Convention officials on the scene did what they could to accomodate this delegate. They found seating above the area where other WHHF delegates were seated – and when it came time to vote, the tellers went to her to record her choice.
Despite these accomodations, the end result was that this delegate could not sit with other delegates from her senate district. Part of the purpose of going to a convention like this is to interact with fellow activists from neighboring communities. This delegate was denied that opportunity.
The Democratic Party – and particularly, the Democratic State Committee – needs to do a better job in accommodating the needs of the disabled – especially given its stated support in favor of these issues.
Please share widely!
and I hope this never happens again. This is, after all, 2008. How is it that a pack of progressives fail to provide reasonable accommodation? Damn, this should not be happening.
Especially since the Party was given advance notice. That is unacceptable especially since they could have made better accomodations quite easily by switching Delegation Location since they had advance notice. I hope your delegation will file a formal complaint with the party. I don’t know how much good it will do. They will apologize for their mistake but will they remember to correct it at the next convention?
….and it was difficult seating for many who use canes, or have had hip replacements. I do not find this venue [or many of the venues used] handicap friendly, and often many are exhausting for me, and almost inaccessible.
<
p>Disclosure: I have both psoriatic and rhuematoid arthritis AND an “early” hip replacmement due to a nasty auto accident. I have therefore learned to expect these events to leave me exhausted, totally.
that advanced notice often doesn’t get you what you want unless you describe what you insist on in painful detail. this isn’t because the organizers want to disrespect handicapped people. it is because they themselves are rarely handicapped, or handicapped in the way that you aren’t and so just are oblivious to what is involved.
<
p>that said, i find it strange that they couldn;t have seated the entire delegation together in an accessible location. that seems like it should be obvious to anyone with a brain cell.
disabilities. Extra access doesnt hurt anyone.
If a venue is handicapped accessible it means the venue as a whole is accessible. For a place like Tsongas that entails having seating for wheelchairs where they can see and elevators. What would happen if every Senate district had chair-bound delegates? There is no way you can expect every district seating area to be accessible to wheelchairs as we have too many to seat on the floor area.
It’s one that the party keeps paying lip service to but doesn’t really address. Put yourself for one second into that person’s wheelchair and you’ll begin to get it. It does take some effort to accomodate people. Making accomodations is not rocket science. It can be done and should be done. There are four months between the caucuses and the convention. There should be a spot on the delegate form to indicate special seating requirements and requests. Someone should actually spend the time figuring it out.
This is a civil rights issue, one that you just pissed on.
<
p>Excuse me? People who use wheelchairs should expect access to all activities involving our government? Are you kidding me?
<
p>People with disabilities have had to fight as any other group that has faced mass discrimination in the United States, and we continue to have to fight for basic rights on a daily basis. Clearly we have more work to do when we have to challenge even those who claim to be progressive.
<
p>You are the kind of person I want to put into a wheelchair for just a week. I assure you, you will change your attitude.
<
p>I want to note that there are a wide variety of mental and physical challenges that people live with on a daily basis. Because the issue here was wheelchair access, I’m addressing primarily that issue. But know, sir, that there are many many more disabilities and issues that create barriers to political participation.
<
p>People with disabilities or physical/mental challenges (not handicapped people, which is offensive) make up a HUGE and potentially incredibly powerful voting block. These disabilities can be both visible and invisible. Just because someone is not in a wheelchair does not mean that he or she can climb a flight of stairs, walk long distances, or navigate challenging terrain.
<
p>How huge and how potentially powerful? Approximately 53 million Americans have some type of disability. Believe me, as baby-boomers age, that number will grow substantially. One never knows in this life, one day you may even be included among our ranks. Currently, potential voters with disabilities make up approximately 1/5th of eligible voters.
<
p>People with disabilities have historically voted at a far lower rate than Americans with no physical challenges, at least not those that make participation due to barriers very difficult if not downright impossible. There are other barriers than just those that are obvious (to those who pay attention like David Eisenthal does) — many of those are centered around attitudes like yours, which is woefully close to that of Antonin Scalia, who “belittles the notion they have basic rights.”
<
p>Some who realize the importance of have made a concerted effort to inform people with disabilities about their voting rights and you, as a Democrat, should be grateful as hell that they have done so. Instead of pissing on them, you should be thanking and helping them. Why? I’ll tell you why.
<
p>The answer is simple — people with disabilities have the power to sway elections. Just check this article from the National Organization on Disability out:
<
p>
<
p>So, Christopher, I suggest that you educate yourself about disability issues, realize that your attitudes are as Neanderthal-like as Antonin Scalia’s, and work on making sure that ALL Americans have access to or political system, not just those who can run a marathon…or even walk into a polling place. You, sir, may one day be among our ranks and will maybe only then understand why pissing on American civil rights is as deplorable as I think your post is.
<
p>
which was — how do you accommodate all of the people with wheelchairs if there is one in each State Senate district? Parts of the arena are acceessible, but the stadium seating areas aren’t and can’t be.
about seating accomodations. Be sure well before the convention that the party knows who must be accomodated and how. If there is someone from each senate district, then consider seating towns together. If the issue is truly one where the venue is not appropriate, then use an alternative venue. We need to stop creating obstacles and come up with solutions that are more than words. Accessible means just that. Sheesh. I’m so tired of listening to the lip service. When even Dems have to be taught about equal rights, we’ve got a long road to travel.
You have no idea how many political events I’ve been to, both large and small, where accessibility wasn’t considered. And these are Democratic events. I recently got an email from my county Democrats which touted a Bill Clinton visit. The email stated that the event was “standing room only.” Needless to say, I had a little conversation with my county Dems on that one! Their solution was to show up about an hour earlier than everyone else (when people were advised to show up at least an hour early already) to arrange accommodations. Um, completely unacceptable answer. They never even considered the accessibility issue until I addressed it.
<
p>I’ve been to many, many events held in inaccessible settings that could easily have been held elsewhere. I’ve encountered many candidates who have inaccessible campaign offices that could easily have been placed in accessible buildings. And I’ve been to many inaccessible settings that could have been more accessible with just a modicum of creative thinking and planning.
<
p>Problem is that too many neither think nor plan. Too many never even consider the issue until someone with a disability shows up and can’t gain access. I’ve personally have to give up, turn around and go home.
<
p>The Democrats have no business supporting venues that aren’t accessible. There are ways to create accessibility that you often don’t consider. I’ll give you one example, one that isn’t an arena but was a public setting. My father had Parkinson’s. He and Mom loved going to the movies. After he became wheelchair bound, they finally stopped going. They stopped going because in their local MODERN movie theater complex, wheelchair access was a joke. He either had to sit WAY up front, in front of the front row, where he had to strain his neck looking up for 2 hours. Or he had to sit in the back of the theater, behind the last row, where his failing hearing made him miss the quieter dialogue. After multiple complaints (and ADA threats), the theater chain finally removed about 6 seats in each theater to accommodate wheelchairs in those places. Simple solution. I realize it’s not that easy in every setting, but as long as people accept inaccessibility as the inevitable status quo, things won’t change and true movement toward true accessibility won’t occur.
<
p>Bottom line: separation isn’t equal and segregation is never acceptable.
spread the seating clusters out more to accomodate the wheelchairs and scooters. The seats were fixed but the districts didnt have to be so crunched together.
<
p>I might have chosen different words, but you said it eloquently! Your clarity was refreshing!
<
p> 🙂
<
p>
I ask a simple and honest question and you just go straight to how evil I supposedly am rather than trying to answer it. I understand that if only a few districts have this issue then the thing to do is to make sure they are situated where wheelchairs can be accomodated. However, precisely because we are an inclusive party it is very easy to imagine a scenario where every district has one or two wheelchairs to accomodate. (BTW, I also realize that mobility is not the only disability, but the original diary seemed to be about this kind of limitation and it is the one most directly connected to the facility itself.)
<
p>I believe the kind of venue we would use for a convention is in fact required by law to be accessible. However, these are used primarily for spectator events, which means only that those with limited mobility need to have some section of the audience to accomodate them, but not necessarily every section. Elevators are also required for travel between floors which the Tsongas Arena had. That being said I don’t know if there is any venue in the state that can accomodate us using only the floor without resorting to bleachers, so some Senate districts will do better than others. The Young Democrats of America requires a member of the Disability Caucus be on its Site Selection Committee for conventions so the state party might want to consider a similar requirement if it is not already the case.
<
p>Of course I want everything possible done to accomodate all of our delegates. Unfortunately, the politically incorrect truth is that those without disabilities will always find life a bit easier. Believe me, I have cerebral palsy (albeit mild, but with some limitations), so I know that first hand.
You picked a topic that is my number one issue (along with health care) and one on which the Democrats have repeatedly failed. I did go after you a little vociferously, and for that I apologize.
<
p>Here’s the deal though. As long as we’re complacent about this issue, things won’t change. As long as we passively accept these situations without challenge, things won’t change. As long as we don’t force those who have the power to make change to pay attention to this as an issue, things won’t change. It’s the disability activists who’ve forced the ADA to pass and who continue to challenge the status quo who’ve gotten us as far as we are now. If others who aren’t as involved accept conditions as they are, they’re not promoting progress, they’re accepting a separate and not equal status.
<
p>I know every building can’t be razed to start over. I know there are going to be issues with access in many buildings — I’ve faced them myself. Hell, a hospital I worked in didn’t have accessible employee entrances! If using a scooter, I had to wait for someone to come along and open doors for me — unacceptable! I’m glad I no longer live in my hometown, NYC, where accessibility is a nightmare (IMO) mostly due to the age of most NYC buildings and the city itself. But I also know that not enough attention is given to this issue and potential solutions aren’t considered. I know that it often takes people with disabilities to point out problems when, sadly, those should have been addressed more forcefully in advance. And it takes not accepting the status quo.
<
p>I’m sure an effort was made, but it needs to be better. And frankly, this issue is broader than just this convention. There is a general lack of understanding about this issue among far too many Democratic leaders (and, needless to say, Republicans). Some get it and do what they can, but that’s too rare.
<
p>I have no doubt there are things that could be changed to do a better job of making sure that meetings and conventions are inclusive. Massachusetts has a long way to go when it comes to making sure that voters (or potential voters) are included in the process. To give you an example, I moved to NC awhile ago. When I arrived the first time to vote, I noted the parking spot reserved for voters who needed assistance, including those who couldn’t go into the polling place and required curbside voting. Well, we’ve all seen curbside voting. What I saw for the first time here (and I never saw at my polling place in MA) was a line attached to a bell that would alert the poll workers that someone had pulled into the parking spot. A poll worker would then scurry out to the car (saw one do that). Believe me, the local election commission got high praise from me on that one! I questioned our polling place arrangements in MA, noting that someone who needed curbside assistance had to actually get out of the vehicle to notify someone (or grab a passerby to do so for them). Nothing changed the next time I went back to the polling place. MA needs to do better.
<
p>
I appreciate your perspective and your apology.
I assume your motive was to inform not punish. I suggest trying a velvet glove next time. I’m not even Christopher, and I have a sharp a keyboard as they come, but I’m sayin’ he didn’t deserve your tone or your shame. HFS.
Not every senate district delegation to yesterday’s convention had disabled delegates.
I’d bet dollars to donuts that you’re wrong.
<
p>Now, did every Senate district have a mobility impaired individual who had informed MA Dems about their disability? I doubt it.
<
p>But, given that (i) something like 20% of Americans are disabled, (ii) older Americans have higher probabilities and the average age of a delegate exceeds the average age of adult citizens, and (iii) each delegation is fairly large [60 people? 100 people?], and (iv) some people face temporary disabilities like leg injuries, the odds that there was a single delegation without a single disabled delegate is damn near zero.
Given the challenges that people with disabilities face they also have a higher probability of cancelling. I was actually expecting three people who use wheel chairs to be in my delegation and we only had two.
there are two levels of the accessibility issue to deal with. the first is the physical characteristics of the structure that the group meets in, and its inherent limitations. the second is how/whether the group chooses to intelligently use that structure. the scenario you outline is possible (outstripping the capacity of the venue), but it doesn’t sound to me like that is what happened this weekend. rather, it sounds like the venue had plenty of capacity for disabled people, but the space was not used wisely by the convention planners.
<
p>side note: someone elsewhere mentioned how “handicapped” is a negative term, and “disabled” is the polite term. i am handicapped/disabled, and i could give a rip which term is used so long as i am treated respectfully. i use them both at various times. it’s similar to the “gay” debate among LGB people. some find the generic “gay” to be an insult, while others love using verbal shorthand. to each their own. there is no correct label, and everyone has their preferences, and no matter what label you use, someone will take issue with it.
is the fact that, even in today’s world, there’s simply too many places that need improvement in this area. Tsongas certainly wasn’t great for access, but neither were any other DSC places I’ve been to lately. My only thought is, if it could be large enough, maybe a huge convention center could be better – since it would be all one level floor, with presumably several elevators. I’m not sure how many convention centers in Massachusetts would be big enough, or if there would be any outside Boston, but it is something to think about.
This has been an ongoing fight with every new facility built not just in our state but nationally. The “distribution of handicapped seating” is just that a distribution that reflects only the intended primary use of the facility. Yet we, as do most all states that I know of, allow other uses o these large venues for the purpose of any group. The distribution formula is a total failure. It continues to prevail in most Stadium building today even at the local level. Here in the Democratic State of Woburn we have a new High school, which has the ability to claim 100% access a fact I am very proud of since I was a part of the planning process. Yet since I left that board we have constructed a stadium for athletics, which presents the same issues as the Tsongas Arena and DCU in Worcester or even Banknorth in Boston. Limited access and “distributed seating” which in my opinion is a total failure needs new regulations, which are stricter for venues that want to have ancillary uses.
<
p>As much as I enjoy venting here on BMG on occasion this is an issue that should get the attention of Beacon Hill and the Governor to look at the regulations. We have a wonderful board here the Massachusetts Architectural Access Board and a set of state regulations that should and can be upgraded to prevent this discrimination from continuing in the future. I would hope people like Doug Rubin et al of the administration would pay attention and realize this is readily achievable with a little thought and ingenuity.
<
p>In the mean time I am only aware of 2 venues in Massachusetts their maybe more that could accommodate a crowd of several thousands with out utilizing stadium seating and that would be the Hynes and the new convention Center in Southie. The Hynes maybe a tight squeeze as I recall but worth looking into. There may be others I am unaware of and should be noted by those who do.
<
p>It was also my understanding that the state party puts the convention out to bid on an annual basis and the speck that goes out maybe written to assure us of a fully accessible location. I believe that if John Walsh, our State Committee Chairman, is made aware of this situation and he will investigate it and move tot change it ASAP.
<
p>This is a civil rights issue. Full-unlimited access should be a part of our Democratic Platform and a Democratic Practice in all cases.
<
p>I currently am in my 12th years as a member of the City of Woburn Handicapped and Disabled Citizens Commission
<
p>As usual Just my Opinions
ADA of 1992 wil celebrate its anniversary on July 26 –
<
p>http://www.eeoc.gov/ada/
<
p>When people ask my why I’m on a disabiltiy committee, I tell them I AM disabled. They are surprised. Over and over and over and over…
and then duck before someone hits you with a cane or runs you down with their motorized wheelchair or their seeing-eye/attack dog.
Yes it has been the law as are volumes of others which is why I advocate that every organization have it written directly into their rules of behavior as a first hand reminder Sort of like a wanted poster reminds us that Murder will get you life or worse in some states. Never hurts to restate the obvious over and over and over again. Sort of like Pavlov’s dog programming from freshman psych class.
<
p>As Usual just my Opinion
…is that costs are extraordinary. I believe this is the key reason we’ve never held a state convention in the Hub. Delegate fees would likely have to skyrocket, creating accessibility issues of the financial kind.
BU’s Agganis arena is new, as is the Southie convention center. Perhaps those have sweeter price points?
The financial picture has always resulted in tough choices being made and the disability community hears it all to often “sorry an elevator is just to expensive” or “a ramp would cost to much”. Cost is a factor no doubt but if we can find a way to overcome it in the private sector over and over again why not in this case How about the SDC fund raising for the convention and the delegates go for free! or at a greatly reduced price?
<
p>Maybe it would give the State Committee members something to do?
<
p>As Usual Just my Opinions
Let me 1st premise my comments with identifying myself, my name is Bob Cassidy and I am a member of the DSC (Democratic State Committee)in which I hold the position of the male representative for those with Disabilities. I also took a strong role among other DSC members from the party’s Affirmative Action Sub-Committee in attempting to make this year’s convention as accessible as humanly possible to all those who suffer from any form of disability/or handicap. The points raised within all your comments to the initial article, though valid in part, omit some of the obsticles that the Sub-Committee and therefore the Party as a whole had to deal with in regards to this particuliar convention. #1.) At the time of the caucus, not only were simple (i.e. plain) delegates elected by each community, but additionally the Party did offer separate delegate status to those with diabilites and or a handicap. Those who chose such a designation (i.e. disabled delegate status)was supplied with a Disabled Add-On Delegate Application form to fill out. On the form itself it provides a space for the individual to state if they request ADA accommodiation.
I currently have copies of all the 43 applications received @ the Democratic Party Office from those who wished for this desigation, only 7 requested either need for a wheelchair to be provided or wheelchair access (for they already had one)as it related to seating, or movement throughout the Arena. Other requests dealt with parking access, hearing devices, better seating due to sight problems or just for assistance during there time @ the convention due to unsteadyness in their ability to get around. In order to address these requests I had suggested (and received)12 wheelchairs, Loop devices (for those who are hearing impaired), a cart machine & cart translator and obtained assistance from fellow DSC members and close to 20 individuals who were willing to work as volunteers, during their time out in Lowell. Granted there were problems, unforseen and forseen that we attempted to get resolved during the day, though I admit not all were able to be addressed and recieve the results we had hoped for. For that I apologize. In order to answer one point raised during the comments on this topic, that being the venue chosen to hold such an event. The Democratic Party’s “Site Selection Sub-Committee” is charged with securing the site for where the State Convention is held. This is done 1 year in advance of each convention. The Affirmative Action Committee has now been able to place a representative for those with disabilites on this Sub-Committee in order that they may tour the Convention site under consideration and make sure that some of the problems stated here are addressed ….it is better to be pro-active! Let me finish with one last point, that being a suggestion re:better communication. One of the major reasons why unforseen problems continually to surface, each year, relating to the disabled is that a good number of us (I have been disabled/handicapped for 35 years)do not have an adequate number of those who need our assistance. The reason behind this is that there is a good number of people who do not want the designation of “disabled delegate” and want to run as a “elected delegate”, this I whole heartedly support, but problems arise when the needs for assistance of such individuals are not forwarded to the State Party Office. This form of communication is vital in order for us as Your Party Representatives to act on and successfully secure every bit of assistance that you require. Without such communication we (meaning all of us)will continually come up on the short side of the stick.
Robert Cassidy
Democratic State Committee
Male Representative for those with Disabilites