INDIANAPOLIS—Often, Indiana politics is characterized by controversy and hostility, with lawmakers seemingly arguing during an entire legislative session. However, in rare moments like Wednesday's Senate Health and Provider Services Committee meeting, they instead shared some laughs and unanimously voted through a bill to help Hoosiers with disabilities.
Photo by Ashlyn Myers, TheStatehouseFile.com.
Taking on a lighter subject than taxes or firearms, Rep. Cindy Ledbetter, R-Chandler, introduced her House Bill 1354, which states that only a dog or miniature horse can be considered a service animal. Yeah, you read that right. Service miniature horses are a thing.
In fact, they have been considered potential service animals since the 2010 Americans with Disabilities Act revisions.
According to usserviceanimals.org, miniature horses best serve those who are blind or visually impaired. The Northeast ADA Center says on its website that horses are great service animals because of their eyesight and night vision and also how steady they are.
In addition to clarifying which animals are service animals, the bill lays out how businesses can appropriately handle customers who may walk in with an animal.
Ledbetter said the bill's genesis came from complaints from business owners who had untrained animals come into their businesses. As a nurse practitioner, she said that an untrained animal even came into her psychiatric practice once.
The bill states that for a business to allow service animals into their establishment, the animal must be housebroken, under control by a leash or harness (if the owner is able) and responsive to voice commands.
The bill also says the person giving the animal accommodation, whether it be a business owner or other office coordinator, cannot ask for specific details about the animal owner's disability. The accommodation giver also cannot ask for physical proof or licensing stating that the animal has been trained, assuming it is apparent the dog or horse is trained and well behaved.
The accommodation giver can, however, ask if the animal is for the person's disability and ask what task the animal is trained to perform.
Finally, the bill outlines the importance of service animals, which give their owners the same freedom as other patrons. It states: "A person with a disability is permitted to be accompanied by a service animal in all areas of a place of public accommodation where: (1) members of the public; (2) program participants; (3) clients; (4) customers; (5) patrons; or (6) invitees; are allowed to go."
Two people came to testify in support of the bill.
Hannah Carlock, senior director of public affairs for The Arc of Indiana, an organization that lobbies for and connects Hoosiers with disabilities, shared her enthusiastic support.
"Service animals are just one of the many accommodations Hoosiers with disabilities utilize to perform activities of daily living," Carlock said. "House Bill 1354 brings Indiana up to date with federal guidelines, and it not only protects the owner of the service animal but also the businesses."
Many legislators didn't realize the difference between an emotional support animal and a service animal.
Emotional support animals help alleviate symptoms but are not specially trained to help a person with a disability. Alternatively, service animals go through rigorous training that can cost anywhere from $20,000 to $60,000, said Carlock.
Kristen S. LaEace, the chief executive officer of the Indiana Association of Area Agencies on Aging, also stood in support of HB 1354 because her clients are in support of it, she said.
"[People with disabilities] tend to support this type of legislation because they want to protect their rights and ensure there's no misunderstanding about their ability to bring that dog into public areas," LaEace said.
After housekeeping concluded, committee Chairman Ed Charbonneau, R-Valparaiso, asked if there would be any "neigh" votes on the bill, which got the crowd laughing.
In good spirits, the entire committee voted through the bill. Sen. Vaneta Becker, R-Evansville, rhymed her "aye" with a horse's "neigh," which also earned some chuckles.
www.thestatehousefile.com
Photo by Ashlyn Myers, TheStatehouseFile.com.
Taking on a lighter subject than taxes or firearms, Rep. Cindy Ledbetter, R-Chandler, introduced her House Bill 1354, which states that only a dog or miniature horse can be considered a service animal. Yeah, you read that right. Service miniature horses are a thing.
In fact, they have been considered potential service animals since the 2010 Americans with Disabilities Act revisions.
According to usserviceanimals.org, miniature horses best serve those who are blind or visually impaired. The Northeast ADA Center says on its website that horses are great service animals because of their eyesight and night vision and also how steady they are.
In addition to clarifying which animals are service animals, the bill lays out how businesses can appropriately handle customers who may walk in with an animal.
Ledbetter said the bill's genesis came from complaints from business owners who had untrained animals come into their businesses. As a nurse practitioner, she said that an untrained animal even came into her psychiatric practice once.
The bill states that for a business to allow service animals into their establishment, the animal must be housebroken, under control by a leash or harness (if the owner is able) and responsive to voice commands.
The bill also says the person giving the animal accommodation, whether it be a business owner or other office coordinator, cannot ask for specific details about the animal owner's disability. The accommodation giver also cannot ask for physical proof or licensing stating that the animal has been trained, assuming it is apparent the dog or horse is trained and well behaved.
The accommodation giver can, however, ask if the animal is for the person's disability and ask what task the animal is trained to perform.
Finally, the bill outlines the importance of service animals, which give their owners the same freedom as other patrons. It states: "A person with a disability is permitted to be accompanied by a service animal in all areas of a place of public accommodation where: (1) members of the public; (2) program participants; (3) clients; (4) customers; (5) patrons; or (6) invitees; are allowed to go."
Two people came to testify in support of the bill.
Hannah Carlock, senior director of public affairs for The Arc of Indiana, an organization that lobbies for and connects Hoosiers with disabilities, shared her enthusiastic support.
"Service animals are just one of the many accommodations Hoosiers with disabilities utilize to perform activities of daily living," Carlock said. "House Bill 1354 brings Indiana up to date with federal guidelines, and it not only protects the owner of the service animal but also the businesses."
Many legislators didn't realize the difference between an emotional support animal and a service animal.
Emotional support animals help alleviate symptoms but are not specially trained to help a person with a disability. Alternatively, service animals go through rigorous training that can cost anywhere from $20,000 to $60,000, said Carlock.
Kristen S. LaEace, the chief executive officer of the Indiana Association of Area Agencies on Aging, also stood in support of HB 1354 because her clients are in support of it, she said.
"[People with disabilities] tend to support this type of legislation because they want to protect their rights and ensure there's no misunderstanding about their ability to bring that dog into public areas," LaEace said.
After housekeeping concluded, committee Chairman Ed Charbonneau, R-Valparaiso, asked if there would be any "neigh" votes on the bill, which got the crowd laughing.
In good spirits, the entire committee voted through the bill. Sen. Vaneta Becker, R-Evansville, rhymed her "aye" with a horse's "neigh," which also earned some chuckles.
No "neighs" for bill outlining rights of those using service dogs and horses
INDIANAPOLIS—Often, Indiana politics is characterized by controversy and hostility, with lawmakers seemingly arguing during an entire legislative session. However, in rare moments like Wednesday’s Senate Health and Provider Services Committee
