# Lawmakers Band Together To Defend ADA



## mark handler (Apr 6, 2018)

*Lawmakers Band Together To Defend ADA*
https://www.disabilityscoop.com/2018/04/04/lawmakers-band-defend-ada/24937/
U.S. Senate Democrats are vowing to block legislation that would dramatically alter the Americans with Disabilities Act.
A letter signed by 43 Democratic senators urges Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., not to bring forward a bill known as the ADA Education and Reform Act, or H.R. 620.
The measure, which was approved by the House of Representatives in February, would require individuals who experience accessibility barriers at public businesses to submit written notice of the issues. Then, businesses would have up to 60 days to respond and another 60 days to start improvements.
Proponents of the legislation say that it would protect businesses from opportunistic lawsuits while giving proprietors time to correct problems.
Disability advocates counter, however, that businesses have had more than two decades to comply with the ADA and the proposed changes to the law would leave people with disabilities unable to access stores, restaurants, movie theaters and other spaces for months after flagging an accessibility violation.
“No American should be forced to endure discrimination for any length of time so that places of public accommodation may learn how to follow a seminal, bipartisan civil rights law that was enacted in 1990,” reads the Democrats’ letter sent to McConnell late last month. “Respectfully, we urge you to join us in supporting the rights of Americans with disabilities by making clear that H.R. 620, or similar legislation, will never receive a vote in the United States Senate during the 115th Congress.”
Since the bill passed the House, Senate leaders could choose to consider it at any moment. The Democrats say that if the bill is brought up, they will block it.
“We haven’t gotten any indications on timing, but since the Senate majority leader has the ability to bring it up for a vote anytime, Sen. Duckworth felt it was important to organize a filibuster-proof coalition of senators in opposition to the bill to make sure he understood it could not pass,” Sean Savett, a spokesman for the letter’s organizer, Sen. Tammy Duckworth, D-Ill., told Disability Scoop.
A representative for McConnell did not respond to questions about the letter or the bill.


----------



## Rick18071 (Apr 6, 2018)

Interesting. How would this be enforced? Would the same individuals who experience accessibility barriers have to go out after the two 60 day segments to make sure it's done and the sue if they do not comply? Or do they send federal agents out to check and if they didn't comply is there is a fine? Or does the law require the local inspector to check it? If the local area even enforces the codes they don't enforce ADA but some version of the IBC. Who would pay the inspector? Most inspectors in my area work for private companies.

 laws are not worth the paper they are written on without enforcement. That is the problem now.


----------



## mark handler (Apr 6, 2018)

Rick18071 said:


> Interesting. How would this be enforced? Would the same individuals who experience accessibility barriers have to go out after the two 60 day segments to make sure it's done and the sue if they do not comply? Or do they send federal agents out to check and if they didn't comply is there is a fine? Or does the law require the local inspector to check it? If the local area even enforces the codes they don't enforce ADA but some version of the IBC. Who would pay the inspector? Most inspectors in my area work for private companies.
> laws are not worth the paper they are written on without enforcement. That is the problem now.


Rick
The ADA Education and Reform Act, or H.R. 620, intends on castrating the ADA.


----------



## steveray (Apr 6, 2018)

It would be months before they would get a permit anyway so what is the harm in that?...I don't mean to trivialize, but really...


----------



## JCraver (Apr 6, 2018)

Here's the bill:

https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/620/text

It doesn't "castrate" the ADA, or do any of the other horrible things Senator Duckworth and, um, _others_, are saying it will.  It just says that if a disabled person notifies a business that they can't access something, then the business has 60 days to fix the issue so that said disabled person can access whatever it was; and that if they don't, _then_ the disabled person can sue them.  It's aimed straight at the drive-by lawsuits that have been gaining steam everywhere, and will hopefully cut down on them.  It also provides funding to educate State and local officials, and business owners, on promoting access - which I'm guessing Sen. Duckworth and those others surely have no problem with.

This is common sense law, and should have been included in the original ADA.  I hope it passes.


----------



## ICE (Apr 6, 2018)

mark handler said:


> Rick
> The ADA Education and Reform Act, or H.R. 620, intends on castrating the ADA.


It’s been a long time coming.  It’s in response to the thieves.  The lament that there will be a four month delay in access for the disabled.......the lawsuits are about money and access isn’t achieved with the thieves’ lawsuits. For all of the other disabled.......you have waited decades, will another four months be a deal breaker?

The only thing that’s changed it that you can’t sneak up on the business anymore.

There’s also the added benefit that nobody will do anything until they get the four month deadline....gotta love that huh!


----------



## Msradell (Apr 6, 2018)

I love to hear how you guys talking about people making money from ADA lawsuits!  I don't care about making money I just wish there was some method to get businesses to comply with the requirements!  Here in Kentucky the rate of compliance is ridiculously low, business is just basically laugh in your face when you say they aren't accessible.  Nobody is interested in pursuing making a business accessible in any way shape or form.

I guess wish is part of this legislation they would implement some kind of enforcement procedure.  Those of us who are really disabled just want business to be accessible, we don't care if we make money on it or not.  I'd rather have the business use the money to improve accessibility.


----------



## Keystone (Apr 7, 2018)

Having awareness let alone knowledge of accessibility or is it ADA or INC or ANSI or ADHAG or some other acronym to the average brick and mortar business owner dramatically varies depending on its location throughout the United States and I think most of us take it for granted as part of our everyday routine because it's part of our daily job. Then throw in contradictory laws like our building codes, a like for like business change will not trigger a change to a brick and mortar facility so why would a business owner provide accessible changes or even be aware of such requirement. We can go to the intermediate side and have a change of use or minor alteration that triggers some type of accessible feature/change to comply with the building codes however this may not be enough to accommodate and avoid litigation.

Having implemented such a significant law was the first step but should have been the last step. I do agree with a "cooling off period" as it's commonly referred to of 60 days or so.


----------



## Msradell (Apr 7, 2018)

Keystone said:


> Having implemented such a significant law was the first step but should have been the last step. I do agree with a "cooling off period" as it's commonly referred to of 60 days or so.


The biggest thing that was done wrong was providing no means for enforcement of the ADA requirements. If an enforcement procedure had been written into the original law we wouldn't have the wide variations of enforcement capabilities we now have.


----------



## ADAguy (Apr 9, 2018)

I've said it before and I will say it again; brick and mortar businesses are required to have a business license. Mail notices to show compliance with the ADA with the annual renewal notices, no proof of compliance no renewal or no issuance of new license. City clerk collects fees, AHJ verifies or issues permits. How simple is that? State law requires code compliance vs ADA so it reverts to local AHJ responsibility to enforce.
Over time all non-conforming businesses will be compliant, or not.


----------



## JCraver (Apr 9, 2018)

ADAguy said:


> I've said it before and I will say it again; brick and mortar businesses are required to have a business license. Mail notices to show compliance with the ADA with the annual renewal notices, no proof of compliance no renewal or no issuance of new license. City clerk collects fees, AHJ verifies or issues permits. How simple is that? State law requires code compliance vs ADA so it reverts to local AHJ responsibility to enforce.
> Over time all non-conforming businesses will be compliant, or not.



Or maybe not?

You can open a brand new business here with no City license required of any kind (except a liquor store).  And if the State does not require a license for your business, then there would be no way to enforce your solution.  If you pull a permit to remodel, then that would force you to comply within the limits of the State accessibility code - but if you don't remodel/don't pull a permit, there is no way (and shouldn't be, IMO) to force anybody to do anything.


----------



## JCraver (Apr 9, 2018)

Msradell said:


> I love to hear how you guys talking about people making money from ADA lawsuits!  I don't care about making money I just wish there was some method to get businesses to comply with the requirements!  Here in Kentucky the rate of compliance is ridiculously low, business is just basically laugh in your face when you say they aren't accessible.  Nobody is interested in pursuing making a business accessible in any way shape or form.
> 
> I guess wish is part of this legislation they would implement some kind of enforcement procedure.  Those of us who are really disabled just want business to be accessible, we don't care if we make money on it or not.  I'd rather have the business use the money to improve accessibility.




I think we can (should) all agree that it was poor law when it was enacted.  The way to fix it is to amend it through legislation - which this new bill at least takes a stab at.  Call/write/email your Senator or Representative, have them sponsor a bill to "fix" it.  That's the only way it'll ever get done.

Or, get a suit all the way to the Supreme Court.  I would caution that route though - in as much as a sizable amount of folks think the whole thing is unconstitutional, a SCOTUS ruling could be bad news for one side of the issue.


----------



## mark handler (Apr 9, 2018)

Several cases have come before the Supreme Court and the Court has affirmed the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504.
Though in most cases the Supreme Court refused to hear cases relating to the ADA, leaving the lower court ruling intact.


----------



## conarb (Apr 9, 2018)

mark handler said:


> Several cases have come before the Supreme Court and the Court has affirmed the Americans with Disabilities Act and Section 504.
> Though in most cases the Supreme Court refused to hear cases relating to the ADA, leaving the lower court ruling intact.


We need another conservative justice before it comes back, Section 504 is the section that has destroyed our school system by requiring intelligent kids be downgraded to the level of morons and imbeciles, *read about it here* from a disability activist site, again it's political law out to create a collectivist society, be it socialism or whatever "ism" you want to call it.


----------

