I haven’t been blogging lately. The truth is that I’ve been trying to categorize the distinctions between the rhetoric of the budget cutters in Washington and the real world scenarios that will face people with disabilities no matter what deficit reduction plan is adopted. While the American Association for People with Disabilities was quick to applaud President Obama’s declaration that he will not cut federal spending on the backs of the elderly and the disabled, the President’s plan does in fact entail cuts to programs for PWDs. While Obama’s cuts (which are still undisclosed) may be less draconian that those proposed by the GOP they are still likely to escalate a nationwide stampede toward gutting social services. Accordingly the hypothesis is that one can accept smaller penalties from one undisclosed scenario or appalling penalties from the other. In turn I’ve been silent for a week because I can’t seem to digest the meats that have been brought cold to the table.
I ask how much would it hurt the U.S. to cancel the construction of a single submarine in favor of funding adequate in home care and special education for all our citizens who have profound mental disabilities?
What matters is the proper analysis of the gulf between rhetoric and reality as it may affect real people.
In this regard I’d like more leadership from the President and the Democrats.
Why haven’t I been writing? Because I’ve been pulling out my hair.
S.K.
Planet of the Blind 
From the L.A. Times: Neediest and sickest would pay the price under GOP budget plan:
http://www.latimes.com/health/la-fi-hiltzik-20110417,0,1181721.column
Rep. Paul D. Ryan’s proposals would relieve the government of much of the responsibility for paying for healthcare, but if the result is that individuals carry a heavier burden, is that really a ‘path to prosperity’?
By Michael Hiltzik
April 17, 2011
LikeLike
To help put this budget crisis in perspective within the greater context of how wealth is distributed in the United States, here is a link to a rather long and detailed (but highly readable) article on the topic: http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
Christianity has a perplexing paradox. How can a religion that promotes a “love thy neighbor” doctrine over a “survival of the fittest” doctrine have grown to be so strong and powerful? Fascist doctrines that seek to weed out the weak logically should prevail — Nazi Germany / Stalinist Russia / Imperial Japan had policies that made survival “sense” on the surface. The problem is, though, that “survival of the fittest” doctrines do not breed social cohesion. Together, in a country that respects and supports individual differences, the collective “we” has great power. People will lay down their lives to secure the freedoms and the potential economic well-being that can occur when we all work together to create a just and inclusive society. Paradoxically, the moment people with power start to use that power to further their own interests to the exclusion of others with less power, a society’s downfall will follow. I feel as if this is the battle that the United States now faces. It’s so important that people realize what is at stake, and are not duped by ignorant people who think that their personal power takes precedence over building a strong society.
LikeLike
The task you are undertaking of making sense of potential budget cuts and their impact on PWD is infinitely more important than your blogging duties. That doesn’t minimize the weekly impact of your blog. Rather it underscores the necessity of understanding the current political and economic climate in this country. Good luck with it — yech! It can’t be much fun.
LikeLike