Apparently, Congresswoman Giffords is still a long way from being able to meet her obligations to her consitituents:
Asked for a blunt description of Giffords’ condition, her chief of staff, Pia Carusone, replied: “She’s living. She’s alive. But if she were to plateau today, and this was as far as she gets, it would not be nearly the quality of life she had before.”
As to whether she resembles herself before the shooting, Carusone said, “There’s no comparison. All that we can hope for is that she won’t plateau today and that she’ll keep going, and that when she does plateau, it will be at a place far away from here.”
The news may be sobering, but it’s not necessarily a surprise. The state of Giffords’ health has been closely guarded information as early, hopeful accounts of her rapid physical and motor recovery yielded to more cautious — and less frequent — reports. She remains at a Houston rehabilitation facility while her staff manages her day-to-day congressional business.
Well, her staff can’t vote for her. Her constituents are essentially unrepresented in Congress. If I were one, I’d be demanding her resignation so they can have a special election, and if it didn’t happen, I’d try to recall her. But her staff doesn’t seem to think there’s a problem:
As far as her political career goes, the only deadline her staff is keeping in mind is May 2012, when she would have to file for reelection if that is her plan.
So they plan to have this go on for at least another year, and perhaps the rest of her term. It’s a tragedy, but if she can’t perform the job, she needs to be replaced with someone who can.
[Update a few minutes later]
It looks as though there is an Arizona law that could take care of the situation, but the Republicans seem reluctant to use it.
I’m shocked, shocked, I say, that they don’t want to lose their jobs.
Oh I dunno, one fewer vote available to Nancy Pelosi doesn’t strike me as a wholly bad status quo. Special elections are tricky things, you know.
Rand, I completely agree. It sounds terrible to say because it is so out of place in our PC environment. Terrible things happen to people, and unfortunately, sometimes those things leave long lasting effects. If she cannot perform her duties (most importantly, vote), she should resign. It’s just a sad fact of life.
I agree with Carl, and I suspect that’s part of the equation for Republicans not pushing the issue. They already have a majority in the House, and pushing for Giffords to be removed would just be a bad PR move, even if the right thing to do. The best thing is a grass roots effort to recall her.
As for the sentimental people that think recalling her is just wrong; I have a friend in a similar state as Rep. Giffords. Except, instead of being put there by a wacked out kid; he was put in his state (severe mental damage) due to blunt trauma caused when a City of Houston dumped truck driver ran a red light and plowed into my friends car and then into three workers (killing one) putting in a sidewalk. Not only did my friend not get a visit from the Mayor nor more than $.5 millon to pay for his medical bills, but the Harris county prosecutor decided not to try the dump truck driver despite protests from the Sheriff’s deputy. So I have sympathy for Rep. Giffords condition, but not for a government employee keeping their job.
The scary part is that she’s going to get a huge sympathy vote no matter her condition should she run for reelection. We’ve become a society which is more concerned about appearances, in this case not being mean to the “disabled”, than in electing someone who can actually perform the job. If she does recover enough, I wouldn’t be surprised to see her run for the Senate seat Kyl is vacating, and she’d be the favorite.
Then again, it’s said that the staff of a Congresscritter does just about all the work except actually voting in committee and on the floor. And as pointed out, her votes as a Dem are pretty much pointless. So it might be hard to make the case that the people of her district are really not being represented. And in this case, the staff doesn’t have to deal with a Weiner whose antics could lead to an end of the good times. Everybody wins!
“She’s living. She’s alive.”
Ooh. That’s actually a rather chilling appraisal. I have a feeling that she is now severely mentally retarded and physically disabled. Not a vegetable, but, not much of a person either. If those assumptions are true, obviously she should in no way remain in office. But, that’s ultimately for her constituents to decide. If they want to ease her out fine, but otherwise, why push.
She has my sympathy vote. If I were religious I’d giver her a prayer. I am not sure I see why one less person active in Congress is a problem anyway. I’d call it a feature.
Wow, harsh folks.
Alex, you might want to google aphasia (which is the name for the condition Giffords has). Aphasia does not leave you mentally disabled. It doesn’t affect your intelligence or your cognitive abilities or your memory at all. What it affects is your ability to express words.
Almost everyone with aphasia improves. It takes a while. Usually 12-24 months to get to a plateau. Along the way you sound much like is described in this article. First you get words back. Then you get more words. Then you struggle to find more words. They come out slow and sometimes you can’t find them. You do it again and again and again in therapy until your brain can find the words more quickly.
You are more likely to improve if you are relatively young (Giffords is) and motivated (Giffords is) and getting speech therapy (Giffords is).
If she is indeed gravely impaired with little hope of near-term recovery, at what point does it become unethical for them to continue to keep her condition from her constituents? I pray that she does continue her recovery to the point that she can have a near-normal life, but it certainly is beginning to sound like that will be quite some time if ever.
The scary part is that she’s going to get a huge sympathy vote no matter her condition should she run for reelection.
I wonder if her husband would run if Giffords herself couldn’t.
As soon as they know.
It’s one thing to say, “If her constituents don’t mind keeping her in Congress in her condition, that’s for them to decide” — but when her constituents’ knowledge of her condition is kept purposely vague, they’re not being given the opportunity to decide.