Senators Scramble

Senators Scramble

The Braille Monitor

__May 1997

(next)

(contents)

U.S. Senators Scramble for Cover

by Barbara Pierce

According to one Senate staffer, "Pick any three letters

of the alphabet, and a camera crew answering to that name was on Capitol Hill

filming Moira Shea and her guide dog Beau," on April 15, 1997. The media

free-for-all occurred following a frantic twenty-four hours which saw a number

of senators scrambling to be seen on the right side of the question of whether

or not a person not actually employed as a member of a senator's staff could

be accompanied by her guide dog onto the Senate floor. At a time when guide

and other service dogs are routinely allowed into hospitals, restaurants, and

taxis driven by people afraid of dogs, one might have assumed that there would

have been no question about admitting a guide dog to the Senate floor. But nothing

is ever simple in the protocol-laden upper chamber of Congress.

Moira Shea is an employee of the Department of Energy, where

she has worked for several years. For the second year she is a Congressional

Fellow on loan to the Senate, where she was assigned to the staff of Senator

Wendell Ford of Kentucky last year and to the staff of freshman Senator Ron

Wyden of Oregon this year to help with his work on the Senate Energy Committee.

She has Usher's syndrome, which has resulted in both a significant hearing loss

and blindness. Her guide dog is an important part of Ms. Shea's ability to function

independently in a demanding job.

The only people allowed on the Senate floor without seeking

permission to enter the chamber from a member of the sergeant at arms's staff

are the members themselves and, by courtesy, the members of their actual staffs.

Everyone else must receive unanimous permission to do so. The senator asks if

there are objections, and, as long as no member says anything, the person may

come in. The procedure is almost always quick and uncomplicated. Late last year

a question about the dog's presence on the floor arose, and Senator Ford introduced

a resolution about the problem. But the session ended before it could be acted

upon. So it was pretty clear that this session Beau was eventually going to

trigger an incident. April 14, 1997, proved to be the day it happened.

The Senate Committee on Rules and Administration establishes

all of the regulations that stipulate behavior and actions on the Senate floor.

No one, including senators, may smoke or bring a laptop computer onto the floor,

for example. We were told that women have been banned from the floor because

their dresses were too short and men because their attire was too informal.

If a doorkeeper believes Senate decorum or a rule is about to be breached, the

question goes to the floor for a decision.

When Senator Wyden showed up accompanied by Shea and her dog

on April 14, the appropriateness of Beau's presence was questioned, and the

fat was in the fire. According to news stories the next day, none of the four

senators then on the floor objected to the dog's presence, but Robert Byrd of

West Virginia, a member of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration

and a man perennially concerned about the unconsidered ramifications of waiving

Senate rules without due reflection, sent in word that he objected to Shea's

use of the dog on the floor until the Committee on Rules and Administration

had considered the matter. Senator Wyden, disturbed at the decision to bar Beau

from the floor, rose to comment on the situation and offer a resolution. This

is what he said:

Congressional Record: April 14, 1997

(Senate), [Page S3126-S3127]

From the Congressional Record Online

via GPO Access.

Mr. WYDEN: Mr. President, the resolution

that I submit today would change the Senate rules that deny floor access to

those individuals who are visually impaired and need to use guide dogs to carry

out their official duties. By denying floor access to Ms. Shea and her guide

dog, the Senate, in my view, is violating the Congressional Accountability Act,

which requires that Congress abide by the requirements and intent of the Americans

with Disabilities Act. A guide dog is a person's vision. A guide dog is a working

dog, not a pet. This guide dog is with Ms. Shea all the time. He is with her

in meetings in my office. He goes with her to energy committee hearings and

has even gone with her to nuclear weapons facilities.

Mr. President and colleagues, I had hoped that there would

be no need to offer this resolution, but I am forced to because discrimination

still persists here. Ms. Shea is being treated differently simply because she

is visually impaired and needs to use a guide dog.

Now some may believe that the Senate fulfills its obligations under the Americans

with Disabilities Act. . .

Mr. REID: Will my friend yield for a

unanimous-consent request?

Mr. WYDEN: Yes.

Mr. REID: I ask unanimous consent that

I be added as a cosponsor of the Senator's resolution.

Mr. WELLSTONE: Mr. President, I also

ask unanimous consent that I be made a cosponsor.

Mr. MURKOWSKI: I ask unanimous consent

that I also be added as a cosponsor to the resolution.

The PRESIDING OFFICER: Without objection,

the Senators will be added as cosponsors.

Mr. WYDEN: I thank my colleagues.

Mr. President, some believe that the

Senate is fulfilling its obligations under the Americans with Disabilities Act

if they provide someone to accompany Ms. Shea to the Senate floor. But let me

say that an unknown staff person is no substitute for a working guide dog.

The relevant language from the Americans with Disabilities Act says that an

employer must provide reasonable accommodation for an individual with a disability.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Office has said, "Reasonable accommodation

[is] when an employer permits a person who is blind to use a guide dog at work."

Let us put ourselves in Ms. Shea's situation. Imagine that you need to go on

the Senate floor to carry out your official duties, but, wait, you must first

check your ability to see with the doorkeeper, or go to the Committee on Rules

and Administration to get a resolution. I fail to see the logic of this, and

I fail to see the justice behind it. Miss Shea's situation doesn't require extra

financial resources nor special treatment. She just wants to do her job as a

professional.

A large part of the problem seems to be a lack of understanding. So let me tell

the Senate a little bit about what guide dogs do. They are working dogs, not

pets. A guide dog is that person's vision, an integral part of that person's

essential activities and professional responsibilities. A blind person or a

visually impaired person, such as Ms. Shea, has learned to turn over her diminishing

sight to her dog and trusts that dog with her safety. This guide dog has blocked

Ms. Shea from oncoming traffic. He knows his left from his right. He is a marker

to others that Ms. Shea is visually impaired. She has gone to the Senate Energy

Committee hearings and nuclear weapons facilities. This dog has even met more

just access with

respect to the Soviet Union.

Yet here in the United States, on the Senate floor, where we passed the ADA

and the Congressional Accountability Act, we are refusing access to someone

who needs to use a guide dog. This guide dog has a serious job, and, I might

add, the dog performs it very well. This is the tool that Ms. Shea uses to be

a productive member of the work force, and today we are denying her the ability

to do her job to the best of her ability. Ms. Shea is part of a growing work

force of persons who want to be independent, who want to be productive, and

who have been raised with a can-do attitude.

Let me conclude by describing how the guide dog would work on the floor. Ms.

Shea would most likely tell him to "follow me," and as they walked

down the aisle, the dog would alert Ms.Shea to each step by stopping. Then Ms.

Shea would say to him "find the chair," and then Ms. Shea would sit

down and the dog would lay right beside her. We would all forget that the dog

was even here. In leaving, Ms. Shea would tell the dog to "find the door"

once again, and the dog would alert her to where all the steps are and take

her right to the door.

Mr. President, that is all there is to it. It seems to me that the Senate should

change its rules to ensure that there is justice for people like Ms. Shea. To

tell someone like Ms. Shea that she cannot come to the Senate floor with either

a white cane or a guide dog and only with an escort is demeaning. You take away

her right to decide what is the best method for her to carry out her job as

a professional. You take away her sense of independence. You take away her dignity.

You make her dependent on others. That is not what the Americans with Disabilities

Act is all about.

Ms. Shea has Usher's syndrome. That is the leading cause of deaf-blindness in

the United States. She has struggled and worked hard to get where she is today

as a professional. She is independent and self-sufficient, and she told me that

she can cope with losing her eyesight, but she should not be forced to face

blatant discrimination.

It is time for the Senate to change its rules. I look forward to working with

my colleagues on the Rules Committee to do this. It is time to ensure that the

visually impaired in our country have justice, and have justice in the way that

Congress envisioned with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Congress

Accountability Act. I thank my friends from Minnesota, Nevada, and Alaska for

joining me as cosponsors this morning on this resolution.

Senate Resolution 71

Relative to the Congressional Accountability Act

Mr. WYDEN (for himself, Mr. Reid, Mr.

Wellstone, Mr. Murkowski, and Mr. Bryan) submitted the following resolution;

which was referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration:

Resolved That:

(A) An individual with a disability (as

defined in section 3 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 [42 U.S.C.

12102]) who has or is granted the privilege of the Senate floor may bring those

supporting services (including service dogs, wheelchairs, and interpreters)

on the Senate floor the employing or supervising office determines are necessary

to assist the disabled individual in discharging the official duties of his

or her position.

(b) The employing or supervising office

of a disabled individual shall administer the provisions of this resolution.

Those were Mr. Wyden's remarks and the

resolution he introduced for consideration by the Senate Committee on Rules

and Administration. Tuesday morning, April 15, the Senate unanimously passed

a motion stating that, until the Committee on Rules and Administration decides

on a general policy with respect to assistive tools for people with disabilities

on the Senate floor, the sergeant at arms, who is the officer charged with enforcing

the rules of the Senate, is to make individual decisions in each case in which

a person seeking entry uses a mobility aid. The sergeant at arms was asked to

rule on Ms. Shea's request to enter the Senate chamber that morning, and to

no one's surprise with the media lined up waiting for the answer, he announced

that she could use her dog while she was on the Senate floor. At 1:15 p.m. Tuesday,

April 15, Moira Shea and Beau were given unanimous permission to enter the Senate,

and the event was replayed by all the television networks that evening.

It was certainly gratifying to find virtually everyone in America lined up in

support of a blind woman's right to use her mobility method of choice. It was

valuable positive publicity to have the woman in question be a Congressional

Fellow assigned to the Senate of the United States. It is even an indication

of progress that a woman who has steadfastly refused to affiliate herself with

the organized blind movement is still prepared to stand up for her rights and

conduct herself with dignity and restraint under pressure. It was particularly

refreshing to have the media turn immediately to the National Federation of

the Blind rather than an agency spokesperson for comment and perspective in

a case of discrimination against a blind person.

It is regrettable, however, that so many reporters covering this story and average

citizens talking about it came away with the impression that Moira Shea, and

by extension, all blind people, are dependent on dogs or human guides. A member

of Senator Wyden's staff assured the Braille Monitor with tears in his

voice that he doesn't think of Beau as a dog; "He is a person, a member

of this staff!" Senator Wyden himself referred in his speech to a guide

dog as the blind person's "vision." The subtext of most of the commentary

that came out of this event seemed to be that Senator Byrd was picking on a

poor blind woman just because she needs a dog to take her where she's going.

In fact, Senator Byrd was distressed and dismayed to find himself portrayed

as the heavy in this event, according to a member of his staff. On April 15

Senate Resolution 72 was introduced and has also now gone to the Senate Committee

on Rules and Administration for its consideration. Senator Byrd has requested

that consideration be expedited. Here is the text:

Senate Resolution 72

To allow disabled persons or Senate

employees seeking access to the Senate floor the ability to bring what supporting

services are necessary for them to execute their official duties.

In the Senate of the United States

April 15, 1997

Mr. Kerry (for himself, Mr. Wyden, Mr.

Reid, Mr. Wellstone, Mr. Murkowski, and Mr. Bryan) submitted the following resolution;

which was referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration.

Resolution

To allow disabled persons or Senate

employees seeking access to the Senate floor the ability to bring what supporting

services are necessary for them to execute their official duties.

Resolved, that an individual with a disability who has or is granted the privilege

of the Senate floor may bring such supporting services on the Senate floor,

which the Senate Sergeant at Arms determines are necessary and appropriate to

assist such disabled individuals in discharging the official duties of his or

her position until the Committee on Rules and Administration has the opportunity

to fully consider a permanent rules change.

Until the Committee on Rules and Administration

determines appropriate rules to govern the use of assistive tools allowed on

the floor of the Senate, the sergeant at arms will be making the decisions.

From off-the-record conversations with staff members in that office, it seems

pretty clear that, had Ms. Shea been using a white cane or wheelchair, no problem

would have arisen. Once again it seems to have been the guide dog, which appears

to some people to resemble a pet, that caused the confusion and the questions.

Some people expressed anger and frustration because this incident seemed to

be a clear infraction of the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Congressional

Accountability Act, which makes the Congress subject to the ADA. But as Dr.

Jernigan said to NBC News when they called before dawn Tuesday morning, April

15, "We have to get beyond the question of whether or not an incident like

this one is illegal. Everyone must come to understand that denying a blind person

the use of a guide dog is simply wrong. Incidents like this one will continue

to occur until people recognize and respect the right of disabled people to

equal access."

Now that the excitement has subsided, it is reasonable to ask what has been

accomplished. Moira Shea got a great deal of media attention, and a lot of Americans

now know that a blind woman who uses a guide dog works for a United States Senator.

An unfortunate inequity in the rules of the Senate has been exposed, and one

can hope that the Committee on Rules and Administration will address this and

similar questions of reasonable accommodation for those working around the Senate.

The media demonstrated again that injustice, even inadvertent injustice, makes

a dandy story for a day, and the National Federation of the Blind emerged as

the voice of the nation's blind community providing comment and background in

matters of civil rights for blind citizens. Senator Robert Byrd has again learned

the hard lesson that he who fights to preserve proper procedure frequently incurs

wrath from all sides. Senator Byrd's press office assures everyone who asks

that he was not discriminating against Moira Shea. His actions and intentions

were misunderstood. When Ed Mcdonald wrote a letter taking him to task for preventing

a blind woman from using her chosen method of mobility on the Senate floor,

Mr. Byrd wrote a letter to the West Virginia affiliate, which was conducting

its annual convention. This is what he said:

Washington, D.C.

April 17, 1997

National Federation of the Blind

of West Virginia

Mr. Edgar McDonald

Keyser, West Virginia

Dear Friends:

On April 15, the Senate agreed to accommodate, on a case by case basis, the

special needs of the disabled Americans who may be required, as part of their

Senate duties, to be present in the Senate Chamber during Senate debate. Such

an arrangement allows access to the Senate Chamber to disabled Senate employees

and Congressional Fellows, while also following the usual procedure for altering

Senate rules and regulations. In my view it is important to carefully examine

all changes regarding Senate floor access, and such changes are properly the

responsibility of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, on which

I serve. It is important that the Senate comply with the letter and the spirit

of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and make reasonable accommodations

to allow disabled Senate employees and fellows to do their jobs. The action

taken by the Senate, with my support, on April 15 achieves this essential goal.

I regret that my concern that the Senate follow appropriate

procedures with regard to changing its rules has been misconstrued. I would

be truly saddened should this incident cause West Virginians and Americans with

disabilities to believe that the Senate as a body, and this Senator in particular,

are insensitive to, or ignorant of, issues of concern to the disabled and the

requirements of the ADA law. Please be assured that this is not the case. I

have long been, and continue to be, a supporter of programs to assist the disabled

and the blind. I voted in support of the Americans with Disabilities Act in

1990. The Senate has put forth important legislation for people with disabilities

and has been home to a number of outstanding Senators with disabilities. These

include former Senators Robert Dole and John Stennis and current Senators Daniel

Inouye, Max Cleland, and Robert Kerry, to name a few. Disabilities do not, and

should not, prevent any American from serving the nation in the U.S. Senate.

It is my hope that you have a successful convention. With kind regards, I am.

Sincerely yours,

Robert C. Byrd

It is probably unrealistic to hope that

a United States Senator would apologize to his blind constituents for his actions

when all he had done was insist that the Senate's own rules be followed, but

one can hope that he has learned to pay more attention to the discrimination

of all kinds facing blind Americans. Despite the media feeding frenzy on April

15 and the probable modifications in the Senate rules, it is hard to see that

this episode accomplished much. Unfortunately, discrimination still flourishes

in our society and the public still views blind people as victims who always

seem to need to be rescued. The fight for first-class citizenship with all its

attendant rights and responsibilities has been advanced a little, but there

is still plenty of opportunity for all of us to join the battle.