- LanguageAfrikaans 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©
Home / Albums / Tags Wade Blank + protests 6
- ADAPT (801)
The Washington Post, Metro Section 5/6/93 [Headline] The Disabled Plan to Show Washington They're Enabled—and Entitled By Liz Spayd, Washington Post Staff Writer Michael Auberger has shackled his wheelchair to city buses in Dallas. He has barricaded hotel entrances in San Francisco, and he has thrown himself in front of federal buildings, government officials, even oncoming traffic, all to draw attention to the rights of the disabled. This weekend, Auberger and hundreds of other activists from across the country plan to converge on Washington for a three-day blitz of demonstrations and marches in what promises to be the largest protest in history for people with disabilities. “We've written the letters, made the phone calls, had the meetings, and the bottom line is we're still being treated like second-class citizens." said Auberger, co-founder of ADAPT, an activist group that is spearheading the activities. “lf those channels don't work, you take to the streets." Organizers say the immediate purpose of the demonstrations is to demand that the federal government commit more money to helping disabled people live at home, instead of in institutions. At the same time, they want to continue the larger campaign for equal rights that produced the Americans With Disabilities Act, landmark legislation that went into effect last year. A march to the White House and a memorial service for Wade Blank, who was a leader in the movement, are expected to draw the largest crowds, both on Sunday. What may draw the most attention, however, are demonstrations on Monday and Tuesday, when protesters are expected to disrupt Washington with human blockades of buildings and streets. The exact places and times for those actions aren't being disclosed, but the targets could include public buildings, such as the Capitol and the White House, and some federal agencies. “We like to preserve the element of surprise," Auberger said. ADAPT — an acronym for American Disabled for Attendant Programs Today — has been staging protests every six months for more than a decade to fight what it says is the inhumane treatment of the disabled at nursing homes and other institutions. The group said it hopes to redirect 25 percent of the $23 billion in Medicaid funds currently budgeted for nursing homes into programs that would enable those with disabilities to have attendants in their homes. Currently, each state sets policy for how much Medicaid money will go toward attendant care programs, but there is no national policy. [Subheading] Disabled Activists Plan 3-Day Protest The strike on Washington is timed to pressure the Clinton administration into focusing on people with disabilities as part of its package of health care revisions, due out soon, activists said. "Clinton has talked about change and says he wants people to be able to live at home, but what we're looking for is more than just words," said Bob Kafka, an ADAPT organizer in Texas who plans to bring a caravan of about 50 people to Washington. In the past, ADAPT activists have drawn attention to their cause by employing sometimes sensational tactics. They have done belly crawls across hotel lobbies in San Francisco, clawing at passersby. They have taken sledgehammers to street curbs in Denver to protest sidewalks that were inaccessible to wheelchair users. And they have swarmed and blockaded buildings in virtually every major U.S. city; a demonstration in Chicago last spring forced the evacuation of more than 1,000 American Medical Association workers and created disruptions in a half-dozen other downtown facilities. Though such events have attracted media attention, some individuals and `groups` sympathetic to ADAPT’s cause question how effective they are in achieving the larger goal of attaining more money for in-home care. “We're sympathetic to their concerns, but we think the tactics they use bring attention to ADAPT and not the problem," said Claudia Askew, a spokeswoman for the American Health Care Association, which represents 11,000 nursing homes and is a frequent target of ADAPT protests. Disabled people also are somewhat splintered over whether ADAPT's approach helps or hurts their cause. “There are people with disabilities that think ADAPT is a little extreme," said Patrick McCurdy, vice president of Marylanders for Adequate Attendant Care, a group that generally relies on peaceful protests and negotiations to lobby for in-home care. McCurdy did defend ADAPT's technique as a necessary part of an overall approach to force change in a society that he said has long ignored the rights of disabled people. Few spoke up for those rights until recently, but the Americans With Disabilities Act provided new protections to disabled people and helped forge a civil rights movement among the 43 million people with physical or mental impairments. “A great byproduct of the [disabilities act] is the new sense of confidence and empowerment it has instilled within the disability community," said Justin Dart, chairman of the President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities, a small federal agency. “It's generated an enormous infusion of dignity and pride." Gregory Dougan, a District resident, said the renewed sense of hope is one reason he will take part in Sunday's march. Dougan, who was born with cerebral palsy and uses crutches, said he is fortunate to be able to live at home. But several of his friends live in institutions because they can't get the in-home care they need. And on Sunday, Dougan said, he will be thinking of them. "I'll be tired at the end of the day," he said, "but my crutches and me are going to that march." - ADAPT (713)
The Guardian, May 27,1992 Photo by Tom Olin: A disabled man dressed all in white (Tim Craven) lies on his back to crawl under a police barricade. Beside him a woman (Barbara Bounds) in a wheelchair leans toward him as if to support and protect him. She is facing the barricade and has a sign taped to the back of her chair that says "People Before Profits." Two police men lean over the barricade toward Tim and another sticks his arm in between them. Behind them are even more officers. On the near side of the barricade yet another officer stands, bending almost all the way forward toward Tim on the ground. Caption reads: Protesters in Chicago got our of their wheelchairs and lay down in front of the barricades, forcing employees to walk over them. Disabled militants bring hope to health reform By Mary Johnson Chicago-Hundreds of members and supporters of ADAPT (American Disabled for Attendant Programs Today) took to the streets here May 10-13 to continue their fight for in-home attendant services and to move the national health-Cate debate into the rights arena. The group is aiming to force the American Medical Association—whose headquarters are here—and the American Health Care Association, the nursing home lobby, to replace “home care" with "attendant services“ which consumers control “in the location and manner of our choice,“ says ADAPT. ADAPT, which under the name American Disabled for Accessible Public Transportation won the national fight for wheelchair lifts on buses, intend their street protests as the “flashpoint," says founder Wade Blank, for national health care reform. There is nothing medical about assistance to bathe, eat or dress, these activists charge. Target: Louis Sullivan Learning that Health and Human Services Secretary Louis Sullivan would be speaking at University of Chicago commencements on May 10, the 250-strong ADAPT contingent cancelled a Mother‘s Day march and stormed into the university‘s pavilion, planning to disrupt Sullivan's speech. Police and Secret Service agents promptly ejected them, but the group spent the afternoon handing leaflets to graduates‘ families. Sullivan has been a perennial ADAPT target for his refusal to meet with them to discuss Medicaid policy on nursing homes. The next day, ADAPT surrounded the HHS regional offices in downtown Chicago, managing to get up to 15th-floor offices before being blocked by police. Others in the group cordoned off exits, forcing building employees to climb over them, and at one point succeeded in getting department officials into the street to listen to the group‘s demands. Ten protesters were cited and released. On May 12, ADAPT moved to AMA headquarters, blocking adjacent streets and crawling up to bang on office windows. Police barricaded the doors, but protesters got our of their wheelchairs and piled themselves at barricades, forcing AMA employees to step over them when their offices shut down early. Police moved to arrest four people they believed to be in command. The four included Mike Auberger of Denver and Arthur Campbell of Louisville, Ky., who were released later in the day. Garnering media attention Though ADAPT planned to press state targets only on May 13, the state barricaded its downtown State of Illinois Building on the two days before. Guards locked wheelchair access doors and forced wheelchair users to submit to police escort on elevators. On May 12, Chicago ADAPT member Paulette Patterson sued the state over discriminatory denial of access. Though District judge Milton Shadur failed to grant a requested temporary restraining order, Patterson’s attorney, Matthew Cohen, said he had “no doubt the suit had an effect.” On May 13, ADAPT took over the building while city police squabbled with state police over jurisdiction and mostly kept their hands off protesters. Longtime Chicago activists noted ADAPT‘s success in garnering media attention. Chicago Lawyers Guild member Ora Schub said ADAPT‘s protests got more coverage than Gulf war demonstrations in the city — even when antiwar protesters shut down Lake Shore Drive. There seems little question ADAPT has begun to have an impact beyond disability rights. As one of the only groups to take the health reform issue into the streets, ADAPT, says Blank, sees its role “as focusing the debate on a bigger political issue” within health-care reform: services as a legal right. “What the disability rights movement can do is humanize society,” he says. Tennessee ADAPT recently forced the hospital power structure there to accept a state financing fee that will fully fund Medicaid (see sidebar). Lawyer Gordon Bonnyman, who was involved in the Tennessee campaign, remembers a “poverty advocate friend" sending him a clipping about an ADAPT protest in Orlando, Fla., in 1990, when the group first took on the American Health Care Association over the attendant services issue. He and his friend “were despairing about health reform," he said, “asking ourselves when the people who were really affected were going to begin to influence the discussion. "l said, ‘l just don‘t see that ever happening until people are willing to stage some direct actions,‘ " Bonnyman recalls. “Then she sent me that clipping from ADAPT's Orlando action and she said, ‘Here are the folks who could do that.'" “My response at that time was, ‘That’s nice, but how many people is that?‘ I now think: ‘Enough.' ADAPT really does have the ability to have an impact nationally on health care issues-far beyond their own issue of personal attendant services." The group plans similar actions in San Francisco this fall. Second, sidebar, article inserted on this page: Saving Medicaid in Tenn Six people in wheelchairs moved swiftly a cross across the drive-way of the Tennessee Health Care Association in Nashville on March 31. Chaining themselves together, the small band waited for members of the Tennessee Hospital Association to come out of their meeting. It was a classic ADAPT action. This time ADAPT was leading a coalition of health care reformers that would force the state‘s powerful hospital lobby to drop its opposition to a state licensing fee intended to prevent a $1.1 billion loss in federal Medicaid funds. Tennessee pioneered the concept of leveraging matching federal Medicaid funds by levying a state financing fee against hospitals that took Medicaid patients. With its 70-30 match, the state took the $300 million collected from participating hospitals to obtain another $700 million in federal matching funds. With that tactic, Tennessee was fully funding its Medicaid program and feeling no financial crisis. By 1991 it was in use in 37 states, with many reporting similar success. The federal government, alarmed at having to pay out increased Medicaid funds to stares that used this method, devised a plan to derail it. A little-publicized 1991 law made such licensing fees illegal unless levied against all hospitals equally. It counted on opposition from hospitals that took no Medicaid patients (and therefore had no reason to agree to the fees) to fight state passage of licensing fee bills. That opposition was swift in coming in Tennessee. The state is home to Hospital Corporation of America and HealthTrust, two of the nation's largest hospital chains, and numerous other hospitals. The Tennessee Hospital Association, of which Hospital Corporation of America is a powerful member, opposed the fee. A state bill to extend the fee to all hospitals was virtually dead, said Tony Garr, head of the Tennessee Health Care Campaign, until ADAPT of Tennessee, led by organizer Diane Coleman, got involved. “The only way we could bring attention to the issue was to hit the streets,” said Garr. “ADAPT played a very important role" in helping other groups in the Tennessee Health Care Campaign “move to direct action,” said Gordon Bonnyman, a lawyer who has worked with Medicaid issues in Tennessee. Beginning in January, Coleman and Tennessee ADAPT members staged weekly actions, targeting the large hospitals as villains who were destroying the state’s Medicaid program. The first week a group of nearly 200 people, headed by ADAPT, marched to the Hospital Association's offices. The next week the group staged a protest in front of Baptist Hospital, which opposed the fee. The group hung a sign asking “Are you Christian?" on the hospital administrator's portrait. The group‘s fifth action targeted Thomas Frist, who heads Hospital Corporation of America. “We had a small casket, with dollar bills draped over it, and a sign that read, “Thomas Frist, how many must die for your $1.235 million in annual cash compensation?” said Coleman. The protests had the desired effect. Frist, reportedly upset by the negative publicity, capitulated the day the group surged on Health Care Association headquarters with the cross and withdrew his corp0ration’s opposition to the fee—reportedly urging legislators to vote swiftly to pass the law to avoid more unfavorable publicity. “There have been Medicaid cuts for the last 15 years in this country, and they have gone mostly unreported," said Bonnyman. “ADAPT galvanized people. Without them, the whole thing would have gone down the toilet." M.J. - ADAPT (395)
St. Louis Post Dispatch 5-22-88 PHOTO by Ted Dargan/Post Dispatch: A Line of ADAPT people roll down a city street. The first person in line (Mike Auberger) has two long braids and sunglasses. His arms hang on either side of his motorized wheelchair and his ADAPT shirt is somewhat covered by the chest strap on his chair. Next to Mike is a man in a manual wheelchair with curly hair and a beard (Bob Kafka) who has is legs crossed and is wearing the same ADAPT shirt as Mike. Behind them a man (Jerry Eubanks) with no legs in a manual wheelchair is being pushed by a blind man (Frank Lozano) who is smiling. Behind them is another man in a maual wheelchair. Behind him is someone in a motorized wheelchair who is looking off to the side. Behind them is another person in a wheelchair. The photo is grainy so it's hard to make out many details. Caption reads: Disabled people demonstrating downtown last week for more accessible bus service. Title: Bus Stop By Joan Bray Of the Post-Dispatch Staff ACTIV1STS FROM local advocacy groups were absent from the scores of protesters who took to St. Louis streets last week asserting the rights of the disabled to accessible bus service. Leaders of the local groups say tactics, not goals, caused them and their members to opt out of the demonstrations. About 150 people blocked entrances at Union Station and surrounded buses at the Greyhound terminal. A majority of them were in wheelchairs, on crutches or otherwise disabled. And they were out-of-towners. They belong to a loosely woven group, American Disabled for Accessible Public Transit, called ADAPT for short. The group was protesting the policies of the American Public Transit Association, which was holding a regional meeting at the Omni International Hotel at Union Station. As a result of ADAPT's civil disobedience, 78 arrests were made, two group court appearances were held and a lawsuit was filed by the group over treatment at the City Workhouse. We support ADAPT's policies on access 1,000 percent," said Max J. Starkloff. He is executive director here of Paraquad Inc., which advocates rights for the handicapped. "But we have not participated in the demonstrations." "Our methods are negotiation, public testimony and organized public rallies," Starkloff said. "Our goals ore the same" as ADAPT's. Both the local activists and ADAPT want the transit association to push for installing a wheelchair lift on every bus in the country. They see 100 percent accessibility as a civil right. Rut the transit association notes in a written statement that no such accessibility is required by the Constitution, the Congress or the courts. It says the number of lifts on buses has increased to 30 percent now from 11 percent in 1981. In that same period, the administration of President Ronald Reagan has slashed the federal transit program's budget by 47 percent, the association says. The association says each local transportation agency should be allowed to determine how it will provide access for the disabled. Special services — like the Call-A-Ride service operated by the Bi-State Development Agency — may work better than lift-equipped buses in some areas, the association says. Local groups' methods for effecting change include working within the system. Starkloff serves on Bi-State's committee on transit for the elderly and disabled. The chairman of that committee, Fred Cowell, is executive director of the Gateway chapter of Paralyzed Veterans of America. Bi-State has made a commitment to install wheelchair lifts on all its buses, Cowell said. But the committee wants the agency's board of directors to adopt a policy stating it will do so. "We know that the buses are here to stay," Cowell said. "If or when budget cuts come, special services such as Call-A-Ride would be the first to go." Cowell and Starkloff said they feared that between the bureaucracy and the protests, the primary point — the need for equal transportation — was being missed. "A disabled person is not unlike any other person," Cowell said. Disabled people need to get to their jobs, to medical care and to social engagements, be said. "There is absolutely no difference in their need to get around," he said. Starkloff noted that the cost of a van equipped for a wheelchair — a minimum of about $20,000 — was prohibitive for most people. But the disabled should not have to wait at a bus stop on the chance that the next bus may be equipped with a lift, be said. Nor should they have to plan their trips 24 hours in advance, as Call-A-Ride requires, he said. Cowell said, "The main thing the (BI-State) committee has been trying to do is develop a deepening concern for services for the disabled and elderly." The fact that the committee has been successful in persuading Bi-State to buy only buses with lifts prevented the agency from bearing the brunt of ADAPT's effort here, one of the protest leaders said. The Rev. Wade Blank, a Presbyterian minister from Denver, is a co-director of ADAPT. He has a daughter who is disabled. Two months ago, representatives of ADAPT met with State officials in preparation for their trip here and learned of the agency's commitment to lifts, Blank said. As a result, ADAPT aimed its protests at the transit association's meeting and Greyhound Bus Lines. Greyhound is bidding on local routes in some metropolitan areas — Dallas, for one, Blank said. But it does not equip its buses with lifts, he said. A spokesman for Greyhound said last week that, instead, it provided a free ticket for a companion for a disabled traveler. Regarding the transit meeting, Blank said: "Our whole intent is to go after people who are so much wrapped up in the system that they insulate themselves from the issue. They have to live and breathe (ADAPT's protests) when they go to these conventions." Demonstrators here represented some of ADAPTs 33 chapters across the country, Blank said. He said his headquarters was with a group in Denver called the Atlantis Community, which moves disabled people out of nursing homes into independent living arrangements. Funding comes primarily from church donations and foundation grants, he said. From 1978 to 1981, ADAPT protested — and "caused a major disruption" — in Denver every month, Blank said. In 1982, the buses there became 100 percent equipped with lifts, he noted. ADAPT has since protested in all the cities where the transit association has met and where it has been invited by other activists, for a total of about 15 cities, Blank said. [unreadable] ...only buses with lifts, he said. Blank said the failure of local groups to join ADAPT's protests did not weaken the cause. Another success that ADAPT points to is a ruling by a federal Judge in Philadelphia in January striking down a regulation of the US. Department of Transportation that allows transit authorities to spend only 3 percent of their budgets on the disabled. The Judge postponed the effect of the ruling while the Justice Department appeals it. Three percent of Bi-State's budget for the current fiscal year Is $2.6 million, said Rosemary Covington, an agency official who works with the advisory committee. But Bi-State will spend only $1 million because of delays in getting bids on new buses and in expanding the Call-A-Ride service. "We are having budget problems, but that wasn't the reason" the money wasn't spent, Covington said. The remaining $1.6 million does not roll over to the fiscal year that begins July 1, she said. She said that by early next year, Bi-State expected that 221 of its fleet of about 700 buses will be equipped with lifts, 12 of the more than 120 routes will be operated entirely with lift-equipped buses, the Call-A-Ride service will include all of St. Louis County and the city and a voucher system will be available for back-up cab service. Equipping all the agency's buses with lifts will take six to seven years, Covington said. Meanwhile the committee will help evaluate the services for the disabled, she said. "If ridership doesn't materialize" on the buses with lifts or "if it costs thousands or millions (of dollars) to maintain them, that will enter into the decision making," Covington said. Bi-State is training drivers how to use the lifts and plans to promote and advertise the service heavily, she said. - ADAPT (86)
Rocky Mountain News PHOTO, News Photo by Jose R. Lopez: A thin woman [Theresa Preda] with dark hair and a big smile stands facing a man [LA Kimball] sitting at a "classroom style" conference table. He has a sickly smile on his face as he looks up at her. Between the tables and beside the woman is a manual wheelchair and she is pointing to it. It appears a man in another wheelchair [Mark Johnson] is pushing the wheelchair toward Teresa. At the table next to Kimball another man, also a presenter, who does not appear to have a disability, stares at Kimball with a slightly startled look on his face. Caption reads: Theresa Preda presents a wheelchair to RTD Executive Director LA. Kimball, right. Disabled riders' flap marks parley By JERRY BROWN News Staff Acting under a court order, Regional Transportation District officials and members of Denver's handicapped community met Wednesday to discuss their differences, but a longstanding argument among the handicapped over the type of bus service they want dominated the session. The 90-minute meeting at the Cosmopolitan Hotel opened with two organizations that have fought for accessible service on RTD’s regular routes presenting a wheelchair to RTD Executive Director L.A, Kimball and urging him to use it to learn firsthand the difficulties handicapped people experience in riding buses. Kimball pledged to use the wheelchair presented by Atlantis and Holistic Approaches to Independent Living, but told reporters: “l probably won't tell you in advance when I'm going to do it." The meeting was the result of a negotiated court order between RTD and the two organizations stemming from a series of demonstrations the organizations staged at RTD buildings in January. Atlantis and HAIL were protesting the transit agency's decision not to put wheelchair lifts on 89 buses scheduled for delivery next year. They have filed a lawsuit in Denver District Court in an attempt to force RTD to put lifts on the buses. But more than half of the l00 or so handicapped people attending the meeting indicated they believed RTD should focus its efforts on the door-to-door service that RTD has provided the handicapped for more than five years — not the accessible service on regular routes advocated by Atlantis and HAIL. Kimball drew cheers when he announced that the door-to-door service, known as Handi-Ride, would not be discontinued this summer as planned. " Kimball said the door-to-door service would continue until sometime next year, and suggested that the handicapped groups present join in a regional effort to devise a system under which someone else would provide the door-to-door service when RTD ends it. RTD began providing wheelchair-accessible service on some regular routes last summer and has promised to have half of its peak-hour service and virtually all of its off peak service wheelchair accessible by July 1. Saying RTD cannot afford to provide both types of accessible service, RTD officials had said they would discontinue the HandiRide service after July 1. The threatened loss of HandiRide service has created a split within the handicapped community, which dominated Wednesday's meeting. Spokesmen for Atlantis and HAIL said they believe both types of service are necessary, and promised to fight any efforts by RTD to discontinue the HandiRide. They accused RTD of using the HandiRide to create dissension among their ranks and “stacking” the audience by sending invitations to HandiRide patrons. But Atlantis spokesman Wade Blank said: "In a way RTD did us a favor." Blank said the meeting would help open communications between the two handicapped factions. - ADAPT (148)
Name of newspaper illegible Los Angeles Times? November 19,1984 Handicapped Stage Protests to Publicize Transportation Needs by Miles Harvey, Times Staff Writer PHOTO: Mary Frampton / Los Angeles Times A tidy looking woman in pants and a vest, with a slight smile on her face, sits in a manual wheelchair on a bus. She is sitting in the accessible doorway, the access symbol visible on the side of the doorway. Below and beneath her is a metal panel, like the barrier on some lifts that keeps the person from rolling off the front of the lift. Caption reads: Barbara Trigg rides a hydraulic lift onto a Los Angeles bus. Article reads: Washington -- It was a scene reminiscent of the 1960s civil rights demonstrations as angry protesters chanted slogans, picketed the White House and stopped traffic before they were finally dragged away by police. And the series of confrontations that ended with 27 arrests last month seemed to come down to a similar central issue— the right to sit on a bus, to have full access to public transportation. There was one striking difference, however. Unlike Rosa Parks and the black civil rights activist who battered down the Jim Crow barriers in the South, these protesters were in wheelchairs, and their goal was equal access for the physically handicapped. “It's a civil right to be able to ride public transportation," said Julia Haraksin, a wheelchair-bound Los Angeles resident who participated in the demonstrations. “In the ‘60s, the blacks had to ride in the back—and we can't even get on the buses." New, Radical Tactics Organizations representing handicapped persons long have urged Washington to require that new buses and rail systems built with funds from the Department of Transportation's Urban Mass Transportation Administration be equipped to accommodate handicapped riders. But Haraksin and other handicapped individuals like her now are beginning to press the old arguments with new, more radical tactics. Frustrated by years of negotiating, lobbying in Washington, going through the courts and staging non-confrontational protests, some members of the handicapped community now are resorting more actively to confrontations and civil disobedience. Thus, early in October, 100 members of a newly formed coalition called American Disabled for Accessible Public Transit confronted a national meeting of city transportation heads here, using the kind of civil disobedience tactics used 30 years earlier by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Protesters were arrested when they blocked entrances and buses of those attending the American Public Transit Assn. convention. The strategy was to physically be a barrier because handicapped people have to face barriers all their lives," Wade Blank, a founder of Denver-based ADAPT said. Calling the protests here " Selma," leaders of ADAPT claimed victory and promised that their struggle has only begun. They already are focusing their efforts on what they hope will be a larger demonstration at the next meeting of the American Public Transportation Assn. a year from now in Los Angeles. But they and their cause may be in for a tough battle. Their opposition comes from the Reagan Administration, from many city governments and even from within the handicapped community. And as public attention focuses on the underlying budget choices involved, the opposition may swell with the addition of taxpayers concerned about the possible costs of a national full-access program. ADAPT argues that a legal right to full access for the handicapped already exists. Federal law states that Urban Mass Transportation Administration funds — which account for about 80% of the costs of new and replacement equipment in most municipal transportation systems—cannot be spent on programs that discriminate against, or exclude, the handicapped. The law does not make clear, however, whether handicapped persons must be provided with access to regular bus lines or whether they can instead be provided with alternative transportation systems. Nor does it indicate who should make that decision. Cities Make Decisions Current Transportation Department policy, which is strongly supported by the American Public Transportation Assn., allows each city to make its own decision on what type of transportation it will provide for the handicapped. This is in sharp contrast with Carter Administration policy, which in 1979 interpreted federal regulation to mean full access. Members of ADAPT, opposing the separate-but-equal philosophy of paratransit argue that it does not meet the needs of the handicapped and that it is inherently discriminatory. "It segregates the disabled people from the able-bodied community," Mike Auberger, an organizer for ADAPT, said. Because paratrasit requires advanced scheduling [unreadable] a ride is needed, he said, “you have to schedule your life according to the system. No one else has to do that. That shows the inequality right there." He and other members of ADAPT contend that because of long waiting lists for paratransit, some cities refuse to offer the service to new users - thus cutting off thousands of handicapped persons from any public transportation. Transit authorities, on the other hand, argue that full access can be too expensive, given the low percentage of handicapped riders in many cities. Lift-fitted buses cost an estimated $8,000 to $10,000 more than regular buses. Furthermore, lift systems are often unreliable and time-consuming to operate and maintain, transit administrators say. In Denver, for example, the transportation district has spent $63 million to purchase or retrofit buses with lifts. 80% of which was paid for by the federal government, according to spokesman Gene Towne. Since it started mainline access in 1982, the district has spent close to $1 million in maintenance of the lifts and expects to spend an additional $900,000 this year. Yet of the district's total annual ridership of 38 million, only 12,000 use the lifts, according to Towne. ADAPT counters that the issue is not cost but civil liberties. “In America we have a way of hiding, our prejudices with pragmatism," said Blank, a Presbyterian minister and veteran of the civil rights and anti-war movements of the 1960s who now supports handicapped activists. Variety of Approaches Across the country, cities are using a variety of approaches to the problems of providing mass transit for the handicapped. In Los Angeles, mainline access is required by state law. Although 1,850 of the Southern California Rapid Transit District‘s 2,400 buses are fitted with wheelchair lifts some local advocates charge that the RTD gives only "lip service" to access, complaining of broken lifts, drivers who do not know how to use the equipment or refuse to do so and an overall lack of commitment to providing access. The system provides only about 1,400 rides a month according to the RTD. Handicapped activists charge that the low ridership is attributable to the system's poor management. There were and are people in the operation department (of the RTD) back there who were and are opposed to the idea of access from day one," Dennis Cannon, a Washington-based expert who helped to plan the RTD's access program in the 1970s said. But in the last six months, the RTD has made "a major effort" to overcome the problem, according to RTD General Manager John A. Dyer. The system boosted its fiscal year 1985 budget for handicapped service by $3 million, to $4.9 million, to provide for a program to educate drivers and upgrade the quality of equipment and service. In Oakland, half the city's 800 buses are lift-equipped and all of the Alameda — Contra Costa Transit District's new buses will be lift-equipped. Seattle’s Services In Seattle, 570 of 1,100 buses are accessible to the handicapped, providing about 5,900 rides a month. The Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle also contracts with private groups to supply paratransit bus and half-fare cab service, providing a total of 8,400 rides a month in Denver. 432 of the city's 744 buses are lift- or ramp-equipped, providing more than 1,000 rides per month. The city also uses 13 vans and small buses in a paratransit system that provides 3,200 rides a month. In New York City, where an estimated 35% of all the transit passengers in the country use Metropolitan Transportation Authority vehicles each day. half of the city's 4,333 buses are fitted with lifts. The city has no figures on how many handicapped riders use the system, but one official calls the number minuscule. A new state law calls for $40 million over the next eight years to retrofit “in the neighborhood of 30" subway stops for handicapped use, according to a transit authority official. In addition the law will increase the percentage of lift-equipped buses to 65% of the fleet, as well as provide a paratransit system in the city by 1988. Minneapolis-St. Paul uses 45 paratransit buses and contracts with private cab companies to carry handicapped persons in all, the city provides 40.000 trips a month. None of Chicago's 2.400 regular buses are fitted with lifts. Instead the city provides 42 paratransit buses, which offer 12,000 rides a month. Additionally, 14 of the city's subway stops have been retrofitted for handicapped access and 300 of Chicago's 1,100 subway cars are accessible. If there is a diversity of approaches to the problem, there is also a diversity of views on the militant new tactics used by ADAPT and its supporters. The views of the handicapped people are all over the lot on what type of transport they'd like," Bob Batchelder, counsel for the APTA, said. But transit specialist Cannon, himself a wheelchair user, counters: “I'm talking to disabled people who wouldn't do what ADAPT does ... but who support what they are doing and think it needs being done." Whether ADAPT's controversial style will work remains an open question. While no negotiations are scheduled, ADAPT leaders vow to continue to harass association meetings. But in Los Angeles, the RTD's Dyer indicated that he hopes demonstrations will be replaced at next year's convention with “serious dialogue and discussion of the issues." "It’s a new thing for the disabled to see themselves with power," ADAPT's Auberger said, "but it's also a new experience for the powers that be." - 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.