PREMIUM SEARCH Search by job title, geography and build a list of executive contacts
By now, most people have their own views and impressions of Vice-President Al Gore. He's locked in a spirited campaign with former New Jersey Senator Bill Bradley for the 2000 Democratic Presidential nomination to succeed Bill Clinton in the White House come November.
Few people realize that Gore -- first as a U.S. representative and senator from Tennessee, and later as Veep -- has been an outspoken advocate for the rights of people with disabilities. He and his wife Tipper have been part of a national effort to improve care and treatment for mental illnesses. And he has an intimate knowledge of many assistive technologies and their benefits for people with disabilities.
While he took a lot of ribbing for claiming to be one of the creators of the Internet, Gore has been a leading supporter of government funding for the Internet and making it more accessible to the disabled. It doesn't end there. His campaign manager, former House Democratic Whip and Wall Street exec Tony Coelho, is an epileptic -- and a passionate champion for the rights of the disabled.
Gore displayed his considerable knowledge on the afternoon of New Year's Eve, when he spoke by telephone with me and Douglas Harbrecht, news director for Business Week Online. During the interview, he paused briefly to check on Tipper, who had an operation to remove a benign growth from her thyroid two days prior to the interview. They were home by themselves. Gore seemed to be relaxed during the interview, and he was exceptionally well-versed on these issues. And he pulls no punches. Here are edited excerpts from our conversation:
Q: What role do you see assistive technology playing in the new millennium for people with disabilities?
A: Assistive technology promises breakthroughs for millions of Americans with disabilities by making it possible for them to make a connection between their minds and the minds of other people, and to the workplace.
Our [White House] budget initiative this year included $35 million that would have doubled the investment in the development and use of assistive technology to help people with disabilities work. That funding unfortunately was cut by the Republican majority in Congress, but I will fight to support such investments. I believe I can make a case to the Congress in a way that will convince them to support the investment.
My view is the federal government should provide accessible technology and information. We recommended and Congress enacted changes to section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act that strengthens the obligations of federal agencies to provide assistive technology. [The Administration] is [now] working on the regulations.
With these changes, the federal government can use its purchasing power to influence private companies toward developing universally designed technology that is accessible to almost everyone.
Telecommunications services and equipment represent a special case. That is why I am pleased that the Federal Communications Commission under the leadership of Bill Kennard announced it will make telecommunications equipment and services available to people with disabilities. And the FCC has also required closed-captioning for video for the 27 million Americans with hearing disabilities.
I think the key [for business] is to be flexible in the employment area. [They should not ask] "What's wrong," or "What is your disability?", but "What's going to work for you?" And then, provide the assistive technology that will make the connection.
Q: Recently the Supreme Court narrowed the definition of a workplace disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act. Are you familiar with the decisions? While business cheered, many in the disability community were outraged.
A: There were several cases. One of them is Sutton v. United Airlines and another is Murphy v. United Parcel Service (see BW Online, 6/23/99, "A Grand Slam for the Disabled"). I believe the court inappropriately narrowed the scope of the ADA by excluding persons simply because they are able to mitigate their disability through medication or the use of a medical appliance.
The problem is employers may conclude that a person is too disabled to work, even though under the law they are not covered by the ADA, according to the decisions. The result is a Catch-22 for persons with disabilities. These decisions could seriously undermine the goals of the ADA by excluding from the Act's coverage many people who are discriminated against by employers because of a physical or mental impairment.
I believe that Sutton and Murphy shouldn't be applied to reach unfair results that are inconsistent with the original intent [of Congress]. If courts interpret these cases to exclude many people with disabilities who deserve protection under the ADA, I am committed to working with the next Congress, which I hope will be a Democratic Congress, to amend the ADA. But we can not risk opening up the ADA in a Congress that is hostile to the ADA, such as the current [GOP] Congress. That would open it up to destructive amendments that can eliminate the important progress that we have made. Also, I think we ought to strengthen the Hate Crimes Law to include people with disabilities.
Q: Will the enforcement of federal laws guaranteeing the rights of people with disabilities be a major priority for a Gore Administration? And if so, how?
A: Yes. I feel very strongly about the enforcement of the ADA, the civil-rights laws, and all laws that are designed to remove barriers and allow full participation of Americans with disabilities in our society. That is true with regard to special education. It's true with the Fair Housing Act. It's true across the board.
I will appoint Supreme Court justices who will uphold the ADA. I will enforce the Transportation Dept.'s regulations to make [all public] buses accessible. I do not agree with the recent decision by the 8th Circuit on the ADA [which narrows the rights of individuals to sue state governments for job discrimination under the ADA]. The Justice Dept. has filed a petition with the Supreme Court disagreeing with that decision.
One of our priorities must be increased funding for enforcement of our civil-rights laws and a reduction of the backlog of private-sector discrimination complaints at the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. This means giving [federal regulators] the resources they need to investigate complaints under the ADA.
Q: How should America's public schools implement the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which extends and guarantees to children with disabilities the same educational resources as other students? And do you see a stronger federal role?
A: I am committed to strong enforcement of IDEA. I have proposed a tripling of the funding under the new law. We have made some progress, and this Administration has successfully opposed two amendments to IDEA that could have led to the unfair expulsions of students with disabilities.
I think the IDEA has to be much more actively enforced. We enacted a stronger IDEA in 1997. In the year 2000, it will serve 6.2 million children with disabilities. We need to meet the needs of children with special needs in a way that works for all of our children, that does not cause school boards to pit the needs of some students against the needs of other students, and parents against parents in a battle of limited resources. That means starting with a substantial down payment, the largest-ever increase in special education.
I have proposed a special pool for funding for [those] few children who require particularly costly services. We can reduce the cost of special education by reducing the numbers of children unnecessarily referred to special-education services in the first place. That means we ought to identify learning disabilities earlier and intervene more quickly to help all children get a strong educational start. Finally, I think we need to offer both special-education teachers and regular classroom teachers more training on how to deal effectively with students with disabilities.
Q: How do you respond to parents of able-bodied children who say "If you put children with disabilities into class with my kids, you will slow down the learning process for my children"?
A: I would say the federal government should provide the teachers with the training to educate children with disabilities. If we implement this law correctly, there is simply no justification for fearing a negative impact on the other children. There are, of course, significant advantages for other children, because it prepares them for life in a society where Americans with disabilities have equal access to all jobs and institutions, and I think that's good for all of us.
Q: Will a Gore Administration employ people with disabilities in areas other than special education and rehabilitation?
A: I am completely supportive of the principal of inclusion and diversity. I have worked hard in this Administration to expand employment opportunities for people with disabilities and to encourage the appointment of Americans with disabilities. I intend to make that policy a goal of a Gore Administration if I am entrusted with the Presidency.
Q: Besides providing telecommunications devices for the deaf and hard-of-hearing so they can contact your campaign staff, what else has the Gore campaign done to make itself communications-accessible to disabled people?
A: Our headquarters is accessible to people using wheelchairs [and with] other mobility disabilities. We have paid particular attention to the use of sign-language interpreters and other accessibility requirements at all of our campaign events. We have made certain that our communications are accessible to everyone. We are developing campaign materials in Braille. Tony Coelho, my campaign manager, can tell you about others. He and I have talked about making our campaign accessible to people with disabilities, and we both share an all-out commitment to making this campaign a model of accessibility.
Q: How would you get states to buy into the Work Improvement Incentives Act so more people with disabilities can go to work?
A: I'm glad that we just got the legislation passed. I'm a strong supporter of it. I want to go a lot farther. The day after it was enacted, I unveiled a campaign proposal based on the highly successful Welfare to Work Program that I call the Disabilities to Work Program. This program is designed to use assistive technology aggressively to connect people to the workplace. It's designed to encourage private-sector employers to hire Americans with disabilities and to make the federal government much more of a role model in expanding employment opportunities for Americans with disabilities.
Q: Mr. Vice-President, thank you for your time, and Happy New Year.
A: It's been my pleasure. Thank you very much. Happy New Year.
As assistive technology columnist for Business Week Online, I have also approached the campaigns of George W. Bush, Bill Bradley, and John McCain for interviews on disability issues. Stay tuned.
Williams writes a weekly column for Business Week Online on assistive technology. For information on assistive technology, write to him at JMMAW@aol.com. You can also discuss these issues on BW Online's EDITED BY DOUGLAS HARBRECHT
Get BusinessWeek directly on your desktop with our RSS feeds.
Add BusinessWeek news to your Web site with our headline feed.
Click to buy an e-print or reprint of a BusinessWeek or BusinessWeek Online story or video.
To subscribe online to BusinessWeek magazine, please click here.
Copyright 2000 , by The McGraw-Hill Companies Inc. All rights reserved.
Printer-Friendly Version
