                       THE BRAILLE MONITOR

                         September, 1987

                    Kenneth Jernigan, 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

                  NFB NET BBS:  (612) 696-1975
               WorldWide Web:  http://www.nfb.org
CONTENTS

SEPTEMBER 1987


GAMES
  by Charlene Groves

THE NATIONAL BRAILLE ASSOCIATION CUTS ITS TIES WITH NAC
  by Kenneth Jernigan

PENNSYLVANIA FEDERATIONIST HAS TROUBLE VOTING

AIR CANADA DISCRIMINATES AGAINST BLIND PASSENGER

BRAILLE--THE COMING RENAISSANCE

THEY CAME UP ON OUR BLIND SIDE by Betty Niceley

WHY NOT BRAILLE  by Mrs. Ann Hollowell

BRAILLE AND THE PARTIALLY SIGHTED by Debbie Hamm

BRAILLABLES by Marie Porter

THEN AND NOW by Michael Baillif

STANDING ON THE BUS by Marc Maurer

OUT TO LUNCH by Kenneth Jernigan

VENDORS FIGHT PROPOSED BAN ON CIGARETTE SALES

CONTINUING PROBLEMS AT THE IDAHO COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND

MARYLAND LIBRARY FOR THE BLIND IN TROUBLE by Kenneth Jernigan

MORE ABOUT THE RUSSELL ANDERSON CASE by Peggy Pinder

A DOG GUIDE IS NOT A PET

AIDS UNLIMITED, INC.

PROCLAMATION

RECIPES

MONITOR MINIATURES


     Copyright, National Federation of the Blind, Inc., 1987


GAMES

by Charlene Groves


  (From the Editor: Charlene Groves lives in New Jersey.  In the
letter accompanying her article she said: "I have been receiving
the Braille Monitor for several years now.  Yet, I still remained
silent about the things which have happened to me.  I have light
perception only, and I spend a great deal of time writing science
fiction and poetry.  I suppose part of the reason I have never
written much about myself is because writing is a lot like
crying.  Once you start, you fear you might not be able to stop. 
So here is part of my story.")

I.

  The little boy was six years old when the German soldiers came
to the farm house looking for his mother.  The tall officer
smiled at the boy.  The man in splendid uniform spoke very kindly
to the boy.  He said that it was of vital importance that they
find the boy's father.  Therefore, they needed the little boy to
tell them where his mother was hiding since she would know where
his father was.
  The boy said that he was sorry but that he wasn't allowed to
tell anyone where his mother was, because it was a secret.  So
the officer said, "Well, then, let's make it into a game.  That
way no harm can come of it.  If you show me where your mother is,
I'll give you these chocolate bars and this iron cross."
  And so the boy took his new friend into the barn and showed him
where his mother lay hiding.
  "Good boy," the German officer said, giving the boy a kindly
pat on the head.  "Now you run along and play while your mother
and I talk."
  The soldier handed the boy the candy and the cross, just as he
had said that he would; and thinking all was well, the boy
happily ran off to play by himself.  It wasn't until the sound of
a shot rang out a few seconds later that the boy understood that
he had been betrayed.
  You see, the boy's father was working for the underground, and
the Germans had threatened to kill his wife if he did not
surrender.

II.

  Then, the music came on, and the credits began to roll silently
across the screen.  The announcer told us that the story we had
just seen was based upon a true incident.  The rest of my family
went back to normal.  For them this was just another television
show.
  But me--I only pretended to go back to normal.  I felt a
profound sense of loss and grief, an ache so deep that no tears
would come.  I was stuck somewhere inside that little boy,
forever compelled to see the world through his heart, mind, and
viewpoint--feeling every texture of my life through his skin.
  But I kept these thoughts a closely guarded secret.  For how
was I to explain having such strange feelings?  And besides, I
was already very often in trouble for being such a little tomboy.

I felt abandoned by all the world, and the frightening thing was
that I didn't know why.

III.

  One day, shortly before I was to enter the public school
system, a lady came to our door.  She was from the New Jersey
State Commission for the Blind.  Apparently it was her job to
make sure that I was ready for school.  She talked to my mom for
a while.  Then, she asked my mom to go out into the yard and wait
so that she could talk to me alone.
  At that time I wanted to go to school, more than anything else
in the world.  I knew that school was where the books were, and
where the books were the power was.  For even at the age of five
I hungered for learning.
  The lady said that because I was blind, she had come to make
sure that I was ready for school.  She said that because I was
blind, there were things that my parents couldn't teach me. 
Therefore, she wished that they would send me away to school--but
since my parents refused to do that, I would have to go to public
school as part of a new experiment.
  However, before I went to school, I would have to pass a test
to see how well I could get around.  We were going to play a
game.  We were going to have fun going into each and every room
in the house, just so she could be certain that I knew where
everything was.
  And so we went, she saying at every opportunity, "And what's in
this drawer?"  Then, she would have me open the drawer in
question, so that she could look through it--in order to see
whether I had given her an accurate description of what lay
within.
  When she finished her work, she told my mother that I was ready
for school.
  After the lady was gone, my mom asked me what the lady and I
had done while she was waiting in the yard.  And when I told her
what had happened, she was outraged.
  Realizing that I had been tricked and used in some way, I began
to cry.  Suddenly it seemed to me that I had done something
terribly wrong.  But mom said not to cry, because I hadn't done
anything wrong.  She said that what had happened wasn't my fault.

She told me that it had never occurred to her that the lady from
the New Jersey Commission for the Blind would do such a thing to
us.  She said that it wasn't anyone else's business what we kept
in our drawers.
  Yet, even so, I still felt so guilty and ashamed, so dirty and
unclean, that I thought I would never feel right again.  I hated
myself for being innocent and ignorant.  I understood then that I
was just another dumb kid, and I felt afraid because I had no
protector who could stand between me and my dumbness.
  My mind and heart kept saying to me:  "You should have known
better.  You should have known better.  You should have known
better"--for I knew that, through me, my family and I had been
robbed of something fine and precious.
  My only source of comfort during that time was my mother's
confession that she had not known what the lady would do either. 
And she was a grownup.  Because she was a grownup, she said that
it was much more her fault than anyone else's.  She felt that she
ought somehow to have foreseen what was coming.
  Thus, I watched in awe as my mother attempted to lift my guilt,
carrying it upon her own shoulders, which were infinitely
stronger and wiser than mine.  But I was a child.  Nothing could
erase the ache or restore the innocence.  Nor did anyone ever
suspect the truth about me.
  No one ever guessed at the secret change which had taken place
inside of me.  I still played with my brother and sister, going
through all of the normal stages that children go through.  But
in the very deepest part of my soul I wasn't a child anymore.  I
was a soldier, and I knew that there was a war on.


THE NATIONAL BRAILLE ASSOCIATION CUTS ITS TIES WITH NAC

by Kenneth Jernigan


  As everybody knows, the last couple of years have been a bad
time for NAC (the National Accreditation Council for Agencies
Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped).  The North Carolina
School for the Blind, the Michigan State School for the Blind,
Kansas State Services for the Blind, Rhode Island State Services
for the Blind, and others decided they had had enough and
withdrew.  There is an old saying to the effect that nothing wins
like success.  The reverse of that coin is that nothing loses
like failure--and NAC certainly offers graphic testimony to the
truth of it all.
  One of the latest to leave NAC's sinking ship is NBA (the
National Braille Association).  Established in 1945, the NBA is
described in the 1984 edition of the American Foundation for the
Blind's Directory of Agencies Serving the Blind in the U. S. as
follows:  "Brings together those interested in production and
distribution of Braille, large type and tape recorded materials
for the visually impaired.  NBA Braille Book Bank provides
thermoform copies of hand- transcribed texts to college students
and professional persons; NBA Braille Technical Tables Bank has a
collection of over 300 tables which supplement many of the texts;
through NBA Reader- Transcriber Registry blind people can obtain
vocational daily living material--at below cost; through Braille
Transcription Assignment Service; requests of college students
for Brailled textbooks are filled.  Publications to aid
transcribers include: Manual for Large Type Transcribing, and
Tape Recording Manual, 3rd Ed. available from LC/DBPH; Teacher's
Manual and Tape Recording Lessons, from NBA national office;
Guidelines for Administration of Groups Producing Reading
Materials for the Visually Handicapped, from LC/DBPH; Handbook
for Braille Music Transcribers, from LC/DBPH; and NBA Bulletin,
issued four times a year to membership, available in print,
Braille, or tape."
  This is how the National Braille Association is described by
the American Foundation for the Blind.  Put briefly, it is the
nationwide organization of transcribers.  It has both prestige
and stability.  It has been one of NAC's sponsors from the very
beginning.  Therefore, its withdrawal must be particularly
troubling to NAC.  When we learned of the NBA defection, our
reporter called NBA officials for comment.  First we contacted
Angela Coffaro, the staff member in charge of NBA's headquarters
in Rochester, New York.  Ms. Coffaro seemed uneasy at discussing
the matter but said she thought that financial considerations
were only partially involved in the NBA board's decision to
withdraw sponsorship of NAC.  She seemed to feel that the
critical point for the NBA board was that NBA and NAC simply "had
no basis for a continuing relationship."  She did not explain
why, if this is true, there was "the basis for a continuing
relationship" from the late 1960's until now.  Ms. Coffaro said
that, even if it had wanted to, NBA could not be an accredited
member of NAC but only a sponsor.  She said that there was,
therefore, no purpose to be served by NBA's remaining as a NAC
sponsor.  Ms.  Coffaro said that the decision to withdraw was
entirely the NBA's and that NAC simply responded with "regrets." 
Ms.  Coffaro offered the thought that she believed other NAC
sponsors were reaching the same conclusion that NBA had reached. 
She seemed reluctant to discuss the matter at all, expressed the
opinion that it might be just as well if no publicity were given
to the situation, and finally referred the Monitor reporter to
Ms. Betty Crolick of Fort Collins, Colorado, NBA's President.
  If possible, Ms. Crolick seemed even more uneasy about
discussing the NAC withdrawal than Ms. Coffaro had.  She
confirmed the fact that the National Braille Association had
definitely withdrawn its NAC sponsorship, and she said that the
reason was not the amount of the annual dues for sponsoring
members.  She said the dues were only $50 per year and were
really not a factor in the decision.
  Ms. Crolick expressed her belief that NBA was one of the
original NAC sponsors, dating back at least to 1970 when she
originally joined the NBA board of directors.  She said she could
not comment on the exact reasons for NBA's withdrawal from NAC,
but she went on to say that NBA and NAC seemed to have very
little in common and that none of the NAC standards would seem to
be relevant to any of NBA's activities.  Beyond that, Ms. Crolick
would only say that it was "just no longer appropriate for NBA to
continue membership in NAC."  She expressed the hope that NBA's
withdrawal from NAC "would not become the center of publicity." 
She explained that this was why she would have to decline to give
further reasons for the NBA-NAC separation.
  The restrained statements of Ms.  Coffaro and Ms. Crolick speak
with more force than loud denunciations.  The facts speak for
themselves.  From the very beginning of NAC (for at least almost
twenty years) the National Braille Association has lent its name
and prestige to NAC.  All of that has now come to an end.  Why? 
Surely NBA and NAC have as much in common now as they did twenty
years ago, and as both NBA representatives emphasized, the
nominal amount of dues for a sponsoring member was not a factor.
  The plain truth is that NAC (if it ever had a constructive part
to play in the field of work with the blind) has such a part no
longer.  The greatest service it could possibly render would be
quietly to dissolve and go out of existence.  If it does not soon
voluntarily do so, the job will almost certainly be done for
it--and with a great deal more pain to NAC than if it just
quietly went away.


PENNSYLVANIA FEDERATIONIST HAS TROUBLE VOTING


  Twenty years ago it was not uncommon for blind persons to have
problems when they went to the polls to vote.  As is usually the
case with discrimination and outmoded practices, the behavior of
polling officials is erratic.  When the blind voter wanted to
take a sighted assistant of his or her choice into the voting
booth, there were varied reactions.  Sometimes the blind voter
was told that an official of each political party must witness
the marking of the ballot.  At other times the voter required a
doctor's certificate, an affidavit, or some other type of
documentation.  At still other times the blind voter was allowed
to take another person into the booth to assist in casting the
ballot with no question or problem at all.
  That was twenty years ago, and in most states the matter has
been settled-- usually by statute.  In almost every part of the
country it is now taken for granted that any person who has
trouble marking a ballot can take another person into the booth
to do the marking, but occasionally there are still throwbacks to
the former era.
  Such an incident happened in Pennsylvania on May 19 of this
year when Federationist John Nemec went to the polls to vote.  He
was challenged and probably would not have been able to vote at
all except for the fact that he is a Federationist and,
therefore, knows his rights and what to do to protect them.  It
took a little time and a second trip to the polling place, but
John Nemec voted.  Here is the letter which the Berks County
Chapter wrote to the local newspaper:

--------------------

Dear Editor:
  We all know it's important for Americans to exercise their
right to vote.  It's significant if someone decides to vote after
not doing so for some years.  Would you deny that person his
voting privileges?  One polling official tried in the recent
primary election.
  John Nemec, a member of the Berks County Chapter of the
National Federation of the Blind, is partially sighted and does
not travel with a dog guide or white cane but does need
assistance with such things as voting.  When John went to vote, a
gentleman refused to let him have assistance.  John's
registration had not been properly stamped to indicate that he
needed help voting.  The polling official was more than reluctant
to accept John's explanation.  When the official did offer John
personal help, John felt it was best to try to get help from
someone less antagonistic.
  John was angered and hurt by the harassment, and sought help. 
Within a couple of hours John went back to the polls and cast his
vote.
  Our thanks go to Congressman Gus Yatron's office, Rosa
Caltagirone, and the Berks County Courthouse for helping to
secure John's opportunity to exercise his rights as any American.
  If history has indeed been changed by one vote, don't you think
a blind person should be able to vote without harassment?  We
think so.

                    Berks County Chapter
        National Federation of the Blind


AIR CANADA DISCRIMINATES AGAINST BLIND PASSENGER


  (Comment from the Editor: Dr. Euclid Herie, the Managing
Director of the Canadian National Institute for the Blind, is
healthy and vigorous.  He is a respected executive, a man of
prominence in the civic and social affairs of Canada, and a
person who comports himself with decorum and dignity.  As his
letter demonstrates, he is also quite articulate and well aware
of his rights as a citizen and human being.
  Blind passengers in the United States are accustomed to
discriminatory and unreasonable treatment from the airlines, but
apparently it also happens in Britain and Canada.  We have
probably not heard the last of the incident described in Dr.
Herie's letter.)

                        Toronto, Ontario Canada
                            June 9, 1987

Mr. Pierre J. Jeanniot President and Chief Executive Officer
Air Canada
Montreal

Dear Mr. Jeanniot:
  On Saturday, May 30th, 1987, my wife and I returned from
London, England, to Toronto on flight number 857.  I requested
that the in-charge flight attendant file a report concerning my
protest at having had a seat reassignment to two center seats
when the two seats previously booked, several months ahead of
time, were summarily and without apology removed from me.
  I believe it is important to briefly document that, on arriving
at the airport in London, the person who checked me in went off
to consult with someone and then returned, explaining to my wife,
not speaking to me at all but referring to me as "the blind
gentleman," that we had been given two other seats since it would
be "easier" for "the blind gentleman" because of the stairs
involved in having to gain access to the upper lounge.  I failed
to understand her reasoning and protested that I wanted the seats
that had in fact been reserved and that a few stairs certainly
presented no problem to me.  I was then told that this would be
more convenient and there should be no further discussion.  There
was no explanation of any regulations, but I did receive the same
comment subsequently from other ground personnel and from the
in-charge attendant once aboard.
  As you may know, I am a member of the Minister's Transportation
for Disabled Persons Implementation Committee and have found the
experience to be generally positive and rewarding.  I believe
that we are gradually eroding some of the long-standing
regulatory and other barriers that create problems such as I have
taken time to outline to you.  Not only was this action a
personal indignity to me--it was embarrassing to my wife and
certainly an offense to my rights for equal access and
transportation and for self-determination.  In the Transportation
Committee, the disabled community has argued effectively that
self-determination in transportation and other areas to achieve
equality must receive proper acceptance in the statutory and
regulatory areas that govern every aspect of our daily life,
including the right to transportation.
  In this instance, I felt that the incident only highlighted the
points that had been raised in the United States, Canada, and
elsewhere concerning the seating of persons in so-called
"restricted" rows.  I have debated that point in the Committee
without success, but I felt that this incident involving a few
stairs to an able-bodied person was nothing short of offensive
and discriminatory.  I have overlooked the discomfort of the
seating arrangement that we had no choice but to accept if we
wanted to return to Toronto as scheduled.  I would, however,
request that appropriate compensation be made to my wife and to
me in consideration of this incident that I considered
regrettable and unnecessary.  With specific reference to
self-determination, I would be curious to know the medical or
other bases that underlie such a regulation, given that
"disability" and the use of the upper lounge might well extend
beyond blindness to hypothetically other disabled persons, for
example persons with one arm, one leg, perhaps a major internal
disability, involving medication or a latent heart condition,
etc.
  These comments are not intended to be flippant because they do
point out that it is really not possible, other than by proper
consultation and respect for the individual, to determine an
individual's mobility and ability, both physically and mentally. 
I would hasten to add that, ironically, I had just completed a
three-day hike in the West Mendip Way that involved thirty-one
miles and a cumulative elevation of well over 4,000 feet.  I
wonder if the small spiral staircase, that I once ascended on a
flight from Calgary to Toronto, really needed to occasion the
sort of incident that it created.
  In drawing this matter to your attention, I would call on your
office to consider suitable compensation without my having to
seek other recourse, given that I have flown with Air Canada for
more than twenty years and want to maintain what I trust can be
an amicable arrangement.  I also trust that this matter, through
copies of this correspondence, will give rise to the sort of
discussion that will resolve this in the future for myself and
others.
  Thank you for you attention, and I will look forward to your
early reply.

                            Yours truly, Euclid J. Herie
                       Managing Director Canadian National
Institute
                           for the Blind

cc: The Honorable John Crosbie Minister of Transport

Mr. Jack Gaum, Director Transportation of Disabled
 Persons Program
Transport Canada

Mr. Stuart Grant
Vice President and Secretary
Air Transport Association of Canada

Mr. Gregory R. Latham, Chairman Transportation of Disabled
Persons
 Implementation Committee

Mrs. G. P. M. Braak National President
The Canadian Council of the Blind


BRAILLE

THE COMING RENAISSANCE


                   Hollywood, California June 4, 1987

Dear Dr. Jernigan:
  I was just listening to your article about your early life and
the Matilda Ziegler Magazine, which I receive on discs.  For
years you gave me the impression that you were older than I, but
actually I now see that I am six years older than you.  I was
born November 15, 1920.  November 15, 1926, (the year I presume
you were born) was the date that commercial radio got started, so
you are at least as old as radio.
  I became legally blind in 1953 and totally blind in 1969 when I
was forty- nine, at which time I taught myself Braille--including
Grade Three.  I also looked at other systems of Braille such as
shorthand, music, and the Nemeth Code.  I even invented a more
compact Braille, which I call Brant.  It consists of one vertical
row of three variated shaped dots, which are capable of forming
into sixty-three combinations just like regular Braille.
  Although I think Brant is superior to regular Braille, I doubt
that it will ever replace Braille because with such machines as
the Optacon, Braille appears to be on the way out.  Increasingly
I am running into young blind people who do not use Braille. 
Typically they are carrying around small pocket-sized cassette
recorders.  Just a few months ago I bought myself (for $19) a
Sony cassette recorder which uses regular- sized cassettes and is
only slightly larger than the cassette.  It is much handier to
carry than a slate and stylus.
  Blind people that I have met with these midget cassette
recorders have confessed that they have never bothered to learn
Braille, nor do they intend to learn it.  I have just been
enrolled in a new club called the Chatterbox Recording Club, and
none of the blind people I have so far contacted in the club
knows Braille.  They all prefer to correspond only by cassette.
  Well, it is the way of the world.  Technology is always
replacing something.  Vaudeville was replaced by the talkies, and
the talkies and radio by television, and television by video
tape--and who knows what will replace that?....

                        Sincerely yours, Bruce Edward Brant

--------------------

                     Baltimore, Maryland June 11, 1987

Dear Mr. Brant:
  I have your recent letter, and I thank you for it.  Apparently
I predate radio by two days since I was born November 13, 1926.
  As you are aware, the National Association to Promote the Use
of Braille is one manifestation of a countertrend to the dying of
Braille.  I think recordings are useful and pleasurable, and
although I read Braille rapidly and without effort, there are
times when I prefer to read on talking book record or
cassette--at night, for instance, when I want to read myself to
sleep.  Nevertheless, recordings are not a substitute for Braille
in many cases-- labeling, delivering speeches, scanning large
quantities of material, finding things quickly in a conference or
meeting while simultaneously listening to others, reading
particular passages to people during conversation or debate, and
at least a hundred other situations which I could enumerate.  To
some extent the blind person who does not know Braille is
illiterate, and just as I do not believe recordings, television,
or the computer screen will replace pencil and paper or books for
the sighted, I do not think recorded matter or any other device
can possibly replace Braille for the blind.
  Moreover, technology is giving positive as well as negative
nudges to Braille.  There is the VersaBraille system, and there
are other similar devices, both now available and in the planning
stages.  The computer is making it possible for sighted
secretaries, family members, and others who do not know Braille
to produce it cheaply and rapidly.  The high speed embossers such
as the Thiel and the lower priced modified Perkins are also
increasing the availability of Braille.  The new technology
allows silent, rapid, portable, and easily edited note-taking
devices and more rapid writing than can be done by slate.  Also,
these devices (using cassettes) permit one to take large
quantities of reading material on bus or plane.  In contrast
several bulky Braille volumes would be required for an equal
amount of reading matter in the nontechnological mode.
  In short, Bruce, I believe that Braille may be in the same
situation today that record players were in the 1930's when
everybody said they were about to be replaced by radio.  The
exact opposite was true.  The recording industry was just on the
threshold of its greatest expansion.
  So it may be with Braille--but the jury is still out.  As is so
often the case, we stand at a crossroads.  Braille can either
slide into oblivion, or it can become more usable and flexible
than ever before in history.  The decision is ours, and the time
is now.  I think the question will be settled during the next
five to ten years.  For my part I think it will be a tragedy if
we permit Braille to become an anachronism.  I say this knowing
that many of the sighted educators of blind children (not being
able to use Braille themselves, being too lazy to learn it, and
having all kinds of psychological hangups about it) want to see
it disappear--or, at the very least, diminish very greatly in use
and importance.  They are not the ones primarily affected.  We
are.  Therefore, we are the ones who should have the major voice
in determining what will happen.
  I have no doubt what we will decide and what we will do. 
Braille is not only here to stay but also in the early stages of
a renaissance.  I am convinced that by the time the twenty-first
century is well under way, we will look back with a smile at
those who said that Braille was finished.


                              Cordially, Kenneth Jernigan
                      Executive Director
        National Federation of the Blind


THEY CAME UP ON OUR BLIND SIDE

by Betty Niceley


  (This article appeared in the Spring, 1987, Newsletter of the
National Association to Promote the Use of Braille (NAPUB). 
Betty Niceley, who is President of the National Federation of the
Blind of Kentucky and a member of the Board of Directors of the
National Federation of the Blind, is NAPUB's President.)

  We didn't see it coming; so we don't know how, when, or where
it started.  We do know that today the ability of blind
individuals to function at their highest level of independence
hangs in the balance.  When did residential schools for the blind
stop including Braille in their regular curriculum--and most
importantly, why?  Who decided that he or she had the right to
withhold from these students specialized skills which might
benefit them at present or in the future?  What prompted
providers of education to determine that students having some
vision should not be taught Braille, thereby limiting their
ability fully to compete with both blind and sighted peers?  Why
did parents stop insisting that their children be given any and
all opportunities to enjoy the best of both worlds?
  Public Law 94-142 mandates that all handicapped children shall
receive free and appropriate education in the least restrictive
environment.  Yet, many of the public school systems throughout
the country fail to recognize the significance of this law as it
applies to blind children.  School administrators very often do
not aggressively seek out those properly trained teachers who are
prepared to equip blind children for reaching their full
potential.  Frequently, teachers--and sometimes parents--do not
understand how far horizons can be broadened for children who
read and write Braille along with their other skills.
  Consequently, blind people who have experienced these custodial
attitudes feel cheated.  This is especially true of the
increasing number of individuals having had visual problems
during childhood and then losing most or all of their vision
after completing high school.  Braille skills learned by children
become second nature to them.  When these same skills (this would
also be true of print) must be learned by adults, the comfort and
speed of reading are likely to be sacrificed.  School officials
(if they have a conscience) must then feel some embarrassment at
having graduated blind students who are unprepared for full and
productive lives.
  What can be done to turn this tide of events?  Simply put,
teachers and administrators of special education must bring into
perspective their responsibilities and the rights of the
students.  Children with any degree of visual loss have the right
to learn Braille and to determine for themselves its capacity for
meeting their needs.  Educators have a responsibility to provide
for them all available and appropriate skills.  To deprive them
of a good working knowledge of Braille is to deny them a basic
right to all available means of communication.  There is never a
question about whether or not these children will learn history,
math, or English, because teachers and parents agree that these
things are essential for a well-rounded education.  They must
reach this same agreement about Braille in order to insure the
future for today's blind children.


WHY NOT BRAILLE

by Mrs. Ann Hollowell


  (This article appeared in the Spring, 1987, Newsletter of the
National Association to Promote the Use of Braille (NAPUB).  Mrs.
Hollowell, who lives in Portsmouth, Virginia, is the parent of a
blind child.)

  Having a visually handicapped child who is in the category of
not totally sightless but legally blind can, as some may know, be
very difficult.  My son at age five was diagnosed as having
macular degeneration, a disease that can leave only peripheral
vision.  In the past three years we have spoken with many doctors
and professionals in the "vision field."  Doctors, of course,
offer very little if any hope for the future, while many of the
professionals cannot agree on teaching skills or learning aids.
  Our first professional, an employee of the Virginia Department
for the Visually Handicapped, only stressed and assisted with
large print books, talking books, and magnifying aids.  She was
very adamant that a person should always use any remaining
eyesight.  To do otherwise would, in her words, "make him
handicapped."  When I suggested Braille as a tool for learning
and as a means of relieving severe eye strain, she became very
upset and firmly stated that Braille skills would never help him.
  Seeing my son struggle for two years in private school, always
at the bottom of the class, was enough to make me realize that
special education was needed.  After contacting our public school
and visiting the vision class, I knew more could be done.  Again,
the professionals felt that no special placement was needed.  I
recommended a regular classroom setting with visiting teachers. 
After much discussion I requested that my son be placed with the
vision program in a school outside our immediate school zone.
  During his first year in the new setting (a public school)
Braille was introduced at my request and with the agreement of
his teachers to see if he would want to learn it.  His response
was extremely positive, and his teachers agreed that Braille
should become a part of his regular education program.
  This year has been wonderful.  His self-esteem has improved. 
With Braille he feels he has a special talent, not a handicap. 
As a parent I see only positive points with his knowing
Braille--a future job, ease and speed in reading, medically less
strain, and therefore less medication for inflamed eyes.
  I feel that no "professional" should be allowed to make all of
the decisions about a child's future learning program.  I know my
child, and I want to be part of his education planning program. 
I have become involved and have learned much in a short time.  By
giving my child this added gift and skill, I feel that his future
looks bright for the first time in many months.  He will have a
choice in the planning of his future with this added skill.  I
say, why not Braille?


BRAILLE AND THE PARTIALLY SIGHTED

by Debbie Hamm


  (This article appeared in the Spring, 1987, Newsletter of the
National Association to Promote the Use of Braille (NAPUB). 
Debbie Hamm is the mother of a blind child and the President of
the Northwest Chapter of the Parents of Blind Children Division
of the National Federation of the Blind.)

  There is a great controversy in this country among the blind
and the educators of the blind.  It concerns the question of
whether Braille should be taught to partially blind students. 
There is a widely held theory that Braille should be taught only
when all other methods of reading competency have been exhausted.

Some of the people who subscribe to this theory question why
anyone would want to learn Braille if any other means of
communication is available to them.  After many interviews and
considerable reading, I believe that this theory will not stand
careful examination. . . .
  Regarding literacy and the use of Braille, Nancy Scott (a blind
writer) states:  "It is the only system that provides a physical
interaction with the written word and allows for instant
perception of format and letter con- tent. . . . Braille becomes
an alternative technique used by blind individuals to gain
information and immediate access to the printed word. . . ."
  The comment has been made to me on several occasions by
itinerant teachers of the blind that Braille is difficult to
learn and that if a partially blind student can learn print, he
or she will want to.  The sighted people I know who have mastered
Braille admit that it is a challenge to learn.  Perhaps the
challenge for teachers to promote a skill in which they are not
proficient is reflected in their promotion of print reading for
their partially sighted students, even those with only a small
degree of eyesight.  An itinerant teacher in Oregon stated to me:

"This is a print world, and if there is any way to teach print,
we will.  I don't know of any partially blind student that is
learning Braille as an alternative technique."  This teacher went
on to say that she wouldn't object to trying Braille, just that
she had never heard of its being done.
  Eileen Rivera, a partially blind graduate student in
Philadelphia, related to me that:  "I was sent to a sight saving
school as a child.  The emphasis was on print.  I wish I had
learned Braille in addition to print.  There isn't much available
in large print, and what there is is very expensive.  If I had
studied Braille as a child, learning it would have been easier
for me.  Now it will be hard to find the time to concentrate on
it."
  When I asked if she got along without Braille she said, "Yes,
but not as well as I would have with it.  It is difficult to make
speeches.  Visualteks are fine, but they are expensive and
cumbersome--not something you can carry in your pocket.  I can
use magnifiers, but I am not always comfortable with them; and it
is awkward when I have to write with my face so close to the
page.  I can use tapes, but there isn't any efficient way to find
what I need to hear--so I use readers."
  In telling me about her experience with readers Eileen Rivera
said that they aren't always reliable, and it takes competent
management skills to get them to do the job correctly.  Readers
are also expensive.  It seems that not using Braille creates
dependence, not independence.
  I learned from several partially blind college students in July
of 1986 that because they were not taught Braille, it is
difficult (if not impossible) to keep up with their sighted
peers.  A few had dropped out of college and moved to a
rehabilitation center to learn Braille, while others struggled
over the decision to interrupt their education and focus a part
of their life on gaining Braille skills.  All of them expressed
the wish that they had learned Braille as children so that they
would be better able to compete in school, and ultimately in the
job market.
  Betty Niceley (President of the National Association to Promote
the Use of Braille) says:  "I was partially blind until I was in
my early twenties, when I became totally blind.  As a child I
learned Braille as an alternative in addition to print.  I
believe if students learn Braille as children, it becomes second
nature to them.  Not teaching a partially blind student Braille
in addition to print is analogous to telling sighted students
that writing is inefficient and that from now on they will only
be allowed to type."
  Eileen Rivera further stated:  "As long as it is necessary for
itinerant teachers to drive, partially sighted students will be
encouraged to read print and discouraged from reading Braille. 
This theory is based on the fact that drivers (sighted people)
must read print.  It follows that print reading will be stressed
to their students.  If Braille is not the itinerant's main method
of receiving and disseminating information, he or she will not
likely become proficient in its use and, therefore, will tend to
discourage it."
  It is not difficult to understand why such attitudes exist.  If
the student uses Braille and if the teacher is not proficient in
its use, added effort on the part of the teacher is required.  At
least in the beginning stages the teacher must transcribe lessons
into Braille and work to assist the student in the interfacing of
Braille with print in the regular school program.
  The mother of a totally blind student in Oregon's Willamette
Valley told me that her son began learning Braille in
kindergarten.  She learned Braille when he started first grade so
that she could help him do his homework.  In the middle of the
year he was introduced to a computer, and in the summer he
received a computer for use in his classroom and another for use
at home.  Each computer is equipped with a speech synthesizer and
printer.  He now does all his work at home on the computer.  This
is easier for his school, his itinerant teacher, and his
mother--and his mother believes that the computer enables him to
compete with his peers on a more equal basis.
  But I am curious about the effect on a child that must rely
exclusively on a computer to communicate with the world.  He
can't put it in his pocket and take it with him, so his world
becomes quite limited.  Also, so far as I know, recreational
reading matter doesn't come out in computer format.  As a result,
he is limited in his exploration of the world.  And what happens
if the power goes out?  A benefit of Braille is that it doesn't
matter whether there is or is not power or technology.  The power
is generated by the user, and his ability to use Braille (like
the ability of the sighted to use print) can bring enjoyment,
knowledge, and convenience.
  Life would be easy if everything was black and white--but it
isn't.  Life is full of gray areas.  My son exists in the gray,
living between the sighted and the totally blind.  For me there
is no question that he is "blind" and will need to learn
alternative methods to enjoy life to its fullest.  It is a simple
fact that he will never drive a car and will have to rely on
public transportation.  His eyes wander due to a condition called
nystagmus.  His left eye protrudes and has an odd appearance. 
Consequently, there will always be people who will stare and make
comments.  He will have to develop methods of dealing positively
with society's prejudice and ignorance.  He will never be able to
apply for a job without a future employer's questioning his
abilities, and not just those that relate to his eyesight or the
job.  He will have to be better prepared than his sighted
competitor to get a job because of the stigmas attached to
blindness.
  For this reason alone I think it is imperative that he and all
other partially blind children be educated with every method of
learning available to them.  He needs to believe that it is
respectable to be blind and that Braille is not an admission of
inferiority or failure.  It is an alternative means of obtaining
and disseminating information--a technique equal to using print,
not better, not worse.  Braille could be the skill that will give
him the confidence to compete, keep up with his sighted and
totally blind peers, and lead an independent life.  Moreover, he
will have a useful tool if he should become totally blind and
need to rely on Braille exclusively.  As a parent I intend to do
my utmost to see that he learns Braille and that it is presented
to him in a positive manner.


BRAILLABLES

by Marie Porter


  (This article appeared in the Spring, 1987, Newsletter of the
National Association to Promote the Use of Braille (NAPUB). 
Marie Porter is Co- Director of The Guild for the Blind in
Chicago.  Some may feel that this article and point of view are
controversial.  Of course they are.  Almost everything that is
worthwhile, as well as many things that aren't, are
controversial.)

  "It's a monkey!"
  Eileen, a member of our staff, was walking by as I worked on a
new Braille drawing.  Although I had not finished more than the
head and shoulders, she recognized the monkey as it was emerging
from my Braille writer.
  That's what I want.  I want Braille to be a shared thing.  I
want drawing to be an experience completely under the control of
blind people, using a skill that is essential to them--as
essential as a pad and pencil to a sighted person.  BRAILLABLES
are my attempt to bring art and Braille together to make drawing
possible, to make Braille less mysterious and isolating.
  A floppy-eared dog, a curly-tailed pig, a Christmas tree, a
lion sitting on a stool, a clown pushing a popcorn cart, a simple
teddy bear, a more complicated teddy bear riding a bicycle--these
are the kinds of things I have drawn.
  I began by using a slate and stylus to make flashcards and
accompanying pictures of an apple, a bell, a house, a candle--all
simple drawings that would fit on an index card.  This became too
tedious, and I began using a Braille writer to make my
BRAILLABLES.
  Now, my creative juices were really flowing, and a lot of ideas
poured out into children's books (fifteen of them, so far).  As a
natural outgrowth of my work, I have written a manual for
teachers and parents, a book of step-by- step instructions for
drawing thirty pictures with a sample of each picture included.
  Some of the books are for beginner readers and have simple
pictures.  Some are for more experienced readers and introduce
two-handed pictures that accompany original stories and poems. 
Some are for older children and emphasize illustrating stories
with drawings that follow along with what is happening.  We are
finding that not only children benefit from the pictures--but
also adults, learning to read Braille, enjoy the stories and try
to figure out what the pictures are all about.
  The next logical step introducing my materials was to get them
on computer and make paper copies of them for people who wanted
them.  I have been able to do this by using an Apple II-E, a
Braille embosser, and David Holladay's Braille- Edit program.  By
changing six keys in the bottom row of the computer and using the
space bar, I have placed all of my work on discs and can run it
off on demand--lots of work, but exciting!
  BRAILLABLES, then, are drawings made by using Braille as the
brush.  By employing a skill that blind people have used to
explore the wonders of books, we are poking into the fantasies of
art.  Why not?  Braille is a joiner, not a loner.  Braille is a
simple arrangement of dots in configurations that are completely
logical, practical, and able to be manipulated.  Where do you
think the idea of dot matrix printers came from?. . . .
  Traditionalists may shudder a bit at this untraditional use of
Braille, but I am more concerned about the children and adults
who might be turned on by reading Braille when they realize that
it is not so distancing, so strange, so out of step with what
they know other people are experiencing.  Braille need not be a
painful reminder of visions lost.  It should be, and can be,
shared with sighted people.
  We hope kids bring home Braille pictures they have drawn to
show parents, to hang on refrigerator doors, to have people say,
"It's a tree!"  I think blind parents can share drawings with
their sighted children.  I think teachers can use BRAILLABLES as
another end road to stretching out the environment for blind
children.  I think BRAILLABLES can give children a means of
expressing themselves in ways we cannot determine--by drawing
what they know, what they think, what they imagine, and what they
want people to see.  Finally, and maybe most important,
BRAILLABLES are fun.
  If you are interested in a listing of our books or have
questions or suggestions, please contact me, Marie Porter, at the
Guild for the Blind, 180 North Michigan Avenue, Chicago, Illinois
60601; phone (312) 236-8569.


THEN AND NOW

by Michael Baillif


  (This article appeared in the Spring, 1987, issue of the
Student Slate, the newsletter of the Student Division of the
National Federation of the Blind.  At the 1987 convention of the
National Federation of the Blind in Phoenix Michael Baillif was
elected President of the Student Division.)

  It has often been said that all things exist in a state of
continuous change.  This is perhaps nowhere more apparent than in
the condition of academic support services to blind college
students.  Over the last decade and a half these services have
been in an accelerated flux, generally on a downward trend.  An
excellent example of this erosion of quality services to blind
students can be illustrated by examining the experiences of a
single California student.
  In the mid-1970's a young Federationist, Mary McDonough,
attended a California State University campus in northern
California.  At the time, the University had what was known as an
office of Disabled Student Services (DSS).  The DSS program,
however, had very little to do and virtually no funds with which
to do it.  The program maintained a list of potential readers
which could be utilized or ignored, as blind students desired. 
Other than this blind students were left to pursue their own
education without special assistance or interference from
institutionalized service providers.  Reader services were
administered by the California Department of Rehabilitation
through a voucher system, which allowed blind students the
freedom effectively to meet their unique requirements.  It was
the responsibility of the blind student to obtain readers,
arrange for test taking, and generally fulfill the obligations
which were required of all students.  McDonough recalls
advertising for her own readers, taking tests under whatever
conditions were convenient, and basically going about her
education with an overall feeling of freedom and independence.
  In 1987 long-time Federationist Mary McDonough-Willows returned
to a California State University campus in northern California to
complete her teaching credential.  The changes she found in the
type and extent of services to blind students can best be summed
up in her own words: "Now you can't even sneeze in a class
without being referred to the Disabled Student Services office." 
McDonough-Willows reports almost total segregation of blind
students from all aspects of academic life and society. 
Everything from academic counseling to test administration is
performed for blind students in the Office of Disabled Student
Services.  Readers are assigned to blind students, and when the
necessity arises, the student must attempt to convince a DSS
staff person to upgrade the number or quality of his or her
readers.  The DSS office represents itself throughout the campus
as the expert on blindness, and any questions which pertain to
blind students are referred directly to the DSS office, instead
of to the students themselves.  The prevailing attitude is that
the DSS office knows best and that blind students should
cheerfully cooperate as they are led by the hand to their
diploma.
  The general trend of academic support services to blind
students over the last fifteen years becomes quite apparent in
this case study.  In California the evolution of disabled student
services and the resulting decrease in the quality of services
offered, or not offered, to blind students can be traced to a
number of causes.
  Initially, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 was
conveniently interpreted so that the responsibility of providing
reader services was shifted from the state department of
rehabilitation to individual college campuses.  This change
resulted in the vast expansion of a service-provider bureaucracy
which embodied poor attitudes regarding the competence and
independence of blind students, decreasing the quality of
services provided.  As DSS programs began to develop, these
attitudes were adopted (unknowingly in many cases) by the
legislature and academic institutions.  They were also subtly and
powerfully communicated to blind students.  The students, in
turn, becoming ever more dependent, completed the circle by
feeling that they needed even more help from the DSS offices and
by demanding a constantly increasing array of services.
  Such has been the course of academic support services to blind
students in California (and very probably many other states) over
the last decade and a half.  Nothing is static; the condition of
services to blind students in 1997 or 2002 will largely be
determined by our own attitudes and our own determination to
affect the future trend which these services should take.


STANDING ON THE BUS

by Marc Maurer


  What constitutes a violation of civil rights, and when is an
issue worth fighting about?  How important is it to defend a
principle, and how do you distinguish between the real and the
petty, substance and nit-picking?  Several decades ago when
blacks were ordered to sit at the back of the bus, were they
justified in raising a ruckus about it?  After all, the back of
the bus arrives almost as soon as the front, and the seats are
equally comfortable.  Furthermore, someone has to sit at the back
of the bus--so why not blacks?
  Was it really worth the controversy, the anger of fellow
passengers, and the harassment and humiliation just to establish
the principle?  The blacks of that day thought it was, and most
Americans (viewing the matter from the perspective of several
decades later) would agree with them.  What was being contested
had little to do with where the people involved sat.  It was as
important as the right to be free--as vital as humanity itself. 
When the blacks were making their fight for the right to sit
where they pleased on the bus, many people did not see it as a
matter of civil rights but only as a demonstration of a militant
unreasonableness.  It was only later that the issue came into
focus.  It is always that way when a minority is trying to gain
the status which others take for granted.
  The blind of today are engaging in the classic struggle to
climb the ladder.  What happens when a blind man boards a bus and
all of the seats are taken?  If the bus is crowded and other
passengers are standing, should a seated passenger be asked to
give his seat to the blind man?  Should the blind man refuse to
accept the seat?  What does it do to his self-esteem and public
image if he insists on standing?  Alternatively, what does it do
to his self-esteem and public image if he submits and takes the
seat?  How far should he take the matter?
  Terry McManus is President of the National Federation of the
Blind of Pennsylvania.  He reads the Monitor.  He has
sensitivity.  He thinks.  In January of 1986 he encountered a
situation and decided he had to do something about it.  The
incident was recounted in a moving letter from Terry in the 1986
banquet address delivered by Dr. Jernigan at the National
Federation of the Blind convention.  As we listened to Terry's
letter, I am sure that each of us asked ourselves how we would
have behaved in a similar circumstance.
  The circumstances of the incident are clear-cut and easily
told.  Terry was threatened, browbeaten, and harassed because he
insisted on his right to remain standing (along with other
passengers) on a crowded bus in Pittsburgh.  The driver demanded
that Terry sit down.  When it became obvious that Terry would not
comply, the bus driver took the bus out of service, told the
other passengers that they must board a separate bus, and drove
Terry (still standing) to his stop. During the ride the driver
provided Terry with a sermon on the rights of other passengers,
courtesy, the responsibility of bus drivers, and the proper
attitude of the blind. As you might expect, he thought blind
people should be passive, grateful, and obedient. Certainly they
should be properly appreciative when public officials (bus
drivers, for example) try to help and protect them. Finally the
driver said that if he saw Terry again, he would pass him up and
that he thought the other passengers would deal with him on the
street.
  Terry filed a complaint with the Pennsylvania Human Relations
Commission.  The decision has now been rendered. The Human
Relations Commission says that a blind person's standing on a bus
is not a matter of safety and that whether the actions of the
driver were motivated by compassion or something else does not
change the discrimination. The blind, says the Commissionn, have
the right to equal treatment.
  The road to first-class citizenship for the blind is a long
one, and there are frustrations and trials along the way. But the
changes come.  Primarily they come because of the work of the
National Federation of the Blind.  One step at the time we move
toward equality.  Here is the finding of the Pennsylvania Human
Relations Commission:

--------------------

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

PENNSYLVANIA
HUMAN RELATIONS COMMISSION

Terrence McManus,
Complainant

v.

Port Authority of
Allegheny County,
Respondent

Docket No. P-2453

FINDING OF PROBABLE CAUSE

Summary of Complaint:

  WHEREAS, on the 15th day of April, 1986, a formal complaint was
filed before the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission
(hereinafter called the "Commission") against the Port Authority
of Allegheny County, Beaver and Island Avenues, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania 15233 (hereinafter called the "Respondent," whether
singular or collectively), by Terrence McManus, an individual
residing at 883 Mirror Street, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15217
(hereinafter called the "Complainant") alleging that on or about
January 14, 1986, Respondent violated Section 5(i) (1) of the
Pennsylvania Human Relations Act of October 27, 1955, P.L. 744,
as amended, 43 P.S. Section 951, et seq., in that Respondent
humiliated and embarrassed him because of his
handicap/disability, blindness, by attempting to prevent him from
standing on a bus.

Statement of Applicable Substantive Law:

  WHEREAS, Section 5(i) (1) provides, in pertinent part, that
"[i]t shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice... for any
person being the owner, lessee, proprietor, manager,
superintendent, agent or employee of any place of public
accommodation... to refuse, withhold from, or deny to any person
because of his... handicap or disability, or to any person due to
use of a guide dog because of the blindness... of the user,
either directly or indirectly any of the accommodations,
advantages, facilities or privileges of such place of public
accommodation..."

Summary of Response:

  The Respondent acted out of "compassion" by extending an
invitation to other passengers to permit Complainant an
opportunity to be seated. While Complainant has the option to
remain standing, his doing so may create a safety hazard for the
driver and other passenger[s].

Summary of Findings:

  1. Respondent is a place of public accommodation, as defined by
the Act, and is engaged in operating public transportation within
the County;
  2. Complainant, an adult individual who is blind, boarded a
crowded bus during "rush hour." Complainant states that he was
using a cane since he is totally blind. As he boarded the bus,
the driver requested that other passengers relinquish one of the
front seats designated for the disabled. Complainant refused the
seat, explaining to the driver that he had good balance, and
would prefer to stand rather than force another passenger to give
up their seat.  According to Complainant, the driver became
"irate" and advised Complainant that if he didn't immediately
take a seat, he (driver) would not move the bus. When the
Complainant remained adamant, the driver transferred the other
passengers to another bus. The instant bus was taken out of
service and Complainant was [taken by the] driver, alone, to his
stop.
  3. According to Respondent, its action of designating seats for
handicap[ped] individuals is an act of "goodwill." While
Complainant has the option of standing, this "may create a safety
hazard" for not only the driver but for the passengers as well.
Respondent states that Complainant chose to stand in such a
manner that the mirrors were blocked from view. In addition, his
standing interfered with the "passenger flow" on and off the bus.

Conclusion:

  Respondent states that the driver, a courteous and
conscientious employee, acted "out of compassion" when he
attempted to locate a seat for Complainant. Respondent further
argued that the driver had been cited for outstanding performance
and acts of bravery. However, the driver's compassion,
performance or bravery is not at issue herein. It is a commonly
known fact that passengers stand on crowded buses during "rush
hour(s)" interfering with passenger flow on and off the bus. Yet,
these passengers have never been characterized as a possible
safety hazard. It, therefore, must be concluded that "but for"
the Complainant's disability, he would have been permitted the
opportunity to stand.
  It is hereby determined that Probable Cause exists to credit
the allegations of the Complainant.

Submitted by:
Lawrence M. Mitchell, Jr.  Human Relations Representative

Date: April 15, 1987


OUT TO LUNCH

by Kenneth Jernigan


  In the preceding article the story of Terry McManus' experience
with a Pittsburgh bus driver in January of 1986 was reviewed. 
Terry was subjected to abuse, harassment, and extreme
humiliation.  He was even threatened with physical violence.
  Terry complained to the Pennsylvania Human Rights Commission,
and the Commission found in his favor.  One would think this was
an open and shut case.  But not so.
  I recently received a letter from an irate individual who said
that Terry was not only wrong but bad-mannered as well.  As
evidence of Terry's benighted ways (and presumably mine as well)
he cited the example of Dr. Jacobus tenBroek, the esteemed
founder of our movement.  He said, as you will see, that Dr.
tenBroek did not carry a cane and that he behaved so much like a
sighted person that many of his students at the University of
California at Berkeley did not even know he was blind.  Now, it
so happens that your humble Editor was an intimate friend and
close associate of Dr.  tenBroek.  I traveled throughout the
country with him on numerous occasions; I went with him to
restaurants; I attended meetings with him--and I also visited
some of his classes at the University of California.  Therefore,
I can tell you from personal knowledge and firsthand experience
that the letter writer's claim is without foundation-- or, if you
like, false.  Dr. tenBroek carried a cane; his students knew that
he was blind; and although he was not belligerent about it, he
would have thought it beneath contempt to try to imitate
anyone--blind or sighted, old or young, black or white, Jew or
Christian, male or female, or anybody else you could mention.  He
was himself.  That was enough.  The next time you hear somebody
talking about what the National Federation of the Blind believes
or what Dr. tenBroek or I have done or thought, consider the
vagaries of fate and think about the following letter:

--------------------

                       Richardson, Texas June 27, 1987

Dear Sirs:
  Terry McManus--the bus rider cited in Kenneth Jernigan's
presidential address--was 100% wrong, as you can see easily by
asking: how did the bus driver know McManus was blind? 
Obviously, there was some distinguishing mark--a white cane or a
collision that a sighted person would've avoided.
  (Not only was McManus wrong.  He also was bad mannered: It's an
insult to reject a favor when somebody is courteous enough to
offer one--so McManus not only insulted the driver but caused
inconvenience to everybody else on the bus.)
  The idea is: If you want to be treated exactly like a sighted
person, you must be willing to behave exactly like one.  Jacobus
tenBroek, founder of your organization, knew this better than
anybody.  He taught at the University of California (Berkeley)
and showed no distinguishing marks: He used no cane or seeing eye
dog--but memorized, literally, every foot of his route.  One
would suspect his blindness only from his slow and deliberate
gait.  (Indeed, some of his own students didn't realize he could
not see--e.g., the student seeking permission to leave class
early, waving an official "pink slip" in front of his face.)
  If you want all the "privileges" of a sighted person, you must
be willing to pay the price.  tenBroek knew this; McManus didn't.
  So let's hope that in the future the NFB teaches better manners
in addition to increased awareness.

                              Sincerely,
                                   -----


VENDORS FIGHT PROPOSED BAN

ON CIGARETTE SALES


  (This article by Marsha Shuler appeared in the Baton Rouge,
Louisiana, State Times on June 17, 1987.)

  A proposed ban on the selling of cigarettes in many government
buildings will financially hurt the blind businessmen who run the
concession stands and not accomplish its goal of deterring
smoking, opponents said Tuesday.
  "It's taking bread out of the vendors' mouths," said Cecil
Turnage, a spokesman for a large contingent of blind
concessionaires attending a public hearing to oppose the proposed
DHHR regulation.
  "The purpose of the rule is to stop people from smoking. . . 
All that's going to be accomplished by this rule is that blind
vendors are going to be denied their legal right to make a
living," Turnage said.
  DHHR Secretary Dr. Sandra Robinson is proposing the ban on
tobacco sales as part of an anti-smoking campaign.
  The proposed regulation and another one to restrict smoking in
DHHR-operated buildings to certain specified areas are scheduled
to go into effect September 1 unless a legislative committee or
Governor Edwin Edwards intervenes.
  A legislative oversight committee has scheduled a June 23
hearing on the proposed changes.
  "We have an obligation to protect our staff and clients from
exposure to tobacco smoke," said Dr. Joyce Matthison, a DHHR
epidemiologist, as she explained the reasons for the proposed
changes.
  She noted the high incidence of cancer and other diseases
because of smoking.  She said there is a $1.26 billion annual
price tag associated with smoking as a result of medical care and
lost employee productivity.
  The Louisiana Lung Association testified in favor of both
changes while the Louisiana Wholesale Tobacco Distributors
Association registered opposition to them.
  The restricted smoking area proposal drew general support, with
representatives of two local hospitals and a DHHR worker
advocating the change.
  But the proposed ban on tobacco sales brought a strenuous
protest from blind vendors and their supporters who came here
from all parts of Louisiana.
  The ban would affect all blind concessionaires who operate in
government buildings because the program is operated by DHHR.  An
estimated 175 blind people are employed at the stands.
  "You are trying to deny me my right to sell what is legally
sold in the United States, and I will not allow anyone to step on
my rights.  I will sell those cigarettes after the first of
September," a defiant Ethel Anderson said.
  Anderson, who operates a concession stand in the municipal
building in Baton Rouge, said her income would be "greatly
diminished if I have to give up cigarette sales."
  Many opponents said the ban will not discourage smokers.  They
said the smokers will only go to the next nearest place to obtain
cigarettes.
  Several speakers labeled the proposed rule "discriminatory."
  "You are taking away from the blind vendor and giving to the
A&P store, the Magic Market.  We need the money more than they
do," Turnage said.
  If state health officials want to do something to stop the
spread of cancer, they should do something about the
petrochemical companies, several people said.
  Ben Fontaine, head of the Lung Association, said blind vendors
can find other items to sell to recover losses from cigarette
sales.
  "Just tell us how?" shouted several audience members.
  Fontaine responded that in one area where cigarette sales have
dropped, condoms were put in vending machines alongside cigarette
packages.  He also said the blind businessman made a "lot of
claims," but presented "no hard facts."

--------------------

  (Editor's Comment: The proposal was defeated June 24, 1987.  It
is interesting to note how the times change.  Thirty years ago
almost no one would have opposed the sale of cigarettes in a
public building, but even the whisper of the word (not to mention
the sale of) condoms would have been unthinkable.  One is moved
to wonder what the year 2117 will bring.)


CONTINUING PROBLEMS AT THE

IDAHO COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND


  (This article appears in Dr. Norman Gardner's presidential
message in the Summer, 1987, Gem State Milestones, the newsletter
of the National Federation of the Blind of Idaho.)

  Conditions at the Idaho State Commission for the Blind continue
to deteriorate.  Those of you who attended our annual state
convention in April will remember that we gave Howard Barton a
list of fourteen of our concerns.  Most of these are not new. 
They simply point out the continuing practices which need
attention at the Commission.  As you will recall, Mr. Barton
committed to answer our concerns in writing within thirty days. 
On May 20 (well over a week past the thirty-day period) I
received a letter from Mr. Barton asking for further
clarification of our concerns.  I have included here a copy of
our fourteen concerns, the letter from Mr. Barton dated May 20,
and my letter of response.

--------------------

The Idaho Commission Hurts Blind People
April 11, 1987

The Commission:

  1. turns down qualified blind applicants who need service. 
Blind people who are or have been employed continue to be
classified as ineligible for services.  Other rehab agencies do
not operate this way.
  2. favors abandoning the talking book machine program even
though the Commission has more staff and money than the state
library and, therefore, should be able to give better service in
this program.
  3. says it helps blind people get jobs, but at the last
Commission board meeting the rehabilitation services chief could
not give even one example of a blind client who had been placed
in competitive employment recently.
  4. spends much time on staff training which takes counselors
and teachers away from clients but little or no attention seems
to be given to employment opportunities for the blind.
  5. bought seven computers almost one year ago with no provision
for access by the blind.  These computers are still inaccessible.
  6. is trying to combine two contract positions which will
deprive one or two blind persons of employment.
  7. often does not pay bills in a timely manner.  College
students have trouble keeping readers who do not get paid.
  8. blames secretaries for problems in serving clients.  It is
not difficult to understand why the secretaries are not familiar 
with the rehabilitation process since they are supervised by the
accountant.
  9. is not serving new clients adequately, especially those who
should be state-only or independent-living clients.
  10. allowed the food services contract at Arco to be renewed
with a sighted person, depriving one or more blind persons of the
opportunity to earn a substantial living in business.
  11. uses unassigned vending machine money inappropriately. 
This money should be used to expand and improve the vending stand
program.
  12. requires an unnecessarily long and irrelevant licensing
process for vendor trainees, keeping people out of the program.
  13. refuses to allow organizations of the blind to provide
information on blindness to orientation students.
  14. allows unauthorized persons to live in the student
dormitories.  One example is that a single, sighted man who is
not employed by the Commission has been living in one of the
student rooms on the women's floor.

--------------------

                            Boise, Idaho May 20, 1987

Dear Dr. Gardner:
  During the NFBI convention you presented me with a list of
concerns which you stated had been put together by members of
your organization.  During discussion of the membership following
my presentation, it was decided you would send me a letter asking
in more specific terms questions relating to each of the
concerns.  As yet I have not received your letter.  Without more
specifics regarding the fourteen items presented to me at
convention, I would only be able to answer in general terms and
am certain that is not your desire.
  Please advise me as to what your wishes are at this time
regarding this matter.

                              Cordially,
                   Howard H. Barton, Jr.  Administrator
          Idaho Commission for the Blind

--------------------

                            Boise, Idaho May 27, 1987

Dear Mr. Barton:
  I have your letter dated May 20, 1987, and I am puzzled by it. 
You seem to remember the events at our state convention in April
quite differently than I do.  You state in your letter, ". . . it
was decided you would send me a letter asking in more specific
terms questions relating to each of the concerns."
  The tape of the meeting on April 11, 1987, will show that no
such decision was made.  In fact, what happened is that you
agreed to respond in writing within thirty days to each of the
fourteen concerns which we presented you with.  I asked you at
that time if you "were unclear," or if you "had any questions"
regarding any of the fourteen items. You indicated only that you
did not understand item #13 ("refuses to allow organizations of
the blind to provide information on blindness to orientation
students").  If you still have questions regarding that item, I
suggest you consult with Cub Lyon or Ed Easterling.
  The one thing I do agree with in your letter is your comment
that you are certain it is not our desire that you respond in
"general terms" to our concerns.  In the past your propensity to
deal with our concerns with cavalier and condescending
nonchalance has been particularly disappointing.  We certainly do
not need more glittering generalities or meaningless platitudes
("general terms" as you put it).
  Surely the list of concerns we gave you is clear enough.  If
some are not clear, which ones?  A request for general
clarification on a list such as the one we gave you can be
considered nothing short of a stall tactic.  Is it possible, for
example, that you do not understand item #14 (". . . allows
unauthorized persons to live in the student dormitories.  One
example is that a single, sighted man, who is not employed by the
Commission, has been living in one of the student rooms on the
women's floor")?
  What more clarification do you need as to our concern?  A
sighted man is now or has been living in a student room on the
women's floor of the student dormitory.  I assume you can
understand why we would be concerned about such a practice at the
Commission for the Blind.  Do you need documentation as to name
and dates?  We would like to know in writing what the policy of
the Commission is with regard to those who occupy the sleeping
rooms at the Commission for either short or extended periods.  We
would also like to hear from you in writing as to the specific
case mentioned in our list of concerns.  Do you deny that it is
happening or has happened?
  Since your letter of May 20 is the only response which I have
received from you (even though it was not within the agreed upon
thirty days), I have no choice but to print it along with our
concerns in our newsletter.
  We would still like to receive your written response to our
concerns.  Better still, we would like to see meaningful changes
in the administration of the program at the Commission.

                       Very truly yours,
            Norman D. Gardner, President National Federation of
the Blind
                                of Idaho


MARYLAND LIBRARY FOR THE BLIND IN TROUBLE

by Kenneth Jernigan


  "What's rat-infested, has termites, floods regularly, and may
end up costing the state nearly $123,000 a year to rent?  It's
the Library for the Blind and Physically Handicapped in the 1700
block of North Charles Street" in Baltimore.  This is what
Political Reporter Frank De Filippo said on the six o'clock news
on Channel 2 in Baltimore on Wednesday evening, July 29, 1987.
  The newscast and the occurrences at Annapolis earlier in the
day were the climax of a long struggle by the members of the
National Federation of the Blind of Maryland to focus attention
on the problems of the State Library for the Blind.  July 29 was
the day on which the members of the State Board of Public Works
(composed of the Governor and two other top state officials) were
scheduled to approve a new lease for the Library.  However,
members of the Federation were present to object, and the signing
of the lease was postponed.  Speaking for the Board, the Governor
said:  "The first thing I want to do is take a look at it and
arrange. . .to go up there, unannounced."
  Lance Finney, Director of the Library, was quoted on the
newscast as saying:  There is "flooding from a leaking roof.  We
are continuously plagued with insects, roaches--ongoing.  This
year we've had a swarm of termites and rodent problems."
  The problem is not that the Library staff and Director are bad.

In fact, some of the staff are quite good and highly respected by
the blind.  Rather, it is that the Library officials have either
not known how to fight for more money and better conditions or
have been afraid to do it.  The consequence (as is often the
case) is that the members of the Federation have had to take the
lead in doing the job, with the result that there is likely to be
a positive outcome and that there are also likely to be a few who
will call the organization militant.
  A library should be a nearly magical place--a place to explore
the world of ideas and enjoy the sense of wonder that comes from
expanding personal horizons.  Merely walking into the library
building should take the reader back in time to the world created
by a well-loved author.
  However, a visit to the Maryland Library for the Blind in
Baltimore creates a different impression.  It conjures up images
of Charles Dickens.  It isn't  that blind Marylanders have come
to love Dickens' books through long hours spent in the Library
reading them, for the Library has few to read.  It does not, for
instance, have a Braille copy of Oliver Twist--but Oliver Twist
is there somehow.  He can be found in the building itself, which
recreates the atmosphere of seedy back street Victorian
London--crowded, dirty, poorly ventilated, and gloomy.  The floor
is littered with buckets to catch the water which leaks through
the roof.  The garbage and the books leave the building through
the same door and compete for space on the inadequate loading
dock.  Often the garbage wins.
  The administrative position of the Library (though it may seem
hard to believe) is even more deplorable than the facilities. 
Somewhere deep within the Department of Education is the Maryland
State Library.  Buried within the state library is a subsection
concerned with public libraries.  Entombed in the subsection is
the Library for the Blind, so obscure and carefully hidden that
it easily escapes all notice.  In the tradition of Dickensian
orphans, the Library did not even have a full-time director until
the blind of the state made the neglect of the program a public
issue.
  The Library leases the space it occupies.  Five years ago, when
the lease came up for renewal, someone in the library bureaucracy
gently pleaded for repairs to make the building more habitable. 
The state agency which handles rental property did not even
bother to send anybody to look at the building before signing the
renewal.  This year, because of the work of the National
Federation of the Blind of Maryland, things have been different.
  For openers we took our problem to the members of the Maryland
General Assembly.  The Library had maintained such a low profile
that we had to begin by telling legislators what it was and that
it existed.  When we got past that hurdle, we found receptive
listeners anxious to help.  At our request language was included
in the Department of Education budget calling on Department
officials to find new space for the Library and to report back on
their progress.  We began to hope that blind people would finally
have a chance for a decent library.
  In June we learned that our optimism was premature.  The
Library was going to sign a three-year lease at the same old
location with an option for an additional two-year extension.  We
were told that wonderful progress had been made.  The landlord
had agreed to make seventeen repairs and to pay for the
utilities.  Of course, he was being paid an additional $20,000
for his concessions, but library officials almost seemed grateful
that the state planners had actually taken the time to come and
look at the building.  In fact, the Director (certainly not a
"pushy" man) was so moved that he wrote a letter to state
planners saying that, though it would mean that the Library would
have to get rid of several hundred books every year, current
space would be, as he put it, "adequate."
  Gratitude and humility are virtues-- but only to a point. 
There comes a time when (like salt on eggs) they are poison. 
With this perspective Sharon Maneki, the able President of the
National Federation of the Blind of Maryland, contacted an editor
at the Baltimore Sun.  The following article appeared in the July
10, 1987, edition of the paper:

--------------------

Lease At Crowded Library for Blind Draws Protest

by Karen Youngblood

  The building housing the Maryland State  Library for the Blind
and Physically Handicapped is so cramped that the library has to
give thousands of its books away each year just to make room.
  Yet state officials just renewed a three-year lease on the
building at 1715 North Charles Street, readily admitting that the
collection needs to be moved to bigger and better quarters.
  Hal Bleakley, a Baltimore businessman and library patron,
described why.  "When I came to Maryland from Pennsylvania in
1978, I asked the library for cassettes or disks on Maryland
history--I asked them to send me everything they had," he said. 
"I got one on crabs and one on political history.  I called them
about three months later and asked for more, and they were sure
that they had more.  I think I made another call three months
later than that, and they were still digging around."
  Mr. Bleakley said he has received no other history book since
1978.
  "I know the building is inadequate and we have every intention
of finding them a new building," said Constance Lieder, secretary
of the Department of State Planning.  "The reason for the
extension of the lease is that it'll take that much time to get
that done, and we need an interim facility.  The lease is not
meant to be permanent.
  But advocates for the blind say they are tired of poor service
and have heard the same line before.  They say they want to see
something done now.
  "We've been complaining for years, and said years ago that the
library is too small and the collection is too little-- that it's
so small it's almost insignificant," said Marc Maurer, President
of the National Federation of the Blind, headquartered in
Baltimore.  "We're most unhappy with the response we've gotten."
  The lease was renewed, because the state did not plan ahead for
an alternative, said K. P. Heinemeyer, director of the real
estate office in the state Department of General Services.  He
said his department started negotiating a new lease last fall
with the building's landlord and found out just as it was to be
finalized that the state legislature had appropriated money for
construction of a new library building.
  Mr. Heinemeyer said he then sought to reduce the lease period
from five years to a monthly basis, but the landlord would only
agree to three years for $20,000 more rent annually while picking
up utilities.  The lease had expired, and the department had no
time to look for a better deal.
  The state did not want another temporary building for the
library anyway, because two moves in a few years would be costly,
he said.
  But Mr. Heinemeyer said the lease oversight may not have been
completely the state's fault, because administrators were unaware
that patrons had a problem with the building.
  "The impression we've always had is that it was a suitable
location for them,"  he said.  "We felt as long as they were
satisfied with it there was no reason to move them."
  Yet, the library has had to give away 3,000 to 6,000 "talking
books"--tapes or disk recordings of literary works--a year to
other states because there is no place in the Charles Street
building to store them, said Lance C. Finney, director of the
library.
  "If we have something that doesn't move in a year, it's gone,"
he said.  "We have to do that or we'd have stacks of books on the
floor.  Our shelf space is limited, and it's already full.  We
are now at a no growth point."
  The library also has 45 volunteers willing to do such work as
repair broken tape recorders or check tape and record collections
to see that they are in good shape, but only about three can work
at the library at a time, because there is nowhere for them to
sit, he said.
  Nor can the library provide special programs for the
blind--such as tax preparation service provided by many public
libraries--because there's simply no space, he said.
  Sharon Maneki, President of the Maryland chapter of the
National Federation of the Blind, said she is angry with the
state's handling of the lease, and doesn't believe official
promises of a new building.
  "We have complained, but it's just not a priority," she said. 
"We have been discussing these things with everybody we could
find for the past two years, and they say, 'Yeah, we're going to
get you a new building,' in the usual bureaucratic way.  I think
things could move a lot faster if someone wanted them to."

--------------------

  This is what the Baltimore Sun said on July 10, 1987; but as we
have already seen, things were different by July 29. 
Federationists and news cameras were in the Governor's office,
and the lease was not signed.  Regardless of how dedicated the
Library staff may be, they cannot give good service without
adequate facilities and sufficient operating funds--and humility
is not always the best policy.  Library officials must learn to
do more than keep records and dispense books.  They must learn to
fight.  It is a lesson that the blind have had to learn, and the
librarians for the blind must learn it, too.
  Until they learn it (and, of course, some already have) we the
blind must do the fighting for them.  But partnership is better
than unilateral action.  At the time of the writing of this
article the situation still hangs in the balance, but the
ultimate outcome will be a better library for the blind of
Maryland.  The National Federation of the Blind will see to
that--and let those who call our attitudes militant make the most
of it.
  (Postscript:  At the time of this writing--the first week in
August--there are new developments, which are more of the same. 
A few days ago a new ceiling was installed in one room of the
library.  It is already severely water damaged, plus the fact
that a light fixture fell on an employee two days ago.)


MORE ABOUT THE RUSSELL ANDERSON CASE

by Peggy Pinder


  On May 5, 1987, the United States Circuit Court for the
District of Columbia Circuit handed down its ruling in Anderson
v. USAir, Inc., a pure exit row case.  Though the D. C. circuit
affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment, the
circuit court's opinion is radically different from that of the
district court.
  As you recall, the district court made extensive, offensive
statements in the course of its ruling concerning the safety risk
posed by blind persons seated in exit rows.  Here are some
examples:  "The Court readily can understand the desire of blind
people to be treated equally with sighted persons to the greatest
extent feasible.  Nevertheless, there are situations in
everyone's life in which a degree of autonomy must be given over
to others in the interest of the safety and well-being of oneself
and of others."  "Although Mr.  Anderson's filings have shown
that there are blind individuals who may be able to make these
determinations in some circumstances, assuredly he has not shown
that blind people as a class are so qualified."  "The study by
the Civil Aeromedical Institute, the recommendation by the FAA,
and the regulations all support USAir's policy determination that
safety requires the exclusion of blind passengers from emergency
exit row seating."  "Reasonable safety restrictions on the
flights are permissible and have not curtailed Mr. Anderson's
right to travel."  "Thus, the contract provided for Mr.
Anderson's removal when he attempted to interfere with the flight
crew's duties which were imposed by the Flight Attendant
Emergency Manual and when he engaged in actions jeopardizing the
safety of other passengers by refusing to comply with a policy
based on safety considerations."
  The district court's grant of summary judgment thus had the
effect of confirming the airlines' argument that the blind pose a
safety risk every time they sit in an exit row.  Anderson
appealed this ruling to the circuit court, arguing that the
district judge had erroneously granted summary judgment by
finding facts, the safety questions, which were properly the
province of a jury.
  The circuit court affirmed the grant of summary judgment,
holding that Anderson had no private right of action under
Section 404(a) of the Federal Aviation Act; no constitutional
claims because there were no government actors in the case; and
no common law claims because the claims were either filed too
late or were insufficient in law.  However, the D.C. circuit's
ruling also wiped out most of what the district court said.  The
D. C. circuit made two vital points:
  1. PVA.  Anderson was arrested in 1984 and immediately brought
suit.  From that time through the point when circuit court briefs
were filed in early 1986, the CAB's (now FAA's) nondiscrimination
regulations applied to all air carriers through Section 504 of
the Rehabilitation Act.  Anderson's central claim was his 504
claim.  After Anderson's briefs were filed and before oral
argument occurred, the United States Supreme Court handed down
its decision in the PVA case.  PVA held that Section 504 did not
apply to most air carriers, including USAir.  Anderson was thus
forced to abandon his 504 claim at oral argument.
  The circuit recounted this history in its opinion and went on
to comment that:  "Congress, however, subsequently passed
legislation, approved October 2, 1986, that effectively overruled
the PVA decision by amending the Federal Aviation Act.  See Air
Carrier Access Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-435."  The court then
quotes the Air Carrier Access Act in full (though this was not
necessary to the deciding of Anderson's case) and devotes an
entire paragraph, crammed full of citations, to demonstrating
that the Air Carrier Access Act cannot apply to Anderson's claim.
  2. Safety.  As mentioned previously, the district court's
opinion was full of safety issues.  The D. C. circuit does not
discuss safety at all until its final paragraph, labeled
"Conclusion." The Conclusion states:

III. Conclusion

  The gravamen of appellant's case is that the FAA has never
formally determined that blind persons seated in any emergency
overwing exit seat present a threat to safety.  Only one study
has allegedly been performed on the subject, and appellant
asserts that it is wholly unreliable.  Appellant thus concludes
that USAir discriminated against him because of his handicap.
  We never reach this question because we hold that appellant
does not here present any cognizable statutory or constitutional
claim.  As there are no "disputes over facts that might affect
the outcome of this suit under. . .  governing law," Anderson v.
Liberty
Lobby, Inc., ---U. S.---, 106 S.Ct.  2505,2510 (1986), we find
that the district court properly entered summary judgment for
appellee USAir.  At the same time, we express no opinion as to
whether the policy pursued by USAir is subject to challenge by
the FAA or DOT.
  Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is

                               Affirmed.

  The D. C. circuit's opinion has several important effects. 
First, by the careful writing in its Conclusion, the circuit's
opinion completely wipes out all the safety-related nonsense in
the district court's opinion.  Next, the Conclusion very broadly
implies that the administrative agencies should get in there and
fix this mess.  Next, the Conclusion also very broadly implies
that, if Anderson (or someone else with an identical claim) could
get himself back into court using some law which unequivocally
gives him a right to complain about the exit row bar, the circuit
court would then be willing to reach the issue of safety.  The
circuit's opinion hints broadly that the Air Carrier Access Act
might be such a law.  And, finally, the D. C. circuit very
carefully made its decision of no precedential value whatsoever. 
By noting that the law has now changed and by firmly grounding
its ruling in the old, unamended law, the circuit has signaled
that the Anderson case stands for nothing regarding
interpretation of the new Air Carrier Access Act.
  Circuit Judge James Buckley wrote the opinion.  Judge Buckley
is a former United States Senator from New York, elected from the
Conservative Party, and is the brother of William F. Buckley, Jr.

The tenor of his opinion is workmanlike and technical, cleaving
closely to the intricacies of black- letter law until the
"Conclusion." Safety is not discussed until the Conclusion.  At
this point the whole tenor of the opinion changes.  For this
brief, concluding passage, some fire and interest show through in
the writing.  One can infer that the author is suggesting that
DOT get out there and fix this mess and that plaintiffs who come
back with an Air Carrier Access Act claim will get a careful and
thorough hearing.  This comports with the judges' reactions at
oral argument.  They were clearly and openly uncomfortable with
what happened to Anderson.  They have concluded that the state of
the law when Anderson was arrested gave him no recourse.  They
have clearly signaled that things are different now.  Of course,
presented with an actual case, they very well could rule against
a blind person on the merits.  This opinion clears away false and
erroneous rulings, leaving the field open for the next blind
person who wants to try a clean shot.  While we would have rather
won, a wiping clean of the slate is the next best thing.  Judge
Buckley did that for us.  The case has significance far beyond
what its final word might suggest.


A DOG GUIDE IS NOT A PET


  If it had happened fifteen years ago, the outcome might have
been different, but the National Federation of the Blind is
changing what it means to be blind:

--------------------

                    Derry, New Hampshire July 8, 1987

Dear Dr. Jernigan:
  Enclosed you will find a copy of the letter I wrote to the
Susse Chalet in Brattleboro, Vermont.  The letter describes the
problems that came about because of my dog guide.  I also enclose
a copy of their return letter to me.  Along with the letter, I
did receive a phone call from their main office extending their
apologies.
  The point that disturbed me most about this whole situation was
that when I phoned the Brattleboro Police Department to report my
problem, I was told that they had never heard of a law that
permitted dog guides to be allowed in motels.  It was only after
my husband quoted the Vermont law to them from my dog guide
legislation book that they were willing to listen to me.  It is
unfortunate that we have to educate police departments as well as
motel managers.

                            Carol Holmes Vice President
        National Federation of the Blind
                        of New Hampshire

--------------------

                    Derry, New Hampshire December 14, 1986

Chalet Susse International Wilton, New Hampshire

Dear Sirs:
  On December 6, 1986, I had an occasion to lodge at your
franchise in Brattleboro, Vermont.  I found the corporate
headquarters very helpful in making my reservation.  The room at
the hotel, while small, was clean and well maintained.
  Soon after registering, the problems began.  While my husband
and I were walking my dog guide on the motel grounds, we were
approached by a Mr.  John Beaulieu.  He told us we could not stay
at the motel because of the dog.  We explained that the dog was a
licensed dog guide for the blind and was protected by Vermont law
from being denied hotel access.  He said he didn't know anything
about this, and the dog could not stay.  He told  us to go to
another hotel that took "pets."  We explained that the dog was
not a "pet" but a mobility aid for the blind.  He would not
listen to reason, so my husband was forced to get angry as a way
of getting him to stop harassing us.
  We quickly retreated to our room and called the local police. 
The desk sergeant said he would "talk" to Mr.  Beaulieu.  We
spent a long sleepless night not knowing if Beaulieu would listen
to the police or would try to evict us.  We thought at the very
least he would apologize to us.  He never did.
  Is it too much to expect that hotel managers be knowledgeable
about basic laws regarding the rights of the handicapped?  Does
this reflect an inadequacy of your training program, or is it
merely that one man is inadequate to the trust you have given
him.  My husband and I await your response.

                              Sincerely, Carol Holmes
                          Vice President
        National Federation of the Blind
                        of New Hampshire

--------------------

                   Wilton, New Hampshire December 16, 1986

Dear Mrs. Holmes:
  I have reviewed your letter of December 14, 1986, in regard to
your stay at the Susse Chalet Motor Lodge located in Brattleboro,
Vermont, regarding your dog guide for the blind.
  We apologize for any inconvenience you experienced and hope you
will accept our offer of a complimentary room for one night at
any of our Susse Chalet facilities.  Exceptions are listed on the
enclosed "Complimentary Room Certificate."
  Thank you for bringing this matter to my attention.

                       Very truly yours, John Favat
                        Regional Manager
        Chalet Susse International, Inc.

cc: John Beaulieu, Manager


AIDS UNLIMITED, INC.


  (Editor's Comment:  Material for this article was supplied by
Aids Unlimited, Inc.  Here is a company that is owned and largely
managed by blind people, most of whom are members of the National
Federation of the Blind.  Here also is a company that is
successful and expanding in a business climate which many people
say is difficult and uncertain.  It would not be at all
surprising if Aids Unlimited, Inc., should during the next five
to ten years become the dominant force in the merchandising of
aids and appliances for the blind.)

  Aids Unlimited, Inc., is an unusual company and represents the
practical application of a concept that we should think about
very seriously.  For the first three years Aids Unlimited
operated out of the apartment of Hal Bleakley, President of the
company-- office, storage, shipping, everything.  Then, in August
of 1984, the company took commercial space in its present
location in the heart of Baltimore--1101 North Calvert Street,
Baltimore, Maryland 21201.  Now it does business throughout the
United States and overseas, providing blind and handicapped
persons with quality products at competitive prices and with
prompt delivery.  The company now has three divisions.  The
Consumer Products Division publishes a catalog in print and on
cassette, listing more than 300 products for use in the home, in
school, and on the job, and in addition has about 80 authorized
field representatives across the country.  The National Institute
for Human Potential Division publishes a monthly updated advisory
service, TEN KEYS, concerning aids and appliances, funding
sources, legislation, literature, and special information
relating to the education, employment, and independent living of
individuals with disability.  It also engages in consulting
concerning the problems encountered by persons with disabilities,
particularly the implementation of Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act.  This division has provided consultation
involving the federal government, state governments,
municipalities, and a variety of nonprofit agencies.  The newly
established Commercial Division is designed to supply products to
blind men and women in retail business--vendors under the
Randolph-Sheppard Act, and others.  Effective May 1, 1987, Aids
Unlimited was appointed as exclusive national marketing agent for
the new R. C. Allen 204T Talking Cash Register.
  This is the profile of a vigorous, growing company.  But, all
apart from the fact that most new companies fail in the first
year or so while Aids Unlimited is succeeding, what's so unusual?
  Here's what's unusual about Aids Unlimited.  Aids Unlimited is
owned, managed, and staffed almost exclusively by persons with
disabilities.  Eighty percent of the stockholders are blind, and
all of the field representatives are blind.  Another two percent
of the stockholders are disabled.  Blind persons own the vast
majority of the outstanding shares in the company.  The board of
directors is composed of five persons, three of whom are blind. 
A fourth member of the board is married to a blind businessman,
and the fifth member of the board has cerebral palsy.  Four of
the board members are women.  Aids Unlimited was put together
with private money under the leadership of Hal Bleakley.  There
were no public funds involved, no Small Business Administration,
no grants, no start-up loans--just a group of individuals, most
of whom are blind, investing their hard- earned dollars in an
idea they believe in.  If there is another nationwide company in
the United States truly controlled by blind persons, we do not
know of it.  This is what makes Aids Unlimited unusual.  Aids
Unlimited is unusual in another way, or maybe we should have
expected it.  While Aids Unlimited, in seeking stockholders or
field representatives, does not ask whether the individual is a
member of the NFB or of another persuasion, most of the
stockholders and most of the field representatives are active
members of the National Federation of the Blind.  Isn't this one
more answer to the question, "Why the NFB?"
  Now let's talk about the statement that Aids Unlimited is the
practical application of a concept that we should think about
very seriously.  The Randolph-Sheppard Act, together with similar
efforts in various states, counties, and municipalities, has
generated badly needed employment for many capable blind men and
women in retail business.  However, the sad fact is that the
number of blind persons in their own businesses, as a percentage
of the blind population, is far below the number of seeing
persons in their own businesses as a percentage of the general
population.  Why is this?  It cannot be because of discrimination
against the blind.  There is far less discrimination against a
blind person in his or her own business than if that same
individual is attempting to persuade an employer to put him or
her on the payroll.  The average customer does business where he
or she can get what they need or want, where it is convenient,
where they feel that the price is reasonable, and where they are
treated with the respect and friendliness they have the right to
receive.  Most of them really do not care whether the owner of
the business is blind or not.  It cannot be because businesses
cost so much to start.  While there certainly are types of
businesses that cost enormous amounts of money to get started,
many businesses have started with extremely meager funds.  The
average investment of stockholders in Aids Unlimited was under
$500.  It cannot be because there are not business opportunities
around.  There are thousands of business opportunities across the
country.  The proof of this is that in the recent recession, more
businesses were being organized than the number that were
failing, more than half a million per year being started.  If
these are not the reasons, then why is it?  The reason lies
within ourselves.  It has been said, and very wisely, "...if you
believe you can or if you believe you cannot, you are probably
right."  This is the essence.  What is it we want and are willing
to work hard to get?  What do we really believe we are capable of
doing?  As far as employment is concerned, first-class
citizenship includes not only striving to get on someone's
payroll but also to get a piece of the action ourselves.  Yes,
you may fail.  Statistically, the odds are against you in
starting your own business, but you never lose until you stop
trying to succeed.  Aids Unlimited really is the practical
application of a concept we should think about very seriously. 
To define the personal qualities needed by the successful
entrepreneur is difficult because no two individuals and no two
business situations are the same.  However, one thing is certain:

To have sight is not a required characteristic.


PROCLAMATION


State of South Dakota Office of the Governor

  WHEREAS, the National Federation of the Blind of South Dakota
is a vital advocacy group that represents the interests of
thousands of blind citizens statewide; and
  WHEREAS, this invaluable organization is an effective voice of
the blind for it seeks to enhance the dignity and increase the
independence of our state's visually handicapped; and
  WHEREAS, as the largest organization of the blind in America,
the NFB strives to educate the public about the capabilities of
the visually impaired; they are a group of individuals who see
themselves not as blind people, but as people who just happen to
be blind; and
  WHEREAS, the National Federation of the Blind of South Dakota
is a group whose blind members don't ask for sympathy, but for
empathy. . .they wish not to be pampered, for they only desire to
be given a chance to prove how much they CAN do and how little
they can't do; and
  WHEREAS, the NFB not only seeks to educate the sighted, but
works as well to inform the visually handicapped of their rights
and of the many services available to them:

  NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE S.  MICKELSON, Governor of the State
of South Dakota, do hereby proclaim the month of May, 1987, as

National Federation of the Blind Month

in South Dakota.  As citizens of this great State, it is
important we all recognize the blind as fellow human beings who
desire only to live full, rich lives in dignity and equality.
  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto
set my hand and caused to be affixed the Great Seal of the State
of South Dakota, in Pierre, the Capital City, this Twelfth Day of
February, in the Year of Our Lord, Nineteen Hundred and Eighty-
Seven.

                     George S. Mickelson
                                GOVERNOR

                         Joyce Hazeltine SECRETARY OF STATE


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

RECIPES

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


  This month's recipes are submitted by two of Maryland's most
dynamic Federationists, Al and Sharon Maneki.  Dr. Maneki (Ph.D.
in mathematics) works for the Department of Defense and is
President of the Central Maryland Chapter of the National
Federation of the Blind of Maryland.  Sharon, who also works for
the Department of Defense, is NFB State President.  Both are
expert chefs, and both (as the Monitor Editor can testify) have a
genius for making guests feel welcome in their home.


BARBECUE RIBS

by Al Maneki


1 gallon catsup
1 cup vegetable oil
3 cups loosely packed brown sugar 3 cups cider vinegar
worcestershire sauce, garlic salt, onion salt, salt, and pepper
to taste
1-1/2 tablespoons dry mustard 10 pounds ribs

  In a large pot mix all ingredients for sauce, bring to a boil,
simmer, stir occasionally, about forty-five minutes, until there
is no vinegar smell.
  Parboil ribs for forty-five minutes.  Place ribs into sauce
while hot.  Let stand until ribs have cooled.  Refrigerate sauce
and ribs mixture for two days.  Broil ribs before serving.  Serve
sauce over ribs.  Sauce may be reheated separately before
serving.

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


BOURBON GLAZED HAM

by Sharon Maneki


1 14-16 pound smoked, low-salt ham 1 cup bourbon, divided 1/3 cup
whole cloves
2-1/2 cups dark brown sugar 1-1/2 teaspoons dry mustard
4-6 navel oranges, peeled and sectioned for ham and for garnish
15 whole maraschino cherries, for ham watercress or parsley for
garnish

  Place ham on rack in a roasting pan, and bake at 325 degrees
for two hours.  Remove, and let cool enough to handle.
  Increase oven temperature to 425 degrees.  Cut away rind on
ham, leaving some fat.  Score fat (deeply, about 1/2 inch) in
rough diamond shapes and return ham to rack in roasting pan. 
With a pastry brush paint 1/2 cup whiskey all over top and sides
of ham.  Stud the fat liberally with cloves.  Combine remaining
whiskey with brown sugar and mustard, and pat firmly all over
ham.  Using toothpicks to anchor them, arrange sections from two
of the oranges and the cherries in decorative designs all over
ham.  Baste lightly with drippings from the previous cooking,
plus any bourbon that has drizzled into drippings.
  Place in oven and bake, undisturbed, for twenty to twenty-five
minutes, or until sugar has melted to form a glaze.
  Remove to a large serving platter.  Surround with watercress or
parsley and remaining orange sections.  Let stand about fifteen
minutes before slicing.

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


CHOCOLATE PECAN PIE

by Sharon Maneki


1 8-inch partially baked pie shell 1-2/3 cups coarsely chopped
pecans 1-1/4 cups semisweet chocolate chips
 (a bit over 6 ounces) 1/2 cup light corn syrup 1/2 cup sugar
2 extra large eggs
1/2 stick butter, melted and cooled 1 cup lightly sweetened,
firmly
 whipped cream
chocolate curls and/or toasted pecan halves for garnish

  Sprinkle pecans and chocolate chips evenly into prepared pie
shell.  Blend corn syrup, sugar, and eggs.  Add melted butter. 
Pour slowly and evenly into pie shell.  Bake at 325 degrees until
firm, about one hour.  Cool to room temperature.  Pipe whipped
cream decoratively around edges of pie and in the center. 
Garnish with chocolate curls and/or pecan halves.

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


CHICKEN MOZZARELLA

by Sharon Maneki


6 boneless chicken breast halves, skinned
1 teaspoon oregano
salt, pepper, garlic powder to taste 1 medium onion, chopped
2 cups sliced, fresh mushrooms 2 cups tomato sauce
3 tablespoons dry, red wine
4 ounces skim milk mozzarella, thinly sliced

  Season chicken breast halves with oregano, salt, pepper, and
garlic powder.  Preheat a large, non-stick skillet.  Over medium
heat, brown chicken lightly on both sides.  Add onion, and cook
three minutes longer, or until onion is soft.  Add mushrooms and
tomato sauce, cover, and simmer over low heat until chicken is
tender, about fifteen minutes.
  Stir in wine and simmer, uncovered, for five minutes or until
sauce is slightly thickened.  Place mixture in a greased, shallow
baking dish, and place cheese slices on top.  Bake uncovered at
450 degrees for five minutes, or until cheese is melted.  Serves
six.

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


ORANGE BEEF STEW

by Sharon Maneki


3 tablespoons salad oil
3 pounds stew beef, in 1-inch cubes 1 teaspoon salt
1/2 teaspoon pepper
2 medium onions, sliced
1 (1 pound) can tomatoes, drained 1 cup orange juice
1 tablespoon red wine vinegar 1 garlic clove, minced
1 teaspoon dried rosemary 1 bay leaf, crumbled
2/3 cup pitted ripe olives, coarsely chopped

  In large skillet or Dutch oven, heat oil.  Brown beef cubes
over medium heat.  Remove beef as it browns and transfer to
two-quart casserole.  Season with salt and pepper.
  In the same skillet, saute onions until soft.  Coarsely chop
tomatoes and add to skillet, along with orange juice, vinegar,
garlic, rosemary, and bay leaf.  Simmer, stirring for three
minutes.  Pour over meat, cover, and bake at 350 degrees for two
hours, or until meat is tender.  Add olives and continue baking,
uncovered, for another fifteen minutes.  Serve over boiled
noodles.  Serves six.

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


MONITOR MINIATURES * * * * * * *


**Honored:
  Under date of May 20, 1987, Nancy L.  Abbott (Executive
Director of the South Dakota Office of Volunteerism) wrote to
Karen Mayry:
  "The South Dakota Office of Volunteerism would like to
congratulate you on receiving the 1987 Heart of Gold Award. 
Russell Conwell once said, 'He who would be great anywhere must
first be great in his own community.'  Your compassion as a
volunteer shows your 'greatness' in your own community.  On
behalf of those whose lives are made better by your volunteer
efforts, we'd like to take a moment to thank you."
  Along with this letter, Karen received a certificate signed by
the Governor of the state, recognizing her contributions as a
volunteer.

**Message to Chapters:
  Marilyn Womble, President of the West Central Chapter of the
National Federation of the Blind of Florida, writes:

Dear Fellow Federationists:
  Jacquilyn Billey, National Membership Chairman, and I have
undertaken a project that really has us excited!
  Have you ever stopped to consider the vast amount of knowledge
and years of experience that we have within our organization? 
Can you imagine what it would be like to "tap" this great source,
compile it into a booklet, and make it available to each chapter?

Well, this is what we are attempting to accomplish.  But, to be a
success, we must have help from each of you.
  This information would be very valuable to a newly formed
chapter or to give new ideas to chapters that are well
established.  For example, send us information on how you conduct
fund raisers; state conventions; socials; seminars; public
awareness campaigns; service projects; internal, intra-, and
inter-chapter communications; White Cane Safety Week; or whatever
you feel might benefit another chapter.
  Please send your information to me before November 1, 1987, at
8181 West Cecil Lane, Homosassa, Florida 32646.

**Elected:
  Evangeline Larson, Federationist from Minnesota, writes:

  At our April, 1987, meeting the Metro Chapter of the National
Federation of the Blind of Minnesota elected the following
officers: Judy Sanders, President; Mary Hartle, First Vice
President; James Davis, Second Vice President; Janiece Betker,
Secretary; and Jonathan Ice, Treasurer.

**Religious Magazine:
  Mike Smith of Charleston, West Virginia, asks that we carry the
following announcement:
  "A monthly Braille periodical, We Could See Jesus, is available
from the International Christian Braille Mission.  Access to a
library of over 200 Braille publications is also available.  This
service is free of charge.  For more information contact:
International Christian Braille Mission, Boulevard Church of
Christ, Kanawha Boulevard and Vine Street, Charleston, West
Virginia 25302; phone (304) 343-6157."

**Successful Seminar:
  Lorraine Webb, Secretary of the National Federation of the
Blind of New York, writes:
  "The National Federation of the Blind of New York State held a
most enlightening and enriching leadership seminar on May 16,
1987.  Guest speaker was Donald Capps, President of the South
Carolina affiliate and member of the National Board of Directors.

The seminar was so well attended, it will undoubtedly be the
first of many for our progressive state affiliate."

**Worshipful Master:
  The following item appeared in the Spring/Summer, 1987,
Federationist in Connecticut, the newsletter of the National
Federation of the Blind of Connecticut:
  "On January 3, 1987, Ben Snow was installed as the Worshipful
Master of Hiram Lodge No. 1, the oldest Masonic Lodge in the
State of Connecticut.  This means he will guide his masonic
brothers in the lodge for the coming year.  As far as we know, he
is the first blind person to serve as Master of a lodge in
Connecticut.
  "Ben Snow, who is now the President of the Greater New Haven
Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind of Connecticut,
has always been interested in civic affairs.  Among other things,
he has worked as an adult Scouter in the Hartford area in a
number of capacities.
  "On the night of Ben's installation, a number of NFB members
were present; and in his acceptance speech Ben mentioned
particularly the National Federation of the Blind."

**Awards and Honorable Mention:
  Michael D'Amico of Connecticut writes:

  On May 5, 1987, my school, Mitchell College, a junior college
in New London, Connecticut, distributed their awards.  I received
honorable mention in mathematics, business, and history.  Also, I
received the John T. Ballantine Award, given by the English
Department.  When receiving the John T. Ballantine Award, I
walked to the stage with my seeing eye dog Tab.  I took pride in
the fact that I simply walked to the stage, received my award,
and proceeded like my peers without assistance from anyone.  As I
received the award, I thought of the Federation and my fellow
Federationists and how much progress we have made.

**Braille Bill:
  The following item appeared in the May 17, 1987, St. Paul
(Minnesota) Dispatch:

Both Houses Pass Braille Bill

  School districts must make Braille instruction available to
blind students, but they are now required to insist that every
blind child learn it under a bill approved Saturday by both
houses of the legislature.
  Under the bill, a reading and writing assessment of each blind
child must be conducted every three years.  If the assessment
does not recommend Braille instruction, a reason must be stated.
  The Minnesota Federation of Teachers had opposed an earlier
version of the bill that required Braille be taught to all blind
children.  The federation said the earlier bill was "bad
education policy" because it did not allow for individual
differences.
  The bill now goes to the governor for his signature.

**EIF/REC Offers Resource Guide:  We have been asked to carry the
following announcement:
  "The Electronic Industries Foundation Rehabilitation
Engineering Center (EIF/REC) announces the availability of a
resource document entitled Revolving Loans Fund: Expanding
Equipment Credit Financing Opportunities for Persons With
Disabilities.  Intended for planners and administrators of
organizations that serve persons with disabilities, this manual
explores planning and implementation of revolving funds used to
help clients finance assistive aids and devices.  Such financial
services are already being offered by innovative programs around
the country.  These programs' experiences are studied,
synthesized, and documented for wider benefit.  A limited number
of copies are available free of charge.  Address requests to:
Librarian, Electronic Industries Foundation, 1901 Pennsylvania
Avenue, N.W., Suite 700, Washington, D.C. 20006."

**Without Comment:
  The following item appears in the May, 1987, Metropolitan
Washington Orientation and Mobility Association Newsletter:
  "Musical Pathway Helps Visually Impaired Elderly Persons
Maintain Independence:
  "A 'musical pathway' system that enables visually impaired
people to travel more independently is being field tested by the
American Foundation for the Blind in cooperation with the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.  It is designed primarily
for visually handicapped persons who have severe spatial
disorientation, memory problems, and need constant reassurance in
traveling.  To engage the system, the resident, whose clothing is
equipped with retro reflective tape, pushes a centrally located
button for a particular destination.  As the person arrives at
the first musical cue, infrared sensors detect the person and
activate the next speaker.  Each subsequent speaker is then
activated in turn, until the person finally reaches the
destination.
  "The prototype system was conceptualized by AFB's national
consultant on O&M, Mark Uslan, after years of research and field
testing.  Lindsay Russell of MIT and a team of engineering
students designed, constructed, and installed the system, which
uses a personal computer, infrared sensing equipment, and a
compact disc player.  It has been installed at the Jewish Guild
for the Blind's Home for Aged Blind in Yonkers, New York, where
selected residents, who had previously needed one-to-one
assistance in almost all their travels, are now walking
independently to interior destinations."

**For Sale:
  We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
  "Optacon--Practically brand new.  Also, a Perkins Brailler and
a Braille/ Large Print Scrabble game.  Please contact Jim Furnas,
P. O. Box 7022, Toledo, Ohio 43615, or call (419) 531- 5863."

**Merchants Division Expands:  Hazel Staley, President of the
National Federation of the Blind of North Carolina, writes:

  On Saturday, May 30, 1987, we organized a chapter of the NFB
Merchants Division in North Carolina.  The officers are Wayne
Shevlin, President; Ken Melton, Vice President; Eva Yee,
Secretary; and Linda Dean, Treasurer.  I am very proud of this
achievement, because we have tried several times before to
organize our vendors and have never before been able to do so.  I
believe our success this time is due in great measure to the fact
that two of these members, Wayne Shevlin and Eva Yee, attended
the vendors meeting in Detroit in April.  When they returned
home, they spread their enthusiasm and belief in the Federation
movement to other vendors, and now we have a chapter. 
Incidentally, Linda Dean won one of the Merchants Division's
grants and will be attending her first convention this year.  Eva
Yee will also be attending her first convention.
  I just wanted to share this good news with you.

**Satisfied or Dissatisfied:
  We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
  "To all past and present clients of the Northeastern
Association of the Blind of Albany: The Capital District Chapter
of the National Federation of the Blind of New York is conducting
a survey to determine if your expectations are being met.  If you
wish to participate in this confidential survey, please indicate
whether you require print or Braille and, send survey requests
(only block print, typed, Braille, or taped requests can be
accepted) to Mike Richardson, P. O. Box 6193, Albany, New York
2206."

**Two New Magazines:
  Under date of May 13, 1987, the National Library Service for
the Blind and Physically Handicapped issued the following
announcement:
  "Two new magazines, Science News and the Nation, are now
available to NLS readers.  Circulation began with January, 1987,
issues.  Science News offers brief coverage in all areas of
science and technology.  The material presented in the magazine
is gathered from research journals, symposia, and interviews. 
Occasionally special issues are devoted to one subject.  The
weekly newsletter Science News was selected for production in
Braille to replace the now defunct Science Digest.  Readers who
had subscribed to Science Digest will automatically receive
Science News.  The Nation, a nationally recognized news magazine,
was added to the recorded magazine program on flexible disc. 
Published weekly, except biweekly in July and August, the Nation
features articles on foreign affairs, local and national
politics, disarmament, education, and law.  It also has reviews
of books, the theater, films, and other arts."

**To Know the Truth:
  The American Council of the Blind claims to be the largest
organization of blind people in the United States.  The National
Federation of the Blind claims to be the largest organization of
blind people in the United States.  Somebody is not telling the
truth.  There are similar conflicting statements concerning other
matters.  How can one determine who is to be believed?
  From time to time an event (perhaps not major in and of itself)
occurs which is incontrovertible.  Perhaps such a happening
offers the best opportunity for guidance.
  Lawrence (Muzzy) Marcelino was a long-time member of the
National Federation of the Blind of California, going all of the
way back to the founding.  In 1978 he was president of the
organization and was in the unpleasant position of bearing much
of the brunt of the abuse of the Acosta faction, which later
became the California Council of the Blind.  Not only was Muzzy
not a member of that organization but he repeatedly expressed
complete aversion for the tactics they used and what they stood
for.  Respect for the dead would seem to require that they not be
maligned when they are not present to set the record straight. 
The following item appears in the "Here and There" column of the
Braille Forum for May-June, 1987:
  "Harriet Fielding, a member of the California Council of the
Blind and past Chairman of the ACB board of publications, was the
recipient of the first annual award given by the San Francisco
Paratransit Coordinating Council in memory of Lawrence Marcelino,
who had been an active member of CCB since its inception in 1978.

The paratransit program is a part of the San Francisco Municipal
Rail System and provides transportation to disabled persons. 
Mrs. Fielding, a member of the Paratransit Executive Council, was
given a plaque in recognition of her advocacy for increases in
the paratransit budget to provide adequate transportation in San
Francisco for disabled and elderly persons."

**Resource Directory of Scientists and Engineers With
Disabilities:  We have been asked to carry the
following announcement:
  "The new, expanded 2nd edition of the AAAS Resource Directory
of Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities contains 950
listings of individuals in all fields of science.  The volume is
cross referenced by scientific specialty, disability,
geographical location, and gender.  The Directory is spiral-bound
for easy access. A Braille edition is also available.
  "The Directory is a source of consultants, speakers, role
models, and peer reviewers.  Potential users of the Directory
include: university administrators; disabled students; parents,
teachers, counselors, and community based organizations;
government agencies and private foundations; human resource
departments; student services offices.
  "Order from: Project on Science, Technology and Disability,
AAAS, 1333 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20005; (202) 326-6667
(voice/TDD).  Price: $10 plus $3 for postage and handling. 
Please enclose a check or money order.  Make check payable to
AAAS.  Inquire about discounts for orders of ten or more copies."

**Wants Brailler:
  We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
  "I would like to buy a used Brailler.  Contact: Connie Kramer,
5534 S. E.  Hillwood Circle, Milwaukee, Oregon 97267; call (503)
653-8348."

**Dialogue Magazine:
  We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
  "Dialogue Magazine is in its 26th year of publication.  This
quarterly magazine, which appears in Braille, large print, disc,
and cassette, covers a variety of topics in each issue, including
audio equipment, cooking, child care, and gardening.  Also
included are columns dealing with products and services,
activities, technology, and careers.  With a 70% freelance rate,
it offers a unique opportunity for blind writers.  A year's
reader/membership costs $20.  For more information or to
subscribe, contact: Dialogue, 3100 South Oak Park Avenue, Berwyn,
Illinois 60402- 3095; telephone (312) 749-1908."

**Like Funny, Man, Funny:
  If you see it in the press or on television or hear it on the
radio, it's true--well, isn't it?  On June 17, 1987, the Omaha
World Herald carried the following:

Remember: Love is Blind

  Marriages among blind people last longer--statistically--than
marriages among sighted people.  So our Love and War man has been
informed.  He doesn't doubt it.  The blind reportedly tend to be
better lovers than the sighted.  Among other reasons,
communicating through touch is quite comfortable for them.

**Elected:
  Tim Cranmer writes: I have been asked by Charles Allen to give
you the following information: May 4, 1987, election results,
National Federation of the Blind of Frankfort, Kentucky.  Charles
Allen, President; Grover Lewis, First Vice President; Jerry
Cameron, Second Vice President; Robert Page, Treasurer;
T. V. Cranmer, Secretary.

**Married:
  Ed Eames and Toni Gardiner of New York (whose articles have
appeared in past issues of the Monitor) were married on June 14,
1987.


