From the mouths of babes. It took a boy at a town hall meeting in Portsmouth, New Hampshire to inject disability into the political conversation. After explaining that his uncle has autism and his father works for people with developmental disabilities, the boy asked Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton what policies she has to assist people with disabilities.

Clinton’s response has left me asking some additional questions:

1. Secretary Clinton, why are you so condescending?

After receiving the question, Clinton gives her signature cackle and thanks the boy. Then she thanks the boy’s father, in the same way that dignitaries often thank military personnel for their service. It rubbed me the wrong way, and suggested that she thinks working in the disability community is a career sacrifice.

2. Secretary Clinton, could you please clarify?

Clinton has an amazing knack for recounting tidbits on a wide range of topics, as evidenced at the debates. (Maybe she picked up the skill after attending her first hundred or so cocktail parties.) This time, she stated that while working with the Children’s Defense Fund, she knocked on doors to identify children with disabilities who were not going to school. She then gave data to Congress, which opened schools to disabled students. Really? I’d like to know more about what tasks, exactly, Clinton did to help bring about the passage of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act. I’d also like to know from where her passion for special education developed.

3. Secretary Clinton, do you believe that the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has really made a huge difference in the lives of people with disabilities?

Giving credit where it is due, Clinton noted that the ADA is the result of bipartisan efforts. Although she notes that housing and community supports are still insufficient for people with disabilities, Clinton insinuates that the ADA has brought about terrific change. I agree that accessible infrastructure is much improved since 1990, but progress in other areas – especially employment – is deplorable. I would like to ask Clinton where she believes the ADA is lacking, and learn what she proposes as means for improvement.

4. Secretary Clinton, what do you think is one of the major lessons that the disability community learned through advocating for the ADA?

I would argue that the ADA would not have passed had different segments of the disability community not put aside their individual needs to advocate for the overarching needs of the community. There is strength in numbers. Yet Clinton states that she plans to roll out a special policy proposal for families affected by autism. Why must we splinter those with autism from the bigger disability community? People with other types of disabilities also need community supports, and access to housing, transportation, and jobs. Clinton refused to reveal her plans during the town hall meeting, but I will not be happy if she proposes something like “Autistic Work Expenses.”

5. What do you think about supported decision-making?

We’re back to the condescension factor. Rather than empowering people with autism themselves, Clinton continually refers to “families.” This is another pet peeve of mine. Even if people with disabilities lack the capacity to make all life decisions independently, there are other methods available – like supported decision-making – to permit individuals to direct their own lives. One of Clinton’s first publications was actually about giving children the power to make decisions in their own lives. So, why would she insinuate the appropriateness of a different standard for those, including children, with autism? Why does the family get to be the surrogate decision-maker?

6. What’s your plan?

In true politician spirit, Clinton answered the question without answering the question. Stay tuned for what I hope is more (minus the cackling and condescension)!

Contact: Emily Munson