TIME FOR A LITTLE REALISM: A few years back, at a briefing held before the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, a well-dressed man with Down Syndrome testified that he “wanted to have a job where I could wear a suit and tie and carry a briefcase and be a professional like my dad who was a teacher.”
It would have been cruel to tell him that he was not going to be a physician, a scientist, an engineer, a dentist, or a lawyer. Nor was he likely to end up in one of the many other challenging jobs where intellectual aptitude matters. No one in attendance would have dreamed of being that cruel.
He gave a speech that was almost certainly written by somebody else. In it, he said that, growing up, he had felt “segregated, devalued, invisible and not respected,” all of which may well have been true. After the briefing he was shuffled off by his minder. It was obvious he had not gotten to the Commission offices by himself. (On the other hand, it is important not to underestimate him or any other Down Syndrome adult. I thought he did quite well considering his situation.)
He was there on behalf of the Massachusetts Down Syndrome Congress. In that capacity, he was advocating for the repeal of a federal program that allows a limited number of employers to hire Down Syndrome and other severely disabled workers at less than minimum wage. This highly regulated program (Section 14c of the Fair Labor Standards Act) was created during the FDR Administration. It makes it possible for many otherwise unemployable individuals to find employment.
Some of those who argue for the program’s repeal are honest about it: They admit that many severely disabled workers will not be able to find jobs at competitive wages. The jobs they are currently doing will either disappear entirely or be filled by more efficient workers, probably recent immigrants with poor English skills and little education. Even so, those recent immigrants will likely be more productive than most of the severely disabled individuals who hold the jobs now. As far as I can tell, the biggest beneficiary of a repeal will be the SEIU.
Those who are honest about it further admit that states will instead have to expand their social services programs to include more daycare for the severely disabled. I don’t see how this solves the witness’s feeling of being “segregated, devalued, invisible, and not respected.” It seems to me it makes it worse.
That’s seems to be what the family members of these individuals think, too. While the Commission was working on the report, we were deluged with comments—almost 10,000 of them—of which 98% asked for the program be continued.
The program is quite small and entirely optional. Anyone with a severe disability is free to seek employment in the regular labor market. Many who are blind or deaf are more likely to find employment in the regular market—with or without the need for special accommodations through the Americans with Disabilities Act. Section 14c is intended to be the last resort. But it’s good to have that last resort.
Nevertheless, more and more states are opting out of the program—very much including red states. Virginia may be next. And there is a federal bill ending that would terminate it.
That seems like a mistake to me. It’s hard not to wonder if our public policies have become unhinged from reality. The 14c program might certainly benefit from some changes, but it isn’t a fundamentally flawed idea.