- Ngôn ngữAfrikaans 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©
Trang chủ / Đề mục / Thẻ President George HW Bush 24
Ngày gởi hình
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 (484)
METRO Magazine March/April 1989 pp.18 - 21 Court Rules On Wheelchair Accessibility U.S. Court of Appeals orders that all new transit buses be wheelchair lift-equipped and paratransit service provided. by Jason Knott (This story continues through 484, 471, 470, 465, and 466. However, the entire text of the story is included here for ease of reading.) DRAWING: A large balance scale with a bowl hanging from each side of the balance. One bowl has the acronym APTA in it, the other has ADAPT. QUOTE below the picture: “I don’t think the government should mandate installation of lifts. It can become expensive for the smaller transit properties." —Davis There are more than 40 million disabled Americans and an estimated 67 percent of them are unemployed, according to the National Easter Seal Society. Meanwhile, a recent Harris poll revealed that three out of every 10 disabled persons say they cannot work because of a lack of accessible transportation. Moreover, the same poll shows that 49 percent of the disabled believe their mobility is limited because of transportation barriers. These statistics confirm that public transit accessibility is an important ingredient to mainstreaming the handicapped into society. On the flip side of the coin are the public transit authorities who are in the business of transporting ambulatory, as well as handicapped, persons in the most economical method possible. It would seem that the handicapped, who depend on public transit, would be natural constituents of transit agencies; however, the two groups have been at odds for years, grappling with each other over the accessibility of service. In particular one handicapped rights group — ADAPT (Americans Disabled for Accessible Public Transit) — has been fighting with public transit across the nation. ADAPT wants every fixed route transit bus equipped with a wheelchair lift. In order to express its point, the group conducts disruptive protests at conferences held by the American Public Transit Association (APTA). (See September/October 1988 METRO Magazine, “When Rights Clash," page 79) Today, disabled Americans can chalk up a victory in their constant battle for a broader distribution of handicapped-accessible transit service. On February 13, a federal appeals court ordered the U.S. Department of Transportation to require transit authorities to equip all newly purchased buses with wheelchair lifts. The 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia also determined the 3 percent cap placed on transit agencies for handicapped expenditures was too low in the case entitled “ADAPT vs. Burnley." Wade Blank. director of ADAPT, applauded the court decision, saying the ruling is significant in the sense it is "evolutionary." Blank said, "We are now getting back to where we were in 1978. When we filed originally, we targeted the 3 percent cap. We decided to broaden the case because the climate in the country has changed. We talked with our attorneys and they broadened it to include the original intent of Section 504, and to really challenge the 1980 case that APTA brought. We are victorious because of a major mood change in the country regarding handicap accessibility." Blank cited two other recent rulings in Detroit and Chicago favoring handicapped accessibility. The Philadelphia ruling is in conflict with APTA's official policy, which was spelled out in a position paper reissued in October 1988. The association favors the local-option approach by which each local transit authority determines its own handicapped transportation policy. APTA's Board of Directors recently rejected a similar proposal calling for all new transit buses to be lift-equipped, according to Albert Engelken, deputy executive director. In other words, APTA believes that each local transit authority should create its own balance between demand response - or dial-a-ride — service, and fixed route accessibility. “It is very important that people realize that APTA is not against wheelchairs on transit buses," said Engelken, “rather, we are for local decision. The board of directors unanimously supports this approach. Every transit system makes their decision after in-depth consultation with the local disabled community. They are not making their decisions blindly." What next? The Department of Transportation is currently exploring its options, which include seeking a rehearing by the appeals court, appealing the-decision to the U.S. Supreme Court, or accepting the ruling. Michael Jacobson, spokesman for the DOT, could not give an estimate on when a decision might be made. An appeal is possible despite President Bush's recent campaign commitment to handicapped programs. Whether the decision will affect bus procurements that are currently - underway is unclear. Jack R. Gilstrap, APTA's executive vice president, issued the following statement concerning the ruling: “Because of the cost impact of the decision which requires lifts on all new buses plus paratransit service, and because it is inconsistent with other court decisions which create conflicting obligations on the part of the DOT and local public transit systems, APTA is urging DOT to challenge the decision." “Obviously this decision is extremely important," said Charles Cowie, national sales manager for Mobile Tech Corporation, a Hutchinson, Kansas-based manufacturer of wheelchair lifts for transit buses. “The objective is to make accessibility and mobility easier for the disabled, but to some, the decision favors a sector of the populous that is not altogether popular." “In a philosophical sense, the ruling is great," said Bill Hinze, National Sales Manager for Ricon, a dedicated lift manufacturer in Sun Valley, Calif. “It’s like a mandate for racial integration — it should have been done years ago." However, Hinze indicated he is still an advocate of demand response systems. “I don't think the government should mandate installation of lifts," said Bob Davis, vice president of Bus Manufacturing USA, a Goleta, Calif.-based distributor of semi-automatic lifts. “It can become expensive for the smaller transit agencies." The court also ruled that the current 3 percent cap on handicapped spending was insufficient; however, many agencies were already spending a higher percentage. In fact, in California and state law already requires all newly purchased transit buses to be equipped with wheelchair lifts. “Other states were already adhering to a similar policy, although it is not written in law," said Don Smith, director of marketing for Lift-U, Inc. in Escalon, Calif. According to Engelken of APTA, an average of 6 percent of transit expenditures are directed toward improving handicapped transportation already — double the required limit. Moreover, an APTA survey indicates that 31 percent of all transit vehicles are lift equipped, with the number steadily rising. The court decision comes in the wake of several different movements toward the improvement of handicapped accessibility to public transit. [Subheading] Project ACTION As part of the APTA’s Elderly and Disabled Task Force, a three-year Congressional program called “Project ACTION" (Accessible Community Transportation In Our Nation) will soon establish six demonstration sites nationwide to study handicapped transit accessibility. The National Easter Seal Society is conducting the three-year, $3 million undertaking. Congress has earmarked $1 million in fiscal year 1988 UMTA research and technical assistance funds to initiate the project, and an additional $1.35 million in fiscal year 1989. Project ACTION is designed to improve access to transit services for the handicapped. It will involve national and local organizations representing public transit operators, the transit industry, and people with disabilities in the development of a cooperative model program promoting greater access to transportation. Project ACTION is the result of a mandate from Congress to find ways to better accommodate the transportation needs of people with disabilities. The program will focus on five key concerns of people with disabilities and local transit operators seeking to improve transit: * Identifying persons with disabilities in the community. * Developing effective outreach and marketing strategies. * Developing training programs for transit riders. * Developing assistive programs for people with disabilities. * Applying appropriate technology to solve critical barriers to transportation and accessibility. “APTA’s task force is examining numerous areas to improve handicapped transportation," said Engelken. “We are looking at how to improve the marketing of service and we are struggling with the wrenching problem that exists in that area. "We have to make sure that people are riding the buses,” added Engelken. “If we don't, then the federal and state government are going to say that transit agencies are spending their money unwisely.” [Subheading] Operating costs The court decision also comes at a time when some transit agencies are lowering their wheelchair lift operating costs. In fact, figures released by ADAPT, claim that Seattle Metro operating costs were $3.13 per lift in 1987, with a reliability rate of more than 98 percent. In comparison, the Bay Area Regional Transit Association cited operating costs of $118.55 per trip for wheelchair lift-equipped transit buses among the several different transit authorities operating in the region. This disparity is due to widely different methodologies for calculating costs, a condition that has led to an absence of reliable nation-wide data. Tim Cook, director for the National Disabilities Action Center in Washington, D.C. and the attorney representing ADAPT in court, said, “I’m not sure accurate figures exist because it varies from system to system. National figures are meaningless because many systems haven't made a decision to make a commitment to accessibility." “Every property has it differently organized. Some agencies will designate one mechanic to maintain 75 to 100 lifts," said Smith of Lift-U, “But it really depends on how committed the maintenance director or general manager is to wheelchair lifts." [Subheading] Technology Mobile Tech and Lift-U manufacture electro-hydraulic passive wheelchair lifts for the transit industry. These lifts do not require the driver to leave his seat to operate the device. Ricon is a leading manufacturer of dedicated lifts, which are common on paratransit vehicles. These lifts are ideal for the handicapped, but cannot be used by ambulatory passengers. The lift does not utilize hydraulics. Another lift on the market is the AMF Hubmatik swivel-lift manufactured in West Germany. The lift is marketed in the U.S. by Bus Manufacturing USA and Ortho Safe Systems in Trenton, N.J. The semi-automatic, electro-hydraulic lift requires the driver to swivel the unit out the door for boarding and departure. It is currently in use by Sun Line Transit Agency in Thousand Palms, Calif. Due to constant R & D by the manufacturers, lift technology is dynamically improving. According to Smith, future innovations in passive lift technology will include state-of-the-art circuit boards, LED's and microchips. Cowie of Mobile-Tech predicted a 180 degree turn in technology within the next two years. Hinze indicated his company is developing a lift that can be utilized by both handicapped and ambulatory passengers and reduce maintenance costs by up to 10 percent. The court ruling does not touch upon rail accessibility at all. Installation of wayside wheelchair lifts for rail systems has not been as active as bus development. According to Smith, some transit agencies have requested lifts be designed for installation on the railcars themselves; however, because of the small demand, this is not profitable for passive lift manufacturers. More R & D is necessary on the shock and vibration of railcars to produce a passive lift that can withstand that environment. However, San Diego Trolley has been using on-board lifts for three years, and recently ordered 41 more units according to Hinze of Ricon. This onboard lift eliminates the problem of railcar operators “spotting” their stops for wayside lift access. The ruling could also mean increased specification of wheelchair restraint systems such as the one manufactured by Q'Straint in Buffalo, N.Y. The system consists of four stainless steel floor plates mounted flush with the floor. Four belts, two in front and two in the rear, and a shoulder harness and lap belt secure the rider. [Subheading] Solving the problem Despite the jubilation one might expect among wheelchair manufacturers, many seem to believe a mixture of demand response service along with fixed route wheelchair service is the ultimate solution to transporting the disabled and elderly. "The degree of demand response versus fixed route service should be a local decision," Cowie said. “It is important to mainstream the handicapped in the bigger cities through fixed route service; however, demand response is good in rural areas." These thoughts were echoed somewhat by Smith, who is a member of APTA’s Elderly and Disabled Services Task Force. "There should definitely be a mixture of services," he said. “[The government] can't dictate how every community should handle this problem. Some communities have spent a lot of money of their dial-a-ride service. You need to have a local option. “Another solution," continues Smith, "might be to make fixed route service fully accessible and let another organization — outside the realm of public transit — take care of special needs or demand response service." He believes the transportation problems of the elderly and the disabled should be handled separately. the end of article BOXED TEXT next to main article: [Heading] The Long Road To Wheelchair Accessibility A federal appeals court has ordered the U.S. Department of Transportation to require transit authorities to equip new buses with wheelchair lifts, and provide public transport for riders unable to use lift-equipped buses. Attorneys who brought the lawsuit called it the most important decision ever handed down for handicapped people needing public transportation. The decision, in the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals was, 2-1. “We conclude that ordering that newly purchased buses be accessible to the mobility disabled does not exact a fundamental alteration to the nature of mass transportation," Judge Carol Mansmann wrote in the majority opinion. “Also, by requiring that newly purchased buses be accessible, we are not imposing undue financial or administrative burdens on the local transit authorities." In the dissenting opinion, Judge Morton I. Greenberg said the section requiring new buses to be accessible was not meant to apply to transit systems choosing a paratransit system. Timothy M. Cook, director of the National Disability Action Center, argued the case before the appeals court and called the decision, “a major, major victory for the handicapped community. We can't say enough positive things about it.” Cook expressed hope that the ruling would not be appealed in light of President Bush's recent comments about his desire to bring the handicapped into the mainstream. The Transportation Department had appealed an earlier decision by U.S. District Judge Marvin Katz in Philadelphia that canceled a 1986 department regulation calling for mass-transit authorities to spend up to 3 percent of their operating budgets on providing services for the handicapped. In his decision, Katz called the 3 percent requirement unreasonable, but ruled the department must resolve differences between equality for the handicapped and cost efficiency. Americans Disabled for Accessible Public Transportation (ADAPT) appealed Katz's simultaneous ruling that upheld the right of transit authorities to decide whether to fit vehicles for the handicapped or provide other services. The appeals court ruling affirmed Katz's decision in favor of dropping the 3 percent provision, but it reversed his other decision by ordering transit authorities to equip new buses with chair lifts or other accommodations for the handicapped.
ADAPT (530)
Different TIMES THE NEWSPAPER DEDICATED TO THE PROPOSITION THAT ALL PERSONS ARE CREATED DIFFERENT, BUT EQUAL $125 Vol. IV, No.4 April, 1990 Protesters disable capitol Photo (World Wide Photos): Three protesters in wheelchairs sit in front of the Capitiol building beside the crowd. One sits, back to the camera, Walter Hart faces the camera with a bandanna and dark glasses, and Joe Carle sits sideways. Behind them in the far distance is the dome of the Capitol and directly behind them between the dome and the group is the ADAPT flag (an American flag with the stars arranged in the access symbol.) Caption reads: About 1500 persons of disability rallied for protest outside capitol in Washington, D.C. last month. STORY 1: by Vonne Worth Protest marches last month may influence passage of a strong Americans with Disabilities Act soon. 1500 join in Washington, DC demonstrations to pass ADA in House On March 12, Americans with Disabilities for Accessible Public Transportation (ADAPT) marched from the White House to the Capitol Building, said Mike Auberger, an organizer with ADAPT. About 1500 people from all over the country with many different disabilities took part, he said. At the White House, a spokesperson "reaffirmed President Bush's position that he wanted to see the Senate version of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) passed intact," Auberger said. The ADA is a civil rights act for persons of disability which prohibits discrimination in employment, transportation, public services, public accommodations, and telecommunications. It has passed the Senate and is now in the House of Representatives, where some business interests are lobbying heavily against it. ADAPT was demonstrating to work for passage of the ADA, according to Auberger. After the march to the capitol, several speakers talked to the crowd. They included Rep. Patricia Schroeder (D-Colo.); Rep. Major Owens (D-N.Y.), one of the sponsors of the ADA; Justin Dart, of the Congressional Task Force on Rights and Empowerment of Americans with Disabilities; Jim Brady, former President Reagan's press secretary; Auberger, and others. Then there was a crawl up the steps of the capitol. "The reason for the crawl was to let everybody in the House know that we're not going to let any obstacle stop us from having the ADA passed," Auberger said. “It wasn't to gain sympathy or to gain votes." ADAPT protesters marched to the rotunda the following day, March 13, and took over the rotunda. 104 of them were arrested. March l4, ADAPT demonstrators went to the Sam Rayburn Building. “We took over [Rep.] Bud Schuster's (R-Pa.) office who's the minority chairman of the Transportation Committee," Auberger said. “He's been the one within the Transportation Committee who's tried to add amendments like ‘Cities under 200,000 would not have to lift-equip their vehicles." “Also he was going after inclement weather—if you had too much snow, like we have here in Denver, you wouldn't have to have lift-equipped vehicles even though we already do. We have an average of 60 inches of snow a year," Auberger related. “Most of those amendments were defeated," Auberger added. “At the same time, we met with Hamilton Fish, (R-NY) who is the minority chairman of the Judiciary Committee," Auberger said. The ADA is undergoing constant attempts to weaken the remedy section; however, Fish didn't seem aware of this, according to Auberger. But Fish sat down in his office with about 30 disabled people and "talked with us probably for about a half hour and made a commitment that he would do everything within his position as minority leader of that Committee to see that there isn't any weakening and we were also at the Judiciary Committee Offices and we were working on setting up a meeting with Attorney General Thornburgh because he was the one who had been raising the issue of weakening the remedies section," Auberger said. “They were working on that and they tried to stall so at about seven o'clock, they were closing the capitol, we all refused to leave from Bud Schuster's office and from the Judiciary Committee and there were 60 people arrested in those offices and we got out about one o'clock that night," Auberger related. He said the demonstrations seemed to work. “lt clearly had this real effect on the hill when you went up there." PHOTO (by Tom Olin): Looking from over the shoulders and head of a woman (Cassie James) on the floor sitting between the back of a power wheelchair and a desk, she is holding onto the desk with her left arm and is scrunched in. Over her head on the other side of the room 3 other people people with disabilities out of their wheelchairs (Eric von Schmeterling, Carol Marfisi and Kent Killam) are sitting on the floor. Behind them is a desk and the wall with photos on it, Congressional meomentos. Caption reads: Demonstrators sit in Rep. Bud Schuster’s (R-Pa.) office to protest his sponsorship of amendments that would have substantially weakened ADA sections dealing with transportation. All of a sudden, these representatives knew the ADA was an issue and that disabled people were here and they [the congresspersons] had that look of ‘Are you one of them that are raising all the hell?’ They had a whole different understanding of disability—that you need to see a different side of disabled people, not the side that you want to think of as poor and helpless. They clearly were educated very fast over those two days,” Auberger commented. “Now as a result of that demonstration and one in Philadelphia, the Department of Transportation (DOT) has rewritten the final regs to require all mainline systems to be lift-equipped into the future and to provide paratransit for those people who cannot get to the bus stop. These are new regs that have 90-day comment periods—the transit industry is not going" to oppose them,” he explained. Also, ADA should come to the House for a vote soon. It will be brought the the floor within 60 days and there is a lot of support for the bill, said Charles Siegal, from Speaker Foley’s press secretary’s office. ADA went through the Energy Committee without any amendments and no changes from the Senate version, Auberger indicated. “That happened while we were there and I'm sure that's why it happened that way," he said. STORY 2: by Vonne Worth A protest in Washington, D.C. by a disability group has resulted in the filing of a half-million-dollarlawsuit against the District of Columbia Court System. Americans with Disabilities for Accessible Public Transportation (ADAPT), many in wheelchairs, crawled up the stairs to the nation ’s capitol and took over the rotunda on March 13. They demanded to talk to Speaker of the House Tom Foley (D-Wash.) and Minority Leader of the House Robert Michel (R-Ill.) about passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). “He [Foley] was not happy to come to meet with us" said Mike Auberger, organizer with ADAPT. "He didn't seem to have met with a lot of disability groups, he didn't quite know how to respond to that many disabled people and he talked about him pushing and speeding up the process and he tried to explain ‘we don’t understand the legislative process,’ and we said, ‘of course, we do, we're not totally stupid, just disabled.” “And Michel pretty much came out with the same sentiment and we let him know that he and other Republicans could be targets of the demonstration later in the week simply because they put more and more and more weakening amendments into the ADA,” Auberger added. The talk seemed to break down and the Capitol Police were called. “They were continuing to speak, we heard enough and so we were pretty much just chanting at that point ‘ADA now, now less,"' Auberger said. “At the point where we decided people could get arrested, all went to the center of the rotunda and circled there and several of us chained ourselves together with kryptonite locks," Auberger related. Within 15 minutes, 104 people, most of them in wheelchairs, were arrested, Auberger indicated. Then the police couldn’t cut through the locks. “They tried bolt cutters, they tried two different types of bolt cutters, they didn't work, so they had to bring in a hydraulic bolt cutter and it finally did work on the first one, but it broke on the second one, so they finally tried the bolt cutters again and they went through this whole process of getting these 104 people who were chanting in the middle of the rotunda ‘ADA now’ out," Auberger said. “It took about two and a half hours to get everybody out of the building since they only used one elevator which could take only one person at a time," Auberger explained. “At 1:28 Eastern time, they had to close the capitol to the public so that they could ‘get rid of all those rowdy disabled people." “They didn't have lift-equipped vehicles, so they had to lift everybody into vans and it took four or five officers to lift each chair into a van and they drive off with two chairs to a van to the police station, and then it took four or five more officers" to get them off, Auberger said. “They took everybody to police headquarters where they booked everybody and released them the next moming about one o'clock," Auberger related. It took 12 hours for the police to book 104 people. “This was a major process, them getting everybody out there," Auberger said, “lt was just a nightmare for them." The next afternoon, they went to the Sam Rayburn Building and took over offices of the congressmen on the Transportation and Judiciary Committees. About 60 people were arrested that day. The next two days were spent in court, Auberger said. “The majority of people ended up paying $10 in court costs and suspended sentences and that was pretty much it,” Auberger said. “There were five people who were given probation in their own cities from six months to a year just for being, I would suspect, ringleaders," he said. The judge in the case was disabled. “He had an arm that he couldn’t use at all,” Auberger said. Auberger said he felt the judge wasn’t sympathetic to the case. “His position was ‘You write your congressman if you want to change things,”’ Auberger said. “We all did that, clearly. It didn’t do a damn bit of good, but he wasn’t going to hear that. He pretty much gave out fines, four of them were for $100 and ten day suspended sentences and mine was $500 and a 20 day suspended sentence plus I have the longest, a year probation in-my city.” Auberger said it was rare for courts to send probation orders back to one’s home city. “Ironically, what was so incredible was the next day, when we went to file our probation papers, the building we were supposed to file our probation papers in was inaccessible,” Auberger said. “We come back to the courthouse, we talked to our attomey; unfortunately, the judge wasn’t around.” “They [had] put us all on probation and then we couldn’t get into the building to do the probation. Well, then, they told us, ‘Do it out in the hall by the courtroom.’.No. That's unacceptable. If everybody else goes into the building, we should be able to as well.” “So we’ve now filed a half a million dollar lawsuit against the District of Columbia Court System for denying us our civil rights.” About 250 people took part in the action. Copyright 1990, Different TIMES
ADAPT (135)
The Denver Post 7/8/90 [This article continues in ADAPT 138, but the entire story has been included here for easier reading] Perspective Access for the disabled: Cost vs. benefit Photo by RTD staff: A smiling African American man in a manual wheelchair, wearing a beret and with a sports coat over his lap is being helped to board a city bus by the driver, who is behind him. In front of the lift a woman stands waiting to board. Caption reads: A LIFT: The President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities was given a demonstration of an RTD lift during its 1987 convention which was held in Denver. By Al Knight Denver Post Perspective Editor Now, while the Americans with Disabilities Act is awaiting President Bush’s signature, would be a good time to reflect on what has been learned by this city's experience in attempting to provide full wheelchair access to public transportation. Assuming the president signs the bill as he says he will, public transit systems all over America will have to begin purchasing new buses equipped with wheelchair lifts, as well instituting a variety of other steps designed to enlarge employment opportunities for the disabled, improve services in state and local government, enlarge public accommodations, and create a national telecommunication relay service to aid the blind and deaf. Critics of the bill have argued that the nation is embarking upon a program without the vaguest clue of what its ultimate cost will be. In many ways, the dispute is a duplication of what took place in Denver in the early 1980s as the Regional Transportation District developed its policy on how rapidly to expand wheelchair access. There were a number of protests in which disabled residents in wheelchairs disrupted RTD service and were arrested. The protests were particularly disturbing for all concerned — RTD, the drivers and the police. The sight of an abled-bodied police officer toting away a wheelchair-bound citizen is not the stuff for law enforcement scrapbooks, nor is it the kind of publicity designed to attract bus riders generally. In 1982, the RTD board, which then was an appointed body, voted against equipping 89 new buses with special lifts capable of handling wheelchair passengers. That vote set off the protests. An elected board took over in 1983 and one of its first acts was to reverse that vote and authorize the purchase of the lifts at a cost of well over $1 million. At the same time RTD struggled with the issue of whether to retrofit existing buses with lifts, and in 1985 resolved it with a resolution that it would buy lifts for all new buses, but not pursue a retrofitting program. There had been a history of mechanical problems with some of the lifts, and on more than one occasion a lift would fail, dumping the wheelchair passenger in the process. In 1982, then Gov. Dick Lamm refused to go along with a proposal by the American Disabled for Accessible Public Transportation, which was demanding wheelchair access to “all U.S. public buses." Lamm suggested in a speech to the American Public Transit Association that such a policy might result in rides costing $600 each: “If America can't say no to a system that costs $600 per ride, we don't deserve to continue as a great nation.“ But as they say, that was then, this is now. Just last fall, RTD was awarded a special citation for having "the finest accessible bus service in the nation." The award came from the President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities. Indeed. it is beyond dispute that RTD has in some respects led the nation. Its experience in developing its current fleet of buses was the prime example used by congressional supporters of the Americans with Disabilities Act. In addition, it is a fact that RTD was the first agency to order its over-the-road buses equipped with lifts. Until RTD's first order, these larger vehicles had been built without lifts. The RTD program hasn’t been accomplished without significant expense. It has cost about $8 million for the lift equipment and millions more for parts, maintenance and training. But the latest figures show per-ride costs are far below the $600 figure mentioned by Lamm. The lifts cost about $13,000 a copy. Because the life of a bus normally is calculated at 12 years, this works out to a little more than $1,000 a bus per year. To this must be added the maintenance cost, which has been dropping each year. As recently as 1985 the cost of maintaining an individual lift was $1,798. This year the average is just over $500. Even without the retrofitting program rejected by the board in 1985, RTD has managed to increase greatly its percentage of lift-equipped buses. In 1985, only 54 percent of buses were so equipped. This year 81 percent are. In recent years, disabled ridership has gone up sharply. In 1982 it was just over 9,000 wheelchair boardings, but last year it reached an estimated 45,000. According to RTD figures, the per-ride cost may have reached $80 in 1984, but with the increase in ridership and the drop in maintenance cost, the cost per ride now has dropped to about $19 a ride, according to the latest calculations. What is not known is how many of Denver’s disabled community actually are served by the lifts. In the mid-1980s, it was estimated that only a few hundred wheelchair-bound residents were regular bus riders. Even as RTD has fitted new buses with the lifts, demands for its HandyRide service have continued to increase. This door-to-door service is available to both the elderly and the handicapped. Some of its wheelchair passengers could be served by regular buses, but many others are unable to get to the bus stop and therefore require the HandyRide service. Precise calculations aren’t available, but it is estimated the cost per ride for using the van service is about $50. Lamm, contacted this week, said he basically hasn’t changed his position on the issue. He said the $600 figure he used in 1982 was based on the experience of the St. Louis bus company. “To govern is to choose," he said, "and I don't believe this nation should make every bus wheelchair-accessible. Should the handicapped be provided transportation? Of course, but it should be provided in the most cost-effective way possible.” Lamm mentioned the expensive elevator system that is a part of the Washington, D.C., subway system as an example of a method that isn't cost-effective. The Denver experience does indicate that the costs of accommodating the wheelchair-bound citizen may not be an endlessly upward spiral. But the key indicator that needs watching is the number of passengers using the service. The taxpayers, the RTD board and staff members clearly have done their part. The wheelchair service is now available on nearly every bus, yet ridership has flattened out. The estimate of 45,000 wheelchair passengers for 1989 is just a few hundred higher than the 1986 level. More persons must be encouraged to use the service. Now that maintenance costs are down, the only way to decrease the still-considerate per-ride cost is to increase the number of passengers using the lifts. The most compelling case the disabled community can make for greater access is to demonstrate an even higher usage of the existing facilities. Highlighted Text: Even without the retrofitting program rejected by the board in 1985, RTD has managed to increase greatly its percentage of lift-equipped buses. In 1985, only 54 percent of buses were so equipped. This year 81 percent are. Photo by The Denver Post/Duane Howell: A slight woman in a wheelchair is being escorted out by two uniformed and one plainclothes police. She is telling one of the officers something and they are all listening with slight smiles on their faces. Behind this group a man in a wheelchair is following, escorted by another police officer and behind them three other policemen stand guard. Caption reads: PROTEST: An unidentified demonstrator at the Regional Transportation District office was escorted out during a 1982 protest over the purchase of new buses.
ADAPT (458)
This article is continued in photo 451, but the text of the entire article is included here for ease of reading. The Handicapped Coloradan May 1989 VOL. 11, NO. 11 Boxed text in masthead: If you use a wheelchair and ever tried — or wanted -- to board an accessible bus in Detroit between Nov. 10, 1984, and the present, you owe it to yourself to read Justin Ravitz‘s story on p. 3. Photo: Man, in a dark suit standing against a white background with his hands in his pockets. He has dark hair and large eye glasses, a firm thoughtful look on his face. Caption reads: Mayor Pena tells UMTA officials they have a “moral obligation" to put lifts on buses. [Headline] Court grants transit rehearing In the wake of an often ugly battle with police, hotel security guards and the courts in Reno, wheelchair activists are heading for Philadelphia where the U.S. Court of Appeals has agreed to vacate its Feb. 13 decision to require all new buses purchased with federal funds to be equipped with wheelchair lifts. The case will now be heard by the entire 13-member court rather than the three judges who originally handed down the decision on a 2-l vote. The rehearing was requested by the Department of Transportation and the Department of Justice. Six disabled leaders had met with President Bush in an attempt to persuade him to call off the appeal. Bush didn't give them an answer at the time, said Wade Blank, one of the founders of the radical American Disabled for Accessible Public Transit (ADAPT), "but it's obvious the President has no intention of taking our side." So when the court convenes at 10 a.m. May 15, scores of wheelchair demonstrators will be outside chanting, "We will ride," the battle-cry of the six-year old movement. At press time, demonstrators were planning on arriving in Philadelphia on May 12 and demonstrating in front of the Justice Department there, up to but not including being arrested. "That will come later," Blank said. On Saturday, demonstrators are expected to attempt to board city buses, crawling onto them if necessary, and to otherwise disrupt service until Philadelphia transit officials sign an agreement promising to provide accessible service. Then on Sunday, the day before court opens, demonstrators will don Revolutionary War uniforms and march from Independence Hall to the federal courthouse, led by fife and drum. The movement is at a crossroads, Blank said, pointing out that many of his fellow activists are afraid that the court will reverse its pro-accessibility vote when its decision is made known, 30 to 90 days from now. Many of those activists are reluctant to appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court if they lose in the Court of Appeals, arguing that the high court has a conservative majority, “We might have to wait 20 years before we get a liberal court," Blank said. "Better we find out where we stand with the court right now and then decide on a course of action." ADAPT has had plenty of experience with conservative judges in recent weeks, according to Blank, who said he broke down and cried at the treatment wheelchair defendants received in the Sparks courtroom of judge Don Gladstone. Gladstone told demonstrators that their mass arrests had "tarnished" their cause and suggested that the group needed "new leadership." Blank said Gladstone's courtroom was a zoo. "He locked the doors and screamed at us." Gladstone wasn't the only person in Reno and Sparks who was upset with ADAPT, which was there to protest at a regional meeting of the American Public Transit Association (APTA) as they have done in 16 other cities over the latter group's refusal to endorse mandatory accessibility for all transit systems in the country. The police weren’t very happy, either. Some 72 demonstrators were arrested during the 5-day-long protest, with about half of that number going to jail. City officials estimated that the protest cost local taxpayers at least $116,000. Police estimated their costs of controlling the group at $79,275, while the sheriff's department, which runs the Washoe County jail, placed its costs at about $34,164. Gladstone said municipal court costs will run about $3,000. But it wasn't just the money that bothered city and county officials. "While (the police) are out there handling these individuals and you cal 911, the response times change dramatically,” said Sparks Municipal Court judge Andy Cray. Police Lt. Tony Zamboni said, "We understand these people have certain rights, but they also don't have the right to obstruct other citizens." Sheriff Vince Swinney agreed with Zamboni and also seemed a bit miffed that the media were playing up the plight of the demonstrators. "Somebody should realize this is what these people want to do," he said. "if they were treated like royalty, they wouldn't be happy. And the media is playing it up 100 percent. I really think that we who have been here and will continue to be here deserve some credibility." ADAPT organizer Mike Auberger, 34, of Denver, said that the Washoe County jail was not prepared to deal with housing 30 disabled prisoners, although sheriffs department officials disagreed, saying that extra doctors and nurses were on duty. Twenty-two of the jailed demonstrators staged a hunger strike, including one woman who was warned by a doctor that she would ultimately go into seizures if she participated in the fast. Another demonstrator, Diane Coleman, an attorney from Los Angeles, was taken from the jail at 3 a.m. Tuesday morning when she started vomiting. Coleman was taken to the Washoe Medical Center where she was given liquids intravenously for dehydration. Headline for part 2 of article: Reno protest turns ugly as judge lectures ADAPT ”Get new leaders. ” Blank said that three or four demonstrators had to be hospitalized when they returned home because of inadequate care received at the jail. For example, Auberger was not allowed to empty his leg bag and he went into hyper reflex, according to Blank. “His blood pressure shot up to 300 and nearly blew his head off," Blank said. Unable to place a call to fellow ADAPT members in Sparks, Auberger was forced to call his parents in Indiana to see about getting help. Ultimately, Auberger had to bail himself out of jail in order to get medical treatment. “That's when the police began telling other jailed demonstrators that their leaders were bailing out on them," Blank said. Demonstrators also complained that the police in Reno and Sparks were rougher than the ones they had dealt with in other cities, pointing out that more of them were actually handcuffed than was usually the case. Most of the demonstrations took place outside the Nugget Casino and Hotel, which was serving as APTA's convention headquarters. Some 700 delegates were staying there. Demonstrators attempted to block all the entrances to the hotel to show APTA delegates what it is like not to have access to public institutions, buildings and buses. One demonstrator, Beverly Furnice, said her knee was broken when a Nugget security guard hit her leg as she was wheeling up to the door on the southeast side of the hotel. Nugget spokesperson Parley Johnson said he was sorry to hear about Furnice. “We made every possible effort to ensure the safety of all involved," he said. "However, if we have someone trying to get in, and we're trying to get the doors closed, what can I say? The person (trying to get in) is contributing to the problem. "We could not allow the group to come in and disrupt our business and cause problems with our customers. And we have every right to do this." Judge Gladstone several times commented on how well the hotel staff and police handled the situation. “He's just a front man for the casinos," Blank commented. On the other hand, demonstrators had nothing but praise for Reno's Citifare public transit system, which has already made a commitment toward a 100 percent lift-equipped bus system. All Citifare buses bought since 1984 have lifts, and the system expects its nonaccessible buses to be phased out by 1996. "We're not fighting Reno or any other city," Auberger said. “We're fighting APTA." Less than three weeks later, demonstrators were doing just that again, this time in Denver, where ADAPT was founded in 1983, Some 30 demonstrators were arrested as they protested outside the Radisson Hotel, where the Urban Mass Transit Association (UMTA) was holding a national transportation conference. The next day, April 25, 40 demonstrators, 30 of them in wheelchairs, were forcibly removed from the Federal Building at 9th and Stout by federal officers. Demonstrators were protesting word that the Department of Transportation, of which UMTA is part, had decided to appeal the Court of Appeals decision. "We are tried of winning lawsuits and never getting them implemented," said protester Maureen O'Rourke. UMTA‘s Alfred A. DelliBovi disagreed with the original court decision, saying his agency supports letting each transit provider decide how to handle disabled riders. Earlier Mayor Federico Pena met with ADAPT and reiterated his strong support for their goals, a statement he repeated when he met later with UMTA officials. Pena was responsible for forcing APTA officials to allow ADAPT to address its national convention in Denver in 1983. That is the only time ADAPT members have been allowed inside an APTA convention.
ADAPT (545)
Denver Post 3/13/90 Handicapped stage crawl-in protest up steps of Capitol Slow pace of access legislation attacked By the Los Angeles Times WASHINGTON — Crawling up the Capitol steps to dramatize the barriers confronting them, scores of disabled persons rallied yesterday to protest delays in congressional action on a Senate-passed bill to expand their access to jobs, transportation and public services. The legislation, endorsed by President Bush, has broad bipartisan backing but has been moving at glacial speed through four House committees since it was approved overwhelmingly by the Senate last September. When dozens left their wheelchairs to crawl to the Capitol entrance, spectators’ attention focused on 8-year-old Jennifer Keelan of Denver, who propelled herself to the top of the steep stone steps using only her knees and elbows. The demonstration at the West Front of the Capitol had some of the fervor of a civil rights rally of the 1960s as the demonstrators chanted slogans and sang songs to underscore their message to Congress. Rep. Pat Schroeder, D-Colo., told the crowd: “What we did for civil rights in the 1960s we forgot to do for people with disabilities." Justin Dart, chairman of the President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities. told the rally, “Two centuries is long enough for people with disabilities to wait before the constitutional promise of justice is kept.” “If we have to come back, perhaps we’ll simply stay until they pass (the bill),” said I. King Jordan, first deaf president of Gallaudet College for the deaf located nearby, hinting at a disabled camp-in on Capitol Hill. Organizers of the rally said disabled persons from 30 states, including many in wheelchairs, came to demand immediate action on the bill without any weakening amendments. Despite grumbling from rally goers that the Bush Administration and Democratic leaders were relaxing their efforts on behalf of the measure, key advocates predicted the House logjam will be broken in the next few weeks. Chairman Evan Kemp of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission denied any lack of enthusiasm by the White House. PHOTO (Associated Press): A young woman (Julie Farrar) bumps up the Capitol steps and watches as a young girl crawls (Jennifer Keelan) up the steps on her hands and knees beside her. They are about a half dozen steps from the top. A cameraman walks up the steps beside Jennifer and another camera person at the top of steps films as well. A half dozen people sit and stand watching the climb. In the background against the sky is the dome of the Capitol. Caption reads: UPHILL BATTLE: Jennifer Keelan, 8, of Denver, left, leads protesters on a crawl up the West Front of the U.S. Capitol.
ADAPT (552)
Los Angeles Times Tuesday March 13, 1990 Disabled Persons Rally, Crawl Up Capitol Steps Congress: Scores protest delays in passage of rights legislation. The logjam in the House is expected to break soon. By WILLIAM J. EATON Times Staff Writer WASHINGTON—-Crawling up the Capitol steps to dramatize the barriers confronting them, scores of disabled persons rallied Monday to protest delays in congressional action on a Senate-passed bill to expand their access to jobs, transportation and public services. The legislation, endorsed by President Bush, has broad bipartisan backing but has been moving at glacial speed through four House committees since it was approved overwhelmingly by the Senate last September. “Two centuries is long enough for people with disabilities to wait before the constitutional promise of justice is kept," Justin W. Dart Jr., chairman of the President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities, told the rally. “If we have to come back, perhaps we'll simply stay until they pass [the bill]," said I. King Jordan, first deaf president of Gallaudet college for the deaf, hinting at a Capitol Hill camp-in for the disabled. Organizers of the rally said disabled persons from 30 states, including many in wheelchairs, came to demand immediate action on the bill without any weakening amendments. At the close of the rally, when dozens left their wheelchairs to crawl to the Capitol entrance, spectators’ attention focused on 8-year-old Jennifer Keelan of Denver, who propelled herself to the top of the steep stone steps using only her knees and elbows. Nearby, sprawled on her back and inching ahead slowly, was Paulette Patterson, 33, of Chicago. “I want my civil rights," Patterson said. "I want to be treated like a human being." Despite grumbling from rally-goers that the Bush Administration and Democratic leaders were relaxing their efforts on behalf of the measure, key advocates predicted the House log-jam will be broken in the next few weeks. The House Energy and Commerce Committee is expected to approve its part of the legislation today, followed by similar action by the Public Works and Judiciary committees. Final House passage appears likely to occur by May. Ralph Neas, executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, said the unusual lobbying effort would provide a "final push" to the legislation, which he forecast would clear the House with no more than 100 votes against it. The demonstration at the West Front of the Capitol had some of the fervor of a civil rights rally of the 1960s as the demonstrators chanted slogans and sang songs to underscore their message to Congress. Rep. Patricia Schroeder (D-Colo.) made the comparison, telling the crowd; “What we did for civil rights in the l960s we forgot to do for people with disabilities." Another member of Congress, Rep. Major R. Owens (D-N.Y.), said there are still threats to passage of the bill from conservative lawmakers and powerful business interests who oppose the legislation's provisions on disabled access to transportation. “All the i’s have been dotted and all the t's have been crossed," Owens said. "There have been enough negotiations-delay is the real enemy." Speaking for the Bush Administration however, Chairman Evan J. Kemp Jr. of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission denied any lack of enthusiasm by the White House. Kemp, who uses a wheelchair, said: "This Administration is more for the bill today than it was 14 months ago.... We have solidarity. Solidarity made Poland free; It can make us free, too." But James Brady, former press secretary to President Ronald Reagan, expressed impatience with Congress’ rate of progress. “l hope these politicians are awake and listening. If not. we'll be back." said Brady, who was disabled when he was shot in the head during an attempt on Reagan's life. Meantime, Atty. Gen. Dick Thornburgh notified key members of the House that the Administration would seek a change in the Senate passed bill to make clear that disabled persons who are willfully discriminated against would not be entitled to monetary damages. The "clarifying amendment" will be introduced during the House Judiciary Committee's consideration of the bill this month, Thornburgh said, adding; "We will . . . continue to support expeditious passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act with this clarification." PHOTO: Looking down from the higher steps at a person crawling up the steps on their hands and knees. To this person's left side is part of another person climbing by sitting and to the right a pair of legs and shoes of another stair climber. Behind the person in the center, on steps closer to the base of the flight of steps are many more people just beginning the climb and still others standing and sitting at the bottom cheering them on. Part of the ADAPT flag is visible in the crowd. Caption reads: Difficult Climb. Scores of disabled people crawled up the steps of the U.S. Capitol, in a protest over delays in congressional action on a bill to expand their access to jobs, transportation and public services. Many of the demonstrators left their wheelchairs to dramatize the barriers they confront dally, organizers said.
ADAPT (537)
The Handicapped Coloradan Small Text Box: If you feel like spending a few days In Washington, D.C. this March, give Wade Blank or Mike Auberger a ring at (303) 936-1110. They've got a tour of the Capitol Building that most travel agencies don't offer. PHOTO (by Tom Olin): Joe Carle, Diane Coleman, Bob Kafka and Mark Johnson, all in wheelchairs and dressed in revolutionary garb lead a march under the leafy trees of Philadelphia's historic district. They have tri-cornered hats, jackets with fancy buttons, ruffled shirts, a fife and drum. Behind the front of the line Ann ___ is visible, as well as other marchers. Diane carries the ADAPT flag and Joe has another dark flag on a tall pole. Caption: Militants could seize capitol rotunda -- Dressed In Revolutionary War garb, several ADAPT members rolled toward the Liberty Bell while the U.S. Court of Appeals was ruling that disabled people have a right to public transit. Many of these same activists are heading for Washington, D.C. on Mar. 10, in an attempt to get Congress to pass the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1989. Protesters intend to leave their wheelchairs and crawl up the steps of the Capitol Building while Congress is in session. Article begins: ADAPT sets roll on D.C. To prod ADA passage Still a mile high following their victory in Atlanta last fall, disabled activists from across the country are planning on rolling on the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., to demand that lawmakers pass the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1989. The act, which grants sweeping civil rights to disabled people (much as the 1965 Civil Rights Act aided blacks), has passed the Senate but is currently bogged down in four House committees, and no one expects a vote earlier than Feb. 28 by the full House membership. Disabled militants, mostly members of the Denver-based American Disabled for Accessible Public Transit (ADAPT), are planning on arriving in Washington on March 10. "If the bill is still in committee at that time, we're going to treat it as if the bill is in trouble," said ADAPT founder Wade Blank, co-director of the Atlantis Community, a Denver independent living health care provider. Blank said that disabled lobbyists in Washington have warned ADAPT to avoid the confrontational politics that it has used in other cities while battling its arch-nemesis, the American Public Transit Association (APTA). The professional lobbyists said it is not advisable to upset Congress, according to Blank. That's too bad, Blank said, because "we're telling them right here and now that we're going in and kicking ass.” Blank expects several hundred will participate in the march on the capitol, with about 125 of the protesters prepared to leave their chairs and crawl upon the capitol steps while other militants sneak in and seize the rotunda itself. If all that works out, it could be ADAPT’s biggest action so far in its seven-year struggle to force transit companies to put a lift on every bus in the country. The federal government unofficially agreed to support that goal in a deal hammered out between representatives of ADAPT and President Bush in Atlanta last October. Part of that deal called upon the President to push for disabled rights in his State of the Union address, which he did, much to the satisfaction of ADAPT, which Blank described as being “very pleased” with Bush. “Now we're going to smoke out a few Democrats," he said. When the agreement was reached in Atlanta, two cities had already started the process of purchasing non-lift equipped buses. Since then Pittsburgh has reversed its position and agreed to buy only accessible buses, while Albuquerque refused to consider altering its plans. “They’ll go down in history as the last city in America to buy lift-less buses," Blank said. In the months since Atlanta, ADAPT has switched its attention to pushing for lifts on intercity coaches. To that end some 45 wheelchair demonstrators were in Dallas Jan. 21-24 to picket a joint meeting of the American Bus Association (ABA) and the United Bus Owners of America (UBOA). Greyhound, the largest intercity bus company, is headquartered in Dallas. Most of those demonstrators were participating in their first action, which Blank said proves that ADAPT is continuing to grow in strength and power. On the first day, pickets blocked the entrance to the conference hotel with relatively little fireworks. But on Monday, Jan. 22, the protesters hit the Greyhound depot where some 29 demonstrators were arrested for blocking buses. Twenty of those were first-time arrestees. Trial has been set for Feb. 12. On the third day, protesters stormed in the exposition hall and interrupted a trade show demonstrating the latest advances in bus design. Most of that design had nothing to do with helping wheelchair riders get on board, Blank said. UBOA president Wayne Smith, who has published articles in the New York Times arguing against the transit provisions of the ADA, decided not to call in the police, and for three hours militant wheelchair protesters engaged in debate with professional transit providers. “It was a very successful happening,” Blank said. He said he hoped that spirit would hold true for the Washington, D.C., action, where he expects to see more first-time protesters. A seminar on ADAPT’S history and tactics is set for Mar. 10 at the Comfort Inn on H Street in northwestern Washington, where neophyte activists are urged to go even if they are planning to stay elsewhere during the action. Although the ADA covers all disabilities, this action, called the “Wheels of Justice," will center on the rights of the mobility-impaired. Blank said he tried to coordinate his action with other groups, including the National Federation of the Blind (NFB), but was rebuffed. “They don't think of themselves as disabled,” he said. “And that’s fine.” (For more on this topic see Homer Page’s column on page 2, “The ADA and the Blind.”) Some blind advocacy groups, including the NFB, have argued that they don't want adaptive devices, such as special buttons on street corners, written into the bill. “We don't need them," said Page, who is vice president of the Colorado NFB chapter. Those people wishing to participate in ADAPT‘s “Wheels of Justice" should contact Blank or Mike Auberger at (303) 936-1110. PHOTO: Medium close up of Wade Blank from the waist up. He is smiling, wearing dark sun glasses and a vest. His below shoulder length blondish hair is parted in the middle. This text covers the article that appears in 537 and 538.
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 (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 (509)
This story in its entirety is on ADAPT 496.
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 (504)
Court Says Yes Again Bush agrees to back lifts, allows ADAPT to occupy federal building [This is part 2 of the story that starts on ADAPT 508, the full text of the story appears on 508]
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 (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.