                       THE BRAILLE MONITOR

                           July, 1997

                     Barbara Pierce, Editor


      Published in inkprint, in Braille, and on cassette by

              THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND

                     MARC MAURER, PRESIDENT


                         National Office
                       1800 Johnson Street
                   Baltimore, Maryland  21230
                   NFB Net BBS: (612) 696-1975
              Web Page address: http://www.nfb.org



           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
                                                       JULY, 1997

The Price of Cowardice: Missouri State Agency Denies
Services to the Blind
     by Barbara Pierce

Arizona--Another Strong Braille Bill
     by Bruce A. Gardner

Meet Kathie Mathis: a Fellow Federationist
     by Deborah Kent Stein

Patent Dispute Threatens Prices of Braille Displays:
Alva Takes Aim at Everybody

Victory for Blind Students in Maryland

Taking a Stand at Rye Playland
     by John Padilla

New Mexico Update

Internet Odyssey
     by Peter and Mary Donahue

Forty Years a Federationist
     by Thomas Bickford

Will Madness Never End?
     by Bruce A. Gardner

The Power of Being Plugged In
     by Gerald Moreno

K.U. Grad Has News for Doubters
     by Heather Kirkwood

An Old Friend Is Honored: Our Fight Against Insurance Discrimination
Remembered
     by James H. Omvig

Recipes

Monitor Miniatures

       Copyright (c) 1997 National Federation of the Blind

[LEAD PHOTO/CAPTION: Kenneth Jernigan is shown here on the campus of
MacMurray College on May 25, 1997.  He has just received the honorary degree of
Doctor of Public Service at the MacMurray commencement.  Also shown in the
picture is Federationist Catherine Horn Randall, who is one of the leaders of the
Jacksonville community and a member of the Board of Trustees of MacMurray.]


                     The Price of Cowardice:
       Missouri State Agency Denies Services to the Blind
                        by Barbara Pierce

     From the Editor: Several years ago Gary Wunder, President of
the National Federation of the Blind of Missouri and a member of
the NFB Board of Directors, was the national representative at
the Ohio affiliate's annual convention. During the weekend he had
occasion to mention the constructive working relationship the NFB
of Missouri had with the state's vocational rehabilitation agency
serving the blind, Rehabilitation Services for the Blind (RSB).
Together the two groups conducted seminars for students, job-
seekers, and the like. RSB contributed funds and expertise, and
the NFB did most of the preparation and organization and supplied
speakers, discussion leaders, and resource materials. Feedback
indicated that participants found these programs useful and
inspiring. At the time my reaction was: what a wonderful example
of consumer group and state agency cooperation to help blind
people. This healthy working relationship gave me hope for what
could be done by professionals and consumers of good will and
commitment to enable blind people to achieve all that they can.
     Then, according to Wunder, the Missouri Council of the
Blind, the state affiliate of the American Council of the Blind,
apparently decided that it didn't like what was happening.
Specifically they objected to the joint seminars and to RSB
counselors' giving NFB brochures, pamphlets, and publications to
consumers of state services. They also objected to the fact that
the Colorado Center for the Blind, the adult rehabilitation
facility in Denver conducted according to Federation philosophy,
was under contract with the state of Missouri to train blind
Missourians interested in effective rehabilitation. It wasn't
that they had materials or services that they wanted substituted
for those offered by the NFB; they merely complained that
consumers were likely to be interested in joining the Federation
after reading NFB literature; and they didn't like it.
     Wunder says that in 1993 and 1994 members of the Council
began writing letters to RSB complaining about counselors'
handing out NFB literature. (Ken Emmons, MCB President, did not
return phone calls requesting comment.) The strategy worked.
According to Wunder, in 1994 the agency announced that counselors
could no longer provide any literature that had not been approved
for circulation by the agency. Then they neglected to establish
any guidelines for approving such literature. The result was that
counselors were no longer able to pass out NFB material to
clients. The agency also said that it would only co-sponsor
seminars planned by both consumer organizations. If one group
subsequently pulled out, agency sponsorship could continue, but
agency participation could no longer take place in activities
conceived by one group only.
     The NFB of Missouri filed a lawsuit in August of 1996
seeking to allow counselors who wanted to circulate NFB
literature to do so. The case is scheduled to be heard in January
of 1998, so agency personnel declined to comment on any matter
associated with the case.
     Meanwhile the Missouri Council of the Blind filed suit in
the summer of 1996 arguing that the Colorado Center for the Blind
did not train people to accommodate to their blindness. But they
failed to cite the specific laws that they alleged were being
broken, and several months later they withdrew their case.
Representatives of the Council have reported to the governor and
members of the legislature that RSB urged them to withdraw the
case, assuring them that, if the investigation then scheduled
demonstrated irregularities or improprieties, the agency would
terminate its contract with the CCB, thereby resolving the
situation without going to court.
     In February of 1997 the agency's advisory council received
and discussed an investigation of the CCB program, which cost
$28,000 to produce. The council voted to continue the contract
with CCB and to make any necessary adjustments within RSB that
the report suggested might be called for.
     The matter might have ended there except that the Missouri
Council had learned its lesson well. Agency bureaucrats did not
have much courage and could be intimidated by self-serving
complainers into watering down services. Returning graduates from
all state-financed rehabilitation programs record their views in
a survey which in 1995 and 1996 demonstrated emphatically that
CCB students found their experience positive, that CCB training
was effective, and that they were ready to resume their place in
their communities. (The 1995 survey showed that CCB training was
the second most highly regarded program among Missouri consumers,
and the 1996 survey showed CCB at the top.) According to Wunder,
counselors thought the program was impressive. The director even
admitted that, as such programs go, this one was fairly
inexpensive. But agency officials were not prepared to withstand
the pressure being brought by the MCB.
     Gary Wunder comments sadly that senior RSB officials have no
real commitment to providing quality services to blind
Missourians. In support of this contention he reports that in the
midst of the 1995 fight to preserve federal rehabilitation
funding by opposing H.R. 1617 in Congress, Sally Howard, RSB
Director, told the RSB Advisory Council that they should do
whatever they could to conduct the fight because this was their
program. She added that she had come to RSB from the Division of
Family Services, and there would be a job for her there, whatever
happened to RSB.
     Wunder says that it was clear to him that RSB was looking
for a way to end the relationship with the Colorado Center.
Agency officials had known for three years that CCB students were
sometimes evaluated for job readiness at the Denver Chapter's
bingo fundraiser. This was done only when the students had no
objection to the location or the activity, and the students never
did much work since the evaluation was completed fairly quickly.
But suddenly Missouri took exception to the notion that its
students were participating in a Denver Chapter fundraiser.
     At the May, 1997, meeting of the RSB Advisory Council the
bingo matter was raised, and the Council voted to suspend the
contract with the CCB. It then voted to urge the staff to try to
renegotiate the contract with the Center.
     This second vote clearly dismayed senior RSB officials, who
grumbled audibly about it at the time, according to NFB members
of the Council. Regardless of what clients and counselors think
of the CCB program, senior RSB officials show no enthusiasm for
renegotiating the contract. They have little to worry about,
however. The Colorado Center for the Blind currently has a
waiting list months long and expresses no interest in jumping
through hoops any longer to satisfy Missouri.
     That is a brief overview of the sad situation currently in
Missouri. The following is a portion of Gary Wunder's
presidential report to the National Federation of the Blind of
Missouri on April 12, 1997. It lays out the situation as Gary saw
it in mid-April. Here it is:

     One of the strategies of opposing counsel in our struggle
with RSB has been to assert that I am the mastermind of all this
discontent and that the rank and file NFB members know nothing
about the issues under discussion. A legal argument like that
could only arise from the minds of theorists who have never
attended one of our conventions.
     To cut through most of the verbiage and speak clearly and
simply to our struggle, let me quote from a letter I am sending
to an assistant in Governor Carnihan's office, Ms. Andrea Ruth:

Dear Ms. Ruth:
     Thank you very much for helping us get a meeting with
Governor Carnihan. He seemed very interested and attentive as we
discussed our concerns, and all of us in the National Federation
of the Blind appreciate his time.
     Near the end of our meeting the Governor asked that we
communicate further with you in an effort to address the concerns
we brought. I hope we can get support for our joint resolution
urging the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to
adopt competency standards for teachers of the blind and that the
Governor will encourage them to comply with both the spirit and
the letter of the law. Some kind of recognition by your office
might be helpful in getting the public to see the crucial role
Braille plays in the education and employment of people who are
blind. The funny thing is that the public already understands the
fact that Braille is to the blind what print is to the sighted.
It is only the teachers and school administrators who work so
hard to find alternatives to teaching this most necessary skill.
     We touched on two other issues in which actions we would
like you to take are less clear. One is the lawsuit we find
ourselves in with Rehabilitation Services for the Blind. The
issues seem, at least to us, to be simple. We have free
literature which blind people find helpful. RSB comes in contact
with people when they could most benefit from what we have to
share. We have asked that the agency use our literature when
their professional staff believe it could benefit a client they
serve. What we are asking is consistent with past practices of
RSB, and the only reason for a policy change forbidding the use
of our literature came about as a result of objections by the
Missouri Council of the Blind.
     Employees of RSB are prohibited from using our literature
for clients because we are classified as a consumer organization.
We have suggested that RSB use literature from any organization,
consumer or otherwise, if Rehabilitation Services for the Blind
believes the literature has a message of value to the blind the
agency serves. The Missouri Council of the Blind has responded by
saying that they will object to RSB's use of any material which
might positively influence an RSB consumer toward the National
Federation of the Blind.
     We believe our message is quite consistent with the goals of
rehabilitation and that what we bring is a much needed supplement
to what the agency can provide. If those who provide services
disagree about the importance or relevance of our message,
nothing we propose would obligate them in any way to provide it
to blind persons they serve. Our only request is that the policy
singling out our literature as inappropriate for use by RSB be
lifted.
     In the same vein you know that Rehabilitation Services for
the Blind sends some of its clients to the Colorado Center for
the Blind, a program started by the NFB. Surveys conducted by RSB
of students that attend such facilities consistently rate the
Colorado Center very highly, and we are told that the cost RSB is
asked to pay is among the lowest charged by centers with which
RSB contracts. These positive factors notwithstanding, members of
the Missouri Council of the Blind object to the State of
Missouri's dealing with the Colorado Center for the Blind because
it is affiliated with the National Federation of the Blind.
     At the last meeting of the Rehabilitation Advisory Council,
a member from the Missouri Council of the Blind moved that RSB no
longer contract with the Colorado facility because, in his
opinion, given its NFB affiliation, it could never meet
Missouri's requirements. The vote on that motion found all
members of the Missouri Council of the Blind voting in favor of
it, members of the National Federation of the Blind voting
against it, and members not affiliated with any group voting to
defeat the motion.
     When the Governor asks whether we ever meet to try resolving
our differences, I am hard-pressed to know how to respond. The
answer to the question do we meet is yes, but those meetings seem
not to move us toward resolution. It isn't that we don't
understand each other, a context in which meetings might help in
sharing perspectives. I think the problem is that we understand
each other perfectly and that we simply don't like what we
understand.
     Our experience indicates that it doesn't matter very much
that we offer a quality service which blind people and RSB staff
like. If we are the sponsors, the Missouri Council of the Blind
is opposed. If the Missouri Council of the Blind is opposed, the
Agency goes to great pains to distance itself from us. Even when
they don't fundamentally alter the program, they at least make
sure they are seen to be tough and demanding in their dealings
with us.
     If our perception is correct and our very sponsorship of
programs or information is enough to cause opposition which in
turn creates reluctance on the part of the state agency, where
then is there room for compromise? To Sally Howard's credit, she
has asked this same question, and again I think the answer has
been that nothing short of our programs' completely divorcing
themselves from the National Federation of the Blind is
acceptable to the Missouri Council of the Blind. This is not at
all acceptable to us.
     The question the State of Missouri must answer is whether we
will turn down quality services which are cost-effective and
unquestionably in demand, simply because someone objects to the
fact that they are provided by what they consider a rival
organization. Not surprisingly I believe that to cave in to these
demands is unworthy of an agency dedicated to the rehabilitation
of the blind. As difficult as it is for public servants and
employees of the state to do, I think you need to go beyond
understanding that there is a controversy and determine for
yourselves the merit of the programs and the merit of the
criticism leveled against them. I propose that you look at the
programs of the NFB and the Colorado Center for the Blind, and,
if you find them poor, you need to act on what you see by
discontinuing contractual relations with us. If, on the other
hand, that review finds the programs we conduct effective and
economical, I believe you have an equal obligation to act based
on your findings and to encourage us in the work we do.
     You might consider saying to all organizations, consumer or
otherwise, that public policy in Missouri will be influenced by
positive offerings and not by sniping and bickering. You should
say that the State of Missouri is glad that both organizations
exist, that it has no preference for one or the other, and that
it is perfectly willing to deal with both as their individual
programs merit. You should say that we in the organizations are
free to argue among ourselves about personalities, philosophies,
and attitudes but that Missouri has little interest in framing
public policy around our competing views. You should say that all
organizations, consumer or otherwise, are welcome to come up with
programs to meet the needs of the blind, and, if those programs
find favor with Rehabilitation Services for the Blind and the
blind people they serve, the resource will be used regardless of
the name of the sponsor.

     That was my letter to the governor's assistant. Turning to
our own suit to lift the ban against the use of our literature by
RSB staff in their work with clients, we participated in a
hearing in October in which we asked that the court issue an
injunction temporarily to suspend RSB'S policy. That injunction
was denied, and it is clear that we have a long road ahead of us.
We were not able to show, to the satisfaction of the judge, that
we have suffered any real damage as a result of the RSB policy.
She asked us to show that we have been damaged monetarily or that
our membership rolls have been diminished.
     Of course, you and I know that our objection is not that we
are financially harmed or that RSB should be a vehicle through
which we gain members. Our argument is that blind people have the
right to the information we freely provide, that the agency has
an obligation to use our material if it believes it may help a
blind client, and that state policy should not be determined
based on objections from those who consider themselves our
rivals. There should be no rivalry when it comes to giving blind
people information about Braille, careers, daily living,
diabetes, discrimination, education, employment opportunities,
Social Security, and technology; but this is in effect what is
happening today.
     When observers say, in their detached and sometimes
disdainful way, that this is just a battle between the two
consumer organizations, I want to ask them what posture they
would have us take. Given that we did not initiate the battle or
try to pressure RSB into changing its relationship with another
organization, it seems to me we are left with only two choices:
One is passively to accept that public policy will be determined
by whoever objects and by whoever makes noise, to accept the
stigma that somehow our literature, by virtue of the fact that we
produce it, is suspect and substandard, and to concede that our
message is inconsistent with the message of rehabilitation and
services to the blind. All of these concepts we can passively
accept while continuing to persuade the Congress, the President,
and our fellow taxpayers that rehabilitation is worthy of
continued and even expanded funding. This is one choice.
     The other choice involves testing our beliefs about the land
in which we live and the concepts of fairness and justice we hold
dear. In a perfect world truth, fairness, and justice might
emerge without struggle or sacrifice, but we live in the real
world, and we do the best we can with our frail institutions and
our own imperfections. One part of me is offended at the effort
required to defend a good program and give away our quality
literature, but another part of me is grateful that we live in a
country where at least there can be a contest between programs
and pettiness, quality, and senseless quibbling.
     Are we certain to win in the end? The answer is that there
are no guarantees. If we continue with this action, in the end we
may have to content ourselves with the knowledge that we have
done what is right; that service to blind people is our number
one priority; and that, win or lose, we will retire each night
knowing we have conducted ourselves with honor, honesty,
integrity, and civility. Our reward must come not in the
knowledge that our position will be upheld but in the knowledge
that any other choice is to abandon our concepts of fairness,
justice, and quality programs for Missourians who are blind.

     At the time of Gary Wunder's presidential report, he was
still hopeful that somehow the unpleasantness might be resolved.
But as the weeks went by, he discovered that members of the
Missouri Council had been writing letters to legislators and the
governor in an effort to undermine the Federation's good name in
the state and to ensure that NFB philosophy would have no
influence in the thinking of newly blind Missourians. Gary wrote
to the Governor in an effort to set the record straight. This is
what he said:

                                                     May 23, 1997

The Honorable Governor Mel Carnahan
Missouri State Capitol Building
Jefferson City, Missouri

Dear Governor Carnahan:
     I am writing to you in my capacity as President of the
National Federation of the Blind of Missouri (Federation). I want
to thank you again for meeting with me last month, and I want to
thank you and those members of the Legislature who recently took
steps to distribute scholarship forms to blind students here in
Missouri. You will be pleased to know that, out of a pool of 500
applicants nationally and with twenty-six scholarships to award,
two young Missourians have been chosen to receive Federation
scholarships.
     It saddens me that I must now write to you concerning a very
unfortunate dispute which exists between the Federation and
another organization which represents the interests of the blind
in Missouri, the Missouri Council of the Blind (Missouri
Council). Recently you received copies of letters from the
Missouri Council which contain critical and untrue comments about
our organization and its relationship with Missouri's
Rehabilitation Services for the Blind (RSB), a part of the
Missouri Division of Family Services. We were not afforded the
courtesy of being sent copies of those letters, and only a
passing remark by a Missouri Council member alerted us to the
information you were receiving. This is our first opportunity to
send a reply to you and to those to whom copies of these letters
were sent.
     For the sake of clarity the letters we are referring to are
dated and addressed as follows:
1. February 26, 1997, letter to Ms. Sally Howard, Director of the
RSB, by Mr. Newburger, counsel for the Missouri Council. You are
carbon copied on this letter by name. We understand that this was
also sent to members of the Missouri Legislature.
2. March 3, 1997 letter to Ms. Sally Howard by Ken Emmons,
President of the Missouri Council. While it does not indicate so
on its face, we understand that a copy of this letter was also
sent to you and members of the Legislature.
3. April 27, 1997 letter to Ms. Howard by Ken Emmons. Again,
while it does not indicate so on its face, we understand that a
copy of this letter was also sent to you and members of the
Legislature.
     In an effort to be aboveboard in the expression of our views
and in the belief that they can stand the light of day, we are
providing a copy of this letter to the Missouri Council and are
asking that they extend the same courtesy to us when discussing
programs with which we are involved. We are also sending a copy
to Ms. Sally Howard since the agency she heads has been the
target of criticism by both the Federation and the Missouri
Council and since we are asking that you rectify the injustices
we believe have been done by this agency.
     The Colorado Center for the Blind (Colorado Center), the
subject of a substantial portion of the letters sent to you, is
loosely affiliated with the Federation. The Federation does not
have any direct role in the day-to-day operation of the Colorado
Center, and accordingly we cannot directly answer for the
Colorado Center. However, the Colorado Center and the Federation
do share a similar philosophy regarding blindness, and we respect
and endorse the teaching methods employed by the Colorado Center.
Because the charges made by the Missouri Council concerning the
Colorado Center fundamentally challenge both that philosophy and
those methods and because those charges in our view imperil the
rights of the blind, we feel compelled to take issue with the
charges leveled against both the Colorado Center and the
Federation in the letters you have received.
     The National Federation of the Blind is an organization made
up of blind and sighted people who believe that with proper
training and opportunity blind people can lead normal and
fulfilling lives alongside their sighted neighbors. Equally true
is that, without good training and real opportunity, blindness
can be one of the most devastating disabilities known to man. A
recent poll shows it is feared more than any other disability,
save AIDS and cancer.
     We know that creating opportunity means providing good
information about what it means to be blind, so the Federation
publishes brochures, pamphlets, and books on subjects ranging
from how one can match his clothing to how one can be certain she
takes the proper medicine though she cannot see the printed
label. Most of our information is provided free of charge in
print, in Braille, and on cassette tape.
     For many years the Federation provided its literature at no
charge to the RSB. Until 1994 the RSB freely provided Federation
literature to its blind clients. Likewise they also used the
literature available from the Missouri Council. For reasons we do
not understand, the Missouri Council elected to threaten the RSB
with legal action if it continued to give Federation pamphlets to
clients. RSB's response was to implement a policy forbidding
their staff from giving clients materials the Federation
publishes and ordering that they not discuss any of the programs
run by the Federation. One such program is Job Opportunities for
the Blind, which we run in conjunction with the United States
Department of Labor.
     At RSB's request the RSB, Federation, and Missouri Council
met to discuss this issue; and the Federation voiced its view
that RSB should continue to use any information, regardless of
its source, which could help people who are blind. We made it
clear that we had no objection to RSB's using literature from the
Missouri Council or any other organization, as long as the
professional staff working for RSB thought the publications might
help the blind they serve. The Missouri Council took the position
that the Federation literature spoke positively about our
organization, that it might influence blind people positively
toward us, and that the RSB therefore had no business providing
it to blind clients, regardless of the need or its value to the
newly blind.
     After more than a year of unsuccessful negotiations with RSB
to lift their ban against our literature and the discussion of
our programs by RSB staff, we were forced to respond to RSB's
direct challenge to our First-Amendment rights by initiating
litigation, which is still pending in the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. We deeply regret the
failure of negotiations and the necessity for legal action, but
we cannot simply stand by and permit our Constitutional rights to
be taken from us, while at the same time watching the needs of
blind people for information take second place to political
considerations.
     Our experience is that training is essential if blindness is
to be a nuisance rather than a devastating tragedy. When we speak
of training, we mean teaching blind people to do those things
which most people can do with sight. Special techniques enable us
to cook, clean, read, write, travel, go to school, learn a trade,
and eventually take jobs and assume our place in the community.
The Colorado Center has, for some time, taken blind people from
Missouri into its program under the sponsorship of Missouri's
RSB.
     As detailed in the letters sent to you and the Legislature
by the Missouri Council, it is alleged that the Colorado Center
discourages the use of guide dogs and will not allow them in its
facility. If this were true, it would be against the law, and, of
course, there is no truth to the allegation. The former Director
of the Colorado Center is herself a guide dog user, and many
people come to the program who use these fine animals. The
Federation urged and worked with Senator Wiggins for eight years
to have introduced (and finally passed) the first Missouri
statute guaranteeing the right of blind Missourians to be
accompanied by their guide dogs. This, in addition to numerous
cases in which the Federation has used the law to help blind
people with guide dogs, should make it clear this charge is
totally false.
     The Missouri Council alleges that the Colorado Center does
not teach students to use their remaining vision and that it
mandates they wear sleep shades. No student is forced to do
anything--the Colorado Center program is for adults, and blind
people are treated accordingly. Since people who go to the
Colorado Center do so because of low or failing vision, the
Colorado Center first seeks to teach skills which are not
dependent on vision. When a student has learned that performing
essential life activities can be done without vision, the
Colorado Center then works with that student to maximize the use
of his remaining sight. Sleep shades are indeed used in training,
since the temptation to rely on one's remaining vision is second
nature for anyone who has it. If the Colorado Center were to
teach visual enhancement first, its emphasis would be on what the
student lacks or is losing. By first teaching techniques which
are not dependent upon vision, the Colorado Center seeks to
convey to the student that any usable vision he or she has is a
supplement and not an essential ingredient to living in a sighted
world.
     Every reasonable human being would certainly agree that any
vision a person has is a blessing that should be used. The only
issue for consideration is whether one teaches visual techniques
first and then adds blindness techniques later, or whether
blindness techniques are the foundation on which one builds other
skills.
     In the letters sent to you, the Missouri Council accuses the
Colorado Center of forcing blind people to use a slate and stylus
when there are other devices with which to write Braille. The
issue of how one writes Braille is not an either/or matter. Just
as with print, there are different writing methods for different
situations. A slate and stylus is to Braille what a pencil or pen
is to print. A Braille 'n Speak device is to Braille users what a
computer, keyboard, and screen are to the sighted. A computer
costs $1,000 for the sighted, and a pencil costs a quarter. The
Braille 'n Speak for the blind costs $1500, and a slate and
stylus costs $3.50.
     The Colorado Center teaches reading and writing skills at
all technological levels, believing that, to the greatest extent
possible, blind people need as many options as do folks who can
see. Consider how cumbersome your life would be if you had to
turn on a computer every time you wanted to take or retrieve a
phone number or had to carry a computer to the grocery store in
order to read your grocery list. To deny blind people a low-tech
alternative in reading and writing would be to eliminate a life
skill widely employed by both the sighted and the blind in
dealing with many day-to-day activities.
     The Missouri Council tells you the Colorado Center requires
its students to use canes produced by the Federation. This is not
so. The Colorado Center recommends the long white cane, which the
Federation contracts to be produced, because it is the lightest
and most durable cane on the market. Cane breakage is most likely
to occur when a student is just learning to travel, and providing
him or her with the most durable cane available in this training
activity is obviously appropriate. While the Colorado Center
certainly recommends the rigid fiber glass or carbon fiber canes
we have produced, it also makes available canes from other
sources and gives them out freely. Current students and alumni
can attest to this and have stated as much to interviewers from
the RSB.
     In another Missouri Council allegation contained in the
letters sent to you, they contend students are forced to do rock
climbing and water skiing. As noted earlier, Colorado Center
students are adults, and the word "forced" has no place in this
environment. One of the Colorado Center's challenges is to get
their students to rethink attitudes about the limited
capabilities of the blind, and it is precisely by getting these
students to engage in activities generally thought off limits for
the blind that the Colorado Center starts to change attitudes at
the gut level. The Missouri Council says that alternatives to
these activities include reading, bowling, and playing games.
While such exercises are unquestionably enjoyable and beneficial,
they do not help to reshape one's attitudes about blindness, a
critical element in rehabilitation.
     A complaint made to you is that students at the Colorado
Center are offered the opportunity to attend the national
convention of the Federation as part of their training. The RSB
has known about and endorsed this practice precisely because the
convention experience contains so many of the elements of
training for which we send blind Missourians to the Colorado
Center in the first place.
     The convention puts our trainees in contact with many blind
people who can independently travel, give speeches using Braille,
and use technology on a daily basis to do their work. Our
convention features over fifty special-interest groups which
center on occupations ranging from preachers to lawyers, child
care workers to nursing home administrators, body shop workers to
college professors, and sheltered shop workers to computer
scientists.
     The Colorado Center and the RSB have endorsed Missouri
students attending the Federation national convention as a part
of their training because it is the largest meeting of blind
people in the world and the most diverse group which annually
assembles to address the concerns of the blind. The investigation
you commissioned suggested this activity might be a contractual
violation. The Missouri Council is pressuring, and RSB is
considering seeking a refund for time spent at Federation
national conventions.
     A request for a refund is being considered despite the RSB
Director's assertion in February that she knew about students
attending Federation conventions, that she had thought it had
training value, and that it would be unfair now to hold the
Colorado Center liable for participating in an activity which had
been considered proper by RSB.
     The most recent charge to be leveled against the Colorado
Center by RSB is that Missouri students have been used by the
Colorado Center to do fundraising while in training paid for by
the RSB. This charge we unequivocally deny. Under the contract
with RSB, the Colorado Center is obligated to provide evaluation
services aimed at determining the employability of those it
serves. This is generally done by finding an employer who will
allow a student to work in his or her place of business and who
will then help the Colorado Center in evaluating the student's
abilities and work performance.
     The Denver chapter of the Federation raises money by running
a bingo game. As early as 1994 the RSB agreed that the Colorado
Center could, with the agreement of the Denver Chapter, use the
bingo operation to perform such work evaluations. A student in
1994 was given a two-week internship at the Denver chapter's
operation, and reports of his progress in learning work
activities generalizable to other employment were filed with and
approved by the RSB.
     In early April of this year another student volunteered to
work in this activity to get some on-the-job experience, was
allowed to take a half-day shift, and was evaluated as was the
student in 1994. Now, however, given the criticism generated by
the Missouri Council of the Colorado Center and the desire of the
RSB to avoid further controversy, this activity has incredibly
been used as the reason for canceling RSB's contract with the
Colorado Center. All of this has occurred without affording the
Colorado Center any meaningful opportunity to defend against an
alleged contract violation.
     There are, of course, alternatives open to RSB, if it
believes this bingo activity has the appearance of a conflict of
interest or promotes the National Federation of the Blind. It
could specifically disallow use of the bingo operation for
evaluations, requiring instead that the Colorado Center seek out
other businesses which would work with it to evaluate the
potential of the student. The RSB could specifically forbid
Missouri students from volunteering to work in the bingo
activity, regardless of the value of the work experience or the
evaluations springing from it. No matter how many alternatives
were suggested to the RSB, however, the Missouri Council insisted
that it would only be satisfied with the termination of the
Colorado Center contract, and that is precisely what has
occurred.
     In May of 1996 many of the charges discussed here were
brought before the Advisory Council that oversees and advises
Missouri's RSB. That body asked you to conduct an investigation,
and this you did by hiring the St. Louis firm of Armstrong,
Teasdale, Schlafley, and Davis, which in turn generated a 100-
page report. The report, as many have remarked, contains a little
something for everyone. The pattern employed is to discuss an
accusation, find no violation of the law, but then say that "some
consumers, however, contend. . . ." Similarly characteristic of
the report are sections which conclude with "While there is no
case law on this subject, some groups of the disabled say. . . ."
If the nearly $30,000 spent in this investigation were intended
to provide you with an overview of what each group was saying
about the other, then our money has been well spent. If, however,
the purpose of the report was to investigate supposed violations
of the law, we the blind and the taxpayers deserve better than
these equivocal statements.

                           Conclusion

     In retrospect, our most grievous error in dealing with the
accusations of the Missouri Council has been to assume that they
would sound as ridiculous to others as they have to us and that
we would be viewed as engaging in petty bickering were we to
mount a full-scale assault on them. We have foolishly assumed
that positive programs would, without defense, be enough to
counter the baseless criticisms leveled against them, but this
neglect on our part has left many free to conclude that, in the
absence of information to the contrary, the charges of the
Missouri Council must be true.
     We would like your help in seeing that Missouri renews its
contract with the Colorado Center and that RSB lifts its ban on
the mention of Federation programs and the use of Federation
public information on blindness. Each year we work hard to see
that RSB receives the federal and state appropriations necessary
for it to do its work of successfully integrating blind people
back into the community.
     We deserve better than to be told that Federation literature
and Federation programs are incompatible with the rehabilitation
process, simply because they bear our name and because a group
which considers itself to be a rival organization offers an
objection. Please see that Missouri takes advantage of any
program or service which can increase the chance that our blind
citizens can successfully live and work alongside their sighted
friends and neighbors.

                                                Yours Very Truly,

                                           Gary Wunder, President
                                 National Federation of the Blind
                                                      of Missouri

cc:  All Members of the Missouri Legislature
     Ms. Sally Howard, Director, RSB
     Missouri Council of the Blind
     
     There you have the letter Gary Wunder wrote to the governor,
and so far we have no indication of its impact. As usual in such
cases, if the governor does not put an end to the nonsense or the
agency does not find the courage to do what is best for its
consumers of services, the only people who will lose are those
Missourians who will become blind in the future or who, for
whatever reason, have not yet received rehabilitation. Of course,
members of the Missouri affiliate will continue to reach out to
those who need their help, but their efforts would have been much
more productive if they could have continued to work collegially
with the state agency.
     Ironically, the Braille Revival League, an organization
within the ACB, conducts a program in St. Louis, in which
volunteers teach Braille to those interested in learning it. Gary
Wunder says that RSB takes advantage of this service, and the
Federation has never tried to discourage the relationship. The
NFB's attitude has always been that there is enough work to go
around and that every good program should be encouraged. Wunder
says that the NFB's challenge is to find its own ways to serve
would-be Braille readers in St. Louis and across the state. It is
tragic that the ACB has not shared this attitude and that the
state agency in Missouri is afraid to stand up for what is right.
As it stands now, neither consumer satisfaction nor effective
rehabilitation matters in Missouri. Neither counselor opinion nor
consumer-group willingness to assist clients is of importance.
Keeping the ACB quiet is apparently all that really matters to
the Missouri agency charged with serving the blind. Cowardice has
a new name and definition; the name is Missouri Services for the
Blind, and the definition is capitulation.


[PHOTO/CAPTION: Governor Symington signs the Arizona Braille bill, and
Lindsey McHugh smiles in appreciation while other members of the NFB of
Arizona look on.]
              Arizona--Another Strong Braille Bill
                       by Bruce A. Gardner

     From the Editor: Bruce Gardner is the President of the
National Federation of the Blind of Arizona.

     I am both pleased and proud to announce to the world that
Arizona has joined the ranks of the now twenty-nine states which
can boast the existence of a strong, comprehensive Braille Bill.
We have even added a little twist which, as far as I know, has
not been adopted in any other state.
     During the past few years the NFB of Arizona has been able
to gain increasing support in the state legislature through
legislative luncheons and other personal contacts. Our hard work
has now clearly paid off; but even so, the ease with which we
moved through the legislature is nothing short of astonishing.
     The bill itself is based upon the national model, which has
enjoyed the support not only of the NFB but also of the other
major organizations both of and for the blind. Our work in
drafting the Arizona bill was also a joint effort. The NFB of
Arizona worked with the Arizona Governor's Council on Blindness
and its member organizations. The task force which drafted the
bill was chaired by Dr. Jane Erin, head of the University of
Arizona's master's program for teachers of the blind.
     Our bill (now state law) includes a presumption that each
blind student needs Braille; states that, even if only one member
of the Individualized Education Program (IEP) team wants Braille
instruction, then it will be taught; provides that book
publishers wishing to sell text books in Arizona must supply a
disk from which Braille books can be produced; and requires that
the special ed teachers of the blind must pass a national Braille
competency test or an Arizona competency test if a national test
is not available.
     The special Arizona twist is this: While several state
Braille laws now require that book publishers supply the state
with computer disks, these provisions generally apply only to
elementary and secondary schools. Thanks to Dr. Erin (she thought
of it; we didn't), our law also requires that publishers selling
to community colleges or universities must furnish the disks.
     The remarkable legislative progress went like this: Bill
introduced, February 4; heard by House Education Committee on
February 12 (passed fourteen to zero); heard by House Rules
Committee on February 18 (passed thirteen to zero); full House
vote, February 26 (passed fifty-four to zero); heard by Senate
Education Committee, March 13 (passed six to zero); heard by
Senate Appropriations Committee, March 26 (passed nine to zero);
heard by Senate Rules Committee, March 31 (passed six to zero);
and passed by the full Senate on April 14 by a vote of thirty to
nothing. The Governor signed the bill into law on April 22, 1997.
     Special thanks must go to Miss Lindsey McHugh of Tucson.
Lindsey is a blind nine-year-old who read Braille for both the
Senate Education and Appropriations Committees. A couple of
usually gruff senators remarked that they did not think it
politically wise to vote against the bill in view of Lindsey's
outstanding testimony.
     At the signing ceremony Lindsey McHugh read a brief
statement to the Governor and the press. She said:

          On behalf of the blind of Arizona, we of the NFB
     thank you, Governor Symington, for having this ceremony
     and for signing our Braille bill. We are also grateful
     to Representative Schottel for all of his good work in
     guiding the bill through the legislature. This Braille
     bill is the first step in improving education and
     training for the blind in Arizona. Next, we have to fix
     rehabilitation training programs for blind adults.

     We of the NFB of Arizona still have a lot of educating to do
to convince parents that partially blind kids will be much more
literate adults if they learn Braille when they are young. But
this new law will bring true literacy for our blind children one
big step closer.


           Meet Kathie Mathis: a Fellow Federationist
                      by Deborah Kent Stein

     From the Editor: The following biographical sketch first
appeared in the Summer, 1996, issue of the Braille Examiner, a
publication of the National Federation of the Blind of Illinois.
It is part of writer and Illinois affiliate First Vice President
Debbie Stein's on-going series of portraits of Illinois
Federationists. Kathie Mathis currently serves as Treasurer of
the NFB of Illinois. She was successful in her bids on two
vending locations mentioned in the profile and is now a working
vendor. Here is Debbie Stein's story:

     Soon after Kathie Mathis finished college, her father died
of cancer. One of their last conversations has always stayed with
her. "Life is an adventure," her father said. "No matter what
happens, some good will come out of it." Judging by the way she
has lived, Kathie took those words to heart.
     After graduating from the University of Missouri in St.
Louis (UMSL), Kathie took a job with the Department of Children's
and Family Services (DCFS) near Hoopestown, Illinois. As director
of a multi-service agency, she found herself trying to serve two
rigidly separate communities. Most of the wealthy farm families
in the area believed that social service was strictly for the
migrant workers who lived outside of town. Kathie began speaking
to civic organizations, explaining that social services could
benefit everyone. She enjoyed public speaking and saw it as a
vehicle for changing people's attitudes.
     In 1973 Kathie decided to make a major career shift.
Following the example of an uncle she greatly admired, she went
into law enforcement. As a juvenile officer with the St. Clair
County Police Department, she established an exciting new program
to work with young offenders. Her Status Offender Program was the
first of its kind in Illinois outside Chicago. Young people in
the program signed a contract which stipulated several
requirements. The child agreed to perform community service and
to enter counseling with his or her family. "It was really a
tough program," Kathie recalls. "When they came into it, some of
the kids just hated me. But as time went on, you'd see their
attitude changing. It really made a difference."
     Whenever she encountered a problem, Kathie tried to find a
solution. Her police work gave her the opportunity to set up a
variety of constructive new programs. During the 1970's she
established one of the state's first drug abuse prevention
programs for school-age children. She helped create a recreation
center for teens. She also pioneered a crime prevention program
for senior citizens. She and her staff led rap sessions at
nursing homes and senior centers, teaching safety precautions and
encouraging people to report crimes when they occurred.
     In 1981 Kathie Mathis was appointed Chief of Police for St.
Clair County. Somehow she managed to combine her busy work
schedule with the demands of raising five children. She was also
very involved in church work and Scouting. As her children
reached college age, she began to look for loans and
scholarships. She soon realized that few families in her
community knew these resources existed. She gathered all the
information she could about financial aid for higher education
and shared it with other interested parents.
     In 1986 Kathie Mathis suddenly lost the vision in her left
eye. Doctors found that she had a rare disease called
"histoplasmosis." This condition, which is endemic in the
Mississippi River Basin, is caused by a fungus found in bird
droppings. "It's a real classy disease," Kathy says wryly. "I
have no idea how I got it." The doctors assured her that her
other eye would not be affected. Kathie quickly learned to
compensate for her loss and resumed all her normal activities.
     Kathie's work as police chief eventually led her to take a
position as deputy federal marshal. The job opened up a realm of
exciting possibilities. Federal marshals may work as undercover
agents. They may be called upon to deal with drug kingpins or
international terrorists. On occasion they protect judges or
witnesses during high-profile trials. Kathie was protecting a
federal judge early in 1992 when suddenly, from one minute to the
next, her right eye ceased to function. She was almost totally
blind.
     At first Kathie was terrified. If she were blind, she could
not keep her job. Her whole way of life was crumbling. Doctors
told her that there was little hope of restoring her vision.
Nevertheless, she underwent a risky operation which seemed to
offer her one last chance. The surgery was unsuccessful and led
to a series of life-threatening complications. Almost a year
passed before she fully recovered her health and could think
about the future.
     Once she accepted permanent blindness, Kathie realized there
must still be ways she could remain active and productive. She
contacted the Department of Rehabilitation Services (DORS). After
two months a counselor finally arrived to do an intake interview.
Kathie asked about the kinds of jobs available to blind people
and was told that there were only two choices--work with either
Social Security or the IRS. Kathie asked about training in daily
living skills and was assured that a home teacher would work with
her. The home teacher never materialized. After months of
mounting frustration, Kathie enrolled at ICRE-Wood (Illinois
Center for Rehabilitation Education at Wood Street) in Chicago.
She was launched on a new adventure.
     Kathie Mathis entered ICRE-Wood with a sense of optimism. At
last she would get the vital skills she needed. She wanted
training in Braille, mobility, computers--anything and
everything. But from the first she found massive obstacles in her
way. She was denied Braille instruction on the grounds that it
would not help her. She was placed on an endless waiting list for
a computer class. She was never given any instruction in the use
of the long white cane. Kathie and her fellow students spent most
of their time confined to a lounge with nothing to do. They were
forbidden to leave the lounge without permission from the staff.
"It was terrible," Kathie says. "I saw people come into the
program with hope, with a sense of self-worth. By the time they
left, they'd been beaten down. The humiliation, the contempt of
the staff made them lesser persons."
     Within her first few weeks at the center, Kathie revived a
long disbanded student council. Against enormous resistance from
the staff, the students began pushing for improvements in the
program. It all finally came to a head with the affair of the
Christmas tree.
     "Christmas was coming, and they weren't going to do a thing
to celebrate," Kathie explains. "No decorations, no party,
nothing. There was a holiday fund, but the money went for a big
staff party. There was absolutely nothing planned for the
students."
     Kathie and the other trainees began asking for a Christmas
tree. The staff refused outright. "Why did blind people need a
tree?" the administration asked. After all, they couldn't see it.
Even when Kathie offered to donate a tree and ornaments herself,
she was told it would not be allowed.
     Eventually Kathie learned that someone had given the center
an artificial tree five years before. It had never once been
used. The staff said it had somehow been lost. Undaunted, the
students kept applying pressure. Finally, on the day before the
Christmas break, the tree mysteriously appeared. Even then the
staff argued that the students should not decorate it themselves.
Blind people would do the job badly. The tree would look
lopsided. It would be an embarrassment to the center. But the
students prevailed. They decorated the tree themselves and had a
memorable Christmas party. They left for the break with a feeling
of triumph.
     Throughout her eighteen months at ICRE-Wood, Kathie Mathis
went on pushing for change. For her efforts she was harassed in
countless ways--denied courses she wanted, given an impossible
schedule which she could not follow, and threatened with
expulsion. But finally, in April, 1994, she completed training
for the state vending program. Currently she is bidding on two
vending locations, one at the Federal Building in East St. Louis
and the other in Greenville Federal Prison. She finds it ironic
that she has come full circle in a sense, back to federal law
enforcement.
     Kathie's experience at ICRE-Wood taught her that blind
people must stand together for mutual support, that they must
fight side-by-side.
     One day a staff member told her about the NFB. He warned her
to stay away from Federationists, that they were "a bunch of
radicals." Considering the source, this was a high
recommendation. Kathie contacted the NFB of Illinois and began
meeting with Steve Benson and Bryan Johnson. Those meetings were
a powerful learning experience on both sides. Kathie alerted
Steve and Bryan to the true horrors of ICRE-Wood. In turn they
taught her about Federation philosophy. She discovered that she
was not alone. Through the Federation blind people all across the
country were fighting for dignity and equality.
     In 1994 Kathie went to Detroit for her first NFB National
Convention. She came home determined to start a chapter in the
Belville area. She spent the next year recruiting new members and
spreading the Federation message. The Four Rivers Chapter of the
NFB of Illinois was chartered at the 1995 state convention in
Quincy.
     "I still really miss police work," Kathie admits. "But I
love the things I'm doing now. Really, I've never been happier in
my life. I went through some pretty rough times, but a lot of
good has come out of it in the end."


*************************************************************
     A deferred charitable gift annuity is a way for donors to
save taxes and make significant donations to the National
Federation of the Blind. (The amounts here are illustrative, not
precise.) It works like this:
     James Johnson, age fifty, has decided to set up a deferred
charitable gift annuity. He transfers $10,000 to the NFB. In
return, when he reaches sixty-five, the NFB will pay James a
lifetime annuity of $1,710 per year, of which $179 is tax free.
In addition, James can claim a charitable tax deduction of $6,387
of the $10,000 gift in the year the donation is made.
     For more information about deferred gift annuities, contact
the National Federation of the Blind, Special Gifts, 1800 Johnson
Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21230-4998, phone (410) 659-9314, fax
(410) 685-5653.
*************************************************************

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Larry Israel]
       Patent Dispute Threatens Prices of Braille Displays
                   Alva Takes Aim at Everybody


     From the Editor: Every time one turns around one finds
another example of the disadvantages facing producers and
consumers alike in a small technology market like the blindness
field. Here is the latest crisis hanging over everyone interested
in the refreshable Braille display technology used in the
portable note takers and in the Braille screen displays of
desktop and laptop computers. But this time there may be
something consumers can do to help. Larry Israel, Chairman,
President, and CEO of Telesensory Systems, Inc., wrote the
following memo for the Braille Monitor summarizing the history of
the problem:

Subject: The Alva Patent Situation
Date: May 28, 1997
     Deane Blazie asked if I would provide you with some
historical background relating to the Alva patent situation. In
approximately mid-1992, Telesensory became aware that U.S. patent
4,985,692 had been issued in January, 1991, to Jacob (Jaap)
Breider and Arend Arends. Jaap Breider is President of Alva B.V.
of the Netherlands, a firm which is a major supplier of
refreshable Braille displays. We later learned that similar
patents had been obtained in Europe, Canada, and Australia, all
of which were assigned to Alva B.V. in the Netherlands, a company
of which Breider is Managing Director.
     The patent purported to cover what is commonly referred to
as "cursor routing." This function typically involves some kind
of switch near each Braille cell, which, when depressed, will
bring the cursor on the screen to that position. This is claimed
to be a convenience to users of refreshable Braille displays. For
instance, while reading the information on the screen (which does
not require moving the cursor), if a typographical error is
discovered which the reader wishes to correct, depressing the
cursor switch brings the insertion cursor to that letter, and the
correction can then be made quickly and easily.
     In October, 1993, Telesensory received a letter from Jaap
Breider claiming that Telesensory's Navigator line infringed on
the subject patent and requesting discussions about paying a
royalty. (There may have been some earlier correspondence, but
this was the first time I had heard of it, based on my current
file search.) We also have good reason to believe that numerous
other companies were similarly approached at one time or another
from that time until the present, including Baum Elektronik of
Germany, Frank Audiodata of Germany, Papenmeier of Germany,
Lameris BV in Holland, Blazie Engineering in the USA, Tieman B.V.
of Holland, KHS of Germany, and Metec of Germany. In each case
Jaap Breider claimed that his patent was being violated by what
had been since the mid-80's a common feature in virtually all
Braille displays.
     He threatened to institute lawsuits against various parties
unless they agreed to pay rather substantial royalties. To the
best of our knowledge, he has never filed a patent infringement
lawsuit, perhaps because (as I will describe below) there is
substantial doubt as to the validity of his patent, nor is anyone
paying royalties to him with respect to this patent, as far as we
know.
     It was and is the opinion of Telesensory that the patent was
essentially invalid because, among other reasons, (a) a number of
products had been marketed in Europe and the USA as early as 1985
which used the same cursor-routing scheme that was now patented;
(b) academic papers had been written at the University of
Stuttgart (Germany) which predated the European patent
application by more than a year and disclosed the idea of cursor
routing; and (c) by the time Breider applied for the patent, the
idea was obvious (a bar to a patent in almost every country) and
was being widely used in many different, independently-developed
products.
     The history of the U.S. patent is interesting because it has
a bearing on whether the patent is valid. The application was
filed on January 20, 1988. It claimed priority based on a
Netherlands patent application filed January 23, 1987. This date
is quite important, because it is my understanding that if it
could be shown that a device embodying the same technology or
idea was marketed more than one year before that priority date of
January 23, 1987, the U.S. patent would be invalid. I do not
specifically know the effect on the patents in the other
countries, but I think it likely that the impact on their
validity would be similar (although patent law is sufficiently
complex and variable from country to country, that I would
hesitate to make any general claims on this point).
     Note that I have stated above that other products using this
same idea were marketed as early as 1985 in the USA and Europe.
If that could be proven, then the various patents would be
invalid, since any date in 1985 is clearly more than one year
earlier than January 23, 1987. As I will show in a moment, that
has in fact been proven.
     Over the next few years considerable action took place in
the European Patent Office (EPO), mostly in Munich, in what is
called an "opposition." Various other manufacturers, including
Baum Elektronik and Metec in Germany, argued to the EPO that the
patent was invalid because, among other reasons, of "prior art."
It was exceedingly difficult to reach a resolution because many
documents were unclear and difficult to recover since
considerable time had elapsed. The EPO issued various interim or
tentative decisions, first favoring one side and then the other.
     However, a very recent ruling by the EPO in Munich, dated
May 5, 1997, contains the following points:
1. The Baum Braille-Box was publicly available in 1985.
2. The available descriptions of that device indicated that it
"destroys the novelty" of Claim #1 in the European patent being
examined (which is basically the same as the U.S. patent).
3. If certain associated allegations were supported, for example,
by affidavit (a relatively easy matter), then the patent could no
longer be maintained in its present version.

     The parties (Alva and Baum) were given two months more to
submit additional information. While the patent holder still has
the right to protest further, if that were all there were to it,
it is highly likely that the European patent would finally have
been rejected, and with it, all the other patents would probably
fail as well. However, there is a peculiarity in European law, as
I understand it, which allows a patent to be restated to try to
make it OK, even after it has been found to be invalid after it
was granted (as here). I do not believe this is possible under
U.S. patent law.
     There is little doubt that Alva will now rewrite the patent,
along lines suggested by the EPO, so that the opposition and
argument will still not reach an end. It is less clear whether
the patent can be sustained under U.S. law since I don't think
U.S. law permits rewriting the patent once it has been granted.
If it's found invalid, that's the end of it. But, once again, I
must clearly state that I am not a patent attorney, and this is a
particularly arcane legal area, which is difficult to understand
with any certainty.
     So this still leaves considerable uncertainty, and it may
well take years to play this out to its final ending. Meanwhile,
valuable resources, which could be put to better use benefiting
blind people around the world, are being spent in a patent battle
in Europe, likely to be followed by one in the USA if necessary.
The view of the many companies objecting to Breider's patent is
that he patented something which was obvious and being widely
used and which he did not, in fact, invent--as most lay people
would understand the term. They believe that he was able to get
his patents because no one in this small industry has patent
lawyers busily watching out for this kind of thing so that they
can object at an early stage (which makes the job much, much
easier). The fact is that many patents are granted which should
not be, simply because no one is interested enough or aware
enough to object at an early stage. Most of the time it makes no
real difference.
     In the interests of settling this matter and avoiding legal
fees, a number of companies have offered to pay royalties to
Breider in some commercially reasonable amount. Breider's only
demand until very recently was for a royalty of four percent of
the selling price of Braille displays using cursor routing or its
equivalent (in his opinion). This would amount, for instance, to
more than $200 on a typical 40-cell Braille display and is quite
a substantial amount, which would have to be passed along to all
customers.
     After the May 5 EPO ruling of a few days ago and presumably
with this information clearly available to him, Jaap Breider
called me and asked if I was willing to settle on behalf of
Telesensory. I told him that it was a nuisance and was taking
time and that I would be willing to pay him a moderate amount,
just to be rid of the matter, provided that I could persuade
other major manufacturers to do the same (which I think could be
done). He rejected my offer out of hand, which means that the
battle will continue.
     We are hopeful, as are other companies who manufacture
Braille displays, that this matter can eventually be put to rest
in some way which leaves all the parties feeling reasonably
satisfied. However, it is unlikely that can be accomplished if
Breider continues to insist on an unreasonable royalty for a
product feature which all his competitors believe should not have
been patentable and for which a patent was obtained only because
the patent offices erred by dealing with an area in which they
have little knowledge and where there was little published
information to refute the unsupported claims of the applicant. In
fact, when we have our day in court (which we will do if we are
ever sued for infringement here in the United States), we intend
to argue (1) that Breider was fully aware of the Baum Braille-Box
at the time he filed his initial patent applications in the
Netherlands and the USA, (2) that it was wrong of him not to
disclose that information to the respective patent offices, and
(3) that his patent ought to be invalidated on those grounds
alone without more (although there are ample other grounds as
well to invalidate the patent).

                                                       Cordially,
                                                     Larry Israel
                                           Chairman/President/CEO
                                          Telesensory Corporation

     There you have Larry Israel's summary of the situation. Here
is the history as Jaap Breider described it to the Braille
Monitor. Breider was a student in the early 1980's studying
psychology, particularly artificial intelligence and cognitive
engineering. He is blind, and he concluded that his work would be
easier if he had a Braille display for his computer, so he built
one, and in February of 1984 he and a partner established a
company in Holland which they called Alva, Inc.
     Breider conducted some experiments using other blind
students at his university. He gave them computer documents with
spelling mistakes and timed them as they corrected the errors. He
determined that, if there were a way to bring the cursor to the
word requiring correction, the task could be completed much more
quickly.
     He took this idea to his partner, who designed and built the
tiny switches beside each Braille cell within a week. Breider,
who has been in this country for several months, could not
remember exactly when this technology was patented, but he did
not object to the January 23 date provided by Larry Israel. He
said that all the patent applications were submitted at
approximately the same time. He has not been able to confer with
his attorneys about the May 5 decision by the European Patent
Office, so he was not willing to comment on the company's plans
in the light of that decision. He did say that he does not at the
moment plan to rewrite the European patent because he does not
believe it is necessary since the court did not "take it off the
table."
     The obvious question to be answered is what date did cursor
routing first appear and how generally was the concept adopted?
Will knowledgeable and experienced blind users now volunteer to
prepare affidavits about the dates they first had access to
cursor routing and related points? Some people may have manuals
or data sheets that pre-date the Alva Patent and therefore
clearly show prior art. Letters or articles from 1985 might also
help if they establish that the technique patented was either
obvious or used prior to January 23, 1986, a year before the
patent.
     One particularly thorny point is that the patent claims that
the ability to keep one's hands on the Braille cells while also
activating a cursor-routing switch is an important
characteristic. But, as Larry Israel points out, "This was
possible with the bar on a Versabraille, which we considered
logically equivalent to the individual switches in a current
cursor-routing arrangement, and the provision of a switch next to
each cell was an obvious extension and provided nothing
innovative or new but was simply an evolutionary growth in
technology that many product developers saw at about the same
time."
     Readers who believe that they may have information that
could assist in demonstrating that cursor routing was available
to users in 1985 should contact Larry Israel. Here is the text of
the request he makes:

     Telesensory Corporation is spearheading a group of
manufacturers of Braille products, including Blazie Engineering
and many others, who are organized to deal jointly with these
patent issues, with the goal of holding down the cost of these
products for blind users worldwide. Any information you may have
can be sent to Larry Israel at Telesensory Corporation, 465
Bernardo Avenue, Mountain View, California 94043, (e-mail:
israel@telesensory.com). If you have documentary information,
please send Larry the best original copy you have and retain a
copy for yourself. You should also let Larry know if you are
willing to have your name and occupation identified specifically
in any information submitted to a patent office and if you are
willing to sign an affidavit regarding your knowledge and
information, if requested to do so."

     Obviously no one wants to pay royalties for cursor routing
to Alva. Deane Blazie commented that he did not want to spend
money on royalties that would just drive up the prices of
technology for blind users. Larry Israel agreed but pointed out
that Telesensory is spending a few thousand dollars every month
in legal fees, along with management time and resources, on this
case. As with most legal matters, the nuisance value makes it
desirable to try to settle even unfounded legal claims. But since
Breider continues to be unreasonable in Israel's opinion, it
seems unlikely that the matter will be settled anywhere but in
court.
     Rumors circulate suggesting that Alva is financially over-
extended and that these royalties would be a helpful augmentation
to the company's income. While Breider agreed that money is
always useful, he categorically denied that Alva was in financial
trouble. He admitted that 1995 had been a poor year for the
group, but he said that '96 was quite good, and 1997 appears at
this point to be very good indeed. He says that several of his
European competitors are in a much weaker financial position than
Alva.
     He pointed out that in August of 1996 Alva purchased
Berkeley Access, a division of Berkeley Systems. Such an
acquisition took money and could not have been made if Alva had
not been in a strong financial position. Alva has moved the sales
and marketing part of the operation to new offices in Emeryville,
California, and development and supervision to the Netherlands.
The new entity in Emeryville is now called the Alva Access Group,
Inc. Among its other offerings, it is the only supplier for
Macintosh-access products (Inlarge and Outspoken for Macintosh).
Alva is now working on Windows 95 access using a refreshable
Braille display.
     When asked why it took Alva so many years to get around to
pressing seriously for licensing agreements with the other
producers, Breider said that he was busy building his company and
its product line.
     Breider is pleasant but cautious in conversation. He is
convinced that this technology belongs to his company, and he
intends to get the royalties that rightfully belong to him. The
American companies are just as convinced that the technology was
generally available before the Alva patent applications were
filed. It seems pretty clear that this disagreement will be
fought out in court and that, whether it's large licensing fees
or fat lawyers' fees, blind consumers will be paying for the
final resolution of this battle.


[PHOTO/CAPTION: Loretta White]
             Victory for Blind Students in Maryland

     From the Editor: Blind students and their parents know
firsthand how many subtle and overt ways school systems have
found through the years to discriminate against them. Sometimes
the students are denied the chance to go places and do things
that their sighted classmates have permission to. Sometimes they
are excused from activities that are determined to be too hard or
too dangerous or too inconvenient. Almost always the reason given
is couched in terms of the best interests of the student. Much of
the time uninformed students and their families accept such dicta
on the grounds that education professionals must know what is
best, and sometimes, it must be admitted, they are secretly
relieved to be excused from competing. But regardless of the
motives on either side, when reasonable accommodation would make
participation possible, refusing to encourage that participation
is discrimination pure and simple.
     Increasingly parents and students are refusing to lie down
meekly and accept these rulings. Members of the National
Organization of Parents of Blind Children (NOPBC), the NFB's
parents division, now understand the importance of resisting
discrimination and teaching their children to do so whenever it
arises. In 1995 members of the Maryland Parents Division began
complaining about the newly introduced Maryland School
Performance Assessment Program (MSPAP). Administered in the
third, fifth, and eighth grades, this battery of tests evaluates
how well each school is doing at educating its students. Would
anyone care to guess which group of youngsters has conveniently
been left out of this state-wide testing program? You guessed it:
Braille readers! Here is the resolution passed at the 1995
convention of the National Federation of the Blind of Maryland on
this subject:

                        Resolution 95-04

     WHEREAS, as part of its program of evaluating each public
school in the State of Maryland, the Maryland Department of
Education requires that every public school student in the third,
fifth, and eighth grades take the Maryland School Performance
Assessment Program test (MSPAP); and
     WHEREAS, the scores of students who take this test using a
reader are not used at all in tabulating the combined scores
given to each school by the staff and local districts; and
     WHEREAS, the Department of Education neither offers the
MSPAP in Braille, believing that its contents cannot be
translated into Braille, nor offers some equivalent test the
result of which could be used along with the results of the MSPAP
to gauge school performance; and
     WHEREAS, the current MSPAP, in fact, cannot be translated
into Braille without compromising its validity; and
     WHEREAS, the Department of Education has recently sought an
opinion from the Office of the State Attorney General concerning
whether it is required to offer the MSPAP to students who wish to
take the test in Braille; and
     WHEREAS, laws such as the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act, the Rehabilitation Act, and the Americans with
Disabilities Act collectively require that disabled students,
including blind students, receive a free, appropriate public
education that includes full and equal participation in all of
the programs and activities offered by public schools; and
     WHEREAS, creating and administering a test for the purpose
of measuring school performance in such a way as to exclude blind
students from full and equal participation is a blatant and
pernicious form of discrimination against the blind:
     NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the National Federation of
the Blind of Maryland in convention assembled this 5th day of
November, 1995, in the City of Ocean City, Maryland, that we do
condemn and deplore the foregoing policies and practices of the
Maryland Department of Education; and
     BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we call upon the Maryland
Department of Education to cease, at once, using the MSPAP or any
other standardized test used for the purpose of assessing school
performance that denies to blind students the opportunity to
participate fully and equally with sighted students in the school
assessment process and to take whatever steps necessary to ensure
that any future test designed for the purpose of assessing school
performance will guarantee such full and equal participation.

     That was the resolution passed at the 1995 convention of the
NFB of Maryland. It was clear and decisive, and one would have
thought that, with representatives from the State Department of
Education present, the resolution would have taken care of the
problem. But things are never that simple in a bureaucracy. In
fact, nothing at all seemed to happen to resolve the problem
until Loretta White filed a complaint with the Office for Civil
Rights, U.S. Department of Education, on June 6, 1996. Until that
date no one could be bothered to examine the challenges involved
in Brailling the MSPAP test. Then suddenly Sharon Maneki,
President of the NFB of Maryland, and James Gashel, Director of
Governmental Affairs for the National Federation of the Blind,
were invited to a meeting at the State Department of Education on
June 24 to discuss establishing a committee to consider Brailling
the MSPAP test. The committee was formed and then adjusted when
it became clear that some of the out-of-state members would not
attend its meetings. Eventually Ruby Ryles, a recognized Braille
educator, and Loretta White herself joined the committee, which
made its report on October 1, 1996. The following is the speech
describing the MSPAP struggle delivered by Loretta White,
President of the Maryland Parents Division, at the 1996 Maryland
convention, beginning with the editor's note as the report
appeared in the Winter 1996-97 issue of the Braille Spectator,
the publication of the National Federation of the Blind of
Maryland:

         The MSPAP: a Disturbing Trend in the Education
                  of Blind Children in Maryland
                        by Loretta White

     From the [newsletter] Editor: Loretta White is the President
of the NFB of Maryland's Parents Division. Despite her busy
schedule she has been an active member of the affiliate and has
been responsible for initiating a number of innovative programs
to help blind youngsters and teenagers. Loretta delivered the
following remarks during the Saturday morning session of our
convention. The agenda was deliberately arranged so that her
address was given upon Superintendent Grasmick's arrival at the
convention. [Nancy Grasmick is the Superintendent of Education of
Maryland.] All of us who heard Loretta's remarks, the
Superintendent included, were deeply moved by Loretta's keen and
sensitive observations.

     Before I begin my talk today, I'd like to share with you a
little about myself. I have been a member of the National
Federation of the Blind for over nine years now, and I've been an
officer or board member in the parents division for about seven
of those years. I'm a special educator, and I'm working toward
becoming a teacher of the visually impaired. I'm very happily
married, but the bottom line of what brings me here today and
what I think qualifies me to speak to you is that I am also a
mom. Particularly, I am the mother of a blind child. My daughter
Nicole is almost ten years old.
     I'm sure all of us have heard of MSPAP (Maryland School
Performance Assessment Program), but what does it mean, and how
does it affect our blind children who use Braille? Well, to find
out, I went to the Internet. I searched the acronym "MSPAP" only,
and I was stunned at what I found. There are ninety-six Web sites
on the Internet related to MSPAP. As I sifted through, I found a
lot of good information from the state and several counties. I'll
summarize Calvert County's definition from its MSPAP Handbook:

     MSPAP stands for the Maryland School Performance
     Assessment Program. It is a statewide testing program
     to evaluate how schools are doing. Results are used to
     make improvements in instruction. MSPAP tells schools
     whether or not their students are meeting state
     standards for educational achievement. It is different
     from other tests in that it is not multiple-choice or
     short-answer. MSPAP is more a test of skills rather
     than knowledge. It tests students' abilities to apply
     what they have learned to real-life problems. It
     includes reading, language usage, writing, math, social
     studies, and science. Schools are scored in each
     subject. All students in the third, fifth, and eighth
     grade who are working toward a high school diploma are
     tested. MSPAP is important to all students every year
     because it requires good thinking skills, which have to
     be taught and developed over a period of time. The test
     is given during the first two full weeks in May with
     each grade testing for ninety minutes a day for one
     week.

     So what about students with disabilities and MSPAP? Well,
the State Department of Education has a fifty-one-page document
called "The Requirements and Guidelines for Exemptions, Excuses,
and Accommodations for Maryland Statewide Assessment Programs,"
dated October 10, 1995. The general principles are basically that
all students are to be included to the fullest extent possible,
and accommodations are to be made to ensure valid assessment of a
student's real achievement and are designed to assist a student
to move from dependence toward independence.
     Both as a parent of children with and without special needs
and as a special educator, I think this is a good document,
because basically it requires the inclusion of all students who
are pursuing a high school diploma. And since MSPAP is about
accountability for the education of our students, it is right
that we be accountable for the education of each and every
student.
     So blind students take the MSPAP right alongside their
sighted peers, and we all live happily ever after. Well, not
quite. Let me go back again to the Requirements Document. Special
accommodations listed include scheduling, setting, equipment,
presentation, response, and level of participation. So it would
seem that the state is making a real effort to include all kinds
of disabilities in the MSPAP, with the exception of one group:
blind students.
     Let's look at the equipment again. The test provides sign
language interpreters; large print; calculators; electronic
devices, including mechanical spellers, word processors,
computers, augmented communication devices, CCTV amplification;
audiotaped materials; visual displays; written copies; and other.
But no Braille. I personally do not know of a single disability
that is not accommodated other than blindness. Excluding Braille
users from the MSPAP reinforces existing problems on multiple
levels. It reinforces a philosophical problem; it reinforces an
educational problem; and it reinforces a personal problem.
     The federal government is committed to the provision of
equal education for persons with disabilities, including equality
of opportunity to participate at all levels of education. This is
evident in legislation such as IDEA and Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act. Check out the policy statements from OSERS
over the last five or so years.
     MSPAP tries to emulate the real world. I'm sure you've all
heard of the story of the engineer who could give you the square
root of a door knob but couldn't turn it. Well, the purpose of
MSPAP is to see if the students can turn the doorknob, so to
speak. And this is a good thing. Further, MSPAP checks to see if
the students can do this individually, in pairs, in groups, with
others they are used to working with, and with those they are
not. Again, this is a good thing because this is how the real
world works. And isn't that the bottom line, to educate persons
who can function successfully in the real world?
     In a very negative sense, excluding Braille users from MSPAP
does imitate the real world. It mirrors the 70% unemployment rate
of blind persons in this country. And it goes beyond that.
Excluding our children from MSPAP raises the question of whether
or not we are truly committed to finding a place for blind people
in our society. It suggests that it is acceptable to exclude
blind children.
     The exclusion of blind students from MSPAP also creates an
educational problem. Again, the purpose of MSPAP is to raise the
level of performance and to create accountability by the schools
for the education of our children. It is clearly an attempt to
reform and revamp instruction. It is a clear statement that we
need to improve the education of our children. This is not
anything you don't already know. It is regularly in the news.
     Excluding our Braille users from MSPAP also means excluding
our Braille teachers from the continuing education they need to
keep up with improvements in education and instructional
practices. At a recent state-level meeting about Brailling the
MSPAP test, which included representatives from across the state,
a teacher of the visually impaired raised the issue that they
were not included in any MSPAP in-service or training activities
and that they did not have access to the materials. This meeting
included teachers of the visually impaired and administrators
from across the state; and, while there were nods of agreement,
not one person said his or her county included teachers of the
visually impaired. And I don't think I need to belabor the fact
that, when our students are placed in local schools, the teacher
of the visually impaired basically shoulders the responsibility
for the student's education.
     So why not just get around the Braille issue by using
readers? Because it will not work. First of all, how many third
or fifth graders have been taught the skills needed to use a
reader to get an assignment done? But far beyond that, the key to
MSPAP is literacy. Can the student read? And I don't mean just
decode words on a page. Can the student understand and use what
he reads? Can she locate information to answer a question, pick
out major points, identify relevant details, follow directions?
It is not reasonable to do this with a reader. For example, if a
reader skims for major points, whose skills are you testing, the
Braille user's or the reader's? And since MSPAP is inextricably
linked to the real world, I wonder how many of you have a reader
available and ready to go each time you need something read.
     The last quibble I have with the exclusion of Braille users
from MSPAP is what it does to the student. Unless you have a
child who is in school or you yourself are in a school, you may
not realize the changes MSPAP has brought. It is truly creating
fundamental changes in the way we teach our children and what
they are exposed to on a daily basis. Preparation for MSPAP
begins on that first day of the school year and escalates all the
way to the first two weeks in May, when it is administered. It
creates an underlying feeling of excitement and importance. Many
schools dedicate a certain time each week when all students are
to be engaged in MSPAP activities. I saw a sign at the door of a
first grade class that read "MSPAP is Life" in big letters, and
underneath it said "Thursday is MSPAP morning." I have seen the
MSPAP icons and words on bulletin boards and hanging in the halls
of elementary and middle schools alike. Many schools have a MSPAP
word of the day, which they discuss and define on morning
announcements.
     Last year I taught in a Baltimore City school, had one child
in a Baltimore City school, and had two more children in a school
in Anne Arundel County. Starting in about January of last year,
we shared over dinner what our MSPAP word was for the week.
Almost every newsletter for each of their schools addresses
MSPAP, and we even received forms from the school offering parent
training on how to prepare for MSPAP and home activities to do
with our children. Even though I filled out every one and
returned it to school, I never received a single one. When I
asked the principal about it, I was told "Oh, your child won't
take the MSPAP, so she doesn't need it." Wait a minute. The
purpose of MSPAP is to improve the education of our children.
"What do you mean my child doesn't need it?"
     Meanwhile, back on the ranch, our children are experiencing
all this in the announcements, in homeroom activities, etc. Even
when the involvement is indirect, they get excited. And this is
intentional. We want our students pumped up and confident and
ready to take the tests. But then when the test comes, our blind
students are left out for a whole week. And I'm here to tell you,
these kids are not stupid. They do feel left out. They do feel
different. They do feel inadequate. My daughter was a third
grader last year. She was crushed when she was not allowed to
take MSPAP. Even though we had told her it was not Brailled, her
answer was "But Mom, Mrs. Kearney said it was for all third
graders, and I'm a third grader, too." I had no answer.
     In conclusion, I would like us to consider what might happen
if our Braille users were included in MSPAP. First, our teachers
of the visually impaired would have to receive the same training
as other teachers so they would be able to deliver instruction
that would prepare the students to participate. Second, MSPAP
requires that students have "prior knowledge," so teachers of
content areas such as science and social studies and other
instructional staff would be put on notice that these students
are expected to learn the same information as their print-using
peers.
     Third, our Braille students would learn how to participate
in cooperative learning in pairs and group activities, because
that is how many of the MSPAP activities are administered.
Fourth, principals and schools in general would pay more
attention to how and how much our Braille students are learning
because now these students would count on the school's
performance report card from the state. It would create
accountability for the education of our blind children, and
overall, this would result in full participation across the
curriculum and across all activities to the greatest extent
possible. Isn't that what we wanted in the first place?

     There you have Loretta's remarks, and things continued to
hang fire throughout the winter. OCR complaints are notoriously
slow. Then, in early May of 1997 the log jam broke. In late April
the Maryland State Department of Education decided that it
couldn't win this one and sent a list of assurances of compliance
to the Office for Civil Rights. Since Mrs. White's original
complaint had been against both MSDE and the Anne Arundel School
District, the department also saw to it that the school district
submitted a similar list of assurances. The following is the
letter from the Philadelphia office of OCR notifying Loretta
White of what had happened and passing along the list of
assurances. Here are both documents:

                                     U.S. Department of Education
                                       Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
                                          Office for Civil Rights
                                 Brenda L. Wolff, Acting Director
                            Philadelphia Office, Eastern Division

                                                   April 30, 1997

Ms. Loretta G. White
Pasadena, Maryland

Dear Ms. White:
     This letter is to inform you of the determination of the
Office for Civil Rights (OCR), U.S. Department of Education (the
Department), regarding the resolution of the above-referenced
complaint against the Maryland State Department of Education
(MSDE) alleging that the MSDE discriminated on the basis of
disability. Specifically, you alleged that MSDE discriminated
against your daughter on the basis of disability by failing to
administer the Maryland State Performance Assessment Program
(MSPAP) test in accordance with the provisions of your daughter's
Individualized Educational Program (IEP). Please be advised that
we are still in the process of resolving the same allegations
that were filed with our office against the Anne Arundel County
Schools (the District), OCR Docket Number 03961219.
     OCR is responsible for enforcing Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504) and its implementing
regulation, at 34 C.F.R. Part 104, which prohibit discrimination
on the basis of disability in educational institutions that
receive federal financial assistance. OCR has jurisdiction as a
designated agency under Title II of the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), and its implementing regulation,
at 28 C.F.R. Part 35, over complaints alleging discrimination on
the basis of disability that are filed against public elementary
and secondary education systems and institutions, public
institutions of higher education and vocational education (other
than schools of medicine, dentistry, nursing, and other
health-related schools), and public libraries.
     Under OCR policy complaint allegations may be resolved upon
the submission of written commitments from the recipient that
specify the action(s) to be taken to resolve the complaint
allegations appropriately. On April 29, 1997, the MSDE submitted
such commitments to OCR (copy enclosed), thereby resolving all of
the complaint allegations discussed above. As is our standard
practice, implementation of the commitments will be monitored by
OCR.
     This letter is not intended, nor should it be construed, to
cover any other issues under Section 504 and the ADA or their
implementing regulations which are not specifically discussed
therein.
     Please be advised that federal regulations prohibit
recipients of federal financial assistance from taking actions
which intimidate, threaten, coerce or discriminate against
individuals who exercise their statutory rights, or because they
filed a complaint with OCR or are taking part in the complaint
resolution process. If you feel that such actions have occurred,
you may notify this office.
     Under the Freedom of Information Act, it may be necessary to
release this document and related correspondence and records upon
request. If OCR receives such a request, we will seek to protect,
to the extent provided by law, personal information that, if
released, could constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy.
     If you have any questions, please contact Mrs. Yvonne R.
Davis, Equal Opportunity Specialist, at (21 5) 596-6769.

                                                       Sincerely,
                                                     Myra Coleman
                                                      Team Leader
                                              Philadelphia Office

     Enclosed with this letter were the Maryland State Department
of Education's list of assurances of compliance. Here is the
document:

ASSURANCES

In order to resolve complaint number 03964033 filed with the
Office for Civil Rights (OCR), the Maryland State Department of
Education (MSDE) provides the following assurances:

1.   For the Spring 1997 administration of the Maryland School
     Performance Assessment Program (MSPAP) for fifth graders,
     the MSDE will develop and administer a Brailled version of
     the test, as a pilot effort and will ensure that the test is
     administered to blind fifth graders whose educational
     program includes receiving printed material through a system
     of Braille. By April 30, 1997, the MSDE will provide written
     notice to all school districts in Maryland of their
     obligation to provide the Brailled test to all qualified
     blind students in the fifth grade and advising of the need
     to provide written justification if it is determined that
     any individual blind student should be exempted from the
     test. Also, at the same time, the MSDE will notify the
     districts of their obligation to provide practice sessions
     to those students who will be participating in the test. The
     MSDE will review the administration of the test and analyze
     the results of the pilot MSPAP administration by October 1,
     1997.
2.   The MSDE will notify all Maryland school districts that,
     starting with the Spring 1997 administration of the test and
     every year thereafter, all qualified blind students who
     attend schools in its jurisdiction must be provided the
     necessary accommodations to enable them to participate in
     the MSPAP testing program, practice sessions, and home study
     as effectively as students without visual impairments can
     participate. The accommodations may include the use of
     Braille readers and scribes, special equipment, special
     instructions to teachers who are preparing the students for
     the test, extra time, or any other modifications to its
     testing program as will enable each otherwise-qualified
     blind student to participate in the MSPAP testing program as
     effectively as can students without visual impairments.
3.   For purposes of these assurances, districts will not be
     required to provide the MSPAP to an individual blind student
     if an appropriate district Admission, Review, and Dismissal
     (ARD) committee provides written justification of its
     determination that the student should be exempted from the
     test for a reason(s) other than the student's visual
     impairment alone.
4.   The MSDE will permit a qualified blind student to be
     exempted from all or part of the MSPAP test only if the
     appropriate ARD committee of the local school district can
     demonstrate that the accommodations necessary to enable such
     student to participate in the testing program, would
     fundamentally alter the testing program. The MSDE will
     provide to OCR by December 31, 1997, a written report
     listing all blind students exempted from the 1997-98 test,
     the accommodation needed for the student, and the basis of
     its belief that the accommodation would fundamentally alter
     the testing program.

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

The MSDE agrees to report to OCR the following information
regarding the 1997 MSPAP:

1.   By June 30, 1997, the number of blind students, by district,
     school, and grade, as of January 2, 1997;
2.   By April 30, 1997, a description of the steps that will be
     taken to accommodate blind students in preparing for and in
     taking the test;
3.   By June 30, 1997, by name or unique identifier, each blind
     student in the third, fifth, or eighth grade who took the
     MSPAP test, a description of the accommodations that were
     provided to make the student's participation possible.
4.   By June 30, 1997, by name or unique identifier, each blind
     student who is in the third, fifth, or eighth grade and who
     did not take the test for reasons related solely to his or
     her blindness. For each such student identify the school,
     grade, extent of disabilities, and reason(s) for not taking
     the test, and the identification of the persons making the
     decision to exclude the student from the test; and
 5.  By June 30, 1997, a copy of the notice sent to all the
     school districts outlining their obligations to provide the
     Braille test and other accommodations. By December 31, 1997,
     the name or unique identifier of each blind student expected
     to be exempted from the Spring 1998 test, the accommodation
     that would be needed, and the basis for the belief that the
     accommodation would fundamentally alter the testing program.

     Signed by Nancy S. Grasmick, State Superintendent, dated
April 29, 1997.

     Something truly significant has been accomplished in the
fight to establish the equality of blind students in Maryland.
Moreover, the precedent will be important in other states and
situations when so-called educators try to argue that blind
students should not be expected to compete with their sighted
peers. Will this victory help Niki, the child for whom the entire
effort was made in the first place? Perhaps eventually. But the
Anne Arundel School District continues to be so rigid and
vindictive that the Whites decided to pull Niki out and began
home schooling her part way through this past academic year. Niki
is doing well, but as things stand now, she will not be in public
school during the first week of May of her fifth-grade year.
Whether they know it or not, all blind students in Maryland owe a
debt of gratitude to Niki, her mother, and the National
Federation of the Blind.


[PHOTO/CAPTION: John Padilla]
                 Taking a Stand at Rye Playland
                         by John Padilla

     From the Editor: John Padilla is President of the National
Federation of the Blind of Connecticut. In the following anecdote
he recalls the first time he stood up for the principle of
equality despite what it cost him.

     Long before I ever became a Federationist, I had the
philosophy of the Federation deep in my heart. In retrospect I
now recognize that the first time I was called to live this
philosophy was when I was eight years old. My family traveled to
Rye Beach Amusement Park for a family outing. My older brother
and I were too excited to eat the abundant picnic lunch my mother
had prepared. We both had one thought--the rides!
     After we had pushed our picnic lunches from one side of our
plates to the other, my parents finally gave us the high sign to
enter the wild and wonderful amusement park. Although I could not
see the fabulous flashing lights that lined each ride, I could
hear the gleeful laughter mixed with high pitched screams from
the children whirling around on those legendary rides.
     For weeks I had imagined myself on the tilt-a-whirl, the
ferris wheel, the roller-coaster. I pictured myself bumping and
whirling in continuous motion, visualizing each sharp twist and
turn. I had heard about these rides from my older brother, but
now my dreams were about to come true.
     My parents had given me several dollars in change before I
entered the park. I had also saved the allowance money I had
earned specifically for this family outing by doing household
chores. With my hand securely in his, my brother led me to the
first ride. As we waited in line, I anticipated its twists and
turns. Finally we were in the place to get on the ride, but
suddenly a voice shattered my anticipation.
     A burly-sounding carnival operator asked my brother if I was
blind. He submissively answered, "Yes." The man then shoved a
stack of free ride tickets into his hand and told him that I was
allowed to ride free. Why? Because I was blind. This was a real
dilemma for my brother since there were far more free tickets
than we could have bought with the small amount of money we had.
     Before he could answer, I told the man, "No thanks. I'll pay
for the ride just like everybody else." This would-be
philanthropist was demanding that we take these free tickets, but
I knew that, if I wanted to be just like everyone else, I could
not accept the free ride.
     Today I hardly remember the rides that day, but I fully
remember the stand I took. After we had spent the money we had
for the rides, we left the amusement park. As a child I would
have been happy to be strapped into the rides until the park
closed. But I knew one thing: I did not want to ride for free
just because I was blind.
     At the age of eight I already knew that being blind was
respectable, and I still feel the same way at the age of fifty.
But my association with the National Federation of the Blind has
reinforced my stand. I have always known that what I did that day
at Rye Beach was right, but I did not recognize the reason why
until I became an active member of the NFB. We are first-class
citizens entitled to the same life and liberty afforded to all
Americans. I took a stand when I was eight, but the NFB has made
me see why that stand was right.


                        New Mexico Update

     From the Editor: In the October, 1996, issue of the Braille
Monitor we reported on the distressing events over the past
twenty years and more at the New Mexico School for the Visually
Handicapped (NMSVH). Things have continued to happen during the
intervening months. One of the most hopeful events was that
Governor Johnson appointed Jim Salas, a leader of the National
Federation of the Blind, as a member of the school's board of
trustees. The following three news articles, taken from two
Albuquerque newspapers, are self-explanatory.

               Principal of Blind School Voted Out
            Regents Let Boss Go After 19-Year Service
     (Taken from the May 3, 1997, Albuquerque Journal)

     The Associated Press. The New Mexico School for the Visually
Handicapped, undergoing a federal investigation, will not renew
the principal's contract, school regents have decided.
     The regents voted 3 to 2 last week in Albuquerque not to
renew Diane Baker's contract, which expires June 30. She has
worked for the school for nineteen years.
     "I'm not going to talk about the specific reasons" why the
contract was not renewed, Board of Regents President James Salas
said.
     "The Board has to do what it thinks is right, just like all
of the decisions of the school," he said.
     J. Kirk Walter, school superintendent, said he had
recommended that Baker's contract be renewed.
     "She's put in a tremendous amount of time and effort here,"
he said. "I feel she's done an excellent job with both students
and staff."
     Federal agents have been investigating whether the rights of
students were violated at the school, officials have said.
     The Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Justice Department
said in a February 26 letter to Governor Gary Johnson that
investigators would look into whether students at the school were
physically and sexually abused, whether they had adequate medical
care, and whether the education and habitation at the school were
appropriate.
     The school has been under investigation by the state
Attorney General's Office since June, 1996, when nine students
sued former Superintendent Jerry Watkins and several current and
former school employees, alleging they were physically and
sexually abused.
     The allegations covered a time period from 1972 to February,
1996. Six other students later joined the lawsuit.
     The school has an endowment of about $100 million and serves
about seventy students on the Alamogordo campus and about 300
others around the state. It has a staff of about 180 employees.

            School for Blind Target of Federal Probe
     (Taken from the March 14, 1997, Albuquerque Tribune)

     The Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Justice Department has
notified Governor Gary Johnson of a federal probe into rights
violations of students at the New Mexico School for the Visually
Handicapped.
     The February 26 letter said investigators will look for
violations of federal constitutional and statutory rights of
students who attend and live at the school.
     Although the letter did not say what prompted the federal
probe, it said investigators will look into whether students at
the school were subject to physical and sexual abuse, had
adequate medical care, and whether education and habitation at
the school were appropriate.
     The school has been under investigation by the state
attorney general's office since June, 1996, when nine students
filed suit against former superintendent Jerry Watkins and
several current and former school employees, alleging they were
physically and sexually abused.
     The allegations covered a time period from 1972 to February,
1996.

         Former Workers at Blind School Told to Testify,
             Depositions Ordered in Civil Abuse Case
                        by Fritz Thompson
     (Taken from the May 22, 1997, Albuquerque Journal)

     Two key figures in a civil suit alleging physical and sexual
abuse at the New Mexico School for the Visually Handicapped were
told Wednesday they can't keep putting off questions about what
went on at the school before they left.
     State District Judge Eugenio Mathis ordered attorneys for
former school Superintendent Jeriel Watkins and former coach and
physical education instructor Jack Harmon to submit to
depositions as soon as the plaintiffs' attorney can set up a time
and place.
     Watkins has said he can't offer testimony because he is
suffering from a mental illness, and Harmon said he doesn't want
to incriminate himself in a possible forthcoming criminal case.
     Plaintiffs' attorney Bruce Pasternak said he foresees the
depositions being taken sometime in July.
     Mathis refused to extend protective orders that the two
defendants have been using to avoid giving the depositions.
     "We need to make some progress here," Mathis told lawyers in
a hearing that lasted about twenty minutes.
     Filed in May, 1996, the suit contains allegations from
fifteen former students at the Alamogordo school that they were
physically or sexually abused by fellow students or school staff
members over a twenty-three-year period ending last year. The
suit claims the school administration ignored some instances of
abuse or created an environment in which the abuse was allowed to
take place.
     Watkins and Harmon, who each were employed at the school for
about twenty-three years, are named as defendants.
     Mark Jaffe, the attorney representing Harmon, asked Mathis
to extend the protective order for his client for another six
months. He said he was making the request because of
investigations being conducted by the state attorney general, the
Otero County District Attorney, and the U.S. Justice Department.
     "If we hold off and allow the investigations to progress, it
won't impede the case," Jaffe said. "Some of the claims (by the
plaintiffs) are exaggerated and sometimes untrue."
     Later, when Mathis refused to extend Watkins' protective
order, one of Watkins' attorneys, J. Duke Thornton, asked that
the deposition of his client be videotaped and that Watkins be
accompanied by a psychologist and a neuropsychologist "in case he
needs medical attention."
     Pasternak said he has been informed that Watkins "is not in
therapy, but he is on medications."
     "If Watkins is mentally ill, that explains everything about
this case," Pasternak said. "It becomes pertinent to this case."
     He did not speculate as to when Watkins, who retired July 1,
[1996], might have become mentally ill.
     Mathis ordered that Watkins make himself available for
depositions before June 24. Pasternak expects a week or two
delay.
     Through his protective order, Watkins escaped previously
scheduled deposition dates on January 15, February 15, and May
15.
     The case was filed in District Court in Albuquerque. But
when both sides disqualified judges in the district, the state
Supreme Court chief justice appointed Mathis of the 4th Judicial
District in Las Vegas to hear the case.


[PHOTO/CAPTION: Peter and Mary Donahue]
                        Internet Odyssey
                    by Peter and Mary Donahue

     From the Editor: Like other state presidents I am frequently
asked for ideas about what chapters can do as constructive
projects in their communities. Peter and Mary Donahue are leaders
in the San Antonio Chapter of the National Federation of the
Blind of Texas. Last year their chapter took part in an ambitious
and rewarding project that they think could be carried out by
other chapters around the country. This is what they say:

     The ability to go online with a personal computer is perhaps
the most powerful feature of today's technology revolution. For a
blind person this permits access to information not available by
any other means. The chief method of getting information from a
remote computer to your PC is through a World Wide Network called
the Internet.
     The Internet is different things for different people in a
wide variety of professional, educational, and recreational
pursuits. One could easily observe this at the 1996 Internet
Odyssey held at the Henry B. Gonzalez Convention Center in San
Antonio, Texas. Several members of the Greater San Antonio
Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind of Texas
demonstrated the way in which blind people access the Information
Superhighway using a personal computer and adaptive technology.
We discussed the way the PC has opened up countless educational
and job opportunities for the blind and expressed our concerns
about our ability to achieve unlimited access to the Information
Superhighway in the future.
     In addition, chapter members learned how PC's and the
Internet work together to move information around the world. We
even learned how the Internet touches our lives and gained a
deeper understanding of how positive attitudes about blindness
among the blind and sighted alike can help achieve our goals of
security, equality, and unlimited opportunity for all blind
people. What follows is an account of the chapter's participation
in this event as told by Greater San Antonio Chapter Secretary
Peter Donahue.
     Our participation in the Internet Odyssey began in an
unlikely place, the laundry room at the apartment complex where
Mary and I live. I was walking through the laundry room on my way
back to our apartment when I met Mrs. Carolyn Awalt, one of our
neighbors and a multi-media specialist at United States
Automobile Association (USAA), one of San Antonio's largest
employers and insurers of military personnel.
     Mary and I were looking for an Internet provider that could
provide a shell account which would allow us to access the
Internet using MS-DOS. Ms. Awalt told us about her provider,
Texas Net. Several other chapter members were already on Texas
Net, and we eventually got an account with this provider. While
talking to Mrs. Awalt, I brought up our concerns about the
increasing threat to our ability to access the Information
Superhighway because of the graphical user interface and
graphical web-browsers. In response she said, "This sounds like
something you need to tell people at the South Texas Internet
Odyssey. Everyone who has anything to do with the Internet will
be there; that would be the place to air your concerns."
     Mrs. Awalt explained that, unlike most computer- and
Internet-related shows which spend most of their time razzle-
dazzling their audiences with claims about the latest Internet
hardware and software trying to entice would-be buyers, the South
Texas Internet Odyssey emphasized what the Internet is and the
ways many people from many backgrounds and from a wide variety of
educational and vocational callings use it. She said that until
now there had been little participation in this event by members
of the disabled community. She urged us to change that. I told
her that it sounded like a great idea and that, if our members
wanted to participate, we would need to be put in touch with the
organizers so we could make arrangements about our needs. "You
make the decision to participate, and I'll see that your concerns
are addressed."
     In the weeks that followed the chapter's board of directors
discussed the matter at length and decided to participate in the
1996 Internet Odyssey. We had many questions about how we would
carry out this project. First was the problem of the computers we
would need. No one wanted to risk transporting their fragile
hardware and software or do without it at home during the entire
event. Moreover, there was always the possibility of theft if the
security at the show was lax.
     But then it occurred to me that several of us used both
Vocal-Eyes from GW Micro, a screen reader for accessing DOS-based
applications, and JAWS for Windows from Henter-Joyce, a program
for accessing Windows applications. Both of these programs
support the Braille 'n Speak from Blazie Engineering, so we could
use the Braille 'n Speak as a speech synthesizer. This
arrangement would be extremely portable, requiring only a simple
set-up and take-down, and we could take the equipment home at
night. If we could load the software onto a PC at the show, we
wouldn't even have to worry about carting computers back and
forth every day.
     But could show organizers provide the PC? Mrs. Awalt
contacted Richard Wadsworth, a professor of computer science at
the University of Texas at San Antonio. He said he was glad to
hear that we wanted to participate in this year's show and
promised to give us all the help we needed, including a PC and
transportation for participating chapter members. He even saw to
it that we had a phone line for the modem and technical and
personal support during the show.
     My chance meeting with Mrs. Awalt occurred in late August,
and the Internet Odyssey was to take place in late October. We
had just under two months to put an exhibit together, but we were
up to the challenge. We briefly looked for a personality to
increase the attractiveness of our exhibit, but the notice was
too short. We soon discovered that no other NFB chapter had tried
a project like this one, so, though we had encouragement from Mr.
Ring at the International Braille and Technology Center and
Curtis Chong, President of the NFB in Computer Science, we were
on our own to do the best we could.
     As the show date drew closer, things gradually fell into
place. We decided to set up our display in the area for vendors.
We shared the location with the San Antonio Express News, our
local newspaper; the International Bank of Commerce (IBC); and
Diamond Computers, to name a few of many. The important thing was
that we were taking our message of hope and a positive view of
blindness to the Internet community to help its members
understand our concerns about continued full access to the
Information Superhighway for blind people and our ability to
compete for jobs requiring the use of personal computers.
     When we learned that there was to be a seminar component to
the show, we asked to be included in that program as well. These
seminars covered using the Internet; Real Audio (a program for
listening to radio broadcasts from around the world through the
Internet); designing World Wide Web pages; and video conferencing
to conduct business meetings and seminars from headquarters to
field offices around the world on the Internet. Our request was
granted. We would give our presentation on Monday, October 28, at
5 p.m.
     In the weeks before the event we worked out the final
details of our participation in the show. Professor Wadsworth
turned transportation over to Mrs. Margaret Halsema, who by
herself handled rides to and from the convention center from all
around the city. Lisa Hall and I went to the convention center on
the morning of October 26 to set up the equipment and to install
the screen-reading software and Procom Plus, the communications
software.
     This was the first time that any of us had used Netscape
Navigator since none of us had ever used a Windows Web browser,
but we wanted to show folks that Internet access through Windows
was possible. As soon as our network connection was working, I
got a crash course in using Netscape Navigator. Jaws for Windows
has macros that make Navigator more speech-friendly, so it was
not too hard to master. On this trip we brought the literature to
be distributed during the show.
     We were not prepared for what awaited us upon arriving at
the hall where the Internet Odyssey was being held. The scene was
more reminiscent of a warehouse rummage sale than a computer
exhibition. When we walked in, we encountered scaffolding, large
bags, barrels, boxes, trash, pieces of plywood, and machinery
parked everywhere. It was a hot day, and the air conditioning was
not yet working. The humidity in that room was fierce.
     The place smelled of oil, gasoline, and tar, and dust was
everywhere. Because we had good travel skills, we traversed this
obstacle course with ease. But there was nothing to do but wait
until the mess was transformed into the setting for a computer
show. We decided that I should come back in the evening to set up
the equipment for the next day.
     In fact, I didn't get to do anything in our booth until
after 9:00 p.m. that evening when the computers arrived.
Establishing the network for the computer show was an interesting
process to watch, but I had my hands full when I began loading
the software that we would need. I didn't finish the installation
until well after midnight. The next morning we did the final
installation of software and made last-minute preparations.
     We were ready for the opening of the show at 12 noon when we
heard the unmistakable opening chords to the theme from 2001: A
Space Odyssey, indicating that the show was open and ready to
receive the public. As that afternoon passed, we were visited by
many persons, including some teachers of the blind and local
business persons and others interested in what we had to share
with show visitors.
     In addition to distributing our literature, we displayed the
NFB WEB site and showed visitors the wealth of information about
blindness they could find there. We discovered that keeping the
computer talking was the key to keeping the public coming to our
booth. When the speech stopped, President Sofka would shout:
"Come on, Pete, get that speech going! That's what's got them
coming over here, so keep it going!"
     Some of those who listened to the speech complained that
they could not understand what was being said. We explained that
understanding synthetic speech, especially less-human-sounding
synthetic speech, requires one to develop an ear for what is
being said and how words are being pronounced. Since we use
synthetic speech regularly, our ears are accustomed to it, and we
can understand what is being said. However, even some blind
people can't understand synthesized speech, and for them and some
others large print or Braille access is more desirable.
     Several of us worked the computer, taking turns during the
show. Those who weren't computer-literate were put to work
handing out literature and talking to visitors about the NFB in
general. Suffice it to say, anyone who wanted to help had a job
to do. The high point of the show for us came Monday afternoon,
October 28, when we gave our seminar on computer access for the
blind. When the announcement was made, people came running from
everywhere. Vendors closed down their booths, and even the
workers in the CyberCafe came over to see what all the fuss was
about. Later we were told that there were fifty to one hundred
people at our seminar--the largest number of attendees at any of
the seminars during the entire show.
     President Sofka welcomed everyone and gave a brief
explanation of what the NFB was and what we were hoping to
accomplish at the Internet Odyssey. Following his speech several
of us demonstrated the ways we accessed various components of the
Internet. Scott Edwards used Gopher, a program that provides
text-based access to various online archives such as the National
Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped's book
collection. Then Lisa Hall demonstrated Internet Relay Chat
(IRC), which allows one to talk over the Net in real time with
folks from around the world. Prior to the show she had arranged
with some of her friends on Genie, one of several widely-known
online services, to meet her in one of Genie's chat rooms. These
are areas where people can meet to discuss matters of specific
interest such as surfing the Internet, for example. Her
demonstration was received with much applause from the audience.
     But the climax of the seminar was the sending of an e-mail
message around the world on seven different blindness-related
mailing lists or listservs. Since we wanted to let the blind of
the world know what we were doing to improve access to
information and to raise awareness of the need to protect this
access, we felt it appropriate to do this in the hope that others
would be inspired to do what we were doing. The message read in
part:
     Blind people of the world,
     This message is coming to you from the Henry B. Gonzalez
Convention Center in San Antonio, Texas. We are participating in
the 1996 South Texas Internet Odyssey to show how blind persons
can use a personal computer and adaptive technology and to raise
awareness of the threat to our continued ability to access the
Information Superhighway posed by the ever-increasing use of
graphical user interfaces, bitmap-images, and other factors. The
members of the Greater San Antonio Chapter of the National
Federation of the Blind of Texas would like to encourage you to
do what you can to promote awareness of these issues, including
participating in events similar to this one. Greetings from all
of us, and let's keep the Net accessible to the blind.

                                                     Yours truly,
                                           James Sofka, President
                                      Greater San Antonio Chapter
                        National Federation of the Blind of Texas

     Throughout the week we received responses to that message,
congratulating us on our efforts. Some people even shared
information about what they were doing in their communities or
countries to heighten awareness of the challenges faced by blind
computer users. But the highest compliment we received came from
Marti Knight, one of the principal organizers of the Internet
Odyssey. He said, "If we have accomplished anything at all this
year, this is it. Showcasing the use of the Internet by the
disabled will more than justify what we have spent in time,
money, and manpower to put on this show. This is an area we need
to expand in the coming years."
     The show concluded on October 29, and all of us were
exhausted, but we all felt good about a job well done. I believe
that not only the sighted public but we ourselves took away
something important from this show. For one thing we were the
first group of the disabled to exhibit at this show. In addition,
we proved to ourselves that, no matter what the size, any of our
chapters can stage events such as this when chapter members work
together to see the task through.
     Some of us also took away something deep and personal
individually. I for one did. Helping to put this event together
for our chapter led me once more to confirm something about
myself. I thrive on challenge, and when challenging situations
are absent from my life or when the outcome is unsuccessful, I
tend to turn in on myself. When I was a child being educated at
several residential schools for the blind, students were never
challenged to reach beyond themselves in any way. Experiences
like the Internet Odyssey remind me how much healthier it is to
reach beyond and to experience success. I thank God that today's
blind children and their parents have the National Federation of
the Blind to encourage them to stretch and grow.
     Since the show a number of things have happened as a direct
result of our participation in this event. For one thing our
chapter now has a World Wide Web site:
http://www.txdirect.net/users/sdyer/nfb/ We welcome all you Web
surfers to visit us online.
     Several of our members are now on the Internet Odyssey Team,
the organization that oversees and organizes the Internet Odyssey
and other events to support this and other Internet-related
projects here in San Antonio. One of these is installing computer
networks in local schools so that the students can have access to
the Net for educational purposes.
      Our work here in San Antonio has sparked interest in having
a similar show in El Paso. We have already contacted members of
our Greater El Paso Chapter about this proposed event, and they
are excited about participating in a show in their area similar
to ours. We would strongly urge all local chapters and state
affiliates to participate in computer shows. There is a
tremendous potential for doing public education of computer
professionals and amateurs through a show such as this. This
participation could pay back big dividends for us in the coming
years.
     Consider this example. The Internet Multi-media Academy is
an organization that, among other things, teaches school-aged
students how to design and write computer software for
educational purposes. We have requested to be a part of this
organization in order to help the kids understand the necessity
for designing their programs so that they are accessible to and
usable by the blind. At a recent planning meeting of the Internet
Odyssey team I heard from a woman who told the group that her son
teaches software and web-page design. As a part of his curriculum
his students are now required to design their projects so that
they can be accessed by blind persons. We haven't solved all of
our access problems just by participating in one computer
exhibition, but we have planted the seeds of knowledge and
understanding. We are excited about participating in this year's
Internet Odyssey, and we invite everyone interested to come to
this year's show.
     It will take place October 12 and 13, 1997, at the Henry B.
Gonzalez Convention Center in San Antonio, Texas. It is exciting
to know that we have gained some strong allies in our fight to
keep computers and the Internet accessible to the blind. Let's
spread the good news that even in cyberspace we are changing what
it means to be blind.


[PHOTO/CAPTION: Tom Bickford]
                   Forty Years a Federationist
                       by Thomas Bickford

     From the Editor: Tom Bickford has been a Federationist for
many years. In many ways that experience has shaped and defined
who he is and the gifts he has to offer in every part of his
life. This is what he says about the enriching influence of the
NFB in a person's life:

     It was in October of 1956 that I first joined the National
Federation of the Blind. Kenneth Jernigan was the president of
the chapter in Oakland, California, at the time, and that is
where I got a thorough grounding in Federationism. I didn't know
what I was getting into, but the more I participated, the better
it got for me.
     You had better believe that we had an active chapter. We
sold raffle tickets. We wrote letters to legislators. We traveled
to the state capital to appear at hearings. We made friendly
visits to nearby chapters. We participated in the NFB state
conventions. On top of all that we got together for dinner
parties. As you see, we were busy.
     The most important part of these activities for me was a
growing understanding that it was all being done by blind people.
Meetings were chaired. Reports were given. Trips were taken.
Activities were organized. I became part of all that, and I was
just as blind as everybody else in the chapter.
     My first National Convention was the next summer in New
Orleans. Many members of the Federation know what a learning
experience that can be for a young person. Three days by
Trailways bus from Oakland to New Orleans was just the beginning.
I had my first experience with that southern food called grits
and observed racially segregated facilities for the first time. I
had yet to learn how close that would come to my own life. I
learned a lot about the Federation, but I learned even more about
myself. I have missed more National Conventions than I have
attended--some for good reasons and some for bad, but every one
of those I attended was full of fun, fellowship, learning, and
inspiration.
     The thorough grounding in Federationism I got has stood me
in good stead through the decades. I consider my achievements in
and through the Federation as glory to the cause. I have enough
ego to be glad when I hear my name spoken or find it published,
but I know it is there because I stayed with the Federation, its
principles, and its members. Over the years I have served as
president, vice president, secretary, and treasurer in the
chapters where I was a member as well as chairman and member of
many committees. If I tell you of my three proudest achievements,
you must believe that they are glory for the cause as well as for
me.
     In 1968 and 1969 I chaired the committee that presented
several candidates for the NFB official song. The convention
chose the "Battle Song," and that song has inspired us through
the years. I am glad that we also inspired more people to write
more songs, and now we have books full of songs.
     In 1971 and 1972 I chaired a committee in Washington, D.C.,
which presented testimony before Congress that led to the passage
of the White Cane Law covering the District of Columbia. It all
started when I was trying to help two blind men through a
discriminatory situation in a local movie theater. That led to
contacting their local Congressman, to whom I sent a copy of Dr.
tenBroek's model White Cane Law. When it was all over I got a
souvenir pen from the Nixon White House with the Presidential
seal on it.
     In 1992 I found myself explaining to a sighted friend some
of the techniques I use to know when to get off the bus. I
decided to write it down, and that was the beginning of Care and
Feeding of the Long White Cane. I spent lots of evenings and
weekends with my Braille writer on my lap, and I received lots of
help from my Federation friends in the form of ideas and the
physical production of the manuscript. In November of 1993 the
Federation published the book, which I am delighted to say has
already helped hundreds of people.
     There is always more work to be done for the cause. How do
you know what to do? The more you get involved, the more will
come to your attention. If you can do more things and better than
I have done, more power to you. There are gavels ready to be
pounded; paper waiting for your ink or Braille; interviewers
looking for subjects; cakes to be baked and sold; and always more
people who need us and whom we need. If you need help, ask, and
people and materials will be on your doorstep.
     Lots of us collect quotations which we find helpful, so here
is one for today. "An artist is not a special kind of person, but
every person is a special kind of artist." I would add that all
of us have more than one talent to bring to the cause. Sometimes
I am just a warm body, sometimes a loud voice, maybe a not-so-
perfect typist writing a letter, now and again a song leader at a
picnic, or part of a brainstorming session deciding how to make
use of someone else's talents. Some of these abilities I brought
to the Federation, but others I developed after I joined. What
kind of artist are you?


[PHOTO: This picture of the Gardner family was taken in a barn. Becca Gardner
holds the baby and two of the older children hold young goats. The family
members are seated on bales of hay. CAPTION: Bruce and Becca Gardner with
their six children.]
                     Will Madness Never End?
                       by Bruce A. Gardner

     From the Editor: Unless they live on otherwise uninhabited
desert islands, all blind parents have collections of depressing
stories about the people who presume that blindness must make one
incompetent to be a good parent and who then communicate that
opinion to the world. I remember facing another faculty wife at
an Oberlin College social event shortly after I began wearing
maternity clothes when my husband and I were expecting our first
child. In a penetrating voice she inquired after a long look at
my dress, "How do you expect to take care of this baby? Surely
Bob can't be around all the time."
     Now the truth of the matter was that I did not know how I
was going to manage a baby. (As a child birth education teacher
several years later I would discover that even those first-time
parents who think they know what they are doing don't have a clue
about what it takes to be a good parent.) But at the time I only
knew that I had tackled lots of things in my life as a blind
person without knowing beforehand exactly how I would accomplish
what I wanted to do, and so far I had always been able to solve
the problems or get around them somehow. So I said with as much
restraint as I could that I thought I would manage about as well
as anybody else would, and then I walked away before she could
begin cross-questioning me about the details.
     By the time we had three children and I had perfected the
mother shuffle and the ability to pick up toys in my sleep, I
could laugh with genuine humor when the uninitiated commented how
wonderful it must be to have children who spontaneously put away
their toys to keep the floors clear in the name of parental
safety. It was probably the offspring of these folks who
periodically asked our children what it was like to have a mom
who couldn't cook.
     Mostly such inquiries merely puzzled the children when they
were small because they picked up their toys only when it looked
as if I would become seriously angry unless they did so and
because I did more cooking and baking than the mothers of most of
their friends. But the time came when such misunderstandings and
ignorance began seriously to anger them, and I found myself
having to teach them and myself constructive ways of dealing with
such situations.
     As so often happens, education was the solution. Together we
learned that most people were willing and able to learn the truth
about blindness if we stopped to teach them. Laughter and
perspective were the tools that enabled us to do the teaching
with both patience and firmness. And it worked. The two older
children each took part in a play group before starting nursery
school, and there was never a murmur about the safety of the
toddlers coming to our house when it was my turn to have the
children. Our birthday party invitations were always accepted
with enthusiasm. In short, the people who had the most contact
with our family concluded that blindness didn't have much to do
with anything but the marks on the oven control and the Braille
on the microwave.
     In the midst of the struggle with irrationality or the
frustration of trying to teach people the truth, it can be very
hard to remember that we really are making progress in educating
others about the abilities of blind people. That's why it is so
helpful to work as part of the National Federation of the Blind.
It helps us keep a healthy perspective. In the following little
story Bruce Gardner tells about an astonishing series of
encounters with a woman who seemed incapable of learning from the
data before her eyes. What I would have given through the years
to have been an attorney, as Bruce is, in order to add weight to
what I was saying! But it is comforting, somehow, to know that
even people like Bruce have run-ins like the following. His
conclusion is sound; there continues to be plenty for the
National Federation of the Blind to do. This is what Bruce says:

     I know that, although the National Federation of the Blind
has for over fifty years been spreading the truth about blindness
and making great progress in changing what it means to be blind,
incorrect ideas and negative notions about blindness still
abound. However, to my surprise, one old misconception that I
thought had surely been eradicated by now raised its ugly head
and stared me in the face only a few months ago.
     In February of 1996, when our daughter Becca was just a
baby, my wife and I went to San Diego, California, to attend the
wedding of a friend. While there, we went to a reception brunch,
and we took the baby along.
     As we left the hotel restaurant and walked out to the
parking lot to get into our car, I happened to be carrying little
Becca asleep in my arms. A well dressed and well mannered woman
came out quickly from the hotel and asked if everything was okay.
We replied that it was. She apologized for bothering us and
explained that she was just concerned about the baby. She said,
"I saw the white cane and, and . . . ." She then excused herself
and left.
     Moments later she came rushing back, fumbling in her purse
for a pen and paper and asked for our names. When I inquired why,
she said, "I just want to make sure that the baby is all right
because, well, I saw the cane and thought you were blind. Sorry
to bother you." And she left again.
     My wife went back into the hotel to change into slacks
because we were going to play tourist for a few hours. I decided
that, while she was gone, I would walk around the parking lot
enjoying the cool breeze with the baby asleep in my arms. A
moment later the same woman was back again, trying to get our
license plate number. Again she raised her concern about a baby's
being held by a man with a white cane. She asked if I was just
using the stick as a pointer for a seminar I was conducting in
the hotel. I told her it was indeed a blind man's cane and that I
was using it because I was a blind man. She again apologized and
left in a tizzy.
     Believe it or not, a few moments later she approached me a
fourth time, expressing concern for the safety of the child. By
then I had had enough. And believing that sometimes the most
appropriate reaction to outrageous behavior is outrage, I took a
couple of steps toward her and calmly but firmly said, "Look,
lady, I am blind. This is my baby; and I often hold, carry, and
care for her. She is just fine!" I then said, "I am also an
attorney, and I know the law. If you bother me again, I will call
the police." She did not return.
     Although she was well dressed and well mannered, I could not
help thinking she was not quite right in the head. But then I was
well dressed and well mannered, too (at least until my last
comment), and apparently she thought I was crazy for thinking a
blind person could safely and successfully raise children.
Because Becca is our sixth child and our oldest three are the
most polite and well-adjusted teenagers you could hope to find
(parental bias notwithstanding), and because I personally know
dozens of blind parents who have successfully raised their
children, I think I know which of the two of us was right.
     Experiences like these cause me to strengthen my resolve to
do all I can to help the National Federation of the Blind share
with others the truth about blindness. I know we are making great
progress, but I am amazed at how long some of the most ridiculous
negative notions linger.


[PHOTO/CAPTION: Gerald Moreno]
                  The Power of Being Plugged In
                        by Gerald Moreno

     From the Editor: Those of us who have been members of the
NFB for many years sometimes take for granted all the benefits we
receive from the organization every day. It's fairly easy for
those who read Federation material but remain aloof from contact
with members to dismiss as propaganda the enthusiastic stories of
those who have recently discovered what a difference the National
Federation of the Blind has made in their lives. Gerald Moreno
presented the following speech during the Job Opportunities for
the Blind Seminar at the 1997 convention of the NFB of New Jersey
on April 18. It is a salutary reminder to us all of how important
it is that we share the gift of the Federation with every blind
person willing to listen. This is what Gerald Moreno said:

     I wanted to use the hair dryer last week. My daughter likes
to keep it in her room, and I always have to look for it. She
claims that I do not have enough hair to use a dryer. Annoyed by
the search, I grabbed the plug and plugged it in. It didn't work.
I had a perfectly good hair dryer, and it didn't work. Then I
realized that I had plugged in the wrong cord. When I plugged in
the right one, it worked.
     It wasn't that the hair dryer wouldn't or couldn't work; it
should have worked, but it didn't because I had grabbed the wrong
plug. The same can be said for the about 70 percent of blind
people in this nation who are unemployed. There are perfectly
employable blind people out there who, for whatever reason, are
not plugged in and not working. Others are working below their
potential.
     I would like to share my experiences with you about the
power of being plugged in--how, why, where. I entered Rutgers in
1968. In late 1969 I had to stop driving because my eyesight had
deteriorated. At that point I went through what many blind people
go through. Many weeks and many tests later I was declared
legally blind. Until this time I was not aware that there was a
National Federation of the Blind.
     I registered with the library in Trenton, RFB in Princeton,
and the New Jersey Commission for the Blind. At that time the
Commission paid for my tuition and books and gave me spending
money. Still I didn't hear about the NFB.
     I graduated in 1972 with a B.A. in economics. Thus I began
my job search. No one was interested. I felt alone in a world
full of people. It was sort of like being a plug that couldn't
find the receptacle where the power was.
     In November, 1973, I was shopping in the W.T. Grants
Department store and had stopped to ask questions of one of the
employees. I related my story to him: no job and my wife four
months pregnant. Little did I know that he was the store manager.
He told me to file an application for a job, and I was hired on
the spot. He gave me a chance.
     Although I was working, this job did not pay enough. I
continued to search and finally found a job as a social worker
for the Essex County Division of Welfare. It was early 1974, and
I still hadn't heard of the NFB.
     In late 1974 there was a change in managers at my office. A
gentleman by the name of William Waldman became the assistant
field office supervisor. Mr. Waldman asked me to take oversight
of the Work Registration Project. The fact that I was legally
blind didn't enter into the equation.
     Over the next five years I had contact with the New Jersey
Commission for the Blind as I developed various needs. I also had
contact with other agencies and groups, but I didn't learn about
the NFB yet. One thing that I should have done was remain active
with the Talking Book Library in Trenton. During my interview I
inquired about receiving Talking Books again. After I reapplied,
I was put on their mailing list.
     The library's spring newsletter arrived in March of 1994.
After being introduced to the technology available and seeing how
it would increase my job performance, I was anxious to call a
telephone number listed in the newsletter for more information
about computers and adaptive technology.
     The telephone number belonged to David deNotaris. I called
David, and the rest is history. Not only did he talk to me about
his computer, he introduced me to an organization that could
benefit me. He introduced me to the National Federation of the
Blind. Finally I heard! Because I had contact with fellow blind
users of adaptive technology, I was better informed. When my
employer was about to purchase my adaptive equipment, I found out
that they had made some changes, and the substitutions were not
compatible. I believe they were acting in good faith, but they
didn't have the expertise to assemble a suitable package for me.
     By that time I had been in contact with a member of the NFB
by the name of Bob Kannish. He explained his system to me, and I
wanted a similar one. Just before the altered package was
purchased, I was able to intercept the order and have it
modified. This technological catastrophe was averted because I
was plugged in. A potential problem was converted into an
advantage because I had contact with those who knew.
     Due to a rather lengthy process (both the Commission's and
my employer's) of testing, evaluations, questionnaires, and more,
the adaptive equipment arrived in January of 1995. Should it have
taken so long? No, but I did get the equipment. We should
probably work on shortening the period between the first
evaluation and the arrival of any assistance such as training or
adaptive equipment.
     Think about what would have happened if I hadn't been
networking. That is why it is important to be plugged in. You can
find out that someone before you has already invented the wheel
so that you don't have to reinvent it.
     When I met David in April, he asked me to go on a bus ride
to the National Center in Baltimore the next month. That is where
I attended my first NFB chapter meeting. I also purchased my
first cane that day. I often wonder when I would have gotten
around to buying one if I had not taken that trip.
     It is very important to remain plugged in. Think of a
rechargeable battery. As long as it remains connected to the
power source, it is energized. The power in the battery would
enable you to listen to a radio or tape this talk. If the
batteries were run down, you would be powerless to do what you
wanted to do.
     Just as a battery needs to be charged, so do you. The blind
job seeker needs to know how or where to look for a job. Not only
the job seeker, but every blind person should take advantage of
what is available. As I said earlier, the right equipment was
purchased for me because I was plugged in.
     You remain plugged in by attending local NFB chapter
meetings and conventions and by getting on mailing lists such as
Job Opportunities for the Blind, the Braille Monitor, and other
worthwhile publications. Developing new relationships and
networking with those who have walked the path you are about to
walk can help guarantee that you will not succumb to the same
pitfalls that others have.
     My life has decisively changed since my introduction to the
NFB. New friends, experiences, opportunities, and challenges have
come my way. The question some might ask is, "How different would
things be if you weren't plugged in?" The truth is that I am
plugged in, so I don't have to wonder. What I do ponder is, what
is next for me?
     Recently I read an article by Carol Castellano in the
Braille Monitor entitled "Possibilities." (By the way, this
appears in the newest Kernel Book, entitled Beginnings and
Blueprints.) In the article Carol recounts conversations that she
had with her daughter Serena concerning her future. The article
reminded me of some conversations that I had with my daughter
concerning future possibilities. I said that I was considering
going on to further my education. The other possibility was to
change careers in a few years. My choices are limited only by my
imagination.
     The possibilities are countless. However, if you aren't
plugged in, you will never be aware of the multitude of choices
before you. Why limit yourself? Life has enough restrictions of
its own. Don't add to them. Become plugged in and informed of the
menu of choices in front of you. Place your order and enjoy. You
are a peculiar type of hair dryer. You can decide to plug
yourself in or not. Plug yourself in and get hot--on fire for
success. The choice is yours.
     I chose to be plugged in over three years ago. Being plugged
in has revealed to me things that I wouldn't have known
otherwise. This is my third state convention, and I am looking
forward to my third national. If you have never attended a
National Convention, by all means make an effort and meet us in
New Orleans. You will assuredly feel the power of being plugged
in.


[PHOTO/CAPTION: Heather Kirkwood]
                 K.U. Grad Has News for Doubters
                       by Heather Kirkwood

     Taken from the July-August, 1996, issue of The Freestate
News, a publication of the NFB of Kansas.
     Editor's note: Heather Kirkwood is a 1992 NFB Scholarship
winner and a 1996 graduate of the University of Kansas in
Lawrence. Here is her article about her decision to major in
journalism and turn it into a lifelong career.

     My senior year of high school I had two options for fourth
period--driver's education and journalism. My guidance counselor
and I laughed at the apparent absurdity of the situation.
     Both classes seemed a waste of time for a legally blind
student, but we decided on journalism because it wasn't likely to
get me killed.
     We were right. That was five years ago, and I'm still here,
but as I walk down the hill Sunday to receive a bachelor of
science in journalism, I won't be laughing.
     In high school I lived in Germany and had the chance to
witness many big stories firsthand. I had been in East Berlin
only weeks before the Berlin Wall fell and in Tallinn, Estonia,
weeks before residents declared their independence from the
Soviet Union. On every trip I carried a notebook in my purse and
took copious notes about everyone I met and everything they said.
     But become a journalist? I didn't allow myself to entertain
the thought because I didn't want to be disappointed. I decided I
would use my interest in politics to make the news, not report
it, and set out for college to major in political science. But my
attitudes toward politics and blindness changed a lot during my
freshman year. Expectations had been set by people who considered
themselves progressive because they made allowances for me.
     The summer before my freshman year in college I met a blind
reporter who worked for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram. A year
later, as I rethought my career goals, I kept thinking about
her. Journalism went from an absurd idea to a perfect solution.
What other profession would allow me to be a part of current
events, get to know lots of different kinds of people, study
them, and learn how issues affected their lives? Best of all, I
could ask lots of nosy questions and tell people it was my job.
     I discussed my plans with my counselor at Vocational
Rehabilitation Services for the Blind. While her initial response
was encouraging, her boss was not enthusiastic. He thought I
should think about whether my career plans were realistic. My
family reacted the same way.
     Luckily, I was not convinced. I was a reporter for my
college's newspaper and had few problems.
     The pressure was on, however, when I transferred to Kansas
University and took my first reporting class.
     I felt I had a lot to prove, but I kept up with my peers,
and my confidence grew. That is, until I went to cover a city
commission meeting.
     I watched the meeting on television the week before and
listened carefully to each member's voice. Then I drew a seating
chart and assigned each member a number so I wouldn't have to
write their names.
     Amazed at how crafty and resourceful I thought I had been, I
went to the meeting and discovered that Lawrence City Commission
members never introduced themselves or recognized each other by
name. I also discovered that the sound system distorted the
voices and changed their direction.
     That night tears streamed down my face as I attempted to
attribute quotes by process of elimination. I would have to admit
to my professor that blindness had interfered with my ability to
get the story. I trudged up the hill, turned in my story, and
confessed what had happened. My professor looked at me, shrugged
his shoulders, and said, "You live in Lawrence right? Don't you
have a right to know who is saying what at a meeting? Why didn't
you just get up and ask them to identify themselves before
talking?"
     Sometimes the hardest problems have the simplest solutions.
     Since then I have had two internships and have been a
reporter for the University Daily Kansan. Like sighted reporters,
I don't like to waste time traveling from point A to point B, so
I make lots of phone calls. Many stories involve covering events
or meetings that allow me a few hours to arrange transportation
or get directions.
     Now, as I begin looking for a job, I bristle at the idea
that there is anything unusual about being a journalist and being
blind. When editors ask questions such as how I will cover
stories, I have to remind myself that five years ago I would have
asked the same thing. Graduation may be a small victory for me,
but the war is only just beginning.


[PHOTO/CAPTION: Jim Omvig]
                    An Old Friend Is Honored:
      Our Fight Against Insurance Discrimination Remembered
                        by James H. Omvig

     From the Editor: Jim Omvig of Tucson, Arizona, has been an
active leader of the National Federation of the Blind since the
early 1960's. He has played a key role in several major
Federation victories, including the struggle to stamp out
insurance discrimination against the blind. This is what he says:

     In late February, 1997, I was contacted by Mrs. Kay Williams
of Des Moines, Iowa, formerly an Administrative Assistant with
the Iowa Insurance Department. Kay told me that an Insurance
Department of Iowa's Hall of Fame was being established, and she
asked for my help.
     Kay was nominating former Iowa Insurance Commissioner
Herbert Anderson as a charter inductee into the new Hall of Fame
(Herb passed away in 1979). Since she knew that Herb had played a
key role in the NFB'S fight to eliminate insurance discrimination
against the blind, she felt that a letter from me outlining
Herb's contribution in our struggle would give additional weight
to her nomination.
     Of course I agreed to do it. I have now heard again from
Mrs. Williams. She told me that Herb Anderson was indeed inducted
posthumously as a charter member. She said that my letter
outlining what Herb did for the Federation was a pivotal factor
in his selection.
     Following is the text of my letter of support:

                                   March 4, 1997

Mrs. Kay Williams, Director
Iowa Ethics and Campaign Disclosure Board
Des Moines, Iowa

Re:  Insurance Department of Iowa's Hall of Fame
     Support for the Posthumous Induction of Herbert W. (Herb)
     Anderson

Dear Mrs. Williams:
     The purpose of this letter is to urge as strongly as I can
that former Iowa Insurance Commissioner Herbert W. Anderson be
among the charter inductees into the Insurance Department of
Iowa's Hall of Fame. I consider it both an honor and a privilege
to have known and worked with Herb, and it is also both an honor
and a privilege for me to have the opportunity to write this
letter in support of his induction. I apologize for its length,
but the impact Herb had on the lives of blind Americans can be
understood only if the story of Herb Anderson and the blind of
America is told.
     The poet Kahlil Gibran, the author of The Prophet, wrote,
"Work is love made visible." I believe that this brief but
profound phrase captures the essence of the man Herb Anderson. He
loved and thrived on his work; he loved the law; he loved good
and right and justice; he loved his family and his fellow human
beings; and he demonstrated all of this love through his tireless
work and his monumental achievements. Also his loyalty, his
character, and his integrity were above reproach. And, as if all
of this were not enough, it must also be pointed out that Herb
possessed a healthy supply of plain old common sense.
     I first met Herb Anderson professionally (I had previously
met him socially) in July of 1976. My wife Sharon and I had
traveled by plane from Des Moines to Los Angeles and back during
the first week of July of that year. At the Des Moines airport we
tried to purchase flight insurance. The carrier would sell
$375,000 of insurance to my sighted wife but would sell me only
$20,000 worth because I am blind.
     Upon returning to Des Moines, I went to see Herb to file a
complaint of insurance discrimination against the blind. Even
though the Iowa Insurance Regulation did not specifically
prohibit discrimination based upon blindness, Herb accepted my
complaint since, in general, the regulations did prohibit unfair
discrimination. His acceptance of this complaint induced speedy
action, and the discriminating carrier resolved the problem
within a matter of days.
     However, by this time I had informed Herb that flight
insurance was not a blind person's only or even his or her major
insurance problem. Some companies would not sell life insurance
to us at all. Others would sell, but at an increased rate. Some
would sell only to the well-adjusted blind. Many would not sell
policies with double-indemnity or waiver-of-premium benefits, and
many would not sell medical insurance at all. All of this was
based upon the assumption that we were poor risks.
     It must be understood that I was not asking for any kind of
special treatment for the blind. I was asking only for equal
treatment under the law, and Herb understood and accepted this
premise.
     Demonstrating something of the thoroughness and fairness of
Herb Anderson, he did not simply accept my telling him that all
of the foregoing was true. To learn the objective facts for
himself and for the Insurance Commission, he conducted a survey
of the major carriers doing business in Iowa.
     The results were so shocking and so outrageous that Herb
decided to propose a rule-making procedure to establish an Iowa
Rule specifically prohibiting unfair discrimination against the
blind. This was a first in the United States.
     I shall never forget hearing day. Herb had set aside a small
hearing room, and he had also decided to conduct the hearing
himself. He had assumed there would be two or three witnesses.
Instead, more than two-hundred industry officials and
representatives from throughout this nation showed up to oppose
the rule. The industry does not like to be regulated. The hearing
had to be delayed until he could find a larger facility.
     After each of those officials who testified in opposition
was finished making a presentation, Herb asked, "And what
empirical data, what evidence do you have to show that the blind
are in fact poor risks?" None was able to produce a shred of
evidence, and Herb ultimately adopted the rule. His action did
not win any friends for him in the industry, but he stood firm in
his conviction that the blind must be treated fairly unless it
could be shown that we were, in fact, poor risks.
     Herb's quest for justice and his deep commitment to and
concern for his fellow human beings then led him to work with us
and to take up the issue of insurance discrimination against the
blind as a national project. He invited me to come to Miami in
the fall of 1977 to address the National Association of Insurance
Commissioners (NAIC). He said that, from time to time, the NAIC
adopted model regulations, and he wanted to work with the blind
of America first to establish a model and then to have that model
prohibiting unfair insurance discrimination against the blind
adopted formally in each of the several states.
     Herb was suggesting that the two of us engage in no small
enterprise--he was proposing that we challenge and take on the
entire insurance industry in America. He was fearless.
     I did go to Florida and made the speech. With Herb's help
and guidance, the NAIC decided to create a task force to study
the issue.
     And what a time we had! The task force consisted of thirteen
members--eleven industry officials, Herb, and me. Some of the
early task force meetings were stormy, and Herb and I each came
in for some pretty vigorous verbal abuse. But again Herb stood
like a rock. The more hostile and outrageous the attack, the more
committed and steadfast he became.
     To divert for a moment, I must tell another story since it
further defines and distinguishes the character and integrity of
Herbert Anderson. In the spring of 1977 (at its annual state
convention), the National Federation of the Blind of Iowa
bestowed its highest honor, The Altig Award, on Herb for his
major contribution to civil rights protection for the blind. For
many years we had presented each recipient of this award with an
engraved plaque in the shape of Iowa and a suitably engraved gold
watch, and we did the same for Herb.
     After the public presentation had been made, Herb came to me
in private and told me that he could not accept the gold watch
unless we would permit him to pay us for it. Frankly, the blind
of Iowa who knew of the incident were distressed and outraged
that the laws had become so rigid that we couldn't honor a
deserving Iowa state official with the gift of an engraved watch.
But in the final analysis Herb won the day. We agreed with him,
he paid, and he kept the watch. On the issue of ethics in
government, Herb was no doubt a man ahead of his time.
     Now back to the national anti-discrimination campaign.
Ultimately Herb and I convinced the other eleven on the task
force to agree to a model regulation, and the NAIC adopted it at
its June, 1978, meeting in Washington, D.C. I made a speech to
the group and talked with individuals for several days urging
adoption of the model but behind the scenes Herb was obviously
the one who did a lot of the convincing and vote-getting.
     We then worked state by state for adoption of the
regulation. Through all of this work and close contact with the
various states, I learned an astonishing thing--that in many of
the states the insurance industry controls the state insurance
commissions. I dare say that the same was not true for Herb. He
was his own man, and his sole concern was to protect the rights
and interests of the citizens of Iowa.
     Herb attended National Conventions of the National
Federation of the Blind both in New Orleans in 1977 and Baltimore
in 1978. He reported both on his work in Iowa and also his
national effort through the NAIC. He received the Dr. Newel Perry
Award, the highest recognition a non-Federationist can receive,
from the National Federation of the Blind, in 1977 in New
Orleans. By 1978 he had become a beloved figure among the blind
of America. Again, in presenting him with the Perry Award, we
gave him an engraved plaque, but this time we did not make the
mistake of placing him in the unfortunate and embarrassing
position of having to buy another expensive, engraved gold watch
from us.
     It should be noted as an aside that over time Herb's
interests and concerns for the blind broadened beyond the issue
of insurance. He became interested in and committed to the much
larger struggle of social justice for the blind.
     Now it is almost twenty years later. Most blind Americans
routinely purchase all types of insurance on an equal basis with
the sighted without so much as a ripple. Many of the blind of
this generation are not even aware of the struggle. But Herb
truly made his mark in the annals of the blind and in our larger
struggle to achieve first-class citizenship.
     Between July of 1976 and the time of Herb's passing in 1979,
he and Jodie, his wife, and Sharon and I became close personal
friends. I had the opportunity to observe him socially as well as
professionally. I have never known a finer human being or a more
compassionate, committed, or distinguished public official. His
love was clearly made visible through his good and abundant work.
     Herb touched our lives, and Sharon and I personally, and the
blind of America generally, are all the better and richer for it.
Herbert W. Anderson truly deserves to be a posthumous charter
inductee into the Insurance Department of Iowa's Hall of Fame.

                                                       Cordially,
                                                   James H. Omvig


                             Recipes

     This month's recipes were contributed by members of the NFB
of Wyoming and Betty Capps, the First Lady of the National
Federation of the Blind of South Carolina.


[PHOTO/CAPTION: Claire Jepson]
                          Venison Chili
                        by Claire Jepson

     Claire Jepson is president of the NFB of Wyoming.

Ingredients:
1 pound ground venison
1 small onion, finely chopped
1 cup canned tomatoes
1 15-ounce can kidney beans
1 tablespoon salt
1/2 teaspoon pepper
1/4 teaspoon cumin (optional)
 1/4 teaspoon chili powder

     Method: Brown meat in hot fat in skillet. Add onion, stir
until onion is brown. Add tomatoes, beans, and seasonings. Simmer
for at least one hour. Yields four servings.


                          Ginger Snaps
                          by Ina Baker

     Ina Baker is from Dubois, Wyoming.

Ingredients:
 3/4 cup shortening
1 cup sugar
1 egg
 1/4 cup molasses
2 cups flour
 1/4 teaspoon salt
2 teaspoons soda
1 teaspoon cinnamon
1 teaspoon ginger
1/2 teaspoon cloves

     Method: Mix all ingredients together and roll dough into
small balls. Flatten with glass dipped in sugar. Bake at 375
degrees for ten minutes.


[PHOTO/CAPTION: Betty Capps]
                   South Carolina Cheese Cake
                         by Betty Capps

Ingredients:
1/2 cup graham cracker crumbs
1 tablespoon butter, melted
1/2 tablespoon sugar
2 8-ounce packages cream cheese
1 teaspoon vanilla
4 large eggs, beaten
 3/4 cup sugar

     Method: Mix the graham cracker crumbs, butter, and 1/2
tablespoon sugar together and pat into a buttered microwave-safe
pie plate. Microwave the cream cheese for forty-five seconds or
until soft. Thoroughly blend the cream cheese with the vanilla,
eggs, and sugar. Beat until fluffy and pour the mixture into the
graham cracker crust. Microwave for ten minutes or until the
filling sets, stirring three times during cooking. Over cake,
pour sour cream topping made by combining 1 cup sour cream,  3/4
tablespoon sugar, and 1 teaspoon vanilla. Microwave on high for
two minutes. The topping must set and the cheese cake chill
before serving.


                        Squash Casserole
                         by Betty Capps

Ingredients:
2-3 cups cooked and drained squash
1 medium onion, chopped
1 cup grated cheese (sharp works great)
2 slices bread, toasted and buttered
2 eggs
 1/4 to 1/2 cup milk

     Method: Mix squash, onions, half of the cheese, and the eggs
together. Add the toast, broken up into pieces, and add the milk
to moisten the mixture fairly well. Turn into a greased 2-quart
casserole dish. Top with remaining cheese. Bake at 350 degrees
for thirty minutes. Yields four servings.


                    Traditional Chicken Salad
                         by Betty Capps

Ingredients:
2 cups cooked chicken, cubed
1 cup chopped celery
1 cup mayonnaise
1/2 to 1 teaspoon curry powder
1 20-ounce can pineapple chunks, drained
2 large firm bananas, sliced
1 11-ounce can mandarin oranges, drained
1/2 cup flaked coconut
Salad greens, optional
 3/4 cup salted peanuts or cashew halves

     Method: Place chicken and celery in a large bowl. Combine
mayonnaise and curry powder; add to chicken mixture and mix well.
Cover and chill for at least thirty minutes. Before serving, add
the pineapple, bananas, oranges, and coconut; toss gently. Serve
on salad greens if desired. Just before serving, sprinkle with
nuts. Yields four to six servings.


                           Swiss Steak
                         by Betty Capps

Ingredients:
1/2 cup all-purpose flour
1 teaspoon salt
 1/4 teaspoon pepper
1-1/2 to 2 pounds beef round steak, trimmed
2 tablespoons cooking oil
1 cup chopped celery
1 cup chopped onion
1/2 pound fresh mushrooms, sliced
1 cup water
1 garlic clove, minced
1 cup water
1 tablespoon steak sauce

     Method: Combine flour, salt, and pepper. Cut steak into
serving-sized pieces. Dredge in flour mixture. In a skillet brown
steak in oil. Drain and place in a 2-1/2-quart casserole. Top
with celery, onion, and mushrooms. Combine water, garlic, and
steak sauce. Pour over vegetables. Cover and bake at 350 degrees
for 1-1/2 hours or until meat is tender. Yields six servings.


                         Pistachio Candy
                         by Betty Capps

     Betty says "This recipe could not be simpler but is very
good."

Ingredients:
1 can ready-made vanilla frosting
1 small box pistachio pudding mix
Coconut

     Method: Mix first 2 ingredients, form into balls, and roll
in coconut. Refrigerate so candy is firm.


                              Mints
                         by Betty Capps

     This recipe can be used for any holiday just by changing the
food coloring--very simple.

Ingredients:
3 tablespoons butter
3 tablespoons milk
1 box creamy white frosting mix
Food coloring
1/2 teaspoon peppermint extract

     Method: Put butter and milk in a 2-quart microwave-safe
bowl. Cook on high for forty-five seconds, or until butter melts.
Stir in frosting mix. Cook on high for 1-1/2 to 2 minutes, or
until mixture is bubbly, stirring twice during cooking time.
Remove from microwave and stir in food coloring and extract. Drop
mixture by teaspoonfuls onto wax paper to cool. Store in an
airtight container.


                       Monitor Miniatures

New Chapters:
     The NFB of Ohio is proud to announce the births of three new
chapters in the past several months. In December the NFB of
Greater Summit County was organized in Akron. Its officers are
Bruce Peters, President; Marilyn Donehey, Vice President; Ford
Pingstock, Treasurer; and Sharon Ohnmeiss, Acting Secretary. In
March we organized the NFB of Muskingum County with officers
Chris Carroll, President; Al Pauley, Vice President; Karen
Barnett, Secretary; and Beth Duvall, Treasurer. Then in May we
went to New Philadelphia and helped a group establish the NFB of
Tuscarawas County with the following officers: Carl Russo,
President; Dale Short, Vice President; Lori Allman, Secretary;
and Peg Weaver, Treasurer. All of these chapters have hit the
ground running and are already active and productive participants
in the organized blind movement.

[IMAGE/CAPTION: This graphic shows the front cover and spiral binding of a
book. The visible text reads: The Bridge to Braille Reading and School Success
for the Young Blind Child
Carol Castellano, Dawn Kosman
Illustrated by Lynne Cucco
A graphic image of a bridge appears above the title, imprints of a child's
hands appear beneath the title with an author's name superimposed on each
hand. CAPTION: The newest book in the National Federation of the Blind
collection.]

Exciting New Book Available:
     We are pleased to announce the August publication of an
important new book for parents of blind children. It is titled
The Bridge to Braille, and it is co-authored by National
Organization of Parents of Blind Children leader Carol Castellano
and Braille teacher Dawn Kosman. The book includes 191 pages of
solid advice and clear illustrations, including Braille dots in
ink demonstrating important concepts and information. The
appendices include step-by-step instructions on learning to write
using the slate and stylus. Because of the book's spiral binding,
it can lie flat for easy reference and clear photocopying. Here
is the press release we received:

     When her first child was three years old, The Bridge to
Braille co-author Carol Castellano wondered how she would teach
her daughter the alphabet. If her child had been sighted, she
would have begun helping her recognize letters and numbers, but
what was a parent to do when the child was blind? Castellano knew
the importance of early literacy experiences for children, but
could such experiences be translated into a meaningful form for a
blind child?
     When her daughter was in kindergarten at the local public
school, new questions came up. How do you form capital letters in
Braille? How do you write 2 + 2? The other children in the class,
all of them sighted, had page after page of colorful worksheets
which provided practice in reading readiness, counting, adding,
and subtracting. Was there a way for a blind child to take part
in this learning?
     Castellano began collecting answers for the questions that
arose, as she problem-solved with her daughter's classroom and
Braille teachers. At last she and Braille teacher Dawn Kosman put
the information together in a book, The Bridge to Braille:
Reading and School Success for the Young Blind Child. Chapters
like "Setting the Stage for Success," "Adapting Materials,"
"Doing Math in Braille," "Independence in the Classroom," and
"Using Technology" show parents and teachers how to guide blind
children from early literacy experiences all the way to full
participation in the classroom. The book demystifies the
education of blind children, authors say, and enables parents and
teachers to give ordinary help with schoolwork to children who
happen to be blind.
     The Bridge to Braille is published by the National
Organization of Parents of Blind Children (NOPBC), an
organization dedicated to creating a climate of opportunity for
blind children at home, in school, and in the community. A
division of the National Federation of the Blind, NOPBC provides
information, resources, and support to parents and teachers of
blind children and fosters contact and partnership with blind
adults. The Bridge to Braille costs $12.95 and can be ordered
from NOPBC, 1800 Johnson Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21230, (410)
659-9314. Check or money order should be made out to NOPBC.
     For further information, contact Carol Castellano, 23
Alexander Ave., Madison, New Jersey 07940, (201) 377-0976.

Free Internet Lists:
     We recently received the following announcement from Peter
Scialli:
     There is now a free listserv for those interested in
learning more about Retino Blastoma. RB is a congenital cancer of
the retina that causes blindness and other problems for those
born with it and for their families. Everyone with a serious
interest in Retino Blastoma is invited to join the list. To
subscribe, send a message to Listserv@Medinfo.org In the body of
the message enter the text "subscribe R-Blastoma."
     The other free mailing list is called Scantalk. This is a
list for those interested in the subject of scanning, optical
character recognition, and other reading technologies used by
people who are blind. To subscribe send mail to
Majordomo@Bolis.com In the body of the message include the
phrase, "subscribe Scantalk."

Hands-on Audio Software Training Adapted for the Blind Available:
     We recently received the following press release, which we
pass along to those who may be interested:
     OneOnOne Computer Training and Ellis Enterprises have
collaborated to offer the leading hands-on audio software
training with fully adaptive formatting for the blind and
visually impaired. This joint effort becomes the first and only
training resource in the United States to be in full compliance
with 1992 requirements calling for a full range of adaptive PC
training for the blind. It uses an interactive audio format that
allows learners to work live in the actual software without the
need to use simulation. The adaptation process for each OneOnOne
course, beginning with Windows 95, which is now available,
involves adding audio segments that teach keystroke alternatives
to mouse commands and provide sound board interfacing.
     In addition to courses for Windows 95 and Windows 3.1,
adaptive training will be available for Word, Excel, PowerPoint,
Access, WordPerfect, and even the Internet. "The Internet is
opening up tremendous channels of communications, learning and
business opportunities for the blind and visually impaired,"
explained Mike Ellis, founder of Ellis Enterprises in Lansing,
Michigan. "Having learned computing from OneOnOne's tapes myself
in the days before the graphical user interface came along, I
took it as a personal challenge to put vision-impaired computer
users back in the game," Ellis said. For further information
contact Ellis Enterprises, 5035 Geraldine Drive, Lansing,
Michigan 48917, fax (517) 321-0770, phone (888) 888-9533, or e-
mail: 74512.2366@compuserve.com or visit
www.oootraining.com/ellis.htm

Wedding Bells:
     We are delighted to report that Lauren Lynn Beach Eckery and
James Walter Merryfield were married at 2:00 p.m. on May 24,
1997, at Mount Vernon Gardens in Omaha, Nebraska. Lauren Eckery
is one of the leaders of the NFB of Nebraska and often appears in
these pages. Congratulations and our very best wishes to the
Merryfields.

Talking Caller ID Available:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     How many times have you hurried to the phone only to
discover that it was someone you didn't want to talk to? CIDney,
the talking caller ID unit, has a voice. CIDney provides
convenience and security because it tells you who is calling
before you answer the phone. All models available will announce
the phone number and/or name of the caller over its own built-in
speaker. With most models you can record the name of the caller
with your own voice (e.g., "It's Mom calling.") CIDney will also
log the caller's name and number and the time of the call so you
always know who called, when they called, and how to reach them.
     CIDney is affordable, starting at $59.95, installs in
seconds, never needs batteries, and is easy to use.
     The four models available boast a variety of features
including voice announcement over built-in speaker or cordless
phone; bilingual (English/Spanish) feature; LED that displays
name, number, and time of call; call-log storage; two-phone-line
feature (perfect for small businesses); call waiting
compatibility; integrated message center for leaving outgoing
messages for specific callers; and more.
     All products work with caller ID services available in the
U.S. and Canada and come with a one-year limited warranty. For
more information or to order CIDney, contact Full Life Products,
P.O. Box 490, Mirror Lake, New Hampshire 03853-0490, or call toll
free (888) 888-4153 or (603) 569-2240.

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Hank LaBonne]
Honored:
     We are very pleased to report that Hank LaBonne, Past
President of the NFB of Louisiana and President of the
Chattanooga Chapter of the NFB of Tennessee, has won the
Jefferson Award for outstanding public service benefiting local
communities. Hank is the Tennessee recipient of this nationally
recognized honor presented by the American Institute for Public
Service in Washington, D.C. Hank will receive a bronze medallion
and a trip to the nation's capital. On June 20 a gold on silver
medallion and a prize of $1,000 will be awarded in the United
States Supreme Court Chambers to one of the state recipients.
     The President of the Visually Impaired Training and Learning
Center (VITAL) Board, Susan Rousch nominated Hank to receive this
honor because of his dedicated service to the blind and visually
impaired in the Chattanooga area. Hank helped found the VITAL
Center, serves on its Board, and volunteers teaching Braille two
days a week at the Center. He was also instrumental in
establishing the Chattanooga NEWSLINE for the Blind(tm) service,
the first in Tennessee, through a joint effort with Tennessee
Services for the Blind and Visually Impaired.
     Hank is retired from the music business and is active in his
church. He teaches Braille to adults and children and can be
found babysitting and performing other needed tasks for his
friends. Congratulations to Hank LaBonne.

Correction:
     We recently received a Miniature correction provided by
Diane Croft, Director of Marketing, National Braille Press. The
original notice appeared in the June issue. The price for The
AltaVista Search Revolution is $17.99, not $18.99 as previously
advertised. You can order this publication from National Braille
Press, 88 St. Stephen Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, (617)
266-6160, fax (617) 437-0456.

Alumni Reunion:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     The first official alumni reunion at Lions World Services
for the Blind (LWSB) in Little Rock, Arkansas, will be held the
weekend of September 19 to 20, 1997. The rehabilitation center
for adults who are blind or visually impaired was formerly known
as Arkansas Enterprises for the Blind (AEB).
     All alumni and former staff members are welcomed back to
LWSB to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the Center. The
alumni committee is planning a weekend of exploring the campus,
food, fellowship, and visiting with former classmates and
instructors. The events will take place at the Holiday Inn
Airport Hotel and at LWSB. It will be a special gathering for all
alumni, spouses, and other guests.
     Early bird registration at LWSB is encouraged before
September 1. Hotel reservations should be made direct to the
Holiday Inn Airport (501) 490-1000. For the itinerary and
registration forms, contact Elise White, LWSB, 2811 Fair Park
Blvd., Little Rock, Arkansas 72204, (800) 248-0734, e-mail
address is lwsb@mail.snider.net LWSB Web site on the Internet
gives details of the alumni weekend: http://www.snider.net/lions

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Shannon Ramsay]
Honored:
     Shannon Ramsay is a blind high school junior who lives in
Los Gatos, California. We reprinted an article about Shannon in
the June, 1996, issue of the Braille Monitor. Shannon is an
active member of the National Federation of the Blind of
California and a bright and energetic student. We recently
received additional proof of Shannon's contribution to her
community. This spring Shannon received first a state scholarship
award from Discover Card and then a national award. The notifying
correspondence said in part:

     The Tribute Awards are given by Discover Card in cooperation
with the American Association of School Administrators (AASA).
They are unique in that they honor students who not only achieve
in school, but have outstanding accomplishments in the community
and in their personal lives. In recognition of those achievements
and in addition to your $2,500 state award, we are pleased to
inform you that you have also won a $20,000 national award, for a
total of $22,500. The Discover Card Tribute Awards recognize the
outstanding achievements of high school juniors in the U.S. and
in overseas schools. An awards ceremony recognizing your
accomplishments as well as those of the eight other national
winners will be held in Washington, D.C., from June 23 through
25.

     A video crew spent several days following Shannon around her
school and community preparing a short presentation about her,
which will be shown at the awards ceremony at the Corcoran
Gallery in Washington. Shannon has received a remarkable honor,
and the Federation family joins Shannon's friends and family in
congratulating her.

Correction:
     In the April, 1997, issue of the Braille Monitor the zip
code for the Zeigler Magazine was incorrect. Here is the correct
address: Zeigler Magazine, 80 8th Avenue, Room 1304, New York,
New York 10011, (212) 242-0263. We regret the error.

Elected:
     David Collins, Secretary of the Tidewater Chapter of the NFB
of Virginia, reports the April 19, 1997, election of officers.
They are Marion Sanders, President; Bill Parker, First Vice
President; Stuart Prost, Second Vice President; David Collins,
Secretary; Willard Nichols, Treasurer; and Ella Herbert and
Charles King, Board members.

Ministry to the Deaf-Blind:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Floyd Rhoads is the administrator of a Christian ministry
trying to reach the deaf-blind for the Lord Jesus Christ. The
name of this ministry is Outreach with the Blind and Deaf-Blind.
     We are trying to provide Braille scriptures with the New
English Deaf Testament in sixteen volumes, printed with computer
Braille on one side of the page. This comes in Grade I and II
Braille.
     We provide a daily devotion written for the deaf. It is
transcribed into Braille for the blind and deaf-blind. Our
spiritual name is Deaf/Blind Evangelism. We also provide a
newsletter called Eyes and Ears with articles of the ministry and
other news semiannually.
     If you are interested in any of our services, please call or
write. If you do not need our services, please keep us in prayer
and help us with the Lord's work in any way you can. Contact
Deaf/Blind Evangelism, 4143 Edmondson Avenue, Indianapolis,
Indiana 46226, (317) 549-3433.

Attention Braille Music Transcribers and Readers:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Do you want to get up-to-date on the latest Braille music
signs and rules that have recently been adopted as the new
international standard by sixteen countries? Then you need the
New International Manual of Braille Music Notation, published in
1996 in a print edition (282 pages, by SVB Amsterdam) and a
Braille edition (3 volumes, by Braille Press Zurich). Previously
available only by special foreign order, both editions are now
available from a U.S. distributor, Opus Technologies of San
Diego, California.
     In addition, Opus Technologies has created and is now
shipping an interactive multimedia CD-ROM edition of the manual.
The CD-ROM lets you access the complete text of the manual,
including all the examples in music and Braille notation. Audio
playback of the music has been added, along with detailed
listings which explain the meaning of every Braille sign used in
each example. Hyperlinks makes it very easy to navigate through
the text. You can access index entries alphabetically or by
Braille sign, quickly search the entire manual for specific words
or Braille signs, and print or emboss any topic. And as a bonus
for those wanting to learn Braille music from step one, included
is a CD-ROM edition of Bettye Krolick's How to Read Braille
Music, the classic introductory text for learning Braille music.
     Prices are $249 for the CD-ROM, $79 for the Braille or print
edition, and $299 for the CD-ROM bundled with the Braille or
print edition. You'll need a multimedia PC with a CD-ROM drive
and sound card, Windows 95, and appropriate screen access
hardware and software. Contact Opus Technologies, 13333
Thunderhead Street, San Diego, California 92129, Phone/Fax (619)
538-9401, email: opus@opustec.com, website: www.opustec.com

Elected:
     The National Federation of the Blind of South Dakota
recently elected officers at its state convention. The new
officers are Karen Mayry, President; Eileen Tscharner, Vice
President; Denise Jones, Secretary, and Ken Rollman, Treasurer.
Board members are Tina Blatter, Peggy Klimisch, and Minnie
Erickson.

For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     For sale, 486 IBM-compatible computer with a 200-megabyte
hard drive and 5.25- and 3.5-inch disk drives. Also Windows 3.X
with 8 meg of memory and many expansion slots. This computer is
good for a blind person using many peripherals such as the
Openbook, a Braille display, and two parallel printers. A 2400
modem is included. Price is $600.
     Also, Blazie original disk drive to be used with the Braille
Lite and Braille 'n Speak. Price $250.
     American Heritage Dictionary (cassette), rarely used. Price,
$25.
     You may contact Denise Avant, 3410 N. Lake Shore Drive, Apt.
4L-M, Chicago, Illinois 60657, (773) 325-1117, between 7:00 p.m.
and 9:00 p.m. Central Time. You may also e-mail at
denisea@netcom.com

Window-Eyes 2.0 Now Available:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     GW Micro, a leader in adaptive products for people who are
blind or visually impaired, has released version 2.0 of its
Windows screen-reading software, Window-Eyes. Window-Eyes 2.0
operates in Windows 95 as well as Windows 3.1 and 3.11. The
current $495 price will hold through July 31, 1997, after which
time it will increase.
     If you don't have a Windows screen reader or you are tired
of fighting with your current one, please download the free demo
at ftp.gwmicro.com For more information check out GW Micro's Web
site at www.gwmicro.com or call (219) 489-3671.

Elected:
     The National Federation of the Blind of Oklahoma elected new
officers at its April state convention. They are Steve Shelton,
President; Nannette Murrin, First Vice President; Ron Miller,
Second Vice President; Ron Burns, Secretary; and Joe Triplett,
Treasurer. The new Board members are Cordelia Sanders, Sue Lee,
Janet Triplett, and Audrey Burns.

For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Selling an Optacon Model R1D in very good condition. Please
call Roueida Salame at (514) 731-3175.

Audio Business Digest Service:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Newstrack Executive Tape Service is the Listener's Digest of
business information. For over seventeen years, thousands of
executives, business owners, investors, entrepreneurs, and other
professionals have listened to this powerful business tool. In
every issue Newstrack editors review over 100 top business
publications and special sources. They select the best sixteen
articles on management, sales, marketing, finance, business
strategy, and much more. Since no one has the time to read every
important business article, Newstrack has become the ultimate
time-saving source in this age of information overload.
     Newstrack is available on both audiotape and CD. You have a
choice of two versions: the small business issue is produced once
a month at a cost of $149 per year on audio cassette; the regular
full subscription is produced twice a month and costs just $299
per year on cassette. We also offer the transcripts of each
article available by e-mail, on 3.5-inch disk, or in hard copy
format.
     To order, call toll-free (800) 334-5771. Mention this notice
and receive a 15 percent discount off the regular subscription
price. Our subscriptions come with a money-back guarantee. If you
are dissatisfied at any time for any reason, just call and we'll
promptly refund the unused portion of your subscription. So start
letting us at Newstrack do your business reading for you today.
