Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to Calendar No. 927, S. 3406, a bill to restore the intent and protections of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; that the bill be read three times, passed, and…
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate now proceed to Calendar No. 927, S. 3406, a bill to restore the intent and protections of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990; that the bill be read three times, passed, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table, without intervening action or debate; that upon passage, Senator Hatch and I be recognized to speak for a period not to exceed 40 minutes total.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Statement of Managers to Accompany S. 3406, the Americans With Disabilities Act Amendments Act of 2008, be printed in the Record.
Madam President, I am extremely proud to be the chief sponsor of the ADA Amendments Act of 2008, along with the distinguished senior Senator from Utah, Senator Orrin Hatch. This bipartisan legislation will allow us to advance and fulfill the original promise of the Americans With Disabilities Act, which was signed into law 18 years ago.
I am especially grateful to Senator Hatch for his leadership and for his friendship through all these years in helping to craft and move this bill here in the Senate. Senator Hatch was one of the key players in helping get through the original ADA back in 1989 and 1990 when we passed it. And in this effort we have here today, he has become a true partner. I deeply appreciate his willingness to take on this critical role. I think it is safe to say that without the help and intense interest of Senator Hatch on this issue, and especially on the whole ADA process, the bill would not be here today. Again, I am so grateful to Senator Hatch for his friendship and his support through all of this long process.
And it has been a long process. We are not here today because we just met the other day to put this together. It has been a couple of years or more in the making, and at least over a year of very intense negotiations with the business community, the disability community, and others to get to where we are today.
This bill is similar to legislation that was introduced in the other body by the majority leader, Steny Hoyer, and Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin. That bill passed by a 402-to-17 margin in June, and of course the bill we have here today is going to pass unanimously.
I am also grateful that from the outset these bills have been conceived and crafted in a spirit of genuine bipartisanship, with Members of both parties coming together to do the right thing for Americans with disabilities. Today, we have nearly 80 Senators cosponsoring this bill. Of course, passage of the original ADA was also a bipartisan effort.
As the chief sponsor of that bill in the Senate, I worked very closely with a great number of people on both sides of the aisle, both here and in the administration--Senator Bob Dole, of course, and others on both sides of the aisle. We received invaluable support from then- President George Herbert Walker Bush and key members of his administration, including White House counsel Boyden Gray, who worked so hard to get the original bill through; and Attorney General Richard Thornburgh, who helped us craft the bill and made sure we did it in the right way. Dick Thornburgh was so instrumental in that initial passage, and ever since then, for the last 18 years, I have kept in contact with Attorney General Thornburgh periodically, talking about the ADA, what it was doing, how it was being implemented, and of course because of the recent court decisions, discussing with him how we could get to this point today and have a bill that would overturn those court decisions. Former Transportation Secretary Sam Skinner was very involved in this also.
But I would be remiss if I didn't state forthrightly the one person through all these years who was the key mover of the Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990, without whose leadership we could not have gotten it done, and who enabled this Senator to be the chairman of the Disability Policy Subcommittee and to get this bill moved through both subcommittee and committee. He was there from the very beginning to the end and has never let up in all his years on his interest in and support of legislation that would fully incorporate people with disabilities in all aspects of American life. Of course I speak of Senator Ted Kennedy, the chairman of the HELP Committee, who can't be here with us today. He is at home in Massachusetts recuperating and getting better so he can be here with us next year when we take up
health care reform. But if Senator Kennedy is watching, I wish to say: Ted, this one is for you. We finally got here. We finally got the bill up.
I thank Senator Kennedy for all of his help in the last 2 to 3 years in pulling everything together, and I am going to have more to say about that at the end when I thank all those wonderful staff members who helped. But Senator Kennedy has been there from the beginning, in the 1980s, when we were doing this, and all through the 1990s, to now, and I am sorry he can't be here with us today. I know he is here with us in spirit, and that spirit has been strong to get us to this point today.
I also thank Senator Enzi. Prior to a couple of years ago, he was chairman of the HELP Committee and was also very interested in helping to move this legislation along. Since he has been ranking member, he has also been involved, and his staff involved, in making sure we could get this bill here today.
The fact is that Americans from all walks of life take enormous pride in what we have done in the last 18 years since the passage of ADA. No one wants to go backwards. The ADA was one of the landmark civil rights statutes of the 20th century, a long overdue emancipation proclamation for Americans with disabilities. Thanks to that law, we have removed most physical barriers to movement and access for Americans with disabilities. We required employers to provide reasonable accommodations so people with disabilities could have equal opportunity in the workplace. We have greatly advanced the four goals of the ADA: equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency.
I think the triumph of the ADA revolution is all around us. I remember a couple of years ago attending a Washington convention of several hundred disability rights advocates, many with significant disabilities. They arrived in Washington on trains and airplanes and buses built to accommodate people with mobility impairments. They came to the hotel on Metro and on regular buses, all seamlessly accessible by wheelchair. They navigated the city streets equipped with curb cuts and ramps. The hotel where the convention took place was equipped in countless ways to accommodate all manner of people with all kinds of disabilities. There were sign language interpreters on the dais so the people with hearing disabilities could be full participants. And the list goes on and on. In other words, a kind of seamless approach to making sure that anyone could participate regardless of their disability.
For many Americans, these many changes are kind of invisible. We kind of take them for granted. We take curb cuts for granted and ramps, and widened doorways for granted. The fact is, every building--think about this--every building being built in America today is fully accessible, with a universal design. A universal design. Now, these changes may be invisible to most people, but for people with disabilities, they are transforming and liberating. The provisions in the ADA outlawed discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities in the workplace, requiring employers to provide reasonable accommodations. Again, these are liberating and transforming for people with disabilities.
But despite all this progress over the last 18 years, we have a problem. We have a big problem. And the problem arises because of a series of Supreme Court decisions that have greatly narrowed the scope of who is protected by the ADA. As a consequence, people with conditions that common sense would tell us are disabilities are being told by the courts that they are not in fact disabled and, therefore, not eligible for the protections of the law. For example, in a ruling last year, the 11th Circuit Court concluded that a person with an intellectual disability was not ``disabled'' under the ADA.
When I try to explain to people what the Supreme Court has done, they are shocked. Impairments that the Court says are not to be considered disabilities under the law--at least in some cases--include amputation, intellectual disabilities, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, diabetes, muscular dystrophy, cancer, and others.
In three decisions on the same day in June of 1999--what we now know as the Sutton trilogy--the Supreme Court held that corrective and mitigating measures must be considered in determining whether an individual has a disability under the ADA. This is in complete contradiction to congressional intent as we expressed in our committee reports.
When we pass laws around here, we don't put every single little thing in the law; we would have huge bills. What we do is we have committee reports and findings to instruct the courts as to what our intent is. We expect the courts to follow them.
In the Senate committee report, here is what we said:
Whether a person has a disability should be assessed
without regard to the availability of mitigating measures,
such as reasonable accommodations or auxiliary aids.
You cannot get much clearer than that. The House report said basically the same thing. It said:
For example, a person who is hard of hearing is
substantially limited in the major life activity of hearing,
even though the loss may be corrected through the use of a
hearing aid. Likewise, persons with impairments, such as
epilepsy or diabetes, which substantially limit a major life
activity are covered under . . . the definition of
disability, even if the effects of the impairment are
controlled by medication.
That was in our report 18 years ago. The Supreme Court ignored that. They ignored it.
In the Sutton case, Sutton v. United Airlines, the Supreme Court held that for persons taking corrective measures to mitigate a physical or mental impairment, the effect of those measures must be taken into account when judging whether a person is ``disabled''--and therefore covered under the law.
That could include anything from visual aids to prostheses.
In Murphy v. the United Parcel Service, the Court applied the same analysis to medication used to treat hypertension, and concluded an employee who was fired because he had high blood pressure and hypertension was not covered because he took medication to alleviate the symptoms. But, again, in our report, as we said before, that should not be taken into account.
In the case of Albertsons v. Kirkingburg--we call it the Kirkingburg case--the Supreme Court went further and declared mitigating measures to be considered in the determination of whether someone is disabled included not only artificial aids such as devices and medications but also subconscious measures that an individual may use to compensate for his or her impairment. What were they talking about? Kirkingburg was an individual who was blind in one eye. Through experience and coping with it, he had been able to compensate for the fact he was blind in one eye. The Court said subconsciously he was able to compensate for that, therefore he must not be disabled. People hear this and they say how could the Supreme Court have decided that?
Last, in another case, the Toyota case, the Court held there must be a ``demanding standing for qualifying as disabled.'' Again, restricted; a demanding standard. We have never said that in the ADA bill. We didn't say that at all.
What has happened is that countless individuals have been excluded from ADA, even though the general rule of all civil rights laws is they should be broadly construed to achieve their remedial purposes, and the ADA is a civil rights statute.
Again, what does all this mean? What this means is the Supreme Court decisions have led to a supreme absurdity, a Catch-22 situation that so many people with disabilities find themselves in today. For example, the more successful a person is at coping with a disability, the more likely it is the Court will find that they are no longer disabled and therefore no longer covered under the ADA. If they are not covered under ADA, then any request that they might make for a reasonable accommodation can be denied. If they do not get the reasonable accommodation, they cannot do their job; and they can get fired and they will not be covered by the ADA and they will not have any recourse.
Let's look at it this way. If you are disabled and you take medication or use an assistive device, then you will be able to do your job, right? If you take the medication, use the assistive device, now you can do your job, but you will not be covered by the ADA.
Therefore, if you ask for a reasonable accommodation, the employer will say: No, you can't do your job, you are fired and, guess what, you go to court and the court will say: You are not disabled, you use an assistive device, you take medication. On the other hand, if you do not take the medication or you do not use an assistive device, you will not be qualified to do the job.
So what is a person with a disability supposed to do? If I use medication or use an assistive device, it enables me to become economically self-sufficient, become independent, become fully integrated in society. If I take medication or use my assistive device I can do that, I can get a job. But then I am no longer covered by ADA, and I can be fired or terminated. I will not get a reasonable accommodation.
You can see what this has done to so many millions of people with disabilities. What am I to do? I want to get a job. But I want the coverage of ADA. But I have to give that up if I use medication or use an assistive device--an absolute absurdity. This is not what I intended. It is not what anyone intended when we passed the ADA 18 years ago.
It boggles the mind that any court would say that multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy or epilepsy is not a disability covered by the ADA, but that is where we are today. Think about the troops coming home from Iraq, losing limbs, getting prostheses. The Court might find they are not disabled. If they might need some reasonable accommodations to get a decent job, the Court would find they are not covered by the Americans with Disabilities Act.
As a result, we have to have this bill, and that is what this bill is all about. This bill is about restoring the Americans with Disabilities Act back to where we intended it to be 18 years ago and to give clear directions to the courts about how they should decide these cases. This bill will overturn the so-called Sutton trilogy and Toyota v. Williams and will give clear direction to the courts on exactly what we mean. It will restore the proper balance, it will clarify and broaden the definition of disability, it will increase eligibility for the protections of the ADA.
People who are denied coverage under ADA will now be covered, and we will get rid of that Catch-22 situation that confronts so many people right now with disabilities.
I tell you, this is extremely important in the employment context. According to most recent data, more than 60 percent of individuals with disabilities are not employed. That is shameful, in our society, that we have an unemployment rate among people with disabilities of 60 percent. These are people who want to work, who are capable of work. They want to go out and become fully functioning members of society and contribute to society. All they need is the opportunity.
I can tell you employers find people with disabilities are sometimes the most exemplary of workers. All they need is the opportunity, a reasonable accommodation, and they can do their job. This bill before us today renews our promise to all Americans with disabilities. We basically say we keep the basic language of the original bill, but we also make sure the bill overturns the basis for the reasoning in the Supreme Court decisions--as I said, the Sutton trilogy and Toyota case that has been so problematic.
We clearly state mitigating measures--such as the medication or assistive devices I talked about earlier--are not to be considered in determining whether someone is entitled to the protections of the ADA. No longer is it report language. We put this in bill language so the Supreme Court can't skirt around it again.
The bill will make it easier for people with disabilities to be covered. It expands the definition of disability to include many more life activities, including a new category of major body functions. The latter point is important for people with immune disorders or cancer or kidney disease or liver disease because they no longer need to show what specific activity they are limited in, in order to meet the statutory definition of disability. The bill rejects the current EEOC regulation which says that ``substantially limits'' means ``significantly restricted'' as too high a standard. We indicate Congress's expectation that the regulation be rewritten in a less stringent way and we provide the authority in this bill to do so.
The bill also revives the ``regarded as'' prong of the definition of disability. It makes it easier for those who suffer from discrimination because of a perceived disability to be able to seek relief if they have been fired or subjected to another adverse action. We also say the definition of disability is to be interpreted broadly, to the maximum extent permitted by the ADA.
Again, this bill will give clear direction, of course, as to exactly what we intend: A broad definition, more people covered, and getting rid of that problem of having that Catch-22 situation.
Eighteen years ago, the Americans with Disabilities Act passed with overwhelming bipartisan support, and I am proud to say we have that same level of support today in passing this unanimously. I am grateful for the bipartisan spirit with which we have considered this bill. We have an opportunity to come together to make an important difference for millions of Americans with disabilities.
I might say the bill enjoys strong support in the country. I have a letter I will submit for the Record from over 250 business, faith, disability, labor, and military organizations that support this bill and urge its passage.
Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that letter be printed in the Record at the conclusion of the statements of both mine and Senator Hatch.
The bill is supported by all the national disability organizations as well the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, the Society for Human Resource Management, and the Human Resources Policy Association.
The genesis of the legislation is a result of direct conversations between the disability and business communities that should serve as a model for other legislative efforts.
I wish to say, there were a lot of negotiations that went on between disability groups, the Chamber of Commerce, the Human Resource Policy Association, National Association of Manufacturers, other business groups. They were long. They were involved. They were tough negotiations. There was a lot of give and take. I think that is the way we have to do things.
To those who say we cannot get anything done around here, I point to this bill. We can get things done around here as long as people of good will are willing to work together. It may take a little time. Sometimes good things take a little time. It takes a lot of negotiations, reaching across the aisle, reaching across to one another, and we can reach these kind of agreements. We can move this country forward, and we can make American society more fair and just and accommodating for all.
I have two last things. I wish to take a moment to recognize our veterans with disabilities. This bill we have before us renews our commitment to ensure that all Americans with disabilities, including a new generation of disabled veterans who are just beginning to grapple with the challenges of living to their full potential, despite any limitations imposed by the disabilities, are able to participate to the fullest possible extent in all facets of society, including the workplace. They deserve equality, access, and opportunity.
I would like to submit for the Record a letter from 23 veterans groups supporting this legislation. I ask unanimous consent it be printed in the Record.
I last would like to thank those who helped us get to this day, including those who are no longer with us. My friend, Justin Dart, who was so instrumental in helping us get the ADA passed. We are fortunate that his wife Yoshiko continues to carry on his legacy, day after day, week after week, year after year. Ed Roberts, the father of the Independent Living movement, whose work and vision live on.
And all the disability advocates and people with disabilities who have been so dedicated to the goals of the ADA, without whose hard work and dedicated efforts today would not have been possible--people such as Jim Ward and his family, who dedicated almost 2 years of their lives traveling on a bus around the country to every State, showing people about the importance of restoring the protections of ADA. Bob Kafka of ADAPT, who was so instrumental in passage of the ADA, and who has dedicated his life to fulfilling the goals of the ADA.
I wish to say a special thank-you to Jennifer Mathis of the Bazelon Center for her practical and practiced advice; Sandy Finucane of the Epilepsy Foundation; of course to Andy Imparato of the American Association of People With Disabilities for always being there in that leadership position--for his level-headed leadership, for bringing different groups together, and sometimes that is like herding cats to get all of us together. Andy did a great job in making sure we were always there and making sure we had our conferences and negotiations and keeping us all headed in the same direction. So to Andy Imparato I give my highest thanks and my deepest thanks for all of his helpfulness.
Thanks to Nanzy Zirkin of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights; and to Professor Chai Feldblum of the Georgetown Law Center for creative and innovative thinking, for always being willing to testify before our committee.
Thanks to Randy Johnson and Mike Eastman of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce; to Mike Peterson of the H.R. Policy Association; to Jeri Gillespie of the National Association of Manufacturers; and to Mike Aitken of the Society of Human Resource Management.
Thanks to our key staff members: Tom Jipping and Chris Campbell of Senator Hatch's staff--great to work with--and Lee Perselay, Beth Stein, and Pam Smith of my own staff. Again, they have worked tirelessly on this day after day.
I wish to thank the House committee staff, Sharon Lewis and Heather Sawyer, and Leader Hoyer's staff, Keith Abouchar and Michelle Stockwell, as well as a wish for them to make quick work of passing this bill when it gets over to the House.
Of course, I also thank the staff of the HELP Committee, the chairman's staff, Michael Myers, Connie Garner, and Charlotte Burrows, and Brian Hayes with Ranking Member Enzi.
I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have supported this bill in overwhelming numbers and made it possible to pass the bill and hopefully get it signed into law and advance the original intent of the original Americans with Disabilities Act.
You know, there may not be a lot of people here on the floor of the Senate today, but I can tell you, though, throughout the country there are millions of Americans with disabilities who know what we are doing here. They have been told. They know what we have done over the last couple or 3 years to overturn those Supreme Court decisions. They are waiting anxiously for this bill to be passed, for the House to pass it, and for President Bush to sign it into law so that once again they can go out with full knowledge that they are covered by this civil rights bill, that they can go out and seek employment, that they can travel, that they can seek the accommodations that will make them fully functioning members of our society and knowing that they are covered by the law. So there are millions of Americans with disabilities and their families all over this country today who I know are expressing thanks to all the people who have been involved in getting this done. Again, so many are not here with us today. They know what we are doing, and they are anxiously waiting for this to pass and to get it to the President, and hopefully we will get that done--hopefully by next week.
The last thing was--I thanked a lot of people, but I would be remiss if I did not thank the one person who more than any other set my feet on this course many years ago, who taught me a lot about being disabled, and who taught me a lot about discrimination against people with disabilities. And, of course, I speak of my brother, Frank.
He was here when we passed the original ADA, but he has since passed on. But it was my brother who first said to me many years ago when he was sent to the Iowa School for the Deaf--they called it the Iowa School for the Deaf and Dumb--he said, ``I may be deaf, but I am not dumb.'' It was also my brother who one time said to me that the only thing deaf people cannot do is hear. He wanted to do a lot of things in his life, but because of prejudices, because of discrimination, he was held back and discriminated against. I saw it time after time after time. He was able to persevere and carve out a life of independence and dignity for himself, but I often thought, why did he have to do that? I mean, why did it require an extraordinary effort on his part just to be a contributing member of our society, just to enjoy a lot of things we take for granted?
So I thought so much about that. I thought, you know, if I ever got in a position to do anything about it, I was going to do something. Well, as fortune would have it, I was elected to the House and then later elected to the
Senate and found myself as chairman of the Disability Policy Subcommittee under the tutelage of Senator Kennedy. We were able to get the first ADA act passed.
I have to tell you a story here, just talking about discrimination. I was sworn into the Senate in January of 1985. I had my brother, Frank; he along with my whole family was here sitting up there in the gallery right back here. I had provided for an interpreter to interpret for my brother as he was watching the proceedings here on the floor of the Senate. Well, then a policeman came out. Actually, one of my brothers said: The policemen are up there and asked the interpreter to leave because she could not be there. I went up to the gallery. I am about to get sworn into the Senate.
I went up to find out what was going on.
The officer said: We cannot let people up in the gallery stand up and do this interpreting.
I said: Why not?
He said: It is against the rules.
What rules?
Well, it is against the rules.
Well, I was furious. So I came down on the floor, and in 1985, you might remember the Senate majority leader was Senator Bob Dole. So I went right to Dole and I said: Senator Dole, here is my problem. I got my brother up there, and they won't let an interpreter interpret.
He said: Really? Well, I will take care of that.
And he took care of it. He took care of it. So we got an interpreter. Of course, now we have closed captioning and all kinds of things now for Senate activities. But, again, it is just that attitude people have. This was in 1985. That would not happen today. Of course, we have access for people who have mobility disabilities to come in, and we have made the Capitol accessible for people with all kinds of disabilities.
But I relate that story as a way of again thanking my brother, Frank, for setting my feet on this path so many years ago. For me, it has been a labor of love, not without its frustrations, not without saying--one day at the Supreme Court, with Bob Dole by my side, listening to the Supreme Court hand down one of these decisions, I said: What could they possibly be thinking? We went out and talked to the press after, Senator Dole and I did. So it has had its frustrations.
We are not to the promised land yet with 60 percent unemployment among people with disabilities. We have a long way to go. But this, the Americans with Disabilities Act, is the civil rights statute that says to people: You cannot discriminate. Just as we passed the civil rights bills that said: You cannot discriminate on the basis of race or sex or national origin or religion, now you cannot discriminate on the basis of disability either, plus you have to take some other steps; we have to have reasonable accommodations. So this is the civil rights statute that emancipates and frees people with disabilities so they can be fully contributing members of our society.
I close my remarks by thanking the President for her indulgence, the indulgence of other Senators for permitting me to speak for so long. As I said, this, for me, for all of my adult life, is a cause to which I have committed myself, much of my staff, much of our time and effort. I am grateful to the leadership of the Senate, both on the Republican and Democratic side, and again to my great friend and partner Senator Hatch for making it possible for us to bring up this bill today and get it passed unanimously. Unanimously. That is even better than what we did with the ADA. We only had six votes against it in 1990. This is unanimous. I think it sends a clear signal that whether you are Republican or Democratic, it does not make any difference--it does not make any difference, we are going to stand behind people with disabilities. We are going to make sure the ADA takes its rightful place once again as the umbrella civil rights statute for all Americans with disabilities.
I thank all of my colleagues. I look forward to the passage of this bill in the House. I look forward to the President hopefully signing it as early as next week.
August 21, 2008
Exhibit 1
Re: The ADA Amendments Act of 2008
Hon. Tom Harkin,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Harkin: The undersigned groups, representing a
broad range of interests, write in support of the ADA
Amendments Act of 2008 (S. 3406). This bill introduced on
July 31, 2008, had 64 cosponsors as of August 1, with 55 of
those joining as original cosponsors.
S. 3406, the ADA Amendments Act, would revise the ADA, in a
manner designed to work for both people with disabilities and
for entities governed under the law. The bill is a result of
sustained efforts between Senators from both sides of the
aisle and intensive and thoughtful talks between
representatives of the disability community and entities
governed by the law. For that reason, we believe that S. 3406
strikes a delicate balance between the needs of individuals
with disabilities and the realities experienced by entities
including employers and public accommodations, which are
covered under the law.
We urge your support in making enactment of S. 3406, the
ADA Amendments Act, a reality as soon as Congress returns to
work in September. We stand ready to work with you towards
that end.
Sincerely,
ABC Business Services, Illinois; Abilities in Motion,
Pennsylvania; ADA Watch/National Coalition for
Disability Rights; ADA Help, Inc., Florida; Air Force
Association; Air Force Sergeants Association; Air Force
Women Officers; Associated Alliance of Disability
Advocates Center for Independent Living, North
Carolina; Alpha-1 Association; Alpha-1 Foundation; ALS
Association; Alzheimer's Association; American
Association for Affirmative Action; American
Association for Respiratory Care; American Academy of
Nursing; American Association of Diabetes Educators;
American Association of People with Disabilities
(AAPD); American Association of University Women;
American Autoimmune Related Diseases Association;
American Bakers Association; American Cancer Society
Cancer Action Network; American Civil Liberties Union
(ACLU); American Composites Manufacturers Association;
American Council of the Blind; American Diabetes
Association; American Federation of Government
Employees--Veterans Council.
American Federation of Labor--Congress of Industrial
Unions (AFL-CIO); I American Federation of State,
County & Municipal Employees (AFSCME); American
Federation of Teachers (AFT); American Foundation for
the Blind; American Foundry Society; American GI Forum;
American Islamic Congress; American Jewish Committee;
American Kidney Fund; American Liver Foundation;
American Lung Association; American Medical Rehabilitation
Providers Association; American Mental Health Counselors
Association; American Physical Therapy Association;
American Psychological Association; American Society of
Employers; AMVETS; ANCOR; Anixter Center, Illinois; Anti-
Defamation League; APEERS (Alternative Peer Edu/Enrichment
Recovery Society), West Virginia; APSE: The Network on
Employment; Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee; The Arc of
Tucson, Arizona; The Arc of the United States.
The Arc of Utah; Arthritis Foundation; ARISE, New York;
Asian American Justice Center; Associated Builders and
Contractors, Inc.; Association of Jewish Family &
Children's Agencies; Association of Programs for Rural
Independent Living (APRIL); Association of University
Centers on Disabilities (AUCD); Asthma and Allergy
Foundation of America; Autism Society of America; The
Autistic Self-Advocacy Network; AZ Bridge to
Independent Living; Bazelon Center for Mental Health
Law; BH Electronics, Inc.; Bimba Manufacturing; B'nai
B'rith International; Brain Injury Association of
America; Breast Cancer Network of Strength; Business
and Institutional Furniture; Manufacturers Association;
Capital Associated Industries, Inc.; Care4Dystonia,
Inc.; Central Conference of American Rabbis; Center for
Women Policy Studies; Children and Adults with
AttentionDeficit/Hyperactivity Disorder; Christopher
and Dana Reeve Foundation.
The Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) in the United
States and Canada; CIGNA Corporation; Coastal Health
District, Georgia; Coleman Global Telecommunications,
LLC; Community Action Partnership; Community Health
Charities of America; Community Resources for
Independent Living, California; Control Technology,
Inc.; COPD Foundation; Council of Parent Attorneys and
Advocates; Council of State Administrators of
Vocational Rehabilitation (CSAVR); Crohn's and Colitis
Foundation of America; Disabled American Veterans;
Disability Policy Consortium, Inc.; Disability Rights
Wisconsin (WI P&A); DTE Energy Company; Easter Seals;
Eastman Chemical; Ellwood Group Inc.; Enlisted
Association of the National Guard of the United States;
Epilepsy Foundation; Evangelical Lutheran Church in
America; Freedom Resource Center for Independent
Living, Minnesota; Freedom Resource Center for
Independent Living, North Dakota; Friends Committee on
National Legislation;
Friends of the National Institute of Dental, and
Craniofacial Research.
Georgia Voice That Count; Granite State Independent
Living; Guide Dog Foundation for the Blind, Inc.;
Hearing Loss Association of America; Hearing Loss
Association of America, Manhattan Chapter; Hearing Loss
Association of America, Mid Hudson Chapter; Hearing
Loss Association of America, North Shore Chapter of
Long Island; Hearing Loss Association of America,
Queens at Lexington; Hearing Loss Association of
America, Western New York Chapter; Heat Transfer
Equipment Company; Higher Education Consortium for
Special Education; Hindu American Foundation; HR Policy
Association; Human Rights Campaign; Huntington's
Disease Society of America; Hydrocephalus Association;
Idaho State Independent Living Council; Illinois
Manufacturers' Association; International Association of
Official Human Rights Agencies; International Franchise
Association; International Paper Company; Iraq &
Afghanistan Veterans of America; Islamic Society of North
America; Japanese American Citizens League; Jewish Council
for Public Affairs.
Jewish Reconstructionist Federation; J.T. Fennell Co.;
Koller-Craft Plastic Products; Lakeside Equipment
Corporation; The LAM Foundation; Lambda Legal; Lawyers'
Committee for Civil Rights Under Law; Leadership
Conference on Civil Rights (LCCR); Learning
Disabilities Association of America (LDA); The Leukemia
& Lymphoma Society; Life, Inc., Georgia; Liz Thurber
Slipcovers; Lupus Foundation of America; The Management
Association of Illinois; Manufacturer & Business
Association (Erie, PA); March of Dimes; Mental Health
America; Michigan Alliance of State Employees with
Disabilities (Michigan ASED); Michigan Chapter of
Paralyzed Veterans; Michigan Rehabilitation
Association; Military Officers Association of America;
Molded Fiber Glass Companies; Monadnock Paper Mills,
Inc.; Motorola; Mullinix Packages, Inc.
Muslim Public Affairs Council; Myasthenia Gravis
Foundation of America; NAACP Legal Defense &
Educational Fund, Inc.; National Advocacy Center of the
Sisters of the Good Shepard; National Alliance on
Mental Illness (NAMI); National Alopecia Areata
Foundation; National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People (NAACP). National Association for Black
Veterans; National Association for Employment of People
who are Blind (NAEPB); National Association for
Uniformed Services; National Association of Councils on
Developmental Disabilities; National Association of
County Behavioral Health and Developmental Disability
Directors; National Association of Governors'
Committees on People with Disabilities (NAGC); National
Association of Human Rights Workers; National
Association of Manufacturers; National Association of
the Physically Handicapped (Manistee County Chapter);
National Association of Social Workers; National
Association of State Directors of Special Education;
National Association of State Head Injury
Administrators; National Association of the Deaf;
National Center for Learning Disabilities (NCLD);
National Congress of Black Women, Inc.; National
Council for Community Behavioral Healthcare; National
Council of Churches in the USA.
National Council of Jewish Women; National Council of La
Raza (NCLR); National Council on Independent Living
(NCIL); National Disability Rights Network (NDRN);
National Down Syndrome Congress; National Down Syndrome
Society; National Education Association (NEA); National
Employment Lawyers Association; National Fair Housing
Alliance; National Family Caregivers Association;
National Federation of Filipino American Associations
(NaFFAA); The National Foundation for Ectodermal
Dysplasias; National Health Council; National Health
Law Program; National Industries for the Blind (NIB);
National Kidney Foundation; National Legal Aid and
Defender Association; National Marfan Foundation; National
Multiple Sclerosis Society; National MS Society, Hawaii
Chapter; National Organization for Women; National
Organization on Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (NOFAS); National
Psoriasis Foundation; National Women's Law Center; Naval
Reserve Association; NCEP Brain Injury Rehabilitation
Program, Nevada.
NETWORK: A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby;
Nevadans for Equal Access, Inc.; New Jersey Protection
and Advocacy; NISH; Non-Commissioned Officers
Association; Northeast Pennsylvania Manufacturers and
Employers Association; Northwestern Mutual; Ohio
Disability Action Coalition; Oregon Family Support
Network; Organization of Chinese Americans;
Osteogenesis Imperfecta Foundation; Our Children Left
Behind; The Paget Foundation; Paralyzed Veterans of
America; Parent Project Muscular Dystrophy; People
Escaping Poverty Project, Minnesota; People First of
Nevada; Portland General Electric; PPG Industries;
Precision Metalforming Association; Presbyterian Church
(USA), Washington Office; Prevent Blindness America;
Reserve Enlisted Association; RESOLVE: The National
Infertility Association.
RTC Paratransit Evaluation Services, Nevada; Roaring
Spring Blank Book Co.; Ryder System, Inc.; SEIU--
Service Employees International Union; Self-Advocacy
Association of New York State, Inc.; Services for
Independent Living, Missouri; Sikh American Legal
Defense and Education Fund (SALDEF); Sjogren's Syndrome
Foundation; Society for Human Resource Management;
Southeast Kansas Independent Living Resource Center,
Inc. (SKIL); Southern Champion Tray LP; Spina Bifida
Association; State of Nevada TBI Advisory Council;
Stuller, Inc.; The Taylor-Winfield Corporation; Teacher
Education Division of the Council for Exceptional
Children; Texas Association of the Deaf; Textile Rental
Services Association of America; Ultra Tech Machinery
Inc.; United Cerebral Palsy; United Cerebral Palsy of
Central Ohio; United Church of Christ, Justice and
Witness Ministries; United Food and Commercial Workers
International Union; United Methodist Church, General
Board of Church and Society.
Union for Reform Judaism; Unitarian Universalist
Association of Congregations; United Jewish
Communities; United Spinal Association; Uniweld
Products Inc.; U.S. Chamber of Commerce; U.S.
Conference of Catholic Bishops; U.S. Psychiatric
Association; U.S. Psychiatric Rehabilitation
Association; US TOO International; Vanamatic Company;
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States; Veterans
of Modern Warfare; Vietnam Veterans of America; West
Suburban Access News Association; Wisconsin
Manufacturers & Commerce; Women of Reform Judaism; The
Workmen's Circle/Arbeter Ring; World Institute on
Disability.
I suggest the absence of a quorum.