[Nfbv-potomac-announce] FW: [Chapter-presidents] ADA Reform Act

Sun Sep 18 15:01:40 UTC 2016

Good Morning,

See below.  There are threats to the ADA.

John

From: Chapter-presidents [mailto:chapter-presidents-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of President, National Federation of the Blind via Chapter-presidents
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2016 6:24 PM
To: NFB Chapter Presidents discussion list <chapter-presidents at nfbnet.org>
Cc: President, National Federation of the Blind <OfficeOfThePresident at nfb.org>
Subject: Re: [Chapter-presidents] ADA Reform Act

Dear Colleagues,

To add to this thread, below is the text of a letter that was sent to members of Congress and that was shared with affiliate leaders:

Mark Riccobono, President  |  200 East Wells Street at Jernigan Place Baltimore, MD 21230  |  410 659 9314  |  www.nfb.org <http://www.nfb.org>  

September 8, 2016 

United States House of Representatives Washington, DC 20515 

Re: Opposing H.R. 3765 the ADA Education and Reform Act of 2015 

Dear Representative: 

The National Federation of the Blind (NFB) opposes H.R. 3765. For seventy-six years, NFB members have fought for, and to protect, the rights of people with disabilities in the United States. In 1990, our members worked closely with our partners in the disability community and Congress to secure the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act, (ADA). The ADA revolutionized the way we, as people with disabilities, interact with and access government services, commerce, and participate in our local communities. The passage of the ADA affirmed the principal that people with disabilities are first-class citizens, with rights and protections under the law, like all other Americans. However, H.R. 3765, the ADA Education and Reform Act of 2015 now threatens to undermine the mechanisms of the law that afford us those protections. 

Under the framework of H.R. 3765, a person with a disability confronting access barriers would be required to give a written notice to the business owner, who then has 60 days to even acknowledge the problem, followed by an additional 120 days to take corrective action. No other group is required to wait 180 days to enforce their civil rights. 

One of the “problems” proponents of H.R. 3765 refer to when talking about this legislation is that businessowners are unfairly being victimized by the accessibility requirements set forth by the ADA. However, this flawed approach neglects to recognize the daily experiences of millions of Americans with disabilities, who every day are discriminated against by public facilities and e-commerce that fail to meet even the most minimal accessibility requirements. Furthermore, the ADA was carefully crafted to ensure that such requirements are not overly burdensome, and our experience as Americans with disabilities has taught us that when included from the design and development stages, accessibility features do not result in increased construction and manufacturing costs. 

Proponents also argue that monetary incentives are behind most civil action under the ADA. However, title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which applies to privately operated public accommodations, commercial facilities, and private entities offering certain examinations and courses, prohibits money damages.i A handful of states allow damages according to their state laws, and this bill will do nothing to prevent damage awards under state laws. 

Furthermore, this bill would force disabled Americans, who face wage, employment, and other forms of discrimination that can impact our financial resources, to pay attorneys to draft the notice. No attorney would take a case without the prospect of receiving payment for their work.  That is why the drafters of the Americans with Disabilities Act included attorney’s fees; it is what makes the ADA function.  

National Federation of the Blind 

Mark Riccobono, President  |  200 East Wells Street at Jernigan Place Baltimore, MD 21230  |  410 659 9314  |  www.nfb.org <http://www.nfb.org>  

Finally, there are a multitude of resources available to help small businesses comply with the ADA. However, there are very few resources available to help blind and other disabled Americans receive the equal access we need to live in society. This bill would severely limit one of the few tools we have at our disposal to ensure we are provided an equal opportunity to participate. 

Despite the major accomplishments of the Americans with Disabilities Act, people with disabilities continue to confront systemic accessibility barriers, and rather than exacerbating this experience, Congress should work to build upon the ADA’s progress to ensure that blind and all other disabled Americans can live the lives we want. H.R. 3765 will not be a step forward, but rather, a step back. I strongly urge you to vote nay on H.R. 3765 

Sincerely, 

Mark A. Riccobono President, National Federation of the Blind 

MAR/gc 

i 42 U.S.C. § 12188; 42 U.S.C §§ 12182 and 12181(7); 42 U.S.C. §§ 12183 and 12181(2); and 42 U.S.C. § 12189.

From: Chapter-presidents [mailto:chapter-presidents-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Fredric Schroeder via Chapter-presidents
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2016 9:32 AM
To: 'NFB Chapter Presidents discussion list'
Cc: Schroeder, Fred
Subject: Re: [Chapter-presidents] ADA Reform Act

Dear Randy & Ann,

To me the bottom line is that the ADA has been the law of the land for more than a quarter century. Large and small businesses have obligations under the law, and the requirements are not burdensome. The ADA already provides that business owners only have to make their facilities accessible to the extent that it is “readily achievable” and does not constitute an “undue burden.” Further, the ADA does not entitle plaintiffs to civil damages if they are successful in suing a business under Title III, so it is ridiculous to argue that a business would pay a potential plaintiff an exorbitant sum of money to settle a complaint since the business could be sued over and over again for the same violation by others. In other words paying to settle a complaint does not fix the violation. The only way the business could protect itself from being repeatedly sued would be by making its facility accessible. 

In my view the real harm here is the chipping away at the ADA’s protections. 

Best,

Fredric K. Schroeder, Ph.D.

From: Chapter-presidents [mailto:chapter-presidents-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Randy Walker via Chapter-presidents
Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2016 8:54 AM
To: NFB Chapter Presidents discussion list <chapter-presidents at nfbnet.org <mailto:chapter-presidents at nfbnet.org> >
Cc: Randy Walker <randywalker410 at gmail.com <mailto:randywalker410 at gmail.com> >
Subject: Re: [Chapter-presidents] ADA Reform Act

I understand the small owners need the chance to make it right.

If the big company's are holding back a employ with a disability because of the Disability then they must be taken a peg or two.

Watt I talking about the big bog stores such as BEST BUY  Wal-Mart and target.

It has happened to me.

Am I right in this?

Randy & Ann Walker
3619 Pheasant Lane Unit 4
Waterloo Iowa 50701
319-2395212

From: Fredric Schroeder via Chapter-presidents <mailto:chapter-presidents at nfbnet.org>  

Sent: Saturday, September 17, 2016 6:05 AM

To: 'NFB Chapter Presidents discussion list' <mailto:chapter-presidents at nfbnet.org>  

Cc: Fredric Schroeder <mailto:fschroeder at sks.com>  

Subject: Re: [Chapter-presidents] ADA Reform Act

Dear Roger,

I share your concern.

In recent years there have been a number of Congressional attempts to weaken the Americans with Disabilities Act. The various legislative proposals are known as ADA notification bills. While the specifics of the proposals differ, the main thrust has been to require notification of an ADA accessibility violation before legal action can be taken. 

Proponents of the ADA notification bills say that lawyers are suing small businesses that did not know of their ADA accessibility obligations without giving them the opportunity to correct access violations before facing costly legal action. Proponents also say that unscrupulous attorneys are doing this to recover large awards for attorney fees, so-called “drive by” ADA suits. The supporting evidence is very weak. 

House leadership had hoped to bring H.R. 3765, the ADA Education and Reform Act of 2015, to a full floor vote next week; however it is not on the calendar and, in my view, is not likely to make it to a vote before the Congress adjourns in early October. 

Many advocacy groups regard this as a dangerous bill and are urging people to contact their members of the House of Representatives asking them to oppose the bill. In its original version, the bill would have imposed criminal penalties for individuals bringing ADA accessibility suits without first giving the business a number of months to correct the violation. While the new version of the bill removes the contentious criminal fine, H.R. 3765 would still have a chilling effect on individuals seeking their right to accessibility. The bill would give businesses that have failed to provide access for over 26 years additional time to comply with the ADA. More troubling is that the bill would remove any incentive for businesses to come into compliance before receiving notification of a violation. Businesses would face no consequence for years of discrimination, while millions of people with disabilities would continue to be unable to participate in basic activities in their communities. 

In my view it is important that H.R. 3765 never sees the light of day. The potential harm and the retreat from basic civil rights protections it represents for people with disabilities is unconscionable.

Fredric K. Schroeder, Ph.D.

From: Chapter-presidents [mailto:chapter-presidents-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Roger Crome via Chapter-presidents
Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 5:51 PM
To: NFB Chapter Presidents discussion list <chapter-presidents at nfbnet.org <mailto:chapter-presidents at nfbnet.org> >
Cc: Roger Crome <rogerc at lifecilmo.org <mailto:rogerc at lifecilmo.org> >
Subject: [Chapter-presidents] ADA Reform Act

Hello All,

Below is a link to a bill that is currently in Congress.  I am very concerned that this type of legislation could weaken the protections given to people with disabilities.  If the law needs to be reformed, the protections need to be strengthened.  Please go to and take a look.  I am interested in the perspectives of other Federationists.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/3765

Thanks,

Roger Crome

  _____  

_______________________________________________
Chapter-presidents mailing list
Chapter-presidents at nfbnet.org <mailto:Chapter-presidents at nfbnet.org> 
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-presidents_nfbnet.org
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Chapter-presidents:
http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/chapter-presidents_nfbnet.org/randywalker410%40gmail.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/nfbv-potomac-announce_nfbnet.org/attachments/20160918/6ee370e8/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: Untitled attachment 00009.txt
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/nfbv-potomac-announce_nfbnet.org/attachments/20160918/6ee370e8/attachment.txt>