More on Obama

I have never been driven to become active in politics. This week I have been reminded why I have consistently avoided getting politically involved. To be blunt, the more I have learned about Barack Obama the less impressed I have become. If he, the acknowledged best candidate for people with disabilities, is the fiercest advocate for disabled people we are in deep trouble. Change, if it is to take place, had better happen quickly or it will not happen at all. This came to me after a reading an article by Jim Dickson, Vice President for Government Affairs of the American Association of People with Disabilities. According to Dickson, primary elections are more important than the general election. In part, this is because the candidates who remain have identified their supporters and decided which issues to base their platforms on. This makes sense to me and based on my email exchange with Seth Harris at the Obama campaign they have decided they are doing the best they can to lure disabled voters. Their best may or may not include access at campaign events and interpreters for the deaf. Their best may include access information on their website but I would not hold my breathe waiting for that to happen. Change, if it is going to take place, will not be coming any time soon.

This is all profoundly disappointing and not only is part of me angry but I feel misled. Earlier this month I read an open letter written by former Clinton officials who endorsed Obama. Seth Harris, Paul Steven Miller, Sue Swenson, and Robert Williams, all major political figures, wrote that Obama was the "disability communities best choice for change" and urged people to "join us in voting and caucusing for Barack Obama". They maintained that there is a need for dramatic change and that Obama represented the best chance for us to change the world, one where it was possible "to build a society in which every person can feel that they belong". This may or may not be true. But one thing I am sure of--it is hard to caucus for a candidate if there is no way to find out if events designed to support a candidate are accessible. It is hard to caucus for a candidate if no interpreters are present.

Based on what I have read on line, I sense a growing dissatisfaction among disabled people with Obama. For instance, I read an interesting post by Ben Vess. Apparently Ness, a deaf man, went to an Obama rally in Virginia Beach and left decidedly unimpressed. He asked people staffing the event if an interpreter would be present and no one knew the answer and was told to simply wait and see if someone showed up. While an interpreter was present, he expected him/her to be on stage and off to one side, clearly visible to the deaf audience. Instead the interpreter was behind the stage, out of sight of many and could not hear Obama because she was behind the speakers. This led Vess to wonder why an interpreter was present (here is the link: http://blog.benvess.com/

Obama has not as yet lost my vote but I am certainly moving in that direction. Running a campaign is complex, costly, and time consuming. I have no doubt including information about a host of access issues is a daunting task. But the more I read the more I get the impression the Obama campaign is trying but ready to concede defeat. The desire may be there to include information about access but that does not help Vess see an interpreter placed behind a stage nor does it help me when I need to know if an event is wheelchair accessible.

Seth Harris wrote to me that he thinks "we're well ahead of the rest of society but nowhere near finished". Part of the problem for Obama is that they are dealing with people who have limited experience with accessibility issues. This observation is sadly not a surprise and an indictment of American society that passed the ADA almost two decades ago--a law that has been gutted by the Supreme Court and ignored and violated whenever possible. I wonder if with Obama we are going to get change or just politics as usual.

An Obama Update Updated

I received a polite, informative, and promising email from Seth Harris, co-chair of the Obama campaign's Disability Policy Committee. Apparently an accessibility check list has been in the works and will be released and, more importantly, used soon. According to Harris, who is also a professor at New York Law School, the Obama campaign website is managed out of Chicago but events are not. This obviously makes inclusion of access information more problematic but not impossible to resolve. While Harris' email was promising and supportive in general there were phrases of concern. For instance he noted access was a "desirable goal" while I would characterize it as a must. I replied to Harris email this morning and remain committed to insuring access information be posted at the Obama campaign website. In my email to Harris I wrote that it was not just the right thing to do but would demonstrate Obama is really a man of change. It would also distinguish Obama from every other person running for president. This I would think is very desirable for a politician. I have no idea if I will be successful in my efforts and part of me feels like the classic character in the children's book The Little Engine That Could who repeats "I think I can I think can". Obama is a man of power while I am a man with, well, a blog and determination.

Wheelchair Dumping and Counter Punch

I began to write a post about Brian Sterner and the infamous wheelchair dumping story that is still developing in Tampa Florida last week while I was getting four new tires put on my car. The entry became too long and I decided to send it to Counter Punch where is was published yesterday. Here is the link:

http://www.counterpunch.org/peace02162008.html

The responses to the story have largely been positive. And this is why I love to write for Counter Punch. As a writer, nothing is more frustrating than pouring work into a story and getting no feedback from readers. Counter Punch readers write to authors and most make some astute observations. This is why writing for Counter Punch is such a rewarding experience--it helps that the editor, Alex Cockburn, is not only dedicated but very smart and politically savvy. Please read the article and let me know what you think.

Pistorius Appeals Olympic Ban

Multiple news papers are reporting that Oscar Pistorius has appealed to the Court of Arbitration (CAS) against his ban from running at the Beijing Olympics with two prostheses. As discussed in previous entries, Pistorius was banned the IAAF from competing against non disabled athletes because his prostheses know as Cheetahs gave him an unfair advantage. This ban was based on two days of studies conducted by Peter Bruggeman at the German Sport University.

According to Pistorius, several studies conducted in the United States have contradicted the findings of Professor Bruggeman. The dispute centers around the amount of energy absorbed and returned by Pistorius' below the knee prostheses. This is the mechanical or biological source of disagreement between Pistorius and the IAAF. While I am not qualified to render an opinion on whether Pistorius' prostheses give him a competative advantage, I hardly think a two day study can provide conclusive evidence he should not run. This point has been made by Pistorius' lawyer who stated "The tests that were performed, we believe, were completely flawed and inadequate".

What interests me are the social implications of Pistorius' ban. Why, I wonder, did no one objected to Pistorius presence until he started to post impressive Olympic quality times and beat competators who raced without prostheses? This point has not been missed by Pistorius who in July ran in the 400 meters B race at the Golden Gala in Rome placing second. Pistorius has repeatedly stated that he would have preferred to keep his appeal within the athletic community--he simply wanted to be treated with the same respect as any other world class athlete. Instead, Pistorius has been forced to take his appeal public because he knows it is the only way he will be treated fairly. Pistorius also knows that his appeal has wider significance. He stated that was filing his "appeal not just for myself but for all disabled athletes. We deserve a chance to compete at the highest levels if our bodies permit us to do so".

I doubt Pistorius appeal will result in victory. Sporting events such as the Olympic Games are about much more than sports. They are laden with rampant nationalism and deep symbolic meaning. This leads me to speculate that Pistorius simply does not look like a world class athlete that most people imagine. Runners run with two feet. Winners walk up to and on a raised podium while the national anthem plays. This vision has not changed in more than a century. Thus Pistorius mere presence upsets this tradition and is a social affront to other athletes and viewers of the Olympic Games.

Obama Update

I will not be going to the local Obama event. It is being held at an inaccessible location. How do I know this? I got a reply from the person who organized the event. This is the good news. The bad news is that all such local events are created and run at the grass roots level. Even if a person organizing an event wanted to include information about wheelchair at an upcoming event it is not possible. At the Obama website one goes to "events" and under events there are three subheadings: "Find an event", "Create an event" and "Manage events". Anyone who desires can create an event. Once "Create an event" is clicked the person hosting the event is restricted to posting the time date and location.

Now that I know how the process works I will now try and find someone who oversees the website and strongly suggest access information be included. This is very important to me for practical and larger reasons: First, I would like to be a part of the process and second, I went to the website of every major candidate, Democratic and Republican, and not a single website includes any information about wheelchair access. Unless disabled people are part of the democratic process, and that means a recognized voting block, their existence will not be valued. I will continue to keep you posted on my progress as I am a man with a mission.

Obama and Disability

I am not impressed by any candidate running for president. The Republicans are, well Republicans and will not be getting my vote. As for the Democrats, I dislike Hilary Clinton for a host of reasons. The only candidate that intrigues me is Barack Obama. He is obviously a gifted speaker and writer. As a fellow Columbia graduate, I liked his book and overall am impressed with how well he is able to articulate his views.

This morning I decided I needed to become a bit more educated about Obama and what he stands for. Readers of this blog will not be surprised to read that the first thing I wanted to know more about was his position on disability rights. I went to BarackObama.com and came away impressed and annoyed. A well reasoned position paper is available entitled "Barack Obama's Plan to Empower Americans with Disabilities". I liked the title and the four point plan that is both forward looking and reactive. There is also a short personal video statement about disability as well.

Given my positive reaction to Obama's plan to empower disabled Americans, I decided that I should try and see the candidate at an event. I also thought going to an event would be a good experience for my son who in a few years will be old enough to vote and has repeatedly told me not to vote for Hilary Clinton. The Obama website is very professional and easy navigate. I clicked on "Find Events", plugged in my zip code and multiple events popped up in less than a second. I then went to event details and this is where things broke down for me. I went to each and every event listing within 100 miles of my home and not once was any information about wheelchair access included. No information about interpreters for the blind--not a single word about accommodations for any disabled people. Obama and his staff have written a good position paper but missed the point about real inclusion. Sure Obama may support the rights of disabled people but neglecting to include information about access at each and every event is more than just a mistake. It is a slap in the face to every disabled person aware of their civil rights. I am angry and this morning I sent two firm but polite emails to the Obama campaign. My vote will now hinge on the reply I get. Is Obama a poser? Does he really support disabled people, want their vote, and support equal access? If so, someone from the campaign will reply to my email and the gross oversight on the website will be corrected. If Obama is a fake and simply seeking to garner votes via position papers I will get no reply. I will keep you posted. And if you want to be part of this experiment in the democratic process send the Obama campaign an email too. Let's see if he is for real--a man of words and actions.

Why the ADA is Needed

I will readily admit that I am not as familiar with Deaf culture as I would like. Two recent stories, one about the upcoming Super Bowl Commercial by Pepsi and the other about a deaf Mom who was refused service at a local Steak and Shake, highlighted why I must rectify my ignorance and demonstrated why the ADA us needed.

On the blog A Deaf Mom Shares Her World a woman details her experience at a drive through Steak and Shake in Illinois. Here is the link to the story:

http://putzworld.blogspot.com/2008/01/steak-and-shake-denies-service.html

I was deeply touched by this story because it reminded me of the many unnecessary social obstacles I have had and still encounter raising my son. This story also reinforced why such seemingly small incidents have such a profound cumulative impact. It is too easy for those who are not disabled to remark that seemingly unimportant incidents should be quickly forgotten. The problem is that these so called small incidents are not isolated experiences. The social affronts may not appear particularly offensive but when they take place day after day they reinforce that the lives and inclusion of people with disabilities are not valued. Thus when I encounter needless obstacles like the deaf Mom that was refused service I get agitated quickly. I am also quick to point out when my civil rights are being violated. This opinion is rarely if ever appreciated and far too many people think I and other disabled people who assert our rights have a "chip on their shoulder". This convenient rationalization ignores the fact the problem disabled people encounter has nothing to do with a particular physical deficit but rather with societal prejudice.