(page 1)

KANSAS DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES
(Kansas Department of Human Resources logo)
COMMISSION ON DISABILITY CONCERNS 
1430 S.W. Topeka Boulevard, Topeka, Kansas 66612·1877 
913-296-1722 (Voice) • 913-296-5044 (TDD) • 561-1722 (KANS-A-N)

Mike Hayden, Governor 	July 7, 1990 	Ray D. Siehndel, Secretary

ADA BULLETIN: RECENT SENATE ACTION

On June 6, 1990, the U.S. Senate voted 53-40 to instruct the Senate ADA Conference Committee members to accept the Chapman amendment. The instruction to the conference members is not binding, but a majority of senators (53) have expresssed their intent to accept the amendment. It is crucial that as many alls as possible be made to the conference committee, demanding REJECTION OF THE CHAPMAN AMENDMENT.

We have seen the ADA being slowly eroded since it was introduced last year. If the Chapman amendment is accepted, I will recommend to my board that KCDC oppose the ADA and I will encourage all others to do likewise. If you agree, please let the conference committee know.

The insidiousness of the Chapman amendment lies in its endorsement of irrational public attitudes toward all people with disabilities. It perpetuates the damaging myth that disabled people are sick and that association with us will result in sickness for the general public. Please take action NOW.

(page 2)

page 2

Senator Dole's office has informed us that the senate did not vote to approve the Chapman amendment; they voted to instruct the senate conference committee members to consider the amendment. Senator Dole voted for the committee to consider only to assure staunch opponents (eg. Senator Jessie Helms, R-NC et al.) that the amendment would receive due consideration, rather than be rejected out of hand. Further, if up-or-down vote were to be taken on the Chapman amendment, Senator Dole would vote against it. We must now demand that the conference committee drop the Chapman Amendment. They are not bound by the senate vote to accept it. I have informed Dole's office that I cannot support an ADA which includes the Chapman Amendment and have encouraged him to vote against it if it does. I hope that others will convey similar messages.