Folks,
I post this reluctantly since I do respect Mary Blanton's post and all of
you who do not think this mailing list is a political forum. I am not
posting this in order to spawn more discussion, but only to provide a link
to those who want more information. After doing a simple google search on
George Bush and disabilities, this was one of the first links to come
up--our nation's White House--so here you go:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/freedominitiative/freedominitiative.html
I also did a search or Ralph Nader and disabilities and found this:
http://www.issues2000.org/2004/Ralph_Nader_Social_Security.htm
It is an old link from 2000 about Social Security. There was no link that
ook me to a statement regarding Nader's stand on the A.D.A. There may be
more information using a different search criteria.
Cynthia
"Senk, Mark J."
<[log in to unmask]>
To
10/27/2004 07:44 <[log in to unmask]>
AM cc
Subject
RE: Re: [VICUG-L] Election
2004
I hope you can find something - please post the link - on the Bush New
Freedom Initiative.
We need a factcheck.org concerning the ADA.
- Mark
Mark Senk | 412-386-6513 | [log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
From: VICUG-L: Visually Impaired Computer Users' Group List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
[log in to unmask]
Sent: Monday, October 25, 2004 5:00 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [VICUG-L] Election 2004
Folks,
I disagree with this email on several counts.
First, I feel it is fear mongering to claim that another four years of a
republican administration will put the A.D.A. at risk. There is no
evidence presented in this email to support this claim. I would note
that
it was a republican administration which first signed the A.D.A. into
law--under the George H. W. Bush administration. In fact, I have
observed
during the last four years that the scope of the A.D.A. has actually
broadened to include web sites under the definition of "places of public
accommodation". This has occurred in a few states so far, but the
number
of appellate courts supporting this definition is growing. All civil
rights legislation takes time to percolate through the system until
their
is broad acceptance. If you doubt this assertion look up the history on
the 1964 Civil Rights Act, not to mention the Section 508 requirements
which were actually part of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Remember
that
Section 508 did not become part of the federal procurement guidelines
until
2001.
Second, I am always suspicious when I am urged to vote for one candidate
or
another merely because of their stand on a single issue. I feel that
neither Bush nor Kerry has addressed the disabilities issues clearly
enough, and agree with Kelly that both candidates should define their
objectives more clearly. When I look at Kerry's record, in particular,
I
find no proposed or passed legislation that helps people with a
disability
in this society. So my approach in this election, like all others, is
to
evaluate candidates on their entire record and not vote based on
unsupported claims that the sky is falling in and that a Bush
administration would be any more dangerous than a Kerry administration
with
regard to the A.D.A.
Cynthia
Lainey Feingold
<lfeingold1@EARTH
LINK.NET>
To
Sent by: [log in to unmask]
"VICUG-L:
cc
Visually Impaired
Computer Users'
Subject
Group List" Election 2004
<VICUG-L@MAELSTRO
M.STJOHNS.EDU>
10/23/2004 11:10
PM
Please respond to
Lainey Feingold
<lfeingold1@EARTH
LINK.NET>
In many states across the country, voting Third Party in this election,
as
was suggested by someone on this list, means voting for 4 more years of
George W. Bush.
The following message was written by long-time disability rights lawyer
and
activist, Steve Gold. As a lawyer who has exclusively represented the
disability community generally, and the blind community in particular,
for
the past 12 years, I agree with this message wholeheartedly. In case
this
message is not read in its entirety, here is Steve Gold's ending first:
"The bottom line - a vote for Bush puts the ADA in serious jeopardy."
To this important message, I would add the following: Even if you are a
person who never intends to file an ADA lawsuit, and even if you're a
person who does not believe in ADA lawsuits, another four years of a
republican administration pose extremely serious risks for the blind
community. Unfair judges on every level can rollback progress for
everyone
-- not just parties to the lawsuit (In the next four years for example,
it
is quite likely that the courts will consider whether public and private
websites have to be accessible.) Federal agency appointments effect the
blind community as well: The Department of Justice will be issuing new
ADA
regulations, including Talking ATM regulations; the Federal
Communications
Commission has important authority over the accessibility of
telecommunications equipment, and the list goes on. Other federal
programs
and issues of importance to various segments of the blind community are
at
deep risk should there be another four years of a Republican
administration: Medicare, Medicaid, special education, stem cell
research,
jobs programs, prescription drug costs. . . again, the list goes on.
Here is Steve Gold's message
>THE ADA, THE COURTS, AND THE ELECTION - 10/04
>
> A number of people have asked me about the Presidential election
and
> the survival of the ADA, as well as how Court decisions impact on the
> empowerment of the disability community. It is important to look at
both
> the Supreme Court AND the lower federal courts.
>
> First, President George W. Bush has said that his model Supreme
Court
> nominees are Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. In two
critical
> ADA/disability cases, OLMSTEAD (integration of persons with
disabilities
> from institutions to the community) and LANE (access to the courts by
> persons with disabilities), both of these Justices ruled against the
> disabled Plaintiffs and therefore against the disability community.
>
> These two Justices have attacked the ADA directly, challenging
> whether or not Congress intended the ADA to require integration and
> whether Congress had the power to end discrimination by requiring
access
> to courts. They have also attacked the ADA indirectly, saying that
> disabled individuals and advocacy groups do not have "standing" to
> enforce the ADA or "federalism" prevents enforcement of the ADA.
These
> two have also been on the anti-ADA side in cases restricting the scope
> and definition of disability.
>
> If President Bush wins on November 2, 2004 and appoints several
more
> Justices in the model of Scalia and Thomas, the ADA will be seriously
in
> jeopardy in the Supreme Court.
>
> Second, while most people focus only on the Supreme Court,
President
> Bush has appointed approximately 200 district and appellate judges.
It
> is at this level that most cases are decided (because the Supreme
Court
> decides very few cases as compared to the number decided at the
district
> and appellate court levels).
>
> While I do not pretend to know, or have documentary evidence,
about
> all these 200 judges, I can use my experience during more than 30
years
> as a comparison. Given the ideological conflicts in this country
which
> also exist in the Courts, the disability community should want the
> appointment of truly fair and principled (unbiased) judges who respect
> Congress' role in banning and defining disability discrimination.
>
> What has happened in the past four years at the lower court level
is
> a demonstrable shift with the odds tilting dramatically against
fairness
> and principles(in most circuits, not all). It has been much harder to
> win ADA cases during the past four years than in the 1990s. There is
a
> judicial attitude that has started at the Supreme Court level and has
> seeped down that lower court judges should feel free not accept what
> Congress intended when it enacted the ADA. This severely hurts the
> disability community.
>
> Third, in the document "Top 20 Reasons Why People with
Disabilities
> Choose John Kerry for President," Senator Kerry has written that he
will
> "Vigorously fight any attempt to weaken the Americans with
Disabilities
> Act (ADA) by proposing legislation to restore the rights that have
been
> whittled away in the ADA by the Supreme Court and appoint only judges
who
> support the ADA and other civil rights statutes." While there are no
> guarantees in this life, that sure sounds better than voting against
> Olmstead and Lane.
>
> The bottom line - a vote for Bush puts the ADA in serious
> jeopardy. A vote for Kerry means we must hold him accountable to his
> written statement.
>
> Steve Gold, The Disability Odyssey continues
>
>Back issues of other Information Bulletins are available online at
>http://www.stevegoldada.com with a searchable Archive at this site
divided
>into different subjects. To contact Steve Gold directly, write to
>[log in to unmask]
Lainey Feingold
Law Office of Elaine B. Feingold
1524 Scenic Avenue
Berkeley, CA 94708
(510) 548-5062
[log in to unmask]
VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask] In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html
VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask] In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html
VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask] In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html
|
