- زبانAfrikaans Argentina AzÉrbaycanca
á¥áá áá£áá Äesky Ãslenska
áá¶áá¶ááááá à¤à¥à¤à¤à¤£à¥ বাà¦à¦²à¦¾
தமிழ௠à²à²¨à³à²¨à²¡ ภาษาà¹à¸à¸¢
ä¸æ (ç¹é«) ä¸æ (é¦æ¸¯) Bahasa Indonesia
Brasil Brezhoneg CatalÃ
ç®ä½ä¸æ Dansk Deutsch
Dhivehi English English
English Español Esperanto
Estonian Finnish Français
Français Gaeilge Galego
Hrvatski Italiano Îλληνικά
íêµì´ LatvieÅ¡u Lëtzebuergesch
Lietuviu Magyar Malay
Nederlands Norwegian nynorsk Norwegian
Polski Português RomânÄ
Slovenšcina Slovensky Srpski
Svenska Türkçe Tiếng Viá»t
Ù¾Ø§Ø±Ø³Û æ¥æ¬èª ÐÑлгаÑÑки
ÐакедонÑки Ðонгол Ð ÑÑÑкий
СÑпÑки УкÑаÑнÑÑка ×¢×ר×ת
اÙعربÙØ© اÙعربÙØ©
صفحه اصلی / آلبومها / برچسب civil rights 14
نمایش:
لیست ماهانه
تاریخ ایجاد / 2013 / جولای / 12
ADAPT (483)
HIGHLIGHTS OF THE COURT DECISION The following is a summary and explanation of the court's decision by Timothy M. Cook, the attorney who argued the case on behalf of ADAPT. The court: l. Struck down, as contrary to federal disability civil rights law, “local option,” the DOT policy that allows transit systems the option of providing transit to persons with disabilities only if we make advance reservations, sometimes several days in advance, and then only in segregated settings. 2. Required that every bus newly purchased with federal assistance must be accessible. No retrofitting is required; the ruling only applies to future purchases. The court said that because transit systems may phase in accessible buses, the ruling would not lead to any undue financial burdens for transit systems. 3. Required that transit systems provide both accessible mainline transportation for those who can use accessible buses, and adequate paratransit to serve those who cannot. 4. Struck down the 3 percent cost cap under which DOT deemed transit systems to be in compliance with federal disability civil rights laws once they spent 3 percent of their operating expenses on disability access. As important as the holdings in the case are the language and rationale used by the court in reaching its conclusions. The 73-page, decision is laced with integration-oriented statements and phrases derived from the corpus of race and gender discrimination cases. Thus, the case sets forth a new charter for interpreting laws like Section 504, stating that Congress’ plain intent was to eliminate the segregation of persons with disabilities. It’s good cause for celebrating. But neither too long nor too loudly, for the war is not yet won. We must press forward on two important fronts before that day comes: l. First and foremost, DOT has 90 days from the date of this decision to decide whether to seek an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. This decision will be made by DOT and the Department of Justice, but the White House will also be involved. It is important that we mobilize quickly and inundate DOT, Justice, and the White House with letters from all of us, urging them to embrace the Court of Appeals Decision. Remind President Bush of his campaign promises to integrate persons with disabilities into all aspects of American life. Without access to public transit, as we all know, that is impossible. And just last week President Bush, in his speech to the joint session of Congress, reiterated his commitment to bring persons with disabilities into "the economic mainstream." Letters should go to: William Skinner Secretary of Transportation 7th & Maryland Ave., SW Washington; D.C. Dick Thornburg Attorney General Dept. of Justice 9th & Penna. Ave. NW Washington, D.C. C. Boyden Gray Counsel to the President 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Washington, D.C. And, of course, to President Bush at the White House. 2. We must move forward in support of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), using the court decision as additional impetus. The ADA, which will be reintroduced in the Congress soon, will require that all new buses and transit facilities be accessible. Urge your Senators and Congressperson to climb onto the bandwagon and be a co-sponsor of the ADA when it is reintroduced. If we can get the ADA enacted, there will be no need for any additional court fights.
ADAPT (487)
The Handicapped Coloradan ADAPT wins transit access VlCTORY! Federal court orders all new buses to be equipped w|th wheelchair lifts APTA pressures DOT to appeal decision Feb. 13,1989. Call it V-D Day. Victory over the Department of Transportation (DOT). Or call it V-A Day. Victory over the American Public Transit Association (APTA). Because on that day in Philadelphia, within earshot of the Liberty Bell and walking distance of the hall in which the Declaration of Independence was forged, disabled Americans won not only the right but the means to ride mainline public transportation. On a 2-l vote, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that in the future every transit system in the nation that buys buses with assistance from the DOT must purchase only buses equipped with wheelchair lifts. That decision reverses a 1988 ruling by U.S. District Judge Harold Katz who upheld DOT’s policy of allowing transit systems the “local option" of providing public transit to people with disabilities through a paratransit system. APTA, which reaffirmed its support of local option at its last national convention, has urged DOT to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court. Such an appeal must be filed within 90 days, or by May 13, 1989. DOT already has filed for a rehearing, and the court is expected to announce by March 29 if they would be willing to reconsider the decision. Justices Carol Los Mansmann and A. Leon Higginbotham wrote the maiority opinion with Judge Morton Greenber dissenting. The case was brought to the Court of Appeals by a dozen disability rights organizations, led by the militant American Disabled for Accessible Public Transit (ADAPT) and the Eastern Paralyzed Veterans of America. Timothy M. Cook, director of the newly formed National Disability Action Center, argued the case. It wasn't the first time wheelchair lifts have been in the courts. in 1979, the DOT, at the direction of President Jimmy Carter, ordered all transit systems to install lifts on new buses, but that mandate was struck down in federal court after an appeal by APTA. APTA’s insistence on local option led to the creation of ADAPT by a handful of militant wheelchair users in Denver, who set up pickets outside the Hilton Hotel headquarters of APTA's I983 national convention. At the insistence of Mayor Federico Pena, ADAPT was allowed to speak before the convention and no arrests were made. That was the last time either situation would exist. At every subsequent national convention or regional APTA meeting, wheelchair militants have shown up in force, blocking buses and hotel entrances until local police forces were forced to cart them away to jail. “Who would have thought a bunch of ragbag crips from Denver could have started something that would have grown this big?" asked ADAPT founder Wade Blank, co-director of the Atlantis Community, a local independent living agency. Both Blank and Cook cautioned that the war was not over yet, although both said they were pleased that the 73-page court opinion was filled with the language of the civil rights movement and would go a long way toward convincing those on the fence that their cause was just. The Court of Appeals opinion reads, in part: “We find the goal of eradicating the ‘invisibility of the handicapped‘ led Congress to enact measures to facilitate, if not immediate and complete mainstreaming of the handicapped, then affirmative and aggressive steps in that direction." The decision involves only new buses, as the justices argued that requiring systems to retrofit old buses would subject them to "undue burdens." Cook said after the decision was handed down that the "opinion is completely consistent with President Bush's call last week, in his speech before Congress, for Americans with disabilities to be ‘in the economic mainstream.‘ Nothing is more essential to meeting that goal than the provision of accessible public transportation." Mike Auberger of the Denver ADAPT chapter, who's been arrested in several cities while engaging in civil disobedience, agreed that accessible public transit is the key to enabling disabled people assume full citizenship. "People are dying out there," Auberger said. "Disabled people go into nursing homes because they don't have any options. I personally know people who have committed suicide because they don‘t have any options. Wheelchair lifts will give them that option." Auberger said that ADAPT doesn't plan to rest on its laurels. They'll be Reno April 7-ll for a regional APTA convention and back in Denver April 23-26 for the national meeting of the Urban Mass Transit Association (UMTA). “Our demand is simple," Auberger said. “We just want them to drop the appeal process and accept the decision." If they don't, Auberger promised that protesters would try to fill the jails one more time. To that end, ADAPT members intend to picket DOT offices in 12 cities on Good Friday, March 24, and ask staff members there to call the Presidiential assistant in charge of transportation matters and ask that the court decision not be appealed. "If they don't make the call, then we don't go," Auberger said. "I'm sure we'll take some heat because we're doing it on Good Friday," he said, explaining that he expects many offices to be shorthanded because of workers leaving early for the Easter weekend. "That should just add to the confusion."
ADAPT (523)
The New York Times Sunday March 18, 1990 Growth of a Civil Rights Movement The Disabled Find a Voice and Make Sure It Is Heard by Steven A. Holmes Doing whatever it takes to fulfill the promise of a landmark Federal law. WASHINGTON THE pictures were striking, just as they were intended to be: Children paralyzed from the waist down crawling up the steps of the Capitol, and more than 100 protesters, most in wheelchairs, being arrested by police officers in riot gear after a raucous demonstration in the Rotunda. The aim of the demonstration was to press for enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act, a comprehensive civil rights bill that extends to physically and mentally disabled individuals the same protections against biased treatment in employment, transportation and public accommodations now accorded women and minorities. You can view disability rights as one of the latest chapters in the overall civil rights movement,” said Wayne Sailor, a professor of special education at San Francisco State University. It was not always so. For years, the agenda for the disabled was set by organizations like the March of Dimes and the Easter Seals Foundation, which focused on providing services for the disabled and prying money loose from government and individuals to find cures for such illnesses as cerebral palsy. In the last two decades, however, the attitude of those with disabilities has shifted from being passive recipients of institutional largess and paternalism to demanding a full role in society. “We're not Tiny Tims, or Jerry’s kids," said Bob Kafka, a quadriplegic from Austin, Tex., as he demonstrated outside the White House last week. The disability rights movement was shaped by' a number of scientific, cultural and political forces. In many ways, it is a by-product of the technological revolution. Breakthroughs in medicine, the development of computers that allow the hearing and speech impaired to use telephones, and advancements in motorized wheelchairs have meant more people with severe handicaps live longer, can do more for themselves and have the potential for enjoying fuller lives. "There are people with serious spinal cord injuries who used to die within two weeks that now live 30 or 40 years," said Dr. Frank Bowe, a deaf scholar whose 1978 book “Handicapping America" is to the disability rights movement what Betty Friedan's “The Feminist Mystique" was to the women's movement. “It’s one thing to say we have this marvelous technology, but if nobody‘s going to hire you, what's the point?” As the most efficient means of creating disabled people, wars have always been a factor in advancing the disability rights movement, and Vietnam was a main force. The war added a large number of disabled veterans, already angry over America's indifference to their sacrifice in Southeast Asia, to an army of people with disabilities demanding fairer treatment. The Library of Congress, for example, estimates there are 43 million Americans with some form of disability. In l973, after two vetoes by President Richard M. Nixon, Congress passed Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, which barred discrimination against the disabled by any entity receiving Federal funds. But no regulations were written to put it into effect until 1978, after advocates staged a 28-day sit-in. Entrenched Barriers But barriers remained entrenched in the private sector, where the bulk of the new jobs were created in the last decade. "We had no rights at all there," Dr. Bowe said. During the l980's, the disability rights movement struck an alliance with traditional civil rights and feminist groups. As a result, for the first time, discrimination against the disabled was barred in the sale or rental of housing, “Standing alone, we could not have done that," said Pat Wright, director of the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, who is legally blind. “But wrapped in the arms of the civil rights community we had a lot more power." The movement has also gained sympathetic ears both on Capitol Hill and in the Bush Administration. Officials and lawmakers who have relatives with various afflictions are more responsive, as are politicians who are increasingly aware that the votes of the disabled are up for grabs. That point became clear after the Republican National Convention in 1988, when, in his acceptance speech, Mr. Bush became the first Presidential candidate to address the problems of the disabled directly. A poll by Louis Harris and Associates taken after Mr. Bush's speech showed that the lead Michael S. Dukakis held over Mr. Bush among disabled voters fell to 10 points, from 33. But advocates say they have just begun. Just as the Government can pass laws that end racial discrimination, but not racism, it can outlaw biased treatment of the disabled but mot mandate acceptance of them. “You can't legislate attitudes," said Ms. Wright. “But the attitudinal barriers will drop the more disabled people are employed, the more they can be seen on the street and when we become not just a silent minority, but full participating members of society. Photo (from Associated Press): Looking up from the ground toward the dome of the Capitol in the background. In front a person in a wheelchair, back to the camera, holds the ADAPT flag. In front of the flag a man, Walter Hart, in a wheelchair with a bandanna tied around his head and dark sunglasses looks toward the first person. On the right side of the photo another man in a wheelchair, Joe Carle, sits talking with the other two. Caption: Rally near the Capitol last week to press for a bill extending rights for the disabled.
ADAPT (527)
Tips & Trends The President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities vol.2, No. 4, April 1990 (This article continues on 519 but is transcribed here for reading ease.) The Civil Rights March of 1990 On March 12, hundreds of people from across the United States joined a march for the Americans with Disabilities Act that would give America's 43 million people with disabilities rights that other minorities have had for years. Beginning at the White House and ending at the United States Capitol, the demonstrators marched the 19 city blocks chanting ”Access is our Civil Right" and other slogans in favor of ADA’s immediate passage with no weakening amendments. The procession moved slowly in the 89-degree heat as individuals with disabilities and advocates made their way along the streets of the Nation's Capital. Aside from many demonstrators in wheelchairs, banners, handmade signs and colorful tee-shirts made the procession a media extravaganza, as representatives of national, local and many independent news services from around the country covered the event. Camera crews kept focus on the demonstration well after arrival at the Capitol, where a brief ceremony was held. Mike Auberger, an ADAPT organizer and leader of the march, introduced Justin Dart, Chairman of the Task Force on the Rights and Empowerment of Americans with Disabilities and Chairman of the President’s Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities. He gave a rousing address, followed by remarks from Evan Kemp, Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Congressman Major Owens (D-NY), who marched in the rally, Representative Patricia Schroeder (D-CO), Dr. I. King Jordan, President of Gallaudet University, Jim Brady, former Press Secretary and Special Assistant to President Ronald Reagan, and Bob Silverstein, Staff Director of the Senate Subcommittee on Disability Policy. Following the formal ceremony, activists in wheelchairs crawled up four flights of stairs to the Capitol building in a dramatic display of commitment to their cause. Each carried with them a copy of the "Disabled People's Bill of Rights”, a document generated by American Disabled for Accessible Public Transit (ADAPT). PHOTO (on 527) - Three people in wheelchairs (Joe Carle, Walter Hart, and Mike Muehy) PHOTOS: Photo 1(on 519) (by Monica Hall): A crowd of people covers the plaza between the two staircases on the side of the Capitol facing the mall. In the distant background you can see House office buildings. Caption reads: Ceremony Assembly at Capitol. Photo 2 (on 519) (by Monica Hall): A small throng of people, many in wheelchairs, head over to the rally area from the march. In the background the Capitol building rises majestically. In the foreground Wade Blank hugs Patty Leffingwell who wears a baseball type cap. Caption reads: After the March. Photo 3 (on 519): Julie Farrar and Jennifer Keelan climb the Capitol steps as about 10 people watch. They are 5 steps from the top. Jennifer who is about 8 years old is crawling on her hands and knees while Julie is doing the backwards scooch up step by step on the butt maneuver. There is a man walking beside Jennifer with a box that appears to be a camera and at the top of the steps there is a person holding a professional mike, like a film crew would use. Julie and Jennifer are carrying scrolls. BULLETIN: Executive Director Jay Rochlin announces his retirement. Story page 3
ADAPT (533)
The Washington Times Wednesday, March 14, 1990 Handicapped protesters arrested The Associated Press Demonstrators in wheelchairs were arrested in the U.S. Capitol yesterday after confronting House leaders with demands for quick passage of legislation guaranteeing them civil rights protections. A crowd of more than 100 disabled demonstrators threatened civil disobedience and interrupted House Speaker Thomas Foley and House Minority Leader Robert Michel as the congressional leaders tried to speak over the din in the cavernous Capitol Rotunda. After the congressmen left, about 70 disabled people assembled in the center of the Rotunda and began chanting in an attempt to provoke arrest. Capitol Police, standing nearby, encircled the protesters and began taking them into custody. Outside the Capitol, police began placing the protesters - most in Wheelchairs - into several government owned vans. The demonstrators were being charged with unlawful entry and demonstrating within the Capitol, said Capitol Police Officer G.T. Nevitt. The first charge carries a maximum sentence of six months in jail and a $100 fine; the second, six months in jail and a $500 fine. “It is a priority for passage in this session of the Congress," Mr. Foley shouted over catcalls from the protesters. “l am absolutely satisfied it will reach the floor. we will have a conference with the Senate and it will become law." “Will it be on the floor in 24 hours? No," Mr Foley added in a statement greeted with a chorus of boos. “I am not going to set an artificial deadline that prevents the committees from sending a bill to the floor that they can defend," he said. It was the second day of lobbying by the disabled. On Monday, dozens of people crawled out of their wheelchairs and up the steps of the Capitol to dramatize their demands. The focus of the protest was the Americans with Disabilities Act, which was passed by the Senate last year but has bogged down in the House, despite widespread predictions of its ultimate passage. The measure would outlaw discrimination based on physical or mental disability in employment, access to buildings, use of the telephone system, use of public and private transportation, and other situations. The Capitol has ramps for wheelchair access to two of its entrances and ramps and elevators inside to enable people confined to wheelchairs to get around. During the midday face-off in the Rotunda, Mr. Foley sought to assure the disabled that House leaders “want to see that this bill has the greatest possible support and will reach the president's desk in a way that he can sign it." Mr. Michel told the crowd he had broached the issue earlier yesterday in a meeting with President Bush at the White House. He acknowledged that the disabled community “is getting a little bit impatient because the wheels of Congress are not moving fast enough." Although the Bush administration and congressional leaders support the bill, some have begun questioning the administration's commitment in recent weeks. White House Press Secretary Marlin Fitzwater denied its support was slipping and said the administration was negotiating with key members of Congress. "We do support the legislation," Mr Fitzwater said. “We‘re very supportive of their rights and their cause."
ADAPT (549)
Denver Post Rights bill OK’d for disabled President expected to sign landmark act By The Washington Post WASHINGTON — Amid rare displays of personal emotion, the Senate gave final approval yesterday to landmark legislation barring discrimination against an estimated 43 million Americans with physical and mental disabilities and sent the bill to President Bush, who is expected to sign it. The legislation was overwhelmingly approved by the Senate after several members spoke with deep emotion of the importance of the legislation to brothers, sisters and children in their own families. The Americans with Disabilities Act, which would give the disabled the same civil-rights protections in jobs, accommodations and services that currently apply to minorities, women and the elderly, was approved by the Senate by a vote of 91 to 6. The House, voting 377 to 28, approved it late Thursday. The way was cleared for final action on the measure when House-Senate negotiators agreed Thursday morning to a Senate proposal to drop a provision that would have let employers transfer workers with AIDS out of food-handling jobs. On the Senate floor yesterday, Sens. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Edward Kennedy, D-Mass, visibly struggled with their own emotions as they told of close relatives who were inspirations to them in spite of — or because of — their disabilities. Simultaneously ,'speaking and giving his summation in sign language in tribute to an older brother who is deaf, Harkin, the bill's sponsor, said it “sends the world a clear and unequivocal message that people with disabilities are entitled to be judged on the basis of their abilities and not on the basis of ignorance, fear and prejudice.” “American will be a better place because of the action we take today,” said Hatch, who fought back tears as he told of the inspiration he drew from a brother-in-law "who was stricken by polio and slept nights in an iron lung after working every day until his death. Kennedy told of his mentally retarded sister, Rosemary, and his son, Ted. who lost a leg to cancer. PHOTO (Associated Press): A group of people stand in a fancy Capitol room. On the left side of the picture two men in suits stand together (Rep. Hoyer and Sen. Hatch) one holding a cloth and smiling, the other wiping his eye. Facing them is a small crowd of people several of whom are clapping and smiling. A man on the far right appears to be blind. In front of the others are a woman and a man (Justin Dart) in wheelchairs. Justin, wearing his trademark cowboy hat, has his head down and is wiping his eyes. A tall man in the back is taking a picture over other people's heads. Caption reads: EMOTIONAL SHOW. Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., left, and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, wiping away a tear, join in celebrating passage of bill on employing people with disabilities.
ADAPT (558)
Grapevine (the title is surrounded by grape leaves and clusters of grapes) Weekly Happy birthday, TJ, see Editorial, p. 2. New Thomas Pynchon novel reviewed, see p. 5. FREE! In This Issue: Editorial . . . . ............ . . . 2 Letters to the Editor ..... 2 City Board Agenda.........2 Lithuanian Story to Tell..3 Grapevine Digest............3 Sheffield Nelson's Vi......4 The Way Were.................5 Grapevine Comics...........6 KUAF Radio Guide.........6 Classifieds.........................7 Community Sportsline.....7 Dictionary of Democracy..7 Watching the Environment 8 The Movies . . . . . . ..............8 Local Live Music . . . ..........8 Volume XXI, Number 32 A Free Weekly Newspaper Fayetteville, Arkansas Friday, April 13, 1990 PHOTO (by Tom Olin): The front line of a big march, headed by an African American man (George Roberts) in a motorized wheelchair with dark glasses and a sign reading "We Shall Overcome", a woman (Stephanie Thomas) with frizzy hair and mirror sunglasses in a manual wheelchair, a sign across her legs reads "Access is A Civil Right", a Latino blind man (Frank Lozano) standing tall with his back back, bandanna-headband, and dog-guide Frazier on his left all with stern expressions on their faces. To Frank's left a young girl (Jennifer Keelan) almost stands in her wheelchair yelling a chant as her grandmother and sister Kailee push her along. Behind them a man in a white button down shirt (Evan Kemp) smiles, Justin Dart's hat is visible over Stephanie's hair and he is being pushed by a tall man (Jay Rochlin) in a suit with a button on his lapel. Between Frank and Jennifer, a short man (Michael Winter) in a wheelchair is visible. Behind them, row upon row of marchers heads, several with mouths open chanting. Breaking Down the Barriers Civil Rights for People with Disabilities by Yaél Hana Bethiem In 1983 I considered killing myself. l considered this out of a deep despair, an agony over my life. In 1983 I had been diagnosed with a progressive disease. I could no longer work, could no longer sit in chairs and could stand for shorter and shorter periods of time. In other words, I was becoming disabled. I was panicked. How could I live without my physical life, my strength, my independence? What I didn't see at the time was that I was buying into our culture's attitudes about disability. I could not value myself or value my life because the system I had to fight to get my basic needs met, did not value me; l live in a culture that believes that "out of sight, out of mind" is acceptable policy for dealing with people with disabilities. In a culture that values productivity above all else, those who cannot produce, or who need assistance to be able to produce, are considered a burden. Our culture also has a myth called the “American way," which says that if anyone "tries hard enough" he or she can “make it." When applied to people with disabilities this means that if only we “try harder" we can "overcome." We can rise above the barriers, showing superhuman strength, and then we will be more acceptable. This attitude makes people believe the barriers do not need tn be removed. Instead, they think we, the disabled, need to overcome them. In other words, the closer we cart be to “normal," the more we are accepted. Those who cannot become more normal are locked away, out of sight, out of mind. Those of us living within this oppression, for it is oppression, often internalize the culture's attitudes. We believe there is something wrong with us. Millions of people share this fate with me; we are locked away by a society that would prefer to pretend we do not exist. We are imprisoned by attitudes that do not see people with disabilities as fully human; attitudes that expect us to "overcome" (or heal ourselves); attitudes that create barriers, or do not see the barriers that do exist. There are 43 million people with disabilities in the United States. We are one of the most repressed minorities in this country. We are denied access to basic rights, transportation, jobs, and respect. For people with disabilities there are thousands of ways the oppression affects us, thousands of forms of prejudice and visible and invisible barriers. An example of the effects of this oppression is the story of David Rivlin. David was a quadriplegic who, last summer, chose to have his respirator turned off. He went to court to ask for the right to die. His story was aired on TV. I heard people around me say, “l would do that too. I wouldn't want to live like that." David lived in a nursing home. He lay in bed twenty-four hours a day tied to a stable respirator. David didn't have to live this way. He could have had a portable respirator and thus been able to use a wheelchair. He didn't know about a portable respirator and no one ever told him. The government was paying $2300 day to keep David in a nursing home, but would pay only $207 a month for an attendant so David could live independently. The day before David died, a reporter covering David's story discovered that money could have been gotten for David to live independently if someone had known how lo “work the system." David's struggle reflects the struggle of people with disabilities in this country. If David, and other people with disabilities were given their right to make choices in their lives all along, there would be no necessity of fighting for the right to die. The Americans With Disabilities Act There is a growing awareness of the need for change in policy and attitude toward people with disabilities. Last year a bill was introduced in Congress called the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA). The ADA would begin to guarantee civil rights for people with disabilities. Although it has already been modified since its inception, the ADA, as it now stands, would be a beginning to removing barriers that prevent people with disabilities from participating in society. Unfortunately, the ADA is facing serious compromise due to powerful lobbies against it. It is also facing changes that would remove its power as a civil rights act. Last summer, the ADA was passed almost unanimously by the Senate. It was endorsed by President Bush. It then moved into the House of Representatives, where it is now stalled. The most powerful lobbies against the bill are Greyhound and the National Federation of Independent Businesses along with the Chambers of Commerce. Greyhound is against the ADA because they will have to equip new buses with wheelchair lifts. They claim it will cost them millions of dollars, yet they are adding in costs that have nothing to do with the Americans With Disabilities Act. While using erroneous concepts for the cost figures, Greyhound is pouring money into Washington to fight the bill. The National Federation of Independent Businesses also base their antagonism to the ADA on erroneous concepts. The NFIB is saying the ADA will cause hardship for businesses. The ADA requires that public facilities constructed after the ADA becomes law be accessible. Existing facilities have to be accessible within two years of enactment if the access is "readily achievable without much difficulty or expense." In other words. businesses can decide for themselves whether they can afford to provide access. On March 10, American Disabled for Accessible Public Transportation (ADAPT) held a march on Washington to promote awareness of the Americans With Disabilities Act. Over 1,000 people with disabilities came from all over the country. They marched from the White House to the steps of the Capitol. The rest of the week was filled with talks with key figures and demonstrations. Many people participated in planned civil disobedience aimed at calling attention to the current injustice. Because the ADA is civil rights legislation, it ties in with the Civil Rights Act of 1964. New legislation has just been introduced that would create real remedies for violations of the Civil Rights Act. Because the ADA is tied to the Civil Rights Act these remedies would also apply to violations of the ADA. Opponents of ADA want to separate the ADA from the Civil Rights Act. For people with disabilities this would be a compromise that essentially negates the purpose of the ADA. People with disabilities deserve to be treated fairly and humanely, which at this point we are not. It is time to remove the barriers, especially the barriers of mind. It is time to break down the walls that have kept people with disabilities imprisoned. The Americans With Disabilities Act is a very important step. Please write to Hon. John Paul Hammerschmidt at U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. 20515 or 35 E. Mountain, Fayetteville, AR 72701 . Let him know you are aware of the ADA. Ask him to support it as it now stands. Only unity can save our threatened planet.On every level we have to move out of the mindset of differences and into the awareness of our shared humaneness. Now it is time also to move out of separation based on physical ability. Only then can we really share our resources. Only awareness of barriers can bring the possibility of their removal. Yael Hana Bethiemn is a free lance writer from Eureka Springs.
ADAPT (562)
USA Today, Wednesday, March 14, 1990 * 3A CLOSE-UP: RIGHTS OF DISABLED House panel passes landmark bill. As wheelchair-bound activists demonstrated at the Capitol, a sweeping civil rights bill for the disabled survived a key House vote. The Energy and Commerce Committee, successfully fending off an attempt to exclude people with AIDS or the HIV virus from the bill's protection, recommended the measure 40-3. Passed by the Senate last year, the bill gives the disabled the same civil rights and job protections that minorities won two decades ago. It also calls for public places and public transportation to be made accessible to people in wheelchairs and requires telecommunications systems to accommodate the deaf. "Ensuring equal rights for the disabled will result in greater productivity and responsibility for a significant portion of our population,” said Rep. Thomas Luken, D-Ohio. An estimated 43 million disabled could be affected. Meanwhile, police arrested 104 disabled demonstrators who confronted House Speaker Thomas Foley, D-Wash., in the Capitol Rotunda on the second day of intense lobbying by disabled people seeking quick passage of the bill. Foley reassured the demonstrators he is “absolutely satisfied” the measure “will become law.” Earlier, Rep. William Dannemeyer, R-Calif., was rebuffed in attempts to exclude people with contagious diseases or behavioral disorders from coverage. “When the people of this country realize just how far-reaching (the bill) is, they will rise up in opposition,” he predicted. But Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., said the bill does not protect people with diseases that can be transmitted through the air: “If someone poses a threat, they can be discriminated against." (Help sought for AIDS victims, 2D) PHOTO (AP): Close-up of a man's face with large glasses, large ears and dark hair. He has a look of urgency on his face. Caption reads: Luken: Cites 'productivity'
ADAPT (567)
Rocky Mountain News Weds., May 23. 1990 (There are 2 articles here. The first article starts here on 567 and continues on 565, the whole story is included here for ease of reading. The second article comes after the first one.) WORLD & NATION News Editor 892-2634, John Davidson, National Editor 892-2731 Clifford D. May, International Editor 892-2739 House OKs rights bill for disabled Measure would ban discrimination Scripps Howard News Service WASHINGTON — The House yesterday passed legislation to outlaw discrimination against 43 million disabled Americans. The 403-20 vote in favor of the bill, regarded as the most sweeping civil rights legislation in a quarter-century, sends it to conference with the Senate, which passed its version 76-8 last fall. The measure is backed by President Bush, who campaigned on the Americans with Disabilities Act in the 1988 presidential race, when few voters had heard of the bill. Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., who shepherded the legislation through the House, hailed it as “the most significant civil rights legislation since the Civil Rights Act of 1964.” The 1964 law barred discrimination based on race, sex, religion, color or national origin in private employment, public accommodations and government service. The Americans with Disabilities Act would extend civil rights protections to the disabled as well. Passage came despite opposition from business groups, which have complained about the potential for lawsuits along with the cost of adapting offices, plants and stores for disabled workers and customers. Sponsors counter that keeping the disabled out of the economic mainstream costs $170 billion a year in government benefits; they say this bill has been changed to take account of business concerns: Companies with 25 or more workers would have two years to comply with the employment provisions, with four years allotted firms with as few as 15 workers. To ease the expense of making smaller stores, restaurants and other public accommodations accessible to the disabled, the House voted to give small businesses at least two years to conform and exempted firms with fewer than 10 workers for 30 months. In Colorado According to Randy Chapman, director of Legal Services for The Legal Center Serving People with Disabilities. the expected passage or the American Disabilities Act will affect the state in three key ways: protect people with mental disabilities, allow disabled people to collect attorneys fees when challenging discrimination and require private businesses to provide reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities. A state law protecting people with mental disabilities is expected to take effect in about a year, but a federal law would take effect immediately, he said. Chapman said businessmen's fears that the law will cost them in litigation and renovations are somewhat unfounded. "Most (businesses) need little or no accommodations . . . and there was substantial litigation when a similar law (for employers receiving federal funds) was passed." Michael Auberger, co-director of the Colorado-based Atlantis Community for disabled citizens, said, "The law will open up the job market, the retail market . . . it will make us a legitimate class that has protection under the law that we never had before." —- Diane Goldie
ADAPT (581)
New York Times NATIONAL Tuesday March 13, 1990 Bill Barring Discrimination Against Disabled Hits Snag By STEVEN A. HOLMES, Special to The New York Times WASHINGTON, March 12 — Having strongly supported a comprehensive bill in the Senate to extend civil rights protections to 43 million Americans with physical and mental disabilities, the Bush Administration is balking at efforts to toughen penalties against businesses that do not comply. Officially, the White House has not withdrawn its support for the bill, which would require all new buildings and services used by the public to accommodate the disabled. “We do support the legislation," the White House spokesman, Marlin Fitzwater, said today. "We‘re very supportive of their rights and their cause." But other Administration officials said President Bush was reluctant to support the measure if its backers persisted in seeking penalties for job discrimination that are harsher than those in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That law bars discrimination on the basis of race, sex and national origin and limits penalties to court injunctions directing a business to stop discriminating and to reinstatement and back pay for those dismissed or not promoted as a result of bias. Both the disabilities bill passed by the Senate and one pending in the House state that penalties for violating the anti-discrimination provisions will be the same as those in the Civil Rights Act. Letter From Attorney General But a new bill introduced in both the House and the Senate last month would toughen the penalties in the 1964 law to allow for compensatory and punitive damages. Thus it would affect those in the disabilities bill as well. Sponsors say chances for passage of the proposed changes in the Civil Rights Act are good. Attorney General Dick Thornburgh, in a letter sent tonight to Representative Steny H. Hoyer, Democrat of Maryland, the chief sponsor of the House bill, said the Administration would seek to amend the disabilities bill to delete any link to the 1964 act and to lay out specifically what the employer sanctions would be. A spokesman for Mr.Thornburgh, David Runkel, said tonight that the Administration does not want the penalties in the disabilities act to go beyond the court injunctions and reinstatement and back pay now in the 1964 law. Senior Administration officials said the White House may withdraw its support from the bill if it is unable to delete any reference to the 1964 legislation. The disabilities measure, which passed the Senate in September by a vote of 76 to 8, has 246 sponsors in the House and passage seems virtually assured. Alixe Glen, a White House spokeswoman, declined to say whether the President would veto the bill if it continues to be linked to the civil rights laws. Rally by Disabled People The maneuvering over the bill came as more than 250 disabled people, many of them in wheelchairs, held a rally at the White House and then moved on to the steps of the Capitol to press for prompt House passage of the disabled rights bill. "Too often disabled people are seen as objects of charity or pity," Bob Kafka, a quadriplegic from Austin, Tex., said. "We're here to change that image. And we're here to send a message to the President and to Congress that this bill needs to be passed with no weakening amendments." If passed in its current form, the Americans with Disabilities Act would be the most sweeping civil rights law enacted since the landmark 1964 act. It mandates that all new buildings used by the general public, including restaurants, lodgings, places of entertainment, doctors’ offices and other establishments, provide the disabled with the means to enter and exit and that existing businesses make appropriate modifications if that can be done without creating a financial burden. The bill would also require that new railroad and subway cars and buses purchased by public and private transportation companies be accessible to people with disabilities and that telephone companies provide public telephones that can be used by persons with speech or hearing impairments. It was to gain the support of the White House and Senate Republicans that the bill's backers agreed to link the penalty provisions to those in the 1964 civil rights law. The bill's supporters had wanted to allow disabled people who proved they were victims of intentional and willful job discrimination to sue for compensatory and punitive damages. But the Administration argued that the disabled should not receive protections that were greater than those accorded to women and minorities. With the Administration's backing, the Senate approved the bill. But as it worked its way through House committees, a separate measure, the Civil Rights Act of 1990, was introduced in Congress with the backing of a coalition oi civil rights organizations that includes groups representing people with disabilities. The new measure amends the 1964 law to permit compensatory and punitive damages for victims of job discrimination. ENLARGED TEXT INSERTED INTO THE ARTICLE: How tough should the penalties against businesses be? PHOTO (The New York Times/George Tames): Three women in wheelchairs (Paulette Patterson, Christine Coughlin, and Lillibeth Navarro) across a sidewalk roll in front of a large white pillared government building [part of the White House complex]. The closest woman is holding a small bull horn and chanting; she is being pushed by another woman with an ADAPT headband and T-shirt. The other two women are in power chairs, the one in the middle has a placard that says something about Rights, and she is carrying the ADAPT flag and chanting. All four women look very determined and strong. Caption reads: Hundreds of handicapped people demonstrated in Washington yesterday to press for passage of the Americans With Disabilities Act.
ADAPT (595)
US NEWS AND WORLD REPORT Sept. 18, 1989 [This story appears in ADAPT 595, 590 and 602. It is included in its entirety here for ease of reading.] [Headline] Liberation day for the disabled by Joseph P. Shapiro Forty-three million will soon win basic civil-rights protections. Their growing movement has brushed aside the opposition and is changing America The day before the Senate passed historic legislation to protect the civil rights of disabled people, Mary Jane Owen got another rude reminder of the daily discrimination that faces people like her. Owen, a writer who is blind and uses a wheelchair, was lobbying senators for the disability-rights bill. But when she moved onto Constitution Avenue to go home, a taxi driver at curbside sped away rather than pick up a woman in a wheelchair. It is similar acts, repeated hundreds of thousands of times a day to the nation's 43 million disabled, that fueled an angry political movement that has brought the nation to a path-breaking moment. In a few weeks President Bush is expected to sign the Americans with Disabilities Act, a broad statement that will extend to the disabled the same protections against discrimination that were given to blacks and women in the 1960s and 1970s. The Senate passed the measure 76 to 8 last week, and the House is likely to approve it next month. The bill is a profound rethinking of how this country views disabled people, defined as anyone with a physical or mental impairment that "substantially limits" everyday living. For the first time, America is saying the biggest problem facing disabled people is not their own blindness, deafness or other physical condition but discrimination. The bill, says Senate sponsor Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), is "an emancipation proclamation for people with handicaps" that will fundamentally change their lives, getting more of them out of their homes and institutions and into full participation in society. Under the new law, restaurants, stores, hotels and theaters can no longer turn away a person with cerebral palsy, epilepsy, AIDS or any other disability. Employers would be prohibited from rejecting qualified workers just because they are disabled, and they would be required to fashion generally inexpensive modifications to the workplace to make it accessible to the disabled, such as putting a desk on blocks to raise it for a wheelchair user. It would also require that new buses be equipped with lifts so that wheelchair users could get on public transit. New buildings, or those undergoing major reconstruction, would have to be made accessible to disabled people, with elevators installed in shopping malls and new structures higher than two stories. Telephone companies would have to hire operators who could take a message typed by a deaf person on a Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) and then relay it orally to a hearing person on another phone. [Subheading] Cost of Access. Businesses, particularly small ones, are wary of the changes. John Sloan, president of the National Federation of Independent Business, complained that the bill will impose costly requirements on businesses" and is "so broadly written" that it is unclear how far, and to what expense, a business will have to go to avoid being open to a lawsuit. Sponsors of the bill said estimates that its implementation might cost billions of dollars were wildly exaggerated. Past experience shows they may be correct. When Congress in 1973 protected disabled people from discrimination by institutions that receive federal funding, North Carolina education officials estimated it would cost them $15 billion to make state university buildings accessible, says architect Ronald Mace of Barrier Free Environments. Instead, many changes were simple and cheap. To accommodate students in wheelchairs, classes were moved to ground floors rather than installing elevators to carry them to top floors. The cost so far has totaled $l5 million, says Mace. Similarly, a 1982 study for the Labor Department found that half the accommodations made in the workplace cost little or nothing. For example, it was easy for companies to change a wheelchair user's work hours to conform with the schedule of lift-equipped buses. Another 30 percent of the accommodations were achieved for between $100 and $500. That included such changes as giving a telephone head-set to a quadriplegic telephone operator. Despite the concerns of business groups, their opposition to a bill that would open them up to a new spate of lawsuits was surprisingly muted and not nearly as vociferous as their fight against the 1964 Civil Rights Act. For one thing, no one wanted to look like a bigot fighting a civil-rights bill, particularly one that was rushing through Congress. More important, businesses in the last few years have seen disabled people as a new source of labor and customers. “If they can get to the stores, business is going to increase" says the U.S. Chamber of Commerce‘s Nancy Fulco, who nonetheless lobbied to limit the rights bill's impact on business. [Subheading] Hidden Army. The mixed feelings of business groups underscored how disability rights is a civil-rights movement different from any other. Unlike the black and women's movements, disability-rights groups have never filled the streets with hundreds of thousands of marchers. Instead, the disability movement boasts “a hidden army,“ says former Representative Tony Coelho, who has epilepsy. Since a fifth of the nation's population has some form of disability, ranging from mental retardation to severe arthritis, Coelho argues, “disability impacts practically every family.“ Nowhere was that clearer than in Congress and the White House. where key supporters of the rights bill felt a particular need to win the bill‘s passage because they personally know about disabilities. Most important was President Bush, who has two sons with disabilities. Bush's strong statements in support of the bill during the 1988 campaign won him important support in the usually Democratic disability community. Nevertheless, the rights bill was in trouble until mid-June because of business fears about its cost. Then, on the day he left Congress, Coelho called Bush to ask him to renew his commitment to the bill. Within a few weeks, White House Chief of Staff John Sununu convened a strategy session with key senators to negotiate a compromise. That was easy to achieve once sponsors agreed to the White House request they drop the provision that would have allowed the disabled to sue for punitive damages if they were discriminated against. a provision that was the most opposed by business lobbies. From that moment, the compromise bill has been on a fast track. The success of the disability movement is extraordinary because it sprang up with little noise and little notice. One essential ingredient has been the growth of a new class consciousness among the disabled. Seventy-four percent of them feel they share a “common identity” with other disabled people, and 45 percent argue that they are “a minority in the same sense as are blacks and Hispanics,” according to a 1985 poll by Louis Harris & Associates. “All disabled people share one common experience—discrimination,” says Pat Wright of the Disability Rights, Education and Defense Fund. Often it is crude bigotry. In January, an airline employee in New York who resented having to help a 66-year-old double amputee board a plane instead threw him on a baggage dolly. A New Jersey private-zoo owner a few summers ago refused to admit children with Down syndrome to the monkey house because, he claimed, they upset his chimpanzees. It is that kind of outrage and countless more subtle discriminations that fueled the movement that now wants to change the image of the disabled. Many now reject the traditional attitudes of society that suggested their lives were tragic and pitiful. Many now loathe charitable appeals such as the annual Jerry Lewis Telethon that raised $42 million for the Muscular Dystrophy Association over Labor Day weekend. Such extravaganzas seek funds by emphasizing the most desperate cases. That kind of approach, activists say, suggests that disabled people are to be cared for and cannot be contributing members of society. “We don’t want to be dependent any more,” says Lex Friedan of the Institute for Rehabilitation and Research Foundation in Houston, who is a quadriplegic wheelchair user, the result of an automobile accident. “We want to be part of society in every way.” Such new attitudes reflect fundamental changes in the lives of disabled people. Since 1975, when federal law first ensured all disabled children access to schools, hundreds of thousands of disabled students have gotten a better education alongside nondisabled peers. Many grew frustrated after college, when they found there were few such protections to help once they tried to find jobs. A recent Census Bureau study concluded that the gap between the earnings of disabled and their nondisabled co-workers is growing. A disabled worker in 1987 made only 64 percent of what his nondisabled colleagues earned. In 1980, it was 77 percent. The 1985 Harris survey found that 70 percent of working-age disabled people were unemployed. Of those, two thirds said they wanted to work but were prevented from doing so because, among other reasons, they faced discrimination in hiring or lacked transportation. Those who do not work now collect federal disability and welfare checks, costing nearly $60 billion a year. “It doesn’t make sense to maintain people in a dependency state when those people want to be productive, tax-paying citizens,” argues Jay Rochlin of the President’s Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities. Although no one knows precisely how many millions of dollars could be saved by bringing the disabled fully into the work force, Sylvia Piper, an Ankeny, Iowa, mother, says she saved taxpayers $4.8 million by ignoring physicians who urged her to institutionalize her retarded son, Dan, when he was born. Instead, she kept him at home and sent him to public school with non-disabled children, the kind of role models who inspired him to get a job this summer. Dan, now 18, saved $800 from his pay as a drugstore stockroom worker. His first purchase was a gray bedroom rug, upon which he slept the night it arrived. The next morning he was ready for work early and announced, “I've got to work harder and make more money." Once again, says his delighted mother, Dan grew when faced with a challenge. The nation’s changing demographics have added to the urgency of meeting the needs of the disabled. By 1990, there will be 6.2 million elderly Americans with one or more basic disabilities, up from almost 5 million in 1984, according to estimates by the Urban Institute, a research organization. And the explosive growth of the number of those with AIDS and HIV infection has already added hundreds of thousands more disabled to the population. That is why AIDS-policy advocates teamed up with disability groups to make sure civil-rights guarantees under the bill also applied to those with AIDS. People with AIDS had won federal court rulings protecting them under existing disability-rights laws, which apply only to federally funded programs. The new bill will expand that protection to the private sector, so that people with AIDS and HIV infection cannot be fired from jobs or denied service in restaurants. [Subheading] Galvanizing Issue. Along with being better educated and more independent, the new generation of disabled people has become more politically sophisticated. Some 200 independent-living centers, which have sprung up since the 1970s to provide a mix of counseling and support services to severely disabled people, became bases of advocacy. One galvanizing issue came in the early 19805, when a Reagan administration anti-regulation effort tried to eliminate key federal protections that prohibit discrimination by any program or contractor receiving federal funds. Negotiating sessions over the regulation first brought then Vice President Bush face-to-face with Evan Kemp, who headed Ralph Nader’s Disability Rights Center. The regulation was never changed, in part because of Kemp’s advocacy and growing friendship with Bush. Last week, the President named Kemp, a member of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission since 1987, to chair the civil-rights agency, which will handle job-discrimination cases brought under the new law. The disability-rights movement is distinctive, too, because it has never had a Martin Luther King or a Betty Friedan to lead it. Part of the reason is that there are hundreds of different disabilities. Nonetheless, disabled people, such as student protesters who last year gave Gallaudet University its first deaf president, I. King Jordan, are now adopting on a small scale the protest tactics of the civil-rights movement. Thirty members of American Disabled for Accessible Public Transportation, which uses tactics of civil disobedience, on Labor Day backed their wheelchairs against buses at the Los Angeles Greyhound terminal and disrupted busy holiday traffic in a protest for wheelchair lifts on buses. As the historic legislation was being debated, there was a curious twist. Watching with interest was a paraplegic visitor from Moscow, Ilya Zaslavski. He made history earlier this year when he won election to the new Soviet national legislature, the first person anywhere in the world to run as a disability candidate. Zaslavski watched the work of Congress and announced plans to introduce SDA—-a Soviets with Disabilities Act. INSERTED TEXT BOX: THE COST FACTOR Businesses are concerned about the costs imposed by the civil-rights bill: BUILDINGS: The cost of making accessible new buildings and those existing structures that are undergoing major renovations runs between 0 and 1 percent of building costs. TRANSIT: Changes required of bus and transit systems to help the disabled over the next 20 years might cost several hundred million dollars. PHONES: It will cost $250 million to $300 million a year to hire operators to work relay systems so deaf people can communicate with those who can hear, according to federal and AT&T estimates. INSERT: PHOTO (Roberta Barnes -- San Antonio Light): A line of people in wheelchairs diagonally crosses the picture. In the front Lonnie Smith Archuleta with his buff physique, in a T-Shirt with a medal-like imprint on the front, wheels his sports chair. Behind him a slight woman (Diane Coleman) with very thin arms and leg braces on her extended legs, rolls her power chair with a flag attached. She wears a straw hat, red ADAPT no steps T-shirt and long red skirt, across which she wears a sign reading "Gentler -n- kinder nation??" Behind her another woman in a power wheelchair (Linda Johnstone) wears a different red ADAPT T-shirt and a sign across her knees reads "We Need a Ride To Work." Behind her is another large woman in a wheelchair (Mary Kay Sanders) in dark sunglasses and a white dress; she carries a white parasol and appears to be chanting. Over the top of the parasol another sign (held by someone walking but obscured from view) written in calligraphy can be seen: "Access is a Civil Right." The line bends back and around out of view. Caption reads: Countless Frustrations. Angry protesters in San Antonio wheel through the streets to protest the lack of accessible public transportation.
ADAPT (601)
THE DENVER POST / NATIONAL Friday: September 9, 1989 [Headline] Senate approves bill to guarantee rights of disabled By Knight-Rldder News Service WASHINGTON — An estimated 43 million America with disabilities won a major victory last night as the Senate approved a landmark bill aimed at moving them into the nation’s social and economic mainstream. The Senate, on a 76-to-8 vote, passed legislation that would extend for the first time sweeping civil rights protections to persons with hearing impairments, epilepsy, AIDS and dozens of other physical and mental disabilities. The measure, which now goes to the House for expected approval, would ban discrimination in the hiring of the disabled; require businesses, shops and transit systems to make their facilities more accessible to the wheelchair-bound; and force telephone companies to provide special operators for the deaf. The bill was endorsed last month by President Bush, and administration lobbyists joined advocates for the disabled yesterday in opposing efforts to modify the legislation to meet business objections that it will be too costly to small firms. Business leaders warned that the measure could put some employers out of business if.they were required to make expensive structural changes in their buildings to accommodate disabled customers and workers. Critics also said the compliance provisions of the bill were vague and would result in years of litigation in federal courts over what constituted discrimination against the disabled. Major provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act would: * Prohibit employers from discriminating against qualified job applicants with disabilities. Changes to accommodate the disabled in the workplace would be required unless they would cause an “undue hardship," a term critics say is too vague. * Require new business establishments to be accessible to the disabled and require existing establishments be made accessible if the alterations are “readily achievable." * Require new buses and trains to be equipped with wheelchair lifts. * Require telephone companies to provide operators who could relay messages from the deaf to hearing individuals. Deaf persons can communicate with each other by telephone now by using Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TDDs), but can't communicate with people who don't have the TDDs. “We’re not asking for special treatment," said Pat Wright, government affairs director of the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund Inc. “Whether it’s putting a ramp in or providing a reasonable accommodation in employment, it makes you equal, not special." The bill, as originally written, would have exempted Congress from its provisions — but that exemption was deleted during debate. And in another concession to the intense interest of the disabled in the measure, the Senate for the first time allowed an interpreter using sign language to translate the televised proceedings of the floor debate so that the deaf and hearing impaired could follow the action. Extending civil rights protections to people with AIDS or the AIDS virus had been recommended by a Reagan administration commission on AIDS, but was opposed by President Reagan himself. Bush, however, has supported the protection. The bill bars employment discrimination against persons with AIDS but does permit employers to deny jobs if the employee poses a significant risk of transmitting the infection to others. However, homosexuals are not covered by the legislation. They can still be discriminated against solely on the basis of their sexuality. After an inquiry by Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C., sponsors agreed to delete transvestites from nation protections. Helms also raised questions about providing protection to schizophrenics, manic-depressives and psychotics, but their status remained intact in the measure.
ADAPT (635)
Different TIMES, September 24, 1990, p. 6 ADAPT fights for attendant services (Reprinted with permission from the Disability Rag; Box 145; Louisville, KY 40201.) [This story continues on 623 but the text is included here in full, for ease of reading.] “People with disabilities have the civil and human right to dependable attendant services that meet our daily needs in the location and manner of our choice." This simple declaration, made in Denver this summer, signaled the offensive being launched by ADAPT against “the nursing home lobby feeding off peoples' lives." It's ironic, says ADAPT member Mark Johnson. "Here we've finally got our rights now, in a law, and here you have more and more severely disabled people wanting to kill themselves—literally kill themselves—because they're being forced into nursing homes." “That Ken Bergstedt in Nevada [who petitioned the court in May to disconnect his respirator] is literally saying, “l'll end my life before I'll go in a nursing home," Johnson said. “What do you expect when people only have institutionalization to look forward to?" adds actress Nancy Becker Kennedy, one of the group that conducted a hunger strike in Los Angeles in July to protest the cut of California’s In Home Supportive Services. “Their attempts to stay in their homes are thwarted." lt’s the same with Georgia's highly publicized Larry McAfee, who was just put into a “group home," says ADAPT. Even after all the publicity, the State of Georgia will not put any money into funding attendant services in one's own home. And ADAPT is fed up. Recalling the phrase the transit industry used to argue that each city should decide whether or not to put lifts on buses, ADAPT calls the patchwork system of funding in-home services “the old ‘local option’ stuff all over again." “We're sick of it,"says Johnson. There needs to be a national commitment. In California, activists battled for several months to restore their In Home Support Services program which had been entirely cut from the state budget—and succeeded only in restoring it to its former level, which allows a disabled person to hire an attendant only at minimum wage and for no more than eight hours a day. People who need an attendant around the clock, like Ken Bergstedt, have little hope of avoiding a nursing home even in California, often cited as the state with the best attendant services program in the nation. Yet such battles sap the energy of disability activists for the larger fight for a national commitment. ADAPT has modified its former name, “American Disabled for Accessible Public Transportation" to “American Disabled for Attendant Programs Today" to reflect its new focus. ADAPT says attendant services are a right. The group wants the program it's calling for to make attendant services available "based on functional need" rather than “whether a person can work or not." They don't want "employability" to be a "condition for getting services. And they don't want eligibility based on any specific disability, as it is in many states now. They want it to be available “to people of all ages, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, with back-up emergency services."They stress they're not asking for “someone to hold your hand" but are speaking of the realistic needs of people like McAfee, Rick Tauscher, and Bergstedt who need an attendant available around the clock. They also say a program that allows the disabled person maximum control over an attendant is mandatory. Maybe a disabled person won’t want that control; maybe they'll want someone else to handle the paperwork and hiring decisions. That should be the disabled person‘s option, they say. There’s a quality-control issue here, they insist; they want to make sure disabled people get quality care but are allowed maximum say over personal services they receive—which is all too often not the case today as home "health" agencies muscle their way into the home "care" field. They‘re sick of the word “care.” They want a program that doesn’t keep anyone from services because they make too much money; they're willing, they say, to deal with a sliding scale for fees for such a program; but they want it available to anyone who needs it—regardless of income. It's a right, and cost is simply not an issue, they say. Keeping disabled people in institutions is ludicrously more expensive than providing in-home services in this country today. They blame that lack for the problems Larry MeAfee's constantly found himself in; they blame the nursing home industry for siphoning off the money that could go to fund such services. And they charge that home health agencies are nothing more than “the new nursing homes." Home health agencies “take people on Medicare and give them services and then bill them for $60 a pop," says ADAPT organizer Wade Blank. “Then when their Medicare coverage runs out after six months, they drop ‘em." The group says it’s also targeting “the big insurance companies like Prudential" and health maintenance organizations, who they say have a vested interest in keeping the system like it is. “We're saying that ethically and morally, nursing homes are not the place to go," says Blank. “When I see my severely disabled friends, living in their own homes, when l visit them in their apartments, listen with them to records or order in a pizza—and then I see my friends living in nursing homes, wasting away, waiting to die, I get very, very angry,” said Southern California ADAPT member Lilibeth Navarro. A survey of ADAPT members through their newsletter, Incitement, led them to decide to shift the focus to attendant services, said Navarro. And they're emphatic about the term too. “It’s not ‘attendant care‘ anymore," said Blank. “Whenever anybody said ‘care’ everybody booed,“ he added. It is fitting that ADAPT, whose original members came from Denver‘s Atlantis Community, will focus on attendant services. It was that need which led to the start of Atlantis, a “community” of disabled people and attendants. Atlantis “has a neat system,"agrees Navarro, noting that the 24-hour rotary attendant services allows any Atlantis person to have an attendant available whenever it's needed. “We could call an attendant at 11:30 p.m. and have somebody here," she said. “People who are having trouble with attendants can call and get an emergency back-up." Navarro, like others, said she knew of people “who endured abuse because they were afraid to lose their attendant"—"because it's so hard to find somebody, and nobody to turn to in an emergency situation." She related the story of a man whose attendant simply walked out on him and left him, unable even to reach a phone, for four days. “If his father hadn't checked on him, he'd be dead." “Only a national attendant program," she stressed, “will free us from emotional slavery Nancy Becker Kennedy agreed with Navarro. “The linchpin for independent living is in-home attendant services. It’s humane; it gives us a future." The group has sent a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Louis Sullivan demanding a meeting in Atlanta Oct. 1; they've given Sullivan until Aug. 15 to reply. ADAPT activists from around the nation will descend on Atlanta the first week of October to launch the fight. They’ll be calling for a quarter of the money now going to the nursing home industry to “go into a pot for attendant services." As usual, ADAPT doesn’t expect this to happen without a fight -- primarily from the “nursing home lobby.” “This October," says Blank, “we will serve notice on those groups who are the enemies of a national attendant services program." TEXT BOX: ADAPT will converge on Atlanta — home of Morehouse College, HHS Secretary Louis Sullivan’s alma mater — on Sept. 28 for week-long direct action protest and training. Nationally known organizer Shel Trapp will conduct the session Saturday, Sept. 29. For more information on travel and hotel arrangements, contact ADAPT in Denver at (303) 936-1110. — Reprinted with permission from the Disability Rag; Box 145; Louisville, KY 40201.
ADAPT (717)
Chicago Tribune, Thursday May 14, 1992 [This article continues in ADAPT 712 but the entire text has been included here for easier reading.] Photo by Eduardo Contreras: A man (Randy Horton) in a denim jacket kneels on the bottom step of an escalator with his arms spread from one handrail to the other. Someone stands on the escalator facing him. Behind him are a group of other protesters in wheelchairs filling the area. The group includes: Steve Verriden, San Antonio Funtes, Chris Hronis and others. Caption reads: Randy Horton (on knees) blocks John Meagher on a State of Illinois Center escalator. Title: Disabled protesters take hard line by Christine Hawes and Rob Kawath Rolling his wheelchair around the cavernous State of Illinois Center, shouting for his rights, Ken Heard recalled how he used to spend his days in a Syracuse, N.Y., nursing home where doctors controlled his life. They would tell him when he could get up in the morning, when he could go to sleep, what he could eat. They would feed him pills, but they wouldn’t tell him what they were for. It was as if he had no mind of his own. “l saw people tied down in their beds, said Heard, who has severe cerebral palsy. "And I saw people die in there." It took some time, a marriage that got him out of the nursing home and a raging desire for independence, but today Heard has regained the power to think for himself. He now earns his own income, rents and fumishes his own apartment and even takes vacations in Las Vegas. His joumey to self-sufficiency began when he heard about an activist group now called American Disabled for Attendant Programs Today. On Wednesday, about 200 ADAPT protesters in wheelchairs disrupted operations at the State of Illinois Center, 100 W. Randolph St., blocking exits and occasionally fighting with building patrons and workers as police stood by, arresting no one. Elaborate security measures the state had put in place Monday to keep the 16-floor, 3,000-employee building functioning broke down while state and Chicago police squabbled over who was responsible for arresting protesters deemed to have gone too far. But the scene of disabled men and women dragging themselves up escalators, surging into the building lobby and clutching the legs of people trying to walk past is just another picture in the well-publicized story of a group of vociferous activists savvy in street action. “One of the strongest points of their civil disobedience is making themselves look as pathetic as possible,” said one Chicago-area official at an agency that has been a target of ADAPT. The official, who asked that his name be withheld, said, “They are excellent media users, and they are very successful at putting spotlights on issues that most people probably wouldn’t normally pay attention to.” ADAPT has taken its dedication to a fever pitch, too fevered for some, and like many new protest `groups`—including the AIDS Coalition To Unleash Power (ACT -UP) for gay rights, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) for animal rights and Earth First for the ecology—is using dramatic, sensational tactics for their cause, to allow any nursing home residents the ability to live on their own. And though some may question their efforts, none can doubt they have impact. One woman who said she was grabbed, tripped and bitten during Wednesday’s melee confessed a few hours later, “I can’t help but feel guilty.” During Heard’s 10-year stay in the nursing home, he met some ADAPT members from Denver and listened to them tell of how they took sledgehammers to Denver's street curbs as a way of objecting to inaccessible sidewalks. Now Heard is a political organizer for ADAPT, in town with 350 other protesters. And though members are no longer taking sledgehammers to cement, they are steering wheelchairs into intersections, chaining themselves to buildings and crawling along dirty streets to get over curbs too high for wheelchairs. For the past two years, ADAPT has been staging demonstrations every six months in support of reallocating one-fourth of the country’s Medicaid funds that now go to nursing homes to in-home health care, and to make it easier for disabled people like Heard to escape their “prisons.” This week in Chicago, protests have played out at the quarters of everyone ADAPT perceives as the health-care power brokers: the federal Department of Health and Human Services, the American Medical Association and the offices of Gov. Jim Edgar. ADAPT claims that having personal, in-home attendants for the disabled costs $900 a month less in state funds than keeping them in nursing homes and other institutions. Illinois officials say the difference is only $600. But aside from financial concerns, ADAPT members say they’re fighting against inhumane restraint and abuse in nursing homes. Their strategy is to make the able-bodied feel as uncomfortable and limited as they themselves do—and to grab as much media time as possible. Television cameras were there Wednesday when bands of wheelchair users mobbed workers trying to use an escalator in the State of Illinois Center. And they were there Tuesday when protesters crawled out of their wheelchairs, across Grand Avenue and over foot-high curbs outside of the American Medical Association’s national headquarters. “This makes us visible," said Jean Stewart, a 42-year-old novelist from New York, who has used a wheelchair since she lost her hip muscle because of a tumor about 17 years ago. “And it enables us to get our message across. It’s not a publicity stunt, it’s education.” The group’s history is rife with attention-grabbing acts of protest after talks with officials were unsuccessful and full of what they feel is noteworthy success. The end result of the Denver protests, said Wade Blank, a founding member of the group, was one of the most accessible cities for disabled people in this country. Three years ago, a handful of ADAPT members were arrested for blocking a Chicago Transit Authority bus with their motorized wheelchairs. But two results of those efforts, they feel, were CTA purchase of buses with wheelchair lifts and even the passage of the federal Americans with Disabilities Act. ADAPT members say they are disrupting business as usual because they are shut out of offices where politicians and association presidents could be sitting down to discuss the issue. And they are trapping members of the public to demonstrate how they feel trapped and restrained. “For so long the issues surrounding disability have remained invisible,” said Stephanie Thomas, who lost her ability to walk when she was run over by a tractor 17 years ago. “So we have to do some extraordinary things to make people pay attention.” Wednesday’s protest, which came after U.S. District Judge Milton Shadur refused to order a lessening of security measures at the state’s Chicago headquarters, left police and Department of Central Management Services security officers snapping only at each other, even after the protest turned ugly. “I have to get to an appointment!" yelled one middle-age man as he wrestled on the ground with two protesters who had grabbed his legs and, in the process, had been pulled out of their wheelchairs. “This is what it feels like to be trapped in a nursing home!” yelled one protester. The man finally struggled free and hustled out of the building while Chicago and Central Management Services police watched from only a few feet away. “We’re sorely disappointed with the Chicago Police Department,” said Central Management Services Director Stephen Schnorf. “Certainly they provided better protection to the other buildings where there were protests this week.” But Chicago Police Cmdr. Michael Malone said the state was in control and his officers were just there to back them up. He said the state was misrepresenting the agreement between the two departments. And all that consternation was caused by a group that claims to be loosely organized and barely funded ADAPT, which has about 5,000 members nationwide, has very little formal correspondence, aside from a newspaper called Incitement and a rare memo, Blank said members keep in touch through word of mouth more than anything, and most of them support their travels through small fundraisers. But though the group says most of its day-to-day procedures are hardly sophisticated, ADAPT leaders are extremely skilled in using the media, say some who have watched the group’s protests first-hand. Sonya Snyder, public relations director at a Florida hotel where ADAPT demonstrated against the American Health Care Association last October, said the protesters only became rambunctious when television cameras appeared. “For most of the time, the police and the protesters would share sandwiches,” Snyder said. “But when the media came, down went the sandwiches and up went the protest.” And Janice Wolfe, a spokeswoman for the health care association, said the group’s efforts are “frustrating and misdirected. Their efforts could be better spent on individuals who are in power to do something.” ADAPT members view their protests as grand displays of strength, not pitiful appeals. They speak of their demonstration plans as though they are plotting battle strategy, using words like “identified enemy,” “privileged information” and "top secret." They pattern their protests after the civil rights demonstrations of the 1960s and compare themselves to the black leaders of that era “This is just like Martin Luther King,” ADAPT member Bernard Baker from Atlanta “We’re fired up, and we can’t take it anymore."