                       THE BRAILLE MONITOR



                    Kenneth Jernigan, Editor
                Barbara Pierce, Associate Editor


     Published in inkprint, Braille, on talking-book disc, 
                        and cassette by 


              THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND 
                     MARC MAURER, PRESIDENT 
 


                         National Office
                       1800 Johnson Street
                   Baltimore, Maryland 21230 

                             * * * *



           Letters to the President, address changes,
        subscription requests, orders for NFB literature,
       articles for the Monitor, and letters to the Editor
             should be sent to the National Office. 

                             * * * *
 


Monitor subscriptions cost the Federation about twenty-five 
dollars per year. Members are invited, and non-members are
requested, to cover the subscription cost. Donations should be
made payable to National Federation of the Blind and sent to: 
 

                National Federation of the Blind
                       1800 Johnson Street
                   Baltimore, Maryland 21230 

                             * * * *

THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND IS NOT AN ORGANIZATION
SPEAKING FOR THE BLIND--IT IS THE BLIND SPEAKING FOR THEMSELVES



ISSN 0006-8829THE BRAILLE MONITOR
A PUBLICATION OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND

                            CONTENTS

                                                      MARCH, 1993

MAKING HAY
by Kenneth Jernigan

NATION'S TOP DISABILITY ADMINISTRATOR TAKES MISSISSIPPI JOB

THE MAKING OF AN ENGINEER
by John Miller

HAVE CIVIL RIGHTS BECOME GROUP RIGHTS?
by Evan Kemp, Jr.

TOWARD A MORE TOLERANT WORLD: THE PRICE OF DISCRIMINATION
by Jillian Brooks

MOBILITY: WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IS IT?
by Gary Wunder

WHAT DO EMPLOYERS LOOK FOR?

A SUCCESSFUL JOB SEARCH IN THE GROVES OF ACADEME
by Adrienne Asch

NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND 1993 LEGISLATIVE MEMORANDUM AND
FACT SHEETS

ALL IS NOT BLISS AT TELESENSORY
by Kenneth Jernigan

BLIND PEOPLE AND GUNS

REMAINING VIGILANT: BILL ISAACS TAKES UP HIS PEN

A CHOICE FOR A LIFETIME
by Richard Hassig

BOOK REVIEW
by Lorraine Rovig

LIKE A DIFFERENT COUNTRY
by Norma Crosby

RECIPES

MONITOR MINIATURES


     Copyright National Federation of the Blind, Inc., 1993
[LEAD PHOTO/CAPTION: In 1944 Kenneth Jernigan (right) spent the
summer making furniture for sale in his community. It was an
ambitious and lucrative summer job. He is pictured here with a
friend, surrounded by a number of the occasional tables which
were the backbone of his business.]

                           MAKING HAY
                       by Kenneth Jernigan

     As a blind child growing up on a farm in the hills of Middle
Tennessee in the late 1920's and early 1930's, I did a lot of
thinking. This is not surprising since there wasn't much else to
do. We lived in a four-room house on a gravel road, and I doubt
that an automobile a week passed our door. We had no radio, no
telephone, no newspaper, no magazines, and no books except the
Bible and the textbooks my brother (four years older than I)
brought home from school.
     The world of the late '20's and early '30's in rural
Tennessee was a totally different place from what we know today.
Nobody thought about atom bombs, pollution, or jet planes. About
the hottest topic I heard discussed by my elders was whether it
was a sin for a woman to bob her hair and what the likelihood was
that you would go to hell if you played cards. I had better
explain that last remark. I am not referring to playing cards for
money, just ordinary games around the family table. And while we
are on the subject, there was no question at all about whether
you would go to hell if you danced or played pool. You would.
     The difference between the world of then and there and the
one of here and now was not limited to the rural areas. Let me
give you an example. When I went off to the Tennessee School for
the Blind in Nashville at the age of six (that would have been
January of 1933), one of the more charming customs of the place
was a Saturday morning ritual involving the Scriptures. Shortly
after breakfast the small boys (I don't know what happened to the
girls since there was strict segregation) were plopped down on a
bench and given the task of memorizing a chapter from the Bible.
It didn't do any good to protest, object, or try to resist. You
sat there until you memorized it, after which you were free to go
play.
     One's religion had nothing to do with it, nor did one's
interest or aptitude. When you got the task done, you could
(within limits) go where you pleased and do what you liked.
Meanwhile you couldn't. And whatever time you spent trying to
beat the system was just that much of the morning gone. I suppose
I need not tell you that I quickly concluded to learn my chapter
with minimum delay, which I religiously (no play on words
intended) did. As a result, I have been a devout Bible quoter
ever since--and much, I might add, to my benefit and long-range
satisfaction. Ah, well, children are not always in the best
position to know what will stand them in good stead.
     I don't want to leave you with the impression that
everything in that Tennessee world of the '20's and '30's
concerned the Bible or religious matters. It didn't. We popped
corn in a pan of bacon grease on the wood stove in the kitchen or
in a long-handled popper at the fireplace in one or the other of
the two bedrooms. (The house had a kitchen, a dining room, and
two bedrooms.) We visited our neighbors and relatives, either
walking or (if the distance was too far) riding in a wagon drawn
by two mules; we gathered hickory nuts and walnuts; and now and
again the family sang songs or listened to a neighbor play a
banjo. At Christmas time there was a great deal of cooking, but
no convenience foods, of course, and as little as possible bought
from the store. For instance, we didn't make fruitcake. That
would have cost too much. Instead, we made jam cake. The black
walnuts, the homemade blackberry jam, and most of the other
ingredients came from our farm and required no outlay of cash.
     As to my personal situation, it was (if you want to be
high-toned about it) what you might call anomalous. Nobody in the
neighborhood had ever known a blind person, so there was no one
to give advice. My parents loved me, but they didn't know what to
do. This led to some strange inconsistencies. For instance, my
mother and dad didn't want me to carry wood for the fireplace or
stove or water from the spring, which was only a few feet from
the house. They didn't want me to play in the yard or go any
farther than the porch. They were afraid I might get hurt. Yet,
they had no objection at all to my shooting firecrackers at
Christmas time.
     It was regarded as a natural thing for boys in that part of
the country to shoot firecrackers, and I suppose my parents just
never thought about it. One of my earliest memories is of me
standing on the front porch with a match and a firecracker in my
hand and of my father, saying as he went past me into the house,
"You'd better be careful, or you'll blow your hand off with that
thing." Young as I was, I knew that he was right and that nobody
would stop me if I was careless--so I wasn't careless. I
developed a technique of holding the match just below the head
and pressing the firecracker fuse against it. Match and fuse were
held between my thumb and index finger, so there was no
possibility of the firecracker's exploding in my hand since my
fingers were between it and the flame. Never once did I get hurt,
and I think the experience helped me learn something about risk
taking and proper caution.
     As I have already said, I did a lot of thinking as I was
growing up. I also did a lot of planning, for I didn't want to
spend the rest of my life in close confinement in that four-room
house on the farm. As I reasoned it, I needed to read all the
books I could, and I needed to go to college. Therefore, as
Braille and recorded books became available to me through the
books for the blind program of the Library of Congress, I
followed through on the matter and crammed my head as full of
book learning as I could. Later I went to college and put the
limited environment of the farm behind me. 
     Meanwhile, I wanted to do productive work and make some
money. This wasn't easy since my family (though loving me)
thought I was virtually helpless. My first effort (caning chairs
at the School for the Blind) brought more labor than cash, but I
had to start where I could. Also, we had cows on the farm, and we
sold their milk to a nearby cheese factory. During summer
vacations I milked cows night and morning and got ten cents a
week for it. At the time I was probably eleven or twelve.
     During the first part of the Second World War (I would have
been fourteen or fifteen), I made a little money collecting peach
seeds. I sold them to a man who came by twice a week in a truck.
I was told that the kernels were used for filters in gas masks,
but I don't know whether that was true or not. What I do know is
that I got a penny a pound for them and that there were a
tremendous number of peaches eaten in the neighborhood.
     Then, there was the NYA (the National Youth Administration),
one of Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal programs. Beginning in 1943
I washed windows, scrubbed floors, shined the small boys' shoes,
and did other chores at the School for the Blind for three
dollars a month--fifteen hours at twenty cents an hour. I thought
I was rich.
     And there was even an extra dividend. I was not the only boy
at the School for the Blind who got three dollars a month for
working for the NYA. There were quite a number, which meant that
we now had a cash economy, with more money in circulation than
the boys at the School for the Blind had ever known. It
stimulated business. I was one of those who profited. I
established a relationship with a local wholesale house and
walked there once or twice a week to carry large boxes of candy
and chewing gum back to the School. I bought the candy for three
cents a bar and sold it for a nickel. Going for the candy was not
only good exercise but also good profit. My roommate and I did a
thriving business. It helped me get some of the money to start to
college.
     There was also my broom-making project. A neighbor in the
country raised broom corn, and I took it with me to the School
for the Blind and made it into brooms. (All blind boys in those
days were taught chair caning and broom making regardless of
their aptitudes or wishes, and I think I could still do a
creditable job at either task.) My neighbor supplied the broom
corn, and I made and sold the brooms. We split the profits.
     During the latter part of the Second World War (by this time
I was sixteen or seventeen) I got a chance during the school year
to make some money by sorting aircraft rivets. The Vultee
Aircraft Company established a plant near Nashville to make dive
bombers, and there were many thousands of rivets in each plane.
The workers would drop rivets on the floor; and when the dirt,
cigarette stubs, and other leavings were swept up, the assorted
mixture was brought to the students at the School for the Blind
for sorting. We separated the rivets from the trash, sorted them
into sizes and types, discarded any with rough spots on them, and
sent them back to the aircraft plant. It was a messy job, but it
was a way to make some money. I think I got two and a half cents
a pound for it.
     But all of these various jobs were preliminary to my first
truly big opportunity. It happened like this: In the summer of
1944 (I was seventeen) I wanted to expand my horizons. Farm
laborers in our neighborhood made $1.25 per day, working from
sunrise to sunset, and I wanted to join their ranks. The pivotal
event occurred when they began making hay. We had no power
machinery. There was a mule-drawn mower, and after the hay was
cut, there was a mule-drawn rake. The men would follow the rake
with pitchforks, putting the hay into shocks and then tossing it
into the mule-drawn wagon. Then it would be taken to the barn and
put into the loft.
     I tried to get my dad and the other decision makers to let
me try my hand at making hay. They were not only unwilling but
didn't even want to talk about it. In fact when I insisted, they
indicated to me that they were busy and had work to do and that I
should stop bothering them.
     Since I was unwilling to spend the summer doing nothing, I
looked around for other opportunities. It occurred to me that I
might try my hand at making furniture. Lumber was cheap in those
days, and I also had the idea of using spools. At that time
thread was wound on wooden spools, plastic not yet having come
into use, and almost everybody sewed. Spools were throw-aways,
and I got all my relatives, plus department stores in surrounding
towns, to save them for me. I got them in every conceivable size
and then sorted them and strung them on iron rods to make table
legs.
     The design was simple, but the product was both durable and
graceful. I could make a table in a day and could sell it for
$10. It cost me $1.75 in materials, so I had a profit of $8.25.
My rejection became a triumph. While the men did back-breaking
labor in the hay fields for $1.25 a day, I stayed in my workshop,
listened to recorded books, and produced tables for a profit of
$8.25. No matter how fast I made them, I could never keep up with
demand. It was as regular as clock work--$8.25 net profit day
after day, not the $1.25 I would have made in the hay field.
     I also designed and made floor lamps from spools. The lamp
had an old steering wheel for a base with a pipe running up the
center, surrounded by four columns of spools, with a fixture and
shade on top. I could make it in a day, and I sold it for $25,
with a cost for materials of a little over $8. This was twice as
much profit as I made from a table. The trouble was that the
lamps were harder to sell, so I got relatively few orders.
     By the end of the summer I had more money than I had ever
seen, and I did it again the following year. I went to college in
1945 and never returned to the furniture business, but it taught
me a valuable lesson, as did the other jobs I have described.
There are many ways to make hay, and if you lose $1.25, you may
make $8.25 if you put your mind to it. As I have already said,
the world of fifty years ago was a different place from the world
of today--but many of the lessons still hold. They probably
always will, and one of them is that making hay is a lifelong
process.


[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Nell C. Carney, former commissioner of
the Rehabilitation Services Administration.]

              NATION'S TOP DISABILITY ADMINISTRATOR
                      TAKES MISSISSIPPI JOB

     This article appeared in the January 20, 1993, Clarion-
Ledger. Written by Butch John, it tells of the appointment of
Nell Carney as Director of Mississippi's Department of
Rehabilitation Services. Here it is:

     Nell C. Carney, who has headed the nation's agency for
disabled Americans since July, 1989, on Tuesday accepted the helm
of the state's Department of Rehabilitation Services.
     "It is my full intention to make the rehabilitation program
in Mississippi a national model," Carney said in an interview
from her Washington office. "Leadership is what's missing.
There's a great opportunity there."
     Carney replaces John Cook as executive director of an agency
that serves more than 100,000 Mississippians. Cook left the
$73,258-a-year position in December.
     Carney, who is visually impaired, said she plans to begin
work in Jackson Monday. She said she turned down one other job
offer and entertained several feelers after President Bush failed
to win re-election November 3.
     Carney won unanimous approval in Tuesday's meeting of the
1,700-employee state agency's governing board.
     As commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services
Administration in the U.S. Department of Education, she was the
obvious pick from about a dozen candidates, board members said.
     "She has just impeccable credentials. When you review a
resume of a person with such a background, you can't help but be
awed. It's difficult to perceive of an individual more
qualified," said Dr. Ed Thompson, interim head of the state
Department of Health and one of the five state agency heads on
the board.
     Andy Taggert, chief of staff for Governor Kirk Fordice,
called Carney's hiring a triumph for Mississippi.
     Carney, who holds a master's degree from Vanderbilt
University and more than 90 hours of additional management
training at other schools, began her career as an instructor at
Middle Tennessee State University in 1974.
     She held several counseling and administrative jobs in
Washington state and Virginia before accepting the federal
position.
     "Having worked 3-1/2 years as a federal administrator, I see
coming back to a state program as a good experience," she said.
"I think Mississippi probably misses a lot of grant money. I'm
the one who knows where to find it."
     Evelyn Williams, who heads a parents' program to make
Jackson public schools more accessible to disabled children,
applauded the change.
     A former client of the state agency, and a harsh critic of
its administration in recent years, Williams said Carney's
reputation and experience seemed to promise a service-oriented
system the state had lacked.


[PHOTO: John Miller speaks with microphone in hand. CAPTION: John
Miller addresses the Job Opportunities for the Blind seminar at
the 1992 convention of the National Federation of the Blind.]

                    THE MAKING OF AN ENGINEER
                         by John Miller

     From the Associate Editor: At the 1993 Job Opportunities for
the Blind (JOB) national seminar, conducted the day before the
NFB convention in Charlotte, North Carolina, seminar participants
heard John Miller, a 1988 NFB scholarship winner, describe his
recent successful search for a job as a systems engineer. He told
the group how important it is for the blind job-seeker to build
and exude self-confidence. He said that one must be able to
discuss blindness knowledgeably and briefly in an interview and
that this can be done only if one has read and studied the
articles in the Braille Monitor. He went on to suggest that every
job applicant among his hearers concentrate on compiling a strong
resume and references who will be prepared to speak
enthusiastically and precisely about his or her skills and
abilities. Finally he warned his listeners that they had to be
prepared to demonstrate creativity and flexibility. An
interviewer must be left with the impression that it would be
interesting and stimulating to have a blind employee. 
     That was in July. By November John had moved to San Diego,
California, and had begun work with his new company. He came to
the convention of the National Federation of the Blind of
California and reported on how he had actually gotten his job and
how it was going. Here is what he had to say: 

     I am a systems engineer at Quacom Incorporated in San Diego.
Just last spring I graduated from Stanford University with both a
bachelor's and a master's degree in electrical engineering. This
year has been exciting for me. Four weeks ago today was my
wedding. I welcome my wife Valerie to the Federation fold for
many years to come. We look forward to seeing all of you in
Dallas this summer. What I am here to talk about, of course, is
employment. 
     During my four years at Stanford one of the most important
things I gained was speaking with many of my disabled friends. In
one of our talks we posed a question to each other, "Would you,
if you could, take a pill that would make you a non-disabled
person?" A number of us concluded "No, we are proud of our
identity as disabled persons. We do not need to be like other
people." As a matter of fact, it's this kind of strength and
independence that we have in the National Federation of the
Blind. We can respect ourselves as blind people and take pride in
being blind. This is what we need to convey to our employers. 
     The employment process has two steps: The first is to get
the job, and the second is to make our employers and co-workers
comfortable with our disabilities. Last winter and spring I
interviewed with twenty-three different companies. From that I
obtained four second-round opportunities to demonstrate my
strength again on plant trips and received three job offers at
the end of that rather harrowing experience. At my many first
company interviews I did encounter discrimination. One thing I
knew at the beginning was that other candidates interview the
recruiter. Recruiters interview about ten different people. Some
of them they remember favorably, others negatively, others not at
all. As blind people we are excluded from the not-at-all
category. They will either remember us favorably or negatively.
We can use this to our advantage. We will leave them with an
impression. Which one that will be is the challenge we face. In
the beginning I thought my Quacom first-round interview went
quite well. We struck up a good camaraderie, discussed a number
of different interests, classes, and some professors that the
interviewer had known at Stanford. Then it occurred to me that he
was telling me about his interests more than telling me anything
to do with the Quacom position or asking me about my past
experience. I asked him if he intended to raise any technical
questions. He responded, "It's not that I feel you are
unqualified; it's rather that I am unqualified to ask you, a
blind person, technical engineering questions." 
     I responded, "It's only fair that you ask technical
questions both to me and to others that you interview today. I am
a teaching assistant of electrical engineering students. We often
deal with electrical engineering issues. If you need to draw to
ask the question, do so and describe to me what you're drawing as
you go along, and I will give you my answer as well as I can." So
a half-hour into the interview I learned that for others it had
been a technical interview from the beginning. I had ten minutes
left in which to prove my merit. When I was done with the
interview, I expected that I wouldn't be hearing from Quacom. But
they did invite me down to the plant. I had four interviews there
that morning, and then we were taken out to lunch--wined and
dined--and told we would have another interview that day only if
we hadn't found a good match with one of our previous
interviewers.
     I was secure in the knowledge that I had found a match, went
ahead to eat a large dessert, and felt very sleepy afterwards. I
came back and went on a tour of the plant. Then they informed me
that the vice president of engineering wanted to interview me at
five o'clock. All I could think of was, "I shouldn't have had
that dessert." I was so sleepy! I recognized that this was an
opportunity because clearly it was not that I hadn't had good
interviews, but that the vice president of engineering wanted to
have a close look at a blind person they might consider hiring. I
took advantage of the opportunity as Rami Rabbi recommends in his
book, Take Charge. (Any of you who are looking for a job please
follow the road map that Rami lays out; it helped me through the
job-search experience.)
     I explained that I thought to do good engineering work I
would like to work with readers ten hours a week and pay them
$7.50 an hour. This would be $3250 a year. I would be willing to
pay it out of my salary; or, if he thought Quacom could afford
it, they could supply the funds in addition to my salary. He said
he would take that into consideration and wrote it into the offer
letter I received several weeks later.
     Now I had a job; I moved down to San Diego and went to work
my first day. I knew that securing the job was just the
beginning. I needed to make my co-workers comfortable with my
disability. Two weeks later I presented a lecture about
disability, the National Federation of the Blind, and positive
attitudes to a hundred engineers. I explained to them that I was
now in their midst and would be asking questions in meetings when
they said, "This line implies..." or "As you can see from this
curve...." So they could expect interruptions any time they made
a presentation and would now know how best to work with me. I
told them that I was proud to be blind and happy to discuss
blindness. I also told them that role models in the National
Federation of the Blind had taught me that blind people can do
anything they put their minds and talents to. I was not a freak
or an incredible blind person; I was an average blind person
doing an average engineering job.
     Before I close, I invite anyone to call me who has questions
about how a blind person can do electrical engineering, how a
blind person can secure Braille text with less than four months
to get the print copy transcribed into Braille, and how a blind
person can read in Braille actual handouts with less than a
week's turnaround by working with volunteer Braille transcribers.
My home number is (619) 587-3975. Thank you very much.


[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Evan J. Kemp, Jr.]

             HAVE CIVIL RIGHTS BECOME GROUP RIGHTS?
                        by Evan Kemp, Jr.

     From the Editor: At the time of this writing (early
February, 1993) Evan Kemp is still Chairman of the U.S. Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission. Whether the Clinton
Administration will ask him to continue in office (and they
probably won't), he has definitely made his mark on the federal
government and taken definite and clear-cut stands. As an
example, he thought that the Jerry Lewis muscular dystrophy
campaign was demeaning to the disabled--and he said so. He did it
knowing that his views were controversial, and he refused to back
down when he was pressured. He thought special awards for
handicapped government employees were insulting, not
complimentary--and he made an issue out of it, advocating that
such awards be abolished. Again he refused to keep silent or
retract.
     More recently Mr. Kemp has made public pronouncements on the
touchy subject of civil rights as opposed to group entitlement.
As with his other hot-potato subjects, he has refused to say that
he didn't mean it and shows no sign of waffling. He expressed his
views on the topic in a speech delivered at the National Press
Club in Washington on November 24, 1992; and whether one agrees
or disagrees, all who give even a moment's thought to the matter
must applaud the behavior of this different breed of federal
bureaucrat. He takes a position; he lays it out; you can
understand it; and when the heat turns on, he doesn't deny that
he said it or claim that he really didn't mean it or was
misunderstood. You can like it or dislike it, but there it is
without apology or equivocation. Ah, that we had more like him!
     His statements at the National Press Club did not, of
course, go unchallenged. Five days after they were made (on
November 29, 1992), the Washington Post took him to task in an
editorial. As in the other cases I have mentioned, he didn't wilt
in the heat. Quite the contrary. On December 8, 1992, he
counterattacked.
     I think Monitor readers will find this exchange not only
interesting but thought-provoking. The questions raised and the
opinions expressed are worth pondering. Here are the November 24
remarks at the National Press Club, the November 29 Washington
Post editorial, and the December 8 Kemp response:

             Have Civil Rights Become Group Rights?
                      by Evan J. Kemp, Jr.

     It's a pleasure to be here at the National Press Club. Most
of you probably watched President-elect Clinton's first press
conference. There the Governor pledged to the nation that his
administration would look like America, that it would reflect the
racial and ethnic diversity of our country. Yet during the
campaign candidate Clinton had made vehement statements opposing
quotas, opposing group preferences.
     That the President-elect used the term "diversity" is not
surprising. Though diversity used to bring to mind the image of
the melting pot, the richness of America, today diversity is a
code word to many for group entitlement, preferences, division--
the very quotas candidate Clinton said he opposed, the very
quotas the American people oppose.
     I have faced this dilemma as Chairman of the U.S. Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission, as did Eleanor Holmes Norton
and Clarence Thomas before me. And it is the dilemma that the new
Chairman of the EEOC will face. I have felt, as will my
successor, the pressure to use our employment discrimination laws
to turn the goal of diversity into a prescription for group
entitlement. President-elect Clinton's promotion of diversity and
opposition to group entitlement must be reconciled. And I can
tell you from experience that this is nearly an impossible job--
nearly impossible because we have not told the truth about what's
really happening in universities, in the work force, in our
cities. We have not told the truth about what words such as
"diversity" and "affirmative action" have come to mean.
     I am glad to have the opportunity to be here today, as my
time as Chairman draws to a close, to reflect on this dilemma, as
well as on what the future may hold.
     Twenty-eight years ago Americans confronted the unequal
status of blacks in this country. The Civil Rights Act of 1964
prohibited discrimination based on race, religion, color,
national origin, and gender in public accommodations and
employment. Later Congress passed the Age Discrimination in
Employment Act. And in 1990, on the twenty-fifth anniversary of
the EEOC, Congress made illegal discrimination on the basis of
disability.
     These laws, based on a strong consensus, a firm belief in
equal opportunity for all, and on the primacy of individual
rights, have brought about unprecedented change. America is far
better for honoring our commitment to the fundamental principle
that all are created equal, that everyone is entitled to the
opportunity to compete for jobs for which they qualify, to gain
those qualifications through education, to travel, to use public
accommodations, and to live wherever they can afford.
     I believe that the civil rights movement of the 1960's
succeeded because we were forced to acknowledge that one group of
Americans had been excluded from these entitlements. Dr. Martin
Luther King, Jr. made us acknowledge that the great American
melting pot had grudgingly, but unfailingly, absorbed refugees
from Europe and Asia but had miserably failed to do the same for
blacks. King's simple but eloquent message stirred and unified
the nation.
     But while King suffered insult, even imprisonment, because
of his race, he did not ask for reparations or for special
privileges. His dream was for a nation where his children--where
all children--would be judged by the content of their characters,
not by the color of their skins. The Civil Rights Act of 1964
realized King's dream of inclusion. The Civil Rights Act of 1964
gave every American the right to be judged by what they can do,
not by someone else's stereotypes. Most recently Americans with
disabilities demanded and won this right.
     Tragically for us all Dr. King's assassination robbed the
civil rights movement of his leadership and his vision. Others
have used his dream of equality to gain power through group
entitlement, promoting distrust and resentment among racial and
ethnic groups. Notions of individual responsibility and the
duties of citizenship have been subsumed by assertions of rights
by virtue of victim status. As author Shelby Steele explains: "We
have taken our power from our history of victimization, which
gave us an enormous moral authority and brought social reforms,
to the neglect of self-reliance and individual initiative."
     Once group entitlement became the driving force, the
consensus of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 began to erode.
Politicians bowed to the politics of pigmentation. The policies
of pigmentation were sold as equal justice for all. Employers
installed quotas and called them "goals and timetables," colleges
lowered entrance standards in the pursuit of fairness, and "race
norming" was used to achieve a balanced work force.
     This was the well from which animosity among groups began to
spring. This animosity can be seen in the charges brought to the
EEOC, in the news from Los Angeles to Crown Heights. What part
did actual or perceived preferences play in the Los Angeles
riots? People are frightened by what columnist William Raspberry
has described as "an increase in disputes, claims and counter-
claims across ethnic, geographical, gender, and economic lines."
     The best advice I can offer my successor is not to give in
to those who would carve up American society along ethnic,
racial, and gender lines. Because if we do, we will tragically
shortchange minority youths by assuming that, because they do not
do as well on a group basis as others, they will never do as
well. We have already lowered standards and expectations. The
individual who does succeed is stigmatized. The others are told
that they cannot hope to compete as individuals, only as members
of a subgroup. Still others get the message, "Don't even try to
compete; success is beyond your reach."
     The focus on groups over individuals has translated into
favoritism toward one group at the expense of another, creating
division and resentment. This country is home to some 150 ethnic
and racial groups. How do we divide the pie? Indeed, what exactly
do we mean by affirmative action? Because if affirmative action
is going to be based on group entitlement and proportional
representation, an impossible task lies ahead for President-elect
Clinton, for the new Chairman of the EEOC, for the entire nation.
And why are we suddenly hearing about "diversity"? I'm afraid
that the term "diversity" is an effort to make permanent what we
had before been assured by the U.S. Supreme Court was temporary.
     I remember remarking to a friend how impressed I had been by
a recent article by Thomas Sowell that examined the use of group
preferences in other countries. I told her, "Now here's a guy who
really understands disability!" Sowell never mentioned disability
in his article. But he talked about the fact that in Sri Lanka,
in India, or wherever preferential treatment has been tried,
those who needed it the least got all the benefits. That is the
reality of preferences with respect to disability as well.
     Entitlements in the guise of quotas have always benefited
those persons with the least severe disabilities, or with what I
like to call the three H's: hemorrhoids, hangnails, and
halitosis. Employers will do the minimum necessary to comply with
the law to meet their quotas. And those with the most serious
disabilities are never used to fill a quota. Moreover,
preferential treatment for persons with disabilities raises other
questions. How would it apply to the hundreds of subgroups of
disabilities? Should the blind be favored over the deaf? Does
hiring one person in a wheelchair excuse a company from
considering a qualified applicant with a learning disability?
     These were among the questions debated in the twelve years
leading up to the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
I was a part of that process, and I can tell you that it wasn't
easy, that not everyone liked the answers. But the debate was an
honest examination of the fears of employers and the desires of
Americans with disabilities. And when we were finished, we had a
strong consensus that the entire nation would benefit from
including Americans with disabilities in the American dream.
     I believe the ADA can and should be a paradigm for the
future of civil rights because it is based on individual rights.
The ADA charges employers to look at an individual's abilities,
rather than disabilities. But, most important, under the ADA
employers are not required to hire an unqualified applicant
simply because that applicant has a disability. The Act ensures
that persons with disabilities who are qualified to do a job will
no longer be locked out by discrimination. But it does not
mandate that employers use statistics and other group-based
numbers to make hiring decisions.
     Would that were true under the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
That legislation certainly was hard fought. Unfortunately, most
of that fight took place behind closed doors, where the politics
of pigmentation could be openly pursued. During the private
debates over the Civil Rights Act of 1991, so-called civil rights
leaders went so far as to plead with the White House for one more
generation of quotas for blacks. And yet publicly they
proclaimed, "This is not a quota bill."
     The fight was over the theory of disparate impact. That
theory came from a highly ambiguous 1971 Supreme Court decision
in Griggs vs. Duke Power Co. It had come to be understood to mean
that neutral employment practices that did not involve
intentional discrimination but disproportionately operated to
exclude blacks would nevertheless be found to violate the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, unless they were justified by "business
necessity." Never mind that the 1964 Act had rejected this
theory. As a result employers came to understand that one way to
avoid lawsuits over whether their hiring practices operated in
this manner was to hire by group preferences, and colleges and
universities changed their admissions policies to do the same.
     Civil rights leaders also became quite attached to this
system. But the rhetoric of civil rights has never reflected that
reality. That was my great frustration during debates over the
Civil Rights Act of 1991. No one involved in those debates should
claim this law was passed with a broad consensus, other than the
stated desire of politicians to "get the quota issue behind us."
But did we get it behind us? Absolutely not. Executive Order
11246, which is the father of quotas and group preferences, was
never even discussed in the two years of debate on the Civil
Rights Act of 1990 and 1991. Some readers of the Act, like the
worried business leaders who have embraced quotas and preferences
to avoid lawsuits and Fred Barnes of the New Republic, believe it
protects them. The EEOC eventually will have to address this
issue, and the Supreme Court ultimately will decide it.
     We need an honest examination of the policies championed by
those well-meaning do-gooders who would protect and patronize the
victim, who would base our civil rights laws on the very
stereotypes they were meant to dispel. We need to get back to
discussions of individual ability and merit versus group
stereotypes and entitlement. We must stop viewing our civil
rights laws as the solutions to educational and economic
disparity.
     And we must return to merit, to values. Values, that much
maligned concept from the recent election. People poked a lot of
fun at the discussion about values. Yet our values have eroded to
the point where studies show that children are cheating more and
more in school and thinking that they are doing nothing wrong.
How can we instill the importance of merit and respect for
individuals if we ignore our values?
     We must begin honest debate about these issues. The
Washington Post took a step in that direction a few months ago in
a provocative series on race. The newspaper sponsored two focus
groups: one all-black and one all-white. The groups then mixed
for a frank discussion about blacks' perceptions of whites and
whites' perceptions of blacks. That discussion became explosive
at times, just as there will be animosity as we focus on topics
that many are afraid to discuss, except among members of their
own group. Senate Democrats were afraid to initiate discussion of
these topics when Clarence Thomas was considered for the Supreme
Court.
     It is time to ask: What does affirmative action mean today?
Is it more than the removal of unlawful or artificial barriers?
Do we owe something special to present-day African-Americans--as
opposed to Korean-Americans, Chinese-Americans, Hispanic-
Americans, Irish-Americans--because blacks have suffered a
history of slavery and discrimination? And, even if we owe
reparations, can that debt ever be repaid in the devalued coin of
racial preferences? In fact, monetary reparations might be far
less costly to society than racial preferences.
     It is time to ask: What does diversity mean today? Is it
inclusion in that melting pot that made our nation great? Is it
divisive preservation of ethnic or racial heritage to the
exclusion of others?
     It is time to ask: Can we afford in today's highly
competitive world to discount the importance of merit in the
guise of fairness?
     This is the challenge we face in the years ahead: to heal a
nation torn asunder by tension among groups. That healing can
begin only when we face the reality of civil rights in America
with honest debate and frank talk. I thank you for giving me the
opportunity to contribute to the debate in this most important of
forums.

     That was what Evan Kemp had to say on November 24. Five days
later the Washington Post responded with the following editorial:


                      Looking Like America

     The Bush Administration's chairman of the Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission thinks he's already caught Bill Clinton in
a contradiction on civil rights. The President-elect has said he
wants his Cabinet and Administration to "look like America," yet
during the campaign he "made vehement statements opposing quotas,
opposing group preferences."
     And there, in case you missed it, is the conflict, the whole
awful thing, as the Bush Administration continues to view the
world. The diversity that the Democratic victor seeks implies the
use of precisely the "preferences" that he says he wants to
avoid, EEOC Chairman Evan Kemp said in a swan song the other day.
No way can the laudable goal be achieved except by suspect means,
no matter how many eminently qualified blacks or women or
Hispanics or members of other such groups you happen to have in
your party or to know; the quota police know quotas when they see
them. "President-elect Clinton's promotion of diversity and
opposition to group entitlement must be reconciled, and I can
tell you from experience that it is nearly an impossible job,"
Mr. Kemp said. He complained that increasingly, since the 1960's,
politicians had abandoned the simple goal of non-discrimination
in favor of a "Politics of pigmentation."
     In fact, the achievement of diversity in an administration
or student body or faculty or work force does not require a
resort to quotas. Even a Reagan-Bush Supreme Court continues to
recognize that there is a middle ground. Mr. Kemp, of course, is
right that a tension exists. Affirmative action does indeed
encompass an inconsistency, as its critics never tire of pointing
out. To overcome the effects of racial and other forbidden forms
of discrimination from the past, precisely those forbidden
factors are required to be taken into account in hiring,
promotions, and admissions in the present; the cure becomes a
reverse dose of the disease.
     The Bush Administration's position has been that the cure
somehow constitutes the greater threat, that affirmative remedies
go too far, entangle the courts, employers, and the like in
precisely the kinds of racial and other offensive labeling that
they are meant to eliminate, and that they ought to be replaced
by a policy of strict neutrality--color-blindness, in the case of
race. But it is government that is blinded and--conveniently from
the standpoint of those who would prefer that it do less--too
often neutralized by such a policy, no one else. Government is
supposed to pretend that race or ethnic origin or sexual
stereotypes are not a factor in situations where everyone else
knows full well that they are.
     Mr. Kemp says that he felt, as will his successor, "the
pressure to use our employment discrimination laws to turn the
goal of diversity into a prescription for group entitlement." No
doubt that's so, but the danger that a policy will be carried too
far is hardly grounds for its abandonment. There's harm--though
not to the same people--in doing too little as well. Mr. Clinton
can have a diverse administration and the country still be safe
from quotas.

     That was the response of the editors at the Washington Post,
and on December 8 Evan Kemp commented as follows: 

             Rights and Quotas, Theory and Practice
                      by Evan J. Kemp, Jr.

     Finally, thanks to the Post's editorial "Looking Like
America," the real debate on civil rights has begun. In my speech
November 24 to the National Press Club--"Have Civil Rights Become
Group Rights?"--I called for such a beginning, for an honest
discussion of the state of civil rights. I emphasized we must
examine the effects of policies--race norming, quotas, goals,
timetables--designed to facilitate affirmative action but
resulting in insidious and pervasive racial, ethnic and gender
preferences. I asked that we take a hard look at what is
producing tensions among groups and fostering division in our
society.
     I have seen how the group approach feeds these tensions. As
a leader of the disability rights movement, I fought for the
guarantee of individual rights in the Americans With Disabilities
Act. I knew group entitlement fails when applied to disability;
employers do the minimum necessary under law to meet quotas and
never fill a quota with individuals with serious disabilities. As
chairman of the EEOC I have found protection on the basis of
group status also fails when applied to race, ethnicity, and
gender.
     President-elect Clinton has recognized these tensions and
resentments, and has been widely praised for doing so. He
courageously told whites and blacks that division is unhealthy
and must be healed. But the challenge to the Clinton
Administration will be to take the next step and examine whether
the prescriptions to cure the disease of racial, ethnic, and
gender discrimination are outdated, even producing a counter-
reaction.
     According to the Post's editorial, President-elect Clinton
"can have a diverse administration and the country still [my
emphasis] be safe from quotas...[T]he achievement of diversity in
an administration or student body or faculty or work force does
not require a resort to quotas."
     In theory, no, but in practice, yes. Even after twelve years
of Reagan-Bush policies, employers large and small, governments,
universities, and nonprofit sector all labor under a regulatory
regime that results in the widespread use of quotas.
     Here's how the system actually works: the Labor Department
requires federal contractors to report the race, ethnic, and
gender composition of its work force. Failure to reflect a
"correct" composition risks loss of federal contracts. Employers
also must grapple with "business necessity" and the Uniform
Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures--the government
regulation that requires businesses to justify any selection
procedure that has a "disparate impact." This means that, if your
payroll doesn't meet the government's prescription for racial,
ethnic, or gender mix, you may be sued.
     Thus the Uniform Guidelines have become the arbiter of
individual merit in American employment. An employer who prefers
high school graduates over non-graduates, for example, would risk
a discrimination charge because of possible differences in
graduation rates among different racial and ethnic groups. But
even when an employer successfully defends the "business
necessity" of employment decisions, the Uniform Guidelines burden
the employer to continue to search for "alternative selection
procedures" producing less of a disparate impact (i.e., producing
equality of results when comparing groups).
     To avoid expensive litigation, prudent employers "hire by
the numbers," ensuring that their work force's "bottom line"
reflects the racial, ethnic, and gender composition of their
labor market. More important, hiring by the numbers satisfies the
Office of Federal Contract Compliance (and for that matter, EEOC
field investigators), even though the Supreme Court has held
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects individuals,
not groups.
     While hiring by the numbers has become de facto civil rights
policy, it begs the question of whose numbers. According to
historian Stephan Thernstrom of Harvard University, there are at
least 106 ethnic groups in the American labor force.
     Here we get to the issue of diversity, which the media treat
as the Holy Grail but which in practice has too often come to
mean group entitlement in the workplace and in our universities.
President-elect Clinton's desire to make his administration "look
like America" is laudable. But how to get there? The Clinton
administration can be expected to report this diversity in terms
of the percentage of race, ethnicity, and gender for some, but
not all, of these groups. Diversity, which used to bring to mind
the image of the melting pot, is today a politically correct call
for group entitlements--the very quotas a majority of Americans
oppose.
     At no point in my November 24 speech did I claim or imply
that "in no way can the laudable goal [of diversity] be achieved
except by suspect means, no matter how many eminently qualified
blacks or women or Hispanics or members of other such groups you
happen to have in your party or to know..." That's what the
Post's editorial said, not what I said or meant. 
     Recently I heard divergent definitions of affirmative action
voiced by two journalists, one black and one white. The black
journalist believed affirmative action means dismantling illegal
barriers to equal opportunity. Her white colleague described
affirmative action as preferential treatment. These insights were
not the political hyperbole or euphemism of Bush-Reagan policy
makers or, for that matter, Post editorial writers. These were
citizens telling the truth as they saw it. And their truths
reveal the lack of consensus, the myth of the middle ground that
characterizes the debate about civil rights.
     Where is the middle ground for which the Post's editorial
yearns? If by middle ground we mean consensus, that can only be
reached by continuing to ask the tough questions--questions such
as: In today's highly competitive world can we afford to discount
the importance of merit in the guise of fairness? Do we owe
something special to present-day African Americans--as opposed to
Korean Americans, Chinese Americans, Hispanic Americans, Irish
Americans--because blacks have suffered a history of slavery and
discrimination? And if the answer is yes, can that debt ever be
repaid in the devalued coin of racial preference? We must not be
satisfied with facile or simplistic answers that bear little
relationship to the reality of the workplace, the universities,
indeed, of society as a whole.
     The incoming administration, as well as the Post editorial
page, must face that fact that, if diversity is used to mask a
regime of quotas, we will tear the fabric of this nation along
ethnic, racial, and gender lines. Surely none of us wants that.


[PHOTO: Jillian Brooks stands outside with skis. CAPTION: Jillian
Brooks is an avid skiier.]

    TOWARD A MORE TOLERANT WORLD: THE PRICE OF DISCRIMINATION
                        by Jillian Brooks

     From the Associate Editor: The April, 1991, issue of the
Braille Monitor included an article by Jillian Brooks of Redding,
California, describing her struggle with Redding Radiation, a
medical facility that had fired her because of her blindness. The
resulting case has taken years to settle, but finally, in the
spring of 1992, it was settled resoundingly in her favor.
Jillian, who learned about the Federation in the course of
fighting this battle and who has subsequently helped to organize
and become the president of the Shasta County Chapter of the
National Federation of the Blind of California, told the entire
story to the California affiliate at its 1992 convention last
November. The following article is taken from her remarks. Here
it is: 
 
     In the sessions yesterday and today we have talked a lot
about acquiring the alternative techniques that blind people need
to succeed. In the student division meeting we talked about ways
of getting grants and scholarships and discussed strategies for
finding jobs. We've also talked about reasonable accommodation on
the job and what you can do to make your job go better. But
sometimes it doesn't go better; things go wrong, and you get
fired. What do you do then? You have learned all the things you
needed to; you have done everything right; you are a qualified
employee. But you get fired because you're blind and for no other
reason. We've all been discriminated against many times, but this
is a big one. I have been fortunate because I have only been
fired once. My poor sister has been fired eight or nine times
because of vision. But the feelings I had when it happened to me
were very similar to those I felt when I learned that my father
had died and when my mother died. It was a horrible, horrible
feeling, and it will never leave me. I certainly have empathy for
anyone else who goes through it. 
     I am an x-ray technologist, and I have worked in the field
for a good twelve years. Several years ago I moved up to Redding,
California, and bought a home. I got a job with Redding
Radiology, and I worked there for all of four and a half days.
Then I was fired because I was considered a safety hazard. When I
was being interviewed for the job, I told them that I had a
severe vision problem and that I would be using a magnifying
glass. I think that's a pretty reasonable accommodation. I pulled
it out to show the interviewer, and she said it was no problem.
But she fired me the day she saw me use it. She just took me into
her office and said, "There is no place in the medical profession
for someone using a magnifying glass." 
     I asked her to check with previous employers, who I knew
would tell her that there was no problem, but she wasn't about to
listen to me. I hadn't met the Federation yet, so I didn't know
about the right to reasonable accommodation. I tried to tell her
about my closed circuit television system that I could bring in
to use if she didn't like the magnifying glass. Her response was,
"I'm sorry about your magnifying glass and your reading machine,
but I just don't think that our doctors would be accommodating to
that idea." 
     I felt humiliated and helpless. I had just come to Redding
and bought a home, and Redding Radiology was the only game in
town in x-ray work. I felt panicky and desperate; I wanted to beg
for my job. I started to cry, and she just turned around and
walked out of her office. That was the end of that, so I walked
home. 
     This is where my story really starts. I got home and called
my sister who lives in New York. She told me that she had a co-
worker and good friend named Rami Rabby. She remembered that he
was a member of an organization of blind people. She couldn't
quite come up with the name, but she came close enough for me to
call telephone information and get the listing for the National
Federation of the Blind of California. When I called, the first
person I spoke to was Linda Milliner. To talk with someone who
understood, who knew what I was feeling, who had been there made
all the difference in the world to me. No one in Redding
understood. Then, after talking with Linda, I met Sharon Gold,
President of the NFB of California. After that it was look out
world! 
     The first thing I noticed in talking with Sharon was that
she wasn't mad at my employer. She explained that most people are
afraid of blindness, and often a little education will bring them
around to rational behavior. She seemed to think that, if we
could begin a dialogue and allay their fears, we could straighten
out the problem. She was prepared to approach them in a very
reasonable, adult way. She didn't come storming out, making
accusations. But the staff wouldn't even return her calls. Can
you imagine not returning Sharon's phone calls? And of course
they wouldn't talk to me; I had been terminated, and that was
that. On the day I was fired I had been warned by a co-worker not
to take any action against Redding Radiology because they were so
powerful. She said, "If you do, I guarantee that you will never
work in this town again." That really scared me. I had bills and
a new house, and I was devastated. 
     Sharon and I began working together. She wrote letters on my
behalf. You have read Sharon's letters; they are impressive,
darned impressive, and I think the Redding people decided that
this just might be someone they would have to take seriously. I
have to say that we went through hell together. I couldn't sleep
at night, and she was on the phone with me at all hours. She
stuck with me the whole way. 
     There were a few funny things that happened. The first time
we met face-to-face with representatives from Redding Radiology,
we got there before any of them were in the room. Sharon, Sheryl
Pickering, and I came in, and Sharon is such a take-charge woman
that she sat down at the head of the table in their own
conference room and made them sit along the sides. 
      I filed complaints with the California Fair Employment
Practices Commission and the United States Department of Health
and Human Services Office of Civil Rights. This was before
enactment of the Americans with Disabilities Act, but Redding
Radiology had received Medicare and MediCal funds, so it was
bound to comply with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act. We
kept trying to resolve the problems, but they weren't interested
in negotiating. To hear them talk, you would never have known
that I had been doing this work for fifteen years. 
     Finally, on the day before the statute of limitations was to
expire, we filed a lawsuit. No one could accuse us of having
jumped at the chance to sue these people. We tried everything to
get my job back. They offered me a job in a darkroom, developing
film at half my normal wages. Then they offered me $10,000 to
drop the suit, but they wouldn't give me my job back. Never
during the negotiations did they explore the question of how I
might do my job. To this very day they have never checked my
references or talked with anyone from my past jobs about how I do
my work. They had made their decision, and they had no intention
of reconsidering it. 
     So, as I say, we were forced to sue. We filed suits against
Redding Radiology, both the partnership and the corporation, and
against each of the thirteen doctors individually. We sued in the
federal court and in the state court. Those suits were a positive
action, but there were negative things going on at the same time.
I was unemployed. There was no money coming in, and I was
ashamed. I don't know why; they were the ones who should have
been ashamed, but they made me feel like a bumbling Mr. Magoo.
And all I wanted to do was to earn my living in the field I had
worked in for so long. 
     In preparing our case, I learned early on that it was very
important for me to attend as many of the depositions as
possible. I discovered that people actually lie in depositions! I
was shocked to discover that. So I figured that, if they were
going to lie, they would have to do it to my face. And that's
what I did: I made them look me in the eye while they were
telling lies about what had happened. 
     During this time I tried hard to be positive. I
concentrated, for example, on the Dress for Success principle.
One day I appeared at a deposition wearing a black linen suit
with immaculate white cuffs. I looked very chic and professional.
I walked into the attorney's office where one of the doctors was
being deposed. I had worked for this doctor, so he had known me
although it had been a year. When I came in, the doctor jumped up
and walked over to me holding out his hand and said, "Hello, you
must be Miss Brooks's attorney." 
     I shook his hand and said, "No way, Dr. Stephens, I'm
Jillian Brooks." He stood there shaking my hand, and I could just
see the fear on that man's face. 
     Then he took his glasses out of his pocket and put them on
saying, "Oh I'm sorry; I didn't have my glasses on." 
     I said, "Better watch out, Dr. Stephens; you could lose your
job for something like that." You can see that during this time I
had my little victories. I had never been deposed before, but in
this case I was deposed for more than sixteen hours. I must say
that I enjoyed the fact that at the end of each day of my
deposition it was the attorney and not me that was sweating. They
kept trying to find some indication of things that I couldn't
see, that I couldn't do; but they couldn't. They even brought in
an ophthalmologist at $500 an hour to testify against me. They
would say to him, "Could she read the print on the cards,
Doctor?" 
     "Well she could, but she would have to use a magnifying
glass to do so." 
     "What size print could she read?" 
     "She could read the very smallest print, but she read it
haltingly." I guess I just hadn't read it fast enough for him. 
     I was very depressed during this time although I did begin
to make friends in the National Federation of the Blind. I
started learning. I remember Sharon's telling me, "Jillian, your
problem is that you don't yet know you are blind." And she was
right; I didn't know I was blind, but slowly I began to learn
that it is respectable to be blind, and I learned that we have
power. It is the brotherhood and sisterhood of this organization
that empower us. I like the idea that, if it is necessary, we can
mobilize tens of thousands of people to make telephone calls. 
     As I say, I was very depressed. I was told to keep looking
for a job, but Redding Radiology was associated with every job in
the town. I would respond to ads in the newspaper with my resume,
and nobody would call me. Being unemployed got to be very
demoralizing. As we got closer to the trial date, I got
increasing pressure to settle. 
     During the summary judgment trial I was declared a qualified
handicapped employee. That was a very large victory because
Redding Radiology was trying to make the case that I wasn't
qualified to do the job or that I wasn't really blind or that I
wasn't blind enough. But the closer we got to the trial, the more
pressure I felt to settle, both from my attorney and from the
other side. We were heading into federal court, where I was going
to be facing a jury, which meant that I would have to convince
every juror of the justice of my position. There was always the
chance that one of those people would discriminate against me
just as the people at Redding Radiology had done. But I wanted
the trial because I wanted the written victory. I wanted a
precedent that would convince people that they couldn't kick
blind people around. 
     The whole thing became more and more stressful. At about
Christmas time they offered me $150,000 to settle the case. I
thought about it and then turned them down because I was feeling
a little bullied by them. But I agonized over my decision. Then,
after the New Year, Redding Radiology's attorneys--which they
kept hiring till you wouldn't believe how many there were--
decided that they had better do some depositions of their own.
There had already been ten to fifteen depositions, but most of
them were done by my attorney. Of course they had to depose
Sharon, which was pretty interesting. 
     They finally contacted my previous employer, my supervisor
Yvonne in an urgent care clinic in the Bay area. I had also
worked with her in the emergency room at Mills Hospital. Redding
had been claiming that I was a safety hazard, that I couldn't
perform in an emergency. My supervisor's testimony was that for
seven years the only time she had worked with me had been in
emergencies--five years of emergency room work and another two
years in an urgent-care walk-in clinic. She assured them that I
had functioned well. When asked how I did things, she said, "Well
she'd look real close at them. She'd use her magnifying glass,
but she did everything fine. I trusted her absolutely."
     The next day their attorneys offered me $180,000. I called
Yvonne and said, "Thank you very much for your $30,000
deposition. I owe you lunch." 
     We were now about three weeks from the trial date, and I was
under incredible pressure. This had been going on for two years
and a couple of months. I had had enough. I wanted it behind me.
I needed to get on with my life. My brother-in-law, who is a
physician in New York, said "You should move from state to state
suing everybody who fires you." I don't want to do that. I don't
ever, ever want to sue anybody again! 
     So eventually we did settle for $180,000. Then they came and
said, "You have to sign this gag order that says you can't talk
about the case." 
     And I said, "No way!" I really wanted to have my day to tell
people what had happened as I am doing right now. I wanted to
tell you guys this story. So Redding Radiology just threw up
their hands and settled anyway, and here I am. 
     I want to conclude by saying two more things: I love the
National Federation of the Blind. I am now the president of a
chapter. I am probably not the best president; I am something of
a social butterfly, but let me tell you that I love you. I love
what this organization stands for, I am here for the duration,
and I care. The other thing I want to say is that three weeks ago
on Friday I got a job doing x-ray work in Redding.


[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Gary Wunder.]

              MOBILITY: WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IS IT?
                         by Gary Wunder

     From the Associate Editor: Gary Wunder is a member of the
Board of Directors of the National Federation of the Blind and
President of the NFB of Missouri. He is also a thoughtful and
sensitive human being. He spoke at the 1992 Parents of Blind
Children Seminar, which took place the day before the NFB
convention in Charlotte, North Carolina. Here is what he had to
say as it appeared in the December, 1992, issue of Future
Reflections, the magazine published by the Parents of Blind
Children Division of the National Federation of the Blind: 

     Priscilla Ferris was just talking about people
misunderstanding what dog guides do. It strikes me that there is
a theme here that is appropriate for the cane user as well: Any
time a blind person is with somebody who is sighted, his or her
mobility is considered by many people as necessarily the sighted
person's responsibility. This poses a problem when one is, as I
am, the blind parent of a sighted child. 
     My daughter was four years old when we were out walking one
day. There have been times when my daughter knew that I knew
everything and times when she was sure I knew nothing. We were
going through one of those "I don't think he knows very much"
stages. Whether that happened because of something that somebody
at preschool said to her about having a blind father, or because
it just happens in the development of children, I don't know. But
we were out walking one day. I've always walked with a cane, and
I've always taken care of Missy--never had one accident
whatsoever. But when we came to the curb, she said, "Stop, Daddy,
stop!"
     I was surprised, and I said, "Missy, I know to stop."
     "How do you know?" said Missy.
     "My cane falls off the curb," I said.
     "Oh, yeah. Well, don't go, Daddy; don't go."
     "Missy, I'm not going to go."
     "Well, you can't see the light."
     "No, I can't see the light, but I can tell when to go by the
traffic. Do you know what I mean?"
     "Huh-uh."
     "Well, when the parallel traffic is going, it's safe for me
to go. When the perpendicular traffic is going, it's not safe. Do
you know what I mean?"
     "No, what's perpendicular?"
     So I explained to her that parallel is that traffic moving
on my right and perpendicular is those cars sitting out here in
front of me. We waited a while, and Missy said, "Go, Daddy, go."
I said, "Missy, the traffic in front of me is still going. It's
not safe."
     She said, "I know. I just wanted to see did you know." 
     So we crossed the street when both the light and the traffic
changed. No sooner did we get across than this woman bent down
and gave my daughter a hug. She said, "Oh, you do such a good job
with him." So, again, it's the public misperception that it's the
dog or the child with the blind person who knows everything, and
it's the blind person who is necessarily dependent in travel.
That is wrong.
     I can't overemphasize the importance of independence when it
comes to having a positive self-concept. Whether that
independence is used to go down to the store to get a loaf of
bread or whether it lets you do something as trivial as getting
up and walking off in a huff when you're having an argument, the
ability to be mobile is terribly important. The difficult thing
for blind people is that we learn dependence at a very early age,
but we are not likely to grow out of it as other people do.
Children at a year and a half or two years old are dependent,
whether they are blind or sighted. Parents hold their hands every
place they go. The trouble is that at six or eight years of age
many of our blind children are still attached to their parents'
hands when walking. And while on the one hand blind children
resent that and wish for freedom, on the other hand they mostly
come to think that this abnormal dependency is a pretty normal
thing for blind kids.
     When I was growing up, you didn't get a cane when you were
six or four or three years old. The cane was a thing that my
parents put off for as long as they could, and they did it with
the support of educators. For them the cane was a symbol. It
transformed me from being their blind son--which was okay--to
being somebody who might grow up to be a blind man. That wasn't
okay. So I didn't see a cane until I was about eleven years old.
     When I was in elementary school, I was taught to read and
write Braille efficiently, but my mobility was something else. I
was one of the kids who formed a giant human train whenever we
went anywhere. We all got into a big line, a line which was led
by a sighted teacher. We all followed along. Because blind people
were necessarily less mobile than everybody else, we got to go to
lunch early. We were the first in line, the first out to recess,
and the first back from recess. We were always in the train.
     Your blind children don't have to do that today because more
and more people are accepting the fact that, if you give a blind
child a cane, he or she can learn to move around independently. I
thought it was a big deal when I invented a technique that would
let me walk around the block. It was called "slide one foot along
the curb." I understand now that I was not the first person to
invent it, but at the time I thought about marketing it to other
blind people. It seemed like a really good idea to me. It was a
lot more fun than being hooked up to somebody else all the time.
     I remember in high school playing lots of tricks and using
gimmicks because I didn't have mobility skills. I remember being
told that, if you had to use a cane at all, you used it only when
you were outside. If you used it inside, you'd be bound to trip
your classmates. That would be a terrible thing to do; it would
be irresponsible. Besides, who wanted to look any blinder than
they had to? That was the line I was given and believed. So I
remember in high school figuring out how long each period was and
trying to arrange things so I could strike up a conversation with
a fellow student just before the bell rang--especially if the
student with whom I struck up the conversation happened to be
going to the same class as I. Now it's fine to have interesting,
stimulating conversations with fellow students; but it's not fine
to believe that that's what you have to do to get from one class
to the next. Again, the reason I did it was that it wasn't
considered acceptable to use a cane indoors. A cane was an
outside thing.
     At first I carried the cane with a certain growl, believing,
like most people around me, that my mobility was really someone
else's responsibility. Most of the time I could find somebody to
hang on to. The cane was only there for times when I couldn't
force that responsibility on somebody else. I got lots of support
for this attitude.
     As I said earlier, for a long time my family resisted
letting me get and use the cane. They always guided me from one
place to another. It wasn't easy to change this when I got to be
eleven and was finally introduced to a cane. My brothers and
sisters just assumed that somebody in the family ought to have
hold of me--if not one of them, then my mother or my father was
supposed to hold onto me. We were taught that mobility was a very
complex and highly scientific thing that had to be taught by the
mobility professionals. If there were no mobility professionals
around, well of course you had to hang on. 
     What's worse is that we were taught that route travel
(memorizing how to get from point A to point B) was the only form
of independent travel a blind person could be taught. If ever
points C and D were to be introduced into that route, the
mobility specialist would have to be notified at least two or
three weeks before the new route was needed. It didn't sound too
exciting to me.
     I learned many things about mobility when I started meeting
blind people who were independent travelers. I learned some of my
best mobility tips from a blind guy who asked me at midnight if I
knew how to get from building A to building B on the college
campus. I said that I didn't, and the mobility instructor wasn't
coming until the next Thursday. My blind friend said that he
thought he could teach me how to get there now, so we went out
and learned it. He showed me how to use things like trash cans
and telephone poles as landmarks. (The mobility professionals had
always taught me to avoid those things.) What amazed me most,
however, about this experience was that I was being taught by
someone who was blind. And he was teaching me that it wasn't so
important to learn a slick routine to get from A to B, but that I
should learn general skills that would let me travel safely.
     There's a tremendous difference between route travel and
truly independent travel. It's strange that it took somebody who
was blind to teach me that. But I'm glad, too, because I knew
that the guy who was blind didn't have professional
certification. He was just a blind man who was looking for
something to do at midnight and figured he could help another
guy. That was wonderful because, at that time in my life, I
didn't believe that blind people could teach other blind people
anything. I thought mobility was a highly technical skill, and it
isn't.
     I remember going for my first job interview. I wanted a
summer job, so I went to the Kansas City Association for the
Blind, which is a sheltered workshop. That summer I put pins
together and put washers on bolts and did all kinds of things
that made me a decent little stash of money for a college
student. My parents had never seen me travel without the benefit
of a travel instructor, so my mother decided she was going to
have me followed. She figured that I would catch her if she did
it herself (I'm not sure why she thought this), so she asked my
cousin to follow me. My cousin was about eighteen years old at
the time and rather scatterbrained. She was a nice enough kid but
couldn't stay on task (that's the term we use for it now). So I
got on the city bus and rode from South Kansas City to Downtown
Kansas City, and while she wasn't looking, I got up and off the
bus.
     It wasn't until two or three blocks later that she realized
I wasn't there anymore. She got off, and--not knowing where I was
going, only that it had something to do with the blind--she went
to a phone book. The first thing she saw was the Bureau for the
Blind. She went over to that office, where she and a counselor
discussed what a wonderful kid I was while I continued on my way-
-unaccompanied--to the Kansas City Association for the Blind. So
it didn't do my folks a lot of good to have me followed, but they
tried. 
     It took me years to come to see my cane as a symbol of
independence. For a long time I regarded it as something to be
used only when I couldn't foist my mobility off onto somebody
else. 
     I want to tell you the story of what broke me of that
attitude. I started dating hot and heavy when I went to college.
I enjoyed it immensely. One night I went out to dinner with a
young woman. Because my date was sighted, I left my cane at home
and went sighted guide. (I thought this was the way that the
world worked if you were blind.) We had liver and onions, and as
I was cutting my liver and engaging this woman in conversation (I
was showing her how witty I was), the plate moved closer and
closer to the edge of the table and suddenly plopped off into my
lap. Well, I was in something of a bind, and I was terribly
embarrassed. When my date asked if I wanted her to walk me home
so I could change my clothes, I already felt bad enough without
also accepting the humiliation of having her walk me home, so I
said "No, I'll be fine." I had to walk six blocks home without a
cane. There were several four-lane, lighted street crossings, and
I didn't like that very much.
     After this experience it seemed to me that carrying a cane
was probably a very good thing. (I also learned to be a little
more careful in cutting liver.) For the first time I realized
that I had to be responsible for my own mobility. I don't know
why that was such a hard concept to understand. I guess that,
after years of being taken care of by people--parents, sisters,
brothers, friends, teachers, etc.--who had assumed that my
mobility was their responsibility, I had come to consider that
attitude just normal.
     Priscilla talked a lot about guide dogs and canes. I used a
guide dog for a time when I went to college. I enjoyed using a
dog, so I don't have a thing to say against using them. However,
I want to give you a couple of precautions which I think
Priscilla would go along with. When I got my guide dog, I did so
because I had some trouble with orientation. I thought, somewhere
deep down inside, that I would be able to give a dog the command,
"Go to 3402 West 52nd Street," and the dog would figure out for
me how many blocks south and west I wanted to go. This didn't
happen. In fact, I would say that the dog often aggravated my
orientation problems because I couldn't look for the landmarks
which were so obvious to me with a cane. I had to keep track in
my head of where we were. The dog didn't let me get close to the
trash cans or the telephone poles because he knew that was the
surest way to get a leash correction. But with a cane I could use
these landmarks. In some respects with a dog I had to know more
about my surroundings in order to travel.
     The second thing I thought the dog would solve for me was a
certain tension I felt when traveling with a cane. It used to
bother me to be clipping along, and suddenly the cane would hit
something. I would have only half a step in which to react. With
only that much distance, you better travel tense; you have to be
on your guard and quick to react.
     It wasn't until I came to an NFB meeting and somebody said,
"Your cane is a couple of feet too short," that I realized that I
didn't have to react in half a step; that I didn't have to walk
with my elbow locked and my arm straight--try holding your arm
straight out in front of you for very long. This is what the
specialists teach because they say that in order to be a
courteous blind person you have to have a short cane that only
comes up to your breast bone. Nonsense. Now I have a cane that
comes up to my shoulder; sometimes I use one that comes up to the
tip of my nose. The length of a cane has nothing to do with
courtesy; it has to do with good use. I like traveling with a
cane much better now that I get a step and a half or two of
warning. I don't find travel to be the ordeal that I did before.
With proper advice I wouldn't have had to go through any of that.
     There are a number of appropriate mobility techniques for
blind people to use from time to time. Sometimes people frame
mobility issues as, "I'm fer it or I'm agin it." Do you use a
sighted guide or don't you? Do you use diagonal cane technique or
don't you? Do you use the pencil grip or don't you? Do you use a
collapsible cane or a straight, rigid one? There are times and
places for all of these things. The issue is to figure out when
you're using a technique because it truly is the most convenient
and appropriate for what you are trying to do, and when you're
using it as a cop-out. If I want to have a conversation with one
of you and we are cutting through this convention crowd, it may
be that I will take your arm or you will take mine--whether
you're sighted or blind. We do that because it is convenient and
appropriate for what we want to do--have a conversation and stay
together in a crowd. So sometimes, yes, that means that I may use
a person as a sighted guide. But do I give him or her
responsibility for my mobility? Not anymore.


[PHOTO/CAPTION: Pictured here (left to right) are Carl Jacobson,
Joanne Wilson, and Ramona Walhof.]

                   WHAT DO EMPLOYERS LOOK FOR?

     From the Associate Editor: With blind people in this country
still facing a jobless rate of more than seventy percent, the Job
Opportunities for the Blind (JOB) Program, which is conducted
jointly by the National Federation of the Blind and the United
States Department of Labor, continues to be a vital service to
many, many blind people. Each year at our National Convention
hundreds of people crowd into the meeting area assigned for the
annual JOB seminar. One of the panels on the agenda of the 1992
seminar in Charlotte was a group of three employers who also
happen to be blind themselves. They were Ramona Walhof, President
of CMS, Inc., which does community outreach and fund-raising;
Joanne Wilson, Executive Director of the Louisiana Center for the
Blind, an adult rehabilitation center; and Carl Jacobson, the
manager of a two-hundred-thirty-seat cafeteria in the state
office building in New York City. They were asked to address the
question, "What does the employer look for in a new employee?"
Here is what they had to say: 

                          Ramona Walhof

     The previous three speakers were all NFB scholarship
winners. The people I hire are not scholarship winners and are
not likely to be. I say this not to downgrade my people--most of
them are great people--but because so often we feature those who
have succeeded in outstanding fields. But that doesn't mean that
people aren't successful if they aren't top of the line--if they
aren't A students through four or six or eight years of college. 
     When I was interviewing for job after job after job, my
perspective was somewhat different from what it is now that I am
an employer. Job-seekers are often advised to do research on the
companies they are interested in working for. That's not a bad
idea; go do it. But some things are generally true about
employers. You will hear some things today from all three of us
that are quite similar. Obviously there are also differences. We
run different kinds of businesses, and we have different
personalities. 
     Employers are all unique individuals. If you remember that
and treat us like individuals, you will get much better mileage.
If a person treats me courteously, I am much more likely to
respond positively and warm up to him or her. Sometimes I hire
one person out of twenty-five. That is tough competition.
Personality will probably make the difference among the top few
candidates. Sometimes I hire one person out of one: I am just
hoping that a person comes along who can do the job. That is a
different situation, but as a job applicant you won't necessarily
know which is which. 
     Let me say a word about the kinds of hiring I have done. I
was the Director of the Idaho Commission for the Blind. I hired
both blind and sighted people for clerical, counseling, teaching,
and accounting positions. I have run a bakery, so I've hired in
food service. I now run a fund-raising, community outreach,
public relations business, and I have four offices and hire
managers, secretaries, and telephone workers. I don't do all the
hiring myself. Sometimes other people do it, and I am going to
support the managers in the decisions they make. I tell you all
this because my perspective has changed after doing so much
hiring. Yet, except for the actual skills needed to do each job,
I am mostly looking for the same characteristics in most of these
people. 
     Where do I look for employees? It partly depends on the
position. I look in the newspaper; I run ads. The employer has to
work the hardest when it's a newspaper ad. I have to answer the
phone and schedule interviews. I try to weed people out on the
phone if I can. When you run an ad, a lot of people come in who
really aren't interested in the job or who don't qualify or who
won't be reliable in coming to work. So if I can weed these
people out, I will. On the other hand, if somebody is interested
and wants an interview, I'm not going to refuse. However, I begin
learning about the applicant immediately, while we are still on
the phone. If the person doesn't want to do it the way I want it
done, that's a negative. If they say, "I want to come in and fill
out an application," I will say, "That's fine. Let me schedule an
interview." 
     "Oh no, I don't need an interview; I just want to fill out
an application"--Bad! I will remember that person, and it won't
help them. 
     If I say that I can interview the applicant at 2:30 in the
afternoon or 7:30 in the evening and ask if one of those times
would be convenient, I do not want a big long speech about why
neither time will work. I want a yes or a no. We're doing
business. Treat me like a business person; I'll treat you the
same. 
     We look through Job Services, the regular employment office.
Job Services sometimes doesn't think telemarketing provides
wonderful jobs, but a lot of people like it. We don't get as many
people as we would like through Job Services, but I am always
glad when I get one. They generally know what to expect.
Sometimes they want to tell me how to run the business (I won't
hire them), but very often the people referred by Job Services
are good. So if anyone is looking for the kind of jobs I am
hiring for--bookkeeper, secretary, or telemarketer--I am likely
to take that person seriously. 
     Private agencies--employers can't afford to hire entry-level
people through private agencies. I have hired through these
services, and for some jobs it is a good way to go, but generally
for the kind of people I'm hiring I can't afford it, and I can't
find the kind of people who want to work for me. 
     I recruit through people who work for me, people I know,
friends of friends, people I have known before. There are lots of
ways to get contacts on the job. 
     What am I looking for? I want you to know what your goal on
the job is. I may ask you what kinds of things are important to
you in a job. If you haven't thought about it, shame on you!
You've got to be able to tell me the atmosphere is most important
or the skills are. As an employer I want you to like this job. I
am prepared to invest a considerable amount of time in hiring and
training you, so I want you to stick. If you haven't thought
about that question, the chances are you will mess up the answer,
and it won't help you. 
     What kinds of things can you do? What have you done before?
What are your skills? If I don't believe you, I will test you. In
fact, I give a reading and writing test to every person I hire. I
don't tell them that's what I'm doing, but I do. How? I ask them
to fill out an application form. I get applications with
misspelled words and illegible handwriting all the time.
     You tell me you are a blind person and you can't sit down
and fill out an application form. But virtually every employer to
whom you will apply has an application form for you to fill out.
How are you going to do it? Figure it out. Before you pick it up,
you had better know how you intend to complete it. Are you going
to ask someone in the office to fill it out for you? That's okay;
I would be glad to have someone help you fill it out if you come
in the way we ask you to. Are you going to bring a reader? Are
you going to take the form away with you? Frankly, I'll be more
impressed if you can get it filled out on the spot, but I will
let you do it that way. Above all, I want you to get it done and
not whine and make me a speech about why you can't do it or why
it should be done some other way or what the law requires. Just
get it done! 
     If you tell me you're not interested in pay, then I won't
believe you. If I don't talk about it (I may forget), ask me
about it in a straight, businesslike way. Don't tell me, "I need
to make $6 an hour because I have three kids." I care about that,
but as an employer I can't afford to take it into consideration.
I want to know what you can do for the business, not what the
business can do for you. I know what it can do for you; I've been
hiring people for years, and I know how much we can do: we can
pay you; we can give you a good solid job; we can supervise you;
we can train you till your skills get better. I need to know what
you can do for me; are you worth the money I will be paying you?
So don't tell me, "I need to make this much money" because I'll
probably tell you that this isn't the right job for you. I'll be
gentle about it, but that's what I'll probably say. So be direct
and factual, but express an interest in salary. I know you care,
and if it isn't enough, say so. It's not my fault; maybe you
qualify for a better job. Maybe you don't; it doesn't really
matter. This isn't the right job for you. 
     Dress appropriately for the job. You know what job you are
applying for, so dress appropriately for that job. If you don't,
I am likely to conclude that you will not do so when you are an
employee. 
     Your personality is important. I want some sparkle, some
imagination. I don't want you to write me a novel during the
interview, but come in with something to say. I ask almost every
applicant I hire to tell me something about themselves--every
employer does. Have something ready to say. If you say, "Well,
what do you want to know?" you have wasted a good chance. I want
to know what you think is important about you.
     I want to see some indication that you can think. You must
be able to read and write, but you must also be able to respond
to the questions I ask you in the interview. That doesn't mean
that you can't ask me questions or volunteer information. But if
I ask you how old you are and you tell me that your mother was
born in Council Bluffs, Iowa, it doesn't help. It doesn't mean
you won't get another chance. People make this particular mistake
all the time, but try to form the habit of answering the
questions you are asked. 
     I am out of time. Remember that employers are human. They
will respond to you as human beings, blind or sighted. Blindness
is important, but it is only one characteristic. 

                          Joanne Wilson

     I want to begin by telling you a story that I read in The
Reader's Digest years ago when I was in high school. There was an
elderly lady who was the envy of all her friends because somehow
she always managed to hire the best cooks and maids and
chauffeurs. Her friends demanded to know how she always found
such good help. She told them that she employed the broom test.
She explained, "I take a broom and lay it across my threshold.
When the person I'm considering hiring walks in to the interview,
if he steps over the broom, I won't hire him. But if he picks it
up and props it in the corner, I'll hire him." That story had a
great effect on me. 
     It taught me that, although it is important for us as blind
people to have the skills to do the job and also the work habits
(Braille and computer literacy, for example) to put them into
effect, it is even more important to remember the other factors
that influence whether or not we get jobs, the more intangible
things that employers look for. These are the things I want to
talk about this afternoon because after I find out that an
applicant is qualified and has the work habits I need, these are
the things I look for. One of these is initiative, and that's
what the broom story is talking about. The people who picked up
the broom demonstrated that they could look ahead, see what
needed to be done, and then do it. I look for that quality in
employees.
     Another thing I look for is loyalty. I believe that if you
are going to work for someone, you ought to have some respect for
and loyalty to your employer. Otherwise the job isn't going to
work out. I can tell you that people who come into an interview
and begin complaining about their bosses and the people they work
with don't get much of a chance with me. I am not interested in
hiring someone who cannot come to an interview and demonstrate
some loyalty to their current employer. 
     I want to say something about dress. I have had people
interview for the job of representing the Louisiana Center for
the Blind with the public and potential employers, and they came
in looking like slobs. We all know that appropriate dress is
important, and a significant part of a person's appearance is
body language. I have had people come in who are dressed
properly, but they slouch in the chair or they fold their arms in
tight and are closed in and nervous. I usually let applicants
wait for a little while out in the lobby. During that time my
office manager and other staff members are sizing them up and
checking out their appearance, posture, and body language. All
this is especially important for blind people because the general
public doesn't think we have the capacity to take care of
ourselves and make a good appearance. 
     Another intangible thing I look for is common sense.
Sometimes this is called good judgment. This is very important to
me, but I haven't yet figured out how to teach it to my students.
I test for this in job interviews by describing a situation and
asking the person how he or she would deal with it. I can usually
tell from what they say whether or not they have common sense and
good judgment. I have had people come into an interview and
listen to me spend fifteen minutes explaining how important it is
that we not overprotect blind people and that we teach them
independence. Then I say, "How would you handle this situation:
You are standing out in the lobby, and one of the students comes
along and says `Mabel, would you please take this fifty cents and
get me a Coke from across the street?'" And if they tell me,
after all my sermon, that they would go get that Coke, the
interview is at an end. 
     Mrs. Walhof said that she gives a little literacy test. I do
too. I look very carefully at the resumes and applications of the
people who come to us looking for jobs. If there is even one
misspelled word on those documents, that applicant doesn't get
the job, no matter what else that resume says. I figure that, if
a person can't do a good job on a resume after weeks to prepare
it, he or she is not going to do a good job for me. 
     Another thing I look for is how applicants answer the
questions I ask them. Do they have the answers. I once had a
blind person interview for a job. He started worrying out loud
about how he was going to manage to get to work. When I saw that
I was going to have to work with him on that problem, I decided
that I didn't want to hire him. 
     Just the other day I had a sighted person who applied for a
job. I told her she would have to come in promptly at 2:00. And
immediately she began fretting about how she would get her lunch
in, since she finished her other job at 1:45. I started helping
her think about carrying a sandwich, and then I thought, "Wait! I
shouldn't be doing this." That ended the interview. If you expect
that the employer is going to take the time to convince you
there's a way for you to do the job, you may as well forget it. 
     I also look for a sense of humor in my employees. Humor is
an extremely important part of the rehabilitation process. It is
also an important part of getting along with fellow staff members
and not taking ourselves too seriously. Work on developing your
capacity to see the funny side of things. Laugh at your boss's
jokes; it means a lot in an interview. 
     One last point is references. Please don't just put down
people's names as references without checking them out. I always
check references. If I call to talk about an applicant and the
reference sounds half dead and not at all enthusiastic, that
tells me a lot. Make sure that the people you ask don't just
agree to have you use their names but are people you can count on
to say really peppy, enthusiastic things about you. 
     I'd sum up what I have been saying with this: Not only do
you have to have the skills, but you have to be likeable. And my
last word to you is, just keep picking up those brooms. 

                          Carl Jacobson

     For those of you who don't know, BEP, the Business
Enterprise Program, is commonly known as the vending program.
Almost every state has one, and you have to be blind to get into
it. It provides opportunities for blind people to make a living
doing retail work in food service. I currently manage a cafeteria
in the state building in New York City. My personal philosophy is
that this program has provided me with the opportunity to work,
so I have a responsibility to provide the opportunity if I can
for other blind people to work as well. So you can see that as an
employer the fact that an applicant is blind doesn't bother me;
my concern is whether you can make money for me. The clear bottom
line in American business is making money. If you can help me do
that, I want you. If you can't, you're no use to me. This theme
runs throughout American business. As Mrs. Walhof said, from our
point of view the important thing is not what the employer can do
for you. You have to convince us that you can do something for
us. 
     I also need to be convinced that you want the job and that
you can do it. The up side of it is that, if you're working for
me, I'm not as concerned about your reading skills. I am
concerned about whether you can chop lettuce, wash some floors,
scrub a lot of pots, and don't mind doing it. You can't feel that
these things are beneath you because that's where you're going to
start. I started by doing those things, and frankly, if it was
good enough for me to start that way, it's good enough for the
person who is going to work for me. You aren't going to come in
making a lot of money; you'll start by making five or six dollars
an hour. You'll look around at the chief cook, who is making
twenty or thirty thousand a year and wish you had his money. But
the way he got where he is was to stay around for a long time and
do a lot of work. I am concerned about what you can do for the
overall operation. 
     If you have some experience in food, I need to know about it
as part of our discussion. If you worked somewhere else and loved
making salads, tell me about that because I have lots of people
who hate making salads. I happen to have a crew right now in
which each person likes doing a different thing: salads, stews,
soups, and sandwiches. This one guy just loves doing the cold
stuff--fruit salads, cole slaw, potato salad--you name it. I'm
sick of making those things, but he loves doing it, and he puts
it out, and it looks real nice. If it looks real nice, people are
going to buy it. Therefore, he's worth money to me. If he can put
something out there in a little tub that costs me thirty cents
and I can sell it for a dollar, then that guy is helping not only
to make his pay check, but mine too. So you have to prove your
worth to me. 
     We have talked here some about what not to do. There is a
guy in the BEP Program in New York who just got his license. That
means that sometime he will have a chance to operate his own
facility. He went in to talk with our district supervisor, who
supervises the southern region of New York State, and asked how
long he had to be here to get a pension. You don't turn on an
employer that way. Don't ask me on your first day about
retirement benefits. He also wanted to know if he could wear
shorts to work. My customers don't want to see your legs. Wear
your shorts at home. He asked me some of these questions before
he went to see the supervisor, and I gave him the answers, but he
was still dumb enough to ask the questions again. I can predict
his future. If you have dumb questions, try to ask them of a
friend before you talk to the employer.
     The bottom line is that you have to sell yourself to the
employer. You have heard things today about the importance of
being clean and making a good appearance. A lot of folks are
reluctant to tell you about your clothing because for some reason
they think our feelings are fragile--that we'll be offended if we
are told that our tie doesn't match or our shirt has a spot.
Frankly, that is what most of the world is looking at. First
impressions are important. Like it or not, that's the reality.
Before I came down this morning I got my shirt and tie on, put on
my jacket, and my wife said, "Are you going to go out looking
like that?" I changed my shirt. If you can't count on hearing
that from someone you trust, you are going to go out making a bad
first impression sometimes. You need to have somebody to tell you
those things. And if they do, don't get an attitude about it. If
you do, you will turn off your prospective employer, and you will
go around wondering why you didn't get a job. You may try
chalking it up to discrimination, but it isn't always
discrimination. Often it is either that you weren't qualified or
you turned off somebody. 

     During a brief discussion following the three presentations
a question was asked about these employers' attitudes about
hiring blind people. They said that they were prepared to provide
tours of their facilities and information about their operations
in order to insure that the blind applicant was familiar with the
job and its expectations. Mrs. Walhof said that she would
probably contrive a small test to assess a blind applicant's
ability to learn and apply the information provided. If he or she
could learn to operate a commercial dishwasher after fifteen
minutes of instruction, for example, she would probably hire the
person in food service. 
     She went on to talk a little about accommodating blind
people. Her business is very dependent on print. Blind people
must be able to handle print, or they can't do the job. In her
business she is predisposed to hire competent blind people, but
if a blind applicant can't tell her how he or she intends to get
the work done, if, as the employer, she is expected to work out
all the details herself, she is less likely to look favorably on
the application. 
     She is committed to giving blind people an equal
opportunity, but making all the arrangements for them is not
equality. If the applicant can't get the necessary information
onto paper in some efficient way, he or she can't do the job. A
blind applicant must be able to type, write legibly, or use tape
in a way that is easy for the secretary to transcribe the
information for entry into the computer. Getting the telephone
numbers in order to make the calls also requires creativity. The
numbers can be recorded, but the blind person must be able to
work from tape or transcribe them for personal use. Then the
results must be displayed in such a way that it is accessible to
the secretary. Braille will not do since the computer entry is
done by a sighted person. 
     A blind employee must be able to move around an office
independently. She mentioned a volunteer who came in and could
move well enough to do her work but who always asked staff
members to get soft drinks for her from the kitchen. This young
woman was sixteen. Mrs. Walhof said that she could have been
trained to be completely independent, but at thirty she might
well be too set in her ways to change. And staff members get
bored quickly with taking care of incompetent co-workers. You
have to know how to handle your blindness even in entry-level
jobs if you want an employer to give you a chance. No employer
can afford to teach blind workers the skills they need from
scratch. They can afford to give you some training, and some of
them will, but the major responsibility belongs to blind job-
seekers. 


[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Adrienne Asch.]

        A SUCCESSFUL JOB SEARCH IN THE GROVES OF ACADEME
                        by Adrienne Asch

     From the Associate Editor: Adrienne Asch is a longtime
Federationist. Because she did not have the luxury of working
full-time on her Ph.D., it took her more years than she cares to
count to achieve that prestigious goal. But last summer, in the
midst of the 1992 NFB convention in Charlotte, Adrienne left
North Carolina and flew to New York to defend her dissertation.
She returned a day later as Dr. Adrienne Asch, a metamorphosis
which many of her friends celebrated with her that evening. 
     Dr. Asch had already obtained a position as associate
professor of social work at Boston University for the coming fall
and was preparing to move to Massachusetts within a few weeks.
But she had no intention of missing the convention, whatever
hardship it cost. Of such dedication is the Federation built. 
     At the beginning of the week, Adrienne addressed the annual
meeting of the National Association of Blind Educators. She
talked about her job search and what techniques had worked best
for her. Her remarks were printed in the Fall/Winter, 1992, issue
of The Blind Educator, the publication of the National
Association of Blind Educators. Here is what she had to say: 

     Now that I shall be a full-time teacher, I expect to have
more time to devote to this division. I look forward to working
with you in the years ahead. 
     Although I have done a lot of adjunct teaching, this will be
my first full-time position. I shall start in the fall at Boston
University's School of Social Work. Let me describe the way I got
this job, tell you a little about the interview process, and
outline the way I handled blindness and reasonable accommodation.
I'll be teaching social workers, who can be about as difficult
for the blind to deal with as rehabilitation counselors. Now I
have the chance to educate a group of professionals who need to
have their attitudes altered.
     I have done college teaching and lots of writing and
publishing. Those of you who teach at the university level know
that the way to get a college teaching job is not just to be a
good teacher. In fact, universities often do not particularly
care how good you are; they do care how many articles you have
published, how many books you have written, and how many grants
you have obtained. For many years I worked on my Ph.D., but I had
written a number of articles, co-authored a book, and attended
many professional meetings. All of these things helped me obtain
good letters of reference.
     When I began my job search, I applied for jobs in various
fields: psychology, social work, medical ethics, and women's
studies. I would look through the advertisements for jobs in my
field. Each ad I answered required a complicated cover letter. I
would advertise myself as a medical ethics specialist one day and
a social worker the next. It was amazing how I learned to package
my skills. Of course, then I would have to make sure to pick out
the appropriate reference letters in my collection to correspond
to each application. The people who were writing these letters
for me were colleagues, friends, and former advisors. It was
somewhat unusual to have references from people who know me
personally. I found out later that my friends had written fine
letters of recommendation, and this was very helpful to me. These
people could speak about the quality of my work and my views on
various subjects.
     Networking is very important in finding a job at a
university. For example, I saw an ad for the job I now have. I
wrote a letter inquiring about it and then called a friend who is
a sociologist at another university and asked if that person knew
anyone on the faculty at Boston University. As it turned out,
someone that person knew was on the search committee. This
individual also turned out to be someone I knew indirectly. One
of the first questions I was asked was whether I would be willing
to move from New York to Boston. I said that I would go anywhere
that a job was available. I ended up having four interviews by
phone. I guess they liked what I said, the articles I sent them,
and my letters of reference. Finally they invited me to Boston
for an interview.
     This interview was a two-day affair. I had a chance to meet
everyone with whom I would work. I was invited to give a talk
about my research and to listen to descriptions of what others
are doing. This was great fun; however, it did take a lot of
energy.
     I had been sent samples of material which I would be
expected to use in my teaching. Also I had material on my
computer which I was taking to the interview and to which I
absolutely had to have access in order to do what was expected of
me. To make a long story short, I dropped the computer on the
plane and broke it. With great luck and intensive use of the
aircraft's telephone service, I located another computer and got
to my interview within two hours of landing.
     I gave a talk followed by a discussion which I chaired. I
told my audience that they could call my name and I would then
invite them to speak one at a time in the same way I would in a
class. At the end of the interview, the search committee asked
what would lure me to Boston. I had been warned beforehand that I
would have to negotiate the terms under which I would work. For
example, I discussed salary, case load, conference travel money,
and research assistants. Being a newcomer in the academic job
market, I needed to know all these things. I did not mention any
blindness-related job issues until after the job offer had been
made. I had already asked if they had any questions about how
blind persons did things, but they indicated that they felt no
concern. They had observed me for two days and noticed that I
used the skills of blindness but that the results were the same
as theirs.
     I mentioned my blindness-connected needs during our general
negotiations. Rather than give me a computer I did not want, they
agreed to pay the service contract on my existing equipment. I
asked for a research assistant for ten hours a week. Most
professors get this anyway, so they did not consider this need
unreasonable. It was clear from the beginning that they were
sincerely interested in having me as a member of their faculty,
so they were happy to provide secretarial time each day to help
me sort my mail. Every human being has individual needs, and I
hope that every employer in this country will begin to consider
blindness as just one in a range of characteristics requiring a
little modification of the job and workplace. 
     As I said, what made it possible for me to get this job was
going to professional meetings, building professional records,
and doing the scholarly work people care about. I hope that other
blind educators will consider a career at the university level. I
shall be glad to assist anyone and will be back next summer with
a year of experience under my belt. I have found my job, and
there is one for each of you as well.


[PHOTO/CAPTION: James Gashel, Director of Governmental Affairs
for the National Federation of the Blind, orchestrates the
legislative activities of the Washington Seminar. He is seated at
one of the tables in the Mercury Room, headquarters for
scheduling and reporting on congressional meetings.]


                NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
           1993 LEGISLATIVE MEMORANDUM AND FACT SHEETS

     Early each February members of the National Federation of
the Blind gather in Washington, D.C., for our Washington Seminar.
A complete report of this event will appear in the April Braille
Monitor. As part of the seminar's activities, Federationists fan
out across Capitol Hill to speak with members of Congress about
matters of concern to the nation's blind. This year there were
three issues of pressing importance: modifying or eliminating the
limitation on earnings imposed by the retirement test and
applying the modified exempt earnings policy to blind people of
working age as well as to retirees; including people with severe
disabilities among those covered by Section 8(a) of the Small
Business Act; and preserving the bulk rate mailing privilege for
nonprofit organizations, a policy which is under attack again
this year. Here are the legislative memorandum and fact sheets
Federationists discussed with their Senators and Representatives
February 1 to 3: 

                     LEGISLATIVE AGENDA 1993

From: Members of the National Federation of the Blind 
To: Members of the 103rd Congress
Re: People Who Are Blind: Legislative Priorities for the 103rd   
     Congress, First Session

     Public policies and laws affecting people who are blind have
a profound impact throughout our society. Most people know
someone who is blind. It may be a friend, a family member, or a
co-worker. The blind population in the U. S. is estimated to
exceed 700,000. Fifty thousand Americans become blind each year.
By themselves these numbers may not seem large, but the social
and economic consequences of blindness directly touch the lives
of millions. Less directly, blindness affects us all.
     People who are blind as a group share a unique struggle.
More than being a matter of physical disability, the real
problems of blindness are lack of good training, lack of
opportunities, and lack of correct information about blindness
among employers and members of the public at large. If a person
who is blind has proper training and opportunity, the physical
loss of eyesight itself can be reduced to the level of a mere
nuisance.
     Public policies and laws that result from misconceptions
about blindness or lack of information are often more limiting to
people who are blind than loss of eyesight itself. This is why we
have formed the National Federation of the Blind. The Federation
is a private-sector resource of knowledge, encouragement, and
support for people who are blind and for anyone (blind or not)
who wants to join in the effort we are making to win
understanding and opportunity. 
     People who are blind are well-organized at the community and
grassroots levels throughout the United States. Our policy
positions are developed and determined by vote of the blind
themselves. This is why the Federation is known by lawmakers and
the public as the "voice of the nation's blind." Our priorities
for the first session of the 103rd Congress express our
assessment of issues requiring action by Congress on behalf of
people who are blind this year. 
     (1) Congress should amend title II of the Social Security
Act to modify or eliminate the limitation on earnings imposed by
the retirement test and apply the modified exempt earnings policy
to persons of working age who are blind as well as to retirees.
This proposal seeks to improve the work incentives provided to
Social Security beneficiaries. Under a 1977 amendment to the
Social Security Act, the same exempt earnings amount--$880.00
monthly, or $10,560.00 annually--is allowed for people of working
age who are blind as well as for those who retire at age sixty-
five. This proposal calls for increasing the exempt amount or
eliminating the limitation on earnings altogether. 
     People of working age who are blind must not be forgotten as
Congress continues to debate whether changes should be made in
the Social Security retirement test. A significant relaxation of
the present earnings limitation would encourage thousands of
beneficiaries to increase their work attempts. Those who
successfully find full- or part-time work will pay taxes rather
than simply drawing benefits. The results of their greater
efforts to be productive will positively affect the Social
Security system, as well as benefitting the individuals and
families involved. A complete removal of the earnings limitation
would provide beneficiaries with the maximum incentive to work.
In any case, the statutory linkage which ties together the exempt
earnings amounts for retirees and working age people who are
blind should not be broken and must be kept in mind as the debate
over the future of the earnings test for Social Security
eligibility proceeds. For more details and an explanation of the
need for this legislation, see the fact sheet entitled "HOW
PERSONS OF WORKING AGE WHO ARE BLIND WOULD BE AFFECTED BY CHANGES
IN THE SOCIAL SECURITY RETIREMENT EARNINGS TEST." 
     (2) Congress should Enact the Americans With Disabilities
Business Development Act. This proposal seeks amendments to the
Small Business Act so that programs authorized to assist
minority-owned small businesses, conducted under section 8(a) of
the Act, will be open to persons with disabilities. The Section
8(a) program is designed to foster business ownership by
individuals who are both socially and economically disadvantaged
and to promote the competitive viability of businesses owned and
operated by them. To achieve these goals, Section 8(a) authorizes
the Small Business Administration (SBA) to enter into all types
of contracts with government departments and agencies for supply,
service, construction, and research and development. Small
business concerns owned and controlled by socially and
economically disadvantaged persons can be eligible to receive
subcontracts to fulfill SBA's procurement obligations. Technical
assistance is also made available to minority small business
concerns. 
     This proposal is simply the recognition of disability as a
condition of minority status for participation in SBA's targeted
efforts to provide economic and technical assistance to members
of minority groups. The social and economic disadvantages which
accompany disabilities are well-known and beyond dispute. The
problem for SBA has been to define disability and the extent of
the class of individuals included. To resolve that issue, the
Americans with Disabilities Business Development Act excludes
minor or perceived disabilities from the term "disability" as it
is defined in the bill. Another problem has been SBA's lack of
legal authority to presume that people with disabilities are
socially disadvantaged in the absence of a clear legislative
mandate. The Americans with Disabilities Business Development Act
will provide that mandate. For more details and an explanation of
the need for this legislation, see the fact sheet entitled
"AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT ACT: A PROPOSAL
FOR BUSINESS OWNERSHIP AND JOBS FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES." 
     (3) Congress should control and stabilize postage rates for
nonprofit organizations such as NFB. This request seeks
sufficient appropriations and support for a permanent legislative
remedy to meet the costs of the United States Postal Service for
qualified free or reduced-rate mailings. Under existing law and
appropriations levels, nonprofit postage rates could be increased
from 11.1 cents per piece for items of letter size to more than
19 cents per piece. An increase of this magnitude would cost the
National Federation of the Blind over $1 million in a single
year. This cost could not be met by the Federation. 
     Nothing can be more critical to a voluntary, private sector
group of citizens than to have affordable, stable postage rates
for mass communications. Paying the postal service's commercial
rates for necessary use of the mails would force the National
Federation of the Blind to dismantle many programs or to cease
operations altogether. Survival for many other groups of
importance in our society would also be threatened. If
communications with persons who are blind and the public at large
are cut, a time bomb is created, since fewer people will
understand anything about blindness and even fewer will know of
the continuing need to help. Then the downward spiral is in
motion, with fewer people helped and even fewer people helping.
Soon the benefits are gone. This does not overstate how
vulnerable we are to the postal rate crisis if Congress fails to
approve adequate funding. The fact sheet entitled "CRISIS IN
NONPROFIT MAIL RATES MEANS SERIOUS HARM TO PEOPLE WHO ARE BLIND"
explains the current situation and gives details on how members
of the 103rd Congress can help. 
     People who are blind are asking for your help in securing
positive action by Congress in the areas outlined here.
Legislative proposals will be offered to achieve each of our
specific objectives. Many priorities confront this session of
Congress, but the needs of the nation's people who are blind must
not be overlooked. We of the National Federation of the Blind
stand ready to assist our Representatives and Senators to
understand our needs and to take meaningful action to address
them. In partnership with the National Federation of the Blind,
each member of Congress can help build better lives for people
who are blind both today and in the years ahead.

                           FACT SHEET
                   How Persons of Working Age
                 Who Are Blind Would Be Affected
                        By Changes In The
            Social Security Retirement Earnings Test

     BACKGROUND: The Social Security retirement earnings test has
been cited as a penalty imposed upon seniors by which their
earnings are taxed to the point where they cannot afford to
remain actively engaged in work. For this reason Congress has
given serious consideration to repealing the retirement test
altogether or perhaps to modifying it. As many as eighteen
separate proposals for repeal or modification were offered in the
102nd Congress. The Senate and the House passed differing
versions, but no change was enacted. Five bills for changing the
retirement test are pending in the 103rd Congress, having over
one hundred twenty-five cosponsors so far.  
     The policy of allowed exempt earnings for people who are
blind and receive Social Security Disability Insurance benefits
is closely linked to the debate over the retirement test and is
bound to be affected by the outcome. However, at this point the
debate has focused largely on relaxing or eliminating the current
limitation on earnings for retirees only. But a 1977 amendment to
the Social Security Act clearly states that people who are blind
and who receive disability insurance benefits are allowed to have
earnings each month as long as the average earnings do not exceed
the exempt amount provided for people who retire at age sixty-
five. 
     EXISTING LAW: Section 216(i) of the Social Security Act
specifies what "blindness" means. The definition of blindness is
clearly stated in medical terms. Therefore, blindness can be
determined quite reliably on the basis of objective medical
evidence. This unique feature of the Social Security Act makes
blindness the only defined disability. All other disabilities are
determined on the basis of an individual's "inability to engage
in substantial gainful activity." This inability is actually hard
to determine reliably in many cases. 
     Although blindness is precisely defined, monthly disability
insurance benefits are not paid to all persons who are blind.
Under the law benefits are paid to only those people who are
blind and who do not have substantial earnings. Wealth not
resulting from current work activity does not count as earnings
and has no effect on eligibility. Only work is penalized, just as
with retirees. The amount of earnings considered to be
"substantial" for working people who are blind is the same amount
that senior citizen retirees may earn without having their Social
Security benefits reduced due to excess earnings. This amount is
currently $880.00 monthly or $10,560.00 annually. Precisely the
same section of the Social Security Act--paragraph (D) of Section
203(f)(8)--is used to establish the respective exempt earnings
standards for retirees and for persons of any age who are blind. 
     PROPOSED LEGISLATION: Congress should amend title II of the
Social Security Act to modify or eliminate the limitation on
earnings imposed by the retirement test and apply the modified
exempt earnings policy to persons of working age who are blind as
well as to retirees. Although the substantial gainful activity
earnings standard for people who are blind is currently linked by
law to the retirement test exempt amount allowed for seniors,
most of the proposals to modify the retirement test have
specifically excluded people who are blind from the change. For
example, an amendment passed by the House on April 9, 1992,
called for raising the exempt earnings standard for retirees to
approximately $20,000 per year to be phased in over five years.
But the same amendment said that the change would not apply to
people who are blind. 
     Language designed to have a similar effect was also included
in retirement test proposals considered in the last Congress by
the Senate. However, Senator John McCain has stated his firm
intention to offer amendments in the future which continue the
statutory linkage between the exempt earnings provisions for
retirees and for people who are blind and of working age as well.
Technically, if the statutory cross-reference between sections
that set forth provisions for people who are blind and retirees
is not disturbed by a retirement test change, the change will
also apply to people who are blind and of working age. Specific
language would have to be included in order for the change not to
apply. Also an amendment to repeal the retirement test would need
to have specific language inserted to apply the repeal to working
age people who are blind. 
     NEED FOR LEGISLATION: Approximately 85,000 people who are
blind now receive disability insurance benefits through the
Social Security system. At present their earnings must be
strictly limited to $880.00 per month. When earnings do exceed
this exempt amount, the entire sum paid to a primary beneficiary
and dependents is abruptly withdrawn after a trial work period.
There is absolutely no assurance that earnings will replace the
amount of lost disability benefits after taxes and work expenses
are paid by the wage earner. Usually they do not. Therefore, few
of the 85,000 beneficiaries can actually afford to attempt
substantial work. Those who do will often sacrifice income and
will certainly sacrifice the security they have from the
automatic receipt of a monthly check. 
     This group of beneficiaries--people of working age who are
blind--must not be forgotten as the debate proceeds toward
modifying or eliminating the Social Security retirement test. A
significant relaxation in the present earnings limitation would
encourage thousands of beneficiaries to increase their work
attempts. Those who successfully find full- or part-time work
will pay taxes rather than simply drawing benefits. The results
of their greater efforts to be productive will positively affect
the Social Security system, as well as benefitting the
individuals and families involved. A complete removal of the
earnings limitation would provide beneficiaries with the maximum
incentive to work. In any case the statutory linkage which ties
the exempt earnings amounts for retirees and working age people
who are blind together should not be broken and must be kept in
mind as the debate over the future of the earnings test for
Social Security eligibility proceeds.
 
                           FACT SHEET
                   Americans With Disabilities
                    Business Development Act:
                A Proposal For Business Ownership
              And Jobs For People With Disabilities

     BACKGROUND: Persons who are blind and persons with
disabilities in general have traditionally had few opportunities
to become employed and even fewer to establish and maintain their
own businesses. This does not reflect a general lack of ability
among this population. It does reflect a lack of the opportunity
and financial support necessary to achieve success in the
competitive business world. Prejudices and fears of employers
have left nearly 80 percent of employable people who are blind
either unemployed or substantially underemployed. 
     Congress has recently sought to address this situation by
enacting the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Under the ADA
employers having twenty-five or more employees are now prohibited
from discrimination on the basis of disability. Employers having
fifteen or more employees will eventually be covered. Regardless
of enforcement activities, the ADA is expected to improve work
force opportunities for persons with disabilities. But complete
equality will require more than employment rights. This fact has
been recognized in our government's efforts to underwrite and
support economic development programs among members of other
traditionally disadvantaged minorities.
     EXISTING LAW: Sections 8(a) and 7(j) of the Small Business
Act establish a Minority Small Business and Capital Ownership
Development Program to be conducted by the Small Business
Administration (SBA). This program is intended in part to foster
business ownership by individuals who are both socially and
economically disadvantaged and to promote the competitive
viability of businesses owned and operated by them. To achieve
these goals, Section 8(a) authorizes SBA to enter into all types
of contracts with government departments and agencies for supply,
service, construction, and research and development. Small
business concerns owned and controlled by socially and
economically disadvantaged persons can be eligible to receive
subcontracts to fulfill SBA's procurement obligations. Section
7(j) of the Small Business Act authorizes SBA to provide
technical or management assistance to individuals or minority
small business concerns. 
     Participation in the Minority Small Business and Capital
Ownership Development Program is open to anyone who can qualify
as both socially and economically disadvantaged. Participants
eligible by definition include members of racial and ethnic
minorities. Other individuals not included by definition may be
found eligible upon application to SBA. Criteria for determining
social and economic disadvantage are not clearly specified in law
or regulations. As a result program participants are almost
exclusively members of the defined minority groups. 
     PROPOSED LEGISLATION: Congress should enact the Americans
With Disabilities Business Development Act. This bill was
introduced by Congressman Jim Ramstead as H. R. 5880 during the
second session of the 102nd Congress for the purpose of amending
the Small Business Act "to authorize small business concerns
owned and controlled by individuals with disabilities to
participate in business development programs established by that
Act." Mr. Ramstead's bill amends several sections of the Small
Business Act to include individuals with severe disabilities as a
defined minority group for purposes of eligibility in the
Minority Small Business and Capital Ownership Development
Program. 
     This proposal is simply the recognition of disability as a
condition of minority status for participation in SBA's targeted
efforts to provide economic and technical assistance to members
of minority groups. The social and economic disadvantages which
accompany disabilities are well known and beyond dispute. The
problem for SBA has been to define disability and the extent of
the class of individuals included. To resolve that issue, Mr.
Ramstead's bill excludes minor or perceived disabilities from the
term "disability" as it is defined in the bill. Another problem
has been SBA's lack of legal authority to presume that people
with disabilities are socially disadvantaged in the absence of a
clear legislative mandate. Mr. Ramstead's bill, backed by the
impetus provided by the ADA, will provide that mandate.
     NEED FOR LEGISLATION: Defined minority status is a distinct
advantage in obtaining section 8(a) eligibility. Proof of both
social and economic disadvantage can be both time-consuming and
expensive. SBA appears to have great discretion in determining
eligibility based on social and economic disadvantage, especially
for applicants who are members of non-defined minority groups. It
is difficult to challenge the decisions made by SBA in this area
because the eligibility criteria are so vague. 
     Firms needing SBA's assistance cannot afford the time and
expense of application delays and appeals. In the absence of
defined minority status, business failures and bankruptcies can
result. This has been the experience of an owner of a Tennessee
sand and gravel business who is blind and is still waiting after
many years for approval of his minority business enterprise
application. After finally agreeing that he was both socially and
economically disadvantaged, SBA then disapproved his application
on the ground that the business had not been in operation for the
past two years. This is only one example of what happens to
applicants who are truly disadvantaged but must first prove their
minority status before they can even be considered. Congress
should resolve this injustice by amending the Small Business Act
to include individuals with severe disabilities as a defined
minority group. 
 
                           FACT SHEET
                 Crisis In Nonprofit Mail Rates
           Means Serious Harm To People Who Are Blind

     THE ISSUE: The 103rd Congress will decide whether federal
funds will continue aiding people who are blind and others by
meeting some of the costs for reduced rate mailings carried by
the United States Postal Service (USPS). Many nonprofit
organizations such as the National Federation of the Blind (NFB)
may not survive if forced to pay commercial postage rates. Yet
this would be the effect of expected budget plans to terminate
federal aid for nonprofit groups to use the mails. 
     Nonprofit postage rates bring help to people who are blind:
Holding the line on nonprofit postage rates will mean the
difference between life and death for groups such as NFB which
operate in the private sector. Voluntary initiatives made by
people who are blind themselves without government expense (such
as public education campaigns and drives for more employment
opportunities for people who are blind) will decline or cease
altogether if postage rates rise further. Materials and resources
aimed at personal adjustment and self-help for people who are
blind, provided without government cost, will not be available.
Organized consultation by people who are blind themselves to
assist in developing technology or to advise officials of public
programs will not be possible. Communications links among people
who are blind to share information, knowledge, and resources will
be gone. 
     Above all, the ability to encourage people who are blind
toward self-betterment, growth, and productive living will be
lost. This is tangible help made possible now because of
federally provided special mail rates. The rates allow for
educational communications and fundraising to enlist community,
private sector support for the efforts of people who are blind to
help themselves. NFB's programs help reduce dependency upon the
government by people who are blind. That in itself is a benefit
to all taxpayers. But if Congress decides not to use tax money to
encourage these private initiatives, demand will rise from among
people who are blind for more help from public agencies financed
by state and federal tax dollars. Costs to the federal treasury
for publicly run programs will rise while private efforts cease
or suffer.
     HOW CONGRESS CAN HELP: (1) Vote for a budget resolution
containing sufficient authority for appropriations to stabilize
nonprofit postage rates at current levels. 
     (2) Vote for FY 1994 appropriations sufficient to stabilize
nonprofit postage rates at current levels. 
     (3) Support legislation now being planned to institute
permanent reforms so that affordable nonprofit postage rates will
be continued indefinitely without the fear of diminished annual
appropriations. 
     CURRENT CRISIS AND BACKGROUND: Pursuant to the Postal
Reorganization Act of 1970, federal funds pay part of the costs
of postage used for qualifying mailings made by institutions or
groups for charitable and educational purposes. Free mail service
for people who are blind to receive reading matter, such as books
and related reading or writing devices, is also provided with
Federal funds. An appropriation to pay for these free or reduced-
rate mailings is known as the "revenue forgone" payment to the
Postal Service. The current amount is $122 million, appropriated
as part of the Treasury, Postal Service and General Government
Appropriations Act. People who are blind are among those who
especially benefit from communications made possible through the
mails. Books mailed free and services provided by nonprofit
groups are two examples. Churches, schools, libraries, and many
other nonprofit groups are also aided. 
     By law the revenue forgone appropriation is supposed to pay
the Postal Service's overhead costs which can be related to
providing the free or reduced rate mail service. But if the
Federal payment is not enough, the shortfall will cause
significantly increased postal rates unless Congress steps in to
prevent them. This is exactly the present situation. The
appropriation for FY 1993 is $360 million below the full amount
needed, but language passed as part of the appropriations bill
has prohibited the USPS from raising nonprofit postal rates for
letter-size pieces. That practice, requiring the Postal Service
to absorb the shortfall in appropriations, cannot continue
indefinitely without eventually penalizing those who use this
special mail service.    The penalty resulting from a continued
appropriations shortfall could come later this year in the form
of sharply increased postal rates for nonprofit groups, unless
Congress acts decisively to provide sufficient appropriations or
to enact a permanent legislative remedy in some form. The current
nonprofit rate paid for a standard letter-size piece is 11.1
cents, compared to the commercial rate of 19.8 cents. Without an
appropriation to the Postal Service, or without some other
mechanism to fund free or reduced-rate mailings, the rate of 11.1
cents would have to be raised to more than 19 cents. For the
National Federation of the Blind this would mean an increase of
over $1 million in the cost of postage for a single year, a cost
which could not be met. 
     A rate hike of this magnitude would mean that substantial
sums would be taken directly from programs which now help people
who are blind. It would also be impossible to contact new
potential contributors to raise additional revenues. If
communications with persons who are blind and the public at large
are cut, a time bomb is created, since fewer people will
understand anything about blindness and even fewer will know of
the continuing need to help. The inevitable result is a downward
spiral, with fewer people helped and fewer people helping. Soon
the self-help organizations of people who are blind will be
destroyed. These are the unanticipated ripple effects of rising
postal rates, but they are nonetheless very real. Since
approximately 50 thousand Americans become blind each year,
either there must be continued widespread mailings to the general
public to inform them about blindness and how to deal with it, or
else an increasing number of those people who have recently
become blind will not be found until it is too late and they are
hopelessly doomed to continuing dependence.


                 ALL IS NOT BLISS AT TELESENSORY
                       by Kenneth Jernigan

     By the early part of last year an increasing number of
complaints were beginning to surface concerning the performance
of the TeleSensory Corporation of Mountain View, California. The
company, which is one of the largest producers and distributors
of specialized devices and appliances for the blind in the
country, was accused of questionable dealings with government
agencies, pressure tactics in selling its products, and poor
service. Quite naturally it disputed these claims. We had
occasion to report on the situation in two articles. The first
one appeared in the March, 1992, Braille Monitor and was entitled
"Concerning Integrity, Monopoly, and TeleSensory." The second
appeared in the July issue under the headline "The Pot Boils and
TeleSensory Stews."
     When I was at the general assembly of the World Blind Union
in Egypt in early November, I heard a good deal of comment
reflecting dissatisfaction with TeleSensory's performance in
Europe. Particularly, I sensed unhappiness with Dr. James Bliss,
TeleSensory's president. There were statements that he had
overreached himself in Germany and a number of other countries
and that TeleSensory's business would suffer accordingly. 
     Under date of December 17, 1992, TeleSensory surprised the
blindness field by a press release announcing the removal of Dr.
Bliss as its president. There was no criticism of Dr. Bliss's
performance, but underneath the sugar coating (and there was a
lot of it) the hard fact was clear. Dr. Bliss had been dismissed
as the operating head of the organization, and (despite the fact
that he was to remain on the board) he would not continue to lead
or play a significant part in the company's management. Toward
the end of the release (after all of the kind words) this
sentence appears: "Dr. Bliss, a founder and shareholder, will
offer his knowledge and counsel to TSC." Knowledge and counsel
can be accepted or rejected, and from one who has just been
removed as company president, it is more likely to be rejected
than accepted.
     There are those who say that the Bliss removal was partly
caused by slumping sales. There are others who say that the
problem was the increasing conflict with consumers which
TeleSensory was experiencing and which Dr. Bliss symbolized.
Whatever the reason, many blind people will view the change of
leadership at TSC as a positive step, promising better things for
the future. In order that Monitor readers may judge for
themselves the tone of the TeleSensory press release, we print it
in full. Here it is:

For Immediate Release
December 17, 1992

                   James W. Morrell Elected as
                President and CEO of TeleSensory

     MOUNTAIN VIEW, CA--The Board of Directors of TeleSensory
Corporation of Mountain View, California, today elected Mr. James
W. Morrell, a member of the Board, as new President and CEO. Dr.
James C. Bliss was elected Vice Chairman of the TeleSensory (TSC)
Board.
     Mr. Morrell has been on the TeleSensory Board for three
years. He had been a career-long employee of Saga Corporation and
was Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors of Saga Corporation
at the time of its acquisition by Marriott. He brings to
TeleSensory a wealth of knowledge and experience in the
management of an enterprise closely coupled with its customer
base. He was particularly effective in building management teams
at Saga and in innovative methods of expanding and strengthening
that business which was initiated by Saga, becoming the national
leader in its field.
     Dr. Bliss co-led the development at Stanford University and
Stanford Research Institute of the Optacon, an instrument with
which the blind user reads ordinary printed matter. The Optacon
was the first product of TeleSensory. Dr. Bliss left SRI and
Stanford in 1971 to set up the company to manufacture and
distribute the product. He has been its President since. Under
his tenure, TeleSensory became the largest manufacturing and
distribution organization in the United States exclusively
dedicated to the provision of products for the visually impaired.
     Within TeleSensory Corporation changes are occurring in
response to the changing environment of our business sector. The
technology of the field is rapidly changing, bringing more
alternatives but necessitating choices. What works best within
the United States does not automatically meet the needs of TSC's
overseas customers who now comprise a third of the market. TSC
customers, the visually impaired individuals and the private and
governmental organizations which serve them, are impacted by
changing economic conditions and the continually changing
governmental support base.
     All members of the TSC organization take pride in the
improvements which our products and services have brought to the
lives of the visually impaired population. The company is in a
very strong financial position giving a powerful base for the new
CEO and his team. Dr. Bliss, a founder and shareholder, will
offer his knowledge and counsel to TSC. He will retain his
position on the Board of Directors, serving as its Vice Chairman.
Dr. John Linvill will continue to serve as Chairman of the Board
of Directors.







[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Anthony Cobb.]

                      BLIND PEOPLE AND GUNS

     From the Editor: Anthony Cobb is a staff member at the
National Center for the Blind. Here is a letter he recently wrote
to The Atlantic Monthly magazine in response to an article which
appeared in its January, 1993, issue:

                                              Baltimore, Maryland
                                                 February 2, 1993

Letters to the Editor
The Atlantic
Boston, Massachusetts

To the Editor:
     How odd to read within the same January issue two entirely
opposite approaches to stereotypes, one regarding African
Americans and the other Americans who are blind.
     I found Nicholas Lemann's treatment of the many facets of
black nationalism helpful and full of information which can
promote understanding by people like me who stand outside the
black experience. I was less pleased later in the issue. In an
article treating the need for tighter restrictions on the
purchase of guns, Erik Larson is moved to comment, "As the laws
are now written, a blind man can buy a gun."
     It is not hypersensitive political correctness to feel some
alarm at the unreasonable stereotyping and genuine harm to blind
people a statement like that promotes. The person who reads it is
going to have a number of negative perceptions of the blind as
incompetent thoroughly reinforced, to the detriment of capable
people who are blind and seek a competitive and productive role
in society. I know several blind persons (men and women) who have
guns--for all the reasons anyone else might own them. These
people represent the same cross section of sensitivity to the
issues Larson raises as the rest of the population, and they
demonstrate behavior as responsible as that of anyone else.
     Larson, however, clearly believes that blindness should be
prima facie disqualification for owning a gun, a premise totally
unsupportable on any basis other than unreasonable
discrimination. The implication that people who are blind cannot
be trusted with firearms is no more logical than assuming they
cannot own automobiles, buy life insurance, ride amusement park
rides, get out of a smoke-filled airplane, or any of the other
mistaken notions about blindness which have long been discredited
by the experience of thousands of people who are blind. I have
always held The Atlantic to be relatively free of the prejudice
and attitudinal barriers which keep minorities from being fully
accepted in society. I hope editorial sensitivity and awareness
on the part of otherwise capable and credible authors like Mr.
Larson will once again prove me right.

                                                       Sincerely,
                                                     Anthony Cobb


[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Bill Isaacs.]

        REMAINING VIGILANT: BILL ISAACS TAKES UP HIS PEN

     From the Associate Editor: Every Federationist has a
responsibility to educate the public about the abilities of blind
people whenever and wherever the opportunity occurs. Sometimes
this consists of imparting information. Sometimes it means
objecting strenuously to injustice or discrimination. And
sometimes it requires tactful criticism of inadvertent or
unconscious discrimination. The task is often discouraging
because in a real sense it never ends. Blindness is a low-
incidence disability (to use the jargon), so a large majority of
the population will always be relatively ignorant of their own
prejudice toward blind people and ill-informed about their
capacities. The good news is that there are now thousands of us
working on the problem, and each of us makes the job a little
easier for the rest. 
     Bill Isaacs is the President of the Kankakee Heartland
Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind of Illinois. He
is well-read and thoughtful. And when he finds manifestations of
discrimination against the blind, he is quick to combat them. He
doesn't wait for someone else to take up the cudgels; he sees
what needs to be done and quietly does it. He has been actively
patrolling the pages of the public press this year and doing what
seemed necessary and appropriate. Let us all draw strength from
his example and help him in the work he is doing. Here are two of
the letters Bill Isaacs wrote as soon as his first-semester
teaching duties ended:
 
                                            Bourbonnais, Illinois
                                                December 23, 1992

Hon. President-Elect Bill Clinton
Little Rock, Arkansas

Dear President-Elect Clinton:
     I want to congratulate you on your election to the
Presidency of the United States. I wish you well in all your
endeavors in that regard.
     An expression of yours, or at least one of local usage in
Arkansas, was printed in the November 30, 1992, Newsweek under
"Arkansas Argots." Someone should warn you that it would be
offensive to the blind of the nation if you were to use this
provincial saying publicly. The expression and its interpretation
go like this: "Any blind hog can find an acorn," which is
construed to mean "any idiot could figure that out." I am one of
more than 50,000 blind Americans, members of the National
Federation of the Blind, who have organized ourselves in an
effort to change what it means to be blind. Common statements,
such as the one mentioned here, rely on old stereotypes which
picture the blind in a negative way that is already all too well
ingrained in the minds of the general public. Expressions such as
this one portray the blind as stupid, inept, or ignorant. If one
is seeking to convey an idea, why not use the precise words in
place of an old cliche which makes degrading reference to the
blind or blindness? 
     Most people who do use such negative stereotypical
expressions do not think of them in the same way that those
sensitive to nuance on the subject do. I know that you are well
aware of the difficulty Ross Perot got himself into when he
referred to his black audience as "you people" in the recent
campaign. I would like to take this opportunity to help you avoid
a similar pitfall by encouraging you to avoid all references to
blind hogs, mice, bats, and men leading one another into ditches.

     Thank you for allowing me to share this concern with you,
and may God's blessing rest upon the launching of your new
administration.

                                                    Respectfully,
                                        Bill J. Isaacs, President
                                  NFBI Kankakee Heartland Chapter
                      ____________________
                                            Bourbonnais, Illinois
                                                December 23, 1992

Editor
The Daily Journal
Kankakee, Illinois

Dear Editor:
     I want to respond to the "Far Side" cartoon by Gary Larson,
which was printed in your newspaper early in December. This
cartoon portrayed blind strikers picketing with signs in front of
a building labeled "Center for Illiteracy." The signs, however,
make it clear that the strikers' grievance is against ACME
Industries for the Blind, located in the building pictured across
the street. I recognize that this cartoon is intended to reflect
Larson's wacky and satirical world view. Nevertheless, its impact
on the blind community was extremely negative. 
     I suspect that the average viewer of this scene would not
even know what the word "satirical" means and would tend to take
the depiction at face value. It is not uncommon for the general
public to think of the blind as helpless, stupid, and ignorant,
or in this case illiterate. Any picture or remark that reinforces
this conception, regardless of the original intent, is not
helpful in removing this astigmatism from the public eye.
     Back in the late 1860's and early 1870's the famous German-
American cartoonist, Thomas Nast, exposed the political
corruption of Boss Bill Tweed, who swindled the city out of
hundreds of millions of dollars, through his skillfully drawn
cartoons of this grafter. Most of the immigrant workers of that
day could not read, but they got the message of the pictures.
Tweed himself referred to those "damn pictures" as the reason for
his downfall. He even tried to bribe Nast with money and a trip
to Europe for higher education in order to put a stop to the
cartoons. The old adage that "a picture is worth a thousand
words," is very apropos. The application can be either positive
or negative. The Larson cartoon is most definitely negative. 
     In the fall of 1991 the American Broadcasting Company aired
a series called "Good and Evil." It was a satirical comedy which
included a blind psychologist, who was a buffoon. The members of
the National Federation of the Blind were not so blind as to be
unable to find the addresses of the program's sponsors in order
to send them thousands of letters encouraging them to drop their
sponsorship, which many of them did. The blind from New York to
Los Angeles found their way to the appropriate ABC network
offices in order to demonstrate and protest against the showing
of this unflattering sitcom. After five telecasts of this series,
it was dropped by the ABC network.
     The fact that the blind cannot see does not mean that we do
not know what is going on in the world around us. Using
alternative techniques, the blind can be as informed and as
productive as their sighted counterparts.

                                                       Sincerely,
                                                   Bill J. Isaacs
                                   Associate Professor of History
                                       Olivet Nazarene University
                            President, Kankakee Heartland Chapter
                                                  NFB of Illinois








                 ******************************
     If you or a friend would like to remember the National Federation of the
Blind in your will, you can do so by employing the following language:
     "I give, devise, and bequeath unto National Federation of the Blind,
1800 Johnson Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21230, a District of Columbia
nonprofit corporation, the sum of $_____ (or "_____ percent of my net estate"
or "The following stocks and bonds: _____") to be used for its worthy purposes
on behalf of blind persons."
                 ******************************



                     A CHOICE FOR A LIFETIME
                        by Richard Hassig

     From the Associate Editor: With an unemployment rate
approaching eighty percent, we in the blindness field do not give
as much attention as perhaps we should to the matter of job
satisfaction. Certainly the first and overwhelming problem is to
find a job and then keep it. One of the surest ways of retaining
a good job is to do something that one enjoys. These days it is
fashionable to speak disparagingly of piano tuning as a career,
but everyone who has ever tried to find someone willing to tune
an instrument knows how rare these professionals have become in
recent years. The following article was written by a man who is
satisfied with the vocational choice he made thirty years ago.
Here is what Richard Hassig has to say about the profession of
piano tuning: 

     My initial training in piano service at the Minnesota
Braille and Sight Saving School was completed in 1957. I worked
in Rochester, Minnesota, for about two years, but it became
apparent to me that I needed to look for a different location.
     In 1960 the opportunity came my way to work for a music
store in Davenport, Iowa. I took this chance, and it was a
significant help to me. I gained much practical experience
working on the pianos which came into the store on trade. I also
was given the opportunity to work in many homes and places which
otherwise might have taken me much longer to cultivate.
     After about seven years with this establishment, I felt that
it was time once again to begin business for myself. The
reputation I had by now established in the community made this
much easier than it otherwise would have been. This endeavor went
quite well, but I did miss the work on the older grand pianos
which had been possible in the store.
     Eventually, in about 1971, my family and I moved into a
house which would make this work once again possible for me. It
had an attached garage which was quite usable as a workshop.
     During the years that we have been here, I have been able to
make this into a space quite suitable for that purpose. In the
time that we have been in this location, I have had about forty-
five grands here for work. Most of them have been restrung, and
the hammers have been replaced. And nearly all of them have had a
new pin block. I had considerable help from sighted individuals
with the first few new blocks, but I have now developed
procedures which allow me to do nearly all of that work myself.
     In addition to my work for private clients, I do the piano
tuning service for three colleges locally and some for the
Davenport School System. I tune for the Quad City Symphony
Orchestra and have worked for many shows which have performed
here.
     Judy, my wife, and I raised three sons. The youngest is now
nineteen, so we feel that we are about done raising children.
     When I was leaving high school and the time was at hand for
me to make decisions about my career, piano service was my first
choice. It was never a last resort or a might-as-well-do-that
decision. I repeat, this was my first choice.
     Looking back on it now, it was a good decision for me, but
even more important, looking ahead, I feel that it was a good
choice for me. When I was eighteen, someone asked me, "Do you
really want to tune pianos for the next forty years?" Well, I
thought that I did. I have been tuning pianos for thirty-five
years now, and I look forward to the next thirty-five. Maybe not
thirty-six, but thirty-five I think I could handle.
     It is not likely that Judy and I will become wealthy because
of my piano tuning, but I have been successful. Success, of
course, depends on how you measure it. I have gained some respect
in this community and have been able to work in many diverse
situations and for many types of people. Last year my business
took in very nearly $50,000. By my ruler, that is some degree of
success, but you decide for yourself, using your own yardstick. 




[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: C. Edwin Vaughan.]

      THE STRUGGLE OF BLIND PEOPLE FOR SELF-DETERMINATION:
             THE DEPENDENCY-REHABILITATION CONFLICT:
             EMPOWERMENT IN THE BLINDNESS COMMUNITY
                   by C. Edwin Vaughan, Ph.D.

                   A Review by Lorraine Rovig

     Lorraine Rovig is the Director of the Job Opportunities for
the Blind program at the National Center for the Blind in
Baltimore, Maryland. 

     Dr. Vaughan writes from his point of view as an experienced
professor of sociology at the University of Missouri - Columbia
and as a blind person with first-hand knowledge of his topic.
Most readers will find this approach to the old story fresh and
exciting. He says:

          My central tenet is that the behavior of blind
     people is not a product of blindness or the amount of
     residual vision, but of socialization. The reactions of
     parents, teachers, siblings, peers, the health
     professions, rehabilitation counselors, and the general
     public have defined the lifestyles of blind people; and
     distinct patterns have emerged. (page 4) 
          My purpose is to analyze patterns of domination
     and subordination, which I and many other people judge
     harmful.... Many blind people have had their lives
     unnecessarily restricted while, in the name of
     benevolence, others who are sighted have advanced in
     their careers, increased their social prestige, and
     gained control of economic resources. (page 8)
 
     Dr. Vaughan's professional analysis explains logically how
and why the needs of legally blind Americans and the needs of
workers for the blind interacted through the years to produce
both the patterns of the blindness system and the current success
at empowerment enjoyed by some blind Americans. Following many
divergent strands, Dr. Vaughan ties economics to the treatment of
blind clients with a very secure knot. For example, after a fast
side trip through the Industrial Revolution, we read on page 28:

          The factory system was extended through
     bureaucratic rationality to all arenas of society. In
     client-centered bureaucracies the recipients of
     services become commodities, are subordinate, and have
     little freedom. The opposite is the case for those who
     dominate and control such organizations. 

And on page 66 he quotes Robert Scott's book, The Making of Blind
Men (1969), "In fact, the greater the involvement with agencies
of rehabilitation, the greater the likelihood of becoming a
product--being molded and managed to fit the agency's procedures
and processes."
     It is intellectually intriguing to follow the quotations
from so many sources. Some of Vaughan's educational fodder comes
from academic mainstream big names like educator John Dewey
(1920): "When we talk abstractly about the state, bureaucracy, or
human rights rather than this or that group of suffering human
beings or this or that social arrangement, it is frequently easy
to detract attention from specific problems." (page 28) At other
times Vaughan quotes the obscure: "Perhaps the worst example of
negative attitudes is reflected in an article by a physician, Dr.
Stetten, published in the prestigious New England Journal of
Medicine (1981)...." (page 96) Then again, we run into names we
know very well--names like B. Lowenfeld or (of course in
opposition) Peggy Pinder, Marc Maurer, and other blind-rights
activists.
     On the negative side, the worst that a reader can say of Dr.
Vaughan's book is that one of his strengths, his background as a
professor, is also occasionally a weakness. Just when the reader
is rolling along, enjoying the apt quotations and pungent real-
life stories that illustrate individual points, the author throws
in something stuffy, and we are reminded that this is a book
meant for the academic world. 
     There are many memorable chapters. My favorites are "The
Consumer as Part of the Industry," "What Went Wrong With Doing
Good," and "A New Specialization." In this last Vaughan explains
that Father Carroll was worried, so "In 1953...[he] called a
meeting of experts...to discuss the need for a new occupational
specialization." Next Lou Reeves and the American Foundation for
the Blind got involved. In spite of the objections of numerous
blind and sighted teachers of travel (and their blind students),
a special AFB conference went on record with "the first step
toward the professionalization of this area...the recommendation
that one year of specialized graduate education be required for
mobility instructors." (page 220) 
     We have now had nearly forty years of the O and M crowd's
efforts to promote the special necessity of sighted college
graduates to teach blind persons how to swing a cane. Does
Vaughan's sociological approach tell us how the new profession is
doing today? He points out on pages 221-222:

          The licensing and accreditation requirements are
     most frequently utilized in smaller and privately
     funded agencies. Consumers have less leverage in these
     agencies partly because the boards of directors are
     comprised of wealthy or prominent citizens who usually
     know little about the issues involved. On the other
     hand, those who work in the larger state-funded
     rehabilitation programs illustrate the influence of the
     publicly funded and bureaucratically organized work
     setting. Consumer groups can directly lobby state and
     federal politicians.... In this context, the
     requirement that mobility instructors have a master's
     degree is not worth fighting about.

     Are you curious to know how "Empowerment in the Blindness
Community" came about? Do you wish you knew how you could get
some? Dr. Vaughan takes his time in the 276 pages of text. As he
says, "Sociological interest focuses on how claims about
conditions are created, documented, and extended." (page 142) By
the end of the book I think only a vested-interest, hard-core
rehabilitation professional of the traditional sort could fail to
understand why we are at our current stage of empowerment and why
the programs run by professionals with such attitudes are an
endangered species.
    The Struggle of Blind People for Self-Determination: The
Dependency-Rehabilitation Conflict: Empowerment in the Blindness
Community, by C. Edwin Vaughan, will be published this summer by
Charles C. Thomas, Publisher (Illinois). The original manuscript
is 299 pages (22 of them a bibliography). A subject and separate
index will be added. Estimated price: $40.











[PHOTO/CAPTION: View of the Dallas, Texas, skyline from the
city's cultural district.]

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Statue of a Texas Longhorn cattle drive, located
outside of Billy Bob's Texas, the famous country music club.]

                    LIKE A DIFFERENT COUNTRY
                         by Norma Crosby

     From the Associate Editor: Norma Crosby is the President of
the Houston Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind of
Texas. Her husband Glenn is President of the Texas affiliate and
a member of the Board of Directors of the National Federation of
the Blind. As you would suspect, Norma is deeply involved in the
planning for our 1993 convention in Dallas-Fort Worth. If you
were in Dallas for the 1990 convention, you already know that
nobody throws a party like Texans, and now that they have the
experience of hosting a recent convention, Glenn and Norma assure
us that the 1993 extravaganza will be even better. Here's what
Norma has to say: 

     It has often been said that Texas is like a different
country, and if you take the opportunity to attend the 1993
convention of the National Federation of the Blind in Dallas-Fort
Worth, we think you will find this to be the case. There is no
other state which can claim the diversity in land, people, and
culture that you'll find in Texas. Some say that we Texans brag a
lot. But then we think we have a lot to brag about.
     Texas consists of 267,300 square miles of prairies, high and
low plains, rivers, islands, bayous, mountains, valleys, canyons,
and forests. There are 254 counties in the state, and one
explanation for the large number is that it was necessary for
early Texans to do their business and vote at the county seat. So
it was determined that none of the boundaries of a county should
be more than a day's ride on horseback from the county seat.
     Although two-thirds of all Texans are Anglo or of northern
European descent, the Mexican culture has probably played the
biggest role in shaping the Texas lifestyle. Texas food, music,
architecture, language, and fashion are all strongly influenced
by 150 years of colonization by Spain and Mexico.
     Texans speak a unique brand of English, which sets us apart
from other people from the South and Southwestern regions of the
United States. One British author, Stephen Brook, described Texas
speech as follows:

     What nourishing mouthfuls of language, flush with
redundancy, one can hear in Texas, words stumbling over each
other, vowels endlessly elongated into diphthongs like verbal
rainbows, containing elements and ghosts of every vowel sound
known to the human race, including a few that, like the Big Bend
mosquito fish, are unique to Texas.

     Many of us from East Texas speak with a slow drawl which
turns one syllable into three. Those from West Texas use minimal
language and punctuate their remarks by staring meaningfully at
the horizon. South Texans speak a mixture of Spanish and English,
which is sometimes referred to as Spanglish, and those from the
northern part of the state speak a mixture of all the above.
Unfortunately, there is no language course to teach you how to
speak Texan prior to your trip to the convention. But you will
probably figure it out before the week is over, and even if you
don't, we are planning so many fun things for you to do that it
won't really make a difference.
     When you get to the Dallas-Fort Worth area, you will be able
to find any type of food you like. But, if you want to get a real
taste of Texas, be sure to try barbecue, chicken-fried steak, and
Tex-Mex food before leaving. Some say that Texans will barbecue
anything, including the tires off their Cadillacs. But real Texas
barbecue is beef. Sometimes a Texan will throw some pork ribs or
sausages on the pit. But mostly it's beef served with white
bread, pickles, onions, potato salad, and beans. And if they give
you a plate that isn't made of paper, you have not entered a true
Texas barbecue joint. In fact, in most barbecue restaurants you
might only be served on butcher paper, and if you're lucky,
they'll give you a plastic knife and fork.
     Then there's chicken-fried steak. It's usually an
inexpensive cut of steak, battered and fried like chicken. It
should always be served with cream gravy, and the inside should
be tender with a crisp crust. The Dallas-Fort Worth area has lots
of restaurants which serve good chicken-fried steaks.
     Finally there's Tex-Mex. In Texas we just call it Mexican
food. But the truth is that it bears little resemblance to dishes
served in the interior of Mexico. It usually contains lots of
chilies (peppers, which may be mild, or which may clear up any
sinus problem you may have), frijoles (beans), and rice. And of
course you can't have a good Tex-Mex meal without washing it all
down with lots of cerveza (beer) or a good margarita. If you want
a real change of pace, try some cabrito (baby goat, usually
grilled over an open fire). It's a favorite of many Texicans.
     Then, after you have eaten, take one of the tours which the
NFB of Texas is planning for Federationists attending this
summer's convention. Of course we will be visiting Six flags Over
Texas, one of the finest amusement parks in the nation, and Billy
Bob's Texas, advertised as the world's largest honky-tonk. It
boasts forty-two bar stations, a 13,000-square foot dance floor,
and an indoor rodeo arena which seats five hundred. The remainder
of its 100,000-square foot area is filled with restaurants and
specialty shops. It's loud! It's gaudy! It's outrageous! It's
definitely Texas!
     We are also gonna take ya'll to a genuine rodeo, which
includes a steak dinner before the fun begins, and of course we
won't forget the barbecue dinner and beer that was such a hit in
1990. There'll be a great band, and you'll be able to kick up
your heels under the stars. Then, if you still need more
excitement, we are planning a visit to the National Museum of
Communications, which has everything from a fifteenth-century
printing press to early radio, TV, and motion picture equipment.
     For those who love to shop and see wondrous things all at
once, we will be taking a tour to the Las Colinas Urban Center.
This is an eleven hundred-acre city within a city, which includes
lots of shops and restaurants. The Mandalay Canal Walk runs
throughout the area containing shops. But, if you want, you can
take one of the mahogany water taxis for just one dollar. Of
course, if you want to see more of the area, you can ride the
five and one half mile monorail, which makes a figure eight
through the entire Las Colinas development. Then there are the
Las Colinas Mustangs. This equestrian statue includes nine giant
bronze mustangs galloping through a stream in the Urban Center.
The area surrounding the mustangs is a bright blaze of color,
created largely of Texas Pink granite. Each horse is one and a
half times life size, and each weighs between 2,000 and 3,000
pounds. An afternoon exploring the Las Colinas area is one you
won't soon forget.
     Besides all the tours and events already mentioned, we also
plan a night or two of Texas-style music. Who knows, we may have
mariachis one night and Texas rock, country, or blues on another.
You never can tell what might happen in Texas. But you had better
plan on being with us so that you can find out. There is a song
about Texas which says,

     When I die, I may not go to heaven.
     I don't know if they let cowboys in.
     If they don't, just let me go to Texas.
     Texas is as close as I've been.

     Most Texans believe that our state is heaven, and we welcome
all visitors to our large chunk of celestial real estate, and you
don't even have to die to come. Just make your plans to be with
us from July 3 to 10 for the 1993 convention of the National
Federation of the Blind. Nowhere else but Texas.
     By the way, if you think you shouldn't come because you have
a phobia about large, open spaces, don't worry. I hear that most
folks wear out only one car driving across Texas; that's not so
bad.

     That's what the Texans are saying about the 1993 convention
of the National Federation of the Blind. Here are some reminders
about hotel registration and convention details. As usual, our
hotel rates are the envy of all who know about them. For the 1993
convention they are singles, $31; doubles and twins, $35;
triples, $38; and quads, $40. In addition to the room rates there
will be a tax, which at present is twelve percent. There will be
no charge for children in the room with parents as long as no
extra bed is requested. 
     In recent years we have sometimes taken hotel reservations
through the National Office, but for the 1993 convention you
should write directly to Hyatt-Regency DFW, Post Office Box
619014, International Parkway, Dallas-Fort Worth Airport, Texas
75261, or call (214) 453-1234. Hyatt has a national toll-free
number, but do not (we emphasize not) use it. Reservations made
through this national number will not be valid. They must be made
directly with the hotel. The hotel will want a deposit of $40 or
a credit card number. If a credit card is used, the deposit will
be charged immediately, just as would be the case with a $40
check. If a reservation is canceled prior to June 20, 1993, $20
of the $40 deposit will be returned. Otherwise refunds will not
be made.
     Hotel reservations should be made early. Remember that
seminars for parents of blind children and for blind job-seekers,
as well as several other workshops and meetings, will be
conducted on Saturday, July 3. Convention registration will begin
on Sunday, and both Sunday and Monday will be filled with
meetings of divisions and committees, including the Monday
morning annual meeting of the Board of Directors of the National
Federation of the Blind, which is open to all. General convention
sessions begin on Tuesday and continue through Friday afternoon.
The annual banquet will take place on Thursday evening, July 8.
     Remember also that we need door prizes from state
affiliates, local chapters, and individuals. Prizes should be
relatively small in size and large in value. Cash, of course, is
always popular. In any case we ask that all prizes have a value
of at least $25. You may bring door prizes with you or send them
ahead of time to Lawrence Doiron, 7917 Pointer, Houston, Texas
77016; phone (713) 631-3013.


                             RECIPES

     This month's recipes come from Idaho. One of the delights of
living in this state is that you can enjoy the great outdoors.
People still hunt wild game, grow gardens, and home-can fruits
and vegetables. Potatoes are wonderful, but they are not the only
delicious crop. Idaho's fruit, particularly its sweet dark
cherries, deserve to be as famous as the Idaho potato. The
following recipes require some of Idaho's special foods, but even
if the Idaho version cannot be found, they are still worth
preparing and enjoying.
     Blueberries grow abundantly in northern Idaho. Try Trudy
Barrett's Blueberry Orange Nut Bread.

                   BLUEBERRY ORANGE NUT BREAD
                        by Trudy Barrett

     Trudy Barrett is an active member of the Magic Valley
Chapter of the NFB of Idaho. 

Ingredients:
3/4 cup sugar
3 cups flour
1 tablespoon baking powder
1/2 cup (1 stick) butter
1 teaspoon salt
1/4 teaspoon baking soda
3 eggs
1/2 cup milk
2/3 cup orange juice
1 tablespoon grated orange peel
1 cup fresh or frozen blueberries
1/2 cup chopped walnuts

     Method: Grease and flour 9 x 5 x 3-inch loaf pan. Preheat
oven to 350 degrees. Mix together flour, baking powder, baking
soda, and salt. In large bowl beat butter and sugar until light
and fluffy. Mix in eggs, milk, orange juice, and grated orange
peel. Stir until well blended. Gradually add flour mixture until
blended. Fold in blueberries and walnuts. Spoon batter into pan.
Bake 1 hour, or until cake tester comes out clean. Remove from
oven and cool. Wrap in aluminum foil. Store overnight in
refrigerator. Serve next day.

                       VENISON SWISS STEAK
                         by Sandy Chess

     Sandy Chess is the secretary in the National Federation of
the Blind of Idaho state office. Sandy and her husband each got a
deer last fall, and her husband got an elk. 

Ingredients:
1 1/2 to 2 pounds tenderloin venison steak, cut into individual
portions
1/2 cup flour
1 teaspoon garlic powder
salt and pepper to taste
1 quart tomatoes (I prefer home-canned)
1/2 cup green pepper, chopped 
1 medium onion, chopped

     Method: Dredge meat in seasoned flour and, using a heated
skillet, brown it quickly in oil on both sides. Place meat in
layers in large baking dish. Spread tomatoes, peppers, and onion
over meat and between layers. Cover and bake at 350 degrees for 1
hour.

                   SPICY MEATBALLS WITH SAUCE
                        by Ramona Walhof

     Ramona Walhof is the President of the NFB of Idaho and a
member of the Board of Directors of the National Federation of
the Blind. All who know her recognize that she is also an
excellent cook. She says that these spicy meatballs can be made
with either ground venison or ground beef.

Ingredients:
2 to 3 pounds ground meat (beef or venison)
1/4 pound cracker crumbs
2 eggs
1 large onion, chopped
1 green pepper, chopped
2 teaspoons chili powder

     Method: Mix above ingredients with hands and shape into
balls approximately 2 inches in diameter. Brown meatballs on all
sides in oiled skillet.

SAUCE:
Ingredients: 
2 #2 (20-ounce) cans tomato sauce
1/2 chopped onion
2 tablespoons Tabasco sauce
salt and pepper to taste

     Method: Combine all sauce ingredients. Place meatballs in
large dutch oven, pour sauce over them, and cover. Place dutch
oven full of meatballs and sauce in preheated oven and cook for 2
hours at 325 degrees. If using a lower temperature, cook longer.
This dish benefits from long, slow cooking. 

                         ROAST PHEASANT
                        by Ramona Walhof

     Pheasants are still plentiful in some parts of Idaho, and
cooked like this, they are delicious.

Ingredients:
2 to 4 birds recommended
Flour
Salt and pepper to taste
Evaporated milk

     Method: Pluck, clean, and cut up birds. Try to remove all
pieces of shot. Roll bird pieces in flour, salt and pepper to
taste. Use plenty of flour; it will make the gravy better. Brown
on all sides in frying pan. Place in deep roasting pan or dish
with cover. Pour evaporated milk over bird pieces until
completely covered. Roast at 325 degrees for 3 hours, or until
tender. If oven temperature is too high, the milk will curdle. If
handled correctly, the milk will make delicious gravy. If you
keep the dish covered, you should not need to add additional
milk.

                      FROZEN STRAWBERRY JAM
                         by Sandy Chess

     It's nice to live where there is still space for a garden.
Even for those without time or space to grow their own, fresh
fruit is plentiful in season. Homemade jams and jellies are just
as good as you remember them and quicker to make. Try these:

Ingredients:
2 3/4 cup sugar
1 box pectin
2 quarts strawberries

     Method: Wash and dry plastic containers and lids. Wash and
stem 2 quarts strawberries. Crush strawberries. Measure 4 cups
crushed strawberries. Mix 1/4 cup sugar with pectin. Gradually
add pectin/sugar mixture to strawberries, stirring vigorously.
Let stand 1/2 hour, stirring every 10 minutes. Stir in remaining
2 1/2 cups sugar into strawberries. Keep stirring until sugar
dissolves. Quickly fill containers to within 1/2 inch of top. Put
the lids on tightly. Let stand at room temperature for 24 hours,
then freeze. Makes about 3 pints.

                        SWEET CHERRY JAM
                        by Ramona Walhof

Ingredients:
3 pounds dark sweet cherries
3 tablespoons lemon juice
1 box pectin
1/2 teaspoon butter or margarine
3 1/4 cups sugar

     Method: Boil jars and lids for 10 minutes and drain. Place
cherries in 6 to 8-quart kettle. Add lemon juice. Mix 1/4 cup
sugar with pectin, then add to cherries. Bring mixture to full
rolling boil, stirring constantly. To reduce foaming, add butter
or margarine. Add 3 cups sugar and continue stirring while
mixture boils for 1 more minute. Fill jars to within 1/8 inch of
the top. Cover quickly with lids and tighten. Turn jars upside
down for 5 minutes, then turn upright. You should hear the lids
pop within the hour to show they have sealed. This jam will be
best if you wait a month or more to eat it. 

                       PUMPKIN/POTATO SOUP
                        by Ramona Walhof

     Of course, we must have at least one recipe for potatoes,
although most people already know how good Idaho potatoes are.

Ingredients:
1 acorn squash
2 to 3 cups pumpkin, cooked or canned
1 medium onion
3 8- to 10-ounce Idaho potatoes
Milk or cream to taste
Season to taste

     Method: Chop and saute one onion, then place in large
saucepan. Wash, cut up potatoes, and add to onion. Also add
pumpkin and enough water to keep mixture from boiling dry. Add
salt and pepper and other seasoning as desired. Cook until
potatoes are done. Cut acorn squash in half and clean. Then place
both halves, cut side down, in microwave or oven to bake. When
done, scoop fruit out of skin and place in blender. Blend until
smooth. Then blend potato/pumpkin mixture until smooth using as
much of the water as needed. Combine squash and pumpkin mixtures.
The resulting mixture should be thick and smooth. Reheat, adding
milk or cream until soup has attained the thickness you wish. You
may peel potatoes if you wish, but the peeling will be cut fine
in the blending process, as will the onions. If you wish to have
a low-fat soup, this is it. If you do not care about calories,
you may add butter or grated cheese for a little different
flavor.


                   * * MONITOR MINIATURES * *

**Elected:
     Laurie Eckery of Nebraska sends us the following
announcement: The election of officers for 1993 for the National
Federation of the Blind of Nebraska, Omaha Chapter, held December
18, 1992, gave the following results: president, Larry Streeter;
first vice president, Craig Groff; second vice president, Gary
Thompson; secretary, Laurie Eckery; treasurer, Alan Kopetzky; and
board members, Lonnie Merritt, Hank Vetter, Linda Groff, and
Sandy Streeter.

**Tandem Vacations for the Blind:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Two for the Road Tandem Touring, a Greenville, North
Carolina, based company, has just announced plans to offer tandem
touring vacations for the visually impaired. The concept behind
the idea is to offer to the visually impaired an opportunity to
take an active vacation with friends or family members.
     The five day/five night vacation packages include deluxe
accommodations, all meals, daily vehicle support, luggage
transport, expert tour guides, and various types of evening
entertainment. Tandem bicycle rentals are available. The tours
are designed for adults. Anyone under 18 years old must be
accompanied by a parent or legal guardian.
     Three tours are planned in the fall of 1993 for the visually
impaired. Two tours target the beautiful southern coastal area of
North Carolina, and one tour highlights the graceful rolling
terrain of the Piedmont region of the state. In addition to North
Carolina, tours are being planned for 1994 in Florida,
Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana. All tours are limited to ten
tandem teams. As with any tandem team, there is a captain (person
in front) and a stoker (person in rear). A visually impaired
stoker and a sighted captain should register as one tandem team.
     The primary advantage of tandem cycling for the visually
impaired is that it allows active participation without any
modification of the sport. Two for the Road Tandem Touring plans
to offer all information before, during, and after the tour in
both print and Braille in an effort to provide the best service
and communication for all customers.
     To receive a brochure or additional information about the
tours, write to Two for the Road Tandem Touring, Route 3, Box
552, Greenville, North Carolina 27858 or call (919) 756-4885.

**Peace Corps Volunteers Wanted:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Peace Corps is looking for 12 special people, trained and
experienced in education for the blind. The men and women who are
selected will serve for two years as Peace Corps Volunteers in
Morocco. They will work in a long-standing Moroccan Government
program teaching blind mobility, including grooming, self-help,
and recreation in schools for the blind. Applications are being
received now. The Volunteer candidates will leave in June or July
to begin language training in Arabic and French, as well as
cultural acclimatization in Morocco.
     In addition to good will and determination, you'll need
either: a BA/BS in Special Education with an emphasis on the
visually impaired; or a BA/BS in Education with at least 3 months
work experience with the visually impaired; or a BA/BS in any
discipline with at least 3 months work experience with the
visually impaired. There is no upper age limit. Experience and
maturity are highly prized. All medical and dental care is
provided, as is air transportation to and from Morocco at the
beginning and end of service. A monthly living allowance for
food, rent, and transportation is also provided, and Volunteers
accrue $200 U.S. for each month of training and service
satisfactorily completed. Repayment of most student loans is
deferred during the period of training and service. "Perkins"
loans are partially forgiven--fifteen percent of principal and
accrued interest for each year of service.
     Call your local Peace Corps Recruiting Office or call 1
(800) 424-8580, Peace Corps Headquarters in Washington, D.C.

**Elected:
     Richard Webb, secretary of the Des Moines Chapter of the
National Federation of the Blind of Iowa reports the following
election results: Bob Ray, president; Curtis Willoughby, first
vice president; Fred Moore, second vice president; Richard Webb,
secretary; and Lora Van Lent, treasurer. Joel Jeffries, Bill
Pearce, Jan Ray, and Revanne Duckett were elected to board
positions.
     To this announcement Mr. Webb appended the following
inquiry: If anyone is using MIDI, the Musical Instrument Digital
Interface, on a personal computer, Richard Webb would like to
know what kind of screen reader you are using. He can be
contacted at P.O. Box 93261, Des Moines, Iowa 50393; (515) 279-
5542 or (515) 274-1341.

**National Writers Conference Planned for September:
     The Writers Division of the National Federation of the Blind
will sponsor a National Conference for Blind Writers at the
National Center for the Blind in Baltimore, Maryland, beginning
on Friday, September 10, and concluding on Sunday, September 12,
1993. Registration fee will be $25, and accommodations at the
National Center will be provided free of charge. A donation will
be requested for the cost of all meals at the Center. If you are
a blind or visually impaired writer and would like to attend the
conference, write to: Jerry Whittle, 22 University Boulevard,
Ruston, Louisiana 71270, for an information packet and
application form. If you need further clarification about these
preliminary facts, you may call (318) 251-2891.

**Breeds Goats:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement: I am
a young breeder of dairy goats and am interested in receiving any
correspondence in Braille or on tape from any other blind person
in my situation. Write to Stephanie Pieck, Song of Joy
Nubians/Song of Praise LaManchas, Ithaca College, Rowland Hall,
Room 13, 953 Danby Road, Ithaca, New York 14850. Or call (607)
256-8213 until May 1st. After that date I can be reached by mail
at RD 3, Box 200, Hurst Road, Altamont, New York 12009; telephone
(518) 861-5522. Nubians and LaManchas are specific breeds of
dairy goats. Song of Joy and Song of Praise are the two names I
have registered with the American Dairy Goat Association. They
appear before the names of all of the animals I breed to
differentiate them from animals bred elsewhere.

**Pen Friend Wanted:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Davide Reitano, a twenty-year-old blind Italian college
student, is in search of pen pals with whom he can correspond in
Braille. He is fluent in English, German, French, and of course
his native Italian. His address is Davide Reitano, via V. Bellini
28, S. Gregorio 95027, Catania, Italy.

**Elected:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     On November 20, 1992, the St. Louis Chapter of the National
Federation of the Blind of Missouri elected the following
officers and board members: John Dower, president; Rick Burch,
vice president; Susan Ford, recording secretary; Tom Clark,
corresponding secretary; Thelda Borisch, treasurer; and Robin
Wallen, member at large.


[PHOTO/CAPTION: Pictured here in conversation at the reception to
honor Nell Carney are (left to right) Tony Francavilla, Director
of Colorado Rehabilitation Services; Diane McGeorge, Director of
the Colorado Center for the Blind; Homer Page, President of the
National Federation of the Blind and Boulder County Commissioner;
and Dr. Nell C. Carney.] 

**Federationists Host a Reception to Honor Nell Carney:
     On Saturday, December 12, 1992, the then Commissioner of the
Rehabilitation Services Administration, Nell Carney, received an
honorary doctorate from the University of Northern Colorado. The
preceding day the students and staff of the Colorado Center for
the Blind hosted an elegant reception in Mrs. Carney's honor. Dr.
James Dixon, Commissioner of RSA Region VIII, and about fifty
other rehabilitation, disability, and political dignitaries
attended the event. 
     Center students and staff had cut down the Christmas tree
that graced the reception area and decorated it and the entire
Center building. They also prepared and served the lavish
refreshments. Several of the guests made a point of inquiring who
the Center had found to cater such a lovely reception, and Diane
McGeorge, Center Director and member of the Board of Directors of
the National Federation of the Blind, made certain that everyone
understood that Colorado Center students and staff had done it
all. The entire reception was a ringing testimonial both to the
honor in which Nell Carney is held by blind people and to the
quality of the rehabilitation carried out at the Colorado Center
for the Blind. 
     Following the academic awards ceremony on Saturday, Dr.
Carney and several Federationists were guests at a celebratory
luncheon hosted by the Dean of Health and Human Services at the
University of Northern Colorado. At the luncheon Dr. Carney was
presented with a special award in recognition of the significant
work she has done to enhance the lives of disabled Americans. 

[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Kathryn C. Davis.]

**Center Named for Federationist:
     In a recent letter we were informed that the Center for the
Visually Impaired in Daytona Beach, Florida, recently dedicated
its new building to Kathryn C. Davis, a member of the National
Federation of the Blind of Florida. The letter went on to say: 
     Kathy Davis, counselor and Coordinator of Disabled Student
Services at Daytona Beach Community College, was recently honored
by the board of Directors of the Center for the Visually Impaired
at the agency's grand opening celebration of its new facility.
The building was officially dedicated in her honor and will bear
the title of the Kathryn C. Davis Center for the Visually
Impaired. A portrait of Mrs. Davis was unveiled for the occasion
and now hangs in the reception area of the agency along with a
commemorative plaque.
     Kathy Davis has led the Center through some very difficult
times. A founder of the CVI, Mrs. Davis was president of the
Board of Directors in 1991 when the agency was in extreme peril
because of internal staffing problems. Rather than allow the
agency to close its doors and cease providing necessary
independent living skills classes to the older adult blind of
Volusia County, Mrs. Davis assumed the responsibility of
executive director and recording secretary for a period of five
months. This was quite a challenge considering that she was
already employed full-time by Daytona Beach Community College.
Nevertheless, she was determined that the agency would survive
and that she would provide the necessary direction and leadership
to put it on solid ground once again.
     With the help of the Board of Directors, the backing of the
Division of Blind Services, and the United Way, Kathy began the
rebuilding process of the Center. Staff was hired and board
members agreed to cover various speaking engagements. Kathy soon
acquired the necessary skills to be an effective executive
director. In this capacity she not only conducted board meetings
and took minutes, but spent many hours engaged in such activities
as reorganizing the agency, communicating with Blind Services,
writing grants, and generally coordinating all CVI-related
activities.
     The first priority during these months was to hire a capable
executive director and a rehabilitation teacher. In May of 1991
Robert Hodge was hired as executive director. Robin Whitely was
brought back as the agency's rehabilitation teacher, and an
orientation and mobility instructor has recently been hired.     
     Kathy, blind since birth, has been a respected faculty
member and counselor at Daytona Beach Community College since
1980. She is also known for her many contributions as a community
volunteer. Her three children are presently completing their
bachelor's and master's degrees. For the past ten years Kathy has
raised her children as a single parent. 
     On December 28, 1991, she married Dr. Thomas F. Davis,
professor of mathematics at Daytona Beach Community College and
current president of the Board of Directors of the Center For the
Visually Impaired. Tom is very supportive of his wife's many
worthwhile endeavors. Both Kathy and Tom are committed to the
organized blind movement and derive tremendous pleasure from
working with visually impaired people of all ages. 

**Elected:
     Norma Gonzales Baker, secretary of the Austin chapter of the
National Federation of the Blind of Texas, reports that the
chapter recently held its annual election. The following board
members and officers were elected: Tommy Craig, president;
Jeanine Lineback, first vice president; Buddy Brannan, second
vice president; Norma Gonzales Baker, secretary; Wanda Carruth,
treasurer; and Andrea Moore and Mary Ward, board members. 

**For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     I have for sale a Kurzweil Personal Reader 7315 with
software upgrade and both table and hand-held scanners. I paid
$12,500, and am asking $7000 or best offer. Contact Katie at
(818) 341-5925.

**Honored:
     Karen Mayry, president of the National Federation of the
Blind of South Dakota, writes to say that Mike Klimisch, one of
the affiliate's young leaders, was recently recognized by his
alma mater, Mt. Marty College, as the Outstanding Alumnus of
1992. The criteria for this award include graduation from the
school during the past five years, community involvement, and
participation in parish and other community activities.
Congratulations to Mike Klimisch.

**Coming Soon:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     The National Federation of the Blind of Oklahoma will be
selling zippered slate and stylus holders during the 1993
National Convention in Dallas. The holders are gold nylon with
the NFB logo in indigo/navy. The price will be $3 each or 2 for
$5. Plan now to look for the Oklahomans.

**Wishing to Buy:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     I am looking for a used Optacon. If you have information
about one that I may purchase, please contact Tamika Polk, 3122-B
Utah Place, Greensboro, North Carolina 27405; Phone (919) 375-
8216.

**Elected:
     Marilyn Rixse, secretary of the Little Rock Chapter of the
National Federation of the Blind of Arkansas, reports the
following chapter election results: Rector Turner, president;
Nancy Mathers, vice president; Marilyn Rixse, secretary; Wilma
Sitterfield, treasurer; and Bessie Ragland, Eddie Lyles, John
Mathews, Dorothy Avants, and Buford Stinnett, board members.

**Roots:
     Recently President Maurer received a note from Gwen Rittgers
of Kansas City, Missouri, in which Gwen said that this year she
will be 79 years old and that she has now been a member of the
Federation for 53 years. This means that Gwen Rittgers goes back
to 1940, the year of our beginning. The Federation is stronger
because it has had those to anchor it with the character and the
spirit of Gwen Rittgers.

**For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Unused VersaPoint embosser, still in its original packing
carton. Runs at five characters per second and does graphics.
Manuals for operation included. Asking $2200 or best offer.
     For more information contact Michelle J. Smithdas in Braille
only, at 10 Marino Avenue, Port Washington, New York 11050.

**Elected:
     Byron Sykes, secretary of the Rockingham County Chapter of
the National Federation of the Blind of North Carolina, reports
the following chapter election results: Wanda Jackson, president;
Randy Mabes, vice president; Byron Sykes, secretary; Lillian
Sykes, treasurer; and Maude Dodd, board member.