In a news release, State Rep. Joe Brennan, D-Lehigh/Northampton, last week announced plans to introduce legislation that would classify disabled veterans as minorities so they have the same status and benefits as racial and gender minorities in securing state contracts."The United States military defends us by combating actual and perceived threats," Brennan said. "Our brave soldiers are leaving the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan – many disabled – having protected us from the reality of terrorism. I believe this legislation will show appreciation to the courageous men and woman who risked their lives so that we can continue to live under the freedoms allowed by the United States Constitution."
Brennan said his bill would grant disabled veterans the benefits awarded to members of the Bureau of Women and Minority Business Opportunities when bidding for state contracts. Additionally, it allows for another minority status outside racial and gender disadvantaged groups. Best of all, he tells me it costs the taxpayers nothing.
17 comments:
Joe has been proving himself in Harrisburg. This legislation is a win-win proposition. Thanks Joe!
To BO, thanks for picking up the local legislative news. It's important. BC.
So if you are a female, African American/Latino/non-white disabled vet, do you get 3 chances over just being white?
Why not start over and clean the slate for all and make things equal across the board...
I won't agree to that.
This guy is becoming the king of feel good legislation. Preferences are wrong, for ANY group.
Who decides which groups are worthy, and how groups become groups? Smilin' Joe legislator? Teh messiah?
Of course, we could save a lot of time and money and just say every group, except evil healthy white men, only has to declare itself, and it gets preferential treatment. Because that is the ultimate goal of this nonsense, isn't it?
But then, Joe and the other busywork politicians would have to focus on actually getting our fiscal house in order and creating an environment where businesses can thrive and employ people.
Power to the people (except the white man with no disabilities). Stick it to the man! Rock on! Give peace a chance. Love the one your with. Yadda, yadda, yadda...
So let me get this straight. You oppose the idea that the government make it easier for a disabled vet to find work and find that it somehow discriminates against the angry white man.
Bernie, I am sure disabled white vets will find it interesting.
The right is very quick to call for war but is very slow to take care of our soldiers when they come home. Their opposition to this bill is very telling.
There you go again, accusing me of being white man!
I'm an American...
And most Americans I know have a great deal of respect for those who served this country, especially if they are wounded. It is Americans who sponsored the first GI bill and the most recent changes to the GI bill.
To 9:03
You would be surprised how handicapped veterans are discriminated in the workplace. Women and the handicapped are overlooked when they submit proposals for government and industry contracts. That's why the LAW is there to protect them from the good-old-boy system (no matter what color) that you defend so ardently.
Where did I say DAV should not be able to find work as easily as anyone else? What I said was preferences are wrong for anyone, and I believe merit and merit only should be the criterion.
The reference to healthy white males was simply for context, because we are getting to the point that everyone except them is a member of a protected class.
Contracts awarded to "Good ol' boys are not examples of discrimination against protected classes. They are examples of bad management and dereliction of duty to the taxpayer. Those who award contracts that way should be immediately removed from office. Perhaps Joe can draft that legislation.
Now, back to the merits of the proposal, who gets the contract when it comes down to a qualified black woman and an equally qualifed white, male, DAV? Which class is more deserving? One will obviously feel they are the victim of discrimination.
Finally, I respect and admire the military as much anyone, you have no corner on that market. I just don't feel two wrongs make a right. A non-BFOQ preference, in favor of one is, by definition, preference against another.
If you admire the sacrifices made by DAVs, you should be willing to give them some preference in getting work, especially since they are often overlooked.
Thuis is where ideology and facts conflict. I understand your point. And in a perfect world, I'd agree with you. but this is not a perfect world. hence, the preferences.
My two cents for what it may be worth!
I know Rep. Brennam and would be willing to bet that if he could have legislation passed or even ever considered to remove all preferences for bidding contracts, he would so.
The way I see it, many, including me, would do the same if we had the opportunity to do so. However, we both know that will never happen.
Therefore, the no taxpayer cost proposal by Joe for our very brave Veterans who protect our Freedom deserve status Joe promotes, is my opinion. www.kisslinger.com
BC, I miss the days when you were posting these releasees.
This is kiss your sister legislation. Stop creating victims then you can stop making feel good exemptions.
for Christ's sake, this has nothing to do with veterans and everything to do with pandering. Like most of this legislation.
Excuse me, but the only way we stop creating DAVs is by forgetting about our national security. This is a good idea and the hell with your lockstep ideology.
If you are a half Hispanic half Black, female lesbian veteran you get bonus points and a free toaster. Thanks Rep. Brennan.
Anon 9:03AM REALLY? it is wrong to give people disabled in the defense of our country preferential treatment? WHAT KIND OF A PERSON THINKS THAT WAY? Really?
Post a Comment