Keeping the Promise Made 35 Years Ago
Headshot of Marty Omoto: Marty Omoto Headshot
SACRAMENTO BEE GUEST EDITORIAL
Below is a reprint of the opposing view guest editorial that was printed in the Sacramento Bee on March 27 in response to a column by Daniel Weintraub (March 16) regarding the Governor's proposals impacting children and adults with developmental disabilities. This can also be read as a response to a far less serious and far less thoughtful guest editorial in the Orange County Register by Assemblymember Ray Haynes on the same issue (though to be honest, it was hard to tell what issue Mr. Haynes was writing about). I view these issues from the perspectives of a former direct care worker, agency board member, advocate and the brother of Alana, who had developmental and other disabilities. . Depending on how many cups of coffee this could be very short or very long (whether I make sense is anyone's guess, though one can be still hopeful against the enormous odds).
While the focus of Weintraub's column was on services to people with developmental disabilities, the emphasis of my response was on the issue of rights to people with disabilities - and that the Governor's proposals represent (perhaps unintended) attack on those rights, with cuts proposed to a wide range of services and supports that infants, children and adults with disabilities and seniors depend on. This includes cuts to in-home services for people with disabilities and seniors, cuts to SSI/SSP, cuts to regional center funded community based services, cuts to Medi-Cal, cuts to mental health services, cuts to habilitation services, vocational rehabilitation, cuts to accessible housing, transportation, and cuts that will impact special education, adult education programs for people with disabilities and more. Many of these cuts are made in the name of 'reform" or some other term that is meant to mask what the impact will be. No matter what it is called, one child or adult with disabilities could be impacted three or more different ways by the wide range of cuts - an impact duplicated thousands of times across California. There are other choices.
A year ago last April, thousands came to the Sacramento Convention Center to protest cuts to people with disabilities last year - and again in December thousands more massed outside the State Capitol to let the Governor and the Legislature know: the whole world is watching. These cuts cannot stand if we stand for the rights of people with disabilities. As the late civil rights advocate Justin Dart said: "We are here! We are united! And we will not go away!"
Here is the reprint of the guest editorial [Note:The guest editorial in the Sacramento Bee is limited to only 400 words and I added back in a few words that were edited out. Many thanks to the Sacramento Bee for publishing the original response] :
Sacramento Bee Opinion Page
Other views: Keeping the promise Gov. Reagan made to disabled
By Marty Omoto -- Special To The Sacramento Bee
Published 2:15 a.m. PST Saturday, March 27, 2004
Ronald Reagan, now a person with severe disabilities cared for in his own home, probably would not be happy with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's proposals that would undo the Lanterman Act, the "civil rights act" for people with developmental disabilities that he signed 35 years ago. Reagan probably appreciates the critical value of in-home services, and wouldn't want cuts that would force thousands of other families to put loved ones into institutions where his own family would not want him to be.
Daniel Weintraub's column on the proposed cuts to regional center services for people with developmental disabilities was right in the need for change, but wrong in concluding these proposals mean reform or would not cause harm ("After misstep, governor applies a lighter touch," March 16).
Disability rights is about reform and challenging the status quo. We are proud of what has been accomplished over the years with people living in their own homes, just as Reagan does. We have always been willing to engage in efforts for real reform that increase efficiency without sacrificing rights.
The Lanterman Act, authored by a Republican, passed by a Republican-controlled Legislature and signed into law by Gov. Reagan, began a profound transformation of recognizing those rights. Now we are witnessing attempts to undo those rights. When light shines on the details, it is simply a brutal attack on children and adults with disabilities.
A proposal to set limits on those rights and eliminate most fair hearings to contest denial of services would give the state a blank check to cut services and funding, resulting in a system that is not efficient, only punitive. Another proposal to require parents with minor children to share the cost of their regional center services is a tax, failing to calculate the enormous resources parents already pay.
If Governor Schwarzenegger can call the VLF a "car tax," oppose raising taxes and support family values, how can he support this tax and these proposals? Would he suggest that other parents pay a portion of their children's public education to balance the budget? These reductions would devastate thousands when combined with cuts to In-Home Supportive Services, Medi-Cal, SSI/SSP and other critical services and supports.
The governor can choose other options for real reform that do not sacrifice the rights of children and adults with disabilities. That was a choice Ronald Reagan made when he signed the Lanterman Act decades before his own disabilities. It's a choice that the present governor should remember - and a promise we will not let anyone forget.