government and society certainly have a duty to the disabled in Mr. Harmon's case, and it's admirable that he is doing something productive and valuable with his time. but that's also government and society, what exactly are we paying them for if they're foisting that responsibility onto each institution or private entity that comes in contact with mr. harmon and people like him?
the two questions i have are, what is the most fiscally responsible solution, and who pays for it?
give him interpreter services sure, government can contribute to that and you can argue they should. make every good and service in the united states that that person could potentially come in contact to, 'disability-proof' for all known disabilities? that is a waste of money and labor and fiscally irresponsible but that is the intent of the law.
the ADA makes exception for financially burdensom actions. that a entity has more than enough means to cover an action and won't be forced to close... does not make the action more cost-effective or more wise. even the law has provision in the case where accommodation with its provisions would be ruinous to the enterprise, because it's better for society to have a non-compliant business and product than to have no product at all.