The ADA Education and Reform Act: Neither Education Nor Reform

Before the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed in 1990, people with disabilities faced extreme discrimination. This was especially prevalent in regards to access to areas such as movie theaters, schools, public transportation, and more.

The ADA was an incredible moment of progress for disability rights, as it opened up many previously closed doors for people with disabilities. However, there are still many doors that remain shut. Americans with disabilities still lag behind in education rates, income, affordable housing, prejudice in the workplace, etc. In fact, in 2016, 26.8% of people with disabilities lived in poverty, which was over twice the national average. Many of those issues can be attributed back to problems of simple accessibility which have yet to be fixed.

In 2014, about 22.5% of Americans had some type of disability, which is more than 1 in 5 people. As there are so many Americans with disabilities, the American government should be working to further improve upon the ADA, instead of regressing in progress like HR620 would do.

HR620, or the ADA Education and Reform Act, is a bill that would decrease the effectiveness of the ADA. Currently, the ADA has no allowed waiting time before action must be made on a complaint. Anybody can file a lawsuit against a business if they are inaccessible in a way that violates the ADA. For example, if a restaurant doesn't have a handicapped parking spot, a person could file a lawsuit against the restaurant and they would have to fix it soon.

But under HR620, if a person were to file a lawsuit against a business about an infraction of the ADA, the person would have to submit a written notice with the exact parts of the ADA being violated. Then, the business in question would have 60 days to acknowledge the issue, and then an additional 120 days until they had to actually start to fix the problem. The person would have to wait 180 days until their complaint is acted upon and they can access the area. That’s almost half of a year. Plus, there’s no guarantee of the business ever fully fixing the problem.

Currently, businesses have an obligation to comply with the ADA if they want to avoid consequences. HR620 removes this incentive. People would be excluded while businesses could just put off the issue. It’s been over 27 years since the ADA was passed; that should have been enough time for businesses to be aware of the ADA and make improvements. Compliance is not a burden, and no one is asking businesses to knock down their entire building and start from scratch.

The justification for HR620 is mainly based on monetary damages. Monetary damages refer to the business having to pay a fine after a lawsuit, and some argue that lawyers nitpick for small issues in order to gain money for themselves. HR620 would get rid of monetary damages. But monetary damages are already forbidden under the federal ADA, and it’s only some states that have their own versions of the ADA that allow the damages. Instead of reducing the efficiency of the ADA, the supporters of the bill could just try to change specific state legislation.

Even if some infractions of the ADA may seem small and unimportant to businesses, small things make a difference to people with disabilities. A bumpy sidewalk makes the difference between being able to transport safely to a destination and being forced to ride in the street. A grab bar in a restroom makes the difference between being able to use the bathroom and being forced to hold it in for longer.

The bill is quite misleadingly named, and by hearing the name “ADA Education and Reform Act”, one might think “What a positive and helpful bill!” Contrary to what it seems, the bill has nothing to do with education and is an unhelpful reform for the ADA. It’s frustrating that the representatives who introduced the bill were allowed to name it something so misleading.

HR620 has been voted on in the House of Representatives so far, and it unfortunately passed 225-192. It has been introduced to the Senate, but no further action has been taken. Not many people have heard of the bill and are misled by the name; thus it is crucial to spread awareness about HR620 and educate people on its true content in order to prevent a step back in progress.

by MIRIAM ABRAMS