Comment

City leaders rally to oppose Pepco-Exelon merger

By Kristi King, WTOP, May 12, 2015

WASHINGTON — New voices are joining the debate over a proposed power company merger and whether it would mean better or worse conditions for people now served by Pepco.

Twenty-two of the District’s 40 Advisory Neighborhood Commissions have declared their opposition to a deal for a Chicago-based company to buy Pepco, and they’re calling on Mayor Muriel Bowser to do the same.

“She needs to come out and say something,” said Judi Jones, a commissioner from Ward 4, said Tuesday at a rally on the steps of the Wilson Building.

“I don’t want to take a step backward,” At-Large D.C. Councilman David Grosso said at the rally in announcing his opposition to the merger.

“I don’t see Exelon as a full partner in the District of Columbia to continue the high standards we have for improving the environment and protecting the environment.”

Grosso and other opponents also fear that having Exelon, a company that generates power, as a parent company to Pepco, which is a distributor, will lead to higher rates.

D.C. Council members Mary Cheh, Charles Allen and Elissa Silverman are already on record saying they believe the merger would best serve the interests of power-company shareholders, but would eventually lead to higher utility rates, a degraded environment and lost local jobs.

The county executives from Prince George’s and Montgomery counties both want the Pepco-Exelon merger to go through. Rushern L. Baker III and Isiah Leggett say in a joint letter published in The Washington Post that the merger would increase power company accountability and the reliability of power supplied to the region.

A decision on the merger from Maryland’s Public Service Commission is expected Friday. A decision from the District’s Public Service Commission is expected this summer.

“The Pepco-Exelon is still under review by the mayor’s legal team. As the last jurisdiction to review the merger, the Bowser administration is committed to negotiating a resolution that best serves the interests of District residents and rate payers,” Bowser’s office said in a statement.

Pepco released the following statement about the proposed merger:

“Since announcing our proposed merger over a year ago, we’ve listened carefully to feedback in the District of Columbia. A diverse set of individuals and organizations — including District residents, business owners, organized labor, faith groups and local nonprofits — have voiced their support for the merger because they understand that it will provide substantial benefits to Pepco customers and communities, and to the District. A number of parties made constructive proposals, and in response, we substantially enhanced our proposed package to deliver even more value to the District and its citizens. Unfortunately, a few parties have taken a “just say no” position on the merger which, in our view, ignores the immediate and long-term benefits to customers and to the District that will not be available if the merger does not go forward.

“We believe that the merger is in the public interest and that the evidence supports this. The Public Service Commission will review the full record and rule in the interests of Pepco customers in the District. Pepco Holdings and Exelon have proposed a $34 million fund to be used for direct customer benefits in the District, and another $51 million in projected merger savings over 10 years will flow back to District customers through rates lower than they would be without the merger. We’ve enhanced our reliability performance commitments to reduce the frequency of outages by 36 percent and the length of outages by 40 percent in the District and have proposed stiffer financial penalties if we fall short of these goals. We’ve committed to keeping Pepco leadership, jobs and control local and to providing $16 million in charitable giving in the District over 10 years. We are committed to working to bring all of these benefits to the District when the merger closes.”

D.C. residents can comment to the Public Service Commission through May 25.

Comment

Grosso sends letter in opposition to Pepco-Exelon merger

Comment

Grosso sends letter in opposition to Pepco-Exelon merger

On May 12, 2015, Councilmember Grosso sent the below letter to the D.C. Public Service Commission expressing his concerns about, and opposition to, the proposed merger of the Exelon and Pepco utility companies. Grosso joined residents and other elected leaders to announce his opposition to the merger on the steps of the Wilson Building. The public can submit comments to the Public Service Commission until May 25--the Commission will decide whether the merger can go forward after that.

Comment

Comment

Anti-Choice Groups Vow to Defy New Provisions of D.C. Law That Don’t Exist

by Emily Crockett, RH Reality Check, May 8, 2015

A group of anti-choice organizations released a joint statement this week that, to many observers, seemed like a vow to commit civil disobedience and violate the District of Columbia’s new Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Act (RHNDA).

It’s not clear, however, if these groups’ planned “resistance” would actually break the law, or whether their objections to the law have any grounding in reality.

“The statement from Alliance Defending Freedom and other groups shows that they still have not taken time to read or understand my legislation,” D.C. Councilmember David Grosso, who sponsored the reproductive health bill, told RH Reality Check via email.

The statement, signed by representatives of Americans United for Life, Susan B. Anthony List, March for Life, Concerned Women for America, Alliance Defending Freedom, and the Southern Baptist Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, pledged to “vigorously resist” alleged violations to their First Amendment rights under the new law.

The pledge comes on the heels of action by congressional Republicans to try, unsuccessfully for now, to block the new law. A resolution of disapproval of RHNDA failed to pass both the House and the Senate before a 30-day deadline, but Congress could still try to block it using the budget appropriations process.

“It is appalling that these organizations have sought congressional interference in our local legislative process and now claim an intention to disobey the law based on their own ignorance about what the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act does and does not do,” Grosso said.

The Heritage Foundation’s Daily Signal website released the statement along with a report claiming that the groups are “putting themselves at risk of violating the law.”

It would in fact violate the law if the groups wanted to fire women for having an out-of-wedlock pregnancy, or fire men whose wives use birth control. The RHNDA amends D.C.’s Human Rights Act to protect employees from discrimination based on their, or their dependents’, personal reproductive health care choices for which some religious conservative employers have been known to fire women.

But if this is the anti-choice groups’ intent, it’s not at all clear from their statement. Instead, the groups appear to be using common misconceptions about what the bill actually does to support their arguments that the bill violates the religious freedom of employers.

“They claim they will not obey the D.C. Human Rights Act, yet their uninformed stance actually means they will be taking actions completely within the law,” Grosso said.

The anti-choice groups’ statement claims that RHNDA is “aimed squarely” at the organizations’ freedoms to “draw our workforces from among those who share our foundational commitment to the sanctity of human life” and to “purchase and provide employee health plans that comport with our pro-life beliefs.”

“Despite the enactment of this unjust law, we will continue to hire employees who share our commitment to the dignity of every member of the human family,” the statement concludes. “We will not abandon the purpose of our organizations in order to comply with this illegal and unjust law. We will vigorously resist any effort under RHNDA to violate our constitutionally protected fundamental rights.”

If all these groups want to do is hire people who share their views, or decline to provide comprehensive insurance that covers contraception and abortion, it doesn’t appear that RHNDA prohibits them from doing that.

The Supreme Court’s Hobby Lobby decision, as much as it rankled reproductive rights supporters and many D.C. Council members, is still the law of the land. Council members and aides have repeatedly said that nothing in the bill deals with insurance, and the bill now contains language clarifying that point.

That clarifying language is temporary, which the anti-choice groups objected to. But D.C. Council members plan to make that clarification permanent, even though some have argued that it would be redundant to do so.

As for the groups’ concerns about being able to hire people who share a “commitment” to their values, the law’s supporters say that groups can hire who they want, and that the purpose of the law is to prohibit firing an employee for their health-care choices.

“This is about ensuring that workers can make their own health decisions without their bosses’ intrusion, whether that is to initiate or terminate a pregnancy, whether that is taking birth control or in-vitro fertility treatments,” Grosso said.

Religious groups might argue that an employee’s abortion or use of birth control demonstrates a lack of “commitment” to their values, but that’s where the new law draws the line.

It’s possible, for instance, for a person to strongly identify as “pro-life” and Catholic but still use birth control funded by private insurance, or to have a daughter who does. Nothing seems to prohibit a group from refusing to hire someone who says they are pro-choice.

“If Concerned Women of America and the other groups are asking individual job applicants whether they use birth control, have had an abortion in the past, or have used assistive reproductive technologies, then they will be clearly violating the law, and doing so in a really despicable manner,” Grosso said.

He added that those employers are “well within their rights to evaluate a job applicant’s ability to execute the functions of the advertised position and seek employees who agree with the organizational mission.”

Comment

1 Comment

Grosso's Bill to Protect Workers from Discrimination Goes into Effect Today

For Immediate Release
May 2, 2015
Contact: Dionne Johnson Calhoun  
(202) 724-8105; (202) 285-6447
 

Grosso's Bill to Protect Workers from Discrimination Goes into Effect Today 

Washington, D.C.--Today, the Reproductive Health Non-Discrimination Amendment Act of 2014 (RHNDA), introduced by Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large), becomes law in the District of Columbia. The RHNDA, which was passed unanimously by the D.C. Council and signed by the Mayor, prohibits employers from discriminating against workers based on their reproductive health choices.  Grosso's bill was the target of a House vote on Thursday to disapprove--or overturn--the law, an action that has not been pursued for decades and was ultimately ineffective without subsequent passage in the Senate and approval of the President.

"This is an important day for all workers in the District of Columbia--to be free of discrimination based on their reproductive health choices," said Grosso. "My bill ensures that women and men can decide on their own health choices, in consultation with their medical professionals and without interference from their employers. I am especially gratified that D.C. residents and others across the country stood with us to defend my bill in the face of bullying and mischaracterization by members of the House. The failed effort by Chairman Chaffetz and other members of Congress to overturn my legislation reiterates, once again, the urgent necessity for D.C. to have budget and legislative autonomy, and ultimately statehood." 

In addition to the RHNDA, the Human Rights Amendment Act of 2014 also came into effect today. This Act closes a long-standing loophole--the so-called "Armstrong Amendment"--to the D.C. Human Rights Act that allowed religious educational institutions to discriminate against LGBTQ students.

"It is a great day for human rights in our city with the elimination of the Armstrong Amendment as well," added Grosso. "I call on all members of the House and Senate to cease political grandstanding with their attacks on D.C. laws and instead focus on  issues in their own backyard."

###

1 Comment

Comment

Grosso opening for DCPS budget oversight hearing April 23, 2015

Across 111 schools, DCPS currently serves over 47,500 public school students. Next year, the system is projecting enrollment increases and after a couple of rounds of school closures will be opening new campuses. However, as many of you already know, for the most part, budgets across the District of Columbia government this year remained flat or experienced cuts.

Comment

Comment

Grosso: Chaffetz Should Stop Attacking Human Rights

For Immediate Release
April 21, 2015

Contact: Dionne Johnson Calhoun
(202) 724-8105

Grosso: Chaffetz Should Stop Attacking Human Rights

Washington, DC -- Today, Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large) issued the following statement on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee’s vote to disapprove D.C.’s Reproductive Health Non-discrimination Amendment Act of 2014:

“Coming on the heels of efforts by Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz to bully the Mayor and Council in February, Chaffetz has decided to again attack D.C. self-government. Despite his avowed dedication to limiting the federal government, Chaffetz called for a vote today to overturn a local D.C. law that I proposed last year, the Council passed unanimously, and the Mayor signed.

I call on Congress and the President to reject this inappropriate meddling by Chairman Chaffetz in D.C. affairs. Surely the Congressman’s constituents in Utah would prefer that he focus on their concerns, and not on waging ideological battle against D.C. residents. Interestingly, Utah recently enacted a new law to provide limited non-discrimination protections to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people in that state. If Chaffetz is so concerned about protecting people’s right to discriminate, perhaps he should seek to overturn that law, in his state, and leave D.C. alone.

As I have said before, in D.C. we stand for the human rights of everyone, including reproductive rights. There is no human right to discriminate. Chairman Chaffetz should stop worrying about the Reproductive Health Non-discrimination Amendment Act and focus on the very real problems facing Congress.”

The Reproduction Health Non-Discrimination Act of 2014 amends the D.C. Human Rights Act of 1977 to ensure that individuals are protected from discrimination by an employer or employment agency based on an individual’s or dependent’s reproductive health decision making, including a decision to use or access a particular drug, device, or medical services, on the basis of an employer’s personal beliefs about such services.

###

Comment

Comment

LGBT ‘cultural competency’ bill introduced in D.C. Council

by Lou Chibbaro, April 14, 2015, Washington Blade

D.C. Council members David Grosso (I-At-Large) and Yvette Alexander (D-Ward 7) introduced a bill on Tuesday that would require continuing education programs for licensed healthcare professionals to include LGBT related “cultural competency” training.

The LGBTQ Cultural Competency Continuing Education Amendment Act of 2015 would amend an existing health care licensing law to require healthcare professionals, including doctors and mental health practitioners, to receive two credits of instruction on LGBT subjects.

The bill says the two credits of instruction would pertain to “cultural competency or specialized clinical training focusing on patients who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, gender non-conforming, queer or questioning their sexual orientation or gender identity and expression (LGBTQ).”

All nine of Grosso and Alexander’s Council colleagues signed on as co-sponsors of the bill at the Council’s regularly scheduled legislative meeting on Tuesday.

“Over 66,000 LGBTQ citizens reside in D.C., and they deserve access to medical professionals who are sensitive to and knowledgeable about the unique health needs of the LGBTQ community,” Grosso said in a statement.

Alexander, who chairs the Council’s Health Committee, said she plans to hold a hearing on the legislation as soon as possible and move the measure to a vote by the full Council following a markup on the bill. She said the legislation is especially needed for the trans community, which she said historically has experienced discrimination in seeking medical and mental health related services.

“LGBT people face substantial systemic discrimination in healthcare due to a lack of understanding of the unique needs and challenges faced by the community,” said Sarah Warbelow, legal director of the Human Rights Campaign, which is coordinating a lobbying effort to help pass the bill.

The Gay and Lesbian Activists Alliance, Whitman-Walker Health, National Children’s Hospital, and the D.C. Center for the LGBT Community are working with HRC as part of a coalition pushing for the bill, according to a statement by HRC.

“Cultural competency is critical to reducing healthcare disparities for LGBT people and improving access to high quality healthcare, especially for transgender people,” Warbelow said.

Comment

Comment

Council Blocks Controversial Jail Contract

by Will Sommer, April 14, 2015, Washington City Paper

Endorsements from two mayors and a heavy lobbying campaign weren't enough to convince the D.C. Council to let controversial correctional health provider Corizon take over at the D.C. Jail. After months of wrangling with the Tennessee-based company, a slim majority of the Council voted to disapprove the jail health contract backed by Muriel Bowser.

The dispute came down between six opponents of the contract, which looks bad because of Corizon's record for attracting lawsuits over its allegedly deficient inmate care, and proponents who either want the Council out of contract approval or because they actually think it's a good deal.

After a motion to change an approval resolution from backer Vincent Orange was amended by six councilmembers to become a disapproval (a majority on the temporarily eleven-member Council), the contract's fate was clear. Charles Allen, Mary Cheh, David Grosso, Phil Mendelson, Brianne Nadeau, and Elissa Silverman voted to disapprove, while Yvette Alexander, Anita Bonds, Jack Evans, Kenyan McDuffie, and Vincent Orange voted against efforts to shut down the contract. With the contract blocked, current jail health provider Unity will keep running jail health services for now.

The dais fight put opponents of the deal in an awkward spot, since many of them are the same good-government-minded councilmembers who generally oppose Council interference in contracting. Before introducing his resolution, Orange read off a list of councilmembers who want the Council to lose its contracting powers who are now opposed to the Corizon contract.

“Sometimes one strong, principled stance must outweigh another strong, principled stance," Grosso, the Council's most outspoken opponent of both the contract and the Council's contract approval power, said.

Orange argued that the deal had already been approved by the Office of Contracting and Procurement in two mayoral administrations, as well as the chairmen of relevant Council committees.

“We all know that the Bowser admin and the [Vince] Gray administration were like oil and water, but they both came to the conclusion that this was the appropriate avenue," Orange said.

In an emailed statement, Bowser spokesman Michael Czin pointed to Corizon's success in the Office of Contracting and Procurement's bidding process. "The Council’s action will extend overpayment for care, which does not fully meet the health needs of a vulnerable population, until a new contract can be awarded," Czin said.

(The argument that OCP approval should be enough for the contract is strange for Bowser, since, just yesterday, she told the Council that she was so unhappy with Gray's contracting boss that she paid $40,000 to push him out of her new administration).

In a statement, Corizon CEO Dr. Woodrow A. Myers, Jr. said he was "disappointed, not solely for our company, but also for the District."

Comment

Comment

Grosso Introduces Bill to Establish a Small Business Tax Deferral Program

For Immediate Release
April 14, 2015

Contact: Dionne Johnson Calhoun
(202) 724-8105

Grosso Introduces Bill to Establish a Small Business Tax Deferral Program

Washington, D.C. – Today, Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large) introduced the Small Business Tax Deferral Act of 2015. This legislation would establish a small business tax deferral program for those business owners with annual gross receipts that do not exceed $5 million when averaged over a three-year period.

“Small businesses provide a significant number of employment opportunities, foster growth and innovation and are often staples in the communities they serve,” said Grosso. “In D.C. we need to create a climate where small businesses not only survive but thrive and helping to alleviate the operational drain that payment of rising property taxes often causes, will certainly aid in this effort.”

According to a recent report published by the D.C. Office of Revenue Analysis, “mom and pop” shops—those with only a handful of employees—have sharply declined over the past 15 years.  These businesses include florists, bookstores, hair salons, butchers and others.  This legislation will help these types of businesses keep their doors open for years to come.

###

Comment

Comment

Grosso Introduces LGBTQ Cultural Competency Legislation for Clinical Medical Providers

For Immediate Release
April 14, 2015

Contact: Dionne Johnson Calhoun
(202) 724-8105

Grosso Introduces LGBTQ Cultural Competency Legislation for Clinical Medical Providers

Washington, D.C.—Today, Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large) introduced legislation seeking to narrow LGBT health disparities in the District of Columbia with the introduction of the “LGBTQ Cultural Competency Continuing Education Amendment Act of 2015.” The legislation requires two credits of instruction on cultural competency or specialized clinical training focusing on patients who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, gender nonconforming, queer, or questioning their sexual orientation or gender identity and expression.

 “Over 66,000 LGBTQ citizens reside in D.C., and they deserve access to medical professionals who are sensitive to and knowledgeable about the unique health needs of the LGBTQ community,” said Grosso.

According to the Joint Commission field guide, “Advancing Effective Communication, Cultural Competence, and Patient- and Family-Centered Care for the LGBT Community,” LGBTQ patients face barriers to equitable care, such as refusals of care, delayed or substandard care, mistreatment, inequitable policies and practices, little or no inclusion in health outreach or education, and inappropriate restrictions or limits on visitations. These factors contribute to higher instances of chronic conditions among LGBTQ individuals; higher infection rates of STDs and HIV; higher prevalence of suicide attempts, mental health illness such as anxiety, depression, and addiction; and higher instances of some cancers.

“LGBTQ health disparities are real and this is a contribution to our efforts to narrow those disparities in the District of Columbia. I am proud that my colleague from Ward 7, Health and Human Services Committee Chairwoman Yvette Alexander joined me in co-introducing this bill. Together, we will continue to ensure the LGBTQ community enjoys a greater quality of life in the District of Columbia,” said Grosso.

###

Comment

Comment

Grosso Will Vote “No” on D.C. Jail Healthcare Services Contract

For Immediate Release
April 10, 2015

Contact: Dionne Johnson Calhoun
(202) 724-8105

 

Grosso Will Vote “No” on D.C. Jail Healthcare Services Contract

Washington, D.C. –- Councilmember David Grosso (I-At Large) released the following statement today on his plan to break with his history of abstaining from votes on contracts before the D.C. Council:

"On Tuesday, the Council is scheduled to vote on a contract to provide healthcare services to inmates across D.C. Department of Corrections facilities.  I will vote "no."  This decision was not made lightly; sometimes one strong, principled stance outweighs another principled stance. And, after careful consideration and a review of Corizon Health, Inc.'s well-documented history of failing to provide adequate medical care to inmates across the country, I must take a strong stand.

"In my time on the Council I have championed good government and ethics reform. I believe the Council's role in voting on contracts over $1 million can be used as a vehicle for corruption and I have consistently voted "present" on those contracts. Despite this practice, it has always been my contention that Council oversight of the contracting and procurement process is critical. Even if the Council was not required to vote on contracts, I would still work diligently to prevent this company from operating in the D.C. Jail given their objectionable track record.

"Awarding this contract would be an absolute failure of government to protect the health and well-being of District of Columbia residents who are in jail. Corizon's history of failing to provide necessary medical care, allowing extreme delays in medical services to persist and operating substandard facilities cannot and should not be ignored. The circumstances surrounding this contract are too egregious to overlook.

“Just as I have worked to encourage greater government transparency, accountability and heightened ethics standards, I have also grounded all of my work on the Council in the principles of human rights.  Our inmates, just like everyone else, deserve to be treated with dignity.  Those in D.C. corrections facilities have a human right to the highest standard of healthcare and safeguarding those rights is imperative.  Therefore, I am obligated to take this deliberate, important and principled stance against this contract.”

###

Comment

Comment

Video: Announcement of New Policy Ending Routine Shackling of Youth in Court

On April 3, 2015, Councilmember Grosso joined Councilmember Kenyan McDuffie and Attorney General Karl Racine to announce a new D.C. Superior Court policy what would end the indiscriminate shackling of youth being tried in Family Court. Grosso has worked on this issue since he learned about it in the course of passing his "Limitations on the Use of Restraints Amendment Act of 2014" which ended the shackling of pregnant inmates and detainees in D.C. adult correctional and juvenile detention facilities.

You can watch the announcement thanks to OCT/DCC:

Comment

Comment

Victory: D.C. Family Court to Stop Routine Shackling of Youth

Today, Councilmember Grosso joined Committee on the Judiciary Chairman Kenyan McDuffie and Attorney General Karl Racine to announce today a policy change at the D.C. Superior Court pertaining to youth shackling. The routine and indiscriminate shackling of youth appearing in the Family Court division is coming to an end with the issuance by Chief Judge Lee Satterfield of an administrative order. The Chief Judge's order instructs judges and court personnel to remove the shackles from juveniles after they arrive in a court room for a hearing, unless there is a clear need for the youth to remain in restraints due to danger of harm to the youth or others, or danger of flight. This order is the result of close collaboration between the Chief Judge, Councilmembers, Attorney General, Public Defender Service, and the Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services.

Grosso became involved in this issue after successfully passing his "Limitations on the Use of Restraints Amendment Act of 2014", which prohibited the use of shackles on pregnant women and girls in D.C. jail or detention centers. He visited the courts, met with the U.S. Marshals and the Chief Judge, and saw the practice of shackling youth with his own eyes. Grosso and his staff will keep a close eye on implementation of the new administrative order to ensure that youth are not being needlessly shackled. Councilmember Grosso is prepared to introduce legislation if necessary to safeguard the human rights and due process of youth in the courts if the new policy does not live up to its expectations.  You can view the order below.

Comment