                       THE BRAILLE MONITOR

                          January, 1996

                     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
PUBLICATION OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND

                            CONTENTS
                                                    JANUARY, 1996

FURTHER COMMENTS ABOUT MOBILITY 
     by Kenneth Jernigan

HOW FAST IS IT REALLY? 
     by David Andrews

A FABLE FOR OUR TIMES:
TALKING SENSE ABOUT TRUNCATED DOMES 
     by Peggy Pinder Elliott

ISVI UPDATE 

NFB OF SOUTH CAROLINA FIGHTS
TO PRESERVE COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND 

AND THE BLIND SHALL LEAD:
BUSY STOCKBROKER AS INDEPENDENT AS HE WANTS TO BE 
     by Kate Thompson

CROSSING FOR BLIND SIGNS CROSSED OUT 
     by Peggy Chong

IF I HAVE SEEN FURTHER:
THE BLIND SERVING COMMUNION? 
     by James H. Omvig

IN MEMORY OF TWO FRIENDS
     by Kenneth Jernigan

LEADERSHIP EMPOWERMENT:
REFLECTIONS ON THE FAMILY 
     by Noel Nightingale

THE LITTLEST LOBBYIST 
     by Judy Jobes

WE DON'T HAVE NORTH HERE 
     by Barbara Pierce

MY FIRST CONVENTION 
     by Barbara Ann Hall

CALIFORNIA CALLING 
     by Deana Bates

SOCIAL SECURITY AND SSI FACTS FOR 1996 
     by James Gashel

RECIPES 

MONITOR MINIATURES 

        Copyright  1996 National Federation of the Blind[LEAD PHOTO/CAPTION: As we think of the 1996 NFB Convention,
we are reminded of former meetings in California. We first went
to the Pacific coast with the San Francisco Convention of 1956.
We were in four hotels (room rates from $5-7 per night), and the
banquet was held in the Elks Building. In 1967 we returned to
California, going this time to the Statler Hilton in Los Angeles.
In 1976 we went back to Los Angeles, and we stayed at the
Biltmore Hotel. We were too big for the Biltmore Ballroom, so our
meetings were held at the Convention Center.
     Some will remember 1976 for the election of Jimmy Carter.
Others will remember it for rampant inflation. For Federationists
it was the year of the banquet speech Blindness: Visions and
Vultures. It was one of the most successful banquets and one of
the most successful conventions we have ever had. Here is a
picture of that banquet as we gathered in our thousands. The 1996
convention at the Anaheim Hilton will be our fourth in
California, and it promises to be one of the biggest and best in
Federation history. Don't miss it!

     [PHOTO/CAPTION: Kenneth Jernigan]

                 FURTHER COMMENTS ABOUT MOBILITY
                       by Kenneth Jernigan

     In the October, 1995, issue of the Braille Monitor we dealt
at length with the subject of mobility for the blind. As was
expected, there was a considerable amount of reaction.
Overwhelmingly it was positive. However, there were a few
exceptions.
     One or two individuals called me dirty names and engaged in
personal abuse. I made no response to the irrationals, but others
raised substantive questions that required consideration. In this
article we are publishing one of the most interesting exchanges
of letters. As always happens in such cases, I learned something
in the process. The challenge to my opinions caused me to refine
my thinking and look again at what I had said in the October
issue.
     I hope you will find these letters interesting and thought-
provoking. I doubt that we will want to print anything else on
the subject for quite some time to come, but meanwhile we have a
great deal to think about:

                                                 October 27, 1995

Dear Dr. Jernigan:
     I am writing in response to remarks you made about guide-dog
users in the October 1995 issue of the Braille Monitor.
     I have been aware of the anti-guide-dog attitudes in the
organization for years. Guide-dog users have often felt unwelcome
at national conventions. I have seldom seen a photograph of a
guide-dog user with their dog in the Braille Monitor, and I've
never heard NFB leadership refer to guide dogs when discussing
independence. There was no conspiracy of silence to spare
feelings: NFB leadership and members have always made it very
clear that guide-dog users are not welcome and looked down upon
in the National Federation of the Blind. If there was a
conspiracy of silence, it was among guide-dog users who never
asserted themselves to oppose this treatment by fellow
Federationists, in order to avoid division within the
organization.
     It is ironic that the NFB claims to be fighting for equal
rights and first-class citizenship for a minority (the blind),
and a minority within the NFB (guide-dog users) are called
second-class citizens by the organization's leader. Through the
years you have compared the organized blind movement to the civil
rights movement. The general tone of your article might be
equated to the backlash which comes when a movement has made too
much progress and the majority, cane users in this case, feel
threatened. See what happens when you let a guide-dog user move
into the neighborhood?
     You say that guide dogs have few advantages and many
disadvantages. Naturally you would feel this way. You are a cane
user. That is why you choose to use a cane. A person decides to
use a dog because for them a guide dog has many advantages and
few disadvantages. There is no controversy here; it is simply
freedom of choice. The danger lies in the fact that the
leadership of the organization holds one point of view which they
are trying to present as a doctrine. We are the National
Federation of the Blind, not the National Federation of White
Cane Users. You have valid concerns and many issues need to be
worked out. However, a slanted and divisive presentation in the
Braille Monitor is not the way to handle it.
     You pretend to be giving a balanced presentation, when in
reality you have stacked the deck when you led off with such an
emotional and divisive defense of the virtues of cane use. You
have also used your status and that of board members to tilt the
scales in your favor.
     You use examples like scratched floors and vomit at a
banquet to illustrate that guide dogs are unacceptable as a means
of mobility for the blind. I have seen cane users cause damage by
knocking things over that a dog would have walked around. This
does not mean that people should not use white canes.
     At NFB conventions I have seen cane users walk into walls,
travel in circles, and engage in cane duels as they try to pass
one another going in opposite directions. I have never heard a
guide-dog user leap to the erroneous conclusion that all cane
users are second-class citizens, who burden all those around
them, present a negative image of blindness to the public, and
will never be fully independent until they use a guide dog as
their primary mobility method.
     You quoted "The Nature of Independence" speech, and it is
interesting that you stopped quoting it just before the following
line, and it is very obvious why you chose to omit it: "We
absolutely must not become so rigid and dogmatic about the means
and precise details of achieving independence that we make
ourselves and everybody else around us miserable. Down that road
lies bigotry, as well as the loss of any real independence or
true normality." You have proven this with your remarks about
guide-dog users in the October Monitor. And in the speech were
you only talking about cane users and excluding those who use
guide dogs? I think not, because later on you say, "In
conclusion, I say to each member of this organization, hold your
head high in the joy of accomplishment and the pride of
independence, but not because of dog or cane or human arm, and
not because of your ability to read Braille or use a computer.
These are the trappings of independence and not the substance of
it. They should be learned and used when needed, but they should
be regarded only as means not ends. Our independence comes from
within." Marc Maurer hailed this as a ground-breaking speech, and
I thought it was the greatest speech you ever gave and would lead
the way to true unity between cane and guide-dog users. Have you
forgotten these words, or have you decided that they are no
longer true? You have come very far from those sentiments when
you can write an article like the one in this Monitor.
     There is another conspiracy of silence which you are not
aware of because it is directed to you as a cane user. Do you
really think the public always tells you the truth regarding what
they think about cane users? I have seen cane users walk into
people and spill coffee on them and the victim of this accident
says, "That's all right; no harm done." When a guide-dog user
moves swiftly and accurately through a crowded concourse,
avoiding obstacles and people, it seems to me that this projects
a more positive image of blindness than the cane user who is
moving more slowly, striking objects, and hitting people in the
ankles. The public agrees because I have heard people say as
much. An occasional mishap with a dog is far less damaging to the
image of blindness than daily cane crashing and bashing. As for
being led around by an animal, you seem to forget that the person
works the dog. The dog does not work the person.
     As for the letter you quote at the end of your article, the
dog is not responsible for going to college, getting married,
etc. The independence using the dog brings is the important
thing. I have heard you and President Maurer speak many times
about people who learned to use the long white cane and
subsequently accomplished great things. This is equally true of
guide-dog users. Why do you praise one and criticize the other?
     There are some cane users and some guide-dog users whose
actions project a negative and stereotypical image of blindness.
There are other guide-dog users and cane users that project a
positive image of blindness, and carry themselves with dignity as
proud, confident, and independent Federationists. To make unfair
generalizations about either group, that is, cane users or guide-
dog users, is cruel, unjustified, and counterproductive to our
common cause. Like their fellow white-cane users, guide-dog users
know who they are and they will never go back, even though the
leaders and some members of the National Federation of the Blind
think they should.

                                                       Sincerely,

                            _________

"We absolutely must not become so rigid and dogmatic about the
means and precise details of achieving independence that we make
ourselves and everybody else around us miserable. Down that road
lies bigotry, as well as the loss of any real independence or
true normality."--Kenneth Jernigan, Dallas, July 6, 1993

Dear Mr. Maurer:
     I am sending you a copy of a letter I wrote to Dr. Jernigan
regarding his recent article in the Monitor. The discussion was
not about "first class citizenship"; it was about ridiculing a
mobility technique of which he and the leadership of NFB
disapprove. There is much more at stake here than hurt feelings.
It undermines the NFB's role as an organization which speaks for
and serves all blind people.
     We are all very concerned about Braille literacy. We demand
that it be made available to all who need and want it, and we
attack those who point out unconvincing disadvantages, while
ignoring obvious advantages, to deprive us of it. As Carla so
movingly states in our new video on the subject, she should have
been given the chance to make that choice for herself, and it
should not have been made for her.
     People have the right to choose which mobility technique is
best for them. If someone feels that they can travel faster,
safer, and more comfortably with a guide dog, that is their
decision to make. Having made that choice, no one has the right
to pass judgment on them by saying that they will always be
second-class citizens, will never be fully independent, and are a
burden to everyone around them.
     The NFB has always discouraged guide-dog use either
explicitly or by excluding it from discussions about
independence. Now the leader of the organization has given his
blessing to treat guide-dog users as second class and to question
their status as Federationists.
     When a blind adult turns to the NFB for help and advice, is
the use of a guide dog given equal consideration as the use of a
cane as a primary mobility technique? I would guess not, after
reading the views of the NFB leadership on the subject. What if
this individual would benefit more by using a guide dog as do
those who have already made this choice? Such a person would not
be presented with that as an equal alternative. If the NFB and
its training centers discourage the use of guide dogs, how is
this different from the teachers, agencies, and vocational
counselors who discourage the use of Braille for those who would
benefit from it? The opinions of NFB leaders and ridiculous
isolated examples like scratched floors and vomit at a banquet
are not sufficient justification.
     If these attitudes prevail, then the NFB no longer speaks
for or fully serves all the blind, and the organization should
change its name to the National Federation of White Cane Users.
     I have put my PAC plan on hold, and I hope others who agree
with me will do the same. How can I continue to support an
organization which has become like the very agencies it has
opposed for so many years? I hope that the National Federation of
the Blind will decide to treat all its members as equals and not
regard those who choose a different mobility technique than its
leaders as second-class citizens.

                                                       Sincerely,


"Hold your head high in the joy of accomplishment and the pride
of independence, but not because of dog or cane or human arm, and
not because of your ability to read Braille or use a computer.
These are the trappings of independence and not the substance of
it. They should be learned and used when needed, but they should
be regarded only as means not ends. Our independence comes from
within."--Kenneth Jernigan, Dallas, July 6, 1993

                           ___________

                                                November 14, 1995

Dear ____________:
     Under date of October 27, 1995, you sent me a letter
concerning my article in the October Braille Monitor. At the same
time, you sent a letter to President Maurer canceling your PAC
plan. I want to say a few things to you about your letters and my
article.
     You say that there is an "anti-guide-dog attitude" in the
Federation and that "guide-dog users have often felt unwelcome at
national conventions." There is not now nor has there ever been
an anti-guide-dog attitude on the part of the Federation. If so,
why would the Federation have permitted and even encouraged the
establishment of a Guide Dog Division? Why would we have spent
money and resources fighting for the rights of guide-dog users?
Any time that a guide-dog user has been denied the right to go to
a restaurant, go to an amusement park, or go to anywhere else
that the public is invited, the Federation has come up to the
line and been counted. This is what we have done, and this is
what we will continue to do. We will continue to support the
Guide Dog Division, and we will continue to defend the rights of
guide-dog users.
     I hope you will reread the October Monitor and look at it in
perspective. An announcement was made at the meeting of the Guide
Dog Division at the convention last summer, saying that the
Monitor was going to deal with the subject of dogs, canes, and
other travel techniques. Those in attendance were invited to
submit articles. Some did, and we printed each and every one of
them, regardless of the content and with very little editing.
     The reaction to the October Monitor has been overwhelmingly
positive. Three or four people have written with objections, and
I have no doubt that there are at least some others who reacted
negatively but did not write. This was a topic that needed
discussing. The evidence can be found in the interest which has
been evoked. Even more than indicating agreement, most of those
who commented expressed relief that the topic has finally been
brought out of the closet and into the realm of discussion.
     In reviewing your letter, I have to wonder whether you read
all of my article or just part of it. Let me refresh your memory.
In one part I said:

     The problem is not simple. Neither is the solution. Above all,
     what I have said must be kept in perspective and seen in proper
     context. The Federation as an organization and I personally have
     fought for the rights of guide-dog users, and that will continue.
     As I have already said, I use a cane. The fact that there are
     disadvantages to the cane should not mean that I cannot use it if
     I choose to do so or that my fellow Federationists should not
     defend my right to do it. The same is true of the use of a sighted
     person's arm, or a dog. As I see it, there are real disadvantages
     to using a dog, but others may see it differently. Regardless of
     that, we have to be able to discuss our opinions freely, but when
     the discussion is finished, we must join ranks and defend each
     other's right to choose--and we must do it with understanding and
     good will.

     That is what I said in the October Monitor, and that is what
I still believe. In your letter you say that I call guide-dog
users second-class citizens. Since that is not what I think and
not what I believe I said, I would like to know how you arrive at
your opinion. Perhaps you are referring to that portion of my
article which reads:

     We are not just talking about methods of travel but about basic
     philosophy. Moreover, even though we didn't plan it that way, we
     have, by discussing this issue in these circumstances, arrived at
     a crossroad in our organization's development. Whatever the
     appearance or trappings, we are not here just (or even primarily)
     talking about canes and dogs. We are considering self-image,
     concepts of independence, equal participation in society, and the
     very notion of first-class citizenship.

     That is what I said, and if you look at it in context, it is
a far cry from accusing guide-dog users of being second-class
citizens. You commented about my 1993 speech on the nature of
independence. Let me remind you of the circumstances which led up
to the writing of that speech.
     A number of the students at the Louisiana Center for the
Blind discussed the fact that I did not travel alone with a cane
at the 1992 NFB Convention but used a human arm. They didn't just
think about it and then write me individually. They publicly
discussed the matter in their classes and then wrote me a letter
and asked me to justify myself.
     What should I have done? Should I have said that they were
accusing me of being a second-class citizen, which in a way they
were? Should I have reacted with anger, attempting to get their
attention and teach them a lesson by canceling my PAC plan? Such
behavior would have been negative and counterproductive.
     They were not attacking me as an individual, but even if
they had been, the question they raised deserved rational
discussion and dispassionate response. As I said in my 1993
speech, I probably do not travel as skillfully as many of those
who have received more intense and formal training. It is hard to
say whether we are being objective or emotional when we talk
about our own conduct. The question of the philosophical
implications of using cane, dog, human arm, or some other method
of mobility is reasonable to consider. It is something else to
accuse each other of second-class citizenship.
     In your letter to President Maurer you say this: "When a
blind adult turns to the NFB for help and advice, is the use of a
guide dog given equal consideration as the use of a cane as a
primary mobility technique? I would guess not . . . ." You go on
to imply that it is my obligation (and the obligation of all NFB
leaders, and possibly members) to recommend with absolute
impartiality the use of cane or dog. You equate this with our
attitudes about the use of Braille. I don't agree.
     With respect to Braille, I am perfectly willing for people
to argue about whether it is good or bad as much as they like and
to recommend whatever reading techniques they think are superior.
They can point out advantages and disadvantages to their hearts'
content, but when the day is done, I want every blind person who
wants Braille to have the right to have it. The fact that I
believe that a blind person is better off using Braille in
certain situations does not mean that I don't want you or
somebody else to have a tape recorder or that I think you are
second class for using one. Neither does it mean that I have to
tell every blind person who asks me about it that I have no
opinion concerning the relative advantages and disadvantages of
the different methods of reading. I feel and behave exactly the
same way when dealing with mobility.
     I don't think that all travel techniques are equally
effective, and I don't intend to say that I do. But I do intend
to fight for the right of other blind persons to believe
differently, to use any technique that each of them wants to use,
and to be treated with respect in the process. I am obligated to
treat my fellow Federationists with respect, but I am not
obligated to advocate what I do not believe to be the truth.
     This is totally consistent with what I said in the 1993
speech on the nature of independence. It is consistent with what
I have always said.
     Let me make a few general observations about the notion of
first-class citizenship. We are told that seventy percent of the
blind of this country who are of working age are unemployed. Are
those who come within that seventy percent first-class citizens?
In other words are they able to achieve first-class status in
society? As I said regarding techniques of mobility, the answer
is not simple. First-class citizenship means the freedom to make
meaningful choices and the ability to make those choices stick.
If an individual is unemployed and does not have some other
source of income, it is hard to see how he or she can be said to
have first-class citizenship. But a person who has inherited
wealth or other plentiful financial resources is in a different
boat.
     What about mobility? Independence in travel probably means
the ability to go where you want when you want without so much
inconvenience to yourself or others that the whole thing ceases
to be worth it. By this definition, probably nobody is completely
independent, and very few people are totally dependent.
     How does this relate to the blind? The two things that
probably outrank all others in determining whether a blind person
can function as a first-class citizen involve mobility and
reading--ease of travel and ease of communication. What about the
blind person who is totally unable to travel alone? Can such a
person achieve first-class citizenship? It depends on what you
mean and how you look at it. Certainly it is proper to discuss
it, and without getting angry or calling each other names.
     I once knew a blind man who was totally unable to travel
without assistance but who had made enough money that he hired
people to stay with him every waking hour. He had the financial
resources to go anywhere in the world that he liked, and he did
it. He went where and when he pleased, and he caused no
inconvenience to others. He was content with himself and the
universe. Was he functioning as a first-class citizen? Some would
say no. I think I would say yes. This is not the way I would
choose to do it, but for him it worked--and it caused no problems
to others. But what about privacy? What about dignity and self-
esteem? As I have said, the question is not simple.
     And while we are on the subject of such things, what about
me? As I said in my Dallas speech, I am perfectly capable of
using a cane, but I often don't. I frequently use a human arm.
When I do, am I failing to function as a first-class citizen?
Whether I am or not, I think other blind people have a right (and
if they think I should behave otherwise, perhaps an obligation)
to consider the matter. Moreover, unless they are personally
abusive about it, I think I should hear what they have to say and
not lose my temper in the process. Maybe I can teach something
during the give-and-take--but just as likely, maybe I can learn
something. What better way to grow and broaden my outlook than to
let my ideas circulate in the marketplace of free discussion? Let
me emphasize again that I am not talking about name-calling or
personal abuse but the rational exchange of ideas among friends
and colleagues--an exchange of ideas vigorously pursued but not
with bitterness--pursued, indeed, with love and respect. That is
the way brothers and sisters should treat each other, and that is
the way they achieve real independence and first-class status--
or, at least, that is how I see it.
     In this context I want to say one thing more about the
notion of first-class citizenship. There are those who hold that
if an individual is "free" in his or her own mind, it is not
possible to make that person a slave. Maybe so, but freedom loses
a lot of its meaning if somebody is standing over you with a
whip. On the other hand, regardless of money or position, the
person who thinks like a slave is (at least to some extent) just
that--a slave. In my way of thinking, one way of expressing what
the National Federation of the Blind has been doing ever since
its founding is helping blind people get over the notion that
they deserve to be treated like inferiors. As we have often said,
you must say a thing before you can believe it, and you must
believe it before it can come true. But if you say it often
enough and believe it strongly enough, and if it is morally right
and reasonably possible, it can and will come true. That is
Federationism.
     Let me now say something about the canceling of your PAC
plan. If you had done it because of financial need, I would have
no complaint. But that was not your reason. You did it because
you didn't like the views I expressed. Yet, if a guide-dog user
(including you) has problems in the future, my PAC money and the
PAC money of other cane users (and, for that matter, dog users)
will be used to fight the battle.
     Or maybe the problem is something else. In a recent
discussion a woman said that anybody else in the Federation has a
right to express their opinions on mobility techniques or
anything else but that I don't. I disagree with that. I think I
am obligated to be considerate and reasonable, but I am not
obligated to keep silent and express no views. When we arrive at
that point, my usefulness to the organization will be at an end,
nostalgic instead of dynamic. I am not willing to be a mere
figurehead who is trotted out for ceremonial occasions and public
statements. I have always engaged in the give-and-take of
Federation policy-making and debate, and I have no intention of
stopping doing it. If the Federation needs me at all, it needs me
as a live participant.
     Against this background, let me say that if my comments were
clumsily put or poorly phrased, I apologize--but I cannot
apologize for seeking the truth or expressing my opinions. I have
always respected you, and I still do. I hope that you will
reconsider what I said in my article and, in fact, that you will
think further about the totality of the questions raised in the
October Monitor. I do not insist that you hold my views on every
question, and I hope that you will accord me the same right. That
is what the Federation is about, and that is also incidentally
what first-class citizenship is about.

                                                       Sincerely,
                                                 Kenneth Jernigan
                                               President Emeritus
                                 NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND

                           __________

                                                November 15, 1995

Dear Dr. Jernigan:
     Thank you for responding at length to my letters. My letter
to Mr. Maurer dated yesterday was written before receiving your
fax, and I decided to let it stand as it was and not to make any
changes in light of your remarks.
     I do not intend this note to be a full response to your
letter. I simply want to make a list of points that I would like
you to know, and I will write you a longer and more formal letter
at a later time.

1)   Your tone in the letter seemed to me to be very different
     from that of the Monitor article. It sounded more like "The
     Nature of Independence" speech, which I admire so much.

2)   When you give your views, they may easily be seen as a
     statement of the organization. However I do appreciate your
     point that you have a right to an opinion like everyone else
     and should not have to forfeit that right.

3)   I did not stop PAC merely because I did not like hearing a
     different point of view from my own. I sincerely feel that
     if the NFB considers guide-dog use to not be as respectable
     as cane use, then I cannot support an organization that
     holds that view, and I am free to make that choice. When I
     feel that the NFB does affirm that guide-dog use is as
     respectable as cane use, then I will continue to support the
     organization wholeheartedly.

4)   Consider the following:
     a)   Independence is the ability to go where you want when
          you want without inconvenience to yourself or others.
     b)   There is no way that the dog user can help causing
          problems to other people.
     c)   Guide-dog users are not independent.
     You espouse a) and b) and so I conclude c). I do not see how
     I can escape that conclusion. You tell me that you are not
     saying this, but I need to somehow reconcile all of these
     remarks. I hope you will be able to help me do so.

5)   I think I made some valid points to you in my first letter,
     but they may have been lost due to the hostile presentation.
     I hope we will be able to further discuss these points at a
     future time.

6)   I recommend a dialogue in person, not necessarily with me
     but with guide-dog users. I think such a discussion would be
     more fruitful than an exchange of letters or Monitor
     articles. By the way, not that it matters, but I am a cane
     user.

     I will write again to discuss these matters further.

                                                       Sincerely,

                            _________

                                                November 20, 1995

Dear __________:
     This will respond to your letter of November 15, 1995. You
say in part: "Consider the following: a) Independence is the
ability to go where you want when you want without inconvenience
to yourself or others. b) There is no way that the dog user can
help causing problems to other people. c) Guide-dog users are not
independent. You espouse a) and b), and so I conclude c). I do
not see how I can escape that conclusion."
     _____________, that is what you say, and your point a) comes
from my speech on the nature of independence. Taken by itself and
out of context, it may appear to be talking primarily about
guide-dog users; but if you read the rest of the paragraph, it is
clear that I am talking about everybody, blind and sighted alike.
Here are my exact words:

     As to travel, independence is the ability to go where you want
     when you want without inconvenience to yourself or others.
     Probably none of us (blind or sighted) ever fully achieves that
     goal all of the time--and almost all of us achieve at least some
     of it some of the time. Usually we are on a continuum.

     That is what I said, and if you will reread my article in
the October Monitor, you will find this sentence: "In fact, any
form of travel by anybody (blind and sighted alike) poses
problems." ___________, the discussion that you and I have been
having has caused me to do some careful analysis. It has also
helped me refine my thinking. As a result, let me talk to you
about four concepts that we in the Federation often use:
     
     1) It is respectable to be blind

     2) Equal participation in society

     3) First-class status in society

     4) The blind as first-class citizens

     When we say that it is respectable to be blind, I think we
mean how we feel within ourselves. We mean that we should not be
ashamed of our blindness, that we should not try to hide it, and
that we have as much innate worth as anybody else. In other
words, we are talking about attitudes--our own, not somebody
else's.
     When we say that we have the right to equal participation in
society, we are talking about our capacity to compete on terms of
equality with others. The concept implies the right to adequate
training and the ability to acquire the financial means to live a
good life and to do the things that others do who are similarly
situated.
     When we say that we have the right to first-class status in
society, we are not talking about our own attitudes but about the
attitudes of others. We are saying that it is not enough for us
to have ability or even money. We must also have understanding
from and acceptance by the general public, the recognition that
we are capable and deserving of the rights and privileges
accorded to everybody else. If we don't have this acceptance and
recognition, we cannot have first-class status, and we cannot
have equal participation in society regardless of our capacity or
resources. I dealt with these things at length in my 1985 speech
on the patterns of freedom.
     Finally we come to the concept of first-class citizenship.
What does it mean? It is a term that we frequently use, but as I
think about it, it is not easy to define. It probably implies all
of the three concepts I have already mentioned plus others, many
of them intangible. Whatever it is, all of us seem to want it,
and we feel considerable unhappiness and anger if anybody implies
that we don't deserve it or that it should be taken away from us.
Effective though the term may be for speech-making, it lacks
precision.
     So let me stay with the other concepts--that it is
respectable to be blind, that we are capable and deserving of
equal participation in society, and that we are determined to
have first-class status. If we get all of those, we probably
won't have to worry about first-class citizenship. It will take
care of itself. In this context maybe I should have used the term
first-class status in society in my October article instead of
the term first-class citizenship. If you will reread the article,
you will see that I did not express the opinion that a blind
person who uses a dog cannot achieve first-class status. I said
(and I made it clear that I was expressing my own personal
opinion) that I thought some of the obstacles were "almost"
insurmountable.
     To those who express resentment at my opinion, I can only
repeat that there are real disadvantages to any form of travel
now available to us. In our march toward equal participation and
first-class status in society we who are blind have repeatedly
faced and overcome almost insurmountable obstacles. Recognizing
and discussing this fact and considering the relative merits of
different forms of mobility, methods of reading, or techniques of
daily living should not occasion anger or personal abuse. Rather,
we should feel able (in fact, we should want) to examine these
questions in the hope of increasing our understanding and
enlarging our opportunities.
     What I was saying in the October Monitor is simply this: we
frequently talk about our choice of mobility techniques as if our
choice affects only us and is nobody else's business. I think
this is not true and that the question is a proper topic for
discussion.
     The disadvantages in using a dog are not made less by
pointing out the disadvantages in using a cane. The opposite is
also true, of course. The disadvantages of cane use are not
diminished by pointing out the disadvantages of using a dog. The
same is also true of using a human arm, present-day experimental
technologies, or something else. In each case the technique must
be judged on its own merit, and it is not just something that
affects the individual who is making the choice. It affects the
rest of us who are blind, and it also affects our sighted
associates. Even so, the final choice must be made by each
individual blind person, and the rest of us have to respect that
choice. That does not mean that we cannot or should not discuss
the relative advantages and disadvantages or that we should not
form opinions.
     As to independence, it is perfectly obvious that none of us
has it completely or all of the time. And that is true whether we
use canes, dogs, or something else. It is also true of the
sighted. The question is not do we have independence, but how
much of it do we have, and at what cost? As I said before, it is
a matter of cost/benefit ratio. What we want is enough
independence to achieve equal participation and first-class
status in society, enough that we can realistically feel that it
is respectable to be blind.
     As I have already said, the Federation has consistently
fought to protect the rights of guide-dog users, and we will
continue to do so. We encouraged and supported the establishment
of the Guide Dog Division, and that encouragement and support
will continue.
     As to those few who have engaged in name-calling instead of
dealing with the issues, I think they are not doing their cause
any good. It is foolishness to say that if a blind person has not
used a dog, that person is not entitled to an opinion about the
matter. It is equally unproductive to take such attitudes about
those who have not learned to use a cane. There is no obligation
personally to experience something before having an opinion about
it. We depend on reason, observation, and the comments of people
around us for our decisions every day. I have never taken heroin,
for instance, or had ten million dollars, but I have definite
opinions about the advantages and disadvantages of both. Usually
we engage in name-calling and personal abuse when we feel that
our case is weak and lacks merit.
     One final thing: I recognize that cane travel is not a
perfect mobility technique. As with dogs, the fact that some cane
users are poorly trained or inefficient does not speak to the
overall usefulness or lack of usefulness of the technique.
Ultimately, technology may give us something superior to both
cane and dog--and, for that matter, human arm. If that day comes,
there will undoubtedly be those who will both resent and resist
the change, saying that the techies have no right to an opinion
because they are not proficient in the techniques they are
discussing. Who knows--maybe I will be among their number.
Meanwhile, I shall hunt for the truth as best I can, and I shall
certainly express my opinions when I think they are worth
stating.

                                                       Sincerely,
                                                 Kenneth Jernigan
                                               President Emeritus
                                 NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND

     [PHOTO/CAPTION: David Andrews]
                     HOW FAST IS IT REALLY?
                        by David Andrews

     From the Editor: One of the most exciting aspects of the
recent technology revolution for the blind is our increasing
access to Braille. Using a personal computer, a Braille-
translation program, and a printer that generates Braille rather
than ink-print, almost anyone can now produce readable Grade II
Braille. The result is that virtually any computer text file can
today be produced in Braille by the insertion of a few formatting
commands that do not require any knowledge of Braille.
     The quality of the Braille turned out by this process
depends in large part on the printer (called an embosser). How
clear is the Braille it produces? How well does it stand up to
the demands made on it? And, of course, how rapidly does it print
a document? As the price of embossers drops, more and more
individuals and organizations can consider actually investing in
such equipment. Deciding which one to buy gets harder as the
choices multiply. Every manufacturer should be prepared to
provide samples of the Braille produced by its embossers, and
with a little investigation one can learn about the reliability
of the equipment other people have purchased and the dealers in
the area. These are subjective measures, but they are important
matters to consider.
     The question of the speed of Braille production is a
different matter. For years manufacturers have been reporting
embosser speed in characters produced per second. How accurate
are their claims? How does each embosser stack up against its
competition? Potential buyers need objective information in order
to make sound decisions.
     Enter the International Braille and Technology Center for
the Blind (IBTC). While David Andrews was still director of the
IBTC (he is now with the Minnesota Agency for the Blind), he
conducted tests to determine the accuracy of manufacturer ratings
of the speed of their embossers. The following article is the
result. Here it is:

     People who are buying a Braille embosser (printer) and who
consult the International Braille and Technology Center for the
Blind always ask us two questions: how much does it cost, and how
fast does it print--not necessarily in that order. Until now, the
speed figures we have given them are those published by the
manufacturers or distributors themselves. While we thought that
some of those figures might be exaggerated slightly, we did not
know by how much, so we decided to find out.

                            The Test

     We began by devising a test--that is, producing a Braille
file that could be sent to all the printers. Our goal was to
devise a test that, while hard, was also a real-life document.
     We chose the July, 1995, issue of the Braille Monitor. We
used a leading Braille translation program, the Duxbury Braille
Translator Version 10.1, to produce a Grade II translated and
formatted file. Our test file contained straight text and other
styles that occurred naturally or that we added. These included
regular and outdented paragraphs, partially and fully blank
pages, centered and right-justified lines, two columns of words,
print and Braille page numbering, lines of dots and table-of-
contents guide dots, and more. We chose to include a range of
formatting and layout variations because different embossers
handle these complications in different ways, some more
efficiently than others.
     We also decided to place twenty-five 40-character lines of
text on each page. While some printers will print up to 27 lines
and/or 44 characters a line on an 11-by-11.5-inch page, we chose
to use less ambitious requirements. First, the 25-line-by-40-cell
page is commonly used, so it represents a real-life test. Second,
while some printers can emboss more than 40 cells on a line, not
all can. But with the exception of the Braille Blazer, which can
print only 34 cells a line, all units can produce 40-cell lines.
Consequently, by using a 40-cell line, we had a basis of
comparison. We formatted the Blazer test for 32 cells, which
allowed room for binding, as was done in the other tests. We also
had to format the Ohtsuki BT-5000 file for 19 lines since it will
not print 25 on a page. This machine embosses both print and
Braille on the same page, which takes more room.
     Finally, using the 25-line by 40-cell page, the file we
generated using Duxbury was 187 pages in length--long enough to
even things out. Of course the Blazer and Ohtsuki files contained
more pages, but the same amount of data.
     The appropriate test file was then sent to the embosser. The
"PRINT" command was used from the MS-DOS command line, and the
already-translated file was sent. This combination allowed a more
accurate measurement of embossing time than other methods that
could have been used. The timer was started at the same instant
that the "Return" ("Enter") key was pressed on the computer. One
of the Braille 'n Speak family of products from Blazie
Engineering--Braille 'n Speak, Type 'n Speak, or Braille Lite--
was used to time all tests. The timer was stopped as the embosser
ceased printing. The resulting time was converted into seconds
and divided by the size of the file, yielding a characters-per-
second rating.
     What follows is an alphabetical list of all the tested
embossers and what they did. The "CPS" acronym stands for
"characters per second" and "IBTC" stands for the International
Braille and Technology Center for the Blind."

Braille Blazer: manufacturer-rated speed, 15 cps; IBTC-rated
     speed, 8.0 cps; percent of variance, 47 percent; price,
     $1,695; price per cps, $211.88
Braille BookMaker: manufacturer-rated speed, 80 cps; IBTC-rated
     speed, 59.9 cps; percent of variance, 25 percent; price,
     $7,995; price per cps, $133.47
Braillo 200: manufacturer-rated speed, 200 cps; IBTC-rated speed,
     193.1 cps; percent of variance, 3 percent; price, $37,995;
     price per cps, $196.76
Braillo 400S: manufacturer-rated speed, 400 cps; IBTC-rated
     speed, 274.4 cps; percent of variance, 31 percent; price,
     $77,995; price per cps, $284.24
Braillo Comet: manufacturer-rated speed, 75 cps; IBTC-rated
     speed, 54.6 cps; percent of variance, 27 percent; price,
     $3,795; price per cps, $69.51
Braille Express: manufacturer-rated speed, 150 cps; IBTC-rated
     speed, 109.0 cps; percent of variance, 27 percent; price,
     $14,995; price per cps, $137.57
Elekul-03: manufacturer-rated speed, 300 cps; IBTC-rated speed,
     263.2 cps; percent of variance, 12 percent; price, $42,500
     approximately; price per cps, $161.47
Express 100: manufacturer-rated speed, 100 cps; IBTC-rated speed,
     78.6 cps; percent of variance, 21 percent; price, $10,500;
     price per cps, $133.59
Everest (Telesensory): manufacturer-rated speed, 100/60 cps;
     IBTC-rated speed, 51.7 cps; percent of variance, 48
     percent/14 percent; price, $5,995; price per cps, $115.96
Everest-D: manufacturer-rated speed, 79 cps; IBTC-rated speed,
     68.0 cps; percent of variance, 14 percent; price, $3,695;
     price per cps, $54.34
Index Basic: manufacturer-rated speed, 50/40 cps; IBTC-rated
     speed, 28.5 cps; percent of variance, 43 percent/29 percent;
     price, $2,795; price per cps, $98.07
Juliet: manufacturer-rated speed, 40 to 56 CPS (one line per
     second); IBTC-rated speed, 33.5 cps; percent of variance, 16
     percent; price, $3,995; price per cps, $119.25
Marathon: manufacturer-rated speed, 200 cps; IBTC-rated speed,
     167.0 cps; percent of variance, 17 percent; price, $12,995;
     price per cps, $77.81
Ohtsuki BT5000: manufacturer-rated speed, 8 cps (print and
     Braille); IBTC-rated speed, 6.4 cps; percent of variance, 20
     percent; price, $4,695; price per cps, $733.59
Porta-Thiel: manufacturer-rated speed, 10 cps; IBTC-rated speed,
     7.8 cps; percent of variance, 22 percent; price, $1,895;
     price per cps, $242.95
Resus RS-214: manufacturer-rated speed, 140 cps; IBTC-rated
     speed, 103.3 cps; percent of variance, 26 percent; price,
     $15,995; price per CPS, $154.84
Romeo RB-20: manufacturer-rated speed, 20 cps; IBTC-rated speed,
     17.2 cps; percent of variance, 14 percent; price, $2,495;
     price per cps, $145.05
Romeo RB-25: manufacturer-rated speed, 25 cps; IBTC-rated speed,
     23.8 cps; percent of variance, 5 percent; price, $2,295;
     price per cps, $96.43
Romeo RB-40: manufacturer-rated speed, 40 cps; IBTC-rated speed,
     28.1 cps; percent of variance, 30 percent; price, $3,495;
     price per cps, $124.38
Ted 600: manufacturer-rated speed, 350 CPS approximately; IBTC-
     rated speed, 295.2 cps; percent of variance, 16 percent;
     price, $37,500; price per cps, $127.03
Thiel BAX-10: manufacturer-rated speed, 300 cps; IBTC-rated
     speed, 183.0 cps; percent of variance, 39 percent; price,
     $66,000; price per cps, $360.66
Thiel Beta X/3: manufacturer-rated speed, 130 cps; IBTC-rated
     speed, 116 cps; percent of variance, 10 percent; price,
     $13,995; price per cps, $120.64
Thomas: manufacturer-rated speed, 40 cps; IBTC-rated speed, 37.0
     cps; percent of variance, 8 percent; price, $2,995; price
     per cps, $80.95
VersaPoint: manufacturer-rated speed, 40 cps; IBTC-rated speed,
     27.4 cps; percent of variance, 32 percent; price, $3,795;
     price per cps, $138.50.

     As you can see from these data, the results we obtained from
some of the printers varied greatly from their manufacturers'
published figures. There are a number of reasons for this
variation, some of which are understandable and acceptable, and
some of which are not. First, remember that manufacturers
naturally rate their machines in the way that shows them in the
best light. While this is understandable and mostly acceptable,
we think that some of them have gone too far and should revise
their figures. One long-time marketing executive in the printer
field said to us, "Lots of mud is going to be slung here, and
some of it will stick to us all, but we [the embosser producers]
will be better off for it in the long run."
     A number of embossers, such as the BookMaker and the Braille
Express from Enabling Technologies, take approximately the same
time to print a line, whether there are 30 characters on it or
44. Since these printers will print up to 44 characters on a
line, the manufacturer naturally computes the CPS rating using
the longer line, which raises the rating. Thus our results, which
are based on a 40-character line length, should legitimately be
increased by at least 10 percent, making our figures very close
to Enabling's.
     Other manufacturers may measure only a single Braille page
of text because the page change takes time. We suspect that this
is in part how Index arrived at its initially unrealistically
high rating of the original Everest. Still others use a burst
rate--timing the printing of just one line. This is what Blazie
Engineering did with the Blazer, according to Deane Blazie.

                   Putting it into Perspective

     What follow are our observations concerning individual
embossers as well as information we believe necessary to
interpret the individual results. Please remember that printing
speed is only one aspect of choosing a Braille embosser. Others
include price; quality of Braille produced; reputation of
manufacturer; reliability; reputation of local dealer; past
experience; availability of timely service and support; ease of
operation; clear and understandable documentation; manuals
available in well-formatted, Grade II Braille; and more.
     The manufacturer-provided speed figure for the Braille
Blazer is a bit optimistic and should be reduced in our opinion.
While a good deal of variance from our test can be expected, a 47
percent difference seems too much to us. Prior to testing, our
hypothesis was that a 10 percent variance would be acceptable.
After conducting the tests, we now conclude that a 20 percent
variation is probably acceptable, although less is better. As
already pointed out, at least a 10 percent variance can
legitimately be accounted for in some cases.
     The Braille BookMaker from Enabling Technologies is one of
the units that was rated by its manufacturer using a 44-cell
line, so its 80 CPS rating is not unrealistic. We were surprised
by how close the Braillo 200 came to its rated speed and how far
off the Braillo 400S was from its rated speed. With a 31 percent
variance, a re-rating by Braillo Norway might be in order. A 350
CPS rating would make more sense. The Braille Comet missed its
mark because it is slow in moving paper when going to a new page
from a partially printed page. The Braille Express and the
Express 100 were both rated by Enabling Technologies using a
44-cell line, so their figures are not as different from ours as
would first appear. The Elekul-03 came fairly close to its
manufacturer's rating; in fact its speed is directly related to
the voltage of the electrical supply. Since ours is on the low
side of average, the speed could be increased by raising the
voltage.
     The Everest-D (originally sold exclusively by Telesensory)
has two figures listed: 100 and 60 CPS. When it was introduced in
1992, Index and Telesensory both widely touted its 100 CPS
figure. As you can see from our results (51.7 CPS and a 48
percent variance) its actual performance doesn't even come close.
In June of 1995 Index published a newsletter in which it provided
speed figures for all their printers. Interestingly enough, all
figures were lower--considerably so in some cases--than those
previously published. Even figures for embossers the company no
longer manufactures were adjusted downward. Further, Index has
developed its own speed test and has been circulating it to other
printer manufacturers in an attempt to get all of them to use the
test. At least one company (Enabling Technologies) has resisted,
feeling, they say, that the testing should be done by an
independent entity like the International Braille and Technology
Center for the Blind. They also believe that the test was devised
so as to put Index products in the best light.
     We have looked at the Index test and have even run it on a
few machines. It yields faster times than the IBTC-developed
test. While it is not a bad one, we concluded that it wasn't very
realistic. It was almost entirely straight text with most lines
filled. It also included no form feeds, leaving page breaks to
the embosser which, with most machines, is usually faster.
However, most Braille translation programs insert form feeds so
that they can control page size, accurately supply page numbers,
and easily change page sizes.
     One Braille translator author described Index's revised
figures as "preemptive revisionism." Index knew we were working
on printer speed ratings and has very recently publicly revised
its figures to be more realistic. While these are now quite
accurate and more realistic than those of many and though the
efforts of Index to get a handle on measured printer speeds are
laudable, the fact still remains that in the past, and for a long
time, Index used some very inflated figures. We can only hope
that everyone will start using more realistic figures now that
attention has been drawn to this issue.
     Other Index embossers tested include the new Everest-D and
the Index Basic. The new Everest came relatively close to its
revised rating of 79 CPS. The Index Basic missed its rating by an
unacceptable level. Index has marketed the embosser as a 50-CPS
machine for years, touting it as faster than the competition, the
Romeo RB-40 and the VersaPoint. At 28.5 CPS, it is little faster
than the others, particularly the Romeo, which we rated at 28.1
CPS. Its revised rating of 40 CPS is more realistic than before,
but its 29 percent variance is still too high.
     According to Enabling Technologies, the Juliet prints one
line per second. Since it can print up to a 56-character line,
its potential speed can be as high as 56 CPS. We found that the
machine comes acceptably close to its published rating.
     Also the Marathon, Ohtsuki, and Porta-Thiel come reasonably
close to their published specifications. As an interesting aside,
the Ohtsuki took over 7 hours to run the printing test. The
quickest machine ran it in just under 9.5 minutes.
     The Resus RS-214, which is no longer available, missed its
specifications by a little more than we would have preferred. It
seems a bit slow in moving paper through blank lines. The Romeo
RB-40 is not rated accurately. The machine misses its mark by 30
percent. A longer line might have helped it a little, but not
much. The RB-20 and the RB-25, on the other hand, came quite
close to their published specifications. The RB-25 in particular
represents a good bargain. For $1,100 less than the RB-40, you
sacrifice only 4.3 CPS, and the Braille quality is quite good.
The RB-20 is primarily marketed to sign makers now. Some
components have been strengthened to allow it to emboss on light
metal and plastic materials reliably.
     The Ted 600 was originally rated at 450 CPS. The
manufacturer later slowed down the machine to make it more
reliable. They estimate the slowed-down version at 350 CPS, and
at 295.2 CPS we consider our rating to be in line with theirs.
     The Thiel BAX-10 was a disappointment, while the Beta X/3
was quite near its published figure. Considering its 183 CPS and
a 39 percent variance figure, the BAX-10 should be re-rated.
     The Thomas is another one of Enabling's new printers that
comes quite close to its published figure, produces good Braille,
and is a good bargain.
     Finally, the VersaPoint missed its mark by a good deal. It
is slower than the Romeo RB-40, which is its main competition. At
27.4 CPS and a 32 percent variance, it should be reclassified by
Telesensory.

                           Conclusions

     While we have devoted a good deal of time and energy to
rating Braille embossers, we reiterate that speed is only one
consideration in making a printer decision. The actual numbers
themselves are probably not as important as their comparisons to
each other. It is more important to know that the Romeo RB-40 is
slightly faster than the VersaPoint or that the Braillo 200 is
faster than the Thiel Bax-10 (which is considerably more
expensive) than it is to remember the exact numbers. Also, as
noted earlier, there are other factors which should be
considered.
     In addition to the speed ratings, we have provided a dollar-
per-CPS figure. While it is hard to resist this measure, it does
involve a couple of dangers. First, there is a tendency
(especially by government types who are writing specifications
for equipment bids) to use measures like this as their sole means
of decision-making. These measures do not take into account
Braille quality and other important factors. Second, when
designing a printer, the manufacturer has to make certain
tradeoffs and compromises. It may be possible to gain some
apparent speed by using a shorter line--at the cost of
flexibility. And an embosser employing a long line and rated by a
conservative but arduous test such as that developed by the
International Braille and Technology Center for the Blind may
look more unattractive than it actually is. In short, a variety
of factors should be considered and balanced when making the
decision to buy an embosser.
     The prices of Braille printers have dropped over the past
few years. There are also many more models available now than
formerly. However, past a certain point, the only way to achieve
more speed or lower price is to sacrifice the quality of the
Braille produced. While we applaud consumer choice and lower
prices, we do not want to see the quality of the Braille produced
by computer-driven embossers reduced dramatically.
     We urge the Braille printer industry to take a new look at
measuring embosser speed. While we may not have designed the
definitive speed test, we do believe that we have designed a
fair, real-life test that can be used to draw valid comparisons.
We also urge consumers, agencies, and government entities not to
look only at our speed figures when making purchasing decisions.
They are a useful comparison and guide, but they should be only
one of many considerations.
     The data presented here, while interesting, do not represent
complete reviews of the Braille printers. However, the NFB's
International Braille and Technology Center for the Blind has
been working as a sub-contractor on a Braille Literacy Training
grant that was awarded to the American Printing House for the
Blind (APH) by the National Institute on Disability and
Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR). Among other activities in
connection with the NIDRR grant, the International Braille and
Technology Center for the Blind has now reviewed all of its
Braille-related technology. The resulting document is being
published in ink-print and Braille by APH and electronically by
the National Federation of the Blind. By the time you read this
article, the entire report should be available.
     For more information about Braille embossers, translation
software, or other technology matters, call the International
Braille and Technology Center for the Blind. You can reach us
afternoons at (410) 659-9314. You can also reach us via NFB NET,
the NFB's computer bulletin board service, by calling (612)
696-1975.


     [PHOTO/CAPTION: Peggy Elliott]

                     A FABLE FOR OUR TIMES:
               TALKING SENSE ABOUT TRUNCATED DOMES
                     by Peggy Pinder Elliott

     From the Editor: We keep trying to explain to our sighted
colleagues that the biggest problem of blindness is not that we
can't see. It is, rather, what we ourselves and the people around
us think about blindness and the limitations it imposes. The
dictionary definition of the word blind and its metaphorical use
in our language show what most people think. But here is yet
another angle on what it means to be blind: You get studied.
There is a class of so-called professionals who make their living
and, it would seem, draw their meaning in life from studying
blind people.
     The latest proposals come from a private consultant hired by
the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board to
advise it on what further research, if any, should be done on the
subject of truncated domes. From past reports in the Braille
Monitor, one would have thought that the studies had all been
done and that the enacting (or rather the de-enacting) of those
absurd truncated-dome regulations should be well under way by
now. Not so, according to the experts assembled by the private
consultant. Their opinion is that much is left to study. This
should not be surprising when one considers that one of the
leading proponents of truncated domes, a professor who has
received thousands in grant money through the years to study the
blind, was a member of the panel of so-called experts making the
recommendation.
     Peggy Elliott, Second Vice President of the National
Federation of the Blind and known for her work on truncated
domes, was asked to comment on these research proposals. Here is
the reply she made:

          RESPONSE TO PROJECT ACCESS RESEARCH PROPOSAL
                   CONCERNING TRUNCATED DOMES

     Useful research only flows from correct identification of a
problem and complete canvassing of solutions to it. I don't see
either of these prerequisites in the material from the Project
Action task force. Perhaps the best way I can make my point is to
offer a fable.

                              Fable

     In the early nineteenth century in this country, literacy
experts convened. They were aware that most Americans could not
read and write. This troubled them, and they constituted
themselves as a task force.
     Task force members agreed without even needing to discuss
the matter that illiteracy would be a fact of American life
forever. This was true due to numerous shortages--books, paper,
teachers, and learning time, which was absorbed by the urgent
need of the economy for workers of all ages, leaving them without
spare time in which to learn. Illiteracy was understood to be
here to stay.
     The experts swung into action. They recommended research on
numerous topics aimed at finding language-neutral solutions to
information problems. For example, they recommended research into
standardizing the use of pictograms instead of writing on all
signs. Numerous innovative methods of handling information were
proposed. One was to address the unemployment problem by having
uniformed officials at major intersections to give directions to
people who could not read maps. The experts left the meeting,
satisfied that they had handled a tough job superbly and happy
that they had found a way to deal with illiteracy.
     There were some critics of the report. Some said that
changing the whole world to address illiteracy was putting the
cart before the horse. These critics said that the way to solve
the problem of illiteracy was to teach people to read. Once
literacy starts to spread, it feeds upon itself. Lack of literacy
skills isolates and excludes the illiterate in a society based on
literacy. Why not expect literacy of everyone rather than dooming
most citizens to illiteracy by (1) refusing to emphasize teaching
and (2) reorienting the world to assume widespread illiteracy?
     Of course, the report had its supporters within the
illiteracy community. There were those who stood up and
proclaimed how included they felt now that illiteracy was
recognized as just another one of those characteristics some
citizens have. These illiterates thanked the experts over and
over for making illiterates feel welcome, for including them, and
for finally addressing their needs.
     Not much was heard from the hundreds of thousands of men,
women, and children who were struggling at night after the chores
were done to learn to read the family Bible or a tattered primer.
These learners were too busy learning to take part in the
national debate. But their way prevailed.

     My point in telling this fable is to try to add some
perspective to this much-plowed ground. It is radically untrue
that no research has been done in the area of efficient travel by
blind persons. Rather, it has been studied to death. Yet the
studies never seem to resolve anything. Why?
     Because the wrong questions are being studied and the wrong
solutions proposed, as in the fable.
     The first problem is that there isn't one--not the way the
research proposal defines it. The problem is defined as an acute
lack of information at every point along a blind person's path--
information that is readily available to sighted pedestrians.
This is just not true. Thousands and thousands and thousands of
blind people walk around this country every day, going about
their lawful rounds, attending meetings and workshops, going to
church or to the store, holding jobs that include travel. These
blind men and women do not think about the details that the
research proposal seeks to examine. They're too busy getting
where they are going, taking care of business, moving on.
     As in the fable, we have two entirely different views of the
present which imply two completely divergent views of the future.
One view holds that blind people are sunk without massive
external help. The other is that we can and do participate right
now in the world as it is. In the fable the experts in illiteracy
believed that no change would occur because they viewed the
illiterates as beneath them and also because the experts were not
thinking in social terms. But the social fact is that many blind
people travel efficiently today, proving that virtually all blind
people are capable of learning to do so.
     One additional factor comes into play here. Human subject
research is notoriously unreliable, and it is notoriously subject
to the Heisenberg effect--that the person being studied will
change behavior while under scrutiny. Added to these vagaries are
two more strands of thought. One is that it is very hard to
research something when the standards are both imprecise and
shifting. We can tell if a virus is dead in a lab dish, but we
cannot tell when a blind person is comfortable or skilled or
neither. All research to date has been flawed because there is no
externally applied objective standard against which we can judge
outcome. And, in addition, the researchers in this area are all
themselves sighted persons who work mostly with those who are
learning to get around as blind people. In other words, the image
in their minds is formed from a sighted point of view and
comprised of people who necessarily have little or no skill. What
about the thousands and thousands and thousands of blind persons
who do have the skill?
     And, while we're on the subject, where did competent blind
people get the skill they have? Most will tell you that they got
their skill from other blind people--either by watching them do
successfully what they themselves have not yet done or by asking
for tips and pointers on more efficient techniques. For example,
every capable blind traveler will tell you that successful travel
ultimately depends on the length of cane; the cane, when stood
with the tip on the floor, should reach to the blind person's
chin or higher. Yet most professionals deal out canes that rise
to the person's diaphragm or sternum, dooming the traveler to
poor posture and tardy, insufficient information and therefore
poor travel skills. Efficient techniques pass from blind person
to blind person; the self-proclaimed experts are never involved
and probably don't even know that their teaching is routinely
overridden and abandoned by experienced travelers.
     What is left out of the research proposal is perspective.
Like the experts in the fable, these experts would freeze the
blind community in its current state of knowledge and
development. They would hold that no improvement is possible and
rebuild the world to address the profound deficiencies now
perceived to be experienced by blind people as a class. But they
have addressed the wrong problem. The problem should be defined
as learning why some blind people travel safely and efficiently
and others don't. As in the fable, the ones who do have taken the
initiative on their own to seek out and learn what they needed to
know. And, I might add, they didn't learn it from professionally
trained orientation and mobility teachers.
     Perhaps a good way of making this point is to mention a
piece of Dr. Bentzen's research done several years ago. She
discovered that many of the test subjects she was using did not
know about curb ramps, did not even know they existed, and were
fooled by them every time. Dr. Bentzen gently remarks that this
may be partly a failure of teachers of the blind, who need to do
a better job of training. She then reverts to the need for
truncated domes--a truly stunning intellectual leap. Many blind
people don't know about curb ramps? Are they just plain stupid?
Don't they ever get out to walk around?
     The answer sadly is that many do not. They do not because
the method of teaching them the use of the white cane was so
rigid and useless that they actually learned that the white cane
is not a safe tool. Many people who are taught use of a cane by
professionals are taught to walk specific routes they have
practiced over and over. Success is graded by precision of cane
arc and exact accuracy of crossing streets, an emphasis on detail
that obscures for both teacher and learner the real point, which
is to get where you are going. Many are taught only a little in
their own neighborhoods. Many never get to the downtown section,
where more of the ramps are located.
     But I still come back to the original point. Dr. Bentzen
herself says that the teachers are not teaching the students what
is in the world and how to work with it. If this is so, then
that's all the research we need. We need to abandon any further
efforts to change anything except the teaching methods now in
use. If the problem is curb ramps and if teachers now are not
teaching curb ramps, then let's change the teaching instead of
attempting to change every curb ramp in the world.
     This is the perspective that is missing. The question should
be to find out why some blind people travel and some do not. The
solutions that flow from the answers to that question are
teaching and social solutions.
     We should all agree that we not spend more money on research
that recommends we spend more money on changing the built
environment until we have thoroughly examined and widely tried
improving travel instruction and developing social solutions. We
may be surprised at how quickly and effectively perceptions of
the problems disappear. Teaching and social solutions are
cheaper. They're more permanent. And, for the blind people who
use them, they're much safer.
     In the end no one can define standards for much more than
slope of ramp because of the infinite variety of the world out
there. It's better to teach the blind person to deal competently
and comfortably with diversity than to try to write the
impossible standard. And, even if the impossible standard did get
written, it would be worthless. Blind people don't need it; they
do desperately need other things like good training; they also
need solutions that are inexpensive and easily applied everywhere
right now. Only good training meets this test. Solutions aimed at
altering the built environment do not. Nor do high-tech whiz-
bang science fiction prognostications.


                           ISVI UPDATE

     From the Editor: During the months since publication of the
May, 1995, issue of the Braille Monitor, in which we dealt
exhaustively with the situation at the Illinois School for the
Visually Impaired (ISVI), we have provided occasional updates on
what is happening at the school. Last summer Dr. Dorothy Arensman
was named to replace Dr. Richard Umsted as ISVI superintendent.
Reports indicate that she is taking hold firmly and beginning to
do what is necessary to restore the institution. Of course, she
is not moving as rapidly as some parents and consumers would
like, but from what we can tell she seems to be going in the
right direction.
     Steve Benson, President of the National Federation of the
Blind of Illinois, invited her to speak to the state convention
during the first weekend in November about the school. Dr.
Arensman accepted the invitation and answered delegates'
questions clearly and completely. She also told the group that
she saw nothing to be gained from continuing ISVI's accreditation
with the National Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the
Blind and Visually Handicapped (NAC). She has since assured Cathy
Randall, First Vice President of the NFB of Illinois and a member
of the ISVI Advisory Council, that she intends to write the
letter notifying NAC of her decision before the end of the year.
She told Cathy, that as far as she could tell, NAC was nothing
more than an old-boy network and that with the school's North
Central accreditation she saw nothing to be gained and much money
to be wasted by maintaining continued NAC accreditation.
     We can certainly applaud the good sense revealed in this
statement.
     The following are two articles that appeared in early
September in the Jacksonville Journal-Courier. Both were written
by staff writer William Dennis. The first appeared on September
5. Here it is:

               New Blind School Chief Warms to Job
                        by William Dennis

     Dorothy Arensman moved thousands of miles to become
superintendent of the Illinois School for the Visually Impaired.
But students are the ones experiencing culture shock.
     Dr. Arensman noticed some odd reactions when she walked into
a student dormitory soon after taking over in late August.
     "I don't think they are used to having someone visit them
(in the dorms)," she said. "I think that will go away once they
get used to me coming and going."
     Dr. Arensman came to ISVI in part because she wanted a job
that gave her personal contact with children, which her previous
job as the director of personnel and special services with the
Bering Strait School District in Unalakleet, Alaska, didn't
allow.
     "I guess it's the nurse in me, but I like to make rounds
every morning," Dr. Arensman said. "I go into classrooms and
spend a little time with students."
     Dr. Arensman's personal touch is "wonderful," said Cathy
Randall of the National Federation of the Blind of Illinois.
"It's a real improvement," Ms. Randall said. "It's great that she
does want to have a personal relationship with the students. She
seems warm and genuinely concerned with the students."
     Dr. Richard Umsted, who was fired last year for failing to
inform the Department of Rehabilitation Services of student-on-
student sexual abuse, had also been criticized by some in the
blind community for not maintaining close contact with students.
     In only six weeks on the job Dr. Arensman also earned high
marks from Dave Postle, vice chairman of the ISVI Advisory
Council and a frequent critic of DORS and Dr. Umsted's
administration. He was impressed with how the new superintendent
handled an assault on a worker by a high school student.
     "Dr. Arensman supported the employee to the hilt," Mr.
Postle said. "The student was punished, which taught him and
other students that misbehavior will not be tolerated. Employees
also learned they will be supported."
     Mr. Postle also is pleased with Dr. Arensman's efforts to
bring new technology to the school, as well as her plans to visit
classrooms and give teachers advice on how to do their jobs
better.
     "Those teachers haven't had that for fifteen years or more,"
he said. "DORS may have made a good choice in spite of
themselves."
     When Dr. Arensman took over, she found employees who "take a
great deal of pride in their work," she said. She was also
surprised by the support Jacksonville residents have for ISVI and
the Illinois School for the Deaf.
     "In some communities facilities with special populations
would not be welcome," she said.
     She is also getting used to working with teachers who have
years of experience working with the same students, she said.
Teachers who worked in rural Alaska villages tended to leave for
new jobs after one or two years, and students there often were
resigned to the idea of their favorite teachers' leaving.
     Dr. Arensman took over the post as the school is trying to
recover from reports that administrators routinely failed to
inform DORS and parents of physical and sexual abuse of students.
     "We are following every rule and regulation so we are above
and beyond reproach," she said.

     That was the upbeat article about the new ISVI
superintendent. The following day, September 6, an article
appeared which demonstrated that, though some things have changed
in matters surrounding the Illinois School for the Visually
Impaired, others remain depressingly discordant, particularly
where Richard Umsted is concerned. Dr. Umsted wanted the state of
Illinois to pay for separate legal counsel for him in a civil
suit brought against him and the state by an ISVI parent whose
son was allegedly molested sexually by other students without
intervention from school officials. Here is Bill Dennis's
article:

                      Umsted Seeks Counsel
                  Abused Student's Father Sues
                        by William Dennis

     The former superintendent of the Illinois School for the
Visually Impaired doesn't want the Illinois Attorney General's
office to represent him in a lawsuit filed by an abused student's
father.
     A possible conflict of interest should prevent Attorney
General James Ryan from representing Richard Umsted, said the
former superintendent's attorney, H. Allen Yow.
     "The state's interest is totally different from Mr. Umsted's
interests," Mr. Yow said. The state would pay any real damages a
court could assess against Dr. Umsted, while the former
superintendent would pay the punitive damages, Mr. Yow said.
     Another conflict could exist because the Department of
Rehabilitation Services may have given Mr. Ryan's office
information about Dr. Umsted after the agency fired the
superintendent in August, 1994, for not reporting incidents of
student-on-student sexual abuse at the school.
     "We don't know exactly what DORS communicated to the
attorney general's office (about) the termination of Mr. Umsted,"
Mr. Yow said.
     A complaint for declaratory judgment filed September 1 in
Morgan County Court seeks to force the attorney general's office
to let Dr. Umsted select his own attorney, whose fees would be
paid by the state. The attorney general's office has refused
requests to allow Mr. Umsted to select his own attorney, Mr. Yow
said.
     The suit filed by Ronald Stevens in June in U.S. District
Court in Springfield seeks $1,000,000 in punitive damages and
real damages of more than $50,000. According to the complaint,
the State Employees Indemnification Act requires Mr. Ryan's
office to represent Dr. Umsted because he was a state employee at
the time of the acts alleged in the suit.
     Mr. Stevens' suit claims his son was "repeatedly subject to
physical assaults of a sexual nature by a fellow student or
students" while the son was a student at ISVI from 1984 to June,
1994.
     The suit claims the assaults were reported to Dr. Umsted,
who failed to notify DORS and the Illinois Department of Children
and Family Services, and also failed to protect the student from
further assaults.
     The student "suffered physical pain, emotional distress,
embarrassment, and humiliation" and will do so in the future as
well, according to the suit. Mr. Stevens incurred medical and
hospital bills due to treatment and diagnosis of his son's
injuries, the suit alleges.
     Mr. Yow is advising Mr. Umsted not to talk to the media. The
former superintendent and his wife moved away from Jacksonville.
     Dr. Umsted has until September 13 to file an answer to Mr.
Stevens' complaint.
     Jeffrey K. Clapper, Mr. Stevens' attorney, did not return a
telephone message.


     [PHOTO/CAPTION: Donald C. Capps, President of the NFB of South Carolina]

                  NFB OF SOUTH CAROLINA FIGHTS
              TO PRESERVE COMMISSION FOR THE BLIND

     State rehabilitation agencies serving the blind seem
inevitably to attract or stimulate political intrigue. The
details vary from time to time and place to place, but people
with serious problems and needing immediate help are
understandably frustrated when overworked staff act slowly or not
at all. Moreover, counselors and supervisors who are being
criticized are likely to become defensive and dig in their heels.
In such circumstances accusations fly and people instinctively
take sides. At that point reason, good faith, and common sense
too often depart. The current brouhaha surrounding the South
Carolina Commission for the Blind provides a distressing case in
point--with a distasteful admixture of racial accusation thrown
in for good measure.
     In the May, 1995, issue of The Palmetto Blind, the magazine
of the National Federation of the Blind of South Carolina, Don
Capps wrote at length about the situation in his President's
column. He pointed out that thirty years ago the South Carolina
affiliate successfully fought for the establishment of an
independent commission to serve blind citizens. Three of the
first four commissioners appointed to lead the agency were
removed from office during times of controversy, and there are
now those who would like to see Commissioner Donald Gist meet the
same fate.
     According to Don Capps, accusations against the Commission
abound: inefficiency, bureaucratic snarls, slow or non-existent
responses to letters and phone calls, etc. Don acknowledges that
phone calls should always be returned punctually, letters be
answered efficiently, red tape cut to a minimum, and
rehabilitation business conducted as expeditiously and
compassionately as possible. People should never be told that
there are no funds for needed services unless that is absolutely
and demonstrably the case. But he goes on to say that from his
perspective things are no worse at the Commission today than they
have ever been, and his personal experience has been that
inquiries are handled quickly and responsibly. He goes on to
point out that the Commission staff members whom some have
recently accused of misconduct are often the same people who were
employed by the agency before Mr. Gist became Commissioner, and
they are giving the same kind of service today they have always
provided.
     There is no doubt, Don says, that blind South Carolinians
are better off today than they were before the Commission was
established. The Business Enterprise Program employs many more
people, and the quality of their jobs and income is much greater.
Many more students are attending college with the assistance of
the Commission than previously, and much good work is being done
to assist older blind citizens and those living in rural areas.
Yet there are always a few people inclined to grumble.
     Unfortunately, in a climate in which the legislature is
always trying to save money by consolidating service-delivery
agencies, the danger is that any dissatisfaction that registers
in the legislature will be used as an excuse to eliminate the
Commission for the Blind and tuck its services into another
agency, where they will inevitably be downgraded.
     This is the danger that now faces South Carolina's
commission and its blind citizens. According to Don, the NFB of
South Carolina is prepared to stand and fight whenever its good
name and reputation for integrity are impugned and whenever the
best interests of blind people are endangered, and he says that
time has now come. This is the way he described the current
situation in his May Palmetto Blind column:

     A few individuals, led by Earlene Gardner, former chairman
of the Board of Commissioners of the agency [the South Carolina
Commission for the Blind], have taken it upon themselves to
engage in destructive activities. The NFB of South Carolina has
many contacts and friends in the South Carolina House of
Representatives and Senate, who keep us posted on significant
developments which affect the blind. On or about March 15 a Dear-
Friend letter signed by a blind vendor, Hattie Waymeyers, but
believed to have been authored primarily by Earlene Gardner was
distributed to legislators, including members of the Senate. In
this letter Commissioner Gist was assailed.
     The letter stated, "Everyone, myself included, thought that
once the new board was in place, the long awaited changes would
occur to correct the many problems at the agency. However, this
did not occur. It seems that the new board chairman, Mr. Robert
Harrelson, has been seduced by Mr. Gist and has elected to ignore
the mandated evaluation of the Commissioner and will not permit
the board to meet in executive session to discuss Mr. Gist's
performance, which performance is at the root of the agency's
problems. Another board member, the Reverend W.O. Willis, has
been wooed by Mr. Gist with travel and perks to Myrtle Beach and
Washington, D.C., as a representative of the agency--an agency
whose operation and mission he knows little or nothing about."
     So said the letter ostensibly written by Hattie Waymeyers,
and it seems out of line that Reverend Willis, who has been on
the board only a few months, would be criticized for travel to
Myrtle Beach and Washington, considering the fact that Mrs.
Gardner received payments from the Commission for the Blind
totalling $25,895.05 from 1990 to 1993. The March 15 letter goes
on to say: "While clients are being told that there are no funds
available to purchase the equipment needed for the employment and
jobs are being lost to lack of Commission support, he is spending
over $40,000 a year at the Rocky Bottom Camp operated by the NFB
of South Carolina for rural-mobility training. This camp is
operated free to all blind citizens, and this training could be
held in any of the nearby state parks at no cost to the
taxpayers."
     After being viciously attacked, the Reverend Oliver Willis
understandably responded to the letter signed by Hattie Waymeyers
of March 15 by writing to legislators on March 23, 1995, in part
as follows: "I just could not let a matter of this significance
pass without a corrected reply. First, where did she [Hattie
Waymeyers] get her information? How did she get her information?
She is not a member of the Board of the Commission for the Blind.
Yet she speaks of the Commission's business as though she were an
ex-officio member. Second, such innuendoes, inferences, untruths
throughout her letter are false, unfounded, and a deliberate
attempt to cause friction. Such accusations concerning me are
outrageous and ill-willed. Why? I do not know. Such comments as
she makes do not warrant a response, for such immature and idle
talk is unbecoming one of dignity and character. . . .
     "Recommendation: It is my honest desire to have Mrs.
Waymeyers make these allegations under oath and to be cross-
examined. Isn't it the American way for the victim to have the
right to confront his accuser? Further, this recommendation would
carry with it a proviso that, if a member [of the South Carolina
Commission for the Blind Board] is discovered to be feeding this
woman false and malicious statements. . . which I believe is the
case. . ., then the member should be required to resign from the
board within ten days."
     Concerning the statements made about Rocky Bottom Camp of
the Blind in the March 15 letter, which were designed to harm
both Rocky Bottom Camp of the Blind and the NFB of South
Carolina, the statement that Rocky Bottom Camp of the Blind
receives more than $40,000 a year from the Commission for the
Blind is inaccurate. The correct amount is $38,000 a year. A
similar amount is being paid to the South Carolina Lions Club
Association for their sight preservation program, but no one
criticizes the Lions contract since it is well known that the
Lions are not going to get involved in any vendetta against the
Commission's administration. Furthermore, Earlene Gardner was a
chief supporter of the program at Rocky Bottom Camp of the Blind
in partnership with the Commission for the Blind when the project
was initiated in 1991. This is an excellent program of service to
the blind, and any objective review of the program by a
responsible person is welcomed. The program is cost-effective.
Waymeyers's March 15 letter goes on to say: "This camp is
operated free to all blind citizens, and this training could be
held at any of the nearby state parks at no cost to the
taxpayers."
     It is true that the rank-and-file blind of this state are
able to visit Rocky Bottom Camp of the Blind and enjoy its
facilities without cost. The special training program in
partnership between the NFB of South Carolina and the Commission
for the Blind for Commission clients provides far more than just
a casual visit to the camp, and Earlene Gardner knows this. The
contract between the NFB of South Carolina and the Commission for
the Blind provides Commission clients, among other things,
"meals; snacks; services of the resident manager; attendance of a
licensed practical nurse to provide health care; and other
related services, facilities, programs, and goods." When
Commission clients are at Rocky Bottom, they receive
rehabilitation, orientation, rural mobility, Braille, and
communication, among other services. The contract goes on to
state, "The services provided at the camp in conjunction with the
programs through the South Carolina Commission for the Blind will
emphasize building the client's skills and confidence."
     Earlene Gardner knows full well that blind persons who visit
the camp for rest, leisure, and recreation do so on a free basis
but are not entitled to the special services provided by the
aforementioned program between Rocky Bottom and the Commission.
In our judgment it is despicable to distort this situation for
political purposes. The Commission for the Blind gets more than
its money's worth for the services provided by Rocky Bottom Camp
of the Blind for Commission clients. More important, the clients
participating in this program are greatly benefited. As for the
idea of state parks' being used for this purpose by the
Commission, to make such a claim is outrageous and is simply
distortion of the facts.
     The activities of Mrs. Gardner and her small following have
now taken on a far more serious tone. Members of the legislature,
including state senators, have now received a so-called anonymous
position paper on the state of affairs at the Commission for the
Blind. This anonymous communication, which was faxed to someone
who then saw that it was circulated to members of the South
Carolina Legislature, has serious ethical, legal, and political
implications. The communication was faxed at 8:45 a.m. April 24,
1995. The fax number was on the communication, and it has been
verified that this fax machine is located at the Owens Corning
Fiber Company in Aiken, South Carolina. Thus the fax is really
not anonymous because the sender and recipient overlooked one
important thing--the failure of the sender to delete the fax
number.
     The so-called position paper begins as follows: "As members
of the Black Blind Professional Alliance (BBPA), we are gravely
concerned about the current state of affairs at the Commission
for the Blind." The position paper goes on to state,
"Furthermore, this administration does not respect the views of
any black, blind person who is educated and outspoken. This is
evident in the fact that Mr. Gist continues to use fear and
intimidation to silence people like Ms. Hattie Waymeyers, who is
highly respected in the black, blind community and a vocal critic
of the Commission for the Blind." The position paper also states,
"We also feel it is not fair for Mr. Gist to claim he is a victim
of `racism.' To play the `race game' is a convenient way to win
sympathy from the black community, which Mr. Gist is able to do
whenever his critics are too vocal. The BBPA will make every
effort to insure that the Black Caucus is not used by Mr. Gist to
serve as his pawn because the real issue is accountability and
not race."
     The position paper contains a veiled threat against the
Black Caucus as the following passage indicates: "Therefore, any
show of support from any member of the Black Caucus will be
viewed with a great deal of `suspicions.'" Reverend Oliver
Willis, vice chairman of the Commission's Board of Commissioners,
is also attacked. As the paper states, "We strongly believe that
Reverend Willis is easily manipulated by Mr. Gist and is not
perceived by the majority of the members of BBPA as being someone
capable of making objective and impartial decisions regarding the
affairs of the agency." Reverend Willis, however, was not the
only board member attacked. The position paper denounces all
members of the board by saying, "Presently, BBPA does not support
the appointment of any governing board members to the Commission
for the Blind because the board, like the previous board, allowed
itself to fall victim to the charm and manipulative games of Mr.
Gist."
     The position paper goes on to say, "On a final note, the
BBPA would like to go on record as supporting `legislation that
would put the agency in the Governor's office, elect a panel of
board members who are accountable to the Governor and not to the
agency head.'" The position paper further states, "Unfortunately,
members of the Black Blind Professional Alliance have opted not
to identify ourselves for fear of becoming victims of
`McCarthyism' or targeted by Mr. Gist for exercising our God-
given right of Freedom of Speech."
     The NFB of South Carolina believes in freedom of speech but
also believes that such freedoms should not include or validate
slander and libelous attacks. It is perfectly understandable why
no one was willing to sign this so-called position paper. It
would appear, however, from information reaching The Palmetto
Blind that Earlene and Charles Gardner were involved in
circulating this position paper. Mr. Gardner is employed by the
Owens Corning Fiber Company of Aiken and has been for a number of
years.
     Contacts have been made with officials of Owens Corning,
including Mr. Jerry Hawkins, by Commission officials and members
of the Senate, who are outraged. Information furnished to The
Palmetto Blind indicates that Mr. Hawkins has discussed this
matter with Charles Gardner, who has not denied that he used
Owens Corning's fax machine to send the fax to Columbia, where it
was apparently reproduced and widely distributed. While Mr.
Gardner apparently faxed the so-called position paper, it is
believed that Earlene Gardner was its principal author.
Information received by The Palmetto Blind indicates that Mr.
Hawkins of Owens Corning Fiber Company disapproved of the use of
that company's fax machine for purposes unrelated to Owens
Corning. The nature and political implications of the position
paper are extremely serious. When the fax was received in
Columbia, it is likely that the duplication involved the use of
state resources, which in and of itself would constitute a
significant impropriety, if not an outright violation of the law.
     Inquiries have failed to confirm the existence of an
organization known as Black Blind Professional Alliance. It
appears that the author or authors of the anonymous paper felt
the use of such a name was necessary to give the paper some
credibility. In our judgment, however, doing so constitutes a
disservice to many fine black blind people in this state who for
the most part would have nothing to do with such an anonymous
paper. This is especially true if (as we believe) the anonymous
paper was written by a white author. The NFB of South Carolina
has more minority members than any other affiliate of the
National Federation of the Blind. They serve as chapter and state
officials and make outstanding contributions to the well-being of
the NFB of South Carolina and to their white blind brothers and
sisters across the state. The nature and tone of the position
paper is in and of itself racist. The NFB of South Carolina would
never endorse or support any organization such as a White Blind
Professional Alliance because this would also be racist.
     The Palmetto Blind has learned that members of the Black
Caucus are also outraged by the manner in which they are
described in the position paper. One thing is certain--the author
or authors of the position paper have managed to alienate a lot
of important people, and their actions seem to be those of
frantic and confused people who are consumed with hate. The NFB
of South Carolina has requested its law firm carefully to
investigate and study the legal implications of the false
pretenses of this position paper. We leave to Owens Corning what
action to take concerning the unauthorized use of its fax machine
to transmit this so-called position paper with its fraudulent
representation of authorship. While every blind South Carolinian
has every right to his or her own position concerning the
Commission and programs for the blind, in light of what has
transpired with respect to the position paper and the
circumstances surrounding it, Earlene Gardner's small following
may wish to rethink its position.
     Finally, with respect to the Commission's monthly board
meeting, the NFB of South Carolina has concerns regarding the
audience-participation part of the meeting. The governing board
of the Commission for the Blind is, of course, responsible for
the conduct of its meetings. At the same time, however, the
integrity and order of the board meeting is also important. While
the NFB of South Carolina supports freedom of expression and
input from the blind at the board meetings, when such expression
and input become irresponsible and mean-spirited, this
participation is not warranted or desirable.
     At the April 19 meeting of the Commission's board, the
audience participation was especially disturbing. Various
participants attacked members of the board as well as
Commissioner Gist and in fact attacked each other. The potential
for violence existed. There is no place for this kind of behavior
in the conduct of Commission business. Since freedom of
expression and input by the blind are important, in order to
avoid future acrimony of the type that occurred at the April 19
meeting, we suggest that the board consider having those blind
persons attending monthly board meetings present their comments
in writing to the board for its consideration and action. Any
future spectacle of the type that occurred at the April 19 board
meeting can only do further harm to the Commission.
     Having participated as a volunteer in this big program of
serving the blind for more than forty years, I know first-hand
that people have different perspectives about state programs.
This is to be expected, but I can not recall during the past
forty years when there has been so much hatred by a few people.
It cannot be justified or permitted to take control. The NFB of
South Carolina will continue to be responsible in its positions
and will do everything humanly possible to help stabilize the
current situation. Because of its impressive track record for
fifty years, the NFB of South Carolina is respected by the public
and the General Assembly. All of us involved in this big program
of serving the blind should do everything we can individually and
collectively to bring about goodwill and respect for each other.
The blind of the state need and deserve the very best possible
from all of us.

     That is the way Don Capps described the events of the early
spring. The six Black Senators, who comprise the membership on
the Senate side of the South Carolina Black Caucus, did not take
kindly to the attack on them in the so-called position paper
circulated by the Gardners and one Black vendor in the Business
Enterprise Program. The most obvious place for the Senators to
lodge their complaint was with the company whose Fax machine had
been used to circulate the accusations. Here is the letter they
wrote to the manager of the Owens Corning plant in question:

                                         Columbia, South Carolina
                                                      May 1, 1995

Mr. Jerry Hawkins, Plant Manager
Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.
Aiken, South Carolina

Dear Mr. Hawkins:
     Last week several senators saw Mr. & Mrs. Charles and
Earlene Gardner sitting in the Gressette Building Canteen talking
with Ms. Hattie Waymeyers. A few days later up pops the attached
Owens Corning fax of 04-24-1995, 8:45 (803-468-6351, 526 Aiken
TSO) in the Gressette Building, and I assume it was received on
the South Carolina Senate Fax: (803) 212-6299. Also, the fax is
coming from a phantom (appearance with no substance, image in the
mind) organization, i.e., the Black Blind Professional Alliance
(BBPA)--which professes to speak for Black people. We didn't
realize that the three founders and three members were in the
process of founding BBPA in Ms. Waymeyers' Canteen--eye witnesses
to history. But this is what puzzles us six Black Senators: If
two members of a three-member organization are white, then how in
the hell can they call said organization Black?--unless, of
course, there is something in the Gardners' family tree roots
that they ain't shared with us.
     Mr. Hawkins, it's bad enough for Mr. & Mrs. Charles and
Earlene Gardner to use Ms. Hattie Waymeyers in a long-standing
vendetta of trashing Mr. Donald Gist, South Carolina Blind
Commissioner. But when the unholy trinity starts trashing and
disparaging the South Carolina Legislative Black Caucus (six
senators and twenty-five representatives), we must quote the dog
that raped the skunk, "We've enjoyed just about as much of this
as we can stand." And if the unholy trinity (BBPA) think we
senators are going to sit here in the South Carolina Senate and
allow them to dump on us, they're crazy as hell. Therefore, we
are respectfully requesting your response in writing to the
following:
     1. Is it Owens Corning policy to let employees use their fax
to disparage Black legislators in the South Carolina Assembly?
     2. What does Owens Corning plan to do in regard to clearing
our names (making us whole), as elected officials that speak for
our constituents in general and Blacks in particular? Yes, unlike
the self-appointed unholy-trinity.
     3. Please list the names, addresses, and phones for Owens
Corning's Chief Executive Officer and attorney.
     In conclusion, please be advised that we shall continue to
speak to the needs, the dreams, and the aspirations of our
people--the self-appointed leaders, phantom organizations, and
unholy-trinity notwithstanding.
     May we thank you in advance for your cooperation in this
grave and serious matter and for a response as soon as
practicable?
                                           Yours in the struggle,
                                            Senator Kay Patterson
                                    Senator John W. Matthews, Jr.
                                    Senator Maggie Wallace Glover
                                          Senator Darrell Jackson
                                              Senator Robert Ford
                                 Senator McKinley Washington, Jr.

     And how did Mr. Hawkins answer this clearly angry demand for
information and a change in company practice? He obviously
remembered the Biblical admonition that "A soft answer turneth
away wrath" and hoped that employing such a strategy would allow
the storm to blow over. This is what he said to each of the Black
Senators:

                                            Aiken, South Carolina
                                                     May 11, 1995

Dear (blank):
     Personally and on behalf of Owens Corning, I regret that our
company fax was used by Mr. Charles Gardner to send his message
dated April 24, 1995.
     Our practice at Owens Corning is not to allow personal use
of company equipment or materials without prior management
approval, which was not sought in this situation. I personally
counselled Mr. Gardner about this matter and emphasized that our
equipment is not to be used for personal or political matters. In
addition, to avoid future misunderstandings we will clearly
communicate our expectations in this area to all 1200 employees
at the Aiken Plant.
     On behalf of Owens Corning and the Aiken Plant, I apologize
for this unfortunate incident and misunderstanding. You have my
commitment that action has been taken to avoid this type of
misunderstanding in the future.

                                                       Sincerely,
                                                 Jerry C. Hawkins
                                                    Plant Manager
                              Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation

     There you have the exchange of correspondence that was
reprinted in the Palmetto Blind. Not surprisingly Mr. Hawkins's
response did not resolve the matter to the satisfaction of
anyone. Two people who were deeply disturbed and offended at the
allegations made in the April 24 fax were Leroy Burns, a blind
vendor, and Leroy Moss, a widely respected employee of the
Commission for the Blind. They have now brought suit against
Earlene Gardner, her husband, the Black Blind Professional
Alliance, and Owens Corning, Inc. Here is the complaint they
filed on October 21, 1995:

                  In the Court of Common Pleas
                     Second Judicial Circuit

                            Complaint
                 Jury Trial Demanded Negligence

                     State of South Carolina
                         County of Aiken
             Leroy Burns and Leroy Moss, Plaintiffs
                               vs.
                Charles Gardner, Earlene Gardner;
   Black Blind Professional Alliance and Owens Corning, Inc.,
Defendants.

     Now comes the Plaintiffs who will show unto this Court that:

     1. The Plaintiffs, are blind citizens and residents of the
County of Richland, State of South Carolina.
     2. Upon information and belief, the Defendants Charles
Gardner and Earlene Gardner are husband and wife, residents of
Aiken County and are agents of each other at all times relevant
to this action.
     3. Upon information and belief, the Defendant, Owens Corning
Incorporated is a Corporation organized under the laws of the
United States and operating in the State of South Carolina.
     4. On or about April 24, 1995, the Defendant, Charles
Gardner, intentionally faxed a document from his place of
employment at Owens Corning using Owens Corning fax machine, to
all African-American members of the Legislature of the State of
South Carolina.
     5. The Defendant, Black Blind Professional Alliance is not
an organized entity within the State of South Carolina.
     6. The document in question contained language in which the
Defendant Earlene Gardner did represent herself to be a member of
the Black Blind Professional Alliance.
     7. The Defendant, Charles Gardner was and is an employee of
the Defendant, Owens Corning.
     8. The Defendant, Earlene Gardner is and was at all times
relevant to this action, a Board member of the Commission for the
Blind.
     9. The Defendants, Charles Gardner and Earlene Gardner are
caucasian.

                   For a First Cause of Action
                           Defamation

     10. The Plaintiffs reallege each and every above paragraph
as if restated word for word.
     11. Earlene Gardner was knowledgeable of and did authorize
the actions of her husband on April 24, 1995.
     12. The Defendants, Earlene and Charles Gardner, through the
Black Blind Professional Alliance have made disparaging remarks
causing retribution to the Black blind population of South
Carolina.
     13. The Defendants, Earlene and Charles Gardner, through the
Black Blind Professional Alliance did state facts about the
Commission for the Blind that are untrue.

                  For a Second Cause of Action
          Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress

     14. The Plaintiffs reallege each and every above paragraph
as if restated word for word.
     15. The Defendant, the Black Blind Professional Association,
did allege such facts about the Commission for the Blind; which
the defendant Earlene Gardner, who serves on the Commission for
the Blind, knew the facts to be untrue.
     16. Defendants' actions and statements were intended to
cause injury to the Black blind persons of the State of South
Carolina, in particular, to the Plaintiffs, and to the Commission
for the Blind.

                   For a Third Cause of Action
                       Respondeat Superior

     17. The Plaintiffs reallege each and every above paragraph
as if restated word for word.
     18. The Defendant, Charles Gardner, did transmit the
disparaging memo while within the scope of his employment at
Owens Corning; as such, the Defendant Owens Corning is liable to
Plaintiffs for Charles Gardner's actions through the doctrine of
respondeat superior.
     19. The Defendant, Charles Gardner, did publish the untrue
defamatory remarks while posing as a representative of the Black
Blind Professional Alliance by using the fax machine that he was
authorized to use at his place of employment, Owens Corning.
     20. The Defendant Owens Corning Incorporated ratified the
action of its employee Charles Gardner.

                  For a Fourth Cause of Action
                           Negligence

     21. The Plaintiffs reallege each and every above paragraph
as if restated word for word.
     22. Defendant, Owens Corning, has a duty to the public to
exercise due care in hiring, supervising, and retaining its
employees.
     23. The Defendant, Owens Corning, through its agents was
negligent in the following particulars:
          a. in the hiring of Charles Gardner.
          b. in the supervision of Charles Gardner in that
     it is foreseeable that an employee could use the
     company's fax machine to perform improper acts, without
     specific written guidelines or company rules to
     regulate an employee's activities.
          c. in the retention of Charles Gardner and not
     taking any disciplinary actions after the company
     became aware of Charles Gardner's use of the company's
     fax machine.

                   For a Fifth Cause of Action
                              Fraud

     24. The Plaintiffs reallege each and every above paragraph
as if restated word for word.
     25. The Defendants, Charles Gardner and Earlene Gardner, did
seek to deceive the African-American members of the Legislature
of the State of South Carolina and members of the public by
posing as representatives of the Black Blind Professional
Alliance.
     26. The Defendant, Earlene Gardner, intended to portray
herself as a member of the blind African-American community and
as a representative of members of the African-American community.

                        Injunctive Relief

     27. The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that they are
entitled to an injunction prohibiting the Defendant Earlene
Gardner from masquerading as a member of the blind African-
American community of the State of South Carolina.

                             Damages

     28. The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that they are
entitled to monetary damages from the Defendants.
     29. The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that as to the
Defendant, Earlene Gardner, she should be removed from her
position with the Commission for the Blind.
     30. The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that the
Defendants are liable for misrepresenting themselves as being
blind persons.
     31. The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that they are
entitled to actual and punitive damages from the Defendant, Owens
Corning, Incorporated.
     32. The Plaintiffs are informed and believe that the
Defendant should be enjoined from masquerading as representatives
of the Black African-American community.
     33. The Plaintiffs cannot afford to pay an attorney. The
Plaintiffs are informed and believe that the Defendants should be
responsible for the Plaintiffs' attorney's fees and costs
associated with this action.

     WHEREFORE, based on the foregoing, Plaintiffs pray that this
Court enter its Order:
     1. Granting Plaintiffs monetary damages.
     2. Ordering that Defendant, Earlene Gardner, be
          removed from her position on the Commission
          for the Blind.
     3. Defendants be held liable for misrepresenting
          themselves as blind people.
     4. Granting Plaintiffs actual and punitive
          monetary damages from defendant, Owens
          Corning.
     5. Granting an injunction barring the Plaintiffs
          from masquerading as representatives of the
          African-American community.
     6. Ordering the Defendants to pay Plaintiffs'
          attorney fees and all other costs associated
          with this action.
     7. Granting Plaintiffs such other and further
          relief as this Court deems just and
          equitable.
                            Dated this 21st day of October, 1995.
                                                  Smalls Law Firm
                                   Joseph L. Smalls, Jr., Esquire
                                          Attorney for Plaintiffs
                                         Columbia, South Carolina


     [PHOTO/CAPTION: Rich Crawford]

                    AND THE BLIND SHALL LEAD:
        BUSY STOCKBROKER AS INDEPENDENT AS HE WANTS TO BE
                        by Kate Thompson

     From the Editor: The following story first appeared in the
July 16, 1995, edition of the Sioux City Journal. Rich Crawford
is one of the leaders of the National Federation of the Blind of
Iowa. He is also a successful stockbroker. Here is the article as
it appeared:

     Richard P. Crawford, Jr., is Vice President/Investment
Officer for Dain Bosworth, Inc.
     Richard Crawford's office at Dain Bosworth looks like most
stockbrokers' offices with a few personal touches.
     The head of a deer he shot a few years ago on a hunting trip
graces the wall near a globe. Framed pictures dot the walls.
There's a computer, of course, and a calculator. And, leaning on
the wall beside the door, there's a white cane. Crawford uses it
to maneuver beyond his office.
     Crawford, forty-five, is totally blind and has been since he
was ten. But don't focus on the limitation. He doesn't.
     Those who make the mistake of figuring they can beat him
because he's blind sometimes find his handicap gives him an
advantage.
     That's what happened more than once when he was a high
school wrestler. In the last few seconds his sighted opponent
could see the time clock and would let up a little. Crawford, who
had no idea that time was running out, more than once pinned
opponents at 5:59.
     "I never lost because I was blind," he says. "I lost because
they were better."
     The deer on Crawford's wall is just one example of his
refusal to accept his limitations. He's tried hunting, driving a
snowmobile, skiing both on water and snow.
     He's even driven a motorcycle--"anytime I can get somebody
dumb enough to ride behind me," he says. "When I snow ski, the
guide skis behind me and uses a walkie-talkie and talks me down
the mountain."

                       Parents get credit

     Crawford credits his parents with much of his success.
     "They taught me the best three-letter word in the language:
try," he says. "I'll just try things to see how far I can push my
talents and abilities. I can't find many maximums. I can't
legally drive a car, but I have driven. I've never taken off or
landed a plane, but I bet most other people haven't either."
     When Crawford's plumbing breaks or his wife's car needs
repairs, he doesn't immediately call for help.
     "I always screw it up worse first," he said. "You'd be
surprised, though, how often I fix it. It's amazing what I can do
when I try."
     Crawford's blindness is the result of a progressive eye
disease. For the first few years, he says, he was angry,
rebellious, and resentful.

                         OK to be blind

     "Thank goodness I outgrew it," he says. "You have to get to
acceptance, and you can't do that until it's okay to be blind."
     Crawford earned a bachelor's degree at Wartburg College in
Waverly, Iowa, and a master of business administration degree at
the University of South Dakota, which he earned while working
full time.
     He and his wife Sara, who is sighted, have a daughter and
two sons.
     Almost twenty years ago he decided he wanted to find an
occupation that earned him more money. When he applied to become
a stockbroker, he wasn't asked how he would solve all the
problems he'd face on the job. Instead, he was told what it took
to be a successful stockbroker.
     "I said I could do that," Crawford said. But he had no idea
how.
     At first he needed an assistant to help him do what other
brokers consider simple tasks, such as scanning the ticker for
quotes and monitoring market news. He had a slow Braille-printing
machine and a talking calculator about the size of a typewriter,
but neither was quick.
     Today he has a pocket-sized talking calculator, a paperless
Braille device that reads his computer screen one line at a time,
a Braille printer in case he wants to take work home, and vocal
scanners that can read typed information aloud or convert it to
his computer, where he can read it.

                        Technology helps

     "The technology is wonderful, and it can give us
independence," Crawford said. "But it doesn't make us
stockbrokers, or accountants, or anything. All they are are the
tools."
     When the Americans with Disabilities Act was passed a few
years ago, the intent was good, but the results haven't been
great, Crawford said.
     "If you think that, if you hire me, you will have to buy all
this equipment, it puts up all kinds of obstacles," Crawford
said. "We have a philosophy. Give us the training, give us an
opportunity, and let us try. If we can't give you results, then
politely fire us."
     Other blind brokers have been hired at Dain Bosworth, and
two of them were fired. But they weren't fired because they were
blind, Crawford said.
     "They were fired because they could not produce at the
standards of our company," he said. "The ADA sometimes interferes
with some employers who would give an opportunity."
     Sometimes those who are handicapped are pigeon-holed into
low-level positions when they have enormous unused potential.
     "If a businessman were smart, he would hire handicapped
people," Crawford said. "The majority are loyal, hard-working,
and dependable. We don't take our job security for granted. Most
of us had to work too hard to get them. Employers should exploit
that."
     Sometimes employers are prevented from hiring handicapped
people when they consider the obstacles those potential employees
face, such as how they will get to the office in the first place.

                         His thumb's out

     Crawford gets there by hitchhiking, rain or shine. His
average time to work is ten minutes, and he's been first into the
office many times when snow kept sighted people home.
     "Nice people stop; snobs drive by," he said. "I meet a lot
of nice people, and I get two or three new clients from
hitchhiking to work every month. I can't afford to quit
hitchhiking."
     Crawford said potential employers should give people the
opportunity to solve their problems creatively. It may cost
$11,000 for a Braille screenreader, but it's cheaper than the 70
percent unemployment now among blind people.
     In his spare time Crawford works with parents of newly
blinded children in the tri-state area and also with handicapped
individuals working to become successful stockbrokers.
     Those people can learn from Crawford, finding out what he's
already learned by trial and error.
     "They don't have to reinvent the wheel," he said. "It's fun
to give. Life has been so good to me. It's fun to give back."
     Some other handicapped people haven't been as successful as
Crawford.
     "I have to be careful not to be an Uncle Tom," he said.
"Maybe their life isn't so good. It's important to share with one
another and help each other as we struggle through life."


     [PHOTO: The picture is of a sign "Xing for Blind." CAPTION: Sign on 1st
Avenue, South at 22nd Street near the National Federation of the Blind of
Minnesota building, which can be seen in the background]

              CROSSING FOR BLIND SIGNS CROSSED OUT
                         by Peggy Chong

     From the Editor: Apparently some small percentage of the
general public observe blind people innocently going about our
business and come up with what they believe are bright ideas. In
the past these have ranged from the ridiculous (a combination
cane and snow-removal device) to the ultimately helpful (white
cane, proposed in 1933 in Peoria, Illinois). The problem has
always been that these would-be altruists almost never consult
blind people before implementing their bright ideas. One of the
few disadvantages of having more blind people than ever before
out and about, carrying on their personal business like everybody
else is that we can probably expect an increase in these well-
meant but usually inappropriate gestures complicating our lives.
     This appears to be what happened to the blind population of
Minneapolis last summer. Peggy Chong, President of the Metro
Chapter of the NFB of Minnesota, recounts the full story:

     In early August, 1995, we discovered that, without our
knowledge or input, crossing-for-blind signs had been installed
near NFB of Minnesota headquarters. Members of our organization
and the students and staff at BLIND, Inc. (our adult
rehabilitation center), were understandably upset.
     As soon as we discovered the signs, president Joyce Scanlan
got on the phone to find out who was responsible for putting them
up. No one would take responsibility for them; each official
passed the buck to some other department. It appeared that, in
order to get the signs removed, we would have to wage war against
the city and wade through the time-consuming, bureaucratic red
tape of city government. Joyce wrote the following letter:

                         August 18, 1995

Michael J. Monahan, Director
Department of Public Works
City of Minneapolis
Minneapolis, Minnesota

Dear Mr. Monahan:

     This letter is written to present to you a formal request to
remove three "Xing for blind" traffic signs which have recently
appeared along Nicollet Avenue, north and south of Twenty-second
Street and along First Avenue to the south of Twenty-second
Street. These signs, which have been added to already-existing
"pedestrian crossing" signs, pose serious problems of safety and
public understanding and social acceptance for the entire
population of blind people. They must be removed immediately.
     As president of an organization whose purpose is to bring
about the integration of blind people into society on a basis of
equality with others, I must point out serious questions and
concerns about the effects of these signs on blind people
throughout our community; on the students of BLIND, Inc., an
orientation center where blind people receive training; and on
the work that all of us do to create better public awareness and
understanding of blindness.
     I regret that I must bring this matter to your attention
after the decision to install the signs has already been
implemented. However, although the signs specifically refer to
blind people and have a direct impact on our lives, neither the
National Federation of the Blind of Minnesota (NFBM) nor BLIND,
Inc., was consulted or given opportunity for input prior to the
implementation of this very unfortunate decision. Therefore we
are forced into the position of undoing an arbitrary and poorly-
thought-out decision.
     On Tuesday of this week, I spoke with Mr. Rick Dahl of the
Transportation Division about my concerns. He was clearly
uninterested in my concerns and said that, in order to reverse
this very harmful situation, I must wend my way through city
bureaucracy and deal with the City Council, et al. This is a fine
example of bureaucracy run amuck and of why citizens today find
government unresponsive and wasteful of public resources.
     Mr. Dahl first told me that either the NFBM or BLIND, Inc.,
had asked for the xing-for-blind signs. When I refuted that
possibility by pointing out that I had not been consulted or
notified by anyone about the signs, he shifted his story to say
that "Maybe it was a City Council member or a concerned
neighbor." I have always understood that, before traffic lights
or stop signs can be installed, there is vast opportunity for
public input. Yet in this instance the public most concerned,
blind people themselves, were excluded from the process.
     Mr. Dahl then argued in favor of the xing-for-blind signs by
saying, "We only put them in areas where there is a concentration
of blind people." This sounds to me like the ghetto mentality. We
had hoped that our community had progressed to the point where
ghettos were no longer considered appropriate for anyone--
including blind people. It should no longer be radical to plead
for integration of blind people into our society. In every aspect
of life today we hear of "mainstreaming" and "full inclusion."
Blind people today travel independently and safely throughout the
entire city, state, nation, and world. Yet our area has been
designated by city officials as constituting a "concentration of
blind people" and the basis for additional and special signs.
     There is no evidence to prove that these xing-for-blind
signs have value for either sighted drivers or blind pedestrians.
Drivers ignore the signs, as witness an incident that occurred
just last week, when a blind student assumed that the driver of
an approaching truck had read and given heed to the xing-for-
blind sign and stepped into the street. Fortunately no one was
injured. Eyewitnesses and the police determined that "It was not
the driver's fault." On the other hand, the xing-for-blind sign
gave the blind student a false sense of security. Mr. Dahl
charged that it is the responsibility of the training center to
help students understand that they must not count on the signs to
provide security. I am struggling to understand who the
beneficiaries of the signs really are.
     A normal environment is very important for blind students in
a training center. The emphases at BLIND, Inc. are personal
responsibility and independence. Students go all over the
community where, in most cases, the environment can be counted on
to be as it is for all citizens. Yet in the immediate area of the
training center, you have created an unusual and artificial
environment by introducing these xing-for-blind signs. Thus the
work of the training program has been made more difficult.
     I tried to discuss the effects of public attitudes about
blindness on blind people themselves. There is a great deal of
fear in the public mind regarding blindness. In fact, numerous
public opinion polls have indicated that Americans fear blindness
more than any other condition except cancer. This fear then
translates into inaccurate and negative information and
devastating consequences for blind people. The xing-for-blind
signs placed on the streets without consultation with blind
people are just one outcome of this public fear and
misunderstanding. Students from the BLIND, Inc., training center
are learning skills to promote independence and employability.
The xing-for-blind signs have a negative effect on their
prospects for a productive future as employed citizens as well as
on the attitudes of the sighted drivers who may be potential
employers of these blind students.
     Then Mr. Dahl said, "I am concerned for the safety of blind
people." I hope that he is concerned for the safety of all
people. Since this "safety" concern is used so often when blind
people are involved, one wonders if the implication is that we as
blind people are not concerned with safety or cannot assume
responsibility for our own safety and must be cared for. I can
assure you that this is not the case. This statement on safety is
frequently used as an argument to exclude blind people from equal
access and equal participation. It is simply another way of
saying, "Don't bother me with the facts; I know what is best for
you blind people." It is an overused and much worn argument
brought into a discussion to discount what we as blind people are
saying.
     A person who is blind learns to listen for the sounds of
traffic and wait for traffic to clear before stepping into the
street to cross. This listening technique truly does work as well
as the seeing technique works for those with reliable eyesight.
The listening technique is normal for those of us who are blind.
We hope not to make mistakes, but after all sighted pedestrians
make mistakes occasionally. The city should have no more
liability for a blind citizen than it has for a sighted person.
     In conclusion, the xing-for-blind signs are far more harmful
than helpful. Please remove them from this area as soon as
possible.
     If you have questions or would like to discuss the matter
further, please call me. I am sure we can resolve this matter
with peace and harmony.

                                                Very truly yours,
                                                    Joyce Scanlan
         President, National Federation of the Blind of Minnesota

cc: Mayor Sharon Sayles-Belton; members of the City Council; Marc
Maurer, President, National Federation of the Blind

     We cannot point out often enough that no one told us the
signs had been requested or were going to be put up. No one came
to ask the blind people whom the signs were supposed to protect
if they were needed or wanted. One novel argument expressed in
support of the signs was that, if they were taken down, the city
would be more liable if a blind pedestrian were hit or injured.
One wonders whether this increased liability would apply at other
intersections around the city--intersections far more likely to
be crossed by a blind pedestrian.
     At the August meeting of the NFB of Minnesota Metro Chapter,
Joyce read her letter to the membership. Many people wanted to
take down the offending signs right away. We ultimately decided
that we did not want to cloud the issue with civil disobedience--
well at least not right away. So we agreed to wait until August
24, at 2:00 p.m. We decided that, if we had not heard from the
city by then, we would stage a picket around the signs and invite
the media.
     Supplies were purchased for picket signs; calls were made;
some members arranged to take the day off; and some arranged for
baby sitters. On Wednesday, August 23, at 1:00 p.m., Joyce
received a call from Michael Monahan. He said that he was
completely supportive of our position but that the removal of the
signs had to be approved by the City Council. We decided to
postpone the picketing and give Mr. Monahan a chance to make the
system work.
     Chapter members got to work. They contacted their City
Council representatives by phone and by mail, informing them that
we wanted the Xing-for-blind signs to come down! And our efforts
paid off.
     Because of the contacts we had made, the Transportation and
Public Works Committee voted unanimously during the week of
September 10 to remove the signs. On Friday, September 15, NFB of
Minnesota members appeared at the Council meeting at City Hall.
When the full Council heard the committee report, not a single
comment was made in opposition. The Council voted unanimously to
remove the signs.
     Not until Tuesday, September 26, did the signs actually come
down. The City of Minneapolis knows now that, if signs for the
blind are ever to be installed, it had better consult the
National Federation of the Blind first instead of spending public
money foolishly.

     There you have it. Because of the decisive action and
determination of members of the National Federation of the Blind
of Minnesota, these obnoxious signs were removed. But the
incident should be a warning to each of us. We must all be
vigilant and prepared to act with speed and clarity in order to
keep our own communities responsive to blind citizens rather than
to those who would preach nonsense on our behalf.


     [PHOTO: James Omvig]

                     IF I HAVE SEEN FURTHER:
                  THE BLIND SERVING COMMUNION?
                        by James H. Omvig

     "My goodness, things are so bad over there at the church,
now that they even have the blind serving communion!" So said an
elderly, homebound member to one of her close friends and
confidants on a particular Monday morning.
     The church in question was the one I attended for several
years in Baltimore, Maryland. The poor blind man who had
supposedly been so abused by this congregation was me. Here is
how it all happened.
     At the time of this incident I had been blind for many years
and had been an active member of this church for a short time.
Years earlier, I had had the great good fortune of encountering
the National Federation of the Blind, and I had experienced
enormously valuable training and insight. I had been taught (and
had come emotionally to believe) that as a blind person I was
simply a normal human being who happened to be blind and that the
opportunities for me to work and participate fully in the world
were limitless. I had also learned that erroneous attitudes about
blindness rather than the physical condition of being blind are
the most persistent problems with which each blind person must
deal on a daily basis. Finally, I had come to understand fully
that as a successful blind person I had an obligation to do what
I could to help change those existing, negative public attitudes.
     I was living to the hilt what I had been taught by the
Federation. I had become an attorney and was the Director of a
major program of the Social Security Administration at its
Baltimore headquarters. Additionally, I was married to a
wonderful wife, had a fine young son, served as Vice President of
my Lions Club, was an active member of my church's governing
Board, and was also active in the local chapter of the National
Federation of the Blind. My life was in every way normal, if
busy.
     A few weeks before the communion incident occurred, I had
been asked by the minister (we'll call him Bob) if I would be
willing to have my name placed in nomination to become one of the
deacons of the church. I agreed and, as church elections
generally go, I was elected without a hitch. It had not occurred
to me that one of the duties of a deacon (at least, at this
church) is to serve communion at the Sunday service.
     Some time after the election we had a day of planning and
training. Early on, the minister Bob came to my sighted wife (not
to me) and said, "I'm making out the communion-serving schedule
of deacons for the year. Jim won't want to serve communion, will
he?"
     My wife Sharon is also well grounded in proper attitudes
about blindness and in the knowledge that we have a lot of work
to do to make things better. She knew as well as I that Bob's
real question was, "Since Jim is blind, he wouldn't be able to
serve communion, would he?"
     Even so, she just smiled and said, "I think you had better
ask Jim about that." Then she came to me in another meeting and
told me about Bob's question.
     What was I to do? Or, more accurately, what were we to do,
since my wife is as concerned as I that we seize every possible
opportunity to provide positive educational experiences about
blindness?
     One thing was clear: It would not be helpful or even
desirable for either of us to become upset or angry. Far from
useful, such a reaction would have served only to teach the
minister (and anyone else who happened to learn of it) that the
blind are not only helpless and incompetent but also rude and
ill-tempered on top of it.
     Frankly, I had not given a thought to the fact that deacons
serve communion or the way in which I as a blind person might
accomplish the task. I determined then and there, though, that it
would be important for me to do it and that I would find a way!
The National Federation of the Blind had taught me that. I
decided to do it both because it was my duty as an elected deacon
and because this would be a marvelous opportunity through quiet
example for me to teach hundreds of people at a single stroke
about blindness.
     We decided that I would just wait until Bob came to speak
with me. But, of course, he did not come. Some time in the early
afternoon Bob went to Sharon again and said, "Jim won't want to
serve communion, will he?"
     Again she said, "You need to talk to Jim about that." And
again she told me, and I waited a little longer.
     Finally, toward the end of the day, Bob came to Sharon yet a
third time. This time he sounded a little impatient. He said,
"You know, I have to finish this communion schedule today. Jim
won't want to be on it, will he?"
     This time Sharon said, "Come along, Bob; let's go find Jim;
and you can ask him. I can't speak for him."
     When they found me, Bob asked if I would be willing to
serve, and I casually said, "Of course I will."
     He sounded more than a little concerned and, with some
awkwardness, he finally got around to asking, "But how will you
do it?" At this church the deacons who are serving gather at the
back of the sanctuary and then walk two-by-two up to the front of
the church and up the steps to the altar. They take the trays
from the minister or elders and then go back down and serve the
individual members of the congregation row by row. When all have
been served, the deacons return to the altar to leave the trays
and then walk again in pairs back to their seats.
     I told him that I had not yet had the opportunity to think
about it but that there was a way. And there was, and I did!
     On the first day I served, the church was a-buzz. Later Bob
said to me with real warmth and an obvious feeling of pride, "You
were more of an inspiration here today than I was. I actually saw
people with tears in their eyes."
     So it was that by Monday the story had spread throughout the
congregation, even to the shut-ins. It is true that the activity
seemed noteworthy in the beginning--even remarkable to some. But
the end of the story was the most gratifying for Sharon and me.
For in a very short time whatever I did (whether it was serving
communion or serving as head of the finance committee or serving
as a trustee) was accepted as the ordinary and unremarkable
activity of a church leader. My blindness simply was no longer an
issue.
     As I look back now, I'm glad that the question of serving
communion came up. Bob learned from it, the members of the
congregation learned from it, and my wife and I learned, too. We
came to have an even deeper understanding of the normality of the
blind and the ease with which real education about blindness can
be presented by each of us to the sighted public.
     I don't know whether it is remarkable, or even unusual, for
a blind person to serve communion or to take an active position
of lay leadership in a church. Perhaps it is, but I think not. As
I relate this story, though, two or three points which I do know
for a certainty come to mind.
     First, I know that it was important for me in this instance
to be firm and confident and to do my share. If I had simply
decided that serving communion was not possible or was too
difficult or was just too much trouble, I would have contributed
to the erroneous attitudes about blind people which have kept us
down and out through the years and which I and others are working
to change.
     Second, I know that, when we as blind people encounter those
who have an attitude such as that displayed by Bob, we can't
afford the luxury of going off half-cocked or losing our cool.
Nor do we have any business trying to fix blame or to become
bitter. What we need is compassion and understanding. It is
noteworthy, I think, that through the years Bob has become one of
my best friends and a true believer in the cause of the blind.
     Finally, I know that the work and education which I had the
opportunity to provide at my church were not mine alone. If
serving communion really was my taking a step beyond what other
blind people had done before me, then it was still made possible
by those who had come before me in the organized blind movement.
They had had the wisdom to join together for concerted action,
and they had formulated constructive ideas. They had developed a
positive philosophy about blindness, and they had then shared
their ideas and philosophy and dreams with me and thousands like
me.
     I believe that Sir Isaac Newton best captured the essence of
this concept when he said, "If I have seen further, it is because
I have stood upon the shoulders of giants!"
     As a blind person, whether it is working and supporting my
family, serving as an officer in a Lions Club, or serving
communion at my church, I have truly stood upon the shoulders of
giants. And if I have seen further, it is because of them--the
founders and early leaders and members of the National Federation
of the Blind.


                    IN MEMORY OF TWO FRIENDS
                       by Kenneth Jernigan

     Less than a month apart this fall two of my closest, long-
time friends died--Elwyn Hemken, October 25, and Phil Parks,
November 10. Either of these losses would have been cause for
personal sorrow. Taken together, they were a severe blow.
     I first met Elwyn (born 1923) some time in 1962. He had lost
his sight as a result of diabetic retinopathy, and in his usual
way he had decided that he had to learn to deal with the new
circumstances. I had come to Iowa in 1958 to direct the State
Commission for the Blind, and our new Orientation Center program
was getting into full swing.
     Elwyn was farming at Blairsburg. He wanted to come to the
Center as a student, but he felt he couldn't leave the farm until
he got things wrapped up for the winter. He became a student in
December of 1962, and he and I became close friends. That
friendship continued until the day of his death. It was one of
trust, mutual respect, and shared effort in a common cause.
     Elwyn's wife Dorothy was truly a partner in all of his
activities--farming, community responsibilities, raising their
children, and the work of the organized blind movement. Dorothy
was as strong a Federationist as Elwyn was, and I know she will
continue that way now that he is gone. If you wanted to find
words to describe Elwyn and Dorothy, you might use genuineness,
determination, honesty, and integrity. You never had to wonder
where Elwyn stood on a question, and nobody ever browbeat or
bullied him into doing anything he thought wasn't right.
     He left the Commission Orientation Center in the spring of
1963 to do his farming for the year, and he came back the next
December to finish his training. He farmed until his retirement
in 1993. Starting in the 1960's, he ran a successful insurance
business.
     Also starting in the 1960's, he became intensely active in
the National Federation of the Blind. He was more than just
active. He was dedicated, and his commitment never diminished.
     He was appointed to the Board of the Iowa Commission for the
Blind in the fall of 1968 and became Chairman in 1972. He
continued in that position throughout the rest of my time in
Iowa. Through good times and bad, he was a rock of stability--
always reliable, never hesitating to speak his mind, and
absolutely fearless when somebody tried to pressure us.
     That was Elwyn. As to Phil (born 1938), he was also a close
friend. As with Elwyn, I met him in the 60's, established an
immediate friendship, and continued it the rest of his life.
     Phil never did anything by halves. He was for you or against
you, no in-between. And he was the same way with the activities
he undertook. If he believed something, he believed it. If he
didn't, he didn't.
     Phil's wife Joyce was always willing and supportive. She
stood by Phil in good times and bad. She worked with him in the
Federation, and she contributed time and effort in her own right.
     I remember a time in the 60's when I went waterskiing with a
group of students from the Iowa Commission for the Blind. Phil
was among the number. He had never waterskied, and it was clear
that he wondered if he could. When he came out of the water after
successfully making the attempt, his first words were: "By God,
if I can do that, I can support a family and make a living." He
could, and he did.
     Phil Parks and Elwyn Hemken, names that remind me of a
bygone wonderful era in the State of Iowa--an era which presaged
and foreshadowed dynamic developments in the organized blind
movement throughout the nation. Many blind people who may never
have heard of Elwyn Hemken or Phil Parks owe much to both of
them. When going was tough and resources scarce, each of them in
his own way stood forth to be counted. They worked and cared and
believed. They did what they could and gave what they had. Nobody
can do more.
     Elwyn and Phil, sleep well. The work you helped pioneer goes
forward with growing momentum. Your names will not be forgotten.


     [PHOTO/CAPTION: Noel Nightingale]

                     LEADERSHIP EMPOWERMENT:
                    REFLECTIONS ON THE FAMILY
                       by Noel Nightingale

     From the Editor: The following article first appeared in the
Summer, 1995, edition of the Blind Washingtonian, a publication
of the NFB of Washington. Noel Nightingale graduated a year and a
half ago from the University of Washington School of Law. Upon
successfully passing the State of Washington's Bar exam, she took
time before beginning her current job to go to the Louisiana
Center for the Blind to learn the blindness skills she knew she
would need to do her job effectively. She originally delivered
the following remarks in January of 1995 at the National
Association of Blind Students Midwinter Conference, which takes
place each year immediately preceding the Washington Seminar.
This is what she said:

     I have a personal story of empowerment in my own life as a
blind person. My father is blind and has been since he was
twenty-six years old, when he lost his eyesight in a work
accident (long before I was born). After he was blinded, my dad
lay on a couch in his parents' home for about a year. Then he got
off the couch, learned the alternative techniques of blindness,
and got a guide dog. He went back to the college he had graduated
from years earlier and took classes using Braille notetaking and
his other newfound blindness skills.
     When he determined that he could indeed successfully compete
in an academic environment as a blind person, he applied to the
University of Chicago Law School and was admitted. During the
time that he was attending college classes he met my mother, and
they were married.
     Ultimately, after encountering many difficulties in securing
a job as a lawyer, my father became an administrative law judge
for the State of Washington.
     As a child I never knew my dad to miss out on anything he
wanted to do because of blindness. He is an avid (some say rabid)
fisherman and has flown as far as New Zealand to catch the big
one.
     He travelled all over the state to conduct hearings as the
state's only judge hearing administrative cases involving state
liquor license violations. He read voraciously. He socialized as
much as my friends' parents. All my life people have told me how
amazing my dad is because of all he does as a blind person.
     So when I was twenty and found out that I have retinitis
pigmentosa, a degenerative eye disorder, I knew from Dad's
example that blindness could not prevent me from living out my
dreams and enjoying life. And although having merely known my
father has been the most powerful influence in molding my
attitude about blindness, ever since learning that I have RP, my
dad has continually encouraged me to obtain the alternative
techniques of blindness. He has harped at me particularly to
learn Braille. In fact, I have never met such an enthusiastic
promoter of Braille.
     Although he does not know it and probably did not intend it,
I am immensely thankful for having had my dad to look to for all
the possibilities still available to me in life as a blind
person. I certainly procrastinated in obtaining the skills of
blindness until it became glaringly clear that I was not
operating at maximum efficiency. But because of my dad's model I
do think I had a head start in developing positive attitudes
about blindness.
     While I have known for a while that my father's travel
skills are not ideal, to say the least, I have never known him
not to get wherever he wanted to go. (A few years ago I was
horrified to learn that he had flown to Alaska to go fishing, by
himself, without a cane or a guide dog, relying solely on the
arms of strangers.) However, I have always assumed that my dad's
Braille skills were excellent. When I recently completed learning
Grade II Braille, I wrote my dad a letter and was quite
emotionally overcome when I got a letter in return. I had never
in my life communicated with my dad in writing. Yet when I opened
the letter, I could not read it. It was a jumble of signs and who
knows what, but it was not the Braille I knew. I think that he
has invented his own shorthand over the years, and since he was
communicating only with himself, it didn't matter that it did not
conform to the code.
     My mother, on the other hand, while having a relatively good
attitude about the abilities of blind people, has focused on
utilizing my remaining vision. She is always on the lookout for
the newest enlarging technology. She wants to buy me those closed
circuit television goggles that recently came on the market. (I
have a hard time imagining myself walking around a professional
office with those things on.) I'm afraid that, if I had had only
my mother to guide me, I would still not know Braille or use a
cane, and as a result I would have a very poor self-image.
     The point is that, although my father's blindness skills
could be characterized as poor, he has empowered me to become as
skilled in the alternative techniques of blindness as I can
possibly be and has given me a powerful example of a blind person
who does not let blindness prevent him from working and enjoying
life. Many of us in this room may believe that we do not have all
of the blindness skills we would like--that we are not super-
blind. Nevertheless, we can empower other blind people to become
as independent and skilled as possible, and we can win our
families' confidence. We can have a positive attitude about the
role blindness plays in our lives and lead as independent a life
as possible, even if we are not perfectly skilled in all of the
techniques of blindness. That is the important work we in the
National Association of Blind Students can do every day of our
lives.
     To be leaders--that is, to empower our fellow blind people
to take control of their lives and strive for true independence--
we need not see ourselves as perfectly skilled in the alternative
techniques of blindness. We must, however, tackle life with an
enthusiasm and energy that reflect our inner confidence and peace
of mind about blindness. What really counts is what is in our
hearts and minds, not what is happening with our fingers and
feet.


     [PHOTO/CAPTION: Laura Wolk (eight) is pictured with her father Michael
Wolk (left) and Governor of Pennsylvania Tom Ridge (right)]

                      THE LITTLEST LOBBYIST
                          by Judy Jobes

     From the Editor: One way and another Federationists spend a
good bit of time working to educate elected officials about the
actual problems facing blind citizens and the legislative and
regulatory responses that would truly solve them. We avoid the
word "lobbying" to describe this activity because we are citizens
speaking about the issues that affect our own lives and because
we have no funds at our disposal to use in persuading officials
to vote our way as do the representatives of big labor and big
business. So it was with some disquiet that I first read the
title of the following story.
     In point of fact, the members of the National Federation of
the Blind of Pennsylvania who went to speak with Governor Ridge
about the importance of enacting Braille literacy legislation
were not advocating a measure that would assist them. Some
members of the group were already good Braille readers; some had
been denied Braille as children and as a result would never
become rapid Braille readers or benefit from improved Braille
instruction in the schools; but they all knew something that the
Governor did not: blind children must be taught Braille early by
teachers who know the code well and believe in its effectiveness
if they are to have a chance to become competent, literate
adults. The group of Federationists had also brought their secret
weapon--Laura Wolk.
     I toyed with the idea of changing the title of Judy Jobes's
story of the group's meeting with the Governor, but somehow "The
Eight-Year-Old Educator" did not achieve the ring of Judy's
title. So meet the littlest lobbyist from Allentown,
Pennsylvania, and her Federation friends:

     The heavy wooden doors opened, and the Governor's secretary
ushered us into his office. The Governor received us warmly.
Governor Ridge had served as my Congressman and had worked with
us on many issues. I introduced him to my colleagues in turn,
leaving eight-year-old Laura until last. Governor Ridge directed
us to a table at the far end of the room. He told Laura he had
been waiting to meet her and asked her to sit next to him at the
head of the table.
     I made my presentation. Only 9 percent of blind children are
taught to read Braille today, and the illiteracy rate among all
blind children is 40 percent. To date twenty-seven states have
enacted Braille bills, a figure which illustrates the need to
legislate a solution rather than to evoke ineffective regulations
and standards.
     Then it was Laura's turn. On cue she read the letter she had
written to the Governor. Her small fingers easily and quickly
identified the Braille dot formations, enabling her to read
proficiently beyond her years. Her letter read like this:

          My name is Laura Wolk. I am eight years old and going into
     the third grade. I have been reading Braille since I was three
     years old. My teacher's name is Mrs. Betz.
          Last spring I made my First Communion. I Brailled Scripture
     and read it from the altar.
          The most difficult thing about Braille is getting enough
     books. I quickly read a book and have to wait a very long time to
     get another one. I need more books.

     The Governor watched Laura intently. He was in awe as Laura
read. He came to understand firsthand the value of Braille. Laura
concluded her letter by saying: "Governor, my wish is that all
children who do not see well could learn to read like me."
     We continued with our presentations. The Governor leaned
over and said something to Laura. She whispered, "Yes." Excusing
himself from us for a moment, the Governor walked to his desk. He
opened a drawer, took something from it, returned to the table,
and asked if anyone would like to join him and Laura in sharing
some jelly beans. We all smiled, and the bag went around the
table as each of us helped ourselves to a few jelly beans.
     The meeting proceeded as Ted Young, President of the
National Federation of the Blind of Pennsylvania, and the
Governor continued to discuss issues relevant to blind
Pennsylvanians. As the meeting concluded, the Governor again
engaged Laura in conversation, asking her about piano lessons and
proclaiming that he might just take in one of her recitals.
     The Governor concluded our meeting by explaining to Laura
that a lobbyist is someone who comes to see people like him, who
are elected, and discuss issues which are important to them. He
said that he had never had a lobbyist come to see him who had
been as young or as effective. We posed for pictures, and our
meeting ended.
     Regrouping in the hall, we shared our impressions of the
Governor's reactions to our issues. Laura opened her small hand,
proudly displaying two, by now rather sticky, jelly beans and
announced that she was keeping those jelly beans; after all the
Governor had given them to her. Accepting gifts from public
officials is not usually the way things are done in lobbying
circles. For the sake of Pennsylvania's blind students, however,
let's hope it was effective.


     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 the National Federation
of the Blind, 1800 Johnson Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21230, a
District of Columbia nonprofit corporation, the sum of
$__________(or "______ percent of my net estate" or "The
following stocks and bonds: ________") to be used for its worthy
purposes on behalf of blind persons."


     [PHOTO/CAPTION: Barbara Pierce]

                    WE DON'T HAVE NORTH HERE
                        by Barbara Pierce

     From the Editor: The following story appeared in Toothpaste
and Railroad Tracks, the most recent in the Federation's Kernel
Book Series of paperbacks. Here it is, beginning with Dr.
Jernigan's introduction:

     People tend to be curious about blindness. Perhaps the
single item which arouses the most curiosity is how a person can,
without seeing where he or she is going, move about without
assistance both inside and out. Despite appearances there's no
magic involved. Barbara Pierce addresses the subject in the story
that follows. Here is what she has to say:

     Blindness is both frightening and puzzling to most people.
It's frightening because most people depend completely on their
eyes to tell them about the world, so the idea of moving and
working and playing without that information is more than
unnerving. It's puzzling because people have no notion how
anybody could gather enough information using a cane to travel
safely.
     Some years ago the five-year-old daughter of an acquaintance
began talking to her mother about the magic lady who passed their
house every day. My friend could not imagine what the child meant
until the day she called her mother to the window to see me
walking past on my way to the hospital where I served as
chaplain. I was moving my long white cane in an arc in front of
me, and the little girl triumphantly explained that I had to be
magic since I was there, and the leash was there, but the dog I
was walking was invisible.
     Even without believing in invisible dogs, many people tend
to behave as though some sort of magic were associated with the
use of the white cane. It doesn't seem possible to them that a
person could travel safely and confidently by moving a cane,
listening to traffic noise and the echoes made by the cane tip,
noting wind and sun direction, and feeling the contours of the
ground.
     In reality blind people depend on finding objects with a
light tap of the cane and then avoiding them. The long white cane
is very good at identifying cars parked across sidewalks, holes
in the street, and parking meters.
     It is hard for sighted people to believe that blind people
really do know where they are and where they are bound. I have a
blind friend who entered the elevator in her office building one
morning to find that the only other passenger was a gentleman. As
she stepped in, he inquired, "Do you know what floor you want?"
She smiled and pushed the correct button, but she wondered what
he thought she was planning to do in the elevator if she didn't
know where she was going.
     As a blind traveler I always appreciate receiving accurate
information in an unfamiliar area. In my work I travel a good
deal, so I frequently find myself in unfamiliar airports. I was
once walking toward the ground transportation area of an airport
new to me when I became aware that a man was following me down
the almost deserted concourse.
     My cane touched a sign post, and I detoured around it and
continued toward the exit. The man said, "I don't understand how
you walk so straight." I commented that I had obviously not been
walking quite straight or I would not have touched the sign. He
replied, "I have been watching you for a hundred yards, and I
know what you've done." I explained that the public address
speakers in the ceiling, the periodic metal strips running across
the concourse, and the conversation of other people all helped me
walk along the proper path.
     As we came to the terminal, I asked him for directions to
the escalator. Without a pause he said, "Thirty feet ahead at two
o'clock." I thanked him and commented that he must be a pilot. He
was surprised that I had guessed his occupation, but pilots, too,
have to know where they are and how to talk about it.
     Many people find it hard to give good directions to a blind
person, and sometimes the stress of giving directions is just too
much. I will never forget a conversation I had with a member of
the staff of a hotel in which I was staying for a week.
     On the first morning of my visit I was standing in the lobby
with my secretary, asking her questions about the floor plan of
the area. We were having a hard time communicating without using
the points of the compass for reference. So I stopped an employee
to ask which way north was. The woman paused a moment and then
announced, "We don't have north here."
     I assured her that even though the river flowing through the
city meant that the streets did not run exactly north-south and
east-west, compasses still indicated north in that part of the
world, but she still couldn't tell me which way it was. In the
end I had to put my question to someone else.
     In short, there is nothing magical about using a long white
cane. It takes practice, common sense, and good information. You
can help.


     [PHOTO/CAPTION: Barbara Hall]

                       MY FIRST CONVENTION
                       by Barbara Ann Hall

     From the Editor: Barbara Ann Hall is a member of the Phoenix
Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind of Arizona. She
attended her first National Convention in Chicago last summer,
and it had a profound effect on her. When she got home, she tried
to get the experience down on paper in the hope that it might
persuade someone else to seek the same opportunity this year in
Anaheim. This is what she says:

     Before I attended the 1995 convention, my NFB friends who
had attended previous conventions advised me on what to expect.
They told me it would be fun, interesting, and educational. More
important, they assured me that I would meet many interesting
people and make new friends. They were right on both counts. They
also advised me on packing: nice clothes for the daytime
sessions, sweaters to protect against enthusiastic air
conditioning, and something dressy for the banquet. (Boy did I
over-pack!) They also made suggestions about which meetings I was
most likely to enjoy and told me stories about their own past
convention experiences. My chapter President, Mrs. Judith Tunell,
promised me it would be an experience I would never forget
without really elaborating on what she meant. Our state President
Ruth Swenson explained that throughout the convention special-
interest groups would meet. Several of these (like medical
transcriptionists) were particularly interesting to me. She
advised me to attend as many of these sessions as I could fit in.
I assumed this would be easy to do since the convention would
last seven days and the groups were to meet throughout the entire
period. Boy was I surprised! Somehow I could not manage to attend
all the sessions I would have liked.
     My Federation friends summarized their advice by saying that
attending the convention would give me a complete look inside the
NFB and its goals and purposes. They all said, "You just have to
be there." Well they were right. No one can prepare you for the
feelings and emotions of a convention. They have to be
experienced firsthand.
     People in my affiliate gave me assistance in making my room
and airline reservations properly, and they also gave me some
financial assistance, for which I was very grateful.
     Chicago might as well be my hometown. I was born and raised
just a few miles away, so I knew the town well. For me, the
expectation of going home added a little more excitement to my
anticipation since I had not been home in over eight years.
O'Hare Airport seemed like an old friend. It still pretty well
matched my memories of it from years ago. After arriving at the
hotel, checking in, and settling in my room, I was ready to
explore the beautiful Hilton Hotel. From the very beginning the
staff were wonderful. They were helpful, polite, and kind in
answering every question I asked them.
     When our chapter president arrived, she made sure that I
knew what the itinerary was and advised me again on what to
attend. She especially encouraged me to attend the Job-
Opportunities-for-the-Blind-sponsored breakfast meetings with
those who had common interests. At my first breakfast meeting the
next morning--it was for first-timers--I was privileged to have
Mrs. tenBroek at my table. I had a marvelous conversation with
her on the beginnings of the NFB. What a delightful lady! I told
Mrs. tenBroek that I was trying to keep up with my exercise
program while I was at the convention by walking up the stairs
from the fourth to the twenty-third floor of the hotel. The next
morning, when I saw her again, she told me that I had some
competition because she had taken to walking up the grand
staircase of the hotel (twice) so that she could keep in shape
too. We sought each other out and had breakfast several times
during the convention.
     I was lucky enough to meet both Mr. Maurer and Dr. Jernigan
the first day of the convention, and my introduction to them so
early in the week made a real impact on me. Somehow everything
during the rest of the convention held more meaning as a result.
These are two very positive, inspirational men, and their
interest in me personally made me feel important to them. Their
speeches during the first general session set the tone for the
rest of the convention. The only word I can use for these initial
speeches and all those that followed is inspirational. I have
tried to find the words to express my feelings during that first
session, but I cannot. It moved me deeply to hear of all that
this organization has done in the past year and continues to do
for the blind of this country.
     In an effort to thank the NFB for the assistance I had been
given to attend the convention, I participated in an Arizona
fund-raiser during convention sessions. Dr. Verna Brasher, a
member of the Phoenix Chapter and a skilled chiropractor, offered
to provide relaxation massages at the PAC table during convention
sessions to raise money for both the national organization and
the Arizona affiliate. I scheduled the appointments, timed the
massages, and did the accounting. The benefit to me was that as a
result I met many exciting and interesting people. This
experience is one of my most cherished memories of the
convention.
     There are many wonderful people to meet and stories to hear
at an NFB convention. Throughout the convention everyone was
upbeat. I never heard a cross word from anyone. No one was a
stranger. We just walked up to people and introduced ourselves,
and a conversation (perhaps even a friendship) developed. Meeting
all these people with whom we have something in common filled our
days. We shared our experiences, problems, and solutions. This
turned out to be a most delightful part of the convention for me.
We are truly one!
     As I have already said, there were too many activities to
fit into a day, and I missed many things I would have liked to
learn more about. The exhibits contained a lot of information I
needed and much information I could take home to share with
others. I purchased some equipment, and my state president
decided to replace my rehab-issued cane with an NFB cane of the
proper length. After this she decided that I also needed some
proper travel instruction, so she arranged for me to meet with a
Federationist, Doug Boone of D. Boone Consultants in Nebraska.
Doug is experienced in educating and rehabilitating blind people.
I learned more from him in one hour than I had learned from the
rehab instructor during my entire training. Experiences like this
one made me realize how little I knew and how much I needed to
learn about blindness.
     The banquet dinner and speech were the highlight of this
exciting week for me. Mr. Maurer's speech was amusing and
poignant. He has a way of making us see what all our work is
about. It turned out to be a wonderful time for me as a first-
time conventioneer.
     During the final meetings and convention sessions I focused
my thinking on what my part in helping bring the NFB's goals to
fruition should be. I had already participated in fund-raising
activities at home, but my goal has always been to focus on
finding new members in our state. I know many blind people who
are not NFB members. I concluded that they needed to be. This
convention focused my thoughts about helping our chapter in
spreading the word about the NFB. Some people actually do not
know what the Federation is all about. I want to encourage them
to join so they can benefit as much as I have. I recognize that
in the months ahead there will be many things I can do
individually to help reach our common goals. I was sorry to see
the convention come to an end because it had been so exciting,
informative, and fun.
     When I got home, I needed a few days to recuperate from the
constant activity of the convention. During that rest I thought
about all of the things I had learned and all of the information
I had gathered. I had a few ideas before I went to the convention
about things I could do to help the organization, and now I have
a focused goal. I want to pass information on to others who are
interested in the needs of the blind and to encourage them to
join the NFB. Our chapter is initiating a membership drive, and
this is one area on which I will focus my activities.
     The convention made me see what needs to be done and gave me
many ideas about how I might contribute to the effort. One thing
I found that I needed to do was to write this article and share
with others the feelings that the convention brought to me. To
anyone who has not yet attended an NFB National Convention, I
would say this: "If you do nothing else for yourself in the next
year, make a commitment to attend the convention in California in
1996. It will be the most important investment you can make for
yourself." The combination of inspirational speeches,
information-gathering, new friendships, and common experiences
made the convention in Chicago just such a week for me. I hope to
meet many more Federationists next year!


     [PHOTO/CAPTION: The Anaheim Hilton & Towers]

                       CALIFORNIA CALLING
                         by Deana Bates

     From the Editor: Deana Bates is a leader in the Orange
County Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind of
California. As a resident of Southern California she is qualified
to provide Monitor readers with information about the area
surrounding the site of the 1996 convention of the National
Federation of the Blind. Here is what she has to say:

     The members of the National Federation of the Blind of
California are honored and pleased to host the 1996 convention of
the National Federation of the Blind, to be held in Anaheim,
California, from June 29 through July 6. As you already know, our
convention will be held at the Anaheim Hilton. Anaheim is twenty
miles south of Los Angeles and is located in Orange County. Since
California is the perfect place for both work and play,we know
that you will find this year's convention one of the best we have
ever had. California appeals to people with diverse interests
because it has a wide variety of things to do and places to see.
In this little article we would like to tell you about some of
the state's history and give you some general information about
Southern California.
     California lies in the Pacific Coast Region of the United
States and is bordered by Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, and Mexico.
The surface of California is more varied than that of any other
state. It ranges from forests to farms, mountains to valleys, and
desert to seacoast.
     California, also known as the Golden State, is the third
largest state in the Union. The name California was used
officially in Spanish documents as early as 1542. Historians
speculate that it came from the description of a fabled island
called California in a sixteenth-century Spanish novel called The
Exploits of Esplandian by Garcia Ordonez de Montalvo.
California's nickname, the Golden State, comes from its golden
poppies, the state flower, as well as from the gold which was
discovered in 1848.
     California became a state in 1850 and since that time has
had the largest population growth of any area in the United
States. The 1990 census shows that California ranked number one
with a population of over twenty-nine million people.
     Southern California is often referred to as the Southland by
its residents and is made up of Los Angeles, Orange, San
Bernardino, San Diego, Riverside, and Ventura Counties. San
Bernardino County is the largest county in the United States,
according to Compton's World Encyclopedia.
     Anaheim, known as the Mother Colony of Southern California,
was founded in 1857 by German Settlers from San Francisco. The
city was named after the nearby Santa Ana River. The German word
"heim," which means home, was added as a suffix. The major crop
produced at the time was grapes. However, in the 1880's the grape
vines were destroyed by a blight, and when growers' attempts to
restore the vineyards failed, Valencia oranges and other crops
were introduced.
     Orange County is one of the most popular tourist
destinations in Southern California. We have three amusement
parks: Disneyland, Knotts Berry Farm, and Wild Rivers. We also
have various museums such as the Movieland Wax Museum, Hobby City
Doll Museum, Ripley's Believe It or Not Museum, and the Richard
Nixon Library/Museum.
     Step back into the English Renaissance with dinner at
Medieval Times. Here you will sip soup from a metallic bowl and
dine on fowl as you watch expert horsemen joust with their
opponents.
     Approximately fifteen miles from Anaheim are the Pacific
Ocean and Newport Beach, where one can cruise the harbor or surf
the ocean. Laguna Beach, still further south from Newport Beach,
has numerous art galleries. At the Laguna Beach Sawdust Festival,
in operation for most of the summer, you can browse the art
boutiques. Anaheim Stadium is the home of the California Angels
baseball team. If you want to bet on the horses, you can go to
the Alamitos Race Track, which is located in Los Alamitos, a city
in Orange County, approximately ten miles west of Anaheim. Los
Angeles and San Diego also offer wonderful places to visit. In
Los Angeles tour the Universal Studios, where you can see famous
movie sets and get a panoramic view of the Hollywood Hills and
the San Fernando Valley. You can also enjoy the Chinese theater
and the Farmers Market. San Diego offers both Sea World and the
San Diego Zoo, one of the largest zoos in the world. You can take
a Harbor cruise at the marina in San Diego, the gateway to
Mexico. Visit Tijuana, Mexico, where you can bargain with local
shop owners for their wares.
     We are planning to make this the best Federation convention
ever, so we hope you will plan to come to sunny Southern
California.
     Here are the rates for the 1996 convention: singles, $45 per
night; doubles, $47; triples, $54; and quads, $57. In addition to
the room rates, there is a tax--just under 15 percent at the time
these rates were negotiated. There will be no charge for children
in a room with parents as long as no extra bed is required. To
make room reservations for the 1996 convention, you should write
directly to Anaheim Hilton, 777 Convention Way, Anaheim,
California 92802-3497, Attention: Reservations; or call (714)
750-4321. Hilton has a national toll-free number, but do not (we
emphasize NOT) use it. Reservations made through this national
number will not be valid. They must be made directly with the
Anaheim Hilton in Anaheim.


     [PHOTO/CAPTION: James Gashel]

             SOCIAL SECURITY AND SSI FACTS FOR 1996
                         by James Gashel

     From the Editor: Jim Gashel serves as Director of
Governmental Affairs for the National Federation of the Blind.
Here is his 1996 report on Social Security and Supplemental
Security Income:

     The beginning of each year brings with it annual adjustments
in Social Security programs. The changes include new tax rates,
higher exempt earnings amounts, and cost-of-living increases.
Each year we make an effort to report on these changes in the
January issue of the Braille Monitor. This year is no exception.
However, the budget controversy at the federal level has made it
impossible this year to include information on the annual
adjustments in the Medicare program. For that reason the Medicare
changes will be reported later. Meanwhile, here are the new facts
which we can report for 1996:
     FICA and Self-Employment Tax Rates: The FICA tax rate for
employees and their employers remains at 7.65 percent. This rate
includes payments to the Old Age, Survivors, and Disability
Insurance (OASDI) Trust Fund of 6.2 percent and an additional
1.45 percent payment to the Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund,
from which payments under Medicare are made. Self-employed
persons continue to pay a Social Security tax of 15.3 percent.
The self-employment tax rate of 15.3 percent includes 12.4
percent which is paid to the OASDI trust fund and 2.9 percent
which is paid to the HI trust fund.
     Ceiling on Earnings Subject to Tax: During 1995 the ceiling
on taxable earnings for contributions to the OASDI trust fund was
$61,200. The taxable income ceiling for contributions to the
OASDI trust fund during 1996 is $62,700. As was true in 1995,
there is no ceiling on earnings that are subject to the HI trust
fund tax contribution of 1.45 percent for employees or 2.9
percent for self-employed persons.      
     Quarters of Coverage: Eligibility for retirement, survivors,
and disability insurance benefits is based in large part on the
number of quarters of coverage earned by any individual during
periods of work. Anyone may earn up to four quarters of coverage
during a single year. During 1995 a Social Security quarter of
coverage was credited for earnings of $630 in any calendar
quarter. Anyone who earned $2,520 for the year (regardless of
when the earnings occurred during the year) was given four
quarters of coverage. In 1996 a Social Security quarter of
coverage will be credited for earnings of $640 during a calendar
quarter. Four quarters can be earned with annual earnings of
$2,560.
     Exempt Earnings: The earnings exemption for blind people
receiving Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) benefits is
the same as the exempt amount for individuals age 65 through 69
who receive Social Security retirement benefits. The monthly
exempt amount in 1995 was $940 of gross earned income. During
1996 the exempt amount is $960. Technically, this exemption is
referred to as an amount of monthly gross earnings which does not
show "substantial gainful activity." Earnings of $960 or more per
month before taxes for a blind SSDI beneficiary in 1996 will show
substantial gainful activity after subtracting any unearned (or
subsidy) income and applying any deductions for
impairment-related work expenses.
     Social Security Benefit Amounts for 1996: All Social
Security benefits (including retirement, survivors, disability,
and dependents' benefits) are increased by 2.6 percent beginning
with the checks received in January, 1996. The exact dollar
increase for any individual will depend upon the amount being
paid.     
     Standard SSI Benefit Increase: Beginning January, 1996, the
federal payment amounts for SSI individuals and couples are as
follows: individuals, $470 per month; couples, $705 per month.
These amounts are increased from: individuals, $458 per month;
couples, $687 per month.


     [PHOTO/CAPTION: Cynthia (Cindy) Handel]

                             RECIPES

     This month's recipes come from Cynthia Handel of the
National Federation of the Blind of Pennsylvania. For the past
eleven years she has been the Treasurer of the NFB of
Pennsylvania. In addition to cooking, she says she enjoys reading
both fiction and non-fiction and writing. She is currently
learning to use her personal computer.
     In addition to its Amish community, Lancaster County,
Pennsylvania, is known for good Pennsylvania Dutch cooking. The
recipe included here for Cracker Pudding is served in many of the
family-style restaurants frequented by tourists and visited on
occasion by residents of Lancaster County. Cindy says that she
has collected the other recipes from her mother and friends over
the years.


                            MEATBALLS

     These are good to make ahead of time and freeze to use as
needed.

Ingredients:
3 pounds ground beef
1 can evaporated milk
1 cup oatmeal
1 cup cracker crumbs
2 eggs
 1/4 cup chopped onion
1/2 teaspoon garlic powder
2 teaspoons salt
1/2 teaspoon pepper
2 teaspoons chili powder
favorite spaghetti sauce

     Method: Mix all ingredients together except for spaghetti
sauce. Cover bottom of large baking dish with sauce. Make small
meatballs and arrange on bottom of baking dish. Spoon about a
teaspoon spaghetti sauce over each meatball. Bake in 350-degree
oven for 55 minutes.


                           TAMALE PIE

Ingredients:
1 1/4 pounds ground beef
1 onion, chopped
garlic, chopped to taste
salt and pepper to taste
1 tablespoon hot chili powder
1 6-ounce can tomato sauce
1 can refried beans
grated Monterey Jack Jalapeno cheese

     Method: Combine all but last two ingredients and simmer
until almost dry. Pour into a 10-inch pie plate. Add one can
refried beans, diluted with a little water. Top with grated
Monterey Jack Jalapeno cheese. Bake in 350-degree oven for 25
minutes. Serve hot with tortilla chips.


                     CHINESE ALMOND CHICKEN

Ingredients:
4 boneless chicken breasts, skinned and cut into bite-size pieces
4 tablespoons oil
3 tablespoons flour
1-1/2 teaspoons sugar
6 tablespoons soy sauce
2 cups sliced mushrooms
1 green pepper, chopped
1 onion, chopped
1 cup sliced almonds

     Method: Stir-fry chicken in wok or large frying pan in two
tablespoons hot oil. Mix flour, sugar, and soy sauce. Add to
chicken and cook five minutes, stirring constantly. Add
vegetables. Cover and cook twenty minutes or until chicken is
tender. Brown almonds in two tablespoons oil. Drain on paper
towel, then add to chicken mixture. Serve over rice.


                         PINEAPPLE CAKE

Ingredients:
2 cups flour
2 cups sugar
1 teaspoon baking soda
2 eggs
1 large can crushed pineapple with juice

     Method: Combine all ingredients in large mixing bowl. Pour
into ungreased 9-by-13-inch pan. Bake in 350-degree oven for
thirty-five to forty minutes.

Icing:
1 8-ounce package cream cheese, softened
1 stick butter, softened
1 1/3 cup powdered sugar

     Method: Combine all ingredients and beat well. Spread icing
over cake while still warm.


                          PUMPKIN ROLL

Ingredients:
1 cup sugar
 3/4 cup pumpkin
3 eggs
1 teaspoon salt
1/2 teaspoon cinnamon
 3/4 to 1 cup flour
1 teaspoon baking soda
1/2 cup chopped nuts

     Method: Grease a 10-by-15-inch jelly roll pan. Cover with
waxed paper and grease the waxed paper. Preheat oven to 350
degrees. Mix all ingredients together, except nuts. Spread on
waxed paper. Sprinkle batter with nuts. Bake fifteen minutes.
Invert cake on clean towel.

Filling:
1 8-ounce package cream cheese, softened
1 tablespoon vanilla
2 tablespoons butter, softened
1 cup powdered sugar

     Method: Beat ingredients together. Spread evenly on cake and
carefully roll up, cover with plastic wrap, and refrigerate.
Note: use powdered sugar on your hands to help roll.


                         CRACKER PUDDING

     This is a sweet desert served in many Lancaster County
family-style restaurants.

Ingredients:
5 cups milk
1 cup sugar
1 cup cracker crumbs, graham or saltine (or  Ritz and  graham)
1 cup coconut
2 eggs, separated
1 teaspoon vanilla

     Method: Combine milk, sugar, crumbs, and coconut together.
Add egg yolks and blend. Stir over medium heat until mixture
coats the back of the spoon and is slightly thickened. Remove
from heat and fold in stiffly beaten egg whites and vanilla.
Refrigerate.


                 ** ** MONITOR MINIATURES ** **

** Turning Upside-down for the Federation:
     Federationists have many talents, and many find remarkable
ways of putting them to work for the organization. Several months
ago Ed McDonald, President of the National Federation of the
Blind of West Virginia and a member of the Board of Directors of
the NFB, mentioned to friends that he could still stand on his
head. They expressed a certain amount of incredulity at this
statement, so Ed demonstrated his prowess. First one then another
of those present offered to contribute $100 to the affiliate if
Ed would repeat his feat at the 1995 West Virginia banquet. Ed
agreed that, if they could raise at least $1,000 for the
treasury, he would stand on his head for at least ten seconds
during the banquet. Suffice it to say, the West Virginia
affiliate is $1,000 richer than it was before its convention.

** For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     For sale, Optelec, 20/20 low vision reading system. New in
1993, used only five months, like-new condition, and complete
with original carton and manual. Original cost over $3,000,
asking $2,000. Call Dave in Sparks, Maryland, (410) 472-4366.

** Elected:
     Mary Belle Rea, Secretary of the National Federation of the
Blind of Arkansas, reports that new officers were elected at the
affiliate's recent annual convention. They are Buffa Hans,
President; Everett Saterfield, First Vice President; Nancy
Matthews, Second Vice President; Mary Belle Rea, Secretary; and
Jimmy Sparks, Treasurer. Les McDaniel and Sherry Martin were
elected to serve on the Board.

** For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Stephanie Pieck is selling a Porta-Thiel Braille embosser in
excellent condition. It comes with Braille and print manuals,
power cord, and interface cable. Asking $1,800, will provide
technical assistance to the purchaser and will pay the cost of
shipping. For more information, call (518) 861-7064 after 8:00
p.m. Eastern Time.

     [PHOTO/CAPTION: Linda Oliva (back left) and Kathy Burnside (back right),
instructors in the Senior Blind Program at BLIND, Inc., are pictured here with
the four members of the first graduating class.]
** Never Too Old to Learn:
     Blindness Learning in New Dimensions (BLIND, Inc.) proudly
announces its first graduating class of seniors under the Older
Blind Program sponsored by State Services for the Blind,
Minnesota's state rehabilitation agency.
     Seniors in the first class began on May 31, 1995. They met
once a week to receive training in Braille; travel with the long
white cane; home management skills; and, most important,
installing batteries correctly in card shufflers. (When batteries
are installed incorrectly, the card shuffler throws the cards all
over the room, and you play fifty-two pick-up.)
     On August 23 the students were ready to graduate. Joyce
Scanlan, Executive Director of BLIND, Inc., presented each one
with a beautiful certificate and a gold framed sun catcher in the
shape of an eagle. (The eagle is the symbol that sits on top of
the freedom bell received by each graduate of the comprehensive
orientation-to-blindness training program at BLIND.) Several of
the older students' counselors from State Services for the Blind
were on hand to congratulate them on the big day. Also present
were Assistant Commissioner Richard Davis and family, and friends
of the students.
     Since the first class began, there have been five other
classes. Nearly every one who starts the Older Blind classes at
BLIND, Inc., completes the course. The demand for this program
has been unbelievable. Contrary to what most rehab counselors
seem to believe, seniors recognize that they have many good years
left, even when they are over eighty-five, and want good
blindness skills to help them enjoy their remaining years with
style.

** For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Type 'n Speak in excellent condition with leather carrying
case, headphones, AC/DC adapter, and instructions. Asking $850 or
best offer. Call Charles at (541) 752-2373 between 10:00 a.m. and
9:00 p.m. Pacific Time.

** Attention Connoisseurs of Infomercials:
     We received the following information from Penny Frasier of
California. It seemed particularly relevant in the light of
Resolution 95-06, passed by last summer's National Convention.
     This announcement is for people who are late night TV
addicts or have an interest in infomercials. Blind or visually
impaired people who want to purchase items or services sold on
infomercials are unable to obtain the address and telephone
number for the desired product or service because they are
displayed on the screen but not announced. This is your chance to
voice your concerns about this dilemma. Here are the names of a
marketing firm and the person that edits a newsletter for
companies who produce infomercials. You should express your
opinions about this problem. The more letters we write, the more
weight we will carry with the company. Write to Chris Ourand,
Editor, National Infomercial Marketing Association, 1201 New York
Avenue, N.W., Suite 1260, Washington, D.C. 20005. Mention that
you read this notice in the Braille Monitor.

** For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Reading Edge, excellent condition, includes latest release
of software; Braille and print editions of the manuals; and a
comprehensive service agreement, which is valid until October,
1996. Contact Robert Feinstein at 1750 East 14th Street,
Apartment 2-E, Brooklyn, New York 11229, or call (718) 627-0713.
Will accept Braille, print, or cassette replies.

** New Chapter:
     Steve Benson, President of the National Federation of the
Blind of Illinois, recently wrote to announce the founding of the
Four Rivers Chapter, which covers a large part of southern
Illinois. The Four Rivers Chapter begins Federation business with
a capable corps of leaders: Cathie Mathis, President; Lisa
Belville, Vice President; Tammy Dothager, Secretary; Shawn Mayo,
Treasurer; and Brian Sumner, Board member. The leaders and
members of the new chapter say that they view the Federation work
ahead of them as a challenge to be met with enthusiasm and
resolve.

** For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Thermoform in good condition. Comes with manual and paper.
Asking $1,500, or best offer. Contact Eric Foss at 4450
California Avenue, Room 222, Bakersfield, California 93309, or
call (805) 322-5476.

** Publication Available:
     Loren Schmitt, a member of the National Federation of the
Blind of Iowa, has asked us to carry the following announcement:
     Now available on tape. Spanish as well as English. The
Militant, a socialist news weekly, published in the interests of
working people. For more information contact Maurice Peret at
2525 Grand Avenue, Apartment 220, Des Moines, Iowa 50312.

** For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Voyager XL CCTV, 19-inch black and white, magnifying device
for those who need to read and write for long periods. Separate
camera and adjustable monitor, includes typewriter attachment,
good condition, $500. Please contact Amir Rahimi at 425 S. Oak,
Apt. 208, Arlington, Texas 76010, or call (817) 460-5005.

** Drink Recipes Available in Braille:
     The National Federation of the Blind of Minnesota has for
sale in Braille only a drink book, Potent Potables. There are
drink and punch recipes for all occasions, including NFB Tea.
Send a $4.00 check to NFB of Minnesota, 100 E. 22nd Street,
Minneapolis, Minnesota 53404.

** For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     I have for sale one Arkenstone Hot Card and one HP scanner,
price $500. Purchaser will receive a free screen reader. Please
contact Stanley Lewis at (510) 778-4881.

** Elected:
     Kerry Smith of the St. Louis Chapter of the National
Federation of the Blind of Missouri reports its new officers.
They are John Dower, President; Daryel White, Vice President;
Susan Ford, Recording Secretary; Thelda Borisch, Treasurer; Anna
Schell, Corresponding Secretary; and Brenda Ford, Board Member at
Large. Gary also reports that Daryel White is recovering nicely
after his recent kidney transplant.

** For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     VersaPoint embosser, excellent working condition, has had
only personal use, Braille and print manuals, and original
shipping carton, asking $1,500 or best offer. Call Sharon Monthei
at (612) 823-5066.

** Liquidation Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Due to my departure from the United States, I am liquidating
my greeting card business and will sell the remainder of cards in
stock at $.30 per card. The cards are made of white thermofoil
with embossed images of flowers, animals, and some Christmas
motifs. Checks or money orders should be made payable to Vera
Honc. Cash is acceptable. Proceeds from this sale will help me to
go home at last. Send orders to Vera Honc, 600 Deerfield, #608,
Gretna, Louisiana 70056, or call (504) 367-8826.

** For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Gourmet salad dressings, labeled in Braille and marketed by
California Federationist Carmela Cantisani, are now available. A
contribution of $3 per case will be donated to the National
Federation of the Blind. You may order Carmela's Gourmet
Vinaigrette Authentique or Balsamic Vinaigrette at $33 per case
of twelve (mix and match possible) plus shipping by calling (800)
301-1151 or faxing your order to (408) 375-5313. Both
vinaigrettes are made with 100 percent extra virgin olive oil,
naturally aged vinegars, and other natural ingredients. They make
great gifts.

** Minnesota History Tape Available:
     Peggy Chong writes to say that the National Federation of
the Blind of Minnesota held its seventy-fifth annual convention
in October. To celebrate, a tape recording of sound bites from
the past was compiled and played at the banquet. That sixty-
minute tape is now ready for purchase. Included are the voices of
Frank Hall, who attended the very first NFB convention; Jacobus
tenBroek; and many more. To get your copy, send a check for $5 to
NFB of Minnesota, 100 East 23rd Street, Minneapolis, Minnesota
55404.
