[misc.handicap] ADA

Walter.Hart@f10.n130.z1.fidonet.org (Walter Hart) (03/23/90)

Index Number: 7258

Attention every disABLED person interested in the A.D.A.
Write the following four people a short note or call if they are your 
Congress Person:  Pass the Americans with DisABILITIES Act without
ANY Weaking Admendments, NOW!
Address for each is :
                    The Honorable  ( name)
                    House of Representatives
                    Washington,DC 20515
Send a letter to Norman Mineta (Chairman)
                 Bud Shuster (Ranking Minority)
If from TEXAS    Pete Geren
                 Greg Laughlin
These are members of the Public Works and TRANSPORTATION committee.
They are doing the Mark up on ADA, NOW! Then catch a train, Fly. drive
or crawl to Washington this Week as the "Wheels of Justice" rolls into
the Capitol.  Standing up isn't necessary, you don't need to see where
you're going. This is a cross disability group saying "ALL THE WAY, ADA."

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!130!10!Walter.Hart
Internet: Walter.Hart@f10.n130.z1.fidonet.org

Rick.Allan@p0.f460.n101.z1.fidonet.org (Rick Allan) (05/31/90)

Index Number: 8542

We must make many more calls in the next two days!!!
Three amendments remain.
First here's what happened Thursday:

Congressman LaFalce (D-NY), Congressman
Campbell (R-CA), the House Leadership and the bill
authors reached a bipartisan agreement to phase
in small business under certain remedies of the
public accommodations provisions (Title III).  Under
the agreement, the provisions of Title III will go
into effect 18 months after enactment of the
legislation.  However, for those businesses with 25
or fewer employees, an individual's rights of action to seek
remedies through court action will not be available
for 6 months following the effective date of the
Title.  For businesses with 10 or fewer employees, the
same right of action will not be available for 12 months
following the effective date.  Administrative remedies will
be available immediately upon the effective date.  [passed]

   McCollum (R-FL): If an employer has a written job
description of a given position, then the criteria set
forth in that job description will be considered the
essential function of the job.  [passed]

   Olin ((D-VA): If an employer is required to spend
over 10% of the annual salary or annualized hourly
wage of a disabled employee, in order to facilitate
the employment of the disabled employee, such expenditure
will be presumed an undue hardship for the purpose of this
bill.  [We defeated the business lobby 213-187]

   Chapman (D-TX): Employers may refuse to assign an
individual with an infectious or communicable disease
of public health significance, to a food handling
job.  The individual must then be reassigned to
another position, if he or she is qualified for such
position.  [We lost 199-187]

   Hansen (R-UT): Individuals who are disabled may not be
denied access to a wilderness area, including the
use of a wheelchair in such area. [passed]

Monday the remaining three amendments are up for consideration:

Sensenbrenner (R-WI): The only remedies that apply under this act
are those set forth in the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  [We oppose
this potential limitation of our remedies to present Act,
precluding remedies to be available if/when the Kennedy-Harkins
Civil Rights Act of 1990 passes (this is a bill which would expand
a person's ability to recover damages if they have been
discriminated against.  It repairs damage done by Conservative
Supreme Court rulings in recent years.]

   Shuster (R-PA): Provides for annual waivers from
lift purchase requirements for new vehicles for
transit authorities operating fixed route systems
in urbanized areas with a population of 200,000 or
less.  [We oppose]

   Lipinski (D-IL): Requires that one car per train be
accessible to disabled persons (within 5 years) and that
demand for additional capacity for the disabled be met
with additional cars as necessary (rather than the
requirement that all new cars be accessible). [We oppose]

We must defeat these three amendments!!

We need to call EVERY REPRESENTATIVE to assure we don't have
more defections!!  We've been given one last weekend to 
muster support for strong transportation access requirements.
The Shuster and Lipinski Amendments would SEVERELY WEAKEN the
transportation requirements in ADA.  The Sensenbrenner
Amendments would, in a sense discriminate against people
with disabilities by saying we won't have the same remedies
that other minorities get in future civil rights laws.

We must defeat these three amendments - and time is running
out to make calls.  Take no vote for granted!

Call your Reps, and all the numbers in previous messages.

We shall overcome these amendments if we quadruple our 
efforts between now and Monday's votes.

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!101!460.0!Rick.Allan
Internet: Rick.Allan@p0.f460.n101.z1.fidonet.org

Gary.Warren@f5.n382.z1.fidonet.org (Gary Warren) (05/31/90)

Index Number: 8550

Well, it looks like there will have to be a reconciliation between the 
Senate and House versions of the ADA.  In which case, it may be the end 
of the summer at BEST before the act is on Bush's desk.
glw

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!382!5!Gary.Warren
Internet: Gary.Warren@f5.n382.z1.fidonet.org

Bill.Scarborough@hnews.fidonet.org (Bill Scarborough) (05/31/90)

Index Number: 8551

     I have been told that there are places (outside of Texas, of course) 
where municipalities of less than 200,000 population have bus systems, 
even to the point of some small cities having one-bus systems.
     Austin had a bus system when it had only about 250,000 population.  
Currently, the Capital Metro Trans Auth includes some small towns which 
may in due time get some sort of local bus service.
      So the 200,000 or less amendment would do great damage by in effect 
repealing protections now found in the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
 

 * Origin: KramMail - The Handicap News 1-203-337-1607 (1:141/420)
--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!Bill.Scarborough
Internet: Bill.Scarborough@hnews.fidonet.org

Joe.Chamberlain@f140.n150.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Chamberlain) (06/04/90)

Index Number: 8597

 BS> Several weakening amendments are probably going to be 
 BS> introduced, and one of the worst would exempt cities with 
 BS> populations under 200,000 from being required to provide 
 BS> accessible public transit.  Everyone needs to call their 
 BS> Congressional Representative and tell him/her to vote FOR the 

        Since the ADA has passed I hope it achieves everything it
is suppose to accomplish.  For example, we should in the near
future have quadriplegic airline pilots and I would hope that the
blind would sue for equal access to, and use of, the interstate
highway system.  Cars, controled by inbedded laser beams in the
highway surface is possible although slightly expensive.

        In reality, SEPTA, the Philadelphia mass transit system
will collaspe under the financial strain imposed by the bill.  It
is already in bad trouble.  Same goes for the systems in NYC,
Boston, and many other cities.

        When this starts to happen, then watch the backlash
against the disabled.
                                -=joe=-

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!150!140!Joe.Chamberlain
Internet: Joe.Chamberlain@f140.n150.z1.fidonet.org

Gary.Warren@f5.n382.z1.fidonet.org (Gary Warren) (06/04/90)

Index Number: 8601

"...watch the backlash against the disabled"??
I don't necessarily agree, Joe.  These transit systems, from the 
impression I have from listening to the CSPAN debates, have months and 
even up to four years to make themselves reasonably accessible.  Upon 
what are you basing your conclusion???
glw

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!382!5!Gary.Warren
Internet: Gary.Warren@f5.n382.z1.fidonet.org

Joe.Chamberlain@f140.n150.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Chamberlain) (06/04/90)

Index Number: 8607

 GW> "...watch the backlash against the disabled"??

 GW> I don't necessarily agree, Joe.  These transit systems, from the
 GW> impression I have from listening to the CSPAN debates, have 
 GW> months and even up to four years to make themselves reasonably 

        Yes, they have a great amount of time but very little
money.  The average rider objects to the fare increases today and
those fare increases are often contest in court battles.  When
the transit system loses and the fare jumps three fold to pay for
the accessibility features that less than 1% of the ridership
will use, then the outcry will begin.

 GW> accessible.  Upon what are you basing your conclusion???

        At the present time on campuses throughout the country and
in job markets everywhere there is outright hostility to members
of minority groups because they are given preference over the
white population.  Whites against blacks.  Blacks against asians.
It is not right but it is a fact.

        The average shopper parks in the h/c slot because many
times it is unused and abused.  Ten percent of the parking spaces
are set aside for the h/c and less than 1% of the licensed
drivers are classified as disabled.

        When the bill will require a small business employer to
make $200,000 worth of additional renovations even if he doesn't
employ the disabled there is going to be loud protests and many
court battles.
                                -=joe=-

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!150!140!Joe.Chamberlain
Internet: Joe.Chamberlain@f140.n150.z1.fidonet.org

Gary.Warren@f5.n382.z1.fidonet.org (Gary Warren) (06/05/90)

Index Number: 8619

Exse me, Joe, but "the average shopper" who parks in the hc spaces are 
the PRIMARY ones who abuse the spaces.  The other people who use them 
not clearly designated as "disabled" may have to use them anyway, such 
as elderly people, but who do not have the correct sticker to PROPERLY 
label themselves.
Also, as to the transits, someone on WASHINGTON WEEK IN REVIEW had said 
the majour services in NYC and others have UNTIL 2015 or thereabouts to 
become completely accessible.  I dunno if this is true, but if a 
metropolitan system can't get to at least 75 percent accessibility, 
something is wrong somewhere, besides $$$.
glw

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!382!5!Gary.Warren
Internet: Gary.Warren@f5.n382.z1.fidonet.org

Curtis.Oglesby@p13.f1.n360.z1.fidonet.org (Curtis Oglesby) (06/05/90)

Index Number: 8636

 JC>        The average shopper parks in the h/c slot because many
 JC> times it is unused and abused.  Ten percent of the parking spaces
 JC> are set aside for the h/c and less than 1% of the licensed
 JC> drivers are classified as disabled.

I understand your point, Joe, but ten percent?  A bit exaggerated,
don't ya think?

 JC>        When the bill will require a small business employer to
 JC> make $200,000 worth of additional renovations even if he doesn't
 JC> employ the disabled there is going to be loud protests and many
 JC> court battles.

I'm sure that the details can be worked out.  But, if the law is
not implemented carefully, I agree that the kind of backlash that
you've been describing is certainly possible, or even likely.  I'd
expect to see a requirement for a certain level of
accessibility/accomodations in new facilities and then a
requirement for a case-by-case review for existing facilities.
This procedure has been used by the federal government and its
contractors for years.  For example, when I was hired into civil
service by the Army, the building was completely non-accessible.
The necessary accomodations were made for me at that time.  But,
any new facilities that are built are accessible.  It'll work if
pragmatism is the approach.  Of course, public buildings are
another matter.

Curt

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!360!1.13!Curtis.Oglesby
Internet: Curtis.Oglesby@p13.f1.n360.z1.fidonet.org

pjdr@cgdisis.cgd.ucar.edu (Peter Rayner) (06/05/90)

Index Number: 8652

In article <12168@bunker.UUCP> Joe.Chamberlain@f140.n150.z1.fidonet.org writes:
>Index Number: 8597
>        In reality, SEPTA, the Philadelphia mass transit system
>will collaspe under the financial strain imposed by the bill.  It
>is already in bad trouble.  Same goes for the systems in NYC,
>Boston, and many other cities.
>        When this starts to happen, then watch the backlash
>against the disabled.
This is blatant nonsense or, should I say, I have a slight disagreement.
The explanation of the logical fault in the above argument is, as usual,
contained in the text itself.  The key sentence is "it is already in bad
trouble". 
The truth is rather boring.  These systems may well collapse, in fact it is
even possible that, to drag out another cliche, the costs resulting from
compliance with the bill will be the straw that breaks ...  However the
reaction of most people in that case is not to blame the straw.  I think
there has been enough debate about the real issues which make the 
economics of mass transit so marginal in this country so that such a red
herring is, fortunately, unlikely to be seized upon.
>                                -=joe=-
>
>--
>Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!150!140!Joe.Chamberlain
>Internet: Joe.Chamberlain@f140.n150.z1.fidonet.org

--
Peter Rayner
disclaimer: I don't even work for NCAR let alone represent them

34AEJ7D@CMUVM.BITNET (Bill Gorman) (06/07/90)

Index Number: 8698

Joe.Chamberlain@f140.n150.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Chamberlain) writes:
>
>[...]
>
>        When this starts to happen, then watch the backlash
>against the disabled.
>                                -=joe=-

Gee Whiz, Joe! Maybe we should all just queue up for voluntary
euthanasia, like Pat keeps fretting about, so nobody will be
"inconvenienced" by our exercise of our rights, eh?

Douglas.Zachary@p0.f10.n137.z1.fidonet.org (Douglas Zachary) (07/18/90)

Index Number: 9229

    Alistair Edwards writes,<26-Jun-90 03:51pm>
 
To: alistair@minster.york.ac.uk (Alistair Edwards)
Index Number: 8865
 
>Would somebody please enlighten a slightly ignorant foreigner. I 
>am aware of the existence and the passing of ADA, mostly through 
>this topic on the network. 
>Now, a more difficult question. Why is the United States so much 
>more enlightened in this area?
 
 Theory:  We have strong resistance from the historical 
 protectionists because of altering historically significant 
 buildings.  We have a lot of undeveloped land in comparison to 
 England and growth is still very active in this country. Your 
 country is much older and tradition bound, spaces for occupancy 
 are much closer together and alteration would be an even greater 
 undertaking. Disabled individuals have united in a stand 
 following disasterous results from other such stands taken in 
 the past by other minoities. Now that the American public has 
 taken a stand against minority oppression in other countries,
 how could we save face if we were guilty of the samething within 
 our own country when so many families of this particular group 
 are affected in some way?
                                       Zack

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!137!10.0!Douglas.Zachary
Internet: Douglas.Zachary@p0.f10.n137.z1.fidonet.org

Joe.Chamberlain@f140.n150.z1.fidonet.org (Joe Chamberlain) (07/24/90)

Index Number: 9453

 GW> I don't necessarily agree, Joe.  These transit systems, from the 
 GW> impression 
 GW> I have from listening to the CSPAN debates, have months and even up to 
 GW> four 
 GW> years to make themselves reasonably accessible.  Upon what are you 
 GW> basing your conclusion???

        When the Boston, New York City, and Philadelphia transit
systems are now threaten with bankruptcy and the ridership is
opposed to fare increases where do you think the money is going
to come from.  A fare increase to finance a rebuilt system to
accomodate a limited ridership will result in an outcry.

                                -=joe=-

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!150!140!Joe.Chamberlain
Internet: Joe.Chamberlain@f140.n150.z1.fidonet.org

Douglas.Zachary@p0.f10.n137.z1.fidonet.org (Douglas Zachary) (07/24/90)

Index Number: 9456

 DZ> Now that the American public has taken a stand against 
 DZ> minority oppression in other countries, how could we save face 
 DZ> if we were guilty of the samething within
 DZ> our own country when so many families of this particular group
 DZ> are affected in some way?
  
FM> Interesting perspective, Zack.  Had never thought about it 
FM> that way.
 
FM>             Fred
                                 
You want to know something strange?  I didn't either until Alistair 
asked that question. I'm sure that is not the complete scope of it 
because we did have a bunch of dedicated and intelligent people even 
within the medical proffesion backing us. Besides that, most of the 
jails were not accessible. :)  I am glad that we didn't need a 
Martin Luther King and people with disabilities could more equally 
share the victory of their own destiny, but don't think for a minute 
that we could have done it without the able bodied people that sided 
with us. Let us hope that the rest of the world follows the example 
and that all people in time see the benefits both compassionately 
and economically.
              Best to you Fred,
                            Zack

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!137!10.0!Douglas.Zachary
Internet: Douglas.Zachary@p0.f10.n137.z1.fidonet.org

Gene.Chase@f3106.n124.z1.fidonet.org (Gene Chase) (07/25/90)

Index Number: 9502

 * Replying to a message originally to Joe Chamberlain
GW> "...watch the backlash against the disabled"??
GW> I don't necessarily agree, Joe.  These transit systems, from
GW> the impression I have from listening to the CSPAN debates,
GW> have months and even up to four years to make themselves
GW> reasonably accessible.  Upon what are you basing your
GW> conclusion???
GW> glw

Hi Gary.... As the law stands as passed, transportation does get a 
bit of a break. I don't believe there will be much in the way of 
backlash to worry aabout (Except of course those who will find 
something wrong with ANYTHING new or different.) If Pres. Bush gets 
it signed into law, I firmly believe changes will begin to happen 
immediately. In the most recent publication of The UN/Limited, we 
have printed the latest information from the minutes of the Texas 
Council On Disabilities... We have followed recent movements of the 
State of Texas and their attempt, (thus far, successful) in bringing 
Texas toward the acceptance of the disabled as a powerful block of 
ideas...

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!124!3106!Gene.Chase
Internet: Gene.Chase@f3106.n124.z1.fidonet.org

Curtis.Oglesby@p13.f1.n360.z1.fidonet.org (Curtis Oglesby) (08/10/90)

Index Number: 9706

Hello all,

I have followed the discussions and the jubilation over the passage
of the ADA.  This is a major step forward.  However, a recent
article in Engineering Times has prompted me to write this note.
It was pointed out that the ADA is not a national building code,
and unless state or local codes incorporate the ADA requirements,
the ADA will not be enforced.  Court action will be the only
recourse.  This means once wronged, we can seek to correct a
problem.  BUT that's not the same as having building codes
requiring a certain accomodation in new construction to prevent
these problems from arising in the first place.

There is NO national building code in which accessibility standards
can be incorporated.  Building codes are the responsibility of
states, counties, cities, etc.  So we must see that these building
codes are revised to meet the standards set forth in the ADA.
Let's not wait several years and become outraged that some new
buildings don't reflect accessibility standards required by ADA.
We would have lost valuable time and numerous buildings to
inadequate accessibility.

Start by contacting those in your city, county, state, or other
local government entity responsible for building codes.  We must
start now to be ready when the law is enacted.

Please keep some things in mind.  The Rehabilitative Act of 1973
has resulted in minimum accessibility standards for all new federal
or federally-funded facilities.  IMHO, these standards are quite
good.  Urge your state and local governments to incorporate these
standards in their building codes.

Existing buildings will be a difficult issue.  "Readily achievable"
changes that aren't difficult or expensive to implement will be
required on existing facilities upon the bills enactment.  This
kind of statement was a deliberate decision to keep from a
carte-blanche requirement of expensive retrofitting of existing
facilities.  This stance really is okay.  As I've said previously,
the federal government has made "reasonable accomodations" in
existing buildings as the need arose.  This approach can work well
under ADA-required accessibility standards.  But, don't expect a
5-man company to install an elevator in a 3-story building just to
give you access to their office.  Use reason and commonsense.  This
approach will also prevent the backlash against us that Joe C. is
concerned about. But, on the other hand, don't let someone run over
you because they claim excessive expense as their way out of doing
any accomodation.

Remember, this year is an election year.  Make your vote count and
make your government representatives know what your vote requires.

There is still much to be done.

Curt

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!360!1.13!Curtis.Oglesby
Internet: Curtis.Oglesby@p13.f1.n360.z1.fidonet.org

Curtis.Oglesby@p13.f1.n360.z1.fidonet.org (Curtis Oglesby) (08/21/90)

Index Number: 9897

 E4> Curt,
 E4> I read your note about NO national
 E4> building standards leading to a fight to
 E4> having ADA enforced in each state. I
 E4> have this question. Has anyone thought
 E4> of legislation to enforce the ADA with
 E4> fines, jail terms etc? Kind of a ADA
 E4> II.

At this point, I think "possible fight" would be a better term.  I
know of no state or local governments refusing to implement the
ADA.  The bill was just signed.  However, it is far too common for
any bureaucracy to fail to act in a timely manner, especially on
anything controversial, or worse, costly.  And the building code
changes will cost the developers of buildings.  But, the important
points to remember are that: it is required by law (the ADA), and
the inclusion of these building standards into the original design
of a building will minimize these costs.  It is retrofitting of
existing buildings that can be expensive.  Architects, developers,
& builders know this fact, but, for economic reasons, some will not
act until compelled to do so.

To prevent these fights (or to bring them to the courts sooner), we
should be emphasizing the need to have the building code changes
become effective as each applicable provision of the ADA becomes
effective.  Again, this is an election year.  Your representatives
should know that this is a concern.  You are a registered voter,
aren't you.  No excuses, I vote by absentee ballot because I can't
use the voting booth.

Let's try pressing state and local governments to act before we
send in the National Guard.  The procedures are in place; they can
work, however slowly.  If it takes longer, start earlier. <grin>

 E4> Bryant Graham
 E4> 'There's got to be a pony in here somewhere!'

You liked the pony story, I see.  There sure is a lot of the other stuff
around. <grin>

Curt

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!360!1.13!Curtis.Oglesby
Internet: Curtis.Oglesby@p13.f1.n360.z1.fidonet.org

Jay.Steinhardt@p3.f230.n231.z1.fidonet.org (Jay Steinhardt) (08/21/90)

Index Number: 9913

Thank you Curtis.  I have been reviewing the standards around the
country.  Only a few states have adopted the ANSI recomendations.
In Indiana even today, inspite of the fact that ANSI is the Indiana
standard; Indian often grants waivers or fails to require
compliance.

The need for continued action is real.  Lets not be too comfortable
just because a law was passed.  We have nothing but a nice idea
until appropreate rules and regulations are promalgated.  ADA MUST
BE MORE THAN A BILL/Law.

ADA is a concept that we need to keep standing strong.  We also
need to work to see that building codes are developed by the
persons who utilize the accomadations.  We need to continue the
effort for an accessable society not as persons seeking ways to
meet individual needs.  We must continue to work as a coalition to
see that all needs are met.

D.R.E.D.F. in Berkly CA. is an exicilent program to help keep you
informed.  D.R.E.D.F. is the Disability Rights Education and
Defense Fund working in coopreration with the Center for
Independent Living.  D.R.E.D.F. has a full time loby effort to
support the needs of the disabled community. and quarterly mailings
plus regular updates on activities in Washington.

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!231!230.3!Jay.Steinhardt
Internet: Jay.Steinhardt@p3.f230.n231.z1.fidonet.org

34AEJ7D@CMUVM.BITNET (Bill Gorman) (09/03/90)

Index Number: 10038

[Note from Bill McGarry: See the next article]

Does anyone have the ADA legislation, as signed into law, in electronic
form. I would like to obtain a copy, as our system here seems to have eaten
mine.

Thanks,

W. K. (Bill) Gorman

wtm@bunker.uucp (Bill McGarry) (09/03/90)

Index Number: 10039

In # 10038, Bill Gorman writes:

>Does anyone have the ADA legislation, as signed into law, in electronic
>form. I would like to obtain a copy, as our system here seems to have eaten
>mine.

I will post this in misc.handicap over the next few days (it's over
170,000 bytes long so I'll have to split it.)  It is available in
ZIP format (only 48K) on the Handicap News BBS (1-203-337-1607,
300/1200/2400 baud) for download (even for first time callers) or
for file requests from other Fidonet BBS's.

I'm not yet sure whether I'll send it out via the Handicap Digest
since it would have to be broken up into about 6 parts and would have
to be sent out over several days to avoid everyone's mailboxes
from exploding.

				Bill