[Senate Hearing 118-145]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]




                                                        S. Hrg. 118-145
 
                   UNLOCKING THE VIRTUAL FRONT DOOR:
                     ENSURING ACCESSIBLE GOVERNMENT
                       TECHNOLOGY FOR PEOPLE WITH
                      DISABILITIES, OLDER ADULTS,
                              AND VETERANS

=======================================================================

                                HEARING

                               BEFORE THE

                       SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING

                          UNITED STATES SENATE

                    ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS


                             FIRST SESSION

                               __________

                             WASHINGTON, DC

                               __________

                           SEPTEMBER 21, 2023

                               __________

                           Serial No. 118-08

         Printed for the use of the Special Committee on Aging
         
         
   
   [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]       


        Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
        
        
        
                         ______

             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 
 53-747          WASHINGTON : 2023 
      
        
        
                       SPECIAL COMMITTEE ON AGING

              ROBERT P. CASEY, JR., Pennsylvania, Chairman

KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York      MIKE BRAUN, Indiana
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut      TIM SCOTT, South Carolina
ELIZABETH WARREN, Massachusetts      MARCO RUBIO, Florida
MARK KELLY, Arizona                  RICK SCOTT, Florida
RAPHAEL WARNOCK, Georgia             J.D. VANCE, Ohio
JOHN FETTERMAN, Pennsylvania         PETE RICKETTS, Nebraska
                              ----------                              
               Elizabeth Letter, Majority Staff Director
                Matthew Sommer, Minority Staff Director
                
                         C  O  N  T  E  N  T  S

                              ----------                              

                                                                   Page

Opening Statement of Senator Robert P. Casey, Jr., Chairman......     1
Opening Statement of Senator Mike Braun, Ranking Member..........     3

                           PANEL OF WITNESSES

Chris Westbrook, Accessibility Engineer, Allyant, Williamsport, 
  Pennsylvania...................................................     5
Ronza Othman, President, Maryland Chapter of the National 
  Federation of the Blind, President, National Association of 
  Blind Government Employees, Baltimore, Maryland................     6
Jay Doyle, Chief Executive Officer, Service Oklahoma, Oklahoma 
  City, Oklahoma.................................................     8
Ashley Lichtle, Americans with Disabilities Act Coordinator for 
  Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City, Utah...........................    10

                                APPENDIX
                      Prepared Witness Statements

Chris Westbrook, Accessibility Engineer, Allyant, Williamsport, 
  Pennsylvania...................................................    27
Ronza Othman, President, Maryland Chapter of the National 
  Federation of the Blind, President, National Association of 
  Blind Government Employees, Baltimore, Maryland................    30
Jay Doyle, Chief Executive Officer, Service Oklahoma, Oklahoma 
  City, Oklahoma.................................................    38
Ashley Lichtle, Americans with Disabilities Act Coordinator for 
  Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City, Utah...........................    40

                        Questions for the Record

Chris Westbrook, Accessibility Engineer, Allyant, Williamsport, 
  Pennsylvania...................................................    45
Ronza Othman, President, Maryland Chapter of the National 
  Federation of the Blind, President, National Association of 
  Blind Government Employees, Baltimore, Maryland................    49
Jay Doyle, Chief Executive Officer, Service Oklahoma, Oklahoma 
  City, Oklahoma.................................................    57
Ashley Lichtle, Americans with Disabilities Act Coordinator for 
  Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City, Utah...........................    58

                       Statements for the Record

Department of Veterans Affairs Statement.........................    63
American Foundation for the Blind Statement......................    68
BOSMA Enterprises Statement......................................    74
Blinded Veterans Association Statement...........................    77
Deaf Seniors of America, Inc. and National Association of State 
  Agencies of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing Statement.............    83
Department of Homeland Security..................................   106
United States Access Board Statement.............................   109
Information Technology Innovation Foundation Statement...........   114
Perkins School for the Blind Statement...........................   117
Jonathan Lazar, Ph.D., Statement.................................   123
United States Department of Education Office of Inspector General 
  Statement......................................................   129
California Governor's Office of Emergency Services Statement.....   133
Pennsylvania Office of Administration Statement..................   139


                   UNLOCKING THE VIRTUAL FRONT DOOR:



                     ENSURING ACCESSIBLE GOVERNMENT



                       TECHNOLOGY FOR PEOPLE WITH



                      DISABILITIES, OLDER ADULTS,



                              AND VETERANS

                              ----------                              


                      Thursday, September 21, 2023

                                        U.S. Senate
                                 Special Committee on Aging
                                                    Washington, DC.
    The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:03 a.m., Room 
106, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Robert P. Casey, Jr., 
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
    Present: Senator Casey, Braun, Blumenthal, Kelly, 
Fetterman, and Rick Scott.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR 
        ROBERT P. CASEY, JR., CHAIRMAN OF THE COMMITTEE

    The Chairman. The hearing will come to order. Thank you to 
our witnesses. I know I was running a little late, so didn't 
have an opportunity to greet our witnesses, but thank you for 
being here, and grateful to be here with Ranking Member Braun.
    This month marks the 50th anniversary of the Rehabilitation 
Act amendments of 1973. When they became law, these amendments 
prohibited discrimination on the basis of disability by the 
Federal Government in federally funded programs and by Federal 
contractors.
    With the passage of the Rehabilitation Act amendments, the 
Federal Government made it a priority to ensure that every 
person has access, access to government programs and services. 
It also established the Foundation for the Americans with 
Disabilities Act, passed some 17 years later.
    Since the passage of the so-called Rehab Act, technology 
has become an important doorway to government services at the 
local, state, and Federal levels. The COVID-19 pandemic showed 
us again the importance of using websites and apps as a way to 
access government programs, services, and information.
    Last year, this Committee examined the compliance, or I 
should say examined compliance, of one part of the 
Rehabilitation Act, Section 508, which requires Federal 
technology to be accessible for and usable by people with 
disabilities.
    One of our witnesses, Jule Ann Lieberman of Devon, 
Pennsylvania, testified she could not access CDC's COVID data. 
Jule Ann told us that at that time, ``in crisis times, all need 
access to trusted information and services.''
    This is true for Federal agencies. It is equally important 
for state and local governments to provide critical services, 
especially those related to safety and emergency response.
    In December of this past year, I released this report. The 
name of it is, "Unlocking the Virtual Front Door." This report 
found accessibility problems with technology at the Department 
of Veterans Affairs, and unfortunately throughout the Federal 
Government. I am pleased that because of bipartisan efforts 
with members on this Committee, and through our Congress, some 
improvements have been made.
    The Veterans Administration reorganized its technology 
access office and bolstered its efforts to make VA technology 
accessible. The Justice Department and the General Services 
Administration committed to new oversight and transparency of 
accessible Federal technology. Many Inspectors General are also 
taking a new look at accessibility.
    For example, the VA Office of Inspector General plans to 
release a report on the accessibility of VA technology in the 
coming months, and we have seen progress to improve 
accessibility of state and local government resources. In early 
August, the Department of Justice issued a proposed rule 
setting website and technology accessible--accessibility 
standards for local and state governments.
    These long overdue proposed standards are necessary to 
ensure people who are blind, deaf, have physical disabilities, 
or intellectual disabilities can access programs, services, and 
information provided by local and state government.
    I commend the Justice Department for issuing these proposed 
rules. I know that the public will help strengthen them, and I 
look forward to the final rule to make all government 
technology more accessible for all Americans.
    These are positive steps, but there--I should say, there 
are more. There is more work we can do. There are positive 
steps we in Congress can take. Recently, I worked with Senator 
Rick Scott to introduce the Veterans Accessibility Act.
    Our legislation would create a VA advisory committee to 
oversee VA's compliance with all accessibility laws. People 
with disabilities would serve on the committee, providing 
important feedback, and today, a number of Senators and I will 
introduce the Federal Agency Accessibility Compliance Act.
    Our bill will bolster the role of Federal Section 508 
compliance officers in Federal agencies, require agency and 
department heads to personally certify, certify, that their 
organization's technology is accessible, and to post plans and 
timelines if their agency technology is not accessible.
    These bills are common sense legislation designed to ensure 
Federal Government services, programs, and communications are 
accessible to all Americans, so, we have much more work to do 
to make websites and technology at all levels of government 
accessible, or, I might add, fully accessible.
    I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about how we 
can accomplish that goal, and I will now turn to Ranking Member 
Braun for his opening statement.

                 OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR 
                   MIKE BRAUN, RANKING MEMBER

    Senator Braun. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Technology has 
definitely changed the way we all live. No doubt about it. It 
has been around for a long time. During COVID, though, far too 
many in-person services were closed.
    People were forced to turn to the internet for basic 
services, from food to health care, and even local, state, and 
Federal Government services. I caution against ever closing 
physical doors again. Some places, technology is not 
widespread.
    Even in a State like ours, where we have been working hard 
to get it into every nook and cranny. Many rural areas did not 
have adequate good high-speed internet. We are relying on it 
more and more all the time. Even though we need to keep, I 
think, person to person services open as well, we need to, with 
technology, design it with accessibility in mind.
    Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act mandates that Federal 
electronic and information technology be accessible to people 
with disabilities. However, we have heard from many 
constituents that the Federal Government has not done a good 
job at complying, far too often leaving people with 
disabilities behind.
    That is why I joined with Chairman Casey in requesting a 
GAO study into the Federal Government's compliance. While this 
law generally does not apply to states, many states have taken 
it upon themselves to improve the accessibility of their 
services. States are generally going to be a lot more 
responsive, a lot quicker at getting something done.
    Not to mention that they are laboratory of different ways 
that might make sense for other states to pay attention to and 
rub off on the Federal Government as well. While this law 
generally does not apply to states in a mandatory way, it 
still--we should not rely on this place to craft those 
solutions.
    In Indiana, for instance, mobile and digital services are 
available, and we have done a good job with it. For more than a 
decade, the Indiana State Government website has included 
screen readers, quarterly accessibility audits, high contrast 
views, and modifiable screen size.
    In 2021, Indiana added a new feature, accessiBe, which 
allows users to modify their experience for various 
accessibility profiles, including seizure, safe vision 
impaired, cognitive disability, or blindness, and the State 
works with local governments to make their website platform 
available to them, so far, more than 70 local governments in 
Indiana use the state government platform, of 92 counties. That 
is a pretty good percentage. We have got places like Bosma 
Enterprises in Indiana that have been on this pursuit for a 
long time.
    It utilizes cutting edge assistive technology and computer 
training programs to help Hoosiers with vision loss regain 
their independence. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the 
record a statement from Bosma Enterprises.
    The Chairman. Without objection.
    Senator Braun. This type of work is not unique to just 
Indiana. States like Colorado, Ohio, Oklahoma, who we will hear 
from today, are all leading in technology accessibility.
    We must ensure that states do not lose the flexibility they 
need to continue to introduce programs and mechanisms that work 
best for their unique communities. I am encouraged by the 
states' leadership and urge them to continue to explore ways to 
improve accessibility.
    I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member Braun. Now, we will 
introduce our witnesses. Our first witness is Mr. Chris 
Westbrook of Williamsport, Pennsylvania. Mr. Westbrook is an 
experienced Programmer and an Accessibility Engineer for 
Allyant, a company that evaluates whether websites are 
accessible for people with disabilities.
    Mr. Westbrook is blind, hard of hearing, and has a mobility 
disability. That means he knows firsthand how accessible--or I 
should say inaccessible websites can impact people with 
disabilities.
    Mr. Westbrook will discuss those personal experiences. He 
will also talk about the more common website barriers he has 
learned from his work. Mr. Westbrook, thank you for testifying 
today.
    Our second witness is Ms. Ronza Othman. Ms. Othman is 
President of the Maryland Chapter of the National Federation of 
the Blind. She is also President of NFB's National Association 
of Blind Government Employees.
    Today, she will discuss how members of these organizations 
have been impacted by inaccessible government technology at the 
Federal, state, and local levels. Thank you for sharing these 
stories with us today, Ms. Othman.
    I will now turn to Ranking Member Braun to introduce our 
third witness.
    Senator Braun. Mr. Jay Doyle is a CEO of Service Oklahoma, 
a State agency focused on making it easier for people in 
Oklahoma to get the services they need.
    Service Oklahoma is a model of sate innovation that has 
been nationally recognized. Jay is a visionary leader with a 
diverse career that revolves around service. His work has been 
recognized through multiple accolades, including the OKC Biz 
40, under 40, and Oklahoma's Next Generation Award.
    Jay earned his Bachelor of Science in Biochemistry from the 
University of Oklahoma. He lives in Oklahoma City with his wife 
and daughter, and I understand you had an anniversary 
yesterday, happy anniversary, Jay, and thank you for being here 
today to testify.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member Braun. Our final 
witness is Ashley Lichtle. Ashley is the Americans with 
Disabilities Act (ADA) Coordinator for Salt Lake City, Utah. 
Previously, she worked as a disability advocate at the Partners 
for Inclusive Communities in Arkansas.
    She will discuss why accessible websites and apps are 
important for Salt Lake City, as well as the City's efforts to 
make its technology more accessible. We appreciate you taking 
the time to testify.
    Now we will start with our witness statements. We will 
start first with Mr. Westbrook. Please share your opening 
statement.

STATEMENT OF CHRIS WESTBROOK, ACCESSIBILITY ENGINEER, ALLYANT, 
                   WILLIAMSPORT, PENNSYLVANIA

    Mr. Westbrook. Good morning, Chairman Casey, Ranking Member 
Braun, and members of the Senate Special Committee on Aging.
    I am a blind Pennsylvanian serving as the Secretary for the 
Board of Directors of the Road to Freedom Center for 
Independent Living of North Central Pennsylvania. I also am 
President of the National Federation of the Blind of 
Pennsylvania's Deaf-Blind Division.
    I also work in the field of web accessibility as an 
Accessibility Engineer for a company called Allyant, so, I deal 
with accessibility issues on a daily basis, both personally and 
professionally. Government websites must be accessible so that 
all constituents at all levels of government have access to 
programs, services, and information.
    For example, imagine not being able to file your local 
taxes online. This is the situation I face simply because I 
have a disability. When I went to the county website to pay my 
taxes online, I couldn't because I couldn't find the button 
used to submit the form.
    This ultimately forced me to seek sighted assistance to 
perform a task that everyone else can perform independently. 
Being forced to use sighted assistance means that I have to 
reveal private and sensitive information to someone else, 
something a sighted person would never have to do.
    I have also tried to use our city's website, but I don't 
think I am getting all the information as the links all 
announce there is a submenu that I cannot access. This could 
result in missing key local services. People with disabilities 
need to be able to perform the same tasks as our non-disabled 
peers when it comes to work, recreation, and community living.
    How do we get there? To make government websites 
accessible, we must improve standards such as the Web Content 
Accessibility Guidelines, WCAG. We must also recognize that 
accessibility is not a one and done deal but is always changing 
due to advances in technology and changes in website software.
    To ensure that government websites and technology are 
accessible, people with disabilities need to be involved in the 
development of the websites and the monitoring of the websites 
to ensure they remain accessible.
    One strategy for ensuring accessibility is to have people 
with disabilities, in conjunction with non-disabled advocates 
and peers, test and monitor websites and technology together. 
At Allyant, we perform what is called paired auditing, where a 
native screen reader user is paired with a sighted auditor.
    This helps ensure that the disables are getting an 
equitable experience to non-disabled users and ensures possible 
barriers to accessibility are identified for all types of 
disabilities, not just blind people. For people like me, and 
really for all Americans, accessibility needs to become just 
another part of doing business.
    Accessibility must be considered from the design phase all 
the way through the process of implementing and maintaining a 
website. That is how we make government technology and all 
technology accessible. Again, thank you for your time, and I 
hope my testimony and expertise can move us closer to a world 
that is accessible to all.
    The Chairman. Mr. Westbrook, thank you for your testimony, 
and thanks for your good work. We now turn to Ms. Othman for 
your opening statement.

         STATEMENT OF RONZA OTHMAN, PRESIDENT, MARYLAND

           CHAPTER OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE

        BLIND, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF BLIND

           GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, BALTIMORE, MARYLAND

    Ms. Othman. Good morning. I would like to thank Chairperson 
Casey, Ranking Member Braun, and all of the other members of 
the Special Committee on Aging for this opportunity to offer 
testimony on the impact of inaccessible technology in 
government.
    My name is Ronza Othman, and by day I am an employee of an 
executive branch Federal agency, where I am an attorney and 
manage equal employment opportunity and civil rights programs. 
However, I am testifying before you in my personal capacity, as 
in my spare time, I serve as a leader in the National 
Federation of the Blind.
    As Chairman Casey indicated, my roles include serving as 
the President of the National Association of Blind Government 
Employees, where I engage with current, retired, and 
prospective employees of Federal, state, and local government 
agencies across the Nation.
    I am also the President of the National Federation of the 
Blind of Maryland, representing blind and low vision 
Marylanders who work for government, but who also, like most 
Americans, engage with Federal, state, and local government for 
a variety of reasons.
    Access to information and communication technology, 
including hardware, software, web, and mobile applications, and 
other platforms and information is a critical civil right for 
the blind, other Americans with disability, and the ever-
growing aging population.
    Technology has been a true equalizer for blind and low 
vision Americans, as well as many others with disabilities, so 
much of the information we receive on a daily basis is 
communicated visually, and the proliferation of technology has 
enabled our community to gain access to that information at the 
same time as our non-disabled counterparts.
    Today, I can use the phone in my pocket to operate my ring 
doorbell, operate my vacuum, set my thermostat, reheat my 
leftovers, and half a dozen other tasks in my house when I am 
not even at home. These are all mainstream technologies, not 
adaptations, made for people with disabilities.
    However, the origins of these adaptations resulted in 
mainstream technology. In essence, when a manufacturer or 
developer chooses to build a product and includes accessibility 
at the beginning, virtually everyone can use it, but when it 
comes to engaging with our government, these technologies are 
woefully behind.
    Often government procured, maintained, or developed ICT is 
not accessible to those of us with disabilities. It is neither 
difficult nor costly to make ICT accessible for individuals 
with disabilities. If accessibility is baked into the system at 
the development stage, it is simply coding in a way that 
ensures information is tagged properly and navigable by 
assistive technology. Imagine making a pizza and adding the 
pizza sauce.
    Now, imagine making a pizza and omitting the pizza sauce 
prior to making it. Then imagine trying to put the sauce on 
after the pizza has been baked, sliced, and even some of it 
served. It is a difficult but not impossible task to fix the 
pizza, but it would have been a lot easier to just have added 
the sauce from the beginning.
    Here are some examples our members have experience that 
illustrate the impact of inaccessible technology. A substitute 
teacher in one county school district was told that she would 
not be assigned to the district's middle schools because their 
attendance recording system was not accessible with her screen 
reader.
    A state employee newly hired to work at a call center for a 
state comptroller's office had her job offer rescinded after 
the State determined its tax information data-base was not 
accessible with assistive technology.
    A Department of Defense employee was kicked out of a 
training program in which she had been enrolled for five years 
and had nearly completed when her agency determined that its 
testing systems for certification were no longer accessible to 
assistive technology users. Dozens of state employees and a 
number of states who use the same software application could no 
longer enter their time and attendance in their states' 
timekeeping system due to updates that broke accessibility.
    Law enforcement entities have to enter information about 
law enforcement officers that are under investigation, which 
would then potentially render their testimony problematic. 
Prosecutors have to check those data-bases in disclose and 
discovery if any officers are under investigation. However, if 
they fail to do so, the entire case is likely to be thrown out 
and potential criminals are set free.
    In the last few weeks, I have heard from two different 
blind prosecutors from different sides of the country who have 
had near misses in terms of disclosing this information to 
opposing counsel in discovery.
    The reason? The system is not accessible to assistive 
technology. Imagine a scenario when it wasn't a near miss, but 
because the prosecutor didn't have effective, accessible tools, 
they unknowingly failed to disclose such information, which 
resulted in a case being thrown out and a potential violent 
criminal being released to commit another crime. Had the 
technology been accessible, this wouldn't be a concern.
    These are just a handful of examples, but there are 
hundreds, if not thousands of others. In my written testimony, 
I shared some recommended actions that will improve 508 
compliance across the Federal Government.
    Chief among them is that the access board must be 
sufficiently resourced to do the job it has been tasked, and 
there have to be improvements in accountability and enforcement 
across the Federal Government. I also shared in my written 
testimony information about which states have laws and policies 
related to technology accessibility.
    I shared some of the recommendations for state and local 
government to improve in this area. One key framework will be 
the ADA Title II regulations. However, the notice of proposed 
rulemaking proposes seven new exceptions that are so 
problematic that they will erase the decades of progress in the 
accessibility space.
    We strongly urge the Department of Justice not to adopt any 
of those new exceptions. We work in government, those of us who 
do, because we care about this country and the people who live 
in it.
    Though our eyes don't work in the typical way, we are 
capable of serving the public and doing so well, provided the 
technology is developed with basic accessibility in mind. In a 
day and age where technology advances at the speed of light, we 
are not limited by our disabilities.
    We are limited by the government that fails to include our 
needs in its technology infrastructure. This is not a 
capability problem. This is a willingness problem. Do Federal, 
state, and local government have the willingness to be 
different? Only time will tell. Thank you very much.
    The Chairman. Ms. Othman, thanks so much for your 
testimony. Before turning to our next witness, we are joined by 
Senator Blumenthal and Senator Kelly as well. Mr. Doyle.

       STATEMENT OF JAY DOYLE, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, 
           SERVICE OKLAHOMA, OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA

    Mr. Doyle. Honorable members of the U.S. Senate Aging 
Committee, I am honored to testify here today to tell Service 
Oklahoma's story on how we are improving the accessibility 
government services for all Oklahomans.
    Home to Four million people, the State provides vital 
services to citizens during some of the most important times of 
their lives. From obtaining essential documents like birth 
certificates, driver's licenses, motor vehicle registrations, 
and professional licenses, to facilitating employment 
opportunities, Oklahomans rely on efficient and responsive 
government services.
    However, as we have witnessed, these services are often 
necessitate navigating a labyrinth of agency websites, offices, 
and phone numbers, a problem magnified during the pandemic when 
access to these services became more critical than ever.
    Citizens found themselves waiting on the phone for hours or 
even camping outside agency offices overnight just to secure 
their spot in the line. It was clear that transformation was 
needed.
    Service Oklahoma was created by the Oklahoma Legislature in 
May 2022, with a mission to ease citizens' stress in navigating 
and obtaining government services, while providing a great 
experience.
    Starting with your stereotypical DMV services, Service 
Oklahoma started the Administration of our driver's license 
program in November 2022, and our motor vehicle program for the 
State in January 2022--or January 2023, transferring those 
existing functions and employees from the agencies that 
previously offered those services.
    Today, we are responsible for seven million transactions 
and generate almost $1 billion in revenue for the State on an 
annual basis. The overarching goal of Service Oklahoma is to 
create a seamless, consistent experience regardless of whether 
you visit our website, call our customer support 
representatives, or come see us at one of our strategically 
located locations spread across all counties of the State of 
Oklahoma.
    We want to meet Oklahomans where they are, designing 
services around the citizen, making services easy to 
understand, available when and where they need them, and being 
proactive instead of reactive.
    While still in our infancy, we have been able to 
significantly improve our services and launch various new and 
improved digital products for our citizens. There is one that I 
want to specifically highlight, which also happened to be our 
first product launch, the disability parking placard, which 
impacts almost 100,000 Oklahomans each year.
    Historically, disabled Oklahomans in need of a disability 
parking placard were required to complete a ten-step process 
that often included repeated contact with their approving 
physician and multiple visits to the Department of Public 
Safety headquarters in Oklahoma City.
    For Oklahomans outside of the Oklahoma City Metro area, 
this step would require them to travel for hours before they 
had the benefit of a disability parking placard. Once the 
customer navigated the cumbersome application process, they 
were left with no means to check the status of their 
application, while they waited on average of 45 days to finally 
receive the disability placard.
    The process was further complicated by the fact that their 
applications were occasionally lost during this process. These 
obstacles created by the original process led to poor customer 
satisfaction, and in some instances, served as a complete 
roadblock to Oklahomans' ability to receive government 
services.
    A multi-agency collaborative program was launched by a team 
now known to Service Oklahoma and the Oklahoma Department of 
Public Safety to reimagine this process for obtaining a 
disability parking placard in a more customer centric, 
digitally oriented, and accessible manner.
    The team also worked with the Oklahoma Medical Board to 
engage physicians in this pilot process. The high-level 
strategy behind the digital disability placard was to 
understand existing pain points from the perspective of all 
stakeholders, but especially the customer, and iteratively 
improve each version of the online product based on surveys and 
interactions with disabled Oklahomans, employees who process 
the applications, and physicians.
    The resulting disability placard product dramatically 
improved the experience for all stakeholders involved. 
Customers now have the option to apply online through an easy 
to find, an easy-to-use form, with no in-person visits 
required.
    This new application to shorten wait times by almost 90 
percent and eliminated 60 percent of the steps required by the 
original process. Customer satisfaction with the new 
application is high, with customers rating the process a 6.2 
out of seven and applauding the ability to track the 
application process and ultimately receive their disability 
placard from the comfort of their homes. Service Oklahoma 
represents a profound shift in how Oklahoma's government 
interacts with its citizens.
    By focusing on simplicity, accessibility, and efficiency, 
we are positioning Oklahoma as a leader in providing government 
services that meet the evolving expectations of our citizens. 
In closing, I sincerely appreciate the opportunity to tell our 
story.
    Service Oklahoma's journey is a testament to what can be 
achieved when we prioritize the citizens' needs. We are eager 
to collaborate, share insights, and work together to knock the 
virtual front door to government services for everyone. Thank 
you for your time. I look forward to your questions and 
discussion.
    The Chairman. Mr. Doyle, thanks for your testimony. Next, 
we turn to our fourth and final witness, Mr. Lichtle--Ms. 
Lichtle, sorry.

          STATEMENT OF ASHLEY LICHTLE, AMERICANS WITH

           DISABILITIES ACT COORDINATOR FOR SALT LAKE

                   CITY, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH

    Ms. Lichtle. Thank you. Hello, members of the Committee. My 
name is Ashley Lichtle. I would like to thank Chairman Casey, 
Ranking Member Braun, their teams, and the other members of 
this Committee for this opportunity.
    This has been a top initiative of mine since I joined the 
Mayor's Office in 2021, so I am honored to be here with you all 
today. The rush to go virtual during the onset of the COVID-19 
pandemic revealed that most functions of daily life were easily 
able to be digital, but more importantly, it exposed just how 
inaccessible much of our digital spaces are when improperly 
designed or designed without the user experience in mind.
    The COVID-19 pandemic also revealed how vital and sometimes 
lifesaving it is that all people have equal access to 
information from their Federal, state, and local governments. 
Governments have utilized digital spaces to provide pertinent 
information as a means of engaging with the public for decades, 
yet still fall short in providing fully accessible digital 
spaces.
    The ADA greatly influenced the inclusion of people with 
disabilities in the built environment, but there remains a 
large gap in digital spaces. Governmental entities want to be 
accessible to and inclusive of their residents, but unlike 
stairs or narrow walkways, inaccessible features of websites 
and other digital spaces are invisible to those who do not rely 
on them unless they have been trained to seek out and remedy 
these barriers to access.
    Salt Lake City's current website templates are often 
inaccessible with little ability to adjust template features. 
The city is migrating to a new system that will allow for 
greater flexibility in fixing any accessibility issues. This 
migration will also allow the city to utilize APIs from other 
local apps to build what our residents and visitors need to 
navigate our digital and physical spaces more independently.
    This move away from some third party app developers is 
vital to the engagement of people with disabilities in our 
city. Recently, I worked with our Information Management 
Services team, a low vision resident, and the city's 
Accessibility and Disability Commission Chair, who is a blind 
individual, to identify ways the City Request App was 
inaccessible to them.
    When reviewing this with the developer, they informed us 
that some issues were well known to them and would not be fixed 
in any upcoming updates. Therefore, this app would remain 
inaccessible to the resident and others like him.
    We can create an accessible user experience with our new 
website and apps through partnerships like the National 
Federation of the Blind of Utah and through the expertise of 
our city's Accessibility and Disability Commission.
    Having implementation guidance from the Federal Government 
would further improve the design and development of these 
spaces. Designing digital content with all users in mind is 
also crucial for civic engagement. People with disabilities 
have been underrepresented in civic engagement efforts or 
entirely prevented from participation in civic engagement 
efforts throughout history.
    Therefore, utilizing WCAG 2.1 and digital surveys, and 
other digital engagement content is vital for the inclusion and 
participation of our residents with disabilities. Our civic 
engagement team collaborates with me often to review 
accessibility before surveys are released to the public.
    This team is also compiling a style guide for creating 
engaging and inclusive surveys. We value the contributions of, 
and feedback from, the disabled community in improving our 
city, and work to make sure our content reflects those values. 
Data shows, on average, people with disabilities make up 
roughly 25 percent of the population.
    This is a significant amount of people that may not be able 
to perceive, interact with, or understand the digital content 
governments create, which can result in frustration, lack of 
engagement, and at the very worst, feelings of isolation.
    Adopting WCAG 2.1 would be a much-needed step toward the 
full participation and independence of people with 
disabilities. It is imperative that entities understand how to 
comply with WCAG 2.1, so I urge the Department of Justice, U.S. 
Access Board, and ADA National Network to be diligent in 
creating technical guidance, especially plain language guides 
and trainings, for entities as they implement these 
regulations.
    Thank you all for your work on this vital effort for 
inclusion.
    The Chairman. Ms. Lichtle, thank you very much for your 
testimony. We will turn to our questions now. I will start with 
Mr. Westbrook. Chris, you shared your experiences living with 
disabilities and you also have worked as both a software 
engineer and now as an accessibility engineer.
    Through both your everyday life and your professional 
experience, you know about barriers, and you highlighted some 
in your testimony that exist in modern technology. You know 
that when inaccessible--you know that inaccessible technology 
can limit independence and place a person at a personal and 
professional disadvantage.
    Can you share with us a little more about how inaccessible 
Federal, state, or local websites can affect the day to day 
life of someone with a disability?
    Mr. Westbrook. Sure, so, I just heard from a friend 
yesterday about this new--they were trying to file for 
unemployment, and they were stymied, I guess you could say, by 
this ID.me. I guess it is like a new way to verify somebody's 
identity due to the camera and stuff like that, and they 
couldn't get past it.
    You know, you can imagine, you know, you have already--you 
know, you have lost your job, and you are trying to file for 
unemployment, which is stressful enough, and then, you know, to 
have that barrier in your way is just, you know, creates 
additional stress and isolation, even sometimes, so, yes.
    The Chairman. You had made reference in your testimony 
about when you were completing a form, and I don't know if you 
could just refer back to that, completing a form and just 
finding the right button and barriers like that. Can you walk 
through that?
    Mr. Westbrook. Yes, so, buttons need to be coded in such a 
way as to be--so that it is going to--you can tell that they 
are actionable buttons, and if they are not coded the right 
way, they can just look like normal text, and sometimes even if 
you do think it is the right button, you know, if you hit 
anywhere on it or whatever using keyboard, it doesn't work 
because it is expecting a mouse--you know, set up a mouse for 
you to click on it, and sometimes, depending on how it is 
coded, no amount of keyboard input will make it work, and that 
was the case with that particular form.
    The Chairman. Is it true you end up using kind of 
workarounds to compensate for it?
    Mr. Westbrook. Yes. There are a few services out there. One 
of them is called ARRA, A-R-R-A, and that is a service that you 
can call and get a sighted assistant to--well, they can do 
anything, but they can connect to your computer in this case 
through remote technology and control your computer as if they 
were you.
    You can tell them what to do and they can, you know, they 
can help you navigate the website, but that is a paid service, 
and so, you know, it is not free, so some people might not be 
able to afford it. You only get a certain number of minutes per 
month.
    You know, it is really important that technology be made 
accessible and that these workarounds are just that, 
workarounds. You know, sometimes we have to start to get the 
job done. You know, we just have to do what we need to do, but 
ultimately, it is really important that technology be made 
accessible.
    The Chairman. Yes. Well, thanks very much for that. Ms. 
Othman, I am going to make reference to the history of the 50th 
anniversary of the passage of the Rehabilitation Act 
amendments, as I mentioned earlier. These amendments were 
really groundbreaking. Among other things, created the U.S. 
Access Board.
    The Act states in part that it requires, ``access to 
programs and activities that are funded by Federal agencies and 
to Federal employment.'' For both the public and for Federal 
employees themselves, a key pathway to accessing Federal 
agencies and programs is through the technology that we have 
talked about.
    The Department of Justice issued a report 10 years overdue 
that show that only 20 percent, just 20 percent, of Federal 
websites are accessible at best. I would ask you this, what do 
you consider the most common barrier to websites and technology 
accessibility at all levels of government?
    Ms. Othman. Thank you. That is a great question. I believe 
that the most common barrier to websites and any type of 
application related technology is knowledge, education. People 
don't know that they have to do it, or they don't know how to 
do it, and so they don't do it.
    The other--on par with that is also prioritization. If we 
prioritize accessibility at the same level that we prioritize 
security, privacy, other technology related aspects, so many 
people with disabilities wouldn't be left behind because we--
there are problems with privacy and security when you are 
standing at a Social Security kiosk and you have to use a 
security guard or you have to use a bystander and tell them 
Social Security number so that they can get you into the kiosk 
to tell the Social Security Administration that you are there 
for an appointment that you have pre-scheduled, or when you are 
standing there talking to the receptionist at the VA, sharing 
your medical history so that they can fill out an inaccessible 
form for you, and now they and everyone within earshot can hear 
you.
    I think it is both the lack of knowledge and understanding, 
but also on that same level is the non-prioritization of 
accessibility on those same lines as security and privacy in 
the Federal space.
    The Chairman. I think that is a good way to think about it. 
Ranking Member Braun.
    Senator Braun. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have two 
questions for Mr. Doyle and one for Ms. Othman. Mr. Doyle, your 
Service Oklahoma is on the front lines, it seems like, in 
Oklahoma, on innovation.
    When I came to D.C., I wanted to make sure my own offices 
here, especially back home, did as well as customer service in 
the business I ran for 37 years. When you take that customer 
service to a new level, I think it shows how you can do at any 
level something better than maybe what was done before.
    Tell me how prioritizing customer service there in Oklahoma 
has enabled you to take it to the next level? Will it actually 
aid in a way to expand it further?
    Mr. Doyle. Thank you for that question. You know, for us, 
we put the citizen at the front of everything that we do. It is 
the center of our business. Our name is Service Oklahoma, 
because we are here to serve our citizens.
    We would be doing a disservice if we didn't design our 
services with our citizen in mind, and so, anything that we 
actually build, design, change, we start with actual citizen 
interviews, having conversations with the person that is 
actually going to be using the product, trying to determine 
their pain points, trying to figure out their feedback on what 
will work and what will not work.
    We also want to believe that our methodology is really 
iterative, and so, even after those initial interviews, that is 
not where our--the feedback loop starts for us, because even 
after we initially launch a product and even into all of our 
products today, at the end of every service, we actually ask 
the citizen for feedback, and we want feedback for how can we 
improve--the service we just provided or offered you, and then 
we actually take that to heart and actually continually try to 
change and improve the products that we offer.
    As we continue to improve our products and better meet the 
needs of our citizens, you know, we are improving our first 
time resolution rate. We are decreasing our transaction times. 
We are actually making our services more efficient for the 
State and actually a better product for our citizens.
    You know, we view feedback truly as a gift. It is the 
driver of everything that we do. The products and our product 
roadmap of what are we going to innovate or what are we going 
to improve next is really truly driven by customer feedback and 
what are the needs that we are hearing and seeing on the front 
lines from our citizens.
    Senator Braun. Thank you. The second question would be 
involving Federal regulations. Whenever we are going after 
improving, or doing it right in the first place, there 
sometimes can be a conflict between.
    Sometimes it works well together. How have the Federal 
regulations dovetailed with what you have been trying to 
accomplish in Oklahoma? Has it made it easier or harder to 
arrive at better results?
    Mr. Doyle. You know, we always are looking at both our 
Federal and state regulations. Obviously, we are in a fairly 
regulated, highly regulated industry just from the services 
that we provide on a day-to-day basis.
    You know, we want to be sure that we are not violating any 
statutes, both federally and locally, as well as jeopardizing 
any potential funding, so, I think those are obviously key 
items that we are looking at.
    You know, I would say, additionally, we are examining how 
can a burden of regulations or compliant requirements have on 
the speed to launch or the cost to actually implement a 
product.
    I think we are definitely having those conversations and 
concerns as we are looking at future products, but for us, the 
really decisio-nmaking for where we go with our products and 
how can we actually provide a better service is really getting 
back about the customer. Is it going to generate a substantial 
benefit for our citizens either through a simpler experience or 
more accessibility to services?
    What are our development or ongoing costs going to be when 
we are launching a new digitally enabled product? Because 
ideally that shouldn't cost us any more than it was previously 
to offer that service.
    We really want to be focused on being good stewards of 
taxpayer funds, and then finally, what is the impact on the 
citizens? Is it going to impact a high number of citizens or 
have a significant impact to their lives are really the real 
drivers we are looking at when deciding what services to kind 
of bring online.
    Senator Braun. Thank you. Ms. Othman, last August, I joined 
Chairman Casey in asking the GAO to study the Federal 
Government's compliance with Section 508. This study will 
examine how the Federal Government complies with laws requiring 
accessible technology. In your opinion, to what extent does the 
Federal Government comply with laws requiring accessible 
technology?
    Ms. Othman. Thank you, Senator, for the question. In my 
opinion, and based on my experience with my constituents, I can 
tell you that I believe the Federal Government is largely and 
substantially noncompliant with Section 508 across the board.
    That this is a systemic issue, and Federal agencies that do 
comply are rare and far between. I can also tell you, Senator, 
that the number of complaints that are cataloged and processed 
is both significantly less than the number of issues that 
actually exist, and also based on under-reporting to Congress 
and other entities.
    Most Federal agencies don't have a structure for 508 
complaints processing, so we don't actually know how bad it is. 
Added to that, no employee wants to sue their employer or file 
a complaint. Most employees will try to find workarounds.
    They will spend lots of time doing this. Most individuals 
with disabilities solve 100 problems before they even show up 
to work in the morning, and so, if these were simple problems 
in terms of inaccessibility, they would solve them themselves.
    No employee wants to make themselves vulnerable by going to 
their supervisor or their agency to say, I am struggling to do 
my job, period, let alone because of something directly related 
to their disability, meaning the inaccessibility.
    While I absolutely applaud and support the GAO study, I am 
also deeply concerned because I do not believe that Federal 
agencies are properly keeping records or that there is an 
accountability or enforcement mechanism in place to accurately 
capture the number and volume of inaccessibility, or the 
individuals that that impacts.
    Senator Braun. That is disappointing to hear, and I think 
it ought to give us pause before we try to maybe do more 
through the Federal Government when it seems to be clear that 
it is not complying with some of the same--some of the things 
it has put out there.
    I think it also means that we have got to make sure that 
states, especially the ones that are wanting to be innovative, 
are out there to where they have full flexibility to probably 
do a better job.
    Sadly, we have completed in my own office as a freshman 
Senate office, 10,000 cases back home across the array of 
Federal entanglements, and that is an amazing number in a 
little under five years.
    I just think hearings like this expose in a way the truth 
of what is being done, what is not being done, practice what 
you preach, and please make sure that we keep the flexibility 
for states to do what appears to be a better job with a report 
like that. I yield back.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member Braun. We have to 
take a break in the hearing now. This hearing of the Special 
Committee on Aging will recess so that members can attend an 
all Senators session to hear from Ukrainian President Zelensky. 
The Committee will reconvene in this room after the session 
concludes at approximately 11:00 a.m. This Committee stands in 
recess.
    [Recess.]
    The Chairman. The hearing will come to order again. We are 
grateful for your patience when we had to take a break to 
listen to President Zelensky. It was an honor to be able to do 
that. I know we are starting late, so I am going to go right to 
two of our Senators who are here waiting patiently. Senator 
Scott of Florida.
    Senator Rick Scott. I thank the chairman for hosting this 
and for his commitment to trying to figure out how we continue 
to help people that need help in our country. In Florida, we 
have heard from veterans that agencies continue to make their 
processes more--as they make their processes more digital, it 
has become increasingly difficult for disabled veterans to 
continue to receive the care and services they are accustomed 
to.
    For example, the VA Beneficiary Travel Service Self Service 
System has been a physical form for years, VA form 103542, and 
as the VA made the program digital in July 2020, we have 
veterans who are being told they cannot file this form in 
person yet are unable to use the online BTSSS process portal 
for a variety of reasons, including disabilities that inhibit 
their ability to use the online system, and they are suffering 
from not receiving their benefits in a timely manner.
    Clearly, I think all of us would agree, that has got to get 
fixed. Our nation's veterans deserve the highest quality 
service we can provide. I am proud to join Chairman Casey on a 
commonsense bill, the Veterans Accessibility Act, to ensure 
that the VA and all of its services are accessible for 
individuals with disabilities.
    I want to thank the chair for doing that. Giving veterans 
and people with disabilities a voice to improve accessibility 
at the VA is at the core of this bill and central to ensuring 
that no one is left behind. I have just got a few questions.
    What are you all doing, and what should we do to improve 
accessibility to--or improve accessibility does not negatively 
impact user experience and participation of people with 
disabilities, older adults, and veterans in government 
services. There is no order. Whoever feels comfortable going 
first. Jay looks like you are going to go first.
    Mr. Doyle. Yes. Senator Scott, thank you for the question 
and the comments, so, Service Oklahoma, we are clearly in our 
infancy as we have been offering services to the citizens of 
Oklahoma for a little less than a year now.
    I think when we view a specific population group like 
veterans, for example, I think we look at it from two different 
components. I think No. 1, we look at it from the individual 
products or services we provide, and how can we make sure that 
those are accessible and meeting the needs of that population.
    Just to give an example, we inherited a online renewal for 
a driver's license, and as we decided to work through 
redesigning that product, we found a couple of things. Number 
one, we wanted to make sure that we made it more accessible and 
simplified for all citizens, so we decrease the number of steps 
from 31 to 14.
    I think the second thing that was really important to us is 
the previous process, if you were 100 percent disabled veteran 
in the State of Oklahoma, you actually received your driver's 
license free of charge, no charge to that citizen.
    Our online product actually didn't have a spot for you to 
check a box or to be eligible--to show that you are eligible to 
get that transaction for free, so, we were requiring those 
veterans to actually pay for the transaction, pay for the 
driver's license, and then they had to depend on our finance 
group to go through the process to go back and refund that 
dollars to them whenever they actually felt like they could get 
to it, so, obviously----
    Senator Rick Scott. This was rebates--they were going to 
send to you, right?
    Mr. Doyle. Exactly. One of those mail in rebates----
    Senator Rick Scott. That you never get.
    Mr. Doyle. Exactly, so, we really wanted to be sure that we 
added that eligibility so that they could have that digital 
product at the service level that was promised to them of 
actually getting that free of charge.
    We have made that improvement as we redesign the product, 
and so that is an example at the individual product level. I 
think from a population as a whole perspective, in the State of 
Oklahoma, there is a variety of different organizations that 
offer benefits or services to veterans specifically, and 
obviously other user groups.
    In our mid to long term plans, what we really want to do is 
centralize those locations of those services so that a veteran 
doesn't have to sit there and try to guess which agency 
provides which benefits or which services, and also have an 
idea of what services are actually available to them.
    We want to put that in a centralized location, really 
design it around what their tendencies would be as an actual 
user or as a customer, and also based on their actual persona, 
so, what actually might be eligible to 100 percent disabled 
veteran as an example?
    Really we want to be sure that we are trying to alleviate 
those frustrations, increase that experience, but also make it 
a lot more accessible to those veterans, and all citizens in 
Oklahoma, so they have an idea of what services are available 
and how to actually achieve those services.
    Senator Rick Scott. Okay. Anybody else? Ms. Othman, would 
you like to say thing?
    Ms. Othman. Thank you, Senator, for the question. You know, 
I can speak about individuals who are--veterans who are blind, 
and in terms of the, you know, many of them have lost their 
sight in service to our country.
    When they come back, though, there is such a digital divide 
because they have--prior to losing their vision, they had 
relied on it, and if they did have access to technology or they 
used technology, it was very visual.
    First and foremost, I think one recommendation for 
government is to meet individuals where they are and provide a 
multifaceted approach. We certainly do not support the 
elimination of paper-based applications or the elimination of 
in-person submission because some people are always going to 
need that.
    The technology, you know, you don't wake up at a military, 
VA hospital and all of a sudden you are capable of whatever 
your limitation is, just jumping right past it to be able to do 
TikTok and all of the other things that people have done, and 
so, we need to make sure that the applications and access 
systems are multifaceted.
    There are, though, some advancements with technology that 
we also, I believe, need to focus on. There are things like, 
you know, think of your smart speaker. There are lots of things 
that you can do with it now by voice command that you couldn't 
before and that veterans could benefit from those sorts of 
things.
    Automated phone services. I think, you know, most 
importantly, it is to have multiple avenues of accessing our 
government products and services because each individual has a 
disability that is going to differ from the person next to 
them, and so we want to make sure that we are not going 100 
percent digital and eliminating the manual process that some 
individuals need, or going 100 percent manual where there is so 
many other people with disabilities who cannot access and lose 
access to systems and services.
    Senator Rick Scott. Thank you. I just, I want--I know my 
time is up. I just want to thank the chair for hosting this, 
and I want to thank him for the quality of the individuals that 
he has brought here to give us information.
    The Chairman. Senator Scott, thanks very much for your 
questions, and thanks for working with me on the Veterans 
Accessibility Act, and for being here today. Before introducing 
my colleague from Pennsylvania, I wanted to note for the record 
something I mentioned in my opening, but I didn't list the co-
sponsors.
    There is another bill, the Federal Agency Accessibility 
Compliance Act, and that is co-sponsored--I am a sponsor with 
the following co-sponsors, Senators Fetterman, Blumenthal, 
Gillibrand, Duckworth, and Sanders, so, I will now turn next to 
Senator Fetterman.
    Senator Fetterman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and it is an 
honor to have you as my mentor, and to welcome--thank you, all 
of you here, and thank you for coming, and for me, it has been 
a very personal issue with me, and I am going to show this, and 
then I am going to describe this to others.
    This is my iPhone, and this is a transcription service that 
allows me to fully participate in this meeting, and 
conversations with my children, and interacting with my staff. 
I had a stroke about 18 months ago, you know, and I have lost 
my ability to fully process language, and I like to think I was 
an empathetic person, truly, but until that happened, it--I 
have raised to a whole different kind of level as well, and it 
is profound to know, though, that I never really considered 
that without this kind of technology, I couldn't watch 
television, and I can't imagine if I didn't have this kind of a 
bridge to allow me to communicate with--with other people 
effectively, and, you know, because I live in a political 
environment, I was ridiculed and made fun of because I wasn't 
able to process things sometimes or say things--things, so. I 
am so sorry that I am sure many of you had to go through this 
kind of thing. You know, I was lucky that I was--I was lucky 
enough to go through my life, the vast majority of that, 
without this kind of disability that I have.
    Again, I can't imagine, and how the challenges, and I 
admire, you know, everyone that has to kind of live with these 
kinds of struggles and prevail over them, and the questions 
that I have is really more of an open ended kind of question to 
everyone on the panel, you know.
    You know, how can we become more empathetic, more 
responsive, and more effective Senators to provide the kind of 
support and services that you, anyone in these communities, 
deserve to be a citizen here in our nation? Mr. Westbrook.
    Mr. Westbrook. Yes. I think it just takes political will 
and, you know, the will to become accessible--making it a 
priority, and just, you know, deciding that it is going to be a 
priority, like Ronza was saying earlier, and on the same level 
of security and privacy and all that kind of stuff.
    Accessibility just needs to be another part of doing 
business, as I mentioned in my testimony this morning. You 
know, we wouldn't think about building a building without 
putting in a ramp, you know, to get into the building now, but 
now, we need to think about building websites and digital 
technologies to make them more accessible.
    Senator Fetterman. Thank you.
    Ms. Othman. May I? Thank you for the wonderful question, 
Senator. First of all, I would say hire a person with a 
disability on your staff. Bring somebody in who is going to 
interact with you, because as they spend time--not you, 
personally, you, so thank you very much for your vulnerability 
and authenticity there.
    In general, to the Members of Congress and lawmaking bodies 
across the country, hire people with disabilities so that they 
can share their lived experience and so you can observe the 
challenges and struggles that they are experiencing.
    If, for example, they have a deliverable that they are 
responsible for bringing to you, and the reason why they are 
not able to complete that deliverable is because there was some 
technology upgrade, or a patch, or a security update that broke 
the accessibility of the whatever platform they were using, and 
now they are struggling to provide it to you, there is nothing 
wrong with how they--their ability to deliver on what you asked 
them to do.
    The obstacle is the technology broke or is broken, and so, 
becoming more empathetic, I think, requires exposing yourself, 
and yourselves as a body and individuals, to individuals who 
are experiencing those challenges and then not looking away, 
and then listening to the community tell you how to solve the 
problem, listening to those individuals.
    The census says that 25 percent of the United States 
population has a disability. That number is growing. It is 
continuing to grow, and so, think about that. If in your 
family, there is four of you, one of you is likely to have a 
disability right now, and probably close to two of you will in 
the next 15 to 20 years, and so, you know, listen, observe, and 
experience, and because we are humans, we are going to learn 
from the people around us. We are going to watch it in the 
interaction with people we love, or people we trust, or people 
we respect, and that is going to make a tremendous difference.
    Senator Fetterman. Mr. Chairman, may I request an 
additional--please, Mr. Doyle, please continue.
    Mr. Doyle. Senator, thank you for the question. In an 
effort not to repeat some of what my peers at the table have 
said, I think--for us, I think it is, especially when it comes 
to technology, is technology is always evolving, and so, I 
think whatever solutions we have in place today or whatever we 
are talking about today is going to be very different several 
years from now.
    I think having an approach of continuing getting feedback, 
continually listening to those with disabilities, and how can 
we make sure that we are offering accessibility of all services 
as technology continues to evolve, I think is key.
    I think we take that approach every single day, is that our 
products today are going to be very different than our products 
12 months from now, 18 months from now, etcetera, and so, I 
think having that mindset that whatever we are talking about 
today needs to have that continued dialog and have that can be 
an ongoing conversation, because it is especially with 
technology, this is going to be--look very, very different in 
the years to come.
    Ms. Lichtle. Thank you, Senator, for your statement and 
your question. I 100 percent agree with Ronza. It is very 
important that we listen to and engage with people with 
disabilities. As one of my close friends and proud self-
advocate says, when you meet one person with a disability, you 
have met one person with a disability.
    Engaging a wide array of people with disabilities, and 
people with the same disability, they are all going to have 
various lived experiences that can inform and shape how we 
create policy and accessible technologies, and that is very 
important for us moving forward. Thank you.
    Senator Fetterman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
    The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Fetterman, and I want to 
commend Senator Fetterman's statement about his own personal 
experience, just like I commend and salute the personal 
testimony of our witnesses.
    Nothing, nothing, is more powerful than personal testimony 
when it comes to matching someone's lived experience with 
public policy changes that we seek to enact into law, and 
sometimes that--most of the time that comes from witnesses, but 
sometimes it comes from a courageous Senator who is willing to 
talk about the challenges he faces and what he is doing every 
day, so we are grateful for his personal witness here today.
    We obviously have more questions but because of our 
interlude, as grave as that moment was to be with President 
Zelensky, I know that it didn't allow us to have more 
questions, but we can follow-up with our witnesses to get more 
information, but each of you have helped us in this hearing 
today when we learned so much about the importance of 
accessible technology for people with disabilities as they seek 
to access government services and information.
    This is a very timely issue. Every level of government now 
uses technology, as I made reference to earlier, the front door 
for programs and benefits. Accessible government websites, 
apps, and other technology are critical for people with 
disabilities who need access, access, to veterans benefits, or 
to read a bus schedule, or simply to pay their taxes.
    America's population is aging rapidly, and older adults are 
more likely to have a disability. When Federal, state, and 
local technology is not accessible, that digital front door is 
locked. The testimony of today's witnesses highlighted the 
importance of government efforts to ensure that accessibility.
    Mr. Westbrook highlighted the personal impact of an 
inaccessible government website. Ms. Othman discussed examples 
of inaccessible technology at every level of government. Mr. 
Doyle discussed his State's innovations in accessible 
government technology.
    Ms. Lichtle discussed her city's efforts to make their 
technology accessible. Through the efforts of the Biden 
Administration and the bills that I and my colleagues--I made 
reference to earlier, Senator Scott, Senator Fetterman, and 
others who have co-sponsored these bills, all of these 
proposals will help us make all levels of government technology 
accessible to people with disabilities.
    I also ask unanimous consent to enter a document into the 
record, the VA's most recent web accessibility report from 
August of this year, August 2023. This report details steps the 
VA has taken to improve accessibility of its technology in 
response to bipartisan congressional oversight, so, we will add 
that document to the hearing record.
    The Chairman. I want to make reference to additional 
questions for Senators. If any Senator has additional questions 
for the witnesses or statements to be added, the hearing record 
will be kept open for seven days until next Thursday, September 
the 28th.
    Again, I want to thank our witnesses again and those who 
are appearing today in the hearing room behind our witnesses, 
for your time today as well, so, thanks for participating, and 
this concludes today's hearing.
    [Whereupon, at 11:40 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.]



      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
=======================================================================


                                APPENDIX

=======================================================================





      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
=======================================================================


                      Prepared Witness Statements

=======================================================================




      
 [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]  

      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
=======================================================================


                        Questions for the Record

=======================================================================




    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]   
    
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
=======================================================================


                       Statements for the Record

=======================================================================



[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]