THE BRAILLE MONITOR October, 1989 Kenneth Jernigan, Editor Published in inkprint, Braille, on talking-book disc, and cassette by THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND MARC MAURER, PRESIDENT National Office 1800 Johnson Street Baltimore, Maryland 21230 * * * * Letters to the President, address changes, subscription requests, orders for NFB literature, articles for the Monitor, and letters to the Editor should be sent to the National Office. * * * * Monitor subscriptions cost the Federation about twenty-five dollars per year. Members are invited, and non-members are requested, to cover the subscription cost. Donations should be made payable to National Federation of the Blind and sent to: National Federation of the Blind 1800 Johnson Street Baltimore, Maryland 21230 * * * * THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND IS NOT AN ORGANIZATION SPEAKING FOR THE BLIND--IT IS THE BLIND SPEAKING FOR THEMSELVES ISSN 0006-8829 NFB NET BBS: (612) 696-1975 WorldWide Web: http://www.nfb.org THE BRAILLE MONITOR PUBLICATION OF THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND CONTENTS OCTOBER, 1989 CONVENTION ROUNDUP by Barbara Pierce PRESIDENTIAL REPORT by Marc Maurer LANGUAGE AND THE FUTURE OF THE BLIND by Marc Maurer 1989 NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND AWARDS THE CLASS OF 1989: NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND SCHOLARSHIP WINNERS A MEDITATION ON MOORE'S MOUNTAIN by Ramona Walhof WHITE CANE THE SILENT ANSWER by Bill J. Isaacs TOOL OF THE TRADE by Nancy Scott A CUT IN THE DARK by Wayne Davis CROSSING THE JORDAN: MEMORIES OF TORGER LIEn by Steve Jacobson OF SYMBOLS AND GOOD SENSe IT COULD HAVE BEEN YOU by Sharon Gold OF YARD SALES, AIRLINES, AND THE DIFFERENTLY ABLED RECIPES MONITOR MINIATURES RESOLUTIONS, 1989 Copyright, National Federation of the Blind, Inc., 1989 CONVENTION ROUNDUP by Barbara Pierce Every National Federation of the Blind convention has a unique character. In times of particular challenge the mood is concentrated, focused, and determined. Some years the enthusiasm and energy have forced those chairing convention sessions and the banquet to resort to steady use of the gavel. The mood of the 1989 convention in Denver, Colorado, was as clearly defined as that of any recent gathering. It was joy the quiet joy one sometimes stumbles upon in the midst of hard work and challenge, a momentary pause in the frantic rush of activity, during which one savors the contentment of a job well in hand and the love of colleagues who share a dream. Complications, worry, and deep sadness were, of course, present at the convention. Several conventioneers were hospitalized, including Gerry Burke and Bill Parker, both from Virginia and both requiring emergency gall bladder surgery. The press of Federationists coming and going was so great that the elevators were slow, giving the delegates ample opportunity to get to know each other while they waited. Above all, the deaths during the weeks immediately prior to the convention of Jim Walker (husband of Barbara Walker, President of the Nebraska affiliate) and Connie McCraw (widow of Maryland's Big John McCraw) were griefs shared by the entire assembly. The most poignant moment of the convention (and the one most eloquently illustrating the strength and love which bind our movement together) came during the roll call of states on Thursday morning, July 6, when Nebraska was called. After providing the required information about who would serve on the nominating committee, who was in attendance, and when the next state convention would be held, Barbara Walker (the state president, who with her two young children attended the entire convention) spoke briefly as follows: I want to say to everyone here, she said, that our Federation family does many things for many people. At this particular time I want to thank everyone for the support that has been shown to my family as we go through the most difficult thing I have ever known. I want in particular to thank Fred Schroeder for the eulogy he delivered on behalf of this organization at the services for Jim. It reached many people. I have received calls from people who have opposed our organization on many occasions who, I believe, were reached (and reached deeply) by the message. As we continue in the various struggles which we have to face, I will pledge to do my best to do the work which Jim faithfully honored all the years of his life. I need our Federation family very much right now, and everyone here is responding in a way that is unbelievable to me. Thank you very much. President Maurer responded: We need you too, and we care for you as much as you do for us. Unlike Jim Walker's sudden and most unexpected death, Connie McCraw's had been inevitable for some time. It had become clear to her in May of 1987 that she did not have long to live, so she arranged to take out a policy as part of the NFB's Deferred Insurance Giving (DIG) Program. Connie died on June 1, 1989, only a few weeks after her policy became incontestable that is, after the Federation was assured of receiving the full $50,000 face value. In her memory the convention decided to establish the Connie McCraw Memorial Fund in the DIG Program with a goal of one million dollars so that chapters, state affiliates, and individuals or groups could purchase $50,000 DIG policies on people under the age of thirty-five at a cost of $3,000, to be paid in full before the end of 1989. Throughout the week announcements were made as policies were bought, and by the close of the convention, the million dollar goal had been reached and surpassed. In fact, the entire DIG (Deferred Insurance Giving) program which at the beginning of the convention had stood at approximately seven and a quarter million dollars was by the end of the convention approaching a record nine million dollars. And there was more good news! The number of those making contributions to the PAC (Pre-Authorized Check) Plan increased from 1,164 at the start of the week to 1,255 at the close, and the amount being contributed annually passed the $300,000 mark for the first time ever, increasing from $278,000 to $303,000. Given the expanding demand on our resources, this demonstration of financial commitment on the part of the members was a message from both the pocketbook and the heart. On Monday, July 3, NFB divisions conducted several intensive seminars and workshops, attended by hundreds of eager Federationists. Butcher, Baker, Candlestick Maker was a day-long seminar jointly sponsored by the NFB Parents of Blind Children Division and the Job Opportunities for the Blind Program. In addition, the Merchants Division conducted a seminar on communications; and the Writers Division, the Computer Science Division, and the Public Relations Committee all held intensive workshops, which were enthusiastically attended. On July 4 (now that the process has been computerized) Federationists poured through the registration lines faster than ever before. By the time of the Resolutions Committee meeting that afternoon, more than 1,800 people had registered. They came from every state and a number of foreign countries, and before the week was out, more than 2,000 had registered. The exhibits and items for sale this year were so numerous that four large areas were required to contain them. Nowhere in the country can a blind person learn so much so quickly about so many aids and appliances as in the NFB convention exhibit area. Food, clever t-shirts, new equipment, revolutionary software: all these were to be found amid the throngs of Federation shoppers. The NFB store and literature tables did a land-office business this year. One of the most interesting products, however, was not sold in the exhibit area at all. The NFB had produced sixty carbon-fiber telescoping canes as an experiment, and the first sixty people to reach the designated area on the convention floor on Friday morning were able to purchase them. While it would not be accurate to characterize the ensuing rush as a stampede, it could certainly be said that the flow of traffic was lively and congested. The canes are lighter than the hollow fiberglas ones, and they are advertised as being much stronger. They are also more expensive, but eager purchasers were anxious to test them to see if they are sufficiently tough and attractive to warrant our producing them in quantity. Hospitality throughout the week occurred at the beautiful Hyatt Regency Denver, just three blocks from the Radisson, headquarters for the convention. On Monday evening the Colorado affiliate hosted a genuine western hoe-down, to which the Coloradans (and a number of others) wore their finest western duds, and Brian Johnson played blue grass and country music interspersed with favorites requested by the greenhorns. On Wednesday a sell-out crowd enjoyed the music of the Queen City Jazz Band, and Thursday at the annual reception and dance everyone enjoyed the big band sound of a live nine-piece ensemble. Although no hospitality had been planned for Saturday evening following the banquet, an enthusiastic group gathered around the Hyatt's grand piano to sing favorite Federation songs and write a new one to the tune of Yankee Doodle, commemorating our struggle with the U. S. State Department. The State Department keeps us out; They say that we're not able; They won't let our readers in To read their secret cables. (Refrain): State Department let us in; We want to serve our nation; We will fight until we win 'Cause we're the Federation. They say that we can't go abroad; They say we'll be in danger; They tell us we will be attacked By every foreign stranger. (Refrain) The blind have travelled far and wide To every state and nation; We can serve in every post And every foreign station. (Refrain) Thirteen committees and divisions held meetings on Tuesday, July 4, and seventeen did so on Wednesday, with several more meetings scheduled later in the week. The Resolutions Committee recommended nineteen resolutions for consideration by the convention, and the Student Division conducted a workshop that drew a standing-room-only crowd of more than 250. As usual, the problem was to decide which meetings to attend. The annual meeting of the Board of Directors took place on Wednesday morning, July 5, with a large and enthusiastic audience. Peggy Pinder, Chairman of the Scholarship Committee, introduced this year's group of scholarship winners. An article about the class of '89 appears elsewhere in this issue. The results of the past year's Associates contest were announced, and the ground rules for next year's were laid down. In fact, the clock is already running to recruit members-at-large as Associates for the new contest. This year gold ribbons were presented to the two best Associate recruiters: one to Tom Stevens, Chairman of the Associates Committee, for recruiting 200 Associates, and one to Kenneth Jernigan for raising $7,856. Eleven people were presented with red, white, and blue ribbons for recruiting more than fifty Associates. In ascending order they are: 11. Norman Gardner, Arizona, 51 Associates; 10. Verla Kirsh, Iowa, 64 Associates; 9. Dottie Neely, North Carolina, 71 Associates; 8. Karen Mayry, South Dakota, 93; 7. Marc Maurer, Maryland, 94; 6. Fred Schroeder, New Mexico, 106; 5. Frank Lee, Alabama, 115; 4. Kenneth Jernigan, Maryland, 135; 3. Bill Isaacs, Illinois, 189; 2. Betty Tetzlaff, Indiana, 191; and 1. Tom Stevens, Missouri, 200. Members of the NFB Research and Development Committee then discussed two new projects they have been working on. The first is a modification of a piece of equipment called the Pixelmaster, which is used with a computer, enabling the user to draw raised colored dots or lines of any shape. It lays down plastic material on the page and can draw with great detail. With the NFB modifications, it can now write Braille in addition to its other type faces. Probably within a few months the NFB modifications will be available to anyone purchasing the Pixelmaster machine. Dr. Abraham Nemeth was present at the board meeting and briefly described a program written by members of the Research and Development Committee which creates a scientific calculator for use with a talking computer. Dr. Nemeth said that the calculator is so powerful that it can express a ratio greater than that of the mass of the known universe to the mass of a single electron. It expresses numbers to fifteen places, and it is less expensive than other, less powerful scientific calculators on the market. The program, together with Braille and print manuals, is now available from the National Office of the Federation for only $40. Also present at the Wednesday morning board meeting was Bill Raeder, head of the National Braille Press. He presented Dr. Jernigan with a copy of the new book written by Rami Rabby, one of the leaders of the Federation, and Diane Croft. The title of the book available in Braille, in print, and on cassette is Take Charge: a Strategic Guide for Blind Job-Seekers . Rami Rabby then thanked the Federation, along with a number of other organizations, for its financial support of this project. He explained that the book applies the NFB's philosophy to the specific challenge a blind person faces in finding a job. Mr. Rabby closed his remarks with a reference to Dr. Jernigan's address Blindness: Handicap or Characteristic which points out that though philosophy bakes no bread, without philosophy no bread is baked. Mr. Rabby warmly thanked the Board of Directors for the bread without which this philosophy would not have been baked. The opening general session of the 1989 convention began on Thursday morning, July 6, in the Grand Ballroom of the Radisson Denver hotel with a series of greetings by city and state officials including the Lieutenant Governor of Colorado, Mike Callahan; the Attorney General of Colorado, Duane Woodard; Councilwoman-at-Large for the city of Denver, Cathy Reynolds; and Mayor of Denver, Federico Pe¤a. The remainder of the morning session was devoted to the roll call of states. As is traditional, the Thursday afternoon session began with President Maurer's annual report, printed elsewhere in this issue. President Maurer reviewed the challenges and accomplishments of the past year and charted the course ahead. In conclusion he said: On the road to equality there is frequently confrontation. We regret the necessity for it, but we are simply not willing to tolerate second-class status. That is why we have formed the National Federation of the Blind. We who are blind can and will help each other as brothers and sisters in the work place, the school, and the home. No one can solve our problems for us; we must do that for ourselves. We have made this commitment, and we intend to keep it....There is a closeness in this organization that is unparalleled. We expect much of each other: ingenuity, energy, commitment, courage, but there is another element. We have the capacity to care. The enthusiastic and deeply-felt response of the audience demonstrated the organization's wholehearted support of the President and its determination to pursue and achieve its objectives. The Honorable David Skaggs, Member of Congress from Colorado, had the difficult task of following President Maurer on the afternoon agenda. His title was Equality on the Line: Congress Considers the Rights of the Blind in Air Travel. Congressman Skaggs is a co-sponsor of our Air Travel Rights for Blind Individuals Act, and his speech was sensible, eloquent, and filled with commitment to protect the rights of blind citizens. Dr. Jernigan then introduced his Excellency Sheikh Abdullah M. Al-Ghanim, Immediate Past President of the World Blind Union, who spoke about The Blind in Developing Countries. Sheikh Al-Ghanim spoke in Arabic, and his remarks were simultaneously translated so that the conventioneers could follow them using specially obtained headsets. This is the same system as the one used during the Second General Assembly of the WBU held last September in Madrid, Spain. The only two companies supplying these headsets in the United States had to combine forces to provide the nearly two thousand that were required. Sheikh Al-Ghanim's remarks gave a distressingly graphic summary of the plight of the blind of the third world and described some of the exciting programs that are now being conducted to alleviate the situation particularly projects being undertaken by the Regional Bureau of the Middle East Committee for the Welfare of the Blind of the WBU. Dr. Euclid Herie, Managing Director of the Canadian National Institute for the Blind, then spoke about Blindness The Canadian Story. He gave a short history of Canadian efforts to assist blind citizens and described the work of the Canadian National Institute for the Blind. Dr. Herie, who has been instrumental in raising funds to support the Louis Braille Museum in France, then presented Dr. Jernigan with a sterling silver medal which was struck in 1952 when Louis Braille's remains were moved from the quiet cemetery in Coupvray, France, to the Pantheon in Paris where France's national heroes lie. In presenting the medal, Dr. Herie said: On behalf of all of us in Canada and the blind in the world, those of us who will continue to work and promote and use Braille, I want to give this silver medal to Dr. Jernigan as a credit to him and his leadership. Dr. Herie went on to say that the medal pictures the bust of Louis Braille with his name written in French Braille below it. On the reverse are the words Et La LumiŠre Fut ( And There Was Light ). This was an inspiring close to a memorable convention session. The Friday morning session began with the election of members of the Board of Directors. Six positions were open this year. They were those held by Donald Capps, South Carolina; Joanne Fernandes, Louisiana; Priscilla Ferris, Massachusetts; Betty Niceley, Kentucky; Fred Schroeder, New Mexico; and Gary Wunder, Missouri. All six were re-elected by acclamation. The members of the Board with one more year of their terms to serve are: Marc Maurer, President; Diane McGeorge, First Vice President; Peggy Pinder, Second Vice President; Joyce Scanlan, Secretary; Allen Harris, Treasurer; and at-large board members: Steve Benson, Illinois; Charles Brown, Virginia; Glenn Crosby, Texas; Robert Eschbach, Ohio; Frank Lee, Alabama; and Ramona Walhof, Idaho. It was clear from the consensus that the convention was pleased with the leadership shown by the Board of Directors and looks forward to the year ahead. Following the elections Dr. Euclid Herie came to the podium briefly to make an announcement of interest to the blind of America. He explained that the Canadian National Institute for the Blind has established and will present this year the Winston Gordon Award (a gold medal) together with a $10,000 prize. It will be given for the first time in September of 1989 for contributions to the blind of the world in technology or techniques of assistance to blind people, and the first to be honored will be Dean Blazie for his creation of the Braille 'n Speak . The audience was delighted to congratulate Mr. Blazie, who is one of our members and who was present in the room. The next agenda item was a series of presentations from a distinguished panel of speakers on various aspects of Social Security programs. James Gashel, NFB Director of Governmental Affairs and perhaps the most knowledgeable person in the country today about the Social Security system, introduced the discussion. Other panel participants were: the Honorable Hank Brown, Ranking Minority Member, Sub-Committee on Social Security, House Committee on Ways and Means; and Rhoda Davis, Associate Commissioner for Supplemental Security Income, Social Security Administration. The Honorable Patricia Schroeder, Congresswoman from Colorado, then spoke to the convention. She is a long-time friend and supporter of the NFB. Her title was Who Speaks for the Blind of America: Your Voice Counts in Congress. Congresswoman Schroeder began her remarks by paying tribute to Diane McGeorge and the work of the NFB of Colorado. She then presented the NFB of Colorado with a check for $2,000 as her contribution to its work. In accepting the check, Mrs. McGeorge made clear that she would see that the gift would be used to help the blind of the entire nation. Congresswoman Schroeder then delivered an impassioned plea for the blind to continue to make our voices heard in Congress. The morning ended with a report from Frank Kurt Cylke, Director of the National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped of the Library of Congress. Speaking on the topic World Literature and the NLS Book Collection, he described the recorded book exchange among the English-speaking library services around the world that now enables a group of three hundred NLS patrons to read works written and produced in other countries. He said that in about a year this pilot project will be expanded so that all NLS users will have access to these books. As always Mr. Cylke fielded questions from the audience and indicated that he would be available during the rest of the convention for in-depth conversation and discussions. Friday afternoon, July 7, was given over to tours, committee meetings, and social activities. The first item on Saturday morning was a panel with the general title The Blind at Work. The participants were: Homer Page, Commissioner, Boulder County, Colorado; Dale Sheldon, Commissioner, Pondera County, Montana; Craig Kenna, owner/operator of Craig's Snacks and Catering, Los Angeles, California; and Eileen Rivera, M.B.A., Administrative Director, Vision Research and Rehabilitation Center, Wilmer Eye Institute, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland. Both Dr. Page and Mr. Sheldon hold elective office, each being a county commissioner; and although one of them (Dr. Page) must deal with the problems of an urban constituency and the other (Mr. Sheldon) with those of a widely scattered rural population, many of the experiences they described were similar overcoming the skepticism of the electorate concerning the ability of a blind official to perform, handling the details and complexities of the job, and meeting and keeping the voters happy. Mr. Sheldon discussed the challenges of his work and told the audience that without the assistance provided to him by the National Federation of the Blind he would be unable to perform his job efficiently. Mr. Kenna talked of his work as an entrepreneur in the food service industry and made wide-ranging comments on a variety of topics. As to the presentation of Eileen Rivera, it can only be described as scintillating. We hope to bring it to Monitor readers in its entirety in a later issue. After the employment panel, President Maurer then called Patricia Munson of Albany, California, to the platform to present her with a $500 prize as the Blind Educator of the Year. The award was given to recognize Mrs. Munson's twenty-five years of outstanding service as a junior high school teacher. The remainder of the Saturday morning session was devoted to a discussion of sheltered workshops and the problems faced by blind shop workers. First Glenn Crosby, President of the NFB of Texas and a member of the National Federation of the Blind's Board of Directors, and Fred Schroeder, Director of the New Mexico Commission for the Blind and also a member of the NFB's Board of Directors, described the situation at the Southwest Lighthouse for the Blind in Lubbock, Texas, and our successful efforts to win the workers' right to collective bargaining. Then, Senator Howard Metzenbaum of Ohio (Chairman of the Sub-Committee on Labor of the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources) spoke on Implementing the Fair Labor Standards Amendments of 1986: Changes in Sub-Minimum Wages for Blind Workers. His remarks, which were spirited and powerful, were followed by a presentation from Beverly Milkman, Executive Director of the Committee for Purchase from the Blind and Other Severely Handicapped. Mrs. Milkman's title was: Upward Mobility and Employment for the Blind The Javits-Wagner-O'Day Act. As with so many other important items on the convention agenda, the remarks of all of these speakers, as well as the discussion that followed, will be printed in the Monitor as space permits. Dr. Abraham Nemeth (Professor Emeritus, University of Detroit) was the first speaker at the afternoon session. His topic, Teaching Mathematics: One Career for the Blind, was not only informative but also lively and stimulating. Dr. Nemeth was followed by Susan Jay Spungin, Ed.D, Associate Executive Director of Program Services for the American Foundation for the Blind, who spoke on the subject: Braille Literacy Issues for Consumers and Providers. The next speaker was Dr. Tuck Tinsley, Executive Director of the American Printing House for the Blind, who spoke about plans and programs for the American Printing House for the Blind. Dr. Tinsley assumed his duties in January of 1989 and expressed his commitment to serving the blind in the months and years ahead. After Dr. Tinsley's address, the convention turned its attention to the recent intensification of the conflict between the blind and the U.S. State Department. Rami Rabby reviewed his unsuccessful attempt to become a United States Foreign Service Officer in a speech entitled The Blind Applicant Rejected: Why Not Diplomacy for the Blind? He was followed by the Honorable Gerry Sikorski, Chairman of the Sub-Committee on Civil Service of the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service of the United States House of Representatives. His title, Blind Persons in the U.S. Foreign Service: A View from Congress, underscored the support which Congressman Sikorski has given to the blind of the nation for many years and emphasized the continuing vigor of that support. It is clear that he has grasped the principle that alternative does not mean inferior and that the State Department cannot be allowed to continue to conduct its business above the law of the land. In conversations with each of the members of Congress following their addresses, leaders of our movement made one point. The National Federation of the Blind (the largest organization of blind people in the nation) is not currently represented on any of the advisory bodies appointed to assist members of the Executive Branch of the federal government in dealing with the problems of the disabled. Every member was asked to do what he or she could to urge that this situation be rectified and to recommend NFB representatives. Though (as they were each quick to point out) members of Congress do not have the power of appointment to these bodies, their advice is seriously taken. The Saturday afternoon session ended with an interesting and inspiring talk by Dr. John Rowley, a blind research scientist with the Los Alamos Laboratory in Nevada. Dr. Rowley lost his sight several years ago and was on the verge of concluding that early retirement was his only alternative. He then learned about our NFB training programs, and after several months at the Louisiana Center for the Blind, he was able to return to Los Alamos and eventually to Las Vegas, Nevada, where he is now working to solve a complex problem which will take him and his staff another year to complete. He concluded his remarks by asserting that without the NFB and its philosophy and training he could never have returned to work. In closing he quoted from the Bible a principle shared by scientists and members of the Federation: You shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. The banquet was again what the banquet always is for the Federation the apex of the convention, the high point of the Federation year, the very touchstone of our movement. Cambridge Chapter, NFB of Massachusetts, helium balloons festooned the banquet hall, and the overflow crowd not only filled the tables in the Grand Ballroom but also in the hotel lobby area. Television monitors and giant speakers broadcast the proceedings to all those who could not squeeze their way into the room. The crowd was jubilant and strong-minded. At one point close to the conclusion of the festivities Dr. Jernigan, who again this year delighted everyone by acting as master of ceremonies, said: Let me now tell you what's next on this evening's agenda. We'll do these things: We will present the scholarships; we will recognize some other people from the head table; we will draw for the final prizes; we will ask the hotel personnel to take a few minutes to clear the tables; and we will then begin the morning session. A full report of the banquet appears elsewhere in this issue. It is only necessary to say here that this year's address by President Maurer, Language and the Future of the Blind, galvanized the audience. Laughter and pain, outrage and compassion combined in this thoughtful yet impassioned speech to challenge each of us to re-energized dedication and informed commitment. The Sunday convention session included the Washington Report (presented by James Gashel, Director of Governmental Affairs) and other business. Nineteen resolutions (reprinted elsewhere in this issue) were debated and passed. And so with the drawing of a trip for two to Orlando, Florida, donated by the Singer Travel Agency, the 1989 convention of the National Federation of the Blind became history. The Mile-High City, the convention hotels, and the Colorado affiliate had all lived up to our expectations. For most of us the joy and excitement of the week were tinged with sadness as we parted to go our separate ways and resume our individual responsibilities, but not for all. Both Joe Triplet and Janet Smith, and Beth Hatch and Enrique Alleyne announced their engagements during the convention. For them and for all of us the Denver convention was memorable. Now begins the preparation for the fiftieth anniversary celebration, the 1990 convention, July 1 to 8, at the Hyatt Regency Hotel in Dallas. It is often said that everything in Texas is a little (or a lot) bigger than in the rest of the world. Glenn Crosby, President of the NFB of Texas, and the other Texans promise that our fiftieth anniversary will be no exception. Maybe with ten pushups a day and an extra hour of sleep each night till then, we'll be equal to the occasion.PRESIDENTIAL REPORT NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND DENVER, COLORADO JULY 6, 1989 Last year, as we came together in our convention (the largest gathering of the blind ever held in the history of the world), it seemed to me that we had completed one of the most successful years the National Federation of the Blind had ever had. As I come before our forty-ninth annual convention here in Denver, I think the same statement is equally applicable. Despite the problems we have had (and there have certainly been many of them), we, the organized blind, are stronger today, more unified in our purpose, and more harmonious than we have ever been. Sometimes we have measured our growth by the increase in the number of our publications, sometimes by the number of new chapters or affiliates that have come into the Federation, and sometimes by legislative or administrative achievements. This year we have not only been successful in strengthening our programs and increasing our membership, but we have also gained a deepened understanding of what we must do and how we must act. Our public education programs (designed to inculcate in the consciousness of the public at large the normality and productive capacity of the blind) have received during the past twelve months growing acceptance and support. For the first time our television public service announcements are being carried on all of the major networks and a number of the cable channels ABC, CBS, NBC, Cable News Network, Greater Media Cable, Manhattan Cable, Tempo Television Network, Trinity Broadcasting, and WTBS Cable. We estimate that our public service announcements are reaching the homes of over one hundred and twenty-five million viewers. In addition, our radio spots are being broadcast on five different networks. There are more than six thousand individual radio stations in these networks three quarters of all the commercial radio stations in the United States. When the subject matter deals with blindness, there is one voice on the airwaves more than any other shaping public attitudes, offering encouragement, presenting information, and providing inspiration. That voice belongs to the foremost leader of blind people in our nation Dr. Kenneth Jernigan. That message belongs to the National Federation of the Blind. We have often said that if the public understood the real problem of blindness, much of the exclusion which occurs would disappear. Our public education programs are central to this effort. Each time we show blind people crossing busy streets, working in offices, and handling all the activities of daily life, some of the prejudice and part of the fear about blindness are eliminated. In the past twelve months we have achieved real progress toward this end. In addition to our public service announcements on television and radio, we have distributed millions of letters describing the work that blind people do. We have placed messages offering assistance or information about blindness in tens of thousands of businesses, and we have issued hundreds of press releases about activities of the organized blind movement. These releases have been carried in newspapers and magazines throughout the country. All of this public education has a direct impact on opportunities available to the blind. Not only has the significance of the organized blind been recognized in the United States, but our unique programs have also stimulated interest in a number of foreign lands. Between our 1988 and 1989 conventions, approximately fifty foreign visitors have come to our headquarters, at the National Center for the Blind. These guests (from Ireland, England, Japan, Australia, India, Korea, Canada, and the Caribbean) have come to learn from the blind of the United States. How did the blind become organized? What methods did we use to achieve the gains we have made? Why do the blind of our country possess such independence? How did it happen that the organized blind movement is at the cutting edge of change in matters involving blindness? These are the questions that attract interest not only throughout our nation but also from around the world. Last September the second quadrennial convention of the World Blind Union was held in Madrid, Spain. Dr. Jernigan, President of the North America/Caribbean region of the World Blind Union, headed our delegation. For over a week, representatives from approximately one hundred countries met to consider the future possibilities for the blind. Although these meetings sometimes seemed chaotic, our delegates brought a spirit of self-reliance and self- determination which changed the emphasis and altered the focus of the entire conference. After the meeting in Spain, we mailed several hundred issues of the Braille Monitor to delegates all over the world. The National Federation of the Blind is leading the way for the blind of this country and also for blind people throughout the world who are seeking independence. Dr. Jernigan also traveled last winter to the United Nations to make a presentation on behalf of the Federation. Public documents and other materials are almost never available in Braille. The National Federation of the Blind presented a computer, a Braille printer, and our own Braille translation program to the U.N. These gifts will be used to produce documents in Braille for those who need them. U.N. Secretary General Javier Perez de Cuellar personally accepted the translation system on behalf of the nations of the world. Last summer, shortly after our convention, Dr. Jernigan appeared in Montreal as a member of a panel consisting of representatives of some of the major organizations of and for the blind in North America. The purpose of the discussion was to consider the present circumstances and future prospects of the blindness system in the United States and Canada. As part of the give and take of the meeting, Dr. Jernigan invited the organizations present to a meeting at the National Center for the Blind in Baltimore to consider the possibility of finding common ground and taking (even if only in a limited way and on a few issues) concerted action. The invitation was accepted, and by the time the meeting was held, all of the major organizations of and for the blind in Canada and the United States had indicated their wish to come. Thus, the Ad Hoc Committee on Joint Organizational Effort came into being and met this spring in Baltimore. Those present were: the American Foundation for the Blind, the Blinded Veterans Association, the Association for the Education and Rehabilitation of the Blind and Visually Impaired, the Canadian Council of the Blind, the Canadian National Institute for the Blind, the National Library Service for the Blind and Physically Handicapped, and the National Federation of the Blind. A number of projects were proposed and tentative understandings reached. Although it is too early to say what the final result will be, certain things are obvious and beyond dispute. This was the first time since the beginning of organized work for the blind that such a meeting had been held and it will be remembered that it was called, sponsored, and chaired by the National Federation of the Blind. The meeting was historic. It symbolized the new reality in the affairs of the blind of this country the tacit statement of our centrality in charting the future, the recognition in tangible form of our growing prestige, influence, and strength. We have come a long way since the early beginnings of the 1940's. We are no longer an organization which asks, and hopes it will be heard. We are now a force which must be considered in any decision affecting the blind or the blindness system. This does not mean that we should behave aggressively, arrogantly, or without restraint. Quite the contrary. With power goes responsibility, and we understand that. At the same time we also understand that the governmental and private agencies which provide services in our field have a responsibility not only to themselves and the public but also to the blind, the people who are most affected by their behavior and not just to individual blind people but to the organized blind as well. Individuals can be selected on the basis of docility or willingness to say what is wanted. We cannot. Those agencies which provide good service and treat the blind with dignity and respect can expect similar treatment from us. Those agencies which give poor service and poor treatment to the blind should heed the Biblical injunction: As ye do, so shall it be done unto you. Indeed, we have arrived at a new day in the affairs of the blind. Approximately six thousand blind people are employed in sheltered workshops throughout the country. Very often, working conditions are poor and wages are low. Nowhere is this more dramatically demonstrated than in the Southwest Lighthouse for the Blind in Lubbock, Texas. Last September I went to Lubbock to meet with workers from the Lighthouse. I discovered that most of them were being paid two dollars and five cents an hour. A few were receiving even less some as little as eighty-five cents. A month earlier, the Lighthouse president had told the workers that the agency was planning to begin deducting money from their pay envelopes for their health insurance coverage. Health insurance had previously been provided by the workshop. Most of the workers barely had enough for their food and other living expenses. Nevertheless, agency officials insisted that these employees must pay for health insurance or be fired. Instead of handing over a substantial portion of their meager wages, the workers called on the Federation, and the blind took to the streets. The newspaper stories about the injustice in the workshop spread over the nation, and both television and radio carried the news of the exploitation. The Lighthouse president changed his mind. The workers would continue to receive health insurance, and the pay in their envelopes would not be cut. We won the first round. Before the end of September, we had taken action to begin the next step. We hired a lawyer in Washington, D.C., and helped the Lighthouse workers file complaints with the United States Department of Labor. The minimum wage is three dollars and thirty-five cents an hour. Most sheltered shop workers in Lubbock are receiving two dollars and five cents. Nevertheless, they are expected to work a long day and produce results. The wages are artificially low and shamefully meager. So, we made plans to bring pressure to change them. We submitted complaints to the Department of Labor. These were the first appeals ever filed under the 1986 amendments to the Fair Labor Standards Act, and it will be remembered that they were filed by the National Federation of the Blind. Because of our efforts to educate members of Congress in 1985 and 1986, all blind people receiving subminimum wages have the right to challenge the fairness of their pay. The lawyer we hired once served as the Assistant Secretary of Labor. In that position he learned about the workshops and how they maneuver to violate the law. In October of last year still another element was added to the battle. With our help, shop employees asked that they be permitted to join a labor union. The Lighthouse challenged their right to organize. By November we were preparing for a full-blown hearing before an officer of the National Labor Relations Board. This hearing was of major importance because several months earlier, a judicial decision had been issued by the eighth circuit Court of Appeals saying that blind workers at the Arkansas Lighthouse for the Blind could not join a union. The right of blind workers in sheltered workshops to organize was being eroded. After the setback in Arkansas, a highly visible public counterstroke was required. We needed to protect shop workers, and Lubbock was the place to do it. There will be a full convention item to discuss this case later in the week. Without reviewing all the factors involved, let me just say that the National Federation of the Blind knows about blindness and the law. We are also able to get things done. On December 30, 1988, the workers voted. The question to be answered was: would the workers join a union or not. By the most overwhelming margin ever recorded in any sheltered workshop election, the workers gave their answer. We won that round, too. There is a union at the Southwest Lighthouse for the Blind in Lubbock, Texas. In addition to the administrative and legal proceedings involving the rights of blind sheltered shop employees, we continue to make other efforts to bring about improvements in the shops. Beverley Milkman, the new Executive Director of the Committee for Purchase from the Blind and Other Severely Handicapped (the agency responsible for distributing federal contracts to sheltered workshops), has met with me at the National Center for the Blind. She will be participating in the convention program. New management brings with it an opportunity for a fresh start and a reappraisal of philosophy. Will this change bring increased cooperation between the blind and workshop officials? The answer to this question is not clear. Nevertheless, the executive director of the Committee appears to be more responsive than those who have held this position in the past. If officials of the Committee for Purchase use their influence to diminish the exploitation of workers in Lubbock and elsewhere, the blind of this nation will be pleased to work with them. If they do not, we will oppose them. Learning Braille is vital to the education of blind children. Nevertheless, the attitude of teachers of the blind often reflects the public misconceptions about blindness. Because teachers fear blindness themselves, and because they believe that the blind are inferior, they attack (often without knowing it) the special tools and techniques used by the blind. Training with a white cane is often discouraged for blind students, and it is frequently the case that Braille is taught only when there is no alternative. Blind students are sometimes required to learn print when Braille would be more efficient. The Charles Cheadle case is an illustration of the misunderstanding and prejudice against the blind that exist in the schools. Charles Cheadle is the blind son of John and Barbara Cheadle. Of course, as Federationists know, Barbara Cheadle is the able president of the Parents of Blind Children Division and editor of Future Reflections , our magazine for parents and educators of blind children. John Cheadle is employed at the National Center for the Blind. The Cheadles are thoroughly knowledgeable about blindness, and they are prepared to fight for a quality education for their children. Two years ago Charles Cheadle entered the Baltimore County School System. Although he had been receiving Braille instruction from the educational institution he had attended, he and his parents were informed that Braille would no longer be available to him. Not only would he receive no instruction in its use, but he was also prohibited from having it in the classroom. As soon as it became clear that negotiation would not bring results, we began the process of appeal. School officials said that Charles made impressive scores on achievement tests, that he could see well enough to read print at least for a while, and that he could retrieve a pencil which had been thrown across the room. Therefore, they said, Charles did not need to know Braille. On the other hand, we pointed out that Charles could not read print for very long at a time. After only a brief period of reading, he found it so difficult that his interest in literature was declining. Charles had progressed through the early grades, and his reading and writing requirements had become more demanding. As he continued to advance through school, he would no longer be able to keep pace with the other students. The size of the print in a textbook for the middle grades is smaller than the print in a primer. Nevertheless, personnel in the school system ordered him to read print and stated unequivocally that he would be punished for reading Braille. The school system may try to punish blind students for not being able to see, but we are prepared to take action to prevent it. We proceeded to a hearing before a state review panel in August, 1988, and again in January, 1989. An independent evaluation confirmed our view that Charles must learn Braille to perform well in school. The final order of the state hearing review panel said that Braille instruction is required and that homework assignments should be completed in Braille. There was a time when well-educated individuals were regarded with suspicion, and books were considered the tools of the devil. In our supposedly enlightened age, we assume that this is no longer true. However, if the book is in Braille, it apparently may be regarded as a sign of iniquity and banned from the classroom. This is exactly what happened in the Charles Cheadle case. The representative for the school system asked the hearing officer to believe that Charles Cheadle was being damaged mentally and emotionally by the very presence of Braille. He suggested that teaching Charles Braille was tantamount to child abuse. However, ancient prejudices cannot be permitted to restrict our opportunities. We insist on literacy and the fundamental right of blind children to possess it. That is one of the reasons why we have the National Federation of the Blind. We have also begun this year to take the issue of Braille literacy for the blind to the United States Congress. In March, I testified before the Subcommittee on Select Education of the House of Representatives. The Education for All Handicapped Children Act has been twisted by some educators so that it no longer guarantees what it was intended to protect. The language of the Act says that handicapped children are entitled to an appropriate education in the least restrictive environment. Some of those in the field of education claim that it is restrictive to learn Braille because the number of print books is greater than the number of Braille books. Therefore, (they argue) the least restrictive environment requires students to learn print. According to this theory, Braille (being more restrictive) is prohibited unless the student has so little eyesight that print is impossible. In my testimony, I pointed out the fallacy of this argument and urged the Select Education Subcommittee to amend the law to encourage the teaching of Braille. Some problems with the airlines are still with us, but there are significant developments to report. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) has issued a proposed rule seeking to establish a federal prohibition against having blind persons seated near emergency exits on aircraft. The rule would apply to all seats in rows near all exits on all flights. The period for submission of public comments on this issue ended in June. I responded to the FAA on behalf of the Federation. As you know, the rule would violate the nondiscrimination requirement of the law. It would also increase the danger for the flying public especially the blind. Of course, the most significant danger of the proposal is that airline personnel would be sent an unmistakable message by the government that discrimination against the blind is all right. However, prejudice and the hidden fears of blindness harbored by airline personnel cannot be tolerated. S. 341, the Air Travel Rights for Blind Individuals Act, was introduced by Senator Ernest F. Hollings of South Carolina early this spring. On March 14, Senate hearings were held before the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, and Dr. Jernigan presented perhaps the most powerful statement ever made about the rights of the blind in air travel. On the same day, I appeared for over five minutes on the Today Show. Both Dr. Jernigan's testimony before the committee and my interview on the Today Show have had a substantial impact in raising the consciousness of members of Congress and the public about the urgency of preventing discrimination against the blind. On June 14, less than a month ago, a guest editorial by Dr. Jernigan appeared in USA Today . Next to Dr. Jernigan's striking editorial was a weak (almost apologetic) argument by the Air Transport Association (ATA). Dr. Jernigan's editorial contained a sworn statement by an airline pilot which said that blind travelers present no hazard in flying. The ATA said that it had no evidence, but it hoped that common sense would show that the blind are a threat. When they have no evidence, they call their prejudice common sense. H.R. 563 (a bill identical to the one presented by Senator Hollings) has been introduced in the House of Representatives by Congressman James A. Traficant, Jr., of Ohio. It has over 160 co-sponsors. If we take the actions that we must, Congress will pass the Air Travel Rights for Blind Individuals Act. We have every expectation that the Senate will approve the bill shortly. Senator Hollings has been a staunch and powerful ally. He agrees with us: a person's blindness should not be the basis for discriminatory seating on aircraft. This is what the bill says. Let us work to see that it becomes law so that we can put discrimination in the airways behind us forever. Our efforts to protect the rights of blind vendors are well known. Even the state agencies have learned of our effectiveness in support of the blind vendor program. Two state agencies (one in Michigan and one in Minnesota) are currently receiving our help in arbitration proceedings against federal property managers. Some people have claimed that the Federation is simply anti-agency and that we cannot work with rehabilitation officials. Of course, that is not the case. Here are two examples. The Michigan case involves a large bulk mail facility near Detroit. The Postal Service has refused to issue a permit to bring the facility into the vending program. Vending machines have been placed throughout the building. The machines are currently operated by a commercial vending company, which pays a portion of the profits to a recreation fund established by the postal workers. We think the law is clear. The profits (all of them) should go to a blind vendor. The Michigan Commission for the Blind is pressing forward to obtain a permit to bring the facility into the vending program, and we are helping with the arbitration. When agencies fight for greater opportunities for the blind, they will find the National Federation of the Blind with them in the battle. In Minnesota, officials of the Department of Veterans Affairs (formerly the Veteran's Administration) claimed a virtual exemption from the blind vendor priority granted under the Randolph-Sheppard Act. But last September, an arbitration panel, convened by the Secretary of Education, found that the law applies to veterans' hospitals just as it does to the rest of the nation. The specific issue in Minnesota involves one location currently operated by Dennis Groshel. Dennis is the only blind vendor at a veterans' hospital. Before this arbitration began, he was in danger of losing the business altogether. He was also being required to pay as much as half of his income directly to the Veterans Canteen Service. Now, as a result of last September's arbitration, the business he operates is secure, and no payments are being made. It is likely that there will be further administrative or legal proceedings, but we will do what we can to help. In the meantime, all of the proceeds from the vending facility belong to Dennis. His income has been doubled. It pays to be a member of the National Federation of the Blind. In California, we are assisting Frank Rompal and Tom Linker with a case against the Department of Rehabilitation, the state licensing agency for blind vendors. Last year, when the Department awarded one of the best vending locations in the state, rehabilitation officials disregarded their own rules. These require the appointment of a selection committee for screening applications and interviewing candidates. This was not done. Those with seniority and demonstrated performance records were apparently not considered in the selection process. A hearing at the state level has been held, and an arbitration is pending. The state agency cannot act in violation of the law or in disregard of its own procedures. When it does, as in this case, the National Federation of the Blind will stand with the vendors and fight for their rights. The Federation continues to provide personal assistance to blind persons in resolving Social Security issues. The case of Sharlene Czaja is a good example. Shortly before the national convention last year, Sharlene was notified that she had been overpaid $6,495.90 in Disability Insurance benefits. We looked at her situation and decided that the overpayment determination was wrong. A hearing occurred the day before Thanksgiving in New York City. Sharlene Czaja worked for a time as an investigator with the human rights department in New York. The Social Security Administration said that she had not been entitled to disability insurance benefits during the period of this employment. The judge at the hearing agreed with our argument, and the Social Security Administration was reversed. Sharlene Czaja had not been overpaid. Sometimes one appeal is not enough, but the National Federation of the Blind is persistent. We never give up. A year ago, Deborah Strother, a blind person from Louisiana, was waiting for the results of a hearing concerning the denial of her Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits. Social Security had refused to pay her because they thought she had too much money. The issue concerned the approval of a Plan to Achieve Self-Support. The decision issued last July was favorable, but the Social Security Administration would not write the check for the full amount of the back payment. So, we helped with a second appeal. The Social Security Administration finally admitted that it had made an erroneous determination. Deborah Strother has now received over $3,000. In Florida, Louis Lombardo faced a denial of his Social Security Disability Insurance benefits. Louis was not a member of the National Federation of the Blind at the time he contacted us for help. However, he had read some of the articles we have published on Social Security. Louis had received notices requiring repayment of $31,407.80. The Social Security Administration wanted the money within thirty days. When we learned about the case, the initial proceeding in the appeal had already occurred, and the decision had been unfavorable. Nevertheless, we agreed to do our best, and a hearing was held early this spring. If Louis Lombardo, a blind vendor, had not known about the National Federation of the Blind and the work we have done to assist with Social Security claims, it is a virtual certainty that the facts would not have been gathered to present and resolve this case. How often do blind persons fail to understand or appreciate the value of becoming involved with the National Federation of the Blind? Louis Lombardo knows of the power of the Federation. He will not be required to reimburse the Social Security Administration, and he will continue to receive benefits. Gladys Penney, a blind person from Florida, is fully insured under Social Security; but all of her previous claims have been denied. We are currently helping her with an appeal. If found eligible, Gladys may receive disability cash benefits that she should have been paid for a period of more than thirty years. We believe that she became eligible to receive them in 1956. On the other hand, reconstructing the evidence necessary to prove that she was entitled to benefits in 1956 may not be possible. One thing is clear: Gladys Penney is not now receiving disability insurance, and she is entitled to get it. The only question to be answered is how much we can help her recover. Rami Rabby has attempted to become employed in the service of the United States as a foreign service officer in the State Department. In this position, he would be responsible for working in a number of foreign countries. He has passed all of the required tests. By now he would have been employed in the foreign service if he had been able to see. The only reason for his rejection is blindness. Last November, the State Department announced that it had adopted a new policy. Although the State Department had never hired a blind person as a foreign service officer, it had been accepting applications from blind people and giving them the tests. An official of the State Department said that to deny the blind the right to sit for these examinations would be discriminatory. The State Department declared that it would certainly not discriminate against the blind and that blind people who could take the foreign service test under normal conditions would be welcome to apply. However, the test would not be made available in Braille, and blind applicants could not use readers to take it. In other words, sight is required. If you cannot see, you will not be permitted to take the test. No discrimination, of course. Just a little test to determine your qualifications. It is shallow, twisted logic like this that causes so much mistrust of the government. If the people designing this State Department policy are charged with international relations for the United States, it is no wonder that we find ourselves in so much trouble around the world. We are working with members of Congress to reverse this policy. Congressman Gerry Sikorski is leading the effort. He will be with us here at the convention later in the week. In Connecticut, Laurie Doyle wanted a job doing substitute teaching in the East Hartford School District. The District hired her over the phone but withdrew the offer of employment when it learned that Laurie is blind. However, Laurie Doyle is not the weak, helpless, insignificant person the school system thought a blind person should be and she has over fifty thousand friends. When we questioned District officials, they sent a written explanation claiming that sight is a bona fide occupational qualification for teachers. Tell that to the thousands of blind people who are teaching successfully in the public schools every day. Tell it to the National Federation of the Blind. Tell it to the judge. It didn't take long for officials of the East Hartford School District to recognize that they had made an error. The decision was rescinded, and Laurie Doyle was paid $3,000 in back wages. In South Carolina, we have taken action to help Joe Urbanek bring suit against the Carnival Cruise Lines. For some time we have tried unsuccessfully to work with Carnival Cruise Lines to obtain a change in its policy concerning the blind. Carnival Cruise Lines officials insist that blind people may not travel alone on a cruise. Any blind person on a Carnival Cruise ship must be accompanied by a sighted guide. It has been a long time since I have needed a baby sitter, and I suspect you feel the same. We have tried to avoid confrontation on this, but enough is enough. Carnival Cruise Lines must change this policy. In short, a lawsuit has been filed. On land or sea, we will not remain idle while blind people suffer discrimination. That is why we have the strength, the commitment, and the resources we do. It is why there is the National Federation of the Blind. In another South Carolina case, we have helped Michael Young with a custody battle. His right to rear his own children was being challenged on grounds of blindness. Frank Coppel, one of the Federation leaders in South Carolina, testified in court on behalf of Michael Young. The substance of his testimony was that the blind are neither unusual nor abnormal. We have the same capacities, hopes, dreams, and understandings that sighted people have. Don Capps, who is a member of the Board of Directors of the National Federation of the Blind and who has been in the leadership of this movement for over thirty years, also appeared on Michael Young's behalf. Don Capps described to the court his experience as a blind father and his work with thousands of blind people throughout the United States. He told the judge that it is unreasonable to break up a family because there are misunderstandings about the ability of the blind. The love of a father for his children is no less significant because the father is blind. The decision of the court affirmed the rights of blind parents. Michael Young was granted custody. There are new developments to report this year about the National Accreditation Council for Agencies Serving the Blind and Visually Handicapped (NAC). This so-called accrediting body was created as a political tool and shield for the most regressive and least effective agencies in the country, and it continues to be unresponsive to the needs of the blind and unconcerned about the quality of programs for blind people. NAC's claim that it is a reputable accrediting organization must be measured against the impact of poor service to the blind and the shocking behavior of some of the staff members at NAC-accredited agencies. Disclosures of child abuse at the Florida School for the Deaf and the Blind, (a NAC-accredited agency) are only the most recent revelations. At this school the children were abused physically and sexually. One student died because those charged with her care failed in their responsibilities. We have, of course, been actively working to try to change conditions at the Florida School. We do not believe (as NAC apparently does) that the death of a child can be ignored. Who with any decency at all would try to defend an institution where such behavior is permitted? Today, most of us in this room are adults. Once, we were children. How many of us had the power to defend ourselves against the abuse that has been exposed at the School for the Deaf and the Blind in Florida? Who will protect the children if the schools won't do it? There is only one answer. We must accept the responsibility ourselves. We have often said that ours is very serious business. It can become no more important than the security and care of blind children our children. There is more about NAC. Many of NAC's adherents are beginning to understand that accreditation by NAC is harmful to the blind. The American Foundation for the Blind has been the principal funding source for NAC since 1967. In all of these years, over half of the NAC budget has come directly from the Foundation. The American Foundation for the Blind has quite literally kept NAC alive. From time to time, there are rumors that the Foundation is ceasing its support of NAC. One can only hope that the administration of the American Foundation for the Blind has the decency to cease supporting programs that defend and protect agencies where child abuse occurs. Last May, the Virginia Department for the Visually Handicapped took formal action against renewal of its NAC accreditation. The person who was the acting head of the Virginia Department at that time has now become the Federal Commissioner of Rehabilitation Services. The Columbia Lighthouse for the Blind in Washington, D.C., (one of NAC's earliest and staunchest supporters) has withdrawn its accreditation. In April, the Michigan Commission for the Blind voted not to put rehabilitation money into agencies that are NAC-accredited. As might have been expected, NAC's supporters (the few that are left) rallied to get the decision reversed. They have not succeeded. At a meeting (billed as a press conference by NAC supporters which, incidentally, was not particularly well-attended by the press) Allen Harris, who is treasurer of the National Federation of the Blind and a member of the Board of the Michigan Commission for the Blind, was asked why the Commission had taken its action. He responded by saying that NAC accreditation has never meant quality service, and he cited the example of the Florida School for the Deaf and the Blind. The NAC treasurer, one Gordon Steinhauer, is employed at a hospital. He was asked if the hospital was accredited. When he said that it certainly was accredited by a commission for accrediting hospitals, one of the NAC officials followed up with this question: Has anyone ever died at your hospital? Such a question is as revealing as any commentary on NAC. People who are terribly ill are taken to the hospital. Some of them recover. Some of them don't. This is understandable but the children at school do not ordinarily die. If they do, something is horribly wrong. Nevertheless, NAC supporters gathered to defend such behavior. As I have said, Allen Harris is a member of the Board of the Michigan Commission. He and the organized blind of that state have every intention of insisting that programs for the blind provide real service, and not just talk. He has every intention of defending the blind of the state against the activities of NAC and its associates. And we have every intention of standing with him to help him get it done. When we are finished, services for the blind will be improved, and there will be no more NAC. During the past half-dozen years we in the Federation have conducted the most extensive scholarship program dealing with the blind in the United States. This has been one of the most fruitful efforts we have made. The success achieved by those who have received scholarships shows just how effective this program is. Eileen Rivera has received one of them. She is now the Director of Low-Vision Programming for Johns Hopkins University. Christopher Kuczynski has gotten another. He is becoming a lawyer and will soon be taking a job with a prestigious law firm in Pennsylvania. Michael Bailiff has been awarded still another. He has just spent a year in Europe on a Watson Fellowship. Shortly, he will be entering Yale University to study law. There are dozens of other examples. Our scholarship program has helped bring educational opportunities not only to scholarship recipients, but also to those who have been encouraged and inspired by the Federation. This one program is helping significantly to change the meaning of blindness. It is one more reason for the National Federation of the Blind. Of course, with all of our growth, we continue with the fundamental activities of the movement. We are distributing literature and materials at a record rate. Approximately one and a half million items of literature and other materials have been shipped from our Center this past year. Our distribution of aids and appliances has almost doubled, and we have provided more canes than ever before. We have expanded the number of aids and appliances that we make available to everything from travel aids to writing equipment, from computers to clocks. We now distribute over five hundred different pieces of literature. With approximately 30,000 copies being produced each month, the Braille Monitor (published in print, in Braille, on disk, and on cassette) is the most widely circulated and thoroughly read publication dealing with blindness in this nation. We continue to produce Future Reflections , the magazine for parents and educators of blind children. There are over ten thousand readers. We distribute the Voice of the Diabetic to the blind and to interested sighted people. We circulated over 30,000 copies of a recent issue of this magazine. There are also the Student Division Newsletter, the American Bar Association Journal , the publication of the National Association to Promote the Use of Braille, and a growing number of newsletters from state affiliates and divisions. A few months ago, our Committee on Research and Development (one of the most able groups of blind scientists ever assembled) developed software which makes a talking computer become a scientific calculator. I have been told that this calculator can handle numbers so big that they exceed the number of atoms in the whole known universe. Blind scientists who need a highly-developed calculator will be able to do much with this new product. During the past year we have continued to conduct seminars at the National Center for the Blind, bringing state and local leaders from throughout the nation to Baltimore for sessions of intense training. In addition, there have also been seminars for educators of blind children. In June, we hosted, in conjunction with Johns Hopkins University, a symposium on the perceptual ability of blind youth. It has often been assumed that blind people are severely limited in learning because much of human knowledge is learned through the eye. However, this symposium focused on blind people's learning through raised pictures. The conclusion reached is that whether the perception is visual or tactile, information is gathered in the same way and with the same efficiency. Blind people may learn by using a different method, but the education is just as rapid, just as valuable, and just as effective. On June 2, 1989, an incident occurred in West Monroe, Louisiana, which outlines with painful force the vital necessity for our movement. JoAnne Fernandes, a member of the Board of Directors of the National Federation of the Blind and president of our Louisiana affiliate, went with fifteen others to a nightclub called Sugie's. JoAnne is the Director of the Federation's orientation center in Louisiana. She teaches our philosophy there and encourages blind students to become independent. The program she directs has had tremendous success. Fourteen of the sixteen people who tried to enter the nightclub were blind. As they stepped through the door, JoAnne and her companions were met by one of the nightclub's owners. There ensued a confrontation which we had thought was far in the past. Sugie's owner said that the blind were not welcome unless they agreed to be led to the bathroom because he thought they would run into tables and spill drinks. If drinks were spilled (regardless of the circumstances), the blind must agree to pay for them. Finally, the owner said that all blind individuals must sign a waiver of liability holding him blameless in case of injury. As self-respecting Federation members would expect, JoAnne and the students with her refused. When they tried to discuss the matter with Sugie's personnel, the police were called, and JoAnne and three students were arrested. When the newspapers reported the incident, they enlarged upon the prejudicial attitude expressed at Sugie's. Notice the sanctimonious tone of the bar owner. Here are excerpts of his opinions as quoted in the newspaper. `I was looking out for their behalf, they won't use the aisle. They bump tables and spill drinks. All I was trying to do was help. I even help my drunks to the bathroom and back. I take them home sometimes. That's the way I am. I never told them they couldn't come in at all. I'm looking at liabilities here.' So, that's what the bar owner thinks that blind people and drunks are in the same category and should receive the same treatment. The bar owner may be expressing his sincere belief, but his attitude does not reflect reality. Furthermore, we are no longer willing to tolerate lack of opportunity based on prejudice. A press conference was held in Ruston, Louisiana, and the Federationists at the Louisiana Center told reporters what had really happened. The word spread throughout the state, and public officials offered support. In addition, a lawyer was retained to defend the rights of the blind to enter Sugie's nightclub. The charges were dropped. Ours is serious business. We know our rights, and we know how to get them. However, on the road to equality there is frequently confrontation. We regret the necessity for it, but we are simply not willing to tolerate second-class status. That is why we have formed the National Federation of the Blind. When members of the public think of blindness, they should come to recognize that there is one organization in our country speaking and acting on behalf of the blind. We who are blind can and will help each other as brothers and sisters in the work place, the school, and the home. No one can solve our problems for us, we must do that for ourselves. We have made this commitment, and we intend to keep it. As I reflect on the activities of the past twelve months, it is clear to me that the Federation has never been in better health. There is a closeness in this organization which is unparalleled. We expect much of each other ingenuity, energy, commitment, courage. But there is another element. We have the capacity to care. This year is one to remember. All of us have made it that way. As President I have come to know the sacrifice and dedication of the individual members of this organization. Not only do I feel humility at being entrusted with such responsibility, but I hope that I may measure up to the honor you have given. There is one more thing. I believe that everybody in this organization every officer, every member can feel a justifiable pride in our achievements during the past twelve months. If we do our work well (and I am absolutely certain that we will), next year will be even better. This is my report. LANGUAGE AND THE FUTURE OF THE BLIND An Address Delivered by MARC MAURER President, National Federation of the Blind At the Banquet of the Annual Convention Denver, Colorado, July 8, 1989 One of the most powerful instruments for determining the prospects of an individual, the future of a social movement, or the development of a culture is language the expression in writing or speech of human thought. However, there is at least one theory which maintains that language possesses its power because the relationship between thought and speech is very often misunderstood. According to this thesis these two (thought and speech) are not separate entities at all. They are one. Thoughts cannot occur without being verbalized (either physically or in the mind), and words cannot be spoken or imagined without expressing thought. The words and the thought are the same. The historian and essayist Thomas Carlyle once noted that language is not the garment of thought but the body of it. Modern anthropologists have advanced the Whorf-Sapir hypothesis, which declares that all of human culture is fabricated by language. The poet Percy Bysshe Shelley said that man was given speech, and speech created thought. Samuel Taylor Coleridge observed that language is the armory of the human mind, and at once contains the trophies of its past and the weapons of its future conquests. Socrates asserted that language is the guiding spirit of all human endeavor. Such as thy words are, he said, such will thine affections be; and such as thine affections will be thy deeds; and such as thy deeds will be thy life. If the language is modified, the thought is also altered. If the thought is shifted, the deed cannot remain the same. Therefore, to change a pattern of behavior, we must change the habit of speech. If this theory is true, patterns of speech are at least as important to the future of the blind as the buildings possessed by the agencies, or the money appropriated for rehabilitation, or the gadgetry designed to lighten the burden of life for us. The policy statements, the laws, the public pronouncements in print and on television, the scholarly papers of those conducting so-called research into the nature of blindness, the thought processes of employers and the public-at-large (sometimes expressed in words but more often simply internalized without being uttered), and our own words and thoughts these will determine the future for the blind. If the language is positive, our prospects will be correspondingly bright. If the words used to describe the condition of the blind are dismal, we will find that our chances for equality are equally bleak. However, this is not a matter to be left to fate. For thousands of years false and downbeat words have been forced upon the blind words like wretched , purposeless , unfortunate . But we are no longer willing to abide such labels. We are not inarticulate. We will write our own story and use our own words. Our thoughts will be the dreams of tomorrow, and the language will say: success, independence, freedom! In 1940, as the National Federation of the Blind was brought into being, there was almost nothing in the language to combat the erroneous but generally accepted view that blindness meant ignorance and inability. Dr. Jacobus tenBroek, the founder and first president of the National Federation of the Blind, and the handful who worked with him to pioneer our movement had to commence the process of altering the patterns of thought by correcting the language. He and those others had to begin to create a literature of independence and freedom for the blind. In the 1950's Dr. Kenneth Jernigan, one of the most powerful writers ever to consider the subject of blindness, joined Dr. tenBroek in building a climate of understanding that would permit the blind to achieve equality. A new language began to appear with new adjectives for the blind. The words employed by Dr. tenBroek and Dr. Jernigan were upbeat, shot-through with vitality, and suffused with confidence. This new method of expression carried with it an innovative pattern of thought, and the altered mental process brought action. No longer were the old words permitted to stand alone. No longer were the limitations of those words accepted without challenge. We came to understand that it is with the blind as it has been with other minorities: the liberation of lives begins with the liberation of language. Today, at our forty-ninth convention, blindness does not mean what it did when the Federation was established. The word itself has changed because the thoughts associated with it have changed. In 1940 the dictionary definition was the only readily available explanation of blindness, and the dictionary was entirely negative. In 1989 there is a substantial body of literature which indicates that the dictionary is wrong. Blindness does not mean helplessness, lack of purpose, inferiority, or absence of intelligence. The dictionary definition will not stand close examination, and we are not willing to let it serve as the definitive statement of our hopes and aspirations. We are the blind, with our own story and our own words and we intend to speak for ourselves. Recently an advertisement appeared from the Carrollton Corporation, a manufacturer of mobile homes. Apparently the Carrollton Corporation was facing fierce competition from other mobile home builders, who were selling their products at a lower price. Consequently, the Carrollton Corporation wanted to show that its higher priced units were superior. In an attempt to convey this impression, the company depicted the blind as sloppy and incompetent. Its advertisement said in part: Some manufacturers put out low-end products. But they are either as ugly as three miles of bad road, or they have so many defects crumpled metal, dangling moldings, damaged carpet that they look like they were built at some school for the blind. What a description! There is the ugliness of three miles of bad road, or crumpled metal, dangling moldings, and damaged carpet. The slipshod work is all attributed to the incompetence of the blind. It is not a portrayal calculated to inspire confidence or likely to assist blind people to find employment. However, the work that we in the Federation are doing is paying dividends. When it was called to the attention of company executives that the advertisement was negative and harmful, they apologized for its publication and withdrew it. The manufacturer changed its public representation because of the protest of the organized blind movement. It is not hard to imagine why a manufacturing company might misunderstand the nature of blindness. Such companies do not have routine association with us. Although their misrepresentation of the abilities of blind people must be brought forcibly to their attention, it is reasonable to suppose that the ignorance they sometimes display stems from lack of information. The same cannot be said of agencies for the blind. They hold themselves out as knowledgeable about blindness and thoroughly familiar with every aspect of our lives and behavior. It is, therefore, ironic that some of the most false and damaging literature written about blindness comes directly from these agencies. The Delaware Center for Vision Rehabilitation distributes a brochure called Images . This flier leaves no doubt about the opinion of the Delaware Center regarding the ability of the blind. The grammatical construction is that of the agency. Here is a portion of the language used: The eyes and vision are priceless parts of every person, shaping their attitudes, experiences, expectations, and physical and mental capabilities. As I read this statement, I wondered if they could really believe it. Do our attitudes differ from those of the sighted? Do our physical and mental powers change with the loss of sight? If our mental capabilities are altered, do they get better or worse? The brochure from Delaware does not say, but the context leaves no doubt as to what they think. On the other hand, an article appearing in the Columbus [Ohio] Register about two years ago answers this question differently. The headline says: Nearsighted found to have higher IQs. The article goes on to say: While the nearsighted may need glasses, their lack of perfect vision could be a sign of high intelligence, say researchers who studied myopic Israeli teen-agers. Doctors tested 157,748 Israeli military recruits, ages 17 to 19, and discovered a link between nearsightedness and high IQs. `There can be no doubt about the reality of the correlation between myopia and intellectual performance,' wrote Drs. Mordechai Rosner and Michael Belkin. Still, they wrote, the 'cause and effect relationship is not clear.' This is what the article says and of course, it does not go on to claim that the more restricted your vision becomes, the more intelligent you get until at total blindness you arrive at total genius. But it does suggest that there may be a correlation. Did the learned doctors construct a faulty test? Did they make a mistake in the way they administered it? Or did they simply fall victim to the ancient stereotype that the blind are peculiar and possessed of mysterious powers? Who knows and in a very real sense who cares? We who are blind are neither specially blessed nor specially cursed, and one misconception is as bad as the other. Regardless of that and the claims of the doctors, there has not been, so far as I know, a rush of employers to hire the blind because of our superior intelligence. Even if we were smarter than the sighted (and I don't believe for a minute that we are), the public attitudes about blindness would likely remain just about where they are a lot of superstition, growing enlightenment, and a long pull ahead. A reporter from the Chicago Tribune recently said categorically and unequivocally that: A sighted person with the IQ of a genius would be hard-pressed to make tuna salad while blindfolded. In other words, even if those who are blind have greater intelligence, it doesn't really matter. Sight is essential. Those who lack it cannot even get around their kitchens to make tuna salad. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) recently issued a tech brief on its newly developed Public-Facilities Locator for the Blind. This is a device intended to help the blind become more independent in daily travel. The document describing the new aid is suitably couched in technical terms. It says in part: A proposed coded infrared transmit/receive scheme would enable a blind person in a building to detect and locate specific `landmarks,' such as elevators, water fountains, restrooms, and emergency exits. A synthesized voice would announce a landmark. Each landmark (the document continues) has a code. A pulse code modulation (PCM) scheme transmits each one, the code being the binary grey code (a one chip encode/one chip decode). The transmitter gives out a burst of two identifications; for example, `men's room men's room,' and repeats it continuously at an even cadence. That is what the tech brief says, and there is more of this high-flown technological jargon in the NASA report. Computer signals have been devised for the stairwell, the lady's bathroom, the escalator, and the telephone. When we tell these space technologists that their legerdemain is not only unnecessary but harmful to the blind, they will probably say that we are super-sensitive and that they are only trying to help. They will not understand that the presence of such gadgetry will encourage both the blind and the sighted to believe that we need complex adaptations of the environment for the simplest acts of our daily lives and that those who work in such modified buildings will be quietly and inevitably indoctrinated to the conclusion that blindness means abnormality and incompetence. Of course, there are dozens of ways in which technology can serve our needs. However, if it is truly to be useful to us, its designers must recognize the fundamental capacity of the blind for full integration into society on the basis of equality. Specialized aids and appliances must enhance independence, not stand as a declaration that the blind are so lacking in intelligence that we cannot even find the bathroom or the telephone. How often we have been told that one of the major problems of blindness is being able to find the bathroom. One thing is certain the mickey mouse contraptions and the prejudice against blindness that they represent must go! We will no longer permit the scientists and engineers to imply that we are somehow peculiar and strange. If necessary we will build the equipment we need for ourselves. We the blind are abroad in the land, and we will not remain silent while the technocrats combine antiquated fantasy and modern science to form a spurious portrait of the helpless blind. We have found our voice, and we know how to use it. They cannot tell us how it is for the blind. For we (as was said on another occasion) have been to the mountaintop, and we know how it is for the blind. The technologists can work with us if they will. But we know what we want and how to get it. And we intend to speak for ourselves. One of the oldest and tiredest jokes about the blind is that the Braille system works better on a date. Now, there is a company that has decided to try to capitalize on that sick so-called sense of humor. An outfit calling itself Valley Enterprises prints T-shirts with easily feelable raised dots. The name they give to this printing is so predictable as to be both inevitable and totally disgusting they call it Body Braille. There are six preprinted messages available on the back of their T-shirts or sweat shirts. They will also print them on the front, if you like. Blind people across the country have heard these messages over and over again. Here are the six: Out of Sight, Keep in Touch, Touch of Class, Hands on Experience, Feeling Good, and Handle with Care. According to the maker of these shirts, the purpose of the company is not merely to raise money for its owners. Instead, they say: `Body Braille' clothing is a unique means of communicating self awareness and self expression for individuals who are visually impaired, a means to raise the consciousness of the sighted public, and an avenue for all people to demonstrate their support of the visually impaired. To which I reply: Yuk and double yuk. Why is it that this company (and so many other people) feel that they have to offer a socially acceptable justification for poking fun at the blind? Blind people do not make a practice of feeling one another up, and we are unwilling for any other group to assume that we do or, for that matter, that it would be all right if we did, or that it is all right for them to do so with us as an excuse. Furthermore, I, for one, am tired of the slightly off-colored humor that is so often claimed to be funny. The blind are like others. We will find the times and the places when intimacy is appropriate. Otherwise, leave it alone, and do not talk or act as if we (like the slaves of a bygone time) are generally available. There is a well-known theory which holds that all blind people require psychological counseling and adjustment. This bald proposition has been given sufficient credence by certain agencies for the blind that they have permanent psychologists on staff to minister to the needs of their clients. Blind people seeking assistance from these agencies are not asked whether they want psychological services. It is simply assumed that all who are blind need them. Often those who try to avoid the psychologist are informed that the ministrations of this specialist are part of the package if they want help in learning the skills of blindness (such as Braille and mobility), securing financial aid for college tuition, or gaining assistance in locating a job. If the blind hope to receive any service at all, they may have to endure the testing, the questioning, and the probing into every corner of daily life and personal behavior. Perhaps you imagine that this psychological review is of the standard sort. Don't you believe it. Some of the agencies (no doubt employing their years of experience and so-called research tools) have decided that the usual tests are insufficient. After all, the standard psychological examinations are designed for the sighted. The blind are different. They are blind. Therefore, an alternative series of tests (special tests just for the blind) has been designed and is now in use. The American Foundation for the Blind has produced a special psychological test called The Anxiety Scale for the Blind. Apparently the putative experts believe that there is a need to measure psychological stress in the blind and that no ordinary analysis will do. Here is a sample of what the test designers say: Although there are a number of general anxiety measures available, counselors and psychologists working with blind clients may question the use with the blind of instruments that have been constructed for the sighted. The purpose of research on the Anxiety Scale for the Blind (ASB) was, they go on to say, to provide a measure of manifest anxiety which could be standardized on populations of blind persons and which later could have wide applicability in the field of work for the blind. There you have it. It is necessary to test the anxieties of blind people, and this is no ordinary task. The anxiety felt by the blind is special. It is certainly not the same as the anxiety felt by the sighted. And these are the people who are charged with providing services to the blind. We have many hundreds of blind people meeting and enjoying themselves at this banquet tonight. Forget your good spirits for a moment, and ask yourself whether you have special anxiety. Do you feel it? Well, I don't either. And what kinds of services do you suppose will likely be offered with this anxiety scale as a background? The next revelation of these so-called experts (from the American Foundation for the Blind) is that they intend to test us all. Psychological examinations have traditionally been given in this country to select groups to achieve specific purposes. They have not been given to entire populations for nonspecific reasons. However, the designers of the Anxiety Scale for the Blind tell us that its use is to be much broader. Although the authors developed this test with students attending schools for the blind, they say: Local norms should be established for blind persons in various environmental settings such as the home, the sheltered workshop, and the competitive work situation. But this is not all. They go on to recommend that there be, in their words: a study of the effects of manifest anxiety on the academic achievement of blind students; a study of the effect of anxiety on learning mobility skills; a study of manifest anxiety in relation to social behavior in courtship and other social situations; a study of the effects of anxiety on success in the competitive work environment; and a study of manifest anxiety in leadership potential among blind persons. The environment of George Orwell's 1984 has, I am glad to say, not yet been fully imposed upon the general population, and we are not going to have it for the blind either. We don't need special testing beyond that given to others in our education, our jobs, or our social lives. If we have reasonable opportunity and a fair chance to compete for jobs on equal terms with others, we will hold our own as well as the next person. We are not freaks; we are not basket cases; and we are not so fragile that we will break. Our problems are more in the area of civil rights and vocational exclusion than maladjustment and the need for counseling and don't you forget it. But back to the testers and the anxiety scale. After informing us that there is virtually no aspect of the daily lives of blind people that should not be subjected to the rigors of this mental measuring stick, the testers list seventy-eight statements. The person being examined is expected either to agree or disagree. Here is a sample from the seventy-eight. As you consider these statements, ask yourself how much confidence is inspired by the language employed. Statement number two: I almost always trust the people who guide me. That statement assumes that the blind need guidance, that this need causes dependency, and that the lack of freedom of movement results in anxiety. The implication is that the blind person cannot function without the superior knowledge or judgment of somebody else and that a degree of decision-making power and control will necessarily be surrendered. All people require guidance from time to time. This is as true of the blind as it is of the sighted. However, hidden in this statement is the insinuation of an innate helplessness by the blind. If this is what they believe, they are not well acquainted with the energy, the resourcefulness, and the self-reliance of blind people. One is tempted to reply with an answer like this: I do almost always trust the people who guide me, except when the guidance comes from the people who designed this test. But back to the psychological examination. The statements go on. Here are some of the others. Ask yourself what is meant by each and how you might respond. Number six: I am uncomfortable when I must eat with sighted persons. Number ten: I would say that blindness has completely ruined my life. Number fifteen: I refuse to carry a cane because it makes me appear helpless. Number nineteen: I would say that in most cases blind people should marry other blind people. Number thirty: I don't worry about being blind. I interrupt to ask how could one help it when the psychologists are trying to ram it down our throats? But there is more to the test. Number thirty-one: I would not date a sighted person. Number thirty-seven: I would say that I often feel unwanted when with my blind friends. Number thirty-eight: Sighted people rarely make me feel useless. Number forty-one: I often find it difficult to express my ideas when in the company of sighted people. Number forty-nine: Frequently, when I am with sighted persons I have trouble with my words. Number fifty-one: In familiar surroundings, I sometimes have a feeling of being absolutely lost. Number fifty-five: I have about the same number or fewer fears than my blind friends. Number fifty-six: I have to be cautious in the company of sighted people. Number fifty-seven: Because I cannot see, life is a constant state of stress. Number sixty: I constantly think and often talk about being able to see well. Number sixty-four: I am more irritable when I am with sighted people than when I am with blind people. Number sixty-five: I frequently feel uneasy about competing with sighted people. Number sixty-eight: I am overly sensitive about my physical condition. Number seventy: Frequently, I feel that a familiar room has changed shape. Number seventy-three: I do not mind asking sighted people for help. Number seventy-four: I often worry about looking ridiculous to sighted people. Number seventy-five: Often I am not polite to sighted people. There is one statement among the seventy-eight which exemplifies the approach of the whole miserable examination. It reads: I often feel under strain because I must stay alert. Now, I ask you, why is it necessary for the blind to be more alert than others? Are blind people more likely to get into trouble? Are we more accident-prone? Is there something about the blind that makes us miss factual information if we do not concentrate more diligently than others? What could possibly be the need for this extraordinary vigilance? Have the testers really met the blind and worked with us on a daily basis? Can they truly understand our fundamental ability, our wishes, and our aspirations? There must have been some reason for including this novel suggestion. Perhaps the explanation is contained in statement twenty-nine. It says: I would say that blindness is a personal punishment. Did these psychological experts learn their scientific principles from ancient mythology or venerable lore? Blindness, a punishment? From whom does the retribution come? Such a statement, in a supposedly even-handed psychological test, puts one in mind of the old Middle Eastern proverb: When you see a blind man, kick him. Why should you be kinder to him than God has been? Dependence, rejection, uncertainty, frustration these are the words associated with the portrayal of the blind in this test. The Anxiety Scale for the Blind is certainly not a document that will engender peace of mind. The set of idiotic statements is well named. It will certainly cause anxiety in the blind, in those, at least, who are gullible, inexperienced, or beaten down enough to take it seriously. And it will also cause anxiety in the rest of us an anxiety to eradicate such misbegotten notions as those advocated by the test. The blind are not less secure or more sensitive than others. It is not reasonable to suppose that lack of sight indicates mental imbalance. The experience of tens of thousands of us shows that it is not so. This so-called scientific test is not really based on evidence at all. It is a sham dressed up in the jargon of science, and its image is harmful to the blind. Its symbolism is the archaic language of deprivation and fear. We reject this prejudicial, ridiculous document because it does not represent blindness as it is. We will not permit it to stultify our hopes and curtail our opportunities. Instead, we will build our own images and use our own words. The language will be ours, and we will say it like it is. For the blind there will be success, independence, freedom! So often those who consider the subject of blindness focus on the dining table. Everyone must eat, and the blind are no exception. One company, Liblan, Incorporated, of Wheeling, Illinois, has designed and patented a special dish and spoon for the blind. In a letter to me Liblan's president says that his company has developed a special Plastic food container and utensil construction designed for manipulation by the sense of touch only. I was asked to send letters of endorsement to major manufacturers so that they would produce this special bowl and spoon for the blind. I leave it to you to determine whether I did. A report in the Tulsa (Oklahoma) World states that a nonprofit organization called New View, Incorporated, has established a program to encourage awareness of blindness by inviting public officials to breakfast and insisting that they eat blindfolded. The results are predictable. All the misconceptions of blindness are enhanced and reinforced by the brief experience. Why are supposedly knowledgeable people willing to believe that blindness can be understood within half an hour? The alternative techniques required for a blind person to function (not to mention the philosophical implications of blindness) are far more complex than the skills required for perhaps a hundred other tasks. Nevertheless, it is assumed that blindfolding a group of public officials for an hour or less will teach them about blindness. These same public officials know that it takes longer than that to learn how to drive a car or shoe a horse. Still, they are urged to think that they know all about blindness with absolutely no training. Here is the way it appeared in the Tulsa World : If you want a lifetime appreciation of sight, try life without it for half an hour. A dinner fork becomes a spear when you can't see it coming toward your face. Rich foods make you thirsty, but you don't drink. A glass is a water tower. A reach through the darkness could be a spill and flood everyone's meal. Coffee is drunk with hesitation. A sip can become a gulp. A gulp can become a scald. You make a lot of noise with eating utensils when you're blind. You stick your fork heavily onto empty china, and with your increased sense of hearing, it sounds as if you're beating drums to everyone's annoyance. You don't talk as much during a meal when you're blind. The loss of one sense amplifies the others. You hear more, and restaurant background music becomes blaring. You think you're shouting just to speak above it. You eat less when you can't see. To hunt for food is to push it off your plate, onto the table, onto your lap. Scambled eggs can burn like a brand. One napkin isn't enough when you're newly blind. You wipe food onto the napkin, then you wipe it back onto your face. You know you're blind and suspect you're bothersome. People who involuntarily lose their sight have a problem with sorrow about what they can't do. People who voluntarily lose it have trouble with guilt about what they can. When you're blind you no longer care that the Russians boycotted the Olympics. You can't even cut your food. Yet the real blind people shave and brush their teeth. You finally think more about their braveness and bravura than your own blindness. The newspaper reporter tells us that the blind are brave for shaving; that blind people cannot cut their food; that one napkin is not enough for the newly blinded; that blind people eat less, talk less, and make more noise than the sighted; that the loss of sight heightens the other senses; that the blind are full of grief, and the sighted full of guilt. All of this occurred because an agency for the blind wanted to impress (and doubtless get money from) public officials by frightening them into believing that it was dealing with a catastrophic situation. The inevitable result is that the agency will receive deference and (no doubt) more sympathy for its fund-raising efforts. But what will the blind receive? More public misconceptions to overcome; more difficulty in finding jobs; and more problems in having the opportunity to live normal, ordinary, everyday lives. If these misstatements, false notions, and devastating descriptions were not so serious, they might be downright funny. However, they have a dramatic impact on the lives of each of us. With this kind of public perception about blindness the job market is closed. The professors at educational institutions may not turn us away, but they will not regard us as serious students. Service in positions of responsibility in government or the private sector will not be available. However, the article in the Tulsa World , with its mistaken notions about blindness, is only one of the public utterances about the blind. There are many others. Our work in the Federation has continued for forty- nine years, and there are measurable changes. For a number of years one of the problems facing the blind was that we were banned from jury service because of blindness. Indeed, in some states the laws still specifically restrict us from being selected. However, the work of the Federation is bringing change. In many states the laws now say that the blind cannot be categorically excluded from jury service. One indicator of our progress is shown by a poll conducted recently by radio station WBZ in Boston. Ninety-five percent of those questioned said that blind people should be allowed to serve on juries. One word, one image, one symbol, one thought at a time we are changing what it means to be blind. One word, one image, one symbol, one thought at a time we are achieving independence, self-sufficiency, and equality. The day when the blind can no longer be excluded from jury service is not a dream for the distant future. It is within our reach. First, jury service. Then, other rights the right to employment on terms with others, the right to live peacefully in our homes without unwanted interference from government officials, the right to travel without harassment or intimidation the right to participate fully in all the activities of daily life. The psychological tests, the blindfolded public officials, the patented dishes and spoons for the blind all of these have an impact on our personal lives. Shortly after last year's convention I received a letter which describes eloquently in unadorned prose the problems we face. The Federationist who sent it knows disappointment and frustration firsthand. The letter contains an exceptional poignancy, more for what it does not say than for what it does. Here it is: September 30, 1988 Dear President Maurer: Two years ago I decided to move back home for convenience reasons. In the past few months I have been treated worse by my mother than by airline personnel or a stranger on the street. Let me give you a few examples. I was asked to take a pot of coffee from the house to my father's machine shop, which was only about a four minute walk either by the road or through the trail in the woods. Well, by the time mother had the coffee ready, and I was ready to go, she changed her mind and said I might fall down with it and hurt myself. Mr. Maurer, I have never fallen down on my way from the house to the machine shop. Another incident: Every time food is served at the table, whether it be spaghetti or hamburger meat, it comes to me in a bowl. Not only that, but with a spoon. I asked once, why the spoon? She replied, `I thought you could handle it better that way.' The other night was better than that. I was served soup with several sheets of newspaper under the bowl. I wanted to say something about this, but we would both just get mad and have a fight. I threw a spoon at her one time. And then, of course, I felt embarrassed and humiliated afterward. I am tired of my mother's negative remarks toward me as to what I can and can't do as a blind person. It seems like, after 37 years, she ought to know damn well what I can and cannot do. Just what can I do to change her attitude about blindness? Well, tonight for dinner fried fish was served with tartar sauce. Then, I noticed she was laying paper down before she served the plate. I asked my father, 'Where is your paper for your plate?' He explained he didn't need paper. So, I just got up and walked away. What can I say to this Federationist? How can I answer his letter? It is bad enough that the agencies promote negative attitudes about us, that the advertisers belittle us in order to sell their products, and that the newspapers misunderstand and compound the problem. But it is even worse when the members of our own families (conditioned by the words and thoughts of society) do the same. It makes little difference that more often than not the members of our families put us down and treat us like children for motives of love. The tragedy, the pain, and the loss hurt no less for the lack of malice. Sometimes, in our humiliation and frustration, we may think the first best step is to leave the table hungry for a night but this is no answer, no remedy, no solution to the problem. There must be concerted action and coordinated effort to change public attitudes and improve the social climate. And we are taking those actions. We are making those efforts. The members of our families are part of the general public, and so are the agencies and their psychologists. For that matter, so are we. For thousands of years we who are blind have been regarded as incompetent, and for the most part we have accepted the legends we have been taught. But that time is at an end. It is true that some still tell us that we cannot perform in the factory or workshop; that we have an altered mentality; that we are unable to handle routine tasks in the kitchen; that we require extraordinary technological devices to help us find the bathroom; that we need raised dot T-shirts to enhance our self-awareness; that we suffer from special anxiety; that we cannot use ordinary tableware; that, when we finally get to the table, we will eat less, talk less, and make more noise than others; and that our lives are filled with grief. But it is equally true that these are not any longer the predominant elements of our lives. In 1940 we organized to speak for ourselves through the National Federation of the Blind, and in the intervening half century the blind have achieved more progress than ever before in all previous recorded history. We have replaced the ancient terms of negativism with a new language of hope, and society has increasingly come to accept us for what we are normal people with normal aspirations and normal abilities. More and more the words (and therefore, the thoughts and the deeds) of the work place and the home, the school and the church, the street and the playground reflect this new mood. And underlying it all, fueling the change and focusing the progress, is (as it has been for the past half century) the National Federation of the Blind. With all of the problems and all of the work we still have to do, we come to this meeting tonight with a feeling of hope and a mood of gladness. We come with a joy and a certainty of triumph. At long last we know who we are and what we must do. We are organized, confident, and prepared for what lies ahead and no force on earth can turn us back. Our words, our thoughts, and our dreams reach for a tomorrow which is bright with promise, and the heart of that promise is the individual determination of each of us and the unshakeable power of our vehicle for collective action the National Federation of the Blind. The past has belonged to others, but the future belongs to us. Let us speak, think, and act in support of each other and we will make it all come true! 1989 NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND AWARDS An organization says much about itself by the awards which it presents. Elsewhere in this issue you will read about twenty-six of the nation's most extraordinary post-secondary school students, the 1989 NFB scholarship winners. Here is a summary of the other awards presented at this year's national convention: The Blind Educator of the Year Award Patricia Munson of Albany, California, has taught in a public school system for twenty-five years. In presenting her with this award during the Saturday morning convention session, President Maurer said in part: Patricia Munson is a writer. She has written numerous articles about blind people: their anxiety to do well and their capacity to achieve. She is also a leader, not only in California, but throughout the United States. This week she has been elected President for the coming year of the National Association of Blind Educators, a division of the National Federation of the Blind. And the National Association of Blind Educators in conjunction with the National Federation of the Blind has awarded her the Blind Educator of the Year Award for 1989. I would like to add our recognition in convention assembled to that of the National Association of Blind Educators. And to demonstrate that we mean what we say, I would like to present to you, Patricia Munson, a check for $500 as the Blind Educator of the Year. Mrs. Munson responded as follows: I accept this check, not for myself, because I would not have this job if it had not been for the National Federation of the Blind. It was Dr. Perry, Dr. tenBroek, Muzzy Marcelino, and Dr. Jernigan, who opened up the teaching profession to the blind. In the mid-fifties blind people could still not teach in public schools. I came along later. I did not know about the Federation, and I got a job. I thought I was wonderful; I had done it on my own. But I had not done it on my own, and I would not have been employed for twenty-five years had it not been for all of you and all of those who came before who helped make this possible. And believe me, I have taught in every aspect of education. When you are a junior high teacher, you fill in for your colleagues, you teach physical education, you teach art, you teach driver ed, you teach whatever it is that has to be covered. We can do it. I've done it, and you can too. In concert we work together. Thank you very much. The Distinguished Educator of Blind Children Award At the banquet Saturday evening Dr. Jernigan called Sharon Maneki, President of the NFB of Maryland and Chairman of the committee making this year's selection, to make the presentation. She said: It is most appropriate that we in the National Federation of the Blind recognize a distinguished educator of blind children. The blind children of this nation belong to us. Their future is of prime importance. Tonight we honor Mrs. Kim Bosshart, a vision teacher in the public schools of Fremont, Nebraska. Kim Bosshart is a person who is changing what it means to be blind for the children of Nebraska. She is a model for the teachers of the entire nation. Tonight we present Kim Bosshart with a $500 check and with a plaque that symbolizes our confidence and support. The plaque reads: National Federation of the Blind honors Kim Bosshart, Distinguished Educator of Blind Children, for her skill in teaching Braille and the use of the white cane, for generously devoting extra time to meet the needs of her students, and for inspiring her students to perform beyond their expectations. Congratulations, Kim. Kim Bosshart responded: Thinking back on my first year teaching blind children, I remember sometimes feeling very angry and frustrated with teachers and parents. Of course, he can use the stairs; he doesn't need to use the elevator. Yes, she can participate in P. E. and Home Ec. It just seemed so logical to me. Expect from these blind children what you would from any other child. But it didn't always happen. Then the realization came to me that this was not entirely their fault. I needed to take a leadership role to help educate them about the abilities of blind people. It was at that point that I began to develop a more community-based program which culminated in my selection as the 1989 Distinguished Educator of Blind Children. I am extremely grateful for this award, and I know that it will serve as an inspiration for me to continue to improve the quality of education that I provide to blind children. Since you bestowed this honor on me, I would like to share with you quickly my approach to the education of blind children. It's based on the mission statement of the Fremont, Nebraska, Public Schools, which reads as follows: `The mission of Fremont Public Schools is to produce creative, adaptable, productive, self-sufficient citizens, who are committed to life-long learning and capable of effecting responsible change, by providing a quality education that is designed to meet the needs of individual students.' How will these needs be met? Well, after having been at this convention all week, I can list three areas in my curriculum that will definitely continue to remain strong. First, it will be imperative to continue having realistic but very high expectations, not only from the students I teach, but also from their parents, the school staff, and the community in general. Second, I will continue to seek out competent blind adults to be role models for the students I work with and sources of valuable information in the schools and community. And third, a well-rounded curriculum will continue to be offered; very specifically but not inclusively this will include Braille reading, beginning with toddler youngsters; Braille writing, using a slate and stylus first and then the Braille writer; and also, with support of the services in Nebraska, continuation of early cane travel for students. The end objective will be for the students to have a sense of self-esteem and dignity that will inspire their own motivation to achieve. So with combined effort of all people who work with blind children, we will ensure that every child is provided the very best education possible, and we must all work together to help produce creative, adaptable, productive, self-sufficient citizens of the future. Thank you. The Jacobus tenBroek Award In making this presentation Steve Benson, Chairman of the Jacobus tenBroek Award Committee and member of the Board of Directors, said: In 1940 the founding of the National Federation of the Blind ignited the torch of freedom for the blind of this nation. That torch was carried high by Dr. Jacobus tenBroek. Dr. tenBroek was an extraordinary man. His achievements as a scholar, teacher, author, and civil rights advocate are part of what he was. He was compassionate, tough when he needed to be, a man of high good humor and dedication to improving the lives of all of us. His concern about the condition of the blind was exceeded only by his love for his blind brothers and sisters. There is no doubt that Dr. tenBroek's writings and speeches represent a very significant chapter in the history of the blind of this nation. The impact of his work is still being measured for his work ( our work) is not yet complete. Since 1974 the National Federation of the Blind has upon occasion presented the Jacobus tenBroek Award. It is the highest honor we can bestow upon one of our own members. Recipients of this award must have demonstrated consistent, long-term commitment to the philosophy of the Federation and to the challenges that Dr. tenBroek so clearly defined for us to fulfill. Recipients of this award must view our organization and our work from a national perspective. Most of all, recipients must love our movement and the blind of this nation. All of this is a reflection of the character and spirit of Dr. tenBroek. It is unusual for this award to be presented in two successive years. However, the committee determined that one individual is so extraordinary that the award should be presented again this year. Our winner has extended herself far beyond the expected to change what it means to be blind. She has built and strengthened chapters, worked to improve educational opportunities for blind children, and begun to reshape the rehabilitation program in her state. A resident of one of the thirteen original states, she exhibits the resilience and determination of the hearty frontier stock from which she comes. Over the past twenty years she has carried the torch of freedom high, in the manner and spirit of Dr. tenBroek. She finds strength in our movement and in her God. Her favorite Biblical verse is, `I can do all things through Christ, who strengthens me.' It gives me great pleasure and genuine honor to present the 1989 Jacobus tenBroek Award to my colleague in the movement, Hazel Staley. The plaque presented to Hazel Staley reads: National Federation of the Blind Jacobus tenBroek Award Presented to Hazel Staley for your dedication, sacrifice, and commitment on behalf of the blind of this nation. Your contribution is measured not in steps but in miles, not by individual experiences but by your impact on the lives of the blind of the nation. Whenever we have asked, you have answered. We call you our colleague with respect. We call you our friend with love. July 8, 1989. Hazel Staley, who was overcome with emotion, responded: Thank you. I can't believe that this is really happening. For almost fifty years many, many people have labored long and tirelessly to bring about equality, opportunity, and security for the blind of our nation and the world. I feel very proud and honored to be deemed worthy to be numbered among that group. Ever since Don Capps recruited me twenty years ago, the Federation's philosophy and its programs and activities have been top priority with me, and they will continue to be top priority as long as God lets me live. I feel very honored to receive this award. I can't talk anymore. Thank you. The Newel Perry Award Donald Capps, member of the Board of Directors and Chairman of its Newel Perry Award Committee, presented this award toward the close of the banquet. He said: Dr. Jernigan, President Maurer, distinguished guests, fellow Federationists Like the Nobel Peace Prize, the Newel Perry Award is granted only as often as outstanding and distinguished accomplishment merits. This highest award is given only to those persons who have made significant contributions toward the progress and independence of the blind. Since the Newel Perry Award is the highest honor which the organized blind of this country can bestow, it is treated accordingly. It is given sparingly with appropriate care and with selectivity. The last time the Newel Perry Award was granted was seven years ago in 1982. This highest recognition is truly reserved for those distinguished Americans who genuinely merit the honor. Tonight we are pleased and privileged to have this opportunity of honoring another distinguished American. We take justifiable pride in presenting the Newel Perry Award in 1989 to the Honorable Gerry Sikorski. Congressman Sikorski is a distinguished member of the United States Congress and proudly represents the great state of Minnesota. Throughout his brilliant service in the United States House of Representatives Congressman Sikorski has clearly demonstrated complete faith and confidence in the abilities of the blind. In 1985 when leaders of the National Federation of the Blind of Minnesota called upon Congressman Sikorski during the annual Washington Seminar, he expressed interest in hiring a qualified blind person to serve on the staff in his Minneapolis office. A few months later, in October of 1985, our own Judy Sanders was hired by Congressman Sikorski. Judy Sanders did not remain in this position for very long, however, because she progressed rapidly, competing successfully with others in the process. Judy Sanders is now the director in Congressman Sikorski's Minneapolis District Office. In this capacity Judy has overall office responsibility for supervising eight additional staff members and scheduling all of Congressman Sikorski's appointments and activities while he is in the district. Congressman Sikorski chairs several House committees, including the Sub-Committee on Civil Service. In February he held a hearing before this committee for the express purpose of focusing Congressional attention upon the State Department's discrimination against our own Rami Rabby. The Braille Monitor very proudly featured the entire hearing, and the transcript was read by thousands across the country and throughout the world. Congressman Sikorski is pledged to remain steadfast with the Federation in its fight to obtain from the State Department for Rami Rabby the non- discriminatory treatment accorded other qualified applicants and candidates for the Foreign Service. Congressman Sikorski has been in the forefront in the National Federation of the Blind's struggle to have all blind Americans treated as first-class citizens in air travel by the airlines. He is a proud co-sponsor of the Air Travel Rights for Blind Individuals Act and is working actively with other members of Congress seeking further support for this meritorious legislation. At this midpoint in Congressman Sikorski's distinguished career of