From: Julie Dawson 
Subject: Equality of Opportunity -- HISTORY.TXT  (fwd)
independence, and opportunity echoed the disability rights
movement. National coverage of the events confronted many
Americans with a foreign image of disability: repudiation of pity
and charity, insistence on civil rights.  The protest also came
at an opportune moment, just over a month before the Americans
with Disabilities Act was introduced in Congress. It powerfully
symbolized the potential of the disability community, a fitting
beginning to a nationwide education about disability and the ADA.
               Mobilizing the Disability Community
     In 1988, the top priorities for the disability community
were the Civil Rights Restoration Act, which became public law on
March 22, 1988, and the Fair Housing Amendments Act, enacted on
September 13, 1988.  The ADA would not get the spotlight until
1989.  However, ADA sponsors and the disability community used
1988 as an opportunity to publicize the act, mobilize grass roots
support, solicit the endorsement of presidential candidates,
enlist congressional cosponsors, and establish the act as a top
priority for the next Congress. 
     The political sophistication attained by the disability
community during the 1980s enabled ADA advocates to pursue a
multi-pronged strategy to meet its objectives.  A
Washington-based ADA coalition coordinated these activities in
conjunction with the bill s congressional sponsors. Although this
coalition did not fully form until 1989, it began to take shape
even before the bill s introduction in April, 1988.  Describing
the emerging leadership is extremely difficult, however, because
it was not highly structured.  There was no body of voting
members that elected officials to formally-defined job positions. 
There were no department heads.  Rather, individuals and a
variety of organizations formed a loose (though united) ADA
coalition.  To facilitate communica tions, the ADA coalition
conducted many of its activities  under the auspices  of the
well-estab lished Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities
(CCD). 
     Paul Marchand, Director of the Governmental Affairs Office
for the Association for Retarded Citizens (ARC), had founded
CCD s predecessor, CCDD, in the early 1970s to unite federal
advocacy efforts of the disability community.  By 1988, the
consortium represented dozens of Washington-based organizations. 
Additional groups enlisted their support to CCD s campaign to
pass the ADA.  CCD s operations were carried out through multiple
task forces, including the Civil Rights Task Force, which from
1988 to 1990 focused almost exclusively on the ADA.  Pat Wright
of the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund (DREDF), Liz
Savage of the Epilepsy Foundation of America (EFA), and Curt
Decker of the National Association of Protection and Advocacy
Systems (NAPAS) were the Civil Rights Task Force Co-chairs.  The
ADA coalition used the task force as its headquarters and CCD
stationary for much of its correspondence.  Although most of the
ADA coalition leaders were from organizations who were members of
CCD, it would be misleading to refer to CCD and the ADA coalition
interchangeably, since key participants also came from outside
CCD.  This applied especially to people with disabilities
representing the grass roots: ADAPT and NCIL, for example.  And
Dart, who was a full-fledged supporter and close ally of CCD,
nonetheless did not officially represent a CCD member
organization: he served the ADA coalition as a voice of the
people.
     The ADA coalition organized its efforts according to four
major functions: overall strategy development; education and
lobbying; grass roots mobilization; and legal writing and
analysis.  And it creatively exploited all available resources to
accomplish the job, varying the approach to meet changing
circumstances.  For the most part, participants tended to focus
on one of these four areas, but there was overlap.  At the core
was a handful of leaders who were most responsible for guiding
the overall effort.
     The ADA coalition embraced four major functions: strategy
development; education and lobbying; grass roots mobilization;
and legal analysis.While many people contributed to developing
the overarching strategy for passing the ADA, two persons in
particular focused their efforts on this area: Pat Wright and
Ralph Neas.  Wright s leadership during the ADA s passage
eventually earned her the nickname  The General.   She had
attended medical school in the 1960s, but, after a progressive
eye disease left her legally blind, she was forced to leave the
profession.  Temporarily derailed, she found a new interest in
assisting persons with disabilities move from institutions to
community- based living and gained an intimate knowledge of how
legal technicalities affected the lives of persons with
disabilities.  Wright made her first major inroads to the
disability rights movement at the San Francisco sit-in of April,
1977, where she had served as a personal assistant to Judy
Heumann and demonstrated her negotiation skills in working with
the guards.  In her decade of work with DREDF, Wright had refined
her extraordinary and tough negotiating techniques. 
     She has [more] hutzpah than anyone I ve ever met,  said
Eastern Paralyzed Veterans of America (EPVA) attorney Jim
Weisman, who worked with her closely during the ADA s passage.
Wright certainly made her presence known.  Her rejection of
standard Washington attire stood out among beltway veterans; one
journalist said she appeared as if she had arrived directly from
the 1960s Berkeley campus.  But Wright was so widely respected in
Congress and the White House The ADA s success was due in no
small part to Pat Wright s efforts.  She has more hutzpah than
anyone I ve ever met. 
          Jim Weismanthat her apparel and colorful vocabulary
were beyond reproach.  She really is brassy,  said Weisman,  but
she got it done.   Indeed, the ADA s success was due in no small
part to Wright s efforts, though some perceived Wright as a
 loner  because she took advantage of her con tacts and her
capabilities to negotiate unilaterally in high-pressured
situations.
     Neas, an attorney and Director of the Leadership Conference
on Civil Rights (LCCR), brought to the ADA coalition unparalleled
expe rience in civil rights legislation.  LCCR carried more than
three decades of civil rights advocacy, and was  the broadest,
the largest, and oldest coalition in the country,  with over 185
organizations and their 60 million dues-paying members.  It had
either assisted or led the coordination of every civil rights
bill since 1957.  As Executive Director of the LCCR since 1981,
Neas led several civil rights campaigns, including the Voting
Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act, the Civil
Rights Restoration Act, and the Fair Housing Amendments Act.  (In
1989, he would begin work on what became the Civil Rights Act of
1991.)  In the spring of 1988, Wright approached Neas and the
Executive Council to obtain an endorsement of the concept of the
ADA.  She stressed that the disability community would work with
Congress to develop a viable bill after the 1988 election; the
important consideration was to lend credibility to the general
principles.  DREDF s efforts during the 1980s paid off, and LCCR
joined the disability community as an indispensable ally. 
Although Neas did not join the strategy team full-time until he
finished with the Civil Rights Restoration Act and Fair Housing
Amendments Act, the ADA would become one of his top priorities in
January, 1989.
     While Wright and Neas were the principal strategists, most
strategy development did not take place behind closed doors.  For
example, Savage and Marchand (who focused on lobbying in
Washington), Justin Dart and Marilyn Golden (who focused on the
grass roots), and Mayerson and Feldblum (who directed legal
strategy) all were regular participants in shaping strategy. 
Moreover, important strategic contributions came from people such
as Mary Lou Breslin of DREDF; National Council on Disability
(NCD) Chairperson Sandra Parrino; Lex Frieden of The Institute
for Rehabilitation and Research (TIRR) and former NCD Executive
Director; Paul Hearne of the Dole Foundation; and Jay Rochlin,
Executive Director of the President s Committee on the Employment
of People with Disabilities. These individuals provided
additional contacts in Congress and the administration and also
contributed specific statutory recommendations.  Such
organizations as NCIL and ADAPT brought the concerns of
consumer-directed organizations to the table.  Further more, when
the CCD Civil Rights Task Force began holding weekly strategy
meetings in 1989, out- of-town visitors were active participants.
     Crucial for implementation of strategy was the
Washington-based education and lobbying effort.  In this respect,
Wright worked especially closely with Savage attorney, Assistant
Director for Government Affairs of EFA, and Co-chair of the CCD
Civil Rights Task Force.  Wright and Savage had met in 1985,
around the time Savage joined EFA.  Together they worked on such
landmark civil rights cases as the Handicapped Children s
Protection Act, Civil Rights Restoration Act, and Fair Housing
Amendments Act.  Wright and Savage s strengths complemented one
another.  Whereas Wright s expertise was in strategy and
negotiating, Savage s strength was lobbying.  This experience and
relationship with Wright naturally evolved into the role of
coordinat ing lobbying activities for the ADA coalition.  If
Wright was the  General,  Savage was one of the principal  Field
Commanders. 
     Marchand also played a key role in the education and
lobbying effort.  As Director of the Governmental Affairs Office
of the ARC, Marchand brought to the ADA coalition the resources
of one of the nation s largest disability organizations: 1,200
chapters nationwide, and an Action Alert Network that monitored
congressional activities and mustered thousands of letters and
phone calls. Advocates for persons with developmental
disabilities were a well-established and widely-respected
presence in Washington, which effectively positioned Marchand for
ADA leadership.  Moreover, as Chairman of CCD he had an effective
platform for working with members of Congress and the
administration.
     To aid in the crucial task of educating members of Congress
about disability and lobbying them to be ADA cosponsors, which
began even before the ADA was first introduced, the ADA coalition
relied on a number of lobbying  captains.   These included Becky
Ogle of the Spina Bifida Association, Bob Williams of the United
Cerebral Palsy Associations (UCPA), Denise Rozell of the National
Association of Developmental Disabilities Councils (NADDC), Tom
Sheridan of the AIDS Action Council, Kathy Megivern of the
Association for Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind and
Visually Handicapped, Fred Cowell of the Paralyzed Veterans of
America (PVA), David Capozzi of the National Easter Seal Society
(NESS), Caren Friedman of the Human Rights Campaign Fund, and
Curt Decker of the National Association of Protection and
Advocacy Systems (NAPAS).  These lobbyists in turn worked with
members of such organizations as CCD, LCCR, NCIL, the National
Organization Responding to AIDS (NORA), and ADAPT.  Together they
organized lobbying teams to visit senators  and congressmen s
offices, which supplemented the efforts of congressional
sponsors. 
     Victory would be won through the efforts of thousands of
advocates across the nation who could humanize and personalize
the issues.Although lobbying was important, successful passage of
the ADA could not be achieved by efforts only within the
Washington beltway.  Well before the ADA entered Congress, the
ADA coalition concluded that success was dependent on convincing
members of Congress, the executive branch, and the general public
that the difficulties faced by persons with dis abilities were a
genuine national problem.  The ADA could not be viewed as the
brain-child of a coterie of think-tank intellects; it had to be
correctly understood as an outgrowth of the pervasive experience
of discrimination.  Victory would be won through the efforts of
thousands of advocates across the nation who could humanize and
personalize the issues, not by privately wrestling with legal
technicalities.  NCD had begun this process through  consumer
forums,  Justin Dart s public forums, Toward Independence, and
The ICD Survey.  After the ADA was introduced, Marilyn Golden of
DREDF and Justin Dart led these efforts.  In 1988, the primary
goal of the ADA coalition was to get an army ready.  In 1989 and
1990, with a communication system in place, Dart and Golden would
issue a nationwide call to arms. 
     There were three main objectives for grass roots
mobilization.  The first was to educate persons with disabilities
about the ADA to prepare them for action.  An important part of
this process was uniting the fragmented disability community by
centering the focus on a common cause.  The second was to
accumulate evidence of discrimination.  This came not only
through the standard form of congressional testimony, but also
through the novel approach of soliciting  discrimination
diaries.   In addition to providing evidence for Congress,
preparing these docu ments would prompt people throughout the
country to organize diary parties and foster the empowerment that
comes from numbers.  Over time, many persons with disabilities
had internalized oppression, taken complete responsibility for
their situations, and thus turned their backs to discrimination. 
By writing down their experiences, however, people could face
discrimination, recognize society s role, get  mad as hell,  and
lose patience with the circumstances to which they had become
acclimated.  Third, grass roots mobilization would provide a
means to apply pressure on members of Congress and the president. 
Not only did persons with disabilities write letters, they also
joined the lobbying campaign by paying for trips to Washington
out of their own pockets.
     Golden drew on the extensive contacts she had made through
administering DREDF disability rights training projects.  In the
1980s, DREDF had brought thousands of persons with disabilities
to Berkeley to educate them in their rights and teach them how to
mobilize communities for action.  These persons in turn shared
their knowledge with their local communities.  Golden
supplemented this network by establishing ties to other
organizations, such as NCIL, and the ARC, and their grass roots
links.  The computer network DIMENET was another avenue for
mobilizing people around the country.
     As a result of his public forums, Dart had become famous
among people with disabilities around the country, indeed he had
become somewhat of a cultural icon for much of the disability
community.  As he toured the country, Dart kept lists of all the
---
---------------