I had written a letter to Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey in regards to increased funding for HIV care and services. She was asked to use her influence in assuring a comprehensive array of services were fully funded for all persons living with HIV/AIDS. I had the opportunity to drop off a handful of signed copies at her local office, her staff was delighted.
On the way to her local office, I dropped of 100 unsigned copies at the clinic where I receive my care. That was 50 copies for the staff to review and sign on their own time and 50 in the waiting room for other client/patients. My thinking was that they are about to lose $1 million dollars per year in Ryan White CARE Act funding and they should also take part in support for this important law.
This is against the rules and every copy was destroyed along with a stack of flyers for my web site www.Commission-on-AIDS.org. The one flyer on the bulletin board is still posted but has been covered up with other materials. It is not the million dollar loss of funding but, the potential loss of quality healthcare that is of my concern. Mostly because I am 100% dependent upon this organization for quality care.
I have received a few PM's from members of these forums, all in support of my decision to take a break from the Planning Counsil and all related committees. This is the primary reason I am so pissed. They will complement me on my ability to coin a phrase, to get such a letter out on such short notice, then fail to support the volunteer work I have done. Some people would get mad, I got even... The Santa Rosa Press Democrat (a New York Times company) ran this letter in every region (5 counties). I may have lost a hundred pieces of paper but, I got over 200,000 copies out in general circulation. I am feeling a little better today than I have in several days.
I also informed the Executive committee that when we complete the Funding Allocation Working Group in September, I am taking a long break from the commission and all of it's committees. Have the best day Michael
www.Commission-on-AIDS.org
DCGuy511:
Why is it against the rules? The clinic staff and patients cannot write congress?
offtopic: I used to live in SF and spent many weekends visitng friends up in Marin and Santa Rosa. Beautiful area.
Oceanbeach:
Hi DC,
The Clinic is funder with government money, primarily RWCA funds with a county contribution. That includes payroll of employees. The employees may participate in lobbying when they are on their own time and many of them do, but not while on paid hours. I am constantly being told how happy they are that I can say the things I do because they can not.
When I leave a huge pile of letters lying about, I am pushing the envelope and we all know it. By getting the letter in the local paper, they can participate by sending those letters after they clock out. WE can not use government money to lobby the government.
I get the same issues when I try and promote my web site www.Commission-on-AIDS.org. The Informations Systems manager has responded to my request to bulk mail the link to people who subscribe to Healh and Wellness news. However since the county web site is owned and operated with government funds, they can not. At COA and sub-committee meetings, I can announce a news item regarding Commission-on-AIDS.org and that item gets entered into the minutes, the minutes get posted on the official site.
I was interviewed on television during a meeting last week, am frequently interviewed in the local newspapers and can take those moments to plug the site. But my requests for postage to send letters to every medical facility in California may not be granted because once again, we can not use government money to lobby the government. Have the best day Michael
The clinic staff can write on their own time but I can not get to them on their own time, I can only pass the letters on company time.
Terry:
June 21, 2006
Mr. Terry xxxxx Drive Guerneville, California 95446
Dear Mr. Terry:
Thank you for writing to me regarding reauthorization of the Ryan White CARE Act. I appreciate hearing from you on this important subject and welcome the opportunity to respond.
I view AIDS as a major public health emergency, and I, for one, will not rest until we can truly say that AIDS is a disease of the past. When I was the mayor of San Francisco, I had firsthand experience with the tragedy of AIDS and its devastating impact. That is why, in 1981, I began the first AIDS program in the nation and made sure that all AIDS budget requests were fully funded during my tenure as mayor.
I would like to assure you that I support reauthorization of the Ryan White CARE Act, which is critical to prolonging and improving the lives of many people living with HIV/AIDS. I appreciate knowing your opposition to the Administration's proposal of mandating that 75% of Ryan White go to "core medical services." Please know that I will keep your thoughts in mind as the reauthorization of the Ryan White Care Act moves forward in the Senate in the 109th Congress.
Again, thank you for writing. I value your correspondence and hope that you will keep in touch on issues of importance to you. Should you have any further questions or comments, please feel free to call my Washington, D.C. staff at (202) 224-3841.
Sincerely yours,
Dianne Feinstein United States Senator
"http://feinstein.senate.gov"
Further information about my position on issues of concern to California and the Nation are available at my website "http://feinstein.senate.gov". You can also receive electronic e-mail updates by subscribing to my e-mail list at "http://feinstein.senate.gov/issue.html".
Terry:
June 20, 2006
Mr. Terry xxxxx Drive Guerneville, California 95446
Dear Mr. Terry:
Thank you for writing to me about the so-called Marriage Protection Amendment, a proposed constitutional amendment which would require that marriage in the United States consist only of the union between a man and a woman. I appreciate you expressing your thoughts to me.
I have continually opposed this amendment, as well as other federal attempts to regulate marriage. In my view, enacting such a measure would overstep the role of Congress by interfering with the States= constitutional authority to legislate in the area of family law. Policies that regulate families and marriage have always been, and I believe should continue to be, a State right and responsibility.
On June 7, 2006, the Senate voted on a procedural motion regarding the Marriage Protection Amendment. I voted against the motion which would have led to the Senate's consideration of the amendment and I have attached a copy of the statement that I gave on the Senate floor which further explains my views on this amendment.
Again, thank you for writing. If you should have any further comments or questions, please do not hesitate to contact my Washington, DC staff at (202) 224-3841.