Medicare inclusion is one of the most important goals CMHCs have set for ourselves and our profession. We see countless discussions between our peers and a large number of discussion topics and threads on the Community website. We advocate and call our legislators to demand that this change be made. Although this is a straightforward method that does the job of getting our collective voices heard regarding something we, as CMHCs see as common sense legislation, may prove to be only one piece, albeit simply a starting point, to the larger picture of what must be done to attain our goal.
WE MUST COLLABORATE!
I am not a betting individual, but regardless, I would be willing to bet that a majority of our legislators actually agree that including CMHCs in Medicare is common sense and desperately needed. In fact, if you were to speak to a number of them, they would probably also tell you that there just simply aren't enough providers to even remotely cover the need even if they included all CMHCs in Medicare. If you do not believe this I would simply argue that you are speaking to a legislator that either A) doesn't understand mental health, or B) you have not spoken to your legislator. In either case you should speak with your legislator because they need to see that their constituents care about this issue and get them informed and on board with our agenda. However, if you do believe what I'm telling you then you might be scratching your head and asking, "If everyone agrees that this is common sense legislation and good for the entire country, then why can't we get it passed, already?!" This is also a Presidential election year. All we hear on the news is how much mental health reform is necessary and needs to be taken more seriously. So, if everyone talks about it and everyone agrees that it would make sense for us to be involved in the treatment process then why can't we get it done.
There's a dirty secret that politicians don't want you know and that is that they don't like making people upset. They like to make people happy. Especially powerful people and groups. So what does that mean for us?
Ask your legislator if there has been any opposition to our Medicare bill. You can find out by simply calling. You will find one of three things to be true: First, there is written support for our bill. Those are supporters of our legislation. Second, there is written opposition to our bill. These are individuals, or groups that simply do not want our bill to pass and are trying to stop it. It always helps to know why someone has written opposition. We have publicly opposed bills on the state level and worked with the bill petitioners to correct the issue to ensure that when it gets submitted that it is something we can live with. We rarely have hostile push back from those we have opposed. Third, there is nothing. Crickets. No submission from anyone.
The way most legislators work and vote is based on those three components. The only one that is good for us is the positive submissions. Those are individuals and groups that will support us. It is always good to have 8,000 AMHCA members and the thousands of individual state chapter members also submitting positive testimony, but in the end they typically just lump us all together as one vote. Their reasoning is simple: I, as a legislator, just received 10,000 positive testimonies from 10,000 CMHCs. Of course they are going to send them in - that's what they want. So, although important, those 10,000 letters all get lumped as one collective vote - AMHCA vote.
Negative submissions hurt us. They are the submissions that directly try to keep us from our objective. These hurt a lot if they come from other powerful groups and organizations. Especially those that have existed for a long time. We have no negative testimony for this bill, so we are good on this front.
The lack of either positive or negative testimony, however, acts as a negative in the eyes of some legislators. Crickets, to some, might mean that they don't want to publicly support or hinder our goals. Keep that in mind...publicly.
In MA we are incredibly lucky. The state organizations representing LMHCs. Social Workers and Psychologists (among others) actively support one another's legislation. We actively collaborate on ways to ensure that mental health is paramount, not simply the profession. In doing so, we actively write public letters of support for one another and their initiatives. We are proud of establishing and maintaining positive bonds with our sibling professions. We have had great success in doing this.
Many legislators have alluded to the notion that even though they agree with legislation, they are weary to vote on it based solely on the perceived notions of "turf wars." This may exist in some areas, but know that it does not exist in all and does play a role in our immediate success. We must work to collaborate with other organizations beyond those who simply align themselves with CMHCs and general mental health. This is a grassroots, collaborative model approach. One that will help bring our professions together and do good for our clients. If we can advocate and collaborate and bring the results to our legislators. Prove that this is a good thing for all of us this will add to the advocacy efforts AMHCA has already been making. Legislators need to know that we as an entire field agree with this bill.