I have gotten to know Scott Dehn who is a fellow Republican in Senate District 45 over the last 3 years as I have seen him at events and talked with him through the web. He is passionate especially about disabilities issues, knowing the challenges first hand.
I chaired the resolutions committee at the convention this year and his resolutions addressing disabilities issues were passed on to the next levels of the CD5 and CD3 conventions. Yesterday he wrote me this note hoping to further explain the problem as he sees it. I told him not to give up and that I would pass it on to some other people and also post his letter at a few blogs to get it increased readership. Here it is.
Since the district convention, I have been struggling with coming up with the right avenue to share some thoughts. I hope this does not sound like I am lecturing or try to accuse anyone of being disrespectful. However, I do want to share a few things that maybe shed some light on why I am republican and what I think I can offer.
Let me make a clear. I firmly believe in the principles of personal freedom and responsibility, less government, local control, and low taxes. However, as a disabled person, I am frustrated by the way the welfare state has treated us, and I don’t need to mention who is responsible for that. It is also frustrating that our side is not getting the right message out. A recent poll I saw in Access Press indicated that 70% of persons with disabilities plan to vote or identify themselves as Democrat. To me, that says the people with disabilities are willing to keep the status quo. Believe me, current policy is NOT working. To be honest, that’s why I here. Yet, at times, I do feel like my message has been getting through. If I may be quite open, there were times, not by anyone on the central committee, that my motives and my abilities were questioned.
The biggest example was a resolution I offered at my caucus about employment and ensuring that people with disabilities should have a right to non-sheltered workshop employment with its sub-minimum wage pay. I was not suggesting more subsidies. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. One of the biggest issues we face is constantly having our abilities sold short. This is especially true in employment. It’s still hard to find work if your disabled. The easiest thing to do is to have people placed in center based employment being paid a low wage using one of two arguments. First, they can’t produce much, so pay them less. This may have some merit, but we are finding out that units of output is either not a good measure of productivity or can been overcome by accommodation (that’s another issue). More frustrating is the argument that you need to keep your income down to stay on benefits to qualify for the support you need. To me, this is humiliating. The message I get from this is “We (the government) know what’s best for you.” It also perpetuates the societal mis-conception about people with disabilities. Yet, based on some of the discussion on the floor, it was argued to vote against the resolution because “most people like that go to a day center to do some work and have therapy. They shouldn’t be just given money.” To be frank, although it did pass and I was given a chance to respond, I went home feeling like giving up on activism.
These are all very complex issues. Granted this was my first attempt at writing a resolution. My point is, if we are going to change the above number of disabled who identify as democrats, we need to get our message out and show ourselves as the party of the person first, self reliance without sacrificing support, and REAL empowerment. Therefore, may I suggest the best way I can serve the district is as follows:
• Issue education—our candidates need to know what the current issues are and why current support systems are NOT working (Personal assistance services, Metro Mobilty, etc.
• Op eds and position papers—I have spent my life navigating the “system” and know how inefficient it is. It seems to me that reducing spending does not mean sacrificing services. Rather, we need to get more bang for the buck and engaging the private sector. It also means pointing out where the problem lies, especially with the ADA—it’s an issue of judicial activism (did you know the obesity is now a disability, thanks to the infamous California 9th circuit).
• Targeting the message—bottom line, we need to get the message out. People with disabilities do have a choice!
I hope that this doesn’t sound like a lecture. I just needed to finally get my feelings out in the open. I welcome any thoughts or comments.
Scott Dehn, MBA, CPA
