@sozobe,
Quote:Yes, but as I mentioned the ADA was enacted under Bush, and one feature of what's happening now is that the Reagan-era Republicans would be considered positively
I see the ADA as simply an extension of the civil rights legislation that came before it, and based on the same foundations, and not any new bold move made under a Republican President. And it was largely accomplished by a grass roots effort by those with with disabilities, or those who were the parents of children with disabilities, who fought a long hard fight to have their concerns recognized and addressed. And the groundwork was set long before Bush took office.
Quote:From a legal perspective, a profound and historic shift in disability public policy occurred in 1973 with the passage of Section 504 of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act. Section 504, which banned discrimination on the basis of disability by recipients of federal funds, was modelled after previous laws which banned race, ethnic origin and sex based discrimination by federal fund recipients.
For the first time, the exclusion and segregation of people with disabilities was viewed as discrimination. Previously, it had been assumed that the problems faced by people with disabilities, such as unemployment and lack of education, were inevitable consequences of the physical or mental limitations imposed by the disability itself. Enactment of Section 504 evidenced Congress' recognition that the inferior social and economic status of people with disabilities was not a consequence of the disability itself, but instead was a result of societal barriers and prejudices. As with racial minorities and women, Congress recognized that legislation was necessary to eradicate discriminatory policies and practices.
http://dredf.org/publications/ada_history.shtml
I don't know that Obama is taking "the reasonable middle ground" or whether he's just taking a rather traditional Democratic stance on these issues. And I think the Republicans are still trying to take rather extremist, "bean-counting" positions, on entitlement programs, like Medicare, and someone like Paul Ryan personified that. It's all about "don't raise taxes, just slash spending" with people like that, even though increased revenue is sorely needed, and the majority of Americans don't want to see the economic protections of a program, like Medicare, in any way reduced, and they favor eliminating tax breaks for the wealthy. And the Republicans still protect the interests of Big Pharma which is why significant reductions in prescription drug costs can't really be accomplished--although that would provide much more effective relief, for consumers, than Part D Medicare.
In the Reagan-era I didn't see much Republican concern for middle-class and working-class folk, and I still don't see it today. And, unfortunately, today's Republican party is considerably less cohesive, and even less coherent, and more in the grasp of it's more extremist elements, then it was back then.
It was under our last Republican President that spending increased, our economy collapsed, and we became involved in two very costly wars, and that's consequently resulted in a mountain of federal debt that can't be eradicated quickly, or by reckless budget cuts. All I want Obama to do is to continue to recognize, and advocate for, the needs and concerns of middle-class and working-class Americans, because the Republican party can't be counted on to do that--they still are very much a party devoted to the interests of big business and the affluent.
