On the recordMay 8, 2012
To the gentleman's point, the minority whip, I think all of us want to protect the ADA and the goals of the ADA. That's why this amendment was offered in the committee. It was to strike this language. What will happen--I think we can all see it--is if these new regulations are allowed to go into effect--at the end of this month, I believe, it will come--there isn't the equipment even available to put it into use. The liability issues are so huge to have a stanchion, basically, with a lift at every pool and a power source right by the water, in every body of water. If there is a resort with 10 pools, 10 lifts. If there are three Jacuzzis, three more lifts. If it's an apartment complex with a small, little pool, they'll still have to do it. Municipalities that have public pools will have to do that as well. What will happen is too many of them will say, We can't expose ourselves to the cost or the liability, and so we'll simply close our pools. Whether they be military or anyone else, what does that do to access for the disabled? What good is it if a pool is closed down because the owner simply can't deal with the cost or the liability? I guarantee you, if this happens, if this goes into effect, then you're just going to be granting waivers based on some kind of spoil system or on whether or not they think they can afford it. It's just not workable. What we need is a workable regulation.
