The National Summit on Accessibility for Government IT

Remarks by Martin Gould at
THE NATIONAL SUMMIT ON ACCESSIBILITY FOR GOVERNMENT IT
The Performance Institute
Washington, D.C. July 23, 2001

Good morning. I am Martin Gould, Research Specialist for the National Council on Disability. The National Council on Disability is an independent federal agency consisting of fifteen members. The Council's members are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate of the United States and are all individuals with disabilities or parents of individuals with disabilities. The Council has a significant history in the area of technology, beginning with its first report on financing assistive technology in 1988. I also wish to draw your attention to the Council's award winning website-www.ncd.gov, on which all of our reports can be found.

Our most recent work, The Accessible Future is the fourth in NCD's series of reports, "Unequal Protection Under Law." This series of reports has examined enforcement and implementation of civil rights legislation, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Air Carrier Access Act and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.

The Accessible Future report, along with our four previous reports on technology access, would not have been possible without the technical assistance and involvement of Tech Watch. Tech Watch is an advisory body to the Council consisting of consumers, technology specialists, and advocates. This group has provided advice and support to the Council on all of its technology activities during the last eight years, including its reports on access to the graphical user interface, the National Information Infrastructure, multi-media access, and AT policy.

The Accessible Future examines access to Electronic and Information technology, which includes the Internet, the World Wide Web, and information/transaction machines. No one would dispute that people with disabilities have the same right and need for the information everyone else has. Paradoxically, at the very time when many people comfortably assume that technology is steadily bringing people with disabilities more opportunities for access than ever before, this same technology (coupled with the attitudes and expectations of those who use it) may in many cases be reinforcing patterns of exclusion and isolation.

The Accessible Future Report examines implementation and enforcement of several significant pieces of legislation, including the Americans with Disabilities Act, Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, and Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. We looked at promising practices and made recommendations toward establishing strong E&IT access policy in the United States.

We found that access to E&IT is, and should be viewed as a civil right, just as access to public and private buildings is now considered a civil right and is a part of our everyday experience. Access to E&IT is equally as important for people with sensory disabilities as access to the built environment is for people with physical disabilities.

The report found that we do not have one comprehensive piece of legislation that promotes E&IT in the same way the ADA requires access to the physical environment. There are several laws, including the ADA, Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act, and Sections 504 and 508 of the Rehabilitation Act. These laws provide a patchwork of requirements, with different levels of access required under each law and leaving certain vital E&IT uncovered.

We understand that access to E&IT is more complicated, because of the changing nature of information technology. The most up-to-date computer system can become obsolete in a matter of months, when a new more sexy product enters the market. Rapid advances in technology require that access remain high on the industry, government, and consumer agenda. Unique, collaborative strategies between consumers, government, and industry are necessary to address the ever-changing and complex issues of E&IT access.

Our report found that many federal agencies have made significant strides in promoting E&IT access over the last several years. These policies and practices were due in large part to leadership of key agency personnel. A corollary finding is that these policies and practices must be institutionalized if information access is to advance.

We also identified several strategies that, if adopted, would make implementation of existing laws stronger and more consistent. Our recommendations include:

Incorporate E&IT Accessibility into the Agency Planning and Government-Wide Planning Processes at All Levels
Review the Federal Contracting Process to Encourage Diffusion of Accessibility, including encouraging or requiring accessibility in grants and contracts, developing model contract language, and providing technical assistance.
Establish federal website quality control, including random auditing of federal websites.
Systematically address the question of cost effectiveness, by establishing a Presidential Commission to study the cost effectiveness of both providing and not providing accessible E&IT. This Commission should be kicked off with a White House summit on accessibility.
Involve consumers in the implementation process, through establishing agency advisory committees and other mechanisms for consumers, industry and government collaboration.
Enrich the Available Resources for Implementation of Section 508. For example, relevant government agencies should collaborate to provide additional guidance on unresolved 508 issues. Technical assistance for non-compliant agencies should be mandated.
Enhance Record-Keeping and Data Collection Mechanisms
The President and Congress should establish or empower a joint blue ribbon commission to examine barriers to effective implementation of E&IT accessibility that may exist in current federal laws, and to recommend changes in law that will foster E&IT accessibility in the public and private sectors.
Reinvigorate the Quality and Focus of ADA Enforcement Through suitable regulations, interpretive guidance, or case initiation, DOJ should take immediate and meaningful steps to set forth its views concerning the applicability of Title III to the Internet and promulgate standards and requirements for the accessibility of public terminals.
The FCC Should Intensify Monitoring and Enforcement Under Section 255 of the Telecommunications Act

Developing a Framework for Government Operations

To ensure accessibility over the long-haul, individual federal government departments need to look at their objectives, strategies, and organization in light of e-government challenges and citizen demands. For example, departments and agencies should be asking a number of questions:

Do we really understand the challenges that E&IT poses and are our objectives and in line with the new realities? For example, if the digital divide is widening the gap between students with and without disabilities, how are we addressing that? Do new threats to workforce development arise and are our priorities correct in addressing them?
Is the correct research and evaluation structure in place for our grant programs? Is it sufficient to realistically assess the new challenges of our distance education or telework initiatives?
As we seek to provide greater access to education and training opportunities to children, youth and adults with disabilities around the country, are we taking full advantage of the possibilities of E&IT?

To ensure accessibility, all branches and components of the federal government invested in developing a national E&IT policy framework should also determine that their relevant activities ensure the provision of:

funding for universal service through improvements to the communications infrastructure of schools, colleges, training academies, libraries, vocational programs;
accessibility at all levels to the wealth and diversity of data, information and knowledge maintained by the public sector;
adequate and reliable hardware and software;
incorporation into E&IT grant programs and contract initiatives (e.g., dealing with assistive technology, information technology, telecommunications);
effective technical assistance and support for integrating E&IT into the practices of publicly funded education and training programs; and
research into the development and application of methods and measurements to allow for continuous improvements in the (federal) government's reorganization effort.

In the near-term, departments and agencies could begin to accomplish this through the development and use of templates - like checklists - that they would use to assess their existing: infrastructure; personnel development; outreach and technical assistance; discretionary program activities; research and development efforts; community and customer relations; and, management and accountability systems.

Conclusions

Our notion of the proper role of government and its relation to its citizens is continuously changing. Electronic and information technologies have both increased the complexity of the issues and interests that lie at the heart of what good government should be, and presented American government with some of its greatest challenges. It should not be presumed that e-government can be achieved solely or even primarily by legislative measures.

In an ideal climate, no person with a disability should be denied the opportunity to access E&IT and transfer its inherent potential into viable, life fulfilling endeavors, whether it be: in pursuit of an education through distance learning, advancement through employment via telework, improvement in health by using telemedicine, or even digital participation in democracy by online voting.

Access to electronic and information technology has become a civil rights issue for many people with disabilities and for our society-and the importance of this issue can only grow. We must all work together to ensure that all Americans can participate in the information society of the 21st century.