Syrian Refugee Crisis - American Betrayal 2.0

Give me your tired, your poor, 

Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,

The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.

Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost, to me,

I lift my lamp beside the golden door!

The irony is unmistakable. For 130 years, Lady Liberty has stood tall in New York harbor, looking east to welcome immigrants to the land of opportunity and freedom. 

But has the time arrived to replace the words of Jewish-American poet Emma Lazarus inscribed on the statue with "Syrians aren't welcome - even Syrian orphans" - the inspirational words of Chris Christie, Governor of the state that stubbornly insists Lady Liberty is a resident of New Jersey? 

Or, "Syrians are welcome...as long as they're Christian'" the opinion of Jeb Bush, brother of the President who's administration was largely responsible for implementing the very vetting system that has "kept us safe" and "protected the homeland" from refugee terrorists? Ironically, it's largely the same vetting system that is now being questioned by current candidates as unreliable. 

Or perhaps “Syrians – welcome to 38% of the United States of America” which represents the percentage of states with Governors who don’t view leadership and statesmanship as simply sucking on your finger and holding it up to gauge the opinion of the most  bellicose segment of their constituency

The United States looks poised to repeat a shameful betrayal to its stated ideals that occurred a little more than 75 years ago.  Adolf Hitler had taken control of Germany and his fascist ideology was rapidly spreading through Europe.  Despite overwhelming evidence of atrocities committed against various ethnic and religious groups (predominately Jewish) in Germany, Czechoslovakia and Austria, President Franklin Roosevelt resisted efforts to facilitate refugee immigration to the US.  Shamefully, it was a view shared by a resounding majority of US citizens.  In fact, a 1938 poll indicates that more than 67% of Americans felt that "with conditions as they are, we should try to keep them out." 

Even after the terror of Kristallnacht, when asked "It has been proposed to bring to this country 10,000 refugee children from Germany - most of them Jewish - to be taken care of in American homes. Should the Government permit these children to come?" 61% of Americans responded no.  

It is easy and comforting to engage in revisionist history as it dampers any lingering national guilt and disguises our current national prejudices. The most common argument against comparing these two US movements against refugee resettlement is that they are "not comparable...the Jews weren't trying to kill us like the Muslim Syrians are."  While easy to justify, these opinions conveniently gloss over US feelings toward German Jews widely held at that time.

In fact, hateful anti-Semitism was wide-spread in the United States. This religious and ethnic intolerance was largely responsible was the environment of mistrust and fear of European Jews most responsible for our county's refusal to welcome them as refugees.  Citizens of the United States did fear and mistrust them.

There was also a widely held belief that Jewish refugees posed a very serious security threat to the US. In fact, the US State Department failed to fill even the small allotment of German refugee slots from 1933 to 1945 due to the belief that "there were many radicals and subversives among Jewish refugees" (Freidman, Max (2003) Nazis and Good Neighbors: The United States Campaign against the Germans of Latin America in World War II Cambridge University Press.) It was unfair and unjust to deny refugee status to German Jews based on mistrust of Germans in general.  It is equally unjust to condemn Syrian Muslims for the recent atrocities of a few French and Belgian nationals.     

Those believing it is best to "send them back" and create a safe zone in Syria would be well served to remember the story of the St. Louis. On May 13th, this ship set sail for Cuba with 900 German-Jewish refugees aboard - all hoping for a safe haven in Havana while they waited for refugee status in the United States. After being denied entry by both Cuba and the United States, the ship returned to Europe where, similar to today, Great Britain, France, Belgium, and the Netherlands provided them a home.  

It is unlikely the horrors of the holocaust would have been avoided even had the United States lived up to its stated humanitarian principles. But it is certain that thousands, perhaps hundred of thousands, of European Jews would have been spared the greatest genocide of the 20th century if we had lived by the principles set forth by our Founding Fathers.  

If we give in to fear and prejudice once again, how will future generations judge us?  And, if once again we abandon our position as leaders in a free and just world to protect "our way of life," is it really a way of life worth protecting? 

And does closing our borders to those most in need make the US a more secure and safe nation or does it further threaten future generations of Americans?  I believe our actions today threaten the very existence of our nation…but those are thoughts for my next post.

What does Respect and Dignity for People With Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Really Mean?

What does it mean to treat all people with respect and dignity – particularly those with intellectual or developmental disabilities(ID/DD)? This is a question those of us who work in the field ask ourselves often. Not surprisingly, there are often disagreements about what actions and language show real respect and dignity.  And, do actions undertaken by very good people with the best intentions actually perpetuate stereotypes of people with ID/DD? Look at the following video for example:

First, and I can’t say this strongly enough, I truly admire the motives of the coach, Mitchell’s teammates and the opposing players.  However, I fear this contrived “success” reinforces the widely held belief that people with disabilities can only achieve success when it is handed to them and reality is manipulated resulting in a “win” that was not earned but created. 

Consider the following:

•          The coach claimed he was prepared to lose in order to get Mitchell in the game.
•       During warm-ups, Mitchell stood outside his teammates and didn’t really participate in drills
•         Referees did not call the game when Mitchell entered – they ignored several traveling calls
•         The opponents committed an intentional turnover.

Again, the motives of all players, coaches and referees cannot be questioned.  However, the story was more about what was done for him not what he accomplished.

Now watch this video of a very similar situation:

First, kudos to Dan Patrick for simply stating what autism is.  He did not show pity toward Jason by claiming he was suffering from or afflicted with autism – he simply took the opportunity to set up the story and educate the public.

Although this situation was similar to the previous story it differs in a few very significant ways.  First, there was footage of Jason alone in the gym shooting shot, after shot after shot.  When his time came he clearly had prepared for it.

Also, he clearly had skills.  I wish my outside jumper was as pure as Jason’s.  He was his team’s high scorer and clearly earned that honor. He moved up and down the court and was competed on offense and defense. 

However, what was most telling was the reaction of the family with a son with autism.  I find the following quote by the Mother very telling: “my only hope is that Eric can play basketball one day…it may only be for two minutes… “  They did not say “I hope someone does this for Eric one day. 

Like most people I have shed a tear or two over these heartwarming stories of the dramatic basket or teams clearing a lane so a player with a disability can score a touchdown.  It is refreshing that people in today’s world still care about people that some in society continue to ignore or marginalize.

However, I strongly believe that everyone is born with unique gifts and talents.  I fear that if work hard to set up a “fake success” we waste opportunities to identify what gifts that person has that can be nurtured and supported to create real success. 

It is a cold reality that many if not most of us will never achieve our Walter Mitty dreams.  But we are all capable of significant achievement and success leading to happiness and respect. That success is something we all deserve.True respect and dignity is not always easy to define but it’s a discussion we need to continue.   

Some useful resources on respect and dignity:

R-Word:Spread the Word to End the Word (Special Olympics and Best Buddies)

Communicating With and About People with Disabilities (U.S. Departmentof Labor)

Disability Awareness Materials (Indiana Governor’s Council for PeopleWith Disabilities)

A Prayer For National Healing

"A house divided against itself cannot stand." I've been thinking of this quote by President Abraham Lincoln often this past year. We are one week removed from one of our nation's most acrimonious and divisive elections.  Pundits and "experts" are taking credit, assigning blame, and assessing what went wrong or what went right - dependent, of course, on one's political leanings.

I happened to be in Washington, D.C. on Election Day.  It was refreshingly quiet and peaceful as most politicians were in their home state campaigning for those last undecided.  Like many, I found myself totally fed-up with the bombastic rants from both sides of the political spectrum and frustrated by the lack of real dialogue on critical issues facing our nation.

My normal stress-reliever is to run.  So I took a relaxing evening run along the national mall.  I couldn't help but reflect on the current state of our country as I passed the Washington Monument.  I thought of the leadership General Washington exhibited in keeping a not yet formed nation together through a brutal revolution.  As I passed the WWII Memorial I thought about the hardship faced by allied soldiers as they fought to rid the world of one of it's greatest horrors including the "mercy deaths" of more than 275,000 people with disabilities at the hands of the Nazis.

As I passed by the Lincoln Memorial I thought of the ugly divisiveness of current US society that pales in comparison to the divided country Abraham Lincoln lead through our nation's greatest (and real) crisis.  I was struck but the desperation and hopelessness of the great depression captured through sculptures at the Franklin Delano Roosevelt Memorial when no safety net existed for people with disabilities...or anyone else for that matter. 

As I often do, I commiserated with Rev. Chuck Werth, a friend and Bethesda's Vice President of Religious Life and Church Relations, who shared many of my frustrations with the intolerance and vitriol of the just concluded electoral season.  He shared with me the following prayer:

Rid us, O Lord, of the arrogant delusions, which we hold regarding the times in which we live. We presume that our era is harder to live in and harder to live through than any previous time in our nation's history. With a certain false pride, we suggest that we are being tried and tested more than any previous generation. Excuses abound for our neurotic screaming, our pitiful muddling, our eroded standards, our sentimental slobbering, and our pinching terror over the future. We confess that these arrogant delusions have caused a terrible division in our nation; two pitched camps each claiming to be protectors of the national heritage, when in fact, both have abandoned the fundamentals of your truth. Teach us, O Lord by your sane and steadying Word that we stand before you as we always have stood, living by your grace, striving to achieve that which is just and righteous in your eyes. Nothing in our present age has altered the great plain, steady fact that you are God and have not forsaken us, nor forgotten us. Confident in that truth, draw us together as a nation to work for the common good, standing shoulder-to-shoulder. Amen

Now that the election is over, I pray that we can come together as a country and work to restore the greatness of the United States. We can and must identify goals we can all agree on and compromise to make certain they happen.

We need to work together to create a Medicaid funding system for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (ID/DD) that encourages true community integration and reduces waiting lists for people who desperately need support.

We must acknowledge and embrace the dignity of work for all people, including those with ID/DD, and work for increased employment opportunities in the community.

We must destroys barriers to employment by people with disabilities and pass legislation such as the Achieving Better Life Experiences Act, that encourages savings to be used for disability-related supports resulting in real consumer-directed services.

We should insist that all countries of the world embrace the inherent rights of people with disabilities through ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

We will never all agree on every issue facing the United States.  However, we need to engage in real and respectful dialogue to begin to address issues that can no longer be ignored like the federal budget deficit, unsustainable spending on entitlement programs, and high unemployment rates.  It's time to act together to restore our nation's greatness.  

I pray that happens now.

The Sorting Hat Puts Chief Justice John Roberts in Gryffindor!!

In the film Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, Professor Albus Dumbledore states “it takes a great deal of bravery to stand up to your enemies, but a great deal more to stand up to you friends.” In awarding Gryffindor 10 points in the race for the house cup, Professor Dumbledore was recognizing the courage of Neville Longbottom in standing up to the series heroes, Harry Potter, Ronald Weasley and Hermione Grainger.  I know this because my youngest daughter was ten when the first Potter book was released and like many parents I spent the next decade waiting in line for books, tickets to midnight showings and at the entrance to the Potter ride in Orlando. 

But, the exchange at the end of the first Potter movie reminds me, in a very strange way, of Chief Justice John Roberts recent opinion in NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS ET AL. v. SEBELIUS, SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, ET AL. or “the Obamacare ruling.” In a decision that shocked a city in which all views and opinions are developed  through a  Republican/Democrat or liberal/conservative filter, Roberts showed a glimpse of courage and integrity almost extinct in our nation’s capitol. For all those who laughed at his suggestion that he was simply an umpire in court cases and that “nobody pays to see the umpire“ Roberts displayed a remarkable degree of statesmanship. 

Ironically, despite the condemnation of most Republican lawmakers, Roberts ruling was very restrained in nature.  He joined the majority in declaring the expansion of Medicaid to be coersive toward states and rejected the right of the Federal government to enact the penalty/tax for lack of health care coverage under the commerce clause.  Many respected court observers have argued that Roberts majority opinion actually reigns in federal power and is a victory for states rights.

So, Chief Justice John Roberts has managed to alienate Reps and Dems as well as conservatives and liberals.  In my mind, that alone makes John Roberts a leader to be emulated. 

Throughout the Potter movies, Neville Longbottom has an increasingly significant role to play in the battle against the evil Lord Voldemort and was forced to make decisions based on what was right and not what was easy.  Politicians can learn a lot from Longbottom and Roberts. 

I’ll leave it to you to determine the political affiliation of “he who must not be named.”

The Conservative History of the Individual Health Insurance Mandate

The Heritage Foundation is described on their website as “…a research and educational institution—a think tank—whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.”  So…would it surprise you to learn that the Heritage Foundation was one of the first national organizations to argue in favor of the same health insurance mandate that conservatives are now calling socialized medicine or worse “Obama care”?

On page six of The Heritage Lectures: Assuring Affordable Health Care for All Americans Stuart Butler very eloquently argues that health insurance is a responsibility of individuals and not businesses and the household mandate requires families to provide insurance.  And “each household, to the extent it is able, to avoid placing demands on society by protecting themselves.  He further argues that the Heritage Foundation “envisions an expansion of the subsidized risk-pools operated through the states.”  Sound familiar?

The first two attempts at Congressional approval of an individual health insurance mandate were bills introduced by REPUBLICANS.  S.1743, The Consumer Choice Health Security Act, introduced by Don Nickels (R-OK) and cosponsored by 24 Republicans, contained an individual mandate.  And, John Chaffee (R-RI) introduced S.1770, The Health Equity and Access Reform Today Act, which required “Each citizen or lawful permanent resident to be covered under a qualified health plan.

So, did President Obama sell out by embracing a conservative ideology or did the Republican’s flip-flop?  If the toxic political environment in which we currently exist has taught us anything, it’s that this can’t possibly be a good idea.  As this historic reality comes to light, it will be fascinating to watch the speed at which conservatives distance themselves from themselves.   

As someone once said, you just can’t make this stuff up!