Comment Below: What does Governor Paterson have against people with disabilities? He vetoed FOUR pieces of legislation which would help our community and reinforce the civil rights protections that federal laws already recognize (see below). Does Gov. Paterson really think NY should not have to abide by the ADA and Help America Vote Act? I'm completely appalled.
From WTen (9/18/09):
Disability advocates outraged over Governor's vetoes
WYNANTSKILL -- Disability advocates are outraged that a bill unanimously passed by the state legislature to better protect people with special needs has been vetoed by Governor Paterson. The bill would have increased penalties for those who abuse a disabled person, making it a felony. The news is devastating for families of the disabled.
We talked to a number of parents and advocates of disabled people who fully expected to be celebrating a victory. Instead they are overwhelmed with disbelief...
...Two other bills involving the disabled were also vetoed by Governor Paterson, adding to the frustration and anger among advocates.
One bill would clarify civil rights protections for people with disabilities. Another would make polling places more accessible to them.
Melanie Shaw, Executive Director of the New York Association on Independent Living, says, "There's surprise, and I think there is some anger, absolutely. Both these bills were bills that we've worked on for a number of years, and they were passed overwhelmingly by the state legislature."...
GOVERNOR’S VETOES OUTRAGE DISABILITY ADVOCATES
New Yorkers with disabilities were stunned last night when Governor Paterson vetoed not one, but two critical pieces of civil rights legislation. Both bills were passed overwhelmingly by the state legislature, and would require state law to conform with existing federal requirements under the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). In response, disability advocates are calling on the state legislature to override the Governor’s vetoes and ensure people with disabilities in New York are treated as fairly in New York State as they are under existing federal law...
“It is unconscionable and highly ironic that a governor with a disability has vetoed these bills. We are very disappointed that, by these actions, he has failed to offer the leadership we hoped he would bring to the governor’s office,” said Christine Zachmeyer, NYAIL board member and chair of the New York State Independent Living Council (NYSILC).
One bill, A.781-B (Paulin)/S.5396 (Huntley), adds federal American with Disabilities Act (ADA) Title II language into state statute, clarifying the obligations of government officials and strengthening the civil rights protections for people with disabilities. Title II of the ADA protects people with disabilities from discrimination on the basis of disability in services provided by public entities, including state and local governments. In the proposed bill, public entities would be required under state law to make reasonable accommodations—the same accommodations already required by federal law—and individuals with disabilities would gain critical access to the administrative enforcement mechanisms through the State Division of Human Rights. This bill imposes no new or additional requirements upon local governments or businesses.
Another bill, A. 584 (Cahill)/S.1058 (Addabbo), would require all polling sites to comply with the accessibility guidelines of the ADA. Across the state, polling sites are notorious for violations of the ADA, infringing on people with disabilities’ right to vote. The new law will update state election law consistent with federal requirements, eliminate outdated waiver language, increase the likelihood of compliance, and increase procedures for enforcement. Inaccessible sites can either be moved, consolidated, or modifications can be made and counties can be reimbursed from pre-existing state and federal HAVA funds for costs incurred in making polling places accessible to individuals with disabilities, including the blind and visually impaired...
Disability advocates now call on the New York State Legislature to override these vetoes and ensure the civil rights of all New Yorkers with disabilities...
The following are summaries of the laws vetoed and Governor Paterson's Veto Messages:
S.1058-A (Addabbo)/A.584-A (Cahill)
Veto #60 (9/16/09)
P-Sen. 57-0; P-Assm. 137-0
This legislation would require that all polling places in the State be accessible to citizens with disabilities, and comply with the accessibility guidelines of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA). It would eliminate state polling place accessibility waiver language and include provisions to the Election Law to reduce confusion regarding polling places access requirements and increase the likelihood of substantial compliance.
Veto Message Summary: Though the Legislature has sought to address an issue of extraordinary importance to the State through this legislation, the time frame imposed for meeting its provisions are too onerous, would place a significant financial burden on State and local governments, particularly the City of New York.
S.5396 (Huntley)/A.781-B (Paulin)
Veto #61 (9/16/09)
P-Sen. 57-0; P-Assm. 137-0
The intent of this legislation is to clarify the scope of protections against discrimination on the basis of disability in services provided by public entities. Specifically, it would outlaw discrimination by public entities against individuals with disabilities with regard to access such entities’ programs, services or activities, and require reasonable modifications in governmental services, programs or activities, unless such modifications would cause an “undue hardship.” Aggrieved parties could file administrative complaints with the State Division of Human Rights.
Veto Message Summary: While the effort to ensure that State and local governmental programs and services accommodate persons with disabilities is laudable, the legislation lacks definitional clarity and, because it could be read as having a broader application than the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), could subject public entities to two different standards. In addition, individuals who are aggrieved under Title II of the ADA already have a remedy through the federal system. Creating a cause of action under State law would augment the ability of plaintiffs to bring suits for damages against the State. Finally, implementation of this legislation would require the hiring of new staff and the dedication of substantial resources that are unavailable at this time.
S.5208 (Huntley)/A.6349 (Gordon)
Veto #69 (9/16/09)
P-Sen. 57-0; P-Assm. 141-0
This legislation amends the Penal Law to add the term “incompetent or physically disabled persons” to existing felony laws against endangering the welfare of a vulnerable elderly person by a caregiver.
Veto Message Summary: Governor Paterson is concerned that the offenses added not be made felony offenses without clearly defining the term “incompetent,” which is a broad term covering a range of disabilities. Further, he is concerned that the requirement that a victim prove his disability of state of competence at trial would be an invasion of his or her privacy that should not be required by a bill like this. He will support this bill if these problems are fixed.
S.3285-A (Adams)/A.8555-A (Espaillat)
Veto #76 (09/16/09)
P-Sen. 53-0; P-Assm. 146-0
The purpose of this bill is to help service-disabled veterans who are owners of businesses increase their ability to partake in the procurement process.
Veto Message Summary: This bill would impose a fiscal cost on the State, is at odds with the State’s policy of competitive bidding and is duplicative of other programs. In particular, this bill restricts certification and pricing preferences solely to businesses domiciled in New York State and owned by service-disabled veterans, which is contradictory to new York’s current open-market procurement policies.
Don't be surprised. There are many Uncle Toms in the disability community, including the ADA coordinator, here in Cambridge MA.
They go along to get along. After all, who butters their bread?
Without meaningful access to the courts, individauls cannot prosecute their individual claims, and law suits. Only "big issue" items get attention, and PWDs are relagated to "client" status.
We need to be able to obtain private attornies, so we can individually bring suit, and win our cases, and get some presidents set. Without adequate funding for independent private attornies, and as long as the majority of cases deal with medical and "access" issues, instead of the direct overt discrimination of segregation and exclusion, and denial of equal enjoyment of benifits, participation, etc, we will continue to be beggars!
Posted by: Kathy Podgers | September 19, 2009 at 01:34 PM
The ADA Coordinator of Cambridge- unlike the majority of municipal ADA Coordinators across the country- is a superb and proactive DisAbility Rights advocate.
Posted by: Eileen Feldman | September 21, 2009 at 06:40 PM
I agree with Eileen. I have found Cambridge's Disability office (which includes the ADA Coordinator) helpful in every issue which I have presented to them over the years. Their outstanding work is the main reason Cambridge was chosen by the NOD as the "most accessible city in the USA" two years ago.
Posted by: Rick McCormick | September 22, 2009 at 04:08 AM