestic violence victims are able to opt-out of mediation in equitable distribution cases. Work with the Sentencing and Policy Advisory Commission to require mandatory sentences for repeat offenders. Work with the Division of Community Corrections Task Force on Domestic Violence to require that all probationary sentences be supervised and that probation officers are trained on domestic violence. Establish additional visitation centers across the state. NCCADV supports this recommendation of the House Select Committee. Require training on domestic violence for prosecutors, magistrates, family law mediators, custody evaluators, and guardian ad litems. Improve immigration laws to benefit battered immigrant women. Increase access to daycare, transportation, and job training for victims of domestic violence. SEX ASSAULT Bill: Sponsors: NC Rape Crisis Centers continue to see an increase in victims seeking services. However, Rape Crisis Centers have received only one increase in funding from the general fund. In 1999 the NC General Assembly increased funding from $838,500 to its current level of $1,117,500. When this increase was allocated only 65 programs shared this money. Services/Funding Currently, in 2005 there are 73 Rape Crisis Programs serving 100 North Carolina counties and NCCASA with the same allocation of $1,117,500. These funds are critical for supporting sexual assault programs 24-hour hotlines, crisis counseling to victims, support groups, community education, as well as victim accompaniment during medical treatment and throughout the legal system. Recommendation: To provide adequate, stable and culturally appropriate survivor-centered services for sexual assault survivors calls for a significant increase of resources and support to NC's rape crisis centers. Increase funding to local rape crisis centers to $30,000 per center. Health and Medical Issues Two of the most significant fears of a rape victim is contracting HIV and becoming pregnant as a result of the rape. Although most hospitals provide compassionate and comprehensive care to rape victims, the resources are limited to pay for the prevention of HIV. The estimated cost of HIV prophylaxis is Recommendation: Increase the capacity of Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners (SANE) to provide comprehensive treatment to sexual assault survivors. Ensure sexual offenders are tested for HIV within the 72 hour timeframe to provide HIV prophylaxis to rape victims. Increase funding to Rape Victim Assistance Program and Crime Victims Compensation to include payment of the HIV prophylaxis. Criminal Justice Response A few local law enforcement agencies have implemented practices to polygraph or voice stress test all rape victims regardless of circumstances. This perpetuates the myth that the criminal justice system revictimizes the victim and doesn't hold offenders accountable. Sexual violence consists of a continuum of criminal offences and many perpetrators often escalate their offences when they are not appropriately held accountable. Such as the serial peeper who moves on to commit a first degree sexual offence. Recommendation: Create a habitual sexual offender law to hold repeat offenders accountable Ensure repeat offenders remain of Sex Offender registry Ensure sexual predator's DNA are entered into CODIS |
 |