Jump to content


Validated Members
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Blues

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Recent Profile Visitors

6,099 profile views
  1. Upthread, Barbaraok said, "As I remember, Escapees sent out information about the census several weeks ahead of time and then we were notified when forms were received in Livingston so we could get them forwarded to us." What information did Escapees send out about the census in 2010?
  2. The only reason you were obliged to admit them is company policy, and the only reason they had to be seated in the disabled section was company policy. It's a shame that people with service animals had to be turned away, but that's the company's choice.
  3. Not entirely accurate. And certainly not the entire story. While the ADA did remove miniature horses from the definition of "service animal," it included a new provision that does cover miniature horses. When it comes to service animals, the ADA provides: "Generally, a public accommodation shall modify policies, practices, or procedures to permit the use of a service animal by an individual with a disability." In the case of miniature horses, the ADA says: "A public accommodation shall make reasonable modifications in policies, practices, or procedures to permit the use of a miniature horse by an individual with a disability if the miniature horse has been individually trained to do work or perform tasks for the benefit of the individual with a disability," followed by a list of things to be considered when assessing the reasonableness of the modification. So while miniature horses aren't included in the ADA's definition of service animals, the ADA says they must be allowed under certain circumstances, which is never the case with a pet or emotional support animal.
  4. But it doesn't matter where you're considered a legal resident--it's the place where you live and sleep most of the time, or more than anywhere else. It sounds to me like for census purposes, Arizona would be considered your "usual residence" even if you're not there on Census Day. That's no doubt what you'd prefer, but that's not how rules work, and I'm a little concerned that Escapees apparently promoted a similar view, in contravention of what the census rules I was able to locate provide. And the rules specifically say that voting address isn't determinative, no matter how much you think it should be. I agree with you that fulltimers are often square pegs when it comes to some issues, but this doesn't appear to be one of them, since it's all location based--where you spend most of your time, or alternatively, where you are on that day.
  5. The campground at Mustang Island is closed. There are designated sites at Bird Island. They are very very narrow; our motorhome with slides extended completely filled the space side-to-side. Kiteboarding is not allowed there. Like Kirk, I'd be very concerned about the salt air down there. It's heavy and oppressive on its own, and the incessant wind pushes it into every nook and cranny and corrodes everything alarmingly quickly. I swear I've seen plastic rust down there.
  6. But the group they're advertising is on Facebook, so if you don't do Facebook, you're not going to be able to join the group anyway.
  7. Just what I read in this document, which I cited it in my original post: https://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2010/resid_rules/resid_rules.html I'd recommend the entire document to anyone interested in understanding the census, but I'll pull out some pertinent bits: and Those are the general rules, and then there's this: The "default" or "fallback" in all situations where "usual residence" can't be determined is where the person is on Census Day, and never his residence or domicile or voting address. So you have residence being defined by "living and sleeping," and saying it's not related to a person's "voting residence or legal residence," along with a specific provision for people in RV parks or campgrounds. Given all that, the only time I can see a fulltimer using his mail service location for census purposes is if he happens to be there on Census Day and there's no other place for him that fits the definition of "usual residence." In no other situation do I see any support for a fulltimer to claim a mail service location for census purposes. Maybe there's a rule or guideline that isn't covered in this document? I understand that it seems like a person's mail service location should apply if nothing else does, but that's not what the rules say.
  8. Whenever I get a quote, I make them give me a breakdown of the individual elements and what the premium associated with each of them is. That way I can verify for myself if it's true fulltimer coverage--it'll have a "fulltimer's liability" portion in it. My premium for that is currently $89/year ($250K/$500K coverage). Also, it might depend on what state you're in on whether a given company offers fulltimer insurance. A few years ago, I got what was supposed to be a fulltimer quote from Geico, and noticed it didn't have the fulltimer's liability portion. I brought that up, and the guy said they don't offer that in Texas, and I said then it wasn't true fulltimer's insurance, and he said it was because it covers you 365 days/year. I obviously didn't buy their insurance, although I think people have since then said Geico has started offering it in Texas. Could be. I'd definitely check the quote/policy to be sure, though. Regardless of which company it is, but definitely with Geico.
  9. The census rules seem pretty clear that they are looking at physical presence--they talk in terms of where someone sleeps. So what did Escapees do to get people who weren't in Livingston (never mind those who never go there) counted there? Answer the census questions on their behalf? Submit some sort of bulk answer on behalf of all of their customers? Did they know if any of their customers were having themselves counted elsewhere?
  10. The attachment to the original post was put there by the poster; SBI's bulletin didn't mention it, so I don't think it's safe to assume that it is forming the basis for what's going on right now. The Advisory Letter prompted action against SBI customers by Clay County last year, and I agree that at that time, Escapees' location at a campground (not to mention one outside Clay County) might have been an advantage. But this time around, Escapees appears to be actually involved in what's going on ("working with" SBI), and their statement mentioned the State of Florida, which makes it sound like whatever is going on has expanded. What's obviously not clear is what has changed from what happened last year--whether there's more going on than just that Advisory Letter, or even if that Advisory Letter is involved at all.
  11. But the census is based on where someone "lives and sleeps most of the time," and if that can't be determined, it's based on where the person is staying on census day. https://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2010/resid_rules/resid_rules.html In 2010, I happened to notice a census worker having lunch at Whataburger and told her I travel fulltime, and she counted me there.
  12. This was an emotional support animal, not a service dog, so it doesn't have to provide assistance with a task related to a disability. The dog owner is being sued. Along with the airline. Actually, the Air Carrier Access Act requires airlines to allow emotional support animals. The ACAA speaks in terms of "service animals" on airplanes, but defines them to include animals trained to perform a task to compensate for a disability (like the ADA), as well as emotional support animals. It allows airlines to require documentation for and advance notice of emotional support animals. This is the letter that people get an internet doctor to write for them so they can have their pet qualify as an emotional support animal under the ACAA, and fly with them in the cabin. There are situations where an airline can refuse to allow a particular service animal based on the circumstances, but allowing emotional support animals is not a business decision they make. Now, in the case of Home Depot or the like allowing animals that aren't service animals as defined by the ADA? That is a business decision to allow animals, and has nothing, legally, to do with whether the animal is an emotional support animal because airlines and housing are the only places where emotional support animals are given any protection. In every other situation, they are just pets. Edited to add: My solution to the airline problem? Amend the ACAA to delete emotional support animals from the definition of service animals, and allow only "real" service dogs. I'm sure there are people who suffer anxiety while flying and can benefit from having their pet along with them. But there are also people who suffer anxiety so great that they just don't fly. Life isn't fair to them, and now that the system has been so abused, maybe life can't be fair to people who can fly only if they bring their pet any more. I'm sure the whole thing started because it's obviously not great to have people freaking out on airplanes, and if having an animal with them made them docile, then everybody benefits. But it's gone off the rails and the cost is now much greater than the benefit. That's life.
  13. No, I didn't miss that. In fact, it was the basis of my statement that you had health insurance in a place where you weren't residing (Arizona, while being California residents), and were traveling to your "health insurance state" to get medical treatments. So you were doing the same thing as you're telling other people they can't do. Not difficult. Impossible. You have to apply for insurance by the 15th of the month before you want your coverage to start, and if you're using a SEP, you have to have documentation supporting your move. Suppose you're in Montana on the 14th and plan to arrive in Wyoming on the 3nd of the next month but aren't sure where you're going to stay, and then you're going to head for Colorado on the 20th . How should you handle the health insurance so that you're covered the entire time? I sure seems to me that it's literally impossible to arrange it to have "local" health insurance in that case. How would you accomplish it? I did. I said I will be traveling all over the country for an extended period, not staying in any one place for any particular time, and what should I do about health insurance? The rep consulted someone and came back and said I should keep the plan I have. It's no different from the advice given to snowbirds--you can keep your plan while you're living in that other place if that works for you, or you can switch plans for the time you're in the other place, but are cautioned that your deductible and out-of-pocket maximums will reset if you do. Traveling fulltimers are just snowbirds writ large. But there aren't enough of them for lawmakers to actually consider them when noodling out details, and there's no lobbyist to bring us to their attention. Just because their particular situation isn't mentioned in an explanatory document doesn't mean the law doesn't cover them. The purpose of the ACA is for people to have affordable healthcare. Maybe high premiums and deductibles affect whether the "affordable" part is fulfilled, but the cornerstone of the ACA is making health insurance available to everyone. It would be contrary to the purpose of the ACA to have a situation where there's no health insurance available to someone just because he travels too much to change his insurance every time he resides somewhere new, or where even if he could figure out how to do it would have his deductible and out-of-pocket maximum reset every month.
  14. I suppose the explanation could be that you're never in one place long enough to get health insurance there, so you used your domicile as the default. After all, the intent of the ACA is for people to have health insurance, and if using your domicile is the only way to do it, then what else are you supposed to do? By your reasoning, your claims should have been denied because you were getting insurance in a place where you weren't residing. In fact, you were visiting there solely to receive medical care, which the FAQ says is forbidden. The bottom line is that the ACA was written without any thought to people moving around any more than snowbirds do, who alternate between residences, and are told they can pick one to have health insurance throughout the year, or they can change each time they move (and are warned that deductibles reset if they change). For traveling fulltimers, it would seem they have the same choice--they can pick one place to have health insurance throughout the year, or they can change when they move. For most of them, it's impractical and often impossible to change each time they move, so they use one of the options given to showbirds and choose the one place, and the obvious choice in that case is their domicile.
  • Create New...