I was having drinks with some people in the disability community last night. In my conversation with one woman who is an established and well-known figure in the disability community, I remarked how I don’t know many people with disabilities in their twenties and thirties. The majority of disability activists I know are at least ten years older than me. She replied that when she was growing up, she bonded with other disabled peers who shared her desire to fight for access and equality. She then told me that today’s young people with disabilities seem more integrated into society and not interested in identifying themselves as a separate community. To some extent, she’s probably right. People in my generation came of age in a time where we were already guaranteed at least some basic rights and services. We took it for granted that we could go to school and do most of the ordinary things our able-bodied friends did, like go to a movie or eat at a restaurant. Most of us assumed that we would get into college without much difficulty. And to a growing degree, we are expecting to be employed and financially independent.
A lot of the tough battles were already fought for us. And perhaps that’s made people in my generation and younger somewhat complacent. Over the next decade or so, the vanguard of original disability activists will begin to fade from the scene and a new set of leaders will be needed. I’m curious to see how and whether my peers will rise to the occasion. I wonder if the world we grew up in–a world that in some ways seemed ready-made for us—will shape our own strategies for the inevitable battles yet to come.

The Jim Henson Company have announced a planned sequel to The Dark Crystal. I’m not sure this is really necessary, but I guess it was greenlighted in part because of the original’s consistently strong video sales. I’ll reserve fanboy judgment until I see the actual film.
I had my second-to-last Fellows meeting today. It was a conference on–wait for it–Social Security. One thing that struck me as I was listening to the panel discussions was that every speaker pointed out that addressing SS’s solvency issues will be a Sunday stroll in the park compared to fixing our health care system. When you get down to it, the choices for making Social Security solvent aren’t that many. You can either raise taxes, cut benefits, or a combination of both. And when the politicos finally do get serious about SS, they probably will both raise revenues and cut benefits. But if we can’t fix SS, there’s no way we’re ever going to get a handle on the multi-headed hydra that is health care.
One of the speakers also said that if you want to assure yourself job security, you should go into health policy. To which I say, Score!

One of my favorite torrent sites, btefnet, went down the other day after the MPAA threatened to go after sites distributing television programs. I’m going to have to find another source for my weekly fixes of Lost and Dr. Who. I’m not too worried. Some other site will spring up soon, most likely in a former East Bloc country that MPAA lawyers can’t easily touch. Meanwhile, I need to check out the last episode of Enterprise to see if it’s as bad as I think it will be.
By the way, you really should see the film Crash. It’s a compelling set of interlocking stories set against the backdrop of multicultural Los Angeles. Kind of like Magnolia, but without the “it’s raining frogs” weirdness.

I’m going to a Civics retreat tonight at a YMCA camp just across the Wisconsin border. I’m not sure how much time we’ll actually be spending outside, though. Temperatures won’t rise much above 50 today and tomorrow, and that’s if we’re lucky. Summer comes in fits and starts around here, which can be aggravating. But it might be nice to get out of the city and actually see the stars, for a change. I haven’t set foot (or wheel, if you prefer) in Wisconsin for a few years, so this will be a sort of prelude to my trip to Green Bay in June.

Missouri’s governor recently signed legislation that will cut nearly 100,000 people from the state’s Medicaid rolls (see NPR coverage here; editorial here). The cuts will limit Medicaid coverage to those who are living under 75% of the federal poverty guidelines, or about $587/month. Coverage for items such as wheelchairs, crutches, and oxygen will be eliminated for adults. It eliminated Missouri’s Medicaid buy-in program, which allowed people with disabilities to hold jobs and still receive Medicaid services. And plans are in the works to completely eliminate Medicaid in Missouri by 2008. Yet the governor still insists his state’s Medicaid coverage is “very generous.” For better or worse, Missouri has transformed itself into a laboratory for purposes of examining the effects of deep health care cuts. Some disability advocates are already planning on suing the state on Olmstead grounds. Olmstead was a Supreme Court decision stating that the ADA requires people to be served in the least restrictive environment. If Missouri’s Medicaid cuts force people into nursing homes, that could be an Olmstead violation. The state’s Republicans seem convinced that cutting Medicaid was necessary to keep taxes low and grow the economy. But I’ve wondered if they have considered this: if Missouri completely eliminates Medicaid, they will lose out on hundreds of millions in federal matching dollars. They may also be jeopardizing the jobs of thousands of people in the health care industry who currently serve Medicaid enrollees.
I also find it interesting that the blind are exempted from many of these cuts. That’s sure to lead to some nasty recriminations within the disability community.
The people of Missouri are about to find out just how compassionate their conservative leaders really are. I guess they can console themselves with the fact that their state is free from the scourge of gay marriage. If that sounds callous, it’s intended. They knew the ideologies of the people they elected. Now they can deal with the consequences.