                       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

PUBLICATION OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND

                            CONTENTS

                                           AUGUST-SEPTEMBER, 1992

CONVENTION ROUNDUP
by Barbara Pierce

PRESIDENTIAL REPORT
by Marc Maurer

NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND AWARDS FOR 1992

THE MYSTERIOUS TEN PERCENT
by Marc Maurer

THE SCHOLARSHIP CLASS OF 1992

SHIFTING BALANCES IN THE BLINDNESS FIELD
by Kenneth Jernigan

THE ROLE OF THE AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR THE BLIND IN MEETING
NEEDS: TODAY AND TOMORROW
by Carl R. Augusto

RFB UPDATE: E-TEXT AND OTHER NEW SERVICES
by Ritchie Geisel

RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE ANNUAL CONVENTION OF THE NATIONAL
FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
JULY, 1992
by Ramona Walhof

CONSTITUTION OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
AS AMENDED 1986












     Copyright National Federation of the Blind, Inc., 1992[3 LEAD PHOTOS. CAPTION: Nearly 3,000 people crowded convention
activities at the 1992 gathering of the National Federation of
the Blind June 28-July 4. The convention hall (above) began
filling early the morning of the first general session. When the
gavel fell at 10:00 a.m., thousands of delegates were in their
seats, ready for the shared excitement and fun of the morning.
During the roll call of states Joanne Wilson (bottom left),
President of the NFB of Louisiana, came to the microphone to
present Yvonne Bradley of South Carolina with the attendance
banner, flown proudly by the South Carolina delegation during
this years' convention in honor of its 270 delegates. Between
convention sessions Federationists flocked to the exhibit hall
(bottom right) to shop and learn about what's new.]CONVENTION ROUNDUP
                        by Barbara Pierce

     It's no secret that Charlotte, North Carolina, has a
reputation as one of the most beautiful and thriving cities in
the United States and that North Carolina hospitality is as warm
and sunny as its summer weather. But knowing a reputation and
experiencing the reality of a Tar Heel welcome are two very
different things. On Sunday, June 28, the National Federation of
the Blind burst into the consciousness of Charlotte residents
with a front-page story in the Charlotte Observer about the
opening of our 1992 convention and the hopes and dreams of blind
Americans. For several days prior to that, convention delegates
had been streaming into our four convention hotels and
discovering the joys of the Queen City with its decorative
fountains, tree-lined streets, and inexpensive and delicious
food. 
     Until recent years everyone considered that Federation
conventions began with the official opening of convention
registration lines and the exhibit hall, but more and more
activities are now taking place the day before registration. The
trend was more pronounced this year than ever before. By
Saturday, June 27, well over 700 hotel rooms were already
occupied by eager delegates. A glance at the pre-convention
agenda told the story: Federationists wanted to be ready for the
ten seminars and workshops being offered on Sunday. These
included programs and activities for parents and educators of
blind children, blind job seekers, blind and sighted children,
blind business people, and writers interested in publishing their
work in magazines. In addition there were workshops for those
concerned about issues facing deaf/blind people, users of the
NFB's computer bulletin board service, and people interested in
self-defense and otherwise taking control of their physical
bodies. As always, both the parents seminar and the Job
Opportunities for the Blind seminar were jammed with enthusiastic
crowds, and their proceedings will be covered more fully later
this year in Federation publications. By Sunday evening everybody
was ready to play, and the beach party around the pool on the
roof of the Holiday Inn was just the place. With live music and
good company, the first of the North Carolina parties was a great
success. 
     Monday morning the registration lines began forming early,
but as soon as the doors opened, people moved through the process
with a speed and efficiency to which we have almost become
accustomed. By the end of the day, just under 2,000 people had
registered and bought banquet tickets. The exhibit hall, which
like convention registration was located in the Charlotte
Convention Center, was huge; and Federationists took every
opportunity to examine technology, cross-question the forty-four
vendors present, and browse in the NFB Aids and Appliances Store,
literature display, and thirty-nine affiliate tables. The
information table just inside the exhibit hall entrance and the
Braille and print listings of display locations were an immense
help to those interested in finding particular items or vendors.
It was well that plans had been carefully made, for the exhibit
hall saw more traffic this year than ever before. 
     Monday and Tuesday were filled with committee and division
meetings and seminars--eleven on Monday and nineteen on Tuesday.
Among the high points were the Resolutions Committee meeting,
which lasted more than four hours and debated thirty resolutions,
and the annual convention seminar sponsored by the National
Association of Blind Students. This included the second
installment of the Jerry Whittle soap opera, "The Young and the
Skill-less," and an address by Mrs. tenBroek, in which she
discussed the concept of militancy. Near the beginning of her
remarks, in a discussion of the early years of our movement, she
said:

     It was not long before the agencies began to increase the
level of pressure. Membership in the NFB would be at the blind
person's peril. It could and did lead to denial of certain social
and rehabilitative services, employment opportunities, and
promotions on the job. Why? Because our demands for improvement
in services and programs were upsetting the status quo. If we
were successful, who would need them? We were branded in the most
pejorative terms as militant, and blind people were warned to
stay away from us.
     What does the adjective militant mean? Webster tells us that
it means "ready and willing to fight; warlike; combative. SYN see
aggressive." After giving the familiar definition, it goes on,
"Aggressive implies a bold and energetic pursuit of one's ends,
connoting (in a derogatory sense) a ruthless desire to dominate
and (in a favorable sense) enterprise, initiative, etc."
"Militant," on the other hand, says Webster, "implies a vigorous,
unrelenting espousal of a cause, movement, etc. and rarely
suggests the furthering of one's own ends." So the agencies were
right. The NFB is determinedly "militant."
     The opposite of militant is passive. Passive is not our
style. "Passive," says Webster, is "1. influenced/or acted upon
without exerting influence or acting in return; inactive but
acted upon, 2. Offering no opposition or resistance; submissive"
and so on. "Passive" is what the blind were for many years--in
fact, for many centuries, and too many are to this day, doing
what the agencies, the rehab officials, and (may we forgive them)
their well-meaning parents tell them to do "for your own good."
Militant (in the proper dictionary term, not the pejorative
sense) is what the National Federation of the Blind has been
since its creation in 1940.

     On Tuesday evening there were also two moving performances
of To Those Who Wait, a powerful new play by Jerry Whittle, based
on the life of Federationist Edgar Sammons.
     At 9:00 a.m. Tuesday, June 30, the 1992 convention meeting
of the Board of Directors of the National Federation of the Blind
(a meeting open to all) was gaveled to order by President Marc
Maurer. Following a moment of silence in memory of those
Federationists who had died, and after other opening activities
and announcements, President Maurer asked Dr. and Mrs. Jernigan
to describe the newest additions to the Federation's series of
small paperback publications. The first to be described is
titled: What You Should Know About Blindness, Services for the
Blind, and the Organized Blind Movement. The front cover features
a lovely water color drawing of the National Center for the
Blind. The book is filled with short, information-packed articles
about services available to blind people in this country and
about the National Federation of the Blind. The first five copies
of this book are free to anyone. Individual copies after that are
$1 each, and a box of fifty costs $10. Because the book is
printed in large type, there is no mailing expense, which will
allow chapters quickly and easily to get it into the hands of
people who are losing their sight.
     A new Kernel Book, The Freedom Bell, was next described.
Like the first Kernel Book (What Color is the Sun), The Freedom
Bell is comprised of easy-to-read inspirational articles about
what it is really like to be blind. A third paperback in this
series is already in progress. Printed in large type, The Freedom
Bell (like What Color is the Sun) costs $3 each for up to fifty
copies. A box of fifty sells for $50. Since What Color is the Sun
is not in large type, there is an extra $5 for shipping and
handling a box of fifty. All of these books are ideal for
placement in schools and libraries and for distribution to
interested members of the public. 
     Dr. Jernigan then turned to a subject that was to absorb a
good bit of convention attention and energy during the remainder
of the week. He briefed the Board and audience on a plan to
establish a study commission on education and rehabilitation for
the blind and visually impaired, which has been incorporated into
the proposed revision of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,
scheduled for reauthorization this summer. The National
Federation of the Blind has never thought that such a commission
was particularly important or even useful. The various groups in
the blindness field are beginning to talk and work together in a
way and with cooperation never before seen, and inserting one
more bureaucratic layer between groups trying to speak to each
other and to their elected representatives in Congress seems to
the organized blind to be, at the very least, wasteful and
probably counterproductive to the consumer movement and to any
constructive effort to bring about improvement in the field. 
     But some, though by no means all, professionals in the
blindness field have rallied behind the commission concept and
are enthusiastic about mandating that the federal government
spend a million dollars or more in the coming year and a half on
establishing a body that, as it was first defined, would have
been composed of fifteen education and rehabilitation
professionals, a third of whom were required to be blind or the
parents of blind children. 
     During the Board meeting plans were laid to oppose the
commission concept and keep it out of the final legislation if we
could, and failing that, to increase the representation of
consumer representatives on the body. Again and again throughout
the week the subject of the commission arose, and Federationists
made many calls to encourage blind people in their states to call
key members of the House of Representatives, where the bill would
first be considered. Federationists also made plans to travel to
Washington following the convention to talk with members of
Congress.
     Carla McQuillan, President of the National Federation of the
Blind of Oregon, next came to the platform to make a presentation
of a check for $48,000 from the Oregon affiliate to the national
organization.
     Dr. Jernigan then made the following introduction: 

     We have had differences with the American Council of the
Blind. However, we have no personal animosity toward anyone in
that organization and, in fact, have worked with a number of
people in the American Council. I hope the day will come when
there can be cooperation between the organizations. That is all
by way of saying that we have with us here in this meeting Paul
Edwards, who is the First Vice President of the American Council
of the Blind. There are two things I would say to him: First, we
appreciate the fact that you have come, and second, you are most
welcome in this convention. [applause] Mr. Edwards, we are
pleased to have you. If you wish to come to the platform and take
the microphone for a minute of greeting, we will be pleased to
hear from you. We are always happy to have any person attend this
convention and certainly are happy to have you here.
     Mr. Edwards then came to the microphone and spoke as
follows:

     First I would like to thank everyone at the National
Federation who I've had the opportunity to meet this week for
being as nice and helpful as everyone has been. And secondly, I'd
like to say that, while I am simply here as an individual looking
around, I hope there'll be a time when the American Council of
the Blind and the National Federation can work together on all
kinds of issues that we see in common. Even though our
organizations may not ever come together as one, I would
certainly like to see us able to work together to build a better
future for blind people in this country, and I think we can do
that. 

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Lydia Usero, President of the National Federation
of the Blind of Puerto Rico, displays the affiliate's charter as
Mildred Rivera (left) and Eileen Rivera (right) look on.]

     Allen Harris, who serves as treasurer of the Federation and
who led an organizing team in late May to Puerto Rico, next moved
that the constitution of the National Federation of the Blind of
Puerto Rico be approved by the Board of Directors. The motion was
seconded by Diane McGeorge and Fred Schroeder. President Maurer
told the board that he had reviewed the document and that it was
in order, and the motion passed unanimously. Lydia Usero,
president of the newest affiliate of the Federation, then briefly
addressed the Board, and President Maurer reviewed the language
of the charter which would be presented to the National
Federation of the Blind of Puerto Rico at the banquet later in
the week. 
     President Maurer then called Sunny and Adam Emerson of
Michigan and Jerry Harvey (the Director of Experimental
Manufacturing for Chevrolet/Pontiac Canada of the General Motors
Corporation) to the platform to make a presentation. Sunny
Emerson is one of the leaders of the Parents of Blind Children
Division, and her son Adam is among our top Associates
recruiters. The Emersons and Mr. Harvey described a small device
which the Emersons had found useful when Adam was learning to
read and write Braille. They recently discovered that it is no
longer being manufactured, but Sunny was convinced that it would
be very useful to anyone, blind or sighted, who was interested in
understanding the composition of Braille symbols. She was
determined to find someone to produce the device again, so she
took her problem to the people at General Motors; and they said
they would produce a prototype for her. 
     They did better than that: They created a number of the
clever little gadgets and presented Mr. Maurer with the drawings
so that the device can now be produced by anyone with the proper
equipment. The finished product measures 1-3/4 inches high by 2-
1/2 inches wide by 3/8 inches thick and represents two Braille
cells side by side. The six dots of each cell are actually pins
that snap forward and back in such a way that in one position
they stand out clearly on the front to form Braille letters and
are flush against the back, and in the other position they form
easy-to-recognize dots on the back and are flush with the surface
of the front. This enables the user to construct large, easily
discernable Braille symbols, and because the symbols are created
by pushing the pins up from the back, a person learning to use a
slate to write Braille can understand quickly and clearly the
principle underlying writing with a slate. The National Office of
the Federation is now looking into the possibility of finding a
producer for this device so that it will be available to everyone
with an interest in teaching or learning Braille. Both the Board
and the audience expressed their thanks to Mr. Harvey and through
him to the Experimental Manufacturing Department of General
Motors. 
     Peggy Pinder, Second Vice President of the National
Federation of the Blind and Chairman of the Scholarship
Committee, then presented this year's class of twenty-six
scholarship winners from across the United States. The actual
scholarships were presented during the banquet on Friday evening,
and a report of those awards appears elsewhere in this issue. 
     The final business of the meeting of the Board of Directors
was to deal with the Associates Program. This is our ongoing
effort to recruit members-at-large, who will become Associates of
the National Federation of the Blind. This year we announced both
the top ten member-recruiters and the top ten money-raisers.
President Maurer listed them as follows:

Top 10 in Number of Associates Recruited

10. Cindy Handel (Pennsylvania): 94
9. Fred Schroeder (New Mexico): 101
8. Leonard Oberlander (Iowa): 102
7. Ed Vaughan (Missouri): 127
6. Karen Mayry (South Dakota): 129
5. Bill Isaacs (Illinois): 142
4. Tom Stevens (Missouri): 152
3. Kenneth Jernigan (Maryland): 179
2. Frank Lee (Alabama): 237
1. Arthur Schreiber (New Mexico): 491

Top 10 in Dollar Amount Raised

10. Ed Vaughan (Missouri): $1,835
9. Fred Schroeder (New Mexico): $1,856
8. Tom Stevens (Missouri): $1,929
7. Bill Isaacs (Illinois): $2,375
6. Frank Lee (Alabama): $2,441.25
5. Duane Gerstenberger (Maryland): $2,755
4. Karen Mayry (South Dakota): $3,042
3. Mary Ellen Jernigan (Maryland): $3,339.74
2. Arthur Schreiber (New Mexico): $5,909
1. Kenneth Jernigan (Maryland): $9,787

     On Wednesday morning the first general session of the fifty-
second convention of the National Federation of the Blind began
promptly at 10:00 a.m. with the awarding of a $100 door prize.
After the invocation and several announcements, Hazel Staley,
president of our host affiliate, and Richard Vinroot, Mayor of
the city of Charlotte, welcomed the convention to the Queen City.
The remainder of the morning was devoted to the roll call of
states. The high point came when for the first time Puerto Rico
was called and President Maurer clearly enjoyed his struggle to
master the Spanish names of the delegates who were announced as
taking part in various convention activities.
     Last-minute notification that a member of President Bush's
cabinet would be present to address the convention that afternoon
resulted in reorganization of the agenda. Paul Cooksey, Deputy
Administrator of the Small Business Administration, spoke to the
convention at 2:00 p.m. on the subject "Opportunities for
Minorities in Business: Where Do the Blind Fit In?" Mr. Cooksey
urged Federationists to seek legislative solutions to the
problems blind business people face in having to prove social and
economic disadvantage individually when applying for SBA
assistance. He cautioned that there is not enough money to go
around now and that dividing an insufficient pie into even
smaller pieces is not a good long-term solution. 
     Following the SBA discussion President Maurer delivered the
1992 Presidential Report, which as usual was filled with evidence
of the vigor and commitment of the National Federation of the
Blind. The entire text of the report appears elsewhere in this
issue. The words with which President Maurer concluded his report
captured the energy and personal dedication to our goals that
define the organized blind movement today:

     As President of this dynamic nationwide organization, I have
had the good fortune to be with thousands of you during the
course of the year. There are certainly problems--some of them
large and complex. But we have the organization; we have the
means of collecting the resources; and most important of all, we
have the spirit that is required. It will not be easy--the simple
things are for those who do not share our commitment, our
dedication. The ignorance about blindness is ancient; the
misunderstandings we face are widespread; and the misconceptions
about us are great. Nevertheless, I have met with you, the
members of this organization, in meetings all over the nation in
our hundreds and thousands. I have shared with you our hopes, our
disappointments, our realities, and our dreams. And I know--I am
certain--that there is nothing on Earth that can stop us or hold
us back. We have the courage, the gentleness, the practical good
sense, the willingness to work--and we have the boldness to dream
of the time when the problems we face will be no more. This is
the promise and the reality of the National Federation of the
Blind--and this is my report to you.

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Lamar Alexander, United States Secretary of
Education, addresses the 1992 convention of the National
Federation of the Blind while Dr. Jernigan listens attentively.]

     At almost the moment President Maurer was beginning his
annual report, Secretary of Education Lamar Alexander entered the
convention hall and made his way to the platform, where he sat
listening carefully to the address. After the standing ovation
that followed the Presidential Report had quieted, Dr. Jernigan
introduced Secretary Alexander and thanked him for coming to
speak to the nation's blind citizens in convention assembled and
for listening to what we had to say about the problems and
prospects facing blind people. Secretary Alexander spoke to the
convention about President Bush's hopes and dreams for improving
education in America, but he also made it clear that he had heard
what we the blind are thinking and doing and that he recognizes
the growing influence of the National Federation of the Blind.
Early in his remarks he said: 

     I got a call about a week ago from Clayton Yeutter, who is
the Domestic Policy Director to President Bush. He said to me, "I
would like you to go to Charlotte to speak to the National
Federation of the Blind on behalf of President Bush." 
     I said, "I can't go," because I already had a number of
things that I was doing today. And the long and the short of it
is, because I know who I work for, I changed those things. I'm
here today because of your importance and because the President
wanted me to be here.... 
     I think that the most important thing I can do here has
already been done. I listened; I had a chance to hear what you
were saying. And one of the first things I'm going to do is go
back and find out, Marc, why we need another commission in
Washington when we already have too many commissions as it is.
[Applause]

     The final agenda item of the afternoon was an excellent
address by Gwendolyn King, Commissioner of the Social Security
Administration. Her title was "Social Security for the Blind: The
Progress of Today and the Plans for Tomorrow." Commissioner King
reviewed the progress that has been made in recent times as her
staff have worked effectively together with the National
Federation of the Blind and other consumers to bring about
change. It is clear that there is now hope that Social Security
programs will increase the likelihood in the future that
recipients can begin to achieve independence.

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Claudell Stocker, head of the Braille Development
Section of the National Library Service for the Blind and
Physically Handicapped, looks on while four participants in her
Braille reading and writing workshop experiment with the slate
and stylus.]

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Despite his cast, Federationist Noel Romey plays
the piano in this year's Showcase of Talent, sponsored by the
Music Division of the National Federation of the Blind.]

     The evening saw more committee meetings and a workshop for
those interested in learning more about reading and writing
Braille, which was sponsored by the Parents of Blind Children
Division. The Music Division's annual Showcase of Talent also
took place Wednesday evening. The three first-place winners were
as follows: in composition, Nancy Herb from Tucson, Arizona, for
her piece, "With a Song in My Heart," which she sang and played
herself; in the children's performance division, Noel Romey, age
twelve of Phoenix, Arizona, who played "Fur Elise" on the piano,
despite having broken his arm on the preceding Sunday; and in the
adult performance division, Linda Milliner of Sacramento,
California, for her vocal rendition of "Misty." 

[PHOTO/CAPTION: So many Federationists flocked to the Wednesday
night party that it was hard to find empty space enough to
dance.]

     The single event, however, that attracted almost everybody
at one time or another that evening was the Midnight Reception
and Dance, which really began at 8:00 p.m. and featured a live
band and lots of enthusiastic Federationists taking part in the
festivities. 
     But Thursday morning at 8:30 delegates were in their places
ready to tackle the crowded agenda. The first order of business
was the election, during which all of the officer positions and
half the seats on the Board of Directors were open. Diane
McGeorge, First Vice President of the Federation since 1984, had
announced during the meeting of the Board of Directors on Tuesday
that she would not be a candidate for that position this year.
Her statement was greeted by the Board and audience with both
regret and understanding since her personal and professional
schedules continue to be extremely busy--but most of all there
was a feeling of affectionate gratitude for her dedicated and
talented leadership for so many years. David Hyde of Oregon also
announced that he would not be a candidate for the Board this
year. Those elected to serve on the Board for the next two years
were Marc Maurer (Maryland), President; Joyce Scanlan
(Minnesota), First Vice President; Peggy Pinder (Iowa), Second
Vice President; Ramona Walhof (Idaho), Secretary; Allen Harris
(Michigan), Treasurer; Steve Benson (Illinois); Charles Brown
(Virginia); Glenn Crosby (Texas); Sam Gleese (Mississippi); Frank
Lee (Alabama); and Diane McGeorge (Colorado). They join the hold-
over Board members elected last year: Don Capps (South Carolina),
Priscilla Ferris (Massachusetts), Betty Niceley (Kentucky), Fred
Schroeder (New Mexico), Joanne Wilson (Louisiana), and Gary
Wunder (Missouri). Sam Gleese, whose name may not be familiar to
everyone, is the President of the National Federation of the
Blind of Mississippi and has been working effectively and
energetically for several years to improve the lives of blind
citizens in that state.
     Edward Mercado, Director of the Office for Civil Rights of
the Department of Health and Human Services, next addressed the
convention on the subject "Interaction of the Blind with
Government: What Lies Ahead." He urged the Federation to continue
to work with his office to protect the civil rights of blind
people. The government's concept of what constitutes
discrimination continues to evolve and mature, and consumers must
insure that appropriate decisions and rulings are made. 
     "Eliminating Ambiguity in the Braille Code" was the title of
an address delivered by Darleen Bogart, Chairperson of the
Braille Authority of North America and National Braille Convener
of the Canadian National Institute for the Blind. She outlined
the current problems in the various Braille codes used in North
America and announced that a serious effort is now underway to
bring all but the music code into a single coherent and
encompassing system that will enable all readers to comprehend
literary, Nemeth, and computer codes by extending their existing
knowledge of one, rather than by learning three distinct and
incompatible codes. 
     The remainder of the morning was devoted to a panel
discussion comprising Kenneth Jernigan, Executive Director of the
National Federation of the Blind; Carl Augusto, President and
Executive Director of the American Foundation for the Blind; and
Ritchie Geisel, President of Recording for the Blind. Dr.
Jernigan's address was titled "Shifting Balances in the Blindness
Field." Mr. Augusto's title was "The Role of the American
Foundation for the Blind in Meeting Needs: Today and Tomorrow."
Mr. Geisel's title was "RFB Update: E-Text and Other New
Services." These presentations and the conversation that followed
them provided fascinating listening for everyone interested in
the history and the future of the blindness field. That
discussion is printed elsewhere in this issue. 
     With no afternoon session scheduled, Federationists
scattered to take part in tours, shopping expeditions, a thorough
exploration of the exhibit hall, and more committee meetings and
workshops. The big event of the evening was the long-awaited Pig
Pickin', North Carolina's version of a barbecue. There was a live
band, as well as lots of food and drink, and hundreds of
Federationists boarded the buses at their hotels to enjoy an
evening of fun, food, and music North Carolina-style. Those with
excess energy and no committee meetings gathered later for the
annual Monte Carlo Night, sponsored by the National Association
of Blind Students.
     But the next morning at 8:45 sharp, delegates flocked to the
Charlotte Convention Center for the opening of the Friday
session. Charles Taylor, Member of Congress representing Brevard,
North Carolina, spoke to the group on the subject "Representative
Government: The Blind are A Part." Next Albert Sanchez, a long-
time Federation leader from Spokane, Washington, addressed the
convention. His title was "Gaining Independence Through Service:
Repairing and Tuning Pianos." Mr. Sanchez assured his listeners
that there is still a good living to be made in this field for
those who are willing to work hard and creatively and who
practice good business skills. 
     Frank Kurt Cylke, Director of the National Library Service
for the Blind and Physically Handicapped of the Library of
Congress, once again this year reported to the convention on the
latest activities and future plans of the National Library
Service. His title was "The Library of Congress Refines Braille
Mailing Containers and Service Patterns While Undertaking a Major
Audio Technology Review." Mr. Cylke then answered as many
questions as time would allow before announcing that during the
lunch hour he would meet with borrowers having questions or
problems. Over the years we have come to enjoy an excellent
working relationship with the Library, and we appreciate the
director's willingness to exchange ideas and discuss problems
with us.

[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: David Blyth, President of the East
Asia/Pacific Region of the World Blind Union, travelled to this
year's convention from his home in Melbourne, Australia.]
     The next item of business was a panel presentation chaired
by Dr. Jernigan, entitled "The Blind in the World." The first
speaker was David Blyth, President of the East Asia/Pacific
Region of the World Blind Union. Mr. Blyth discussed the strong
commitment to Braille among a broad range of countries in his
region and urged the National Federation of the Blind to work
with him in the coming years to share our expertise with the less
developed nations, insuring that blind citizens, and especially
the most oppressed of these, are given an equal chance. He
concluded by saying that the most valuable contribution that the
World Blind Union can give blind people is not money, but the
knowledge and expertise to make the most of the resources that
become available.
     Euclid Herie, Treasurer of the World Blind Union and
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Canadian National
Institute for the Blind, then addressed the convention on the
topic "The World Blind Union and the Developing Countries--
Reality or Illusion." Dr. Herie pointed out that any organization
that attempts to bring together for common action a group as
diverse in education, culture, political background, and outlook
as the representatives of organizations of blind people and
agencies serving the blind from throughout the world will have
profound difficulties. WBU committees are by and large not
working well, and very real changes must be made if anything
positive is to be accomplished. But he believes that the job can
be done, and he sees signs that a real beginning is being made.
     In several short statements during this agenda item, Dr.
Jernigan emphasized that the National Federation of the Blind has
in recent years taken an increasingly active role in the
deliberations of the WBU. He said that the last four years of its
existence have been characterized by many meetings and that the
coming quadrennium will probably be decisive in determining
whether or not the WBU will take its place as a permanent force
for progress in the international blindness field. He, too,
expressed the hope that the WBU will succeed and pointed out that
it takes time for any new organization to make a difference but
that if thinking and conscientious people in a group, the blind
for example, are not prepared to make a start, life will never
improve for any of the members of that group either in the
present generation or in any future generation. 
     The final item on the morning agenda was a panel of
presenters whose topic was "Blind People Working for Our Daily
Bread." The participants were Bonnie Peterson, Instructor of
Communications at the University of Wisconsin, Parkside; Daryel
White, auto body repair worker at Marty's Body Works in St.
Louis, Missouri; William Skawinski, Ph.D., Chemist at the New
Jersey Institute of Technology; and Ruth Swenson, Managing
Attorney at Community Legal Services in Chandler, Arizona. 

[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Nell Carney, Commissioner of the
United States Rehabilitation Services Administration.]

     The afternoon session began with an address entitled "The
Federal Rehabilitation Act Now and in the Future" by Nell Carney,
Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration.
Commissioner Carney began her remarks by saying: 

     Thank you, Mr. President. Members of the Federation, I am
here this afternoon to bring you greetings from George Bush and
his Administration as the President's appointed person to advance
rehabilitation policy and programs throughout the United States.
President George Bush is the only president in our history who
has made disability issues a primary concern of his
administration. Yesterday afternoon I received a call from the
White House asking that I please announce at this conference, the
largest gathering of disabled people anywhere in the world that
we know about, that the President yesterday appointed a blind
attorney (Richard Casey of New York City, with the firm Brown and
Wood) to sit on the Seventh District Court in the State of New
York. [applause] Mr. Casey is the third blind person that the
President has appointed to a high-ranking position in the federal
government: I was the first. He then appointed a blind man to sit
on the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, and now Mr. Casey. 

     Commissioner Carney went on to report to the convention on
the current effort to reauthorize the Rehabilitation Act and on
other programs of importance to blind consumers. Again the
Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration
demonstrated her understanding of the issues that matter to blind
people and her genuine commitment to assist all blind citizens to
achieve better, more productive lives. 
     Following a spirited and fruitful series of questions and
answers between Commissioner Carney and the audience, President
Maurer introduced an agenda item focusing on the education of
blind children. The first presentation was entitled "The Future
of Education for Blind Children: Problems of Placement and
Responsibility." Fred Schroeder, Executive Director of the New
Mexico Commission for the Blind and member of the Board of
Directors of the National Federation of the Blind, delivered this
address; and Louis Tutt, Superintendent of the Maryland School
for the Blind and President of the Council of Schools for the
Blind, spoke on the topic "The Role of Schools for the Blind."
The presentations underscored the growing problem of inadequate
educational alternatives for blind youngsters in virtually all
settings and the need to improve the programs we provide and the
expectations we have for these children and their teachers. 
     The final topic of discussion for the afternoon was
"Architectural Barriers for the Blind: the Myth and the Reality."
Peggy Pinder, Second Vice President of the National Federation of
the Blind and this organization's representative to recent
meetings of the Committee on Accessibility of the American
National Standards Institute (ANSI), and Richard Hudnut, Chairman
of the ANSI Committee on Accessibility, took part in this
discussion. It is clear that important changes have been made in
official attitudes toward the general competence of blind people
as a result of Miss Pinder's participation in the deliberations
of the ANSI committee and that all blind people will benefit as a
result. At the close of the afternoon session the convention hall
emptied quickly as people sped back to their rooms to prepare for
the evening's festivities. 
     This year, as is always the case, the banquet was the high
point of the entire convention. There is a kind of electricity
that flows through a crowd of more than 2,000 people gathered
together in eager expectation of an evening of inspiration,
laughter, and the joy of shared dedication to a vital cause. Dr.
Jernigan presided over the gala and kept the program moving as
only he can. The recipient of the 1992 Blind Educator of the Year
Award was Allen Harris of Dearborn, Michigan. Mr. Harris is
chairman of the Social Studies Department at Edsel Ford High
School, President of the NFB of Michigan, and Treasurer of the
National Federation of the Blind. The Jacobus tenBroek Award was
presented to Richard Edlund for his long and dedicated service to
and for the Federation. Mr. Edlund, currently a member of the
Kansas state legislature and one of the leaders of the National
Federation of the Blind of Kansas, was formerly the treasurer of
the National Federation of the Blind and the president of the
Kansas affiliate. The Distinguished Educator of Blind Children
Award was presented to Ruby Ryles of Bothell, Washington. Mrs.
Ryles is a leader of the Parents of Blind Children Division, as
well as an outstanding educator. A detailed report of these award
presentations appears elsewhere in this issue. 
     Twenty-six scholarships (ranging in value from $2,000 to
$10,000) were also presented at the banquet. The winner of the
Ezra Davis Memorial Scholarship of $10,000 was Carlos Servan of
New Mexico. A complete report on this year's scholarship winners
and the awards they received appears elsewhere in this issue. 
     The highlight of the banquet and of the week was, of course,
this year's banquet address by President Maurer. It was titled
"The Mysterious Ten Percent," and in it he called the blind to
claim and achieve the substance of our dreams of equality and
freedom. His audience responded with energy and rededication to
our shared promise to ourselves and to the next generation to
seize the justice and freedom to which we are entitled. He said
in conclusion:

     If we cannot muster the courage, sustain the dream, or
maintain the nerve, the loss will be unimaginable. But, of
course, we will not fail. We have one another, and nobody--no
agency for the blind, no magazine editor, no film producer, no
so-called scientific researcher, no television network official--
can prevent us from going the rest of the way toward freedom. We
believe in one another; we have faith in the ability of our blind
brothers and sisters; and we will share the burden that must be
borne to bring true independence to the blind. Ninety percent
must be known if learning is to occur. But there is the other ten
percent, the mysterious ten percent, the vital ten percent--and
we will supply it; we are the National Federation of the Blind.
My brothers and my sisters, come! Join me, and we will make it
all come true!

     The full text of the banquet address is printed elsewhere in
this issue. 
     Saturday, July 4, the final day of the convention, was
devoted to organization business. The Washington Report,
delivered by James Gashel, Director of Governmental Affairs,
reviewed the year's legislative activities and discussed current
issues of concern. A number of other reports of committee
activities were also made. In the Pre-authorized Check (PAC)
Program of contributions to the movement, we came into the
convention with 1,283 people contributing a total of $295,000 a
year. At the close of the convention those numbers had risen to
1,368 people contributing $310,000 a year. In the Deferred
Insurance Giving (DIG) Program this year we concentrated on
encouraging state affiliates to purchase $100,000 policies on
young adults that could be paid up immediately or in a short
period of time. Ten states made arrangements to take part in this
effort, raising a million dollars for the organization. The
states were California, Colorado, Maryland, Michigan, New Mexico,
New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Utah. We also
worked hard for the first time on signing up individuals on the
NFB Network so that up to ten percent of their long-distance
phone bills can be contributed to the NFB as a tax-deductible
contribution. For more information about this program consult
Sharon Gold, President of the NFB of California, who is
organizing this effort. Her office phone number is (916) 424-
2226. 
     Those resolutions that had not been dealt with earlier in
the week were debated and passed on Saturday. The texts of all
this year's resolutions appear elsewhere in this issue. 
     With that work completed, the 1992 convention of the
National Federation of the Blind adjourned and became history. If
one were to choose a single word with which to characterize this
convention, it would be contentment--not that the delegates were
satisfied with things as they are for blind people in this
country. There is much for us to do to improve the lives of blind
people before we can rest, but we have found the way. We know
what we must accomplish, and we have good friends to encourage us
as we travel the road together. 
     Another year has passed with its full measure of challenge,
frustration, and victory. Sadly some who marched faithfully with
us are no longer here to share the burdens and celebrate our
joys. But there are many more who have found our cause and joined
our movement. On Thursday morning Dr. Jernigan conducted an
experiment in which he asked the audience to respond according to
the decade in which they came to their first convention. Only a
voice or two could be heard from the forties. But with each
succeeding decade through the eighties the volume rose, and those
attending their first convention this year held their own in
volume with every other group. 
     The organization is in good hands because it is clearly in
the hands of blind people who know what must be done and how to
move forward. On Sunday morning we packed our bags and scattered
to every corner of the country with promises to see one another
next summer in Dallas. The count-down has begun. The 1993
gathering of the National Federation of the Blind will be the
biggest, most exciting event in the blindness field. You won't
want to miss it, so begin planning now to be a part of the
celebration. But in the meantime we have lives to change,
injustice to correct, and history to write.


[PHOTO: Mr. Maurer standing at podium microphone, reading
Braille. CAPTION: Marc Maurer, President of the National
Federation of the Blind, delivers his 1992 Presidential Report.]

                       PRESIDENTIAL REPORT

                NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
                    CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
                          JULY 1, 1992

     During the past twelve months the endeavors of the National
Federation of the Blind--the largest, most dynamic organization
of blind people in the nation--have been diversified, extensive,
and energetic. The oneness of spirit and the harmony within the
Federation are as great as they have ever been. As we have come
together in this convention to plan for the year ahead and
reflect on the year just ended, our mood is upbeat, enthusiastic,
self-assured. The influence of the organized blind in matters
dealing with blind people continues to increase. The problems for
the blind are many, but we have the know-how, the determination,
the dedication, and the talent to solve them. 
     When we think of the work of the Federation, many images
come to mind--teaching Braille and the other skills of blindness
to blind children or adults, seeking the adoption of laws or
regulations that will protect the rights or promote opportunities
for the blind, collecting technology of use to the blind,
distributing information about employment to the blind, planning
meetings with public officials to persuade them to follow a
certain course of action beneficial to the blind, assisting the
parents of a blind child, speaking to the public about the
normality and respectability of being blind, and assembling in
our meetings and conventions at the local, state, and national
levels to discuss the matters that affect our daily lives. As the
members of the public come to understand blindness, and as our
sighted colleagues become aware of our hopes and dreams, much of
the difficulty that we as blind people face will be a thing of
the past.
     Our name and activities have become so well-known throughout
the United States as to be almost household words, but our
philosophy and point of view are also recognized and sought in
nations beyond our borders. This spring Dr. Kenneth Jernigan (our
Executive Director, the most widely recognized author in the
field of work with the blind today, our teacher, and our leader)
was invited by the American government to represent the United
States in matters concerning blindness at the Eastern European
Conference on Disabilities in Prague, Czechoslovakia. When Dr.
Jernigan indicated that his schedule would not conveniently
permit him to attend, the government officials involved urged him
to change his plans and made it clear that he, as the primary
spokesman knowledgeable about blindness in our country, would be
a keynote speaker for the conference. As reported in the June,
1992, Braille Monitor, Dr. Jernigan went, and he carried our
message. 
     In addition, Dr. Jernigan, at the invitation of the Director
of the Office for Civil Rights of the Department of Health and
Human Services, traveled to Puerto Rico last year to be the
featured speaker at a conference to discuss the importance and
the meaning of the Americans With Disabilities Act. We in the
National Federation of the Blind have been a powerful force--
perhaps more effective than anybody else--in bringing blind
people into the workplace. The Office for Civil Rights of the
Department of Health and Human Services has shown its commitment
to equal rights for the handicapped. It has been very much
interested in working with us to see that disabled people are
employed on terms of equality with others. 
     Last year I reported to you that the National Federation of
the Blind had created the National Braille and Technology Center
for the Blind, which is now called the International Braille and
Technology Center for the Blind because included within it are
products from many countries and because this Center is available
for use and study by individuals from any nation on Earth.
Collected in one place is every piece of hardware which we have
been able to locate (and most of the software packages) capable
of producing information in Braille or in speech. The perspective
gained by an examination of this array of computer technology is
not merely helpful from an intellectual point of view. It
provides technical solutions to everyday problems and inspiration
for imaginative methods of employing electronic equipment.
     The establishment of the International Braille and
Technology Center for the Blind (along with the far-ranging
interaction of the National Federation of the Blind with others
throughout the blindness system) helped stimulate the convening
of the U.S.-Canada Conference on Technology for the Blind, which
took place in Baltimore at the National Center for the Blind last
September. This conference brought together for the first time in
history the leaders of all of the major entities in the field of
work with the blind in this country and many of those from
Canada, along with the principal manufacturers and distributors
of technology for the blind. This international conference (which
nobody else could have called and organized) is noteworthy
because it engendered a spirit of unity never before achieved in
the field of work with the blind. Leaders from the Rehabilitation
Services Administration, the Library of Congress, the private
agencies for the blind, the vision consultants, the professional
organizations for the blind, the producers of technological
devices and software for the blind, and blind consumers came
together to discuss common problems, share information, learn
from each other, and plan for future cooperation. Such a meeting
could not have taken place as recently as ten years ago (or, for
that matter, even five years ago) because of the fragmentation,
distrust, and hostility which then existed in the field of work
with the blind. But the hostility, the distrust, and the
fragmentation are diminishing, and the blind are receiving better
services and expanded opportunities as a result.
     Dr. Kenneth Jernigan serves as President of the North
America/Caribbean Region of the World Blind Union. As the elected
leader of the world organization from our area of the globe, he
attended meetings this year in Tokyo, Hong Kong, Saudi Arabia,
Bahrain, and Canada. The international cooperation among agencies
and organizations dealing with blindness has been tremendously
beneficial to the blind of the United States and to other
countries as well. Not only have we gained knowledge of matters
dealing with blindness in other lands and perspective regarding
our efforts at home, but we have also been stimulated to plan
cooperative ventures with other entities in the field of work
with the blind that would never have occurred without our
involvement in the international arena. Indeed at the National
Center for the Blind we have welcomed over a thousand visitors
during the last twelve months--many of them from nations beyond
our borders, including:  Australia, Bermuda, Brazil, Canada,
Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Germany, Hungary, India, Ireland, Japan,
Lithuania, New Zealand, Pakistan, the Philippines, Russia, Saudi
Arabia, Sweden, Switzerland, Thailand, Turkey, and the United
Kingdom. In the fall of 1992 at the quadrennial meeting of the
World Blind Union scheduled to be held in Cairo, we will be
participating actively to expand opportunities for the blind. Not
only in our own country, but throughout the world, we are
changing what it means to be blind.
     One of the best known medical research centers dealing with
vision loss is the Wilmer Eye Institute, a department of Johns
Hopkins University. In 1989, working in conjunction with this
prestigious medical facility, the National Federation of the
Blind published the book Blindness and Disorders of the Eye. In
1992 the Wilmer Eye Institute has released its publication,
Vision Loss Information and Resources. In this brief document the
National Federation of the Blind is mentioned seven times. As is
the case with others, the medical professionals are discovering
that they can serve their clients better when they become
associated with the organized blind. 
     Two of the best known writers in the field of education of
children with disabilities are Daniel P. Hallihan and James M.
Kauffman, authors of the volume Exceptional Children:
Introduction to Special Education. In 1988 Professors Hallihan
and Kauffman released a new edition of their textbook, which
contained statements indicating that the blind could not be as
competitive as those with eyesight. At the invitation of the
National Federation of the Blind, these authors attended and
participated in our 1991 National Convention. After returning
home, Professors Hallihan and Kauffman wrote to the Federation
indicating that the information about blindness they intended to
include in the next edition of their book would be much more
positive, and they give credit where credit is due--to the
National Federation of the Blind. The blind children of today
(the oncoming generation of blind adults of the decades ahead)
must be given the opportunity to be treated like the normal human
beings they are, and deserve the right to be--and we (you and I,
the members of the National Federation of the Blind) are the ones
to get the job done. We can do it--and we will do it!
     One of the most positive programs for the blind is the Books
for the Blind Program conducted by the National Library Service
for the Blind and Physically Handicapped of the Library of
Congress. For a number of years the National Federation of the
Blind has been working cooperatively with Mr. Frank Kurt Cylke,
the Director of the NLS program, and other officials at the
Library of Congress. The resulting interaction between blind
consumers and library officials has provided the opportunity for
give and take, joint planning, and imaginative exploration of
technological and programmatic alternatives. 
     This spring the National Conference of Librarians Serving
Blind and Physically Handicapped Individuals was held in
Baltimore. All two hundred of these librarians came to the
National Center for the Blind and were our guests for lunch and a
tour of the facility. The dining room at the National Center for
the Blind is a sizable area, but until May of 1992, it had never
been quite so full. Many of the librarians had not previously
visited the National Center, but the response makes it clear that
this first meeting will not be the last. 
     The National Federation of the Blind is among the most
outspoken proponents of Braille. In addition to publishing the
Braille Monitor in Braille, circulating tens of thousands of
documents in Braille, establishing the National Association to
Promote the Use of Braille, supporting Braille lending libraries,
serving on a committee to advise the National Library Service for
the Blind and Physically Handicapped regarding the development of
a Braille competency examination, creating the International
Braille and Technology Center for the Blind, and initiating other
actions to support Braille, we have authored, taken to the state
legislatures, and fought for the passage of Braille literacy
bills entitled the "Blind Persons Literacy Rights and Education
Act."  These proposals have been introduced in the legislative
halls of over twenty states and have been adopted in a dozen of
them. In Kentucky the Braille literacy bill passed both houses of
the legislature without a dissenting vote.
     In Maryland the state Education Department tried to weaken
the measure by eliminating the presumption in favor of Braille
for blind students. Education Department officials claimed (if
you can believe it) that legislation with such a presumption
would violate federal law. But we know better--and, incidentally,
so did they. It is not against the law to support Braille or
literacy for the blind. We asked the Attorney General of Maryland
to consider this question:  "Does a presumption in favor of
Braille violate federal requirements?"  When the opinion of the
Attorney General became public, we learned that he agreed with
us. A presumption in favor of Braille complies fully with federal
law. The Maryland Braille literacy bill was adopted without
alteration, exactly as we had drafted it. 
     Let no one be deceived. We will not quit or rest until every
blind child in this nation has the chance to become literate--and
that means the chance to learn Braille. We will do it by
negotiation and gentleness if we can--by stronger means if we
must. But make no mistake about it:  We absolutely intend to get
the job done.
     The public service announcements of the National Federation
of the Blind continue to receive recognition as among the most
positive portrayals of blindness available on radio or
television. Our messages are broadcast by all of the major radio
and television networks and a number of cable systems. It is
estimated that this upbeat depiction of the blind has gone into
the homes of almost two hundred million Americans. 
     Not all of the radio and television coverage about blindness
during the past twelve months has been positive. The ABC program
"Good & Evil," which made fun of the blind, is a malodorous
reminder--a reminder that many of the attitudes about the blind
held by entertainers and others are still both superficial and
negative. ABC personnel had the effrontery to tell us that the
blind character on "Good & Evil," shown as a clumsy oaf who used
blindness as an excuse to fondle indiscriminately the sex organs
of both men and women, was a positive portrayal of us as blind
people. But we of the National Federation of the Blind were not
prepared to take this abuse without a fight. And if it ever
happens again, we won't take it next time without a fight either.
     Dr. Jernigan appeared on the nationwide television broadcast
of "Entertainment Tonight" to inform the public that "Good &
Evil" should be cut from the entertainment lineup because its
characterization of blind people was deliberately misleading,
degrading to the blind, and a straight-out lie. Blind Federation
members marched with picket signs in front of ABC headquarters in
New York and Washington. We were interviewed by newspaper
reporters throughout the nation. "Good & Evil" quickly reached
the cutting room floor, and today it is only a disgusting memory.
Let no one doubt it:  The reason for its demise was the National
Federation of the Blind.
     Shortly after Dr. Jernigan appeared on the television
program "Entertainment Tonight," the Cable News Network conducted
an interview with him about blind people serving on juries. A
number of us had been rejected for jury service, and there were
certain so-called experts saying that blind people could not
judge the facts. Dr. Jernigan pointed out that the task of a
juror does not require eyesight but the capacity to understand,
make judgments, and reach conclusions. It is not so much the
state of the eye but the condition of the brain that matters. In
this respect blind jurors are quite as capable as their sighted
colleagues. CNN carried the message to millions--the message of
competence, the message of ability--the message of the National
Federation of the Blind. 
     Last spring the producers of "L.A. Law" contacted the
National Federation of the Blind with questions about the
portrayal of blindness. An actor playing the part of a blind
lawyer was scheduled to appear in several episodes. What would be
believable, they wanted to know. What would be most realistic? 
The information was provided. As it happens, several of the
leaders of our organization have experience with the legal
profession. Blindness is no bar to the competent and effective
practice of law, and we demonstrated this to the screenwriters. 
     In 1990 the Americans with Disabilities Act was signed into
law by the President of the United States. One of the
requirements of this law is that information be made available to
the blind in forms accessible to them. In partnership with the
United States Department of Justice, the National Federation of
the Blind established, last October, the Information Access
Project. Through this project we are providing private companies
and government institutions with assistance and technical support
in meeting the needs of the blind for information. This project
operates through the National Information Access Center (a
subdivision of the National Federation of the Blind) and uses the
facilities, equipment, and expertise of the International Braille
and Technology Center for the Blind, another of our subdivisions.
Volunteers are available in each state to help solve the problems
of obtaining access to information on the local level. During the
first eight months that we provided service through this project,
approximately five thousand people participated in meetings and
seminars about alternative methods for providing information.
From October to May approximately a hundred people a month
visited the National Information Access Center for hands-on
demonstrations. More than thirteen thousand copies of the
brochure Toward Equal Access:  Providing Information Access
Services to Blind and Visually Impaired Persons Under the
Americans With Disabilities Act were distributed in Braille, in
large print, in recorded form, on computer disk, and in digital
format through computers. 
     One of the features of the International Braille and
Technology Center for the Blind is our computer bulletin board,
NFB NET, established about a year ago. This bulletin board is a
computer that can be reached by telephone by people who have
computers that know how to talk on the phone. Our computer has a
lot of storage in its memory. The memory bank is so big that you
could stuff an entire encyclopedia into it and have room left
over. It will hold over 100,000 pages of print, and it talks very
rapidly. 
     Included in the information available from this computer
bulletin board are the Braille Monitor, other NFB literature,
computer games, and specialized computer programs such as
synthesized voice software. Our bulletin board has received more
than five thousand telephone calls, and the number is growing
exponentially. Over twenty-eight million bytes of message and
file information have been transmitted to the board, and more
than one hundred forty-nine million bytes have been disseminated.
We try to make information about blindness available in every
possible way. No matter what the medium, we will use it to send
our message throughout the nation and the world. The blind have
the need--and we have the know-how; we have the resources; and we
have the determination. 
     When I joined the National Federation of the Blind, over
twenty years ago, our movement had a reputation which combined
toughness with generosity and tenderness with a hard-as-hell
practicality. We try to be gentle, but we won't be walked on--and
we have good memories. We do our best to avoid conflict, but when
combat becomes unavoidable, we fight to win--and we never quit.
     In 1984 several members of the National Federation of the
Blind were fired from the Idaho Commission for the Blind because
they were a part of the organized blind movement. For the past
eight years we have been involved in a lawsuit to protect the
rights of the two blind supervisors who were dismissed, Frank
Smith (who has since died) and Ray Martin. The lawsuit charged
unlawful dismissal on two counts: discrimination on the basis of
blindness, and violation of the constitutional right to freedom
of association. The defendants asked that the case be dismissed
on technicalities. They objected to a trial by jury. They urged
the court to rule that even if they admitted the truth of what we
said, the Constitution and the laws of the United States had not
been violated. There was a trial in the federal court, followed
by a proceeding in the Court of Appeals. We had lost in our
arguments at the lower court level, but the Court of Appeals
reversed the decision and ordered a second trial, which was
scheduled to occur later this summer. As the second trial became
imminent, officials in Idaho asked if it wouldn't be possible to
settle the case. Although the documents filed for settlement
carefully avoided admitting wrongdoing, the payment involved may
suggest the extent to which the state officials believed the
charges were true. I have been informed that I am not to disclose
the size of the payment. However, the amount is sizable. The cash
to be paid would not quite buy a new Rolls Royce which might sell
for upwards of $200,000, but I believe it is in the range. 
     In 1986 John Jones, who was then employed as a fire fighter
in the Baltimore City Fire Department, became blind. His
superiors forced him to accept disability retirement. In November
of 1989, we assisted John Jones with a federal lawsuit charging
that the forced retirement was discrimination. After much
maneuvering in the court, the case has now come to a favorable
conclusion. It is helpful to have knowledgeable, determined
friends; it is worthwhile to belong to the National Federation of
the Blind. John Jones is presently reporting to work in the Fire
Prevention and Inspection Section of the Baltimore Fire
Department, and he has received back wages. The total amount of
the payment to him is $108,000. Oh yes, we who are blind have
found our voice--and we have also found our strength. We have
found it through the National Federation of the Blind.
     Sheryl Pilcher, who is a sighted woman living in Texas, has
a five-year-old blind daughter named Ashley. Recently, she
attempted to buy insurance for Ashley, but she was informed by
Security General Insurance Company that they did not insure the
blind. When Sheryl Pilcher brought the matter to the attention of
the Texas Insurance Department, officials there indicated that
nothing could be done. This sighted mother could buy insurance on
her blind daughter from another company or go without. Then, the
National Federation of the Blind came to her assistance. We
examined Texas insurance discrimination laws, and we reached the
conclusion that the Security General Insurance Company had
violated the code. Our findings were brought forcibly to the
attention of the Texas insurance commissioner. Under date of June
2, 1992, the supervisor of Consumer Services of the Texas
Department of Insurance wrote to Security General requesting that
a change in the underwriting guidelines be filed with the
Commission within ten days. The insurance company was told that
it may not refuse to sell insurance to the blind. This is the
law. It was adopted because of the National Federation of the
Blind, and it is being enforced because of the National
Federation of the Blind. We care; we follow through; and we take
care of our own.
     Karen Small is a blind parent living in Illinois. During a
custody dispute in the early 1980s, a misguided judge ordered
that Karen (because she is blind) could not have custody of Eric,
her own son. The court said that Eric must be placed with sighted
grandparents and that Karen could visit the boy only with sighted
supervision. Although our initial efforts in the courts were only
partially successful, we did not quit. In 1984 we persuaded the
judge to eliminate the requirement for sighted supervision, but
custody remained with the grandparents. Today, as a result of our
continuing support and work, a complete change in the custody
order has been made. Eric now lives with his mother. Karen Small
has her son--and we have preserved and strengthened our self-
respect. 
     The National Federation of the Blind is helping Jerry
Vaughn, a blind businessman, who operates a sand and gravel pit
in Tennessee. In 1986 he filed an application to become a
minority small business enterprise contractor under Section 8(a)
of the Small Business Act. Participants in this program must
demonstrate that they are both socially and economically
disadvantaged. Those who are members of certain minority groups
are presumed by law to be socially disadvantaged, but the blind
are not within this classification. The SBA demanded that Jerry
Vaughn prove that he is socially disadvantaged. (You sometimes
wonder whether to laugh or cry.)  For five years Jerry Vaughn
carried on a regular correspondence with them. He would ask for
minority contractor status; they would demand additional
documentation; he would send the paperwork; they would demand
still more. When the SBA had finally become convinced that he was
both socially and economically disadvantaged, they rejected the
application because, they said, Jerry Vaughn had not been in an
active business during each of the last two years. 
     The sand and gravel contracts in the area where Jerry Vaughn
is in business are largely government orders. Those who get them
are either very large corporations with the economic backing and
influence to build multi-million-dollar projects or small
business operators like Jerry Vaughn. If the small business
operators are not part of the minority small business program,
they are prohibited from competing for a very substantial amount
of the business. In other words, the failure of the Small
Business Administration to grant the application for
participation in the small business enterprise program drove
Jerry Vaughn out of business. Now that his company has failed,
the SBA is claiming that they cannot grant the application. Such
treatment will not do. We will not permit it. We have assisted
Jerry Vaughn in bringing legal action in the federal court, and
we intend to win.
     We continue to be active to protect the interests of blind
vendors in the Randolph-Sheppard program. As Federationists know
from discussions at these conventions year after year, Dennis
Groshel is a blind vendor in Minnesota who operates a facility at
the Department of Veterans Affairs Hospital in St. Cloud. The
income from this facility is about $30,000 a year. The Department
of Veterans Affairs first argued that Dennis should not be
permitted to have a vending facility at the VA Hospital at all,
but the arbitration panel convened to hear the case ruled against
them. However, the VA asked that it be paid a commission
amounting to seventeen percent of the gross receipts from the
vending facility (about $15,000, or half of the profit). The
arbitration panel erroneously granted this request, so we are
helping with an appeal. 
     The Dennis Groshel arbitration is, to say the least, quite
unusual. The vending facility in question is operated by Dennis
Groshel; the money being taken is the income of Dennis Groshel;
and the person who reports to work is Dennis Groshel. It seemed
only reasonable that one of the parties in the case should be
Dennis Groshel. However the lawyer for the Department of Veterans
Affairs has tried to keep him out. But this is simply not fair.
We are helping Dennis intervene in his own case. He will be
involved, and we intend to help him keep the money that is
rightfully his under the law. Incidentally, all other vendors
should take note, for this case has implications for every one of
them throughout the nation.
     Kenneth Godwin has, for a number of years, been a blind
vendor in Kansas. On May 1, 1991, officials of the state
licensing agency summarily dismissed him from his vending
facility. Although the Randolph-Sheppard Act requires a hearing
before termination of a vendor's license, state officials claimed
that they did not violate the law because they were not
terminating the license. They were (if you can believe the
hypocrisy) merely preventing him from operating his business. He
still had the license, they said. 
     Lynn Webb Bary is a member of the National Federation of the
Blind, a blind vendor, and one of our leaders in Kansas. She
heard about the abrupt and unfair dismissal of Kenneth Godwin,
and she came to his assistance. She was present at the
administrative hearing in support of Godwin, and she was prepared
to offer testimony. Agency officials were saying that Godwin had
been caught drinking in the vending facility, but they couldn't
produce evidence to substantiate the claim. The record at the
hearing strongly suggests that they had decided to get rid of him
because he insisted on his rights and would not be bullied by
agency personnel. He would have been completely out of the
program, however, without the help of Lynn Webb Bary and others
in the National Federation of the Blind. The decision in the
vending hearing has not yet been reached, but we expect it to be
favorable. Even if it is, it will not solve all the problems in
the Kansas vending program. There appears to be a pattern
developing--a pattern of harassment by vending officials in
Kansas. And who would you guess is the object of this harassment? 
It is the person who supported Kenneth Godwin in his efforts to
gain fairness in his dealings with the agency; it is Lynn Webb
Bary. If agency personnel take reprisals against this blind
vendor for protecting the rights of her blind colleague, we want
here and now to make them a promise. They will face all of us;
they will face the organized blind; they will face the collective
power of the National Federation of the Blind. We will not be
silenced--and we will not be bullied into meekly giving up our
rights.
     We have also been involved in a number of Social Security
cases. Gary Metzler is a blind vendor living in Florida. He was
advised by the Social Security Administration that he was no
longer eligible to receive Social Security benefits. Their notice
indicated that he had been overpaid $32,698.10. The accounting
procedures in the vending program in Florida make it appear that
blind vendors are employees of the state. Blind vendors,
operating under the rules applicable to self-employed
individuals, may deduct a number of work-related expenses that
are not applicable in the case of state employees. Consequently,
the erroneous determination that this blind vendor was employed
by the state deprived him of work-related deductions to income
which should have been available. The lawyers for the Social
Security Administration did not understand the distinctions
involved, but we know the law, and we know how the facts should
be applied. The decision in this case has now been received. Mr.
Metzler does not owe $32,698.10. In fact, he has not been
overpaid at all. He is entitled to monthly benefits, and he is
currently receiving the checks.
     A year ago the Social Security Disability benefits being
paid to David Dillon of Massachusetts were unceremoniously cut
off. He was unemployed, but this fact seemed insignificant to
officials at the Social Security Administration, who were drawing
their own checks on a monthly basis without interruption. David
Dillon had worked for a newspaper on a part-time basis for a few
months in 1989 and 1990. Social Security officials said that this
demonstrated his ability to work, and the ability to work made
him ineligible for benefits. They insisted that he return over
$10,000 in Social Security benefits that had been paid to him
during the two years that he had done part-time work. David
Dillon felt desperate. He was unemployed; Social Security
declared that he was no longer eligible for benefits; and they
demanded that he pay $10,000. He turned to the National
Federation of the Blind. 
     A hearing has now been held before the Social Security
Administration, and the decision has been reached. There has been
no overpayment; David Dillon is not required to return $10,000;
and Social Security benefits should continue to be received. This
is not the only result of the hearing. The record shows that the
Social Security benefit for David Dillon was figured incorrectly.
When the calculations have been properly made, there should also
be a substantial back pay award. This is one more reason why we
have formed the National Federation of the Blind. If we don't
take care of ourselves and each other, others will certainly not
do it for us.
     Harvey Heagy works as a disk jockey at an FM radio station
known as Oldies 106.5 located in the New Orleans area. Most of
his work is done at night and on weekends when public
transportation is not available. He gets to work by taxi, which
costs a bundle. A year ago he was notified by the Social Security
Administration that he could no longer receive benefits and that
he had been overpaid about $20,000. Social Security ignored the
costs of job-related transportation. During the past year we have
assisted him in receiving a correct determination of his
eligibility. The case is not yet over, but there has almost
certainly been no overpayment, and Harvey Heagy should be
receiving a substantial amount of back benefits. 
     The National Center for the Blind (the headquarters of the
National Federation of the Blind) is a facility both functional
and impressive. Renovations during the past twelve months have
been extensive. The front entrance has been completely
redesigned. There is currently a front portico, which is a
hundred and thirty-two feet long and adorned with a decorative
wrought iron railing. At our front door there is a staircase
twenty-two feet wide, topped with a twenty-five foot internally
lighted canopy. Displayed in light is the name of our building,
the National Center for the Blind. This newly installed front
entrance is wheelchair-accessible. 
     We have also constructed a conference center on the second
floor. This area has office and meeting room space, and a
kitchen. 
      All of the metal and wood on the outside of the National
Center for the Blind is being painted with a dark green acrylic
aliphatic urethane. This modern product resists abrasion, water,
corrosive fumes, chemicals, and weather conditions of all kinds.
We estimate that the amount of paint being applied weighs
approximately 3,500 pounds, one and three-quarter tons. 
     In August of 1991 on the roof of our building, we installed
a forty-foot aluminum flag pole with a ten by fifteen-foot United
States flag. Illuminated with four spotlights, the flag flies
above and behind our National Federation of the Blind sign. This
combination creates a commanding impression for the fifty
thousand drivers who pass our building each day.
     In addition to the programs and cases we have initiated this
year, we in the Federation have continued our other ongoing
activities. Our publications are the most widely distributed and
recognized in the field of work with the blind. We circulate in
print, in Braille, and in recorded form approximately 30,000
copies of the Braille Monitor each month. We have available
almost five hundred items of literature about blindness, and we
have mailed tens of thousands of our Kernel book What Color is
the Sun. The second Kernel book, The Freedom Bell, is being
released at this convention, and if it has an impact as great as
the first, this Kernel book will do much to change the image of
blindness in the public mind. We will soon be releasing the third
Kernel book, entitled As the Twig is Bent. We continue to produce
over 30,000 copies of the Voice of the Diabetic each quarter, and
our magazine for parents and educators of blind children, Future
Reflections, is received by more than ten thousand individuals
and institutions. In our studio we record the Braille Monitor;
Job Opportunities for the Blind Bulletins; the Student Slate,
which is the magazine for students; the American Bar Association
Journal; and a number of other newsletters and individual pieces
of literature. The National Federation of the Blind is by far the
largest publisher of information about blindness in the world. 
     From our Materials Center we distribute aids, appliances,
and literature. Our NFB canes, lightweight and strong, have come
to be recognized as the world standard. In the past twelve months
we have distributed over 7,000 cane tips. We have also continued
to distribute literature at a record rate. We have shipped over
thirteen thousand of our new Diabetics Division brochure, almost
700,000 What is the National Federation of the Blind, more than
350,000 Do You Know a Blind Person, and a number of other
materials. Almost 25,000 different aids and appliances have been
sent, and the total of all items distributed from the Materials
Center since last year is almost two million. In April, 1992, we
released a new book entitled What You Should Know About
Blindness, Services for the Blind, and the Organized Blind
Movement. In the first two months that it has been available,
more than five thousand copies have been sent to provide
information about blindness and the organized blind movement.
This large print pocket-sized book is the best general
information quick reference guide about blindness available. 
     In 1975 the National Federation of the Blind completed the
organizing of affiliates in all fifty states and the District of
Columbia. In 1992 an additional affiliate was added to the roll.
We welcome to the family of the Federation the National
Federation of the Blind of Puerto Rico. 
     The blind of America have been traveling to the National
Center for the Blind, the nerve center of programs and activities
in the blindness system, for the past decade and a half.
Increasingly, agency representatives, government officials, and
those considering a career in programs for the blind have also
been coming. In October of last year Dr. William Wiener, the
president of the Association for Education and Rehabilitation of
the Blind and Visually Impaired, brought his class of orientation
and mobility students from Western Michigan University to visit
the National Center for the Blind and to interact with Federation
members and leaders. The directors of publishing houses for the
blind, state agencies for the blind, schools for the blind, and
federal programs have also come. The National Center for the
Blind is ideal for such interaction, but the reason they come is
the imagination and spirit which they find. The National Center
for the Blind is a symbol as well as a superb physical plant. Dr.
Kenneth Jernigan had the wisdom to imagine such a Center and the
talent and energy to focus resources on its acquisition and
development. Now that the Center is in place, it is easy to see
how much it is needed. The same is true of the largest gathering
of blind people in the nation, the convention of the National
Federation of the Blind. 
     Much of our work is done in meetings and by telephone, but
there is also the mail. We receive thousands of letters a year.
Many of them are routine, but there are many which contain the
very essence of the reason for the National Federation of the
Blind. The diabetic mother who is becoming blind writes to ask
for help because she can no longer have children of her own, and
she is convinced that her growing loss of sight prevents her from
adopting. A woman whose father has become blind tells us she is
glad we exist because her father has given up hope, and she needs
our support in bringing him to believe he can use his talents
again. A sighted seventh-grader who writes for the school
newspaper and has read our Kernel book What Color is the Sun
wants to interview a blind student for the paper. She says: "I
want to show everybody that blind people are just like everybody
else. I figure if we start showing everybody the truth now, we
will have fewer problems. Remember we are the future."  Then
there are those who in writing (sometimes without even knowing
it) express their fear and shame about blindness, but there are
fewer of these than there used to be. We try to address each of
the problems, and we do our best to help.
     Whether it is a blind parent seeking to adopt a child, a
mother trying to find an educational opportunity for a blind
student, a blind high school graduate seeking the chance for a
college education, a blind adult looking for a job, or a blind
senior citizen seeking the means and the understanding to remain
active and involved in the community, we are there. With our
publications in almost every field, with our chapter meetings in
almost every city, with our support groups in virtually every
profession and calling, we are able to give the advice and
encouragement that are needed. 
     As President of this dynamic nationwide organization, I have
had the good fortune to be with thousands of you during the
course of the year. There are certainly problems--some of them
large and complex. But we have the organization; we have the
means of collecting the resources; and most important of all, we
have the spirit that is required. It will not be easy--the simple
things are for those who do not share our commitment, our
dedication. The ignorance about blindness is ancient; the
misunderstandings we face are widespread; and the misconceptions
about us are great. Nevertheless, I have met with you, the
members of this organization, in meetings all over the nation in
our hundreds and thousands. I have shared with you our hopes, our
disappointments, our realities, and our dreams. And I know--I am
certain--that there is nothing on Earth that can stop us or hold
us back. We have the courage, the gentleness, the practical good
sense, the willingness to work--and we have the boldness to dream
of the time when the problems we face will be no more. This is
the promise and the reality of the National Federation of the
Blind--and this is my report to you. 


[PHOTO: Allen Harris stands next to Steve Benson at podium
microphone, holding plaque. CAPTION: Allen Harris, prepares to
address the banquet audience after receiving the 1992 Blind
Educator of the Year Award.]

[PHOTO/CAPTION: President Maurer (left), Fred Schroeder, and Dr.
Jernigan (right) congratulate Richard Edlund, who holds his
Jacobus tenBroek Award plaque.]

[PHOTO/CAPTION: President Maurer (left) and Sharon Maneki (right)
congratulate Ruby Ryles for being named the 1992 Distinguished
Educator of Blind Children.]

                NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
                         AWARDS FOR 1992

     National Federation of the Blind awards are not bestowed
lightly. If an appropriate recipient does not emerge from the
pool of candidates for a particular award, it is simply not
presented. At this year's convention banquet July 3, 1992, three
presentations were made:

                Blind Educator of the Year Award

     At the Friday evening banquet, Steven Benson, member of the
National Federation of the Blind Board of Directors and Chair of
the Selection Committee, made the Blind Educator of the Year
presentation. Here is what he said:

     The history of the Federation has been shaped by the skills
of outstanding Federationists. In 1940, the year the Federation
was founded, Jacobus tenBroek began a distinguished career that
touched the lives of thousands, blind and sighted alike. The
Blind Educator of the Year Award has been presented to
distinguished teachers, who in their own style carried the torch
of learning ignited by Dr. tenBroek. Previous award recipients
have been Pauline Gomez, Patricia Munson, Dr. Abraham Nemeth, and
Patricia Harmon. 
     This year's Blind Educator of the Year Award Committee is
composed of Patricia Munson of California, Homer Page of
Colorado, Judy Sanders of Minnesota, and Adelmo Vigil of New
Mexico. I thank each of you for your fine effort. 
     The Blind Educator of the Year Award of 1992 will be
presented to an individual who prevailed over a weak system of
education for blind children to build an outstanding academic
record. This extraordinary individual earned honors outside the
classroom as well. Upon graduation from college, this year's
award winner came face to face with the challenge of securing a
full-time teaching position. Networking is a vital element in a
successful job search. Tonight's honoree skillfully cultivated
substantial numbers of key contacts. At an appropriate time and
place, one contact spoke up on behalf of tonight's winner, and a
suitable position was offered and accepted. The principal of the
school in which tonight's winner teaches writes: [Blank]
"personifies the meaning of the word `professional.'" This
administrator goes on to praise this outstanding teacher's
methods, subject mastery, and ability to maintain students'
interest. His remarks focus particularly on the support this
teacher enjoys from students, parents, and faculty. Tonight we
pay tribute to a teacher whose talent is shared beyond the
classroom. We in the Federation have also benefitted from the
skill of this master teacher. 
     The Blind Educator of the Year Award consists of a check in
the amount of $500 and a plaque. The plaque reads: 

                Blind Educator of the Year Award
                National Federation of the Blind 
                          Presented to
                          Allen Harris
          in recognition of outstanding accomplishments
                   in the teaching profession.
                    You enhance the present.
                  You inspire your colleagues.
                      You build the future.
                          July 3, 1992

     Allen, congratulations.[Applause]

     When Allen Harris came to the microphone, he responded by
saying:

     I hardly know what to say. But I did listen to the remarks
made, and to be honored by this organization is the most
important recognition I have ever received, and I receive it on
an ongoing basis. It's usually not a plaque or a check, but it's
in every other form that you can imagine. I owe everything that I
have, whatever I am, and whatever I've become to Dr. Jernigan,
Dr. tenBroek, President Maurer, and all of my fellow
Federationists. Thank you so much.

                     Jacobus tenBroek Award

     Fred Schroeder, a member of the Board of Directors of the
National Federation of the Blind and Director of the New Mexico
Commission for the Blind, chairs the tenBroek Award Committee.
When he came to the platform to make this year's presentation, he
said:
 
     The tenBroek Award is a very important award. As Dr.
Jernigan mentioned, the tenBroek Award is not given annually;
rather it is given only when a particular individual warrants the
receipt of this prestigious award. The tenBroek Award, of course,
bears the name of the founder of our organization. Dr. Jacobus
tenBroek was a man who led us as blind people from a condition of
hopelessness and dependency. Under Dr. tenBroek's leadership we
were freed from the shadow of non-participation and led into the
promise of real equality. Dr. tenBroek taught us about the power
of collective action; with this award we honor our founder, and
we honor the recipient. It is appropriate that the recipient of
the Jacobus tenBroek Award be an individual who has kept the
faith and who has dedicated his life to making the lives of blind
people better throughout this nation. This evening I want you to
join with me in honoring and recognizing a long-time leader of
our organization, Richard Edlund. [applause]
     Mr. Edlund is an individual who is known and loved by many
of us in this room. He was born in 1924 and became blind at the
age of sixteen. Mr. Edlund is a man who has never let blindness
slow him down or stop him from doing whatever his interest was.
Mr. Edlund, many of you may or may not know, owned and managed an
airport. He was also trained and was skilled in engine repair and
taught it to a number of blind people, allowing them to achieve
self-support as a result. Mr. Edlund operated his own hardware
store for more than thirty years and did it successfully. He
became well-known in his community as a leader. He is a past
president of the National Federation of the Blind of Kansas and
also has served as the treasurer of the National Federation of
the Blind.
     His ability in political life is well known to all of us. He
has been a powerful voice on behalf of the blind for many years,
helping spearhead the campaign to adopt his state's white cane
law and, more recently, Braille bill. I should tell you that the
Braille bill in Kansas is one of the few that require competency
testing of teachers. The most recent accomplishment is, I think,
one that is appropriate because it speaks to Mr. Edlund's
leadership throughout his community as well as with the blind. In
1990 Mr. Edlund was elected to the Kansas Legislature. 
     The plaque that I will be presenting reads:

                   The Jacobus tenBroek Award
                National Federation of the Blind
                          Presented to
                       Richard J. Edlund 
         for your dedication, sacrifice, and commitment
             on behalf of the blind of this nation.
    Your contribution is measured not in steps but in miles,
        not by individual experiences, but by your impact
              on behalf of the blind of our nation.
             When we have asked, you have answered.
             We call you our colleague with respect
              and we call you our friend with love.
                          July 3, 1992

     When Mr. Edlund came to the platform to receive his award,
he responded as follows:

     Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Surprise, shock, I don't know--
whatever you want to call it. Brother Harris probably said it far
better than I could. I feel a great deal the same way. What I
have been able to accomplish is because I have learned from the
Federation. Dr. Jernigan and all of my other colleagues in this
organization have been teachers, supporters, and challengers.
Really, that's what it's all about. I don't know that I ever set
out to prove anything; perhaps I did. I've enjoyed my affiliation
with all of my fellow Federationists all over the country. We all
do what we can. I probably just happened to be in the right place
at the right time. I appreciate the strength and support all of
you have given me, and I especially appreciate all the patience
that Dr. Jernigan had by inviting me to about twenty-four
seminars. I was a real hard learner. So thank you very much, and
I love you all.

       The Distinguished Educator of Blind Children Award

     Sharon Maneki, President of the National Federation of the
Blind of Maryland and Chair of the Distinguished Educator of
Blind Children Selection Committee, presented this award. She
said:

     The Distinguished Educator of Blind Children Award is a very
important award that we in the National Federation of the Blind
have established because of our belief and hopes for our
children. The most precious gift we have is to improve the future
for our children.
     This evening we recognize a woman who is known to many of us
because she rings the bell for freedom at every convention she
attends by working with parents, be it in the Parents Division,
at the IEP workshop, or just sitting down to talk. This woman
became involved in special education because of her son Dan. She
stayed involved because she cares about the blind children of
America. Mrs. Ruby Ryles, will you join me at the podium here?
[Applause] 
     Mrs. Ruby Ryles was an itinerant teacher in Anchorage,
Alaska. She has been a vision consultant at the Arkansas State
Department of Education. And when there was no program in the
Bellingham School District, she created one in typical Federation
spirit. Mrs. Ruby Ryles, the Supervisor of the Bellingham School
Vision Program, this evening we present you with a check for
$500. [Applause.] And we also present you with a plaque to
express our appreciation and recognition of your efforts for our
children. Let me read the plaque:

            Distinguished Educator of Blind Children
              The National Federation of the Blind
                             honors
                           Ruby Ryles
            Distinguished Educator of Blind Children
               For your skill in teaching Braille
                 and the use of the white cane,
           for generously devoting extra time to meet 
                   the needs of your students,
             for inspiring your students to perform
                   beyond their expectations,
                   and for sharing your wisdom
                with your colleagues and parents 
                       across the nation. 
                          July 3, 1992

     Mrs. Ruby Ryles in a few short years will be Dr. Ruby Ryles,
and I'm sure that we will be hearing more from this fine lady.
[Applause.]

     After Mrs. Ryles accepted her plaque, she said: 

     What words can I possibly use to express my gratitude for
the greatest honor a teacher could receive? I did not learn to
teach blind children from the universities or the professionals,
but from the real experts--from you. You taught me the value of
sleep shades, early cane use, slate and stylus; and in your
characteristic way you cut through the fat of the professional
debates in my field and showed me how really simple it is to
determine which children need Braille instruction. There is no
debate, you taught me. If I am thought of as knowledgeable in the
field of education of blind children, it is due to the countless
numbers of Federationists who instructed and supported me and
became my friends. Mackenstadts, Omvigs, and other NFB faithfuls
forever changed the way I taught about and, more important,
thought about blindness. My mother used to say, "Choose your
friends wisely because you are a little part of each of your
friends." I say to you tonight that each of you--every single one
of you in the National Federation of the Blind--is not only a
part of me, but a part of every child, every family, every
professional, and every class I teach. I thank you for taking me
in and teaching me how to be an effective teacher. But most of
all, I thank you for being my friends. Were she here today, I
know my mother would say in the best of her Southern mothering
styles, "Ruby Nell, you certainly did choose your friends well,
and I told you so." Thank you, friends. [Applause.]


[PHOTO: Mr. Maurer stands at podium microphone. CAPTION: Marc
Maurer, President of the National Federation of the Blind,
delivers his 1992 banquet address.]

[PHOTO: Crowded banquet hall shows head table from back of room.
CAPTION: A banquet audience of thousands listened with rapt
attention to President Maurer's address.]

[PHOTO: Euclid Herie speaks at podium while Dr. Jernigan stands
to his left with Braille and gavel in hand. CAPTION: Following
President Maurer's banquet address, master of ceremonies Kenneth
Jernigan introduced several distinguished guests for brief
remarks. Pictured here beside Dr. Jernigan is Euclid Herie,
Treasurer of the World Blind Union and President and Chief
Executive Officer of the Canadian National Institute for the
Blind.]

                   THE MYSTERIOUS TEN PERCENT

                     An Address Delivered by
                           MARC MAURER
           President, National Federation of the Blind
             At the Banquet of the Annual Convention
             Charlotte, North Carolina, July 3, 1992


     Almost without exception, the physical characteristics of
existence are recognized because they fit a familiar pattern. It
is not that those events which fail to conform to the framework
of the generally accepted belief system are repudiated; they are
not perceived at all. Reality, as we know it, is not made up of
all discernible phenomena. Instead, it is the interpretation of
those incidents that our understanding has permitted us to
observe. 
     Those in the field of education tell us that students must
be familiar with ninety percent of the subject matter of a class
if learning is to occur. What is true in the classroom is also
valid for less formal settings. Ordinarily, we comprehend only
that which we already largely know. 
     In the history of science the matrix of belief is called the
paradigm, and the pithy admonition to the scientist is to "save
the phenomena."  There is a powerful urge to include in
scientific experiments only those facts which fit the theory
being tested. When the facts do not demonstrate what they were
expected to show, those conducting the examination are tempted to
dismiss them as insignificant. Of course, the integrity of the
scientific process does not permit such behavior. If science is
to make progress, it must account not only for convenient results
but for all observed results--the scientists must save the
phenomena. However, if the experiment which might have been
performed doesn't fit the paradigm--the structure of belief, the
framework of recognition--it will never be conducted at all.
Those facts which might have been observed will not be seen
because nobody will look.
     Sometimes at the conscious level, and sometimes without
knowing it, society divides all knowledge into two major
categories--those matters which can be studied and those which
are beyond exploration. These two segments of knowledge are
fundamentally distinct because in those which are regarded as
proper for study, society believes that there is something to
learn. In those which are regarded as sacrosanct, it is presumed
that study is irrelevant because knowledge is (if not complete)
sufficient for decision making on all practical questions.
However, even when the study is intense and the receptivity is
great, learning is limited by the ninety percent factor. The
inevitable result is that some of the knowledge we regard as
settled is necessarily incomplete and, therefore, incorrect. 
     Incorporated within the theories devised to explain all
known information, there are assumptions. When new evidence
becomes available, the underlying theory which explained the
knowledge of the past is not ordinarily discarded. Instead, it is
altered or expanded to include the new factor without, however,
changing or eliminating the assumptions upon which the idea is
based. Each time an additional factor is incorporated, the theory
is doctored to make the new information fit. This process brings
to mind the folksy aphorism, "It ain't what you don't know that
hurts you so much, but what you do know that just ain't so."
     What does all of this mean for us--for the largest
organization of blind people in the nation?  One of the accepted
doctrines throughout history has been that it is essential to be
able-bodied to be productive. The blind are not in this group.
Hence, we are told that we have very limited capacity. Whether in
the writings associated with the field of work with the blind, in
the great body of general world literature, in the visual images
presented for entertainment, or in the public mind, the
incompetence of the blind has become an almost universally
accepted part of the canon of knowledge. So completely fixed is
this idea that further examination is presumed by many to be
irrelevant.
     Our own experience refutes that commonly held belief.
Thousands of us have demonstrated that we are able to handle the
ordinary job in the ordinary place of business, and (as with the
sighted) some blind people demonstrate extraordinary ability and
make remarkable contributions. Nevertheless, the notion of the
incapacity of the blind remains firmly embedded in the thinking
of millions. 
     In the face of so much evidence, how can this be?  We human
beings observe what we already know; we learn only when we
believe that further study is warranted. Evidence which does not
fit the established pattern is not rejected; it is never
perceived at all. Even when it is known that there is something
to learn, ninety percent of the subject matter under examination
must be understood before learning--recognition of the
unfamiliar--becomes possible. But, the ninety percent factor
leaves the other ten percent available for discovery. This ten
percent--the unknown ten percent, the vital ten percent, the
mysterious ten percent--is an opportunity waiting to be made.
     We the blind must accept the challenge of identifying the
necessary ten percent, the essential elements for our integration
into society; we must internalize the learning; and we must
assist the public to comprehend what blindness really is by
making the normality of blind people sufficiently familiar so it
can be readily understood--so it can become a part of the
mysterious ten percent. We must encourage the exploration,
channel the thought processes, and focus the inquiry for a new
understanding. What we are seeking is an alteration in the
fundamental rules governing the acceptance and participation of
the blind in every part of the culture. This will be good for the
blind, but we will not be the only beneficiaries--so will
everybody else. Our society will, for the first time, be using
the collective talents of an entire class of people, and we will
have a deepened understanding, sharing the needs and aspirations
and being part of the force which makes our civilization what it
is.
     Who is responsible for achieving this objective?  You know
as well as I--those who have come together in the largest
organization of the blind in the nation, the tough-minded
individuals who have gathered here tonight to represent the blind
from throughout the country, the members of the National
Federation of the Blind.
     Just over half a century ago, at a meeting in Wilkes-Barre,
Pennsylvania, the National Federation of the Blind was brought
into being. Dr. Jacobus tenBroek, a blind professor and one of
the most scholarly and dynamic individuals of the twentieth
century, along with a handful of others from seven states,
founded this nationwide organization of the blind and thereby
initiated the movement that would bring us independence. We the
blind declared that the responsibility for our future belonged
not to others, but to us. We intended to take a hand in shaping
our own destiny. 
     In view of the circumstances which existed in 1940, such
boldness required both courage and nerve. Almost no blind person
had entered the competitive job market. Schools for the blind
provided some education, but the officials who set the tone in
those institutions had little expectation that blind students
would emerge able to accept the challenges of higher education or
employment. There were some libraries and a few books, but the
volumes collected were meant primarily for recreation, and they
were often hard to get. A number of sheltered workshops had been
established, which offered employment in simple, repetitive tasks
at extremely low wages to a small percentage of the blind; but a
productive career with the responsibilities of citizenship was
virtually unknown. 
     Despite the dismal prospects, a new and exciting possibility
was inevitable from that first meeting of the National Federation
of the Blind. The promise we made to ourselves that day has never
changed, and the faith that we pledged has always been kept. No
longer is our future determined entirely by others. Instead, we
who are blind (acting individually and through our own
organization, the National Federation of the Blind) play an
increasingly important part in creating and determining the
standards applicable to the conduct not only of our own daily
affairs but of everything dealing with blindness. In creating the
National Federation of the Blind (our own vehicle for self-
expression and collective action), we have decided that the
subservience which has so often been a part of existence for the
blind must and will be eliminated. We insist on equality; we
yearn for independence; we strive for full participation. We come
together to achieve unity, to disseminate information, to provide
inspiration, and to take concerted action through the organized
blind movement--the National Federation of the Blind.
     In 1940, books about the blind were few, and those that had
been written (even those which, by the standard of their time,
were regarded as progressive) depicted the blind as much more
limited than was true or than we would hope to find today. One
such volume (written, interestingly enough, by the famous blind
historian William H. Prescott and printed in 1858) gives a
picture of mixed images. Entitled Biographical and Critical
Miscellanies, this volume includes an article which comments
about the condition of the blind. Prescott recommends that
improvements be made for the blind, but he believes the
possibilities for full integration are unattainable. Although
what Prescott says seems archaic and old-fashioned by the
standards of 1992, his writing must be judged by the criteria of
its day. In 1858 (in the context of the times, the technology
then existent, and the attitudes and working conditions of pre-
Civil War America) the article is more positive than negative. In
1940 (although many, especially those in work with the blind,
would probably have denied it) Prescott's views were the
generally accepted standard--but they were no longer viable. In
1992 (despite the fact that the Prescott thesis has glimmerings
of positive philosophy) we should be able to put it behind us,
viewing it as nothing more than a quaint element of the past.
Unfortunately, such is not the case. While the present day
language of the professionals in the blindness system is much
more ours than Prescott's and while progress has been made, too
many of the Prescott ideas still linger, some of them so deeply
embedded in the public mind that they have not even emerged into
the mysterious ten percent of thought which can be examined and
reconsidered. 
     But before saying more, let me give you excerpts from the
Prescott article. It is not only reminiscent of the America of a
century and a half ago but useful as a touchstone for perspective
today.

          Immured within hospitals and almshouses [Prescott
     says], like so many lunatics and incurables, they [the
     blind] have been delivered over, if they escaped the
     physical, to all the moral contagion too frequently incident
     to such abodes, and have thus been involved in a mental
     darkness far more deplorable than their bodily one. 
          This injudicious treatment [Prescott continues]
     has resulted from the erroneous principle of viewing
     these unfortunate beings as an absolute burden on the
     public, utterly incapable of contributing to their own
     subsistence, or of ministering in any degree to their
     own intellectual wants. Instead, however, of being
     degraded by such unworthy views, they should have been
     regarded as, what in truth they are, possessed of
     corporeal and mental capacities perfectly competent,
     under proper management, to the production of the most
     useful results. 

     These are quotations from the 1858 publication. To protect
the blind from the misfortune of the hospitals and institutions
for the insane, Prescott recommends the establishment of asylums
for the blind. The description of the asylum indicates that it
fulfills the functions that we would associate with a school for
the blind, a home for the blind, and a sheltered workshop. The
workers in one of these asylums, says Prescott, produced a number
of articles including: 

     cotton and linen cloths, diapers, worsted net for
     fruit-trees, basket-work of every description, hemp and
     straw door-mats, saddle girths, rope and twines of all
     kinds, netting for sheep-pens, fishing nets, beehives,
     mattresses, cushions, feather beds, bolsters, and
     pillows. 
          There has been no necessity [Prescott continues]
     of stimulating their exertions by the usual motives of
     reward or punishment. Delighted with their sensible
     progress in vanquishing the difficulties incident to
     their condition, they are content if they can but place
     themselves on a level with the more fortunate of their
     fellow-creatures. And it is observed that many, who in
     the solitude of their own homes have failed in their
     attempts to learn some of the arts taught in this
     institution, have acquired a knowledge of them with
     great alacrity when cheered by the sympathy of
     individuals involved in the same calamity with
     themselves, and with whom, of course, they could
     compete with equal probability of success.

     Such is the writing about blindness of the historian
Prescott, and in the record of our development, it is well worth
having. The asylum for the blind is far superior to the
almshouse, and Prescott is urging that the talents of the blind
be used to a greater extent than they had been. If the
characterization of the blind by Prescott were merely a page from
the past, it would be interesting and instructive but not a
matter for concern. However, the language employed in his
description is still encountered today, and this brings it from
the archives to the battlefield of current ideas. Even now in
1992, blindness (we are told in some quarters) is a calamity;
blind people are so cheered by productive work, alongside those
who are in a similarly unfortunate plight, that there is no
necessity of stimulating them with the usual monetary rewards of
productive labor; the blind cannot compete on terms of equality
with others but need a special place, where they have the
possibility of being competitive--not with those in the regular
labor market, of course, but only against other blind people.
     How often have we been told by the managers of sheltered
workshops that the reason for operating such institutions is to
give blind people something useful to do, which will provide a
sense of purpose?  The ongoing labor of blind workers, which
produces the goods and generates the money, is not really "work,"
we are told, but "therapy."  And what are many of the sheltered
workshops if they are not special places where blind people
"cheered by the sympathy of individuals involved in the same
calamity as themselves" can compete with equal probability of
success?  This is not the way it should be; this is not the way
it need be; but this is the way many of the managers of the shops
want it to be and have made it be. 
     The description of the asylum for the blind brings to mind a
much more modern incident. In 1991, less than one year ago, a
blind man, a member of the National Federation of the Blind from
the state of Michigan, became employed in the printing shop for a
large public school system. He got the job with the help of our
National Treasurer, Allen Harris, and through Job Opportunities
for the Blind, the nationwide program operated by the National
Federation of the Blind in partnership with the United States
Department of Labor. This blind man is being paid six dollars an
hour for his work. During the eight years prior to his employment
in the print shop, he was given what certain rehabilitation
officials called "meaningful employment" at a work activity
center. The pay stubs he collected from the work activity center
confirm a story which is almost unbelievable. For sixty long
hours one week this blind man performed the work he was assigned.
His take-home pay for those sixty hours was less than five
dollars. The philosophy of rehabilitation in the 1990s is (at
least in some situations) not as constructive as the philosophy
of Prescott in the 1850s. At least the wages in the blind asylum
were closer to those in the regular work force of that day than
this man's pay in the work activity center was to what he now
makes in the print shop. He is the same man. He has the same
capacities in the print shop that he had in the work activity
center. In short, he was taken advantage of, abused, and
exploited--not because he deserved such treatment but because
those who dished it out thought they could do what they did and
get away with it. It is to fight this very kind of degrading
injustice that we have formed the National Federation of the
Blind--and fight it we will until we have crushed it out of
existence. 
     At the time of the founding of the National Federation of
the Blind (despite such advances as had been made), blindness was
still regarded as a personal tragedy. The incapacity of the blind
was presumed. Blindness might be used to evoke pity, pathos, or
amusement, but blind people were not taken seriously. 
     In W. C. Fields's 1934 film, It's a Gift, blindness is used
to get a laugh. A blind man of venerable age and irascible
temper, Mr. Merkle, enters a grocery store operated by Fields. In
finding his way to the counter, this blind character clumsily and
furiously destroys a display of light bulbs--note the symbolism.
Merkle orders chewing gum, and when it is finally brought to him,
he (playing upon the exaggerated notion that the blind are
demanding, touchy, and cantankerous) tells the grocery store
operator that he is not prepared to carry it. He wants the gum
delivered. After the rampage is over, someone asks who the blind
man was. Fields replies, "He's the house detective over at the
hotel."  
     Blind people do sometimes stumble and bump into things, but
this is not the norm (not if there has been training, not if
there has been reasonable opportunity). And some of us are
irascible and demanding, but I doubt that the proportion is
higher for us than it is for the sighted. The exaggeration of the
1934 movie is unreasonable and intolerable because the damaging
picture of the blind is unrealistic, degrading, and disgraceful.
In 1934 such a depiction could be made without a protest because
the blind had not yet organized. The popular belief at that time
was the blind were not (and could not be) successful.
Consequently, the occasional demonstration to the contrary was
dismissed (as it is even sometimes today) as an exception. 
     But that was 1934, and this is 1992. That was before the
National Federation of the Blind. Today we have come together in
our tens of thousands from every corner of the nation--and when
blindness is discussed, we intend to have a word--in fact, in
certain instances we intend to have the last word. 
     When ABC produced its program "Good & Evil" in the fall of
1991, the blind reacted with decision and strength. ABC made fun
of us. George, the blind character who was said to be a
psychologist, acted as though he had not merely lost his eyesight
but also his brains, his sense of proportion, and his self-
respect. He gently embraced a coat rack under the mistaken
impression that it was a woman. He fondled a male but wasn't
aware that the individual with whom he was taking such liberties
was a man until his hands found their way below the belt. He
smashed glass objects or windowpanes in almost every scene but
seemed almost blissfully unaware that he had caused any harm. The
pictures were accompanied by so-called humorous dialogue about
the blind developing such keenness with their other senses that
they could compensate for the loss of sight. 
     ABC officials seemed unable to understand why we objected to
this travesty. When we received an advance copy of the first
episode of the program, we urged ABC to rethink its position, but
network officials dismissed our objections. They apparently
harbored the opinion that we of the National Federation of the
Blind were simply oversensitive and touchy, not to mention
helpless and unable to do anything about what they were doing. We
responded to this brush-off by telling them that such behavior
would not be tolerated. Our message was articulated with logic
and reason, but ABC continued to ignore us. Working through the
National Federation of the Blind, thousands of blind people
protested by letter and telephone. Our words became not only
brief but blunt:  "Stop 'Good & Evil.'  Stop it, or face the
consequences."  They didn't--and we acted. We picketed, contacted
sponsors, talked with the media, distributed leaflets, and
alerted the public. 
     In less than two months the program was off the air. Some
ABC officials complained privately that the National Federation
of the Blind had stopped the show. When it comes to programs
belittling the blind, the National Federation of the Blind is a
real showstopper. We intend to evaluate the underlying
assumptions of those who make pronouncements about us; we will
set our own standards of fairness with respect to the images
projected about us; and we will take our message to the public--
including the television networks. Let those who think they can
ridicule us and disregard our opinions reflect on the fate of
"Good & Evil."
     The presentations about blindness in film and on television
that we have been discussing are not revolutionary. They are a
reiteration of what people have always thought about the blind.
If the film producers and television screenwriters were told that
they should study blindness, they would wonder why. Blindness
doesn't change, they would think. It is a severe physical
deprivation with known, predictable consequences. There isn't
anything to study. 
     But this is the general public. What about the professionals
in the blindness field?  There are institutions which tell us
that they have made a thorough examination of blindness and that
they are the experts. Consider these quotes from a letter
distributed to the public by the New York Lighthouse for the
Blind. As you will see, the letter shows that the Lighthouse
believes that to the extent a person has eyesight, life is
worthwhile. To the extent that eyesight has been lost, there are
crushing difficulties. The only way (they say) to circumvent the
problems is to seek their counseling and advice. This material is
not from 1858 or 1934. It is not from 1940 or twenty years ago.
It is less than five years old. Here are the recommendations of
the Lighthouse experts:

          If [they say] you thought blindness was something
     that happened to "the other guy," you should realize
     blindness is something that could happen to you.
          Imagine how you would feel if you were told by your
     doctor that eyeglasses won't help, that you are, indeed,
     losing your sight.
          How long would you be able to work?  How long
     would you be able to drive?  How could you enjoy an
     active retirement?  
          Every day, you notice it getting worse. You become
     less and less able to take care of yourself. Your
     relationship with your family becomes strained. They
     want to help, but they don't know how. Unable to work.
     Unable to play. Unable to read, or even watch TV. You
     become more and more cut off from the people, places,
     and things that filled your life before. 
          Fortunately, there is a place to turn. 
          Since 1906, The Lighthouse--The New York
     Association for the Blind--has been helping people cope
     with the fear and the isolation accompanying their loss
     of sight--as well as teaching them new home and job
     skills. 
          There's a lot you can do [the letter continues].
     Not just to help those less fortunate than yourself,
     but also to support an organization that someday might
     come to your aid, or to the aid of someone you love. 
          You'll help us promote more research on how to
     help blind people deal with their disability. 
          They need your help. 
          And you should give it to them.
          Not just because it's the "right thing" to do.
          But because someday it could be you.
          Or someone you love. 

     Tucked away among the negative images in this agency's
letter is this statement:

          Blind people are not different from the rest of
     us. They are not "poor, unfortunate souls" with tin
     cups and pencils.
          They are people like you and me. They have jobs,
     and families, and responsibilities. Like all of us,
     they want to lead productive, meaningful lives.

     These are the only positive words in the entire document.
Although they suggest that blindness may not be a complete
tragedy, they are hardly believable when placed in the context of
the statements that surround them. The blind are unable to work,
unable to play, unable to have a fruitful retirement, unable to
appreciate fully the society of family and friends, unable to
read, unable to enjoy TV, and unable to care for themselves. Is
such a picture realistic?  Do blind people have jobs, play with
the kids, read books, write articles and monographs, manage the
responsibilities of family life, and participate in community
activities?  
     When the Lighthouse declares that it wants to do "research
on how to help blind people deal with their disability," what
kind of research does it have in mind?  Their letter, written in
the late twentieth century, is, in many respects, worse than the
literature about blindness produced over a hundred years ago. The
outlook is one of despair; the prescription is for the managers
of the asylum to take charge of the affairs of the blind; the
method is scare tactics to frighten the public. The emphasis is
not on the ability possessed by the blind but on the care others
should devote to them. The decision-makers are not the blind but
the custodians of the blind. If this is all that their research
is capable of producing, I ask you, what good is it?  If the
point of their effort is to argue that blindness is an
unmitigated disaster, let them leave us alone. We can do without
their help. This representation of blindness is not true but
false--not reality but fantasy--not an examination of fact but a
reinforcement of ancient and time-worn fiction. The New York
Lighthouse for the Blind is accredited by NAC, the National
Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually
Handicapped, the most divisive institution in the field of work
with the blind today. Is it any wonder that the Lighthouse view
of blindness is negative?  
     We are not opposed to competent research about blindness
conducted by competent researchers. Blindness has been
misunderstood for thousands of years, and it should be studied.
What we find objectionable is the ancient body of myths and
misconceptions dressed up in the clothes of modern scientific
experimentation. Not only do we welcome researchers who come with
an open mind, but we are increasingly participating in that
research. Indeed, the cutting edge of scientific advancement
involving blindness must necessarily include the organized blind.
There is no other way for the misconceptions of the past to be
identified and eliminated. 
     Whether the researchers come from within the field of work
with the blind or from some other establishment, the results of
their experimentation about blindness are, to say the least,
unusual when they do it without consulting the blind. Blindness
is often regarded as equivalent to darkness, even though the two
are not the same. Recently, at the Baylor College of Dentistry,
in Texas, a study was conducted dealing with the lowly salivary
gland. It seems that the amount of saliva produced by a human
being is directly related to oral hygiene. If you don't produce
enough saliva, you won't have a clean mouth. You may have thought
that, interesting though saliva experiments may be, they aren't
related to blindness. Consider, however, these statements from a
document describing the study:

          The purpose of this study [says the report] is to
     examine, for the first time, the relation between
     visual impairment and reduced salivary flow. Normal
     salivary flow is necessary for healthy teeth and
     intraoral tissues. Research has shown that salivary
     flow decreases dramatically in dark environments. Thus,
     it appears reasonable to hypothesize that blind people
     might suffer from decreased salivary flow and oral
     health problems. 

     This is what the report says, and it boggles the mind.
Remember that they are talking about you and me. Do you think
that those of us in this room who are blind have drier mouths or
less spit than those of us who are sighted?  The questions that
come to mind while contemplating this study are legion. How did
they find out that salivary flow decreases in the dark?  If you
keep your mouth shut (I presume it is dark in there), will the
absence of light reduce your salivary flow?  Do the people who
talk a lot, especially in well-lighted places, produce more
saliva than others?  What other characteristics were the subject
of this investigation?  I was tempted to ask, "Does your hair
grow faster at night?" or "What happens to it if you put on a
hat?"  There are some things worth studying in the dark, but I
had never thought of salivary flow as one of them. I have not yet
received the results of the Baylor College study, but if their
hypothesis were correct, it would follow that blind people suffer
from bad teeth. Perhaps we do, but I doubt it. In short, "spit on
it."
     Blindness is sometimes blamed for more than it deserves. Of
course, magazine publishers are in business to sell magazines,
and the melodramatic (some believe) will increase circulation,
but melodrama should not masquerade as truth. An article in the
September 10, 1991, issue of Woman's World describes the
experiences of a young blind woman. It purports to be a direct
quote, but I wonder if it is taken out of context or selectively
edited to emphasize the sensational. Here is what it says: 

          Sometimes I want to scream until I shatter glass.
     I want to take the heavy wooden post from my canopy bed
     and smash in the television screen. I want to hurl the
     television set against the wall and then storm through
     my neighborhood smashing everything. 
          Other times I feel like laughing out loud at
     something only I find funny. I want to whoop until I
     can't remember what it was all about.
          My wildly swinging range of emotions are related
     [the grammar is theirs not mine] directly or indirectly
     to my blindness.
          I am blind. After four years, I still have to
     repeat that uncomfortable statement to myself. 
          It wasn't until last year that I could bring
     myself to admit it. 

     Do you think this report in Woman's World truly represents
the experience or the feelings of most blind people--even those
who have been blind for only three or four years?   Becoming
blind can be extremely trying emotionally. Yet, we who are blind
do not spend our days wanting to scream at the top of our lungs,
fighting an urge to smash everything, or laughing uncontrollably
at nothing. I am, of course, not saying that we lack emotion. We
possess feelings and dreams in abundance, but they do not spring
from the fact of our blindness. They are a part of our basic
humanity. They live within us, and come from the heart. Blind
people are not weird or peculiar--we are just blind, and we are
not prepared (even if the magazine editors would like us to say
so) to tolerate the assertion that we are somehow abnormal,
idiotic, or subhuman. 
     Many thousands of letters come to the National Federation of
the Blind each year. Some are dramatic; some are matter-of-fact;
some are unassuming. Often those who see our public service
announcements respond with requests for assistance. Reading
between the lines, it is possible upon occasion to learn much
from a very few words. Here is a letter, which I received less
than six months ago:

          I was watching TV one afternoon and saw a
     commercial. It was your commercial. I was just
     wondering what your organization is all about.
          I am legally blind and have been since late
     December, 1983. I attended the Pittsburgh Guild for the
     Blind in 1986. I spent over a half year there.
          I was watching TV, and I saw a commercial. It was
     your commercial. So I decided to write, and just find
     out what your organization is all about. Like what all
     do you do?  So I was wondering if you could send me
     some information.
          I was sent down to United Rehabilitation Services
     to get trained for a job. I think some blind
     organization was sending the work for me to do. But
     then they didn't send anything, so I sat there.

                                                       Sincerely,

     Simple, straightforward, uncomplicated--direct language,
eloquent. The woman who wrote became blind in 1983. Three years
later, in 1986, she received training at the Pittsburgh Guild.
After six months at the Guild she was sent to an agency to do a
little work. The work didn't come. She sat there. In 1992, nine
years after she became blind, she is still waiting--watching
television and wondering what there is for her. How long does it
take to crush the spirit or kill the dream?  This woman's letter
is not demanding, but the exact opposite. She wonders what our
organization is about. The repetition of the tentative phrasing
indicates that this woman does not wish to face one more
disappointment. During the last nine years there must have been
many, and she is almost afraid to hope. But she did not give up;
she did write; and we did respond. Blindness should not mean (and
it doesn't have to mean) interminable waiting, idle hours, and a
place to sit while the rest of the world moves on. Training in
the skills of blindness can be found; a job with all of the
frustrations and joys that accompany it can be procured; and of
greatest importance, there is hope for a better tomorrow. 
     This woman tells us, as we read between the lines, that the
Pittsburgh Guild for the Blind has nothing to offer. This comes
as no surprise since the current executive director is Richard
Welsh, who also serves as one of the principal officers of the
National Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the Blind and
Visually Handicapped (NAC), probably the most controversial and
regressive agency for the blind of the twentieth century. Be that
as it may, we have our own vehicle for collective action, and we
know how to use it. The woman who wrote for information about our
organization received encouragement and support. We will help. 
     I joined the National Federation of the Blind in 1969. The
organization was different from anything I had ever encountered.
It told me that blindness need not be a disaster, that it could
simply be a characteristic, that it did not have to keep me from
pursuing a career. I had reservations about it, but I hoped that
the message was true--and I said that I believed. Even though I
tried to accept the philosophy of the Federation wholeheartedly,
my views about blindness today are not precisely the same as
those I held in 1969 when I joined. Learning cannot happen all at
once, and both individuals and organizations gain experience and
understanding as long as they retain the flexibility of an open
mind. 
     Shortly after I became a part of the National Federation of
the Blind, several members of the organization, traveling by
plane to a state convention of one of our affiliates, hotly
debated whether a blind person could competently travel from one
airport gate to another without a guide. I believed at the time
(although I was a little nervous about expressing my opinion)
that it was foolishness to maintain that a blind person could
travel easily and gracefully through an airport without an
escort. Some of my colleagues argued that modern travel skills
could be as effective in an airport as anywhere else. They
pointed out that blind people can get around with assurance in
large cities. Why shouldn't the same principles apply to the
airport?
     We put the matter to the test. I sought assistance in
traveling, and one of my colleagues struck out on his own. I
don't suppose I need to tell you that he got to the next gate
before I did. These days I travel routinely from one gate to
another in busy airports without ever giving it a thought
(sometimes with and sometimes without assistance). The point is
that I can get where I want to go whenever I need to, and I am
grateful to my Federation colleague for showing me that I could.
     In 1940, Dr. Jacobus tenBroek had the inspiration and self-
assurance to found the National Federation of the Blind. In 1952,
Dr. Kenneth Jernigan first attended a National Convention of the
organized blind movement. Fired with enthusiasm by Dr. tenBroek,
Dr. Jernigan began to add his effort to the creation of the
literature of independence and to the building of the structure
of self-organization that would forever change the fundamental
meaning of blindness. Dr. tenBroek, the philosopher who could
dream of a future unlike any previously contemplated, and Dr.
Jernigan, the builder who carried the philosophy of independence
to the rehabilitation establishment and to the blind of every
state, came together to create a leadership both powerful and
dynamic. Dr. tenBroek conceived the notion of equality for the
blind; Dr. Jernigan popularized the idea and established a
training center which incorporated it in the curriculum. Together
these pioneers forged a gathering of energetic blind people
dedicated to making the dream of independence become reality. 
     Although the belief system of the past may hold that there
is nothing essential to learn about what blindness is or how to
deal with it, this time-worn understanding of the capacity of the
blind is no longer uncontested. We human beings ordinarily
observe only that which we already know, and we learn only when
ninety percent of what is presented is familiar. But this is not
all. Learning cannot occur unless there is a teacher with the
wisdom and the capacity to dream of the other ten percent. Those
in the school systems, in the governmental and private agencies
for the blind, and in the public at large can work with us to
accelerate the achievement of independence for the blind, and
increasingly this is precisely what has been occurring. But they
cannot provide the inspiration and the dream--that must come from
us. We will learn what we must, imagine a time when we have
eradicated the misconceptions about the blind, provide an
alternative explanation which is more complete than the misguided
theories of the long ago, and teach the public about our basic
normality. This is our goal, our mission, and our right. 
     If we cannot muster the courage, sustain the dream, or
maintain the nerve, the loss will be unimaginable. But, of
course, we will not fail. We have one another, and nobody--no
agency for the blind, no magazine editor, no film producer, no
so-called scientific researcher, no television network official--
can prevent us from going the rest of the way toward freedom. We
believe in one another; we have faith in the ability of our blind
brothers and sisters; and we will share the burden that must be
borne to bring true independence to the blind. Ninety percent
must be known if learning is to occur. But there is the other ten
percent, the mysterious ten percent, the vital ten percent--and
we will supply it; we are the National Federation of the Blind.
My brothers and my sisters, come!  Join me and we will make it
all come true!


[PHOTO: NFB Scholarship winners, 1992. Front row (left to right):
Dennis Bowling, Brad Martin, Heather Kirkwood, Kristen Jocums,
Ramon Vela, Chad Newcomb, Jean Janicke, T. V. Raman. Center row
(left to right): Corinna Trujillo, Jana Littrell, Lora Felty,
Richard Chen, Ann Marie Bovaird, Kristen Knouse, Charles Marston,
Shelly Berger, Tonya McCluskey. Back row (left to right): Ali
Nizamuddin, Katharine Bond, Carlos Servan, Marla Medford,
Christopher Kuczynski, Jim Hamon, Gary Scott, Mark Heaphy,
Heather Certner.]

[PHOTO: Carlos Servan standing at podium microphone. CAPTION:
Carlos Servan of New Mexico, the 1992 winner of the Ezra Davis
Memorial Scholarship.]


                  THE SCHOLARSHIP CLASS OF 1992

     The task of the National Federation of the Blind Scholarship
Committee is never easy. During the spring its members must pore
over many hundreds of scholarship applications to select the
group of winners, who will attend the convention to compete for
the various awards. Then during convention week, when there are
always at least five things one wants to do with every free
moment, Committee members must find the time to get to know each
of the twenty-six winners in order to make the final judgements
in the competition. This year the job was particularly difficult.
The Class of '92 is uniformly talented and energetic. A number of
its members were already active in the Federation, and a number
of others during the convention began to demonstrate deep
interest in and personal response to our philosophy and
commitment to changing what it means to be blind. Here are the
1992 scholarship winners as they presented themselves to the
Board of Directors at its Tuesday, June 30, meeting. Peggy
Pinder, Chairman of the Scholarship Committee, introduced each
person and listed first the state from which the winner comes and
then the state in which he or she will be a student this coming
fall. This is what the winners had to say in the few seconds they
were given in which to introduce themselves:

     Shelly Berger, Colorado, Colorado: "Hello. I am a junior at
Colorado State University. I am hoping to get into veterinary
school. I just wanted to let Dr. Jernigan know that I have been
taking my NFB vitamins for the past years, and it has really been
a help. Thank you."
     Katharine Bond, Virginia, Massachusetts: "I'm very honored.
I am going to be studying art history this fall at Williams
College. I have worked in the art museum field for the last five
years as an assistant art curator at the State Archives in
Maryland and as a full staff member at a small museum as a
collections manager. I have an undergraduate degree from St.
John's College, and I'm delighted to represent blind people in
this field."
     Ann Marie Bovaird, Ohio, Kentucky: "It's a great honor to be
here. Last December I graduated with a bachelor's degree in
international studies from Miami University of Ohio. Beginning in
August I will start pursuing a master's degree in international
affairs from the Paterson School of Diplomacy and International
Commerce at the University of Kentucky. Thank you very much."
     Dennis Bowling, Illinois, Illinois: "Hi. I'm Dennis Bowling,
and I'm very glad to be here. I will be starting my third year of
doctoral studies at Loyola University of Chicago this fall, but
in many, many respects--perhaps in the most important respect--my
education began here on Sunday night at 5 o'clock."
     Heather Certner, Maryland, Maryland: "Hi. My name again is
Heather Certner. I'm completing a master's in victimology, going
on to the University of Maryland to start a J.D. and a Ph.D. I
just want to thank you all for letting me have the opportunity to
be here. I look forward to meeting as many of you as possible and
learning from all of you as well."
     Richard Chen, New Jersey, Massachusetts: "Hi. My name is
Richard Chen. I go to Harvard University. I'm currently a
sophomore, studying government, international relations; and I
hope to become an international lawyer or a corporate lawyer. So
I appreciate talking to any lawyers any time. I am currently
going to Harvard summer school and working as a law intern."
     Lora Felty, Kentucky, Kentucky: "Hi. First of all I just
want to say that I am really, really honored to be here. I
graduated from Northern Kentucky University with a degree in
English and secondary education last December, and I am starting
this summer to work on a master's degree in special
education/vision impairment from the University of Louisville.
Thanks."
     Jim Hamon, California, California: "I would like to say
greetings to the most cantankerous, contentious group of citizens
that have ever stood up and looked every gift horse in the mouth-
-not afraid to kick out the teeth if they need to either. I am
really impressed. I study democratic process as a social
institution. I am in the graduate Sociology Department at UC
Berkeley."
     Mark Heaphy, Virginia, Connecticut: "Good morning. My name
is Mark Heaphy. I did my undergraduate work at the College of
William and Mary in international relations and philosophy. I am
currently a second-year graduate student at Yale University,
studying international security programs."
     Jean Janicke, Texas, Belgium, and Massachusetts: "Thank you
very much. I'm Jean Janicke. I'm thrilled and delighted to be the
imported scholarship recipient this year. I am currently working
in Brussels, Belgium, and in September I will be starting a
master's degree in public policy at Harvard University."
     Kristen Jocums, Utah, Utah: "Good morning. I am currently a
third-year law student at the University of Utah. I am also
chapter president of the Salt Lake City Chapter of the NFB of
Utah, also a treasurer of the newly-formed student chapter of the
NFB of Utah. I would like to thank all of you for making this
opportunity possible. It's through each of us that we as blind
people can become successful. Thank you."
     Heather Kirkwood, Germany, Kansas: "Hello. I will be a
sophomore in the fall. I'm majoring in political science and
minoring in journalism. I've been a member of the Federation for
about a year now. I love this group because it's a strong group,
a united group, and a caring group."
     Kristen Knouse, New Jersey, Illinois: "Good morning. I'm
going into my second year of graduate study at Northwestern
University. I'm studying speech and language pathology. I work
with patients with communications disorders such as stroke, head
injury, and voice problems. I also enjoy horseback riding in what
spare time I have. It's a real honor for me to be here with the
National Federation of the Blind because there are only a few
blind people in the field of speech pathology, and I may be the
first. So thank you for allowing me to be one of the openers in
the field."
     Christopher Kuczynski, Pennsylvania, Connecticut: "Fellow
Federationists, good morning. I am a 1986 graduate of Villanova
University, from which I received my BA in English literature. I
received my law degree from Temple University Law School in
Philadelphia in 1989. After three years in private practice, I've
decided to pursue a career in law teaching and, to that end, will
be attending Yale University Law School's Master's of Law program
beginning in September. This is my seventh national convention,
my sixth in a row, and I'm honored and delighted to be at this
one as a national scholarship winner."
     Jana Littrell, California, California: "Hi. I'm glad to be
here. Conventions are my favorite places to be. This is my sixth
one. I would like to work with blind children, so I'm currently
attending San Francisco State University. I will receive teaching
credentials, one in special education, working with blind
children, another in social studies, and a master's degree in
special education."
     Charles Marston, Florida, Florida: "Hello. I just graduated
from Miami Senior High in the City of Miami. I graduated number
eleven from a class of 700 students. I'm going to the honors
program at Miami Dade Community College and then transfer to
Florida International University. I would like to become a lawyer
and work in the civil rights field. Thanks."
     Brad Martin, Alabama, Alabama: "Hello. I graduated sixth in
a class of about 260 at the age of seventeen. I will be pursuing
a degree at Springhill College in communication arts, going in as
a freshmore, meaning that I will start with thirty hours of
college credit for work completed in my high school career. Thank
you."
     Tonya McCluskey, Montana, Wyoming: "I'm going to go to
Northwest College in Powell, Wyoming, in the fall. I'm going to
major in equine studies, and I'm going to have a minor in agri-
business. I want to some day own my own working horse and cattle
ranch."
     Marla Medford, North Carolina, South Carolina: "Hello. I'm
pleased to be here, and thank you for the opportunity to be at my
first convention. I am originally from North Carolina, the
mountains near Waynesville. I received a B.S. in mathematics from
Western Carolina University, an M.S. in mathematics from Clemson
University, and am currently working on a Ph.D. in mathematics
from Clemson, where I am a teaching assistant. Thank you."
     Peggy Pinder: "You should all be sure to congratulate Marla,
too, on her upcoming marriage in about a week and a half."
     Chad Newcomb, Wisconsin, Minnesota: "Hi. Good morning to all
of you. Next year I will be attending Winona State University,
where I will be majoring in composite materials engineering and
pursuing a minor or perhaps second major in English. And while I
am up here, I would like to express my gratitude to all of you
because you have really opened up a world of opportunities to us
as scholarship recipients. You have made it so much easier for
all of us. Thanks."
     Ali Nizamuddin, Illinois, New York: "Good morning everyone.
I am a second-year Ph.D. student at Columbia University, pursuing
political science. Within political science my specialization is
international relations. Within IR my focus is on Japan. Within
Japan I am studying Japanese securities issues. Anyway, I have
been in the Federation for the past five years, and I joined in
1987. I went to the Phoenix convention primarily because I wanted
a vacation. I have stayed and will continue to do so, because I
have never been involved in an organization or society or a group
whose members love each other as much as the members of this
organization do. Thank you very much. I am delighted to be here."
     T.V. Raman, New York, New York: "Hi. My name is Raman and
first let me say how happy I am to be here at the convention.
This is the first time I am getting in contact with the NFB, and
it's been a great experience so far, and I think it will continue
to be the same during the convention and hereafter. As I said, my
name is Raman, and I'm a graduate student at Cornell, working on
my Ph.D. in applied math and computer science. Thank you."
     Gary Scott, California, Pennsylvania: "Thank you Peggy and
all the members of the Committee, the Board, and the membership
for allowing me the opportunity to come and experience this
convention. My experience so far has been highly inspirational,
illuminating, and empowering. It's quite an event. I am finishing
my doctorate this year at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh in
philosophy, where my main areas of concentration will be medical
and business ethics, political philosophy, and theories of
perception. Thank you."
     Carlos Servan, New Mexico, New Mexico: "Good morning. My
name is Carlos Servan. Next semester I'm going to be a senior at
the University of New Mexico, majoring in political science and
international programs. After that I'm going to law school to
study international business law. I'm very glad to win a
scholarship. I also went to Puerto Rico to organize a chapter
over there. I am the current president of the Student Division in
New Mexico. I'm in the honors program at the University of New
Mexico. I was elected senator of the University of New Mexico
three months ago. Thank you."
     Corinna Trujillo, Colorado, Colorado: "Good morning. I'm
Corinna Trujillo. I'm a professional dancer and choreographer,
and I'm a student of the humanities at the University of
Colorado. I'd like to use my last fifteen seconds in sharing my
favorite quote with you. This is by an unknown author, but I'm
sure it's a thought that's shared by all of us: `There is no
chance, no fate, no destiny that can circumvent, hinder, or
control the firm resolve of a determined soul.'"
     Ramon Vela, Puerto Rico, Massachusetts: "Good morning. My
name is Ramon Vela. I am from Puerto Rico, as Peggy said. So it's
a special honor for me to be a scholarship winner at the same
year and the same convention that my affiliate has been accepted.
I will begin studying in the graduate program at the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology this fall, working on a
Ph.D. in political science, and some day I hope that I can put
that training to good use and help the Federation teach uppity
Congressional staff people a lesson or two about blind people."
     Peggy Pinder: "And there, Mr. President and members of the
National Federation of the Blind, are the twenty-six scholarship
winners this year." [applause]

     As you will observe, it was an impressive group of students
this year. Here are the awards they received: 

     $2,000 NFB Merit Scholarships: Tonya McCluskey, Charles
Marston, Gary Scott, Richard Chen, Shelly Berger, Dennis Bowling,
Corinna Trujillo, Lora Felty, and Ali Nizamuddin.
     $2,000 Hermione Grant Calhoun Scholarship: Jean Janicke.
     $2,000 Ellen Setterfield Memorial Scholarship: James Hamon.
     $2,000 Kuchler-Killian Memorial Scholarship: T.V. Raman.
     $2,500 NFB Scholarships: Heather Certner, Ramon Vela, Brad
Martin, Kristen Jocums, and Heather Kirkwood.
     $2,500 NFB Educator of Tomorrow Award: Marla Medford.
     $2,500 NFB Humanities Scholarship: Mark Heaphy.
     $2,500 Frank Walton Horn Memorial Scholarship: Ann Bovaird.
     $2,500 Howard Brown Rickard Scholarship: Christopher
Kuczynski.
     $3,000 Melva T. Owen Memorial Scholarship: Chad Newcomb.
     $4,000 NFB Scholarships: Katherine Bond and Jana Littrell.
     $4,000 Anne Pekar Memorial Scholarship: Kristen Knouse.

     The $10,000 Ezra B. Davis Memorial Scholarship was presented
this year to Carlos Servan. In introducing him during the
banquet, Peggy Pinder said:

     Carlos will be a senior in the fall at the University of New
Mexico, where he is earning a bachelor's degree in political
science and Latin American Studies, but that tells you very
little about Carlos. He intends to be a lawyer, either in
international business or in civil rights, but that doesn't tell
you much about Carlos either. He is originally from Peru. After
graduating from high school and while studying some college
courses, Carlos joined Peru's special military forces, which
combat guerrillas and conduct counter-terrorism activities. In a
terrorist attack several years ago, Carlos lost his eyesight and
one hand. 
     He came to the United States less than two years ago to
receive the more sophisticated medical treatment he needed, and
he found other things in addition. Not speaking one word of
English when he came, he found a new language. He also found our
kind of freedom, and he found a new way of life in the National
Federation of the Blind. 
     Practically since he came into the States, he has served as
the President of the Student Division of the National Federation
of the Blind of New Mexico. If you have been around this
convention at all, you have bought a raffle ticket from Carlos
Servan. 


     As the winner of the top scholarship award, Carlos Servan
was invited to make a few remarks to the banquet audience. Here
is what he said: 

     Thank you, Federationists. First of all I would like to
thank the members of the Scholarship Committee and its Chairman,
Peggy Pinder. Let me try to tell you a little bit about how I
feel and how I love this Federation. All this week I have felt
that the hotels were full of energy, and I feel energized to be a
part of this group, this National Federation of the Blind. 
     Last Sunday President Maurer talked to us, the scholarship
members, and he mentioned to us how important it is to keep
ourselves busy. After the banquet speech tonight, let me tell
you, President Maurer, that I promise you--and not only you, but
all the Federation, because I'm part of the Federation--that I am
going to be very busy serving blind people in this country and
all over the world. I will be busy also to learn and teach the
ten percent that you were talking about. 
     I would also like, with your permission, to thank two women.
One is Eileen Rivera. When I came to Maryland and the doctors
told me that I wouldn't see again, I wanted to find out something
about blindness. Eileen asked me, "What is your philosophy about
blindness?" 
     I answered her, "I think a blind person can do whatever he
wants to do. All he needs is opportunity and training." 
     She told me, "That's our philosophy." 
     I said to her, "Who is this `our'; who is `us?'" So she was
telling me about the Federation, and I attended my first national
convention in 1989, a month after I had come to this country. Let
me tell you the truth; I was a little skeptical about what she
told me about many blindness professionals. However, as Mr.
Maurer mentioned also, we have learned little by little, and we
won't ever forget what the Federation is doing for us. 
     I went to the Orientation Center at Alamogordo, and I was
busy learning English and basic skills. I used to tell the
administrator, Mr. Davis, that I would like to be a lawyer if I
can. He never doubted; he just told me, "Yes you will." That is
the Federation. Nobody in the Federation ever told me "maybe."
They always told me, "Yes you will." 
     I also want to thank my wife for her support. This is her
first convention. In very hard times, especially when we had my
younger brother and sister living with us, studying full-time,
working, she was there all the time. She is a Federationist; she
understands our philosophy of blindness.
     To end, I would like to emphasize my thankfulness to Dr.
Jernigan. I have been listening to and reading his speeches. Dr.
Jernigan, you have kept the Federation in the right way. The
Federation is changing the lives of many blind people in America.
Dr. Jernigan, you will continue to change the lives of many, and
I am going to repeat something that you have said in many of your
speeches: We won't ever again settle for being second-class
citizens. Thank you.


[PHOTO: Dr. Jernigan standing at podium microphone. CAPTION:
Kenneth Jernigan, Executive Director of the National Federation
of the Blind.]

            SHIFTING BALANCES IN THE BLINDNESS FIELD
                     An Address Delivered by
                        Kenneth Jernigan
                       Executive Director
                National Federation of the Blind
                    At the Annual Convention
                    Charlotte, North Carolina
                          July 2, 1992

     On Thursday morning, July 2, 1992, delegates to the annual
convention of the National Federation of the Blind listened
attentively to a panel presentation devoted to an examination of
the present and future structure of the blindness field.
Participants were Dr. Kenneth Jernigan, Executive Director of the
National Federation of the Blind; Mr. Carl Augusto, President and
Executive Director of the American Foundation for the Blind; and
Mr. Ritchie Geisel, President of Recording for the Blind. Because
of the vital significance of the ideas presented, we are printing
the texts of the three addresses as they were given that morning.
Some of the discussion after the last two speeches is summarized,
following the texts of those addresses. Here are Dr. Jernigan's
remarks as he delivered them on July 2: 

     The German scientist Max Planck said: "A new truth usually
doesn't triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see
the light but rather because its opponents eventually die and a
new generation grows up that is familiar with it." In more
prosaic language I say that those who base their actions on
yesterday's perceived truths (whether real or imagined) are
poorly equipped to deal with today's realities and are likely to
have much time for reflection in tomorrow's leisure of
unemployment.
     Today we are talking about the future of services for the
blind. The fact that we are, along with the popularity and
recurrence of the theme, means that there is a felt need and that
there are problems. But we are talking about something more. We
are talking about the shifting balances in the blindness system
of this country. We are talking about the governmental and
private agencies, blind consumers, and the relationship between
consumers and professionals. In a broader sense we are talking
about the very survival of the blindness field as we have known
it.
     The most notable thing about the blindness field is how
different it is today from what it was twenty or thirty years
ago. From the 1920s to the 1960s the unquestioned leader among
the governmental and private agencies doing work with the blind
in this country was the American Foundation for the Blind, and
there was a reasonable amount of coherence and unity. As to the
organized blind movement, the National Federation of the Blind
didn't even exist until 1940, and it didn't become a major factor
in the field for quite a few years after that. Today everything
has changed. If what I am about to say is to do any good at all,
it is absolutely essential that we deal with facts, not just
wishes or claims or fantasies.
     Let me begin with the American Foundation for the Blind. It
was established in 1921, and its mission was fairly clear. It was
to coordinate the efforts of the professionals in the blindness
field throughout the country, help create and guide new agencies,
do research, serve as a mechanism for resources and referrals,
and generally act as a focal point for agency activities. 
Realistically viewed, most of those functions no longer exist as
prime objectives.
     In the 1920s the Foundation was instrumental in establishing
and providing initial guidance to quite a number of state
agencies. In Iowa, for instance, where I was formerly director,
the American Foundation for the Blind worked in 1926 and 1927
with the state legislature and the school for the blind to
establish the Iowa Commission for the Blind. It sent staff
members to help get programs started and to find and train
personnel. The same was true in a number of other states. That
mission no longer exists. Today the state agencies are well
established, and they don't now generally look to the Foundation
for guidance; nor do they feel any particular loyalty to it.
Rather, they look to their state-federal relationships, their own
national organizations and committees, mechanisms within their
state borders, and alliances with consumer organizations. This is
not to criticize but simply to state facts.
     In the twenties and thirties the American Foundation for the
Blind, if not alone in the work, was certainly the principal
leader in developing specialized tools and appliances for the
blind: Braille watches, measuring devices, household aids, and
the like. The Foundation also took the lead in developing the
talking book machine, and for a time it was virtually the only
organization producing talking book records. All of that has now
changed. The Foundation is a relatively minor participant in the
production and sale of specialized tools, aids, and appliances.
It does not even sell or ship these from its own premises but
relies on a catalog fulfillment company to do the work. If the
Foundation were to go completely out of the specialized tools and
appliances business today, there would scarcely be a ripple. The
Foundation is, by no means, the principal manufacturer or
distributor. That part of its original mission is now largely
(and in the main, successfully) finished.
     As to the production of talking book records, the Foundation
still does it, but there would be no great problem to anybody but
the Foundation if it ceased the activity. Others have now taken
the lead in the field. Again, this is no criticism. In fact,
quite the contrary. It emphasizes the success of the Foundation's
pioneering effort.
     The Foundation played a key role in helping design and pass
some of the principal legislation which determined the direction
of the blindness field and which still underpins many of the
opportunities that we as blind people enjoy, but that was decades
ago. The golden age of the Foundation's influence in shaping
federal legislative and administrative policy was probably the
1930s and the early '40s when the Books for the Blind program of
the Library of Congress was established, Title X (the Public
Assistance for the Blind section of the Social Security Act) was
adopted, the Randolph-Sheppard Act was passed, the Rehabilitation
Act (Barden-La Follette, 1943) was amended to include the blind,
and a whole new spate of other legislative and administrative
policies came into being. Indeed, the Foundation did not
singlehandedly make these achievements, having at times to
compromise with others in the field and even now and again
failing altogether to get its own way--but few would argue that
the Foundation was not at the center of the action or the
dominant force.
     That, however, was more than fifty years ago, and the 1990s
bear little resemblance to the 1930s and '40s. Certainly the
Foundation is no longer a controlling factor in legislative or
executive decisions concerning the blind. We who are blind now
speak for ourselves through our own organization, the National
Federation of the Blind, and we are the most powerful force in
such matters in Washington and the state capitals today. Of
course, the governmental and private agencies for the blind still
have a major presence in legislative and executive decisions
concerning blindness, but they speak with many voices--and
certainly with no dominance or central influence on the part of
the Foundation. Again, I cannot emphasize too strongly that what
I am saying is not meant as criticism but only as a recognition
of fact.
     The Second World War and the period immediately following
brought a shift in emphasis for the Foundation. Because of the
thousands of children who developed retrolental fibroplasia
(today we would call it retinopathy of prematurity), there was a
crisis in education. In California, for instance, where I was
living at the time, there were in the early 1950s more than 1,200
young RLF children who were blind--and the residential school
could handle only about 200. What was to be done? RLF had largely
been conquered, and when the wave of hundreds of blind children
had passed through the population, there was every reason to
believe the number would return to normal. It made neither
economic nor political sense for the state of California to build
five or six new residential schools for the blind. It was simply
not in the cards. At the same time the parents were not going to
permit their blind children to stay at home and not have an
education. The answer was obvious. They would have to be placed
in the public schools in their local areas--which, incidentally,
made the endless arguments (arguments often stimulated by the
Foundation) about which environment is better for the education
of a blind child, the residential or the public school, not only
pointless but downright harmful and diversionary. Regardless of
the quality of the training or the competence of the teachers,
most of these children were necessarily going to be trained in
the public schools in their home communities.
     To its credit, the American Foundation for the Blind stepped
into the breach. It had a major new mission, the establishment of
university programs to train teachers of blind children, the
recruitment of the teachers, the finding of teachers to teach the
teachers, and the development of educational materials to make
the process possible. Important as that mission was (and it was
extremely important), it has long since passed. The university
programs to train special education teachers for the blind are
now completely mature. They demonstrate no special loyalty to the
Foundation nor any evidence of following its leadership or asking
it to coordinate their efforts. In fact, as adult children are
wont to do, they often find themselves competing with the
Foundation for money and leadership. Whatever else may be said
for the loose national confederacy to which most of the
university programs belong--that is, the Association for
Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired
(AER)--the organization is not now controlled or dominated by the
American Foundation for the Blind. This is true despite the fact
that the Foundation was instrumental in establishing many of the
university programs and that in the 1970s it gave sizable amounts
of money to the AER, which at the time was using another name.
     As a natural concomitant of its work with the university
programs, the Foundation began to organize and give direction to
parents of blind children. In fact, a few years ago the
Foundation was instrumental in organizing NAPVI (the National
Association for Parents of the Visually Impaired). It provided a
staff member to the organization, gave direction and leadership
to it, and helped it set policy. Recently, however, the Hilton
Foundation gave the Perkins School for the Blind a $15,000,000
grant, running over a five-year period; and Perkins effectively
took control of NAPVI, giving it many tens of thousands of
dollars, much more than the Foundation could possibly muster. The
Foundation competed for the Hilton grant, but it lost--another
sign of the shifting balances in the blindness field.
     With respect to those shifting balances, there is still
another factor. The Parents of Blind Children Division of the
National Federation of the Blind is now probably the major force
in the field. Certainly its magazine, Future Reflections, is the
largest circulation publication for parents and educators of the
blind, as well as the most influential. In any case the
Foundation (to the extent that it has any part left to play in
organizing and directing the activities of parents of blind
children) is now only a minor participant.
     Once more I repeat that I am not being critical. The
American Foundation for the Blind filled a need with respect to
the education of blind children and the counseling of their
parents which could not have been filled by anybody else at the
time and which absolutely demanded attention. It is simply that
this part of the Foundation's mission has now been largely
accomplished. There are those who would argue (in fact, I am one
of them) that some of the Foundation's advice to the parents and
many of its policy guidelines to the universities were custodial
in nature, overly defensive about what was called
professionalism, and more involved with complexity and prestige
than common sense and the good of the child--but these criticisms
must be viewed in context. When considered from the distance of
the years and the magnitude of the task undertaken, the
criticisms soften and take perspective. There was no viable
alternative, and the Foundation did what it could with the
knowledge it had and the resources it possessed. It deserves our
appreciation, not our spleen.
     The Second World War brought other changes besides those
affecting the education of blind children. It moved the United
States to the center of the stage in world affairs. Among other
things, this meant that our country would take the leading role
in helping other nations develop programs for the blind. The
American Foundation for the Blind was the natural leader and
coordinator.
     It played a principal part in establishing the World Council
for the Welfare of the Blind, and in November of 1945 it took
control of the American Braille Press for War and Civilian Blind
and renamed it the AFOB (the American Foundation for Overseas
Blind). The AFOB was technically a separate organization, but its
board was almost identical to that of the Foundation. Throughout
the world in the forties and fifties the Foundation was generally
recognized as the leading force in the blindness field in the
United States and as our chief spokesman in overseas matters.
     All of that has now changed. In the late sixties and early
seventies the AFOB went through an alteration. It changed its
name to Helen Keller International, began to acquire a different
board from that of the Foundation, and ultimately broke the ties
almost completely. Then, in the changing climate of public
opinion about overseas projects, Helen Keller International very
nearly went bankrupt. It is now largely financed (and, therefore,
in reality substantially controlled) by the U.S. government and
spends the major part of its money (a sizable budget) in
prevention of blindness projects in other countries. Meanwhile
the American Foundation for the Blind no longer has preeminence
in overseas activities.
     In 1984 the International Federation of the Blind and the
World Council for the Welfare of the Blind (the two major world
organizations in the field) merged to become the World Blind
Union. The North America/Caribbean Region of the World Blind
Union consists of organizations of and for the blind in Canada,
the English-speaking nations of the Caribbean, and the United
States, and is generally recognized by other countries as the
principal mechanism for action affecting the blind in this part
of the world--particularly, regarding overseas matters. The
Foundation is a member of the regional structure, but it is
certainly not dominant.
     I have already alluded to the $15,000,000 grant which the
Perkins School received from the Hilton Foundation. Some of this
money is being spent inside the United States, but much of it is
being used to develop projects and give aid overseas. With
respect to dollars spent in overseas aid, Perkins is now a major
factor--and with money goes influence. I think it is fair to say
that (with the exception of providing a certain amount of
professional literature) the American Foundation for the Blind
does not today have any significant commitment, influence, or
mission beyond the borders of this country. This is in no way to
belittle or take away from the work which the Foundation did in
this area in the past or the work which it may do in the future.
It is simply to state facts as I believe them to be at present.
     Let me turn next to NAC (the National Accreditation Council
for Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped). In the
1960s the American Foundation for the Blind created COMSTAC (the
Commission on Standards and Accreditation). It financed COMSTAC
and provided it with an executive director. The objective was to
establish for agencies in the blindness field a system of
accreditation, which the Foundation hoped would come to be
universally accepted, bringing influence to the Foundation and
harmony to the field. The exact opposite occurred. After a brief
existence, COMSTAC established NAC, which confidently announced
that it would be completely self-supporting in no more than five
or six years and that it would encompass most of the agencies.
     What followed is a study in failure. NAC was never accepted
by even as many as twenty percent of those that it wanted to
accredit. Through the sixties, the seventies, and the eighties it
bled the Foundation financially and politically, a black hole of
controversy and cost. NAC has been the Foundation's Vietnam--and
(as with America's Vietnam) disentanglement, admission of
mistakes, and loss of face have been bitter medicine to swallow.
My conversations with Foundation officials indicate that the
Foundation has spent more than $9,000,000 on NAC. It has now
stopped the expenditures, and NAC is in its death throes. Even
so, the Foundation understandably finds it difficult to make a
clean break and a public statement that the chapter of its
Vietnam must be closed and left in the past.
     In a number of discussions during the past few months, Carl
Augusto (the recently appointed president and chief executive of
the Foundation) has talked with me quite frankly about the
condition and future of his organization. I gather from him that
the Foundation's assets have dropped from a worth of about forty
million dollars four or five years ago to a present value of
something over twenty-four million and that the hemorrhaging
(though slowing) continues. I also understand that the Foundation
eliminated some twenty percent of its staff positions during
1991, making massive layoffs. In my opinion this does not mean
that the Foundation will go bankrupt or cease to be a major
participant in the affairs of the blind, nor do I think it would
serve the best interests of the blind if such were the case.
Rather, I think it means that the Foundation must redefine its
mission, free itself from its Vietnam, and accept the realities
of the present day.
     As to redefining its mission, the Foundation has recently
been working on the matter. Under date of January 15, 1992, Mr.
Augusto sent me a letter concerning extensive planning sessions
the Foundation conducted during 1990 and 1991, and along with the
letter he enclosed a statement entitled the "AFB Mission." Here
it is:

     The mission of AFB is to enable persons who are blind or
visually impaired to achieve equality of access and opportunity
that will ensure freedom of choice in their lives. AFB
accomplishes this mission by taking a national leadership role in
the development and implementation of public policy and
legislation, informational and educational programs, diversified
products and quality services.
     To advance this mission, AFB works to: develop and
disseminate knowledge, programs, and products that can be used by
professionals providing service to persons who are blind or
visually impaired, by educational institutions, by legislators,
by employers, and by others in a position to widen and improve
equal access; to initiate or join with coalitions of other
organizations, when appropriate, to accomplish specific goals or
objectives; to promote the positive image of persons who are
blind or visually impaired in the media and the community, and to
provide a diversified and stable funding base for the
organization to ensure ongoing support for the strategies and
activities required.
     The mission statement [the document continues] calls for AFB
to move toward a more selective national leadership role in
effecting the fundamental changes required to achieve equality of
access and opportunity for persons who are blind or visually
impaired. It defines AFB's national leadership role as an
information broker, an agent of change, a leader, and innovator.

     That is what Mr. Augusto sent me as the Foundation's new
mission statement, and I can only say that I find it somewhat
disappointing. It seems to me that it is too much couched in
generalities and does not contain enough that is different from
yesterday's largely finished activities. It announces almost no
new initiatives, no specifics, and no clear direction for the
future. Perhaps the Foundation will go back to the drawing board
and further define its role and how it intends to achieve it. I
hope that it will, for the blind and the blindness field need the
Foundation--not a Foundation looking back to the past but the
kind of creative organization of the formative years--vital,
resilient, determined, and innovative.
     It is a positive sign that the Foundation and the Federation
have been working together with increasing closeness during the
past decade. Bill Gallagher and I have become warm personal
friends, and Carl Augusto shows an interest in continuing to
strengthen the ties. He was at last year's convention and
indicated a positive desire to speak on this year's program.
These things would not have been possible twenty years ago.
     In this discussion of shifting balances in the blindness
field, why have I spent so much time on the American Foundation
for the Blind? The answer is simple. The Foundation has played
such a major part in the development of the blindness system in
this country during the past seventy years that any meaningful
discussion of where we are and where we are going must take it
into account and give it significant emphasis.
     But there are other forces to be considered. One of them is
the AER (the Association for Education and Rehabilitation of the
Blind and Visually Impaired). The AER resulted from a merger
between the AAIB (American Association of Instructors for the
Blind, which later changed its name to the Association for
Education of the Visually Handicapped) and the AAWB (the American
Association of Workers for the Blind). The AAIB was established
in the middle of the last century, and the AAWB came into being
in 1905. The merged organization (AER) was meant to encompass
most of the professionals in work with the blind in both Canada
and the United States. It has a large membership on paper and is
potentially the leading force among the agency professionals--but
the potential has never been realized, and there seems little
likelihood that it will. The problem is that AER has almost no
central authority. It is so loosely knit that in many ways it is
an organization in name only. Its constituents show no prime
loyalty to it and no ability to act in concert on tough questions
and meaningful issues. It has many members but little influence,
and it is likely to stay that way.
     Let me illustrate. In the summer of 1988 at an AER
convention in Montreal a number of us decided to try to see if we
could pull the blindness field in Canada and the United States
together for concerted action. Accordingly, the Committee on
Joint Organizational Effort (JOE) was established. Those invited
to attend as initial members (it was thought we might later
expand the membership) were the Canadian National Institute for
the Blind, the Canadian Council of the Blind, the AER, the
American Foundation for the Blind, the National Library Service
for the Blind and Physically Handicapped, the American Council of
the Blind, the Blinded Veterans Association, and the National
Federation of the Blind. The first JOE meeting was held in March
of 1989 at the National Center for the Blind in Baltimore and was
hosted by the National Federation of the Blind. All who were
invited attended except the American Council of the Blind, which
thereby emphasized and increased its growing isolation from the
main stream of the blindness field.
     Although the first JOE meeting spent much of its time
smoothing tensions and establishing relationships, it dealt with
substantive issues as well. One of these involved Braille
literacy. After much discussion we unanimously agreed upon the
language of a statement. Present as representatives of AER were
its immediate past president, its then current president, and its
president elect--presumably the top leaders of the organization.
Most of us left that meeting feeling that we had achieved a
binding agreement. Yet, the AER board agonized, wanted to water
down the statement, and ultimately rejected it.
     At the second meeting of the Committee on Joint
Organizational Effort, which was held at the Canadian National
Institute for the Blind in Toronto in November of 1990, the need
to find a way to increase Braille literacy was further discussed.
At the third JOE meeting, held at the American Foundation for the
Blind in New York in January of this year, Braille literacy was
again considered. Once more, AER was represented by its immediate
past president, its current president, and its president elect.
After much discussion and refinement of language we unanimously
agreed upon the following statement:

     Recognizing that ongoing assessment and due process are
requirements of the law, the members of the Committee on Joint
Organizational Effort endorse the principle that in planning the
educational program for a blind or visually impaired child, these
guidelines be followed:
     - If reading and writing are to be taught and if the parent
or parents and the decision makers for the school want the child
to be taught Braille, this should be done.
     - If reading and writing are to be taught and if the parent
or parents and the decision makers for the school want print to
be taught, this should be done.
     - If the parent or parents and the decision makers for the
school cannot agree, then both Braille and print should be
taught.

     This was the statement we agreed upon, and if it had been
any milder, it would have been worthless. Also, remember that it
had been discussed over a three-year period at three succeeding
meetings and that top AER officials had participated throughout
the process. Yet, under date of April 12, 1992, Dr. William
Wiener, president of AER, sent a memorandum to the members of the
Committee on Joint Organizational Effort entitled "Recent JOE
Agreements." Here is what he said:

     As you may know, because AER is a membership organization,
its Board of Directors requires that major policy decisions of
the Association be reviewed by its duly elected representatives.
Based on this policy, the officers of the Association that
attended the last JOE meeting presented our agreements for
confirmation by the Board of Directors. It is the purpose of this
memorandum to report the decisions that were made.
     In general the Board is supportive of the efforts of the JOE
to discuss issues that affect blind people. Because our
differences are sometimes great, it should not be viewed as
negative when consensus is not reached. It is felt by the Board
that honest discussions will result in an increased ability to
understand each other and that agreement is not a required
outcome.
     The Board was appreciative of our efforts to reach consensus
on the issue of Braille Literacy. After a lengthy discussion,
however, the Board voted not to support our concluding agreement.
The Board felt that the wording of the agreement left the
statement open to different interpretations. A statement that can
be viewed differently by different groups serves no useful
purpose. The Board did, however, endorse that AER supports the
goal that no child should ever find the implementation of
legislation an obstacle to his or her best educational process.
The JOE discussions on this issue have been useful as they have
inspired the Board of AER to move ahead to define its own
position on Braille Bills. As President, I have appointed an Ad
Hoc Board Committee chaired by Toni Heinze to develop a statement
that clearly defines our beliefs. It will not be "model
legislation" but rather important points to be considered in
formulating a position on any particular version of the Braille
Bills. I believe this will be a useful tool as we move forward to
insure that blind children and adults receive the best possible
education and rehabilitation.
     It is our goal to complete this task by our biennial meeting
in Los Angeles. I will be sure to share this information with the
Committee on JOE as soon as it has been approved by the AER
Board.

     There you have the AER memorandum--and there you also have,
in AER's own language, the reason why it is not, and cannot be,
the leader of the governmental and private agencies in this
country or, for that matter, even a strong force in their
conduct. The AER totally rejected the actions of its top leaders
on what should have been almost a non-controversial issue, and
even if the Board had approved, there is no reason to believe
that the individual agencies and members of AER would have paid
any attention or altered their policies in the slightest. Again I
remind you that I am not criticizing. I am only stating facts as
I see them and suggesting that those in the blindness field (all
of us) must either avoid the world of fantasy and face reality or
risk destruction.
     Let me next turn to the ACB (the American Council of the
Blind). It was formed in 1961 at the end of the NFB's civil war,
partly from people who were expelled from our organization and
partly from those who quit. It, too, has an identity crisis and a
problem of mission. At first its goal seemed simple--hate the
National Federation of the Blind and get revenge. But that was
over thirty years ago, and a new generation has risen. Hate and
negativism are poor materials for long-term building, and
thoughts of revenge are mostly the dream of the weak and the
solace of the dispossessed. At our conventions you will observe
that the American Council of the Blind is rarely thought of or
mentioned, but at their meetings the circumstances are different.
We are frequently the topic of discussion and the subject of
snide allusion.
     As to mission, the Council has a growing problem. In the
sixties and seventies, when the American Foundation for the Blind
and some of the other agencies were in bitter conflict with us,
the ACB was used as a buffer. When there was a hotly contested
issue, the agencies could trot the Council out and say: "The
Federation does not represent the blind. Here is another consumer
organization, which agrees with us." In short, the Council served
as a company union. But that was before the 1980s when the
Federation and an increasing number of the agencies started
drawing closer and working in partnership. As the process
continues and accelerates today, the Council not only ceases to
be an asset to the agencies as a company union but actually
becomes an embarrassment and a liability. It does, that is,
unless it is willing to change its stance and join with the rest
of us in trying to build a new basis for positive partnership in
the field. At a minimum this would mean stopping the pretense
that it is the largest organization of the blind in the country
(a claim which nobody, including its own members, takes seriously
anyway) and ceasing the hate campaigns--in short, leaving fantasy
and facing reality. The American Council of the Blind can be a
real force for constructive action if it will, and we will gladly
work with it if it takes that road.
     There are, of course, numerous other organizations and
agencies in the blindness field, but many of these have not taken
a significant role in the politics of it. The Blinded Veterans
Association, for instance, falls into this category.
Comparatively small and generally respected, it has traditionally
limited its activities to matters concerning veterans. The
National Council of State Agencies for the Blind, the
organization of residential schools, the organization of state
vision consultants, the National Council of Private Agencies for
the Blind, and a number of other such groups have been loosely
associated and have generally not attempted to exert much
influence outside their particular specialties--and even in those
areas of specialty, they have largely been forums for discussion
and exchange of information rather than rallying points for
broad-based, united action. Obviously all of this can change, and
there is a good deal of evidence that in some instances it will.
The balances are shifting.
     In addition to the groups I have mentioned, there are
individual agencies which have a national constituency and scope
of operation that potentially give them influence far beyond what
they have ever developed or chosen to use. I think of the Hadley
School for the Blind, Recording for the Blind, and the American
Printing House for the Blind as prime examples. All three of
these agencies are reaching out to play broader roles than they
have ever attempted before, and their presence is being felt.
     The Rehabilitation Services Administration and the National
Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped of the
Library of Congress are also factors in the equation. They have
broad constituencies and will necessarily play key roles in
determining the nature and effectiveness of the blindness system
in the years ahead. They will influence and be influenced by the
coalitions which are built and the philosophies which are
developed. With the leadership that they currently have, it seems
clear that they will make positive contributions.
     Then, there are the vendors of technology. They, too, are
becoming an important part of the mix. Thirty years ago they did
not exist, and such technology as we had came almost exclusively
from the American Foundation for the Blind and the American
Printing House for the Blind. Today the situation is totally
different. There are an increasing number of commercial and
nonprofit producers and distributors of both high and low tech
items, and their influence is growing. Their products affect our
lives, and their sales representatives and service personnel
mingle with us on a continuing basis. Whether they want to or not
(and, for that matter, whether either they or we like it or not),
they will necessarily be a significant factor in the discussions
and alliances that are shaping the future of the blindness
system.
     Of course, technology has brought major changes in the lives
of the sighted just as it has in the lives of the blind, but
there is a significant difference. When the sighted moved from
medievalism to the industrial revolution, then to the automobile,
the airplane, and later to the electronic age, they had 200 years
to do it, and there was time for adjustment and acclimatization--
but not so with us. Our move from medievalism to electronics has
happened in less than thirty years, with all of the upheaval such
compression brings. Yes, technology is changing our lives--and
there are political as well as technological implications.
     So the vendors and distributors of technology will play an
important part in determining the course of the blindness system,
and there are also others who will. Some of the agencies in New
York and other parts of the country, for instance, now have
financial resources (more than one of them with upwards of fifty
million dollars) which far exceed those of the American
Foundation for the Blind or the others I have mentioned. Will
they choose to become factors in the national mix? They could--
and some of them may. Perkins, for instance, (although possibly a
little less wealthy than a few of the rest) is well financed and
energetically led. Whether it will choose to raise its profile
and whether that will be good or bad will turn entirely on its
motives and actions.
     Whatever all of this may prove, surely there can be no doubt
about at least one thing. The blindness field in this country is
in ferment, and the old alignments and power bases are gone, gone
forever. New forces are emerging. New balances are being struck.
Will this be good or bad, positive or negative? It depends on
what choices we make, what wisdom we show, and how responsibly we
act.
     So far, I have talked about others. Let me now say a few
words about us, about the National Federation of the Blind. What
does the new reality mean for the Federation? Well, for one
thing, it means that we must be careful not to get too big for
our pants. We may be (and I think we unquestionably are) the
strongest force in the affairs of the blind in this country
today--but we are not the only force. There are others, and their
views must be taken into account. If we make the mistakes of some
of those who were leaders in the blindness field in the past, if
we fail to reach out in cooperative good will, our momentum will
slow. Our progress will stop. We do not want to boss or lord it
over others. We know what that feels like. We have been treated
that way too often ourselves to want to do it to anybody else.
     But let nobody misunderstand what I am saying. We are just
as determined as we always were, never again to be treated like
second-class citizens or kept from having a say in our own
destiny. We have had a bellyful of that--and we are strong enough
to see that it doesn't happen again. We still have teeth, and we
know how to use them.
     The blindness system in our country today is seriously
threatened. Unless it can pull itself together in true
partnership (with all, or at least the major participants,
working in mutual respect), it may very well perish. Budgets are
tightening; the environment is deteriorating; population is
rising; and resources are dwindling. In addition, other
disability groups (once disorganized and invisible) are finding
their voice and reaching for power. They are now a growing force
to be reckoned with, and there is no turning back.
     As we look ahead, the future is bright with promise. We as
an organization are stronger than we have ever been, and we are
prepared to work in partnership with any and all who are
interested in helping the blind move toward opportunity,
equality, and freedom. These are the things we want, and these
are the things we intend to have--opportunity, equality, and
freedom. A measure of our progress can be seen in the increasing
number of governmental and private agencies and members of the
public who are joining with us in common cause, but the real
indicator of our progress is what is happening within us as blind
people. By the thousands and tens of thousands we have gained
confidence, determination, and self-respect--and no force on
earth can turn us back. This is the meaning of all I have said.
This is the message of the shifting balances in the blindness
field. Let us join together, and we will make it come true!































                 ******************************

     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."

                 ******************************

[PHOTO: Carl Augusto standing at podium microhpone. CAPTION: Carl
R. Augusto, President and Executive Director of the American
Foundation for the Blind.]

       THE ROLE OF THE AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR THE BLIND 
              IN MEETING NEEDS: TODAY AND TOMORROW
                       by Carl R. Augusto

     In introducing Mr. Augusto, Dr. Jernigan called favorable
attention to the fact that shortly after taking over as president
and executive director of the American Foundation for the Blind,
Mr. Augusto came to observe the 1991 convention of the National
Federation of the Blind. During the year since that good-will
gesture Mr. Augusto and Dr. Jernigan have spoken often by
telephone and have met upon occasion. A working relationship is
beginning to develop.
     This spring President Maurer extended an invitation to Mr.
Augusto to speak at this summer's convention, and in an effort to
prepare him for what would be said by the Federation during the
panel discussion, Dr. Jernigan made a point of calling to discuss
his own speech. There is certainly some hope that even in
difficult times channels of communication between the two
organizations are now open. Here is the address which Mr. Augusto
delivered July 2, 1992: 
 
     Coming to a convention of the blind reminds me of the first
one I attended. I remember walking through the hotel doors and
wondering how it would feel if I were sighted and didn't have
much contact with blind people and my boss had told me that as a
member of the hotel staff a couple hundred blind people would be
coming in that day or the next week for a convention. I think I'd
be pretty anxious if I didn't have contact with people who were
visually impaired or blind. However, I thought the hotel was very
much prepared for blind people. I remember the bellman giving me
very specific instructions on the layout of the hotel, giving me
some good orientation of the room and the floor my room was on.
     When I went to lunch later on that day, the hostess that met
me gave me a Braille menu, and I thought that was sort of neat--
not having had very much experience with that. However, the
waitress that served me was very, very nervous. She told me that
my fish was at twelve o'clock, and my fish turned out to be at
six o'clock. She told me my potatoes were at six o'clock, and
they turned out to be at twelve o'clock. So what I proceeded to
do was pick up the lemon and start squirting it over the
potatoes. She came running over, very apologetic, and said, "Gee,
I'm terribly sorry. I'm not doing very well. I think I said the
wrong thing." 
     I said, "Don't worry about it. By the end of the week, after
you've served hundreds of blind people, you're going to do
better." I don't think she took to that very well. 
     But she said, "I have a confession to make." And she bent
down, came very, very close to me, and said, "You're the first
one!" 
     No woman had ever said that to me before, nor did I ever
think it would happen in a restaurant. 
     I'm very pleased to have been invited to address your
convention this year. I was with you, as Dr. Jernigan mentioned,
several days last year; and I was very impressed with your
spirit, with your numbers, with your unity, and with your
commitment. And I must say I am equally impressed this year. 
     I'd like to say a special thank you and a warm hello to
members of two of your local affiliates. First of all, your
Cincinnati Affiliate. Do we have members of the Cincinnati
affiliate here? [Cheers from the Ohio delegation] Northern
Kentucky--is your Northern Kentucky affiliate here? [Cheers from
Kentucky] Great! I very much enjoyed working with you, knowing
you, being with you, during my six years in Cincinnati. And I
felt that we had open and productive communications. We didn't
always agree, but we did communicate, in my opinion, which is the
objective that I have with your national leadership. I believe
that we've made a very good start in developing open and
productive communications. 
     Today I'd like to tell you a little bit about the programs
and priorities of the American Foundation for the Blind and also
my view of the major challenges confronting the field of work
with the blind. Since its inception in 1921, AFB has taken a
national leadership role in the passage of legislation, in the
creation of organizations, and furtherance of our mission.
     Our most prominent leader was indeed Helen Keller, who was a
counselor, a fund raiser, and an ambassador for AFB from 1924
until her death in 1968. That was then; this is now. And the
world has changed so dramatically in those years, and so have the
challenges facing blind and visually impaired people in the field
of work with the blind. AFB must change to successfully work with
others to deal with those challenges. 
     As we all approach the twenty-first century, my vision of
AFB is that of a preeminent resource for information--information
to the public, information to workers for the blind, and
information for blind people themselves. My vision of AFB is as a
change agent through legislation, through consultation, and
increasing public awareness of blind people, the nature of
blindness, the capabilities of blind people, and the increasing
numbers of blind people. And perhaps, most importantly, I'd like
to see AFB be a leading force in tackling the most significant
issues confronting blind and visually impaired people in the
field--and, of course, tackling them in harmony with others. We
do need to be more selective at AFB in our activities because of
financial and other exigencies.
     But we need to bring together the diverse constituencies in
work with the blind, and we want to do our part in doing that and
also forging partnerships between providers and consumers. I
think this is an ambitious vision, and it requires hard work and
an on-going commitment to our mission. I'm confident that that
foundation for that vision is being built right now at AFB. 
     Now, to AFB's present programs and some of its priorities.
I'd like to start first with our national technology center. At
our national technology center we develop, manufacture, sell, and
evaluate low- and high-tech products for visually impaired
people. In recent years we've developed some new products--some
talking products. We have now a talking thermometer, a talking
blood glucose analyzer (which is our biggest seller), and a
talking blood pressure meter. 
     We sell over three hundred products--high- and low-tech--
from our consumer products catalogue: medical devices, tools,
kitchen aids, clocks, watches, games, and other things. Our
catalogue is available in Braille, cassette, and print by calling
our hotline, 1(800)232-5463--which spells out AFBlind--but I can
never remember how to translate those letters into numbers, so I
remember the numbers. 
     We periodically conduct evaluations of similar high-tech
products. We've currently completed an evaluation of note-taking
devices. We've recently completed evaluations of Braille printers
and Braille displays. You can obtain those evaluations (it's sort
of like the Consumer Reports evaluation) by calling area code
(212)620-2080. 
     We have a low-interest loan fund, which enables visually
impaired people to purchase Kurzweil products, including the
Kurzweil Personal Reader, at a discount through a low-interest
loan fund; and we plan to extend that loan fund to include other
types of high-tech equipment and also other manufacturers. We're
excited about that prospect.
     We have a careers and technological information bank, which
is a database containing the names of more than thirteen hundred
visually impaired people on the job, using technology, high-tech
or low-tech. If you're interested in getting information or
putting your name on the list for those who would like to share
information about what you're doing in your job and what kind of
technology you are using, you can also call that number--
(212)620-2080.
     AFB inaugurated the talking book program in the thirties,
and today we still produce talking books for the Library of
Congress. Annually we hold a special event called the Scourby
Narrator of the Year Awards in New York in honor of perhaps our
most famous, and certainly most prolific, Talking Book narrator,
Alexander Scourby. This is the sixth year we've held this award,
and this year our winners are Barbara Caruso, for excellence in
reading children's books (you might know Barbara or have heard
her voice); Gordon Gould, for excellence in nonfiction; and Jill
Ferris for excellence in fiction. 
     If you'd like any other kinds of information and you'd like
to contact our hotline, I'll give you that number again,
1(800)232-5463. Our governmental relations department is AFB's
linkage within the legislative and executive branches of our
federal government. We also house the largest circulating library
of its kind in the U.S. on the subject of blindness and perhaps
in the world, and we're the primary publishing house for
textbooks and materials used by professionals in the field of
work with the blind, although we've expanded in recent years to
include parents and consumers. 
     And of course, we still conduct social research and sponsor
workshops and seminars. Through our headquarters office in New
York and five regional offices, we provide the public, blind
people, and professionals with information and referral services,
consulting services, innovative programs, and materials to
enhance services to blind and visually impaired people. 
     Now, I'd like to turn to talk about my view of the major
challenges confronting blind and visually impaired people in the
field of work with the blind today. I'm going to prioritize them,
and I'll count them down from number five to number one, just
like Casey Cason does on Sunday mornings. I'll pick up from his
lead.
     Major challenge number five: unemployment and
underemployment. Studies have shown over and over again that only
three out of ten blind people of working age are employed, and I
think we know personally that many of them who are employed are
underemployed. Why? Well, of course, I think all of us recognize
that the rehabilitation system in our country needs to be
revamped; and AFB, NFB, and others are active on the Hill
expressing our views and advocating our views on how to improve
and revise the Rehabilitation Act, which is presently underway.
Another reason is, although employer attitudes have improved,
they still can be pretty bad.
     The employment provisions of the ADA fortunately go into
effect later on this month. We've been waiting for two years; the
law was passed; now they go into effect. We were a leading force
in advocating for the passage of ADA, and we have started a
consulting group to work with employers and businesses to help
them comply with the law. Another reason why there's so much
unemployment and underemployment relates to the work
disincentives built into the Social Security Act.
     Now there are many SSDI recipients--I know many myself--who
find it more profitable to stay at home than to work because the
difference in the income between getting a job and getting Social
Security for many of them is minimal and, of course, they'd lose
their Medicare benefits. We have supported a bill to eliminate
the earnings limitations for blind and visually impaired people.
And we understand this is a concept that you can support, too. I
know both organizations are ready to support that bill, have been
supporting it and similar bills, and I hope that we can work
together in a very forceful way in the next year to get that job
done once and for all. 
     Technology is also opening many doors of opportunity for
blind people, but unfortunately I think you're in the minority.
Too many visually impaired people don't know much about
technology. (I think you probably know more than most.) Too few
educators and rehabilitation professionals know about the value
of technology. We need to make sure that they learn more about
this technology--where to get the training; to establish training
programs where they don't exist; and, perhaps most importantly,
to find the financial resources that will enable all of us as
blind people to purchase some of this equipment. 
     I'd like to commend you, the National Federation of the
Blind, for bringing together the major players in the U.S. and
Canada for your conference on Technology for the Blind last
September. That was truly an outstanding conference, an
outstanding start, and we look forward to working with you toward
the next conference and toward our common objectives in that
area. So major challenge number five: unemployment and
underemployment. 
     Major challenge number four: increasing numbers of people
who are blind and visually impaired. The number of visually
impaired people who are sixty-five years of age and older has
doubled in the last thirty years, from 1.2 million to 2.5 million
in the year 1990. We estimate that that number 2.5 million will
double in the next thirty years; and because of the baby boom
generation reaching maturity, we will reach a high of 5.8 million
people in the year 2030. Now if you look at the number 1.2
million in 1960 and then think about 5.8 million in the year
2030, you see that's an increase of almost five times the number
of people who are sixty-five years or older and are severely
visually impaired. 
     At the other end of the age spectrum, low-birth-weight
babies are surviving at much higher rates than they did in the
past, due to advancement in technology, but they're surviving
with many more impairments, and blindness is one of the most
frequently occurring impairments. How will our educational
system, how will our rehabilitation system deal with so many
multi-handicapped children and young adults in the future? How
will our independent living system deal with the influx of so
many more older visually impaired people in the future?
     AFB plans to do its part to be as responsive as it can to
those systems, to help those systems deal with this increasing
population. 
     Since we're talking about numbers, the number of deaf/blind
people is increasing, and we're in the midst of a four-year
project to develop in-service training materials, especially in
the areas of communications and mobility for teachers of the
deaf/blind. We have an ongoing commitment to the deaf/blind
because of Helen Keller's legacy. 
     Now, with the increasing number of blind people, there's
going to become an increasing need for Braille. Through our
national Braille literacy program, we want to demonstrate our
strong support for the use of Braille for those students who
cannot effectively read print, and we are coming closer to the
National Federation of the Blind in our positions in support of
Braille bills throughout the country. Number four major
challenge: increasing numbers of people with visual impairment. 
     Major challenge number three: threats to the integrity and
independence of specialized agencies and schools for the blind.
State vocational rehabilitation agencies for the blind, separate
agencies for the blind, and state schools for the blind are
constantly under pressure to either merge or to extinguish. Let's
face it--state officials are simply looking for solutions to
their budget crises, and they're saying things like "Why not
close schools for the blind? We could just send them off to
schools for the deaf. That's a very similar disability, right?
But anyway, all blind kids should be mainstreamed in the public
schools."
     They also say, "Why should there be a separate agency for
the blind? There aren't any separate agencies for people with
other disabilities." We must fight--fight harder and fight more
to retain specialized agencies and schools for the blind,
especially since we haven't been able to come up with the kind of
objective evidence that we need to come up with or that would be
helpful to us to prove that specialized is better. 
     AFB has formed a special task force to study these issues
and also to look into the possibility of research to write about
it, and, most importantly, to advocate for specialized agencies
and schools for the blind and to help all organizations of and
for the blind be more effective in their advocacy efforts. So
number three major challenge--threats to the integrity and the
independence of separate agencies and schools for the blind. 
     Major Challenge number two: insufficient financial and
personnel resources. Our field of work with the blind has enough
difficulty serving the present numbers of people. How in the
world are we going to serve so many more, so many more elderly
people and younger people in the years ahead? We must compete
more effectively for the private dollar, and we must advocate
more strenuously for governmental support.
     Whether we like to believe it or not, blindness no longer
attracts the attention and the dollars it once did. AIDS,
homelessness, drug abuse: they're grabbing the headlines and also
grabbing the funding. We must give high priority to educating the
public about blindness, the nature of blindness, the fact that
the number of blind people is increasing, the capabilities of
blind people, and the fact that services do work when they're
provided effectively. They do work for blind and visually
impaired people. 
     NFB probably has done more than any other organization in
the blindness field to produce public service announcements and
to educate the public about the capabilities of blind people, and
I applaud what you have done for many, many years. All of us must
be doing more. We must be able to develop the resources to
increase public awareness about the capabilities of blind people,
and I believe it can be done. Whether or not we secure sufficient
funding to serve all those many more people in the future, we
must continue to look to new ways of serving visually impaired
and blind people. 
     The individualized service model that many people have held
so dearly, developed by fully qualified personnel, may just no
longer be possible. It may be a luxury. It may be a casualty of
twenty-first century realities. The blindness field simply needs
to understand that there is a role for peers and there is a role
for professionals in the services to blind and visually impaired
people. Number two major challenge--inadequate financial and
personnel resources. 
     Well, what do we have left? What's, in my view, the number
one major challenge confronting us today? That is disunity among
many organizations of and for the blind. How many times over how
many years have we heard people say, "If we could only work
better together, we could accomplish so much more"? And certainly
I'm not saying that we have to agree on every issue. We won't.
But I believe we've too often missed opportunities to combine our
forces because we've disagreed on minor aspects of issues, and
we've disagreed on other issues. 
     We can't simply continue to pass up opportunities to work
together. In my opinion, due in large part to Kenneth Jernigan
and to my predecessor Bill Gallagher, the Committee on Joint
Organizational Effort was formed to bring together the field
toward collective action. I must admit that initially I was
skeptical, but I have watched. I've seen the progress. I've
experienced myself, and now I'm very committed to doing my part
in this effort. 
     Coming together has been a beginning. Continuing to
communicate together is progress. But working it out will be
success. And why do I say that the major challenge relates to
disunity and working together? Because I'm absolutely convinced
that if we do work closer together, those other four major
challenges will simply disappear because professionals and
consumers will work together arm in arm toward common goals, many
of which we believe in already, but for some reason we haven't
been able to work together as well as we should toward achieving.
     Well, that's my view of the five major challenges:
unemployment and underemployment, rapidly increasing numbers of
blind and visually impaired people, threats to the independence
of specialized schools for the blind, inadequate funding and
personnel resources, and disunity. Unfortunately, many of these
major challenges have been around for some time, and I think they
seem to many to be insurmountable; and, of course, there are
many, many more challenges. Some question whether we have the
will or the ability to work together to successfully deal with
these challenges.
     Some may call me a dreamer when I say that we can. And I
must admit that I am a dreamer because I'm dreaming of the day
when all people who are blind and visually impaired achieve their
maximum potential as fulfilled and contributing members of
society in the mainstream of community life. I'm looking forward
to doing my part with you toward achieving that objective. Thanks
for inviting me to this year's convention. I'll be coming back.

     Following Mr. Augusto's remarks, Dr. Jernigan took the
opportunity to call attention to the fact that (as far back as
the '40's) the National Federation of the Blind was the only
organization to argue strenuously against earnings limitations in
Social Security programs. Such limits discourage the blind from
taking jobs for fear that they will lose their Social Security
benefits and then be unable to support themselves and their
families.
     He expressed pleasure that the American Foundation for the
Blind is now working vigorously toward the same end. The most
important objective is to get the job done once and for all. But
the impression left by Mr. Augusto's speech might be that the NFB
is the Johnnie-come-lately, and history will show that this is
simply not the case. 
     Shortly after the convention Mr. Augusto wrote Dr. Jernigan
the following letter to set the record straight: 

                                               New York, New York
                                                    July 20, 1992

Dear Ken:
     During my presentation to the NFB Convention in Charlotte, I
urged NFB to join with AFB in the passage of the Campbell Bill,
which would eliminate limitations as a criteria for eligibility
for SSDI for blind people. I do want you to know that I recognize
NFB's longstanding support of this position and the fact that you
have taken a leadership role in advocating this position for many
years.
     I do hope that we can work closely together on passage of
such legislation, so that blind Americans can be encouraged,
rather than discouraged, to earn a living.

                                                       Sincerely,
                                                  Carl R. Augusto
                                   President & Executive Director
                                American Foundation for the Blind



[PHOTO: Ritchie Geisel standing at podium microphone. CAPTION:
Ritchie Geisel, President of Recording for the Blind.]

                           RFB UPDATE:
                  E-TEXT AND OTHER NEW SERVICES
                        by Ritchie Geisel

     The concluding presentation in the July 2 panel discussion
of the present and future in the field of work with the blind was
made by Mr. Ritchie Geisel, President of Recording for the Blind.
Here is what he had to say: 

     I did appreciate the opportunity a year ago in New Orleans
to be on the program, and I'm very pleased to be invited back.
I'm especially glad to be back on the East Coast. I spent last
weekend in Palm Springs, California, just about twenty miles from
the epicenter of the earthquake, so it's nice to be back on safe
ground.
     I also want to thank President Maurer for serving on RFB's
Scholastic Awards Achievement Selection Committee earlier this
spring. We were honored by Dr. Jernigan's participation a year
ago and Mr. Maurer's this year, and I know that several of the
nine winners selected this year are members of the NFB and are
here at the convention, and I want to congratulate them again as
well as all of the NFB scholarship winners--all of whom, I hope,
are RFB borrowers.
     I was reminded yesterday by Lamar Alexander's comments about
a GI Bill for kids that RFB's founding dates back to the original
GI Bill, when veterans were returning from World War II with the
opportunity for a free college education, but those who had been
blinded in the war didn't really have that chance. That's what
inspired Ann McDonald to begin RFB. We've grown over the years to
the point now where we have five thousand volunteers, who
annually record approximately three thousand new books, and in
the year just ended RFB served a record thirty thousand people
with one hundred eighty thousand books on tape and several
thousand more on computer disc. You'll hear a little bit more
about that in a moment.
     In the past two years our service growth has been twenty-
five per cent. If that was all we were doing, we'd be plenty
busy, but in the rapidly changing environment in which we find
ourselves, that would not be nearly enough. So I'd like to spend
the next few minutes mentioning some of the ways RFB is
responding to the new environment, particularly as it relates to
all of you.
     First of all, the changing environment, as it affects RFB's
work, is changing in three ways. First, the ADA, the
reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act, and other legislation have served to raise both
consciousness and expectations and may result in increased
opportunities for people with print disabilities to pursue a
greater variety of academic studies and careers.
     Second, as has already been mentioned, are the promising new
technologies, with what we call the personalized or adapted
computer being perhaps the most significant development in making
information accessible.
     And finally, as Carl Augusto just mentioned, we're all
facing increasing financial pressures. Reductions in government
funding in the last twelve years, coupled with a dramatic
increase in the number of nonprofits competing for those fewer
dollars, have made it difficult for all of us.
     How has RFB responded to this challenging environment? We
have been an organization in transition for the past three years.
I spoke last year about the new RFB with its increasing emphasis
on customer satisfaction, listening to you, our consumers, and
actively working with other organizations in advocating for
access to the printed word. Now we are expanding RFB's mission.
We're beginning to move beyond making education accessible, to
helping to make full employment accessible--not only to RFB's
graduates, many of you, but to others who experience vision loss
in mid-career.
     What are some of the new products and services we are
offering? I have to begin with E-TEXT, what we call electronic
text. A year ago we announced the merger of Computerized Books
for the Blind with RFB. We've been very pleased with the progress
we've made since that time in developing this important
supplement to our basic audio recording service.
     We have another announcement this year, which I am delighted
to make: RFB and a little company known as IBM have just signed a
joint-development agreement. The agreement will provide us with
the ability to deliver our E-TEXT books in a format that's far
more powerful and versatile than the current flat ASCII file.
Book Manager is a state-of-the-art reading software that will be
publicly available by early 1993 through RFB at a price
significantly below IBM's retail price.
     So this year's E-TEXT priorities for us will include getting
Book Manager to the public and beginning to expand our E-TEXT
library, beyond computer science and reference books, to include
more K to twelve and college textbooks with the descriptions
added and professional materials, including three journals we
hope to begin offering this year.
     I have been asked whether RFB and the American Printing
House for the Blind are working together in developing
computerized text. Let me say first that we're very excited about
E-TEXT, and we'd be happy to work cooperatively with any other
organization in developing this new technology. In fact, RFB and
APH are cooperating in formatting the file structures so we'll
all end up using a standard file format regardless of which
software is being used.
     We're also continuing to work with APH on publisher
relations and in obtaining blanket-permission agreements in order
to make more source files available. RFB's intent is to serve our
consumers in the best way we can with the best product we can,
and we think that with E-TEXT we're doing just that. Keep in mind
that with E-TEXT you choose your own output--synthetic speech,
enlarged print, or Braille. E-TEXT can also be used to expedite
Braille production. Enough about E-TEXT.
     A second new product is the fact that we are now offering
our catalog in a couple of accessible forms. A year ago we
started a quarterly recorded catalog, and as of yesterday we now
offer a quarterly disc catalog. It will list all of the E-TEXT
titles and all of the audio titles that have been added to RFB's
library during the previous three months. Anyone is eligible to
subscribe to any of these catalogs. We now have eighty thousand
titles in our library, and I think there are a lot of interesting
books for everyone. Please keep in mind that we don't just do
textbooks for students. You are all invited to be RFB borrowers.
     A third product is that we're now offering a portable
cassette player. A lot of people had asked why we didn't sell
one, so now we are. We're offering the Talkman IV, which I think
many of you are familiar with. If the response is positive, we'll
look into offering one or two other models later this year. And
I'm delighted to have such a fine working relationship with
Mohymen Saddeek of Technology for Independence, which produces
the Talkman line.
     Finally, RFB has begun what we call custom services. Again,
this is in response to requests primarily by governmental
agencies, corporations, and other organizations, seeking
assistance in complying with legislation requiring print
materials to be made available in accessible form. So, for
example, we are recording materials such as ADA documents, under
contract to the Department of Justice.
     Dealing with financial pressures is something we're all
facing. RFB's effort includes the first-ever major fund-raising
campaign we've undertaken, which is now on target after three
years with two years to go. Custom services, which I just
mentioned, is a way for us (through third-party payers) to
generate revenues to fund the growth in our audio service, which
we remain committed to maintaining as a free lending library
service.
     In all of these activities, RFB is increasingly seeking
opportunities to work cooperatively with other organizations to
the ultimate benefit of the people we serve. I've mentioned our
relationship with APH, with IBM, the American Association of
Publishers. We're also working with NLS, APH, and the National
Library of Congress on a cooperative data exchange. The result
will be that RFB's catalog, which is already available on-line
through NLS's union catalog, will also become available within
the next year through the new APH CARL Database system, as will
all materials produced by the National Library of Canada.
     Separately, RFB's database--that is our catalog--will also
become accessible through Internet, which is a telecommunications
network, linking our catalog with colleges and universities. This
will permit both search and ordering capability. We're very
excited about this.
     Finally, I want to mention RFB's interest in Braille
legislation, and especially our involvement in the implementation
of the Texas Braille Bill. This is happening through George
Kirscher's participation on the implementation commission.
     Let me say right up front that RFB supports efforts to
promote Braille literacy. That's not the issue. For us, our goal
is to strengthen future Braille bills in the following ways: We
believe laws should be written for all print-disabled students,
including those who are dyslexic or physically disabled. We also
believe that large print, audio, and direct access through
adapted computers such as E-TEXT should be mentioned along with
Braille as accessible reading systems encouraged by this type of
legislation.
     Third, we believe that the files provided by the publishers
should be in the American Association of Publishers established
standard file format, that is, what they call the Standard
Generalized Markup Language (SGML). There simply must be a single
standard, and one of George Kirscher's main efforts as part of
the Commission in Texas and as chairman of a new international
commission working on standards is to establish a single
standard.
     Finally, once publisher source files have been converted for
Braille, large print, or direct access using an adaptive
computer, they should be made available to any state. This is
where RFB and APH in particular can serve as useful facilitators
by working closely with the publishers.
     This year marks the end of the United Nations Decade for
Disabled Persons. Although significant progress has been made
during the last ten years, providing for greater participation of
persons with disabilities in all aspects of social and economic
life, there is still a long way to go. The passage of the ADA,
the development of promising new technologies such as E-TEXT, and
our own recent dramatic growth in service all suggest that this
is indeed an exciting time for RFB and for the people we serve.
     We believe that RFB is uniquely positioned to help level the
playing field for our consumers by making the printed word
accessible. My own vision for RFB is for us to assume a
leadership role in working with the disability community, the
publishing industry, public educational agencies, the NFB, and
others toward a goal of, not just easier access, but equal
access. I promise each of you that RFB remains deeply committed
to meeting your needs for education and professional resources in
accessible form. I hope you will not hesitate to let me know how
we could do a better job of serving you. Again, thank you for
inviting me back, and I'll look forward to seeing you next year
in Dallas.

     In comments following Mr. Geisel's address, Dr. Jernigan
warned generally against the danger of weighing down state
Braille bills with additional language broadening them to include
large print, audio, and direct access materials. Doing so is a
prescription for failure of the Braille bills. He promised that
if the Braille bills are kept clean of complicating amendments so
that they can be passed on their own merit, the Federation will
join with those interested in the additional protections to fight
for them as extensions of the Braille access already achieved.
Mr. Geisel said that he had no intention of torpedoing Braille
bills, but that where the legislative language was already
broadened, as in the Texas bill, everyone requiring alternatives
to print could benefit from the access solutions mandated by
Braille bills.
     At the close of the session Mr. Geisel took one last moment
to say that Recording for the Blind had not always been as
responsive to its customers' needs and preferences as it should
have been. This is now changing. RFB is now dedicated to serving
consumers responsively. The morning session ended with audience
as well as presenters grateful for having had the opportunity to
listen and speak to one another with honesty and openness. 


[PHOTO/CAPTION: It requires a large table to seat the fifty-two
members of the NFB Resolutions Committee.]

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Left to right, Ramona Walhof, Chairman of the
Resolutions Committee; Sheryl Pickering, secretary to the
Committee; and Dr. Jernigan are seated together at the opening of
the 1992 meeting of the NFB Resolutions Committee.]

                   RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE
                    ANNUAL CONVENTION OF THE
                NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
                           JULY, 1992
                        by Ramona Walhof

     Resolutions adopted by the National Federation of the Blind
are written policy statements of the organization. Each
resolution is presented to the convention for discussion and a
vote. Prior to coming before the convention, resolutions are
ordinarily presented to the Resolutions Committee for discussion
and a recommendation. The committee may not block a resolution
from coming to the floor; it can only recommend "pass" or "not
pass." The committee may recommend changes and revisions, but
these must be acceptable to the presenter if they are to be
incorporated in the text of the document. Any NFB member may
present a resolution to the Resolutions Committee and, through
it, to the NFB convention. If the presenter chooses to withdraw a
resolution based on committee discussion or for some other
reason, this is also possible.
     At the 1992 convention the Resolutions Committee consisted
of fifty-two Federationists, who considered thirty resolutions.
Twenty-five were brought to the floor of the convention. All of
them passed and are printed below. Five resolutions were
withdrawn by their authors.
     Resolution 92-01 opposes the establishment of the Study
Commission on Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind and
Visually Impaired.
     Background: At the time of the convention a proposal to
establish such a commission had been made in the Committee on
Education and Labor in the House of Representatives. Members
worked throughout the convention to help Congress understand the
problems which this commission would cause.
     Resolution 92-02 supports statutory linkage between the
earnings exemptions for blind people and for retirees under
Social Security.
     Background: For some years benefits for blind people
receiving Social Security Disability Insurance have been paid
according to the same formula as the one used for computing
benefits for retirees who are sixty-five or older. The NFB has
worked to maintain these similar benefits.
     Resolution 92-03 calls upon Secretary of Education Lamar
Alexander to terminate his Department's inclusion of the National
Accreditation Council on the Department of Education's list of
approved accrediting bodies.
     Resolution 92-04 commends Congressman William Jefferson of
Louisiana for sponsoring legislation to strengthen the right of
choice for individuals receiving Vocational Rehabilitation
Services, and it encourages other Congressmen and Senators to
join with Mr. Jefferson in this effort.
     Resolution 92-05 calls upon employers and software
developers to help make Graphical User Interfaces (GUI's)
accessible to the blind.
     Resolution 92-06 is an updated statement of NFB policy
regarding audible traffic signals.
     Background: Audible traffic signals have been installed in
some cities, purportedly to assist blind individuals at street
crossings. The National Federation of the Blind is on record
opposing audible traffic signals. For the most part this position
has not changed. However, it is important, under the Americans
with Disabilities Act, that representatives of the National
Federation of the Blind be consulted by city and county
governments considering the installation of audible traffic
signals. Further, newly developed audible traffic signals which
can be activated by pedestrians and used only when they choose to
do so may require study and testing.
     Resolution 92-07 opposes research on detectable warnings for
the blind in architecture, on sidewalks, etc.
     Background: The Architectural and Transportation Barriers
Compliance Board adopted regulations implementing the Americans
with Disabilities Act, requiring installation of truncated domed
tiles as a warning to the blind of the proximity of certain
allegedly dangerous areas. For example, a strip could be used
between a sidewalk and a parking lot if there is no curb. The
blind have argued that bumpy tiles are more dangerous than
helpful and tend to lead others to the false conclusion that the
blind are incapable of gathering information when, in fact, they
are.
     Resolution 92-08 calls upon rehabilitation agencies to
provide instruction for blind clients in the use of city buses
and trains even if special Dial-A-Ride services for the
handicapped are available.
     Resolution 92-09 calls upon officials in the Department of
Justice to support the arbitration process provided for by the
Randolph-Sheppard Act.
     Resolution 92-10 seeks to avoid competition between
Randolph-Sheppard vending facilities and the Committee for
Purchase from the Blind and Other Severely Handicapped.
     Resolution 92-11 opposes North Carolina legislation
regarding vending facilities.
     Background: A piece of legislation was introduced in the
North Carolina Legislature which seriously damages opportunities
for vendors in that state. At the time of the convention in
Charlotte, this bill was being debated.
     Resolution 92-12 calls upon the National Library Service for
the Blind and Physically Handicapped to offer all its tests for
blind proofreaders in Braille.
     Resolution 92-13 calls upon the Small Business
Administration to award contracts to the disabled and to define
disability as a presumed social and economic disadvantage.
     Resolution 92-14 joins the voice of the Federation with that
of the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in
requesting that federal agencies eliminate special awards for the
disabled. 
     Background: Many federal agencies have long had the practice
of presenting disabled employees with awards which are different
from--and often in addition to--awards presented to their other
employees. If these awards were ever desirable, there seems to be
general agreement among the disabled that that time has passed.
     Resolution 92-15 calls upon the Social Security
Administration to develop improved reporting procedures for
disabled persons who are working.
     Resolution 92-16 calls upon the Health and Human Services
Office of Civil Rights to treat blind applicants for Child Care
Certification in the same way as it treats sighted applicants.
     Resolution 92-17 declares that parents should have primary
decision-making responsibility about whether a blind child should
attend a residential school or a public school and calls upon
school officials to furnish parents with relevant information.
     Resolution 92-18 takes the position that guide dog schools
do not have the right to stipulate the kinds of employment in
which their graduates may engage. 
     Background: The National Federation of the Blind has worked
hard to reduce the number of blind persons who engage in begging.
The image of the blind beggar is one of the most destructive
stereotypes which puts us down and keeps us out. We have worked
to improve training and job opportunities and to broaden public
understanding of blindness. We have also fought to increase
welfare and Social Security benefits for the blind. Further, the
NFB has gone on record repeatedly as believing that demeaning
activities (such as begging) carried on by some blind individuals
reflect poorly on all members of the blind community.
Nevertheless, the convention took the position that no guide dog
school should have the power to deny any blind person appropriate
training and a dog on the basis of the individual's occupation. 
     Resolutions 92-19 and 92-20 were withdrawn by their authors.
     Resolution 92-21 calls upon all guide dog schools to
transfer ownership of dogs to the blind people who use them.
     Resolutions 92-22 and 92-23 were withdrawn by their authors.
     Resolution 92-24 calls upon those exploring the installation
of audible traffic signals to consider the problems these signals
may cause for deaf-blind people and to consult them when
considering such installations.
     Resolution 92-25 requests exploration of the purchase and
circulation in this country of Braille books produced in Great
Britain.
     Resolution 92-26 calls upon the Association for Handicapped
Students Services Programs in Postsecondary Education to consult
with the NFB to develop a policy on blindness that does not lump
blind students with all other disabled students.
     Resolution 92-27 demands that the Educational Testing
Service comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act.
     Resolution 92-28 calls upon the General Services
Administration to amend its rules so as to exempt blind federal
employees from mandatory special requirements regarding building
evacuations.
     Resolution 92-29 calls upon the Internal Revenue Service to
do local hiring and training of blind people.
     Resolution 92-30 was withdrawn by its author.
     The following are the complete texts of the resolutions
adopted by the 1992 convention of the National Federation of the
Blind: 

                        Resolution 92-01

     WHEREAS, Congress is considering legislation to amend and
extend the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; and
     WHEREAS, provisions in a bill before the Committee on
Education and Labor of the United States House of Representatives
call for the establishment of a "Commission on Education and
Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired"; and 
     WHEREAS, the stated purpose for this commission is to con-
duct an eighteen-month study of programs and needs in areas such
as the adequacy of mobility instruction and the need for improved
instructor training programs, Braille literacy, specialized ver-
sus generic services, the Randolph-Sheppard program, physical
accessibility, advancements in technology, specialized services
for children and youth, assistance to older blind individuals,
and more; and 
     WHEREAS, the proposition that a special commission should be
appointed to examine the needs of the blind and then interpret
them to the President and the Congress has the air of paternalism
in that the commission if created would lead policymakers to the
false belief that individuals employed to serve the blind or
appointed to study the blind are the legitimate representatives
of the blind; and 
     WHEREAS, since 1940, with the formation of the National
Federation of the Blind, blind people in the United States have
had a vehicle for self-expression and a means of explaining our
needs to local, state, and federal policy-makers; and 
     WHEREAS, the desire to have a special commission on blind-
ness, which is principally supported by the trade association of
blind service agency employees, is, in fact, a reaction to the
effectiveness of the consumer movement; and 
     WHEREAS, members of Congress and officials of the Bush Ad-
ministration should adopt a consumer-empowerment stance by re-
jecting the commission on blindness as a ploy by blind service
workers to speak for the blind through the auspices of a
specially-appointed body whose members will not be accountable to
anyone, including the blind, the President, or the Congress: Now,
therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization strongly
oppose legislation to establish a "Commission on Education and
Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired" because the
structure and purposes of such a commission have been designed to
quash methods of effective advocacy by blind consumers; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that all members of Congress and
responsible officials of the Bush Administration are urged to
stand up for an independent voice for blind consumers by calling
for, and if necessary by voting for, removal of the commission on
blindness provisions from the Rehabilitation Act reauthorization
bill.

                        Resolution 92-02

     WHEREAS, on June 11, 1992, the Committee on Finance of the
United States Senate approved legislation to amend the Social
Security Act, including provisions to raise the ceiling on
earnings exempt from benefit-offset requirements for retired
persons who have attained age sixty-five; and 
     WHEREAS, the House of Representatives has already approved
similar legislation to raise the age-sixty-five earnings ceiling
in staged increases beyond the normal annual adjustments
currently required; and 
     WHEREAS, these plans to increase the basic exempt earnings
amount under Social Security would retain an earnings ceiling but
would more than double the amount of $10,200 annually (or $850
monthly) presently permitted without penalty; and 
     WHEREAS, earnings of blind individuals evaluated under
Social Security to measure "substantial gainful activity" in the
disability insurance program are linked by statute to the basic
exempt amount for retirees age sixty-five to sixty-nine; and 
     WHEREAS, this statutory linkage between the exempt earnings
amounts for retirees, on the one hand, and blind beneficiaries,
on the other, would be broken by the legislation now being
considered; and 
     WHEREAS, there is no rational basis for breaking the
relationship between these earnings exemptions, since both
blindness, as a disability, and age sixty-five, as retirement
age, are clearly defined conditions, neither of which is measured
by earnings; and 
     WHEREAS, from 1978 through 1982, when substantial increases
were made in the earnings exemption for retirees, precisely the
same increases were allowed for blind people by law; and 
     WHEREAS, raising the earnings ceiling for blind people, just
as for seniors, is supported by evidence of the need for work
incentives among people who qualify for Social Security benefits: 
Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization call upon
all members of Congress to endorse the policy of maintaining the
statutory linkage between the earnings exemptions for blind
people and for retirees under Social Security.

                        Resolution 92-03

     WHEREAS, the National Accreditation Council for Agencies
Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped (NAC) is seeking
continued recognition by the United States Secretary of
Education; and 
     WHEREAS, the Secretary of Education has official criteria
that are used to evaluate all accrediting agencies applying for
recognition; and 
     WHEREAS, the criteria for recognition include having
sufficient personnel and financial resources to conduct ongoing
accreditation activities, including regular reviews of accredited
agencies at stated intervals; and 
     WHEREAS, another criterion is widespread recognition and
acceptance of the accreditation agency in the field in which it
operates; and 
     WHEREAS, still another criterion states that the recognized
accrediting agency must operate in a field where accreditation is
necessary for postsecondary programs or students to be eligible
for federal assistance; and 
     WHEREAS, a substantial body of evidence submitted to the
Secretary of Education shows that NAC fails to meet these
criteria in that (1) federal funding for any program or student
of an agency serving the blind at the postsecondary level does
not depend upon accreditation by NAC or by any other agency; (2)
NAC is not generally accepted by agencies and blind people; and
(3) NAC consistently postpones the announced re-evaluation of its
member agencies and in many instances automatically extends the
accreditation of agencies well beyond their five-year term; and 
     WHEREAS, the ultimate purpose for the Secretary to place an
accreditation agency on the recognized list is that the
accreditation agency is a reliable authority on the quality of
the postsecondary programs in its field, something which NAC
certainly is not; and 
     WHEREAS, the extensive documentation of NAC'S failure to
meet the Secretary of Education's criteria presents a solid basis
for the Secretary to use in withdrawing the recognition at this
time: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this Federation urge Lamar
Alexander, Secretary of Education, to remove NAC from the list of
recognized accrediting agencies; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we invite Secretary Alexander to
join with the blind in finding that, in twenty-five years of
trying to establish its legitimacy as an accreditation agency,
NAC has failed.

                        Resolution 92-04

     WHEREAS, "empowerment" is becoming a guiding theme in
designing programs and services for people with disabilities; and

     WHEREAS, placing fundamental decisions squarely in the hands
of eligible individuals, rather than solely in the hands of their
counselors, is essential for empowerment to be more than an empty
promise; and 
     WHEREAS, choosing the provider of each vocational
rehabilitation service is a fundamental decision to be made in
the vocational rehabilitation program, just as the choice of an
institution of higher education is one of the most crucial career
planning decisions for any student, disabled or not; and 
     WHEREAS, current practices in vocational rehabilitation
favor counselor decisions over client decisions, especially in
the selection of agencies to provide rehabilitation services; and
     WHEREAS, Congressman William Jefferson has introduced
legislation (H.R. 4259), which says that the client, not the
counselor, will have the final say in the actual selection of
each service-providing agency to be used in the client's
vocational rehabilitation program; and 
     WHEREAS, Congress is presently considering amendments to the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and, therefore, this would be an
appropriate time to add Mr. Jefferson's amendment (or language
with a similar purpose) to the law: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization express
official commendation to Congressman William Jefferson for
standing tall in favor of true empowerment for blind consumers of
vocational rehabilitation services; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we urge all members of Congress
to join with Mr. Jefferson in calling for the enactment of
legislation to strengthen the right of individual choice in the
design of services and in the selection of agencies used in the
vocational rehabilitation program.

                        Resolution 92-05

     WHEREAS, Windows and other computer programs incorporating
the Graphical User Interface (GUI) are being used by public and
private employers; and 
     WHEREAS, these programs cannot be accessed by blind people
using current screen access products: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that we call upon public and
private employers to provide equal access for the blind to all
computer programs using the Graphical User Interface with the
understanding that equal access may vary for different programs
and applications; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we request all commercial
software developers to work with the organized blind and with
developers of screen-access technology to insure that all
Graphical User Interface applications are accessible to the
blind. 

                        Resolution 92-06

     WHEREAS, one of the unfortunate negative effects of the
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has been a renewed interest
in the installation of audible traffic signals for use by blind
pedestrians; and 
     WHEREAS, the intent of the ADA is not the wholesale redesign
and reconstruction of the environment to satisfy every whim and
wish of disabled persons, but only to require the essential
accommodations which would permit them to live and work on terms
of equality; and 
     WHEREAS, the ADA also grants disabled persons the right to
refuse to accept specific accommodations; and 
     WHEREAS, long experience has repeatedly demonstrated that,
with proper mobility training, blind persons can competently and
safely negotiate a wide variety of traffic conditions--rendering
the installation of audible traffic signals an unnecessary
expense; and 
     WHEREAS, it is particularly damaging to blind persons for
audible traffic signals to be installed at intersections located
near facilities serving the blind such as schools, rehabilitation
centers, and workshops; and 
     WHEREAS, in rare instances there may exist an intersection
with complicated traffic sequencing and road patterns at which an
audible traffic signal might be helpful to some blind persons;
and 
     WHEREAS, the only appropriate audible traffic signals are
those which are strictly pedestrian-activated and which do not
interfere with the sounds of traffic; and 
     WHEREAS, in comprehensive traffic design as well as work on
individual intersections, ADA mandates that public officials seek
and include participation of blind consumers in decision-making:
Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization reaffirm its
long-standing policy against wholesale and routine installation
of audible traffic signals; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this organization demand that,
where audible traffic signals are being considered, public
officials comply with the mandate of the Americans with
Disabilities Act by including representatives of the National
Federation of the Blind in their decisionmaking. 

                        RESOLUTION 92-07

     WHEREAS, the United States Architectural and Transportation
Barriers Compliance Board is considering priorities for research
activities to be undertaken during fiscal year 1993; and 
     WHEREAS, some of the priorities suggested by the Board in an
official notice have merit, such as methods for making automatic
teller machines accessible to blind people; and 
     WHEREAS, detectable warnings are also listed as a research
priority, even though the overwhelming sentiment among blind
people is that the truncated domes used for such warnings may be
hazardous to all pedestrians and can interfere with the ability
of blind people to travel effectively; and 
     WHEREAS, the Board's considerations and research activities
have focused exclusively on the technical aspects of detectable
warnings, including their color, shape, size, and placement,
ignoring the often-expressed objections of the blind; and 
     WHEREAS, continuing to research the technical aspects of
detectable warnings begs the real question, which the Board
itself must settle--that is, should detectable warnings of any
color, size, or shape be permitted or required at all; and 
     WHEREAS, the experience of thousands of blind people in
traveling each day testifies to their ability to travel safely
without truncated domes and argues further that placement of
these warnings without a documented need discriminates against
blind people by fostering false notions that the blind must have
modified environments: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this Federation strongly
oppose all further research on the color, size, shape, and
placement of detectable warnings, since such research itself
leads to the false conclusion that such warnings serve a
legitimate purpose, which they do not.

                        RESOLUTION 92-08

     WHEREAS, for years, the National Federation of the Blind has
proven that most blind persons can master the skills of indepen-
dent travel, including the use of fixed-route transportation; and

     WHEREAS, the National Federation of the Blind operates
orientation and adjustment centers in which cane travel programs
emphasize the use of fixed-route transportation (buses, trains,
etc.), thus requiring students to use these forms of public
transportation; and
     WHEREAS, despite such programs that foster greater
independence among the blind, some vocational rehabilitation
agencies emphasize the use of paratransit as a primary means of
transportation for blind people, believing that traveling by
paratransit is a safer alternative for blind clients and that
they cannot master the skills needed to travel on fixed-route
transportation; and 
     WHEREAS, the decision to use paratransit or fixed-route
transportation can be made objectively by a blind person only if
he or she receives adequate training in the use of all forms of
public transportation: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization demand that
all state vocational rehabilitation agencies instruct blind
clients in the use of fixed-route transportation and promote this
mode of travel as the primary means of transportation for blind
clients.

                        RESOLUTION 92-09

     WHEREAS, the concept and use of binding arbitration as a
mechanism to resolve disputes arising in the administration and
operation of the Randolph-Sheppard program is sound and fair for
blind vendors, state licensing agencies, and federal property-
managing agencies; and 
     WHEREAS, the National Federation of the Blind was the
principal architect of and proponent for the arbitration
provisions which were enacted by Congress and signed by the
President of the United States as part of the Randolph-Sheppard
Act amendments of 1974; and 
     WHEREAS, arbitration is an orderly process for resolving
legitimate differences, and by the very nature of arbitration the
positions taken by contending parties may be upheld, altered, or
lost altogether, which is a risk taken by any party entering into
a process of this kind; and 
     WHEREAS, the Justice Department of the United States, in
appealing an arbitration decision (which found in favor of the
Mississippi state licensing agency and against the federal
government), argued to the court that the arbitration provisions
of the Randolph-Sheppard Act are unconstitutional; and 
     WHEREAS, although the court in the Mississippi case has now
rejected the government's challenge to the constitutionality of
arbitrations in the blind vendor program, future assaults upon
the arbitration law can be expected as long as federal officials
feel free to attack the process when the outcome of a case is
unfavorable to their position: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this Federation deplore the
attack by the Department of Justice upon the arbitration process
in the Randolph-Sheppard program; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that policy-making officials of the
Department of Education (who are responsible for administering
the law) and policy-making officials of the Department of Justice
(who are sworn to defend and uphold the law) are hereby urged to
commit publicly to the arbitration process and to honor the
integrity of this process just as all other parties must, whether
they win or lose.

                        Resolution 92-10

     WHEREAS, a priority for blind persons to operate vending
facilities on federal property has been established by the
Randolph-Sheppard Act; and 
     WHEREAS, the officials responsible for conducting each
government activity are required by the Act to cooperate with the
Secretary of Education and the Commissioner of the Rehabilitation
Services Administration in assuring that one or more vending
facilities are established for operation by blind persons at each
federal site; and 
     WHEREAS, the Committee for Purchase from the Blind and other
Severely Handicapped has added services of the type provided by
blind vendors to the "procurement list," which it publishes for
federal agencies to use in purchasing products and services from
nonprofit agencies for the blind and other severely handicapped;
and 
     WHEREAS, placement of vending facility services on the
"procurement list" is an action which causes direct competition
between the priority for blind vendors in the Randolph-Sheppard
program, on the one hand, and the non-competitive purchase of
services from nonprofit agencies for the severely handicapped, on
the other; and 
     WHEREAS, the fundamental nature of the Randolph-Sheppard
program is to promote individual responsibility and
entrepreneurship among blind people by providing them with
business opportunities involving management and supervisory
skills, including the opportunity for upward mobility in the
conduct of complex food service operations; and 
     WHEREAS, contracting with nonprofit agencies for the purpose
of employing severely handicapped persons in food service
operations conducted at federal sites will inevitably diminish
business opportunities for blind vendors and is inconsistent with
the statutory objectives of the Randolph-Sheppard Act and the
goals set by Congress for this program; and 
     WHEREAS, even without competition from nonprofit agencies
that employ persons with severe handicaps, the Randolph-Sheppard
program already faces stiff obstacles in establishing large-scale
food service businesses on federal property; and 
     WHEREAS, rather than fostering and endorsing competition
between federally sponsored programs which provide opportunities
and jobs for blind and severely handicapped individuals, the
Committee for Purchase from the Blind and Other Severely
Handicapped should respect and promote opportunities for persons
who are blind, as well as using its procurement policies in other
areas to provide jobs for persons who are severely handicapped:
Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization register its
fervent opposition to placement of vending facility services on
the procurement list of the Committee for Purchase from the Blind
and Other Severely Handicapped; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we urge the Committee for
Purchase from the Blind and Other Severely Handicapped to adopt a
formal policy of noncompetition with the Randolph-Sheppard
program and with other programs which provide employment
opportunities to blind people and to persons with other
disabilities as well.

                        Resolution 92-11

     WHEREAS, the North Carolina Department of Human Resources is
seeking the enactment of state legislation that would radically
alter the fundamental relationship between the state licensing
agency and the licensed blind vendors in the state; and 
     WHEREAS, the assignment of vendors for indefinite periods
would end in North Carolina if this legislation is enacted; and 
     WHEREAS, strict income limits would also be placed on
vendors in the state, with the imposition of a 50 percent tax
(called a set aside charge) on all income over $56,000 this year
and a 75 percent tax on proceeds above $74,000; and 
     WHEREAS, these policies, if enacted by the legislature of
the state of North Carolina, would defeat the declared purposes
of the federal Randolph-Sheppard program by threatening vendors
with the loss of their businesses every two years and by
penalizing those who successfully build their businesses as
anticipated by the federal law; and 
     WHEREAS, these policies are being forced upon the vendors of
North Carolina under circumstances in which many of the vendors
feel that they have no choice but to go along with the state's
decisions; and 
     WHEREAS, the potential passage of this legislation in the
state of North Carolina makes a statement that the right to fair
treatment of blind people everywhere may be threatened by
government officials virtually at their whim--a condition which
blind people throughout the United states cannot and should not
accept; and 
     WHEREAS, officials of the Department of Human Resources are
fully aware of the powerful relationship which they have over the
vendors and have not failed to flex their muscles in getting most
of the vendors to knuckle under to the policy changes now being
sought: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
convention assembled this first day of July, 1992, in the City of
Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization deplore the
shameful tactics used by the state officials in North Carolina
who have bullied many of the blind vendors into accepting
policies which will make them even more vulnerable to agency
demands in the future, not to mention the inequitable fees that
would be imposed; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that copies of this resolution be
dispatched immediately to every member of the legislature of the
State of North Carolina with the urgent request that this
proposed legislation be stopped in its tracks in fairness to
blind people in this state and throughout this country.

                        Resolution 92-12

     WHEREAS, for many years, the National Library Service for
the Blind and Physically Handicapped has offered courses in
literary Braille transcription and literary Braille proofreading;
and 
     WHEREAS, the National Library Service for the Blind and
Physically Handicapped is currently developing courses in the
Braille Music Code and the Braille Mathematics (Nemeth) Code for
blind proofreaders; and 
     WHEREAS, the Hadley School for the Blind also offers courses
in both the music and the mathematics Braille codes; and 
     WHEREAS, by using material on audio cassettes as well as
material printed in Braille, Hadley has designed these courses so
that all aspects, including test taking, can be performed without
the need for a sighted reader or copy holder; and 
     WHEREAS, in 1991 the National Library Service for the Blind
and Physically Handicapped began offering a test in the
Mathematics Braille Code to blind proofreaders; and 
     WHEREAS, currently, this test can be taken by a blind
proofreader only if he or she has access to a sighted reader, who
follows along with a printed version of the test; and 
     WHEREAS, some blind persons do not have ready access to
sighted persons who can read music and other specialized
materials; and 
     WHEREAS, providing this material to the blind proofreader on
audio cassette would eliminate the need for a sighted reader,
thus allowing the blind proofreader to complete the tests
independently: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization strongly
urge the National Library Service for the Blind and Physically
Handicapped to furnish to its blind proofreaders both Braille and
cassette versions of proofreading tests for specialized Braille
codes; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the National Library Service for
the Blind and Physically Handicapped work closely with the
National Federation of the Blind and the National Association to
Promote the Use of Braille (NAPUB) in designing these courses and
tests so that they are accessible to all blind proofreaders. 

                        Resolution 92-13

     WHEREAS, socially and economically disadvantaged small
businesses may receive assistance from the United States Small
Business Administration under section 8(a) of the Small Business
Act; and 
     WHEREAS, the assistance provided to businesses that qualify
as socially and economically disadvantaged includes government
contracts assigned without competition and technical assistance
in managing the business as well; and 
     WHEREAS, the National Federation of the Blind has found that
the current regulations of the Small Business Administration tend
to screen out applicants who are blind, unless the applicant is
also identified as a member of a recognized racial or ethnic
minority group; and 
     WHEREAS, members of recognized racial and ethnic minority
groups are presumed to be socially disadvantaged under the
application criteria for the Section 8(a) program, but blind
people (or persons with other severe disabilities) are not given
the same presumption, forcing each new applicant to prove
individually that he or she has in fact been socially
disadvantaged; and 
     WHEREAS, regardless of the ongoing and significant efforts
being made by public and private agencies, as well as by blind
individuals and organizations, to increase employment
opportunities, it is still estimated that more than 70 percent of
employable blind people are either unemployed or underemployed;
and 
     WHEREAS, the rate of unemployment among blind people far
exceeds that of any of the recognized minority groups, yet they
are presumed to be socially disadvantaged and the blind are not;
and 
     WHEREAS, the findings made by Congress as the basis for the
Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 provide the Small
Business Administration with all of the authority and evidence
needed to classify blind people and others with severe
disabilities as having a presumed social disadvantage, thus
making it easier to qualify for assistance through the section
8(a) program: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this first day of July, 1992, in the City of
Charlotte, North Carolina, that we urge the small business
Administration to amend its regulations for the Section 8(a)
program by declaring that a presumed status of social
disadvantage exists for persons who are members of disability
minority groups as well as for persons who are members of racial
and ethnic minorities; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, beyond taking this action to
smooth the way for the prompt consideration of applications by
persons with disabilities, the Small Business Administration is
hereby urged to adopt affirmative action policies designed to
ensure that future section 8(a) contracts are actually
distributed to firms that are owned and controlled by persons who
are blind.

                        Resolution 92-14

     WHEREAS, while the Federal government claims to be a model
employer of the disabled, blind and disabled people are
significantly underrepresented in the Federal work force; and 
     WHEREAS, the National Federation of the Blind has long
recognized that prejudice derived from negative public attitudes
is the principal barrier which blind people face in securing
employment opportunities; and 
     WHEREAS, Federal agency disabled-employee-of-the-year awards
and similar special awards for the disabled tell Federal managers
and the public that blind and disabled workers should be held to
a different and lesser standard of performance; and 
     WHEREAS, such awards also promote the misconception that
blind and disabled employees who do good work are exceptional;
and 
     WHEREAS, Evan Kemp, Chairman of the United States Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission, has called for the elimination
of special awards for disabled Federal employees as inconsistent
with the objective of promoting equality for the disabled under
the Americans with Disabilities Act: Now, therefore 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization recognize
that disabled employee-of-the-year awards are harmful relics of
paternalism and strongly endorse the efforts of Equal Employment
Opportunity Commission Chairman Evan Kemp to eliminate these and
other similar awards for the disabled. 

                        Resolution 92-15

     WHEREAS, regulations and public statements from the Social
Security Administration encourage blind disability insurance
beneficiaries to work or attempt to work; and 
     WHEREAS, beneficiaries who respond to these work incentive
provisions by performing work activity will often find that they
are charged by the Social Security Administration with
substantial overpayments, amounting to tens of thousands of
dollars; and 
     WHEREAS, in many of these cases beneficiaries have fully
reported their work activity but are told by claims
representatives not to worry since their cases will be evaluated
at periodic intervals; and 
     WHEREAS, lack of due diligence by Social Security personnel
and the procedures they use tend to be the most common reason for
substantial overpayments, leaving beneficiaries who work almost
always at risk of incurring a debt to the Social Security
Administration which they cannot ever hope to repay; and 
     WHEREAS, the procedures for evaluating work activity appear
to be based on the expectation that most beneficiaries will not
work, and therefore a frequent and simple reporting system is not
being used for beneficiaries who do work; and 
     WHEREAS, persons who receive Social Security retirement
benefits while working file annual reports so that their earnings
and benefit status can be reviewed; and 
     WHEREAS, the use of a similar annual work reporting system
in the disability insurance program, used solely for the purpose
of evaluating earnings, could lead to a reduction in the number
of sizable overpayments and would give beneficiaries more
certainty about their status with Social Security while working:
Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization ask the
Social Security Administration to institute a frequent and simple
work reporting system for disability insurance beneficiaries in
recognition of the fact that increasing numbers of beneficiaries
want to work but are concerned about how their earnings will
affect their benefits; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we urge the Social Security
Administration to design a work reporting system in consultation
with beneficiary representatives, including leaders of the
National Federation of the Blind, to the end that work activity
is encouraged and beneficiaries who attempt to work are protected
from threatening overpayment allegations and the consequences
resulting from substantial and unpayable debts; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this organization call upon the
Social Security Administration to establish a policy that, once
the annual work activity and earnings evaluation is completed by
SSA and accepted by the beneficiary, that work period is closed
and shall not be reopened for further evaluation absent good
cause. 

                        Resolution 92-16

     WHEREAS, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS)
Office for Civil Rights is responsible for enforcing Section 504
of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 with respect to recipients of
Federal funds distributed by the Department of Health and Human
Services; and 
     WHEREAS, in ruling on and reviewing a complaint filed
against the Massachusetts Office for Children, the HHS Civil
Rights Office has determined that it is not unlawful
discrimination under Section 504 to subject blind people to extra
scrutiny in deciding on their suitability for licensing as
childcare workers; and 
     WHEREAS, it is an established fact that blind people are
capable of caring for children to the same extent that sighted
people are; and 
     WHEREAS, just as race, ethnicity, or national origin cannot
be used as reasons for extra scrutiny in childcare licensing,
neither should blindness be used to permit extra scrutiny: 
Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this second day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization demand that
the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office for
Civil Rights reverse its policy of using extra scrutiny when
blind people apply for child care licenses from public agencies. 

                        Resolution 92-17

     WHEREAS, the skills of blindness and an understanding of
blindness within society are two components of education which
distinguish the education of blind children from that of other
children; and 
     WHEREAS, the emphasis required in each of these areas will
vary from child to child and from time to time during each
child's school years; and 
     WHEREAS, without the skills and understanding of blindness,
the ability of the blind child to integrate into society and to
compete on the basis of equality as a blind adult is seriously
compromised; and 
     WHEREAS, both residential and public school programs can
meet the special education needs of blind children, but the two
programs offer distinctly different advantages and are therefore
not interchangeable for any child at any given time; and 
     WHEREAS, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and
Public Law 94-142 were intended to open up more educational
opportunities for disabled children and greater participation by
parents in educational planning; and 
     WHEREAS, blind children have a unique educational history in
this country and specific educational needs which are not
addressed in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and
Public Law 94-142, an omnibus act covering all disabilities; and 
     WHEREAS, education officials have their own reasons, which
may have little or nothing to do with the best interests of the
child, for placing blind students in one setting or another; and 
     WHEREAS, parents have no vested interest in one educational
program over another, but are concerned only with what is best
for their child: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this third day of July, 1992, in the City of
Charlotte, North Carolina, that the decision of whether a blind
student shall attend a public or a residential school for the
blind should rest primarily with the parents of the blind
student; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we call upon the administrators
of educational programs in each state to provide to parents of
blind children complete information about alternative educational
placements.

                        Resolution 92-18

     WHEREAS, guide dog schools, alone among agencies for the
blind, have historically refused to provide training and guide
dogs to blind persons who are street musicians or beggars; and 
     WHEREAS, graduating students are required by most schools to
sign a contract agreeing not to engage in activities which the
schools define as begging, even when such activities are clearly
within the law; and 
     WHEREAS, guide dog schools have used this contact provision
to take guide dogs away from blind persons; and 
     WHEREAS, conditioning the training and provision of guide
dogs on the behavior of students which is unrelated to the use of
the dog, even if that behavior is considered demeaning to the
image of blind persons and guide dogs, constitutes unwarranted
interference and intimidation: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization call upon
all guide dog schools to provide their services to all eligible
blind persons regardless of the past, present, or future
occupation of those persons; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this organization demand that
any and all references to begging be removed from student
contracts and applicant literature used by guide dog schools. 

                        Resolution 92-21

     WHEREAS, the goal of the National Federation of the Blind is
the integration of blind citizens into society on terms of
equality; and 
     WHEREAS, participation of blind citizens in society is
linked to independent mobility; and 
     WHEREAS, the National Federation of the Blind has always
supported the use of guide dogs as a mobility choice for blind
Americans; and 
     WHEREAS, ownership of guide dogs by blind individuals
promotes individual responsibility and independence; and 
     WHEREAS, for decades a leading guide dog program has given
the right of guide dog ownership to those completing the training
program while maintaining a commitment to blind person/guide dog
teams; and 
     WHEREAS, another leading guide dog program recently
recognized the advantages of permitting guide dog users to own
their dogs by announcing its own new ownership program; and 
     WHEREAS, the policy of retaining guide dog ownership by many
other training schools is based on paternalism and fosters a
sense of dependence: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization commend
guide dog training schools that provide the full right of
ownership to those completing training programs, whether by long-
standing tradition or recent enlightenment; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we again call upon all guide dog
training programs to adopt without further delay similar
progressive ownership policies.

                        Resolution 92-24

     WHEREAS, the installation of audible traffic signals is an
issue which is widely debated in communities throughout the
nation; and 
     WHEREAS, the National Federation of the Blind has
accumulated documentation which indicates that audible traffic
signals are often a nuisance to the general populace and an
unwelcome distraction to pedestrians who are blind; and 
     WHEREAS, audible traffic signals tend to be confusing and
dangerous for blind pedestrians who are hard of hearing since
these signals block and distort traffic sounds; and 
     WHEREAS, audible traffic signals constitute an additional
hazard to deaf-blind pedestrians because a driver seeing a deaf-
blind pedestrian using a white cane or guide dog at an
intersection where there is an audible traffic signal assumes
that the deaf-blind pedestrian can hear the signal; thus the
driver may not exercise appropriate care: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization call upon
those exploring the installation of audible traffic signals to
consider the problems these signals may cause for deaf-blind
people.

                        Resolution 92-25

     WHEREAS, the production in Braille of current fiction titles
by the National Library Service for the Blind and Physically
Handicapped and private agencies tends to lag far behind the
production of similar materials in recorded form; and 
     WHEREAS, the Scottish Braille Press and the Royal National
Institute for the Blind in the United Kingdom regularly produce
additional fiction titles in English Braille; and 
     WHEREAS, the National Federation of the Blind is committed
to the promotion of literacy for the blind through the use of
Braille; and 
     WHEREAS, there is inadequate leisure reading material
available in Braille in the United States; and 
     WHEREAS, the availability of additional fiction titles in
Braille would be welcomed by many blind and deaf-blind consumers:
Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this Federation review the
availability of fiction titles produced in English Braille in
other countries which are unduplicated in America; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this organization investigate
the feasibility of importing, developing, and circulating such a
collection of titles within this country. 

                        Resolution 92-26

     WHEREAS, every blind student, like every other student, can
use the college years to learn to manage time, resources, and
personal and professional relationships on the way to becoming
employable; and 
     WHEREAS, many college and university offices providing
services to disabled students attempt to perform these functions
for blind students under the misguided assumption that blind
students cannot perform these functions for themselves; and 
     WHEREAS, examples of this misguided assumption include
controlling the terms of reader services, controlling the
circumstances of testing, controlling communication of every kind
between the blind student and everyone else at the institution,
and compelling blind students to undergo psychological testing
merely because they are blind; and 
     WHEREAS, it is counterproductive to provide or require these
services for students during the years when they need to learn to
manage these matters for themselves; and 
     WHEREAS, the Association for Handicapped Students Services
Programs in Postsecondary Education (AHSSPPE) is a nationwide
organization for university and college administrators in offices
which serve students with disabilities: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization call upon
the Association for Handicapped Students Services Programs in
Postsecondary Education to work with representatives of the
National Federation of the Blind to develop a policy on
blindness, providing guidance to AHSSPPE members on campuses of
postsecondary institutions across the country; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we call upon AHSSPPE to refrain
from lumping blind students with other groups of disabled
students or requiring that blind students receive special
services, but rather that its members encourage independence for
blind students, including independence from offices for disabled
students. 

                        Resolution 92-27

     WHEREAS, testing agencies routinely eliminate questions from
the Braille versions of tests on the grounds that pictorial
information integral to the question is too visual to transcribe
when they could allow a live reader to accompany the blind test
taker to describe such untranscribed information; and 
     WHEREAS, testing agencies routinely require blind test
takers to accept any reader assigned by the testing site
administrator even though most of these readers are untrained and
unqualified so that their incompetence diminishes the blind
person's test score; and 
     WHEREAS, those testing agencies which allow a blind test
taker to bring his or her own reader routinely require
notification of the identity of the reader long before the actual
test, even though the test itself is fully proctored, causing
some blind test takers to be denied testing until the next
testing cycle if the planned reader cannot attend; and 
     WHEREAS, testing agencies sometimes require blind persons to
apply to take the test at an earlier date than their sighted
peers, causing confusion about when the application must be made
and resulting in blind persons' being denied testing until the
next cycle; and 
     WHEREAS, many testing agencies provide tests in some
alternative media while providing no preparatory material in the
same media; and 
     WHEREAS, the validity of standardized test results for blind
persons is undermined by many of the practices of standardized
testing agencies which inhibit the blind test taker; and 
     WHEREAS, each of the practices listed above can diminish the
performance of the blind test taker due to the testing agencies'
reaction to blindness rather than due to the competence of the
blind person, a practice which violates the Americans with
Disabilities Act; and 
     WHEREAS, the results of standardized tests are the gateway
to college, graduate school, and many of the professions for
blind as well as sighted persons; and 
     WHEREAS, standardized tests should be provided in Braille,
on cassette tape, in large print, and in standard print accessed
with a live reader: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization demand that
the Educational Testing Service and other testing agencies cease
their unfair and illegal practices; and 
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this organization demand that
the Educational Testing Service and other standardized testing
agencies meet with elected representatives of blind students to
address these issues and to achieve compliance with the Americans
with Disabilities Act. 

                        Resolution 92-28

     WHEREAS, blind persons have demonstrated that they are able
to compete on terms of equality as federal employees; and 
     WHEREAS, evacuation plans developed for times of emergency
in federal facilities often require that disabled employees have
an individual assigned to them to insure safe evacuation; and 
     WHEREAS, persons with disabilities are often required to
wait in elevator lobbies instead of using stairs to evacuate the
building while persons who are not disabled use stairs; and 
     WHEREAS, blind persons are often lumped with all other
disabled persons with regard to these requirements and there have
been instances where blind federal employees have been formally
reprimanded for walking down stairs during evacuations; and 
     WHEREAS, discussions with federal safety officials held to
explain that blind persons do not present an increased safety
risk to themselves or others during building evacuations are
often fruitless because the officials point to General Service
Administration rules which state that employees with disabilities
must remain in elevator lobbies during emergency evacuations and
have an assistant assigned to them; and 
     WHEREAS, the intent of the Americans with Disabilities Act
is that safety is a consideration in treatment of persons with
disabilities only where significant increases in risk can be
shown; and 
     WHEREAS, the ADA also mandates that individual differences
in disabilities must be recognized in making policy decisions;
and 
     WHEREAS, we know of no instances where blind persons have
been at higher risk to themselves or others during emergency
evacuations from federal buildings; and 
     WHEREAS, the GSA requirements are but another instance of
the time-worn prejudice against blind persons based on the myth
of the helpless blind: Now, therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization call upon
the General Services Administration to amend its rules to exempt
blind federal employees from mandatory special requirements
regarding building evacuation of disabled persons. 

                        Resolution 92-29

     WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Service has a long history of
hiring blind persons, who have proven their ability successfully
to compete on the job; and 
     WHEREAS, the Internal Revenue Service has followed a
practice of requiring blind persons to be trained separately from
its own ongoing training classes; and 
     WHEREAS, such practices prevent blind persons from
establishing initial equipment needs and peer contacts with those
who will be co-workers; and 
     WHEREAS, in several instances in which local hiring and
training have occurred, blind persons have proven they are able
to participate in local training classes, gaining all of the
benefits of such classes and being successfully employed: Now,
therefore, 
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this fourth day of July, 1992, in the City
of Charlotte, North Carolina, that this organization call upon
the Internal Revenue Service to take all necessary steps to bring
about the local training and hiring of blind IRS employees.


                          CONSTITUTION
                             OF THE
                NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
                        AS AMENDED 1986 

                         ARTICLE I. NAME
 
     The name of this organization is the National Federation of
the Blind. 
 
                      ARTICLE II. PURPOSE 

     The purpose of the National Federation of the Blind is to
serve as a vehicle for collective action by the blind of the
nation; to function as a mechanism through which the blind and
interested sighted persons can come together in local, state, and
national meetings to plan and carry out programs to improve the
quality of life for the blind; to provide a means of collective
action for parents of blind children; to promote the vocational,
cultural, and social advancement of the blind; to achieve the
integration of the blind into society on a basis of equality with
the sighted; and to take any other action which will improve the
overall condition and standard of living of the blind.

                    ARTICLE III. MEMBERSHIP 

     Section A. The membership of the National Federation of the
Blind shall consist of the members of the state affiliates, the
members of divisions, and members at large. Members of divisions
and members at large shall have the same rights, privileges, and
responsibilities in the National Federation of the Blind as
members of state affiliates.
     The Board of Directors shall establish procedures for
admission of divisions and shall determine the structure of
divisions. The divisions shall, with the approval of the Board,
adopt constitutions and determine their membership policies.
Membership in divisions shall not be conditioned upon membership
in state affiliates. 
     The Board of Directors shall establish procedures for
admission of members at large, determine how many classes of such
members shall be established, and determine the annual dues to be
paid by members of each class. 

     Section B. Each state or territorial possession of the
United States, including the District of Columbia, having an
affiliate shall have one vote at the National Convention. These
organizations shall be referred to as state affiliates. 

     Section C. State affiliates shall be organizations of the
blind controlled by the blind. No organization shall be
recognized as an "organization of the blind controlled by the
blind" unless at least a majority of its voting members and a
majority of the voting members of each of its local chapters are
blind. 

     Section D. The Board of Directors shall establish procedures
for the admission of state affiliates. There shall be only one
state affiliate in each state. 

     Section E. Any member, local chapter, state affiliate, or
division of this organization may be suspended, expelled, or
otherwise disciplined for misconduct or for activity unbecoming
to a member or affiliate of this organization by a two-thirds
vote of the Board of Directors or by a simple majority of the
states present and voting at a National Convention. If the action
is to be taken by the Board, there must be good cause, and a good
faith effort must have been made to try to resolve the problem by
discussion and negotiation. If the action is to be taken by the
Convention, notice must be given on the preceding day at an open
Board meeting or a session of the Convention. If a dispute arises
as to whether there was "good cause," or whether the Board made a
"good faith effort," the National Convention (acting in its
capacity as the supreme authority of the Federation) shall have
the power to make final disposition of the matter; but until or
unless the Board's action is reversed by the National Convention,
the ruling of the Board shall continue in effect. 
 
                           ARTICLE IV.
                  OFFICERS, BOARD OF DIRECTORS,
                   AND NATIONAL ADVISORY BOARD
 
     Section A. The officers of The National Federation of the
Blind shall be: (1) President, (2) First Vice President, (3)
Second Vice President, (4) Secretary, and (5) Treasurer. They
shall be elected biennially. 

     Section B. The officers shall be elected by majority vote of
the state affiliates present and voting at a National Convention.

     Section C. The National Federation of the Blind shall have a
Board of Directors, which shall be composed of the five officers
and twelve additional members, six of whom shall be elected at
the Annual Convention during even-numbered years and six of whom
shall be elected at the Annual Convention during odd-numbered
years. The members of the Board of Directors shall serve for two-
year terms. 

     Section D. The Board of Directors may, in its discretion,
create a National Advisory Board and determine the duties and
qualifications of the members of the National Advisory Board. 
 
                           ARTICLE V. 
                    POWERS AND DUTIES OF THE
                      CONVENTION, THE BOARD
                          OF DIRECTORS,
                        AND THE PRESIDENT

     Section A. Powers and Duties of the Convention. The
Convention is the supreme authority of the Federation. It is the
legislature of the Federation. As such, it has final authority
with respect to all issues of policy. Its decisions shall be made
after opportunity has been afforded for full and fair discussion.
Delegates and members in attendance may participate in all
Convention discussions as a matter of right. Any member of the
Federation may make or second motions, propose nominations, and
serve on committees; and is eligible for election to office,
except that only blind members may be elected to the National
Board. Voting and making motions by proxy are prohibited.
Consistent with the democratic character of the Federation,
Convention meetings shall be so conducted as to prevent
parliamentary maneuvers which would have the effect of
interfering with the expression of the will of the majority on
any question, or with the rights of the minority to full and fair
presentation of their views. The Convention is not merely a
gathering of representatives of separate state organizations. It
is a meeting of the Federation at the national level in its
character as a national organization. Committees of the
Federation are committees of the national organization. The
nominating committee shall consist of one member from each state
affiliate represented at the Convention, and each state affiliate
shall appoint its member to the committee. From among the members
of the committee, the President shall appoint a chairperson.

     Section B. Powers and Duties of the Board of Directors. The
function of the Board of Directors as the governing body of the
Federation between Conventions is to make policies when necessary
and not in conflict with the policies adopted by the Convention.
Policy decisions which can reasonably be postponed until the next
meeting of the National Convention shall not be made by the Board
of Directors. The Board of Directors shall serve as a credentials
committee. It shall have the power to deal with organizational
problems presented to it by any member, local chapter, state
affiliate, or division; shall decide appeals regarding the
validity of elections in local chapters, state affiliates, or
divisions; and shall certify the credentials of delegates when
questions regarding the validity of such credentials arise. By a
two-thirds vote the Board may suspend one of its members for
violation of a policy of the organization or for other action
unbecoming to a member of the Federation. By a two-thirds vote
the Board may reorganize any local chapter, state affiliate, or
division. The Board may not suspend one of its own members or
reorganize a local chapter, state affiliate, or division except
for good cause and after a good faith effort has been made to try
to resolve the problem by discussion and negotiation. If a
dispute arises as to whether there was "good cause" or whether
the Board made a "good faith effort," the National Convention
(acting in its capacity as the supreme authority of the
Federation) shall have the power to make final disposition of the
matter; but until or unless the Board's action is reversed by the
National Convention, the ruling of the Board shall continue in
effect. There shall be a standing subcommittee of the Board of
Directors which shall consist of three members. The committee
shall be known as the Subcommittee on Budget and Finance. It
shall, whenever it deems necessary, recommend to the Board of
Directors principles of budgeting, accounting procedures, and
methods of financing the Federation program; and shall consult
with the President on major expenditures. 
     The Board of Directors shall meet at the time of each
National Convention. It shall hold other meetings on the call of
the President or on the written request of any five members. 

     Section C. Powers and Duties of the President. The President
is the principal administrative officer of the Federation. In
this capacity his or her duties consist of: carrying out the
policies adopted by the Convention; conducting the day-to-day
management of the affairs of the Federation; authorizing
expenditures from the Federation treasury in accordance with and
in implementation of the policies established by the Convention;
appointing all committees of the Federation except the Nominating
Committee; coordinating all activities of the Federation,
including the work of other officers and of committees; hiring,
supervising, and dismissing staff members and other employees of
the Federation, and determining their numbers and compensation;
taking all administrative actions necessary and proper to put
into effect the programs and accomplish the purposes of the
Federation. The implementation and administration of the interim
policies adopted by the Board of Directors are the responsibility
of the President as principal administrative officer of the
Federation. 

                  ARTICLE VI. STATE AFFILIATES

     Any organized group desiring to become a state affiliate of
the National Federation of the Blind shall apply for affiliation
by submitting to the President of the National Federation of the
Blind a copy of its constitution and a list of the names and
addresses of its elected officers. Under procedures to be
established by the Board of Directors, action shall be taken on
the application. If the action is affirmative, the National
Federation of the Blind shall issue to the organization a charter
of affiliation. Upon request of the National President the state
affiliate shall provide to the National President the names and
addresses of its members. Copies of all amendments to the
constitution and/or bylaws of an affiliate shall be sent without
delay to the National President. No organization shall be
accepted as an affiliate and no organization shall remain an
affiliate unless at least a majority of its voting members are
blind. The president, vice president (or vice presidents), and at
least a majority of the executive committee or board of directors
of the state affiliate and of all of its local chapters must be
blind. Affiliates must not merely be social organizations but
must formulate programs and actively work to promote the economic
and social betterment of the blind. Affiliates and their local
chapters must comply with the provisions of the Constitution of
the Federation. 
     Policy decisions of the Federation are binding upon all
affiliates and local chapters, and the affiliate and its local
chapters must participate affirmatively in carrying out such
policy decisions. The name National Federation of the Blind,
Federation of the Blind, or any variant thereof is the property
of the National Federation of the Blind; and any affiliate, or
local chapter of an affiliate, which ceases to be part of the
National Federation of the Blind (for whatever reason) shall
forthwith forfeit the right to use the name National Federation
of the Blind, Federation of the Blind, or any variant thereof.
     A general convention of the membership of an affiliate or of
the elected delegates of the membership must be held and its
principal executive officers must be elected at least once every
two years. There can be no closed membership. Proxy voting is
prohibited in state affiliates and local chapters. Each affiliate
must have a written constitution or bylaws setting forth its
structure, the authority of its officers, and the basic
procedures which it will follow. No publicly contributed funds
may be divided among the membership of an affiliate or local
chapter on the basis of membership, and (upon request from the
National Office) an affiliate or local chapter must present an
accounting of all of its receipts and expenditures. An affiliate
or local chapter must not indulge in attacks upon the officers,
Board members, leaders, or members of the Federation or upon the
organization itself outside of the organization, and must not
allow its officers or members to indulge in such attacks. This
requirement shall not be interpreted to interfere with the right
of an affiliate or local chapter, or its officers or members, to
carry on a political campaign inside the Federation for election
to office or to achieve policy changes. However, the organization
will not sanction or permit deliberate, sustained campaigns of
internal organizational destruction by state affiliates, local
chapters, or members. No affiliate or local chapter may join or
support, or allow its officers or members to join or support, any
temporary or permanent organization inside the Federation which
has not received the sanction and approval of the Federation. 

                    ARTICLE VII. DISSOLUTION

     In the event of dissolution, all assets of the organization
shall be given to an organization with similar purposes which has
received a 501(c)(3) certification by the Internal Revenue
Service. 

                    ARTICLE VIII. AMENDMENTS

     This Constitution may be amended at any regular Annual
Convention of the Federation by an affirmative vote of two-thirds
of the state affiliates registered, present, and voting; provided
that the proposed amendment shall have been signed by five state
affiliates in good standing and that it shall have been presented
to the President the day before final action by the Convention.