A Wisconsin lawmaker who's paralyzed isn't allowed to participate in meetings
1–10 of 65 posts
Re: A Wisconsin lawmaker who's paralyzed isn't allowed to participate in meetings
#2"It just comes down to the fact that I think it’s disrespectful for someone to be asking questions over a microphone or a speakerphone when individuals are actually taking the time out of their day to come and testify in person," Vos said.
This is quite an act of mental gymnastics.
Re: A Wisconsin lawmaker who's paralyzed isn't allowed to participate in meetings
#3> Vos spokeswoman Kit Beyer noted that Anderson voted for a set of Assembly rules in 2017 that eliminated a provision that allowed Assembly members in some cases to participate in committee meetings through web cameras.
whoops
Re: A Wisconsin lawmaker who's paralyzed isn't allowed to participate in meetings
#4> "It just comes down to the fact that I think it’s disrespectful for someone to be asking questions over a microphone or a speakerphone when individuals are actually taking the time out of their day to come and testify in person," Vos said.
I can see going "hey, voice over phone just doesn't work as smoothly" without considering the disability.
But of course, that's the point - they get to consider "normal" as not involving the disability. That's, like, the definition of privilege.
By framing it in terms of "respect" you just make the matter worse. What was a logistical issue ("voice over phone isn't as smooth, can we improve that?") is now a moral issue of "respect" - which is basically impossible to nail down, and puts everyone on every side of the issue on the defensive.
Re: A Wisconsin lawmaker who's paralyzed isn't allowed to participate in meetings
#5So the argument for why remote callers should not be allowed is because the meeting is a great burden for its participants to commute to it and the burden must be felt by as many people as possible. Maybe we could make everyone happier by allowing remote meetings?
Re: A Wisconsin lawmaker who's paralyzed isn't allowed to participate in meetings
#6> "It just comes down to the fact that I think it’s disrespectful for someone to be asking questions over a microphone or a speakerphone when individuals are actually taking the time out of their day to come and testify in person," Vos said. I can see going "hey, voice over phone just doesn't work as smoothly" without considering the disability. But of course, that's the point - they get to consider "normal" as not i…
I just don't understand how people so heartless and selfish like this exist and are functional. It speaks poorly to society that one can be this way and not shunned. This person thinks their ego and perceived "respect" matters more than anything and a disabled person using accessibility tools is a slight? There is not a single shred of empathy there. It's just inconceivable to me to think like that.
Re: A Wisconsin lawmaker who's paralyzed isn't allowed to participate in meetings
#7> "It just comes down to the fact that I think it’s disrespectful for someone to be asking questions over a microphone or a speakerphone when individuals are actually taking the time out of their day to come and testify in person," Vos said. I can see going "hey, voice over phone just doesn't work as smoothly" without considering the disability. But of course, that's the point - they get to consider "normal" as not i…
Vos is talking about members of the public coming to testify in person to their Congress, and saying the people's Congressmen owe it to be present to listen. Didn't sound like it had anything to do with a technical issue.
Re: A Wisconsin lawmaker who's paralyzed isn't allowed to participate in meetings
#8> Vos spokeswoman Kit Beyer noted that Anderson voted for a set of Assembly rules in 2017 that eliminated a provision that allowed Assembly members in some cases to participate in committee meetings through web cameras. whoops
I always wonder if that kind of thing is them voting for something obviously good, e.g. "Orphaned kittens of Wisconsin Aid Bill of 2017" that has ostensibly good stuff that of course you'd vote for, but then tucked away in some sub-sub-sub-paragraph in 5pt font there's "oh and legislators can't join committee meetings via the web, ok thx plz sign the bill below"
Re: A Wisconsin lawmaker who's paralyzed isn't allowed to participate in meetings
#9> Vos spokeswoman Kit Beyer noted that Anderson voted for a set of Assembly rules in 2017 that eliminated a provision that allowed Assembly members in some cases to participate in committee meetings through web cameras. whoops
I always wonder if that kind of thing is them voting for something obviously good, e.g. "Orphaned kittens of Wisconsin Aid Bill of 2017" that has ostensibly good stuff that of course you'd vote for, but then tucked away in some sub-sub-sub-paragraph in 5pt font there's "oh and legislators can't join committee meetings via the web, ok thx plz sign the bill below"
Maybe, and I realize this is crazy, legislators could read the full text of what they vote on.
Re: A Wisconsin lawmaker who's paralyzed isn't allowed to participate in meetings
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
I always wonder if that kind of thing is them voting for something obviously good, e.g. "Orphaned kittens of Wisconsin Aid Bill of 2017" that has ostensibly good stuff that of course you'd vote for, but then tucked away in some sub-sub-sub-paragraph in 5pt font there's "oh and legislators can't join committee meetings via the web, ok thx plz sign the bill below"
Maybe, and I realize this is crazy, legislators could read the full text of what they vote on.
Or maybe the top-line bill is so important that you just swallow the bitter pill of less important riders, because getting a clean bill seems unlikely / out of your own control.