Obama Disappoints with Simplistic Schiavo Comments

(Note: None of the following should be interpreted as an endorsement or rejection of any candidate. NDY does not endorse candidates for public office.)

For those of you who missed it, the debate last night between Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama led to a jarring and unpleasant reminder of just how insignificantly our issues and advocacy are being treated by the candidates. The regrets expressed by Senator Obama regarding the Senate vote on Terri Schiavo show a lack of knowledge – or regard – for the more than twenty disability advocacy organizations that weighed in on this matter. Below is an excerpt, courtesy of the NY Times, (registration required) of the statement in question:

RUSSERT: Before you go, each of you have talked about your careers in public service. Looking back through them, is there any words or vote that you’d like to take back?

***

RUSSERT: Senator Obama, any statements or vote you’d like to take back?

OBAMA: Well, you know, when I first arrived in the Senate that first year, we had a situation surrounding Terri Schiavo. And I remember how we adjourned with a unanimous agreement that eventually allowed Congress to interject itself into that decisionmaking process of the families.
It wasn’t something I was comfortable with, but it was not something that I stood on the floor and stopped. And I think that was a mistake, and I think the American people understood that that was a mistake. And as a constitutional law professor, I knew better.
And so that’s an example I think of where inaction…

RUSSERT: This is the young woman with the feeding tube…

OBAMA: That’s exactly right.

RUSSERT: … and the family disagreed as to whether it should be removed or not.

OBAMA: And I think that’s an example of inaction, and sometimes that can be as costly as action.

This wasn’t the first time that Obama brought this up. He made the same points, briefly, in an earlier debate.

A large part of Senator Obama’s reputation and appeal is built on the notion that he can acknowledge, respect and understand opposing points of view. That may be true in other topic areas, but so far, he’s stuck to the traditional and partisan framing of the Schiavo tragedy as one that is solely about the “decisionmaking process of the families.”

For obvious reasons, Senator Obama omitted mention of a major player in the Senate bill and vote over Schiavo – Senator Tom Harkin. Here are some conveniently forgotten statements from Senator Harkin regarding the bill that Senator Obama now regrets:

“I have long been an advocate for the rights of people with disabilities. Many in that community are keenly aware of the risk of incapacitation. In such cases, I believe that every precaution should be taken to learn and respect their desires regarding the removal of life supports.

“Over the last week, I have been working hard, and in good faith with Senator Mel Martinez (R-FL), Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) and Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and others to come up with legislation that would allow federal review of this case. On Thursday, we came up with a bipartisan measure that did just that and many of my Senate Republican and Democratic colleagues deserve praise for their hard and swift work.

“Unfortunately, the House Republican Leadership refused to take up the bill before sending members home for a two week vacation. We are now giving the House another chance to pass this bipartisan bill.

“Congressional action in this area should be based on respect for the wishes and dignity of those who are incapacitated. I do not believe there was a need for this to be dragged out in the media yesterday, today and now into the weekend. The House now has another opportunity to act and I hope they will.

“I would have preferred to address the underlying issue and not just this case. I plan to continue to work with my Senate colleagues on both sides of the aisle to give cases like this an opportunity for further review in federal courts.”
# # #

As it turns out, there was no exploration of the underlying issues affecting people in similar situations, thanks to the combined efforts of figures on both the left and the right to portray this as a “culture wars” clash, erasing disability advocates and even Tom Harkin from the media and the public consciousness.

We hope that in the future, Senator Obama will at least acknowledge that there are other dimensions to the Schiavo case than the simple partisan framing he has settled on. Many of us in the disability community who fought long and hard in that battle only to be treated as insignificant to the debate carry a bitter taste in our mouths.

For a start, Senator Obama might want to read – or reread – a classic text written by a former professor of his. Making All the Difference – inclusion, exclusion and American Law by Martha Minow is a text that tears apart the simple assumptions that issues such as competence and guardianship are simple ones.

It’s a good bet that large numbers of people in the disability community will be voting for the Democratic candidate in the coming presidential election. But, as Peggy Noonan has put it several times, the candidate who wins may be the one who has the greatest number of supporters willing to crawl over broken glass to vote for him or her.

Just about every disability advocate I know feels that way about Tom Harkin – the greatest ally the disability rights community has in Congress – and would act accordingly if he was running for a national office. Senator Obama might want to think about the cost of dampening enthusiasm in the disability community.

Considering the hit and miss reality of polling accessibility, we need all the enthusiasm we can muster. –Stephen Drake