I 110THCONGRESS 1STSESSION H. R. 3195 To restore the intent and protections of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES JULY26, 2007 Mr. HOYER(for himself, Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. ACKERMAN, Mr. ALLEN, Mr. ANDREWS, Mr. BACHUS, Ms. BALDWIN, Mr. BERMAN, Mr. BILBRAY, Mr. BISHOPof New York, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Ms. BORDALLO, Mr. BOS-WELL, Mr. BOUCHER, Ms. CORRINEBROWNof Florida, Mr. BUTTERFIELD, Mr. CALVERT, Mr. CARDOZA, Mr. CARNEY, Mr. CHAN-DLER, Mr. CLAY, Mr. CLEAVER, Mr. CLYBURN, Mr. COBLE, Mr. COHEN, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. COSTA, Mr. COSTELLO, Mr. COURTNEY, Mr. CUMMINGS, Mr. DAVISof Illinois, Mr. TOMDAVISof Virginia, Mr. DEFAZIO, Ms. DEGETTE, Mr. DELAHUNT, Ms. DELAURO, Mr. DINGELL, Mr. DREIER, Mr. EHLERS, Mr. EMANUEL, Mrs. EMERSON, Mr. ENGEL, Mr. ENGLISHof Pennsylvania, Mr. ETHERIDGE, Mr. FARR, Mr. FER-GUSON, Mr. FILNER, Mr. FRANKof Massachusetts, Mr. FRANKSof Ari-zona, Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN, Mr. GALLEGLY, Ms. GIFFORDS, Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. HALLof New York, Mr. HASTINGSof Florida, Mr. HINOJOSA, Mr. HOLDEN, Mr. HOLT, Mr. HONDA, Mr. ISRAEL, Mr. ISSA, Mr. JEFFERSON, Mr. JOHNSONof Georgia, Mrs. JONESof Ohio, Ms. KAPTUR, Mr. KENNEDY, Mr. KILDEE, Ms. KILPATRICK, Mr. KIND, Mr. KINGof New York, Mr. KIRK, Mr. KNOLLENBERG, Mr. LAHOOD, Mr. LANGEVIN, Mr. LANTOS, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. LEWISof Georgia, Mr. LEWIS of California, Mr. LOEBSACK, Ms. ZOELOFGRENof California, Mrs. LOWEY, Mrs. MALONEYof New York, Mr. MARKEY, Mr. MATHESON, Ms. MATSUI, Mrs. MCCARTHYof New York, Ms. MCCOLLUMof Minnesota, Mr. MCDERMOTT, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. MCHUGH, Mr. MCNULTY, Mr. MILLERof North Carolina, Mr. GEORGEMILLERof California, Mr. MORANof Virginia, Mr. PATRICKJ. MURPHYof Pennsylvania, Mr. NAD-LER, Mr. NEALof Massachusetts, Ms. NORTON, Mr. NUNES, Mr. OBER-STAR, Mr. PAYNE, Mr. PERLMUTTER, Mr. PETRI, Mr. RAHALL, Mr. RAMSTAD, Mr. RANGEL, Mr. RODRIGUEZ, Mr. ROSKAM, Mr. ROTHMAN, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, Mr. RUPPERSBERGER, Mr. RYANof Wisconsin, Ms. LORETTASANCHEZof California, Mr. SARBANES, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. SCOTTof Virginia, Mr. SHAYS, Ms. SHEA-PORTER, Ms. SLAUGHTER, Mr. SMITHof New Jersey, Ms. SOLIS, Mr. SOUDER, Mr. SPACE, Mr. STARK, Ms. SUTTON, Mrs. TAUSCHER, Mr. TIAHRT, Mr. TIERNEY, Mr. VerDate Aug 31 2005 17:15 Jul 28, 2007 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6652 E:\BILLS\H3195.IH H3195jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS2 •HR 3195 IHTOWNS, Mr. UDALLof New Mexico, Mr. VANHOLLEN, Mr. VISCLOSKY, Mr. WALSHof New York, Ms. WASSERMANSCHULTZ, Ms. WATSON, Mr. WAXMAN, Mr. WELCHof Vermont, Mr. WELDONof Florida, Ms. WOOL-SEY, Mr. WYNN, Mr. YOUNGof Florida, Mr. YOUNGof Alaska, Mr. WALZof Minnesota, Mr. MCCOTTER, and Mr. DICKS) introduced the fol-lowing bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor, and in addition to the Committees on the Judiciary, Transpor-tation and Infrastructure, and Energy and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee con-cerned A BILL To restore the intent and protections of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa-1tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 2SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 3This Act may be cited as the ‘‘ADA Restoration Act 4of 2007’’. 5SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSES. 6(a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds that— 7(1) in enacting the Americans with Disabilities 8Act of 1990 (ADA), Congress intended that the Act 9‘‘establish a clear and comprehensive prohibition of 10discrimination on the basis of disability,’’ and pro-11vide broad coverage and vigorous and effective rem-12edies without unnecessary and obstructive defenses; 13(2) decisions and opinions of the Supreme 14Court have unduly narrowed the broad scope of pro-15VerDate Aug 31 2005 17:15 Jul 28, 2007 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3195.IH H3195jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS3 •HR 3195 IHtection afforded in the ADA, eliminating protection 1for a broad range of individuals who Congress in-2tended to protect; 3(3) in enacting the ADA, Congress recognized 4that physical and mental impairments are natural 5parts of the human experience that in no way dimin-6ish a person’s right to fully participate in all aspects 7of society, but Congress also recognized that people 8with physical or mental impairments having the tal-9ent, skills, abilities, and desire to participate in soci-10ety are frequently precluded from doing so because 11of prejudice, antiquated attitudes, or the failure to 12remove societal and institutional barriers; 13(4) Congress modeled the ADA definition of 14disability on that of section 504 of the Rehabilita-15tion Act of 1973, which, through the time of the 16ADA’s enactment, had been construed broadly to en-17compass both actual and perceived limitations, and 18limitations imposed by society; 19(5) the broad conception of the definition had 20been underscored by the Supreme Court’s statement 21in its decision in School Board of Nassau County v. 22Arline, 480 U.S. 273, 284 (1987), that the section 23504 definition ‘‘acknowledged that society’s accumu-24lated myths and fears about disability and disease 25VerDate Aug 31 2005 17:15 Jul 28, 2007 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H3195.IH H3195jlentini on PROD1PC65 with BILLS4 •HR 3195 IHare as handicapping as are the physical limitations 1that flow from actual impairment’’; 2(6) in adopting the section 504 concept of dis-3ability in the ADA, Congress understood that ad-4verse action based on a person’s physical or mental 5impairment is often unrelated to the limitations 6caused by the impairment itself; 7(7) instead of following congressional expecta-8tions that disability would be interpreted broadly in 9the ADA, the Supreme Court has ruled, in Toyota 10Motor Manufacturing, Kentucky, Inc. v. Williams, 11534 U.S.