Consider writing members of this committee!
Norman Coombs
Chair of EASI (Equal Access to Software and Information)
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Justice For All Moderator" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Sunday, February 06, 2000 10:06 PM
>Subject: Urgent: Affirm ADA Applies to Web!
>
>
>>
>>                         Justice For All
>>
>>                         [log in to unmask]
>>
>>               Urgent: Affirm ADA Applies to Web!
>>
>> Charles Crawford, [log in to unmask], writes:
>>
>>      As some may know, there has been a memorandum written by
>> Attorney Paul Taylor of the U.S. House of representatives
>> Judiciary Committee, subcommittee on the constitution to
>> subcommittee chairman Charles T. Canady entitled "Hearing
>> Proposal Regarding the Application of the Americans With
>> Disabilities Act's Accessibility Requirements to Private Internet
>> Web Sites and Services."  A quick summary of the memo after two
>> readings of it reveals the following points.
>>
>>      *  There needs to be a legislative record of congressional
>> intent with respect to the issue of ADA application to the web.
>>
>>      We might answer; that legislative history precedes the
>> passage of a law rather than being created after the fact.  In
>> short, holding a hearing to establish intent is neither
>> appropriate nor in any real way an expression of the will of the
>> congress through a mere committee.
>>
>>      *  The internet has already been working to accommodate the
>> needs of people with disabilities and despite the benefits this
>> has accomplished, disabled people are increasingly going to court
>> as evidenced by the NFB suit against AOL.
>>
>>      We might answer that the days have long since passed when
>> people with disabilities ought to be thankful for what we get and
>> stop being ingrates by demanding real access to the web.
>>
>>      *  The internet and web are a major economic force in the
>> overall U.S. economy and would suffer harm if accessibility were
>> to be imposed.  This is due to such things as having to
>> accommodate people with cognitive problems and to make audio
>> files to be downloaded by blind folks.  These kinds of
>> accommodations would force small web sites to have to purchase
>> more space, invest in equipment, slow their transfer of
>> information rates, put in more work and expense, purchase or
>> expand their band width, chill their creativity, and lose
>> revenues from less traffic because of slower and more bulky
>> interfacing.
>>
>>      We might answer by pointing out that all the work on what
>> constitutes an accessible web site has been done by the World
>> Wide Web Consortium and implementation of their web authoring
>> guidelines is neither difficult, expensive or counter-productive
>> to their business interests.
>>
>>      *  Unless the congress holds this hearing, Section 508 of
>> the rehabilitation Act and all of its requirements of
>> accessibility will be imposed upon governmental web sites and
>> those of the states receiving assistance under the Assistive
>> Technology Act.  This would mean that private web sites would
>> increasingly be expected to have the same level of access as
>> would the public sites.
>>
>>      Again our answer is that it just ain't that hard and these
>> kinds of smoke screens accomplish nothing more than raise
>> hysteria to the uneducated.
>>
>>      *  Title III of the americans with Disabilities Act does not
>> apply to the internet because the web sites are not places of
>> public accommodations, the first amendment of the Constitution
>> prevents the government from forcing web page editors to utilize
>> space for purposes not chosen by those editors, and the same
>> amendment would prevent the government from limiting speech by
>> governmental imposition of additional costs.
>>
>>      Our answer is simple.  Like the Justice Department has said,
>> if you have a business and you use the internet as a way of
>> selling beyond the doors of your store, then you are responsible
>> to make sure your customers have access.  Even if you don't have
>> a physical store, there is plenty of common sense to suggest that
>> if you sell it on the net, it is no different than anywhere else
>> and so you must make your site accessible.  The other arguments
>> on the notion of compelled speech by forcing design changes is
>> just a bunch of esoteric legal babble that makes no sense since
>> all you are doing is making what you want to say accessible
>> rather than changing the nature of it.
>>
>>
>>      This summary has been very short and is interpretive of what
>> was written, but it clearly points to a dangerous attempt on the
>> part of this attorney to present an alarmist point of view that
>> could plant the seeds of misguided thinking with respect to the
>> ADA and the web.  Not only are there proper protections in the
>> ADA to prevent abuses, but the obvious lack of understanding by
>> this person of what the technology is and his pointing to largely
>> dubious relevant case law can only lead us to conclude that he is
>> suffering from economic speculation that is likely incorrect and
>> pushing a hidden agenda that is possibly the product of those who
>> don't want to be bothered by annoying people with disabilities
>> asking for things that are more annoying to produce.
>>
>> So what could this mean?
>>
>>      If this is truly the first shot in a war against
>> accessibility requirements for the web, then we can anticipate
>> more negative commentary on what a burden we place on the
>> internet.  We will hear how the net is the future of our economy
>> and how nothing should stand in the way of its totally free
>> growth.  We will hear how the web is the ultimate expression of
>> free marketeering and any attempt to regulate it is an offense
>> against creativity, initiative and the american way.  All of this
>> will of course happen while fortunes are made and any
>> consideration of our needs (whether blind or otherwise disabled)
>> will be a function of charity or a sense of fairness, but
>> certainly not as any kind of right or ability to infringe upon
>> the absolute freedom of those on the web.
>>
>> So what should we do?
>>
>>      We must communicate with the congress directly and
>> repeatedly until we are secure in our rights of access.  Our
>> message will be straightforward and clear; the internet is the
>> vehicle through which the future of information sharing and
>> commerce will pass and we simply will not allow ourselves to be
>> pushed back into the darkness of the past where we relied upon
>> others to give us access to information at their pleasure.
>>
>>      We must communicate with the members of the subcommittee and
>> let them know that the hearing scheduled for tuesday February 9,
>> 2000 must be an affirmation of our participation on the world
>> wide web and not a condemnation of it.  Tell these members of the
>> subcommittee your story on how you use the web and what a
>> difference it makes for you and other people with disabilities.
>> Here is the listing of the members of the subcommittee and how
>> you can reach them.  There is not as much of a need to
>> communicate with other members of the House of Representatives at
>> this point since our objective is to kill the notion of the ADA
>> not applying to the web right in the subcommittee.  If this
>> misinformation campaign against the ADA and the web continues,
>> then we will need to be much more aggressive and alert the entire
>> congress to our needs.
>>
>> List of subcommittee members to contact.
>>
>> 1.) Charles T. Canady, FL, Chairman (R)
>> Phone: 202-225-1252
>> Fax: 202-225-2279
>> web site: http://www.house.gov/canady
>>
>> 2.) Henry J. Hyde, IL (R)
>> Phone: 202-225-4561
>> Fax: 202-225-1166
>> web site: http://www.house.gov/hyde
>>
>> 3.) Asa Hutchinson, AR (R)
>> Phone: 202-225-4301
>> Fax: 202-225-5713
>> web site: http://www.house.gov/hutchinson
>>
>> 4.) Spencer Bachus, AL (R)
>> Phone: 202-225-4921
>> Fax: 202-225-2082
>> web site: http://www.house.gov/bachus
>>
>> 5.) Bob Goodlatte, VA (R)
>> Phone: 202-225-5431
>> Fax: 202-225-9681
>> web site: http://www.house.gov/goodlatte
>>
>> 6.) Bob Barr, GA  (R)
>> Phone: 202-225-2931
>> Fax: 202-225-2944
>> web site: http://www.house.gov/barr
>>
>> 7.) William L. Jenkins, TN (R)
>> Phone: 202-225-6356
>> Fax: 202-225-5714
>> web site: http://www.house.gov/jenkins
>>
>> 8.) Lindsey O. Graham, SC  (R)
>> Phone: 202-225-5301
>> FAX: NA
>> web site: http://www.house.gov/graham
>>
>>
>> Democrats
>> 1.) Melvin L. Watt, NC   (D)
>> Phone: 202-225-1510
>> FAX: 202-225-1512
>> web site: http://www.house.gov/watt
>>
>> 2.) Maxine Waters, CA (D)
>> Phone: 202-225-2201
>> FAX: NA
>> web site: http://www.house.gov/waters
>>
>> 3.) Barney Frank, MA  (D)
>> Phone: 202-225-5931
>> FAX: 202-225-0182
>> web site: http://www.house.gov/frank
>>
>> 4.) John Conyers, Jr., MI (D)
>> Phone: 202-225-5126
>> FAX: 202-225-0072
>> Web site: http://www.house.gov/conyers
>>
>> 5. Jerrold Nadler, NY (D)
>> Phone: 202-225-5635
>> FAX: 202-225-6923
>> web site: http://www.house.gov//nadler
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Fred Fay
>> Chair, Justice For All
>> [log in to unmask]
>> http://www.jfanow.org
>>
>> Register to Vote Online at http://www.fec.gov/votregis/vr.htm
>>
>> =====================================================================
>>                  Justice-For-All FREE Subscriptions
>>    To subscribe or unsubscribe, send mail to [log in to unmask]
>>          with one or the other in the body of your message:
>>                          subscribe justice
>>                         unsubscribe justice
>>
>
>

EASI's online workshop on accessible Web design,
Barrier-free Web Design, begins Feb. 22.
Making your Web pages accessible is the right thing to do,
and it is the law.  For information, go to
http://www.rit.edu/~easi and click on workshops.