- FotogroottesVierkant
Miniatuurafbeelding
XXS - Zeer klein
XS - extra klein
S - klein
M - medium
✔ L - groot - TaalAfrikaans 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©
Startpagina / Albums / Labels President George HW Bush
+ civil rights 6
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 (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 (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 (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.