                       THE BRAILLE MONITOR

                         February, 1990

                    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
                        BRAILLE MONITOR
       PUBLICATION OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND

                            CONTENTS
                          FEBRUARY 1990

TOURING IN THE HEART OF TEXAS: MAKE YOUR PLANS NOW

OF CHANDELIERS AND SHODDY PRACTICE IN ALABAMA: 
ANOTHER NAC AGENCY ROCKED BY SCANDAL
  by Barbara Pierce

WHAT USE IS THE LONG WHITE CANE?
  by Sharon Duffy

CONSUMERISM: IMPROVING THE SERVICE DELIVERY SYSTEM
by Kenneth Jernigan

COMMENTS ON THE AUDIT OF THE 
IDAHO COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND
  by Ramona Walhof

ALABAMA REVISITED IN THE IOWA PEPPER MILL
  by Kenneth Jernigan

THE FIGHTING ELVES
  by Michael Baillif

REFLECTIONS ON THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
by Kenneth Jernigan

THE PROBLEM WITH COALITIONS
  by Ted Young

REPORT FROM THE NATIONAL LIBRARY SERVICE 
FOR THE BLIND AND PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED

TROUBLE CONTINUES AT 
ASSOCIATED SERVICES FOR THE BLIND IN PHILADELPHIA

I DON'T SEE HOW YOU COULD POSSIBLY WASH OUR DISHES
by Ron Schmidt

LETTER TO HORIZON AIRLINES

BLIND MEN AND ELEPHANTS
  by Hisham H. Ahmed

IS PATRICK CRAZY?
  by Zach Shore

REPORT FROM BLIND INDUSTRIES AND SERVICES OF MARYLAND
by Richard J. Brueckner

RECIPES
  by Barbara Pierce

MONITOR MINIATURES

Copyright, National Federation of the Blind, Inc., 1990

                 TOURING IN THE HEART OF TEXAS: 
                       MAKE YOUR PLANS NOW

Attending Federation conventions always provides an excellent
excuse to enjoy the sights in various cities around the United
States. As you might expect, the opportunities available to us in
the Dallas/Ft.  Worth area during our golden anniversary
convention Saturday, June 30 through Friday, July 6, 1990 will be
unparalleled and unforgettable.
As usual, Wednesday is our free afternoon and evening. This year
it falls on the Fourth of July, and Texans really know how to
celebrate
a birthday be it a Texan's or a nation's. Amusement park
enthusiasts already know about the wonders of Six Flags Over
Texas, but they will be able to check out for themselves the
claims of hair-raising rides and unforgettable spectacles.
For those fans of the television program,  Dallas,  there will be
a tour of the buildings in Dallas in which filming has been done
as well as a lunch and tour of South Fork, the ranch home of
J. R. Ewing. The bus trip, luncheon, and tour will cost about $25
a person; the fantasy is free.
Kennedy buffs and committed shoppers will be attracted to the
tour that explores both the Kennedy Memorial and the Kennedy
Museum at the Book Depository before unloading the tour group at
the West End shopping area, which includes some of the finest
retail stores in all of Texas. Shop till you drop sounds like a
formidable promise in Texas heat, but this tour features air
conditioned comfort for those who want ample time for selecting
their mementos.
As plans stand now, Wednesday evening will offer a real Texas
barbecue with all the trimmings, out under the Texas stars. Plans
are not final, but it should be lots of fun for everyone who
can't go home without sampling real Texas hospitality.
At the close of the convention a lucky busload of Federationists
will be able to enjoy a steak dinner followed by a true Texas
rodeo, which Texans assure us is very different from the
television version. So if this idea tickles your fancy, sign up
for this opportunity as soon as you arrive at the hotel. Space is
limited.
On the other hand, if you have your heart set on going horse-back
riding yourself while you are in the Lone Star State, you will be
pleased to know that if enough of us are interested in riding,
Glenn Crosby, President of the National Federation of the Blind
of Texas, and the rest of the Texans will be able to organize a
tour of a working ranch and enough riding to make us careful
about sitting down for a day or two. The cost will probably be in
the neighborhood of $40 a person, and the tour will take place on
the Saturday following the convention, July 7. If you are
interested in this proposed expedition, drop a line to Glenn
Crosby before May 1, 1990, so that you will be included in the
count. Those on his list will be contacted with further
information.
There are a surprising number of interesting museums in Dallas
which you can get to easily if you have a car available or if you
want to hop the airport bus into downtown Dallas. These include a
wax museum; a transportation museum; a radio museum; and the
Ripley's Believe It or Not Museum, which includes simulations of
an earthquake and
a tornado. If you would like to cast a vote for organizing an
actual tour to any of these attractions or if you want to get
your name on the list for horseback riding, contact Glenn Crosby
at 1403 Cheshire Lane, Houston, Texas 77018. It's easy to
organize a tour if there's enough interest in it, so let Glenn
know what you'd like to do while you're attending the best
Federation convention ever.
And as you think of Dallas, don't forget all of the other
possibilities:  Nieman Marcus; the stadium where the Dallas
Cowboys play, with possible interviews of personalities and
examination of memorabilia; wonderful restaurants; and a great
deal more.
While you're making your plans for convention week, don't forget
to make your reservation with the Hyatt Regency Hotel DFW, Post
Office Box 619014, International Parkway, Dallas- Fort Worth
Airport, Texas 75261; or call (214) 453-1234, or toll-free (800)
233-1234. The hotel will want a deposit or a credit card number.
Our hotel rates continue to be the envy of all who know about
them. For the 1990 convention they are: singles, $27; doubles,
$30; triples, $33; and quads, $37.  For more detailed information
about the convention, see the November, 1989, issue of the 
Braille Monitor . The 1990 convention will be here before you
know it. Don't miss out because you didn't get around to making
your plans early.
   OF CHANDELIERS AND SHODDY PRACTICE IN ALABAMA:  ANOTHER NAC
AGENCY ROCKED BY SCANDAL
                        by Barbara Pierce
Maybe there is something about work with the blind that attracts
disreputable people or encourages the proliferation of despicable
human impulses.  Maybe, like televangelists, agency personnel in
this field are held in such reverence by the public at large that
some of them begin to think they are above the law. Or perhaps it
is merely the presence in the field of an accrediting body (NAC)
that provides protection
for virtually any shoddy practice (as long as only the blind are
injured), perpetuating a network that inflates or fumigates
professional reputations as required. NAC (the National
Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually
Handicapped) may be dying, but it still provides a facade behind
which many of its member agencies, and most especially their
senior officials, seem to believe they can snuff
out the dreams and sometimes the very lives of their clients or
students while reaping substantial public commendation and
personal financial rewards.
Many of the blind in Alabama feel that Jack Hawkins, Dr. Jack
Hawkins (who until July 2, 1989, was the President of the Alabama
Institute for the Deaf and Blind at Talladega) is a perfect
example of this breed. In the ten years (1979-1989) during which
he served as president of this NAC- accredited agency, he
severely damaged the Institute's sheltered workshop, using its
entire $900,000 nest egg, according to workshop officials, to
handle bills the Institute failed to pay after an agency
reorganization. His administration consistently invested more
funds in the School for the Deaf than the School for the Blind,
with such unfairness that even the deaf raised objections. In the
opinion of many of the alumni, the AIDB Foundation, which Hawkins
established, materially contributed to the increased segregation
of both blind and deaf students from the larger community.
The casual hiring practices of Hawkins' administration led,
according to many, directly to bringing a man to the Institute
who murdered four people associated with the agency. And as if
all this were not enough, when in the summer of 1989 he moved out
of Talladega to take the position of Chancellor at Alabama's Troy
State University, he left behind him police investigations and
Ethics Commission probes into two separate matters. He also took
with him without authorization thousands of dollars worth of
Alabama state property. Last year it was the Florida School for
the Deaf and the Blind (see the March, 1989,  Braille Monitor ).
Now it is Alabama. What NAC-accredited agency will be next, and
what has yet to be uncovered?
But back to Alabama. Has Hawkins' reputation been destroyed by
these revelations? It has certainly been tarnished, but
astonishingly he continues to serve as a member of the American
Foundation for the Blind's Board, and he has moved onward and,
one presumes, upward to a university presidency. As to the
Alabama Institute for the Deaf and Blind, it is not at all
astonishing that it continues to enjoy NAC accreditation. After
all, what is NAC accreditation for?
The job at the Alabama Institute for the Deaf and Blind which
Hawkins left last summer at age forty-four paid him a reported
salary of $85,000 a year with an additional expense account of
$4,000, and his business travel and entertainment costs were, of
course, reimbursed in addition.  But there is more: He lived in
the President's Mansion (their apt terminology, not ours) at the
Institute a residence which included the services of a maid and
gardener, and there is still more: To keep the wolf from
scratching the paint from the door of this NAC-accredited mansion
the state also reportedly paid for utilities (including phone). 
But even all of that was apparently not enough. The Hawkinses (as
press accounts make painfully clear in minute detail) were
permitted
to purchase with state funds and to use a mind-boggling array of
luxuries.  It is hard to believe that the Troy State
Chancellorship can be more attractive than what Hawkins had, but
why else would he leave the Alabama Institute for the Deaf and
Blind, where he had (as the saying goes) the world by the tail
with a downhill drag?
The Alabama Institute for the Deaf and Blind (AIDB) in Talladega
essentially provides such services as there are for the deaf and
the blind of the state. The Institute consists of the industries
program (a large sheltered shop, producing an impressive array of
products and providing jobs for more than 300 blind and
physically handicapped people); the
E. H. Gentry Technical School (offering limited rehabilitation
and post-secondary training in some fifteen trades); the Helen
Keller School (serving deaf-blind and other severely handicapped
children from a number of states); the School for the Deaf; and
the School for the Blind. The Governor of Alabama appoints a
Board of Trustees to oversee this conglomerate, and the board
hires the President of the Institute.
Until the early 1980's the adult programs at the Institute had a
more or less autonomous director, who (like the Institute's
President) answered directly to the Legislature and prepared and
managed a budget separate from that of the rest of the Institute.
But all things change, and in September of 1979
thirty-four-year-old Dr. Jack Hawkins, Jr., was appointed
President of the Alabama Institute for the Deaf and Blind. He was
(according to those who observed him for the past decade) young,
energetic, and ambitious so ambitious that he was not content
merely to be president of AIDB. He persuaded his board to give
him extra power and responsibility. In addition to the presidency
of the Institute they appointed him to be director of Adult
Services so that he alone would report to the Legislature and so
that only through
his office would flow the budget appropriations for the entire
conglomerate.  Presumably it was argued that this reorganization
would result in eliminating duplication and waste, thus
increasing the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of the entire
administration.
But the financial figures that have now come to light reveal that
something else happened instead something that had drained funds
from Adult Services to the great benefit of the School for the
Deaf.  In 1988 the Alabama Legislature budgeted just under ten
million dollars for the Institute's Children and Youth Services,
which includes the School for the Blind, the School for the Deaf,
the Helen Keller School, and the Parent-Infant Preschool Program.
Adult Services received an appropriation of about three and a
half million dollars, and the Industries Program got about one
and a half million. According to sources close to the Industries
Program, this last appropriation is intended to cover the
expenses incurred in providing daily transportation for workshop
workers and in subsidizing the wages of those workers who cannot
work competitively. Though Industries' staff members seem not to
have access to the figures that would reveal how much profit or
deficit their program is running, they report that Adult Services
was expected in 1988 to find almost three quarters of a million
dollars as its contribution to what was called Shared Services
the concept here being that each component of the Institute
should contribute toward defraying the costs of the services that
they all share. With a combined budget of less than half that of
the Children and Youth Allocation, Adult Services was suddenly
asked to cover sizable new chunks of the Shared Services budget
and to do so without any increase in its budget. One is left to
conclude that the Industries program must have been showing a
profit since Adult Services did manage to produce the funds
demanded for shared programs.
According to a confidential document, which was inadvertently
released by the Institute, during the first eleven months of the
1988 fiscal
year Adult Services contributed the following amounts in several
categories of these Shared Services: $47,954 of the $65,000
salary paid to the Vice President whose duties included
supervision of the Industries program; $134,000 for health
services (according to Industries sources, this bought workers
three hours a week of a nurse's time); $44,598, a little more
than half of the President's salary; $13,739, about
one quarter of the salary of the Executive Assistant to the
President; $147,410, for the business affairs office; $26,583,
half of the Development Officer's salary; $13,062, half of the
cost of running the Publications Office; $9,966, about a fifth of
the Public Affairs Officer's salary; and $5,424, half of the
salary of the President's maid a salary which, unlike those of
the professionals on the staff, would seem to be anything but
queenly.
Annualized, Adult Services assessments for shared services for
the 1988 fiscal year total $720,000, and Adult Services officials
and area legislators reportedly pleaded with the Institute's
President and the Board to reduce the amount for fiscal 1989. But
for whatever reason, the 1989 assessment against Adult Programs
was set at $801,000.  Also effective in 1989, the Board voted to
transfer $500,000 from the Adult Programs unrestricted fund money
not provided by the state for specific uses and therefore, almost
certainly, profits earned by the blind workers and plowed back
into the Industries Program to be used for  future funding
projects,  according to a resolution passed at the August, 1988,
Board of Trustees meeting. Apparently the fund transfer will
enable the institution to use the money for construction projects
on its school campuses.
At the same time all this was happening, the sheltered shop staff
was learning the hard way that their bills seemed to be the last
ones
paid by the Institute, now that the Industries Program was not
independently responsible for its own budget and bill-paying.
According to those close to the Industries Program, by March of
1988 the shop owed some 1.3 million dollars to suppliers a
revelation which the staffers found astonishing and infuriating.
Even National Industries for the Blind made inquiries about when
the Alabama shop planned to pay its outstanding bills. Rumor has
it, however, that by September of 1989 the amount owed was down
to $198,000 and that at the end of the year the slate had been
wiped clean. But a decade ago the Industries Program had a nest
egg of $900,000 set aside for large equipment purchase and
meeting emergencies a pot of gold which seems to be entirely gone
now. Shop workers and management don't usually agree on much at
Alabama Industries for the Blind, but the one clear exception is
the notion that merging their Program with the rest of the
Institute under Dr. Hawkins has been bad for the shop and bad for
the state's blind adults.
In the Alabama Code of 1975 the Legislature clearly established
the separation between Children and Youth Services and the Adult
Programs, so when Hawkins made his grab, there was a growing
restiveness. By
the late 1980s concerned citizens encouraged a local legislator
(Clarence Haynes) to request the Alabama Attorney General to
render an opinion on the legality of the Hawkins reorganization.
On February 24, 1989, the Attorney General handed down his
opinion, clearly stating that
the Hawkins reorganization is illegal. Here is what the Attorney
General said:
____________________
                                                    Don Siegelman
                                                 Attorney General
                                              Montgomery, Alabama
                                                February 24, 1989

Honorable Clarence E. Haynes
Member, House of Representatives
Talladega, Alabama

Dear Representative Haynes:
This opinion is issued in response to your request for an opinion
from the Attorney General.

Question: Can the department of adult blind and deaf be combined
with the Alabama Institute for the Deaf and Blind?
Facts and Analysis: The statute establishing the department of
adult blind and deaf is found at Code of Alabama 1975, Section
21-1-15.  It states:
 There shall be at the Alabama Institute for Deaf and Blind a
separate department of adult blind and deaf. Legislative
appropriations for the department shall be made separate and
apart from the legislative appropriations made for the support
and operation of this institute.  The department shall have the
authority to establish and to operate a library service for
blind, visually handicapped, deaf, or severely handicapped
persons, and the department is hereby designated as the official
agency to operate a regional library for the blind, visually
handicapped, deaf, and severely handicapped.  [In 1976 then
Governor Wallace transferred authority for the library to the
State Library.]
The fundamental rule in construing a statute is to ascertain and
effectuate legislative intent as expressed in the statute. This
intent may be gleaned from the language used, the reason and
necessity for the act, and the purpose sought to be obtained.
Shelton v. Wright, 439 So.2d 55 (Ala.1983).
Section 21-1-15 states that the department of adult blind and
deaf is to be a separate department in the Alabama Institute for
the Deaf and Blind. According to the statute, legislative
appropriations for the department are to be made separate and
apart from legislative appropriations made for the support and
operation of the institute.  These appropriations are to be used
solely for the operation of the
Adult Deaf and Blind Department. The department is authorized to
establish and to operate a library service for blind, visually
handicapped,
deaf, and severely handicapped persons and is designated as the
official agency to operate a regional library for such persons.
Therefore, the language used in Section 21-1-15 and the purpose
in enacting the statute indicate that it was the intent of the
legislature that the department of adult blind and deaf was to be
separate from the Alabama Institute for the Deaf and Blind.
Furthermore, my research does not reveal any authority that would
permit the department to be combined with the Institute for the
Deaf and Blind.
Conclusion: The department of adult blind and deaf cannot be
combined with the Alabama Institute for the Deaf and Blind.
I hope this sufficiently answers your question. If our office can
be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us.

                                                       Sincerely,
                                                    Don Siegelman
                                                 Attorney General
____________________
That is what the Attorney General said, but almost a year later
it is still not clear what impact the opinion will have on
business as usual at the Alabama Institute for the Deaf and
Blind. The Board is the body that will have to change the
institution's course, and forcing that action may require a
lawsuit, which several people with whom we talked seem prepared
to undertake if necessary.
In the meantime one might be pardoned for hoping that, even if
the blind adults in Alabama are suffering because of shared
services and mingled funding, blind children, at least, might be
benefiting from the skewed system. Alas, this does not seem to be
the case. A document circulated to the Board of Trustees at their
August, 1989, meeting indicates that during the past ten years
$16,272,000 has been spent for renovation of existing structures,
construction of new buildings, and maintenance of the buildings
and grounds. Of this amount $9,569,000 was spent on the School
for the Deaf and $2,411,000 on the School for the Blind. In fact,
the physical plant of the School for the Deaf received about one
and a half times the amount spent on the facilities of all other
programs combined. The disproportion has become so lopsided that
the Board of Trustees' deaf consumer representative recently
recommended that more money be allocated to the School for the
Blind,
though there is no evidence yet that her plea will be heeded.
Parenthetically one might inquire whether the academic programs
of these schools are so sound that there really is sixteen
million dollars available to
lavish on physical plant and presidential luxuries, important as
buildings and luxuries may be. Many in the blind community and
several in the Alabama Legislature believe that the answer should
have been no. But Dr. Hawkins clearly recognized the advantage of
heading a facility that looked attractive, whether or not the
students were flourishing or, for that matter, safe.
For example, the two vans used by the School for the Blind both
have driven, according to the School's principal, more than
200,000 miles.  One is a 1975 model; the other was built in 1977.
The Institute's director of transportation has said that one of
the two is not road-worthy for any extended driving, but as far
as is generally known, there are no imminent plans to replace
either vehicle.
We are informed that according to a recent furniture bid, the
cost of furnishing and equipping the new student center at the
School for the Deaf was $198,000 (with $105,000 being spent on
furniture alone).  On the other hand, the amount spent on
furniture in the entire School for the Blind during the decade
was $220,000. The new deaf student center contains a conference
table, costing a princely $5,500, and 448 stacking chairs, each
of which cost $46. During a recent alumni event at the School for
the Blind, attendees report that the folding chairs they were
using kept collapsing under them. The only other startling
expenditures on the furniture bid are a $2,000 desk and several
$238 trash baskets. It is puzzling to know how one could manage
to spend $238 on a single indoor trash receptacle, but it must be
gratifying for the deaf students to know that even their trash is
departing in high style.
If the school-age blind population being served in Alabama had
been shrinking more rapidly than the deaf population during the
past decade,
marked differences in the funds expended on the schools might be
understandable.  But ten years ago 480 deaf students were
enrolled at that school,
and today there are 240 a decrease of 50 percent. In 1979 140
students attended the School for the Blind; today there are 130 a
decrease of less than 10 percent. The Helen Keller School served
135 children in 1979 and enrolls 90 today, 60 of whom are
visually impaired.  The Parent-Infant Preschool Program works
with about 125 blind children and roughly the same number of deaf
children. The E. H. Gentry facility has historically served a
population, sixty percent of whom are visually impaired, and
about two-thirds of the adults working at Alabama Industries for
the Blind are blind and about one-third sighted or otherwise
handicapped.  It is clear from these figures, reported by an
Institute official as having been drawn from the Alabama
Institute's own annual report, that today a majority of the
people served by the institution are blind.
Some observers have worried about what they see as the
Institute's increasing tendency under the Hawkins administration
to segregate
its students from the greater Talladega community. Hawkins' AIDB
Foundation one of those convenient nonprofit reservoirs of money
that officials can
channel in directions not approved by the legislature built a
chapel that, according to members of the alumni, the students
didn't need. These members of the alumni believe that it was
preferable for youngsters to attend churches in the town rather
than having separate services in a private facility. But the
chapel was built to serve the students whether they liked or
needed it or not, and as a result, the inmates of the Institute
were separated still further from the town.
During the early eighties, apparently as a cost-cutting measure,
the Hawkins administration decided to reduce the Institute's
security staff. At the same time observers close to the
institution report that it was engaging in the kind of sloppy
hiring practices that led to such catastrophic results at the
Florida School for the Deaf and Blind. (See the March, 1989, 
Braille Monitor .)
We are told that a man was hired to offer both deaf and blind
youngsters at AIDB firsthand experience in artistic expression,
without an interview or research into his background. The new
employee brought a friend (Daniel Spence) to Talladega with him
who had jumped bail in San Francisco and escaped from prison in
Nevada, where he had been serving a sentence for stabbing a man
to death in a homosexual brawl. This second man, too, began
establishing contact with blind and deaf students as a volunteer
aide. He described himself around town as working at the
Institute, according to sources close to the situation. But
again,
so far as we can determine, no effort was made to learn anything
about the man.
Probably on February 21, 1986 (not all the bodies were discovered
for some time), Danny Lee Siebert (also known as Daniel Spence)
entered an apartment building housing disabled people and killed
two deaf women and the two small sons of one of them. Sometime
later in the rampage he also killed his next door neighbor and
abandoned her body in a wooded area. Perhaps a routine background
check, a face-to- face interview, or the presence of security
officers on campus would have done nothing to prevent what
happened, but one wonders. NAC, of course, showed no public
concern. Whether they were privately concerned, we have no way of
knowing. Only one of the deaf women was actually a current
Institute student (the other was an alumna), so neither was
enrolled in the School for the Blind. The fact that blind
Institute students could just as easily have been the ones killed
was immaterial.  Cavalier hiring practices and cost- cutting in
security measures presumably have nothing to do with standards
and quality of services in the NAC lexicon.
In May of 1989 Dennis Hartenstine, Executive Director of NAC,
boasted to blind consumers in Michigan:  I assure you, if
anything ever occurred and our commission [NAC's Commission on
Accreditation] was concerned about the safety of the
organization, the safety of the individuals being served and the
accredited body did not take action to make changes, the
Commission would withdraw accreditation. 
Viewed in the uncompromising light of Florida and Alabama, NAC's
promises, like its standards of excellence, can be seen for what
they are a sham and a mockery.
Apparently everyone in Talladega worked together to hush things
up.  Only a few people, labeled by the Institute as blind
trouble-makers, asked difficult questions, and no one in the
administration of the
Institute or the accrediting body that was supposed to lend it
respectability was visibly interested in seeking hard answers.
Hawkins did summarily fire the art instructor, but the instructor
was, of course, no longer in touch with the murderer, who had
fled the scene of the crime in a car belonging to one of his
victims. The murderer was caught eleven months later and is now
appealing his sentence to die in the electric chair.
In summary it seems clear that during the years of the Hawkins
administration students and clients in general, and the blind in
particular, have gotten short shrift at the Alabama Institute.
Two things happened in the spring of 1989, however, that
suggested a change might be in the wind. In May, Calvin Wooten
(one of the two blind Trustees) was elected Chairman of the Board
the first blind person to be so honored. But according to the
blind, he has remained deaf to their concerns. Staff members at
the School for the Blind report that he does not visit the school
or talk with them about their problems.  He does, however, attend
some School for the Deaf football games.

As the situation worsened throughout 1989, the blind of Alabama
collected about 250 names on a petition asking the state's
governor to remove Mr. Wooten from the Board. The signers
included virtually everyone who could be considered a leader in
the blind community in Alabama.  Unanimity among the blind has
rarely before existed on any issue in the state, but the governor
refused seriously to consider either their request or the
underlying crisis that the very existence of two hundred-fifty
names on such a petition demonstrated. It goes without saying
that NAC did not disaccredit the institution or show any visible
concern.  Wooten can hardly be blamed for all the difficulties
facing the blind at the Institute. After all, he has only chaired
the Board since May of 1989. Hawkins is clearly much more
responsible for the damage to the programs for the blind.
Just about everyone in the blind community was, therefore,
delighted to learn that on July 2, 1989, Dr. Hawkins was to
resign in order to take the post of Chancellor at Alabama's Troy
State University on September 1. In a state with a
well-entrenched old-boy network and with an official as tightly
tied into that network as Hawkins appears to be, there was no
hope of making him accountable for what he had done to damage the
Institute or the blind, but at least he would be leaving. Perhaps
someone else could be encouraged to assist the blind. So Hawkins
was wined and dined. The Alumni Association of the School for the
Deaf presented him with a $1,500 set of golf clubs. The AIDB
Foundation (the one he had established) bought up the remainder
of his country club membership; the new chapel that no one wanted
was named after him; and in general he was told what
a fine fellow he was and what a wonderful job he had done. The
blind, for the most part, remained silent.
Then bits of information began to surface. Alabama has an ethics
law with a provision that prevents the president of an
institution from influencing the hiring of his wife. It appears,
however, to an objective outsider that Hawkins wanted his wife to
do some consulting work for the Institute in the Parent-Infant
Program. According to some sources, she had been doing the work
for years, and it only seemed fair for her to be paid for it.
Others maintain that she didn't even begin
to earn the salary she was eventually paid. Hawkins apparently
dreamed up a scheme which would enable him to funnel some $24,000
of Institute money to his wife through the University of Alabama
at Birmingham,
an institution with which Mrs. Hawkins had previously been
associated.  When the story eventually blew open, it was covered
by the  Daily Home , the local Talladega paper. This is the way
the  Daily Home  reported the story in late September, 1989:
____________________
            Preuitt [State Senator]: Hawkins Abused 
Power as AIDB President
                       by Denise Sinclair

Controversy continues to surround former Alabama Institute for
Deaf and Blind President Dr. Jack Hawkins, Jr. This time state
Senator Jim Preuitt is questioning whether a contract allowing
Hawkins' wife Janice to work as a consultant through the
University of Alabama at Birmingham is ethical.
Preuitt said Tuesday,  He (Hawkins) primarily contracted with the
University of Alabama for $24,350 for a part-time job for Mrs. 
Hawkins. The money was funneled from AIDB to UAB. It may not be
illegal, but it sure sounds unethical. 
Preuitt said there is no indication the Board approved the
contract, which ran from June, 1988, to May, 1989.
The contract was a cooperative agreement between AIDB and UAB for 
the exchange of professional and expert services.  It involved
the AIDB Parent-Infant Program, which provides quality services
to the hearing and visually impaired pre-school child.
According to the contract terms, Mrs. Hawkins  developed,
promoted, and evaluated  the program.
Under the contract, Mrs. Hawkins received $22,000 for consultant
services, $1,350 for travel and $1,000 for materials and
supplies.
AIDB reimbursed the University of Alabama for the services at a
rate
of $2,030 per month under the contract. Also, according to the
contract, the services were for a two-thirds position.
Hawkins signed the contract for AIDB. Signatures of Mr. Dudley
Pewitt, senior vice president for administration at UAB, and Dr.
Keith D.  Blayney, dean of the School of Health Related
Professions, were also on the contract, which was dated May 17,
1988.
Preuitt pointed out that the contract doesn't say Mrs. Hawkins
would be the recipient.  I do know she paid into the Alabama
Retirement System for a salary of $22,000 during that period. I
think it was
cut and dried. It's a cowardly way to put your wife on the local
payroll.  I questioned Hawkins about this in January in
Montgomery as to whether
or not his wife was on the payroll. He said I was getting too
personal.  The senator said he had the AIDB minutes researched
and there is  no authorization by the Board  for this contract. 
This is another thing where the public will have less confidence
in schools. These misuses of funds are reasons the public will
not vote on new taxes.  Institutions must be accountable. 
Preuitt added,  The local legislators have been trying for five
years to get redirection of funding at AIDB to children and
adults
rather than beautification. We did not want to do what we did in
Montgomery.  But that was the only way we could get Jack Hawkins'
attention. We wanted questions answered. Many people thought we
were too tough on him at that time.
 We've just scratched the surface. There is so much abuse by this
(Hawkins) administration. It got to the point where he thought he
was above the law. 
Rep. Clarence Haynes said he questions the legality of the
contract or agreement.  I understand the contract was typed at
AIDB. This is just another example of mismanagement of funds. We
have been trying to correct this for a couple of years. It's one
of many incidents that are not right. We've (the local
legislative delegation) been outgunned and outwritten in the
newspapers. 
AIDB Board member Ralph Gaines said he had no knowledge of the
agreement between the Institute and the University of Alabama. 
I've been
on the Board 2-1/2 years. I don't recall any discussion or Board
action on this contract between UAB and AIDB, particularly Mrs.
Hawkins.  Jim Bosarge, assistant director of University Relations
at UAB, said,  The consulting agreement was new in 1988. Mrs.
Hawkins had maintained a part-time position with UAB since moving
to Talladega. She is a long-term employee of UAB since the
mid-1970s. The AIDB Field Services Office requested a person for
consultation purposes prior to the agreement.   She had been
serving AIDB needs on a voluntary basis for several years. They
requested more of her time, which led to the consulting
agreement. 
Bosarge said the University had information from the Ethics
Commission regarding Mrs. Hawkins' employment.  It's my
understanding it was OK for her to consult with AIDB in one of
her specialties if it occurred through another institution. She
was a part-time employee of UAB. There was no reason for her not
being hired as a consultant.  No one else in the area had the
skills to do the work. 
AIDB Board Chairman Calvin Wooten of Anniston declined comment on
the agreement.
The  Daily Home  was unable Tuesday afternoon to obtain
information from the Ethics Commission in Montgomery regarding
the matter.
Preuitt and Haynes both stressed they feel strongly about public
institutions' being more accountable for citizens' tax dollars
and the recent abuses at AIDB point to this fact.
____________________
That's what the newspapers were saying, but that was far from
all.  Alabama also has a law that prevents anyone from buying
state property except at auction. The salary and perquisites a
tax-free expense account and a mansion with maid, gardener, and
utilities bestowed upon Dr. Hawkins by the Alabama Institute for
the Deaf and Blind out of funds provided by the state's taxpayers
can go a long way in a small southern town, where the cost of
living is lower than in most cities; and plenty of people, like
the Hawkinses' maid, scrape along on less than $11,000 a year. If
the state had provided Dr. Hawkins nothing more, this job would
still, by any standard, have been generously (perhaps too
generously) remunerative. But apparently Alabama (whether it knew
it or not) was prepared to provide the Hawkinses with the
use of a kingly array of luxuries in their residence. One state
official told the  Braille Monitor  with disgust that Mrs.
Hawkins loved wallpaper more than any woman he had ever seen. 
Seemed like there was new wallpaper and carpet about every six
months. 
When the time came to move from Talladega, the Hawkinses
apparently couldn't bear to leave behind some of the lovely
things the state had purchased. According to Dr. Hawkins, on
August 17, 1989, he wrote a check in the amount of $2,781.65 to
cover the cost of the items he wished to purchase no doubt
appropriately discounted because they were used merchandise. It
is clear that Dr. Hawkins knew about
the state prohibition on outright purchasing of Alabama property
because he had someone from the Institute call the state's Ethics
Commission
to inquire how a person could legally buy a desk from the state.
Probably assuming that the desk in question was an old and
beloved memento of years of service, the state official said that
if a check were written for the market value of the piece, it
would pass muster, or at least no one would probably bother to
ask questions. This is the way the  Daily Home  told the story on
September 28, 1989. As you read, ask yourself what happened to
the desk in question. Was the initial question asked about a desk
simply because it would sound more innocuous that way? Was the
desk in question never returned?  How many other objects slipped
through the cracks? Here is one of the many news stories printed
at the time:
____________________
                     Ethics Complaint Filed
                       Against Dr. Hawkins
                       by Denise Sinclair

An ethics complaint was filed Tuesday against former Alabama
Institute for Deaf and Blind President Dr. Jack Hawkins, Jr. for
purchasing furniture and china from the president's mansion.
Tom Mills of Tuscaloosa, a 1981 graduate of AIDB's E. H. Gentry
Technical Facility, filed the complaint with the state's Ethics
Commission.  In his complaint to the Commission, Mills said
Hawkins improperly used his position to buy the furniture that
belonged to the Institute.  Wayne Hall, assistant chief examiner
with the state Examiner of Public Accounts Office, said Wednesday
afternoon that state law prohibits such a sale.
 State property must be declared surplus property and sold
according to the rules and regulations of the Alabama Department
of Economic and Community Affairs,  Hall said in a telephone
interview from Montgomery.
Hawkins resigned from AIDB in the summer to become chancellor of
the Troy State University System on September 1.
Before leaving AIDB, Hawkins bought the furniture and china for
$2,890.  The items had been in the president's home on South
Street. The items were a nest of tables, curio cabinet, a set of
Lennox China (six place settings), two place settings of Lennox
China, a set of queen size bedding, one bed frame, an
entertainment center, a butcher block, and one desk.
These items were returned to the mansion Wednesday afternoon,
according to an AIDB official, and Hawkins will receive a refund
for the items he purchased.
AIDB officials have said they were advised in mid-August by an
official of the state examiner of public accounts that the sale
would be legal provided Hawkins paid fair market value.
Hall said his office records show the initial contact was made by
an AIDB official on Monday.  We received a call on Monday from
someone at the school concerning the sale of a desk and the
proper procedures. The other items were not mentioned,  he said. 
Ethics Commission Director Melvin Cooper would not comment on the
complaint, saying state law prohibits him from doing so.
Mills said,  I'm not accusing Dr. Hawkins of anything. I'm
concerned about the public picture statewide regarding presidents
of universities and institutions such as this who spend money on
lavish lifestyles instead of education. The voters in this state
have a right to put their feet down when it comes to boards of
trustees around Alabama who buy things like the entertainment
center and china. Bibb County next door to me can't afford
textbooks. The public should be incensed by this. 
Mills said that until this lavish spending is stopped by
presidents
of institutions, the public will keep saying  no  to any
additional tax moneys or funds for education.
 Until these big educational people quit living lavish
lifestyles, education in Alabama will suffer,  he concluded.
State Representative Clarence Haynes and Senator Jim Preuitt are
calling for an investigation concerning other items that were
removed from
the president's home before Hawkins left office. The items were
returned Sunday. Hawkins said the items were inadvertently packed
by movers.  Bibb Thompson with Thompson Company, which moved some
of the Hawkins' furniture, said,  My company employees only
inventory and load what they are told to load by the person or
family we are moving.  ____________________
So said the  Daily Home , and a careful reading of this article
reveals that the entertainment center, nest of tables, Lennox
china, etc., is not all that left Talladega with the Hawkinses.
In fact,
some who lose no love for Dr. Hawkins suggest that the financial
transaction on August 17 provided convenient camouflage for the
disappearance
of a much longer list of items a list as astonishing for its
variety as for its value. But this is only speculation. The facts
are clear enough. The Hawkinses have explained and explained that
they were both running in and out of the house all day while the
movers were there to pack up their possessions. They maintain
that they had no idea what was being packed because the movers
insisted on wrapping the things they were to move. But the maid
reports that Mrs. Hawkins told her to instruct a workman to take
down a chandelier for packing, so one suspects that a good deal
of planning went into the preparations for moving despite the
protestations of the Hawkinses that they never intended to take
state property with them.
When the absence of the valuables was noticed, the Hawkinses
agreed to return them. Hawkins arranged to bring back the items
on a Sunday so that he and members of the Board of Trustees could
go over the inventory list and check off the returned goods.
Hawkins just happened to arrive in Talladega Sunday morning
instead of Sunday afternoon as agreed. He says he decided to
stack the things in the president's mansion just to get them
deposited before going to a luncheon engagement.  He says he
didn't know that the door locks had been changed, which meant
that his key (it isn't clear why he still had a key to the
mansion at all) didn't fit in the front door. He reports that he
then found
a side door unlocked, through which he carried the things he was
returning.  There is now no record of how closely the list of
items Hawkins returned resembles the list of those reported as
missing one of the objectives that the Institute should have had
in mind when it arranged to have its Trustees present when the
goods were returned.
A neighbor, however, had noticed someone carrying goods between a
van and the house and apparently concluded that the mansion was
being burgled. She called Representative Clarence Haynes, who in
turn called the police. [It is worth considering why a citizen,
seeing such unusual behavior, would not call the police directly.
Could it have been fear of tangling personally with the powerful
Alabama Institute? If the observer recognized the ex-president,
one can hardly blame her for wishing to avoid being pulled into a
legal matter.] In any case, the police dashed to the scene to
find the esteemed ex-president of the Institute surreptitiously
slipping state property back into the house.  Perhaps it really
was all an unfortunate mistake perhaps. But credulity has its
limits somewhere. Here is an excerpt from the  Daily Home's 
account of the story on September 27, 1989:
____________________
               Legislators Call for Investigation
                         of AIDB Matter
                       by Denise Sinclair

TALLADEGA State Representative Clarence Haynes and Senator Jim
Preuitt are calling for a full investigation into an incident in
which items, pieces of furniture and silver, were taken from the
president's mansion at the Alabama Institute for the Deaf and
Blind.
Former AIDB President Dr. Jack Hawkins, Jr. and several others
returned Sunday the items, which were discovered missing
following an inventory
of the mansion. Hawkins assumed the chancellorship at Troy State
University on September 1.
Haynes got a phone call Sunday morning from someone who saw a van
parked at the mansion, and thought the residence was being
burglarized.  Haynes reported it to the Talladega Police
Department, who on checking found Hawkins there returning the
missing items.
Haynes picks up the story from there.  I had zero knowledge of
any of this happening before Sunday morning. I received a call
that someone had broken into the president's home at AIDB. I
don't know who called. I assumed it was someone in the
neighborhood who spotted the van. I called the police. The police
later called me. I met them there at the home. I was told the
Hawkins family had brought some things back from Troy State in a
Troy State University van. I understand two weeks ago some AIDB
officials had reported a list of items missing from the home
after Dr. Hawkins left.
 Through business services and controller's office inventory and
with the aid of purchase orders, a list of items was put together
that were taken from the home. Hawkins was called and ordered to
bring the items back. Had it not been for AIDB Board member Ralph
Gaines, these items probably would not have been returned. 
It was reported by other news agencies in the state and in the 
Daily Home  Tuesday afternoon the incident was a misunderstanding
according to Gaines and Board Chairman Calvin Wooten.
In a statement to the  Daily Home  Tuesday afternoon, Gaines
said,  The  Daily Home  has reported I have said there was
a `misunderstanding' regarding recent events involving the
President's home at AIDB and some of its contents. I have not
communicated with anyone at the  Daily Home  until I saw this
report in the paper.   The only misunderstanding I know of was
the time and manner certain items which had been removed were to
be returned to the home.  Gaines went on to say that Hawkins had
done a good job at AIDB and as a Board member he hopes no adverse
effects on the Institute, its children, and adults would occur
because of this issue.  I hope we can continue with the good work
that's going on, and I am sorry these things have occurred. 
After learning of the incident and not knowing the full story,
Haynes asked Board Chairman Calvin Wooten,  What's going on? 
Wooten, Haynes noted, said the items had been  inadvertently
taken by movers. 
Wooten in a telephone conversation Tuesday afternoon called the
incident  a comedy of errors.  He said,  Everything has been
brought back to the mansion. I knew myself he was coming Sunday.
I didn't go into any details with him on returning the items and
volunteered to help him if he needed assistance. He said he had
it under control.
It didn't cross my mind the former president would be accused of
breaking into his former home. I contend it was no break-in. All
the items are inventoried and everything is back in place. 
The representative questions why Hawkins returned to Talladega
Sunday morning instead of the appointed time of 3:30 p.m. the
same day.  He had an appointment with the Board at 3:30 Sunday to
return the items.  I have not talked to him. I do know he and the
others went in the house early and put the items back unknown to
the current resident, Dr. Erskine Murray. I did not know at the
time when I called the police it was Dr. Hawkins. But I want to
point out he had no business in that house. 
Haynes said that in talking with Wooten, he feels the Board
chairman wants to  cover up  the matter.  This is the kind of
thing that has been going on for years, and this proves what some
of us have been trying to point out about the Hawkinses' blatant
disregard of the taxpayers' money. I will ask for further
investigation by the Board into this, and also I want the Board
to check out the possibility of items bought without purchase
orders that are not on the inventory list. 
Haynes commended board member Gaines for his effort  to do the
right thing.  He added,  I only wish the chairman (Wooten) could
see things the way Gaines does. 
He concluded,  Wooten has tried to shield some of this from the
public. It is not right, no matter who it is, to take property
that doesn't belong to you. I think people deserve to see the
truth good, bad, or indifferent. 
Preuitt echoed Haynes' sentiments and said he will call for a
full investigation.
 From all indications the items were taken from the mansion and
moved to Troy. The big question is do these items belong to the
school, the state, or the taxpayers, and why would they be moved?
The merchandise was asked to be returned.
  Hawkins had moved out almost 30 days ago, and he returned with
the items Sunday. Why move the items out if they didn't belong to
you and then slip them back in? Dr. Murray is living there, and
he was not home when this took place. It's wrong. Why take the
goods
to begin with when they belong to the taxpayers? This warrants a
full investigation,  Preuitt said.
He, too, thinks a coverup is occurring.  They say the movers got
the items by mistake. That will not hold water. Most of the
merchandise belonged to the Institute and the taxpayers. The
movers were directed to move the items. This is not a mistake on
the part of the movers, and it deserves being investigated
because it is taxpayers' money.  A list of the items returned to
the president's home are: one tea
set, one ginger jar with base, one dresser, one lamp globe, two
entrance rugs, two small round tables (one with marble top), one
brown narrow table, two mirror runners, one octagon mirror, four
crystal candle holders, one tea pot with two cups, one large
Revere bowl, one soup tureen, two glass decanters, one crystal
compote;
One china plate, four figurines, one cup and saucer, three silver
wine goblets, 12 small Revere bowls, one large brass planter, one
capa de onte planter, Buttercup silver (22 cocktail forks, eight
knives, eight forks, six butter spreaders, eight salad forks,
seven tablespoons, one sugar spoon, eight teaspoons, and eight
soup spoons), 17 silver napkin rings, one lace table cloth;
One casserole dish in silver holder, one silver wire basket, two
oblong silver platters, 18 silver coasters with three holders,
three silver trays, one set of blue stoneware, one set flatware,
two brass lamps, one side table, one soup tureen, three
decorative apples, 41 glass serving plates, one waste basket, one
gate leg table, one chandelier, one two-drawer file cabinet, one
chaise lounge, one padded headboard with bed accessories, one
brass floor lamp, one oak desk, one bookcase, one bedside table,
one quilt stand, and one VCR.
____________________
There it is as it was reported all over the state at the time.
And what about the investigation being conducted by the state's
Ethics Commission? From the beginning there was next to no chance
that the Commission would find against Jack Hawkins. The Old Boy
network in Alabama is alive and well, and the blind are not a
part of it. As
we go to press in December, the Ethics Commission has found in
Hawkins' favor. As one person close to the case, who asked not to
be identified said,  He may have broken the law, but not the
ethics law, so he is exonerated. 
This leaves only the police investigation of the Hawkins purchase
of state-owned goods and his removal and return of still other
state property. The District Attorney is not saying what he
intends to do.  The current grand jury is about to stand down, so
he may wish to wait until a new one is impaneled. Maybe justice
will yet be done, but
the blind of Alabama are understandably skeptical. Why should it
begin now?
A new President of the Institute was named on November 9, 1989.
He is Thomas Bannister, who was the Superintendent of the Utah
School for the Deaf and Blind. He was the only one of the five
finalists who had any past experience at all with blindness, so
(although as we have seen in the case of Hawkins, experience with
blindness is
not necessarily a proof of rectitude) perhaps the luck of blind
people in Alabama has changed. One can only hope but may be
pardoned for doubting.
With a united voice the blind of Alabama have called for redress.
The governor has ignored them, and Legislators James Preuitt and
Clarence Haynes (whose blind mother is an active Federationist)
have demanded reform of the Institute to no avail. And where was
NAC when questions about the quality of services to blind people
were being raised and condemnation of the Institute's President
was filling virtually every newspaper in the state? In bed with
the establishment, of course,
where it always wants to be. In May of 1989 Dennis Hartenstein
explained with sanctimonious condescension to a group of blind
people that NAC's mission is to improve agencies in the field. If
accreditation were to be withdrawn or refused, he asked
rhetorically, what incentive would there be for that agency to
improve its services to the blind?  To which one is driven to
reply: What impetus is there now? Alabama has never been a good
place for blind people, but its attractiveness has been declining
during the past decade. Jack Hawkins is clearly the immediate
cause of this sorry state of affairs, but the ultimate
responsibility must lie at NAC's door. Whether NAC likes it or
not, the general public understands the concept of accreditation
to be a way for experts to indicate their approval of an agency's
actions and policies. NAC must decide whether it would rather
claim that the morally bankrupt activities and policies of the
Hawkins administration are outside the purview of its standards
or that it has simply been looking the other way in an effort
(one supposes) to improve the Institute.  Both alternatives are
damning, and both are probably, to one degree or another, true.
We will say it once again in case we have been misunderstood. We
have no quibble with the concept of accreditation. If it were
done with commitment to improving the welfare of blind people, if
it reflected society's commonly held notions of legality and
ethics, if one could ever see a pattern that suggested blind
people were flourishing and growing in competence through the
work of accredited agencies, then
one could embrace NAC accreditation with enthusiasm. The Alabama
Institute for the Deaf and Blind, and its checkered history under
the leadership of Jack Hawkins, is only the latest chapter in the
NAC scandal. The corruption at the Alabama Institute demonstrates
once again the true degree of NAC's commitment (or lack thereof)
to quality service and high principles. When NAC and its agencies
cozy up together and claim to be taking care of the blind, the
blind lose every time. We will keep fighting for justice in
Alabama, as we have so often done before.  Through hard
experience we have learned that if we who are blind do not fight
for ourselves, no one else will do it for us.WHAT USE IS THE LONG WHITE CANE?
                         by Sharon Duffy
 Sharon Duffy is Mobility Instructor at the Orientation Center of
the New Mexico Commission for the Blind. She is a good teacher
and a perceptive author. The following excerpts are taken from
Miss Duffy's  The White Cane,  copyright, 1987. Apparently they
appeared a few months ago in the publication of the NFB of
Florida.  Although we did not catch them at that time, we picked
them up in
the October, 1989,  Insight,  the publication of the NFB of South
Dakota. They make a lot of sense. Here they are: 

Cane travel is one of the most valuable skills a blind person can
attain. It not only means independence for the individual but is
more often the means of acceptance of blindness than any other
skill.
1) A blind person who uses a cane is not only making a statement
to others that he is blind but, more importantly, is
acknowledging his own blindness. In dealing with the challenges
that blindness brings, the first step must be this acceptance of
blindness, and then the ability to look at each problem
unemotionally and logically to work out its solution.
2) It is respectable to be blind. It is respectable to use a
cane, and it is normal for blind persons to use canes.
3) Why is the denial of blindness so prevalent? Throughout time
blindness has been portrayed as helplessness, and today it
continues to get bad press via commercials, movies, and
literature. Most blind people recognize that they do not fit the
negative stereotypes presented.  Therefore, many blind
individuals' reaction is to deny that they are blind. Pride in
ourselves as human beings and acceptance of what we are is the
real solution.
4) We should take our white canes with us wherever we go. It is
important in identifying ourselves as blind persons in terms of
public awareness.  Identifying oneself as blind can reduce the
number of uncomfortable situations which would arise without it.
The blind person who asks where something is, something in plain
sight, spares himself and the sighted person embarrassment. Since
the incidence of blindness is so low, a person probably would not
immediately conceive that the individual asking the question is
blind.
5) Many blind people mistakenly believe that they appear more 
normal  if they don't carry a cane. The fact is that the public
may not recognize
that a person is blind but does realize that there is something
different mental retardation, drunkenness, illiteracy, to name a
few. Ultimately it
is more comfortable for blind people to identify themselves as
blind, allaying the confusion that results from the
misidentification that would otherwise inevitably occur.
6) Self-confidence is the goal of cane travel. It can be achieved
through promotion of the respectability of blindness, learning
good technical skills, and challenging ourselves to do what we
did not believe we could do. Do whatever it takes to attain this
end.                      CONSUMERISM: 
IMPROVING THE SERVICE DELIVERY SYSTEM
                       by Kenneth Jernigan
 The following address was delivered at the conference of the
Penn-Del Chapter of the Association for Education and
Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired in Lancaster,
Pennsylvania, on November 17, 1989. 

There are those who say that nothing ever changes. I am not one
of them. There are those who say that especially nothing ever
changes in the blindness field. Again, I am not one of them. I
believe that the past half century has brought unprecedented
changes, not only
in the world at large but also and particularly in the blindness
field.  Moreover, I think the changes have overwhelmingly been
for the good.
However, as is almost always the case, with progress has come
problems both in the world at large and in the blindness field.
Today we are talking about consumerism. The fact that we are,
along with the popularity and recurrence of the theme, means that
there is a felt need and that there are problems. In the summer
of 1988
I participated in a panel discussion on this topic at the AER
convention in Montreal. Some of the things which I said at that
time bear repeating, for they deal with basic questions matters
concerning relationships and performance in our field.
At the National Federation of the Blind convention in Chicago in
1988, 2,443 people registered as attendees. No other group has
that kind of attendance. You know it, and I know it. In October
of 1989 the National Federation of the Blind distributed (on
cassette, on flexible disc, in Braille, and in print) over 29,000
copies of its magazine the  Braille Monitor . Again, no other
publication in our field has that kind of circulation, or
anything even approaching it.
At my first NFB convention in 1952 barely 150 people were
present, and we had no monthly publication. At that 1952
convention we spent more than fifty percent of our time talking
about the rehabilitation system what it was doing, how to improve
it, and what we wanted from it. At our 1988 convention we had
twenty-five hours of program content, and we spent a total of
forty-five minutes (or three percent of the time) dealing with
the rehabilitation system of the United States. Of that
forty-five minutes, fifteen minutes was spent hearing from the
federal Rehabilitation Commissioner; fifteen minutes was spent
hearing from our Director of Governmental Affairs, who talked
about problems blind people were having with the system; and the
final fifteen minutes was spent with questions and comments from
the audience, indicating their concern with the failure of the
system to deliver.  In short, only one percent of the program
time was used to hear from the rehabilitation system, and none of
the time was spent talking about threats to the system or how to
save it. Why?
Is it simply, as some have charged, that the members of the
Federation (all of the thousands and tens of thousands of them
or, at least, their leaders) are negative and destructive
irresponsible radicals and agency haters? No. Such a thesis
cannot be sustained. The facts do not support it. Let us turn
again to the statistics of the 1988 NFB convention.
Kurt Cylke, head of the National Library Service for the Blind
and Physically Handicapped, was with us for the entire week, and
so were several of his staff. Day after day they answered
questions, talked with our members, and planned with us for the
future. There was an atmosphere of partnership and mutual trust.
Likewise, top officials of the Social Security Administration
were present to speak and participate. The Deputy Commissioner
for Policy and External Affairs had a forty-minute segment on the
program, and
other Social Security personnel conducted a seminar and answered
questions for most of an afternoon. As with the Library, there
was no tension or confrontation only partnership and a feeling of
shared interest and mutual concern. Moreover, with Social
Security it must be remembered that many blind people throughout
the country experience problems with underpayments, demands for
return of overpayments, denial of applications, and similar
difficulties; and more often than not, the National Federation of
the Blind represents those blind persons in hearings to reverse
Social Security's actions. Millions of dollars
and numerous professional judgments are repeatedly called into
question.  Yet, there is no hostility only friendliness and joint
effort.  On a continuing basis the National Federation of the
Blind and the Social Security Administration share information,
exchange ideas, and work together in a spirit of cooperative
harmony.
In short, our problems come only with the rehabilitation system,
with some of the private agencies which function as part of that
system, and with a group of educators. And even here there must
be a further narrowing and focusing, for the problem is with the
system itself
and some of its more vocal spokespersons, not with all of its
component parts or personnel. An increasing number of those in
the system are beginning to take a new look and work with us. The
very fact of our discussion here this morning is an evidence of
that trend and the shift in thinking.
This brings me to our topic,  Consumerism.  I think blind people
must have not an exclusive but a major role in shaping the
blindness system. Otherwise, the system will die. Moreover, when
I say  blind people,  I do not mean just blind individuals.  I
mean democratic membership organizations  of  the blind. I mean
effective participation by the blind, and the only way that can
be achieved is through organizations of the blind. In a sense, of
course, blind people have always shaped the system, as indeed
they do today. In most cases blind persons started (or played a
major part
in starting) the agencies. There have always been blind agency
directors, and individual blind persons prominent in the
community have from the beginning served on advisory and policy
boards and lent their names and prestige to funding and public
support.
Even so, the system has traditionally been custodial in nature
and high-handed in dealing with meaningful input from the blind.
This is why the system is in trouble. It is in danger of being
absorbed into generic programs for the disabled, starving for
lack of funds, and losing its position of centrality and
perceived importance in the lives of the blind. This would not be
the case if the average, thinking, responsible blind adult in
this country felt that the system really mattered excluding, of
course, the blind people who work in the system.
Let me be clearly understood. I am not saying that
rehabilitation, training in mobility, assistance for the newly
blinded, or education are not important urgently important; for
they are. Rather, I am saying that year by year more and more
blind persons have come to feel that the system is not
effectively providing those things and that it is both
unresponsive and irrelevant. Remember that I am talking about the
system as a whole, not individual agencies or particular people
working in those agencies.
It is not, as a few have claimed, that the organized blind wish
to take control of the agencies. It is, from the point of view of
the system, far worse than that. It is that more and more blind
people
are coming to feel that, in the things that count in their daily
lives, what the agencies have to offer won't help and doesn't
matter.
If I felt that the system was hopeless and that nothing could or
should be done to improve it, I would not be here today talking
with you.  It is late, but if honest evaluation and forthright
action occur, I think the system can be saved and that it is
worth saving.
However, certain things must be said without equivocation. As a
beginning, the agencies must change their attitudes about
criticism and about the role of the organized blind in decision
making. The matter of
Fred Schroeder is a case in point. As most members of this
organization know, Mr. Schroeder is blind. He is currently
Director of the New Mexico Commission for the Blind. Before
taking that job, he taught mobility professionally, received all
of the academic credentials for doing so, and then was denied
certification by this organization (the Association for Education
and Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired). The
denial was based on the belief that a blind person cannot safely
and competently teach another blind person how to travel or, if
you like, teach another blind person mobility.  The National
Federation of the Blind as an organization and I as an individual
thought you were wrong in that decision, and we were entitled to
that opinion. On the other hand, it was perfectly proper for your
organization to believe that you were right to attack our
position, but it was not proper for the members of your
organization to attack us (as some of you did) on irrelevant
grounds denigrating our character and morals because of our
beliefs. Of course, the same would obtain for our treatment of
you.
Moreover, workers in the blindness system must resist the growing
tendency to hide behind the term  professionalism  and must stop
treating  professionalism  as if it were a sacred mystery.  There
is a teachable body of knowledge which can be learned about
giving service to the blind; but much of that knowledge is a
matter of common sense, good judgment, and experience. Most
thinking blind persons (certainly those who have been blind for
any length of time and have had any degree of success) know at
least as much about what
they and other blind people want and need from the system as the
professionals
do, and it must also be kept in mind that not every act of a 
professional  is necessarily a  professional  act or based on 
professionalism.  Just as in other fields in America today, the
professionals in the blindness system must be judged on their
behavior and not merely their credentials.
Consider, for instance, the question of whether children with
residual vision should be taught Braille. After careful
consideration the members of the National Federation of the Blind
believe that every such child should at least have the option of
being taught to read and write Braille. Some of the educators
(especially those who cannot fluently
read and write Braille) resist this view. Is their opinion a 
professional  judgment, or is it a decision based on vested
interest? Whichever
it is, the views of the organized blind are entitled to serious
consideration and not simply a brush-off, with the statement that
the blind don't know what they are talking about and that they
probably have bad motives and morals into the bargain.
This brings me back to what I said about Kurt Cylke and the
National Library Service for the Blind and Physically
Handicapped. The libraries are not in trouble, and (regardless of
economic conditions or changing theories) the libraries won't be
in trouble. They won't because the blind of this country won't
let it happen. And, yes, we have the power to give substance to
our feelings. We don't control Kurt Cylke or the libraries. We
don't want to and besides, he wouldn't permit it. Neither does he
control us and for the same reasons. We support the National
Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped because
we need it, because it gives useful and good service, and because
its leaders understand that they  exist  to give us service, and
that they have accountability to us. What I have said about the
Library is also true of the Social Security Administration and an
increasing number of agencies and individuals in the fields of
rehabilitation and education.
But the hard core of the blindness system still resists, to its
detriment and ours. It tries to say that it speaks for the blind
because the head of an agency is blind or because blind people
serve on a staff
or board. No great intellect is required to understand that in a
representative democracy only those elected  by  a group can
speak  for  that group; that the heads of agencies can have
vested interests which transcend their blindness; and that when
an agency can pick and choose individual blind spokespersons from
the community, it can get people who will say whatever it wants
them to say.
Unless things change, I believe the central core of the blindness
system will sink into obscurity and wither away, but I believe
this need not happen and should not happen. Blind people (and
that means the organized blind) must have a major voice in
shaping the blindness system and the programs which operate
within it whether those programs be sheltered shops, residential
schools, state agencies, or private nonprofit organizations. It
must be a partnership and not a partnership of dominance and
subservience but of consenting equals a partnership based on
trust, respect, and mutuality. Let these things happen, and all
else will follow. Let these things happen, and the system will
thrive.
If those who work in the public and private agencies want broad
support from the blind community, they must be responsive to the
concerns which the blind perceive as important. Today there are
relatively few major issues which divide the organized blind and
the agencies.  Twenty years ago it appeared (at least, on the
surface) that there was at least one such issue the National
Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually
Handicapped (NAC). But
the problem was more apparent than real. NAC (despite its few
remaining vocal supporters) has never been a significant factor
in the lives of the nation's blind and is now rapidly becoming a
dead letter and a subject only for the historians. It has never
been able to get more than twenty or twenty-five percent of the
nation's eligible agencies to accept its accreditation, and
increasingly as the larger and more prominent agencies have
pulled away from it, it has been forced to try to keep its
numbers up by accrediting smaller and less well-known
organizations. Let the dead be dead, and let the rest of us move
on to better things.
The real question we face is not how to resolve controversies
between consumers and the agencies but whether consumers can
continue to feel that the agencies on balance are relevant enough
and important enough for the consumers to nurture and save them
in short, whether there can be common cause, shared purpose,
mutual respect, and true partnership.  Certainly the problems
which face us are formidable and challenging.  We still have a
long way to go in improving the climate of public opinion so that
the blind can have opportunity and full access to the main
channels of everyday life. We have made tremendous progress in
this area, but much yet remains to be done. All other things
being equal, the job can best be handled through joint effort by
the blind
and the agencies, but handled it must be whether the agencies
participate or not.
Likewise, there is a broad spectrum of specific programs and
activities, ranging from technology to education to employment,
which need urgent and sustained attention and again (all other
things being equal) the job can best be handled by joint effort
on the part of the blind community and the agencies. But one way
or another, the blind intend
to achieve full equality and first-class status in society. The
question is what part the agencies will play and what
relationship they will have with the increasingly powerful
consumer movement.
The story is told that one evening a nightclub patron approached
the bandstand and said to the drummer,  Does your  dog bite?  
No,  the drummer said,  he doesn't. 
The man reached down to pet the dog, and it almost bit his arm
off.  He leaped back in a fury and said to the drummer,  I
thought you said your dog didn't bite. 
 He doesn't,  the drummer said,  but that isn't my dog.  You see,
the man asked the wrong question, so he got an unsatisfactory
answer. Let us be sure that in dealing with consumerism in the
blindness field we not only try to get the right answers but also
ask the right questions. Otherwise, we may lose an arm.
                  COMMENTS ON THE AUDIT OF THE 
IDAHO COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND
                        by Ramona Walhof
From the Editor: The following article appeared in the Winter,
1989, issue of the  Gem State Milestones , the publication of the
National Federation of the Blind of Idaho. Whether or not our
opponents would agree, this article is most significant for its
gentleness. It discusses audits of the Idaho Commission for the
Blind for a period beginning July 1, 1986, and ending June 30,
1989. The Administrator of the agency for those three years was
Howard Barton. Supervisor of the Business Enterprise Program was
J. Scott Fenwick. Chief of Rehabilitation Services was Ed
Easterling. These names are not mentioned in the Walhof article,
but  Monitor  readers will remember that the administration of
the Idaho Commission for the Blind was not supportive of the
blind of the state or responsive to them. The audit shows serious
financial problems for which Barton, Fenwick, and Easterling were
responsible.  The new Administrator of the Commission for the
Blind in Idaho was hired July 31, 1989. He is Ed McHugh, formerly
of Massachusetts. McHugh is reputed to work well with all blind
persons and organizations.  Federationists in Idaho were content
with the selection of McHugh and report that improvements appear
to be taking shape although more slowly than might be hoped. As
the Walhof article makes clear, members of the National
Federation of the Blind want nothing more than a good working
rapport with agencies serving the blind. In states where this
occurs (and it does with increasing frequency) blind clients,
employed blind persons, and agency staff members receive more
respect and better benefits from the public at large and the
government than in states where the rapport between the blind and
the agency is poor.  No more valuable support for a good agency
for the blind can be found than support from the National
Federation of the Blind. Even when
an agency is mediocre, the NFB tends to be tolerant; but when an
agency is downright bad, we have no choice. We must fight. That
is the only way to get improvements. When changes are made, we do
what we can to help. If change is for the better, we say so. If
change is for the worse, we go back to the fight. In Idaho change
seems to be for the better. It remains to be seen whether the
change will mean programs are a little better or a lot better.
Here is the article which appeared in the  Gem State Milestones :

One of the functions of the National Federation of the Blind of
Idaho is to monitor government-funded programs for the blind.
When an audit
is released which is critical such as the one for the Idaho
Commission for the Blind that was completed in October of 1989
our office gets calls and questions: What does it mean? What
should we do about it?
In this audit, six findings and recommendations were made for
fiscal years 1987 and 1988. These dealt with relatively minor
problems, which can be corrected. The audit for fiscal year 1989
included the same
six findings and recommendations plus one additional item. This
seventh matter is serious. Probably a total of at least $140,000
was misspent, incorrectly accounted for and/or improperly
committed. The situation so identified has to do with the
management of one cafeteria for about one year, and only one
blind person could have benefited from the expenditure of all
that money and it is doubtful that he did.  The blind have been
concerned about this situation since it started.  The money has
already been spent, but this does not end the matter.  Serious
mistakes were made. Three top people at the Idaho Commission for
the Blind were responsible. The administrator was replaced last
summer, and the two supervisors in question were replaced before
that.  Since the audit did not do it, it seems important to let
those who care about the Commission program know that these
replacements have occurred. It does not seem necessary to name
the names of the three who did the damage. The names are easy to
obtain and besides, knowledgeable people in the state know who
they are. The new administrator, Ed McHugh; the two new
supervisors; and the Commission board are quietly going about the
business of trying to improve the programs and correct the
mistakes of the past.
If the blind of the state thought serious mistakes were being
made by these three former officials, and if the auditors found
what they found then it is not surprising that there have been
questions raised about the administration of the Idaho Commission
for the Blind during recent years. On the other hand, the new
people must be given the opportunity (including a reasonable
amount of time) to make the improvements that are needed. Most,
if not all, of the staff who remain are conscientious. We do not
expect magic. We do expect change and we are beginning to see it.
Many examples could be given, but here is one which will require
at least a certain amount of time. The former administration
threw away the Job Development position at the Commission. This
was done in spite of the fact that there is a seventy percent
unemployment rate among
the blind of our state and that the loss of the position was not
necessary.  No more important position can exist than one for the
purpose of job development and placement for the blind. Yet, it
was eliminated. The new administration must get the governor and
legislature to fund a
brand new position for this purpose always a harder job than
maintaining an existing position. The request has been made and
is supported by the governor. It goes without saying that the
National Federation of the Blind of Idaho supports it. Even if it
passes the legislature (and we are doing everything we can to see
that it does), the job development position cannot be filled
before July 1, 1990 and even after that, it will take some time
for all of it to translate into new jobs for blind people. There
is probably no way to speed up the process.
We have no reason to question any of the information in the
audit,
but we hope and believe that the most serious problems are being
corrected and that progressive changes are in motion.
Since it is part of our function to monitor agencies for the
blind, the National Federation of the Blind of Idaho will not
hesitate to report the fact if improvements are not made within a
reasonable time.ALABAMA REVISITED IN THE IOWA PEPPER MILL
                       by Kenneth Jernigan
In the January, 1990,  Braille Monitor  we carried an article
about the goings on at the Iowa Department for the Blind
(formerly the Iowa Commission for the Blind). Now, there is more
much more.  It will be remembered that Terry Pepper, the person
responsible for accounting at the Iowa Department for the Blind,
was accused of stealing funds from the agency, that he pleaded
innocent and resigned, and that there was every indication that
he would be prosecuted.
Under date of January 13, 1990, the  Des Moines Register  carried
an article giving further unbelievable details. The headline 
Ex-State Official Admits Stealing Taxpayer Money  summed up the
new developments, but it did not do justice to what was to come.
In general the article detailed a lurid account of the misuse of
state funds for the purchase of everything from Pepper's
underwear to a $101 gravy dish. The state auditor was quoted as
saying that in June of 1988 a state check in the amount of
$20,342 was sent to a local department store to make a partial
payment on Pepper's personal charge accounts. The list of items
rivals the one which appears in the article (printed elsewhere in
this issue) concerning the Alabama Institute for the Deaf and
Blind.

But one thing about the Iowa case is particularly disturbing and
requires comment. It is that section of the article which reads: 
Had Trust of Boss The manipulation was made easier because
Pepper, who can see, had won the trust of agency director R.
Creig Slayton, who is blind. As a result, Slayton, on at least
one occasion, signed an authorization document, the purpose of
which had been misrepresented by Pepper. Having the confidence of
his boss `put him in a position of trust that allowed him to
engineer some of these transactions,' Kiplinger [the auditor]
said. 
This is what the article says, and the thrust of it is
unmistakably clear.  After all,  the auditor is saying (and there
will doubtless be many to agree with him),  what can you expect? 
Slayton, the director, is blind so how could he prevent this sort
of thing from happening? He is at the mercy of any sighted person
who can get his trust and hoodwink him. Perhaps there is room for
pity, but none for respect. 
To all of this I say nonsense. For twenty years (from 1958 to
1978) I was director of the Iowa Commission for the Blind, so I
know from personal experience how the procedures work and what
can and cannot be done. While I was there, I administered the
receipt and expenditure of tens of millions of dollars; I am
totally blind; not every person with whom I had dealings was an
angel; and the audits indicate that
not one dime of money was misappropriated or stolen. This is no
accident.  I am not saying that there is no conceivable
circumstance under which someone could have engaged in theft of
funds, but I am saying that I do not believe an incident such as
the one involving Terry Pepper could have happened under the
rules I established. I am saying that there was plenty of advance
warning in the Pepper case and that it happened because of
carelessness and ineptitude, not blindness.
To tell you why I say this, I must give you some of the
particulars of the operation of the Iowa agency. As I have
already said, it was known as the Commission for the Blind in
those days, so I will simply refer to it in that way. The
Commission does not write its own checks.  It prepares vouchers
and supporting data, which are then sent to the office of the
state comptroller for review. The comptroller's office writes the
checks and returns them with supporting data to the Commission. 
In my day (surely they still do it) we submitted to the
comptroller
a list of the names of the people authorized to sign the voucher
documents.  I suppose I need not add that the accountant's name
was not on the
list. Only the director or his designee could sign the voucher
documents, and neither the director nor his designee could (by
the rules I established) prepare the documents. As a general
practice I had my deputy director (sighted) sign the voucher
documents, but the deputy was required
to check with me before signing any document involving more than
$500 or which in any way seemed unusual. (In the event there was
any question about it, it was defined as  unusual. ) Did I ever
sign a voucher document? Yes. But I never did it without asking a
sighted person (not the accountant who brought it to me) to
verify it.
Did this mean that I didn't trust my associates? No. Did it mean
that I didn't administer the program? Ask the people who were
there. I administered it, and I trusted my colleagues but it is
not only foolish but sinful to place needless temptation in the
way of fallible human beings.
In this connection let me quote from the state audit which was
recently issued. It says:  Board minutes were altered on one
occasion to fraudulently show that the Board authorized purchases
for furnishings which were delivered to Mr. Pepper's personal
residence.  When I was Director of the Commission, the accountant
did not have access
to the minutes. They were kept locked in the administrative
office and for the very reason here illustrated.
There were other safeguards. When the mail came to the
Commission,
my deputy opened and reviewed it all of it: that for the
accountant, and that for every other department. It would, of
course, have been easier (some would probably say more efficient
Pepper, for instance) simply to have given the accounting mail to
the accountant. That procedure would have prevented annoying
delays and after all, who has more knowledge about the finances
than the accountant? Some people were irritated with our mail
policy, but I believe that most saw the sense of it. The mail
policy applied, as I have said, to every aspect of the program,
not just to accounting.
Regardless of how some felt about it, it worked and we did not
have a Terry Pepper case. Moreover, whatever people may have
thought about the Commission for the Blind or its director, never
once did I hear even a hint of weak administration because of
blindness. I heard plenty of other things but not that.
The audit which was triggered by the Pepper caper is entitled: 
Special Report, Iowa Department for the Blind, Special
Investigation Misappropriated Funds, January 13, 1982 through
September 15, 1989.  A review
of the document indicates that Pepper signed authorizations,
prepared voucher documents, wrote letters of purchase,
intercepted the incoming mail, had access to the agency's
minutes, and presumably did anything else he pleased. Why did the
office of the state comptroller not raise questions about such a
policy, and where (in the name of sanity) was the agency's
director and his assistant? Again I say that we are not dealing
with blindness but an astounding lack of understanding and
responsibility.
So where does the Iowa Department for the Blind go from here? And
while we are on the subject, where does the public image of
blindness
go in the state of Iowa? What the auditor has said and what the 
Register  has printed will be much more in accord with the
general notions of blindness than with what we worked (with some
success) through the years to build. What impact will the Pepper
case have when the next blind applicant for Director is
considered? What will it do to the agency's credibility and
flexibility in authorizing innovative expenditures to help blind
clients?
Most of the staff at the Iowa Commission for the Blind (and I am
sure that many still are) were thoroughly competent and good
people but when one considers what the Iowa Commission for the
Blind was and what it has now become, one can only turn away in
disgust and say,  YUK!  It is no wonder that some now call it the
Iowa Pepper Mill.
In this discussion I have not dealt with the proposed treatment
of Pepper, which is nothing short of nauseating. If Pepper is
guilty (and apparently he says that he is), then he ought not to
be let off with a mere public tongue lashing and a pay back with
blue smoke and mirrors. The damage he has done to the blind of
Iowa and their programs is incalculable. But there are also
others. The damage which has been done by the people who
initiated the sloppy procedures that permitted this miserable
fiasco to happen is almost equally incalculable. They, too,
should be held to account.
There is one final thing that I want to say. If an unsigned
article appears in this magazine, it ordinarily (not always, but
ordinarily) means that I either wrote it or edited it so
substantially that it
comes to the same thing. I did not write the article on the Iowa
Department for the Blind which appeared in the January, 1990, 
Braille Monitor .  It was written by Associate Editor Barbara
Pierce and published without my reading it, something which is
unusual. But I wrote every word of the present article, and did
so after careful consideration and reflection. I, for one, am
sick and tired of hearing a few apologists defensively tell me
that the Iowa Commission for the Blind is just
as good as it ever was. Surely we can now lay that insult to
intelligence to rest and get on with the business of trying to
rebuild decent programs for the blind of the state.
Here is the article from the  Des Moines Register :

                        Ex-State Official
                 Admits Stealing Taxpayer Money
               by Thomas A. Fogarty and Lou Ortiz

A former state administrator who used taxpayers' money to
decorate his West Des Moines condominium to suit his champagne
tastes pleaded guilty Friday to theft charges.
He also agreed to repay the state of Iowa nearly $103,000.
Terry Pepper's guilty pleas in Polk County District Court
followed
by hours issuance of a report by State Auditor Richard Johnson's
office outlining an elaborate scheme in which Pepper was able to
charge thousands of dollars in home furnishings, clothing, and
stereo equipment, then have state government pay the bill.
Deputy State Auditor Kasey Kiplinger said Pepper's case is
perhaps the largest case of misappropriation of public money in
Iowa in his two decades in the auditor's office.
Until he resigned last September, Pepper, 40, was the No. 2
administrator at the Iowa Department for the Blind, where he had
worked for eight years. According to the audit report, Pepper was
able to steal from the state in two ways: by depositing checks
written to the agency in his personal bank account, and by
arranging the issuance of state checks to pay personal charge
accounts.


Had Trust of Boss


The manipulation was made easier because Pepper, who can see, had
won the trust of agency director R. Creig Slayton, who is blind.
As a result, Slayton, on at least one occasion, signed an
authorization document, the purpose of which had been
misrepresented by Pepper.  Having the confidence of his boss  put
him in a position of trust that allowed him to engineer some of
these transactions,  Kiplinger said.
The audit report suggests that Pepper spared little expense when
it came to redecorating his condominium at 1100 50th Street in
West Des Moines.
On three occasions Pepper managed to have the state issue checks
to Younkers department store or its home furnishing store to pay
off personal charge accounts he had there. They totaled $35,219. 


$101 Gravy Dish


Among the Younkers purchases paid off with government money, and
the prices paid, were: carpeting, $4,004; a bamboo chair, $272; a
gold stallion, $230; a brass table, $562; a gravy dish, $101; a
covered vegetable dish, $162; a cream and sugar dish, $108; and a
coffee pot, $115.
In addition, he charged hundreds of dollars worth of sheets,
underwear, and clothing, much of it of the expensive Ralph Lauren
Polo line.  Pepper also managed to have the state pay Best Buy
Stores $4,102 for television and stereo equipment. Other personal
purchases billed to the state include a $340 brass lamp and a
$570 floral arrangement.  Pepper was able to make his scheme work
by generating fake documentation that led state officials to
believe they were issuing state checks for legitimate agency
expenses.


Fabricated Documents


On June 1, 1988, for example, the audit report says Pepper mailed
or personally delivered it isn't clear which a $20,342
state-issued check to Younkers to be applied to his personal
charge accounts. The audit report showed that Pepper had
fabricated documents to make officials believe they were paying
Younkers for remodeling in the Department for the Blind's
district offices.
Pepper triggered an investigation into his activities last August
when he attempted to deposit into his personal bank account a
$346,146 check from the U.S. government to the Department for the
Blind. A Des Moines bank questioned the legitimacy of the
deposit, which was made at an automatic teller machine.
Following that investigation, the Polk County attorney's office
charged Pepper with theft for earlier deposits of checks totaling
more than $61,000 written to the state agency. He pleaded
innocent to the charges in October.
Pepper quit his state job last autumn when criminal charges
appeared imminent.


Changed Plea


In a hearing before Polk County District Judge Arthur Gamble,
Pepper changed his plea on the theft charges to guilty.
Prosecutors didn't file an additional charge on the $41,598 that
state government paid to satisfy his personal charge accounts.
Pepper faces up to 20 years in prison and up to $20,000 in fines
when he is sentenced February 26. Under a plea agreement,
prosecutors will refrain from recommending a prison term.
Pepper declined to comment after the hearing. His lawyer, Robert
Kromminga, said as much as $25,000 of the promised restitution
would be in the form of forfeited pension money and vacation
accumulated during the time Pepper worked for the state.
An additional sum, which Kromminga said he could not estimate,
will
come from the sale of the West Des Moines condominium and from
investments.  The balance will be in monthly installments,
Kromminga said.   He has a master's degree [in public
administration], so he's employable,  Kromminga said.
                       THE FIGHTING ELVES
                       by Michael Baillif
 Michael Baillif is the President of the National Federation of
the Blind Student Division. This article is reprinted from the
Spring/Summer issue of the  Student Slate,  the newsletter of the
Student Division. Mr. Baillif, who is a first year student at the
Yale University School of Law, delivered  The Fighting Elves  at
the 1989 meeting of the Student Division, which took place during
the national convention in Denver, Colorado. Here is what he had
to say: 

  Y e fighting elves of the world, unite, for you have nothing to
lose but your diminutive status.  So read the banners which
fluttered from the battlements in a distant place in a time long,
long ago. Elves from throughout the land were being summoned to a
desperate and determined elvish muster. From far and wide the
elves marched, heeding the call for unity and answering the
summons of their elvish leaders, for it was clear to one and all
that the time for a last stand short though it might be was upon
them.  By the thousands the elves gathered at their stronghold,
The Bastion De Minutia. Their mission? Once and for all to
confront and destroy
the tyranny practiced over them by the Big People. You see, this
distant land was cohabited by people of all sizes. Yet for
uncounted ages, those labeled (through lack of height) as elves
were subject to foolish and malicious, prejudicial and
discriminatory treatment. Finally,
the elves had simply had enough. They were no longer willing to
accept the inferior status to which they had been relegated
solely on the basis of reduced stature.
So the elvish muster went forward. All who arrived at the Bastion
De Minutia were outfitted with appropriate weapons and armor. The
atmosphere was grave and determined, yet also festive and full of
life. Battle plans were slowly and carefully forged while
jubilant parties sprang up throughout the camp. The elves
believed that their battle was destined to be a difficult and
perilous one. Yet the very act of confronting their oppression
was, for many of them, a relief and a victory.
When the battle plan was finally announced, it first met
astonished silence, and then tumultuous cheers rose from the
Bastion De Minutia.  The elves were to march upon the capital of
the Big People, Long Island, as it was commonly known. The 
assault was to be undertaken boldly and openly. The elves would
face not only the weapons and war machines of the big people, but
also the demeaning misconceptions of others and their own
feelings of inferiority which had for so long held them down.
Cries of  Reduced stature, yes; reduced rights, no!  and  With
elvish might, we will fight!  rang out and would probably have
continued all night long had not one of the elvish leaders
climbed to the top of the battlement and gestured for silence. 
He then proceeded (for the next five hours) to chronicle the many
grievances of the long-suffering elves. There are varied accounts
of his lengthy oratory. Here is an excerpt which, from our
perspective as students, we may find particularly interesting and
relevant. Midway through his declamation, as some listened with
rapt attention, others snored noisily, and still others passed
bottles of wine to and fro, the elvish leader waxed eloquent on
the subjects of job opportunities and educational possibilities.
 The current situation  is disgraceful and unacceptable, 
said he.  It is the negative stereotypes and ignorant
misconceptions about shortness which keep us down. People of
height assume that simply because we are short we can work only
half as well and half as long
as they. In most cases they are not even willing to give us the
opportunity to disprove this limiting and ridiculous assumption.
Since almost
no one will hire us, the big people see that most of us are not
working, then claim that we lack not only ability, but motivation
as well.
If some of our number do succeed in finding work and do well for
themselves, they are designated as `super elves' and set apart
from the rest of us as the exception. What is truly tragic, my
short friends, is that some of our community actually believe
what they are told by the tall people. They accept the notion
that being an elf is shameful and try desperately to pass as
something that they are not. In fact, rather than being proud of
themselves as they are and claiming that it is respectable to be
short, they choose to assert that they are not elves at all, but
only `height-impaired.' These people do not help us in
our efforts to gain equal treatment and status. But even more
tragically, they hurt themselves by selling themselves short, by
not demanding of life all it has to offer, and by not believing
in their hearts that they can do and be whatever they dare to
dream. Such are the bitter fruits of oppression and
discrimination which we have been forced to eat for too long!
 Now let's talk about some of the weeds in the garden of our
land's educational system. The big people take tests for
admission into what they call `institutions of higher learning.'
As elves we are effectively prevented from competing in these
same tests. Why? Because these tests (when taken by elves) are
not valid. They say that we take the examinations under
non-standard conditions. And what may these non-standard
conditions be? Our desks are shorter and our pencils not as long
as those of
the tall people. Do these alternative accommodations affect the
evaluative outcome of our test scores? Of course not! I know it;
you know it; but, until now at least, the big people in their
tall ivory towers
have slammed their windows upon our cries for common sense and
equitable treatment.
 Within the educational institutions themselves, unfortunately,
things are often no better. Our young people enter these
institutions
of higher learning in the same frame of mind as all other
students rather timid, apprehensive, and unsure of their own
abilities. Nevertheless, they are willing to put in the work and
take their chances in an attempt to feel a sense of
accomplishment, to achieve success, and to gain that personal
development which can occur only through the process of trial and
error. Some altruistic big people, however, believing that we
elves are at a disadvantage and cannot conceivably do well in
school without their aid, have established Offices of Abbreviated
Student Services. Some of these ASSes, as they are affectionately
known, provide services which help (or at least do not hinder)
academically oriented elves. Unfortunately, many of them
patronize and custodialize us elves. They attempt to do for us
what we ought to be doing for ourselves, taking a hand in our
academic endeavors, speaking with our professors, and standing as
the on-campus authority on shortness.  They work to eliminate the
possibility of failure; and in doing so,
they obliterate our potential for true success. If we are never
challenged, how can we ever hope to develop? I ask you, what have
we come to as a class when our best and brightest young people
are custodialized by ASSes? 
The elvish orator spoke through the night, firing his elvish
legions up to a fever pitch, inspiring them for their legendary
march, which would commence with the sunrise.
Now let us leave the elvish hordes for the moment in order to
address two very important questions, the first of which you may
already be asking yourself and perhaps your neighbors as well. It
goes like this:  What in the world does the elves' struggle for
liberation have to
do with the Presidential Report which is listed in the Student
Division agenda? The answer is simple nothing. Don't worry,
though. The Student Division Board is a sociable group, and I
know that, if you are interested, any of us would be very pleased
to discuss with you over a drink, or two, or three, our
accomplishments in the past year.  Much more important than our
recent achievements, however, is our present reality, and about
this we can learn much from our elvish contemporaries.
As to the second question, let me ask you this, and please
consider the answer carefully and honestly. Do you ever feel
small because of your blindness? Do you ever feel as though you
are an elf, filled with feelings of insecurity, incompetence, and
inadequacy, attempting to function in a world of giants? When
people have told you (either directly or indirectly) that,
because you are blind, you are somehow less a human being with
less to offer, less ability, and less potential for a meaningful
life, has any part of you ever believed it? If you are human and
if you are honest with yourself, then the answer for you, as for
me, is yes.
Now we must consider why this is so and what we must do about it. 
The first part is easy. It is so because of negative and ignorant
public attitudes about blindness. We must overcome these
attitudes by educating the general public as well as ourselves
that blindness
is just a characteristic which (with proper training, positive
attitudes, and the opportunity to put them to work) can be simply
a nuisance and nothing more. If deep down you doubt this
statement, look around for the rest of the convention, and you
will see many, many blind people who confidently and competently
lead lives as fulfilling and achievement-oriented as anyone who
is sighted. While you are looking around this week, apply a
slightly altered version of the Biblical  Test of Gomorrah  to
the National Federation of the Blind.
See if you encounter just one person who has something to offer
you be it friendship, leadership, or a role model. If you find
this person,
then stay, take what that person has to offer, take what this
organization has to give; and then, in your own way, in your own
time, give what you can to other individuals, to the National
Federation of the Blind, and ultimately to yourself. Let us
undertake together the education
of society, which also includes ourselves. As we accomplish this
education, there will be times when the intransigent few who
simply will not listen who will not be educated must be
decisively dealt with if they stand in our way. On these
occasions regrettably, sorrowfully, but nonetheless determinedly,
we march side by side to war just as do our elvish friends whom
we have left waiting for too long.  After the orator had ceased
and the sun was rising on the eastern
horizon, the elves assembled in orderly ranks line upon line
stretching away beyond sight. Then, after a great clashing of
weapons and loud
shouts of exortation, the elves commenced to march toward their
destination.  On their road a very strange and surprising
circumstance befell the zealous elvish troops. They began to
grow. The very act of coming together, of organizing, of taking a
stand for their own dignity and self-worth and the very act of
confronting those attitudes and institutions which had for so
long held them down inspired in the elves a growth which made
their armed assault on Long Island unnecessary. In overcoming the
inertia and feelings of isolated powerlessness in order to take
the initial step on their march, the elves had fought and won the
greatest battle which they would ever face.
As a result of this event, only a few with the physical qualities
of the elves still exist today. Nevertheless, their spiritual
legacy is part of us. Within each of us is the tendency to shrink
or grow, depending upon how we deal with our own characteristics.
Circumstances summon us daily to march. We need only gather
within our own organization, the National Federation of the
Blind, and take those initial steps
on the warrior road in order to move decisively toward ultimate
victory.  Let us learn from the example of our elvish forerunners
and, by working together, help each other to grow. Our battle is
perhaps destined to be longer than that of the elves, but it lies
down the same road.  Like the fighting elves, we should unite,
for we have nothing to lose and everything to gain. Through
shared effort and commitment, let
us march together toward, not only security, equality, and
opportunity, but also toward the personal confidence, competence,
and stature which we need to live in the world, succeed in the
classroom, and excel in life. We have much to do and many
challenges to undertake. The days of our diminutive status are
past; let us march together into a promising future in which our
collective action aimed at achieving first-class citizenship is
marked by shared comradeship, effort, and commitment.
  REFLECTIONS ON THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT by Kenneth
Jernigan
No proposed piece of legislation during the past thirty years has
created more comment and soul searching among the disabled of
this country than the Americans with Disabilities Act. The bill
passed the Senate in 1989 and at the time of this writing (early
1990) is awaiting action by the House of Representatives. At
first glance it would seem that no disabled American could
possibly object to this bill. It would be like opposing
motherhood, Santa Claus, and the Easter Bunny but some do oppose
it, and even more have serious reservations about it in its
present form that is, the form in which it passed the Senate and
is now being considered by the House.
At its 1989 convention in Denver, Colorado, the National
Federation of the Blind passed a resolution declaring that if the
bill could not be amended to cure its weaknesses, it should be
opposed. In the circumstances it seems desirable to examine the
proposed law and consider its possible advantages and drawbacks.
Obviously it is not easy to oppose such legislation, for the
enthusiasm of those who favor it is at such a fever pitch that
any cautionary comments (regardless of how sound or constructive)
are likely to be taken out of context, distorted, or twisted to
convey meanings they were never intended
to have. Nevertheless, this legislation is so far-reaching and
all-inclusive that it cannot be allowed to go forward without
analysis so here is how we see it, how we think it affects the
blind as it is currently written, and how we think it should (at
a minimum) be amended.  

                             Purpose


The bill as it passed the Senate says that the purpose of the
Americans with Disabilities Act is  To establish a clear and
comprehensive prohibition of discrimination on the basis of
disability.  The proponents of the legislation say that it will
give to qualified individuals with disabilities the right to
equal participation in employment, public accommodations,
transportation, and other activities. They say that it will do
this by mandating special accommodations for the disabled. But
some of us who have doubts about the requirements of the Act feel
that by eliminating certain problems and discriminations it may
actually create others. Particularly, we are concerned that the
bill is so written that the disabled may (whether they need them
or not) be required to accept the special accommodations mandated
by the bill and (regardless of their abilities, desires, or
circumstances) be prevented from using the same facilities and
services that are available to others.


                  Background on the Americans 
with Disabilities Act and its 
Comparison with Existing 
Civil Rights Laws


The Americans with Disabilities Act has been proposed to prohibit
discrimination against persons with disabilities. Under the bill
it
would be discriminatory to deny disabled persons access to (1)
employment;
(2) services, programs, and benefits of state and local
governments
(including public transportation); (3) public accommodations and
transportation provided by private entities; and (4)
telecommunications services.

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 was the first
federal nondiscrimination statute of general applicability to 
handicapped individuals.   The law itself originally consisted of
one sentence, specifying that recipients of federal aid could not
subject otherwise qualified handicapped individuals to
discrimination under any program or activity receiving or
benefiting from federal financial assistance.  The Americans with
Disabilities Act significantly extends this requirement and
vastly expands its reach.
Following the language and concepts of the section 504
regulations, the Americans with Disabilities Act identifies
physical barriers to the disabled as discriminatory. The premise
of the bill is that limits on physical access lead to restricted
participation or outright denial of opportunity. Under the bill,
opportunities are to be barrier free.  A legal standard of what
is called  accommodated participation  is used as the rule of
thumb for nondiscrimination. Physical accessibility requires
modifications to architectural design features. Changes in
programs in order to accommodate them to the physical limitations
of the disabled are also required.
The premise of the section 504 regulations has been that the
standard
for prohibiting discrimination against disabled persons differs
substantively from the standard used in the Civil Rights Act of
1964. The standard used in that Act (the Civil Rights standard)
is that race, sex, national origin, and religion must not stand
in the way of equal opportunity.   Equal participation  must be
afforded to everyone regardless of differing traits.
The Americans with Disabilities Act uses the accommodated
participation standard first developed with the section 504
regulations. Rather
than being disregarded, disability must be considered. Equal
opportunity as contemplated in the Americans with Disabilities
Act means participation, with or without modifications. Failure
to accommodate programs to the disabled (or failure to provide
services that are separate or different from the services
provided to others) is expected to result
in a denial of opportunity and is, therefore, to be considered
discriminatory.

The Americans with Disabilities Act does not outwardly reject the
equal participation standard of the Civil Rights Act, but in
emphasis the bill strongly favors accommodation modifying
buildings, buses, airplanes, and the environment in general as
well as the establishment of separate programs. In some instances
(with respect to some disabilities) it may be reasonable to argue
that accommodations must be made to prevent discrimination. In
other instances (such as in the case of discrimination against
the blind) so-called  accommodations  may often themselves be
discriminatory. This fact must be considered in the further
development of the Americans with Disabilities Act.
Otherwise, the Act itself could become a source of unintentional
discrimination against some persons with disabilities.


                  Nature of Discrimination on 
Grounds of Blindness


Blindness is unquestionably a disability as that term is defined
in
the Americans with Disabilities Act. This inclusion implies that
discrimination against the blind arises primarily from lack of
physical access or lack of special  accommodations.   The
implication is not
only incorrect; it is dangerously incorrect. Structural
characteristics do not ordinarily prevent blind persons from
having full and equal access to any buildings or facilities used
by anybody else.  Blind persons are customarily able to use
programs, services, and facilities without modification.
Discrimination against the blind comes from the false assumption
that sight is essential for successful performance of most tasks.
Blindness is the inability to see, but it is not generally
disabling. Alternative techniques used by blind persons work as
well, and as efficiently,
as visual techniques used by sighted persons. It is, therefore,
discriminatory to require the blind to be treated differently
from the sighted when such treatment is not warranted. Unwanted
accommodations for the blind discriminate by falsely portraying
the blind as limited in ways that they are not.
Increased attention to civil rights for the disabled has led to
misplaced and discriminatory uses of accommodation. One example
is offering a wheelchair to assist a blind person in moving
through an airport
or similar facility. If the blind person rejects the offer,
preferring to walk, it is not unusual for airport officials to
try to force the
blind person to use the wheelchair. What starts as an attempted 
accommodation  is now discrimination. Another example is
insisting that all blind
people must sit at the front of public buses because those seats
are designated for the elderly and handicapped. In either
example, the blind person who can walk and move as well as
anybody else is made to appear as limited. The person may,
indeed, be permitted to have access to the building or the bus,
but the access is certainly on discriminatory terms for that
blind individual or for the blind as a class.
The experience of the blind with Section 504 should be
instructive.  Programs are now established to, as the terminology
has it,  take care of  the needs of the blind. In the bus
example, Section 504 clearly prohibits denying service to the
blind. It does not clearly prohibit the bus driver from insisting
that a blind person sit in one of the front seats designated for
the elderly and handicapped.  Some may regard disputes about
seating as quibbling, but Rosa Parks and others brought the
entire civil rights movement to a national focus by exactly this
type of issue. Section 504 requires that disabled persons be
accommodated on the bus. If blind persons who are capable of
sitting anywhere are forced to accept seating accommodations and
use the seats designated for the elderly and handicapped, they
are being subjected to arbitrary and unreasonable restrictions.
It is exactly this type of situation, resulting from Section 504,
that the blind find objectionable. We are expected (in fact,
often  required ) to act as if we are disabled in ways that we
are not. Accepting the blind on terms of full equality is the
proper policy of nondiscrimination. Conversely, it is
discriminatory to assume that participation for the blind is made
possible only by means of what are called  accommodations.   When
that assumption is applied, the result is discrimination treating
the blind as disabled in ways that they are not.


                    Need for a Participation 
without Modification Amendment In 
the Americans with Disabilities Act


Serious problems of unintentional (but very real) discrimination
arise from the  accommodated participation  standard in the
Americans with Disabilities Act. As with women and minorities
protected by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the most appropriate
legal standard for the blind and others is  equal participation.  
This means that the terms and conditions of participation are
applicable alike to all persons. Accommodated participation means
that modifications
must be made so that persons with disabilities will be given an
opportunity.   Disability  under the Americans with Disabilities
Act is treated as a generic condition. This leads to
inappropriate use of accommodated participation. The fact is that
the blind have the unique condition of not seeing, which is not
generally disabling. Discrimination occurs against the blind when
blindness is treated as generally disabling.  The experience of
the blind with the airlines exemplifies the problem.

The advent of federal civil rights laws for handicapped
individuals brought pressure on commercial airlines to serve
persons with disabilities.  Physical barriers of aircraft and
equipment had prevented service
in some instances  particularly, to those using wheelchairs. This
was never a problem for the blind. In the case of the blind, air
transportation was almost always provided on essentially
nondiscriminatory terms.  We bought our ticket, got on the plane,
sat where we chose, left the plane at our destination, and went
about our business like anybody else. Certainly (in contrast to
the situation of some disabled persons) there were no policies to
deny or restrict service to the blind. Blindness was not regarded
as a disability for purposes of air travel.
The pressure brought on commercial airlines by persons with
certain disabilities (particularly, those with orthopedic
problems) may have been necessary, but the effect it has had on
blind persons has been a civil rights disaster. When the airlines
and the Federal Aviation Administration began to plan ways of, as
the term is used,  accommodating  the handicapped in order to
(again, as the jargon has it)  serve  them, they included the
blind in the general category. All of a sudden it became
unacceptable to think of the blind as not disabled for purposes
of air travel. So the blind were made to be disabled and
restrictions, thought to be appropriate for the disabled, have
been wrongfully imposed
on the blind ever since. This policy has now been pursued (first
condescendingly and then when the blind objected, aggressively
and with hostility) by the airlines. Ironically, the net effect
of the civil rights laws for the disabled has been to place new
and unwarranted restrictions
on the blind in air travel. This is the result of the generic
disability approach in setting the standard for
nondiscrimination.
Relying on federal law, the airlines are now attempting to make
the blind disabled in ways that they are not. This and many other
examples justify the concern of the blind that the Americans with
Disabilities Act will cause unintentional, massive
discrimination. The bill (as introduced and passed by the Senate)
presumes that   disability (every disability) implies the need
for what is called an  accommodated  form of participation.
Covered entities will want to comply with the Act by making
accommodations, especially those of minimal cost. As with the
airline example, the blind will be expected to accept policies
which apply to the generic  disability  class, including
accommodated participation and the restrictions that necessarily
accompany it.
The  accommodated participation standard  is perhaps appropriate
for many persons with disabilities. This standard may help make
their participation possible. For blind persons, however, the
accommodation standard incorrectly assumes a degree of inability
and directs unwanted and even harmful changes. The individual's
true abilities are overshadowed by  accommodated participation, 
and the changes made become the focus of everyone's attention. It
is assumed that the individual could not participate were it not
for the  accommodation. 
To use another example, some people now assume that blind people
cannot cross street intersections without special signaling
devices. The devices are audible traffic signals which emit a
sound (often a bird call) to indicate the changing of the traffic
lights. The modification has been promoted by persons who assume
that blind people will not know when or where to cross the street
if they are not given a special audible cue. But rather than
being a form of assistance to the blind, this adaptation becomes
(in the minds of most blind persons) a hindrance, falsely
presuming that blindness is an impairment to street crossing. 
The fact is that blind people cross streets by themselves every
day without audible traffic signals. We have been doing so ever
since cars, street crossings, and traffic lights were invented.
The sound of the traffic and the direction of its flow give all
the information that is needed. An audible traffic signal adds
nothing, and many blind people say that the additional sound only
confuses them. Most significantly, this modification implies that
the blind cannot cross ordinary streets.  In this respect, it is
a damaging and false public statement that the blind are disabled
in ways that they are not. To give only one example of the
damage, potential employers will be less likely to offer jobs to
the blind because of the implication of helplessness
and the specter of added costs for special modifications and
accommodations in these businesses and neighborhoods.
It is harmful to blind persons to have accommodations being made
for them that falsely imply limitations caused by blindness which
do not exist. Opportunities necessarily depend on public
understanding and social acceptance. This will be the case with
or without the Americans with Disabilities Act. Blind people want
to be accepted on terms of equality with the sighted, having the
opportunity to succeed or fail on merit and being judged on their
ability to perform. This is a proper and realistically achievable
objective. Our equality will be blocked, however, if we are faced
with a federal law that implies a degree of permanent inequality.


            Explanation of the Right to Participate 
Without Modification Amendment


The amendment we propose would prohibit discrimination against
qualified individuals with disabilities by clarifying each
person's right to participate in programs and activities that are
not separately established for the disabled or modified for their
use. The bill already requires accommodated participation when
necessary to give persons with disabilities opportunities that
would otherwise be denied.
The amendment, entitled  Right to Participate Without
Modification  would provide each person with a disability the
right to participate in programs and activities that are not
separate or different from the programs and activities used by
others. It would provide that the existence of separate forms of
participation for the disabled may not be used to deny an
individual the opportunity to participate in the same programs
that others use. The amendment would require that modifications
made for persons with disabilities shall not impair the choice of
any such person to participate without modification.  Despite our
resolution at the 1989 NFB convention in Denver in July, which
stated that we would oppose the Americans with Disabilities Act
unless it could be amended, Congress and the Administration moved
forward in steamroller fashion to pass the bill as it was
written.  When word began to circulate in Washington in
mid-November that the National Federation of the Blind meant what
it was saying and might actually come out against the Americans
with Disabilities Act, a number of the proponents of the bill
became concerned. This is where a man named John Wodatch comes
into the picture. He is the Deputy Section Chief, Coordination
and Review Section, Civil Rights Division, United States
Department of Justice. Mr. Wodatch is the Bush Administration's
foremost legal expert on disability-related federal civil rights
policy.  His involvement in this area dates back to the original
Section 504 regulations issued by the Office of Civil Rights of
the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. He did most of
the staff work in
the negotiations, development, and writing of HEW's original 504
regulations, which were published in 1977. By virtue of his
background and position, Wodatch has become one of the Bush
Administration's key staff level negotiators on issues relating
to the Americans with Disabilities Act.
After hearing of our potential opposition, Mr. Wodatch called us
to attempt to negotiate language for an amendment that we could
support.
It was at about this same time (just before Thanksgiving) that
Congressman Christopher Cox agreed to offer our amendment in the
House. Wanting to coordinate his efforts with the Administration,
Congressman Cox
sent our amendment to John Wodatch. At the time of this writing,
Congressman Cox is prepared to offer our amendment  particularly,
if it can be negotiated with the Administration first.
To this end Mr. Gashel and Mr. Maurer met with White House Staff
on January 19, 1990. They felt that the meeting was quite
successful and that the likelihood is that an amendment which we
can support will be agreed to. Otherwise, we must oppose the bill
as vigorously as we can if it is to remain in its present form.
But are our concerns exaggerated and overdramatized? For
instance, is it really conceivable that if a hotel has set aside
one room with a visible fire alarm for the deaf or special
markings or devices for the blind that a deaf or blind person
would be denied the right to
rent any other room in that hotel? Is this not far-fetched and
unrealistic?  Not at all. John Wodatch sent us the following
statement last December, and this is a direct quote:

 Problem: In a case where a deaf person refuses to take a hotel
room with the visible fire alarm system because another room has
a better view or is near a friend, is the hotel liable for harm
if fire breaks out? Does the statute need some form of assumption
of risk doctrine specified? (E.g., language like  provided that
the entity providing such service shall not be liable for harm
resulting from the refusal to accept such accommodation or
modification. ) 

This is what Mr. Wodatch said, and much of the discussion which
we have had with Congressional and Administration leaders has
centered around the point of liability and responsibility. As the
bill passed the Senate, it seems likely that many of the old
discriminations and stereotypes which we had thought were long
behind us will be revived.  Hotels may refuse to permit blind
persons to rent rooms above the ground floor, claiming that the
stairs or elevators would be a hazard.  We could be segregated in
specially modified rooms and not permitted to have rooms near
those traveling with us. We could find ourselves forced by bus
drivers to sit in special seats, segregated from family or
friends and all in the name of safety and protecting our civil
rights. Moreover, the courts might well use the language of the
Americans with Disabilities Act to support these decisions and
cause major setbacks in our struggle for equal treatment and
enlightened policy.
We do not want to hinder the progress of other groups of the
disabled, nor do we want to engage in controversy or scare
tactics. But we have lived with discrimination and unreasonable
treatment, and we do not intend to lose our hard-won gains even
if it be in the name of civil rights.
Although it seems unlikely that the Americans with Disabilities
Act can do very much to help the blind, we will not oppose it if
it can be amended so as not to deprive us of our civil rights,
but if it cannot be so amended, we will do anything we can to
slow it down and block its passage. This is the only responsible
course of action which the blind of this country can adopt.
Simply because a thing calls itself civil rights, that does not
mean that it is civil rights.
                   THE PROBLEM WITH COALITIONS
                          by Ted Young
 Ted Young is the energetic President of the National Federation
of the Blind of Pennsylvania. His reflections on and analyses of
the philosophical positions of the Federation are always worth
reading.  (See his July, 1988,  Braille Monitor  article,  On
Traffic Signals. ) The October, 1989, edition of the  Blind
Activist,  the publication of the National Federation of the
Blind of Pennsylvania, includes the following article. People in
other disability rights organizations are often puzzled and
frustrated when they learn about the Federation's policy against
forming or participating permanently in coalitions. Here is Ted's
explanation of our position. 

It must have been the early Seventies when the notion of
coalitions was first presented to me. At the time I hadn't really
made up my mind whether the idea was good or bad. But the
National Federation
of the Blind did make up its collective mind in a quick and firm
fashion, stating that we would not join coalitions on a permanent
basis. Now, almost twenty years later, it may be useful to look
at the concept of coalitions again. Was the movement right or
wrong in its initial assessment of the situation?
The arguments for coalitions are several and appear logical. The
problem is that one needs to accept their underlying premises in
order to make the logic work. Let's set forth those arguments,
then analyze each of them.
1. Since all handicapped persons have similar disadvantages in
our society, it makes sense to pool our resources and numbers to
seek change.
2. In a coalition you don't really give up your autonomy since
your organization continues to function independently, and the
coalition acts only on matters of mutual concern.
3. Politicians respond to numbers, so legislative efforts will
bring about more results if handicapped persons coalesce.
4. Since people are working in coalitions, we the blind had
better join and get on board, or we will be left out.
The first argument is the foundation stone of coalitions and is
the fundamental premise that must be bought if the other
arguments are to work. Do we, as disabled people, have similar
problems? I think not. The problems of the blind are unique, and
we must not forget that fact. In what follows I am not saying
that other disabled persons do not have problems or that they are
not severe. I am simply maintaining that the problems of blind
people (whether real or imposed by society) are different from
and most often have nothing to do with the problems of people
with other disabilities.
To survive and prosper as a blind person in our society, it is
necessary to learn a number of alternative techniques, which
touch every area of our lives reading, writing, travel, household
maintenance, cooking, sewing, matching clothing, etc. They are
not simply modifications of general techniques, but a set of
distinctive skills which are in many instances different systems,
e.g., Braille, cane or dog guide travel.
Once these alternative techniques have been learned, a blind
person can function independently. The problems we encounter are
not the same as those of the orthopedically handicapped, the
deaf, or persons
with most other disabilities. For example, while we do not need
architectural modifications in order to move around inside a
building, people in wheelchairs understandably need ramps, wider
doorways, etc. But while they can, having gained admission to the
building, read the signs and readily fill out print forms without
readers (another alternative technique), we need to employ our
adaptations. While a well-trained blind person can jump onto
public transportation and go where he or
she wants to without modifications to the system, a person in a
wheelchair needs to fight for special adaptations to assure
access. I could go on and on listing such differences, but I
think my point is clear.  Then and this may be the most telling
point of all  there are a number of problems of the
orthopedically handicapped which I cannot begin to think of while
I sit here typing.
By now some of you may be saying to yourselves,  Of course this
is true; tell us something that we don't know.  Unfortunately, as
important as these differences are, many blind people have been
convinced by fashionable notions to forget them and to put them
aside in favor of a few supposed similarities.
 Society treats us the same,  says the well-trained coalition
advocate.  You can't deny that we are all considered helpless and
dependent and that we are all paternalized. 
Any blind person who is honest with himself or herself will know
that this argument does not even resemble fact. A Gallup Poll in
1976 showed that, after cancer, the American public most feared
blindness. Blindness is imbued with a special set of stereotypes,
myths, and misconceptions that transcend the physical difference
and make statements about the personality and mental capacity of
the blind person. Let anyone who doubts this refer to two of the
most significant treatises on the subject:  Blindness: Is History
Against Us  and  Blindness:  Is Literature Against Us  by Dr.
Kenneth Jernigan. I am not saying that other handicapped people
are not pitied or paternalized. They
do not meet the present day all-American macho image and will be
treated accordingly. I am not saying that persons with other
physical disabilities do not need to work to overcome their own
problems caused by societal treatment. Those problems are as
important to them as the problems of the blind are to us, and I
wish them the best in their struggle to overcome them. I am
saying (and those blind persons who are honest with themselves
know this to be true) that blindness is not generally perceived
simply as the lack of sight. Rather, it is wrapped in a
cloak of myths that additionally presume sinful causes, mental
weakness, hearing deficits, and total inability to function.
As an employer I am likely to believe that, if the building is
accessible, the employee in a wheelchair can easily talk on the
phone, read the case records, and conduct interviews. On the
other hand, I will most often believe deep in my gut that the
blind person cannot handle the job because he or she cannot read
print visually or see the person he or she is interviewing.
Without special effort I will not accept the fact that Braille is
as valid a means of reading and writing, nor will I understand
that there are innumerable ways to detect the nonverbal clues in
the interview or even that the blind person can get around the
building safely. These attitudes are the real handicap of
blindness, and they are different and more exaggerated than those
faced by people with other disabilities even though good training
can reduce the physical barriers of blindness to a nuisance
level.  The real work of creating equality and opportunity for
the blind has to do with tearing down the attitudinal barriers we
face.
 If this is true,  argues the coalition advocate,  Why are so
many blind people active members of coalitions? 
Here we come to one of the most interesting and probably most
controversial thoughts of this article: blind persons are taught
in a myriad of ways from birth that we should consider ourselves
inferior to the sighted. As a result of this constant
bombardment, many blind persons come to internalize this belief.
Having done so, such people have
a number of options available for expressing their impaired
self-image.  They include:
1. Deny or minimize the reality of blindness and emulate the
sighted.  One manifestation of this is choosing to read print at
ten words a minute rather than studying Braille, which could
increase one's reading rate sharply and decrease eye strain.
2. Assume the traditional role assigned to blind people and
conform to that role in a manner that reinforces the image of the
idealized blind person in order to gain status and recognition
from the sighted.  Yes, you recognize in this option the blind
Uncle Tom.
3. Totally accept the notion of inferiority and stop trying to
accomplish anything.
I am sure that we have all known blind people who use one of
these adaptive techniques in their daily lives. Now, what does
this have to do with coalitions? Well, for openers, although the
other members of the coalition may have various physical
disabilities, they do have sight, and it can be expected that the
blind person without a healthy self-image will fall into the
traditional pattern of revering and following the sighted as
outlined in the second adaptive technique just listed. Yes,
although he or she would deny it vigorously and seek to justify
it in a flood of rationalizations, we are describing our Uncle
Toms packaged in an up-to-date wrapper. Indeed, because
the coalition needs the blind to increase its stature as a full
coalition, it is as natural for that body to treat its blind
members with special attention as it is for agencies serving the
blind to give special recognition to its token blind (usually
Uncle Tom) board members.  Why not? Both the agencies and
coalitions use and treat the blind specially because they depend
on the blind to some degree for their very existence.
This brings us to the question of autonomy. The theory holds
that, just because an organization or individual belongs to a
coalition
they are not really giving up autonomy as an individual or an
organization.  Surely such an idea defies everything that we know
about human nature.  One of the first goals of a coalition is to
get people to modify their views and needs in order to agree on
things for which they can all work together. Now, if we assume
that blindness is no different from other disabilities, this
would be an easy thing to do since there would be few differences
to put aside. On the other hand, if blindness is truly a distinct
disability, which presents different problems from those of, let
us say, the deaf or the orthopedically impaired, then it requires
different solutions.
Some of these solutions must necessarily be subordinated to the
needs of the coalition. For example, it might be important for
the blind to fight hard for paratransit expansion to areas in
which no public transit system exists at the same time as persons
with other disabilities are pressing the same transit system to
modify buses and rail systems to allow wheelchair accessibility.
Both goals are important and both should be sought, but both
goals necessarily compete for the same funds. Further, even if
the coalition had adopted both paratransit goals as important, 
it would almost certainly have to agree to defer one of them for
political expedience. It would naturally defer the one for which
it had the fewest votes; and, because the blind are always a
minority among disability groups, it is not difficult to imagine
which one that would be.
Having already modified one's goals and priorities for the sake
of the coalition, it is difficult or impossible to work in
opposition
to those goals. Cooperation, and not what is best for the blind,
becomes the rallying cry of the day. The blind representatives to
the coalition must do their best to help their separate
organizations to modify their approaches in order to preserve
their personal status in the coalition and to maintain the
organization's membership. By agreeing to become part of the
coalition in the first place the organization has agreed to
modify its goals and approaches in order not to conflict with
that coalition regardless of the cost of such an alliance to the
blind. Further, and even worse, since the coalition's habit of
thought is what the participating blind organization is most
exposed to, it may well cease to assess important issues
independently.   Well,  says the coalition advocate,  suppose I
concede to you that we will have to give up some things that the
blind want in order to make overall progress, it is still true
that politicians prefer working with coalitions.  Yes, the point
is well taken.  Everyone would prefer the least complicated
approach to any subject, and politicians are no exception. The
cry used to be that the blind should get together and decide what
they want, as if the blind were
not like any other minority with differing points of view and
conflicting philosophies. Then, as the handicapped formed
organizations and became effective lobbyists in their own right,
the blind were pressured to work with the rest since that made
things easier for the politicians.  The problem is that
politicians would prefer to bury the real differences and even
the contradictions between various groups of the disabled in
order to simplify their job of preparing legislation. We know
that those differences cannot be buried. When we participate in
coalitions, however, we tend to reinforce the view that blind
people don't have different needs, and our participation becomes
self-defeating. It is my belief that no state would ever have
established a separate agency for the blind in this country if
persons with other handicaps had become politically sophisticated
earlier or if coalitions had been the strong force that they are
today.
Finally, let's examine the argument that says,  Since coalitions
are the accepted forum, we had better get on board or the blind
will be left out.  Although it is more difficult to fight for
one's rights and needs separately, if those needs are separate,
then we
must do so. To the argument that the pace may be slower, the
thoughtful person will respond by questioning what the blind have
gained out
of twenty years of working with coalitions. Although our weaker
blind brothers and sisters have participated in these groups, one
sees very
few or no accomplishments that directly benefit the blind. The
coalition's activities are devoted, as they should be, to the
needs of the majority, which is not blind. Just as important as
the lack of actual gains for the blind won by coalitions over the
past twenty years is the question of what damage such
participation has done to the cause of
the blind as a separate group with unique needs. That cannot be
measured now, but we should make no mistake about it; there will
be a future cost for such activity.
Finally our coalition advocate takes a parting shot.  If blind
people enjoy participating in coalitions, for whatever reason,
maybe even the fact that they enjoy the special status bestowed
by their sighted colleagues, where is the harm? Why not just let
them go enjoy themselves. Even if the goal is social, what's
wrong with that?  If the coalition did not pretend to speak for
the blind, then there
would be no harm in it at all. If the presence of the blind in a
coalition did not reinforce the view that we have no differences
from other handicapped persons and can be served effectively by
the same legislation, regulations, and agencies, then no harm
would be done. Unfortunately, this is not the case, and the
participation of the blind in coalitions is taken as proof that
our needs are similar; this makes our work that much harder.
Considering the work that remains in order for blind persons to
achieve first class citizenship, we cannot afford to have
the tide of change slowed or reversed by the confusion that the
participation of blind people in coalitions brings about.

   REPORT FROM THE NATIONAL LIBRARY SERVICE  FOR THE BLIND AND
PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED
 From the Editor:  The October-December, 1989, periodical
entitled  News  (a quarterly publication of the National Library
Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped of the Library
of Congress) contains a number of items of general interest to
the blind. Therefore, we are printing these items in the
following composite: 

                     CERTIFICATION STUDIED 
FOR TEACHERS OF BRAILLE

 The people who teach our children to read Braille should know
Braille themselves.  This attitude, expressed in various ways by
parents, organizations of blind people, and other groups in the
field of blindness, is the guiding force that led to a meeting
held
at NLS on October 13 to discuss the feasibility of Braille
certification for teachers.
The meeting was a direct result of a priority identified by the
Ad Hoc Committee on Joint Organizational Effort, which brought
together
in March, 1989, seven major North American groups concerned with
blindness.  The resolution called for  proven proficiency in
knowing and teaching all Braille codes,  and certification by the
Library of Congress.   That resolution, along with many requests
we have received from individuals and organizations, gives us a
mandate to study the matter,  says Frank Kurt Cylke, NLS
director.
Topics being explored, according to Claudell Stocker, head of the
NLS Braille Development Section, include:
* What constitutes a basic level of proficiency,
* Methods for establishing that that level has been attained,
including the possibility of a special certification,
* Whether the availability of such certification would have the
desired impact on educational standards, and
* Whether NLS is the proper entity for development of such
certification.
Participants in the October 13 meeting included experts in
education, rehabilitation, and blindness. Two other meetings are
scheduled for spring, 1990. No action will be decided on until
recommendations from all three meetings have been evaluated.
 Handling this issue is not simple,  Mrs. Stocker says, and
explains that there are different practices and requirements for
special education teachers throughout the country and variations
even in schools for the blind. There are no national standards,
and very few state standards.
She continues,  And the problem is not limited to teaching
children.  There is a great shortage of qualified Braille
teachers in the rehabilitation area.
 If this study indicates that certification is the way to go, 
she says,  the certification will deal with Braille proficiency
only knowledge of the material being taught. Teaching methods are
not in our province, and shouldn't be. 
The only national certifications in Braille proficiency are now
provided by NLS, as are materials for courses leading to
certification. Currently individuals can be certified as Braille
transcribers in the literary, music, and mathematics codes and as
Braille proofreaders.
Most certified Braille transcribers are volunteers who work alone
or through organized groups to produce materials on request for
individuals, school systems, and network libraries. In a few
places, people who teach Braille have been required to be
certified in literary Braille transcription, and some teachers
have taken the course on their own to improve their skills.


                     On-Demand Braille Books
         RESEARCH SHOWS POTENTIAL FOR NETWORK LIBRARIES


An experimental project is testing the feasibility of producing
Braille books in a library setting using a computer-controlled
high-speed embosser developed under contract for NLS. The
technology should prove valuable at network libraries to
supplement the basic press-Braille collection and provide
on-demand materials for patrons.
Henry Paris, chief of the NLS Materials Development Division
says,  The major advantage of this technology is that a lot of
material can be stored in a small space, which is not usually the
case with Braille. 
The NLS-sponsored project has been operating at the Florida
regional library for approximately three years, using a TED- 600
embosser and computer disks containing coding for the Braille to
be produced. This phase of the project was designed to test the
reliability of the embossing equipment, ease of use by
professional and volunteer staff, time required for production,
cost, and consumer satisfaction with the Braille product. 
Approximately 100 titles available as press-Braille books were
used in this experiment. They were obtained from an NLS
contractor, using files converted from those prepared for
press-Braille production.  The patron test group consisted of 300
people who requested one or
more of these titles. More than 952 volumes were produced and
distributed.  A patron survey during the first year of testing
indicated satisfaction with books received and identified a few
production problems, primarily with the binding method and
missing Braille dots. Costs, time of production, and ease of use
were all sufficiently promising for continuation of the project.
NLS staff, the test team at the Florida library, and the TED-600
contractor have addressed the problems. The TED-600 has been
reworked to prevent sticking pins and therefore missing Braille
dots, a quality-assurance procedure for the embossed books has
been established, and a new binding method is being reviewed.
The next phase of the project, now underway, deals with
introducing new material to supplement the collection, using
volunteers to produce on computer disks local material or books
requested by patrons, in much the same fashion as volunteer
narration teams supplement the recorded program. Equipment tests,
similar to those in the first phase, will continue. An additional
100 press-Braille titles are also being added.
This phase is expected to last at least two years and involves
the cooperation and efforts of the many active volunteer groups
located in Florida.


                         GROUP TARGETS 
COLLECTION NEEDS


The National Advisory Group on Collection Building Activities
made twenty-four recommendations for improvements in the NLS
collection at its thirteenth annual meeting August 24 and 25. The
group again called for additional titles in the subject areas of
westerns, romances, and mysteries, a recommendation that ranked
among the fifteen high-priority items.
Other top priority recommendations included:
* that all TB titles be withdrawn in the same manner as the
CB collection was;
* that re-recorded and reissued titles be predominantly fiction
selections and that the choices focus on westerns, romances,
mysteries, classics, and family-type books; and
* that no action be taken on an earlier recommendation to produce
in both cassette and flexible disc format about twenty westerns
and romances that are not bestsellers.
The group asked NLS to establish a quota of no less than 55
percent fiction selections over the next three-year period. It
also recommended that half of the titles produced annually be
current titles and the other half be retrospective titles, and
added the caveat that the advisory group review this percentage
on a yearly basis.
The advisory group also called for the production of a typing and
keyboarding title, as recommended in 1988; about six titles
dealing
with rape and incest; more titles on the principles of spelling,
grammar, and usage; more titles in the hard sciences; more books
by and about handicapped people; more light and humorous titles;
more books by and about black persons; and additional NLS funds
to increase the foreign-language collection. The group felt that
identifying and producing more clean, wholesome books should
remain a high priority.
The advisory group gave its support of the recent recommendations
of the National Audio Equipment Advisory Group calling for
research to improve mailing containers, primarily for Braille
materials, noting that current packaging presents a deterrent to
the reading of Braille.  Additionally, the group recommended that
NLS make  Talking Book Topics  (TBT) permanently available on
recorded cassette, but with improved packaging, NLS standards for
recording, and an order form similar to that in the flexible-disc
version of TBT.
The advisory group suggested that annotations for series, both
juvenile and adult, contain the book numbers and titles for both
prequels and sequels.
The group made four recommendations for children's and young
adult materials:
* Produce more biographies of historical figures for all grade
levels in Braille and on cassette.
* Produce more books on parenting for young adults.  * Produce a
new, separate catalog for young adult readers; meanwhile, list
young-adult titles in a separate index in the current catalogs.
* Obtain funding as soon as possible to produce a young-adult
magazine.
Members of the advisory group represent network librarians,
patrons, and consumer organizations. They recommended that
representatives be appointed in a more timely fashion and that
names and addresses
of those appointed be published (in advance of the meeting) in 
Talking Book Topics  and  Braille Book Review. 

       COMBINATION MACHINE GETS FINAL PRE-PRODUCTION TESTS

Staff at regional and subregional libraries and at machine-
lending agencies recently tested a new combination machine that
plays both cassettes and discs. After further field testing and
refinement, the combination machine, to be known as the CT-1, is
expected to join
the NLS family of playback equipment as a special-use machine. 
Just as the E-1 (easy) machine was produced for the reader
willing to trade versatility for easy play,  says NLS Materials
Development Chief Henry Paris,  the CT-1 is for the reader who
will accept complexity in return for versatility. 
As its name implies, the combination machine combines in one case
a cassette player and a disc player, so that the one machine can
play all of NLS's recorded materials. About the size of a regular
talking-book machine, the CT-1 costs and weighs approximately the
same as a regular disc player and cassette player together.
Although it is portable and can play on batteries, it is not as
convenient to travel with as a regular cassette player.
The cassette deck in the CT-1 is similar to that of the E-1,
which was developed at the same time, but the CT-1 allows the
reader to choose manual or automatic control of side changing.
The CT-1's disc player offers new features: it has a
variable-speed capability and a limited review option, and its
tone arm is positioned by pressing down gently, rather than
picking up. The tone arm is designed to help the reader find the
edge of the disc and drop the needle into the first groove.
 Some readers now using a cassette player and a talking-book
machine will probably request a CT-1 in exchange for the other
two machines,  Mr. Paris says.  Like the E-1, the CT-1 will offer
readers a special playback option.  Mr. Paris expects early
production of the CT-1 machine to be limited, with the quantities
increasing if the combination machine becomes popular and demand
for other types of machines decreases.  In the first phase of the
machine's field testing, each regional and subregional library
and each machine-lending agency received one machine along with a
videocassette and brochure that show how to operate the machine
and demonstrate its special features. Staff members experimented
with the machines and sent NLS written reports of their findings.
The National Audio Equipment Advisory Committee, meeting in late
October, studied this preliminary information and advised on the
distribution policy to be used when the new machine is added to
the NLS family of playback equipment.
A second testing phase is already beginning. NLS is sending some
800 additional machines to regional and subregional libraries for
testing by readers. Patrons will use the machines for three
months and will then report their experience and suggest changes
if necessary.
The CT-1's operations are monitored and controlled by a
microprocessor chip with Electrically Programmable Read Only
Memory (EPROM). When patron evaluation is completed, the NLS
engineering staff will analyze any problems encountered in the
machine's operation, and will adjust the microprocessor's
software as needed. Once the program is perfected, subsequent
machines will have ROMs that cannot be changed.
After the testing has been completed and adjustments to the EPROM
have been made, NLS's contractor, Telex Communications, is
expected to begin producing the CT-1s.  Once we see how the CT-1
fits into the NLS family of playback equipment,  Mr. Paris says, 
we expect to adjust the numbers of the various machines produced,
according to patron need. 
   TROUBLE CONTINUES AT ASSOCIATED SERVICES  FOR THE BLIND IN
PHILADELPHIA
 From the Editor:  In the February-March and the July, 1989,
issues of the  Monitor  we carried stories on the labor problems
at Associated Services for the Blind in Philadelphia. An article
from the October 23, 1989,  Philadelphia Inquirer  entitled  At
Agency for the Blind, Turmoil Over Labor Practices  makes it
clear that those problems continue unabated. Obviously there is
widespread unrest among blind employees of the agency, a
circumstance not limited to the case under discussion. Is it any
wonder that sheltered shop employees feel exploited? Is it any
wonder that in increasing numbers they join the National
Federation of the Blind and seek assistance from it? Is it any
wonder that the more regressive agencies attack
the National Federation of the Blind with slogans like  radical 
and  militant?  Is it any wonder that NAC (the National
Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually
Handicapped) continues to accredit these workshops and that
National Industries for the Blind is giving $200,000 to NAC and
trying to pressure all of the workshops to join up? Is it any
wonder that members of Congress and others are beginning to
question the legality of the NIB contribution to NAC
since it comes from money which should be going to increase the
pitifully meager wages of blind shop workers? 
 The answer to all of these questions is: Of course not. Here is
the article from the  Philadelphia Inquirer.

                    At Agency for the Blind,
                  Turmoil Over Labor Practices
                          by Lisa Ellis
                      Inquirer Staff Writer 

Nobody has walked a picket line in front of Associated Services
for the Blind on Walnut Street since September, 1987.
But neither time nor a contract negotiated four months after that
eight-day strike has brought normalcy to the labor- relations
climate at Associated Services, where layoffs and alleged threats
and harassment on both sides have produced continued tensions and
a slew of charges of unfair labor practice.
And in a bizarre twist, the agency for nearly four months has
refused to admit Louis McCarthy, the employee union's feisty
president, to
the ASB building at 919 Walnut Street. Despite his 13-years of
seniority and experience with most union jobs at the agency,
McCarthy, the most senior of 15 people laid off in February,
1988, was the only one not rehired.
An administrative law judge of the National Labor Relations Board
ruled three weeks ago that the agency discriminated against
McCarthy for his union activities and ordered that he be rehired.
In all, Judge Elbert D. Gadsden found 13 violations of labor law.
Now, both employees and administrators are waiting to see what
happens next. Executive director Vince McVeigh said the agency
had not decided whether to fight the decision and had been
granted a 30-day extension to decide.
But employees interviewed last week said they had little hope
that the agency would bring back McCarthy or that this victory
for their union, the independent ASB Employees Group, would
change what they described as the climate of fear at the agency.
 A lot of people are terrified to speak out,  said Dave McMahon,
a union member who is a maintenance man at the agency. Many of
the employees, like him, are handicapped, he noted.  They're
blind, they're visually impaired, and they're afraid they can't
find another job. 
 It's nice to win things, but they do appeal everything,  said
John Wilson, an administrative assistant.  There's no feeling
that things are suddenly going to turn around and they'll start
listening to employees. 
Union membership has declined, McCarthy said, from a peak of 32
members out of 56 people in the bargaining unit in 1987 to 14
members out of about 50 eligible now.
Employees interviewed attributed the low membership to fear.  My
feeling is that people don't forget their job was eliminated, 
said one employee, who did not wish to be identified.  That's
kind of a bitter experience, I guess. They're afraid for their
jobs.  McVeigh denied such an atmosphere existed.  If even [a
few] people say that, that disturbs me. I think we have fairly
tight staff now, and I think morale is pretty good. 
 They just don't want to deal with the union,  said McCarthy, who
sees only dimly, and only out of one eye, as a result of glaucoma
and cataracts.  They make it seem that you should be thankful
we've given you employment. 
But McVeigh suggested that union membership might be down because 
we're working hard to address some of their concerns. 
For example, he said, the agency last month started a committee
designed to gather employee suggestions in the department that
transcribes books and magazines from print to Braille. It is the
department where the union was born and where McCarthy worked as
a computer operator before the layoffs.
Both sides have begun bargaining to replace their first contract,
which was negotiated after the strike and expires January 14.
McVeigh acknowledged that relations remain rocky.
 We have this personal conflict with McCarthy,  he said.  Here's
the head of the union, who's not employed here. He's not allowed
to come into the building. I have my reasons for doing that. But
it makes it difficult to negotiate. 
He said McCarthy was excluded from the building and was not
rehired when laid-off employees began to be rehired last winter
because of his behavior on several occasions when he was visiting
the building after he was laid off.
 There's a lot of reasons why you don't employ somebody,  he
said.  It's not performance. We've never said that. 
The administrative law judge, in his September 29 ruling, found
that union activity was the reason McCarthy was not rehired.
McVeigh would not describe what kind of behavior by McCarthy he
found disturbing. But he said he acted after an incident that was
witnessed
by four people, including two who were not agency employees. The
incident occurred May 19.
McVeigh declined to describe that incident, either. But McCarthy
said he was accused of making a threat in front of two managers
and two visitors on an elevator.
 I supposedly said, `if I had a grenade, I'd get everybody,'  he
said.  Actually, I said, `if somebody had a grenade, they'd get
us all,' and we all laughed.  McCarthy filed an NLRB charge after
the agency cited the incident as a reason for excluding him from
the building effective June 30.
McVeigh, who was not present, would not discuss the specific
wording attributed to McCarthy, but denied that anyone laughed. 
The people who heard the incident took it as disturbing,  he
said.  McCarthy said there were no other incidents that he knew
of.  To me, this is their pattern harassing me and getting me to
defend my character all the time rather than focusing on the
union.  McVeigh said the agency delayed its decision on
contesting the recent NLRB ruling to see what would happen to
McCarthy's NLRB charge concerning the May incident.
Francis Hoeber, assistant to the NLRB's Philadelphia regional
director, said that an investigation of the May incident was
under way and that it was not known whether the board would
decide within 30 days on whether to file a formal complaint
against the agency.
Even union members acknowledged that McCarthy can be  hot-headed, 
as one put it.  He never went to Dale Carnegie, let's put it that
way,  McMahon said.  But I have a lot of respect for him because
he was the guy who stood up. 
An employee who did not wish to be identified contended that
Association Services would not bring McCarthy back,  almost at
all costs.   Why? Because of what they had to go through to get
rid of him.  They eliminated 15 jobs so they could get as far
down as Lou. They want to keep him out because he's the leader. 
In his ruling, issued September 29 after a hearing in March,
Gadsden ruled that the agency had discriminated against McCarthy
because of his union activities when it issued him a written
reprimand on August 14, 1987, after a supervisor accused McCarthy
of threatening personal harm against him. The reprimand was what
led to the strike.
The administrative law judge found that the agency had made
little effort to investigate the charge, and he accepted
McCarthy's story that he told the supervisor he would  slap him
with a charge,  referring to the NLRB process.
The supervisor, who the judge said appeared to have problems
understanding English, had contended that McCarthy told him he
would  slice you in your ear. 
The judge also found that Associated Services violated labor law
by telling McCarthy it would not rehire someone who was 
disruptive ; by unilaterally changing its policy in August, 1988,
and requiring McCarthy to obtain clearance to be in the building;
by refusing to rehire him for jobs he was qualified for; by
unilaterally removing two bookkeepers from the bargaining unit;
and by failing to bargain on several other issues.
When the agency announced the layoffs, all of which came in the
Braille department, officials said they had lost one of their
contracts to do Braille transcribing.
Immediately after the layoffs, Associated Services found
employment for six of the 15 displaced employees through a 
bumping  procedure in which employees could claim the jobs of
those with less seniority. McCarthy did not get one such job
because he failed to meet a deadline set by McVeigh for choosing
which employee he would bump.
McCarthy protested that the deadline and other procedures were
not bargained but imposed unilaterally.
McVeigh said he never intended to get rid of McCarthy but assumed
he would be bumped to another job because of his seniority.  That
was an absolute shock to me,  he said.
                   I DON'T SEE HOW YOU COULD 
POSSIBLY WASH OUR DISHES
                         by Ron Schmidt
 Ron Schmidt lives in Maple City, Michigan. Here is his story as
he tells it. 

Over the past three years I have looked forward to the  Braille
Monitor  each month for encouragement in my search for a suitable
and fulfilling job. The articles about persons who found ways to
get the jobs they wanted gave me ideas and determination to keep
trying, and I now have a job I am happy with and that I feel can
lead to bigger and better things. Please pass my story on to 
Monitor  readers if you feel it may encourage others.
Today I am heading for work at the Homestead Resort to take
reservation calls and plug the necessary information into my
computer. My computer talks quite well to me, and we have become
good friends in the past two months. It is the talking computer
which has enabled me finally to get the job in reservations I had
tried for for three years. It was also the result of a lot of
perseverance on my part in the face
of continuous discrimination and negative attitudes. The saying, 
When the going gets tough, the tough get going,  came to my mind
many times when things looked bleak since that spring of 1986
when our family farm, where I was a manager, was forced out of
business by the farm credit system, and I had to face the real
world of being blind and looking for work in the real world.
Farming, I found, did not qualify you for anything but farming in
most employers' eyes, and since I wanted to move on to other
kinds of work, all the skills I had developed in the past ten
years on the farm were discounted as worthless. I was told I
might be able to wash dishes, but although this is a worthy job,
it was not my hoped-for job. Nevertheless, after six months of
rejections by other kinds of employers, I needed money to support
my family so I started applying for dishwashing jobs.
As Dr. Abraham Nemeth stated in the November, 1989,  Braille
Monitor , I felt I should inform employers in my applications and
letters of introduction that I was blind. Big mistake. Employers
are looking for reasons to eliminate most of the people who apply
for a job and interview only the top few. They do not have the
time to consider everyone equally even if they want to so by
telling them I was blind, I immediately lost all chances at even
an interview for a job.
I therefore started making sure I applied for jobs in which my
blindness would not prevent me from doing the work. I still only
received offers of interviews for dishwashing jobs, mainly due to
my farming background and employers' beliefs that farmers had few
skills or mental abilities.  I remember the first interview when
the owner of a French restaurant, seeing that I was blind, said 
I don't see how a blind person could possibly wash our dishes. 
Another employer told me he had a small kitchen and things had to
be stacked up, which I would surely knock over and break. Other
employers, upon having their receptionist inform them a blind
person had come, would have me told that the job open fifteen
minutes before was now gone, but  They would keep my application
on file. 
I finally found an employer who said quite frankly,  I don't know
what a blind person can do, but I have a job that needs doing and
you can try it.  It was washing dishes for the Homestead Resort,
and I took it. I figured I would have to show someone I could do
a better job than their former dishwashers. I was watched closely
for a few days and then left alone to do my job. After three
months my supervisor told me I was definitely the best dishwasher
he had had in seven years, and all of those former dishwashers
were sighted.  I worked with over thirty other employees, who
gained new respect for the capabilities of blind folks, and I was
glad of that.
But I still had my heart set on a job in reservations, so I
finally applied for it again and was not immediately turned down.
I had shown an employer I was a dependable and hardworking
employee, and if I could get the equipment to show I could handle
the job, he would be willing to consider my promotion from
dishwasher to reservation clerk.  The Michigan Commission for the
Blind came to my aid at this point,
and I made contact with Bob Tinny, the Commission's computer
specialist.  Bob learned what equipment I would need and what
software would be required for communicating with the Homestead
main computer. He then brought the equipment over 200 miles and
took a day showing my prospective employer how everything would
work. Bob is also blind, and I think his incredible knowledge of
computers and software helped convince everyone that I might
really be able to handle the job. After a month of discussion and
my calling once a week to see if a decision had been reached, I
was finally informed I could have a shot at the job.

Now I am starting my third month as a reservation clerk. I am
still learning and trying to increase my speed in processing
information, but I am doing the job and everyone is happy I am
working there. For anyone who starts to feel that a good job will
never come his or her way, take heart. Keep thinking and trying
every idea, and if you have to, start at the bottom of an
organization and show management what you can do. Keep moving
toward the job you really want and if you are denied it, try
somewhere else. Find out what special equipment and technology
can help you do jobs you think you maybe couldn't, and never give
up. There is always someone who will let you get your foot in the
door and then you have to use your own drive and abilities to get
the door all the way open. It may take you three years to get the
job you want as it did me, but you can get if if you don't give
up or believe what most employers tell you.
I am forty-three years old and now embarking on the most exciting
part of my life. I have my sights now on getting a program
started to teach other blind compatriots the skills to do the
kind of job
I have. Every move up for any of us helps all of us. So read the 
Braille Monitor , and be willing to wash dishes.
                   LETTER TO HORIZON AIRLINES 

 From the Editor:  As  Monitor  readers know, Ramona Walhof is
President of the National Federation of the Blind of Idaho and
a member of the Board of Directors of the National Federation of
the Blind. For quite some time she has been engaged in
correspondence with Horizon Airlines. Here is her latest letter: 

                                                     Boise, Idaho
                                                November 27, 1989

Mr. Dennis Decker
Horizon Air
Seattle, Washington

Dear Mr. Decker:
I have your letter dated October 11, 1989, and I thank you for
it.
It makes it clear that you have given the matters I raised some
attention.

You indicate that the FAA considers seating a safety issue.
Certainly some individuals who work for the FAA have that
opinion, but I am not sure that the FAA itself has any policies
or directives on the subject. If I am wrong, I would be glad to
see what you have.
I would like to put aside the talk of written requirements and
deal with good sense. Blind people who use a white cane or a dog
guide
are making a statement that they are blind. The cane or dog is a
tool, but it is also an identification card that says  I am a
blind person.  Most well- trained blind individuals are not
ashamed
of blindness and have no desire to hide it. Many persons who are
newly blind and have poor or no training do feel ashamed of
blindness and hide it successfully from airline personnel. I sat
next to such a person recently on an aircraft. The man was
seventy years old, had macular degeneration, and could see only
vague shadows. He did not carry a cane and discussed his eye
condition with me only because I had more experience with
blindness than he did. Airline personnel dealt with me in a
condescending and patronizing manner frequently, but not
constantly. They did not treat the gentleman beside me the same
way. Chances are (if he had been seated in an exit row) no one
would have objected.
Yesterday I returned from Baltimore to Boise, traveling on three
different aircraft. On one of them I was seated in front of a
family of three, two parents and a mentally retarded girl. The
girl was probably about twenty, physically mature. She walked
normally and did not appear
to be handicapped. Yet, the conversation among the three made it
clear that this girl's understanding was that of a small child.
She was outspoken about being overweight. Her interests were very
unusual
for a twenty-year-old woman. She caused no trouble. She was not
seated in an exit row. If she had been, however, it is unlikely
that she would have been identified as unable to cope with an
emergency.
I bring these two examples to your attention because they point
out the problem now faced by the blind and the airlines. I would
have
been better able to cope with an emergency including a fire
outside an exit row window than either of the two people I just
described.  Because I carry a cane, airline personnel have been
taught to treat
me as though I have very little experience and very little
intelligence.
The attitude would not be stated that way, but that's how it is.
Well-trained blind people are confronted with this problem
constantly. Exit row seating is only one example. When airline
personnel pretend that a blind person like me is a risk in an
exit row and at the same time are unable to identify individuals
who are far greater risks and are unwilling to exclude senior
citizens who are more likely to have health problems, we are
dealing with unreasonable and irrational behavior.  It is
discriminatory, and it has nothing to do with safety. Serving
alcohol to people seated in exit rows is equally irrational. I
realize that Horizon has many flights that are so small that
beverages are not served. I also realize that no airline has ever
skipped rows when serving alcohol.
Your last letter would indicate that you have the capacity to
understand the dilemma we now face. The airlines and the blind
have taken different positions, but we face the same problems. An
honest examination of exit row seating and the blind will
demonstrate that safety is not the primary issue.
So what do I expect you to do about it? If you behave in the
standard recent airline pattern, the answer is nothing. On the
other hand, if you are as perceptive and sensitive as I hope you
are, you may realize certain things: Because this is a matter of
basic civil rights, the blind are not going to give up and quit.
In short, the problem will not simply go away. In fact, unless
the airlines change their behavior, it will get worse and time is
running out. Think about what I have said, and see whether it
makes sense. If it does, help us do something about it.

                                                Very truly yours,
                                         Ramona Walhof, President
                            National Federation of Blind of Idaho

                     BLIND MEN AND ELEPHANTS
                       by Hisham H. Ahmed
 Hisham Ahmed teaches in the Political Science Department at
Florida
International University in North Miami. 

                                             North Miami, Florida
                                                December 31, 1989

Professor John T. Rourke
c/o The Dushkin Publishing Group, Inc.
Guilford, Connecticut

Dear Professor Rourke:
I am writing to you primarily regarding the introduction to your 
Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Controversial Issues in World
Politics , second edition, pp. xii-xxi. Choosing to entitle your
introduction  Elephants, Blind Men, and World Politics,  you
state:   There is a classic allegorical tale about several blind
men who attempt to describe an elephant. Each touches the animal,
and, depending on whether he is feeling the trunk, ear, leg, or
tail, each variously describes the elephant as a snake, a fan, a
tree, or a rope. The study of world politics is something like
that. 
In this opening statement you depict persons who are blind as
stupid, confused, and unable to figure out whether an elephant is
an elephant.  This is not the first time authors have associated
blindness with ignorance and incapacity to comprehend their
surroundings. Nor, I believe, will it be the last.
World politics is indeed a murky subject and a field not easily
understood.  But to equate blindness with the lack of ability to
understand life, even the simplest basics in life whether the
tail of an elephant is a tail, his trunk a trunk, his ear an ear,
or his leg a leg does not provide students of world politics with
useful tools for understanding this complicated subject. To the
contrary, telling them that blindness is synonymous with
incomprehension distorts their very thought process.  I want to
assume that you did not consciously intend to give a negative
portrayal of blind persons. But it is incumbent upon me to
indicate
to you that your characterization of blindness not only does
tremendous disservice to blind persons and to the process of
thinking things through without distortion, but that it also
resembles the obsession with commercialization which is
frequently observed in the media.
My feeling is that you presumed that your opening remarks would
attract teachers and students to your textbook. The tragic fact
is that you perhaps succeeded in your endeavor.
But what detriment did this success cause to blind persons? Blind
persons are lawyers, engineers, computer programmers, laborers,
and university professors despite the fact that society's overall
trend
is to exclude them from its tasks, duties, and obligations. Your
opening remarks not only preserve this exclusionist phenomenon of
society, but also nurture it by enveloping it in academic
discourse.  Consciously, I decided to adopt your book in my fall,
1989,  World Prospects and Issues  course, despite the fact that
I am myself blind and in spite of my apprehension that your
negative opening remarks would taint students' thinking about
blindness. I decided to adopt the book because I believe that, on
the whole, it provides students with useful insights regarding
world politics, and in order to satisfy my curiosity with respect
to what students would think about blindness after reading your
introduction. Out of approximately thirty students, one student
thought the association of blindness to ignorance was
appropriate.
Another important element of your book which drew the attention
of many of my students, in addition to the above- stated point,
is the
lack of objectivity when you present the issues of Palestinian
statehood, terrorism, and the status of the PLO mission to the
United Nations.  For example, several students pointed out that
your juxtaposition of two Israelis on the issue of Palestinian
statehood diminishes the credibility of your selections. Since
Palestinian statehood concerns the Palestinian people first and
foremost, they argued, why was the work of a Palestinian scholar
not presented?
I seriously hope that you will consider the implications of the
points I have raised. Standards of education are already
declining, and it is our duty, yours and mine, to provide our
students with the best education that can be attained. The
students of today are the generation of the future: They will
either lead or mislead. The main determinant in this process of
construction for the future is whether students are now given the
tools to perceive or misperceive.

                                                       Sincerely,
                                                  Hisham H. Ahmed
                                     Political Science Department
                                 Florida International University

cc: Dr. Kenneth Jernigan
Executive Director
National Federation of the Blind
                        IS PATRICK CRAZY?
                          by Zach Shore
From the Associate Editor:  Zach Shore is the Editor of the 
Blind Activist,  the publication of the National Federation of
the Blind of Pennsylvania. This article is reprinted from the
October, 1989, issue of that newsletter. What he has to say about
well-adjusted and informed sighted children is right on target.
Reading about Patrick, I am reminded of Anna Cheadle, the young
sighted daughter of staff members at the National Center for the
Blind. One day when she was a toddler, she picked up a curtain
rod, began using it like a cane, and announced that she was Mrs.
Maurer, President Maurer's wife. When Jim Omvig, a long-time
leader in the Federation was serving as a high official at the
headquarters of the Social Security Administration in Baltimore,
he lived next door to a four-year-old boy who very much enjoyed
talking and playing with Jim. One day a family friend asked
the child what he wanted to be when he grew up. The answer was
immediate,  I'm going to be blind.  For these sighted children
blindness was a characteristic one that they rather admired since
the blind people whom they knew were admirable. This is the
opportunity all sighted children should have. So now meet Patrick
and the friends whom he enjoys being with: 

 Who is Patrick, and why would anyone call him crazy? Patrick
McCuller is the seven-year-old son of Claire McCuller, the
director of the Louisiana Center for the Blind's Buddy System
Program this summer.  The purpose of this innovative project was
to work with blind children on developing positive attitudes
toward blindness. The amount of energy devoted to this task by
Joanne Fernandes, Director of the Louisiana Center for the Blind;
Claire McCuller; and the six counselors (including me) was
colossal. None of us expected Patrick to pitch in as well. 
Modeled after the adult program at the Louisiana Center, our
Buddy System included classes in Braille, typing, cane travel,
computer
use, and independent living. In addition we provided countless
activities like camping, horseback riding, water-skiing,
swimming, bowling, inner-city bus travel, a Bon Jovi concert, and
more. All of these classes and activities greatly increased the
self-confidence and independence of the kids, but possibly it was
our weekly Talk Time sessions, in which we discussed our feelings
about blindness, that helped us grow the most.
During one talk time someone noted Patrick's peculiar behavior.
While many of the other kids hated carrying their canes and had
to be told repeatedly to use them, Patrick, who is sighted, never
left home without his cane. And not only did Patrick always have
his cane with him, but he even used it properly: tapping it from
side to side, checking for curbs, and so on. One of the blind
teenagers in the program (whom I'll call Tom) exclaimed that he
would never use a cane if he didn't have to. He said that Patrick
had to be crazy. Angrily, he shouted,  Why would anybody in their
right mind want people to think they were blind when they're not? 
Tom was really saying,  I wish no one could tell that I am blind.

Tom had only light perception, yet he had never used a cane
before he came to this program. Often he bumped into things, fell
down, cut himself, or worse, all because he thought he would look
more blind with a cane.
So why did Patrick carry a cane? After all he didn't need it, and
he ran the risk of having people think that he was blind. Part of
the reason was that Patrick simply wanted to fit in with the
group.  Since everyone around him was using a cane, he stood out
without one.  In a similar way many of these blind kids had been
doing the same thing by not using canes. They didn't want to
stand out in a crowd
of their friends who were sighted. The critical difference is,
however, that Patrick was not at a disadvantage with a cane,
while blind people most definitely are handicapped without them.
It is perfectly natural and normal to want to fit in and be part
of a group. We all want to be liked and accepted for who we are.
The danger comes when we allow the group to limit us and make us
act in ways which are hurtful to us. In my own case I spent years
not using a cane and pretending to see when I really couldn't. I
was first given a cane in high school, but I never used it. I
thought I had too much sight to carry a cane, and I was afraid of
what other people would think and say. Everyone I knew thought
blindness was something bad, so naturally I did too.
Patrick, however, didn't view blindness as shameful. Because so
many
of the people around him for that month had positive ideas about
blindness (including his mother), he absorbed those attitudes. It
did not matter to him that people in the community might think he
was blind because he understood that blindness is respectable.
Unknowingly, Patrick helped to give Tom this message.
Is Patrick really crazy? Not on your life. He is a Federationist
through and through. I am not suggesting that all sighted people
should begin carrying canes to prove their acceptance of the
blind, and I would not encourage Patrick to continue using a cane
forever. His attitudes about blindness, however, I hope will
continue for the rest of his life. I think that our ultimate goal
in this movement is to help the rest of the world to think more
like Patrick.
                          REPORT FROM 
BLIND INDUSTRIES AND SERVICES OF MARYLAND
                     by Richard J. Brueckner
 As  Monitor  readers know, Blind Industries and Services of
Maryland (BISM) has not enjoyed an unruffled relationship with
the organized blind. Richard Brueckner assumed the presidency of
the agency at the beginning of 1989, and early on he began
sending signals that he would like to establish constructive
relations with the National Federation of the Blind of Maryland.
Sharon Maneki, President of the Maryland affiliate, invited Mr.
Brueckner to address the convention on November 5, 1989. His
message was constructive and sensible. It
is too soon to be certain how things will develop, but the early
signs are hopeful for a positive relationship with an industries
program
that employs a number of blind people. Here are the remarks that
Richard Brueckner made to the Maryland convention: 

I would like to start off this morning by thanking all of you for
inviting me and my family here to share this experience with you. 
Before I get started, I would also like to extend a special
thank-you to NFB of Maryland President Sharon Maneki, Maryland
Vendors Committee Chairman Don Morris, NFB National President
Marc Maurer, and especially to my friend and your Executive
Director Dr. Kenneth Jernigan. Without the help and support of
these fine leaders, I would not be standing before you this
morning and presenting such a positive BISM update.  As most of
you know, BISM (Blind Industries and Services of Maryland) has
existed in one form or another since 1908. I did not come here
today to dwell on the past, but rather to talk about the present
and future of the new BISM, which started on January 1, 1989. The
theme of my speech today can be summarized in two words,
Responsibility and Accountability.
As President of BISM, I can say that we expect to meet these
awesome responsibilities and are perfectly willing to be held
accountable for our actions and results. Who are we at BISM
accountable to? In response to that question, I list the
following:
1. The Governor of the State of Maryland
2. The Legislature of the State of Maryland
3. The BISM Board of Trustees, who are appointed by the  Governor
and ratified by the Legislature
4. All the blind people in the State of Maryland
5. The National Federation of the Blind (NFB)
6. The employees of BISM
7. The vendors in the Maryland Vending Program for the Blind
8. The Department of Vocational Rehabilitation (DVR)
9. National Industries for the Blind (NIB)
Ladies and gentlemen, we are eager and enthusiastic about
accepting these challenges. You may be asking yourselves,  How
does BISM plan to be accountable to such a diverse list of
organizations and individuals?  We know that we can't be
everything to everyone,
nor can we make everyone happy all the time. None of us can be
everything we want to be. We must learn how to say  no  to the
good so that we can say  yes  to the best! After all, life is not
easy  however, I believe if you are tough on yourself, life will
be easier on you!
BISM has a mission statement which says,  We are a private,
not-for-profit state-aided corporation, created to provide
employment, rehabilitation, and services at no cost to all blind
adults in the State of Maryland.  We have established long and
short-range goals which, if accomplished, will lead to the
fulfillment of our mission. Later, I will discuss in more detail
some of our accomplishments to date and our goals.  However, at
this point I believe you are more interested in hearing from me
the approach we are using to accomplish these goals and how BISM
will be dealing with each of you.
We have assembled a staff at Blind Industries and Services of
Maryland that live their lives by virtues, or unifying
principles. I know that what you believe (your unifying
principles) will directly determine how you perform. I believe in
and expect BISM staff members to follow these six unifying
principles which will lead to the highest form of personal
productivity and proper interaction with you as well as the other
groups and individuals we are accountable to.
1. Be honest with myself and everyone around me. Free myself from
any form of hypocrisy. Be open and fair with my boss, employees,
family, and friends. See that justice is properly administered.
See that all my business dealings are fair, completely
aboveboard, and impeccable.
2. Have high self-esteem. Continually develop and maintain a
strong sense of personal worth as I relate to myself and others.
3. Love my family. Build a close interpersonal fusion with my
spouse and children, showing care, respect, and kindness. Take
sufficient meaningful time with them and help each realize his or
her maximum potential and self-fulfillment.
4. Be humble. Free myself from boasting, arrogance, egotism, and
self-centeredness.  Be teachable. Keep in close touch with
reality and know myself as
I really am. Minimize my personal accomplishments in favor of
building other people.
5. Grow intellectually. Expand the mind with depth and breadth by
reading and thinking. Seek discussions that will expand the mind. 
Weigh all knowledge within the framework of my unifying
principles.
6. Be a leader. The most powerful leaders show the right way by
going first and have a following that is voluntary. They guide
themselves
and others with clearly defined, mutually agreed-upon goals, and
demonstrate the best method of achieving these goals.
To this point I have shared with you our mission and the
principles you can expect to be used by the BISM staff you will
come in contact with. Now, I would like to talk about goals in
general and BISM's specific goals.
We have tried to balance our goals so that we can meet the
responsibility and accountability mentioned earlier. We have
asked ourselves the following question:  Will reaching our goals
make BISM more secure,
win us friends, give us peace of mind, or improve family
relationships?  We truly hope that fulfillment of our mission
will result in the development of positive attitudes in a
fundamentally negative world. We have long-range goals that
require stretch and time to reach them. Long-range goals are
necessary to smooth over the small temporary setbacks we get from
some of our smaller on-going goals. Goal setting is a continuous
process of revising and adjusting as conditions change. A
philosopher once said,  Go as far as your mind can see. When you
get there, you will always be able to see farther. 
I personally ask myself two questions when I am trying to reach a
decision or set a goal on any important matter. I encourage BISM
staff members to use the same approach, and I am sure that many
of you will also find these questions helpful:
1. Is it morally right and fair to everyone concerned?
2. Will it take me closer to or farther from our major objective? 
Let's stop and think about these questions for a second.
Correctly answering these questions will help everyone make the
best decision.  Abusing others, walking over them, taking
advantage of them to achieve our objective simply is not valid in
the environment we operate in today. We must work in cooperation
with others to achieve our goals.  We have used our principles,
mission statement, and long- range goals to set our direction.
Positive results will not come only from ability; it is thinking
and direction that will make the difference.
You can expect us to take these factors into account as we deal
with you.
1. Do we know where we are today so that we can get the right
starting point for heading into the future?
2. What are the benefits of what we are considering? What are the
risks?
3. What are the obstacles we must overcome to reach our goal?
4. Who are the individuals, groups, and organizations we must
work with to reach our goal?
5. What is our detailed plan of action to reach our goal?
In our dealings with everyone that we feel accountable to, we are
working diligently to overcome F.E.A.R.:

 F alse
 E vidence
 A ppearing
 R eal


An organization operating on F.E.A.R. presents a danger to all
that it comes in contact with since the conclusions and outcomes
drawn from the false evidence have the same impact as if they
were true.  Last, in our dealings with everyone, we try to
present and cultivate
a positive self-image. People from every walk of life perform or
behave in accordance with the image they have of themselves.
Positive thinking will not work with an individual who is
negative about himself.  I hope that you all are able to see
that, as my talk continues, I am moving from generalities to
specifics. Continuing on that course, I will now share with you
BISM's long- and short-range written goals.  Our Board of
Trustees and key staff members will meet later this week in a
retreat to refine and extend these goals.

* Enhance working relationships with the following organizations: 
National Federation of the Blind, Department of Vocational
Rehabilitation, National Industries for the Blind, Maryland
School for the Blind, State Legislature, blind vendors and their
elected committee in the Maryland Blind Vendors Program.
* Significantly improve BISM's communications and community
relations activity in order to enhance:

a. Recognition and outreach in the blind community,

b. Understanding and image in the general community.  * Enhance
revenues by:
a. Initiating fundraising and grantsmanship,
b. Increasing state appropriations for operating and capital
needs,
c. Improving Industries operations.
* Enhance Braille production by purchasing state-of-the-art
equipment.
* Re-establish an effective Rehabilitation Program designed to
meet the needs of all blind adult Marylanders, not just those in
need of vocational training.
* Modernize and automate our accounting system and develop and
implement a computerized management information system.  *
Identify products and services for the commercial market suitable
or advantageous to blind employment that would enhance the
capability and revenues of the Industries Division, ultimately
leading to more jobs for blind adult Marylanders.
* Develop a plan for encouraging and assisting blind
entrepreneurship through identifying  prospects  and linking  
them to state economic and small business development efforts,
such as the Maryland Corporate Partnership.
* Following an assessment of employee need and demand, develop a
program for remedial education and enhanced skill training for
BISM'S employees.
* Develop an active upward mobility program for employees
to enable them to work in jobs that are more suitable and
challenging to their abilities and prepare them to leave BISM to
accept employment in the private sector.
* Continue as the Nominee Agent for Department for Vocational
Rehabilitation to manage the Maryland Blind Vendors Program. Make
necessary changes in attitude, philosophy, and management, to
create an atmosphere of mutual respect and trust between the
vendors and BISM so that the Randolph Sheppard Program in
Maryland can once again be something we can all be proud of.
* Hire, develop, and train an effective motivated management team
capable of assuming the responsibilities necessary to run the
organization professionally, in a business-like manner, without
losing sight of the special needs of many of our employees.
* Review BISM compensation and incentive programs and make
appropriate changes at all levels so that employees can live
comfortably and independently.
* Improve attitudes to be more positive in dealing with staff,
employees, outside individuals, and organizations and especially
in dealing with the capabilities of blind employees.
During the past 10 months we feel that significant progress has
been made on all of our stated and written objectives.
Specifically, I would like to mention the following
accomplishments:
1. I hope that you all as well as the folks at the Department for
Vocational Rehabilitation, National Industries for the Blind, the
Maryland School for the Blind, the vendors, and their committee
have sensed a change in our willingness to enhance our working
relationships.  I would like to think that proof of that
effectiveness lies in the fact that I am here today, speaking
with you in this forthright manner.
2. BISM has raised the level of community awareness by printing a
new brochure and attending health fairs and schools.
3. We have hired a Director of Public Information, as well as a
full-time fund raiser. A volunteer program is currently being
developed.
4. We have purchased a new TED-600 interpoint Braille embosser,
and we have on order a new Kurzweil Reader.
5. We have re-established the Rehabilitation Program, and as you
heard Glenn update you yesterday, we have four students and two
instructors and are modernizing our daily living skills area.
This is a flexible program designed to meet the varying needs of
many different kinds of blind Maryland adults.
6. We are in the process of automating our accounting system with
the addition of microcomputers and upgrading our mainframe from
an IBM 34 to an IBM 36. An effective management information
system is substantially completed, and we are using it to make
better decisions every day.
7. The following changes have occurred in the Industries
Division:
a. Hired 15 new blind employees.
b. Increased sales 35%.
c. Reduced inventories 32%.
d. Improved Cash Flow.
e. Developed new business in these areas: microfilming, vending,
sub-assembly work, sub-contract work, sub-contract packing,
handsoaps and detergents.
f. Developed upward mobility programs and moved 3 blind employees
forward through them.
8. We have significantly improved our relationship with the blind
vendors and are beginning to work together to solve problems that
have not been addressed for years. Active participation by the
Committee has now become standard operating procedure. We are
opening 4 new stands, moving 4 others, and renovating 5 more.
Major strides have
been made in establishing vending machines at the rest areas on
interstate highways under Kennelly legislation.
9. Many new faces from all walks of life have been added to the
BISM staff. This includes the addition of 4 new blind staff
members.
10. All hourly employees were given an across-the-board
twenty-five-cent-an-hour wage increase in August in addition to
the regular yearly increase.  The average hourly wage at all
locations now exceeds $5.00 per hour.
11. I believe BISM attitudes have changed both internally and in
dealing with outside organizations. Rather than my commenting on
our success in this area, I would rather you be the judge. At
this time I would like to extend a permanent invitation to every
one of you to visit BISM at any time. You are always welcome at
any of our three locations.  Additionally, I would like to remind
you that our Board meets the third Thursday of each month at 8:30
a.m. at BISM. I encourage you to attend any of these meetings if
you so desire.
In closing I would like to address success and the measurement of
it. How do you measure success? Success has a different meaning
to each of us. I would like to define success as follows:
The self-direction in acquiring whatever one desires of life that
contributes to the peace, happiness, and personal achievement of
oneself and others.
It is difficult for me to separate success from self-esteem. 
Self-Esteem: Belief in oneself. Having a sense of personal worth. 
Self-respect. Self-love. The most fundamental of all attitudes
for high productivity in anything you do.
Is BISM successful? I hope so. Are we trying our best to be more
successful?  Yes we are. Can we be totally successful without the
help and support of everyone here today? No we can't. Are we
asking for your help and support? Yes we are. Are you willing to
work with us on the many things we agree on that directly lead to
a better and more independent life for people who are blind? I
hope you are. The National Federation of the Blind logo displays
the words  security, equality, and opportunity.  Your mission
statement says,  The National Federation of the Blind is not an
organization speaking for the blind it is the blind speaking for
themselves. 
I hope you leave here today knowing that BISM is an organization
committed to working with and for the blind to create
independence through security, equality, and opportunity.
Thank you for your kind attention.
                                 
RECIPES 
 From the Associate Editor:  February strikes me as a month of
doldrums. I find comforting the fact that seventy-five percent of
the time it has only twenty-eight days. Where I live (Ohio) the
days are still some of the coldest in the year even though they
are getting noticeably longer, and such birds as have not had the
good sense to retire to warmer climes for the winter are
beginning to sing more energetically, which I am told by people
with more scientific knowledge than romance is the bird's
response to increased light and not its heart-felt conviction
that spring is on the way.
So what is one to do to wile away these days between the January
white sales and the invigorating winds of March? Have you noticed
that February seems to have more than its share of holidays?
Perhaps it is society's instinctive response to our need for a
pick-me-up. I don't know that
there is much to be done in celebration of Groundhog's Day, but
Valentine's Day is another matter. How about making a cake? A
boxed mix will do; just choose a flavor that makes you (or your
valentine) smile. Bake the cake in one eight-inch square pan and
one eight-inch round pan, instead of two identical ones. When the
cakes have been removed from their pans and cooled completely,
cut the round layer along the diameter so that you have two
semicircles. Then arrange the square cake with one corner near
the edge of a large serving plate, and carefully place the two
semicircular cakes against the two adjacent sides of the square
nearest the center with the eight-inch sides touching them. The
rounded edges then form the top of the valentine. Ice the whole
thing with
a fluffy frosting (either seven minute or butter cream is a good
choice) and decorate the masterpiece if you desire. It is always
fun to tint the frosting pink as it is being made.
I don't believe in Presidents Day. Generations of children will
now grow up not remembering that Lincoln's birthday is February
12 and that George Washington's is February 22. A month that
witnessed the arrival of both these great men can't be all bad,
regardless of its cold and gloom. I haven't found a culinary way
of saluting Honest Abe, but anything with cherries makes a fine
tribute to the Father of our Country. How about preparing baked
ham with this warm cherry sauce poured over it just before
serving?
                        Cherry Sauce for 
                           Baked Ham 

Ingredients:
juice and fruit from 1 1-pound-14-ounce can bing cherries
2 tablespoons corn starch
2 tablespoons sugar
2 teaspoons salt
1/4 teaspoon ground cinnamon
1/4 teaspoon ground cloves
1/4 cup dry sherry

Method: Combine all dry ingredients in a medium sauce pan and
stir well to break up the lumps of corn starch. Add the cherry
liquid and cook over a moderate heat, stirring constantly, until
sauce is thickened and clear (about two minutes after it has come
to a boil). Add fruit and sherry before heating through again. Do
not allow mixture to boil unless you wish to have the alcohol
evaporate.

 Or, in these days of women's liberation, bake Martha
Washington's currant pound cake. I have no idea whether Martha
ever baked it, but I have been making it for years, to the
gratification of all. 

Ingredients:
2-3/4 cups sugar
1-1/2 cups margarine or butter
6 eggs
1-1/2 teaspoons vanilla
5 cups flour
1 1/2 teaspoons baking powder
1 teaspoon nutmeg (freshly grated is best)
1/2 teaspoon salt
1 cup milk
11 ounces currants


Method: Using an electric mixer or a very strong arm and wooden
spoon, beat the butter and sugar together for five minutes, until
very light. Add the eggs, beating well after each. Add the
vanilla.  Then sift the dry ingredients together (does anyone
bother to do so anymore?) and add alternately with the milk,
beginning and ending with the dry ingredients and beating the
mixture each time just enough to work in all the flour. Fold in
the currants and bake in a greased and floured tube pan at 350
degrees for 1-1/3 hours or until a tooth pick inserted in the
center of the cake comes out clean. Remove from the pan after
about ten minutes. Cool completely on a wire rack.

 Finally, here are a couple of wonderful recipes that you could
whip up to celebrate the last full month of winter.  


                       Breakfast Casserole 
                         by Hazel Staley 


 As  Monitor  readers know, Hazel Staley is the President of the
National Federation of Blind of North Carolina. She is also
an excellent cook. This recipe makes a comforting Saturday night
supper or a delicious center piece for a brunch. 

Ingredients:
1 pound hot bulk sausage
6 eggs
2 cups milk
1 teaspoon salt
1 teaspoon dry mustard
6 slices white bread, cubed
1 cup sharp cheddar cheese, grated

Method: Brown sausage; drain and crumble. Beat eggs with milk,
salt, and mustard. In a generously buttered nine- by
thirteen-inch baking dish toss bread, sausage, and cheese. Pour
egg mixture over ingredients in dish. Cover with aluminum foil
and refrigerate overnight. Remove foil and bake at 350 degrees
for forty-five minutes. Serves six to eight. As a variation, try
spreading a can of condensed cream of mushroom soup mixed with a
half cup of milk over the surface of the casserole just before
baking.

                           Rice Pilaf 
                          by Mary Pool 

 Mary Pool is the President of the National Federation of the
Blind of Stark County, Ohio. She does lots of catering for her
church, and this is one of her favorite recipes. 

Ingredients:
1/4 pound butter
1 large chopped onion
1 cup rice
1 can mushrooms
2 cans beef consomme

Method: Fry onion in butter until transparent. Add mushrooms just
before onion is done. Put in casserole with rice (do not
pre-cook).  Pour in consomme. Stir. Bake at 350 degrees for one
hour.  
                 * * *MONITOR MINIATURES* * *  

**Appointed:
Under date of December 6, 1989, a letter was sent from Rose
Mofford, Governor of Arizona, to James Omvig, who now lives in
Tucson. The letter said in part:
 Arizona State Government and I are both grateful that you have
agreed to serve as a member of the  Governor's Council on
Blindness and Visual Impairment . One of the satisfactions of
holding office is the opportunity to recognize outstanding
citizens by naming them to positions of leadership within our
state government. 
The Governor's Council on Blindness and Visual Impairment is an
advisory body to oversee and coordinate programs for the blind in
Arizona.
Ruth Swenson, President of the NFB of Arizona, and Bruce Gardner
already serve on the Council.

**Sue Viders Tapes Available:
We have received the following communication from Nancy Scott:
The Sue Viders Seminar, held in July, 1989, at the NFB national
convention is now available on four ninety-minute cassettes. The
cost is $14 per copy. Sue Viders, nationally known author and
lecturer, provides a practical guide to motivation for writers
and  how-to's  for marketing their work. Discussions include
where to get ideas,
how to focus and organize ideas, how to write query letters,
manuscript submission, copyright, and attitudes that will help to
get work published.  To order this seminar or to obtain
information about other cassettes available from the NFB Writers
Division, contact: Nancy Scott, 1141 Washington Street, Easton,
Pennsylvania 18042. Make all checks payable to the NFB Writers
Division.
**Parent Tips:
We have received the following announcement from Janiece Betker: 
Parent Tips; The Challenge Years Most of the comments and
questions I received from readers of the original  Parent Tips 
book concerned issues relating to school age children. How can we
help our child with homework or work with him to improve his
reading? How can we get involved in her dance recital or his
Little League games? How comfortable are our children with our
blindness, and what can we do
to minimize any discomfort that may exist? Will our blindness be
perceived by the school system as the reason our child is having
difficulty learning, is a discipline problem, is shy, or has
certain talents?  Where does a parent's blindness fit into the
broader scheme of things?  Will your child's school personnel
treat you in a different way from the way they relate to other
parents? Can you help with that school play or fund-raising
event, or should you be content to let others handle these tasks?
What about transportation? Can you sign your child up for hockey,
knowing that there may be times when your best efforts to find a
ride for him will fail?
These and many other issues are discussed in a new book,
available on standard format cassettes at $12.95. Those who have
purchased the first  Parent Tips  on cassette or who wish to
purchase both at once at $22.90 will recieve a six-slotted
cassette storage album that will house both books. Cassettes are
tone-indexed for convenience
in locating the beginning of each section. A resource guide and
bibliography are included. The book is not available in print at
this time but will be made available if there are enough requests
for the print edition.
For your cassette copy, send check or money order to: Janiece
Betker, 1886 - 29th Avenue N.W., New Brighton, Minnesota 55112,
phone: (612) 639-1435. Cassettes will be sent via Free Matter
unless you specify UPS, in which case you must add $3 shipping.
Orders from outside the U.S. must include postage for surface or
air mail on the basis of five ounces for an individual  Parent
Tips , twelve ounces for the two books with the album, where Free
Matter does not apply. This postage must accompany all foreign
orders. Payment must be in US dollars only. Agency purchase
orders accepted.

**Braille Proofreaders Wanted:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
Triformation Braille Services, Inc., is looking for Braille
proofreaders to move to Stuart, Florida, for employment. Anyone
interested please call Judy McQuae at (407) 286-8366.

**North American Van Lines:
In the spring of last year we entered into an agreement with
North American Van Lines regarding members of the National
Federation of the Blind who use North American to move household
articles from one place to another in the 48 lower, contiguous
states, (that is not including Alaska and Hawaii); if you arrange
for North American Van Lines to move you, you will get a contract
that will let you move with 35% off the normal moving costs and
25% off the normal storage costs. (There are published tariffs
that say how much moving companies should charge for moving
materials from one place to another by truck.  The Interstate
Commerce Commission establishes the rates.)  In addition to the
rate reduction, North American Van Lines will make a contribution
to the National Federation of the Blind equal to 2% of all costs
of moving for those who use this program.
If you want to contract with North American Van Lines to move
your materials you should call Cindy Rupples at 1 (800) 873-2673.
Tell her that you are a member of the National Federation of the
Blind, that you have heard about the agreement between the
National Federation of the Blind and North American Van Lines,
that you understand North American will give these discounts, and
that you want to sign up to
get moved. Then remind her that 2% of the moving costs will be
contributed to the National Federation of the Blind. During 1989
several of our members used this program and did receive the
discount; and the NFB received close to $500.00 in donations from
North American Van Lines.  This program is also available to
families and friends of the National Federation of the Blind if
they indicate their connection with the Federation.

**Sell:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
For sale: A 128 K Apple 2E with an Echo Speech Synthesizer,
Braille Edit Software, and Pro-Comm Modem with talking transcend
software.  The system contains an RF modular for TV display,
Appleworks, and Print Shop software. The cost for the entire
package is $500. For more information you should contact Sarah
and Ed Edwards at (301) 247-9395. Their address is: 4704 Belwood
Green, Arbutus, Maryland 21227.

**BIT Corporation:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
BIT Corporation has just published its Winter, 1989, catalog. The
seventy-two-page large print catalog contains over fifty
products, many of them never before available. In addition to the
Talkman line of four-track cassette players, BIT now offers a
desktop cassette recorder with speech compression, the Optonica
line of talking VCRs, a new voice-recognition telephone, new
talking watches and clocks, and a host of other products for
independence for blind and visually impaired people. BIT's
catalog is also available in Braille and cassette recorded
versions. For more information call BIT at (800) 333-2481 or
(617) 666-2488.

**Cookbook:
We recently received the following letter from Carolyn Colclough,
Director of Marketing for Multiple Services Media Technology,
Inc.:  Recently Multiple Services Media Technology completed the
Braille translation and production of a Sunset cookbook called 
Light Cuisine .  The Braille has 385 pages in two volumes, spiral
bound, with hard vinyl covers. The recipes are delicious and, as
the name implies,
this is cooking for healthy living. Each recipe has calories per
serving and the protein, salt, fat, and cholesterol contained in
a serving.  The prepaid cost is $39 sent to: Multiple Services
Media Technology, 3917 Mayette Avenue, Santa Rosa, California
95405. Please contact me at (707) 579-1115 or write me at the
address given if you have any questions or need additional
information.

**Catholic Faith:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
Would you like to know more about God and serving him through the
Catholic faith? A free home study course is available in ten
cassette tapes. These lessons are taken from the Paulist Fathers'
home study course and have optional questions and answers for
each lesson. We invite you to send for Lesson 1 on cassette tape
and our free catalog by contacting: Catholic Inquiry for the
Blind, 228 North Walnut Street, Lansing, Michigan 48933, (517)
342- 2500.

**Book Available:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
Make Braille work for you! Sixteen lessons will enable you to
master a usable reading system. Pocket sized contraction list
included. To order  Making the Alien User- Friendly , send $12.25
to: Lois Wencil, 19 Parkview Drive, Millburn, New Jersey 07041.

**Bible in Different Languages:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement by Bible
Alliance, Inc., Post Office Box 621, Bradenton, Florida 34206:
The New Testament on audio cassette is now available in three new
languages Russian, Indonesian, and Korean. Blind people from
around the world are requesting cassette Bibles in all of the 28
languages that we have available. We distribute the Bible on
cassette completely free of charge to those who cannot read
because of blindness and visual impairment. This is not a lending
program. All of our materials are free of charge and are meant to
be kept. We have recorded the New Testament in twenty-eight
languages and in several languages have
also recorded portions of the Old Testament, Bible Studies, and
Messages.  These audio cassettes run at commercial speed and will
play on most cassette players. One set of Bible cassettes and
Bible Studies is offered to each eligible person in the language
of his or her choice.
All that is needed is a request from the individual with a valid
certification of the visual impairment. This certification can
come from an agency, library, or medical doctor that specializes
in work with or service
to the blind. The certification should be written on
organization/doctor letterhead stationery and give the name and
address of the recipient and specify the nature of the
impairment. We will ship directly to
the recipient  Free Matter for the Blind.  Entry fees or custom
taxes, if any, are the responsibility of the recipient.

**Sell:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
For Sale: Toshiba 1200 Laptop, 2 3.5-inch disk drives, Arctic
Speech Synthesizer, external disk drive. Asking $2,000. Contact:
John P.  Olsen, 15 West Walnut Street, Islip, New York 11751;
(516) 277-5899, or (516) 277-0765.

**Cooperative Effort in South Dakota:
Writing in the October, 1989,  Insight , the publication of the
National Federation of the Blind of South Dakota, Karen Mayry
says:  There is a promise in the air; a new breeze; a glint of
better things for the blind in South Dakota. For the very first
time the National Federation of the Blind of South Dakota and the
South Dakota Services for the Visually Impaired will jointly
sponsor Job Opportunities for the Blind seminars,  Focus on
Success. 
These events will take place in Watertown and Sioux Falls on
October 10 and 11, 1989. The morning agenda will focus on the
employer, both those who employ or have employed blind persons
and those who are potential employers of the blind. The afternoon
will be directed toward the blind employee. Our own Rami Rabby
and Curtis Chong will conduct the sessions.
Mr. Rami Rabby (New York, New York), a Fullbright Scholar and
honors graduate of Oxford University, has been employed by the
Ford Motor Company of Britain, Hewitt Associates, and Citibank of
New York. He also holds a master's in business administration
from the University
of Chicago, has authored two books, and has had several articles
published in prestigious management magazines. His recent
publication,  Take Charge A Strategic Guide for Blind Job Seekers
, is viewed as
one of the leading resources available to blind persons seeking
employment.  Mr. Rabby is currently a consultant, writer, and
speaker on employment of people with disabilities.
Mr. Curtis Chong (Minneapolis, Minnesota), Senior Systems
Programming Specialist for IDS Financial Services, has been
employed by the Federal Aviation Administration and the State of
Minnesota. Mr. Chong has attended the University of Hawaii, the
University of Minnesota, and is a graduate of Brown Institute,
Minneapolis. In addition to numerous honors, Mr. Chong was
selected by the National Jaycees as one of the Ten Outstanding
Young Americans in 1986. Mr. Chong will lead a round table
discussion of employers and employees in addition to addressing
the noon luncheon about  Technology and the Job. 
We are excited and hopeful as we look towards a better
relationship with Services for the Visually Impaired and the
future of blind South Dakota citizens.

**Almost A Hundred:
In mid-December of 1989 the Associated Press carried the
following
story:
Nashwauk, Minnesota Attorney M. B.  Ben  Rustan tried to
negotiate a 20-year lease for his law office back in 1981, when
he was 91 years old.
When he turned 99 he told a bank cashier he wanted to buy the
longest term certificate of deposit possible.
Rustan expected to be practicing law July 4, 1990, on his 100th
birthday.  But the man who hung his law shingle in this Iron
Range town of northwestern Minnesota in 1918 died Sunday of a
heart seizure.
What made Rustan's achievements even more remarkable was the fact
he was blind. His eyes were removed when he was 5 as the result
of spinal meningitis.
But no one seems to mention his blindness until they've talked
about how dedicated to his job he was, how meticulous in dress he
was, how serious he was.
He couldn't be considered an elder statesman because he never
retired.  But he garnered that type of respect. It was
appropriate that his home address was 1 First Street.
Rustan suffered the seizure, his first serious one, November 28,
1989, in a car on his way to work with his secretary.
Rustan worked mainly in real estate transactions, transfers of
deeds and titles. When he went to the courtroom he took Braille
notes with a slate and stylus.

**Elected:
We recently received the following letter from Nancy Martin:
The Clark County Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind
of Washington held elections this month on December 16, 1989. The
officers are the following: President, Doug Trimble; First Vice
President,
Mike Freeman; Second Vice President, Kaye Kipp; Secretary, Nancy
Martin; and Treasurer, Charlie Rogge.

**Multiply Handicapped Children:
Mrs. Colleen Roth writes as follows:
Barbara Cheadle has appointed me chairman of the Committee on the
Multi-handicapped Blind of the National Federation of the Blind
Parents Division. Through this committee we will be sharing
information and ideas with parents, professionals, and other
interested persons. We will also link people together whose
children have similar disabilities.  Please indicate name, age,
and type of disabilities your child has.  If you are an educator,
please describe the types of disabilities
you work with. If you know of any parents of multi-handicapped
children who would be interested in this network, please share
this information with me. Any correspondence will be kept
confidential. If you would like to receive material from this
committee or would like to network with others, please contact
me: Colleen Roth, Chairman, 1912 Tracy
Road, Northwood, Ohio 43619, telephone: (419) 661-9171 or (419)
666-6212.

**In the High-Tech Vanguard:
 From the Editor:  I first met JoAnn Giudicessi in the
mid-seventies when I was Director of the Iowa Commission for the
Blind and she was a student. In the beginning she was withdrawn
and self-effacing, but
as those who have seen the film  We Know Who We Are  can testify,
that changed. In those days many people from the country and the
world came to the Iowa Commission for the Blind. One of them was
Allen Becker, a young man from the newly established Kurzweil
Company, and he and JoAnn found that they had more than
electronics to talk about. Soon she went to Massachusetts, and
later she and Allen were married.  Today the Beckers (Allen
sighted and JoAnn blind) are working together building a new
company and an exciting product. The name of the company is
Reflection Technologies. Allen handles the electronics, and JoAnn
works on public relations, including entertaining potential
investors at dinner parties and the like. It is clear that the
company is going to succeed in a big way. It is equally clear
that the Beckers are succeeding in a big way. Here is an item
which appeared about Reflection Technologies in the December 7,
1989,  Wall Street Journal :

                     This Device Has People 
Staring Into Space

Cyberspace Corporation, a Norcross, Georgia, start-up, has added
an eye-catching twist to the conventional laptop computer: no
screen.  Using a lightweight eyepiece worn on a headband, the
Cyberspace display appears to float in midair about two feet from
the user a crisp, full-sized image that no one else can see.
The trick is in the eyepiece, which is being designed into scores
of new products from more than a dozen companies. Developed by
Waltham, Massachusetts-based Reflection Technologies, Inc., it
uses light-emitting elements, lenses, and a tiny oscillating
mirror to make the image appear in front of the user.
The device has potential wherever a portable, high- resolution
screen is required. Hughes Aircraft Company is developing a line
of portable information equipment around the product for military
use. PortaFax Corporation, New York, is building a palm-sized fax
machine that lets users see fax transmissions away from the
office.
Then there's the  electronic book  from Selectronics, Inc., of
Pittsford, New York, that will allow a bookshelf of information
to be carried in a shirt pocket or clipped to a belt.

**Narrative Television Network:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
National Network Offers Television and Movies for the Blind The
Narrative Television Network was launched October 1, 1989, to
serve our nation's blind and visually impaired and their
families. NTN is currently presented on over 500 cable and
broadcast stations nationwide.  NTN programming consists of a
talk show, followed by the narrated version of a motion picture.
Guests who have been interviewed for the NTN talk show include:
Katharine Hepburn, Cesar Romero, Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., and many
of Hollywood's brightest stars. After the talk show, the
unobtrusive voice of a narrator is inserted between the existing
dialogue of a movie or television show to describe the visual
elements of the program. This makes NTN enjoyable for fully
sighted, partially sighted, and totally blind audiences. NTN is
currently offered on the Nostalgia Channel nationally and many
other independent cable systems. There is no cost for NTN to the
cable system or the cable audience, and NTN requires no special
equipment. If you do not yet receive NTN in your area, please
write: The Narrative Television Network, 5840 South Memorial
Suite 312, Tulsa, Oklahoma 74145.

**Elected:
Norma Baker writes as follows: The Austin Chapter of the National
Federation of the Blind of Texas elected officers for 1990 at the
regularly scheduled January meeting. They are as follows:
President, James Bradley; First Vice President, Tommy Craig;
Second Vice President, Jeff Pearcy; Secretary, Norma Gonzales
Baker; Treasurer, Margaret  Cokie  Craig; and Board Members:
William Johnson and Zena Pearcy. The chapter is looking forward
this year to a productive year and joins the other Texas chapters
in welcoming all the delegates to the national convention in
Dallas this summer.

**Hospitalized:
During a conference telephone meeting of the Board of Directors
of the National Federation of the Blind on Tuesday night, January
9, 1990, Bob Eschbach of Ohio told us that his wife Patricia was
going into the hospital later in the week for surgery. At the
same meeting Fred Schroeder of New Mexico said that his wife
Cathy had just come home from the hospital. Our prayers and best
wishes are with both Patricia and Cathy. May their recovery be
rapid and complete. At the time of this writing we do not have
further details.

**Ohio Parents Elect:
We recently received the following announcement:
 The Parents of Blind Children Division, NFB of Ohio, held a
luncheon meeting on November 5, 1989, during our recent state
convention and elected the following individuals as officers and
board members: Lori Duffy, President; Colleen Roth, Vice
President; Tom Anderson, Second Vice President; Debbie Robinson,
Secretary; and Diana Felice, Treasurer.  Board members elected
were Bernadette Dressell, Julianna Wilson, and Shirley Hammond. 

**Dies:
Sharon Gold, President of the National Federation of the Blind of
California, writes to report that on August 9, 1989, Annis
McClendon, President of the Pathfinder Chapter of the National
Federation of the Blind of California, died following an
extensive illness. Annis was a long-time member of our Federation
and served the Pathfinder Chapter continually and faithfully for
many years. She regularly attended national and state conventions
and worked hard to improve the lives of the blind in the South
Los Angeles Area. Annis will be missed by all of us.

**Organized:
Karen Mayry, President of the National Federation of the Blind of
South Dakota, reports that in May of 1989 the Northern Hills
Chapter of the South Dakota affiliate was formed. The officers of
the new chapter, which serves several towns at the northern end
of the Black Hills, include the following: President, Verna
Butterfield; Vice President, Ida Mary Koskela; and
Secretary/Treasurer, Ladonna Barden. Congratulations to the new
chapter and to our South Dakota affiliate.

**Congratulations:
We recently received a press release from Amway Corporation
publicizing honors received by Sharon Gold, President of the
National Federation of the Blind of California, for distinguished
accomplishment. The release said in part:
 Ada, Michigan, November 10, 1989 Sharon Gold of Sacramento
earned recognition from Amway Corporation in Ada, Michigan, for
reaching the level of Direct Distributor of the company's
products.   In honor of her achievement, Sharon was awarded an
expense-paid seminar at the network marketing company's world
headquarters in Ada.  The seminar allowed her to meet other new
Direct Distributors from across the nation, tour Amway's
corporate offices and manufacturing facilities, learn about the
company's newest products and services,
and obtain advice on how to make her distributorship more
profitable.   Sharon became a Direct Distributor through her
sales and sponsoring success. One million independent
distributors in more than 40 countries and territories around the
world sell Amway products and services. 

So says Amway, and the  Monitor  says: Congratulations Sharon;
knowing you as we do, we are certain that Amway is learning a
good bit about the competence of blind business people.

**Somebody Bet on the Bay:
The National Federation of the Blind of Sacramento reports: On
August 3, 1989, we participated in  A Night at the Harness Races. 
The second race was named the National Federation of the Blind of
Sacramento Trot. During its running some of the members went to
the field to help cheer the winning horse across the finish line.
As a part of our participation in the event, chapter members
raised money for our treasury by helping with the sale of general
admission tickets to the California Expo Raceway.

**Elected:
The National Federation of the Blind of Sacramento elected new
officers at its September, 1989, meeting. The newly elected
officers are President, Linda Milliner; First Vice President, Lon
Sumner; Second Vice President, Mona Sweeney; Secretary, Sheryl
Pickering; Treasurer, Donna Siebert; and Board Members: Charles
Coe and David Estes.

**Write Them! Phone Them!:
We have just received the following letter from Jonathan P.
Ramsdell:


                                                 Biddeford, Maine
                                                  January 1, 1990


Dear Mr. Jernigan:
Enclosed you will find a cartoon clipped from the January, 1990,
issue of  Penthouse  magazine. It depicts a highway on which
there are the splattered remains of six blind people. White
canes, dark glasses, blood, and bodies are strewn all over the
road. On the opposite side of the highway is a red brick building
with a sign announcing
that it is the  Highway House Home for the Blind.  A 65-
mile-per-hour speed limit sign is prominent in the illustration.
The artist and I use the term loosely has signed his or her name,
W. Deceti, in the upper corner.
I find this cartoon extremely offensive. Its implications are
obvious:  blind individuals are not capable of safely crossing
streets. Proper mobility training, including the use of a white
cane, apparently doesn't assist the blind individual successfully
to negotiate in moving traffic at least, in the warped opinion of
the cartoonist responsible for this disgraceful misrepresentation
of the blind as a whole.
I am appalled that the editors at  Penthouse  let this run.
Granted,  Penthouse  has never been noted for its good taste, but
this goes a bit too far. The cartoon isn't the least bit funny. I
believe that, in allowing illustrations such as this to run, the
editors at  Penthouse  have done us all a grave disservice. As a
Federationist, and as a legally blind individual who tries to
dispel the myths of the blind as being incapable of
self-sufficiency wherever and whenever possible, I feel that 
Penthouse  magazine owes us all an apology.  I would urge all
Federationists, as well as anyone else with a modicum
of interest in the ending of blind stereotypes, to write to 
Penthouse  magazine and register a complaint about this offensive
cartoon. Letters should be addressed to: Penthouse Magazine, Post
Office Box 3039, Harlan, Iowa 51537-3039. In addition, their
telephone number is (800) 289-7368.


**Sell:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
I make a Reading Center cabinet to hold the talking book machine
and the tape player at armchair or bed height. For information
contact:  John Postma, 1466 West Michigan, Battle Creek, Michigan
49017.  

**Elected:
The Pueblo Chapter of the NFB of Colorado held their election for
new officers for the coming year on November 11, 1989. Officers
elected at the regular chapter meeting were: Kay Howard,
President; Dave Elgin, Vice President; Catherine Tonne,
Secretary; and Arthur Williams, Treasurer.  Elected to the Board
were: Cora Williams, first chairman; Mike Massey, second
chairman; and Darlene Stanton, third chairman. Outgoing president
Alice Bouy was presented with a silver and gold pen and pencil
set for serving seven years as a dedicated and faithful chapter
president.

**Descriptive Video Services:
We have been asked to carry the following announcement: 
Descriptive Video Services (or DVS) is a new national  service
from station WGBH in Boston that makes television programs
accessible to blind and visually impaired persons through the use
of stereo television broadcasting. DVS provides narrated
descriptions of a program's key visual elements without
interfering with the program audio or dialogue.  The narrated
track describes action, settings, scene changes, costumes, and
body language. The narrations occur in the pauses in dialogue. 
DVS is delivered to the home TV set or VCR through the Separate
Audio Program Channel, referred to as the SAP channel. Every
stereo TV receiver or stereo VCR is equipped to receive the SAP
channel in order to hear the descriptions. You select the SAP
channel. The television station must be broadcasting in stereo
with the SAP channel. It is currently estimated that 14.8 million
homes have stereo receivers, and over 25 public television
stations broadcast the SAP channel.
For information or to be on the mailing list for the DVS
newsletter, contact: Laurie Everett, Director, DVS, WGBH, 125
Western Avenue, Boston, Massachuetss 02134.
