                       THE BRAILLE MONITOR



                    Kenneth Jernigan, Editor
                Barbara Pierce, Associate Editor


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


              THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND 
                     MARC MAURER, PRESIDENT 
 


                         National Office
                       1800 Johnson Street
                   Baltimore, Maryland 21230 

                             * * * *



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

                             * * * *
 


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

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

                             * * * *

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



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

                            CONTENTS

                                                   DECEMBER, 1992

REHABILITATION ACT REAUTHORIZED: VICTORY FOR THE BLIND

COMING TO GRIPS WITH BLINDNESS: 
A MOTHER TALKS TO MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS
by Loretta White

FURTHER LOSSES FOR NAC
A YEAR-END STATUS REPORT   
by Barbara Pierce

HONOR ROLL UPDATE

ROLL CALL OF SHAME

WINNING OUR FREEDOM:  VIEWS FROM THE UNIVERSITY CAMPUS

THE BIOGRAPHY OF THEODORE PAUL LUBITZ
by Theodore Lubitz

A CHRISTMAS STORY FOR ALL SEASONS
by Donald Capps

CONTINUING THE STORY
by Scott LaBarre

THE 1993 BLIND EDUCATOR OF THE YEAR AWARD 
by Stephen O. Benson

DISTINGUISHED EDUCATOR OF BLIND CHILDREN AWARD FOR 1993
by Sharon Maneki

FEDERATIONISTS JOIN IN ADA LAWSUIT TO BLOCK MEDICAID CUTS
by Greg D. Trapp 

BLIND NO LONGER INCOMPETENT IN OKLAHOMA

SOMETHING NEW UNDER THE SUN
by Elizabeth Browne

CONVENTION 1993: TEXAS BECKONS

RECIPES

MONITOR MINIATURES


     Copyright National Federation of the Blind, Inc., 1992[LEADPHOTO: The National Center for the Blind
CAPTION:  The National Center for the Blind, symbol of the
shifting balances in the blindness field.
     As we move into the mid-1990s and look ahead to the 21st
century, the blind play an ever growing part in determining their
own destiny.]


[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Kenneth Jernigan.]

REHABILITATION ACT REAUTHORIZED:
VICTORY FOR THE BLIND
By Kenneth Jernigan

     On Monday, October 5, 1992, the United States Senate passed
the bill reauthorizing the federal Rehabilitation Act. The House
had passed it on the previous Friday. At the time of this writing
(October 12) I don't know whether the President has signed the
bill or not, but in the circumstances this is only a formality.
The planning, waiting, and maneuvering are over. The deed is
done.
     Since the Rehabilitation Act involves some $2 billion in
federal money, along with a considerable amount of state and
other funds, and since we now have the law that will govern the
program for the next five years (a law which will have tremendous
impact on the lives of the blind), we should look at it to see
how we fared. Did we win or lose, make progress or go backward?
If we had to sum it up in a single statement, the answer would be
that we won an overwhelming victory. 
     Specifically there are five areas which should be singled
out for comment. The first of these, of course, is the National
Commission on Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind and
Visually Impaired. This proposal, which originated with some of
the agencies doing work with the blind and which was generally
referred to as the Study Commission on Blindness, became the
focal point of a major battle. 
     When the Study Commission first seriously came to our
attention a year ago in January of 1991, we attempted to find a
compromise that all of the principal groups in the blindness
field could accept. A meeting was held at the National Center for
the Blind in Baltimore, and after several hours of give and take,
a draft proposal was unanimously agreed to. It was then rejected
by one or two organizations, and the next thing we heard, the
original unacceptable bill was publicly being pushed in the
Congress--and we were not even given the courtesy of being told
that the negotiations were over. 
     This bill would have established a fifteen-member
commission--five to be appointed by the Senate, five by the
House, and five by the President. The purpose of the Commission
would have been to study all aspects of work with the blind
(education, rehabilitation, and the rest) and then to report back
to Congress and the President. It was clear that although the
members of the Commission would technically be appointed by 
Congress and the President, they would in reality be largely
appointed and controlled by a rather narrow group of the
professionals in the field. They were required to be persons who
were recognized as having expertise in education and/or
rehabilitation of the blind, and only one-third of them were
required to be either blind or parents or guardians of a blind
person. Even then, this minority group of the blind and their
parents and guardians was not excluded from the requirement of
being recognized as having expertise. The bill did not say who
would determine what constituted expertise, but no great skill is
needed to make a very good educated guess. The consumers (and
particularly the organized blind) were being dealt out. 
     If the bill had been passed as written, the cause of
consumerism would have taken a heavy blow. The Commission would
have, in a very real sense, served as a buffer between Congress
and the organized blind, between the Executive Branch and the
organized blind, and even between Congress and the Executive.
Every time we would have gone to Congress to support or oppose a
particular piece of legislation, there is a good likelihood that
the recommendations of the Study Commission would have been
trotted out as an excuse for acting or failing to act. Moreover,
the concept and make-up of the Study Commission did not accord
with current realities or the present balances in the blindness
field. In short, it was unacceptable, and we determined to kill
it. 
     The National Federation of the Blind did not willingly
choose to make the Study Commission a test of political strength
in the Congress, but that is exactly what it became. We were
openly told by one person that we would be taught a lesson (which
indeed we were, but not the one intended), and it was publicly
stated during the House committee meeting in July that the
National Federation of the Blind stood alone in opposing the
Study Commission. At the conclusion of that committee meeting we
lost by a vote of twenty-one to seventeen. This was not bad in
view of the fact that the committee chairman, the subcommittee
chairman, and the ranking minority member of the committee were
all opposed to us and in favor of the bill--but a loss is still a
loss.
     As we assessed our situation in July, it was clear that we
had to work to win in the Senate and to change enough minds to
win in the House-Senate conference that would follow. From July
until the final Senate vote in October, the Federation
communicated, educated, and corresponded. We prevailed in the
Senate, and we changed enough minds in the House to prevail in
the conference committee, underscoring what I said at our
National Convention this summer about the shifting balances in
the blindness field. 
     We did not, of course, accomplish the task alone. The
Council of State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation
(CSAVR), the federal Department of Education, many of the state
and local groups affiliated with the Association for Education
and Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired (AER), and
various other national and state organizations joined with us--
but the driving force and the coordinating effort were ours. And
all who were involved know it--those who supported us, those in
Congress, those in the Executive Branch, and those who opposed
us. In such a situation, when the line is drawn, there can be no
partial success or failure. Either you win, or you don't. We did-
-and the implications are unmistakable for those who have the
ability to perceive and the willingness to understand. 
     But a postscript must be added. Unless all of us (and I do
mean all) learn from this experience, everybody connected with
the blindness field loses in the long run. Opportunities were
missed because of this battle, and the price may be heavy. One of
the great dangers to the blindness field is the growing trend to
eliminate specialized, disability-specific services in favor of
generic programs, which lump all of the various disabilities
together in a Mulligan stew of mediocrity. In the formative
stages of the bill to reauthorize the Rehabilitation Act,
important gains might have been made that were never even
mentioned or attempted. 
     That in no way detracts from the very real gains which the
blind as a group and we as an organization made, but before
leaving the subject of commissions, I need to comment on one
other item. Not only was the Study Commission on Blindness
considered but also a commission to study the overall
Rehabilitation Act and make recommendations to Congress and the
President. In accordance with our agreement with the state
administrators of vocational rehabilitation we opposed this
second commission, but everybody knew where our central focus and
real concern were. The proposal to establish this second
commission (I believe it is called the National Commission on
Rehabilitation Services) was adopted. This was in another section
of the bill entirely and has nothing at all to do with the Study
Commission on Blindness. The National Commission on
Rehabilitation Services will be an eighteen-member body, and a
majority of its members must be persons with disabilities. The
majority and minority leaders of the Senate will appoint six of
the members; the majority and minority leaders of the House will
appoint six; and the President (or the Secretary of Education for
him) will appoint six. The members will select the chairman, and
the commission will study all manner of things dealing with
rehabilitation, making a final report to the President and the
Congress no later than January 30, 1997, the year in which the
Rehabilitation Act comes up again for reauthorization. 
     Now that we have finished with commissions, let me turn to
more important things. Let me deal with the truly significant
gains we made in the reauthorization of the Rehabilitation Act.
There are major changes with respect to client choice. To begin
with, there will be a variety of pilot projects to test different
options for letting clients choose their own service providers.
This initiative (and it is a positive one) was introduced and
spearheaded by the Rehabilitation Services Administration and
Nell Carney. It has long-term implications for improved service
and holds great promise.
     Of more immediate importance to the blind, however, is the
amendment concerning choice introduced by Congressman William
Jefferson of Louisiana. Those of you who attended our New Orleans
convention in 1991 will remember that Congressman Jefferson stood
on our platform and told us that he would help us get the
Rehabilitation Act amended to provide that blind persons might
choose the agencies from which they would receive training or
service. He was as good as his word, and our amendments were
adopted. As the bill passed, all clients should have increased
opportunities for choice. The Secretary of Education is required
to receive public comment within 120 days and then to make
regulations establishing criteria pertaining to selection of
Vocational Rehabilitation Services, as well as the procurement of
such services directly by clients. The details of this client
choice provision are yet to be worked out since they will only
come in the regulations, but the law definitely provides for
client choice. This point is made and reinforced several times in
the amendments--and there is no question as to who proposed it
and successfully fought for its adoption.
     There are also big changes in eligibility for
rehabilitation. As you know, many rehabilitation agencies
sometimes deny services to blind persons who are receiving
Supplemental Security Income (SSI) or Social Security Disability
Insurance. They do this for a variety of reasons. A blind person
may, for instance, have once held a job and then have lost it.
The agency may then say that the person has no handicap to
employment since he or she has demonstrated the ability to work
by already holding a job. This makes no sense, and so we
successfully set about trying to change it. 
     Under the amendments that were included in the
reauthorization, a person who, by reason of blindness or
disability, is eligible for Social Security Disability Insurance
or SSI is almost automatically eligible for rehabilitation. The
language is so written that it would be virtually impossible for
an agency to deny eligibility to a blind person as long as that
person is also eligible for disability insurance or SSI. Because
of the special provisions for eligibility of blind persons under
Social Security, this new rehabilitation provision should mean
that even upward mobility services (that is, services beyond
entry-level employment) must now be provided. This is a major
positive change, and one for which we are primarily responsible. 
     I cannot leave this year's reauthorization of the
Rehabilitation Act without saying a few words concerning
independent living services for older blind persons--or, as it
came to be widely discussed during the battle, Title VII C.
(Incidentally, VII C has now come to be officially known as Title
VII Chapter 2, "Independent Living Services for Older Individuals
Who Are Blind.") Undoubtedly all parties will claim that they won
a victory in what happened regarding VII C, but certain facts are
indisputable. The amended Act provides that the current grant
program for independent living services to the older blind will
continue unchanged until at least 1994. In that year the program
could be expanded so that these services for the older blind will
be available in all of the states on a formula grant, with each
state getting a share of the federal money. The 1994 expansion
will not occur, however, if the Congress fails to appropriate at
least $13 million for the program. If appropriations are less
than that amount, the present program, which does not include all
states and is on an application basis, will continue. Currently
the appropriation is $6.5 million. It would have to double in
order for the formula grant program to go into effect. 
     At our 1992 convention in Charlotte I publicly told Carl
Augusto, president of the American Foundation for the Blind, that
I thought the forces that were pushing the Study Commission on
Blindness were jeopardizing the expansion of VII C. He was
leaving our convention to go to the AER convention, and we asked
him to urge AER to join with us in defeating the Commission and
getting VII C amended. That week I also called Dr. William
Weiner, the then AER president, to give him the same message. I
told Dr. Weiner that the Study Commission had no chance of
passage and that all that would be accomplished by continuing to
fight for it would be to damage the chances of VII C. However,
AER and the others who supported the Commission would not be
persuaded, leaving us where we now are. The Study Commission was
defeated, and there is a strong likelihood that the expanded
formula grant program for Title VII C will never go into effect.
In fact, more than one influential senator has told us that this
is exactly what is contemplated. In the present climate of
opposition to disability-specific programs, it will be very
difficult to get added money to put into effect the expanded
version of VII C which its proponents wanted, especially when it
would mean doubling the present appropriation in a time when
major deficits not only exist but can also be used as the reason
(or excuse) for not doing it. If all of the forces in the
blindness field could have worked together on the reauthorization
of the Rehabilitation Act, there is every likelihood that VII C
would have been made into a formula grant program, would have
gone into effect immediately, and would by now have been on the
road to appropriate funding--but that is not what happened. The
only positive thing that can be said about it is that perhaps we
can profit from the experience and avoid a recurrence.
     Meanwhile, nothing can diminish or take away from the
tremendous gains which we made in this year's reauthorization. It
means better lives for blind people, and it also confirms the
growing strength of our organization. In concluding these
comments perhaps I can do no better than to repeat something I
said at this year's convention in Charlotte. What does the new
reality mean for the National Federation of the Blind? 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 goodwill, 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. 
     That is what I said at Charlotte, but there is a corollary
which should also be added. While we don't want to be too big for
our pants, we don't want to be too little for them either. With
maturity and decisiveness (dealing appropriately with those who
will work with us, and also with those who won't) we must play
the role that our strength, our position, and our resources now
fit us to play--and we must do it with care for the present and
thought for the future. 


[PHOTO: Loretta, Joe, and Niki White. CAPTION: Loretta and Joe
White Pictured here with their daughter Niki.]

                 COMING TO GRIPS WITH BLINDNESS:
             A MOTHER TALKS TO MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS
                        by Loretta White

     From the Associate Editor: Coming to terms with the fact
that one's child is blind is, according to those who have
undergone the experience, one of the most difficult challenges a
parent can face. Yet, if the blind youngster is to grow up well-
adjusted and capable, it is essential that those who care most
deeply for him or her move past their anger, grief, and
frustration in order to have enough energy for helping the child.
The medical personnel who work with the family can help in this
process, or they can compound the suffering. 
     The following article provides wise advice to medical
professionals from a mother who is an experienced recipient of
both bad and good medical support. It was first published in the
Spring, 1992, issue of Future Reflections, the quarterly magazine
of the Parents of Blind Children Division of the National
Federation of the Blind. It begins with an introductory note
written by Barbara Cheadle, Editor of the publication. Here it
is: 

     Loretta White is the capable and energetic president of
Maryland's NFB Parents of Blind Children Division. Her leadership
and organizational ability are giving the division new zest and
sparkle. This past fall she and I, as representatives of the NFB
of Maryland, were invited to conduct an in-service training
session for nurses who work with children and babies at the
internationally known Wilmer Eye Institute at Johns Hopkins. This
article is an edited version of the talk she gave at that
in-service meeting. Loretta also was invited to speak at the
Ninth Annual Symposium for Ophthalmological Nurses held in
Baltimore last spring. Here is what Loretta White said at Wilmer: 
     My name is Loretta White, and I live in Anne Arundel County
with my husband and four children. Their ages are sixteen, six,
almost five, and almost three. I am also a licensed day care
provider, so most of my time is spent with and around children. 
     My daughter Niki will be five in November. Niki has been
totally blind since birth. It's most likely due to retinopathy of
prematurity, but since she was adopted from India, we don't know
for sure. Her prenatal history is unknown, and the postnatal is
sketchy at best. She also has some neurological problems that
include a seizure disorder. 
     I'm here today to talk to you about Niki and our
experiences. I hope I can help you better understand how to deal
with parents who have a blind child. And if you have any
questions you've never had the opportunity to ask parents or felt
comfortable asking, please feel free to ask me. 
     I have done a lot of reading and talking to other parents of
blind children. I find that the problems and difficulties and
things that we have had a hard time coming to grips with are
pretty much the same. I have also learned that the sooner we, as
parents, can pull ourselves together and start constructively
dealing with our children's blindness, the better off our
children will be. Early intervention is crucial--and the earlier
the better. 
     The first thing we parents face is being told that our child
has a vision problem. We may have suspected it or even known it,
but being told by the medical professionals seals it. And that
moment, for better or for worse, will be permanently etched into
the parent's brain.
     In our case, Niki came home from India when she was five
months old. We took her to a pediatrician for a check-up a couple
of days after we got her. He told us that her eyes didn't look
quite right, so he wanted us to have her checked by an
ophthalmologist. The ophthalmologist he sent us to didn't do
children, so all he did was take a quick look and tell us that,
yes, she has cataracts; he then referred us to a pediatric
ophthalmologist in Harrisburg. (At that time we were living in
Pennsylvania.) So I took Niki to the appointment by myself while
my husband watched the other children. I was expecting to have
her seen and then scheduled for cataract surgery. I spent the
entire day there.
     The doctor had a wonderful reputation, but I quickly found
out in the waiting room that he had the bedside manner of Attila
the Hun. So I was pretty nervous to begin with. Once the
technicians had examined her eyes, done their tests with the
drops, and completed the sonograms and what not, the doctor came
in and quickly looked at her eyes. Then, with the same demeanor
one might use to comment on the weather, he told me that my
daughter's blindness was total and permanent. I'm sure he must
have read the look on my face and realized that I had not known.
Then he added, "Well, it's not that bad. It's like a Hershey bar.
If you've never eaten chocolate before, you wouldn't miss it
because you can't miss what you never had." Then, after a couple
of minutes of very uncomfortable silence, he gave me the name of
a doctor who might try some heroic surgery, wished me luck, and
left the room. I never saw that doctor again.
     Somehow I collected myself and my baby and made the hour and
a half drive back to my home. It took me a long time to forgive
his brutal honesty, but I will never forget it. On that afternoon
I would really have appreciated some compassion. Also I did not
appreciate the belittling of my child's condition. Things could
always be worse, but so what? Right now they feel awful, and any
parent who has just been dealt such a blow is entitled to some
recognition of that pain.
     As I was preparing for today, I asked myself what would have
made that moment easier? First, I would ask you, the medical
professionals, to find out how much parents know about their
child's vision problem. Explain the tests, procedures, and
results in terms they can understand. Often we are told about the
tests in medical jargon. In the beginning we may not understand
enough of this terminology to know whether we have questions or
not. Also, whenever possible, tell both parents together so they
will have each other to lean on. Use some compassion and respect
in choosing your words. I read about a survey that was done to
find out which medical problems Americans fear most. Going blind
was third. We considered only AIDS and cancer to be more
devastating.
     Some parents may need quiet time alone to collect themselves
before leaving. Be sensitive to that, but please don't let them
get away without referrals. Have literature available, at least
some information from the National Federation of the Blind as an
anchor to help them get their bearings and figure out what is
next. They don't have to think about it or look at it at that
moment, but they will need it soon.
     There are a lot of emotions brewing at such a moment. We may
be angry, and that anger may be directed at you simply because
you are the bearer of the bad news or because you cannot fix it
or make it go away. Or we may deny the problem. We may think that
you've made a mistake--our child can't be blind. We may go from
doctor to doctor trying to find someone who will tell us it isn't
true or that it will pass or that some heroic surgery will fix
it. We desperately want the magical cure which will restore our
child's sight.
     In our case, we went through the anger at the doctors and
also at the adoption agency who had placed her. From what we were
later told, anyone who examined her should have seen the detached
retina and scar tissue mass. And yet we had paperwork that said
she had an ophthalmologic evaluation and that her eyes were in
good condition. Knowing probably wouldn't have changed our minds
about her, but we certainly could have been prepared and avoided
the shock.
     We also tried the heroic surgery. We took her to a doctor in
Tennessee who had had some success at reattaching retinas. We put
ourselves in debt mustering up the finances to make three trips
to Tennessee (two for surgeries and one for a check-up). We did
all this knowing initially that her chances of regaining any
usable sight were less than ten percent. But at that time we were
so frightened of blindness we were willing to try almost
anything.
     After, or maybe along with, the anger and denial, most of us
will then go through a grieving process. It is as if our child
had actually died. We have lost that perfect child we had planned
for and hoped for and longed for, and in a sense what we feel we
have left is a broken child. Our lives are permanently impacted
and forever changed--not only our lives as parents, but the lives
of our other children, and (to a lesser degree) the extended
family. Things will never be the same again.
     Some parents become angry at each other, one wanting to
blame the other for being responsible for the child's blindness
or for not caring enough or for caring too much. Sometimes we
parents may feel sorry--sorry for ourselves because we have this
tremendous burden and sorry for our child because she has to
endure it. Sometimes it's hard to get past that feeling of "my
poor, poor baby." But for our child's sake, we must.
     We hope these stages won't last very long, and parents won't
get stuck in any of them. But these are feelings we have, and we
need to deal with them so we can move on and constructively meet
our child's needs. That may leave us feeling, "oh my gosh, what
now?" This is because we are now forced to deal not only with our
own child, but with our feelings toward blindness in general.
     Before Niki came into my life, I had virtually no experience
with blindness. The only blind person I had ever known was Tammy,
who lived across the street from my family for a short while when
I was six. I can still see this eight-year-old girl in my mind.
All she ever did was sit and rock, sometimes poking at her eyes.
Her speech consisted mostly of repetitions of what she had just
heard. She never played with the other kids or even went to
school. She just sat and rocked. As you can imagine, that memory
haunted me for a while after we found out Niki was blind.
     If the only experience you've had with blindness is seeing a
man begging on a city street, you're hardly going to feel excited
about your child's future. And if the parent doesn't have a
positive image of blindness, how can the child hope to develop a
positive self-image?
     As we begin to deal with blindness, we parents will be full
of questions. We wonder what children with little or no sight are
really like. Do they live in a world of darkness? Do they grow
and develop like other children? Where do they go to school? Do
blind people ever get married? How do they earn a living? Can
they be happy? Can they live independently? What will happen to
my child when I die?
     We may feel overwhelmed when we think of the long years
ahead in which we will have to cope with what seems to be an
insurmountable number of problems involved in raising a visually
impaired child. But the sooner we get to work, the better off we
are, and the better off our children will be. So we need for you,
the professionals, to get us steered in a positive direction from
the very beginning. We need to know--and most parents do
not--that there is an infants and toddlers program offered
through the school system in Maryland and a number of other
states at no charge. We need to know how and where to look for
services for our child.
     When we found out Niki was blind, we were given a diagnosis
and left on our own. Perhaps referrals were made, but we never
heard from anyone. So I began to look on my own. I got a copy of
Reach Out and Teach, probably at the library, and found a list of
sources for information on blindness, probably fifty or more. I
made a form letter requesting information and sent it to every
one. For the next few months I got back all kinds of letters,
pamphlets, and books. These were really helpful, and I learned a
lot from them. Then one day I got a phone call from Barbara
Cheadle of the National Federation of the Blind. This was a
turning point for me and for my daughter Niki.
     Through the Federation I have met successful blind
individuals from all walks of life and from all over the country.
By observing and interacting with these people, I have been able
to revise my perceptions of blindness. Reading about it in a book
will teach you here in your head, but by living it, you learn it
here in your heart. Children learn what they live. I want my
child to know in her heart that she can be successful and
independent because she has grown up watching successful and
independent blind adults around her. Through education and
interaction with the Federation, Niki can even take this for
granted and think of her blindness as a mere nuisance, just as
many other Federationists now do.
     As Niki's parent, I have found the Federation to be my
source of information through literature; interaction with blind
people; and, very important, networking with other parents of
blind children. Sharing what does and does not work has saved me
lots of valuable time and energy.
     The Federation has also been there to advocate for Niki at
school. This is by no means a small task. It has been my
experience that a child in special education can get all the
services and benefits entitled by law, provided the parent can
find out what they are and is willing to fight tooth and nail for
them.
     One last thing that I would ask is that, regardless of your
perceptions of how or what we parents are doing, you always give
us your encouragement. You see our child only from time to time.
Teachers and schools may change. Friends may come and go. Three
years from now you may not even remember our child's name. But
we--the parents--will still be there working for and with our
child. A pat on the back or an "atta girl" can go a long way.
     And what about the kids themselves? How do we ask you to
deal with them? Although our daughter is multiply handicapped,
she is still very much the active, busy, noisy, drive-Mom-crazy
preschooler. Niki can identify each of her doctors and their
offices. Her pediatrician has the office with steps by the window
full of toys. When she visits her neurologist, she goes up the
elevator and gets to play with a bead toy while she waits. Her
dentist has a chair that lies down like a couch, and so on.
     Most of the time going to the doctor is O.K. for Niki
because the people she sees have seen her over a long period of
time and have learned a few do's and don'ts that make everybody
more comfortable. First, always identify yourself when you come
into the child's presence, and let her know when you are leaving.
When someone comes into the room that Niki does not recognize,
she asks over and over, "Who is it?" until she finds out. 
     Doctors and nurses who see Niki often have learned to talk
directly to her whenever possible. "Niki, do you want a toy?"
rather than asking me, "Do you think she'd like something to play
with?" It also helps to let the child explore the environment as
much as is safely possible and to use a lot of descriptive
language that the child can understand. We may be embarrassed to
let the child crawl all over and under anything and everything,
but this is how she learns. Your permission lets us know you
understand this truth.
     Also tell the child what you are going to do before you do
it, and be as honest as you can. If it's going to hurt, say so. A
child who can see knows what to expect when he sees the needle or
the eye drops, regardless of what he's told. We want our kids to
trust us, so we have to be honest with them.
     The last thing I would suggest is, please do not presume
that any child needs help. Blind children are just like sighted
children--they want to do it themselves! Wait until she asks for
help or demonstrates a need before you offer help. You wouldn't
presume to help a sighted six- or seven-year-old in the bathroom,
so you probably wouldn't help a blind child that age either. If
in doubt, ask.
     And please remember to use the National Federation of the
Blind as a resource for yourselves--the medical
professionals--and for the parents whose blind children are your
patients. We are here to help.


[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Barbara Pierce.]

[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Ralph Bartley.]

                     FURTHER LOSSES FOR NAC
                    A YEAR-END STATUS REPORT
                        by Barbara Pierce

     Everyone who follows matters in the blindness field knows
that, since long before the actual creation of the National
Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually
Handicapped (NAC), the organized blind movement has warned,
argued, and fought against this particular accrediting body and
its approach to accreditation. We are as interested as the next
person (and have a higher stake than most) in encouraging high-
quality services from schools, rehabilitation agencies, and
workshops that deal with blind people. But NAC (with its old-boy
approach to accreditation, its consuming need to accept dues from
any agency willing to pony up, and its resulting genius for
looking the other way whenever its members' misconduct comes to
light) has never in our view been a fit keeper of the excellence
flame. 
     Since 1984, when it boasted its all-time high of one hundred
four member agencies, NAC has been in an increasing decline. (See
the articles "NAC at Twenty-five: A Look at the Numbers" in the
January, 1991, Braille Monitor and "NAC in the Death Throes: The
Passing of an Era" in the September, 1991, Braille Monitor.) The
American Foundation for the Blind, which had spent almost ten
million dollars in an effort to prop up NAC, and National
Industries for the Blind, after pressure from its own members and
federal officials, who questioned the legality of NIB's
underwriting an accrediting body that evaluated some NIB member
facilities, both withdrew their financial support of NAC and at
one stroke drove the agency to the very brink of bankruptcy in
May of 1991. In February of this year the National Advisory
Committee on Accreditation and Institutional Eligibility
recommended to the Secretary of Education that he limit the
Department's inclusion of NAC on its list of approved accrediting
bodies to two years--instead of the usual five--and that the
Department staff keep very close fiscal tabs on NAC during the
period. (See the April, 1992, issue of the Braille Monitor.) In
mid-October, as this is being written, Secretary Alexander, who
was supposed to have acted on this recommendation within one
hundred twenty days, has not yet made a decision, which raises
real questions about whether NAC will officially get even the
two-year extension it has been counting on in order to shore up
its pretense of respectability. 
     The year 1991 with its near bankruptcy, radical down-sizing,
and loss of seven members was certainly a very bad one for NAC,
and 1992 is proving to be no better, despite NAC's assurances to
the Advisory Committee on Accreditation in February that it would
have no difficulty meeting the accrediting schedule it was
facing--thirty-six agencies up for review. For reasons that are
painfully obvious, NAC strongly resists answering inquiries about
the details of this schedule. A number of NFB state presidents
who have reason to believe that agencies in their areas are on
the reaccreditation list for this year have written to Ruth
Westman, NAC's Executive Director, to inquire when on-site review
teams are due to make their visits so that consumers could
participate in the process. Apparently Ms. Westman ignored the
requests that came from states in which the agency in question
has dropped its NAC accreditation. Other state presidents
received letters that referred them to the agencies in question
for the information being sought. 
     Semi-annually NAC produces a publication called the Standard
Bearer, which includes a list of NAC's member agencies. By
comparing these lists, one can gather the data that NAC avoids
admitting directly. 

                    Information Gleaned from 
          The July, 1992, Issue of the Standard Bearer

     During the first half of 1992 eight agencies were
reaccredited for periods from three to five years. The names
listed here are the shortened forms that are familiarly used.
Asterisks indicate agencies for which accreditation had already
been postponed at least one year, and often several. The date
following each name is the year in which the new accreditation
will expire. The eight are: 

     Arkansas V.R. 1996 *
     Lighthouse of Pasco & Hernando Counties (FL) 1995 *
     Tampa Lighthouse 1997
     Chicago Lighthouse 1997 *
     Blind Association of Western New York 1997
     Ed Lindsey Industries (TN) 1996 *
     Utah School 1996 *
     Lighthouse, Seattle (WA) 1997

     Six agencies seem to have been deferred--that is, though the
January list showed them as due for evaluation in 1992, the July
list shows a date in 1993 or '94. Deferral is the most likely
explanation for these data. Accreditation for less than three
years is hardly worth the trouble, and all of the agencies on
this list are organizations which NAC would hate to lose. It is
likely that these folks have asked for a little more time to
decide whether or not to jump ship, and NAC is happy to oblige
them in the hope they will stay. The six agencies are:

     Illinois Bureau of Rehabilitation Services for the Blind
          1993
     Vision Enrichment Services (MI) 1994
     Royal Maid Association for the Blind (MS) 1993
     Kansas City Association for the Blind (MO) 1993
     Catholic Guild for the Blind (NY) 1993
     Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired 1993

     The following sixteen agencies are still waiting for
accreditation this year. One of them, the state vocational
rehabilitation agency in Arizona, is of particular interest. By
state law at least one person is to provide services to the blind
and visually impaired, but earlier this year the incumbent, who
was unpopular with blind Arizonans, was moved to another part of
government; and the general vocational rehabilitation agency was
given responsibility for serving blind clients. When state
officials were asked who the service-provider for the blind
mandated by law now was, the answer came back that it was still
the man who had been transferred and that he was officially
charged with training and evaluating service to blind citizens,
even though he now has nothing to do with service delivery to
blind people. This means that NAC is currently accrediting a
program that has no substance--no case service budget, no
service-delivery staff, and no clients. It will be interesting to
see how NAC manages to reaccredit such a program. Here is the
list of sixteen agencies still awaiting accreditation this year: 

     Arizona State Services for the Blind and Visually Impaired *
     Lighthouse for the Blind of the Palm Beaches (FL) *
     Savannah Association for the Blind (GA)
     Services for the Blind Branch (HI)
     Maine Center for the Blind 
     Maine Division for the Blind and Visually Impaired *
     Perkins School for the Blind (MA) *
     Division of Vocational Rehabilitation for the Blind (MS) *
     Helen Keller Services for the Blind (NY)
     The Lighthouse, Inc. (NY)
     Aurora of Central New York, Inc.
     Central Association for the Blind and Visually Impaired (NY)
     North Dakota School for the Blind *
     Lancaster Association for the Blind (PA) 
     Loaiza Cordero Institute for Blind Children (PR) * 
     Visually Impaired Persons Program, Milwaukee Area Technical
          College (WI)

     There are six other agencies which appear on the January
list and do not appear on the July one. One had a 1993 expiration
date, and the other five were listed for reaccreditation in '92.
They are: 

     Louisiana Association for the Blind *
     The Lighthouse for the Blind (LA) 
     Association for the Blind and Visually Impaired of Greater   
         Rochester (NY) 
     Ohio State School for the Blind *
     Delaware County Branch, Pennsylvania Association for the     
         Blind *
     Lighthouse for the Blind of Houston (TX)

     One other name appeared on the NAC list in July with a 1992
reaccreditation date, but it will not appear on the January,
1993, list. That was the Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and
the Blind. Dr. Ralph Bartley, until recently the Superintendent
of the Kansas State School for the Visually Handicapped, assumed
his duties as the Superintendent of the Arizona institution on
September 14 of this year. The letter he wrote to Ruth Westman in
early October explains in a few words what happened. Here it is: 






Tucson, Arizona
October 6, 1992

Ms. Ruth Westman
Executive Director
National Accreditation Council
New York, New York

Dear Ms. Westman:

     This letter is to confirm our telephone conversation of
October 6, 1992. The Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and the
Blind Board of Directors unanimously voted on October 1, 1992 to
opt out of accreditation by your organization. Effective
immediately, please remove ASDB as a school accredited by your
organization.
     Please be assured that ASDB will continue to be accredited
by state and regional organizations. If you have any questions,
please feel free to call or write.

Sincerely,

Ralph E. Bartley
Superintendent
Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and the Blind

     There you have Dr. Bartley's letter to NAC, and it brought
to seven so far this year the number of agencies and schools
which have decided to disassociate themselves from NAC. Last year
NAC attempted to offset the impact of seven defections by
ignoring the backlog of members due for periodic review and
accrediting five facilities, mostly small, for the first time.
This year, however, there are no new names on the NAC roster, and
the exodus may well not yet be finished. 
     No status report on NAC would be complete without a look at
the overall trends that this recent activity--or lack of it--in
the blindness field represents. In the article, "NAC at Twenty-
five" (Braille Monitor, January, 1991), Peggy Pinder calculated
the percentages of schools for the blind, state vocational
rehabilitation agencies, and sheltered workshops employing blind
people that were accredited by NAC. Here are the same data
recalculated to incorporate the most recent agency activity: 
     Of the seventy-one schools for the blind on the American
Foundation for the Blind's complete list, twenty-three (32%) are
currently accredited by NAC. Only thirty schools have ever sought
NAC membership, which means that 23% of the thirty have had
second thoughts and left. 
     Of the fifty-two state vocational rehabilitation agencies
(one in each state, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico),
only thirteen (25%) have ever affiliated with NAC, and only eight
(15%) are currently on the NAC list. Moreover, 38% of the state
vocational rehabilitation agencies that were ever accredited have
now left the NAC fold. One third (twenty-six) of the eighty
sheltered workshops employing blind people listed on the combined
National Industries for the Blind and General Council of
Workshops for the Blind rosters are currently accredited by NAC.
Considering that NIB has offered for years to pay the costs of
accreditation for any member workshop willing to associate itself
with NAC, this number is surprisingly low. Half of the shops in
this group of eighty have at one time or another been accredited
by NAC, which means that 35% of them have now disaffiliated
themselves from NAC. 
     These numbers are good news for those in the blindness field
who recognize that the time has come to put the schism and
discord engendered by NAC behind us. For the three people who
work for the accrediting body and for the shrinking handful of
those fighting to keep NAC functioning, it has been a hard year,
and 1993 promises to be worse. Increasing portions of the country
can boast a NAC-free environment. The following eighteen states
have no NAC-accredited agencies: Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut,
Delaware, District of Columbia, Idaho, Kentucky, Louisiana,
Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island,
South Carolina, Vermont, Virginia, and Wyoming. Another seventeen
states have only one NAC member. These are Alabama, Hawaii, Iowa,
Indiana, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri,
New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, North Dakota, Puerto Rico,
South Dakota, Utah, and West Virginia.
     In conclusion, one can say, a look at the accompanying map
reveals that after twenty-five years of stormy weather, the NAC
forecast is now for increasing clearing. 


[PHOTO: U.S. map with shading. CAPTION: States colored black have
more than one NAC-accredited agency. The shaded states are down
to one NAC-accredited agency. The unshaded states can boast a
NAC-free environment.]


                        HONOR ROLL UPDATE

     In the January, 1991, Braille Monitor we published the list
of those agencies that had decided to leave the NAC fold.
Happily, that list has expanded in the past two years. Here is
the list of additional NAC members who have reconsidered their
NAC affiliation and terminated it. 

     Virginia Department for the Visually Handicapped
     New Jersey Commission for the Blind and Visually Impaired
     Iowa Braille and Sight Saving School
     In-Sight (RI)
     Southwest Lighthouse for the Blind (TX)
     MSB (MN)
     Low Vision Services, St. Joseph's Hospital (AZ)
     Louisiana Association for the Blind 
     The Lighthouse for the Blind (LA) 
     Association for the Blind and Visually Impaired of Greater   
       Rochester (NY)
     Ohio State School for the Blind 
     Delaware County Branch, Pennsylvania Association for the     
       Blind 
     Houston Lighthouse for the Blind (TX)
     Arizona Schools for the Deaf and the Blind



                       ROLL CALL OF SHAME

     In January of 1991 we also printed the complete list of
United States agencies that are currently members of NAC. The
group has shrunk to eighty-nine. Some of them are seriously
considering leaving NAC. We look forward to the next status
report and the opportunity it will give to pay tribute to those
agencies that will have joined the movement away from NAC in its
death throes. 
                             Alabama
Services for Blind and Visually Handicapped Children and Adults
of the Alabama Institute for Deaf and Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1993

                             Arizona
Arizona State Services for the Blind and Visually Impaired
Accreditation Expires: December, 1992

Foundation for Blind Children
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

Tucson Association for the Blind and Visually Impaired
Accreditation Expires: June, 1996

                            Arkansas
Lions World Services for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1994

Arkansas School for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

Division of Services for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1996

                           California
Lions Blind Center
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

Sacramento Society for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

Center for the Partially Sighted
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

                             Florida
Conklin Center for Multihandicapped Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1996

Broward Center for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1994

Florida Association of Workers for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1993


Lighthouse for the Blind of Pasco and Hernando, Inc.
Accreditation Expires: December, 1995

Visually Impaired Persons Center
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

School for the Blind, Florida School for the Deaf and the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

Division of Blind Services
Accreditation Expires: December, 1994

Independence for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1993

Tampa Lighthouse for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1997


Lighthouse for the Blind of the Palm Beaches
Accreditation Expires: December, 1992

                             Georgia
Center for the Visually Impaired
Accreditation Expires: December, 1996


Georgia Industries for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

Savannah Association for the Blind
Accreditation expires: December, 1992

Georgia Academy for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

Blind & Low Vision Services of North Georgia
Accreditation Expires: December, 1994

                             Hawaii
Services for the Blind Branch
Accreditation Expires: December, 1992

                            Illinois
The Chicago Lighthouse for People Who Are Blind or Visually
Impaired
Accreditation Expires: December, 1996

Philip J. Rock Center & School
Accreditation Expires: June, 1994

Illinois Bureau of Rehabilitation Services for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

Illinois School for the Visually Impaired
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

Deicke Center for Visual Rehabilitation
Accreditation Expires: December, 1996

                             Indiana
Indiana School for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1995

Macy's Vision Rehabilitation Institute
Accreditation Expires: December, 1995

                             Kansas
Wichita Industries and Services for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

                              Maine
Division for the Blind & Visually Impaired
Accreditation Expires: December, 1992

Maine Center for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1992

                            Maryland
Maryland School for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1996

                          Massachusetts
Perkins School for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1992

                            Michigan
Greater Detroit Society for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1996

Visually Impaired Center, Inc.
Accreditation Expires: June, 1993

Vision Enrichment Services
Accreditation Expires: June, 1994

                            Minnesota
Duluth Lighthouse for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

                           Mississippi
Royal Maid Association for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1993

Mississippi School for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

Division Vocational Rehabilitation for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

Rehabilitation Services for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1992

                            Missouri
Kansas City Association for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1993

                          New Hampshire
New Hampshire Association for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1994



                           New Jersey
St. Joseph's School for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

                           New Mexico
New Mexico School for the Visually Handicapped
Accreditation Expires: December, 1994

                            New York
Northeastern Association of the Blind at Albany
Accreditation Expires: June, 1996

Programs for the Visually Impaired
Accreditation Expires: June, 1994

Helen Keller Services for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1992

Blind Association of Western New York
Accreditation Expires: June, 1997

Catholic Guild for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1993

Jewish Guild for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1994

The Lighthouse, Inc.
Accreditation Expires: December, 1992

Rockland County Association for the Visually Impaired
Accreditation Expires: June, 1995

Aurora of Central New York, Inc.
Accreditation Expires: June, 1992


Central Association for the Blind and Visually Impaired
Accreditation Expires: December, 1992

Guiding Eyes for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1993

                          North Dakota
North Dakota School for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1992

                              Ohio
Cincinnati Association for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1995

The Clovernook Center Opportunities for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1996

Vision Center of Central Ohio
Accreditation Expires: June, 1994

The Sight Center
Accreditation Expires: June, 1993

                            Oklahoma
Parkview School
Accreditation Expires: December, 1996

Visual Services Unit
Accreditation Expires: June, 1993

Oklahoma League for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1993

                          Pennsylvania
Lancaster Association for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1992

Feinbloom Vision Rehabilitation Center
Accreditation Expires: December, 1994

Pittsburgh Blind Association
Accreditation Expires: June, 1996

York County Blind Center
Accreditation Expires: June, 1994

                           Puerto Rico
Loaiza Cordero Institute for Blind Children
Accreditation Expires: December, 1992

                          South Dakota
South Dakota School for the Visually Handicapped
Accreditation Expires: December, 1994

                            Tennessee
Tennessee School for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1996

The Alliance for the Blind and Visually Impaired
Accreditation Expires: June, 1994

Volunteer Blind Industries
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

Ed Lindsey Industries for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1996

                              Texas
Texas School for the Blind and Visually Impaired
Accreditation Expires: June, 1993

Dallas Lighthouse for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1996

                              Utah
Utah School for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1996

                           Washington
Lighthouse for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: June, 1997

Community Services for the Blind & Partially Sighted
Accreditation Expires: June, 1994

                          West Virginia
West Virginia School for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1996

                            Wisconsin
Industries for the Blind
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

Wisconsin School for the Visually Handicapped
Accreditation Expires: December, 1993

Visually Impaired Persons Program
Accreditation Expires: December, 1992


[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Brian Buhrow.]

[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Geoffrey Courtney.]

                      WINNING OUR FREEDOM:
                VIEWS FROM THE UNIVERSITY CAMPUS

     From the Associate Editor: One of the most exciting aspects
of the recent growth of the National Association of Blind
Students, the student division of the National Federation of the
Blind, is the increase in the number of students around the
country who understand the importance of fighting for their
personal freedom as blind people, protecting their individual
rights, and insisting upon carrying out their responsibilities.
Members of the general public are all too eager to dismiss blind
people as incompetent, neurotic, and unable to compete. Resisting
these notions is an on-going task for everyone dedicated to the
dream of independence for the blind.
     Increasingly, today's students are demonstrating their
ability to enter this struggle for justice and equality. They
bring energy, exuberance, and intelligence to the battle, and
their presence is joyfully welcomed by us all. The following are
two letters written by students. In very different ways they
demonstrate the capacity and insight of the fourth generation.
Brian Buhrow is the vice president of the California Association
of Blind Students. He spent a semester of his junior year
studying at the University of Leeds in England. In March of 1991
he wrote a letter to Michael Baillif, then president of the
National Association of Blind Students, describing his adventures
and cataloging his impressions of life as a blind student in the
United Kingdom. This letter appeared in the Spring, 1992, edition
of The Student Slate, the student division's publication. Here it
is:

                                                   Leeds, England
                                                    March 9, 1991

Dear Michael:

     When I first arrived in England, I was enchanted by the
prospect of experiencing the sights and sounds of London and the
entire European culture. I was thrilled by the prospect of going
to school with my betters and absorbing from their vast pool of
knowledge. I didn't know what to expect, but I expected great
things. Alas, one must always remember that towering expectations
are bound to be disappointed.
     Untroubled by the coming crash, I attacked London with a
vengeance. I spent the first three days with the rest of my
University of California contemporaries catching up on sleep,
gaping at all of the old buildings which surrounded us, stopping
in every pub we passed just for the novelty of it, and trying to
remember to look right first when crossing the road. We also
discovered the joys of the tube. In short, we were tourists of
the most ignorant kind.
     Soon, however, my experiences began to differ from those of
my friends. I noticed that, whenever I walked alone, I couldn't
take five steps without being asked if I needed help. In
addition, whenever I did inquire for information, the recipient
of my inquiries would insist on escorting me personally to my
goal or turn me over to someone else with the assurance that he
or she would escort me to the desired location. Sometimes this
was genuinely useful, but most of the time it was an annoyance
because I knew where I was.
     When I traveled to Leeds, I thought that things might
improve. Unfortunately, they didn't. Now, not only did I have to
deal with people on the street, I had to cope with professors and
students who didn't know what to do with me. Lecturers didn't
want to tax my capabilities, and they continually told me how
amazed they were that I was able to function as well as I did. I
thanked them but said that I was doing nothing extraordinary and
hoped that they would come to believe me. 
     Rather than allowing these inappropriate affirmations of my
ability to waft away into the ether, I began to try to determine
the philosophy of blindness on campus. I discovered soon enough
that the existing philosophy was one of custodialism based on
ignorance. While no one bore me any personal ill will, most
people, not knowing how to deal with blindness, preferred to have
as little to do with me as they could--leaving me, as they
supposed, to the proper authorities. Thus I discovered the
frustration of trying to make a point, only to have it ignored on
the ground that "I don't deal with those issues." This is a
frustration which many long-time NFB members must be all too
familiar with and which most blind people here in England know
well.
     Curious to know how other blind people functioned in this
oppressive environment, I became friends with the workers at the
Leeds University Brailling service. What I discovered
disappointed me greatly. Most of the blind people I learned of
were either in low-paying protected jobs headed by some
government agency (most often the Royal National Institute for
the Blind), or they were professors who had lost their sight
after attaining their positions. What was more disappointing was
that those blind people in high positions seemed to be so lacking
in a positive philosophy of blindness that they reminded me more
of puppets than of independent people. Those that seemed to have
some idea that they were being oppressed spent so much of their
time engaged in personal rebellion that they didn't have time to
develop a constructive philosophy. Sadly, there were also some
blind people who, because of a lack of training, were totally
dependent on sighted assistance. With so much misinformation
circulating in an ignorant community, it was no wonder I was
encountering amazement.
     Thus in the space of a few short months I learned, better
than I ever could have done at home, why the NFB exists and why
its members stand by it through thick and thin. Dr. Jacobus
tenBroek and his fellow delegates at the 1940 convention realized
that the only way for the blind to succeed in the United States
was for them to develop skills, and in order to have skills blind
people had to have training. Finally and most important, they
realized that in order to have effective training, they had to
write a lesson book and a plan of action. They therefore evolved
the philosophy of independence, which has driven our organization
ever since. They understood that their philosophy of equality was
the foundation; and, if they built on that, training, skills, and
independence would follow. Today the NFB is a going concern
because that philosophy is sound and has proven itself and
because the alternatives are terribly unpleasant to contemplate.
     There is a saying that you can lead a horse to water but you
can't make him drink. It may be true, but the horse will drink if
he is thirsty enough. So it is with people. We cannot force
others to adopt our philosophy. We can, however, continue to
offer that philosophy to people as well as the proof that the
philosophy works and be pretty confident that, when they are
thirsty enough, they will drink and drink and drink. 

                                                 Sincerely yours,
                                                     Brian Buhrow

     There you have a letter from a student struggling with the
effects of a society in which blind people have not been equal to
the task of demanding and assuming the responsibilities of
freedom. There is always a cost to be paid in obtaining and
maintaining such freedom, and today's students are demonstrating
their willingness to work and sacrifice when necessary for their
independence.
     Geoffrey Courtney is a law student at the University of
Texas. He was a 1990 NFB scholarship winner, and in addition to
his award that year, he took home the Federation philosophy of
normality and independence. When he sees encroachment on the
right of blind students to be treated like their peers, he is
prepared to do battle. Here is the letter he wrote to the Vice
President for Student Affairs after, having been named to the
University President's Committee on Disabled Students, he read
the handbook prepared by the University of Texas for the use of
its faculty and staff in dealing with disabled students:

James W. Vick, Ph.D.
Vice President for Student Affairs
University of Texas at Austin

Mr. Vice President:

     I have recently received a copy of Students with
Disabilities, A Guide for Faculty and Staff from Gage Paine of
the Dean of Students office. As a blind first-year law student, I
was quite interested to see what guidance this booklet offered in
negotiating the relationship between a disabled student and a
faculty or staff member. Much to my shock, I have found the guide
not to offer help, but to perpetuate the misconceptions which are
at the heart of discrimination. Because I am sure that this was
not the purpose of this guide, I have taken the liberty to write
to you and express a few of my concerns.
     It is important to begin by saying that I do not doubt that
the University of Texas at Austin has made great strides in
recent years toward making sure that no one is denied educational
opportunity because of a disability. Certainly, the university
has done much to reduce the physical and procedural barriers that
often prevented a disabled student from realizing her or his
potential. Yet the attitudinal barriers still remain. It is
distressing that this guide should encourage these sorts of
barriers and thereby support a very real form of prejudice.
     When taken as a whole, this guide clearly gives the
impression that the disabled student is mentally very different
from the average student. In terms of academic ability, the guide
concedes, "all students with disabilities at the University of
Texas at Austin have been admitted through the same admissions
process as other students." (p. 2) However, the academic
comparison between the disabled student and other students ends
with this hollow statement. This is unfortunate. In an age in
which many people still believe that disability is synonymous
with inability, it would be helpful if the office charged with
advocacy for disabled students reminded faculty and staff that
disabled students display academic achievement as diverse as any
other group of students. Merely stating that disabled students
are admitted through the same process does not affirm a belief in
academic equality with other students. The guide missed an
opportunity to destroy the belief that disabled students
represent low academic standards; it allowed an old prejudice to
survive.
     If this were the only problem with this guide, perhaps it
could be forgiven. The guide, however, engages in a
characterization of the emotional capacity of disabled students
that is, at the very least, prejudicial and untrue and, at worst,
offensive and discriminatory. I was surprised to see this poor
characterization when the guide itself states, "The attitudes of
students with disabilities about themselves and the college
experience vary according to the individual student." (p. 3) This
is as true for the disabled student as it is for others. But the
guide does not stop with this assessment. It goes on to classify
disabled students in two groups, those born with a disability and
those who were traumatically injured. (p. 4) The first group of
students has likely accepted their disabilities and learned the
accommodations they need to make to be successful in the world.
However, some of these students may have spent their formative
years in medical settings or other sheltered environments. Thus,
working with faculty and staff who are unfamiliar with
individuals with disabilities may be difficult for them.
Apart from being an inaccurate account of the life of an
individual born with a disability, this statement clearly gives
the impression that the life-long disabled student is a frail,
unsocial creature that requires the greatest measure of care and
attention; these passive students, although well-adapted, require
extra compassion. Nothing could be further from the truth. These
are University of Texas students, nothing more, nothing less.
They are as frail and as strong as any other group of students.
     Whereas the guide portrays the life-long disabled student as
frail and unassuming, the traumatically injured is portrayed as a
pressure cooker of resentment, moments away from catastrophic
explosion. The student who has been traumatically injured has a
different set of problems. These students may be angry,
embarrassed, confused; perhaps they are still grieving the loss
of a way of life. Again, this is a prejudicial characterization
from the office charged with advocacy for disabled students.
     It is clear that these characterizations have no place in
this guide. Certainly, the University would not think to
characterize African-Americans by whether they grew up in the
inner city or in the suburbs or women by their preferred use of
cosmetics. Uninformed prejudicial statements could be made in all
of these cases; however, in doing so one dismisses the truth and
opens the door to discrimination.
     Frighteningly, it appears that the drafters of this guide
actually believe the characterizations contained in it. Once
again, the Counseling and Mental Health Center figures
prominently in the list of campus agencies and resources for
students with disabilities. (p. 7) I fully understand the
importance of the Counseling and Mental Health Center to life at
the University. I do not understand why it should be emphasized
in literature about students with disabilities. Disabled students
are no more in need of the Counseling and Mental Health Center
than are the other students, the staff, the faculty, and the
administration. Disabled students are as emotionally diverse as
all other segments of society; to imply otherwise is prejudice.
     Finally, the guide leaves me wondering if the drafters
actually believe discrimination against individuals with
disabilities exists. The guide states, "many believe that they
are subject to discrimination based solely on an unalterable
fact--in this case, their disabling condition." (p.2) This
statement all too casually dismisses the fundamental issue for
anyone concerned with discrimination on the basis of disability.
The truth is that discrimination on the basis of a disabling
condition is not a matter of belief, but a matter of fact. To see
this discrimination, one need only sit with me in an exit row of
an airplane, take time to consider the unemployment figures for
disabled Americans, or reread this guide. Unless the guide begins
with the proposition that discrimination exists, it can never
hope to voice advocacy for students with disabilities.
     Given the fact that this guide, from the Services for
Students with Disabilities, is no service to students with
disabilities, I must request that your office do all that is
within its power to prevent the dissemination of Students with
Disabilities, A Guide for Faculty and Staff. I offer to be of any
help I can in drafting a new guide to negotiating the
relationship between the disabled student and faculty and staff
members. It is my sincere hope that this new guide may, in place
of prejudice, provide the understanding that is necessary to
build a strong institution.
     I look forward to hearing from you. If I can be of any
assistance, please ask.

Cordially,
G.N. Courtney
President's Committee on Students with Disabilities
Field Representative, National Federation of the Blind
Law School Class of 1994

     As we move toward a new century, there is no chance that the
problems of discrimination are behind us. As long as we are a
minority in society, people will have to be educated about the
abilities of blind people and our capacity to work and contribute
in our communities on terms of equality. But it is clear that the
men and women who will carry on that educational process and
bring our dreams of freedom into reality are learning their craft
and taking their places in our ranks.



[PHOTO: Ted Lubitz as a child, sitting in a cart pulled by a
goat. CAPTION: Ted Lubitz at age six being pulled in a cart by a
billy goat.] 

[PHOTO: Ted Lubitz as a youth, playing a violin.  CAPTION: Ted
Lubitz plalying the violin he crafted as a high school student.]

              THE BIOGRAPHY OF THEODORE PAUL LUBITZ
                       by Theodore Lubitz

     From the Associate Editor: Several months ago, Ted Lubitz,
who is eighty-three, wrote to Dr. Jernigan and enclosed a copy of
his life story. He thought that Monitor readers might be
interested in hearing what it was like to be blind in America
during the early years of his long life. His story has a simple
eloquence and is a strong reminder of the vigor and toughness of
those who have gone before and paved the road for us who have
come after. Here are the letter Ted Lubitz wrote to Dr. Jernigan
and his autobiography: 

Watertown, South Dakota
April 23, 1992

Dr. Kenneth Jernigan
National Federation of the Blind
Baltimore, Maryland  

Dear Dr. Jernigan:
     I am a member of the NFB, and I am writing you a letter to
see if you would be interested in putting the story of my life in
the Braille Monitor. We have a policy here at the Hi Rise
Apartments where I live that any one who would like to put their
life story in the "Hi Rise News," which we get every month, can
do so. I have sent a copy to Karen Mayry, president of the NFB of
South Dakota, so she can print it in the state newsletter,
Insight. There is a picture of me holding the violin I made at
school and another one taken when I was six years old in a cart
being pulled by a billy goat. Please let me know if you can use
this autobiography in the Braille Monitor. 
Your friend,
Theodore Lubitz

     I was born on August 21, 1909, at Marion, South Dakota. When
I was real little, I lost my father and lived with my mother and
my grandparents. My grandfather was a blacksmith, and my
grandmother was a seamstress. My mother operated a cream station
for the Bridgeman Russel Company of Sioux Falls.
     When I was about four years old, I developed real sore eyes
and had a lot of pain. My folks called a local doctor at Marion.
He put the wrong medicine in my eyes, and it burned the corneas
and the pupils, which gave me even more pain in my eyes. This
left scars on both eyes when it healed. I could only see around
the scars.
     I was then taken to several doctors to see what they could
do, but they could not do much for me. In the meantime I went to
the Lutheran School at Marion. In the morning I learned German,
and in the afternoon I learned English. School was hard for me
because most of the work was done on the blackboard. 
     Later on we heard of a doctor at Omaha, Nebraska, and I was
taken there. We stayed for a whole week, and at the last meeting
the doctor said that the best thing for me was to attend the
school for the blind. 
     That September I enrolled in the school for the blind at
Gary, South Dakota, in 1921. I was already eleven years old. We
could not really tell them what grade I was in, so I started all
over in the first grade. It was hard for me to get used to
reading Braille by touch, so I used my eyes. They had to put a
blindfold on me. They found out that I had musical talent, so
they put me on the violin and piano right away, along with my
regular school work. I took violin, piano, making baskets, rug
weaving, putting seats on chairs, making brooms, and so on.
     In 1925 I was chosen to try to make my own violin. We had an
employee who was a very fine violin maker. I worked every day
after school and all day Saturdays on this violin, and in April I
finished it. 
     I advanced very fast in my music. I did not like the piano
as well as the violin. In 1928 I entered the high school music
contest and won first place. When I got into high school, I
started learning to become a piano tuner.
     There was a girl at school named Agnes Redepenning who sort
of fell for me, and that was fine with me. We sang a lot of duets
together and attended all the school dances. I said to some of
the students that "This is going to be my wife someday," and they
all laughed! Agnes Redepenning started school the same year I
did. We did not graduate together because Agnes was sick for a
year and was taken out of school to live with her parents.
     I practiced four hours a day on the violin. I was taking
harmony, history of music, composition, and voice. I graduated in
the spring of 1931, which was a bad time for anyone to finish
school because of the Depression.
     From 1921 until then there was very little done for the
blind. There wasn't any employment for us. The American
Foundation for the Blind was just starting. I had lost my
grandmother in 1929, so I came home and put myself behind my
stepfather and mother's table. The little money I made in piano
tuning was just spending money once a week. That went for shows
and a few beers once in a while.
     In 1938 I was contacted by the Williams Piano Company to
work for them in Sioux Falls, so I went. It was better than
staying at home. I lived in the YMCA. During that time I went to
visit my girlfriend whenever I had a chance. Agnes and I prayed a
lot about our marriage. We did not want to go into it unless it
was right.
     On March 23, 1941, Agnes and I married at Bellingham,
Minnesota. The next day we went to Sioux Falls. In 1943 we moved
to Watertown. I was called to Watertown by Al Williams, who was
selling pianos and operating a second-hand store. Watertown at
that time did not have a piano tuner. I have been here ever
since. I have worked for Al Williams, David Piano Company, Art
McCain's Music Store, and Alvin John's Music Store. I had my
private work besides. When the Music Tree Store came to
Watertown, I worked for them also. I had a driver for when I went
out of town.
     My wife was a very good cook, and her specialty was chicken
and dumpling soup. She had a radio program every Sunday from
Grace Lutheran Church for twenty-one years until she had to quit
because of her health in 1971.
     From that time on my wife's health went down hill, and she
had to quit singing. You see, Agnes was a professional singer.
She suffered a few little strokes, and each time it hampered her
physically.
     In December, 1987, Agnes suffered a very severe stroke, and
in April she died. That was a great shock to me. I also landed in
the hospital. While Agnes was in the nursing home, I moved into
the Hi-Rise. That was January 14, and I have been here ever
since.
     By the grace of God I have overcome all of my difficulties.
Through prayer I have made it through my hardships. If it were
not for the Lord, I could not function. God has been good to me.
I am very happy here. I have many friends!
     I have several hobbies that I will tell you about. First, I
am a Stephen Minister of the Grace Lutheran Church. I have been
in this for two years. I belong to a voice-spondence club all
over the United States. I talk to people all over. Then I have my
model trains, which I have taken down to the Community Room for
Christmas to show the people around here. I also had a reading
class, where I had a book on tape and invited the folks to come
and listen to the stories. Also I have the Messiah on recording
for the folks at Christmas time. 
     I keep books on all my expenses and have done this for
sixty-one years. I have a system where I set aside three percent
of every item that I buy for an emergency fund and also the
income. It works. I draw from this fund when I need some extra
money. I do a lot of reading. I teach Braille to the elderly. I
am teaching Braille to a lady who is losing her sight. I listen
to a lot of classical music and tape some of it. I have a small
library of cassette tapes.
     Well, this is the story of my life, and I hope those of you
who read it will find a blessing in it.

Your Friend, 
Ted Lubitz


[PHOTO: President George Bush shaking hands with John Fling.
CAPTION: President George Bush congratulating John Fling.]

                A CHRISTMAS STORY FOR ALL SEASONS
                         by Donald Capps

     From the Associate Editor: The following article appeared in
the November, 1991, issue of The Palmetto Blind, the publication
of the National Federation of the Blind of South Carolina. It is
a wonderful illustration of the deep and selfless brotherly love
that we think of at this season. When the world seems filled to
the breaking point with suffering and tragedy, it is well to
remember that people like John Fling are living and serving in
our midst. 
     As Monitor readers know, Don Capps is the senior member of
the Board of Directors of the National Federation of the Blind.
He and his wife Betty now fully dedicate their time to doing good
in the world, chiefly by working tirelessly to strengthen the NFB
in South Carolina and around the country. Here is what Don has to
say:

     It was Thursday morning when a phone call came which brought
me overwhelming joy and gratitude. It was my longtime friend,
John Fling, who until recent years was very much involved in
helping the Columbia Chapter of the National Federation of the
Blind of South Carolina. In more recent times John has broadened
his unselfish service to include many other groups and
individuals, and therefore I had not heard from him in some time.
However, I had been able to keep up with the charitable
activities of this very special person since he is frequently
featured in the news media. I also knew that John Fling had
become a national and international celebrity, having received
many high honors--including one bestowed upon him at the White
House by the President of the United States. Knowing that he had
once worked almost exclusively for the blind through the
Federation, I was especially proud of John Fling, recognizing
that he truly puts service above self. 
     But getting back to that Thursday morning call on January
16, I heard a familiar voice: "Don, this is John Fling, and I
happen to have some funds left over from Christmas and was
wondering if you would accept a little contribution to the
Federation?" In a split second I assured my longtime friend that
the Federation would be most grateful for any contribution,
especially at this time. He said that he would stop by my house
that afternoon, and true to his word he drove into our driveway
at about 3 o'clock. After a most enjoyable visit during which we
brought each other up-to-date on our activities, John handed me a
check with instructions to use it any way I wanted to, just so
that the Federation would be helped. He then departed without
fanfare; got into his truck, clearly marked "John Fling
Ministries"; and continued on his way to assist someone else.
After John's departure, Betty looked at the check and said, "Don,
this check is in the amount of $10,000." Both of us were
absolutely overwhelmed. Never had I received a Federation
contribution for such a substantial sum without having solicited
it. As a matter of fact, I was so overwhelmed that I needed time
to think about the real significance of what this wonderful man
had just done and how this substantial gift to the Columbia
Chapter of the NFB of South Carolina could best be used to assist
blind people. I wanted to share the good news with fellow
Federationists but felt that I needed time to think and ponder
about what we might do to justify this generous gift and how it
should be used to meet a special need. It was the next day before
I shared the wonderful news with the chapter president, Mike
Sutton, and the Federation Center's chairman, Frank Coppel,
because I felt as if I should sleep on this matter before making
any recommendations. Mike and Frank were just as excited and
overwhelmed as I was. 
     Something led me to call John Fling that evening. I clearly
remembered his stating that I was to use the money to do the
greatest good for the largest number of blind people. I knew that
the Columbia Chapter desperately needed a new van since its ten-
year-old vehicle had served the chapter well but was probably no
longer road-worthy without considerable repairs. Additionally, I
knew that President Sutton had appointed a search committee to
acquire another van. During my telephone conversation with John
on Friday evening, I discussed our need for a new van, and he
readily volunteered to donate an additional five thousand dollars
in order to purchase one. John said that he was well connected
with the Addy Dodge dealership in Lexington, and would I meet him
there the following morning at 11:00 a.m. In the twinkling of an
eye I answered in the affirmative. At two minutes before eleven
o'clock Saturday, Betty and I arrived at Addy Dodge, and John
rushed out to greet us. So did Tim and John Addy, owners of the
dealership. As it happened, we parked next to a beautiful, brand
new 1992 fifteen-passenger white Dodge van with maroon interior,
and John asked me to check the van over. He said that this was
the van that he had picked out because he understood from our
Friday-evening conversation that we wanted a white one. After
talking with John, I had called President Mike Sutton that same
evening to inquire whether he would trust me with the details of
purchasing a van. Mike replied that of course he would. 
     The sticker price on this beautiful van was in excess of
$22,000, and I immediately wondered how we would swing it, but
John had already worked it out. We were ushered into the office,
where all the paperwork had already been done. Because of their
respect for John Fling and a desire to help the Federation, the
Addy brothers had reduced the price of the van by nearly $5,000.
However, I knew that the initial gift of $10,000 plus the promise
of an additional $5,000 would not cover even the reduced price
for the van. But before I had time to become concerned, John
pulled out a pen and began writing a check for the remaining
cost, about $8,500. Thus, in the end John Fling Ministries gave a
total of about $18,500 to the Federation to cover the total cost
of this beautiful new van. 
     But this is not the end of the story. Mr. Addy checked the
blue book and advised us that we could sell our old van for about
$3,500, which could be used for insurance or other expenses. Mr.
Addy said that there is a great need among churches and day-care
centers for previously owned vans. 
     As I said earlier, John Fling has been honored at the
highest levels for his benevolence and good deeds. On September
30, 1991, at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts
Concert Hall in Washington, D.C., John Fling participated in
America's awards honoring unsung heroes who personify the
American character and spirit. In a special publication entitled
"America's Awards," a program of the Positive Thinking
Foundation, the following article is dedicated to John Fling:

                "You're Never Too Old To Do Good"
     At age seventy, John Fling does every day what he has done
every day for forty-five years--spends most of his waking hours
helping those in need.
     One of nineteen children, John Fling grew up in Gabbetville,
Georgia (population forty-six). His parents were so poor they
weren't even sharecroppers; they were sharecroppers' helpers.
What family members ate, they had to catch out of the water, dig
out of the ground, or shake out of a tree. At age twelve, John
quit school to work in the cotton fields, where he labored for
six more years.
     At age twenty-five, after a six-year stint in the U.S. Army,
John settled with his wife in Columbia, South Carolina, landing a
job as supervisor to one hundred boys who delivered newspapers.
He began providing them and their families with food, clothing,
and school supplies. Helping others became his personal mission.
     One night in 1951, John accompanied the police to settle a
domestic dispute. The couple had a small baby, but apparently the
boy wasn't fathered by the woman's husband. John asked if it
would solve the problem if he took the baby. The couple readily
agreed, signing a scrap of paper that gave John all rights to the
baby. John and his wife Jane raised the child along with their
natural son. 
     John and his wife have never owned a home. They live on
Social Security, in a rent-free cottage behind his mother-in-
law's house. Though he has worked all his life--sometimes several
jobs at once--John is almost without material possessions. Before
he retired as a parts delivery man, John's employer, Love
Chevrolet, gave him clothes to wear and a truck to drive--and
lots of time to serve.
     The clothing John gives away is often better than what he
wears. He hasn't bought clothes, except underwear, for twenty
years. He doesn't have a television or the time to look at one.
Only recently did John get a telephone--to better serve those who
depend on him. He has never owned a car, but he has bought cars
for five others.
     For forty-five years John Fling has spent most of his waking
hours driving the streets of Columbia, looking for someone he can
help. There has not been a single day that he hasn't done
something to help the poor. He delivers food, medicine, and
laundry; helps with bills; repairs screen doors; mows lawns;
unstops sinks; and transports the needy to appointments--for an
extended family that includes forty blind people, two hundred
seniors, and four hundred children.
     Having lost sight in one eye in a boyhood hunting accident,
John shows a special interest in the blind. He gives them rides
and takes them to the beach or fishing. He drives his more
adventurous blind friends out to a cow pasture, settles them into
a go-cart, places earphones on their heads, sits on his truck,
and--using a two-way radio--tells them to go left or right. Some
of them are hot rods.
     John is caring, selfless, and limitless in energy. He is
unincorporated and refuses to become a non-profit organization.
There are no boards to direct him and no committees to support
his activities. Most of the money he hands out is donated by
local businessmen and by friends around the country. He often
takes the last dime out of his pocket to help someone.
     Once, while visiting a nursing home with two deacons from
his church, John met an elderly woman who said she didn't know
what time to take her medicine because she didn't have a watch.
John pulled the watch from his own wrist, handed it to the woman,
and walked on.
     As the three men left the nursing home, John met a one-
legged man on the street who said he needed a rain coat. John
took off his own coat and gave it to the man. One of the deacons
said to John, "Let's get back in the truck before you give away
your pants."
     John's first love is still the children. As he drives
through Columbia's back alleys, kids emerge from the shadows and
rush the truck. Embracing as many as he can, John asks them how
they are, and what they need and gives them what he can. As he
leaves, John comments to a visitor, "Even more than money, what
they need is love."
     And John gives them lots of love.
     At 5:30 a.m. every Sunday, John starts driving a donated van
for three hours to go to the Baptist Church next door, collecting
as many as seventy-nine children as he travels a fifty-five-mile
circuit. On the way home he stops at a restaurant and treats each
of the children to a meal.
     Every Christmas John provides the kids he cares for with a
shopping spree at one of the local department stores. Last year
he took one thousand two hundred sixteen children to K-Mart,
providing them each with a $50 gift certificate. To encourage
kids to take their education seriously, he offers $20 to students
making B's and higher on their report cards. Grades have soared.
     Over the years, John's generosity has become known
throughout the world. When a man in India writes to a man he
knows only as "John Fling, USA," to request help in obtaining a
prosthesis, and the letter somehow arrives, John's response is
equally characteristic. Somehow he finds the money to buy and
send the needed prosthesis.
     Now seventy years old, John continues to have a tremendous
impact in his role as a one-man social-service agency. Few people
in South Carolina are as well known, and few people in the world
are as well loved. When you ask about John Fling, the first thing
people say, more often than not, is, "That man is a living
saint."


[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Scott LaBarre.]




                      CONTINUING THE STORY
                        by Scott LaBarre

     From the Associate Editor: Scott LaBarre is the president of
the National Association of Blind Students (NABS), the student
division of the National Federation of the Blind. Each year, on
the Saturday before the NFB's Washington Seminar, NABS conducts a
day-long seminar for students. These hours are filled with
inspiration, determination, and laughter; and the culmination is
a banquet complete with a stirring address from one of the
Federation's leaders. Students and all those who are interested
in matters of concern to students should make plans now to attend
the 1993 Student Seminar beginning with an evening get-together
on Friday, January 29, and lasting all day Saturday, January 30
in Washington, D.C. 
     Just before the close of the 1992 seminar, Scott LaBarre
addressed the group, summing up the themes of the day. Here are
his remarks as they appeared in the 1992 edition of The Student
Slate, the publication of the National Association of Blind
Students: 

     Last year, Michael Baillif, my predecessor as president of
the National Association of Blind Students stood before this body
and described the ways in which society's stories about blind
people portray us as helpless, incompetent, and second-class.
This last year has only proven that society's story still has a
strong grip on the public's imagination. On the positive side,
however, the NFB's story of blind people as helpful, competent,
and first-class citizens is becoming more wide-spread. Now I
would like to tell you another story.
      In 1978 a small boy contracted a strange virus which led to
his eventual blindness. Both he and his parents were terrified of
the future, for they believed that people who were blind had no
chance of achieving true success. 
     Fortunately, however, he received an adequate education with
training in Braille, cane travel, and other alternative
techniques which made him competitive with his peers. He passed
through elementary school, junior high, and finally the glorious
years of high school. As he went, he kept climbing to higher
levels of achievement. His dreams grew and his hope expanded. He
seemed to be on a collision-course with success. Then he ran into
a barrier which seemed at the time almost insurmountable. The
network of rehabilitation counselors, teachers of blind children,
and even the community around him began telling him in subtle
ways that blind people could not succeed. 
     He entered the Summer Work Experience Program (SWEP), which
brought blind high school students together to live in a
residential setting in which their independent skills would be
assessed. These evaluations were to be forwarded to the student's
local school district, where the professionals were supposed to
help develop the student's skills. As you may have guessed, the
follow-up work in the local school district very rarely, if ever,
occurred. 
     Part of the program's summer evaluation included classes on
job-readiness skills. Our student and his peers traveled each day
to a rehabilitation center, where their job skills and
inclinations were measured. During these evaluations this
ambitious blind student began to wonder about the efficacy of the
program's goals and its ability to help blind people succeed in
the jungle of the real world. 
     Every day he had to complete tests which measured how fast
he could assemble nuts, bolts, and steering knobs. He concluded
that something major must be awry. He maintained an A average in
school and had dreamed of attending college and someday settling
down in a rewarding and interesting career. The drudgery of
repeating mechanical tasks each day frustrated him until he was
finally driven to say something. 
     He called the rehab supervisor over to his station and told
her he recognized that all people should improve their dexterity,
but he wanted to test all his job skills, including those that
would prepare him for college and a professional career. The
supervisor muttered a few polite platitudes and shrugged off the
complaint. His rage, frustration, and depression continued to
swell until he again called the supervisor to his station. Once
more he made his case for setting higher expectations for blind
people in that rehab center. 
     At this point the supervisor flew into a rage. She told our
friend that he did not understand reality. It was all well and
good to dream of challenging careers, but the facts were that
blind people did not or could not handle them. Continuing her
tirade, the supervisor told him that he had better get used to
working in a workshop setting because it would be the only type
of job that he could expect to keep. 
     This supervisor's demoralizing message received nothing but
support from other members of the summer program staff. In fact,
the student's counselor actually told him that the supervisor had
been right on target with her expectations, but the counselor
added to this insult by asserting that the student was arrogant
and unrealistic to think that he could ever enter a challenging
profession of his own choice. The counselor essentially told the
student that he should shut up and get back to work. 
     At this point the once-hopeful student started wondering
about his own self-worth. Maybe all those people were right.
Perhaps blind people could not climb above the low expectations
which society had already prescribed for them. Despair and
profound depression took root in him. 
     Somehow, after leaving the summer program, he re-assembled a
little self-esteem, and he continued to excel in his studies and
prepared himself for college. 
     Then came a significant event in his life: he became a
member of the National Federation of the Blind. He had always
wanted to believe that blind people could achieve any goal which
they desired to pursue. The problem had always been that he did
not know many blind people who were successful in their lives--
that is, until he went to his first NFB convention. There he met
thousands of blind people who believed in themselves and who did
not allow stereotypes or fear to dampen their aspirations. Riding
on this wave of new-found hope and confidence, our friend entered
college and achieved his goals, fulfilling all his most important
undergraduate dreams. 
     He decided to attend law school after receiving his degree,
and there he intended to continue his journey toward fulfilling
his life-long ambitions. In fact, he had greater expectations for
law school. Since his entering class was filled with intelligent,
diverse people, he assumed that they would automatically accept
him as an equal and believe in his competence. 
     A few weeks into the semester, two simple sentences uttered
by a classmate both shattered this hope and filled him with shock
and outrage. She attempted to hand him a document which was being
passed around the class. After trying to give him the papers
silently, she then recognized the problem and said: "Oh, I forgot
you were blind. You'll have to stumble around some to remind us
that you can't see." 
     After several minutes of stunned reflection he recognized
that in a few words his classmate had summed up the greatest
barrier blind people face. Here was a bright woman, sensitive to
social causes, putting into one statement the discrimination and
ignorance that we confront every day. Since an intelligent and
well-meaning woman could utter such damaging words, it is no
wonder that blind people face a seventy percent unemployment
rate. It is no wonder that ABC television aired a program like
"Good and Evil," in which a blind character was portrayed as a
stumbling, bumbling, fumbling buffoon. It is no wonder that blind
parents are deprived of their children because of their
blindness. 
     This story which I have been telling you is, of course, my
own. None of these adventures rank among the most hideous or
egregious types of discrimination we face. They represent,
however, the social misperceptions which result in the evil and
gross forms of discrimination we have heard about in this seminar
today.
     As Dan Frye recounted earlier, a representative from a New
York law firm told him that blind people do not possess the
imagination and creativity to practice law. Furthermore, it would
not be a good idea for a blind lawyer to meet with clients
because they would obviously be afraid of him and therefore would
not want to give their business to the firm. 
     The common misconceptions about blindness have inevitably
resulted in the widespread difficulties that blind students have
faced in Disabled Student Services offices. Today, Sheila Hall
told us of her serious problems with the DSS office at Indiana
University/Purdue University at Indianapolis. After being
harassed by a man on a city bus, Sheila took a reasonable and
responsible action. She went to the campus police to obtain
advice on how she might protect herself from such harassment in
the future. When the DSS staff found out about Sheila's call to
the campus police, they told her that she needed to come in for a
psychological evaluation. They later told her that she had acted
in a paranoid fashion by calling the police. When the staff
learned that she had missed a class, they told her that she must
report to them every time she planned to do so. 
     Undoubtedly each of us has faced discrimination, subtle or
overt. The National Federation of the Blind formed in 1940 so
that the blind of this country could have a vehicle for
collective action. We are gathered here today because we have a
common goal. Through education of the public, advocacy at all
levels, and our indomitable spirit, we have engaged our society
in a battle--a battle for freedom and equality. 
     It is unfortunate that we must necessarily encounter strife
and conflict while we attempt to break down society's
misconceptions. It is unfortunate that good people like Dan Frye,
Sheila Hall, and the rest of us must be continually humiliated
and confronted by patterns of discrimination. As we grow and
realize that we can indeed achieve first-class citizenship, we
will undoubtedly face more and more instances of conflict because
we will recognize that we are being treated unfairly, and we will
simply not put up with it! 
     We are gathered here today to prepare ourselves for the
battle. We have learned about the resources we can use to make
our path to equality easier. Each agenda item has given us
invaluable tools we can use in our struggle. 
     Of course, the most important resource which we possess is
one another--in other words, the National Federation of the Blind
itself. Although the specifics of how we combat discrimination,
become a successful student, and get a job are important, the
most important thing that we should leave this conference and
seminar with is the fact that we can rely on one another's love
and support. It is the National Federation of the Blind that has
helped Sheila Hall gain respect on her campus. It will be the
National Federation of the Blind which will help Dan Frye let the
New York law firm know that it simply cannot treat the blind as
second-class citizens. It is the National Federation of the Blind
that organized the powerful campaign to remove "Good and Evil."
It is the National Federation of the Blind that will continue to
move the blind of this country from social isolation to first
class citizenship with all the rights that status deserves. 
     Fifty years ago our blind brothers and sisters could only
have dreamed about the great accomplishments that we now achieve
as a matter of course. Since they were fighting to extricate
themselves from the bonds of poverty, they could only dream of
discussing the subtle distinctions between being treated equally
or as equals, for equality loomed so far off in the future that
it was an intangible dream. Today we know that we must and will
achieve equality in our society. Let us, however, allow the
stories of Dan Frye and Sheila Hall serve as a reminder that we
must remain vigilant in order to combat discrimination wherever
it may appear. We must remain true to our philosophy and
steadfast in our resolution to change society's inaccurate
portrayal of the blind. In achieving our dreams, we must never
forget that our most important resource is one another and that
we will always walk together in our march to first-class
citizenship.
     Come, my friends. Let us take the advice and support we have
gained here today and apply them to our everyday lives. Let us
build on the success of the courageous men and women who have
been the pioneers of our movement. Let us be the driving force
which propels the blind to true equality!


[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Steve Benson.]

           THE 1993 BLIND EDUCATOR OF THE YEAR AWARD 
                      by Stephen O. Benson

     From the Associate Editor: Steve Benson is a member of the
Board of Directors of the National Federation of the Blind and
president of the NFB of Illinois. He also chairs the committee
charged with identifying each year's Blind Educator of the Year.
Here is what he has to say:

     Several years ago the Blind Educator of the Year Award was
established by the National Association of Blind Educators (the
teachers' division of the National Federation of the Blind) to
pay tribute to a blind teacher whose exceptional classroom
performance, notable community service, and uncommon commitment
to the NFB merit national recognition. Beginning with the 1991
presentation, this award became an honor bestowed by our entire
movement. This change reflects our recognition of the importance
of good teaching and the impact an outstanding blind teacher has
on students, faculty, community, and all blind Americans.
     This award is given in the spirit of the outstanding
educators who founded and have nurtured the National Federation
of the Blind and who, by example, have imparted knowledge of our
strengths to us and raised our expectations. We have learned from
Dr. Jacobus tenBroek, Dr. Kenneth Jernigan, and President Marc
Maurer that a teacher not only provides a student with
information, but also provides guidance and advocacy. The
recipient of the Blind Educator of the Year Award must exhibit
all of these traits and must advance the cause of blind people in
the spirit and philosophy of the National Federation of the
Blind.
     The Blind Educator of the Year Award is presented at the
annual banquet of the National Federation of the Blind. Honorees
must be present at the National Convention and at the banquet to
receive an appropriately inscribed plaque and a check for $500.
     The members of the committee which will select the 1993
Blind Educator of the Year Award are Steve Benson, Chairman,
Illinois; Patricia Munson, California; Homer Page, Colorado; Judy
Sanders, Minnesota; and Adelmo Vigil, New Mexico. Nominations
should be sent to Steve Benson, 3032 N. Albany, Chicago, Illinois
60618. Letters of nomination must be accompanied by a copy of the
nominee's current resume and supporting documentation of
community and Federation activity. All nomination materials must
be in the hands of the committee chairman by April 30, 1993, to
be considered for this year's award. 



[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Sharon Maneki.]

                     DISTINGUISHED EDUCATOR
                OF BLIND CHILDREN AWARD FOR 1993
                        by Sharon Maneki

     From the Associate Editor: Sharon Maneki is president of the
National Federation of the Blind of Maryland. She also chairs the
committee to select the Distinguished Educator of Blind Children
for 1993.

     The National Federation of the Blind will recognize an
outstanding teacher of blind children at our 1993 convention July
3 to 10, in Dallas, Texas. The winner of this award will receive
an expense-paid trip to the convention, a check for $500, an
appropriate plaque presented at the banquet, and an opportunity
to make a presentation about the education of blind children to
the National Federation of the Blind Parents of Blind Children
Division early in the convention.
     Anyone who is currently teaching or counseling blind
children or administering a program for blind children is
eligible to receive this award. It is not necessary to be a
member of the National Federation of the Blind to apply. However,
the winner must attend the national convention. Teachers may be
nominated by colleagues, supervisors, or friends. The letter of
nomination should explain why the teacher is being recommended
for this award.
     The education of blind children is one of our most important
concerns. Attendance at a National Federation of the Blind
convention will enrich a teacher's experience by affording the
opportunity to meet other teachers who work with blind children,
to meet parents, and to meet blind adults who have had
experiences in a variety of educational programs. Help us
recognize a distinguished teacher by distributing this form and
encouraging teachers to submit their credentials. We are pleased
to offer this award and look forward to applications from many
well-qualified educators.

     Please complete this application and attach your letter of
nomination, one additional recommendation, written by someone who
knows your work and philosophy of teaching, and a personal letter
discussing your beliefs and approach to teaching blind students.
You may wish to include such topics as the following: 
     What are your views on the importance to your students of
Braille, large print, and magnification devices; and what issues
do you consider when making recommendations about learning media
for your students? 
     When do you recommend that your students begin the
following: reading Braille, writing with a slate and stylus,
using a Braille writer, learning to travel independently with a
white cane? 
     How should one determine which children should learn cane
travel and which should not?
     When should typing be introduced and when should a child be
expected to hand in typed assignments? 

     Send all material by April 15, 1993, to Sharon Maneki,
Chairman, Teacher Award Committee, 9736 Basket Ring Road,
Columbia, Maryland 21045; telephone: (410) 992-9608.
               NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
         DISTINGUISHED EDUCATOR OF BLIND CHILDREN AWARD
                        1993 APPLICATION

Name:                                                            

Home address:                                                    

City:                             State:         Zip:            

Day phone:                     Evening phone:                    

School:                                                          

Address:                                                         

City:                            State:          Zip:            


List your degrees, the institutions from which they were
received, and your major area or areas of study.

                                                                 

                                                                 


How long and in what programs have you taught blind children?

                                                                 


In what setting do you teach?     residential school classroom, 

    special education classroom,     itinerant program, 

    other, please explain. 


How many students do you teach regularly this year?              


What subjects do you teach?                                      

                                                                 


How many of your students read and write primarily using: 

    Braille      large print     closed circuit television  

    recorded materials     small print

[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Greg Trapp.]

    FEDERATIONISTS JOIN IN ADA LAWSUIT TO BLOCK MEDICAID CUTS
                        by Greg D. Trapp 

     From the Associate Editor: Greg Trapp is one of the leaders
of the National Federation of the Blind of New Mexico. He is also
an attorney with the Protection and Advocacy System in the state.
Last May he and his colleagues brought what appears to have been
the first lawsuit ever in a State District Court claiming
violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Those of us
who have watched and worked for passage of this legislation know
that there are very real limits to what it can do to assist
disabled people. It is a tool, and we must learn to use it wisely
and appropriately. This case is instructive and serves as an
example of what the ADA can and cannot do in difficult and
complex legal and fiscal situations. Here is the story as Greg
Trapp told it:

     A recent Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) lawsuit is of
special interest to blind people. The lawsuit was decided on
issues related to the ADA Title II provision on "effective
communications." It was an effort to block Medicaid cutbacks in
the state of New Mexico. Several members of the National
Federation of the Blind were deeply involved in the lawsuit,
including Albuquerque board member Marcella Gallegos, who was one
of the three plaintiffs; NFB of New Mexico president and
Information Access Coordinator Joe Cordova, who testified as an
expert witness; other NFB members who were prepared to testify as
fact witnesses; and many more Federationists who came to the
hearing to demonstrate their support. In addition, I was a member
of the team of eight attorneys from the organization Protection
and Advocacy System (P&A) which litigated the case.
     Protection and Advocacy Systems are familiar to many as the
state-appointed, mostly federally-funded entities usually charged
with representing the developmentally disabled and (through the
Client Assistance Program, CAP) with representing state
rehabilitation agency clients. However, the New Mexico Protection
and Advocacy System is one of only eleven state agencies to
include a Protection and Advocacy for Individual Rights (PAIR)
project along with its other services. PAIR provides advocacy to
recipients of services from Rehabilitation Act Title VII
Independent Living Centers, including the section C, older blind
adult programs.
     Like Medicaid programs in other states, the New Mexico
program has a budget deficit caused by the national recession and
Medicaid expansions. This past March the New Mexico Human
Services Department (HSD) published legal notice of proposed
cutbacks in the state Medicaid program. HSD also published legal
notice of a public hearing on the proposed cutbacks, which was to
be held in Santa Fe on April 10, 1992. The purpose of this
hearing was to enable HSD to gather public comment on the
proposed cuts so that these concerns could be considered prior to
the adoption of the final rule.
     There are 170,000 Medicaid recipients in New Mexico, most of
whom are low-income, elderly, or disabled persons. The proposed
cuts would have limited these Medicaid recipients to just two
doctor's visits and three prescriptions per month. Non-emergency
dental care and elective surgical procedures would have been
eliminated. Recipients would have been required to make co-
payments for each doctor's visit and prescription. Medicaid
payments for important items such as eye glasses, hearing aids,
and other durable medical equipment (as well as diapers and adult
protective undergarments) would have been eliminated altogether.
     One of the ironies of the proposed cutbacks was that, rather
than saving the state money, a strong case can be made that the
cuts would ultimately have cost the state more than the six
million dollars HSD projected it would save. The restrictions on
doctor's visits and the newly-imposed co-payments would have
forced many Medicaid recipients to defer needed early medical
treatment, which often results in medical complications that can
lead to expensive hospital treatment. Additionally, Medicaid
payments allow many severely disabled persons to live outside of
costly medical care facilities. The cutbacks would have forced
many of them into nursing homes or hospitals.
     When the devastating impact of the proposed cuts became
known, Protection and Advocacy began to formulate a strategy to
oppose them. Our first plan was to file a lawsuit seeking a court
order requiring the Human Services Department Secretary to
rescind the cuts. We had to show that he had failed to comply
with his "mandatory non-discretionary duty" to abide by state and
"other applicable" law. We argued that the Secretary failed to
abide by New Mexico statutory laws concerning the rule-making
process and that he failed to comply with the requirements of the
Americans with Disabilities Act.
     The ADA is comprised of five divisions: Title I currently
covers private employers with twenty-five or more employees;
Title II covers state and local governments; Title III covers
private sector public accommodations; Title IV covers
telecommunications; and Title V includes miscellaneous provisions
of the Act.
     Title I currently covers employers with twenty-five or more
employees and prohibits discrimination based on disability. It
requires employers to provide reasonable accommodations for
disabled and prospective employees. It mandates that disabled
employees be required to perform only the "essential functions"
of a job and makes illegal job requirements such as having a
driver's license if the job requires only occasional driving and
if the driving can be assigned to other employees. It makes
illegal job application questions which would tend to elicit
information about a person's disability.
     Title II covers all activities of state and local
governments. These must be operated so that, when viewed in their
entirety, they are "readily accessible to and usable by" disabled
people. Communication with these individuals must be as effective
as communication with others. Title II does not require
elimination of barriers in existing buildings. However, newly
constructed buildings and facilities must be free of
architectural and communication barriers, and substantially
remodeled portions of existing buildings or facilities must be
accessible. A Title II public entity need not make a fundamental
alteration in a facility, service, or program or be required to
make alterations or modifications which would result in an undue
administrative or financial burden.
     Title III covers private entities that operate public
accommodations such as hotels, restaurants, and theaters. It
requires that public accommodations provide goods and services in
an integrated setting, eliminate discriminatory eligibility
standards, and make reasonable modifications in policies,
practices, or procedures, provided that a fundamental alteration
would not result in a change in the nature of the goods and
services provided. Although Title II does not require state and
local governments to remove barriers in existing facilities,
Title III does require that public accommodations remove barriers
in existing facilities, where "readily achievable," that is,
"easily accomplishable and able to be carried out without much
difficulty or expense." Public accommodations must furnish
auxiliary aids when necessary to ensure effective communication,
unless an undue burden or fundamental alteration would result.
Public accommodations must provide equivalent transportation
services, maintain accessible features of facilities and
equipment, and design and construct new facilities and alter
existing ones in accordance with the Americans with Disabilities
Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADA-AG). (The infamous truncated
domes discussed at length in the October, 1992, issue of the
Braille Monitor are contained in the ADA Accessibility
Guidelines.) Private entities offering examinations for
educational or professional purposes must offer them in an
accessible place and form or offer alternative accessible
arrangements.
     The ADA can be understood better by looking at the areas
which it does not cover. Religious organizations are generally
exempt unless they rent facilities to a Title III public
accommodation or unless they employ twenty-five or more persons,
in which case they are covered by Title I. Indian tribes are also
not covered. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973 covers the Federal
Government, and therefore the ADA does not apply to it. The Fair
Housing Act was amended in 1988 to protect against discrimination
based on disability, so therefore the ADA does not cover housing
or apartment rentals. Likewise, the ADA does not cover airports
or airlines because they are already covered by the Air Carrier
Access Act. 
     It is at this point, when looking at the interplay between
the various laws, that the ADA gets a little tricky. For example,
private vendors located in airports are not covered by the Air
Carrier Access Act and are therefore covered by Title III of the
ADA. The Fair Housing Act does not cover hotels and other places
of temporary lodging, so therefore Title III covers them. While
most state and local governments receive federal funds and
therefore have long been covered by Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, not all governmental entities receive
federal funds. Therefore, Title II of the ADA, which is basically
a restatement of Section 504, is intended to reach those
previously uncovered governmental entities and applies ADA
requirements to even the smallest local governments. Thus, an ADA
complaint against a small town which receives no federal funds
will be investigated as a Title II complaint. If, on the other
hand, an ADA complaint is filed against a state agency which
receives federal funds, it will be treated as a 504 complaint and
routed to the federal agency which disperses funds to the
department in question.
     Any individual who believes that he or she is a victim of
discrimination may file a complaint. Complaints on behalf of
classes of individuals are also permitted. They should be
submitted in writing, signed by the complainant or an authorized
representative, contain the complainant's name and address, and
describe the alleged discriminatory action. Eight federal
agencies are designated to receive ADA complaints. A complaint
filed with the wrong agency will eventually be routed to the
proper one. The Department of Justice is designated as the
primary ADA enforcement agency; so, when in doubt, complaints
should be sent there. ADA complaints must be filed with a
designated agency (even if it is the wrong one) within one-
hundred-eighty days of the discriminatory act, unless there is
good cause for delay.
     In addition to the federal complaint process, private
lawsuits may be brought to enforce the ADA, and these may be
brought prior to exhaustion of administrative remedies. It was
this provision that permitted Protection and Advocacy to raise
ADA violations in our lawsuit against the New Mexico Human
Services Department.
     Although Title II of the ADA reiterates the provisions of
section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, it does elaborate upon the
earlier legislation in several important areas, including
additional definition of the provision concerning communications.
Section 35.160 of Title II of the ADA regulations requires state
and local governments to communicate with the public in a manner
that is "as effective" for disabled persons as for the non-
disabled. Section 35.160 reads as follows:

                   SUBPART E - COMMUNICATIONS

     35.160 GENERAL.
     35.160(a) A public entity shall take appropriate steps to
ensure that communications with applicants, participants, and
members of the public with disabilities are as effective as
communications with others.
     35.160(b)(1) A public entity shall furnish appropriate
auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an
individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate
in, and enjoy the benefits of, a service, program, or activity
conducted by a public entity.
     35.160(b)(2) In determining what type of auxiliary aid and
service is necessary, a public entity shall give primary
consideration to the requests of the individual with
disabilities.

     The New Mexico Human Services Department, however, ignored--
or perhaps more accurately was oblivious of--these provisions of
the ADA. We argued that the HSD announcements of the proposed
cuts, the publication of the regulations implementing the
proposed cuts, and the April 10 public hearing on the proposed
cuts failed to comply with the Section 35.160 provisions
requiring "as effective communications for the disabled as for
the non-disabled." We also argued that the public hearing itself
was inaccessible. It had originally been scheduled in a room
which seated one-hundred-twenty-eight persons and which was
largely wheelchair-inaccessible, having only a small handicapped
section at the back. It had an inaccessibly steep ramp leading to
the front, where the microphones were located, and no provision
was made for a person using a wheelchair to travel to the
microphones. HSD had made no provisions for sign language
interpreters and had to scramble to locate several at the last
minute. None of the written information on the cutbacks was
prepared in alternate formats such as Braille or audiotape. Over
five hundred persons appeared at the public hearing, and as a
result HSD decided to move it across the street to the State
Capitol Building. The hundreds of persons--many of whom were on
crutches, in wheelchairs, or on stretchers--had to make their way
through two parking lots and across a busy street in order to
reach the Capital Building. 
     The cuts were scheduled to take effect on May 1, 1992. On
April 29 we filed our court order in State District Court,
expecting that a hearing would be scheduled in a couple of weeks.
The judge issued a temporary order granting our Writ and, to our
surprise and that of the HSD attorneys, scheduled a hearing for
the next day. After the judge granted the temporary Writ, we met
with the HSD attorneys into the evening. We were trying to agree
on certain facts so that we would not have to contest them at the
hearing. Three attorneys represented P&A at this meeting. It
concluded with an exchange of witness lists, and I announced our
intention to call Fred Schroeder, director of the New Mexico
Commission for the Blind, and Joe Cordova, president of the
National Federation of the Blind of New Mexico and NFB
Information Access Coordinator for the state, as expert witnesses
on the ADA and issues related to blindness. Notice of intent to
call an expert witness is usually required to be given to the
other side in a lawsuit so the attorneys can prepare their cross-
examination. Both Mr. Schroeder and Mr. Cordova have amassed
impressive credentials. When I recited them, a task that took
several minutes, Shannon Broderick, HSD's lead attorney, sat back
and said, "I'm beginning to think that it isn't realistic to have
this hearing tomorrow." 
     We returned to our office at about 8:00 p.m., and shortly
thereafter Ms. Broderick called to request that we agree to an
extension of the temporary Writ and a new hearing date. This
seemed to be in our interest, so we agreed. However, no one knew
whether the judge would agree to the postponement, so we had to
be prepared to present our case the next day. Consequently, Joe
Cordova and Marcella Gallegos, who was one of the plaintiffs and
a member of the board of directors of the NFB's Albuquerque
chapter (Fred Schroeder was out of town), made the first of what
turned out to be three hour-long trips to Santa Fe. This one
proved to be unnecessary because the judge agreed to the
postponement and rescheduled the hearing for May 12, 1992.
     During the interim we made plans to pack the court with
people who had obvious disabilities. As a result about fifty
persons with disabilities, including nearly a dozen
Federationists, were present at the start of the hearing. Several
newspaper reporters along with news crews from all three local TV
news organizations were also present to record the events.
     I had been given responsibility for formulating the ADA
arguments, so we decided that I would present the majority of the
ADA case at the hearing. Our plan was twofold: 1. argue that the
ADA had been violated; and 2. argue that the process by which the
rule enacting the proposed cutbacks was promulgated and
eventually adopted was not in accordance with statutory
requirements. We had a small parade of sympathetic witnesses, who
were to testify that the public hearing was inaccessible and not
conducted in accordance with the statutory requirements for a
public hearing.
     The judge began by disparaging our entire case and
especially casting severe doubt upon our ADA arguments, saying
that he didn't think the ADA applied, but if it did, he would
give it only slight weight. After this discouraging introduction,
the judge called the case, and the lead attorneys presented
opening arguments. HSD argued that they had complied with all
relevant New Mexico statutes governing the adoption of agency
regulations and the holding of public hearings and that the ADA
did not impose any additional requirements above those contained
in the New Mexico statutes.
     We began to call our witnesses and elicited testimony about
the inadequacy--even complete lack--of accommodations provided by
HSD. We took every opportunity we could find to elicit testimony
about the harm that would result from the proposed cuts, and HSD
quickly objected each time. We called several witnesses who
testified to the inadequacy of the sign language interpretation
arrangements and to the need to publicize the availability of
sign language interpreters. The ADA clearly requires that steps
taken to comply with the Act be publicized.
     I called our first expert witness, Anne Thomas, an attorney
who is knowledgeable about the ADA. My first job was to have her
recite her qualifications as an expert. Ms. Thomas has extremely
impressive ADA credentials, including being the Director of Equal
Opportunity Programs and ADA Coordinator at the University of New
Mexico, serving five years as a staff attorney at the Equal
Employment Opportunities Commission, serving on several
disability- and ADA-related boards and commissions, and writing
numerous scholarly articles on the ADA. Ms. Thomas also uses a
wheelchair. Needless to say, the effect was quite dramatic. Also
needless to say, Ms. Broderick vociferously objected to Ms.
Thomas's being allowed to testify. However, the judge overruled
her objections and allowed the testimony. 
     An expert witness is permitted to give an opinion on an
ultimate question of law. Ms. Thomas was thus able to state her
opinion that the Human Services Department had failed to comply
with the Americans with Disabilities Act. She testified that
Section 35.160 of Title II required HSD to communicate the notice
of the proposed cuts and the notice of the public hearing in a
way that was "as effective for the disabled as for the non-
disabled." Specifically, she testified that HSD was required to
provide the notice in Braille and on audiotape as well as take
steps to communicate directly to organizations representing the
blind. Most important, she was also able to convince the judge of
the applicability of the ADA to HSD and of the Act's supremacy
over the narrow public-hearing and rule-making requirements
listed in the New Mexico statute. This testimony countered the
HSD argument that it was required to abide by the statutory rule-
making requirements only and that it therefore did not have to
take steps to accommodate persons with disabilities. The
transformation in the judge's thinking was evident at the end of
the day's testimony when he referred to the ADA and said, "It's a
whole new world."
     I called Marcella Gallegos to testify on the second day of
the hearing. The presence of Ms. Gallegos, who was one of our
named plaintiffs and an active Federationist of many years
standing, was very important to our case. She gave us clear
reason to assert that Section 35.160 of Title II had been
violated. The lawsuit claimed that her Title II rights were
violated because HSD had taken no steps to make the notice of the
cuts and public hearing comply with the Section 35.160
requirements that such notices be effectively communicated. Ms.
Gallegos had been unaware of the proposed cuts. I asked her to
describe how she would be harmed by them. This question was
objected to, although the objection was overruled on the basis
that the question addressed the importance of Ms. Gallegos'
receiving adequate notice and the likelihood that she would want
to attend the public hearing.
     Our last witness on the second and final day of the hearing
was state NFB president Joe Cordova. We called him as an expert
witness on effective communications for the disabled and on
blindness. The judge knew of Mr. Cordova from a letter which he
had recently sent to all New Mexico judges pointing out that
blind persons should not be kept from jury duty based solely on
their blindness. The judge's reaction to Mr. Cordova and his
letter seemed positive. He listened closely as the witness
testified to the number of blind persons in New Mexico who
receive Medicaid and his opinion on the ineffectiveness of the
HSD communications. Mr. Cordova, who is the state NFB's
Information Access Coordinator, described the steps necessary to
assure effective communication with the blind and hearing-
impaired.
     The HSD attorneys put on a rebuttal argument and called the
director of the Medicaid program. It was clear by this time that
HSD officials were in difficulty. The legal team was trying to
construct the argument that abiding by the ADA would have
resulted in an undue financial or administrative burden. Upon
cross-examination, however, the Medicaid director admitted that
HSD had taken no steps to make the notices of the proposed cuts
and public hearing comply with the ADA. After our cross-
examination the judge himself questioned the Medicaid director
asking him "how much would it cost to make audiotape copies of
the regulation?" The director could only respond, "Not much." The
director gave a similar answer when the judge asked how much it
would have cost to place a sentence on the notices stating that a
TDD number was available and that copies of the notices were
available in Braille and other accessible formats.
     It was obvious to all that the judge was about to rule in
our favor. However, he threw out the arguments we had made
concerning HSD's failure to abide by the statutory rule-making
requirements. Instead, he found that HSD did not comply with the
Title II ADA requirements for provision of effective
communications, making the hearing fundamentally unfair.
     The decision caught many state officials off guard. HSD
initially threatened to appeal the decision and even challenge
the constitutionality of the ADA. The Governor, however, was
quoted as saying that he did not want to be perceived as being
against the disabled by challenging the ADA. Finally, the
attorney general decided against an appeal on the basis that the
facts of the case were too sympathetic to our side and that the
result might be a decision against the state which would have
even broader legal precedent.
     State agencies, however, have taken notice of the decision.
The New Mexico Commission for the Blind, which reflects the
Federation philosophy of its director Fred Schroeder, is busy
filling requests for ADA information and providing Braille
services. The Newsline for the Blind (telephone newspaper-reading
service) director, Mike Santullo, has even had to create a new
legal notices category on the Newsline system. Mr. Cordova is
also now responding to requests for information on how to provide
more effective communication for blind people. As a result of
this lawsuit, the positive philosophy of the National Federation
of the Blind is being disseminated by many people in New Mexico.
Best of all, it is all being done with nary a mention of a
truncated dome.

     There you have Greg Trapp's description of this important
ADA case. Here are two of the newspaper articles published at the
time it was making news. Jackie Jadrnak was the reporter who
wrote both stories. The first was published in the Albuquerque
Journal on Thursday, May 14. Here it is: 

            JUDGE HALTS MEDICAID CUTS, SAYS DISABLED
                       KEPT FROM HEARINGS

     Medicaid cuts won't be allowed to take effect under a court
ruling Wednesday--a ruling that could have a major impact on
public accommodations that must be made for people with
disabilities.
     The decision effectively means the state Human Services
Department can't count on any savings from the cuts in its budget
before the June 30 end of the fiscal year, according to Secretary
Dick Heim.
     State District Judge Art Encinias ruled the department
didn't go far enough to make a public hearing on Medicaid cuts
accessible to people with disabilities. Because the process to
enact the cuts didn't comply with the federal Americans with
Disabilities Act, the cuts themselves couldn't take effect, he
said.
     Heim said he would decide today what course the department
would take next. It's possible the department could both appeal
the decision and begin a round of new hearings to cut Medicaid
coverage, he said.
     One option might be to challenge the constitutionality of
the Americans with Disabilities Act itself on the grounds that
the federal government is interfering too closely with powers
reserved to the state government, said Judith Ferrell, attorney
for Human Services.
     That could set the state in the forefront in challenges to
the act, which toughens requirements for making public buildings
and events accessible to people with disabilities. The act took
effect January 26. 
     As it is, Encinias' ruling was the first in New Mexico on
the effect of the disabilities act. "There are going to be very
serious implications to state government," Heim said.
     Encinias said the department failed to give effective notice
of the public hearing on the Medicaid cuts to people with
disabilities, especially those who couldn't see.
     In addition, the notice of the hearing failed to mention
what special steps would be taken to make it easier for people
with disabilities to participate, he said.
     Testimony showed the notice of the hearing was available
mainly in written form and didn't mention that sign language
interpreters would be available.
     Without offering details of what should have been done at
the hearing, Encinias said adequate accommodations weren't
offered for people with visual, hearing, or mobility impairments.
     Saying he didn't believe the department acted in bad faith,
Encinias said, "It treated the disabled without thought...as
invisible men and women."
     Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, they can be
invisible no longer, he said. "They are absolutely entitled to
participate in public life," Encinias said.
     The Medicaid cuts, which were to take effect May 1, would
have reduced payments to various health-care providers and scaled
back coverage for the 170,000 low-income people receiving
Medicaid in New Mexico. For instance, Medicaid would have stopped
paying for hearing aids, glasses, or dental care for adults and
would have limited the number of doctor office visits and
prescriptions it would pay for.
     The cuts would have saved $4.3 million in state and federal
spending during the last two months of this fiscal year.
     Without those savings Heim estimated that state funds are
short $2.9 million to $6.9 million this fiscal year for the
Medicaid program. The gap between the two figures represents
money the state hopes counties will contribute to the program.
     Donna Smith, director of the New Mexico Association of
Counties, said at a legislative hearing Wednesday that she might
know after meetings this week how much counties might ante up.
Doa Ana County already has agreed to give about $1 million, but
several counties may have to donate to make it worthwhile for any
of them to do it, she said.
     Otherwise, only one or two counties would end up subsidizing
the program statewide, according to Smith.
     Odis Echols, lobbyist for Bernalillo County, said county and
University Hospital officials are discussing whether they want to
give Medicaid $2.5 million to help keep it out of the red this
fiscal year.
     Counting the federal match--the state gets about $3 in
federal funds for every $1 it spends on Medicaid--the program's
shortfall is running between $11.5 million and $27 million. The
department estimates this fiscal year's spending will total about
$500 million.
     Next fiscal year expenses under Medicaid could run up to
$565 million, while funding would be only about $500 million,
according to department estimates. For the next fiscal year the
department still has to figure out either how to cut spending or
find new money.

     There you have the first article. A little more than a month
later, Ms. Jadrnak completed the story. Here is the Albuquerque
Journal article of Tuesday, June 23: 

               STATE WON'T APPEAL MEDICAID RULING

     The state won't appeal a court ruling that blocked Medicaid
cuts and interpreted some requirements of the new federal
Americans with Disabilities Act, officials said Monday.
     Attorney General Tom Udall said he was trying to practice
preventive law instead.
     Noting that his office is trying to develop guidelines for
all of state government to comply with the disabilities act,
Udall said, "After we have a chance to work at them a little
more, we'll be able to resolve some of these issues rather than
resolve them through litigation."
     Last month state District Judge Art Encinias ruled that
planned cutbacks in Medicaid couldn't take effect because a
public hearing on the cuts didn't comply with the disabilities
act. For example, public notices didn't state that interpreters
for the deaf would be available, nor was any effort made to
notify blind people of the hearing, he said.
     The decision now specifically affects Human Services, but an
appeal could set a strong precedent for all of state government,
said Human Services Secretary Dick Heim.
     Udall indicated it might have been hard for the state to win
the case, "The courts, under the set of facts we had here, might
well find against us," he said. "The facts could be very
sympathetic to the plaintiffs and the judge's ruling."
     Also, the decision on whether to appeal had no real effect
on Human Services' battle against a budget deficit, said Deputy
Secretary Aug Narbutas.
     It would be too late for program cuts to save the department
any money for the current fiscal year, which ends next Tuesday,
he said. Meanwhile, the department is working on a set of cuts
that would go through a hearing process and might take effect
about September, he said.
     The department hasn't settled on a list of proposed cuts,
Narbutas said, but added that the Medicaid program could be $65
million or more short next fiscal year. In New Mexico Medicaid,
which pays medical bills for some low-income and disabled people,
gets almost three-quarters of its money from the federal
government.
     "There are only two ways to deal with this: to increase
revenues or reduce expenditures," Heim told members of the
Legislature's Health and Human Services Committee Monday. "We
most probably will go with another round of cuts.
     "We can't avoid being sued, but we hope to avoid losing," he
added.
     "If we don't find another way to finance Medicaid growth,
we're inevitably going to see significant cuts in the Medicaid
program," said Sen. Janice Paster, D-Albuquerque. "Medicaid is
just eating the general fund up....
     "This is a gigantic train wreck--and I think it's coming
next legislative session," she said, noting that program costs
have grown thirty percent in each of the past two years. "This is
a disaster of major proportions."

     That is what the newspapers were saying, and there is no
question but that the Medicaid program is in deep trouble. All
citizens with a concern about this crisis should have an
opportunity to be a part of the discussions being conducted by
state governments across the country in an effort to find
solutions. This case has demonstrated the new legal necessity to
insure that no disabled citizens shall be prevented from taking
part in the discussion. The Americans with Disabilities Act is no
panacea, but in the right hands it is a tool that can help to
insure justice.


[PHOTO: Oklahoma delegation standing with Oklahoma governor and
legislators. CAPTION: Shown here from left to right are: Suzanne
B. Taylor, NFB; Nannette Murrin, NFB; James Triplett, NFB;
Representative James R. Dunlap, co-sponsor; Governor David
Walters (seated); Eva Chaney, NFB; Jean Jones, Office of
Handicapped Concerns; Representative Betty Boyd, author; and
Representative Bill Widner, co-sponsor.]

             BLIND NO LONGER INCOMPETENT IN OKLAHOMA

     From the Editor: I recently received a letter from Eva
Chaney, president of the National Federation of the Blind of
Oklahoma, which said in part: " ... state laws can happen without
the public's ever knowing." The rest of her letter explained what
she meant. Here it is:
     In Oklahoma there was an Incompetency Law that stated the
blind, deaf, mute, or any combination thereof could be declared
incompetent based on said physical handicap. No, it wasn't left
over from the Dark Ages. It was only enacted in 1980. It has
taken the past four years, with great opposition from lawyers,
finally to remove this law. Thanks to the hard work of the NFB of
Oklahoma and state legislator Betty Boyd this threat no longer
exists.
     On May 15, 1992, Oklahoma Governor David Walters signed a
new law which abolished this injustice. Members of the National
Federation of the Blind of Oklahoma were invited to attend this
important event. I would advise Federationists throughout the
country to check the incompetency laws in their states.



[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Elizabeth Browne.]

                   SOMETHING NEW UNDER THE SUN
                       by Elizabeth Browne

     From the Associate Editor: Dr. Elizabeth Browne has been
sharing her thoughts and adventures with Monitor readers for some
years now. Last summer she and her husband decided to attend
their first NFB convention. Almost everyone finds this a
momentous experience, and Dr. Browne is no exception. If you are
considering the possibility of joining us in Dallas next summer,
this article will be of particular interest to you. Here is what
she has to say: 

     With due respect to the Biblical writer, something new under
the sun did occur for me last summer in North Carolina. Early in
the spring of 1992, I determined to take the plunge and attend my
first national convention of the NFB. I had been a member off and
on for years and lately had had the honor of being elected to the
Board of the Chicago chapter. All well and good, I thought, but
enough's enough! I began considering that I ought to avail myself
of the opportunity of going the whole way and attending my first
national convention.
     Allow me the privilege of a brief explanation. All my life I
have been a fighter, spunky, a trouble-maker in some folks'
terminology. This stance came readily to me, and I inwardly
thought that, with or without others to support me, I could stand
up for my rights, which I have done frequently.
     All this is true, and my life is more or less a testimony to
my philosophy; however, there comes a time in the affairs of
every person that the spirit wanes in one's bosom and one looks
about for a friendly word of encouragement. I think I had reached
this point, for true it is, John Donne, "no man is an island
entire of himself," and the same holds for women. 
     My husband and I reserved airplane tickets and made
tentative plans, checking that I would not be signed up to teach
summer classes at Loyola University. I was not listed, so our
plans quickly developed. Unaware of the magnitude of this
undertaking, we took off into the friendly skies and found
ourselves in Charlotte, North Carolina. 
     When in the course of human events has it ever been seen
that such an enormous number of blind individuals (almost three
thousand of us) gathered together, intent on creating a new
society with far more than a meager thousand points of light?
Sorry about that, Mr. Bush. Solomon in all his splendor would
surely be astounded at such a prodigious event! At least I was. I
felt as though I were caught up in the midst of one of those
presidential campaign rallies that at times I eagerly watch on
TV.
     On our very first morning we joined the rapid stream of
people surging along with determination and fixed purpose toward
the huge convention hall, and we let go and simply let the
current take us whither it would.
     Unbelievably piercing shouts from human megaphones, NFB
barkers, directed us with their "This way to exhibits!" "This way
to the convention!" or "The convention is about to be called to
order!" I feared loss of hearing if I were inadvertently to pause
alongside one of these human amplifiers as we hurried along to
the opening session. To myself I said, "That's Ken," and again,
"That must be Bryan." Nobody else has a voice like that!
     In the hall we met friends and strangers who soon became
friends eagerly urging us to sit down and share our adventures in
getting to the convention. "Here we are!" the Chicago delegation
was calling to us, and I felt at home and joined our own throng,
awaiting the speeches, news, and whatever lay ahead.
     The events of the convention were well elaborated in the
August-September Braille Monitor, and I only hope to share my
reaction as an initiate at this baptism, for a baptism of
inspiration is precisely what it turned out to be for me.
     "Did you enjoy the convention?" Steve Benson, president of
the NFB of Illinois, asked me several days after my return.
"Well, I think I've about recovered," I began; "I never realized
all the things that go on: the exhibits, the discussions, the
addresses, the dignitaries from Washington, D.C., the folks from
all over the world, the man from Australia, the Federationists
from Canada, all those impressive scholarship winners; and I
think I may have missed a couple of things that I didn't have
time to get to.
     "Oh yes, the ball. I was there, too (early, as a matter of
fact) with my husband; and we sat and relaxed until--well, that's
another story, I'll tell you later."
     Aftershock. One thing, however, brought me up short and
caused me much reflection. I still ponder its meaning. We passed
by the meeting of parents of blind children and picked up a few
handouts. One was a questionnaire about how children who are not
blind react to a blind parent. I began to reflect on my own
experience as a mother of five children, all of them with normal
vision. I wondered about them and decided to mail each one a copy
to learn something about their reactions and what effects my
blindness had had on them as they advanced in age and grace
before God and sighted mankind.
     I hope to report on my findings on that inquiry, which will
be news to me as well as to my husband. I have always felt
confident in my life and its arrangement. But in Charlotte I met
with something unexpected, something from which I know I will
learn.
     As the weeks pass, more and more ideas emerge, and I begin
to dig more deeply into my impressions and reactions. The writer
of Ecclesiastes may have felt that there is nothing new under the
sun, but he never had the opportunity of attending the National
Federation of the Blind's annual convention.


[2 PHOTOS: 1) Dr. Jernigan speaks from the podium at the 1992
National Convention before a room full of Federationists. 2) A
group of Federationists are singing as they crowd the corridor
outside the hall where the 1992 National Federation of the Blind
National Convention banquet was held.
CAPTION: The throngs of people that jammed the division meetings,
convention sessions, and annual banquet at the 1992 convention of
the National Federation of the Blind in Charlotte, North
Carolina, were exuberant and virtually inexhaustible.
Federationists filling the convention hall (above) experienced
all the warmth of a North Carolina welcome.  In a crowd of near
3,000 people from every state, the District of Columbia, the
island of Puerto Rico, and numerous foreign countries, they
listened with rapt attention to the presentations on the crowded
agenda. The Dallas-Fort Worth Hyatt Regency hotel is a marvelous,
spacious, and self-contained facility, with room for all the
meetings already in the planning stage for next year's agenda.
The picture of the crowd (below) waiting for the 1992 banquet to
begin reflects the fun and excitement of a National Federation of
the blind annual banquet. Those who attend the 1993 convention
can be sure of finding inspiration, good friends, and invaluable
experience. Make plans to join us at the 1993 convention of the
National Federation of the Blind July 3 to 10 in Dallas, Texas;
it's the only place to be.]

                        CONVENTION 1993:
                          TEXAS BECKONS

     The time has come to plan for the 1993 convention of the
National Federation of the Blind. As Federationists know, the
1992 convention in Charlotte was probably the best we have ever
had--excellent program, good facilities, and wonderful
hospitality. However, Texas in '93 promises to be even better.
     We will return to the Dallas-Fort Worth Hyatt Regency, where
our spectacular fiftieth anniversary convention was held in 1990.
Who can forget the 1950's atmosphere of Sullivan O'Shaughnessy's
Restaurant, the barbecue at Bear Creek, or the memorable Texas
hospitality? NFB of Texas president Glenn Crosby promises that
1990 was only an opener for the 1993 extravaganza. 
     As usual, our hotel rates are the envy of all who know about
them. For the 1993 convention they are: singles, $31; doubles and
twins, $35; triples, $38; and quads, $40. In addition to the room
rates there will be a tax, which at present is twelve percent.
There will be no charge for children in the room with parents as
long as no extra bed is requested. 
     In recent years we have sometimes taken hotel reservations
through the National Office, but for the 1993 convention you
should write directly to: Hyatt-Regency DFW, Post Office Box
619014, International Parkway, Dallas-Fort Worth Airport, Texas
75261, or call (214) 453-1234. Hyatt has a national toll-free
number, but do not (we emphasize not) use it. Reservations made
through this national number will not be valid. They must be made
directly with the hotel. The hotel will want a deposit of $40 or
a credit card number. If a credit card is used, the deposit will
be charged against your card immediately, just as would be the
case with a $40 check. If a reservation is canceled prior to June
20, 1993, $20 of the $40 deposit will be returned. Otherwise,
refunds will not be made.
     Federationists who attended the 1990 convention will
remember that the Hyatt Regency DFW is actually located on the
property of the Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, and the
airport people-mover train makes a stop at the hotel. The
facility's 1,300 rooms are divided between two towers connected
by a quarter-mile-long corridor. Many of us found that walking
between the two towers provided welcome exercise, but if walking
is a problem, electric carts are always available to carry guests
back and forth. There are four excellent and very different
restaurants within the hotel: Il Nonno's, an Italian trattoria,
which specializes in northern Italian cuisine and has servers who
sing to diners; Sullivan O'Shaughnessy's, which has already been
mentioned; and two other fine restaurants. In addition, the bar
in the East Tower serves sandwiches and snacks during most of the
day. 
     The 1993 convention of the National Federation of the Blind
will be a truly memorable event. Make plans now to be a part of
the Federation fun and hard work July 3 to 10. Hotel reservations
should be made early. Remember that seminars for parents of blind
children and for blind job-seekers, as well as several other
workshops and meetings, will be conducted on Saturday, July 3.
Convention registration will begin on Sunday, and both Sunday and
Monday will be filled with meetings of divisions and committees,
including the Monday morning annual meeting of the Board of
Directors of the National Federation of the Blind, which is open
to all. General convention sessions begin on Tuesday and continue
through Friday afternoon. The annual banquet will take place on
Thursday evening, July 8. 
     Remember also that we need door prizes from state
affiliates, local chapters, and individuals. Prizes should be
relatively small in size and large in value. Cash, of course, is
always popular. In any case we ask that all prizes have a value
of at least $25. Drawings will be made steadily throughout the
convention sessions. As usual, the grand prize at the banquet
will be spectacular--absolutely worthy of the occasion and the
host affiliate. At Charlotte, for instance, the grand prize was
$1000 in cash. Don't miss the fun! You may bring door prizes with
you or send them ahead of time to: Lawrence Doiron, 7917 Pointer,
Houston, Texas 77016; phone (713) 631-3013. 
     The displays of new technology; the meetings of special
interest groups, committees, and divisions; the fascinating tours
(more about them in later issues of the Monitor); the hospitality
and renewed friendships; the solid program items; and the general
excitement of being where the action is and where the decisions
are being made--all these join together to call the blind of the
nation back to the Dallas-Fort Worth Hyatt Regency Hotel in 1993.
Come and be part of it. 



                             RECIPES

     From the Associate Editor: The recipes this month come from
Florida, which, along with Louisiana, was battered by Hurricane
Andrew in late August. Things are still far from normal, but the
National Federation of the Blind of Florida conducted an
enthusiastic convention in October, and Federationists continue
to keep busy helping blind people across the state and rebuilding
the lives of those who were affected by the storm. The following
is a brief report about the situation in the state written by
Wayne Davis, president of the NFB of Florida. Here is what he has
to say:

                         After the Storm
                         by Wayne Davis

     Hurricane Andrew struck hard at the southeast coast of
Florida on August 24, leaving thousands of people without homes
or jobs. Dr. Jernigan likes to say, "When life gives you lemons,
make lemonade." My wife Carmen got busy right after the
hurricane, calling people who might need help. Other chapter
members also helped her track down hard-to-find Federationists.
She and I worked hand in hand with the Red Cross, hurricane
shelters, and our transportation service here in Dade County to
provide necessary assistance to blind persons who were victims of
the storm.
     As state president here in Florida and as president of the
Greater Miami chapter of the NFB of Florida, I want to thank
Federationists from across our state and from all over the
country for your many phone calls and expressions of concern.
Several chapter presidents offered to open their homes to us, and
our state officers and board members were there for us on a daily
basis, making phone calls and offering us their love and support.
     Carmen and I have always been proud to be a part of the
Federation, but the love and kindness showered on us by members
of the NFB after Hurricane Andrew struck is something we will
never forget. Andrew was really bad, but President Maurer and Dr.
Jernigan, along with many other members, took the time to pick up
the phone to remind us that they cared and to see what they could
do to help. To us, the National Federation of the Blind is much
more than a movement; it is our family.
     Dr. Jernigan and President Maurer saw to it that money was
sent into our state to provide relief for blind hurricane
victims. Our thanks go to everyone who made possible such
generous help to blind victims in the wake of Hurricane Andrew.
     Here in the Christmas season I am pleased to inform you that
slowly but surely Florida is getting back on its feet. As for the
blind community, we are also putting our lives back together, and
together we are learning a lot about making some of Dr.
Jernigan's lemonade out of Andrew's lemons. Merry Christmas from
the NFB of Florida.

                 SPICY SKILLET CHICKEN AND RICE
                         by Carmen Davis

     Carmen Davis is the wife of NFB of Florida president Wayne
Davis. She is also a hard-working and dedicated Federationist in
her own right. 

Ingredients
4 4-ounce chicken breast halves, skinned and boned
1/2 teaspoon salt, divided
1/2 teaspoon paprika
1/2 teaspoon coarsely ground pepper
vegetable cooking spray
3/4 cup sliced fresh mushrooms
1/2 cup long-grain rice, uncooked
1/4 teaspoon onion powder
1/4 teaspoon garlic powder
1/4 teaspoon ground turmeric
1 10-1/2-ounce can low-sodium chicken broth
3/4 cup frozen green peas

     Method: Combine 1/4 teaspoon salt, paprika, and pepper.
Sprinkle over both sides of chicken. Coat a large non-stick
skillet with cooking spray. Place over medium heat until hot. Add
chicken and cook 3 minutes on each side or until lightly browned.
Remove chicken from skillet and set aside. Keep warm. Add
remaining salt, sliced mushrooms, and next 5 ingredients to
skillet. Stir well. Bring to a boil, then return chicken to
skillet. Cover, reduce heat, and simmer over medium-low heat 20
minutes or until liquid is absorbed. Stir in peas, cover, and
cook an additional 3 minutes. Makes four servings.

         MARINATED FLANK STEAK WITH AVOCADO CHILI BUTTER
                         by Carmen Davis

Ingredients:
1 cup Tequila
1 teaspoon grated lime peel
1 teaspoon garlic, minced
1/4 teaspoon salt
1/2 teaspoon freshly ground pepper
1 small flank steak (1 and 1/2 pounds)
Avocado chili butter:
1 ripe avocado, peeled and seeded
1 4-ounce can green chilies, chopped and drained
2 green onions, chopped
1/4 cup fresh cilantro, chopped
3 tablespoons fresh lime juice
pinch ground red pepper

     Method: Combine Tequila, lime peel, garlic, pepper, and salt
in a large shallow glass dish. Add steak and turn to coat. Cover
and marinate one hour, turning once. 
     Avocado chili butter: Blend all ingredients in food
processor or blender until smooth. Makes 1 and 1/3 cups.
     Preheat broiler and broiler pan. Remove steak from marinade
and broil 4 inches from heat ten minutes for medium-rare, turning
once after five minutes. Transfer to serving platter and let
stand five minutes. Serve with avocado chili butter. Makes six
servings.



                       MICROWAVE BROWNIES
                         by Carmen Davis

Ingredients:
1 cup granulated sugar
3/4 cup all-purpose flour
1/2 cup unsweetened cocoa powder
3/4 teaspoon baking powder
1/4 teaspoon salt
1/2 cup (one stick) butter or margarine, softened
3 large eggs
2 teaspoons vegetable oil
1 teaspoon vanilla extract
confectioners sugar

     Method: Grease a 9-inch square microwave-proof baking dish.
Mix sugar, flour, cocoa, baking powder, and salt in large bowl.
Cut in butter with pastry blender or two knives used scissor-
fashion until mixture resembles coarse crumbs. Whisk eggs, oil,
and vanilla until blended. Stir into cocoa mixture with spatula
(50 strokes). Spread dough in prepared dish. Microwave on medium
5 minutes, turning halfway through. Rotate dish and microwave on
high 2 and 1/2 to 3 minutes until center is just firm to the
touch. Sprinkle with confectioners sugar, or the following
topping. Cool on wire rack. Cut into 2 and 1/4-inch squares.
Makes 16 brownies.

Confetti Topping ingredients:
1/2 cup semisweet chocolate chips
1/2 cup miniature marshmallows
1/2 cup candy-coated chocolate candies
1/4 cup chopped nuts (optional)
     To create topping, sprinkle top of brownies with chips and
marshmallows. Microwave on high 30 seconds, then sprinkle with
candy-coated chocolates and nuts.


                       MONITOR MINIATURES

** A Gift in Good Taste:
     The NFB of Wisconsin asks that we carry the following
announcement:
     Imagine a food perfect for today's lifestyles. It would be
great tasting, nutritious, all-natural, and ready to eat in an
instant. Wisconsin's been making that food for more than a
century. It's cheese! No other food comes in so many tempting
varieties. It's a part of so many of our favorite meals from
breakfast to a late-night snack. Cheese is a natural for today's
healthy and hectic lifestyles. The goodness of milk is
concentrated when making cheese--ten pounds of milk are needed to
create one pound of most varieties. Cheese is a natural dairy
product, rich in calcium, protein, and other essential nutrients.
     The Wisconsin Gift Cheese Box contains NFB literature along
with one pound of delicious Wisconsin colby cheese and two pounds
of America's favorite Wisconsin cheddar cheese, two eight-ounce
boxes of no-salt Groft's crackers--one of wheat and the other of
garlic. These items are contained in a box with Holstein cows on
the outside. A Wisconsin Gift Cheese Box will make a wonderful
Christmas gift--definitely a gift in good taste for family and
friends.
     Send your prepaid order of $19.95 within the continental
United States to: Wisconsin Gift Cheese Box, 1612 Winnebago
Street, La Crosse, Wisconsin 54601. For orders outside the
continental United States add $20.00 per box. Payment can be made
with check or money order with checks payable to the National
Federation of the Blind of Wisconsin.


[PHOTO: The Ehab Yamini family. CAPTION: Ehab and Sabrina Yamini
with seven of their children.]

**New Baby:
     From the Editor: Those attending the 1991 National
Federation of the Blind convention will remember Ehab and Sabrina
Yamini and their children. Ehab appeared on the program and
talked about his beekeeping and honey business. Ehab called me
today (October 8) to tell me that on September 30, 1992, he
became the proud father of a baby girl, Ruby Clara Muhammad
Yamini, who weighed 7 pounds 12 ounces. He told me that this was
child number thirteen and that, who knows, it might be the last.
Ehab, who is a past president of the NFB of Georgia, not only
works as a beekeeper but is also the masseur at the Cable News
Network (CNN) building. He says that anyone who wishes to contact
him about puchasing honey, bee pollen, royal jelly, or other such
products, should contact him by calling (404) 577-9079 or writing
him at CNN Center, 954 Byron Drive, Atlanta, Georgia 30310.

**For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     I have for sale an Arkenstone Reader with 300 DPI flat-bed
scanner, daughter card, documentation in print and on disk, and
connection cable. I am asking $2,000.
     I also have for sale two 40-characters-per-second VersaPoint
Braille printers. One is three years old; the other is four. They
use continuous feed paper (narrow and wide), print sideways, and
do graphics. They are both in excellent condition. I am asking
$2,200 for one, and $2,000 for the other. If interested, call
Kathy Buckley at (617) 731-0179.

**Elected:
     Patricia Tussing, Secretary of the NFB of Indiana, writes to
report that at its recent annual convention the affiliate elected
John Stroot, Barbara Schmidt, and Harold Bradley to the board of
directors of the National Federation of the Blind of Indiana.


[PHOTO: Members of Elmore County Chapter of the NFB of Idaho
stand holding National Federation of the Blind banner. CAPTION:
Bernice Benham, Joann Grimmet, and Charles Kennedy (left to
right) carry the Federation sign in the Mountain Home, Idaho,
parade, while a camera man looks on.  At five, Marian Grimmett is
too short to reach the sign, but she uses her cane like a pro.]

**Federation on Parade:
     Fourteen members of the Elmore County Chapter of the NFB of
Idaho took part on September 12 in the Air Force Appreciation Day
in Mountain Home, Idaho. Ramona Walhof, president of the NFB of
Idaho, and Margaret Martinez, president of the Elmore County
chapter, were driven in a Corvette convertible along the parade
route; other chapter members marched and carried signs. Marian
Grimmett (age five) was the youngest marcher, and her cane
technique was a great advertisement for early introduction to the
white cane. 

**Welcome To Our Table Now on Tape:
     In the October, 1992, issue of the Braille Monitor we
announced the publication of a cookbook entitled Welcome to Our
Table, compiled by the Kanawha Valley Chapter of the National
Federation of the Blind of West Virginia. Carolyn Ranker recently
wrote to say that the cassette edition of the book is now
available. The four-track cassette edition is now available for
$6. Checks should be made payable to KVCNFBWV and sent to Mr. Ed
Greenleaf, 502 Piccadilly, Charleston, West Virginia 25302.


**Searching:
     We have been asked to print the following:
     I would like to buy a cassette player/recorder which handles
both normal and half-speed cassettes and has a built-in short
wave radio. The only one I know about is the JVC Loc-Toc-30
cassette unit. If anyone is interested in selling this or any
other model with these features, I would like to buy it for my
mother. I am willing to pay top dollar for a unit in good
condition. Please call (718) 474-0863, or write to Sergio L.
Fonseca, P.O. Box 155, Rockaway Park, New York 11694.

**Growing and Multiplying:
     David Schuh, one of the leaders of the National Federation
of the Blind of Wisconsin, wrote recently to report the
following: 
     On September 19, 1992, the Northcentral Wisconsin Chapter of
the NFB of Wisconsin conducted its first election since it was
organized two years ago. The officers elected were David Schuh,
president; Connie Miller, vice president; Dennis Schuh,
Treasurer; and Rhonda Baranowski, secretary. Since its founding
the chapter has kept its members busy hosting a state convention,
donating money and time to the NFB at the national and state
level, writing letters and making phone calls to legislators
regarding issues that concern blind people, working to pass
Wisconsin's Braille Bill, and sending members to national
conventions and the Washington Seminar. Four days after the
election, on September 23, Dennis Schuh, treasurer, and Margie
Schuh, member of the board, became the proud parents of a baby
boy named Anthony John Schuh. Anthony weighed six pounds and
fifteen ounces and was twenty inches long. As you can see,
everyone in the Northcentral Wisconsin Chapter is busy and happy.
     That's what David Schuh reported, and we say congratulations
to the chapter for its growth and hard work, and congratulations
also to Dennis and Margie Schuh on the birth of their son. 

**Inquiry:
     We have been asked to carry the following inquiry:
     How can the visual display screen messages of a music
synthesizer be converted into audible speech? Please send
suggestions in print, Braille, or on cassette to Suleman Currim,
797 Jane Street, Suite 502, Toronto, Ontario, CANADA M6N 4B8; or
call (416) 766-7777.

**For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Apple IIe Enhanced computer system in excellent condition.
Included are 10-meg hard drive, two 5.25-inch floppy drives, the
Echo Plus speech card, a printer, a modem, and much more. Also
included are all manuals (in print) and many, many talking disks-
-games, applications, the Bible, Sensible Speller, etc. Price,
$500 negotiable. Call Morgan Jones days, evenings, or weekends at
(914) 255-1254, Eastern time; no collect calls, please.

**Mount Rushmore Moves to Washington, D.C.:
     David and Ron Stowe, co-owners of Classic Casting, Inc., of
Olathe, Kansas, recently presented an accurate sculptural
representation of the four Mount Rushmore presidential carvings
to the National Park Service for display at the Headquarters of
the Department of the Interior in Washington, D.C. A similar
sculpture is available for tactile study in the Visitors Center
at the Mount Rushmore National Memorial in South Dakota. 

**Large-Note Collections of Piano Music Now Available:
     The director of marketing for CPP/Belwin, Inc., has written
to announce that two collections of large-note piano music are
now available, and a third should be in production by the end of
the year. "Through the Years, Golden Standards" and "All Time
Christmas Favorites" are now available at $9.95 a copy. Coming
soon is "America's Favorite Songs, A Community Songbook." These
books are attractively compiled and include large-print lyrics as
well as large-note music. For more information contact CPP/
Belwin, Inc., P.O. Box 4340, Hialeah, Florida 33014-9969. Make
checks payable to Music Ventures, and include $2 for postage and
handling in addition to the $9.95 per book. Credit-card orders
can be placed by calling (800) 628-1528.

**Job Available:
     Catlin Donnelly of the Massachusetts Association for the
Blind has asked us to carry the following job announcement: 
     Wanted, an Executive Director/CEO. A dynamic, visionary
leader and proven administrator is needed to revitalize an
established agency which provides an array of community and
residential services to blind and visually impaired individuals
and multiply disabled children and adults. Demonstrated skill in
strategic planning, management, and fund raising are necessary,
as well as team building, excellent communication and fiscal
skills, and proven ability to manage change in complex
environments. Experience working with the blind and disabled
would be helpful; sensitivity to clients' needs is a must. Salary
is competitive. Send application information to Executive
Director Search Committee, Massachusetts Association for the
Blind, P.O. Box 2370, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02239.

**South Carolina Continues to Grow:
     We recently received the following communication from Don
Capps, president of the National Federation of the Blind of South
Carolina. Here is what he says:
     At the recent state convention I announced that it is the
goal of the NFB of SC to have a chapter in all of the 46 counties
of the state by the year 2000. Another significant step has been
taken to achieve this goal. Tuesday evening, September 29, the
Chesterfield County Chapter of the NFB of SC was organized. This
new chapter becomes the 38th chapter of the NFB of SC, which has
realized phenomenal growth in 1992. This year five county-wide
Federation chapters have been organized throughout the state,
including chapters in Hampton County, Berkeley County, Bamberg
County, Chesterfield County, and the former Hartsville chapter
which was reorganized to include Darlington County. Several weeks
ago NFB of SC treasurer Parnell Diggs made an exploratory trip to
the Chesterfield County area to make some initial inquiries.
Since that time, Betty and I have made three trips travelling
throughout Chesterfield County. Our second vice president, Frank
Coppel, also worked in Chesterfield County. A long time associate
member, Louise Gulledge, lives in Chesterfield and was
tremendously helpful in this organizing process. The organizing
dinner took place at Saint Paul's United Methodist Church in
downtown Chesterfield. The new chapter has an excellent
president. He is Ken Rape, who owns an auto repair shop in
Pageland. To the best of my knowledge, Ken is the only totally
blind person in South Carolina who both owns and operates an auto
repair business, personally doing the repair work. When I called
on Ken on Monday, September 28th, he was working on the engine of
a 1984 Chrysler New Yorker. The other officers are vice president
Jerome Sellers, secretary Dalphine Sellers, and treasurer Algie
Sellers. The chapter will have good leadership. The NFB of SC
family now has 41 important entities, including 38 chapters and 3
statewide divisions.

**New Cassette Newsletter:
     Janiece Betker, an active member of the National Federation
of the Blind of Minnesota and an author of books about the family
and parenting, writes to announce plans to begin a cassette
newsletter about relationships. Here is what she says: 
     Have you been perplexed and amazed at the vagaries of human
relationships? Have you had experiences or solved relationship
problems in ways that might help others? Are there issues you
would like others to help you with? If so, we invite you to join
our interactive newsletter by sending for your free introductory
cassette. Send us your name and address with your phone number,
if you wish, in Braille or on cassette if possible. (Print can be
managed, but your request will be delayed a few days.) Send to
Pipeline, c/o Janiece Betker, 1886 29th Avenue, N.W., New
Brighton, Minnesota 55122, or call (612) 631-2909, leaving a
message with your name and address. 
     Help make this newsletter a great success. We want your
views in your own voice for our first issue.

**Pen Friend Wanted:
     Lorri Riddle has asked that we carry the following
announcement:
     Are you a newly-accomplished Braille reader? So am I. I am
looking for pen pals. If you are interested, please contact Lorri
Riddle, 402 Fourth Avenue, East Twin Falls, Idaho 83301.

**Rozek's Now in Format for the Blind:
     We have been asked to print the following:
     Rozek's, the Seattle-based newsletter written and edited by
veteran magazine journalist Michael Rozek, is now available in
three formats for blind readers. The eight-page bimonthly
publication, each issue of which features a 7,000-word-plus
profile of a remarkable American, is being offered in Braille,
large-print, and audio cassette editions. Rozek's features no
advertising, illustrations, or photographs--placing its emphasis
instead on pure text. Subjects for recent or upcoming stories
include Jonathon Storm, one of the world's most accomplished
nature sound recordists; Dave Nemo, host of the most popular
late-night radio show in the U.S. geared for truck drivers; Kathy
Casey, one of America's top young chefs; and Leslie Muth, a Santa
Fe-based gallery owner and expert on American folk art.
     Rozek's currently has subscribers in thirty states and is
planning Japanese and Russian editions to be distributed overseas
in 1993.
     Subscriptions to Rozek's are $10 for a year of six issues
($18 for two years) and can be obtained by sending a check or
money order to Rozek's, 3424 10th Avenue West, Seattle,
Washington 98119. Please specify Braille, large print, or audio
cassette format. 

**Hoping to Buy:
     Eldridge Hardy has written to say that he would like to
purchase a V-tek closed circuit television system from anyone
interested in selling one. He can be reached at Route 1, Box 33,
Tyler, Alabama; or by telephone on weekends only at (205) 875-
6248.

**Elected:
     Steve Benson, president of the National Federation of the
Blind of Illinois, writes to report that the results of the
affiliate's October 11, 1992, election were as follows:
president, Stephen O. Benson; first vice president, Cathy
Randall; second vice president, Tony Burda; secretary, Ruth
Isaacs; Treasurer, Robert Randall; and board members, Bill
Isaacs, Don Hert, Bill Reif, and Mary Jo Seiler. 

**New Parents Division Organized:
     Peggy Pinder, president of the National Federation of the
Blind of Iowa, writes to report the following: 
     Parents of blind children are becoming more involved in the
NFB throughout the United States. These children are our future,
and we welcome them and their parents into our Federation family.
We are proud to announce the formation of a new chapter in Iowa,
the Iowa Parents of Blind Children Division of the NFB of Iowa.
The following officers were elected: Deb Smith, president; Bennie
Elsey, vice president; Rocky Smith, treasurer; and Kim Brown,
secretary. The first meeting was held on September 19, 1992, with
NFB of Iowa president Peggy Pinder in attendance.

**For Sale:
     We have been asked to print the following:
     I want to sell a Compaq 8086 portable computer with a 22
mega-byte hard drive. RAM is 512K, which can be upgraded. The
price is $800 or best offer. I am also selling a VertPlus voice
card. Even though the card is a 1985 model, I have the latest
software to run it. The price for the VertPlus is $1,095 or best
offer.
     The voice card is presently installed in the computer. I can
sell them together or separately. The hard drive includes many
software programs, such as WordPerfect, Lotus 1-2-3, dBase,
Multimate, and many more. 
     Interested parties may contact Luis E. Thorin, 2655 Colfax
Ave., South, 203, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55408.

**World Series Baseball Computer Game Update Now Available:
     We have been asked to print the following:
     The 1993 update of the award-winning World Series Baseball
Game and Information System is now ready. (WSBB is played on IBM-
compatible computers with screen readers and synthesizers.) The
update will include three new information programs: a baseball
quiz, a history of baseball, and a new leaders program that
displays the leaders in all important statistical categories for
every year. Nine new teams have been added, making the total
eighty-three. Six are for franchises which have not had a pennant
winner, including the two Canadian teams. A squeeze play and a
steal of home have been added. WSBB is now being played in
thirty-nine states and three foreign countries. Cost of the
update is still only $5. For new users, cost for the entire game
and system is $15. Send your check to Harry Hollingsworth, 692
South Sheraton Drive, Akron, Ohio 44319, or call (216) 644-2421. 

**Wisconsin Convention:
     We recently received the following report from Bonnie
Peterson, president of the National Federation of the Blind of
Wisconsin:
     The 1992 convention of the National Federation of the Blind
of Wisconsin was held at the Best Western Hotel in Green Bay on
October 2-4. The election of officers was as follows: Bonnie
Peterson, president; Linda Mentink, first vice-president;
Kathleen Sebranek, second vice-president; Jodi Cowle, secretary;
Larry Sebranek, treasurer; and Deb Jacobson and David Schuh,
board members.
     A charter of affiliation was presented to our new La Crosse
chapter. The La Crosse chapter in only 195 days has started
Braille classes in the area, met with their congressman to
eliminate the National Commission on Blindness, had a chicken
barbecue fund raiser, and brought warmth and dedication to the
National Federation of the Blind. La Crosse chapter officers are:
Larry Sebranek, president; Doris Selke, vice president; Steve
Johnson, secretary; Kathleen Sebranek, treasurer; and Lucy Ruege
and Juanita Phillips, board members.

**Everywhere:
     The vital work of the National Federation of the Blind is
sometimes found in unusual places. Sooner or later the influence
of the organized blind movement will be found everywhere.
     A nationally distributed flier for the Catholic Church
entitled "Ten Commandments: Our Church Week" for September 27,
1992, has an important message about Braille and the blind
printed on the back. Included in the message is:

                The Lord Gives Sight to the Blind

     Kansas State Representative Dick Edlund sponsored a law that
ensures every blind child has the chance to learn Braille. He
knew that Braille, a tactile reading system, is essential to a
blind person's independence and success. Not teaching a legally
blind child to read Braille is the same as refusing to teach a
sighted child to read print. Dick Edlund knew all this because he
happens to be blind.




                 ******************************
     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."
                 ******************************
