Overwhelming Majorities of Public Find it Unacceptable for States to Claim They Are Exempt from Provisions of Americans with Dis
February 18 2004 - 5:46PM
PR Newswire (US)
Overwhelming Majorities of Public Find it Unacceptable for States
to Claim They Are Exempt from Provisions of Americans with
Disabilities Act ROCHESTER, N.Y., Feb. 18 /PRNewswire/ -- If the
Supreme Court voted with public opinion they would find against
several states that claim that they should not be required to make
courthouses and other state buildings accessible to people with
disabilities. The court is currently reviewing the case of
Tennessee vs. Lane, where several plaintiffs with disabilities have
encountered inaccessible courthouses. These plaintiffs had to be
carried up the steps, or had to crawl up, in order to be present at
their own trials or to perform their court-related jobs or errands.
Since the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) in
1990, federal government buildings, theaters, restaurants, offices
and public transportation have been required by Title II of that
law to be accessible to people in wheelchairs and with other
disabilities. This poll shows that the public overwhelmingly
believes that they should be. But, Tennessee, with the support of
seven other states, has argued before the Supreme Court that states
are not required to comply with the ADA. A nationwide Harris Poll
of 3,378 adults surveyed online between January 19 and 28, 2004,
finds that a 93% to 7% majority of all adults thinks that "states
should be required to make courthouses and other public buildings
accessible to people with disabilities." This includes well over
90% of those withand without disabilities. When this sample of all
adults was presented with two arguments for each side in the case,
they almost all agreed with the arguments against the states. The
arguments for the states were rejected by large majorities but were
accepted by larger minorities: * A 94% to 6% majority of all adults
agrees that "any system which forces someone to leave his or her
wheelchair and crawl up stairs to get to a courthouse is totally
unacceptable." * An almost equally massive 93% to 7% majority
agrees that "as private businesses are required by law to make
offices, workplaces, restaurants, theaters, and transportation
systems accessible to wheelchairs, state governments should also be
required to do so." * One-quarter (25%) of all adults agree with
the argument that "making courthouses and other state buildings
accessible to wheelchairs may be desirable, but the federal
government should not have the right to force states to do
this."However, 75% reject this argument in favor of states rights.
* One person in six (17%) agrees with another argument for the
states that "making courthouses and other public buildings
accessible to people in wheelchairs would involvespending too much
of the taxpayers' money;" but here again, a very large majority
(83%) disagree. Of course, the Supreme Court is not the court of
public opinion, so what the public thinks about this issue will not
decide this case. If the Supreme Court decides to support the
states it will surely not be the first or last time it has voted
against public opinion, but it is surely rare to decide against the
opinions of such a huge majority of the public. Reacting to these
findings, Alan Reich, the President of the National Organization on
Disability (N.O.D.), said, "I am heartened that Americans so
overwhelmingly support our right to access courthouses and other
public buildings. Americans with disabilities worked long and hard
to secure the civil rights that the ADA promises us, and we are
counting on the Supreme Court to support the law of the land, as
well as to do what the majority of citizens support, by deciding in
favor of the plaintiffs in Tennessee Vs. Lane. This is part of the
long-term effort to secure and protect the rights of the one-fifth
of our population who have disabilities." TABLE 1 SHOULD STATES BE
REQUIRED TO MAKE COURTHOUSES AND PUBLIC BUILDINGS ACCESSIBLE TO
PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES "The Supreme Court is hearing several
cases where people with disabilities are suing state government to
make courthouses and other state buildings accessible to
plaintiffs, defendants, and lawyers with disabilities, for example,
those in wheelchair. Do you think that states should not be
required to make courthouses and other public buildings accessible
to people with disabilities?" Base: All Adults Total People with
People Disabilities without Disabilities % % % Should be required
93 95 93 Should not be required 7 5 7 TABLE 2 REACTIONS TO FOUR
STRONG OPINIONS ON THIS LIST "Please indicate whether you agree or
disagree with the following statements." Base: All Adults Agree
Disagree % % Any system which forces someone to leave his or her
wheelchairand crawl up stairs to get to a courthouse is completely
unacceptable 94 6 As private businesses are required by law to make
offices, workplaces, restaurants, theaters, and transportation
systems accessible to wheelchairs, state governments should also be
required to do so 93 7 Making courthouses and other state buildings
accessible to wheelchairs may be desirable, but the federal
government should not have the right to force states todo this 25
75 Making courthouses and other state buildings accessible to
people in wheelchairs would involve spending too much of the
taxpayers' money 17 83 Methodology The Harris Poll(R) was conducted
online within the United States between January 19 and 28, 2004
among a nationwide cross section of 3,378 adults. Figures for age,
sex, race, education and number of adults in the household were
weighted where necessary to bring them into line with their actual
proportions in the population. "Propensity score" weighting was
also used to adjust for respondents' propensity to be online. In
theory, with probability samples of this size, one could say with
95 percent certainty that the results have a statistical precision
of plus or minus three percentage points of what they would be if
the entire adult population had been polled with complete accuracy.
Unfortunately, there are several other possible sources of error in
all polls or surveys that are probably more serious than
theoretical calculations of sampling error. They include refusals
to be interviewed (non-response), question wording and question
order, and weighting. It is impossible to quantify the errors that
may result from these factors. This online sample is not a
probability sample. These statements conform to the principles of
disclosure of the National Council on Public Polls. About Harris
Interactive(R) Harris Interactive
(http://www.harrisinteractive.com/) is a worldwide market research
and consulting firm best known for The Harris Poll(R), and for
pioneering the Internet method to conduct scientifically accurate
market research. Headquartered in Rochester, New York, U.S.A.,
Harris Interactive combines proprietary methodologies and
technology with expertise in predictive, custom and strategic
research. The Company conducts international research through
wholly owned subsidiaries-London-based HI Europe
(http://www.hieurope.com/) and Tokyo-based Harris Interactive
Japan-as well as through the Harris Interactive Global Network of
local market-and opinion-research firms, and various U.S. offices.
EOE M/F/D/V To become a member of the Harris Poll Online(SM) and be
invited to participate in future online surveys, visit
http://www.harrispollonline.com/. Nancy Wong Harris Interactive,
585-214-7316 DATASOURCE: Harris Interactive CONTACT: Nancy Wong of
Harris Interactive, +1-585-214-7316, Web site:
http://www.harrisinteractive.com/
Copyright