The Duality of Texas

[Guest guest]

The more I think about it, we really shouldn't be surprised that

Texas leads the nation in warehousing its citizens with developmental

disabilities in " state schools " , while coming in dead last in

supporting community-based care. After all, we're home to the

largest and most glamorous churches in the country, many of which are

a few blocks away from the largest and most glamorous strip clubs in

the country. Duality is something we Texans seem to embrace as part

of our unique culture.

As a rule, most Texans believe that big government is bad, and large

social programs are a tell-tale sign of big government. We prefer a

free market economy to stimulate economic growth, with the market

responding to the desires of the consumer. Our low tax base

stimulates this economic growth, while also keeping our overall cost

of living attractive and comfortable.

Now let's play this out in the mind of the typical Texas legislator.

The state schools are like a military base. They directly employ

people in the area and create jobs through ancillary development,

such as nearby restaurants, shops, motels, etc. Closing a state

school is like shooting the chicken that lays the golden eggs, with

those eggs being the economic growth these institutions support.

As an alternative to state schools, many families would prefer

community-based programs which give the family greater control. It

is significantly less expensive to support someone in the community

versus placing them in a state school. However, to that typical

Texas legislator, the funding for this smells like welfare, the

greatest of all social programs and the hallmark of big government.

Please refer back to paragraph #2.

This Texas duality exists in the advocate community as well. It

fights for the elimination of all state schools in order to fund

community-based programs, saying that the money should follow the

person. This would be great, if these same advocates were not also

campaigning against parents on how the funds should be used. For

example, many families would like to use these state funds to pay for

small community homes, many of which are run by churches and are

extremely well managed. Failing to discern the difference between

these family-driven communities and the state-driven schools, the

professional advocates actually increase the costs to families

wanting to provide care to their loved ones.

Perhaps we Texans will someday realize that the pendulum doesn't have

to be forced to the far left or the far right. Hanging half-way in

the middle may be the best place to be.