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