# Newseum settles disabled access case



## mark handler (Dec 9, 2013)

Newseum settles disabled access case

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/12/08/3806220/newseum-settles-disabled-access.html

BY MICHAEL DOYLE

MCCLATCHY WASHINGTON BUREAU

The Newseum in downtown Washington, D.C. will be making renovations to improve access for the disabled, under a settlement reached with the  Justice Department.

The 11-page settlement agreement reached made public Friday resolves alleged violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. The problems were uncovered as part of an ADA compliance review that began in May 2011.

As part of the agreement, the Newseum will provide additional wheelchair spaces and companion seats in a museum theater, provide listening devices for the deaf and hard-of-hearing and ensure that the operating controls of interactive programs are within reach of those in wheelchairs, among other changes.

The Newseum did not admit liability, as part of the agreement.


----------



## ICE (Dec 9, 2013)

> The problems were uncovered as part of an ADA compliance review that began in May 2011.


That pretty much says it all.


----------



## mark handler (Dec 9, 2013)

So are you implying that if we do not do compliance reviews there will be no violations....


----------



## ICE (Dec 9, 2013)

Not at all.

It took years to do a job that could have been done in an afternoon.  Why is that?  Everything about ADA is being forced on a society that doesn't want it.


----------



## Msradell (Dec 9, 2013)

ICE said:
			
		

> Not at all.  It took years to do a job that could have been done in an afternoon.  Why is that?  Everything about ADA is being forced on a society that doesn't want it.


Maybe a better way to word it would be "a society that refuses to accept it"!


----------



## mark handler (Dec 9, 2013)

ICE said:
			
		

> .  Everything about ADA is being forced on a society that doesn't want it.


Society does not want a lot of things, until they need them.


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Dec 9, 2013)

When we get to the point that most of our society needs excessive assessabilty, then we are doomed.

Especially if if those that do not need special conditions can be convinced that they really do.

Plus, the more that can be indoctrinated the better for those making money in the industry.

Brent


----------



## mjesse (Dec 9, 2013)

I like the future humans in the animated movie Wall-E

View attachment 955


None of us will walk any more, we'll all be too fat and lazy.




View attachment 955


/monthly_2013_12/wallefatties.jpeg.804641774e9034cadc97e3a593549b60.jpeg


----------



## mark handler (Dec 9, 2013)

excessive assessabilty?

I am sure even you mean accessibility...


----------



## conarb (Dec 9, 2013)

Mark said:
			
		

> Society does not want a lot of things, until they need them.


Totalitarian societies tell people what they should want.  As I've said I've talked to several people in wheelchairs and walkers my age, while they say some parts of ADA are good, it's not worth all the ill will they suffer.  I've told them that the real culprits are the scoundrels who are exploiting them to line their own pockets, from the durable goods medical industry that funded this to the lawyers, architects, CASps etc who are exploiting it.

Speaking of the Durable Goods Medical Industry, has everybody noticed that Obamacare has levied a special tax on them, they should, it's such a profitable industry.

On another thread I posted the ADA law as passed by our elected representatives, were I a representative I would have voted for it too, including the private right of action to keep enforcement out of the public servant bureaucracy, the overreaching problems are with the regulations written by the bureaucracy.  The House Judiciary Committee is holding hearings now on the rights of the executive to enforce or not enforce regulations, I could only hope that it creates a constitutional crisis that will cause the Supreme Court to address the issue of executive enforcement, in the case of the ACA I've read that it's 1,700 pages of legislation and 20,000 pages of regulations, I have no idea how that compares to the ADA.


----------



## mark handler (Dec 9, 2013)

Supreme Court has ruled on ADA issues.

ADA, according to the Supreme Court,* IS the law of the land*

I guess the Supreme Court, congress, the state government and the president are all parts of your Totalitarian conspiracies....


----------



## conarb (Dec 9, 2013)

Mark said:
			
		

> Supreme Court has ruled on ADA issues.


Please cite the rulings.  Who wrote the regulations being enforced implementing the legislation?

In the House Judiciary Committee hearings Tuesday Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley said:



> In a December 2013 congressional hearing, responding to a question from  Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R-VA) about the danger posed by President Obama's  apparent unilateral modification of laws passed by congress, Turley  said, "The danger is quite severe. The problem with what the president  is doing is that he's not simply posing a danger to the constitutional  system. He's becoming the very danger the Constitution was designed to  avoid. That is the concentration of power in every single branch. This  Newtonian orbit that the three branches exist in is a delicate one but  it is designed to prevent this type of concentration. There is two  trends going on which should be of equal concern to all members of  Congress. One is that we have had the radical expansion of presidential  powers under both President Bush and President Obama. We have what many  once called an imperial presidency model of largely unchecked authority.  *And with that trend we also have the continued rise of this fourth  branch. We have agencies that are quite large that issue regulations.  The Supreme Court said recently that agencies could actually define  their own or interpret their own jurisdiction." *¹


Turely is one of the two liberal constitutional experts being questioned, not one of the two conservative experts.  in case you don't get it, look at the bolded sentences, the "fourth branch" Turely is referring to is the regulatory agencies that write the regulations, they are limited to defining and interpreting, not expanding like the Department of Justice had done with the ADA.  Depending upon the outcome of these ACA judicial hearings I would think a constitutional challange to the sweeping ADA regulations would be in order.

¹ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Turley


----------



## mark handler (Dec 9, 2013)

conarb said:
			
		

> Please cite the rulings.  Who wrote the regulations being enforced implementing the legislation?In the House Judiciary Committee hearings Tuesday Constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley said:
> 
> Turely is one of the two liberal constitutional experts being questioned, not one of the two conservative experts.  in case you don't get it, look at the bolded sentences, the "fourth branch" Turely is referring to is the regulatory agencies that write the regulations, they are limited to defining and interpreting, not expanding like the Department of Justice had done with the ADA.  Depending upon the outcome of these ACA judicial hearings I would think a constitutional challange to the sweeping ADA regulations would be in order.
> 
> ¹ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Turley


His testimony had to do with warrantless wiretaps, your conspiracy theory continues,,,, read you own cite

Obama did not create ADA congress did First bush signed it. Second bush resigned it.

Long before Obama was around to P*ss on.

The standards were not written by the DOJ, try the Access Board in 2004, they are enforced by the DOJ


----------



## mark handler (Dec 9, 2013)

Supreme Court ADA cases

Have fun, Remember ADA is not a construction code it is a civil rights law.

https://www.google.com/#q=ada+supreme+court+decisions&undefined=undefined


----------



## conarb (Dec 9, 2013)

Mark said:
			
		

> His testimony had to do with warrantless wiretaps, your conspiracy theory continues,,,, read you own cite


Mark:

I realize that you don't have a legal education, but Tuesday's hearings had nothing to do with warrantless searches, they were about Obamacare (ACA) and the executive's authority to enforce or not enforce, in the end Turley addresses the "fourth branch" writing regulations, it's my contention that if these hearings lead to a constitutional crises the whole subject of government agencies writing regulations that exceed the legislation should come up, as I said, I don't have a problem with ADA as passed by congress, but I do have a problem with the overreaching regulations.

That was last Tuesday, tomorrow another similar case is coming to the courts, this one involving the EPA:



			
				Bloomberg said:
			
		

> Two of President Barack Obama’s  top pollution-control measures face courtroom tests tomorrow as  coal-dependent utilities, miners and some states challenge what they  call overreach by the Environmental Protection Agency.  Efforts  to regulate pollutants that cause smog and soot, as well as mercury from  coal plants, have moved in fits and starts for more than a decade. If  both rules go forward it would cause power producers such as American Electric Power Co. (AEP) and Southern Co. (SO) to shutter old plants or invest billions of dollars in pollution-control technology.
> 
> The U.S. Court of Appeals  for the D.C. Circuit struck down the rule. It said the regulation was  too strict and that EPA didn’t give states a chance to put in place  their own pollution-reduction plans before imposing a nationwide  standard. The Obama administration and environmental groups are  appealing.¹


The ADA needs some major constitutional challenges.

¹ http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-09/obama-s-pollution-control-agenda-goes-to-court-tomorrow.html


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Dec 9, 2013)

mark handler said:
			
		

> Supreme Court has ruled on ADA issues.ADA, according to the Supreme Court,* IS the law of the land*
> 
> I guess the Supreme Court, congress, the state government and the president are all parts of your Totalitarian conspiracies....


Jim Crow was held constitutional by SCOTUS.

There are others, and notable.

Brent


----------



## conarb (Dec 9, 2013)

I've got to go now to meet with both my CPA and tax attorney, trying to get my $300,000 to $400,000 estimated income tax burden down for this year.  A few blocks away I'll pass a park closed down being remodeled as an "All Abilities Park", this is my tax dollars at work.  ADA is just another redistribution of wealth program, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need", in this case maybe Marx should have written "From each according to his ability, to each according to his disability".


----------



## mark handler (Dec 9, 2013)

MASSDRIVER said:
			
		

> Jim Crow was held constitutional by SCOTUS.There are others, and notable.
> 
> Brent


Jim Crow ruling, one of the first in a series of Anti discrimination laws that lead to the American with Disabilities Act

Are you saying you want to repeal the Jim Crow ruling? .... are all parts of the Totalitarian conspiracies....

Jim Crow ruling, another Totalitarian court ruling... lets continue the civil war.....


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Dec 9, 2013)

mark handler said:
			
		

> Jim Crow ruling, one of the first in a series of Anti discrimination laws that lead to the American with Disabilities ActAre you saying you want to repeal the Jim Crow ruling? .... are all parts of the Totalitarian conspiracies....


You do realize, I hope, Jim Crow laws created legal segregation, among other racist dogma, under the auspice of equality?

And you should know I am using it in context of illustration of bad law held up by SCOTUS. I am enlightening you, generously mind you, that simply noting "law of the land" in a bad metric on which to base argument. Another would be Roe v. Wade. Regardless of stance on abortion, it is generally regarded as bad law from those on both sides of the issue.

Judge Roberts recently plopped a confounding turd when he upheld the Obamacare debacle on the basis of, according to his thinking, if congress enacts a law, it is SCOTUS responsibility to find a way to uphold that law. This ruling alone caused others on the court to have dissents of their own dissents attempting to come to terms with such a crap argument.

Brent


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Dec 9, 2013)

mark handler said:
			
		

> Supreme Court ADA casesHave fun, Remember ADA is not a construction code it is a civil rights law.
> 
> https://www.google.com/#q=ada+supreme+court+decisions&undefined=undefined


That is the foundational problem.

Brent


----------



## mark handler (Dec 9, 2013)

the jim crow  ruling as cited below, Jim Crow ruling (case) as cited below , was one of the first in a series of Anti discrimination laws that lead to the American with Disabilities Act

Marshall mounted a well-planned assault on Jim Crow in the educational system by arguing Sweatt v. Painter (1950) and McLauren v. Oklahoma State Regents (1950). In Sweatt, a case against the University of Texas Law School, the Court ruled that the black facilities provided by the university did not meet the standard of equality, so black students could not be excluded from the white facilities....

You need to read more, not just the media bites presented by fox news


----------



## mark handler (Dec 9, 2013)

MASSDRIVER said:
			
		

> ..." foundational problem." Brent


Brent Do you know what that means? good. foundational is that a word. and that is a fundamental problem,when conveying your argument.


----------



## mark handler (Dec 9, 2013)

conarb said:
			
		

> Tuesday's hearings had nothing to do with warrantless searches, they were about Obamacare (ACA)


your Wikipedia citation quotation related to his one sided comments on the NSA program, Obama did not start.


----------



## mark handler (Dec 9, 2013)

conarb said:
			
		

> I've got to go now to meet with both my CPA and tax attorney, trying to get my $300,000 to $400,000 estimated income tax burden down for this year.  A few blocks away I'll pass a park closed down being remodeled as an "All Abilities Park", this is my tax dollars at work.  ADA is just another redistribution of wealth program, "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need", in this case maybe Marx should have written "From each according to his ability, to each according to his disability".


Now I clearly know there is no conspiracy, I told them to bill you for $536,000 not  $400,000


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Dec 9, 2013)

mark handler said:
			
		

> Brent Do you know what that means? good. foundational is not a word. and that is a fundamental problem,when conveying your argument.


Don't be a nerd.

That's a word.

Thank you for post #21. That's more like it.

As for Fox News, I don't even have a tv, so you may dispense that illusion.

I will try not to confuse my natural inclination, as a woodbutcher, to gravitate towards foundations, when I should be concerned, rather, with fun.

Brent


----------



## mtlogcabin (Dec 10, 2013)

Compliance achieved and no demand letters where sent to pay damages to someone who never visited the facility? Oh I see it wasn't in CA so it was a Federal issue and enforced by the Feds. Just the way it should be.


----------



## conarb (Dec 10, 2013)

Debate.org had a debate on ADA, repeal it or keep it, with 18 voters keep it won 40 to 36, for any interested read not only the debate but the comments of the voters below.


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Dec 10, 2013)

mark handler said:
			
		

> your Wikipedia citation quotation related to his one sided comments on the NSA program, Obama did not start.


Mark, you have an odd love/hate relationship with WIKIPEDIA. On the one hand, you chide incessantly on it's use, and on the other, use it for yourself. It is useful for quick reference, as evidenced when a lack of law education was mentioned, you were able to wiki Jim Crow and therefore find your references.

Ironic, as Sweat vs. Painter merely stated that facilities should be equal, not constructed specially.

You should also note, as I pointed out, Jim Crow was racist law, and bad law, which the cases you wiki'ed fought.

Trying to find your point here...

Brent


----------



## mark handler (Dec 10, 2013)

MASSDRIVER said:
			
		

> Mark, you have an odd love/hate relationship with WIKIPEDIA. On the one hand, you chide incessantly on it's use, and on the other, use it for yourself. It is useful for quick reference, as evidenced when a lack of law education was mentioned, you were able to wiki Jim Crow and therefore find your references. Ironic, as Sweat vs. Painter merely stated that facilities should be equal, not constructed specially.
> 
> You should also note, as I pointed out, Jim Crow was racist law, and bad law, which the cases you wiki'ed fought.
> 
> ...


Wikipedia is not my source. What is your point...

https://lcrm.lib.unc.edu/blog/index.php/tag/mclaurin-v-oklahoma-state-regents/


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Dec 10, 2013)

mark handler said:
			
		

> Wikipedia is not my source. What is your point...https://lcrm.lib.unc.edu/blog/index.php/tag/mclaurin-v-oklahoma-state-regents/


Sure.

It was either that or ADA for dummies.

Brent


----------



## JPohling (Dec 10, 2013)

You all change it and then let me know,  until then I will enforce it without mercy.


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Dec 10, 2013)

JPohling said:
			
		

> You all change it and then let me know,  until then I will enforce it without mercy.


Really? How about without prejudice and fairly, Mr. Building official?

You should enforce it.

Brent


----------



## JPohling (Dec 10, 2013)

its the same thing


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Dec 10, 2013)

JPohling said:
			
		

> its the same thing


Hardly. You have the authority to enforce code. Mercy is a judicial quality.

You are to be objective and check for compliance. No one elected you to rule. That's the only thing you have sAid that p1ssed me off.

King Nothing.

Brent.


----------



## ADAguy (Dec 10, 2013)

Problem in "your" mind, a resolveable issue in the minds of others.

Just wait until someone close to you requires a walker, chair or cane, "then" just maybe you attitude will change.

If "others" are entitled to civil rights then why shouldn't the disabled be too?


----------



## JPohling (Dec 10, 2013)

First off,  I used "enforce" a bit loosely as I am not a BO.  lowly architect here.  But I do not show any mercy on my accessibility surveys.  I identify all of the items that are out of compliance.  objective and thorough.


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Dec 10, 2013)

That's different. I apologize and have zero problem with your work

Brent.


----------



## MASSDRIVER (Dec 10, 2013)

ADAguy said:
			
		

> Problem in "your" mind, a resolveable issue in the minds of others.Just wait until someone close to you requires a walker, chair or cane, "then" just maybe you attitude will change.
> 
> If "others" are entitled to civil rights then why shouldn't the disabled be too?


Your assumptions about me are wrong.

Brent


----------

