                       THE BRAILLE MONITOR

                     August-September, 1994

                     Barbara Pierce, Editor


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


              THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND 
                     MARC MAURER, PRESIDENT 
 


                         National Office
                       1800 Johnson Street
                   Baltimore, Maryland 21230 

                             * * * *



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

                             * * * *
 


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

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

                             * * * *

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



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

CONTENTS
                                        AUGUST-SEPTEMBER, 1994
                                                                 
CONVENTION ROUNDUP
by Barbara Pierce

PRESIDENTIAL REPORT
by Marc Maurer

NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND AWARDS FOR 1994

PREPARING FOR EMERGING CHALLENGES AND PARTNERSHIPS
by Fredric K. Schroeder

LET THE WING OF THE BUTTERFLY FLAP
by Marc Maurer

THE SCHOLARSHIP CLASS OF 1994
by Peggy Elliott

OF BRAILLE AND HONEYBEES
by Kenneth Jernigan

BRAILLE AND BEYOND
by Susan Spungin

PARTNERSHIP OF AGENCIES AND CONSUMERS
Summary of remarks prepared by Hilda Caton

HOW TO PASS A BRAILLE BILL
by Homer Page

GROWTH AND ADVANCEMENT FOR THE BLIND IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
by Barbara McCarthy

RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE ANNUAL CONVENTION OF THE
NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
JULY, 1994
by Ramona Walhof

THE CONSTITUTION OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND

        Copyright  1994 National Federation of the Blind[LEAD PHOTO: The towers of the Renaissance Center as taken from
the ground, looking up. CAPTION: Detroit's Renaissance Center,
pictured here, scene of the 1994 Convention of the National
Federation of the Blind. Four office towers surround the Westin
Hotel, which soars 72 stories into the sky.]
[Photo #1: Mr. Maurer stands at the podium with his arm extended, ready to
bring down the gavel. Caption: President Maurer gavels the opening session of
the 1994 Convention to order.]
[Photo #2: Lynn Mattioli bends down on one knee, facing Kaylee Arthurs. Lynn
holds Kaylee's cane--with its silver spur hanging from the top--and Kaylee
holds Lynn's cane, which is almost twice Kaylee's size. Caption: At National
Conventions, blind children have the opportunity to learn from blind adults.
Here, Kaylee Arthurs of Ohio compares canes with Lynn Mattioli of Virginia.]
[Photo #3: Nicolas Stockton stands with his cane in one hand, pushing his
stroller. His piggy bank is in the stroller, and John Cheadle is reaching down
and placing a bill into the bank. Caption: Nicolas Stockton and his pig
gratefully receive a contribution from John Cheadle to help establish the West
Virginia cane bank.]
[Photo #4: Tammy Kearney and Sandy Jo Hansen, walking with canes, step on to
the People Mover. Caption: Federationists Tammy Kearney of Wyoming and Sandy
Jo Hansen of South Dakota took advantage of the People Mover to explore
downtown Detroit.]
[Photo #5: A junior-high-aged girl sits cross-legged on the floor, reading a
Braille book in her lap. Caption: Braille readers of all ages took part in the
Braille-a-thon. Here, Ellen Nichols of Maryland settles down for a good read.]
[Photo #6: Russell Anderson stands behind an exhibit table stocked with canes,
demonstrating canes to people in front of the table. Caption: Russell Anderson
of Colorado assists Federationists to find just the right cane in the exhibit
hall.]
[Photo #7: Carol Cotton stands behind the head table and speaks into the
microphone as Marvin Sandler looks on. Dr. Jernigan sits at the head table.
Caption: Carol Cotton of the Royal National Institute for the Blind announces
the availability of RNIB products from Independent Living Aids, Inc., while
Marvin Sandler, President of ILA, looks on.]
[Photo #8: Mrs. tenBroek sits, smiling, holding a stuffed cow. Caption: Hazel
tenBroek, first First Lady of the Federation, attends a meeting of the
lawyers' division accompanied by the newest member of her stuffed animal
collection.]
[Photo #9: A toddler sits on the floor, playing a toy keyboard which is in her
lap. Other children sit and play in the background. Caption: Elizabeth
Jacobson from Minnesota enjoys the toys at NFB Camp.]
[Photo #10: A 9-year-old girl runs through the grass with her cane
outstretched and a big smile on her face. Caption: Hailee Linhart of
Washington enjoys NFB Camp activities on the third floor podium of the hotel.]
[Photo #11: A man sits behind the microphone with his hands on the Myna
computer. Caption: Venkatesh Chari of Technology for Independence demonstrates
the Myna computer.]
[Photo #12: Hundreds of Federationists sit, talk, and eat at picnic tables.
Caption: More than 1,000 Federationists celebrated the Fourth of July at an
old fashioned American picnic.]
[Photo #13: Dr. John Smith plays the piano and sings into a microphone.
Caption: Dr. John Smith competes in the Music Division Showcase of Talent.]
[Photo #14: Portrait. Caption: Richard Edlund.]
[Photo #15: Portrait. Caption: Ed McDonald.]
[Photo #16: Portrait. Caption: Gary Wunder.]
[Photo #17: Ernest Laginess stands at the podium and Mr. Maurer stands beside
him, holding the Braille teaching tool high in the air. Caption: President
Maurer displays the Braille teaching tool with Ernest Laginess at his side.]
[Photo #18: An elementary school student stands at a table with his hands on
three-dimensional pictures. Caption: Federationists of all ages enjoyed the
art at the Tuesday afternoon exhibition and sale by blind artists. Kyle Neddo
of Michigan examines three-dimensional pictures.]
[Photo #19: High school and college students sit at a round table with poker
chips in front of them. Caption: Monte Carlo night provides a grand
opportunity for fun and fellowship.] 

                       CONVENTION ROUNDUP
                        by Barbara Pierce

     Sometimes annual conventions of the National Federation of
the Blind are filled with a sense of history in the making, like
the one in 1986 in which we elected Marc Maurer as President for
the first time. Sometimes they are stirring and full of
challenge, like our fiftieth anniversary convention in 1990.
Sometimes they ring with exuberance and high spirits, like the
1991 convention in New Orleans. And sometimes they manage to
embody both the pain and the joy of family life, the height and
depth of human experience--which, when freely embraced, create
true community in an organization or a people.
     The 1994 Convention of the National Federation of the Blind
was such an event. At one extreme was the joyful wedding of long-
time Federationist Harold Snider and Linda Fossett, following the
noon recess of the Tuesday morning general convention session.
The Rev. Robert Eschbach performed the ceremony, and the entire
convention was invited to attend.
     At the other extreme was the death early Tuesday morning of
little Justin Buterbaugh of Phoenix, Arizona, who was two years
old. He had a history of seizures and died quietly and instantly
in his sleep. His mother, Maria, had recently learned about the
Federation and was attending her first convention. She had
already formed several friendships and had been overjoyed to
discover the hope and optimism of the NFB's approach to working
with blind children.
     The entire convention was shocked and grieved when President
Maurer explained the tragedy at the opening of the Tuesday
morning session, and Federationists rallied 'round with the love
and concern that we have come to expect and depend upon at such
times of sorrow in our Federation family. NFB friends surrounded
and supported Maria throughout that difficult day and accompanied
her home to Phoenix. When Federationists learned on Wednesday of
the Buterbaugh family's need for substantial financial help to
deal with the heartbreaking expenses associated with the tragedy,
members immediately contributed nearly $4,000 to help.
     Late in the week Jim Omvig, one of the leaders of the
Arizona affiliate and Chairman of the PAC (Pre-Authorized Check)
Plan Committee, reported to the convention a conversation he had
had with Maria after her return home. She talked of the funeral
arrangements. Then she asked how efforts to sign up more people
on the PAC Plan were going. In response to his statement that he
hadn't yet had much time to work on PAC but that he was sure
people would respond positively, she said: "I learned while I was
there that the most important thing in this world for any parent
of any blind child is to have literature produced by the National
Federation of the Blind and to come to the National Convention.
Please ask people for me to help fund the organization." That
spirit of determination and dedication to the Federation and its
mission, come what may, permeated the entire convention and made
it unforgettable.
     A word must be said about the Westin Hotel and the entire
Renaissance Center. The architecture was a challenge to the
travel skills of the best among us, but the array of shopping
possibilities, restaurants, and meeting space was truly
outstanding.
     The Westin staff were pleasant, eager to help, and
interested in the convention. One front desk employee approached
a member of our national staff to ask if she could be placed on
the mailing list to receive Federation literature. She explained
that she was finishing medical school and was planning to become
an ophthalmologist. She figured she needed to know about the NFB
and wanted to attend the convention next year in Chicago.
     The hotel engineering staff particularly distinguished
themselves. An example is the incident involving Kaylee Arthurs,
who is a deaf-blind four-year-old. Kaylee was working one day
with her mother and Joe Cutter, one of the finest cane travel
teachers of young children in the country today. Over the past
three years Kathy Arthurs has taught her daughter everything she
knows about using a cane because the experts in her area refuse
to work with Kaylee on cane skills. Kathy was eager to have an
expert critique Kaylee's technique. In the course of this
activity Kaylee managed to drop her cane down the elevator shaft.
She realized immediately what she had done and sank to the floor,
reaching for the cane and sobbing, "Cane, cane!" Kaylee's cane
has a silver spur threaded onto the chain in order for her to
find it quickly at NFB Camp, the child care program at National
Convention.
     When an attempt was made to give her another cane to use in
place of the one now at the bottom of the elevator shaft, Kaylee
rejected it because there was no spur; it was not her trusted
cane. She was too upset for explanations to get through to her--
so the elevators were turned off, and an employee with the
necessary expertise was called in on triple overtime (it was the
Fourth of July). He crawled in and found the cane. It took two
hours and the efforts of a lot of people, but Kaylee got her own
cane back. As soon as it was in her hands, the tears dried; she
agreed to leave the elevator area; and after she dispensed hugs
to everyone who had taken part in the rescue operation, she ran
off, using her cane. And some people still maintain that young
blind children have no need of the information a cane can give
them.
     Another remarkable youngster who made his mark on the entire
convention was pre-schooler Nicolas Stockton from West Virginia.
Nicolas, whose great-grandfather, Dr. Sam Lawton, was the founder
of the South Carolina affiliate, is energetic and already an
involved Federationist. He has received assistance from the NFB,
and he already understands how important canes are for
independence-minded blind children, so he decided to try his hand
raising funds to establish a cane bank for the families of blind
youngsters in West Virginia. Nicolas started his campaign by
contributing the pennies in his piggy bank--in fact, he
contributed his bank as well. All week long, wherever Nicolas
went, the pig accompanied him, and Nicolas's invitation was
always the same: Please help us begin a cane bank in West
Virginia. Very soon it became necessary to use a stroller to
carry the bank, but Nicolas was not deterred. By the close of the
Convention the bank weighed thirty-four pounds; and, when the
money was counted, Nicolas had raised more than $400 for the
state's cane bank.
     By Thursday evening, June 30, hundreds of eager
Federationists had already checked in and were exploring the
Renaissance Center and the parts of Detroit accessible by the
People Mover. Well over a thousand people were on hand for the
nineteen activities and workshops scheduled, beginning at 7:30 on
Friday morning, July 1. These included a seminar on tax law and
financial planning for retirement; a workshop on assistive
learning devices for deaf-blind people; the first annual Braille-
a-thon, which raised about $3,500 to help promote Braille
literacy; and many more activities.
     This year's day-long seminar for parents and educators of
blind children took place on Friday, July 1. A large number of
blind and sighted youngsters visited the Henry Ford Museum and
Greenfield Village, while others were cared for in the NFB child
care facilities at the hotel. In the afternoon there was a
convention orientation session for teens, and on Friday evening
families enjoyed hospitality and one-on-one conversation with
blind convention attendees, true experts on blindness. As usual,
Friday afternoon was the time of the annual Job Opportunities for
the Blind (JOB) seminar. JOB is a job referral program jointly
conducted by the National Federation of the Blind and the United
States Department of Labor, and this seminar is always packed
with helpful and worthwhile presentations and opportunities for
exchanging ideas and information. Presentations from both the
parent and JOB seminars will appear in Federation publications in
coming months.
     It was the Motown sound that drew everyone Friday evening to
a dance and the first real opportunity to see old friends,
establish new relationships, and enjoy music and conversation.
This was the first of the Michigan parties, and it set the tone
for the lighter side of the Convention for the week to follow.
     Saturday morning brought convention registration with its
fast-moving lines and first look at the convention agenda. (Well
over a thousand people registered before noon.) The 25,000-
square-foot exhibit hall opened mid-morning, and the crowd poured
through the doors to look at what's new in appliances and
technology for blind people. Eighteen NFB chapters, affiliates,
and divisions took the opportunity to sell things and provide
literature and other information. As always, one of the most
popular areas in the exhibit hall was the NFB Store and
demonstration area, where shoppers could examine and purchase all
the aids and appliances sold year-round through the Materials
Center at the National Center for the Blind. In addition
delegates could stock up on Federation literature in Braille or
print or on cassette. This year display booths were staffed by
more than fifty vendors, including two international groups. One
of these, the Royal National Institute for the Blind (RNIB) of
the United Kingdom, announced at the convention that for the
first time RNIB products will now be available for purchase in
this country through the auspices of Independent Living Aids,
Inc., of Plainview, New York.
     Saturday afternoon and evening thirteen Federation
committees and divisions conducted seminars or meetings,
including the Resolutions Committee, which traditionally meets
for several hours on the afternoon of convention registration
day. Because of the importance of the work of this committee,
very few other meetings are scheduled during that time, and
hundreds of interested Federationists gather to listen to the
committee discuss issues and decide on its recommendations to the
Convention. Nineteen resolutions were brought to the committee
this year, eighteen of which eventually came to the convention
floor for debate and action. The texts of these resolutions are
reprinted elsewhere in this issue.
     Sunday, July 3, was filled with committee and division
meetings, twenty-one in all. That evening also saw a production
of Jerry Whittle's new play, Time for Every Purpose, presented by
the Louisiana Center for the Blind Players.
     The meeting of the Board of Directors, which took place at
nine o'clock Sunday morning, was as always the first actual
convention session. It began as usual with a moment of silence
for those in the Federation family who had died during the past
year.
     Following the roll call of Board members, the pledge of
allegiance to the flag of the United States, and the NFB pledge,
President Maurer announced that for personal reasons three
members of the Board of Directors had decided not to run for re-
election this year: The Rev. Frank Lee (Alabama), Glenn Crosby
(Texas), and Dr. Fred Schroeder (New Mexico). After explaining
that Dr. Schroeder had been nominated by President Clinton as
Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration (the
nomination was confirmed by the United States Senate on Friday
evening, July 1), President Maurer read Dr. Schroeder's letter of
resignation:

Dear President Maurer:
     It is with sincere regret that I offer my resignation from
the Board of Directors of the National Federation of the Blind. I
wish my resignation to be effective July 3, 1994. During the ten
years I have served as a member of the Board, I have gained
immeasurably from the energy and dedication of the Federation's
many thousands of members. Through the Federation I had the
opportunity to develop a belief that I as a blind person could
live a full and normal life. I particularly wish to thank you for
your friendship and encouragement and Dr. Jernigan for his wisdom
and kindness. Through your efforts the blind of the nation have
an effective vehicle for creating change through collective
action.
     Thank you for giving me an opportunity to be a part of the
Federation's efforts to promote real equality for the blind of
the nation.

Sincerely yours,
Fredric K. Schroeder

     After remarks of welcome from Allen Harris, President of the
Michigan affiliate, Dr. Jernigan, Chairman of Convention
Organization and Activities, made a number of announcements. He
demonstrated a credit-card-size recorder that will record about
sixty words for brief note taking and which the Federation was
selling for $20 at the Convention and $25 afterwards (plus $5
shipping and handling). He also demonstrated a talking clock with
alarm, selling for $10 (plus $3 shipping and handling) as long as
they last.
     Dr. Jernigan also described the three newest books available
from the NFB. The first is called If Blindness Comes and replaces
What You Should Know About Blindness, Services for the Blind, and
the Organized Blind Movement, our general information book. This
small paperback is now available from the Materials Center at the
National Center for the Blind at $12.50 for a case of fifty.
Individuals may receive a single copy free of charge. The two
newest titles in our Kernel Book series of large-print paperbacks
are The Journey and Standing on One Foot. These are available for
$3 a copy or $50 for a case of forty-eight. Like all of the other
Kernel Books, they are available in Braille ($10) and on cassette
($5).
     President Maurer announced that the organization now has
forms available to assist members in making provision to remember
the National Federation of the Blind in their wills. He urged
people to consider making these arrangements and said the advice
of tax attorneys is available when necessary.
     The Board then voted that in the future at least three of
the National Federation of the Blind's scholarships be designated
each year for award to previous scholarship winners. Peggy
Elliott, Second Vice President of the National Federation of the
Blind and Chairman of the Scholarship Committee, then introduced
the twenty-six scholarship winners for 1994. A full report of
this year's scholarship program appears elsewhere in this issue.
     David Ticchi, President of the Cambridge Chapter of the NFB
of Massachusetts, presented a $1,500 check to the National
Federation of the Blind from his chapter and announced that a
similar check would be presented to the Massachusetts affiliate.
Brett Winchester, President of the Western Chapter of the NFB of
Idaho, announced that his chapter had given $4,000 to the
National Federation of the Blind from a bequest, had purchased
100 SUN shares, and had an additional check for $1,000 to
purchase 100 more SUN shares during the Convention. The SUN
(Shares Unlimited in National Federation of the Blind) Program is
our new effort to generate funds intended for future or emergency
use. It is not an endowment fund since the money is available if
needed, but the intention is to reserve the principal of all such
contributions for investment and to use only the interest for
ongoing Federation activities.
     Sharon Maneki, Chairwoman of the Distinguished Educator of
Blind Children Award Committee, next presented that award to Joe
Cutter of Wharton, New Jersey. A full report of this ceremony
appears elsewhere in this issue.
     Steve Benson, Member of the Board of Directors and President
of the National Federation of the Blind of Illinois, then
introduced Tony Burda of Chicago, a pharmacist, who had just
completed the grueling Denver Post Ride the Rockies. This bicycle
race of 422 miles from Trinidad to Golden, Colorado, requires
participants to compete at an altitude ranging between nine and
twelve thousand feet. Tony and his work colleague and friend,
John Boland, rode the entire distance in six days to raise funds
for the National Federation of the Blind.
     Mary Willows, Director of NFB Camp, the day-camp-like child
care facility provided during Convention sessions and the
Banquet, then reviewed this year's hours and costs and invited
children to participate. She arranged for a number of
Federationists to contribute their skills and talents during the
week to show youngsters what blind people can do and to supervise
them in exploration of all kinds of interesting activities.
     President Maurer then announced the creation of a task force
composed of representatives from the parents division, the
computer science division, and the Research and Development
Committee. This group's goal is to develop computer games and
activities for young blind children that will provide them with
the beginning computer skills that their sighted classmates now
get from using drawing and other visual computer games in school.
The task force is looking for people with expertise in early
childhood learning and educational computer software. Interested
people should contact Mrs. Cheadle at the National Center for the
Blind.
     The Board then turned its attention to the Associates
Program. President Maurer announced that from June 1, 1993,
through May 31, 1994, 395 people recruited 3,203 Members-at-Large
to become Associates of the Federation. Those recruited not only
make contributions (almost $80,000 during the past year) but also
become full-fledged members. The top ten recruiters by number of
Associates and by dollar amount are as follows:

                        Top 10 in Number
                     of Associates Recruited
10. Pat Tussing (Indiana), 63
9. Mary Ellen Jernigan (Maryland), 84
8. Kenneth Jernigan (Maryland), 85
7. Laura Biro (Michigan), 90
6. Karen Mayry (South Dakota), 94
5. Fred Schroeder (New Mexico), 97
4. Arthur Schreiber (New Mexico), 113
3. Toni Eames (California), 118
2. Bill Isaacs (Illinois), 145
1. Tom Stevens (Missouri), 210

                 Top 10 in Dollar Amount Raised
10. Jim Salas (New Mexico), $1,289
9. Larry Streeter (Nebraska), $1,290
8. Fred Schroeder (New Mexico), $2,097
7. Bill Isaacs (Illinois), $2,235
6. Tom Stevens (Missouri), $2,302
5. Karen Mayry (South Dakota), $2,486
4. Mary Ellen Jernigan (Maryland), $2,677
3. Duane Gerstenberger (Maryland), $3,081
2. Toni Eames (California), $3,081
1. Kenneth Jernigan (Maryland), $12,108

     At 9:45 a.m. on Monday, July 4, President Maurer gaveled the
first general session of the 1994 Convention of the National
Federation of the Blind to order. As always there were numerous
drawings for door prizes. This year the job of randomly selecting
the winners was done by the remarkable little 386 computer, the
Myna, produced by Technology for Independence. This tiny palmtop,
weighing only 1.2 pounds, combines DECtalk speech with IBM's
ScreenReader and will soon have a twenty- or forty-character
refreshable Braille display at the option of the purchaser. This
amazing little computer was awarded as a door prize at the close
of the Banquet on Wednesday evening, and many at the Convention
hoped mightily throughout the week that their names would be
drawn.
     During the welcoming ceremonies a representative from the
Detroit City Council read a resolution proclaiming Independence
Day, 1994, as National Federation of the Blind Day in the City of
Detroit. Governor John Engler also proclaimed the week National
Federation of the Blind Week in all of Michigan in a proclamation
that was read to the Convention. The remainder of the morning was
devoted to procedural matters and the roll call of states.
     The afternoon session began with this year's Presidential
Report. As always this address was a powerful and moving summary
of the organization's past year and an irresistible call to
action for the year ahead. The full text of this report appears
elsewhere in this issue.
     Following the Presidential Report was a panel of
Federationists who talked about their jobs. These included Sandy
Halverson from Missouri, "Teaching in the Business Setting"; Jim
Salas from New Mexico, "Supporting the Armed Forces of the United
States: Blindness No Hindrance"; and Steve Handschu from
Michigan, "The Aesthetic Sense." All three described the ways in
which they accomplish their jobs and the battles they have faced
in getting where they are. Their remarks were lively,
interesting, and inspiring.
     The final agenda item of the afternoon consisted of
presentations by Dave Vogel, Director of Rehabilitation Services
for the Blind in Missouri; Shirley Smith, Director of the
Department of Services for the Blind in Washington; and Arthur
Schreiber, Chairman of the New Mexico Commission for the Blind.
All three described the improving relationships in their states
between their vocational rehabilitation agencies and consumer
organizations of the blind.
     In concluding this discussion Dr. Jernigan made a general
statement aimed at all directors of agencies serving blind
people:

     I want to ask you to think with me for a moment about
agencies in general. Our relationship has been changing, and we
must avoid certain pitfalls and certain sophistries. When an
agency director says, "I don't play politics. I deal equally with
both organizations," it depends on what is meant. If what is
meant is, "I don't give better service to somebody who claims to
be a member of one rather than the other," the answer is, "You
shouldn't give service on the basis of organizational affiliation
at all; and if you do, we will come after you." That is bad
business, even if you favor members of our organization; that
obviously goes without saying. But if an agency means, "I will
duck being responsible to organizations by the following tactic:
when representatives of one come to see me, I will say, `I can't
really deal with you or be responsive to you because the other
one might get mad at me,'" what that really means is, "I will not
be responsive to consumers, and I will do as I please, and
furthermore, I will treat you as if you couldn't make me do
differently." If that's what is meant, that's bad business.
     I'm not talking to these three agencies; I'm talking to
every agency in this country. If I were an agency director, (A) I
would give equal service to all blind people, and I wouldn't
think about organizations. And (B) I would be truthful in this
way: I would be responsive to people who I thought could help me
politically, and I would be responsive in proportion to the power
of the political groups involved. That's what agencies really do;
that's what all of us do, and that's what we should do. Not
compromise principles; I'm not talking about that. But I can tell
you this; I think I can prove it to you: let an agency director
get three calls simultaneously from the President of the United
States, the governor of the state, and a client--do you want to
guess which one he's going to talk to? Play politics? Of course
we play politics--all the time--all of us do. You're going to
answer the President of the United States first. Incidentally, so
am I; we all are. Then, if the President lets you loose, and you
have time, you'll answer the Governor. Then, if you have time,
you'll get to the client. Somebody may say, "Nah, I'd be real
brave and tell the President to go to blazes; I'll deal with my
client first." It's all right, but, if you say that, you're a
liar; that's not the way it's going to be.
     We have a right to expect candor. Once I talked to a group
of agency directors. I said to one of them, "In your state the
ACB is stronger than the NFB; and, if I were you, I'd pay more
attention to what that group says. If we get stronger, you'll
have to pay more attention to what we say, but in either case
that has nothing to do with what kind of services you ought to
give." More to the point, both ACB and NFB are going to get to
the place where they combine on at least one thing: we are going
to see if we can start making agencies for the blind pay when
they try to play one of us off against the other and pretend to
neutrality.[applause] I have been working with the national
President of ACB to see if we can establish a partnership in that
respect. When that happens, we are really going to put the bite
on such agencies.
     I understand that in some states there are still situations
in which, if one group--no matter how weak--feels that the other
group is getting preference, it goes and complains. Short-
sightedly and in the agency's short-term best interest, that
agency director may neutralize out and try very hard not to work
with the stronger organization, whichever it may be. Such
behavior will and should discourage the strong organization as it
gets stronger from defending that agency. In short, what we seek
is true partnership and realism in political dealing. Anybody who
interprets that as meaning that we are asking for better services
for our members than for other blind people does not understand
us and will learn better, because we will undertake to teach well
on that score. And again, the reason is self-interest. If we were
to sanction for a moment giving less good services to members of
another organization, in reality we would be inviting
discrimination against our own members. We would never do that;
that is not the way to get the best services. What we seek with
the agencies is honesty, candor, true partnership, and realism.
In short, we want to deal with the agencies as an organization,
irrespective of how they deal with the ACB, and I suspect the ACB
is equally tired of hearing talk about how they can't be dealt
with because of the NFB. I don't wish to see us yoked with ACB or
ACB yoked with us. And in the long run this view will prevail.

     So ended the Monday afternoon general session. What could be
more appropriate for the Fourth of July than a picnic, including
all the hot dogs and hamburgers, baked beans and lemonade, apple
and cherry pie one could eat--oh, and beer as well? That's the
way well over a thousand Federationists spent Independence Day
evening this year. The party took place on the open-air third-
floor podium at the Westin. The location made it easy to rotate
between the picnic and a full evening of Federation activities
continuing to take place in the hotel.
     As usual these included a workshop for parents of blind
children on the Individualized Education Program (IEP) and the
Music Division's annual Showcase of Talent. With no entrants in
the composition division the judges were instructed to award two
first and two second prizes in the performance category this
year. The winners were as follows: Stanley Wainapel, M.D., (New
York) classical piano, first prize; Bob Burke (Connecticut),
contemporary piano, first prize; Dr. John Smith (Ohio),
contemporary voice and piano, second prize; and Stephanie Pieck
(New York), piano, second prize.
     One other of the many activities that evening is worthy of
special note. The NFB gave birth to the Science and Engineering
Division on the Fourth of July. A number of eager and
enthusiastic Federationists gathered to accomplish the deed, and
John Miller of California was elected President. Dr. Michael
Gosse will edit the group's newsletter, and there are high hopes
and great plans for a publication worthy of educational
circulation to scientific and engineering companies around the
country.
     Tuesday morning's Convention session opened with the 1994
elections. President Maurer announced that the hold-over Board
members with another year to serve are Don Capps (South
Carolina), Priscilla Ferris (Massachusetts), Sharon Gold
(California), Betty Niceley (Kentucky), and Joanne Wilson
(Louisiana). Ramona Walhof, who chaired the Nominating Committee,
then gave the Committee's report. The names of the following
people were placed in nomination as officers of the National
Federation of the Blind: Marc Maurer (Maryland), President; Joyce
Scanlan (Minnesota), First Vice President; Peggy Elliott (Iowa),
Second Vice President; Ramona Walhof (Idaho), Secretary; and
Allen Harris (Michigan), Treasurer.
     To fill the six two-year Board positions the names of the
following were placed in nomination: Steve Benson (Illinois),
Charlie Brown (Virginia), Dick Edlund (Kansas), Sam Gleese
(Mississippi), Diane McGeorge (Colorado), and Gary Wunder
(Missouri). Ed McDonald, President of the National Federation of
the Blind of West Virginia, was nominated to fill Fred
Schroeder's unexpired term. All candidates were unanimously
elected.
     Longtime Federationists will recognize the names of both
Gary Wunder and Dick Edlund. Gary returns to the Board after a
year's absence, and for many years Dick served as Treasurer of
the NFB. He retired from the Board when he was elected to the
Kansas House of Representatives in order to have enough time to
learn the ropes of state government. Now that he is an old hand
in the legislature, he has sufficient time to return to active
involvement with the Federation Board.
     Ed McDonald, too, is a longtime Federationist. Quiet and
thoughtful, Ed's sleeves are always rolled up when there is work
to be done. He produces, records, and markets radio programs from
his own studio in Keyser, West Virginia. This is what he said to
the Convention after his election:

     Thank you very much, President Maurer, Dr. Jernigan, and
fellow Federationists. This is certainly an honor and a humbling
experience for a person of generally few words. Apparently 1969
must have been an outstanding year for a lot of us. [Richard
Edlund and President Maurer had already referred to the 1969
Convention as their first Federation Convention.] It was in that
year, twenty-five years ago, that I attended my first state
convention in West Virginia, at which Dr. Jernigan was our
national representative. Since that time my life in the
Federation has been a sort of spiritual pilgrimage, with all that
that implies. The work and words of Dr. tenBroek, Dr. Jernigan,
and President Maurer have been the inspiration; and my fellow
Federationists, fellow pilgrims as it were, have been the support
and the strength in that pilgrimage. Except that it hasn't had
just one destination; it's had a lot of milestones along the way.
This is one of them. And it brings with it a lot of opportunities
for me, opportunities for growth and learning and more work and
more contributions. I can only say to you that I will do my best
to recognize those opportunities and to seize them and to make
the best of them and to do all that I can to propel this movement
forward. Thank you very much.

     The next agenda item was a presentation by Ernest Laginess,
co-administrator of one of the Chrysler Corporation's Product
Quality Improvement Teams. The Subcommittee for Community Service
of this team began work in October of 1992 on an idea proposed by
Dave Hilliker, whose daughter Allison has had great difficulty
winning the right to learn Braille. [See the July, 1994, issue of
the Braille Monitor.] Hilliker proposed that the team find a way
to redesign a little Braille teaching tool that had been handmade
for the NFB by another company several years ago. The cost of
production was still too high, so, even though the tool is very
useful, it has not been generally available. The Chrysler team
went to work, and the outcome (1,000 small Braille teaching
tools) was being presented to the Federation in this ceremony.
These small devices are capable of forming any Braille symbol
since they consist of two enlarged Braille cells side by side
with steel pins that snap back and forth to create the six
Braille dots in each cell. Chrysler presented not only the
thousand Braille teaching tools, but the equipment for making
them; and several suppliers whom Chrysler asked to donate
additional materials and parts have generously provided them in
order that more of the little tools can be assembled. A number of
the Chrysler employees and supplier representatives responsible
for this project were in the audience and were warmly
acknowledged and thanked by convention delegates. Those
interested in ordering a Braille teaching tool from the NFB of
Michigan's Parents Division can contact Sue Drapinski, 111 W.
Woodward Heights, Hazel Park, Michigan 48030. Checks in the
amount of $10 for each tool should be made payable to NFB of
Michigan.
     Frank Kurt Cylke, Director of the National Library Service
for the Blind and Physically Handicapped of the Library of
Congress (NLS), then addressed the convention. His title was
"Books, Books, Books." Because of the press of time, his remarks
were short, but he warmly thanked the Federation for the heart-
felt expression of support for the NLS Program Federationists
demonstrated in the House and Senate this year when the Library's
budget was under attack. He then provided a few statistics about
current and future NLS book production and invited interested
people to talk with him that afternoon or contact him in writing
after the convention.
     Carl Schier, an attorney from Troy, Michigan, then spoke on
"Civil Rights and the Blind: Twenty-five Years of Progress." Mr.
Schier was the lawyer who fought two landmark discrimination
cases in Michigan for the Federation in the late sixties and
early seventies. He reflected on how far the disabled and the
entire nation have come and what remains to be accomplished.
Michigan Senator Carl Levin next addressed delegates. His title
was, "The Blind Can Make it Happen: Winning Equal Rights Through
Organization, Commitment, and Action."
     Dr. Jernigan then warmly introduced several people visiting
the convention representing O.N.C.E., the Spanish organization of
the blind. Enrique Servando, the Director General of O.N.C.E.,
addressed the audience in Spanish, and Eileen Rivera, President
of the Greater Baltimore chapter of the NFB of Maryland,
translated his remarks for listeners. Mr. Servando described the
challenges facing O.N.C.E. and the solutions that are being
found.
     Shortly before the noon recess the Convention was delighted
to hear an outstanding address from Dr. Fred Schroeder, newly
confirmed Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services
Administration. Dr. Schroeder, who received rousing ovations both
before and after his speech, chose as his title, "Preparing for
Emerging Challenges and Partnerships." His speech appears
elsewhere in this issue.
     The final agenda item was presented by Dr. Euclid Herie,
Chief Executive Officer and President of the Canadian National
Institute for the Blind (CNIB). He spoke briefly on the subject,
"CNIB Technibus--Wheels for the Mind." He described the touring
bus that CNIB fitted out to serve as a traveling technology fair
containing 100 pieces of technology for blind and visually
impaired people. The bus traveled 24,000 miles in eight months
during the CNIB's seventy-fifth anniversary year and visited more
than 150 communities. About 17,000 people toured the display and
learned what is available to assist blind and visually impaired
people.
     When the convention session recessed, delegates scattered to
an afternoon and evening of tours, workshops, seminars, committee
meetings, and fun. One of the events was the second annual art
exhibit and sale, prepared by blind artists and enjoyed by many
conventioneers. In addition people could attend an outreach
seminar on Social Security programs and Supplemental Security
Income, a number of Descriptive Video movies, a workshop on
children's programming, and the student division's annual Monte
Carlo Night.
     Despite the brevity of the night's sleep, the Wednesday
morning convention session opened to a full house and a crowded
agenda. The first item was "By the Blind, for the Blind--
Providing Orientation Training: a Panel Discussion." The
participants were Diane McGeorge, Director of the Colorado Center
for the Blind; Joanne Wilson, Director of the Louisiana Center
for the Blind; Joyce Scanlan, Director of BLIND, Inc., Minnesota;
and Sharon Gold, Director of the Lawrence Marcelino Center for
the Blind, California. Together they reviewed the history of
effective rehabilitation for the blind of the United States and
demonstrated through anecdote and program description that
successful rehabilitation can and does happen frequently--in NFB
centers, at least.
     The next item was an address by Congressman Joe Knollenberg,
ranking Republican on the Subcommittee on Minority Enterprise,
Finance, and Urban Development of the Small Business Committee in
the United States House of Representatives. His title was
"Business Opportunities for Blind Americans: How Minority Status
Can Help." Congressman Knollenberg believes that supervision of
the Section 8(a) Program of the Small Business Act should be
moved to the Commerce Department's Minority Small Business
Agency.
     The final presentation of the morning was made by Dr.
Shirley S. Chater, Commissioner of the Social Security
Administration (SSA). Her title was "Implications for the Blind:
A Report on the Social Security Re-engineering Program and Other
Developments." It was a clear and comprehensible review of SSA's
efforts to make service delivery more efficient and faster. Dr.
Chater's grasp of the complex program she administers was
impressive, and she seemed genuinely committed to improving
things for program recipients.
     Most of the afternoon session was devoted to the
consideration of Braille. The opening item was titled, "To Read,
To Believe, To Gain Independence: A Panel Discussion." The
speakers were Dr. Kenneth Jernigan, President Emeritus, National
Federation of the Blind; Dr. Susan Spungin, Vice President,
National Program Services, American Foundation for the Blind; and
Dr. Emerson Foulke, substituting for Dr. Hilda Caton, Director of
the Braille Research Center at the American Printing House for
the Blind, who was ill. Dr. Homer Page, President of the NFB of
Colorado, and Ms. Barbara McCarthy, President-elect of the
Association for Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind and
Visually Impaired, also addressed aspects of the Braille
question; and their remarks were treated as part of the panel
discussion. This entire Convention item was extremely interesting
and is reprinted elsewhere in this issue.
     Betty Niceley, President of the National Association to
Promote the Use of Braille, was then called forward to make the
1994 presentation of the Golden Keys Award to Mr. Joseph
Sullivan, whose knowledge of and work with the various Braille
codes have been of immense assistance in the effort to devise a
unified Braille Code. The entire award presentation appears
elsewhere in this issue.
     The final agenda item for the day was presented by Dr. C.
Edwin Vaughan, Professor of Sociology at the University of
Missouri. It was titled, "Blindness: A Perspective from China,"
and was a lively report on his most recent teaching experience
and travel in China.
     The annual banquet (chaired by Dr. Jernigan) was what it
always is--an event filled with high good humor, anticipation,
and inspiration. In addition to the twenty-six scholarships
conferred during the festivities, two awards (the Jacobus
tenBroek Award presented to Dr. Homer Page and the Distinguished
Service Award presented to Doris Johnson) were bestowed at the
banquet. All of these presentations are described in more detail
elsewhere in this issue.
     The banquet address was vintage Federation fare, one of the
very best President Maurer has so far delivered. He reminded his
listeners that, when sixteen people gathered in a Wilkes Barre
hotel room in 1940 to form the National Federation of the Blind,
their small act of determined defiance of society's expectations
forever changed the lives and dreams of blind people in this
country. The title of this memorable address was "Let the Wing of
the Butterfly Flap," and it appears elsewhere in this issue.
     Despite a post-banquet party that lasted into the small
hours of the morning and a fund-raising escapade by members of
the student division in which they climbed the stairs of the
seventy-story hotel (some more than once), delegates were in
their seats Thursday morning for the opening gavel. The day was
devoted to organizational business matters. Dr. Jernigan
delivered the financial report, and James Gashel, Director of
Governmental Affairs, gave the legislative report. The eighteen
resolutions brought to the Convention floor were debated and
passed. In addition a number of other brief reports were made.
For example, Dr. Jernigan reported that forty-six international
visitors had registered for and attended the Convention. They
were from Australia, Canada, England, Germany, Japan, Mexico, New
Zealand, Peru, South Africa, South Korea, Sweden, and Thailand.
     Ollie Cantos, President of the National Association of Blind
Students, reported that they had already collected almost $900
from the stair climb. More was coming in all the time, and the
division would be contributing half the proceeds to the national
organization.
     Individuals, chapters, and affiliates were busy all week
buying and pledging to buy NFB SUN Shares and collecting bright
yellow ribbons to affix to their convention badges. By the close
of the week Gary Wunder, Chairman of the SUN Committee, reported
that more than $20,000 had been raised for this important
investment program.
     Jim Omvig, Chairman of the PAC Committee, reported Thursday
afternoon that by the close of the convention seventy-five new
people had signed up on the Pre-Authorized Check Plan, which
meant that 1,413 Federationists were now members of PAC, making
automatic monthly contributions to the Federation. They are now
contributing over $326,000 a year through PAC.
     Shortly before the close of the final general session, Steve
Benson, President of the NFB of Illinois, came to a microphone to
say:

     Mr. President, I want to make sure that everybody here is in
Chicago next year. We promise you only the finest National
Convention we have ever had. I have the pleasure, with a few
other people from Illinois, of being the National Convention host
for the fifth time. And it's going to be better than we've ever
hosted in Illinois! Come on to Chicago!
     So began our journey to the 1995 Convention of the National
Federation of the Blind. Like this year's convention, the year
ahead will be filled with joy and sadness, hard work and
challenge, dreams and drudgery. But we have goals to reach and
promises to keep. We packed our bags with renewed determination
to invest our time well between now and then. Blind people wait
to learn about the Federation and the hope it brings. Numbers of
parents will learn this year that their children are blind. There
are injustices to resist and victories to win before we gather
again on July 1, 1995, in Chicago. But as always, we are up to
the challenge and ready for the adventure.


[Photo: Mr. Maurer stands at the podium, reading Braille. Caption: President
Maurer delivers his 1994 Report to the Convention.]

                       PRESIDENTIAL REPORT
                NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
                        DETROIT, MICHIGAN
                          JULY 4, 1994
                         by Marc Maurer

     The activities of the National Federation of the Blind
during the past year have been extensive and diversified. The
change in the scope and breadth of our undertakings from the time
we first organized has been dramatic. We have become much bigger,
much more complex, and much more vigorously involved in a broad
spectrum of endeavors than we were even as recently as a decade
ago. The Federation might seem to be different from its former
self to those who have known it only superficially, but our
essential character as a nationwide movement of the blind working
on a volunteer basis, along with our sighted colleagues and
friends, has never altered. The spirit which is the driving force
of our organization is as clear, as distinct, and as alive today
as it was when our founder Dr. Jacobus tenBroek and those few
other blind people established the Federation at Wilkes-Barre,
Pennsylvania, in 1940.
     We are the blind, organized in every part of the nation--
those who have recently become blind and those who have been
blind for a long time; the older blind; the parents of blind
children and the children themselves; those in the field of work
with the blind; blind students; those blind people who are
hunting employment and those who have employment (the teachers,
the lawyers, the factory workers, the vending operators, the
office employees, the farmers, the day laborers)--volunteers from
every level of society, from every ethnic background, from every
kind of employment, and from every cultural setting. As we
assemble in the largest gathering of blind people that will take
place anywhere in our country this year (probably the largest
that has ever taken place in the history of the world), our
dedication is strong; our purpose is unified; and our mood is
harmonious.
     A few weeks before this convention, the television program
"Jeopardy!" asked us to verify that the National Federation of
the Blind initiated White Cane Safety Day. This day was first
established in 1964 by Congressional resolution, which had been
introduced at the request of the National Federation of the Blind
to encourage official public recognition of the white cane as a
symbol of the right of blind people to be fully independent and
to be an equal part of the community. National White Cane Safety
Day and the National Federation of the Blind, we were told, would
be included in the questioning on the "Jeopardy!" program. The
white cane has sometimes been regarded as a mark of inferiority
rather than an emblem of independence. The National Federation of
the Blind is the vehicle for gaining acceptance and recognition
of this independence, and our message is being carried, even on
the "Jeopardy!" program.
     It is vital that an in-depth understanding of the real
meaning of blindness be internalized in the thinking of society.
Our publications, especially our Kernel Books--What Color is the
Sun, As the Twig Is Bent, The Freedom Bell, Making Hay, The
Journey, Standing on One Foot, and soon When the Blizzard Blows--
are among the most powerful tools that have ever been created for
illustrating the innate normality and ability of blind people.
Not all families in the United States have one of our Kernel
Books, but an increasing number do. Since our last convention we
have distributed over four hundred thousand of them--
approximately fifty million pages of information about what we
are and what we are doing. Blindness is not the crippling malady
that many people think it is. Our Kernel Books are disseminating
a positive understanding about blindness.
     The Kernel Books are not our only method of public
education. There are the radio and television spots which we have
transmitted by satellite to thousands of stations this year for
broadcast to the homes of an estimated hundred million people.
There are the news and information programs on television which
have featured prominently the work of the National Federation of
the Blind, including NBC's "Today Show." Our television
appearances have numbered more than fifteen hundred in the last
twelve months. There have also been more than five thousand
newspaper articles about us.
     Paul Kay is a lawyer in Washington, D.C., and a dedicated
member and supporter of the Federation. He and I were interviewed
on the Larry King radio program last winter about the programs of
the Federation and our efforts to gain equal opportunity.
     For most of recorded history blindness has been synonymous
with disadvantage, isolation, and inability to compete. However,
we are changing that mistaken image one article, one mailing, one
book, one public service announcement, one television appearance,
one radio program, and one daily life of a Federationist at a
time. The combined impact of all of this public education is
immeasurable and sweeping. The new understanding throughout the
nation is not yet complete, but we are getting there.
     More and more the influence of the National Federation of
the Blind is being felt not only in the United States but in
other parts of the world as well. A letter which came to us this
spring requests permission to translate into the Russian language
Dr. Kenneth Jernigan's banquet address entitled "Blindness: The
Pattern of Freedom." This request came from the City Library for
the Blind of St. Petersburg, Russia. If you want to know about
the real meaning of blindness, look for our literature in the
libraries. From Boise to Baltimore, from San Francisco to St.
Petersburg, you can look us up in the library.
     Dr. Kenneth Jernigan serves as President Emeritus of the
National Federation of the Blind and President of the North
America/Caribbean Region of the World Blind Union. Our
participation in international meetings during the past year has
provided unprecedented opportunities for interaction with
organizations of and for the blind and with blind individuals
throughout the world.
     At a meeting of the World Blind Union Executive Committee in
Melbourne, Australia, held earlier this year, Dr. Jernigan
learned that the birthplace of Louis Braille, the blind Frenchman
who invented the Braille system more than a hundred and fifty
years ago, had been closed to the public because of needed
repairs. This historic structure, now a museum, must be saved.
Louis Braille gave us literacy, which opened to our minds the
great panoply of learning. Joining people and organizations from
many parts of the world, we in the United States committed
ourselves to provide leadership and financial support in the
restoration of the museum. Dr. and Mrs. Jernigan traveled to
Coupvray, France, to visit the Louis Braille home to examine the
condition of the building and to discuss renovations. They
carried with them the initial gift from the blind of the United
States--$10,000.
     Dr. Jernigan stood on the threshold of the Louis Braille
home and spoke for the blind of the United States. While he was
there, in the place where the system of writing for the blind was
invented, he reached back in spirit to touch the events of a
former time--to be at one with the creator of the Braille system-
-and he reached forward to a time when Braille literacy will be
available not only for five or ten or fifteen percent of blind
people, but for all of us. The commitment that we reaffirmed
forty miles outside of Paris in Coupvray, France, is that we will
never forget our heritage. We will never relinquish the right of
the blind to meaningful education, the right to full
participation in society, the right to equality--in short, the
right to read.
     Several years ago we initiated a nationwide Braille literacy
campaign, which continues today. We drafted model legislation
which declares that blind students have the right to learn
Braille and that the school systems everywhere in the country
must provide both Braille textbooks and instruction in Braille
whenever this is warranted. Furthermore, textbook publishers
wishing to sell materials in print to the school systems are
required to provide an electronic copy of the text in a format
that can be used by the school system to produce the book in
Braille. Comprehensive Braille literacy statutes sponsored and
promoted by the National Federation of the Blind have been
adopted this year in New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Utah,
Ohio, Georgia, and Colorado. This brings the number of states
that have Braille literacy laws to twenty-five. We continue to
fight for the introduction and passage of these bills, and we
will not rest until every state has adopted our model law.
     Braille literacy legislation was adopted in Wisconsin in
1992, but the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (along
with a number of teachers of the blind who said they represented
the Wisconsin Association for the Education and Rehabilitation of
the Blind and Visually Impaired), decided to nullify the law by
regulation. Although the clear language of the statute declares
that teachers of the blind must be able to demonstrate their
competence in reading and writing Braille, the proposed
regulations to implement the law said otherwise. Teachers of the
blind could receive certification, these proposed rules said,
without demonstrating the ability to read and write Braille. A
passing grade in a college course that dealt with the subject of
Braille would be enough.
     The blind were not buying it. We could not be bamboozled.
Those who are supposed to teach Braille must know it. Led by
Bonnie Peterson, the able President of the National Federation of
the Blind of Wisconsin, the blind of that state gathered to
protest. Members of the legislature were contacted; testimony was
prepared; articles were written; and the experiences of blind men
and women who had been denied the opportunity to learn Braille
were recounted. On June 3, 1994, the regulations were finally
completed. Those who seek certification as teachers of the blind
in Wisconsin will be required to take and pass the National
Literary Braille Competency Test administered by the Library of
Congress. This would not have happened without the efforts of the
organized blind. We know Braille works; we want the teachers of
the blind in Wisconsin and elsewhere to know it too. And we
intend to have something to say about what is in the curriculum.
     Our Braille Literacy Training program is a joint effort
between the National Federation of the Blind and the American
Printing House for the Blind. In this program we are developing
teaching materials which incorporate the experience of competent
educators and literate blind persons. Those lessons go beyond the
formal academic setting to our daily lives. Although an eminently
sensible idea, this approach to the study of Braille is
completely novel. Sometimes blind people have taught each other
to read. Sometimes teachers of the blind have done it. In our
Braille Literacy Training program, the teachers and the blind are
working cooperatively, both in the teaching of the skill and in
the development of the materials to be used in the classes. Is
there any doubt that expanded literacy for blind readers will be
the result? Of course not.
     In 1991 the first U.S./Canada Conference on Technology for
the Blind was convened at the National Center for the Blind. It
was an historic meeting because, for the first time, every major
organization of and for the blind in the United States and Canada
participated. Hosted by the National Federation of the Blind, the
Second U.S./Canada Conference on Technology for the Blind
occurred in the fall of 1993. This meeting was even more far-
reaching than the first had been. Cooperative interaction among
producers of technology, service providers, and blind consumers
stimulates accelerated development of new products and innovative
technology for the blind. The Second U.S./Canada Conference on
Technology for the Blind was an overwhelming success, and we are
pleased to have been able to host and chair it. Its value can be
seen in both the new attitudes and the new technology that are
now emerging.
     The proceedings of this conference were printed in the
January, 1994, issue of the Braille Monitor, which has received
broad distribution. One indication of the value of this
conference is contained in a letter from the Executive Officer of
the United States District Court for the Central District of
California to the Assistant Director of the Administrative Office
for the entire federal court system. The letter says:

          The enclosed magazine, titled Braille Monitor, is a
     publication of the National Federation of the Blind. A
     management analyst from the Bankruptcy Court, Donovan
     Cooper, sent me a copy of the publication. The contents
     focus on the subject of twenty-first-century technology for
     the blind.
          I thought you might wish to share this publication with
     appropriate members of your division staff that might be
     called upon to address hardware/technology issues for
     special needs court personnel.
          Besides being a very talented statistician [the letter
     continues], Mr. Cooper is extraordinarily active in the
     blind community and knowledgeable of the issues challenging
     the non-sighted in the work force.
          Mr. Cooper would be an excellent court resource if the
     need arises.

     This letter shows what can be done when we use the resources
that we have. Throughout the entire administrative structure of
the federal court system, the resource in matters dealing with
blindness is the organized blind movement, the National
Federation of the Blind.
     In conjunction with the Second U.S./Canada Conference on
Technology for the Blind, we opened the newly renovated and
expanded International Braille and Technology Center for the
Blind. After this major upgrade, the IBTC consists of a main
display hall two-and-a-half times as large as the area previously
used, an office for the director, ten additional offices,
conference facilities, a kitchen, a pantry, space for a museum,
an office for the museum director, and a maintenance area. The
construction in the International Braille and Technology Center
for the Blind is typical of what we have done and continue to do
at the National Center for the Blind. The interior walls are over
six inches thick, made of paneling over heavy-duty dry wall for
extra strength. In this one operation we used 33,728 square feet
of paneling and over a hundred thousand pounds of dry wall.
     The main display hall of the International Braille and
Technology Center for the Blind, which is truly the gem of the
renovated area, has a number of custom-designed features. More
than sixteen hundred square feet of built-in desk-top space is
available to display the technology. Forty-four electrical
circuits feed over six hundred different outlets for the
approximately one hundred and seventy-five technological products
now on display.
     We have installed thirty-one new products and upgraded
thirty-five others this year. These include five Braille
embossers, six Braille translators, six speech synthesizers,
sixteen screen review programs (three of which are for Microsoft
Windows), five refreshable Braille displays, two money
identifiers, one color identifier, two telecommunications devices
for the deaf-blind, one note taker, six stand-alone reading
machines or PC-based reading systems, a number of software
packages, and several new computers to operate these devices, as
well as associated peripherals, cables, connectors, and related
material.
     I emphasize that all of what I have mentioned has been added
during the past year. It is in addition to the main body of
technology that we already had in place. The added value of this
new technology represents a great deal of money, but it
represents an even greater asset to the blind of our country and
the world. The replacement cost for our technological products is
approaching two million dollars. This, of course, does not count
the value of the structural upgrade, the furniture, and the
built-in desks and circuitry.
     When we opened the International Braille and Technology
Center for the Blind in 1990 on our fiftieth birthday, we
undertook a tremendous task. We said that we would get and keep
current a truly awesome collection of technology. We would
provide (for examination, study, and evaluation) at least one of
every device for producing hard copy and refreshable Braille
being made anywhere in the world, and we would do the same for
speech-producing devices. We would do likewise for reading
machines that would convert the printed page to spoken words, and
we would also keep current on other devices, such as money
identifiers, communication devices for the deaf-blind, and
calculators.
     The pledge that we made to ourselves and the world in 1990
has been kept. No other comparable collection of technology has
ever been assembled, and regardless of the cost we will continue
the program and keep the technology current. The International
Braille and Technology Center for the Blind serves as a testing
and learning center for manufacturers of devices for the blind,
for educators and administrators, for governmental officials, for
employers, for the general public, and (by no means least) for
the blind themselves both here and abroad. Technology is being
built. We will collect it; we will help design it; we will help
distribute it; and we will work to see that it truly serves the
needs of the blind--the purpose for which it was created in the
first place.
     Our computer bulletin board service, NFB NET, continues to
expand. More than 8,000 calls were made to the board during the
past year. Approximately 500 new users registered with the
service. Discussions of blindness and the National Federation of
the Blind are not only carried on NFB NET but are also
distributed through our bulletin board service to almost 250
other bulletin boards. In addition to the Braille Monitor, Future
Reflections, and a wide variety of other NFB literature, our
bulletin board carries substantial collections of computer
information, electronic magazines, reference materials, computer
programs, and electronic copies of classical literature. Some of
the books we have on the bulletin board are the writings of
Aristotle, Aristophanes, Confucius, Shakespeare, Sir Arthur Conan
Doyle, Edgar Rice Burrows, and Mark Twain. To handle all of this
information we have increased our telephone lines and obtained a
new, faster computer, with lots of memory and multi-gigabytes.
     Because we are the organized blind, we serve as a watchdog
over programs for the blind. At times this role causes certain
agencies and institutions to feel uneasiness, or worse. However,
more and more of the agencies in the blindness field are coming
to recognize the positive value of this function and are working
with us. Cooperation is growing among agencies and organizations
dealing with the blind. In March of this year Dr. Kenneth
Jernigan, our President Emeritus and the most prolific writer and
brilliant philosopher in the field of work with the blind, was
invited to make a keynote address to the American Foundation for
the Blind's Josephine Taylor Leadership Institute. This
invitation is one more indication of the shifting emphasis and
balances in the blindness field. It is a signpost on the road of
progress which we are traveling. Not all of the disagreements
between the organized blind and the agencies serving the blind
are at an end, but there is now a mechanism for handling
disagreements and a climate to make it possible.
     Along these lines it should be noted that we went with three
other groups last fall to meet with Judy Heumann, the newly
appointed Assistant Secretary of Education for the Office of
Special Education and Rehabilitative Services. The meeting was
harmonious and resulted in positive outcomes. It is illustrative
of an increasing number of joint activities that we are
undertaking.
     There have been many legal cases this year. Our files
indicate that in the course of our history we have assisted blind
people in over eleven hundred legal matters. A number of them
were actively pursued during the last twelve months.
     Carol Ducote has served as an assistant principal at
Brunswick High School in Glynn County, Georgia, for eight years.
She became blind during the 1992-93 school year but continued to
perform her duties. Evaluations of her performance indicate that
she is competent at handling her job.
     A year ago Carol Ducote was told by the school district
superintendent not to return to work in the fall of 1993 because
she was blind. The superintendent's directive was, of course, a
violation of the law. The school system had offered this blind
teacher a contract for the 1993-94 school year, and she intended
to fulfil it. Carol Ducote contacted leaders of the National
Federation of the Blind of Georgia, and we in the National Office
also assisted with the case. At a meeting in mid-November last
fall, we told the school board that their choices were simple--
either Carol Ducote could be returned to her position as an
assistant principal, or the National Federation of the Blind
would go with her to federal court. The school board did not take
long to make up its mind. Within a week Carol Ducote was back at
work. She completed her assignments for the school year that has
just ended, and she has signed a new contract for the one that is
about to begin. Blindness didn't stop her, and we didn't let
prejudice stop her either.
     Richard Stanley had been a police officer for the city of
Winter Haven, Florida, before he lost his sight. Although he had
become blind in the line of duty, he was denied disability
benefits through the police department because the officers in
charge of disability payments concluded that Richard Stanley was
not blind. The evidence for this conclusion is contained on a
videotape which shows Richard Stanley trimming his shrubbery.
Blind people, so the argument went, cannot trim shrubbery, so
Richard Stanley must be faking it. We explained the facts to the
pension board and assisted in gathering evidence to establish the
nature of the injury that resulted in disability. Richard Stanley
is now receiving benefits, and he can trim his shrubbery in
peace.
     For several years Geneva Teagarden worked at Foley's
department store in Fort Worth, Texas. A year ago, before she
became blind, Geneva Teagarden had been one of the most valuable
employees at Foley's. When she reported her blindness to store
management, they asked her to retire. But Geneva Teagarden did
not want to retire. She felt that she had much to contribute, but
she needed training in the alternative skills of blindness. We
helped her arrange for the Texas Commission for the Blind to send
her to our Louisiana Center for the Blind, where she is presently
a student. We also assisted her to secure a leave of absence. She
can return to her job at Foley's in December. The training is
essential, but so is the job, and so is the part played by the
National Federation of the Blind. Geneva Teagarden is succeeding
because of the collective efforts of all of us, because of the
National Federation of the Blind.
     Eric Baenen is a twenty-nine-year-old blind man living in
North Dakota. He has been trying for many years to get financial
assistance from the state rehabilitation agency to help him go to
college. Last winter, when his plans for attending school were
disapproved because the rehabilitation agency told him there was
only money for priority cases and that he wasn't one, he
contacted the National Federation of the Blind to find out what
could be done. On a Friday afternoon we communicated with the
North Dakota office of rehabilitation to insist that the long
years of waiting come to an end. By the following Monday the
decision of the agency had changed. Eric Baenen received his
chance to go to school with full funding for tuition and related
services.
     In the name of providing equal access to education, a number
of universities have established an office for assisting disabled
students. Sheila Ritchhart (formerly Sheila Hall) discovered
while she was attending Indiana University that she could not
make her own arrangements for taking tests, planning schedules,
and arranging for readers. The office for disabled students did
that, she was told. And in addition this office routinely
scheduled special psychological examinations for blind students
as a part of the intake process. Sheila objected to having the
disabled students' office arrange her life for her, and she most
certainly objected to having to take special and extra
psychological tests. But the people who ran the disabled
students' office told her that they knew best.
     When, however, it became clear to decision makers at the
University that the National Federation of the Blind was
involved, attitudes changed. Sheila Ritchhart reports that the
custodial policies have been dropped, not only for her but for
others as well. Blind students now attend their classes and take
their tests without interference, and there are no special
psychological examinations because of blindness. As a tangible
demonstration of the responsiveness of Indiana University,
officials from the Office of Adaptive Educational Services,
including the director, Pamela King, are with us at this
convention--and so is Sheila Ritchhart.
     Last year I reported to you on the case of Henrietta Brewer,
a blind child-care provider living here in Michigan. When she
applied to the Michigan Department of Social Services for a
license to provide child care, the application was denied--
because blind people (they said) cannot safely provide this
service. With our help Henrietta Brewer filed a complaint,
charging the licensing department with discrimination. The
Justice Department has now issued its decision. The denial of the
day-care license violated federal law. Blind people can care for
children. Henrietta Brewer knows it; we know it; the Justice
Department knows it; and the Michigan Department of Social
Services is learning it.
     In the fall of 1992 Monica Horodenski, a blind student, was
finishing her work for a teaching degree at Edinboro University
in Pennsylvania. One of the requirements for the degree is
successful student teaching. The supervising professor for
student teaching failed Monica Horodenski because the professor
believed that a blind teacher could not assure the safety of the
students in the class or adequately supervise them. All other
courses were completed satisfactorily. The only bar to the
teaching license was this one student teaching course. We have
assisted Monica Horodenski with an appeal. The matter has now
been resolved. Monica Horodenski will have the opportunity to
demonstrate her competence in a setting which will measure her
abilities without prejudice. Edinboro University will pay the
tab, not only for the student teaching course but also for her
living arrangements. She will have the chance to succeed or fail
according to her ability, her ingenuity, and her willingness to
work. That is all she asks. That is all we ask. It is all we ever
ask for. It is all we want, in this or any other case. I have
every confidence that Monica Horodenski will get her teaching
credential.
     Four years ago Scott LaBarre, Curtis Chong, and several
other Federationists in Minnesota decided to challenge the so-
called safety policies of Valleyfair Amusement Park, which
declared that blind visitors must be accompanied by a responsible
adult or be denied boarding on the rides and access to many areas
of the park. A responsible adult, according to Valleyfair
Amusement Park, is anybody who is at least four feet tall, as
long as that person can see. In most places being an adult means
attaining the age of majority--twenty-one, or at least eighteen.
But not at Valleyfair. Age has nothing to do with it--it is
length that matters. Four feet tall, and you're in. Do they
measure them with or without their shoes, I wonder?
     A complaint was filed with the Minnesota Department of Human
Rights, and the decision has now been rendered. The Valleyfair
policy concerning blind people exists no more. We are welcome to
visit the park and to ride the rides on the same terms and
conditions as others. There are no longer any special rules or
procedures for the blind. The four-foot theory has been
abandoned. Because of the work of the National Federation of the
Blind, Valleyfair Amusement Park is a good deal more amusing and
a lot more fair.
     About fifteen years ago the National Federation of the Blind
introduced white canes for blind children. Although it had been
the popular wisdom in rehabilitation circles that cane travel
should be taught only to adults, canes for children soon became
extremely popular--because they work. In the fall of 1992 the
parents of Linda Perez Delker asked school officials in South
Dakota to teach cane travel to their seven-year-old blind
daughter. Officials responded that this was not appropriate, that
a pre-cane travel aid should be used, and that Linda Perez Delker
would not be permitted to have a cane with her at school. The
Delkers requested an independent evaluation, but the school
district refused.
     This did not stop the Delkers. They know Karen Mayry,
President of the National Federation of the Blind of South
Dakota, and they have become part of the Federation family. A
Federation member provided private lessons to Linda. Prior to her
using a white cane, Linda would not venture off the front porch.
After she had learned to use it, this little girl traveled
independently outside her home both on her parents' property and
in public places. Yet she was refused the opportunity to carry
her cane at school, to use it on the school grounds, or to
receive further instruction. We helped with the appeal, and the
decision has now been reached. The independent evaluation has
been completed. It shows that Linda should be using a white cane.
This blind student will be receiving the cane travel instruction
she needs in school because of the efforts of the National
Federation of the Blind.
     We have assisted a number of blind vendors during the year.
Two years ago Paul Howard, President of the National Federation
of the Blind of Indiana, was operating a vending facility at the
main post office in Gary. In September of 1992 he was summarily
ordered by the state rehabilitation agency to leave the facility
because post office officials had requested his removal. There
was no hearing, no discussion, no negotiation--just an order.
With our help Paul Howard filed a complaint. The law is clear. A
state agency is prohibited from removing a vendor unless there is
just cause, and even then it cannot be done unless there has been
a hearing to evaluate the rights of the vendor. The Paul Howard
case took more than two years, but it has come to an end. The
State of Indiana paid for improperly removing Paul Howard from
the vending facility. In the meantime he has become a teacher in
the Gary public schools, but he received the back pay which he
had been denied--all $10,728.95 of it.
     On several previous occasions I have reported on the Dennis
Groshel case. He operates a vending facility located at the
Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center in St. Cloud,
Minnesota. Although the Randolph-Sheppard Act grants to blind
vendors an unequivocal priority to operate vending facilities on
federal property, officials at the veterans hospital attempted to
dismiss Dennis Groshel from the vending facility because he would
not pay almost fifty percent of his income to the hospital.
Working with the Minnesota attorney general's office, the
Minnesota rehabilitation agency, and Dennis Groshel, we took
legal steps to prevent this injustice. At each step in the
proceedings, we received favorable rulings, but the Department of
Veterans Affairs continued to balk.
     On March 11, 1994, the United States Court of Appeals for
the Eighth Circuit ruled decisively on the Groshel case. The
Randolph-Sheppard Act, they said, does apply to the Veterans
Affairs Medical Center in St. Cloud. Dennis Groshel is secure in
his vending facility. This decision also applies to many other
veterans medical centers. It is likely that the ruling of the
court will be precedent-setting for the nation. This ruling has
already been followed in an arbitration in Maryland. The decision
of the arbitration panel was unanimous. Blind vendors are
entitled to a priority in the operation of vending facilities in
the veterans hospitals. It will not surprise you to learn that
one of the arbitration panel members is also a member of the
National Federation of the Blind.
     In this past year we have continued to help blind people
with Social Security claims.  Marc Graff is a blind person living
in Oregon. Three years ago he applied for Social Security
disability benefits, but his claim was rejected because officials
said he had not met eligibility requirements. However, these
officials had not applied the special rules for the blind. The
President of the National Federation of the Blind of Oregon,
Carla McQuillan, with assistance from the National Office
represented Marc Graff. In a hearing before an administrative law
judge, she insisted that the special rules for blind applicants
be applied. Marc Graff is now receiving monthly disability
benefits, and he has received a back pay award of $34,764.20.
     We continue to welcome visitors to the National Center for
the Blind. The questions we are asked and the information we
provide help to instill a greater understanding of blindness and
bring a wider range of opportunity to blind people. More than
twelve hundred people visited the National Center for the Blind
this year, including visitors from Australia, Austria, Canada,
Czech Republic, Cyprus, England, France, Germany, Ireland, Japan,
Mongolia, New Zealand, Norway, Russia, Singapore, Slovak
Republic, South Africa, South Korea, Sweden, Switzerland,
Tanzania, Thailand, Tobago, Uganda, and Ukraine.
     There are also the ongoing activities of the Federation. We
publish in print, in Braille, and in recorded form more
literature about blindness than anyone else in the nation. In our
recording studio we produce the master tapes for our magazines--
the Braille Monitor, Future Reflections, the Voice of the
Diabetic, and a number of other publications. To ensure high
quality for these publications, we have upgraded the recording
equipment with a computer-driven studio audio digital editor.
This is a word-processing system for sound. It can handle eight
different tracks at one time. The computer screen displays the
sound as a series of lines. Errors can be eliminated
electronically; noise can be reduced; and alterations in volume,
frequency, and pitch can be made by reshaping the lines. This is
the same system being used by the British Broadcasting Company,
Voice of America, and a number of music studios in Nashville.
     From our Materials Center we have continued to distribute
aids, appliances, and materials. There are now over 400 different
kinds of aids and appliances and over 800 different publications.
Included in these items are extra-long carbon fiber canes--up to
sixty-nine inches; jackets and t-shirts bearing the name and logo
of the National Federation of the Blind; all of our Kernel Books;
our general information publication, If Blindness Comes, which is
the most comprehensive quick reference guide regarding blindness
now available; our general information publication for the
parents of blind children, Future Reflections, Introductory
Issue; and a collection of special Christmas recordings. We are
producing our catalogs of literature, and aids and appliances in
large print, in Braille, and on computer disk. Within the last
year we have shipped from the Materials Center two million
separate items with a total weight of more than thirty-one tons.
     Through our Job Opportunities for the Blind Program (JOB) we
continue to assist blind people in finding employment. Because of
our efforts more than a hundred blind people who were not
employed last year are now reporting for work. The jobs of those
who have been hired range from accountant to administrative
assistant, from bill collector to busboy, from teacher to tool
grinder--and all of them are above the minimum wage.
     Many thousands of calls come to the National Office of the
Federation each year. Most are what might be called routine, but
some are of special significance. Just before our last convention
we received a series of calls from Connecticut. A child, Aaron
McCullon, had been born to a blind couple, Tammy and Jim
McCullon. But the baby was premature and small enough that he
must wear a heart monitor. The blind parents requested
information about how to handle the situation. The infant's
grandmother called to ask about techniques used by blind parents.
Officials at the hospital where the baby was born wanted to know
whether blind parents can competently care for children--
especially premature children. These officials at the hospital
thought that the baby should be kept in the medical center to
ensure proper care. If the baby were sent home, they believed
that either a full-time nurse or the child's grandparents should,
perhaps, live with the McCullons.
     As it happens, this situation is not new. In 1984 my wife
Patricia and I became the parents of a premature infant, David
Patrick. He needed a heart monitor. When David Patrick was born,
hospital officials wondered if we, his blind parents, Patricia
and I, had the ability to care for him--a tiny, premature infant.
We did--and we have. Our experience and understanding from the
1980's helped these blind parents in the 1990's. Aaron McCullon
received his heart monitor and wore it home. His parents were the
ones to bring him and to give him the care he needed. The
heartache and pain of family separation never happened. The
support, the information, and the encouragement that these
parents needed were readily provided. We in the National
Federation of the Blind showed the officials at the hospital that
blind parents have as much ability to care for their children as
sighted parents. Having the right to raise our families--this,
too, is why we have organized.
     As I consider the activities of the National Federation of
the Blind during the past year, I have every confidence in our
future. The problems we face are many--gaining an education,
finding recognition, attaining equal treatment, changing the
negative attitudes of the public about blindness, and finding
enough money to finance it all. All of these demand our
attention. Our goal is nothing short of altering the beliefs and
modifying the behavior of the entire society. The administrators
of programs for the blind, the educators, the hospital officials,
the government personnel, and the sighted public must come to
accept a new belief and a new understanding.
     And we must accept it too--we who are blind. We must grow in
it, embrace it, and live it with increasing fullness every day.
The task ahead of us is monumental. But so is our need and so is
our determination. We have a pact with each other, you as members
and I as President. You have the right to expect from me that I
will give all that I possess in the way of ability and work and
commitment to this organization; that I will stand in the front
line where danger threatens and not ask you to take more risks
than I am prepared to take or make more sacrifices than I am
willing to make; that I will lead with firmness, make decisions,
and stand by those decisions. And I have the right to expect
certain things from you--your work to make our programs possible,
your unified support to give our policies strength and
credibility, and your trust to make my presidency viable. These
things we have the right to expect from each other; but there is
something more, something which cannot be demanded but which is
the essential ingredient that makes us what we are, that binds us
together as a family, a movement, and a power. It is the love and
care we have for each other. Let us lose that love, and we lose
more than political strength. We lose our organizational soul,
our right to be called a movement. But let us keep our love for
each other, and no force on earth can stand against us. And, of
course, we will keep it.
     We have kept faith with the founders of our movement and
with the tens of thousands of members who have joined through the
decades. We have pledged to support each other, and we have
promised that the commitment and dedication which come to us from
those who have made this organization what it is will remain
unshakable. No matter what comes, I know as surely as I know the
members of this organization that we will find the strength,
gather the resources, and muster the spirit to meet the
challenge. I am absolutely certain that we will gain equality and
go the rest of the way to freedom. This is the meaning of the
National Federation of the Blind. And this is my report to you
for 1994.


















[Photo: Joe Cutter stands holding microphone, with Sharon Maneki in
background. Caption: Joe Cutter responds after being presented with the
Distinguished Educator of Blind Children Award.]
[Photo: Joe Sullivan stands at the podium holding a plaque, with Betty Niceley
in the background. Caption: Joe Sullivan receives the Golden Keys Award
presented by Betty Niceley, President of the National Association to Promote
the Use of Braille.]
[Photo: Doris Johnson stands holding a plaque, with Dr. Jernigan on her right
and Mr. Maurer on her left. Caption: Doris Johnson receives congratulations
from Dr. Jernigan and President Maurer after being presented with the NFB's
Distinguished Service Award.]
[Photo: Homer Page shakes hands with Dr. Jernigan and Mr. Maurer stands with
his arm around Dr. Page. Caption: Dr. Jernigan and President Maurer
congratulate Dr. Homer Page as he receives the Jacobus tenBroek Award.]

                NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
                         AWARDS FOR 1994

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

                   The Distinguished Educator
                     of Blind Children Award

     At the Sunday morning Board of Directors meeting Sharon
Maneki, President of the National Federation of the Blind of
Maryland and Chairwoman of the Distinguished Educator of Blind
Children Selection Committee, presented that award. She said:

     Good morning, fellow Federationists. We are truly changing
what it means to be blind in the field of education. Gone are the
days when students had to wait until high school, as many of us
did, to get a white cane. The days when young blind children are
taught to trail walls, slide their feet, shuffle, are still here,
but they're going. And they are going because of the National
Federation of the Blind, and they're going because of the
recipient of this year's award.
     Many of us already know this recipient because of his work
as an orientation and mobility instructor. He works for the New
Jersey Commission for the Blind. He is in his twenty-fourth year
of teaching. While he works for the Commission, he really works
for the interests of children. He has been working at this
convention. Many of us have met him in the Parents Division and
in the various workshops that he has conducted. Ladies and
gentlemen, the selection committee of Allen Harris, Fred
Schroeder, Jacquilyn Billey, Joyce Scanlan, and me are truly
pleased and honored to present Joe Cutter as the Distinguished
Educator of Blind Children.[applause] I'd like to present Mr.
Cutter with a plaque, which I would like to read.


                    DISTINGUISHED EDUCATOR OF
                         BLIND CHILDREN
              The National Federation of the Blind
                             honors
                           Joe Cutter
            for your pioneering effort in introducing
             young children to the long white cane,
         for promoting independence and self-confidence,
                  by encouraging your students
                  to explore their environment.
        We highly commend you for your positive attitude
         toward blindness and for working in partnership
                with the organized blind movement
                           July, 1994

     Congratulations, Mr. Cutter.[applause] And, of course, we
have one more important thing to present you. This is a check for
$500.[applause]

     After Mr. Cutter accepted his plaque, he said:

     This is a beautiful plaque, and it's a generous award. It's
an honor to receive this award from the National Federation of
the Blind. I have come to respect this organization for its clear
information, its positive thinking, its can-do approach. Blind
persons have provided me as a sighted person a quality education
about blindness. In New Jersey I've had the opportunity over the
years to learn from blind children and their parents. For
example, parents like Carol Castellano and Bill Cucco truly
exemplify the philosophy of the NFB in their day-to-day lives--
equality, opportunity, and security. And with them and their
children Serena and John, and the other parents and other blind
children in New Jersey, I have learned; and somehow there is a
correlation between becoming a learner and being a better
teacher. Sometimes, as an itinerant going from homes to school,
traveling in my car, it can be a bit lonely and precarious when
you are traveling "the road less traveled."
     I accept this award, its support, and encouragement for me
to continue to travel this road, and I look forward in
partnership with blind children, their parents, and the National
Federation of the Blind to continuing to give the best I can
offer. Thank you.

                      The Golden Keys Award

     Near the close of the Wednesday afternoon session President
Maurer called forward Betty Niceley, President of the National
Association to Promote the Use of Braille. Betty then made the
following presentation:

     At this convention the National Association to Promote the
Use of Braille, a division of the NFB, is celebrating its tenth
birthday.[applause] As part of that celebration NAPUB is
presenting its second Golden Keys Award. Our recipient this year
has devoted his professional life to the study of Braille and the
development of computer programs that translate print into Grade
II Braille. He has developed the world's leading Grade II
translator of English Braille. He has developed translators for
Arabic, Hebrew, French, and Spanish, just to mention a few of the
languages and dialects. Such contributions are making it possible
for Braille to be produced much less expensively, and we can have
a lot more of it all over the world.
     His lifetime of experience has given a profound and deep
knowledge of Braille which serves us well. The International
Council on English Braille conducts a project, and its objective
is to eliminate the confusion resulting from a plethora of
partially compatible codes by developing a unified Braille code
that would be used throughout the English-speaking world. Because
of our recipient's deep knowledge of Braille, he was asked to
chair this committee. As such, he developed a process for a
continuing and ongoing meeting to be held via Internet, which
means that he must continually monitor what's happening and also
write the summary reports for all committee members. His profound
knowledge of Braille and his unflagging dedication to its
improvement have gone a long way toward making an increased
supply of Braille available to blind people all over the world.
He has donated his time, his energy, his knowledge, and his
talent of leadership to a degree that can only be classified as
self-sacrifice. These are only a few of the reasons why NAPUB
presents the 1994 Golden Keys Award to..., and we're extremely
happy to do this, and we're grateful for the time to do it, Dr.
Jernigan and Mr. Maurer. The plaque reads:




                     NATIONAL ASSOCIATION TO
                   PROMOTE THE USE OF BRAILLE

                             To you

                       Joseph E. Sullivan

                   we award these golden keys
                in recognition of your commitment
                      to Braille and to the
                    readers who depend on it.
                        To these readers
              you have given keys that unlock doors
                   to the temple of knowledge.
                           July, 1994


     When he arrived at the microphone, Joe Sullivan responded by
saying:

     Thank you very much, Ms. Niceley, for your kind words and to
all of you for this great honor. I must realistically share it
with many people, too many to name; but I would like to name one-
-my wife Genevieve for thirty years. For the last twenty she has
provided essential and (I might say patient) support to our work.
I would also, in general, like to thank so many of you who have
shared with me your deep knowledge of Braille and your well-
placed passion for this important technology. What else invented
in the early 1800's is still so vital today? To you, I'd like to
say this, that you have made this work not just work, but
actually a lot of fun, as well. Thank you very much.[applause]

                   Distinguished Service Award

     During the Wednesday evening banquet two awards were
presented. The first was the rarely presented Distinguished
Service Award, and Dr. Jernigan made the presentation. He said:

     A lot of you may not even know Doris Johnson because she is
self-effacing and doesn't push herself forward. Doris was born
and raised in South Carolina, the second of nineteen children--
all with the same parents if anybody wants to know. She has
always been a hard worker. She worked her way through high school
by cleaning the principal's house before classes every morning.
She then caught the train and went to school. After getting home,
she would work in the fields until dark. (Her parents were share
croppers.) After it was too dark to work outside, she would study
for school the next day.
     After high school Doris went to Baltimore, where she worked
her way through Morgan State University, graduating with a degree
in home economics in 1956. She has always been active in her
church and was the secretary of the church Sunday school for many
years. While teaching at a Baltimore beauty and barber college,
Doris earned the outstanding teacher of the year award on two
separate occasions. She also helped prepare many students for
their state licensing examinations. For many years Doris went to
Montebello State Hospital in Baltimore and did the patients' hair
as a volunteer.
     Let me turn now to Doris's work with the Federation. Because
she is quiet and unassuming, few people know how much she does.
She does over a thousand hours of volunteer work every year at
the National Center for the Blind. (Allen Harris says that there
are a lot of people who have high-paying jobs who don't work that
much.) She does everything from erasing tapes and labeling
cassettes to manning (or, if you like, "womaning") NFB booths at
local events. In the kitchen she is invaluable. She comes early
and stays late, until the last dish is done. When there is a
seminar or a meeting of any other kind, Doris is always willing
to help in whatever way she is needed.
     Doris, you exemplify the spirit of our movement, the best
that is in us, and the essence of service to others. I have here
a brass plaque on polished walnut wood that I want to present to
you. It is the tangible manifestation of the love we have for you
and the appreciation of what you are and what you do.





                NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
                   DISTINGUISHED SERVICE AWARD
                          PRESENTED TO
                          Doris Johnson

YOUR ENERGY AND COMMITMENT ARE FREELY AND ABUNDANTLY GIVEN
YOUR DEVOTION AND SPIRIT INSPIRE YOUR COLLEAGUES

                      No task is too humble
                        No hour too early
                         No job too much

           THE BLIND OF THE NATION GIVE YOU THIS AWARD
                   WITH LOVE AND APPRECIATION
                          JULY 6, 1994

     After Doris accepted her plaque, she said:

     Thank you so very much. I am so surprised--I want to thank
everybody, and one thing I want to say to you is my parents have
always told us to be faithful to your word, and whatever you
commit yourself to do, then do the best you can. You don't ever
know who's watching you. I just want to thank you.

                   The Jacobus tenBroek Award

     Dr. Fred Schroeder, Chairman of the Jacobus tenBroek Award
committee, then came to the podium to present that award. This is
what he said:

     It is a genuine honor for me this evening to present the
Jacobus tenBroek Award. Let me begin by thanking the members of
the 1994 selection committee: Allen Harris, Joyce Scanlan, Ramona
Walhof, and James Omvig. There is, of course, no greater honor
within the National Federation of the Blind than to be selected
for the Jacobus tenBroek Award. Jacobus tenBroek was our founder.
He was the one who had the capacity to envisage for the blind a
future of equal status with the sighted. With his intellect and
his vigor, he began the process of translating our dream into
action. In 1940 Dr. tenBroek met with representatives from seven
states and created the means by which blind people could work
collectively toward first-class status.
     The 1994 recipient of the Jacobus tenBroek Award is an
individual who in his own right has demonstrated the same
capacity to dream of true freedom for the blind and translate
this belief into action. He is an individual who in his own right
stands out as a leader in the organized blind movement. He is a
man of great integrity, a man of conviction, and a man with the
ability to inspire hope in others. The 1994 recipient of the
Jacobus tenBroek Award is Dr. Homer Page.[prolonged applause]
     All of you know Dr. Page is the President of the National
Federation of the Blind of Colorado. For many years he has
chaired our Affiliate Action Committee, which requires tireless
work and is, of course, key to our National Conventions' running
smoothly. In 1987 he was one of the individuals who helped found
our center in Colorado, the Colorado Center for the Blind. Since
its inception he has served as the chairman of its Board of
Directors. He also serves as the chairman of the Board of the
Colorado School for the Deaf and Blind and also for the Boulder
County Center for People with Disabilities. He also serves as the
chairperson of the Boulder County Commission, an elected
position, which reflects the high esteem in which he is held by
his community.
     I've only listed the things of which he is chairman. He is
involved in many other things. Dr. Page holds a Ph.D. in social
and political ethics and serves as a member of the faculty at the
University of Colorado at Boulder. He is an individual with great
talent and compassion. He is an individual, of course, deserving
the highest honor we, the organized blind, can bestow--the
Jacobus tenBroek Award. The plaque which I will now present reads
as follows:

                     JACOBUS tenBROEK AWARD

                National Federation of the Blind

                          Presented to

                         Dr. Homer Page

         for your dedication, sacrifice, and commitment
             on behalf of the blind of this nation.
    Your contribution is measured not in steps but in miles,
        not in individual experiences but by your impact
            on the lives of the blind of the nation.
           Whenever we have asked, you have answered.
             We call you our colleague with respect.
                We call you our friend with love.

                          July 6, 1994

     When Dr. Page came to the microphone, he responded by
saying:

     Dr. Schroeder, I want to thank you and the committee and
everyone who had something to do with this. The Jacobus tenBroek
Award is one that I've listened to as it's been presented over
the years, and I've thought, "That's something some day I would
really be honored to receive." I didn't have any idea it would
really happen. I remember when my dear friends, Ray and Diane
McGeorge, received this award. It really is an award given to
people who work, and I'm surprised that it was me. But it is an
award that the organization gives to the people who care and love
and live in the organization. It is such an honor to receive it.
I want to thank all of you very much for thinking of me in this
way. Thank you.[applause]



[Photo: Dr. Fred Schroeder reads Braille from the podium. Caption: Dr. Fred
Schroeder, newly named Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Commission,
addresses the Tuesday morning Convention session.]

       PREPARING FOR EMERGING CHALLENGES AND PARTNERSHIPS
                     by Fredric K. Schroeder

     This address was delivered at the 1994 Convention of the
National Federation of the Blind on Tuesday, July 5.

     The movement of a people toward first-class status is a
process, not an event. The challenges of tomorrow are very often
the challenges of today, and indeed the challenges of yesterday.
The move toward social equality is an evolution; and, with each
new generation building on the experience of the last, we move
farther along the continuum from social isolation to first-class
status.
     Two years ago at our National Convention in Charlotte, Dr.
Jernigan described the shifting balances in the blindness field.
For the first time we have come into an age when the blind
themselves control the political influence and economic resources
to breathe life into the dream of self-determination. Will true
social equality be realized in the Federation's third generation?
Or the fourth? Or the fifth? The answer will depend some on our
ability, some on our commitment, and perhaps some on forces
beyond our control. Nevertheless, laying "when" aside, we know
with certainty that our goal will be reached. The events of
yesterday and today are important parts of our history,
toughening us and giving us perspective as we look to the future.
     In 1967 Dr. Jacobus tenBroek, our founder and first leader,
delivered his final banquet address at our National Convention in
Los Angeles. In that address Dr. tenBroek looked back eleven
years to an earlier convention in California to evaluate the
progress we had made as a movement. In his address he said:

     ... The state of our relations with the agencies, at that
     turbulent point of our history, can be briefly
     characterized. It was a state of war. We were in fact the
     targets of concerted opposition--both nationally and within
     many of our affiliated states. The purpose of that attack
     was to break up the organized blind movement and return its
     members to the alienation, dependency, and disorganization
     of the status quo ante bellum-- that is, the good old days
     before the blind were organized.

     Dr. tenBroek went on to say:

     The private agencies and voluntary societies are very much
     in evidence, as powerful as they are visible. Are they our
     collaborators or our calumniators? When the agency official
     passes by, who goes there: friend or foe?

     Now it is 1994 and the question is still as relevant today
as when Dr. tenBroek posed it in 1967. "When the agency official
passes by, who goes there: friend or foe?" And as in 1967 the
answer today "remains qualified and doubtful."
     Balances in the blindness field have shifted and continue to
shift. Our momentum is undeniable and our progress unstoppable.
For many years we pressed the rehabilitation establishment to
join with us in correcting the eighty-percent unemployment rate
among the blind, and now the 1992 Amendments to the
Rehabilitation Act support our contention that the rehabilitation
system exists to promote employment. For many years we spoke out
against a failed system of rehabilitation training premised on
outmoded beliefs about the incapacity of the blind. When the
agencies would not respond, we the blind established our own
training centers and successfully pushed for changes to the
Rehabilitation Act ensuring a client's right of choice. We led
the way in emphasizing the importance of Braille as the only true
means to literacy for the blind.
     In the education of blind children we led the way in drawing
attention to the problems of mainstreaming and later full
inclusion. We exposed a system that offered blind children a
watered-down curriculum in exchange for desegregation and put
forward the belief that integration and high expectations can and
must work together. While not vilifying the residential schools,
we have also resisted the temptation to romanticize their
importance. For many children they have been effective vehicles
for providing a good basic education. But as with other
traditional programs for the blind all too often they have lacked
the capacity to envisage a role of equal partnership for the
blind. In employment and education we have been the ones with the
courage and capacity to assert a new vision of blindness. As
President Maurer told us last year:

     Not all of the problems faced by the blind have been
     solved--far from it. But many have. Not all of the negative
     attitudes about us have been eradicated, but it is fair to
     say that all of them have been affected by our years of
     effort.

     What accounts for our success? The unstoppable force of the
organized blind movement is not simply the product of a group of
people resisting oppression. We do not exist simply to respond to
mistreatment. We exist to promote a new and positive philosophy
of blindness. We believe in our right to live normal lives with
dignity and equal opportunity. We share this belief and hence
share the responsibility for making it come true.
     When I was sixteen years old and became totally blind, I was
entirely without hope. I envisaged a future of idleness,
isolation, and dependency. I had neither the perspective nor the
ability to free myself from this conception. The Federation gave
me hope and the encouragement necessary to help me reshape what I
believed about blindness. I was urged on by others until
gradually I was able to believe in myself and believe in the
promise of equal status for the blind. We do not simply resist
oppression but promote a positive vision. Our leaders, who
devoted themselves to building the Federation, were not compelled
to do so by personal circumstances. Dr. tenBroek was a brilliant
man, well educated, with a demanding career. Similarly, Dr.
Jernigan and President Maurer are highly educated and
professionally successful. Yet they all gave of themselves so
that a newly blind sixteen-year-old, lying in a hospital bed in
San Francisco, could have hope.

     Here in this room today is a young man thirteen years old
who in the past year began losing his sight. I do not know
whether he is experiencing the same fear and despair I
experienced as a teenager. I do know that he is here with us and
therefore inside must have at least some kindling of hope. He has
a right to live a full and normal life. In this room twenty-five
hundred of us are ready to stand with him and assist him in
obtaining the training and confidence he needs. He is our hope
for the future, and we and those who came before us are his hope
for the future. As Dr. Jernigan once told us:

     We must never forget our history; we must never dishonor our
     heritage; we must never abandon our mission. With love for
     each other and faith in our hearts, we must go the rest of
     the way to equal status and first-class membership in
     society.

     The challenges of tomorrow are the challenges of today and
of yesterday. Those who came before us laid the foundation upon
which we are building, and the next generation will take what we
have achieved and move the blind closer still to the goal of real
integration. We work with a clear sense of purpose. The tide has
turned, and the balance has shifted. Today we are in a period
which can be described as the blindness field's equivalent of
Perestroika and Glasnost. As it is with nations, so it is in the
blindness field. While restructuring and openness are publicly
greeted with enthusiasm, old habits die hard, and neither side is
anxious prematurely or disproportionately to weaken its own
arsenal. Increasingly we are sought out for partnership and
collaboration.
     While this marks significant progress, it is difficult to
greet this new day without a tinge of bitterness. Many of those
who kept us down and kept us out would be our partners today. We
should enter into partnerships when we can. Yet those who would
be our partners must understand that we are not prepared to sell
out our fundamental beliefs for the sake of getting along.
     One area where we have been sought out for collaboration
concerns architectural accessibility. For the most part we hold
the view that it is better to train blind people to deal with the
world as it is rather than altering the world according to
someone else's conception of what the blind need. Accessibility
for the blind is invariably cast in terms of the over-dramatized
needs of a mythical blind person.
     A good example of this problem has to do with elevator
accessibility for the blind. At one time there was no Braille in
elevators, yet somehow the blind managed to find their way. Later
Braille became commonplace in elevators, and while not essential,
it was undeniably useful. After all, there are print markings on
elevator panels, and Braille markings provided a convenient way
for a blind person to get the same information. As technology
marched forward, talking elevators came along; and as with
Braille they provided another convenient source of information by
identifying the floor on which the elevator had stopped. But the
designers and architects, acting on the conception of the
mythical blind person, could not stop there.
     Recently I stepped onto a new elevator with the latest
accommodations for the blind. Braille marked the panel, and
speech announced the floors. But beyond this the designers had
added an innovation. When the elevator stopped, a voice
announced, "Fourth floor, the doors are opening. "Fourth floor,
the doors are opening." After a moment the elevator announced,
"Do not attempt to enter; the doors are closing." "Do not attempt
to enter; the doors are closing." While I need information, I do
not require a mechanical custodian. I do not know any blind
people who are so unaware as to require an announcement to know
when the doors are opening. Nor do I know blind people who need a
mechanical device to tell them not to enter when the doors are
closing. This type of accommodation is no accommodation at all,
but high tech paternalism. It is insulting to me and to every
blind person I know.
     We have been asked to collaborate in many ways. As you know,
the Association for the Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind
and Visually Impaired (AER) has been the organization that
certifies orientation and mobility instructors. They used to have
a requirement that you had to be fully sighted, with normal
vision, to be certified as a mobility instructor. When Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act came along and the university
programs that trained mobility instructors were afraid of being
sued, they modified it to a functional abilities assessment
checklist. These functional abilities included things like
observing a student from distances as high as 375 feet. These
were not tasks associated with orientation and mobility. A fully
sighted person who had never worked with a blind person could
have performed the functional abilities, while an experienced
blind cane travel teacher could not have passed the functional
abilities assessment. Its sole purpose was to discriminate
against the blind. AER is proposing next week in Dallas to modify
it even further. The new modification will allow us as blind
people to become certified, but only if we pass the functional
abilities test by using a reader--that is, a sighted person to
give us the information that they believe is so vital. This marks
no progress at all. This marks no understanding of how blind
people teach cane travel. To add insult to injury, they intend to
take note of these accommodations and mark them on your
certificate to protect the client and the employer.
     Most recently we have been asked to participate in a
conference. (This is to show how open-minded the AER has become.)
The conference would bring together blind people who have taught
cane travel and university types who run the mobility programs,
and we would demonstrate for them our techniques. Then they would
go back and conduct research to see whether they work. This type
of proposal is also insulting and intolerable.
     While we are willing to work with others, we will not sell
ourselves out just to get along. We will continue to speak up for
that which is right and speak out against that which is wrong! It
is our strength and commitment to purpose that have shifted the
balances and caused those who were once our opponents to seek our
partnership now. The agencies are keenly aware that they can no
longer be sustained without us. Yet, as in 1967, we must still
ask the question, "When the agency official passes by, who goes
there: friend or foe?" Only now the agency official is compelled
to ask the same question of us. "When the blind pass by, who goes
there: friend or foe?" No longer is power vested solely in the
agencies. Today it is also vested in the organized blind. The
balance has shifted.
     What are the challenges that lie ahead? They are the
challenges of increased social and economic opportunity: the
right to go to school and get a good education; to become
literate and to hold a responsible job, to own a home, raise a
family, and participate actively in the community; the right to
obtain training and to be treated with respect; the right to work
in equal partnership with the governmental agencies charged with
providing rehabilitative services; the right to associate freely
with others and work collectively for the common good; the right
to pass on to each new generation a sense of hope for the future
and perspective on the past. These are the rights associated with
freedom and the rights we intend to have. These are the
challenges of tomorrow and the challenges of today and the
challenges of yesterday. Only now we have rounded the last turn,
and the finish line is within sight. Our success is unstoppable.
     The National Federation of the Blind is the vehicle by which
we move toward freedom. Collectively we share a history marked by
tyranny and exclusion. Collectively we have battered down much of
the old thinking about blindness and replaced it with a new
vision, and collectively we will arrive at that day when we as
blind people attain equal membership in society.
     Soon I will be moving to Washington to take up my new work
with the Rehabilitation Services Administration. I do not know
all that lies ahead,but I do know that I will not compromise my
fundamental values for the sake of getting along. You can count
on me to do my part to further our mission and to work for that
day when, as blind people, we truly do obtain first-class status
in society.


[Photo: Mr. Maurer reads Braille from the podium. Caption: President Maurer
delivers the 1994 banquet address.]

               LET THE WING OF THE BUTTERFLY FLAP
                     An Address Delivered by
                           MARC MAURER
           President, National Federation of the Blind
             At the Banquet of the Annual Convention
                 Detroit, Michigan, July 6, 1994

     Events in the universe have traditionally been classified as
cosmos or chaos--cosmos for order and chaos for disorder. But
within the last twenty years this division within the realm of
science has become indistinct. A new discipline seeks to explain
what appeared in the past to be random events by attempting to
identify patterns in chaos. The significance of this study was
dramatized by the meteorologist and mathematician Edward Lorenz,
who asked in his 1979 address to the American Association for the
Advancement of Science: "Does the Flap of a Butterfly's Wings in
Brazil Set Off a Tornado In Texas?"
     In the scientific study of chaos events are divided into two
categories: those which are repeated precisely and those which
(even though they sometimes appear to be repetitious) are never
duplicated. Exactly repeated events (known as periodic
occurrences) are understandable and predictable. Nonperiodic
events may be strikingly similar, but they never entirely
reproduce the circumstances of a former time. Therefore, they are
unstable and unpredictable.
     The Lorenz thesis is that a nonperiodic system is unstable
at every point. Consequently, a small change in one part of it
may be magnified through repetition so that, several cycles
later, it becomes prodigious. The hope of the scientists studying
chaos is that, if the overall pattern can be understood and if
the controlling elements of a scientific process can be
identified, unstable chains of events can be manipulated. The
possibility emerges of bringing order out of chaos.
     But what does all of this have to do with the blind? Do the
principles involved in the scientific study of chaos have
application to us? Is there a pattern to be recognized--and if
so, what does it tell us? Do we as blind people exist within a
structure that is nonperiodic and hence unstable at every point?
Does this mean that there is the possibility of altering our
circumstances--not only when the time is right, but at any time
that we can find the strength, the will, and the resources?
     If we were foolish and imperceptive enough to accept the
beliefs about blindness that once were universally held, our
history would be brief and our story soon told. Here it is in a
nutshell: Our patterns of action and interaction are almost
nonexistent. They are unremarkable--flat--so entirely repetitious
and dull as to be dismissed without the slightest stir of
interest. The cycle for the blind (we have heard it through the
centuries) is periodic, stable, predictable. According to this
theory, we who are blind come into being and live our lives
without making substantial contributions, either to society or
ourselves. Well, perhaps one contribution. Since we require more
support than others, there will be a lightening of the burden for
the rest of humanity when we leave this "vale of tears." If you
think I exaggerate or overdramatize, I ask you to remember that
the Greeks and the Romans exposed their blind children on the
hillsides to die, and so did many others.
     Yes, that was the theory. And in some quarters that is still
the theory. But don't you believe it! It's a lie! That theory is
not our theory. That understanding of blindness is not our
understanding--and those who think that way cannot comprehend
either the effort and sacrifice of our past, the struggle and
transition of our present, or the hope and dream of our future.
Chaos theory tells us that tiny alterations (even the flapping of
the butterfly's wing) may produce dramatic effects--and at least
for us, that is true.
     We can prove it by what happened in Wilkes-Barre,
Pennsylvania, on November 16, 1940. The wing of the butterfly
flapped, and tornadoes were produced, not only in Texas but all
over this country and the world. Just a handful of blind men and
women met that day to form the National Federation of the Blind.
Their leader was our first President, Dr. Jacobus tenBroek, a
young blind professor and brilliant Constitutional scholar. Only
a handful. Only the writing of a constitution and the exchange of
a pledge of joint action and mutual support. Yet for the blind
the repercussions changed the world. The wing of the butterfly
flapped.
     Although in 1940 some schools for the blind had been in
existence for over a hundred years and although a number of
agencies and institutions had been operating for decades,
conditions for the blind remained bleak. Blind people were not
regarded by the public as capable of independence, and often the
professional educators who worked with the blind on a daily basis
felt the same way, believing that we could be no more than wards.
     One of the early pioneers in work with the blind was Dr.
Samuel Gridley Howe, who served as the first superintendent of
the Perkins School for the Blind and who went counter to the
general trend. An educator of real understanding and discernment,
Dr. Howe believed that blind men and women could perform
satisfactorily in the ordinary workplace along with their sighted
neighbors. Such progressive perceptions were not shared by most
other educators in the field.
     A biography of Edward Ellis Allen, written by his wife and
coincidentally published in that pivotal year of 1940, describes
the work of one of Dr. Howe's successors, for Allen was a
superintendent at Perkins. Mr. Allen divided blind students into
two categories: the blind and the semi-sighted. According to
Allen, only some blind people are bright enough for education,
and even those learn at a reduced pace. The semi-sighted are in
danger of psychological damage if they study with the blind, and
blind people are completely helpless unless assisted by those who
are assigned to instruct them. Here are excerpts from Mr. Allen's
biography. It is worthy of note that much of the content of the
book consists of direct quotes from his own writing and that the
book was approved by him:

     When I entered upon my responsible duties [he says], I did
     so, having resolved to add my best strength to ameliorate
     the condition of the blind--to thin the ranks of the
     pitiable blind by transference of as large a number as
     possible to the ranks of those who command the respect of
     everybody.

     I interrupt the narrative to ask: Is the implied sweeping
generalization believable? If we have not had the advantage of
instruction by an educator of the blind, are we, as blind people,
unable to command respect? Without the ministrations of a
professional like Allen to ameliorate our condition, do we remain
pitiable? But there are other pronouncements from this 1940
publication:

     It has been said [continues Allen] that more than any other
     class the blind are in the hands of their educators. If this
     is true, how vast are our responsibilities. The task before
     us is greater in that we have not only to instill into the
     blind a belief in themselves, we must also bring it about
     that the seeing believe in them too. The dependence of the
     blind upon us, their helplessness--this it is that gives the
     work its absorbing interest.

     I pause to reflect that if those who would teach us believe
that we are interesting because they think of us as dependent and
helpless, may we be saved from such teaching and such teachers.
But this is not all from the Allen biography:

     One of the early and late problems [in schools for the
     blind, the book says,] was their children who saw too little
     to be taught in the public schools but too much to be in a
     school for the blind, where they were misfits. They would
     not become finger-readers; the retarded pace of the blind
     children caused these others to slow down to meet it, or
     they spent their superfluous energies in teasing and
     hectoring the children who saw less.
     Such children [says Allen] had previously either given up
     school or had gone off to institutions for the blind, where,
     because of being misfits, they commonly became poor students
     and psychologically more blind than seeing. Their change to
     an atmosphere of appeal to the eye [in the semi-sighted
     classes where blind children with a little remaining vision
     were taught to read print] was of untold benefit,
     establishing in them a new morale.

     This summation of the prospects for the blind was just as
much a lie and just as repugnant to thinking blind people in 1940
as it is today. Our morale does not depend on sight. When we are
children, we do not slow down the so-called semi-sighted (or, for
that matter, the fully sighted) because we read Braille. We are
not completely dependent or helpless, and we do not need
caretakers to interpret our potential to the public so that we
may gain respectability. The Allen description contains a failure
of understanding--one which is simple to express but vast in its
implications. Allen's conception of the blind is that we cannot
speak and act for ourselves--that there is a fundamental
difference between those of us who are blind and those who are
sighted--that a guiding hand will always be necessary to the
lives of the blind--that equality between those who are blind and
those who are not can never be achieved--and that the semi-
sighted are stuck somewhere between in gradations of inferiority
and helplessness, depending on how much or how little sight they
have.
     At the same time that these shop-worn opinions were being
prepared for dissemination to the public, the National Federation
of the Blind was being formed. The Federation (whose thousands of
members are gathered here tonight, more than half a century
later) serves today, as it did in 1940, as tangible refutation of
this misguided portrayal of who we are and what we can do. The
recent shift in emphasis in work with the blind, both for
administrators of agencies and for educators in residential and
public schools, is nothing short of dramatic. Increasingly the
mood is one of cooperation, interaction, and mutual
responsibility between programs for the blind and organizations
of blind consumers.
     We have every reason to hope that the day will soon be at
hand when those of us who are blind can have first-class
citizenship as a matter of right, and have it without the qualms
which members of emerging minorities often feel as to whether
they are worthy or entitled--not whether they are competent or
able to contribute, but whether they are worthy or entitled. And
while we are on the subject of worthiness and entitlement, we
seem (thank God) to be almost approaching a time when we can be
accepted as first-class citizens and equal participants in
society without the constant necessity of hitting professionals
in the blindness field over the head with their own misguided
books and meaningless studies to deter them from trying to hold
us in custody. We want to live in peace and cooperation. We have
absolutely no desire for custody and control over the lives of
others, and we absolutely won't permit others to have custody and
control over us.
     The Allen postulate is that there can be no true
independence for the blind, but the daily experience of the least
among us proves that this is not so. There was a time when the
overwhelming majority of administrators and professionals in
programs for the blind thought we were their inferiors--and
behaved accordingly. But that time is rapidly coming to an end.
With increasing frequency those in the field of work with the
blind are joining with us on the road to freedom. Our founder and
first president, Dr. Jacobus tenBroek, charted the course in
1940. In his twenty-fifth anniversary banquet address in the
nation's capital in 1965, he set forth the basic tenets of our
movement as clearly as they have ever been put:

     Until the advent of the National Federation of the Blind [he
     said], the blind people of America were taken care of but
     not represented, protected but not emancipated, seen but
     rarely heard.... We who are blind knew in 1940 that if we
     wished to be free, if we meant to gain those inestimable
     privileges of participation for which we had so long
     yearned, then we must organize for purposes of self-
     expression and collective action, then we must concert to
     engage in a noble struggle.

     That is what Dr. tenBroek said about the reason for the
existence of this organization. If we wanted freedom, he said, we
would have to organize. We would have to struggle, and it would
be a noble struggle. He was right. We did. We still do. It is.
And we intend to keep doing. We intend to keep doing until we get
equal opportunity and full participation. Hear what I am saying.
We are not asking for extra privilege or special status but only
for the right to be ourselves, to be fairly judged as we really
are, to fail or succeed on our own merit. That is why the
National Federation of the Blind was formed. That is why it
continues to exist. That is what we want, and that is what we
will have.
     As I have already said, blindness has been regarded as a
settled, periodic, repetitive matter for most of recorded
history, without a stir or the flap of a butterfly's wing. Those
who lack the capacity to see, the theory has always gone, are
unable to compete. With the recent advent of institutionalized
concern for the blind and civil rights legislation, the language
has changed, but many of the beliefs have not.
     Nondiscrimination legislation dictates that public entities
and many private companies must have a handicapped coordinator.
Those designated to be handicapped coordinators have become
(usually without benefit of training or experience) experts in
disability--self-proclaimed experts, it is true, but accepted as
experts notwithstanding.
     In the spring of 1994, materials were distributed to city
bus drivers in Boise, Idaho, to assist them in being properly
sensitive to the needs of blind passengers. In a volume entitled
"Passenger Assistance Techniques: A Training Manual for Vehicle
Operators of Systems Transporting the Elderly and Handicapped,"
drivers are taught that blind people are different. The book
says:

     Since vision is an important part of balance, and due to a
     lack of visual warning or abrupt movements, many visually
     impaired passengers prefer to sit in seats against the
     vehicle wall or in seats that have arm rests.

     That's what the Boise bus company says. I would have hoped
that the notion that sight is required for balance had been put
to rest decades ago. But here it is again--one of the fundamental
characteristics of blindness, according to the experts down at
the bus company. Using these false assumptions about the nature
of blindness as a starting point, bus company officials have
prepared an appendix which lists the rules for leading the blind.
Here is a sample of it:

          1. Never take hold of a person using a white cane
     without first telling him who you are and what you plan to
     do.

     That is what the rule says, but think how much is not said
but implied. After you have told the passenger who you are and
what you plan to do, go right ahead. Take hold. Then do it. It
isn't really necessary to determine whether the blind person
wants you to do it or not. You are the driver. Besides, the
passenger is blind. That means you're in charge. If the passenger
objects to this kind of treatment, this only demonstrates that
blind people are touchy and irritable, not to mention needing to
sit in seats with an armrest and against the vehicle wall. It's
really your duty to make the blind person do what you want. Rule
number two is like rule number one. Here it is:

          2. Never take hold of or move a person's white cane
     until you have told him exactly what you are doing and why.

     Again, how much is implied but never stated! After you have
explained what you are doing and why, feel free to take whatever
action you please. Blind passengers shouldn't have a choice in
these things. They are passengers, and you are the driver. Their
behavior is your responsibility--and besides, they need to sit in
a seat with an armrest and against the vehicle wall.
     If you don't like rules number one and two, think about rule
number four. It begins sensibly enough, but after the good
beginning, it comes to a wretched end. This is what it says:

          4. Always stay one-half pace ahead of the person you
     are leading. Remember, if you forget to tell him the
     direction of movement, the one-half pace will allow him to
     follow the movement of your body. If the person being led is
     staying beside you, he may well fall if you forget to tell
     him the direction of movement.

     Do you suppose the tendency of blind people to fall is
connected with the instability and lack of balance created by
absence of sight? One of the oldest, most outworn, and used-up
lies about the blind is that we fall a lot--falling down stairs,
falling off buses, falling off the wagon, or falling in love. Do
we who are blind fall more frequently than the sighted? But how
often has this been used as a reason for requiring our
acquiescence to irrational demands that we participate in special
programs for the handicapped and that we keep out unless we are
(as they put it) accommodated? We who are blind, the rules tell
us, need to ride in seats with armrests or next to the vehicle
wall.
     The tone of this group of rules for bus drivers in Boise,
Idaho, is perhaps most succinctly set in rule nine, which says:

          9. Make sure that the stop command becomes automatic.
     You may not have time for explanations in a real emergency.

     The brevity of this rule does not hide its ugly
significance. The blind passenger is under the control of the
driver. It is expected that the passenger will be obedient to the
commands of the driver and that the response will be automatic
and unquestioning.
     The irony of this publication is that it was created in
response to the legal obligation to accommodate the handicapped.
Although the booklet doesn't say so directly, its obvious
presumption is that touching, pulling, propelling, or otherwise
manhandling the blind passenger is acceptable behavior. In the
name of being helpful, drivers are instructed to adopt a pattern
of obnoxious officiousness. This behavior and thinking are not
new, of course. They are simply the old, discredited
custodialism, decked out in the new regalia of ADA and hiding
behind the jargon of present-day bureaucracy and synthetic
expressions of concern for the weak and disadvantaged. This is an
example of the uninformed instructing the uninterested regarding
the unfortunate. If we who are blind are in as bad a condition as
that, you have to wonder how we got out of the house and found
the bus stop in the first place. Let the wing of the butterfly
flap. Oh, yes, let it flap! In fact, we will help it flap. No! We
will do more than that! We will see that it does flap!
     There are many odd theories about blindness. One of the
better known is that those who become blind are granted
compensatory powers. Everybody knows, for example, that we who
are blind are good at music. After all, when the Lord removes one
of your senses, according to the legend, he takes out the
grindstone and sharpens up the others. Blind people have more
acute senses of smell, touch, and hearing than the sighted--
right?
     You may have thought that all of this talk about the special
powers you possess was simply a matter of ignorance in bygone
ages. Well, think again! We are now in the process of confirming
that ancient foolishness with so-called scientific research. I
wonder if we will ever know how much damage has been done to the
blind by somebody making an application--to get a grant, to do
research, to get a Ph.D., to get a good salary, to feel a sense
of power, to make another application, to do more research!
     A letter from the National Institutes of Health indicates
that the federal government thinks there might be compensations
for the loss of sight. Here in part is what it says:

          In a collaborative effort between several laboratories
     at the National Institutes of Health, we are planning to
     explore the possible existence of "Compensatory Plasticity"
     in the blind. There is sporadic evidence for the fact that
     blind humans can compensate for their loss of vision by
     improving their remaining senses, but objective studies have
     been rare, and some studies even claim the contrary, namely
     that vision loss, especially when it happens early in life,
     actually impairs the development of other sensory
     modalities.
          From behavioral and neurobiological studies on cats
     with early visual deprivation that some of us have
     undertaken recently [the letter continues], we are very
     optimistic that compensatory plasticity does exist in the
     mammalian brain, and we would like to explore this concept
     now in blind human subjects with modern quantitative
     techniques. Positron emission tomography (PET), for
     instance, has proven invaluable for monitoring neural
     activity in the living brain by measuring changes of local
     blood flow during mental tasks. It is a non-invasive,
     completely harmless technique, which we would like to apply
     to blind volunteers while they are listening to auditory
     stimuli presented to them via speakers or headphones. We
     hope to see an increase in brain activation in formerly
     visual as well as multisensory areas.
          In our opinion [continues the letter], the importance
     of this planned research for the blind community cannot be
     overestimated. Not only would the objective proof of
     compensatory brain plasticity give the blind and their
     families a better outlook for their future, but it seems
     that more effective use of this compensatory plasticity
     should be possible, which would allow the design of sensory
     aids or prostheses better tailored to the brain structures
     and functions that have improved in this process.
          Among blind subjects we are interested in those who
     have been blind from birth as well as those who have become
     blind later in life. These individuals should be essentially
     healthy and as free as possible of insults to the brain,
     other than blindness.
          We would be extremely grateful to you and your
     colleagues if you could draw the attention of interested
     persons with total blindness to our planned research.

     That is what the letter says. Believe me! I did not make it
up. It is from the National Institutes of Health, a part of the
government of the United States. Compensatory plasticity in the
brains of blind people--that is what they want to study. When we
are deprived of the sense of sight (holds the theory), the nerve
impulses that might have come to the brain from the eye are
redistributed to the other senses--touch, taste, smell, and
hearing. If so, those of us who are blind are able to taste more
keenly, smell more distinctly, feel more perceptively, and hear
more acutely than others.
     Think, for example, of the sense of touch. If our ability to
feel is really intensified, a spanking for a blind child would
hurt more than it does for a sighted child. Then, there is the
intimacy of a kiss. Do we get more out of it than the sighted? I
do not know how you feel about this proposition, but I suspect
there might be those who would be willing to volunteer for the
experiment.
     Despite the scientific jargon, despite the studies on cats,
despite the implementation of techniques using positron emission
tomography, what a ridiculous bunch of nonsense! We are not
freaks, and the so-called scientists who would treat us that way
can learn something about us without the necessity of another
scientific study and another federal grant. Blindness has not
changed our mental powers. Not at all. We the members of the
organized blind movement have learned to think, and one result of
that thinking is that we are not willing to permit the ignorant
theories and ignorant superstitions of a former time to be
sanctified in the scientific literature by people wanting
government grants to carry on so-called research. Blind people
are not abnormal, and we will not let the experts tell us that we
are. We have the strength, the will, and the resources to make
our future what we want it to be. The wing of the butterfly has
flapped.
     In the medical laboratories and the offices of the city bus
company, a thorough understanding of blindness is not to be
expected. In the field of work with the blind, however, a more
exacting standard should be demanded. The educators who write
about the blind should have the background, the experience, and
the knowledge to recognize the new reality. Unfortunately the
assumptions in the literature of the 1990's sometimes resemble
those of an earlier era.
     In 1993 an educational text was published entitled The Art
and Science of Teaching Orientation and Mobility to Persons with
Visual Impairments. This book by Dr. William H. Jacobson, a
professor of rehabilitation of the blind at the University of
Arkansas at Little Rock, was ostensibly written to encourage the
teaching of cane travel skills to the blind. However, an
examination of the contents does not inspire confidence.
     In Chapter Five there is a section entitled "Turns and
reversing direction." It is not exactly what you would call a
long section--ponderous, maybe, but not long. It contains seven
sentences and three pictures. I discovered, to my astonishment,
that the subject matter is how to turn around. Not how to move
around the block or walk around the room or get around the
teacher or go around the world but how to turn around. The text
of this section is hard to follow without reference to the
pictures. These show two people in an elevator. In the first
photograph their backs are to the reader; in the second they are
facing each other with their sides to the reader; and in the
third they are facing forward. In other words, they turned
around. As you hear these instructions, ask yourself if you are
capable of this complicated maneuver. Here are the sentences:

     When the instructor and student pivot around each other in
     turning and reversing directions, the cane is held in the
     not-in-use manner. To reverse directions using the about-
     face procedure, the two turn to face each other. The student
     places the cane in the hand that is holding on to the
     instructor. He places the cane vertically to the ground and
     flat against the instructor's arm, with the cane between the
     palm (or thumb) and the guiding arm. The student finds the
     instructor's free arm with the freed hand of the "cane" arm.
     He lets go of the original arm and grasps the cane in the
     not-in-use position. As he grasps the instructor's new
     guiding arm in the basic sighted guide position, they turn
     to face in the opposite direction (see Figures 5.1-5.3).

     As you ponder Professor Jacobson's words, think back a
little. Do you remember kindergarten and that little song "Do the
Hokeypokey"? That's the one in which "You put your right foot in,
and take your right foot out. Put your right foot in, and shake
it all about. Do the hokeypokey, and turn yourself around. That's
what it's all about." Did Professor Jacobson miss kindergarten,
or is he under the mistaken impression that the blind did? Do we
really need a college text to instruct those who will teach us to
travel with a cane the intricacies of turning around?
     The professor's writing would be amusing if it were not so
destructive. The fact that such bizarre material can seriously be
distributed is an indication of the extent of the misperceptions
of blindness that still exist. The underlying assumptions of the
work of Dr. Jacobson are completely without foundation. They are
false--a distortion--a part of the burden of our past. We possess
the ability to think and speak and act for ourselves. We know
about our capacity to build and our powers of comprehension. A
growing number of the professionals in work with the blind also
know. Let Professor Jacobson turn from the pattern of yesterday
and gain a new perspective. Let him learn about the flap of the
butterfly's wing.
     Although blindness can, with proper training and
opportunity, be reduced to the level of a physical nuisance, it
does not always happen that way. Sometimes the misunderstandings
about blindness are permitted to survive, and those who become
blind receive little stimulation, no encouragement, and virtually
no training. When this occurs, the life of the blind person is
wasted, and there is sorrow indeed.
     About a year ago I received a letter from a mother in
Philadelphia. Although it is brief, this letter describes a
dramatic and soul-searching problem--one which demands our
attention---one which raises questions that must be answered. The
letter says:

     Enclosed is my check for the most enjoyable book, Making
     Hay. I also have a blind son. He has been living in the
     blind residence since my husband died six months ago. I sent
     him there, as I am getting up in years and can no longer
     take care of him. The home might close, and there is no
     other place in Philadelphia for the blind. I wrote dozens of
     letters and made many phone calls, but no one responded--no
     one cares for the blind. I wrote to United States Senator
     Arlen Specter in Washington, D.C., and no reply from him
     either. If you have any suggestions as to where we can get
     funds to remain open--it would be appreciated.

                                                  Most sincerely,

     As we have so often said, blindness need not be a tragedy,
but in this case it is--or, more precisely, the false assumptions
which have ruined this man's life are. When our state president
visited the home for the blind, he learned the details. This
mother cared for her blind son until he was almost forty years
old. Then she moved him to a home for the blind because she was
no longer able to give him the attention he needed. This blind
man, a resident of the home for the blind, sings for his church,
but he has no other regular interaction with society outside the
home. There has been no training, no opportunity for productive
employment, no encouragement to be a part of the broader society,
and no prospect for taking initiative and planning his own
future. But this is not the worst of it. This blind man's very
wish for independence is gone. The spirit that might have sought
self-sufficiency and freedom has been killed, stamped out
forever.
     What went wrong? What action can now be taken to correct the
problem? How many other blind people are there who face the same
isolation and loneliness of an unproductive, segregated
existence? How many blind people are being urged to be satisfied
with protection and care instead of self-sufficiency, risk, and
freedom? How many of us have (without even knowing we did it)
accepted less from ourselves than we might have achieved for the
sake of a little peace? But our pattern is not unalterable. We
have been told that our lives are predictable, and in the past
this has often been true. The pattern of care and custody is
being replaced by one of initiative and hope--and we the blind
are making it happen. Although there may be some individuals who
have given up, we have not. In the homes for the blind, in the
hamlets and towns throughout the nation, on the farms or in the
cities, there are opportunities to be had, and we will bring them
into being. Tiny alterations can create tremendous results, and
we shall not rest until the pattern is shifted. Let the power of
the butterfly's wing be felt.
     As I was contemplating the gathering of the organized blind
movement in this convention of the National Federation of the
Blind, I was reminded of an incident which occurred on a
Thanksgiving day in the early 1970's. Dr. Jacobus tenBroek is the
innovator and founder of the National Federation of the Blind.
Dr. Kenneth Jernigan is the tireless builder of our movement and
resourceful teacher of the blind, who in the early 1950's met Dr.
tenBroek for the first time and began a period of intensive work
and study that has never abated despite the death of Dr. tenBroek
in 1968. The message of Dr. tenBroek, that the blind could engage
in a noble struggle to win the rights of full participation and
first-class citizenship, struck a responsive chord in the mind
and heart of the philosopher and teacher, Dr. Kenneth Jernigan.
He carried that message to every corner of the nation and began a
process of building the National Federation of the Blind and of
teaching blind people, which has altered the course of our
history for all time. Dr. Jernigan encouraged us, challenged us,
taught us--and the range of his instruction was broad enough to
include matters as diverse as how to cut wood, how to structure a
sentence, how to barbecue a steak, how to believe in ourselves,
how to speak in our own best interests, and how to jump rope.
Tiny alterations in a system can lead to changes that are beyond
imagining.
     A number of us had gathered for a meeting of the Federation
that Thanksgiving day, and we had enjoyed one of those bountiful
dinners. Late in the afternoon a few of us were talking about the
participation of blind people in gym class. Some among us had
believed that jumping rope could not be done without sight. Dr.
Jernigan showed us otherwise. Rope jumping can be done alone, but
it is more intricate, more complex, and more satisfying when done
in tandem. One, two, three, or four at a time we jumped rope.
Four at a time takes timing, precision, and cooperation. If it is
to be done successfully, there must be similarity of purpose and
coordinated effort. Jumping rope is a simple thing unless the
person doing the jumping starts with the belief that it can't be
done.
     As it is with jumping rope, so it is with cooking a steak,
sawing a tree, gaining independence, changing a society,
revolutionizing thought, or causing the butterfly's wing to flap.
Dr. Jernigan taught us to believe in our own abilities, and with
that belief came the power to act. With something as simple as
jumping a rope, he emphasized the importance of working together.
It was true in 1940; it was true in 1970; and it is just as true
today. If we want to alter the pattern, we must work with each
other to reinforce each repetition in the cycle. Dr. tenBroek
created the mechanism; Dr. Jernigan taught us to use it. What
comes next is our responsibility.
     And the prospect we face is bright. Look about you! We live
in a wonderful time of unparalleled hope and opportunity.
Federation centers are scattered throughout the nation, turning
out competent graduates. We are getting more and more jobs in
both government and private employment. An increasing number of
professionals in the blindness field are coming to the new
understanding and marching with us to freedom. And as important
as anything else (maybe more important because more encompassing)
is the positive shift in public attitude. All of this has not
happened by accident. We have caused it to happen--through our
Kernel Books, which blanket the land; through our television and
radio announcements; through our daily example in workplace and
home; and through our routines of daily living. We have made it
happen, and we are accelerating the process exponentially.
     As we come together tonight in our thousands from every part
of the nation, we must try to identify those elements that make
the pattern for us what it is. We cannot erase the past, the
universal belief of a former time (which is even accepted
sometimes today) that we who are blind are helpless and inferior.
That incorrect assessment (that chain of mental slavery) is a
part of our heritage. We should not hate it. Rather, we should
cherish it, understand it, and learn from it. Let us hug it to
our breasts and remember the countless thousands of blind men and
women who were destroyed by it. It will be one of our most
powerful teachers and motivators as we come fully to appreciate
our own worth and strive for the recognition and acceptance that
must and will be ours. In the theory of chaos we are told that a
nonperiodic system is unstable at every point--that tiny
alterations can produce dramatic effects. But of course an
unstable system can be influenced for good or ill. We must seek
those elements which will bring creative and positive change, and
we must minimize the influence of everything else.
     Although many of the writings regarding blindness (such as
the ones from the Boise bus company, the National Institutes of
Health, and the professor of rehabilitation at the University of
Arkansas) are negative, dreary, and false, they are no longer
unchallenged in shaping the pattern. The sentiments contained in
these writings have been repeated almost without alteration for
centuries. But no more! A new course has been taken--and we are
not now dealing with the mere flap of the butterfly's wing. That
occurred in 1940. It has been amplified and re-amplified through
repetition until there are now tornadoes, not only in Texas but
throughout the world.
     We are altering the course of our history--not only when the
time is right but as the need arises. The future is not a matter
of prediction but decision--our decision. We have the example of
our founder, Dr. tenBroek, and our leader, Dr. Jernigan. With
growing momentum we are building upon what we in the Federation
have already accomplished. Each of us must contribute our energy,
and the combined effort has already become the strongest force
that the field of work with the blind has ever known. The wing of
the butterfly has flapped. But more than that, we have made it
flap. The winds of change that are blowing will sweep away the
old ideas, and we who are blind will gain our freedom. This is
our promise--to ourselves and to the blind of coming generations!
This is the commitment that was made at the time we first came to
organize. This is the commitment we reaffirm today. We always
keep our word. Our future is in our own hands. Let us go together
to meet it!


[Photo/Caption: NFB SCHOLARSHIP WINNERS, 1994--Front row (left to right):
Corinne Vieville; Lisa Connor; Jeffrey Treptow; Nancy Feldman; Lori Miller;
Latonya Phipps; Jennifer Koch; Christine Gravinsky; and Patricia Lawson.
Center row (left to right): Cecilia Ojoawo; Leann Keefe; Cary Supalo; Joel
Zimba; Randy Horwitz; Chester S'groi; and Shannon Bartch. Back row (left to
right): Christine Boone; Luis Anaya; Kurt Kuss; Shawn Mayo; Shane Buresh;
Joseph Drenth; James Lyons; Tracy Rogers; and David Berry.
[Photo: Christine Boone speaks at microphone. Caption: Christine Boone, winner
of the 1994 American Action Fund scholarship, addresses the banquet crowd.]

                      THE SCHOLARSHIP CLASS
                             OF 1994

     The task of the National Federation of the Blind Scholarship
Committee is never easy. During the spring, members must pore
over many hundreds of scholarship applications to choose the
group of finalists, who will attend the convention to compete for
the various awards. Then during convention week, when there are
always at least five things one wants to do with every free
moment, they must find the time to get to know each of the
twenty-six winners in order to make the final judgments in the
competition. This year the job was particularly difficult. The
Class of '94 is talented and energetic. A number of its members
are already active in the Federation, and during the convention
many others began to demonstrate deep interest in and personal
response to our philosophy and commitment to changing what it
means to be blind. This is what Peggy Elliott, Chairman of the
Scholarship Committee, had to say to and about the members of the
Class of '94 at the Wednesday, July 6, banquet as she presented
scholarship certificates to each person:

     The word change is much used these days. To me change is a
slippery word. Change can be good or bad. It can be change
backward or change forward. We in the National Federation of the
Blind, for example, say, "We are changing what it means to be
blind." We know the direction of that change; it can't get any
worse; it can only get better. But this afternoon Dr. Jernigan
described another kind of change, the change in literacy among
blind people--that change brought about inadvertently by
mainstreaming, sending literacy down for blind people. That is
not positive change.
     A better word than change is progress. Progress implies
going in a deliberately chosen direction toward a specified goal.
Since 1940 the National Federation of the Blind has brought about
steady progress in the condition of the blind by knowing what we
want; by ourselves devising the means for getting it; and by
gaining strength by doing the job ourselves, doing it well, and
taking pride in the doing.
     Likewise, this year's twenty-six scholarship winners are all
on steady courses of progress. Each one has chosen education as a
necessary tool that he or she needs in order to achieve his or
her goals. Each of these scholarship winners aspires to certain
goals. Some of them will achieve the goals they now seek. Some,
along their path, will choose to change their goals. But as you
will see from the twenty-six scholarship winners this evening,
each of them is making progress. Each of them is changing his or
her life for the better, and by doing so each of them helps to
further the progress of all blind people toward freedom. I'm
about to introduce to you the twenty-six scholarship winners. Let
me begin by saying that each of them has a distinguished academic
record. Most of them have a grade point average that could be
described as "3.9 something." So I'm not going to say they are
academically distinguished over and over again--you can take that
statement as applying to all of them. I'll tell you a little
about each as he or she comes forward to receive his or her
certificate. I do want to mention though that most of the donors
of most of the scholarships are here in this room tonight. A few
of our scholarships were endowed by wills or by people who are
not here. But all of the scholarships named National Federation
of the Blind are given by you and me--the people in this room and
those thousands of Federationists who weren't able to join us
tonight but who are long-standing members of the National
Federation of the Blind. I will now begin, ladies and gentlemen,
to introduce to you the twenty-six scholarship winners and to
tell you what each has won.
     The first category is National Federation of the Blind
Scholarships. Each of these particular scholarships is in the
amount of $2,000, and there are eight such scholarships.

     Shane E. Buresh, Nebraska, Nebraska: Shane aspires to be a
teacher. Next year he'll be a junior at Peru State College in
Nebraska, where he's studying in the curricula of both education
and mathematics. His goal is to be a secondary math or possibly a
teacher of special education in the public schools. Shane also
serves as a newspaper columnist for his college newspaper and
competed in a statewide competition of newspaper columnists in
which he won second place. He's also a senator in his college
senate, and he has participated in several state and national
conventions of the National Federation of the Blind.

     Joseph Bradley Drenth, Michigan, Michigan: Joseph has just
graduated from Petoskey High School, which he describes as six
hours north of here, still in the State of Michigan. He'll be a
freshman in the fall at Michigan Technological University, where
he intends to earn a degree in electrical engineering and
computer science. His goal is to go on through to graduate
studies, where he wants to study bio-engineering with an emphasis
on brain and neuro-intercommunications involving electro-chemical
voltage variances! I'm not kidding. Joseph began to lose his
sight only a couple of years ago. He's a National Merit Scholar,
and he's also an avid gardener--even six hours north of here.

     Randall S. Horwitz, New York, New York: Randy has just
completed his first year at Rochester Institute of Technology,
where he is earning a B.S. in computer science. Randy intends to
work in the field of computer programming. He was also recently
elected to serve as President of his local Hillel chapter, the
international Jewish organization for students.

     Patricia Lawson, Texas, Texas: Patricia will be a sophomore
in the fall at Houston Community College, where she is earning an
A.A. degree in mental health and social work. Patricia intends
ultimately to earn an M.S.W. and become a licensed professional
counselor. Patricia has been a member of the Houston Chapter of
the National Federation of the Blind for eight years. She works
now full-time at the Houston Lighthouse for the Blind in the
social services department and is attending school full-time at
night.

     Latonya Phipps, Maryland, Georgia: Latonya will be a
sophomore in the fall at Spelman College, where she already has
one year under her belt. She is working towards a B.S. in
psychology. She would ultimately like to earn a Ph.D. in
psychology and have her own practice. She would also like to have
a Ph.D. in African-American literature. She'd like to work part-
time as an English professor and full-time as a psychologist.
Latonya has been a freshman member of the class council. She is a
member of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored
People, and she also served as a judiciary representative for her
class. Latonya knows what discrimination is first-hand since her
French professor told her that he didn't know what she was doing
there, because she obviously couldn't perform. She proved him
wrong.

     Chester Paul S'groi, California, California: Chester will be
a senior in the fall at Humboldt State University in northern
California. He's simultaneously earning a B.S. in psychology and
a B.A. in religious studies. Chester's goal is to be ordained as
a Roman Catholic priest.

     Jeffrey J. Treptow, Arizona, Arizona: Jeff is now working at
Phoenix Community College toward an A.A. in office automation. He
intends to get employment in word processing and ultimately
become a supervisor. I want to read to you a few sentences from
Jeff's application letter. I think it's one of the, well you will
see what I mean: "During the past nine years, I have worked in a
sheltered workshop for the blind, Arizona Industries for the
Blind, doing basic production work for substandard wages. In May
of 1992 I was laid off and tried to find other work. However, I
was not able to find other work because of my lack of education
and computer skills. I have been a member of the Phoenix Chapter
of the National Federation of the Blind for approximately two
years. I honestly believe that the only way out of sheltered
workshops is through better education. They only want the blind
to work in sheltered workshops and do menial labor. This
scholarship certainly would be a great help to me and insure the
fact that I will not have to return to sheltered workshop
employment. The state rehabilitation agency does not want to help
the blind get a better education. They only want the blind to
work in sheltered workshops and do menial labor."

     The next scholarship winner, unfortunately, though she has
been with us throughout the convention, is not here this evening.
She has been felled by a combination of infections, and I'll read
her scholarship to you and will convey it to her at another time.

     Elizabeth Anne Winterstein, Illinois, Illinois: Elizabeth
will be a sophomore at the College of St. Francis in the fall.
She is earning a B.S. in psychology, hopes ultimately to earn a
Ph.D., and wants to counsel children and adults with vision loss.
She says to us that her true passion is public speaking, which
many of us can appreciate, and that she has been active in
Illinois state Republican politics.

     The next scholarship is the Hermione Grant Calhoun
Scholarship in the amount of $2,000. As many of you remember,
this scholarship was endowed by Dr. Isabel Grant in memory of her
daughter. Dr. Grant traveled internationally sometimes, I think,
more than she stayed in the U.S. of A. This scholarship goes to:
     Christine L. Gravinsky, Alaska, Colorado: Christine has
completed two years of her baccalaureate studies at the
University of Alaska at Fairbanks, where she outgrew them. She
has now moved to the University of Northern Colorado in Ft.
Collins, where she'll start her junior year. She intends to get
degrees in German and Spanish. She wants to interpret and
translate with fluency in a minimum of seven European languages.
You can see how she outgrew the University of Alaska at
Fairbanks.

     The next scholarship is the Ellen Setterfield Memorial
Scholarship in the amount of $2,000. This scholarship is
restricted to people studying in the social sciences, and the
donor prefers a graduate student. We didn't happen to have one
this year, so the scholarship goes to:

     Jennifer Ranee Koch, Wisconsin, Minnesota: Jennifer will be
entering her senior year in the fall at the University of
Minnesota, where she is pursuing a bachelor's degree in English
as a second language. She wants to be a teacher of English as a
second language, and her discipline is Chicano studies. She's a
woman of broad interests, working in Habitat for Humanity,
volunteering in nursing homes, and working with retarded adults.
She is a member of the Twin Cities Chapter and a member of the
National Federation of the Blind of Minnesota Board of Directors
and has helped with fund raising for that organization. She also
helped to organize a new chapter in Austin, Minnesota.

     The next scholarship is the Kuchler-Killian Memorial
Scholarship in the amount of $2,000, endowed in loving memory of
June Rose Killian's parents. June Rose, of course, and all the
Killians are always here. This scholarship will be given to:

     Joel Steven Zimba, West Virginia, West Virginia: Joel will
be a junior at West Virginia University in Morgantown, West
Virginia, in the fall, where he is earning a bachelor of science
degree in computer science. To tell you a little more about Joel,
he plans to make his career in the area of making software
applications useful to and friendly to people with no computer
knowledge. He also plays electric guitar, chess, and the game,
Dungeons and Dragons.

     The next scholarship is a new one this year, endowed by a
person who has shown much interest in the blind community over
the years, endowed by Mr. Ray Kurzweil in the amount of $2,000.
The Kurzweil Scholarship will go to:

     Lisa Genevieve Connor, Hawaii, California: She is a high
school senior right now and has just completed her work in Hawaii
Preparatory Academy. In the fall she will be a freshman at
Stanford University, and hers is my favorite discipline. She is
going to earn a B.S. in symbolic systems. Lisa is then going to
earn an M.B.A. and work in the business field with computers. For
six years Lisa has been a member of the National Federation of
the Blind. Remember, this is a graduating high school senior. She
currently serves as Second Vice President of the National
Federation of the Blind of Hawaii. I want to tell you that her
mother is also a long-time member and is also attending this
convention.

     The next four scholarships are National Federation of the
Blind scholarships, each in the amount of $2,500.

     Robert David Berry, Nevada, Nevada: Dave is currently in his
senior year, working toward a bachelor's of social work degree at
the University of Nevada at Reno. He intends to complete his
B.S.W. and work towards an M.S.W. He also intends to do private
counseling with young adults, adolescents, and children doing
grief therapy. David is President of our Carson Valley Chapter.
He was recently elected to a seat on the Board of the National
Federation of the Blind of Nevada, attended his first D.C.
Seminar this year, and is a single parent of two children, one of
whom is blind.

     Nancy Lorraine Feldman, Oregon, Oregon: Nancy will be a
junior in the fall at the University of Oregon. She has just
completed work at Chemeketa Community College and is going on to
the University of Oregon, where she is going to earn a B.S. in
psychology. Her goal is to earn a master's in psychology or
whatever she needs in order to become a clinical psychologist.
Nancy is also a single parent of two daughters. She is a member
of the Lane County Chapter of the National Federation of the
Blind. She is an equestrian and before her current career has
marketed books, computers, and software.

     Kurt Friedrich Kuss, Illinois, Illinois: Kurt has just
completed work at National-Louis University on his bachelor of
social work degree and will also be certified this fall in
substance and alcohol abuse counseling. He'll begin his first
year of a master's degree program in social work at Loyola
University of Chicago in the fall. Kurt intends to become an
employee assistance program counselor. He has chosen a field, as
he says, in which you can get a job. He wants to counsel people
with multiple substance-abuse problems. You can see that Kurt is
a man of focus. He has chosen a field in which he knows he cannot
be one of those seventy percent unemployed.

     Lori Michelle Miller, Indiana, Indiana: Lori is entering her
sophomore year at the University of Notre Dame in South Bend,
where she is taking full advantage of the smorgasbord of
opportunities at the post-secondary level. She is undecided as to
her discipline at the moment but considers possibilities in law
or being a college professor. She is leaving from here to go play
on the World Cup Goal Ball team in Colorado Springs. She also
enjoys swimming and roller dance skating.

     NFB Educator of Tomorrow Award, $2,500:

     Corinne Vieville, California, California: Corinne will be
beginning her second year in her master's degree at San Francisco
State University, where she is in the Education Department. Her
goal is to receive a certificate in adult rehab and also a
credential in orientation and mobility, to which we all say,
"Good luck." Corinne also wants to have a job in job development
and career planning for blind students transitioning between home
and work, with the opportunity to teach them skills as well as
transitioning. She herself serves as President of the Mt. Diablo
Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind of California and
lives on a family farm with her husband and four children, where
they raise dairy and Angora goats, dairy and beef cattle, wool
sheep, pigs, horses, donkeys, ponies, and a variety of poultry. I
want you to know that, carrying all those responsibilities, she
commutes one-and-a-half hours a day, one way, to college.

     National Federation of the Blind Humanities Scholarship in
the amount of $2,500:

     Cecilia Ojoawo, Massachusetts, Massachusetts: Cecilia is
about to begin her fourth year in her Ph.D. studies at Boston
University, where she is earning a Ph.D. in psychology. She would
like to be a college psychology professor. Cecilia herself lost
her own parents in Nigeria when she was young and someday would
like to build an orphanage for children in Nigeria. She also
enjoys canoeing. She is a member of and serves currently as
Secretary of the NFB of Massachusetts Boston chapter, and she
teaches Sunday school to first-grade kids.

     Frank Walton Horn Memorial Scholarship in the amount of
$2,500. This scholarship, of course, is endowed in loving memory
of Catherine Horn Randall's father by Cathy and her family, all
of whom are staunch and active members of the NFB of Illinois:

     Cary Alan Supalo, Illinois, Indiana: Cary has just completed
his freshman year at Northern Illinois University, where he is
seeking a bachelor's degree in electrical engineering. He has
decided to change schools in the fall, and he'll be a sophomore
at Purdue University in Indiana. He intends to earn an E.E. and
to work as an engineer in a large corporation. He is an active
member of the National Federation of the Blind of Illinois, where
he attends chapter meetings. He has been to state and national
conventions. While at NIU he served as a student senator from his
class to the student government, also as a volunteer receptionist
at the Roman Catholic Youth Center, and he is currently President
of the Illinois Association of Blind Students. So, Illinois,
you'll have to find a new president.

     The Howard Brown Rickard Scholarship in the amount of
$2,500, our most long-standing scholarship, and restricted to
students in the fields roughly of natural sciences, architecture,
or law. It has been given since 1968 and goes this year to:

     Luis Anaya, California, California: Luis is currently a high
school senior, having just finished at California Academy of
Mathematics and Sciences. He will be a freshman in the fall at
the University of Southern California, where he also intends to
earn a B.S. in electrical engineering. His goal is to add a J.D.
to that E.E. He wants to be a lawyer and ultimately a patent
attorney, combining his knowledge of math and science with the
law. He has served as student body president during his time at
the California Academy of Math and Sciences. He likes to race
bikes, and he has taken college-level courses already in things
like differential calculus and physics.

     Melva T. Owen Memorial Scholarship in the amount of $3,000:

     James Anthony Lyons, California, California: James will be a
senior in the fall at San Diego State University, where he is
studying in the discipline of liberal studies with an emphasis in
music. His goal is to be an elementary school teacher. I heard
someone say this week, "I wish he was teaching my girl right now
rather than some of the teachers she has." James also serves as
Treasurer of the San Diego Chapter of the National Federation of
the Blind of California, and he attended and won a scholarship at
last fall's NFB of California convention. James is a single
parent of a teenage daughter.

     The next scholarship is a brand new scholarship. This
scholarship is the Mozelle and Willard Gold Memorial Scholarship
in the amount of $3,000. This will be an annual scholarship
endowed by Sharon Gold in memory of her parents. Her mother
passed away in 1988, and her father passed away in March of this
year. Sharon's mother learned Braille when Sharon was a
youngster, and when she was eight, her mother learned that there
were over three hundred blind adults in the Bakersfield area who
did not know Braille. Her mother started the Braille classes that
continue today. She believed in literacy in the 1940's, '50's,
and '60's, before we took up the issue in the National Federation
of the Blind. Her father was one of those people of whom it was
said, "He asked nothing of others and gave everything to others."
This scholarship will be given this year to:

     Shannon Raen Bartch, Missouri, Missouri: Shannon has just
graduated from high school and will begin her freshman year of
college at St. Louis University, where she will begin her studies
toward a bachelor of science degree in psychology. Shannon also
intends to earn a J.D. and to become a lawyer. Right before
convention Shannon started learning Braille. I think that is one
of the nice reasons why this is such a good scholarship for
Shannon. She was also a cheerleader for four years in high
school. She is a member of the Missouri Triangle Chapter and went
to the D.C. Seminar this year. Shannon Bartch, the first winner
of the Mozelle and Willard Gold Memorial Scholarship.

     The next two scholarships are called National Federation of
the Blind Scholarships. They are each in the amount of $4,000:

     Shawn Marie Mayo, Illinois, Illinois: Shawn will be a senior
at Bradley University in the fall, where she is also studying
towards a B.S. in psychology. Her goal is to achieve a degree and
then to counsel children with chronic and terminal illnesses and
to do research on that same subject. In addition to her
vocational interests, Shawn is now trying to write a book on this
subject. She is also an equestrian. I wonder, Illinois, if you
have found your next President for the Illinois Association of
Blind Students?

     Tracy Edmond Rogers, Colorado, Colorado: Tracy will be a
junior in the fall at Colorado State University, where he is
going to be earning two degrees, a bachelor's of social work and
also a B.A. in history. Tracy ultimately hopes to earn a J.D.
degree and listen to these aspirations. He wants to be a federal
prosecutor or litigation expert when he comes out of school.
Within twenty years he wants to be either a U.S. Congressman or
Senator or a federal judge. Tracy is also a single parent of a
three-year-old daughter and likes to write songs, go to plays,
and go with his daughter for walks in the park.

     The next scholarship is the Anne Pekar Memorial Scholarship
in the amount of $4,000. This scholarship endowed by the parents
of Anne Pekar in loving memory of her is restricted to a woman
between the ages of seventeen and twenty-five:

     Leann M. Keefe, Kansas, Kansas: Leann will be starting her
second year of her graduate studies in a master's program at the
University of Kansas in Slavic languages and linguistics. Her
goal is to be a professor of Russian and Slavic languages. Leann
spent nine months recently in Russia, some of that teaching and
some of that attending Moscow State University herself. Leann is
a member of the Lawrence Chapter and active in programs for blind
students in Kansas.

     The final scholarship is the American Action Fund
Scholarship in the amount of $10,000. I will first tell you who
the scholarship winner is and then, as that winner comes forward,
tell you a little about her:

     Christine Leah Boone: Many of us know Chris, and she has
lived in the states of Nebraska, New Mexico, Colorado, and
Oregon. She has served in chapter presidencies and as a state
president in many of those states. Some of you probably don't
know that she has now just completed her first year of law school
at Creighton University in Omaha. She is going to earn a J.D.
degree and become a lawyer. She is also the mother of two
children, Edward and Katie, who are here along with her husband
at this convention. As a blind person Chris has successfully and
lovingly taught cane travel professionally, and she has also
taught teachers of the blind as well. She is now changing
careers, and in whatever career Chris Boone decides to engage,
you know and I know that she will not only make progress but she
will make a success. Here, for a few remarks, is our $10,000
winner, Chris Boone:

     Out of all of these incredibly intelligent, articulate,
brilliant men and women, I can't believe you chose me. It's very
difficult to find the words to express how honored I am. I think
this is probably the greatest honor of my life, to be here before
you, my brothers and sisters and friends, and to know that you
have bestowed this incredible honor upon me. The Federation has
given to me so richly by the wise teachings of Dr. Jernigan, and
the kind and strong encouragement of President Maurer, and the
eloquent and enduring writings of Jacobus tenBroek--many of which
I still read this year, my first year of law school, even though
they were written forty years ago. I want to say that I have been
a Federationist for many years. I will always be a Federationist.
It's forever for me. I love you guys, and now let's embrace our
future together and make a lot more tornadoes.



[Photo: Dr. Jernigan reads Braille from the podium. Caption: Dr. Kenneth
Jernigan delivers the first address of the Wednesday afternoon panel
discussion, titled "To Read, To Believe, To Gain Independence."]

                    OF BRAILLE AND HONEYBEES
                       By Kenneth Jernigan

     From the Editor: Most of the afternoon session on July 6 was
devoted to a discussion of the problems and challenges
surrounding Braille literacy for blind Americans today. The first
speaker on the panel was Dr. Kenneth Jernigan. Here is what he
had to say:

     For the blind of the United States the road to Braille
literacy has been long and difficult, but the dream may at last
be in process of becoming a reality. There are undoubtedly still
battles ahead, but the changing climate is symbolized by a
meeting that was held at the National Center for the Blind on
April 4, 1994. That meeting brought together major elements in
the blindness field and gives promise of unprecedented
accomplishments. It also has the potential for tremendous strife
and disunity if lessons are not learned and commitments not kept.
     In recent years Braille has become extremely controversial,
but it was not always so. Until after the Second World War,
almost all blind children who were to be educated, as well as a
great many of the partially sighted, went to residential schools
for the blind. Braille was a given. Everybody learned it, and the
students with partial sight made a practice of reading it with
their eyes, blindfolds and lectures from teachers
notwithstanding.
     With the coming of retrolental fibroplasia and the sudden
increase in the number of blind children, public school education
became a necessity. There wasn't anywhere else to put the
increased population, and the parents were not about to permit
their children to grow up illiterate. But there was a side
effect, one that received relatively little comment at the time.
The centrality of Braille was destroyed.
     The public school teachers didn't know Braille, and the new
crop of teacher trainees in the mushrooming university programs
were not much better off. It is true that they received a course
or two in Braille, but that is not the same as concentrated use
and everyday practice.
     It was only a step from not knowing Braille to the
rationalization that it was unimportant, outdated, and in many
instances harmful. As technology advanced, it offered the
vehicle. Parents, of course, were not only willing but anxious to
swallow the fallacy. If the child could see even the tiniest bit,
the teachers (not knowing Braille and feeling comfortable with
print) could say: "Reading print is normal. You want your child
to be normal. Therefore, you want your child to read print if
this is at all possible. Never mind that the magnifiers may be
awkward and clumsy and that large print may be scarce. Never mind
that reading print may be slow and painful. Braille is that way,
too."
     Almost without exception the parents nodded in agreement and
settled down to a life of limited expectations for their
children. Mostly they didn't know any blind adults, people who
could read Braille at hundreds of words a minute and use it as
flexibly and efficiently as print is used by the sighted. They
relied on the "professionals," the people who were trained to
know and give competent advice.
     I don't mean to paint a picture that condemns the
professionals of the forties, the fifties, and the sixties. In
the main they were sincere and dedicated, and in many instances
they coped extremely well. The problems they faced were
unprecedented, and there was probably no way that a proper
emphasis on Braille could have been maintained or a true
perspective achieved.
     I attended a residential school for the blind in the
thirties and forties and had a thorough grounding in Braille, so
I suffered no damage and feel no resentment. The same cannot be
said of many of the children of the post-World War II era. For
the most part those with any sight at all swallowed the flimflam
and limped along with print. When they reached high school and
college, their reading needs increased; their sight often
worsened; they met blind people who were literate and competent
in Braille; and their anger and frustration congealed into a cold
fury. They felt that they had been cheated and lied to, and they
were determined that the blind of future generations should not
be similarly victimized.
     This brings us to the eighties and early nineties, but
before continuing the story, I think it is only fair to say a
word about the changing climate among professionals. Many (but by
no means all) of today's teachers of the blind have reassessed
the value and necessity of Braille. Working with the organized
blind, these new pioneers insist that blind children must have
the opportunity for true literacy and a full life. This means
Braille. It also means an understanding of the part which social
attitudes play in creating or inhibiting opportunity. It means
the daily reinforcement of the concept that it is respectable to
be blind and that, given adequate training and reasonable
opportunity, the blind can compete on terms of equality with
others.
     Many elements have gone into the movement for Braille
literacy which has built to a crescendo and is now sweeping the
nation, but few would deny that the fight has been orchestrated
and led by the National Federation of the Blind. The Federation
organized NAPUB (the National Association to Promote the Use of
Braille). The Federation has introduced and continues to press
for the passage of Braille Bills in state legislatures--laws
which guarantee the right of blind children to be taught Braille
and to have teachers who are competent in its use. The Federation
has promoted reading contests and similar activities to stress
the importance of Braille to blind children. The Federation
maintains a constant drumfire of publicity to reinforce the value
of Braille, and it now spearheads a campaign to enact national
legislation to assure that blind children will be taught Braille
and that their teachers will know how to read and write it.
     This brings me back to the April 4 meeting at the National
Center for the Blind and the events that preceded it. At the
first meeting of the Committee on Joint Organizational Effort,
held in 1989 at the National Center for the Blind, the Federation
pressed for a policy statement affirming the value of Braille and
the right of blind children to have it. After considerable
discussion and negotiation, such a statement was drafted and
agreed to by those present, including the representatives of AER
(the Association for Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind
and Visually Impaired). However, AER subsequently said that its
board had decided not to support the statement. This led to
considerable controversy and no small amount of bad feeling.
     The question of Braille literacy was discussed at subsequent
meetings of the Committee on Joint Organizational Effort and also
at regional meetings of the World Blind Union, but without
agreement. The Federation constantly pressed, and AER just as
constantly found problems with the language and some of the
concepts. Although less vocal about it than the Federation, the
American Council of the Blind supported the emphasis on Braille
literacy. The American Foundation for the Blind (though
frequently having problems with specific language and particular
requirements) tended to do likewise.
     At a meeting of the Committee on Joint Organizational Effort
in January of 1992, I pressed hard for the adoption of a simple
statement recognizing the right of blind children to have Braille
instruction, and such a resolution was adopted. I don't want to
make it appear that the AER representatives who were there were
grudging in their acceptance of the resolution or that they
opposed the concept of the value of Braille literacy. Such was
not the case. However, they were reluctant to have unambiguous,
straightforward language.
     They said that the federal requirement for an IEP
(Individualized Education Program) for each disabled student
prohibited the blanket requirement that blind children should
have Braille available to them. Such an argument concerning the
teaching of print to sighted children would be laughed to scorn,
but the world of disability and blindness has peculiar norms. In
any case I want to give you the entire text of the January, 1992,
resolution. It was unanimously adopted by the Committee on Joint
Organizational Effort, with representatives of AER present and
voting affirmatively. I intend to give you the full text of other
documents as I proceed, and although some of them will be
repetitious and characterized by the arcane jargon of
professionalism, federalese, and bureaucracy, I urge you not only
to give attention to them but to concentrate on their every word.
We as blind people should become intimately familiar with the
details of the resolutions, policy statements, and proposed
Congressional enactments which vitally affect our lives and the
lives of the blind of coming generations. Here is the text of the
January, 1992, resolution:

                      RESOLUTION ON BRAILLE

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

                                   Unanimously adopted by the    
                                   Committee on Joint
                                   Organizational Effort
                                   January 16, 1992

     Although the AER representatives participated in drafting
the final language of this resolution and voted for it, they made
it clear that they could not commit AER to its support until and
unless they received approval from their board. Subsequently the
AER board rejected the resolution.
     Meanwhile, Federation Braille bills continued to be
introduced and passed in state legislatures throughout the
country. More often than not these bills were opposed (witness
Wisconsin) by AER representatives. Certainly this was not
universally the case, and in some instances there was and is
collaboration.
     Another element was the Braille competency test developed by
NLS (the National Library Service for the Blind and Physically
Handicapped of the Library of Congress). The members of the
Committee on Joint Organizational Effort requested NLS to develop
the test, and it was painstakingly and competently done. It was
released for use in January of this year, but a number of the
teachers of the blind throughout the country said that the test
should not be used since it had not been, to use their
terminology, "validated." Never mind that the Library of Congress
has been giving competency tests by the thousands to certify
Braille transcribers since the 1940's, and never mind that the
NLS test was developed by the most knowledgeable professionals in
the blindness field, including leaders of AER. There were those
who said that the opposition to the test was from people who did
not know Braille, even though they were supposed to be in a
position to teach it, and that in the name of professionalism
they were simply trying to protect their jobs and cover their
nakedness. Regardless of how vehemently such statements were
made, they were just as vehemently rejected.
     At its Washington Seminar in January of this year, the
Federation made a federal Braille literacy law one of the prime
objectives of its legislative program. The vehicle was meant to
be the IDEA (the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act),
which must be reauthorized before Congress adjourns this fall. To
this end hundreds of Federation members went to Capitol Hill and
contacted every Senatorial and Congressional office.
     One of those contacted was Congressman James Traficant of
Ohio, one of the Federation's longtime friends. In February of
this year Congressman Traficant called the Federation's National
Office and said that he intended to introduce a Braille Literacy
Bill and that he would like proposed language. Although
Federation representatives had talked to Congressman Traficant at
the time of the Washington Seminar, his call was unexpected. In
the circumstances (even though the time frame was short and the
drafting necessarily hasty) the language was provided. Any other
course would have been ill-advised, risking bad will and being
counterproductive. The introduction of a Traficant Bill could do
no harm since there would be plenty of time to refine the
language and get consensus.
     In a letter to members of the House of Representatives dated
February 24, 1994, Congressman Traficant said in part:

     The numbers of the blind who can read at all are declining.
     In 1968, out of 19,902 blind students enrolled in elementary
     and secondary education, 40 percent read Braille, 45 percent
     read large type or regular print, and 4 percent read both.
     In January, 1993, out of 50,204 blind students, fewer than 9
     percent could read Braille, 27 percent could read print, and
     40 percent could not read at all. In other words, while
     there are 40,000 more blind children in school today, only
     30 percent can read--a far cry from 95 percent in 1968.

     This is what Congressman Traficant said, and it graphically
emphasizes the problem. There are those who claim that these
statistics are misleading since many of the blind children who
were counted in the 1993 census were multiply-handicapped while
most of those listed in the 1968 computation were not, but such
an argument fails to take into account two important factors.
With the shifting of most of the educable blind children to
public schools, the residential schools have correspondingly
become the collecting place for children with multiple handicaps.
This has inevitably meant a declining emphasis on Braille even
for the educable blind children remaining in the residential
schools. At the same time, as already noted, the public schools
(with their thinly scattered population of blind students and
their inexperienced teachers, who have no necessity to use and
practice Braille on a daily basis) have been unable to fill the
gap. Therefore, there is no place left where a blind child can be
assured of receiving competent Braille instruction in a friendly
environment.
     Without any consultation or delay both AER and the American
Foundation for the Blind sent letters and telegrams to Congress
opposing the Traficant Bill. Upon reflection, leaders of both
organizations say that they think they were mistaken in such
impulsive action--action which created the very impression that
the blindness field has been trying to avoid: namely, that the
field is characterized by dissension and total disarray.
Likewise, (and for those of you who are hasty to condemn I ask
you to consider) we of the Federation should have found the time
to alert AER and AFB to the step we were taking.
     However, the negatives of the situation may have been more
than balanced by the positives. The Federation called a meeting
to be held in Baltimore at the National Center for the Blind on
April 4 of this year. Present were Carl Augusto, Susan Spungin,
and Scott Marshall of the American Foundation for the Blind; Paul
Schroeder of the American Council of the Blind; Michael Bina,
Tuck Tinsley, and Kathy McGivern of AER; and Marc Maurer, Jim
Gashel, and I representing the National Federation of the Blind.
We spent the day negotiating about Braille literacy and reached
consensus on two documents--a statement of principles and
proposed amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act.
     But before giving you the language of these documents, I
must go back to two other events. At the American Foundation for
the Blind's Josephine Taylor Conference held in Washington on
March 3 of this year, Carl Augusto, Susan Spungin, and I
discussed in graphic and straightforward language the Traficant
embroilment. We kept our tempers, but we made our feelings clear.
It was obvious that all concerned wanted to find a solution and
that we were in basic agreement on most of the issues. It was at
that time that we agreed that the Federation would call the April
4 meeting.
     At the regional meeting of the World Blind Union held at the
American Foundation for the Blind building in New York on March
18 I presented a proposed statement of principles concerning
Braille literacy. The statement was discussed and unanimously
adopted. Again, by saying that I presented it, I do not mean to
imply that the others at the meeting opposed it or were grudging
in their acceptance of it. Everybody there was cooperative and
engaged in give and take. At the end of the session it was not my
statement but the statement of the entire group. Here is what it
said:

          If a child is totally blind or has such visual
     impairment as to be unable to read print, and if
     literacy skills are to be taught, the child should be
     taught to read and write Braille by a certified teacher
     competent to teach Braille literacy skills to the
     blind.
          If a child has a visual impairment and if literacy
     skills are to be taught, the child should, if the
     parent or parents want this to be done, be taught to
     read and write Braille by a certified teacher competent
     to teach Braille literacy skills to the blind.
          No teacher should be considered competent to teach
     Braille literacy skills to the blind unless such
     teacher has passed the Braille competency test
     developed by the National Library Service for the Blind
     and Physically Handicapped of the Library of Congress.
     The passing of the Braille competency test should not
     be considered a substitute for or an alternative to
     regular training and certification of a teacher but
     should be in addition to such training and
     certification.

     This is the statement we adopted on March 18 of this year at
the regional meeting of the World Blind Union, and although the
AER representatives who were there made it clear that they would
have to go to their board for final approval, surely it was
reasonable to expect that the approval would be forthcoming.
After all, the concepts (and even the details of the language)
were not new. They had been kicking around for several years.
Nevertheless, when we came to the April 4 meeting at the National
Center for the Blind, AER had a counter-proposal. Before
commenting on it, let me give you the exact text. Here it is:

          It is absolutely imperative that blind and
     visually impaired students receive appropriate special
     education services to meet their current and future
     needs. The ability to read and write Braille is one
     skill which is critically important for independence
     and success. Failure to provide Braille instruction in
     the frequency and intensity as required in a student's
     Individualized Education Plan will inexcusably result
     in a student who has unrealized potential and who is
     unprepared to achieve and compete in school, work, and
     society at large. Without literacy skills and
     accessibility and availability of Braille, blind
     students are more seriously handicapped to achieve,
     succeed, and function by this illiteracy,
     inaccessibility, and unavailability than by their
     visual disability.
          A student must be provided Braille instruction by
     qualified, competent staff as required by an
     Individualized Education Plan based on various
     considerations not limited to the student's visual
     capability, literacy potential, and input from parents
     and service providers.
          A student must be provided Braille instruction who
     is capable of learning literacy skills, and who is
     either totally blind or who, in spite of appropriate
     low vision interventions, has a serious visual
     impairment to the degree as to be unable to read print
     efficiently as determined by a comprehensive
     assessment. In addition, parent rights, safeguards, and
     input must be respected and considered as provided in
     the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
     and respective state laws and rules.
          Teachers of blind and visually impaired students
     must be graduates of comprehensive teacher training
     programs and must possess specialized certification to
     work with blind students. As an integral required part
     of the coursework to graduate from a teacher training
     program and to qualify for certification, teachers must
     pass the Braille Competency Test developed by the
     National Library Service for the Blind and Physically
     Handicapped of the Library of Congress. Individual
     state certification requirements should be strengthened
     to require additional coursework in the teaching
     methodology of Braille reading and writing over and
     above the current coursework which predominantly
     emphasizes the Braille code. Refresher opportunities
     should be made available to ensure that previously
     trained and currently certified teachers remain current
     and competent in teaching Braille.
          The federal U.S. Office of Education Special
     Education Programs (OSEP) in its monitoring of
     individual states, and in turn the respective state
     monitoring of school programs should include specific
     criteria to ensure compliance with regard to provisions
     of 1) quality Braille instruction in local education
     agencies and state schools and 2) appropriate teacher
     certification.
          In addition, consumer, advocacy, and professional
     organizations of and for the blind in the United States
     must work cooperatively with federal, state, and local
     officials and agencies to alleviate the critical
     personnel shortage and meet the significant demand for
     qualified and competent teachers of blind students in
     the United States.

     This is the document which the AER representatives brought
to the April 4 meeting at the National Center for the Blind, and
it is clear that we were moving toward consensus. However, the
document also exemplifies certain problems which have
characterized our negotiations with AER not only about Braille
literacy but about most other things as well. Among the involved
phrases and the commendable sentiments, the crispness begins to
fade, and there lurks considerable leeway for wiggling. What we
have been trying to get from the very beginning is an unequivocal
commitment that every blind and visually impaired child shall
have the right to be taught Braille and that the Braille should
be taught by somebody who is competent in its use. It is that
simple and that uninvolved.
     Again, I want to be sure that I am understood. Many of the
leaders of AER say that they are firmly committed to the
necessity of making Braille available to blind and visually
impaired children and to having competent teachers, but the
organization is so loosely structured that the leaders cannot
with any certainty speak for the members who elected them. This
must be frustrating to the leaders and doubtless also to many of
the members. Perhaps the Braille literacy negotiations and other
recent events will cause AER to rethink its procedures and give
more authority to its officers. Otherwise, the organization will
have difficulty coming to the table as an equal in the
negotiations and partnerships of consensus which are beginning to
emerge in the blindness field. AER has many strong leaders and a
vital role to play in the new reality. If it cannot achieve
discipline and purpose, it will lose--and all of us will lose.
     The April 4th meeting at the National Center for the Blind
was characterized by good will and detailed exactness. The
documents that emerged were unanimously approved by those
present, and later by the AER board and the other organizations
involved. Here is the final wording of the Statement of
Principles:

          If a child is unable to read print by reason of
     total blindness or visual impairment, and if literacy
     skills are to be taught, the child should be taught to
     read and write Braille by a certified teacher competent
     to teach Braille literacy skills to the blind, unless
     by reason of multiple disabilities it is impossible for
     the child to read Braille.
          If a child has a visual impairment and if literacy
     skills are to be taught, the child should, if the
     parent or parents want this to be done, be taught to
     read and write Braille by a certified teacher competent
     to teach Braille literacy skills to the blind. If a
     dispute arises between the parent(s) and the local
     educational agency regarding appropriate reading media,
     both print and Braille shall be taught.
          No teacher should be considered competent to teach
     Braille literacy skills to the blind unless such
     teacher has passed the Braille competency test
     developed by the National Library Service for the Blind
     and Physically Handicapped of the Library of Congress.
     The passing of the Braille competency test should not
     be considered a substitute for or an alternative to
     regular training and certification of a teacher but
     should be in addition to such training and
     certification.

     After we had adopted this Statement of Principles, we
proceeded in the spirit of the document to draft proposed
amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. We
said that the Individualized Education Program for a child who is
blind or visually impaired must include a Braille Literacy Plan,
and we then adopted the language to make it happen. Here in
pertinent part is the wording of the proposed amendments:

          The term "Braille Literacy Plan" means the
     components of an Individualized Education Program (IEP)
     for a child who is blind or visually impaired which are
     designed to enable the child to communicate effectively
     using Braille either exclusively or in combination with
     other skills.
          The plan shall:
          (a) be individually developed after the child's
     present literacy performance and future literacy needs
     have been evaluated, or independently assessed if the
     parents or the child, as appropriate, disagree with the
     results of the evaluation;
          (b) be based on the presumption that for the child
     who is blind or visually impaired effective
     communications skills commensurate with ability and
     grade level will often require Braille instruction and
     use; and
          (c) in the event that Braille has not been found
     necessary for the child's present educational progress
     or future needs, assure that all members of the team
     responsible for the IEP have concurred, provided that
     if any member or members have not concurred, Braille
     instruction and use will be included in the child's IEP
     along with other appropriate literacy skills.

     STATE PLAN REQUIREMENTS

          ... set forth assurances that in the expenditure
     of federal funds for the purchase of textbooks or other
     educational materials, the state, a local education
     agency, or an intermediate educational unit, as
     appropriate, will obtain such materials in electronic
     text versions appropriate for producing Braille.

     APPLICATION REQUIREMENT

          ... provide satisfactory assurances that the local
     educational agency or intermediate educational unit
     will:
          (a) establish or revise, whichever is appropriate,
     a Braille Literacy Plan which shall be incorporated
     into the Individualized Education Program of each child
     who is blind or visually impaired as defined in Section
     602;
          (b) assure that Braille instruction under each
     such plan is provided by appropriately trained and
     certified personnel who have demonstrated Braille
     competency at a level consistent with the National
     Literary Braille Competency Test adopted by the Library
     of Congress;

     GRANTS FOR PERSONNEL TRAINING

          There shall be
          ... pre-service and in-service training of special
     education personnel and other personnel in Braille to a
     level of competency consistent with the National
     Literary Braille Competency Test developed by the
     Library of Congress.

     This is the substance of the agreements reached at the April
4 meeting and later approved by the Association for Education and
Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired, the American
Council of the Blind, the American Foundation for the Blind, and
the National Federation of the Blind. At long last the principal
organizations in the blindness field of the United States have
reached consensus on a major issue. That achievement is
momentous. The credit does not belong to any single organization
or individual. It belongs to all who participated, and all can
share in the pride of accomplishment.
     If the commitments that have been made are kept and if the
unity of purpose can be expanded to other issues, an
unprecedented era of harmony and progress may be opening before
us--but before we settle down to celebrate, let us keep in mind
that the new partnerships will be difficult to maintain. The
building of trust takes time. It requires care, forbearance, and
enough sense to understand long-range benefits and self-interest.
     And there is something else. We have not won the battle for
Braille literacy yet. We have only agreed to join together to
fight it. We must negotiate with the Administration and Congress,
and we must keep our ranks together and present a common front.
     On one thing, however, there can be no doubt. The National
Federation of the Blind is absolutely and irrevocably committed
to the achievement of Braille literacy for the blind of this
country. On this issue we will not equivocate; we will not
compromise; and we will not quit. It must--it will be done.
     We are demonstrating our commitment by raising tens of
thousands of dollars to restore the birthplace of Louis Braille
in France--and we are doing it not only as an organization but
also as individuals: blind men and women throughout the country
with our dollars and dimes, our love and belief. We are
continuing to introduce Braille bills in the state legislatures,
and we will keep at it until every blind child in the United
States has opportunity and hope for the future.
     We want no strife or confrontation--but we will do what we
have to do. Those who negotiate and engage in diplomacy without
the willingness to fight are simply rationalizing their weakness
and lack of purpose and will. But those who fight and are not
willing to negotiate or engage in diplomacy are rationalizing
barbarism and their lack of commitment to constructive
objectives. As Harold Stassen said, "The man who kindles the
flames of hate and violence lights a fire under his own house."
     We know these things, and we are also aware of Dag
Hammarsjkold's often quoted statement. He said, "Like the bee, we
distill poison from honey for our self-defense. What happens to
the bee if it uses its sting is well known. It dies."
     Yes, we know that. But we also know something else--
something which Hammarsjkold failed to mention. The individual
bee may die if it stings, but the whole hive dies if in proper
circumstances it refuses to sting. Through long experience and no
small number of exercises in survival, we have learned our
lessons well. We will sting if we must, regardless of the cost to
each of us personally--but we will survive as an organization and
a movement. And we hope to enjoy the honey and live in peace with
others and ourselves.


[Photo: Dr. Susan Spungin speaks from the podium. Caption: Dr. Susan Spungin
addresses the Convention.]

                       BRAILLE AND BEYOND
                      by Susan Jay Spungin

     From the Editor: Dr. Susan Spungin is the Vice President of
the American Foundation for the Blind for National Program
Services. She delivered the following remarks Wednesday
afternoon, July 6, 1994, at the Convention of the National
Federation of the Blind.

     Dr. Jernigan, President Maurer, and friends: I am delighted
to have been asked to address the NFB Convention of 1994 here in
Detroit, Michigan. The last time I had an opportunity to speak to
NFB about Braille was five years ago at your National Convention
in Denver, Colorado, in 1989. Many things have happened over
these five years that are so significant they deserve review.
Looking back at what has taken place in the Braille arena these
past five years may help us in thinking about the future.
     Braille has always been and always will be more than a tool
or means of literacy for those blind individuals who use it as
well as for those who don't. As Dr. Fred Schroeder points out in
his recent dissertation:
     Braille for some represents competency, independence,
     and equality.
Issues of self-identity and the desire not to be considered blind
may affect a legally blind individual's decision to use or not to
use Braille as much as or more than the assertion that he or she
does not need Braille. Therefore, the Braille problem must be
expanded from a literacy issue.
     I am not suggesting that I have changed my mind about the
importance of Braille issues such as the lack of instruction and
production on a timely basis. They are very important issues.
However, in the past five years we all have learned that Braille
is also a major symptom of larger problems inherent in winning
equality of opportunity and freedom of choice for people who are
blind or visually impaired.
     Personally these past five years have taught me that the
road to success is always under construction. Five years ago I
discussed eight major reasons for the increasing illiteracy of
people who are blind or visually impaired. Briefly they were:
1.   Lack of and inappropriate use of demographics statistics on
     individuals in the U.S. who are blind or visually impaired.
     Problems of child count and multi-handicapped in reporting
     under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
     was a major issue.
2.   The emphasis on low vision and the use of print at all costs
     over the past twenty-five years.
3.   Negative attitudes toward blind people and the communication
     skills they need--Braille--truly unintended, but nonetheless
     insidious.
4.   Lack of standardized Braille teaching methods and quality
     control of teachers of the visually impaired's knowledge of
     Braille codes.
5.   The complexity of the Braille Code.
6.   Technological advances, especially speech output as a viable
     substitute for Braille.
7.   The U.S. educational service delivery system, which often
     leads to dumping visually impaired youngsters into regular
     classrooms. No child can learn anything in any academic area
     from a teacher who visits once a week. And Braille must be
     considered an academic area.
8.   The Individualized Education Program (IEP) process is in
     many ways a failure model because of how it is defined in
     the law itself. It sounds great on paper; but in reality
     limitations, not needs and expectations for the child, often
     shape their educational programs. For example, the IEP is
     often based on what the school has in terms of staff and
     budget.
     That NFB presentation was turned into a monograph, published
and available free from AFB, naturally in both print and Braille.
The title is Braille Literacy: Issues for Blind Persons,
Families, Professionals, and Producers of Braille.
     In the past five years a great many things have happened as
a direct result of groups of individuals and organizations such
as the National Federation of the Blind (NFB), the Association
for Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually
Impaired (AER), the American Foundation for the Blind (AFB), the
American Council of the Blind (ACB), the Canadian National
Institute for the Blind (CNIB), and National Library Service
(NLS) working together.
     Consumers, families, professionals, and producers of Braille
have begun working together to ensure equality of access to all
of life's challenges. As Braille is a symptom of a greater
problem, the field's work these last five years has had to go
beyond Braille in several ways:
     1. The validity of the demographics of the blind population
continues to inhibit our field from making substantive progress.
The federal government reports numbers of blind people declining
while states report them increasing.
     If I were paranoid, I would think the declining numbers
reports intentional, as a means of limiting funding. In reality,
as is true with most problems, it is due to many factors. Five
organizations--NFB, AFB, ACB, AER, and CNIB--recently held a
meeting to determine how best to insure the gathering and use of
accurate demographic data on blindness, focusing on issues of
definition and public education. Researchers do not ask the
question, "Are you blind?" the same way. This makes comparisons
of data sets impossible. Not having consistent, accurate numbers
limits funding, policy development, and maintenance and growth of
existing resources. This group of five organizations hopes to
work toward a solution in this area by pooling their collective
resources and talents.
     2. During the past five years I believe we have seen a shift
from overemphasis on use of low vision at all costs to use of
Braille as a viable communication tool. Who would have believed
in 1989 that all national organizations of and for the blind
would have agreed on the principles statement on Braille literacy
skills to which Dr. Jernigan referred? I will not reread it, but
I will point out for me professionally what I think is one of the
most significant sentences in that document. It is as follows:
     If a dispute arises between the parent and the LEA regarding
     the appropriate reading medium, both print and Braille shall
     be taught until the dispute is resolved through the IEP
     process.
     As Dr. Jernigan indicated, in April of 1994 that statement
was translated into a Braille Literacy Amendment signed by all
five organizations to guarantee that Braille is viewed as an
equal and viable option to print, not as a second-class
communication tool, but the key to literacy for the blind in the
U.S. More importantly, there was also agreement that when the IEP
team cannot reach a decision on appropriate reading media, both
Braille and print be taught until a decision is made.
     I must admit to all of you here today I have changed my
position on the need for Braille bills. I no longer see them as
redundant because of the IEP process, but rather as a major
factor in bringing the public's attention to the critical needs
of children who are blind and visually impaired in this country.
[applause] Braille bills have worked, and they have worked well.
However, I still believe that Braille bills must discuss not only
eligibility criteria but the need for functional assessment as
well as appropriate teacher qualifications.
     With the closing down of teacher training programs in vision
and the move toward "full inclusion," which I will discuss in a
minute, separate, identifiable programs for blind children--not
to mention the teaching of Braille--are under attack. This has
profound implications in terms of our efforts to insure literacy
and equality.
     The third and fourth issues, negative attitudes and the need
for systematic teaching methods in Braille, are closely related.
What we do not know and are asked to do we frequently don't like.
AFB's National Braille Literacy Initiative, under the direction
of Dr. Diane P. Wormsley in our office in Atlanta, is addressing
this problem of Braille instruction for teachers both at the pre-
service and in-service levels. AFB will publish two books on
teaching strategies and tips on Braille later this year. I also
recommend highly AFB's new video, "Understanding Braille
Literacy." AFB Teacher Mentor Program and Database continues to
grow, and if you have not participated and wish to serve as a
mentor to other Braille teachers, please contact me at AFB in New
York.
     AFB is also working on developing Braille teaching
strategies for adults who have become blind--a major need in the
field that I know the American Printing House for the Blind (APH)
and NFB are working on as well. There are other positive
developments as well. Thanks to Kurt Cylke and the National
Library of Congress we have now the potential for quality control
of teacher knowledge of the Braille Code. Although many states
have developed their own Braille test, it is nice to know there
is at last a National Standard--thank you, Mr. Cylke.[applause]
     Exciting--and for some frightening--things are happening
with the Braille Code too. Dr. Hilda Caton, Chair of BANA, was to
speak on her work regarding the Unified Code and the
International Community. In this area my mind has been changed
too. I believe now, due to the complexity of the needs of
multihandicapped and visually impaired children, that there is a
place for grade one Braille instruction and even, would you
believe, MOON type!
     Now let's look to the future and especially technology. We
cannot help but wonder what electronic books might do to Braille
usage. The Joint Organizational Effort (JOE) has addressed this
issue with a statement regarding electronic books. Although JOE
applauds the work of APH and Recording for the Blind (RFB) and
other entities engaged in the development, promotion, and
distribution of electronic books, it reminds manufacturers and
distributors of such materials that current electronic formats
are no substitute for hard copy Braille, and that a less
expensive, more easily produced format not be allowed to supplant
hard copy Braille texts. Once again freedom to choose Braille and
its availability could be threatened.
     As wonderful as the information superhighway is, the reality
is that blind people are being left in the back seat. Now more
than ever we must insure access to information in Braille, not
exclusively, but always available as a choice.
     We need to work together, side by side with present and
future programmers and technologists, to insure that gains we
have made in literacy for the blind will not be run over in the
name of access to information for all. Issues of accessibility of
output as well as graphical user interfaces (GUI's) are problems
that cannot wait to be solved by someone else.
     We, as a field, cannot afford to take a reactive stance but
rather must work with and assist the technocrats and information
brokers of today and the future. This one area alone can change
for better or for worse the future of literacy for the blind. AFB
plans to continue, with others, to take a strong leadership role
in the area of the impact of technology on information access for
the blind. It is not acceptable for progress to be made at the
expense of others.
     Let me now speak to the last two issues, that is, the impact
of the Special Educational Service Delivery Models, and,
hopefully inherent in that, the IEP process. If I were asked to
point to one movement in the field of special education that
poses the greatest threat to the education of children who are
blind or visually impaired, it would be full inclusion.[applause]
The movement toward full inclusion as defined in the May, 1993,
Joint Organizational Effort position statement states that:

     "Full inclusion," a philosophical concept currently
     advanced by a number of educators, is not a federal
     requirement of special education. Proponents of full
     inclusion nevertheless take the position that all
     students with disabilities must receive their total
     instruction in the regular public school classroom
     regardless of individual needs. Unfortunately, full
     inclusion would eliminate all special placements,
     including pull-out services, resource rooms, and
     specialized schools. Such an arrangement would be
     detrimental to the educational development of many
     students with disabilities.

     The field of blindness does not support full inclusion or
any policies that mandate the same placement, instruction, or
treatment for all students who are blind or visually impaired.
Many of these children benefit from being served in the regular
classroom. However, the regular education classroom is not the
appropriate placement for a number of children who are blind or
visually impaired because they may need alternative instructional
environments, teaching strategies, and materials that cannot or
will not be provided within the context of a regular classroom
placement.
     If we regard inclusion as a religious principle, if we
disregard the differences among the students who are blind or
visually impaired, if we continue to insist that the least
restrictive environment (LRE) is some absolute standard rather
than a continuum of variability that has truth only for each
individual in question, we will lose some of the most valuable
and creative citizens in our community.[applause]
     We face three immediate tasks: keeping the issue of
educational placement in perspective, choosing idea over image,
and avoiding fanaticism.
     The major hope, however, is that the full inclusion movement
is being profiled as part of the Education Reform Act, known to
many of us as Education Goals 2000. Our major hope and greatest
supporters opposing inclusive education are none other than the
regular classroom teachers and the teachers' unions: AFT and UFT,
who do not mince words. They justifiably believe that inclusion
threatens the academic achievements of all children, and they are
right! They are concerned about the growing insensitivity to the
unique needs of exceptional children. Inclusion is mainstreaming
with a vengeance. In the name of integration it guarantees
failure for students and teachers alike. As the JOE position
paper on inclusion states:

     We strongly urge that decision makers carefully
     consider and be sensitive to the impact of reform
     initiatives on the education of students with visual
     disabilities. Caution must be exercised to insure that
     educational philosophy and trends such as full
     inclusion do not seriously endanger appropriate and
     specialized services for students who are blind or
     visually impaired. If properly implemented, IDEA can
     provide legal safeguards to insure that all individual
     children can realize their full potential for
     independence and success.

As Albert Shanker, the head of the AFT, states:

     The abuse must stop and give common sense and sound
     educational policy a chance to prevail--full inclusion
     is becoming more widely practiced based on budgetary
     and social motivation, not what classrooms need to be
     about, education.[applause]

     The need to define disability as an overarching generic
condition for purposes of program design, administration, and
funding continues to be the main issue that I believe we will
still be fighting as we enter the twenty-first century. It is an
issue for all blind people: for children it is inclusion, for
adults it is the fight for identifiable agencies, and for the
elderly it is the exclusive use of the medical model, ignoring
the disability rights or independent living model with its
emphasis on pride in group identification, which allows for
choice and the respecting of different means of functioning. So,
as important as Braille literacy is, it may be considered merely
the tip of the iceberg, for Braille represents information and
education, and we all know that is the currency of the future.
Information--being able to manage it and manipulate it--is very
important to our success as an economic power and our dignity and
perceived self-worth as individuals. It is therefore important
that, whatever educational system we have, we ensure there is
choice in learning and a choice in access to that system's
information. The issue of literacy and access to information now
and in the future will determine everyone's potential in life.
     We know from our rich history when inclusion or (as we
called it in the fifties) integration works and when it does not.
Learn from our mistakes. Do not repeat them. I often worry that
we are not seeing the forest because of the trees. We all are
climbing the ladder toward equality with the best of intentions;
I just hope the ladder is on the right wall. Please, let us all
continue, as we have these past five years, to work together and
get that road to success that is under construction up and
running.
     Thank you.[applause]


[Photo: Dr. Emerson Foulke speaks from the podium. Caption: Dr. Emerson Foulke
presents remarks prepared by Dr. Hilda Caton.]

              PARTNERSHIP OF AGENCIES AND CONSUMERS
           Summary of Remarks Prepared by Hilda Caton

     From the Editor: Dr. Hilda Caton, Director of the Braille
Research Center at the American Printing House for the Blind and
long-time advocate for Braille, was recovering from surgery and
was therefore unable to address the convention as part of this
panel. Her colleague at the Braille Research Center and a
Federationist, Dr. Emerson Foulke, spoke in her place using notes
that she had prepared. The following is a summary of his remarks:

     When the influx of large numbers of blind youngsters due to
retrolental fibroplasia hit the nation's schools in the early
fifties, very few of their special education teachers knew
Braille well enough to teach it effectively. And those who did
usually had such large territories to cover that they could not
spend enough time with any one child to do a good job of teaching
proper use of the code. When professional educators then observed
the Braille skills of all these children, they concluded that
Braille must be very hard to teach and to learn and that any
other alternative would be better and certainly easier to
provide. The children themselves certainly didn't know enough to
insist on being taught Braille, so the demand for it declined and
the conclusion that it was no longer needed became widespread.
     In recent years blind people have begun to speak out in
defense of Braille, and the National Federation of the Blind has
played a central part in reversing the anti-Braille trend. The
National Association to Promote the Use of Braille has urged
children to read Braille and has honored people who have played
an important part in increasing the availability of Braille and
in increasing its usefulness. The state Braille bills have been
important, and the effort to pass a piece of federal Braille
legislation will be an important fight in the months ahead.
     Work has also continued in developing instructional
materials for teaching Braille. Dr. Caton began her career
teaching Braille at a time when it was still being taught well,
and she was certainly a good teacher. She has spent a good deal
of her working life in educational research at the Printing
House, developing good teaching material for both children and
adults. Patterns and Read Again are examples of her ground-
breaking work in this area.
     For some time Dr. Caton had believed that a partnership
between producers and consumers of Braille could develop
particularly useful materials and programs. She was proven
correct when the Printing House and the NFB joined together in
submitting a proposal for a grant from the National Institute on
Disability and Rehabilitation Research. Its title was the Braille
Literacy: Training, Mentoring, and Technological Services Program
for Blind Adults. As funded it had three components. First, new
materials were developed for teaching Braille to blind adults.
They were created by APH and reviewed and critiqued by a panel of
Federationists who were experienced Braille readers. The
resulting manual was tested in the three NFB adult rehabilitation
centers in Louisiana, Colorado, and Minnesota and the New Mexico
Commission's adult orientation center. Second, a mentoring system
was established through which mentors were identified and trained
before being assigned to work with newly trained Braille readers.
The idea was to assist new readers to solve their ongoing reading
problems; help them to find the materials they need and, in
general, encourage them to continue to use Braille until it
becomes an indispensable tool for them.
     Third was the gathering of reviews of the technology
involved in Braille production. David Andrews is the coordinator
of this project, and responsibility for producing the reviews has
been given to the NFB Research and Development committee.
     Books have now been written in connection with all three
parts of the grant. The Braille Connection is the teaching book.
The Braille Connection: a Guidebook for Mentors is the handbook
developed to assist the mentoring team. The first volume of
technology reviews is almost ready for production. It includes
information about Braille-production hardware and software, e.g.,
refreshable Braille displays, Braille printers, and Braille-
translation programs. Two other volumes are being planned: one on
DOS-based reading systems and one for Windows-based programs.
     The partnership between the Printing House and the NFB has
been so successful that the two are jointly writing another
grant, this time to the Rehabilitation Services Administration.
If funded, this project would work with state rehabilitation
agency Braille teachers and the university programs that train
them to improve their mastery of Braille. The effort would be to
enable blind clients of these agencies to receive better Braille
instruction as a result.
     Dr. Foulke said in closing that Dr. Caton had often
commented that she has always recognized the importance of
consumer participation in the development of Braille materials.
But when she actually had her first experience working closely
with the NFB panel of Braille users, she realized in a new way
that she should have been doing so throughout her entire career.


[Photo: Dr. Homer Page reads Braille from the podium. Caption: Dr. Homer Page,
President of the National Federation of the Blind of Colorado, describes the
struggle to pass his state's Braille bill.]

                   HOW TO PASS A BRAILLE BILL
                          by Homer Page

     From the Editor: Dr. Homer Page is the President of the
National Federation of the Blind of Colorado. He is also an
experienced politician in his own right. He has enjoyed a long
career as an elected official in Boulder, Colorado, and currently
serves as Chairman of the County's Board of Commissioners. He
knows how to organize people effectively in order to get a
political job done. This is the way he described the Colorado
affiliate's struggle to persuade the legislature to pass the
state's Braille bill last spring:

     "Blind Bill Raised from the Dead," read the newspaper
headline. I received several phone calls. "Who is this fellow,
Blind Bill?" they wanted to know.
     Representative Dorothy Rupert introduced House Bill 1148,
our Braille Literacy Bill, into the Colorado House of
Representatives in early January, 1994. Representative Rupert is
a Democrat in a House which has a thirty-four to thirty-one
Republican majority. However, she had an understanding of why
this legislation is important to blind persons, and she had the
commitment to join in legislative combat with powerful forces in
order to get our legislation passed.
     During the previous two years the National Federation of the
Blind of Colorado, Colorado AER, Colorado Department of
Education, the University of Northern Colorado Vision Education
Program, and the Colorado School for the Deaf and Blind had been
working together to develop a consensus position with regard to
Braille literacy. A needs assessment was conducted, and a
conference was held which focused on how to assess a child's need
for Braille instruction. A collaborative mood seemed to have been
developed. However, in December, 1993, things began to come
undone. The Colorado AER took the data from the needs assessment
study and independently wrote a report which concluded that there
was no need for a Braille literacy bill in Colorado.
     In early January the Braille Literacy Committee of AER
invited me to meet with them. They read the report to me with its
conclusions. I thanked them for the report and asked them if they
wanted to work with me right then to draft a bill that we could
take across the street to the capitol to have introduced. They
said that they would. Once again a collaborative position had
been developed.
     H.B. 1148 had its first hearing before the House Education
Committee in mid-February. We filled the House Hearing Room with
Federationists. We emphasized the collaborative approach that had
taken place to develop this legislation and the multi-model
approach to literacy which it embodied. Brenda Shepard, the CAER
past president, spoke on behalf of the bill. She had worked very
hard to develop a collaborative environment. However, two
teachers attacked the bill. Lobbyists from the two largest
Colorado school districts also asked the House Education
Committee to kill the bill. The committee chairman and vice-
chairman opposed the bill, but we had done our homework. We had
previously spoken independently with the members of the
Committee. The bill passed out of that Committee on a six-to-
three vote.[applause]
     The passage of H.B. 1148 in the House Education Committee
was but the first skirmish in what would be a protracted war. The
newly elected Colorado AER President opposed the bill. Teachers
began to call legislators expressing their opposition. Dr. Susan
Newhart-Larson wrote a widely quoted letter in which she
asserted, "Only a small but powerful group [the NFB] supported
this legislation." Representative Norma Anderson, the powerful
Education Committee Chairman, threw her personal power and
influence into the battle. She tried intensely to kill our
Braille bill. She seemed to take special delight in quoting Dr.
Newhart-Larson's letter saying, "Only a small but powerful group
supported this legislation."
     However, we were not without our resources. We had a simple
strategy. We needed to solidify our Democratic vote and pick up
just two Republican legislators. The NFB of Colorado swung into
action. We made assignments. Our members called legislators. We
locked the Democrats in place. Our bill was finally to come up on
second reading. Second reading in the Colorado House of
Representatives is done before a committee of the whole. The
Committee of the whole votes and then recommends later to the
House acting in its official capacity. When the time came for our
bill to appear, we filled the gallery with Federationists. The
bill was to be heard in the morning, but it kept being put off.
Through the day Representatives Rubert and Anderson worked the
floor of the House.
     Finally, when the time for the vote occurred, Representative
Rupert had enough votes by one, but when the votes were counted,
the outcome was a tie. Our decisive vote came in just as the
voting had closed. The bill was dead. We were in a state of
despair.
     As I said, however, it is the procedure of the House that
the report must be made before the House in its official
capacity. When that report was made, Representative Rupert moved
to amend the report of the Committee of the whole to say that
H.B. 1148 had passed. This time she had all of her votes there;
it passed by one![applause] Our Braille Bill had been raised from
the dead.
     We weren't done yet, however; we still had to face a third
reading in the House. Federationists continued to call potential
Republican supporters. On third reading the bill passed by a vote
of thirty-seven to twenty-six.[applause] We were through the
first chamber of the legislature.
     Senator Sally Hopper carried our bill in the Senate. She
received many calls and letters. These calls and letters also
attacked the Braille Literacy Bill. They seemed to be saying that
the NFB had done good work in getting dog guide legislation
passed, but we were overstepping ourselves by addressing
educational issues. The teachers knew what was best for blind
children, not the blind themselves. One of the letters came from
a teacher in a school district who said that in her district
there were thirty-one low vision children, and thanks to three of
those children being from one family, there were nine of the
thirty-one who were receiving Braille instruction. I could have
kissed her! The letter was a gift from heaven.
     I prepared a response to the letters from the teachers for
Senator Hopper to use. When our bill came up before the Senate
Education Committee, we took on the assertions of the teachers
and of the CAER. We attacked their report on the needs assessment
study. We said that the data didn't support the conclusions. We
said that it was self-serving and that ninety-seven percent of
the teachers who had filled out the survey indicated that visual
acuity was the key factor in determining whether a child should
or should not receive Braille instruction. We prepared testimony
given by young blind persons from around Colorado. They told how
their lives had been injured because they had not been offered
Braille instruction when they were students. Our bill passed the
Senate Education Committee on a six-to-zero vote.[applause]
     On May 5, Governor Roy Romer signed our bill into
law.[applause] We had been told by the president of the Colorado
AER in legislative testimony that statistics nationally indicated
that only eleven percent of blind children were Braille-literate,
and in Colorado the figure was seventeen percent. Therefore,
there was no need for Braille legislation in Colorado, and
Colorado should be a model for the nation. We referred to that as
the seventeen percent solution. I talked with Norma Anderson
after the hearing before the House committee. I asked her what we
could do to make her feel better about the Braille legislation.
She said, "No, nothing--I intend to kill this bill." I said to
her, "Then I suppose all we can do is count the votes." Well the
votes have been counted, and we do have Braille legislation in
Colorado.[applause]
     We may or may not be a small group; we may or may not be a
powerful group, but I believe that we have demonstrated that we
can take on powerful forces, and we can prevail.[applause] There
has been much conflict in Colorado over the passage of the
Braille Literacy Bill. When the bill was signed in the Governor's
office, a broad cross-section of the education community was
present. We believe that this bodes well for the implementation
of the Braille Bill in Colorado. We believe that it is a time for
healing. The National Federation of the Blind of Colorado is
ready for that healing. We believe that it is important for us to
work in a spirit of friendship and collaboration with teachers
and administrators to implement H.B. 1148. Only if we can work in
that spirit will the children of our state realize the full
benefits connected with a Braille literacy bill.
     However, we intend to have this bill implemented.[applause]
We will work in a spirit of collaboration if others will join us.
If they will not, we will find other means. We will not stand by
and allow a generation of blind children to grow up into the
demanding world of the twenty-first century without the basic
skills that they need to compete.
     The children of Colorado and the nation depend on us. We
shall not fail them. Thank you.[applause]


[Photo: Barbara McCarthy speaks from the podium. Caption: Barbara McCarthy,
newly elected President of the Association for Education and Rehabilitation of
the Blind and Visually Impaired, speaks to the Convention.]

              GROWTH AND ADVANCEMENT FOR THE BLIND
                       by Barbara McCarthy

     From the Editor: When Barbara McCarthy addressed the NFB
Convention on the afternoon of July 6, 1994, she was the
President-elect of the Association for Education and
Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired (AER). A week
later she became that organization's president. Her relationship
with Federation officials has been frank and cordial. This is
what she had to say:

     Good Afternoon. I'm honored to have been invited to attend
and address the annual Convention of the National Federation of
the Blind. I must tell you that this is a day of firsts for me:
it's my first visit to Detroit, the first NFB Conference that
I've attended, and the first time I have ever spoken before so
many people. When Dr. Jernigan invited me to come to Detroit, I
told him that I would be extremely nervous to speak in front of
3,000 people; he laughed and assured me I would be fine. Well, I
have to tell you, as I stand here before you, I'm comforting
myself with the words of Edmund Burke. To paraphrase, he said,
"Wrestling strengthens one's nerves and sharpens one's skills."
I'm having a wonderful workout right now!
     My remarks to you have been titled "Growth and Advancement
for the Blind," (a subject that could take days to cover
adequately), and I do intend to address that topic specifically,
but I'd like to deviate for a few minutes.
     Prior to coming, I spoke with Dr. Jernigan about what you
would like to hear me speak about, and he and I discussed some of
the things that he mentioned earlier when he was discussing the
Braille amendment issue. Some of the things that I intended to
speak with you about really relate to all of that and to AER. I
really wanted to take this opportunity to talk about some of the
things that concern you, and there is a relationship between that
and growth and advancement.
     Initially I want to tell you a little bit about myself,
because most of you don't know me at all. I think that will help
you understand where I come from and what some of my goals will
be in the future. On July 13 I will become the President of the
Association for Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind and
Visually Impaired. Many of you do not know me, but I thought
perhaps you would be curious to know more of Barbara McCarthy and
what I represent. I am not really sure that my undergraduate
degree in psychology adequately prepared me for the
organizational work in which I have become involved, but I'll
admit that I have relied upon it on occasion. After college I
worked in Virginia providing personal management skills
instruction to recently blinded adults and young children, as an
employee of what was then the Virginia Commission for the
Visually Handicapped. I was fresh out of college and wet behind
the ears; but a college classmate of mine was blind, and (thanks
to her example) I came to the job with the impression that blind
people could succeed at anything. Armed with that attitude, I
convinced the agency to hire and train me.
     After several years in that position I realized that I had
developed a keen interest in working with blind children. The
conviction that the blind children who are provided with the
education and training they deserve become successful adults was
burning strong within me. Subsequently, I taught in the Blind
Department at the Virginia School for the Deaf and the Blind at
Staunton and earned a master's of education degree in education
of the visually impaired from the University of Virginia. After a
move to Richmond I was hired by the Virginia Department for the
Visually Handicapped to write grants (which I might add were
funded!), and since February of 1985 I have been Director of the
Instructional Materials and Resource Center in Virginia, where I
am responsible for providing blind children with Braille and
large-print textbooks, as well as equipment and tangible aids.
Additionally, I plan annual workshops for teachers of the
visually impaired and have recently been designated to coordinate
transition services for blind youth.
     I am particularly proud of two accomplishments in my current
job: Virginia has a strong Braille transcribing program, and I
was able to develop a system for sharing and selling Braille
textbooks to other states. This service grew beyond my wildest
imagination. Not only did we receive requests for textbooks, but
also for original Braille work for businesses, agencies, and
individuals. Since this was well beyond the scope of my Materials
Center, I was able to establish a Braille services unit through
the Enterprise Program, which provides on-demand Braille to other
agencies, organizations, private businesses, and individuals.
     When I took my first Braille course, I never dreamed that
Braille would become so important in my work and such a
significant part of my life. I currently spend some part of every
workday discussing issues related to Braille--items about
translation of textbooks, use of software, training of
transcribers and proofreaders, questions about codes and tactile
graphics, materials to be used in the production of texts,
training of teachers--well, obviously, the list could go on.
     In addition to the areas I've just mentioned, I have been
directly involved in developing language that will change and
strengthen the existing Braille bill in my state. This spring I
have participated in a collaborative effort with representatives
from the Virginia Department of Education, the Department for the
Visually Handicapped, teachers of the visually impaired, the
Council of the Blind, and Charles Brown and Deborah Prost from
NFB. I know that Charlie Brown will tell you that our meetings
have been extremely productive, and the end result appears to be
a bill that will ensure that all blind children in Virginia will
be afforded the opportunity to learn Braille; that they will be
instructed by competent, knowledgeable teachers; and that
publishers will be required to provide the texts in electronic
format. I'd like to acknowledge Charlie Brown for his persistent
and appropriate reminders to the group about the presumption of
Braille.
     Most noteworthy in this process was the fact that we agreed
on the key elements: blind children need to learn to read and
write Braille, and there must be a way to ensure that teachers
are completely knowledgeable and literate in Braille. Frankly,
the only difficulty to the process came in the hammering out of
the precise language necessary to reflect our intent. Many of
you, I'm sure, have been or are involved in similar efforts (and
we just heard about Colorado's). I must say that some of what I
heard really disheartened me. When you have a collaborative
effort going on, and you hear about ones that are not, it's
discouraging, and I'll speak to that a little bit further along
in my remarks. But I hope that those of you who are still engaged
in developing Braille bills will have as fruitful an effort as we
had in Virginia.
     Although I was not directly involved in the development of
the Braille bill to amend the Individuals With Disabilities
Education Act that Dr. Jernigan referred to earlier (it was
adopted by ACB, AER, AFB, and NFB) I am aware of some of the
initial problems that arose prior to the forging of that
amendment. When the group finally sat down together, there was
basic agreement about the key elements. Let me assure you that
when the AER Board of Directors was asked to take action on the
Joint Organizational Effort amendment, the approval was
unanimous; the Board of Directors felt strongly enough as a group
to support the amendment.
     Let me take this opportunity to diverge a bit more. Dr.
Jernigan suggested that I might address a couple of specific
issues, and out of respect for him I will do so. This seems to be
the appropriate time. Dr. Jernigan and I have discussed the fact
that AER operates with a Board of Directors that is responsible
for taking action for the organization. Dr. Jernigan has also
expressed to me that he thinks that AER has less force in
negotiations if the president is unable to act without this
approval. He has also indicated that he is troubled over the fact
that, when the AER Board does act, there may not be total
agreement among the state chapters.
     Regarding the Braille amendment, although the AER Board had
previously accepted a Braille position statement that was
developed by the Joint Organizational Effort, which supported the
principles behind the Braille amendment, approval of an amendment
to federal law had never been discussed by the Board. The Board
had to have an opportunity to review the issue because its
genesis occurred between Board meetings, and the concept of an
amendment to federal law had never been discussed at a Board
meeting. Now we can certainly debate this point, but one thing
remains clear and distinctive--AER was established as an
organization that is accountable to its members through the Board
of Directors. Some may say, "That is AER's weakness when
collaborating with other organizations." I say it is AER's
strength. AER is an organization of professionals who do have
different opinions and voices, and through listening to different
sides of issues we are able to grow.
     Sometimes we are slow as a group to see things differently.
The organization was designed very differently from NFB. We
represent a number of different disciplines and elements. We may
not be able to unite on all issues the way that you do, and that
is clearly your strength. Perhaps some AER chapters or some
members will disagree with action that the Board takes. That is
their right, but it is also something that members of a board-
administered organization have to accept--that is, that their
elected representatives are responsible for making decisions. The
Board of AER is also responsible for educating and bringing along
the members. New guidelines, such as those set forth in the
Braille Amendment to IDEA, impact the members of AER more than
any other group; the natural human reaction is to be apprehensive
of change, particularly when you are the one most directly
affected. The AER Board of Directors acted in a manner determined
to be appropriate, and it is the hope and desire of the Board
that all members will come to see that.
     Looking ahead, what I can say and what I have promised Dr.
Jernigan is that I will be open and honest. Issues that are new
and potentially controversial will have to be discussed with the
Board, and I want to make that perfectly clear. There are some
issues and situations, however, in which the AER President can
act without prior approval. There will be times when Board
approval must be sought, but the approval can be expedited. I
have expressed to Dr. Jernigan, and I want to assure you, that in
negotiations with NFB and the Committee on Joint Organizational
Effort I will be mindful of the nature and importance of the
negotiations, and I will act accordingly.
     With an eye to the future I know there are important issues
in which we have organizational disagreement. I can't speak with
you today about specifics, but we all know what some of these
issues and concerns are. My extreme hope and desire is that these
issues will be brought forth for reasonable and open discussion.
I hope that my organization will take the initiative and
opportunity to do some self-examination and reflection in order
to open and broaden our horizon. I see change on that horizon,
and I fully intend to guide AER in that direction.
     As we look ahead to growth and advancement of the blind in
the next century, I'd like to take the remaining time to briefly
mention an important issue. Currently there is an issue facing
all of us that will change the course of how we access
information. I am, of course, talking about the National
Information Infrastructure. Technological advancements have
created the potential for persons with disabilities to access
information in ways that will allow control and independence over
information and their lives. Unfortunately, the speed and scope
of these advancements have not allowed for the development of
products and services that are accessible to all members of
society, and specifically to the blind. Legislation will have to
address this situation. We all have a responsibility to ensure
accessibility for the future.
     The educator in me is most concerned about what the
classrooms of the not-so-distant future will look like, how we
will have educational access to the National Information
Infrastructure. The potential for blind children is enormous, if
due consideration is given now. This advancement in information
exchange will have a universal effect, and it is imminent.
Members of The National Federation of the Blind have consistently
led the way in educating the public about what blind people can
achieve. I urge you to remain abreast of this issue, to advocate
when appropriate, and to use your powers of persuasion to
influence policy.
     Thank you for the opportunity to attend your National
Convention and to address you as a group. I do have a strong
conviction that together our organizations can have tremendous
influence and be effective. We won't agree on all issues, but the
more we talk, the more we find we can agree. I look forward to
meeting some of you individually (all of you isn't quite
realistic), and to working with you in the future.
     I'd like to think my workout might be over, but I understand
that the agenda lists a time for questions. I'm willing to
entertain questions now, but I'd like to invite you to speak with
me individually since I'll be here with you this evening.

     In the question period that followed, Dr. Jernigan began by
saying:
     Let me be sure that I am understood about what I regard as a
problem for AER. Some people could say, "It's not your business,"
but it is my business because what AER does affects all of us as
blind people and because we need AER and we need AER strong and
able to function well. Part of that is that it must not
rationalize a problem by saying that problem is really a
strength. Realistically speaking, AER is not more democratic than
other organizations in this field, nor does it have more
diversity. AER is made up of people who are fairly like-minded--
mostly professionals in the field. That's fine; nobody criticizes
that. AER has a board, and that board is no more responsive than
this board or any other board. But very often AER's elected
officials go off and negotiate in good faith and then come back,
and their board seems, at least to the rest of us in the field,
to engage in a lot of lost motion. It seems to me that all of us
have a stake in AER's trying to tighten its process up.
     Ultimately what AER does is its business, but there is a
problem in a confederacy. The Confederacy was not more democratic
than the Federal Union. So I for one hope that AER will address
this problem and that it will address it as a problem, not
rationalizing it as a strength. Representative democracy is
desirable; we'd all agree with that. AER has some good, strong
leaders, and AER has an invaluable part to play in this field. We
are going to have to move fast and decisively in the years ahead
if we're going to save programs for the blind in this country. We
need to work closely and harmoniously with each other. I doubt if
we will disagree on as many items as might be thought. With
respect to Braille, we simply have too many teachers who came up
in a system in which they just plain didn't learn Braille. They
are not bad people; they simply are moved by the impulse that
prompts us all to save our own hides.
     In response Mrs. McCarthy said, "I couldn't agree more with
about half of what you just said."
     A little later in the discussion Dr. Jernigan said:
     Here is a problem I want to present to this audience and to
the people on the panel. It's all very well to agree on
generalities. When you come to specifics, though, especially if
your own job is involved, it's almost beyond human expectation to
see things objectively. Change is difficult. We asked the
National Library Service to develop a Braille literacy competency
test. NLS is good at that sort of thing. Mr. Cylke got people in
the field together, including those in the university programs,
and in meeting after meeting they hammered this test out and
agreed to it. The results of the first administration of that
test are now in. We have to be careful now that the people who
said they favored the test don't now try to worm out of it by
saying, "The test is too hard, it doesn't really test; it is
invalid." Let me read you the letter Mr. Cylke wrote me; that's
the easiest way:

          I am writing to provide a brief preliminary report
     on activity related to the National Literary Braille
     Competency Test developed by NLS at the request of the
     JOE Committee.
          As of June 23, 1994, the National Literary Braille
     Competency Test has been administered to thirty-nine
     people. Thirty-three of these tests have been scored.
     Of this number, three individuals have passed. Two of
     these people are lifelong Braille users. The third
     person to pass works as a paraprofessional in a
     classroom and has been Brailling materials for several
     years.
          The thirty people who failed are sighted and for
     the most part in teacher preparation programs. Six
     individuals indicated that they are teachers of
     visually impaired children in an "alternative
     certification program." Twenty-two are college students
     in teacher preparation programs, some currently
     teaching in a regular classroom and working toward
     certification with visually impaired individuals. Two
     are transcribers providing support to the classroom
     teachers.

     There is more to this letter. Some people have expressed
shock when I have told them that thirty people who are university
graduates or who are working in university programs took this
test and failed it. I said, "I'm not shocked at all." The
university programs, as they are currently structured, don't
really teach people how to read and write Braille. That's our
problem! How can they teach Braille when they don't know it
themselves? A lot of people will read into my comments that I am
opposed to education, or that I am opposed to universities, or
that I am opposed to Braille courses. Not at all. What I am
saying is that these programs must be beefed up. New emphasis
must be placed on Braille. Not only we, but people throughout the
agency establishment and throughout the profession want this
done, too. This points up our problem. I said to Mr. Cylke,
"Don't you dare go and soften the test because someone couldn't
pass it." Make it an honest test. 
     Susan Spungin then commented:

     I don't think anyone sitting up here is surprised,
unfortunately, about the failure rate on the test from the
National Library Service. We have been talking about the problem
for many years. I hope that we can put our energies toward
finding a solution rather than hoping that it will just get
better or that the test will be softened so that more people will
pass. The solution lies in developing proper materials. We do not
have the materials we need to train teachers in Braille in a
variety of circumstances. That's why I got into the question of
different models for teaching teachers. It is inexcusable that
those in university programs could not pass that test, and they
should not get their degrees until they pass it. Hopefully better
quality control will be the positive fallout from that test.
     But there are presently many, many teachers working in the
field with blind children who haven't seen a blind child for
several years and simply do not remember the Braille code, or
maybe they never knew it very well. That's a problem. We need to
get materials to them to train them. We need to develop systems
to ensure that they will be able to learn Braille and improve
their competence. We cannot ignore or forget about all those
people out there who are working with our children. The answer is
to help them, and together we must develop materials and delivery
systems to insure that every teacher working with blind children
in this country is competent in literacy.
     Dr. Jernigan agreed and added:
     It will take the best efforts of all of us to develop the
materials and to bring about a new climate. At the same time we
must see that people don't try just to get by. It's been a
vicious circle: they've not known Braille, so they've not taught
Braille to children, so they have not needed Braille, so they
haven't known it. I agree with you; we do know the problem. And
people of good will in this field, blind and sighted, consumers
and professionals, must work together. This points up the problem
and where we've got to go.
     Rami Rabbi asked one final question of Mrs. McCarthy. He
said:
     Mrs. McCarthy, you said you came to the field of work with
the blind, because of your experiences in college, believing that
blind people could succeed in anything. Does that mean that you
yourself are at odds with Division IX of AER, which clearly
believes that totally blind people, at least, cannot succeed in
one area particularly, namely mobility and orientation teaching?
     Dr. Jernigan then intervened by saying that he was not there
to protect the speaker but that as a member of the diplomatic
corps Rami could probably appreciate that, as a new president,
Mrs. McCarthy might well have to give a soft rather than a hard
answer to that question if she hoped to effect change in her
organization.
     Mrs. McCarthy agreed that she could not speak publicly on
the question at this time, but she added that she would have been
disappointed if she had not been asked it.


[Photo: Mr. Maurer, Ramona Walhof, and Sheryl Pickering sit at the Resolutions
Committee head table. Mr. Maurer is speaking into the microphone. Caption:
President Maurer addresses the Resolutions Committee as Ramona Walhof
(center), Committee Chairman, and Sheryl Pickering, Committee Secretary, look
on.]
[Photo: A crowd of Federationists sit in the Resolutions Committee meeting
audience. Caption: Hundreds of Federationists attend the annual meeting of the
Resolutions Committee, which takes place on the afternoon of convention
registration day.]

                   RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE
                    ANNUAL CONVENTION OF THE
                NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
                           JULY, 1994
                        by Ramona Walhof

     From the Editor: Ramona Walhof is the Secretary of the
National Federation of the Blind and President of the NFB of
Idaho. She also serves as the Chairman of the Resolutions
Committee. Each year she presides over the receipt and handling
of all resolutions until they are acted upon by the convention.
This is what she has to say about the resolutions considered at
the 1994 convention of the National Federation of the Blind:

     The National Federation of the Blind takes seriously
resolutions proposed and resolutions passed by the convention.
Any resolution passed by the convention constitutes a policy
statement of the organization, and goals expressed in the
resolutions become a part of our march toward independence and
first-class citizenship for the blind.
     Resolutions may be brought directly to the floor of the
convention by the Board of Directors. But any member of the NFB
may also present a resolution to the Resolutions Committee for
its consideration. That person must then be present both when the
resolution is debated by the Committee and when it is brought to
the floor. Certainly the more common procedure is through the
Resolutions Committee, which may not bottle up any resolution.
     The Committee reads and considers all resolutions brought to
it and takes them to the floor of the convention with the
recommendation "do pass" or "do not pass." The Resolutions
Committee does not rewrite resolutions; it merely discusses them,
votes them up or down, and carries them to the floor of the
convention. Generally speaking, the convention follows the
recommendations of the Committee, but there have been exceptions
to this pattern.
     In 1993 we established a new policy that resolutions should
be in the hands of the President or the committee chairman at
least two weeks before the Committee meeting at the convention.
This has made it possible (in the event that two resolutions on
the same topic are presented) to work out differences and
problems. It has also made it possible to check on questions of
fact when they arise. In short, this change has improved the work
of the Committee and the quality of the resolutions.
     At this year's convention nineteen resolutions were
presented, and eighteen were passed. One was withdrawn. As usual,
we provide here the full texts of all the resolutions passed in
Detroit by the 1994 NFB Convention. First I will attempt to give
a brief description of each:
     Resolution 94-01 seeks appropriate certification of blind
cane travel teachers by AER and calls upon RSA to review training
programs for mobility teachers to see that they do not
discriminate against the blind.
     Resolution 94-02 seeks class-wide recognition of blind
persons as socially disadvantaged when applying for loans and
contracts through the Small Business Administration and commends
Congressman John Lafalce and the other members of the House Small
Business Committee and Congressman Jim Ramstad and the other
ninety-three co-sponsors of the Americans with Disabilities
Business Development Act for the work they have done to improve
business opportunities for the blind.
     Resolution 94-03 seeks to maintain a continuum of choices in
the educational placement of blind children.
     Resolution 94-04 calls upon RSA to adopt regulations which
prohibit use of funds for support groups that are controlled by
agencies serving the blind rather than organizations of the blind
themselves.
     Resolution 94-05 calls upon the Department of Veterans
Affairs to support the Randolph-Sheppard Act and to issue permits
for vending facilities according to its provisions.
     Resolution 94-06 calls upon the American Council on
Education and the GED Testing Service to change their policies so
that blind persons may use readers when taking GED examinations.
     Resolution 94-07 expresses the interest of the blind in the
modernization of U.S. currency and expresses our determination to
educate the public to the fact that blind persons can and do
handle their own money, no matter how it looks or feels.
     Resolution 94-08 was withdrawn.
     Resolution 94-09 calls upon Congress to increase the
appropriation to NLS to maintain and improve library services to
the blind, including the replacement of old and worn-out cassette
and disc players.
     Resolution 94-10 seeks national legislation providing for
independent living services for the blind separate from
independent living councils for groups with other disabilities.
     Resolution 94-11 calls upon guide dog schools to stress to
students the importance of learning and always using effective
methods of picking up after guide dogs.
     Resolution 94-12 condemns the Department of Transportation's
insistence that detectable warnings must be installed on subway
platforms and commends the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Area
Transit Authority for resisting this requirement.
     Resolution 94-13 calls upon the Department of Education to
disapprove grant applications from schools and agencies that
discriminate against the blind when hiring cane travel
instructors.
     Resolution 94-14 calls upon Congress and the Department of
Education to include Braille literacy requirements in the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act amendments.
     Resolution 94-15 calls on Congress to pass H.R. 3264 and S.
2161 to improve work incentives for SSI recipients.
     Resolution 94-16 calls upon the Social Security
Administration and Congress to move forward with the approval and
implementation of re-engineering and streamlining a plan for the
disability determination process.
     Resolution 94-17 condemns sub-minimum wages in sheltered
workshops and asks that NFB representatives be included when a
new minimum wage proposal is developed.
     Resolution 94-18 calls upon RSA and state rehabilitation
agencies to adopt regulations that promote, not discourage,
client choice in rehabilitation.
     Resolution 94-19 opposes means testing for Social Security
benefits paid to retirees and disabled persons.
                        RESOLUTION 94-01

     WHEREAS, one of the major factors in the growing
independence of blind persons in the Twentieth Century has been
the development and skillful use of the long white cane; and
     WHEREAS, a principal element in the process is proper
instruction in the use of the cane; and
     WHEREAS, from the earliest days many of the most successful
mobility instructors of the blind have been blind themselves--
others, of course, being sighted; and
     WHEREAS, mobility instructors of the blind have
traditionally been trained by state agencies and others who have
employed them, and more recently by universities; and
     WHEREAS, many of the university-trained mobility instructors
have joined the Association for Education and Rehabilitation of
the Blind and Visually Impaired (AER) and, particularly, its
Division IX for Orientation and Mobility Instructors; and
     WHEREAS, Division IX has proclaimed that it has the sole
right to certify, or withhold certification from, those wishing
to teach orientation and mobility to the blind; and
     WHEREAS, despite the fact that many blind persons are
competently working in state rehabilitation agencies for the
blind and elsewhere as mobility instructors, Division IX refuses
to certify such blind instructors, contending that they cannot
successfully perform the duties of the job; and
     WHEREAS, the state rehabilitation agencies for the blind,
which are the primary employers of orientation and mobility
specialists, have by resolution rejected the practice of
disqualifying blind mobility instructors; and
     WHEREAS, such disqualification is contrary to federal law,
current practice in the field, traditional wisdom and experience,
and the best interests of the profession and blind trainees; and
     WHEREAS, there have been recent indications that Division IX
and its parent organization, AER, may be considering a revision
of their policy of rejecting blind applicants for certification
as mobility instructors, but in a totally inappropriate manner
since the proposed new standards presuppose the correctness of
the techniques used by sighted instructors (merely seeking ways
to accommodate to those techniques) instead of recognizing that
the techniques of blind instructors are different but not
inferior: Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that we reject the notion that blind
persons cannot competently function as mobility instructors of
the blind or that their techniques are inferior to the techniques
used by sighted instructors; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we call on Division IX of AER to
reconsider its position concerning certification of mobility
instructors and to bring its policies into conformity with
current best practice in the field; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we call on the federal
Rehabilitation Services Administration to discourage violation of
federal antidiscrimination statutes by reviewing university
applications for funding of mobility training courses to see
whether those universities qualify for future federal grants if
they continue to discriminate unfairly and unreasonably against
the blind; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we call on all concerned parties
in the blindness field to reconsider the current system of
certification of mobility instructors of the blind; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we commend the National Council
of State Agencies for the Blind for the resolution which it
passed concerning this matter on May 13, 1994.

                        RESOLUTION 94-02

     WHEREAS, legislation in the form of H. R. 4263, entitled the
"Small Business and Minority Small Business Procurement
Opportunities Act of 1994," is being considered by the Congress
as part of a broader initiative to reform purchasing procedures
of the federal government; and
     WHEREAS, among other things this legislation proposes that
annual contracting goals shall be established by the President,
including a requirement that not less than 5 percent of the total
value of all prime contract and subcontract awards for each
fiscal year must go to small businesses which are owned and
controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged
individuals; and
     WHEREAS, the Committee on Small Business in the House of
Representatives has included language in H.R. 4263 directing the
Small Business Administration to consider persons with severe
disabilities as socially disadvantaged for purposes of
eligibility for minority set-aside contracts; and
     WHEREAS, This legislation as now amended by the House Small
Business Committee is a positive departure from existing law,
which disregards the social disadvantage that often accompanies
most disabilities, especially blindness; and
     WHEREAS, this legislation represents an important new
direction in policy for the minority small business program and
underscores once again the need to enact a similar change in
Section 8(a) of the Small Business Act: Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization commend chairman
John Lafalce and the members of the House Small Business
Committee for responding positively to the request of the
National Federation of the Blind for acknowledgment of our right
to participate in minority small business programs; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this organization continue to
insist upon adding persons with disabilities to the list of those
who, for purposes of participating in the minority small business
program, are acknowledged by law as socially disadvantaged; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT we commend the ninety-three
members of the United States House of Representatives who, along
with Congressman Jim Ramstad, have co-sponsored the Americans
with Disabilities Business Development Act and ask them to join
us in requesting that, following the example set by H.R. 4263,
all bills relating to the minority small business program include
class-wide recognition for blind persons and others with
disabilities when they are passed.

                        RESOLUTION 94-03

     WHEREAS, an educational philosophy called "full inclusion,"
is, in its popular implementation, if not in its definition,
being used to place all children in the regular school classroom
at all times and for all forms of instruction without considering
all of a student's needs for instruction and services relating to
disability; and
     WHEREAS, a desirable goal of the full inclusion movement is
the elimination of artificial or discriminatory educational
placements which have occurred for convenience and in many
instances because of prejudice; and
     WHEREAS, genuine inclusion of blind students in all aspects
of integrated school settings is a desirable goal, but a mandate
for full inclusion is not the most effective way to reach that
goal for many students during at least some portion of the
educational process; and
     WHEREAS, blind students must have educational services which
are unique to blindness, including mobility instruction, learning
to read and write Braille, and opportunities to become proficient
in other adaptive skills, each of which requires time, attention,
and knowledge which of necessity are not part of the regular,
daily classroom experience with full inclusion at all times; and
     WHEREAS, a continuum of educational placements, combined
with an expressed preference for the least restrictive setting
appropriate to the needs of the individual child, is the best
policy to promote the ultimate integration of blind students in
school and society by directing that arrangements for specialized
services be provided in an effective setting for the child: Now,
therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization oppose policy
changes in either legislation or regulations which would remove
the continuum of educational placement alternatives which is now
available to parents, educators, and students; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that in the current reassessment of
special education policy which may lead to changes in the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act we urge the Congress
and the Clinton administration to maintain support for choices
among educational placements for blind students.


                        RESOLUTION 94-04

     WHEREAS, the defined legal and legitimate mission of state
vocational rehabilitation agencies is to provide the vocational
rehabilitation services which are prescribed in each client's
individualized written rehabilitation program; and
     WHEREAS, there are a growing number of instances in which
state vocational rehabilitation agencies have established and
operated ongoing groups of agency clients and others for the
purported purpose of providing support and self-help services;
and
     WHEREAS, chapters, affiliates, and divisions of the National
Federation of the Blind not only conduct self-help and self-
support activities but are themselves a self-help and self-
support network throughout the United States; and
     WHEREAS, chapters, affiliates, and divisions of the National
Federation of the Blind are used as resources by vocational
rehabilitation agencies in many instances; and
     WHEREAS, support groups conducted under the auspices of the
state vocational rehabilitation agency are in reality often a
reaction to the organized blind movement, which is independent
from the state agency; and
     WHEREAS, rather than fostering support and self-help
activities among blind persons, the organization, management, and
oversight of support groups by the vocational rehabilitation
agency undermines the expression of views which may not
necessarily be in harmony with those of the state agency or its
policies; and
     WHEREAS, collaboration in good faith between organizations
of the blind and vocational rehabilitation agencies serving the
blind can be a constructive means of promoting self-support
activities, but the outright conduct of support groups by
agencies in ways which conflict with the organized blind movement
is clearly an abuse of agency position and resources, smacking of
custodialism and company unions: Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization oppose the practice
of conducting support groups which are controlled either directly
or indirectly by state vocational rehabilitation agencies; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we ask the Rehabilitation
Services Administration to adopt clear regulations which prohibit
use of funds for support groups that are controlled by agencies
serving the blind rather than organizations of the blind
themselves.

                        RESOLUTION 94-05

     WHEREAS, the federal Randolph-Sheppard Act declares that
priority must be given to blind persons in the operation of
vending facilities which are under the control of departments,
agencies, and instrumentalities of the United States; and
     WHEREAS, in a federal court challenge to the Randolph-
Sheppard Act the Department of Veterans Affairs sought a ruling
that the medical centers which it operates are exempt from
providing priority to blind vendors; and
     WHEREAS, the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth
Circuit has now determined that the Department of Veterans
Affairs and its Veterans Canteen Service must honor the priority
for blind persons established by the Randolph-Sheppard Act; and
     WHEREAS, in addition to the site at issue in the federal
court challenge the Department of Veterans Affairs has 170
medical centers, and many of these sites would likely have
sufficient business potential for a Randolph-Sheppard facility:
Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization request cooperation
by the Department of Veterans Affairs in making good faith
efforts to establish business opportunities for blind vendors
throughout its medical center system; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we urge the Department of
Veterans Affairs to cease and desist from further legal
challenges to the priority granted by the Randolph-Sheppard Act
and affirmatively demonstrate this policy by negotiating permits
for blind vendors to operate facilities at the Department's
medical centers nationwide.

                        RESOLUTION 94-06

     WHEREAS, blind persons of all ages frequently use readers
both to study for and to take tests at all levels of education
from elementary school to post-graduate studies; and
     WHEREAS, the use of a reader has proven to be a viable and
successful alternative to the use of tapes, large print, and
Braille for many blind persons who prefer to use this form of
studying and test-taking or who do not possess the skills or
training to use the other alternative techniques of blindness;
and
     WHEREAS, many other testing services, such as SAT, GRE, ACT,
and NTE have always permitted blind persons to use readers to
take their tests, and this has proven to be an effective method
of examination; and
     WHEREAS, the current policy of the American Council on
Education, GED Testing Service, is not in compliance with Section
36.309 of the regulations implementing the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA); and
     WHEREAS, the ADA states that the methods used for teaching
test materials must also be available for taking the examination;
and
     WHEREAS, the American Council on Education and the GED
Testing Service do not allow the use of readers when taking the
GED test, although many blind persons prefer to use readers to
study the GED materials before taking the GED examination; and
     WHEREAS, this antiquated and inconsistent policy is not in
the spirit of the regulations for the ADA and is not consistent
with the policies of other nationally known testing services or
the preferences of many blind persons: Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization condemn and deplore
the obsolete policy of the American Council on Education and the
GED Testing Service for its intractable attitude toward the use
of readers when blind persons take the GED examination; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this organization use its
influence and whatever measures are necessary to persuade the
American Council of Education and the GED Testing Service to
change this outmoded policy and to allow blind persons to use
readers when taking the GED examination.

                        RESOLUTION 94-07

     WHEREAS, the United States Department of the Treasury is
examining alternatives to the present currency for the purposes
of making counterfeiting more difficult and for making currency
more compatible with modern technology; and
     WHEREAS, revisions to the present currency may include
variations in color, raised markings, bar coding, or other
electronically readable formats; and
     WHEREAS, it is a widespread misconception that blind people
cannot handle their own money because they cannot see it; and
     WHEREAS, it is beyond dispute that blind people can, in
fact, handle their own money; however, bills which can be
identified by other than conventional print could be more
convenient for everyone, may be a necessity to safeguard against
counterfeiting, and may be desirable to take the best advantage
of evolving technology: Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization express the interest
of blind people in the discussion of a modernized form of
currency so that any changes which may eventually be made will
include methods of identifying money by other than strictly
visual means; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Federation, notwithstanding
its expressed interest in the ultimate decisions on currency
changes, do all in its power correctly to inform the public that
blind people can and do successfully handle money in its present
form.

                        RESOLUTION 94-09

     WHEREAS, the Library of Congress, National Library Service
for the Blind and Physically Handicapped (NLS) program is the
primary source of reading matter for most blind people in the
United States; and
     WHEREAS, for both cost and copyright reasons the service
includes provision of machines which are especially designed to
play cassette tapes and flexible discs recorded in slow speed and
multi-track formats for exclusive use in the NLS program; and
     WHEREAS, the commercial availability of recorded or Braille
reading matter is not a viable option either as a supplement to
or as a replacement for the NLS service, since the choice of such
materials from commercial sources is sparse, the reading matter
is often abridged, and the prices charged are prohibitively
expensive, far exceeding the cost of purchasing the same material
produced in standard ink print; and
     WHEREAS, funding is the single most urgent need of the NLS
program to meet the demands of normally anticipated growth, to
acquire needed titles for the collection, and especially to
ensure an adequate supply of machines to replace thousands of
aging ones still in use; and
     WHEREAS, budgets presented by the Library of Congress and
the President for fiscal years 1993, 1994, and 1995 have each
sought funding to begin a phased schedule of replacing the
specialized playback machines which have been in service beyond
their useful lives; and
     WHEREAS, the Congress has so far failed to appropriate
sufficient funds to address the growing problem of aging playback
machines in the NLS program: Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization express top priority
support for the NLS program to receive the highest possible
appropriation, with special attention being given to replacing
the growing number of outmoded and broken playback machines which
must be supplied for readers to use the recorded media; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we alert all members of Congress
to the urgent need for funds to ensure that quality library
services for the blind remain available both now and in the
future.


                        RESOLUTION 94-10

     WHEREAS, the 1992 amendments to the Rehabilitation Act
require each state to create a State Independent Living Council
(SILC); and
     WHEREAS, Rehabilitation Law has always provided that states
may have separate agencies serving the blind; and
     WHEREAS, the 1993 Rehabilitation amendments (in keeping with
this practice) added the provision that state rehabilitation
advisory councils be separate for blind agencies; and
     WHEREAS, many of the needs for persons in the other
disability groups are not needs of the blind and, likewise, the
blind have needs that are not significant for persons with
different disabilities; and
     WHEREAS, the result of this emphasis on "cross disability
services" is that most of what the SILCs are doing is useless and
sometimes counterproductive and harmful for the blind, often
causing valuable existing programs to be discontinued for lack of
funds; and
     WHEREAS, some states have preferred to form two SILCs or two
independent living plans under one SILC, thus providing an
appropriate plan and representation for and among the blind; and
     WHEREAS, where there is only one SILC in a state, it has
attempted to secure all of the independent living monies
available through both the general and blind agencies, leaving no
funds for meaningful independent living services for blind
individuals in those states: Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that we call upon the Congress of the
United States to pass necessary legislation so that agencies for
the blind can provide meaningful independent living services for
the blind with independent living funds allocated to these
agencies.

                        RESOLUTION 94-11

     WHEREAS, guide dog training includes teaching students to
take responsibility for complete maintenance and control of a
guide dog; and
     WHEREAS, many guide dog schools do not teach their students
efficient methods for relieving and picking up after their dogs;
and
     WHEREAS, many guide dog schools do not stress the importance
of learning and maintaining these methods both during and after
training; and
     WHEREAS, these omissions on the part of many guide dog
schools have resulted in the graduation of guide dog users who
are unable and/or unwilling to pick up after their dogs; and
     WHEREAS, the problem is compounded by ordinances in many
cities which exempt blind persons from the requirement that these
citizens pick up after their dogs--a permission for blind persons
to skip this responsibility of citizenship which blind people
should reject and which the guide dog schools should also reject
by their training; and
     WHEREAS, the irresponsible conduct of guide dog users who do
not pick up after their dogs reinforces negative attitudes about
blind people in the mind of the public and undermines the efforts
of responsible guide dog users to demonstrate the effective use
of guide dogs for independent travel: Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization call upon all guide
dog schools to stress the importance of learning and always using
effective methods for picking up after a guide dog both during
and after training.

                        RESOLUTION 94-12

     WHEREAS, the United States Department of Transportation has
now decided to impose a requirement for detectable warnings to be
placed on the edges of passenger boarding platforms at key-rail
stations; and
     WHEREAS, this approach is at odds with the more enlightened
position of the Department of Justice and the Architectural and
Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, both of which have
suspended detectable warnings requirements during a period of
further study, including a review of the need for the
requirements; and
     WHEREAS, the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority
has decided not to install the detectable warnings on subway
platform edges after being ordered to do so by the Secretary of
Transportation, citing safety reasons as the basis for
challenging the detectable warnings requirement; and
     WHEREAS, the Washington area Metro system, which serves
Washington, D. C., the national capital area, and the surrounding
suburbs, is among the safest and most used rail facilities in the
United States, with platform edges which have recessed flashing
lights and are detectable by cane or dog guide; and
     WHEREAS, the platform-edge-warning features of the
Washington Metro system were designed for the safety of all
riders and demonstrably fulfill that purpose; and
     WHEREAS, there is not a scintilla of evidence that the
installation of detectable warnings would make travel on the
Washington Metro system safer for blind people or for anyone
else, and compared to the present platform edge warnings there is
ample reason to believe that the system would in fact be less
safe with detectable warnings: Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization condemn and deplore
the Department of Transportation's irrational insistence upon
imposing detectable warnings on transit providers and users of
rail systems; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this organization commend the
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority for standing tall
on behalf of the safety of all transit users, including riders
who are blind.

                        RESOLUTION 94-13

     WHEREAS, the Association for Education and Rehabilitation of
the Blind and Visually Impaired (AER) has established criteria
for certifying orientation and mobility instructors for the
blind; and
     WHEREAS, the certification criteria which have been used for
many years presume that sight is essential to perform the duties
of an instructor in orientation and mobility; and
     WHEREAS, professional preparation programs, rehabilitation
programs, and education programs often rely upon AER
certification in both their admission policies and their
employment practices; and
     WHEREAS, use of the AER certification criteria in any way
leads to artificial and discriminatory barriers, resulting in
exclusion of blind people from orientation and mobility
instructor certification; and
     WHEREAS, agencies and schools which hire orientation and
mobility instructors will often require AER certification as a
condition for employment, and the institutions which train such
instructors will almost without exception not admit blind people
to their programs because they would not eventually become
certified; and
     WHEREAS, the agencies and schools serving the blind and the
professional preparation programs for instructors are all
federally funded but the Federal government has followed a hands-
off policy and permitted discrimination against the blind in
these programs for many years; and
     WHEREAS, methods of proven effectiveness exist for blind
people to teach other blind people how to travel both safely and
independently: Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization condemn and deplore
the discriminatory practice of excluding blind people from
training, certification, and employment in the orientation and
mobility profession; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we petition the United States
Department of Education, the Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services, and the Rehabilitation Services
Administration to institute a policy of disapproving any future
grant applications for programs which in their admission or
employment policies follow the discriminatory certification
criteria of AER.

                        RESOLUTION 94-14

     WHEREAS, the decline in literacy skills among blind youth of
school age is so pronounced as to constitute a national crisis--
of the legally blind children reported to the American Printing
House for the Blind in its 1993 annual child count, fewer than 9
percent used Braille, 27 percent used print, and 40 percent, the
largest group, read neither Braille nor print; and
     WHEREAS, comparative figures for prior years show a steady
downward trend in literacy skills among blind children in
America; and
     WHEREAS, the federal government through the United States
Department of Education provides significant financial aid to
both state and local education agencies and conditions
eligibility for these funds upon meeting certain federal
requirements; and
     WHEREAS, the unmet literacy needs of blind children are not
currently addressed in the federal requirements, although blind
adults who do not receive Braille instruction as children will
often become dependent upon financial support and services from
federal programs; and
     WHEREAS, amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act (IDEA) are being considered by the Clinton
administration and the Congress in anticipation of legislation to
reauthorize or modify certain provisions of IDEA: Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization call upon
responsible leaders in the Congress and officials of policy rank
in the Department of Education to approve strong Braille literacy
provisions as part of the IDEA reauthorization bill; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Federation declare its firm
and continuing commitment to secure the right to receive Braille
literacy services for all students who are blind or visually
impaired.

                        RESOLUTION 94-15

     WHEREAS, assistance paid in the Supplemental Security Income
(SSI) program is intended to meet the basic food, clothing, and
shelter needs of recipients but is often insufficient even to
achieve these purposes; and
     WHEREAS, recipients who have the ability to work or to
engage in training with the goal of self-support must be given
opportunities to do so without suffering the loss of SSI benefits
to meet their basic needs; and
     WHEREAS, amendments to title XVI of the Social Security Act
(H.R. 3264 and S. 2161) have been proposed in the Congress for
the purpose of strengthening the SSI work incentive provisions;
and
     WHEREAS, changes made by this legislation would include the
following: (1) acceptance of a Plan for Achieving Self-Support
(PASS) unless it has been disapproved by the Social Security
Administration within thirty days of submission by a recipient;
(2) greater flexibility in the time allowed for fulfillment of a
PASS, including a period of longer than four years if required by
the recipient's goal; (3) allowing recipients to accumulate
resources under a PASS for the purpose of buying a home; (4)
clarifying that unemployment compensation, workers' compensation,
and sick pay are considered to be "earned income" rather than
"unearned income" for purposes of determining eligibility and
payment amounts in the SSI program; and (5) specification that
grants, scholarships, and fellowships not otherwise excluded from
a recipient's income are "earned," not "unearned," income; and
     WHEREAS, approval of these changes would promote self-
support efforts among recipients and eventually lead to complete
independence from SSI for many: Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization call for enactment
by the Congress of the SSI work incentive amendments proposed in
H.R. 3264 and S. 2161; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that in requesting the prompt
approval of this legislation this Federation remind the Congress
that investment in work incentives for SSI recipients makes good
sense and fulfills sound economic principles.

                        RESOLUTION 94-16

     WHEREAS, a proposal to re-engineer the process used for
determining disability is being considered by the Social Security
Administration; and
     WHEREAS, in its major thrust the plan would streamline and
simplify the procedures now in place to evaluate medical and
other evidence relating to disability and blindness
determinations affecting applicants for benefits in both the
Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) and the Supplemental
Security Income (SSI) programs; and
     WHEREAS, the conditions for determining blindness and
eligibility for benefits in both programs are clearly prescribed
in the Social Security Act, including a defined exemption of
earnings used to measure "substantial gainful activity" (SGA) in
the SSDI program and no consideration of SGA whatsoever for blind
applicants in the SSI program; and
     WHEREAS, in light of these provisions the eligibility
process for blind individuals should be completed in a matter of
days rather than consuming several months as is now the ordinary
case; and
     WHEREAS, if a blind applicant presents all of the
appropriate information which is sufficient for an examiner to
make a "presumptive eligibility" determination in either the SSDI
or the SSI program, benefits due could be paid on time and the
process would be further streamlined: Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization urge the Social
Security Administration and the Congress to move forward promptly
with approval and implementation of a re-engineering plan for the
disability determination process; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that in the development of the final
plan, and especially in its implementation, the unique status of
blind applicants be considered in ways that will achieve both
quick and accurate determinations; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that, as a further streamlining to
the process, we urge the Social Security Administration and the
Congress to include provisions for presumptive eligibility
determinations to be made in the SSDI program as is now the case
in the SSI program whenever a blind applicant supplies
information sufficient for such a determination.


                        RESOLUTION 94-17

     WHEREAS, the Clinton administration has voiced its intention
to present a proposal to the Congress for raising the federal
minimum wage; and
     WHEREAS, an exemption from the minimum wage affecting blind
employees allows for exploitation of workers with pay rates that
are far below the minimum wage and falling far short of the
amount required even to meet basic subsistence needs; and
     WHEREAS, this exemption affects blind people who work in
segregated factories which are often referred to as sheltered
workshops; and
     WHEREAS, evidence presented to the Congress in a hearing on
March 16, 1994, established that procedures now in place to
protect subminimum wage employees against management abuses do
not work and cannot work to achieve fair pay practices; and
     WHEREAS, any system such as the present minimum wage
exemption, which benefits employers, is largely employer-
executed, and is mostly employer-policed, will never safeguard
the interests of the workers: Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization condemn the
substandard pay practices which still exploit the labor of
capable blind workers; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we insist upon a place at the
table in working with the Clinton administration as the next
proposal for raising and modifying the minimum wage is developed.

                        RESOLUTION 94-18

     WHEREAS, by virtue of the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of
1992, individuals eligible for vocational rehabilitation services
are to be given "choice and increased control" over decisions
made concerning the selection of vocational rehabilitation goals,
services, and service providers; and
     WHEREAS, this mandate for consumer choice runs counter to
the philosophy and practices historically followed by vocational
rehabilitation agencies and personnel who in all too many
instances have asserted so-called professionalism in preference
to the expressed wishes and priorities of clients; and
     WHEREAS, the acknowledged anti-choice bias which has been
prevalent among rehabilitation agencies and professionals makes
it imperative that clear regulatory direction concerning the
choice mandate must be given from the federal level; and
     WHEREAS, draft regulations for the vocational rehabilitation
program which were recently circulated tend to send mixed signals
by mentioning choice but also allowing state agencies the freedom
to conduct business essentially in the usual manner, with perhaps
a nod in the direction of consumer choice; and
     WHEREAS, the law now requires that rehabilitation agencies
and their personnel must abandon practices of exercising control
over their clients, and therefore regulations to implement the
law must provide the direction which is necessary to achieve this
change: Now, therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization insist upon an
unambiguous mandate for consumer choice in the federal vocational
rehabilitation regulations; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Federation call for
cooperation by all state vocational rehabilitation agencies in
establishing policies to make consumer choice the guiding
principle in the rehabilitation program of each individual
served.

                        RESOLUTION 94-19

     WHEREAS, a national commission has been appointed to develop
a plan for addressing the growth of entitlement spending as a
portion of the federal budget; and
     WHEREAS, virtually the entire discussion of entitlement
reform portrays many of the programs involved as wasteful and out
of control; and
     WHEREAS, the Social Security system, the largest of the
entitlement programs, includes two special trust funds known as
the Federal Old Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund and the
Federal Disability Insurance Trust Fund, from which monthly cash
benefits are paid to individuals and their qualifying dependents
based on work performed and contributions to the trust funds
resulting from earnings; and
     WHEREAS, eligibility rules for receipt of cash benefits are
clearly prescribed so that wage-earners and their dependents can
qualify only in the event of retirement, death, or disability;
and
     WHEREAS, proposals being considered by the entitlement
reform commission include means testing of Social Security
benefits, in other words reducing future Social Security benefits
based on financial circumstances; and
     WHEREAS, the insurance concept which underlies the Social
Security system is one of its fundamental strengths, providing an
incentive for all Americans to work and earn coverage and
assuring that all who do work will be treated equally in
receiving the benefits which they have earned as a percentage of
their lifetime earnings; and
     WHEREAS, the benefits paid and payable to thousands of blind
Americans could eventually be affected significantly by a
decision to means test Social Security in any way: Now,
therefore,
     BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of the Blind in
Convention assembled this seventh day of July, 1994, in the City
of Detroit, Michigan, that this organization state its firm
opposition to means testing of benefits paid from either the
Federal Old Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund or the Federal
Disability Insurance Trust Fund both now and in the future; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the position expressed in this
resolution be communicated promptly to the entitlement reform
commission with the reminder that rather than reflecting a
program that is out of control, the costs of the Social Security
system demonstrate the continuing need for a viable social
insurance program in the United States.

                          CONSTITUTION
                             OF THE
                NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
                        AS AMENDED 1986 

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

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

                    ARTICLE III. MEMBERSHIP 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

                  ARTICLE VI. STATE AFFILIATES

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

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

                    ARTICLE VIII. AMENDMENTS

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


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