Wisconsin state assembly recently passed two resolutions that contained provisions to accommodate wheel chair bound democrat Jimmy Anderson of the 47th District. Both measures were enacted despite Andersons’s opposition and the objection of all other assembly democrats.
That’s right, now Anderson can phone in to meetings and the assembly won’t hold any more late night sessions. Anderson made a big stink about such a session forcing him to sit in his wheel chair so long that he had to be hospitalized and have “pounds of flesh” cut from his body due to pressure sores.
The 33-year-old assemblyman opposed both measures because they also contained provisions allowing multiple override votes of the governors veto. Democrats complain that this gives Republicans the ability to hold an override vote when there are not enough democrats in the chamber to oppose the override. More
“”offensive,” “disappointing” and “frustrating” that Republicans did not consult with him before proposing ways to accommodate his needs”
News flash for wheelchair bound democrat Jimmy Anderson of the 47th District – prior to my children being born I used to do a great deal of advocacy on behalf of disabled individuals. After work three nights/week on average I would go out and do field audits if weather permitted and then sit at my computer writing up reports and seeking remediation on their behalf. I traveled the State, at my own expense, and as such was invited to meetings and sessions involved in the crafting and adoption process of rules and regulations covering accessibility within the public right of way.
I can tell you that without exception the process was co opted by “advocates” who used it as an opportunity to grandstand and virtue signal and by those who had vested interests in ratcheting up the cost of compliance to the point that very little gets done because the cost of doing anything exposes the jurisdiction to doing everything and the sky’s the limit.
Believe me when I say this, the only interest most of those driving the agenda have in you is as an asset they can exploit to achieve their own ends.
It is a scandal and a disgrace, what has taken place and when I was doing advocacy a good 80+% of those contacting me were looking to get back at someone they had an axe to grind with or looking to make money suing something trivial – they were a nuisance, the remaining <20% were unsafe and/or unusable and were examples of gross incompetence/negligence and of them I only had time/resources to take on about a quarter of them.
The business of law making has moved away from comprise. There is no more give and take any longer.
Now it’s “do what I want you to do or I’ll condemn you and cry to the media about what a rotten individual you are for not giving me my way.