Specific findings of the poll included the following:

Nearly two-thirds of all disabled Americans never went to a movie in the past year. In the full adult population, only 22% said that they had not gone to a movie in the past

year.

Three-fourths of all disabled persons did not see live theater or a live music performance in the past year. Among all adults, about 4 out of 10 had not done so.

Two-thirds of all disabled persons never went to sports event in the past year, compared to 50% of all adults.

Disabled people are three times more likely than are nondisabled people to never eat in restaurants. Seventeen percent of disabled people never eat in restaurants, compared to 5% of nondisabled people. Only 34% of disabled people eat at a restaurant once a week or more, compared to a 58% majc-ity of nondisabled people.

(Louis Harris and Associates, The ICD Survey of Disabled Americans: Bringing Disabled Americans into the Mainstream, p. 3 (1986))

Another specific finding of the poll had to do with grocery shopping and similar activities:

Disability also has a negative impact on vital daily activities, like shopping for food. A much higher proportion of disabled persons than nondisabled persons never shop in a grocery store. Thirteen percent of disabled persons never shop in a grocery store, compared to only 2% of nondisabled persons. About 6 out of 10 disabled persons visit a grocery store at least once a week, while 90% of nondisabled adults shop for food this often.

(Id., p. 3)

Why don't people with disabilities frequent places of public accommodation and stores as often as other Americans? The Harris, poll sheds some light on the reasons for this isolation and

nonparticipation by persons with disabilities in the ordinary activities of life. Two of the major reasons have to do with not feeling welcome and inaccessibility.

The preeminent reason why people with disabilities do not participate in various aspects of commercial, social, and recreation activities that are a routine part of ordinary life for most other Americans is that they do not feel that they are welcome and can participate safely. Two of the major reasons most commonly identified by the Harris poll why the activities of people with disabilities are limited are fear and self

The Harris organization

consciousness about their disability. reported that "Fear is the barrier mentioned most frequently by disabled people as an important reason why their activities are limited, with nearly six out of ten (59%) of those reporting activity limitations listing fear as an important reason (Id., p. 63). And self-consciousness about their disability was reported as an important factor by forty percent (Id., p. 64). То а disturbing degree, people with disabilities do not feel safe or welcome to attend or visit ordinary places open to the public for socializing, doing business, or engaging in recreation and other major activities in our society.

Another way in which people with disabilities are prevented from visiting social, commercial, and recreational establishments (and in which the lesson of not being welcome is underscored) is by the presence of physical barriers. Many people with mobility impairments, including in particular those who use wheelchairs, cannot get into or use a facility that has steps, narrow doorways, inaccessible bathrooms, and other architectural barriers that keep them out. People having visual and hearing

impairments are often unable to make effective use or to

participate safely in activities and services if the facility in which they occur has included no features for communication accessibility.

According to the Harris poll, forty percent of

individuals with disabilities reporting limitations on their activities say that an important reason why they are limited is inaccessibility of buildings and restrooms (Id., p. 64).

The Harris poll documents the social isolation of people with disabilities that results, in large part, from discrimination they encounter when they try to engage in the ordinary social and commercial transactions of daily life.

NEED FOR TITLE II-LIKE PROTECTION

Nearly three decades ago, four black students sat down at a lunch counter at a Woolworth's store in Greensboro, North

Carolina, ordered a cup of coffee, and refused to move until they were served. Unknown to the four young men at the time, their act of courage would precipitate a series of sit-ins and other forms of civil disobedience challenging the racial segregation of lunch counters, restaurants, hotels, motels, parks, and other The segregation of such places was a principal target of civil rights protests, lawsuits, and proposals for legislative reform during the early sixties.

facilities.

These afforts culminated in a major section of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 title II, which prohibits discrimination on

the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin in places

of public accommodation.

Title II (42 USC 2000a) defines the

phrase "place of public accommodation" to include a range of establishments that had generated serious problems of segregation. These include inns, hotels, motels, and other lodging establishments; restaurants, cafeterias, lunchrooms, lunch counters, soda fountains, and other facilities selling food for consumption on the premises; gasoline stations; and motion picture houses, theaters, concert halls, sports arenas, stadiums, and other places of exhibition or entertainment. Since 1964 it has been illegal for any of these establishments to discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, or national origin. Unfortunately, it is not unlawful today for these same establishments to exclude, segregate, mistreat, insult, or otherwise discriminate against people because of their

disabilities.

People with various disabilities are turned away from restaurants because proprietors say that their presence will disturb or upset other customers. Steps, narrow doorways, curbs, and other physical barriers block people who use wheelchairs from entering many arenas, stadiums, theaters, and other public buildings. People with visual or hearing impairments find that no arrangements have been made for their attendance or effective participation.

At the height of civil rights confrontations in the early sixties, some parks and zoos were closed by entrenched

authorities rather than permit these facilities to be integrated.

Nearly thirty years later, people with disabilities are still having trouble gaining admission to many such establishments. Last year, the Washington Post reported that a New Jersey zookeeper refused children with Down syndrome admission to his zoo because he was afraid they would upset his chimpanzees. In 1985, I wrote an article for the Washington Post concerning the lack of accessibility at Ford's Theatre and other Washington performing arts facilities. Since that article was written, some substantial improvements have been made to improve access at Ford's. A major factor in the change for the positive was that the Ford's Theatre is subject to federal laws and regulations governing federally owned, leased, and federally assisted buildings, and a complaint of discrimination was filed on account of the inaccessibility of the theatre. In resolving the formal discrimination complaint, the National Park Service concluded that accessibility features were necessary and could be achieved without compromising the historic character of the Ford's building, and has worked diligently to have such changes

implemented.

Had the Theatre not had a federal nexus, however, it would not be prohibited from discriminating against people with disabilities even though it is an important public accommodation. If such a facility were privately owned and operated, the improvements that have been made to increase accessibility would not have been required, and it could persist in discriminating, by practice and through architectural barriers, against people