We can go just so long constantly reaching dead ends. I am broke, degraded, and angry, have attempted suicide three times. I know hundreds. Most of us try but which way and where can we go? What and who can we be? If I were understood, I would have something to live for. (Testimony before House Subcommittees on Select Education and Employment Opportunities, Ser. No. 101-37 July 18, 1989, p. 58.) The frustration experienced by many Americans with disabilities was expressed by Cindy Miller: I am tired of being tired, fighting angry, and depressed every day fighting for my rights I do not want to be Rosa Parks, I just want to be Cindy Miller. (Testimony before House Subcommittee on Select Education, Ser. No. 100-109, October 24, 1989, p. 161.) THE EFFECTS OF DISCRIMINATION ON SOCIETY The Committee also heard testimony and reviewed reports concluding that discrimination results in dependency on social welfare programs that cost the taxpayers unnecessary billions of dollars each year. Sandy Parrino, the chairperson of the National Council on Disability, testified that discrimination places people with disabilities in chains that: .. bind many of the 36 million people into a bondage of unjust, unwanted dependency on families, charity, and social welfare. Dependency that is a major and totally unnecessary contributor to public deficits and private expenditures. (Testimony before House Subcommittee on Select Education and Senate Subcommittee on the Handicapped, S. Hrng. 100-926, September 27, 1988, p. 27.) She added that: It is contrary to sound principles of fiscal responsibility to spend billions of federal tax dollars to relegate people with disabilities to positions of dependency upon public support. (Id. at p. 28.) President Bush has stated: On the cost side, the National Council on the Handicapped states that current (federal) spending on disability benefits and programs exceeds $60 billion annually. Excluding the millions of disabled who want to work from the employment ranks costs society literally billions of dollars annually in support payments and lost income tax revenues. (Statement by Vice President George Bush on Disabled Americans, March 31, 1988, p. 2.) Attorney General Thornburgh has stated that: We must recognize that passing comprehensive civil rights legislation protecting persons with disabilities will have direct and tangilble benefits for our country... Certainly, the elimination of employment discrimination and the mainstreaming of persons with disabilities will result in more persons with disabilities working, in increasing Justin Dart testified that it is discrimination and segregation that are preventing persons with disabilities from becoming self-reliant: and that are driving us inevitably towards an economic and moral disaster of giant, paternalistic welfare bureaucracies. We already paying unaffordable and rapidly escalating billions in public and private funds to maintain ever-increasing millions of potentially productive Americans in unjust, unwanted dependency. (Testimony before House Subcommittees on Select Education and Employment Opportunities, Ser. No. 101-37, p. 65.) Thus, discrimination makes people with disabilities dependent on social welare programs rather than allowing them to be taxpayers and consumers. Discrimination also deprives our nation of a critically needed source of labor in a period where demographic and other changes in our society are creating shortages of qualified applicants in many jobs. President Bush has stated: The United States is now beginning to face labor shortages as the baby boomers move through the work force. The disabled offer a pool of talented workers whom we simply cannot afford to ignore, especially in connection with the high tech growth industries of the future. (Statement of Vice President George Bush on Disabled Americans, March 31, 1988, p. 2.) Jay Rochlin, the executive director of the President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities, explained why the needs of people with disabilities for employment opportunities and the needs of businesses for qualified employees make for what he calls a "win-win" situation: The... (Department of Labor's) Opportunity 2000 concluded that businesses will be able to satisfy their labor needs only if they successfully confront . . . barriers and empower individuals presently outside the economic mainstream to take advantage of meaningful employment opportunties. "... While comprehensive civil rights legislation can provide protections from employment discrimination for persons with disabilities, it will also enhance the private sector's access to an additional resource of human capital-qualified individuals with disabilities." (Testimony before House Subcommittees on Select Education and Employment Opportunities, Ser. No. 101-51, September 13, 1989, p. 33.) 36-871-91 - 11 Mr. Rochlin related the story of Tina Saenger, who became quadriplegic as the result of an auto accident. She used a wheelchair but access was not a problem at her job at AT&T where whe worked as a long distance phone operator, because the office was fully accessible. The fact that Tina had limited use of her fingers might have prevented her from being able to perform her job because the office had a policy prohibiting the use of pencils by phone operators to punch in numbers. Under rights provided under section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act, however, Tina was able to have this rule modified as a reasonable accommodation to her disability. Her job performance to this day is outstanding. As Mr. Rochlin says: Consider the economic impact of that simple accommodation. It enables Tina to have a job which pays well. She owns both a home and a car and supports her mother in addition to herself. The alternative is no longer acceptable. We should not spend our tax dollars to support someone who is able to be an independent and productive taxpaying citizen, particularly when we can do so, so easily. (Id. at pp. 36-37.) Justin Dart, Jr. stated: As a former CEO of both large and small enterprises, employing persons with severe disabilities and constructing accessible facilities, I know that ADA is affordable for business and that ADA is good business and this is not simply my personal opinion. Every significant requirement of ADA is now being implemented successfully by progressive public and private entities somewhere. (Testimony before House Subcommittees on Select Education and Employment Opportunities, Ser. No. 101-37, July 18, 1989, p. 57.) In the increasingly competitive international economy, our nation must adopt policies which result in a bridging of the vast gulf separating the actual from the potential contributions of people with disabilities to the health of our economy. To remove the unnecessary barriers shackling people with disabilities is to avail our society of the full range of their talents and abilities. Robert Mosbacher, Jr. stated: From the perspective of a private sector employer, this legislation is also extremely important. If we are to remain competitive as a nation in the international marketplace, we must have a well trained, well educated and highly motivated workforce. Millions of disabled Americans who have been denied access to the workplace are well educated and can be easily trained. What is more, they are some of the most highly motivated people in our society today. (Testimony before House Subcommittee on Select Education, Ser. No. 101-56, August 28, 1989, p. 62.) Our nation's most precious resource is our people. To the extent that the changes in practices and attitudes brought about by implementation of the Act ultimately assist people with disabilities in becoming more productive and independent members of society, both they and our entire society benefit. Mark Donovan, Manager of Community Employment and Training Programs for the Marriott Corporation testified: . . . Marriott is recognized as a leader in the area of employment of people with disabilities . . . I raise that issue because I think it's important to note why Marriott has so aggressively assumed this position. The reason is simple: it makes good, bottom line, business sense. As a corporation operating in the hospitality industry, our employees are our life blood. It is only to the degree to which we can find, attract, train, and retain able and motivated people that we will be successful . . . From our perspective, not to draw upon the resources represented by people with disabilities would be absurd. (Testimony before House Subcommittees on Select Education and Employment Opportunities, Ser. No. 101-51, September 13, 1989, pp. 45-46.) Discrimination also negates the billions of dollars we invest each year to educate our children and youth with disabilities and train and rehabilitate adults with disabilities Howard Wolf, Chairman of the Board of the Institute on Rehabilitation and Research, stated: Have we accomplished enough when we educate, rehabilitate and care for people with disabilities only to ignore discrimination against them in the workforce, in transportation, in public accommodations? How many well educated and highly capable people with disabilities must sit down at home every day, not because of their lack of ability, but because of the attitudes of employers, service providers, and government officials? (Testimony before House Subcommittee on Select Education, Ser. No. 101-56, August 28, 1989, p. 67.) Sylvia Piper, a parent of a child with developmental disabilities testified that: We have invested in Dan's future. And the Ankeny public school District has made an investment in Dan's future... Are we going to allow this investment of time, energy, and dollars, not to mention Dan's ability and quality of life, to cease when he reaches age 21? (Testimony before House Subcommittee on Select Education and Senate Subcommiteee on the Handicapped, S. Hrg. 100926, September 27, 1988, pp. 68-69.) Attorney General Thornburgh has made the same point: The continued maintenance of these barriers imposes staggering economic and social costs and inhibits our sincere and substantial Federal commitment to the education, rehabilitation, and employment of persons with disabilities. The elimination of these barriers will enable society to benefit from the skills and talents of persons with disabilities and will enable persons with disabilities to lead more productive lives. (Testimony before House Subcom mittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights, Ser. No. 58, Oc- Apart from the economic benefits to individuals with disabilities and to the nation that this legislation is expected to bring about, its non-economic improvements in the quality of life of millions of Americans are no less important. The deaf person who can, be cause of the mandated nationwide TDD hookup, now spontaneously communicate with hearing friends in or out of their state; the woman who uses a wheelchair who can now accompany her children to the newly accessible museum using an accessible bus, or visit her sick mother in another state using a newly accessible intercity bus, or enter the supermakret; the blind individual who can, using newly marked elevator buttons, conveniently get to her sixth floor office appointment; the woman with cerebal palsy now allowed to enter the movie theater-the value of such benefits to individuals who seek to live a full life, free from arbitrary, confining, and humiliating treatment, cannot be calculated. The commitment to promote greater dignity and an improved quality of life for people with disabilities evinced in the provisions of the Act provide further powerful justification for its enactment. CURRENT FEDERAL AND STATE LAWS ARE INADEQUATE; NEED FOR COMPREHENSIVE FEDERAL LEGISLATION State laws are indaequate to address the pervasive problems of discrimination that people with disabilities are facing. As Admiral Watkins said: My predecessor [Sandy Parrino] here this morning said enough time has, in my opinion, been given to the States to legislate what is right. Too many States, for whatever reason, still perpetuate confusion. It is time for Federal action. (Testimony before House Subcommittee on Select Education and Senate Subcommittee on the Handicapped, S. Hrng. 100-926, September 27, 1988, p. 39.) The fifty State Governor's Committees, with whom the President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities works, report that existing state laws do not adequately counter acts of discrimination against people with disabilities. Current Federal law is also inadequate. Currently, Federal antidiscrimination laws only address discrimination by Federal agencies, entities that have contracts with the Federal government, and recipients of Federal financial assistance. Last year, Congress amended the Fair Housing Act to prohibit discrimination against people with disabilities in the sale and rental of private housing. However, there are still no protections against discrimination by employers in the private sector, by places of public accommodation, by State and local government agencies that do not receive Federal aid, and with respect to the provision of telecommunication services. With respect to the provisions of accessible transportation services, there have been misinterpretations by executive agencies and some courts regarding the prohibition against discrimination by public entities under the Rehabilitation Act and there has been |