As I’ve shared before, the year I lost my sight while serving in the U.S. Army overseas, our country passed a landmark piece of legislation: the Rehabilitation Act. This law requires public and federally funded entities to be accessible to people with disabilities. Much research and funding went into producing codes and standards that provided equal access to people with disabilities, the elderly, and the mainstream public.
Nearly five decades later, these accessibility features have quietly become essential to all of us, not just those with disabilities. Recently at Olcott Beach Carousel Park, I heard a father comment how he appreciated the larger restroom stalls so he could assist his young son while maintaining his child’s privacy. A mother mentioned how glad she was that a ramp gave them restaurant access without her having to take her sleeping baby out of the stroller. An elderly couple looking for directions inside a public building spotted a large print sign directing them to the cafeteria, something they wouldn’t have otherwise noticed.
All these situations stem from Section 504, which has been the law of the land since the 1970s, incorporating accessibility into local, state and federal building codes. Today it’s a cost of doing business — giving all people the ability to access our communities freely, independently and equally. These accommodations benefit everyone, and disabled Americans represent more than $500 billion in annual purchasing power, a significant economic force that grows when barriers are removed.
Now, abruptly, the Department of Energy announced it would rescind 40-year-old accessibility requirements for federally funded buildings, claiming they’re too expensive.
Last summer, when we examined the conservative movement-created Project 2025 report (which Donald Trump claimed he and the Republicans had nothing to do with), we saw that it attacked the disability community, arguing it’s too expensive for the U.S. Government to make their facilities totally accessible for all citizens. Consider that statement: our government claims it cannot afford to make its buildings accessible for wheelchairs, walkers, blind people, or integrate signage for the deaf, grab bars, and wider restroom features — all the things that we use.
Who are these buildings for? If they’re for the people — to work in, visit, and conduct business — why are we turning our backs on 15% of the American public? We all grow older, don’t we? Those grab bars will become useful, those ramps become more than convenient, and large print will become preferred. Yet this administration acts as if people with disabilities, wounded veterans, and the elderly don’t deserve to navigate public buildings easily and safely.
Further, what really strikes me is how the federal government claims it cannot make a building universal for all, but has the funding to throw a one-day military parade costing $45 million — on Trump’s birthday, no less. How little must this current administration think of us that they either don’t believe we’re smart enough to see what they’re doing, or they just don’t care.
The assault on accessibility extends beyond buildings to the very healthcare our veterans depend on. I find it particularly troubling that Executive Order 14168, “Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,” signed Jan. 20, 2025, has been interpreted to allow healthcare professionals at the Department of Veterans Affairs to discriminate against our former service members.
According to documents obtained by The Guardian, the VA has removed protections against discrimination based on political affiliation, marital status, and national origin — meaning doctors could potentially refuse treatment to unmarried veterans or those from certain nations. Healthcare professionals can also now face employment discrimination at the VA for these same reasons. The changes affect all VA providers: doctors, nurses, psychologists, dentists, and other specialists.
When asked, VA press secretary Peter Kasperowicz did not deny the reporting and told The Guardian that the changes were just a “formality” to comply with Trump’s executive order.
But experts see it differently. Dr. Arthur Caplan, founding head of the division of medical ethics at New York University’s Grossman School of Medicine, called the VA’s new rules “extremely disturbing and unethical.”
“It seems on its face an effort to exert political control over the VA medical staff,” Caplan said. “What we typically tell people in healthcare is: ‘You keep your politics at home and take care of your patients.’ Those views are not relevant to caring for patients. So why would we put anyone at risk of losing care that way?”
This isn’t about politics, it’s about humanity. It’s about whether we believe that all Americans, regardless of their physical abilities, political affiliations, or life circumstances, deserve equal access to public spaces and services. The message being sent is clear: if you need accommodations, if you don’t fit a narrow definition of “acceptable,” then you’re expendable.