Super Shareware Collection/Super Shareware Collection.iso/info/brlm9402.zip/BRLM9402.TXT

Text File | 1994-02-01 | 198KB | 3,598 lines

                       THE BRAILLE MONITOR



                     Barbara Pierce, Editor


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


              THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
                     MARC MAURER, PRESIDENT



                         National Office
                       1800 Johnson Street
                   Baltimore, Maryland 21230

                             * * * *



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

                             * * * *



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


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

                             * * * *

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



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

                            CONTENTS

                                                   FEBRUARY, 1994

ARE SPECIALIZED EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS FOR CHILDREN WITH
DISABILITIES IMMORAL?
by Barbara Pierce

STAYING THE COURSE, SHIFTING THE EMPHASIS: THE BLIND IN THE
1990'S
by Gary Wunder

GEORGIA EDUCATOR TEACHES SCHOOL SYSTEM NOT TO DISCRIMINATE
by Scott LaBarre

THE OREGON BRAILLE BILL: AN EXERCISE IN COOPERATION
by Carla McQuillan

WALKING ALONE AND MARCHING TOGETHER IN ALAMOGORDO

THE NFB IN ACTION
by Kevan Worley

BASIC RIGHTS AND HIGHER PRINCIPLES
by Fatos Floyd

EXPECTATIONS: THE CRITICAL FACTOR IN THE EDUCATION OF BLIND
CHILDREN
by Fredric K. Schroeder

1994 CONVENTION BULLETIN
MICHIGAN: THE FIRST, THE BIGGEST, AND THE BEST

FEDERATIONIST HONORED

RACE AND REASON: A BLACK PERSPECTIVE ON A DARK ISSUE
by John W. Smith

NEW FACULTY MEMBER MAKES A PLACE FOR HIMSELF

SOCIAL SECURITY, SSI, AND MEDICARE FACTS FOR 1994

RECIPES

MONITOR MINIATURES





     Copyright ■ 1994 National Federation of the Blind, Inc.
[2 LEAD PHOTOS:  PHOTO 1) Four men in National Center for the Blind kitchen,
cleaning and doing dishes.  PHOTO 2) President Maurer and Mr. Cobb stand on
ladders cleaning walls in an office. CAPTION: Whether it's walking a picket
line, stuffing envelopes, or helping to clean at the National Center for the
Blind, Federationists have never been afraid of hard work. Above, members of
the Board of Directors of the National Federation of the Blind wash dishes
after a meal during the Board's annual Thanksgiving weekend meeting. Below,
President Maurer and Tony Cobb of the National staff wax the paneling in the
new street-level area at the National Center. Working or playing, members of
the National Federation of the Blind enjoy spending time together.]




[PHOTO: Barbara Pierce standing at microphone. CAPTION: Barbara Pierce.]

              ARE SPECIALIZED EDUCATIONAL SETTINGS
             FOR CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES IMMORAL?
                        by Barbara Pierce

     The nation's highest ranking governmental official dealing
directly with disability issues is Judy Heumann, Assistant
Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services in
the Department of Education (DED). The fact that Ms. Heumann uses
a wheelchair and therefore understands and shares the views of a
significant number of the people whom her programs ultimately
affect is fairly novel and frequently helpful. But despite Ms.
Heumann's firsthand knowledge all is not harmonious sweetness and
light in the field of education of children with special needs.
     The present difficulty is yet one more manifestation of the
same old problem: in a field in which there are many different
disabilities and in which even students with the same deficit
have very different needs, no one educational solution will ever
fit everybody. Clearly a continuum of learning environments from
full inclusion in the regular classroom to the specialized
residential school must be available and acceptable educational
alternatives if disabled children are not to be the losers. Yet
even when a range of options is available, we human beings have a
near genius for doing the wrong things for the right reasons as
well as the occasional possibility of doing the right thing for
the wrong reasons. All this complicates even the best-intentioned
effort to find the right educational setting for each disabled
child.
     Add to all this the instinct on the part of many public
school officials to cloak their fears and misconceptions about
disabilities in fashionable educational jargon and excuses about
limited financial resources, and you have a situation in which
what is best for the individual disabled child is often
completely disregarded. Knowing that many children with special
needs could thrive in the regular classroom if there were only
some architectural modifications or some special instruction
(Braille, sign language, speech therapy, etc.), some advocates
maintain that disabled students will never be truly accepted in
the regular classroom until schools are required to include them
in regular classes as a matter of course. On the other hand both
mainstream teachers who recognize that these children almost
never get all the support services and specialized instruction
they need and those who believe that disabled students can never
fit in and always cause complications and disruption in their
classrooms are frantic to keep all such children out. Sometimes
with good reason and sometimes not, they say that they can't give
disabled students the time and attention they require.
     There is no easy solution to this mess. But in an article
printed elsewhere in this issue, Fred Schroeder discusses the
first step to finding the answer. All teachers of disabled
children must begin with a fundamental belief in the abilities of
the children they work with. Teachers, parents, and ultimately
the students themselves must come to have real confidence in the
youngsters' ability to compete academically and socially with
their nondisabled peers of comparable ability.
     Sufficient funds must be found to insure that the necessary
skill instruction and services are available for disabled
students. If these conditions were met and schools were fully
accessible to students using crutches or wheelchairs, most
youngsters with sensory or mobility impairments could certainly
fit into the regular classroom with little problem and special
services that decrease as they mature. Whether or when children
with severe mental, emotional, or behavioral disabilities belong
in the regular classroom is to my mind a different question and
one which we in the National Federation of the Blind are not
equipped to discuss knowledgeably.
     In 1994, however, we are very far from being at this ideal
level of educational enlightenment. It is fair to say that not a
single element of the educational continuum is currently
providing consistently excellent service, which is to say that
improvement is necessary in every regular classroom and in every
alternative setting. Enter Assistant Secretary Heumann and her
predisposition in favor of full inclusion. As a youngster whose
only problem was the necessity to use a wheelchair, she
undoubtedly belonged in the regular classroom, an option which
for part of her education, at least, she was denied. It is
understandable that today she feels keenly the importance of
seeing that prejudice, ignorance, and sloppy design will never
again prevent disabled students from benefitting from the
educational opportunities she was denied. And certainly the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) includes
language that strongly encourages the mainstreaming of special
education students. In fact, the Department of Education is
preparing to send appropriate officials in every state copies of
a brief it recently submitted in a court case together with an
important court decision, the Oberti case, handed down last
September.  The Oberti lawsuit ended when the Clementon, New
Jersey, school district chose not to appeal a court order that it
must try to educate a student with Down's Syndrome in a regular
classroom by providing support services. According to statements
made by Judy Heumann, the rightness or wrongness of inclusion is
not a legal question. The legal issue is what the IDEA requires,
and the Department of Education concurs with the Oberti decision
on this point. The decision reads in part:
     "We construe IDEA's mainstreaming requirement to prohibit a
school from placing a child with disabilities outside of a
regular classroom if educating the child in the regular classroom
with supplementary aids and supportive services can be achieved
satisfactorily. In addition, if placement outside of a regular
classroom is necessary for the child to receive educational
benefit, the school may still be violating IDEA if it has not
made sufficient efforts to include the child in school programs
with nondisabled children whenever possible. We also hold that
the school bears the burden of proving compliance with the
mainstreaming requirement of IDEA, regardless of which party (the
child and parents or the school) brought the claim under IDEA
before the district court."
     Such language can all too easily be (and, in fact, has
already been) interpreted by school districts as justification
for eliminating resource rooms, itinerant teachers, and special
programs of all kinds. Then, as if this possibility were not
dangerous enough, Ms. Heumann made a statement in a speech in
California early last fall to the effect that she considered
segregated special education immoral. Her statement and a
subsequent exchange with a member of the audience were reported
in the November 2, 1993, issue of the  publication, The Special
Educator. In an article entitled "Oberti Decision is Core of the
ED's Inclusion Position," the exchange was reported as follows:
     At one point Heumann compared the IDEA's mandate [for full
inclusion] with the landmark Supreme Court case on racially
segregated education, Brown v. Board of Education, stating
"separate but equal is not acceptable." She also called
segregated special education "immoral."
     During a question and answer period following Heumann's
address, one special education administrator challenged that
term.
     "I don't support full inclusion and I'm not immoral," an
administrator said, drawing the applause of many in the audience.
"I think special education students will lose in the regular
classroom. These kids don't really learn anything there. Their
needs are lost."
     In her reply Heumann said, "If special education segregated
classes were working, these kids wouldn't be dropping out of
school in record numbers."

     That's what Heumann said, and the outcry in the special
education community was immediate. Sherry Kolbe, Executive
Director of the National Association of Private Schools for
Exceptional Children, wrote first to Ms. Heumann and then to
Senator Edward Kennedy, Chairman of the Committee on Labor and
Human Resources, to express the Association's dismay and deep
concern.  Here are the two letters:

                                                 Washington, D.C.
                                                November 17, 1993

Judith Heumann
Assistant Secretary
Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services
U.S. Department of Education
Washington, DC

Dear Assistant Secretary Heumann:
     On behalf of the National Association of Private Schools for
Exceptional Children (NAPSEC), I want to express our
disappointment in learning of your recent classification of
separate settings for children with disabilities as "immoral."
     Obviously, your using the term "immoral" to describe
separate settings for children with special needs is disturbing
to all who are involved in providing specialized services to
children outside the regular classroom. NAPSEC schools and the
services that they provide are both necessary and critical to the
special education system.
     I find it most disturbing that, upon having met with me, you
acknowledged the need for our schools in the special education
system, yet would subsequently make such an inflammatory
statement. At no time during our meeting at the Department did
you even insinuate that you felt our schools were "immoral."
These are obviously conflicting statements. I am also
disappointed that you cannot see any of the good things that have
happened and continue to happen in separate special education
settings. Maybe it would be beneficial for you to visit some of
our schools so you can see first hand that your comment is
unfounded.
     Also, in your statement regarding segregated special
education, you mentioned that, if these settings were working,
then children with disabilities would not be dropping out of
schools in record numbers. The Department of Education's
Fourteenth Annual Report to Congress on the Implementation of the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act states that students
who attend larger schools and those who spend relatively more
time in regular education classes are more likely to fail
courses, and those who failed a course in their most recent
school year were almost three times more likely to drop out than
students who had not failed a course. Also how do you explain the
drop-out rate for regular education students being educated in
the regular classroom? In 1991 the drop-out rate in New York City
was 17.2%, in Chicago it was 51.1%, and in Los Angeles it was
38.1%. If the regular classroom worked for everyone, wouldn't it
also work for these students?
     NAPSEC is not anti-inclusion, but pro-child. It is our
concern that, by taking the "individual" out of the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act, children with disabilities will
not receive the timely services necessary to address their unique
needs. With the passage of P.L.94-142, we won the fight against
one system of education for all children, and now the education
system is able to provide a continuum of services to ensure that
each child's individual needs are appropriately met.
     All NAPSEC schools operate on this fundamental belief: to
guarantee that each child's unique needs are met on an individual
basis in order to achieve his/her maximum potential. The goal of
each NAPSEC school is to provide a learning environment in which
the child can establish and develop the skills necessary to allow
him/her to function successfully in society. Further, our belief
is that there is nothing "immoral" about providing options for
children and families with special needs.
                                                       Sincerely,
                                                  Sherry L. Kolbe
                                               Executive Director
cc: Michelle Doyle, Office of Private Education

                      ____________________

                                                 Washington, D.C.
                                                November 17, 1993

Dear Chairman Kennedy:
     On behalf of the National Association of Private Schools for
Exceptional Children (NAPSEC), I want to call your attention to
the recent comments made by the Assistant Secretary of Special
Education and Rehabilitative Services, Ms. Judith Heumann,
regarding educating children with disabilities in separate
settings.
     Ms. Heumann made her feelings clear when she stated at a
meeting in California that segregated special education is
"immoral." Obviously this is very offensive to all of those
dedicated special education teachers who have devoted their lives
to working with children who have special needs. It is
unacceptable for someone who is supposedly representing all
children with disabilities, regardless of placement, to call
those who provide educational services in separate classrooms and
facilities, both public and private, "immoral." It is also very
unsettling to know that these views are coming from someone who
represents the Department of Education. It has been our belief
that the Department both recognizes and respects the necessity of
choices and options for individuals who cannot better themselves
without special services to address their individual needs.
     NAPSEC represents over 200 private special education schools
that provide special education services for both publicly and
privately placed students. The majority of our schools serve
publicly placed children who are referred to our schools because
they need individualized services that are not available in the
public school setting. These students are funded through the
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and the
Chapter 1 Handicapped Program. As you can see, if separate
settings for children with disabilities are indeed immoral as
stated by Ms. Heumann, the funding for these "immoral" services
is being provided by law. IDEA requires that each child have an
individual education program (IEP) designed to meet his/her
unique needs. The determination of educational placement is based
upon the student's IEP. The law also requires that students have
access to a full continuum of special education services,
provided in both public and private settings. Placing every child
with disabilities in the regular classroom regardless of his/her
needs is not only inconsistent with the law but may be
detrimental to the child's ability to learn.
     There is a group of individuals that believe that all
children with disabilities should be educated in the regular
classroom and that all other options and choices should be
eliminated from the law. These individuals use the term
"segregation" when they speak of children with disabilities that
are placed outside the regular classroom. This word immediately
conjures up ugly visions of discrimination and racial prejudice.
The term is inappropriately borrowed from the civil rights
movement and is not applicable to children with disabilities.
Children being served in separate classrooms and schools are
receiving the type of additional assistance necessary to help
them succeed--not keep them from succeeding.
     At this point we are unsure of what to believe. The
Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative
Services states that separate settings for children with
disabilities is "immoral," while the Director of the Office of
Special Education Programs, Dr. Thomas Hehir, has stated publicly
that the inclusion of all children with disabilities in the
regular classroom will not work for all special needs children.
These are conflicting statements, yet both are coming from the
Department of Education.
     Ms. Heumann's statement is very disturbing to those of us
who see educators of children with disabilities, in any setting,
as persons who should be applauded for their efforts and
devotion, not be called "immoral" by the person who is in charge
of the programs that make their function possible.
     It is our sincere hope that the Congress will work to
maintain a continuum of services for children with disabilities,
as stated in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, to
ensure that children with special needs will continue to receive
services that appropriately address their individual needs.
                                                       Sincerely,
                                                  Sherry L. Kolbe
                                               Executive Director

     It did not take Assistant Secretary Heumann long to respond
to Ms. Kolbe's letter, and Senator Kennedy was not far behind. In
his letter the Senator commended all those who work with
exceptional children and explained that there had been confusion
over Ms. Heumann's California remarks. He then enclosed a copy of
Ms. Heumann's letter written to Sherry Kolbe. Here is that
letter:

                                                 Washington, D.C.
                                                 December 2, 1993

Ms. Sherry Kolbe
Executive Director
NAPSEC
Washington, D.C.

Dear Sherry:
     I received your letter regarding my comments about
educational placements in separate settings for students with
disabilities, and I am pleased to have this chance to clarify my
position. During the five months since I was confirmed as
Assistant Secretary for the Office of Special Education and
Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), I have had the opportunity to
meet or talk with the leadership of numerous organizations
involved in advocacy for disabled children and adults. I have
also met with hundreds of parents of disabled children across the
nation. I firmly believe that within the last twenty years there
have been major accomplishments in the education of disabled
students in this country. However, I know more needs to be done.
The primary concern I have heard expressed during these
conversations is that for many disabled children the full range
of placement options is not available.
     The continuum of alternative placement is an integral part
of the IDEA regulations which Office of Special Education
Programs Director Tom Hehir and I are bound, both by our
positions and by our own beliefs, to enforce. Tom and I both
believe, consistent with IDEA, that the regular classroom in the
neighborhood school should be the first placement option
considered for students with disabilities. We also believe our
education system must provide administrators and teachers with
the training and support they need to make the regular classroom
in the neighborhood school the appropriate placement, and we aim
to provide strong leadership to help make that happen.
     Being disabled myself and having received part of my
education in segregated settings for no other reason than that I
happened to use a wheelchair, I do not shrink from describing
such placements as wrong--when the placement is made for reasons
other than the educational needs of the child. With fifty percent
of physically disabled students still receiving their education
in some type of separate setting, I will continue to make strong
statements in support of regular classroom placements. At the
same time we fully appreciate and support the important role of
other options on the continuum for some students.
     I also know of the critical need for parents of all disabled
children to receive more and better information about the
available options and the supports that may be needed for their
children. I believe that the more information parents have, the
more effective they will be in the decision-making process
affecting their children's education. There is a role for all of
us in this empowerment process.
     I regret that my schedule does not accommodate my
participation in the annual meeting of NAPSEC next month. Still I
would welcome the opportunity to visit a NAPSEC member school
that you consider especially effective in providing educational
services to disabled students. It may be easier to schedule a
visit to a site in the Washington, D.C., area, but I could also
consider such a visit in another part of the country. I hope you
will identify some potential sites for my review.
     I am convinced that we hold in common the most basic
interest: better outcomes for all disabled students through
appropriate and high quality education services. It is
unfortunate that a few statements from my presentation in a
public forum have been interpreted as a lack of support for
ensuring that a full range of placement options is available for
each disabled child and his or her family. My record, both past
and future, will show that I fully support the availability of a
continuum of placement options for students with disabilities. I
look forward to working with you to achieve our mutual goals.
                                                       Sincerely,
                                                Judith E. Heumann
                            United States Department of Education
          Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services
                      ____________________
     That is what Ms. Heumann wrote, and it was reassuring to
have her commit to paper her belief in the importance of a
continuum of special education settings. One cannot help pointing
out, however, that it would be helpful if she were to make this
commitment more publicly and more often. Here is the letter that
Sherry Kolbe wrote Ms. Heumann in response:

                                                 Washington, D.C.
                                                 December 6, 1993

Judith E. Heumann
Assistant Secretary
Special Education and Rehabilitative Services
Washington, D.C.

Dear Judy:
     Thank you for your recent letter. I appreciate your taking
the time to clarify your position on the continuum of options for
children with disabilities.
     I agree with you wholeheartedly when you say that the full
range of placement options is not currently available to children
with disabilities. I too have talked with hundreds of parents
regarding the lack of appropriate services for their children.
Some of the conversations are very sad and unsettling. I have
talked with teachers who have told me that they are not allowed
to tell parents that there are any other options available for
their children besides those that are offered in the public
schools, regardless of whether they are appropriate or not. I
have talked with children in NAPSEC schools who have told me that
they did not have any friends before they came to the school. All
of these conversations are equally disheartening. Yes, I agree,
there is still much to be done.
     NAPSEC has always strongly supported placements based solely
on a child's Individual Education Program (IEP) and like you,
does not excuse those placements based on other unrelated
judgments. However, it is imperative that, when you make strong
statements against "such placements as wrong" as described in
your letter, it is done on an individual-by-individual placement
basis to avoid promoting the concept that all placements in
separate settings are wrong for children with disabilities. As
you well know, using an all-or-nothing approach that disregards
individual educational needs often leaves us with nothing. You
also stated in your letter that "the continuum of alternative
placements is an integral part of the IDEA regulations which
Office of Special Education Programs Director Tom Hehir and I are
bound, both by our own positions and by our own beliefs, to
enforce." This is a message that has not yet been clearly
expressed. The majority of articles in which you are quoted deal
with your support for full inclusion. The importance of
maintaining a full continuum of options for children with
disabilities is not discussed. This could be an area where you
can help to provide parents with "more and better information
about the available options and the supports that may be needed
for their children" by publicly discussing the options available
through the continuum, of which inclusion in the regular
classroom is just one of many options available to address the
individual educational needs of children with disabilities.
     Enclosed for your review are copies of NAPSEC Directory
pages that provide program descriptions of nine member schools in
the metropolitan area that you may wish to visit. I will be happy
to work with your office to schedule school visits and any other
arrangements that you may need. You may be particularly
interested to know that the Ivymount School in Rockville,
Maryland, and the School for Contemporary Education in Annandale,
Virginia, have recently been recognized as Schools of Excellence
by the Department of Education.
     Again, I appreciate your taking the time to state your
support for a continuum of options. I will share your views with
the NAPSEC membership. I look forward to working with you to
ensure that options and choices for children with disabilities
and their families remain available and accessible in the future.
     Best wishes for a happy and healthy holiday season.
                                                       Sincerely,
                                                  Sherry L. Kolbe
                                               Executive Director
                      ____________________

     The most recent group to weigh in with its views on full
inclusion is the American Federation of Teachers (AFT). In the
December 17, 1993, edition of the publication, Disability Funding
News, the AFT called for a moratorium on full inclusion. One is
forced to question whether this call is based on a disinterested
concern for all children or panic at the prospect of facing new
challenges. The answer is undoubtedly some of both. Here is the
article:

         AFT Urges Moratorium On Full Inclusion Programs

     The American Federation of Teachers urges a moratorium on
school inclusion policies that integrate all special needs
students in regular classrooms.
     AFT proposes a strategy for making inclusion work more
effectively where appropriate, beginning with a reappraisal of
federal, state, and local policies.
     "A moratorium means that the abuse must stop and give common
sense and sound educational policy a chance to prevail," says AFT
President Albert Shanker. "We must put the brakes on a helter-
skelter, even tumultuous, rush toward full inclusion so that
everyone involved--parents, school boards, legislators, Congress,
and the Clinton administration--can develop a policy based on
what is best for all children in our public schools."

       But Advocates of Inclusive School Policies Disagree

     "Inclusion benefits all students in schools where careful
planning has taken place and training and support are provided
for teachers," responds Brenda Welburn, executive director of the
National Association of State Boards of Education (NASBE).
     "Schools with successful inclusion environments are
characterized by active teacher involvement in decisions about
scheduling, staffing patterns, and staff development. These
schools should be used as models for other schools to proceed in
implementing inclusion, rather than putting the whole reform
effort on hold."
     The move toward inclusion is most aggressive in California,
Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, New
Hampshire, Minnesota, Utah, and Vermont. And inclusion was
gathering momentum in Ohio and West Virginia until teachers began
campaigning against it, Shanker says.
     New inclusion initiatives currently in the works could
potentially place up to 4.7 million special education students in
regular classrooms. Some 34 percent of those 4.7 million children
were taught in regular classrooms in 1990-91, according to the
Department of Education.
     AFT maintains that placing disabled students who yell,
scream, and are prone to violent outbursts in regular classrooms
threatens the academic achievement of the other students.
     "More and more teachers are catheterizing children, fixing
feeding tubes, giving medications, and performing other
procedures on medically fragile children, while across the room a
violently disruptive student is on the verge of getting away with
mayhem because he can't be disciplined without a court order,"
Shanker says. He notes that a recent AFT survey of the one
hundred largest school districts finds only five percent of
schools train their general classroom teachers to deal with
special needs children.
     While NASBE agrees that providing little or no support to
teachers to handle children with special needs or implementing
inclusion without adequate support is inappropriate, Welburn says
"To stop the entire effort to include students with special needs
in general education classrooms is an overreaction."
     Andrew Stamp, spokesman for NASBE, says the concern that
teachers spend too much time disciplining special needs students
is unfounded. In fact, the majority of students causing the
problems in the classroom are not special needs students.
     "We cannot lay the ills of society or the problems in the
classroom on the backs of students with disabilities," he says,
adding that one Louisiana school district, in its third year of a
five-year move toward full inclusion, reported a 50 percent
decrease in K-6 discipline referrals to the principal.
     The motivation for inclusion is often based on budgetary and
ideological motivations, Shanker says, not educational reasons.
     "Schools claim to do it [inclusion] for idealistic reasons,"
Shanker says. "It's simply a budget savings device using the fig
leaf of altruism."
     Due to budget shortfalls in the federal government, school
systems are under financial pressure to cut back expensive
programs for students with special needs, and inclusion is one
such budget-cutting measure. As a result, services are bound to
be reduced or eliminated once students are scattered throughout
the school system, Shanker explains.
     But inclusion advocates say many states actually reward
school districts financially if they keep disabled students in
separate classes. They contend that special services can continue
for these students if they attend regular classes.
     The AFT strategy calls for:
 A reappraisal of federal laws and policies that encourage
inappropriate inclusion.
 Congress to fulfill its pledge to fund 40 percent of costs for
special needs children, as provided in the Education for All
Handicapped Children Act (now the Individuals with Disabilities
Education Act). Congress currently provides only seven percent of
this funding.
 Giving teachers the authority to help determine which special
needs students should be placed in regular classes.
 Limits on the number of special needs children in regular
classes.
 Removing limitations on disciplining special needs students who
are disruptive or dangerous to others.
     While the moratorium is in existence at the state and local
level, Shanker says, policy makers at all levels must work to
balance the needs of special education and regular students for
the future.

     There it is--a complicated and varied situation in which
there is no clear way of protecting the disabled child's right to
a free and appropriate education. Clearly there is no one
solution for all children or even for a single youngster
throughout his or her educational life, and that means there is
no one course of action for knowledgeable parents and advocates
to take. We must continue to fight for improvements at every
point on the special education continuum, and we must resist
efforts to drop blind youngsters into regular classrooms without
giving them instruction in the skills of blindness or support
services to provide the educational materials they need in
accessible form. There is still much for informed, thoughtful,
and caring members of the National Federation of the Blind to do
to protect the rights of today's blind children.



[PHOTO: Gary Wunder stands with microphone in hand. CAPTION: Gary Wunder.]

           STAYING THE COURSE, SHIFTING THE EMPHASIS:
                     THE BLIND IN THE 1990'S
                         by Gary Wunder

     From the Editor: Gary Wunder is the President of the
Missouri affiliate and a leader at every level of the National
Federation of the Blind. In November of 1993 he was the national
representative at the NFB of Ohio convention, and the banquet
address he delivered still has those who heard it thinking and
talking about it. Here is what he said:

     This past weekend I had the good fortune to work with ninety
high school and college students who attended one of our seminars
to learn about the skills which would benefit them in their
education. The name of the event was Student Network, and it was
jointly hosted by Missouri's state agency, Rehabilitation
Services for the Blind, and the National Federation of the Blind
of Missouri. In general terms, they pay; we present--a nice
arrangement, and one which they encourage.
     The reactions we get from students are almost uniformly
positive. They are quick to say they appreciate our time; think
our speaking is at least passible, if not entertaining; are
encouraged by our accomplishments; and say they would attend the
next Network should we decide to have one. Interspersed with this
praise, however, are statements like the following: We would like
to hear more from students; we spend too much time listening to
old people. Sometimes I think the presenters are too rigid; it is
as though they think they know all the answers. I wish you'd talk
more about problems and how you solved them and less about
philosophy and life. Then there is the all-important request:
"Tell us more about how we can get our own Braille 'n Speaks and
computers."
     Since we ask for the evaluations in an attempt to improve
our program, we have to wrestle with ways to keep the good while
incorporating the criticisms in something positive. The
difficulty we face is one which buffets us everyday as
Federationists, workers, parents, and members of American
society. How can we convey the meaningful values which have made
us what we are, while at the same time recognizing the changes
that have taken place between the past we describe and the
present we occupy as we speak? In more concrete terms, how do we
stress the importance of old-fashioned educational values without
telling that worn-out story about walking seven miles to school
each day in snow up to our hips?
     All of this preamble leads me to what I want to talk about
tonight--the changes which have occurred in recent decades for
blind people, the ways in which we have brought about these
changes, and our current role in this new reality. Even though
our history reveals a change in emphasis from decade to decade,
never have we lost the vision which brings continuity to it all:
our vision of a world in which the blind are treated as normal,
capable people who simply do not see, a vision of a world in
which every blind person can have a job, a family, and a valued
place in his or her community.
     When we began our movement over fifty years ago, our first
task was to establish a means of subsistence-level support for
the blind. Most blind people in 1940 lived with family members
and had no means of self-support. As long as their care and
support were the responsibility of relatives, they would continue
to be treated like children and would likely regard themselves as
inferiors, lesser beings whose thoughts and opinions were of
little significance. Our work then was to provide a monthly state
payment for the blind, and this we were successful in securing.
     After a minimal income was provided by law, our next job was
to see that blind people got training. Not only was it necessary
to learn the skills of blindness that would allow for independent
travel and self-care, but additional academic and job skill
training would be required if the blind were to secure
employment. At first the training we received was minimal and
rarely adequate, but each year saw new victories, and hope grew
as the blind of that generation witnessed the changes.
     Once we had won the right to an education and some training,
our emphasis shifted once again, and we turned our attention
toward changing the attitudes of a skeptical public who simply
did not believe the blind could work and make a contribution to
society. In the fifties you will remember our struggles with the
Civil Service, our demand that we be given the right to take
tests, our demand that our test scores be posted, our demand that
we be interviewed when our test scores were competitive, and
finally our demand that we be hired when we were the most
qualified candidates available. Through this lengthy and at times
frustrating process, we continued to do what we had always done
for one another--reminding ourselves that we truly were competent
human beings. At times we had our doubts, for few were those who
believed as we did. Each day we hoped and dreamed, sharing with
our blind cohorts our little triumphs and defeats, clinging to
the progress of each of our brothers and sisters as proof of the
rightness of our belief in ourselves.
     Throughout the sixties and seventies we did much in the
legislatures of the land to provide basic civil rights protection
for the blind. White Cane laws soon declared that blind people
could travel where we wished with our canes and our dog guides.
Landlords could not deny us a place to live or charge us more to
live in their establishments. Public transportation systems were
not only obliged to permit us to ride but were compelled to make
reasonable accommodations for us such as announcing stops and
giving us the name of the route the bus was traveling.
Restaurants were ordered to seat and serve us without regard to
our use of a dog guide, and even insurance companies were
compelled to review their policies regarding the sale of
insurance to the blind, being required to justify any higher rate
by statistically demonstrating that we were a greater risk than
others. This, of course, they could not do.
     Having made substantial gains in securing basic civil rights
protection, our emphasis gradually shifted, and the seventies and
eighties witnessed landmark legislation designed to assure that
we would be considered for jobs in the public sector without
regard to our blindness. Many of us found work as a result of
amendments to the Federal Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973
and some state laws which were similar in intent.
     We found, of course, that legislation was not enough. A
major portion of our energy and funding was given to enforcing
the laws we had introduced and passed, and reports of successful
court challenges were a major staple in our annual presidential
reports, our banquet speeches, and our governmental affairs
activities.
     In the nineties there is little I have mentioned that cannot
still be found in the work we do. We continue to press for a
guaranteed and adequate income for the blind, for quality
affordable housing, and for the special programs which teach the
skills and attitudes required to function independently as blind
people. We still take problems which the blind of the nation
bring, and these often result in administrative challenges,
arbitration hearings, and court battles. You will have noticed,
however, that, as our message becomes ever more widely accepted
and our legal protection more firmly secured by precedent, these
issues appear with some less frequency than they did in the past.
     What then is our major task to fulfill in the 1990's? I
believe it is to strengthen the confidence our brothers and
sisters have in themselves so that they are able and willing to
risk the possibility of failure on the chance of success. We must
deepen the faith we have come to feel in one another so that it
extends beyond faith in our power as a body and fills those areas
of our lives where doubt or contentment with the status quo now
resides.
     Let me turn for a moment from this abstract discussion of
the challenges which face us to share with you a few specific
examples which concern me, because of what they illustrate in the
way of changes we must address. I have been a member of the
Federation for twenty years, and in that time have listened to
and worked on behalf of many people who have had grievances
against the education and rehabilitation establishments. Often in
my early years the conflicts came about because the
rehabilitation counselor simply didn't believe that a blind
person could do what the client insisted he had the right to try.
Often there were elements of custodial treatment which also
aggravated the situation, and in most instances the blind people
pressing their cases were supremely qualified to do what they
wanted to do. This didn't mean that winning was easy or that the
victories were always everything we wanted, but it did mean that
every advance brought us that much closer to enjoying true
equality with the sighted.
     In the last few years I have seen a change in the kinds of
issues brought to us for resolution. Let me give you two examples
I find disturbing.
     Jim is a man who would like to get his Ph.D. in educational
administration and work as a high school principal or
superintendent. He came to us when it appeared he would be denied
admission to graduate school. He was interested in discussing
with me the problems blind people have when taking tests
administered by the Educational Testing Service. When tests are
administered under nonstandard conditions such as with the use of
readers or Braille or the provision of additional time, the ETS
sends with a blind person's test score a letter noting that it
cannot say with certainty just what the score means. Our concern
about this disclaimer is that it may be used to diminish the
learning indicated by our scores. Jim asked that I note our long-
standing objections to this attachment in a letter he might use
before the graduate admissions board, and this I did.
     When Jim came to me several weeks later to ask that we hire
an attorney to help him sue the university for its denial of his
request to enter the graduate program, I did a little research so
that I would have a better understanding of his case and could
decide how we should be involved.
     In denying Jim admission to its degree program, the school
gave four reasons: (1) his high school and undergraduate grades
were too poor for admission, (2) his grades while in graduate
school on a trial basis were mediocre, (3) he did not have
teaching experience, and (4) his Graduate Record Exam scores were
far too low. The school argued that it had tried to be flexible
in evaluating Jim as a candidate for a degree and that it had
tried to take into account the special problems which might be
faced by people who are blind. It argued that it had admitted Jim
provisionally, without first requiring him to take the GRE; that
it had overlooked his lack of work experience in the field; and
that it had been willing to put aside Jim's poor performance in
high school and college and was prepared to judge him on his work
in graduate school. The school further argued that it had
attempted to accommodate Jim in taking the GRE, that initially
accommodation had been refused, and that later it had been
accepted and provided. In short, the school argued that it could
have overlooked any one of Jim's shortcomings and admitted him,
but that the cumulative record simply went beyond reasonable
accommodation.
     Jim argued that his high school and college grades were poor
because at the time he was sighted and did not take school as
seriously as he would have had he been blind. He said his lack of
job experience should be obvious, for blind people just could not
find employment in the public schools. With regard to his GRE
scores, Jim argued that he was disadvantaged the first time he
took the test by the failure of those who administered it to
provide him with accommodation--a reader. His second score, he
said, was not a reflection of his true ability specifically
because of his accommodation--a reader. Jim said that he was not
accustomed to taking tests with readers and that this should
invalidate his score. In short, the school should understand that
he was a blind man and abandon trying to give him the test
altogether since there was obviously no good way to measure what
he knew.
     After talking with Jim and members of the department which
rejected him, I suggested that his lack of the skills of
blindness played a real role in his lack of success and that we
could help. He had argued that discrimination caused by blindness
kept him from getting teaching experience. I gave him the name of
Tom Ley, a math teacher in Louisiana, and Fred Schroeder, a
former teacher and the current Director of the New Mexico
Commission for the Blind. I discussed with him the possibility of
getting training at a center; learning to use readers,
magnifiers, and Braille; requesting mobility training; and
brushing up on academic skills to improve his test scores and
overall performance in school.
     In the end, Jim had no interest in anything I said and made
it clear that he was angered by what he viewed as interference.
Jim hotly told me that he was interested in information
pertaining to discriminatory treatment by the Educational Testing
Service and nothing more. Blindness meant all requirements and
standards should be waived. The law was on his side, and he'd use
that law with or without us. Never mind the test scores, the
grades, the experience, or the skill deficits. He wasn't
interested in any of it. The test scores were indicative of
nothing. The value of having experience as a teacher before
becoming a school administrator was not important either. He
wanted what he wanted, and if blindness provided an avenue to
further his complaint, then that's the road he would travel.
Forget the training that would make him truly competitive and
equal. That would take too long. What he wanted was admission to
school, and he wanted it now and without unsolicited
interference. He had defined our role, and now we should function
within the boundaries he had set. We refused to take part, but he
persists.
     About this same time I was contacted by a woman I will call
Ardith. Ardith said that she was a writer of plays and movies and
that she had been working on her productions since 1987. She
wanted our help because she needed a loan for word-processing
equipment. She said she had requested the equipment from
Missouri's Rehabilitation Services for the Blind without results.
She complained about being thwarted by the bureaucracy, about the
rehab establishment's lack of faith in the blind, and about the
way in which these poor excuses for public servants were robbing
the world of good entertainment and robbing her of a lucrative
livelihood.
     Now I've been a Federationist long enough to know when it's
my turn to come on stage, so recognizing my cue, I began
encouraging her and planning how I would present her case to the
Director of Rehab Services. Just as a precaution--being a middle-
aged rather than a very young and inexperienced Federationist--I
asked if I might see something she had written. I said that,
while I was no authority on what was or was not a good play, I
knew one person who would be glad to review her work for me and
share with both of us her opinion of its worth. Ardith's response
was slow in coming, but eventually she said, "Well, maybe I could
show you something, but I wouldn't want you or anyone else to
steal it, so I'll have to get it copyrighted first. Okay?"  Then
she said that I'd have to overlook any misspellings, problems
with grammar, and mistakes in typing. That, of course, was
because she didn't have a word processor. Then I asked the really
tough question: has anyone expressed an interest in your work,
offered you any money, or performed one of your plays? I asked it
with a bit more tact than I've shown here, but the answer was an
insulted "no," as though that really didn't matter.
     Again I did some research, still prepared to get my exercise
by beating on Rehab if I needed to, but thinking at this point
that a little caution might be in order. I learned that Ardith's
relationship with Rehab was a long-standing one and that her case
had been closed following her pronouncement that her counselor
should go straight to hell. Okay, Ardith might lack something in
tact, but how could a Federation leader be upset by someone
spirited enough to tell off Rehab? Then I discovered that
Ardith's request for a word processor had been greeted with
enthusiasm, the counselor having feared that there was nothing
Ardith was interested in pursuing.
     Knowing that Ardith had no word processing skills, and
feeling that something besides Ardith's declared intention to be
a writer should appear in the file as justification, the
counselor presented Ardith with two options, either of which
Rehab would fund. One option was to go for a one-month evaluation
at a rehab center where Ardith could use many different kinds of
adaptive equipment and choose which device best suited her. The
evaluation could also be used to determine her aptitude as a
writer, and the recommendations of the rehab staff and Ardith's
own preferences would result in the purchase of a talking word
processor. The second option for Ardith was to enroll for a
semester as a student at the university near her home. She could
take an English class and use the equipment in the Student
Services labs; and at the end of the semester, provided she
passed, the equipment she wanted would be delivered.
     When I called Ardith to talk with her about what I'd been
told, I fully expected to hear that the counselor had exaggerated
the offer she had actually made or that in presenting it she had
been rude or short or negative. Ardith, however, made no such
accusations. She confirmed, in fact, that these were the options
she had been given but said she found both totally unacceptable.
I asked her why, and she said she had no obligation to prove
herself to anybody. She further said she didn't have time to
waste going for a month to a center and thought she'd get very
little out of spending a semester in a university class. "You
have to understand," she said, "that I'm very busy here trying to
get out my made-for-television movie. I just don't have time to
screw with them. Now let's talk about a loan from the
Federation."
     All of you who are here tonight know how strongly we feel
about the need to serve the blind and to be advocates for those
in need. Our role in standing up for blind people and fighting
against the agencies is well known. For a long time, if someone
had asked me what the primary work of the Federation was, with
great enthusiasm I would have said it was to defend the blind
individual against the custodial, stingy, and patronizing
professionals who work with them. While from time to time we
certainly do find ourselves in these situations, today they are
the exception rather than the rule, and with ever-increasing
frequency we find the agencies and the organized blind working
together to create opportunities and change lives.
     What I want for myself and others who are blind is a chance
to compete. I want people to listen and discuss with us the
accommodations we need, but I don't expect them to throw away the
standards they use in determining what it takes to do the job
competitively. If their job descriptions say "must be able to
read," rather than "must be able to understand written material,"
then we ought to be ready for a fight. If a training program
denies a blind person access because they say he cannot draw flow
charts, even though he can write an efficient computer program,
then we ought to champion his case.
     Our task in the 90's is to get blind people to look not only
at the forces allied against us in the pursuit of a home, a job,
and a family, but to look at the opposite side of the coin and
recognize with equal attention those forces we have rallied in
support of our ambitions. When Dr. Jernigan presented his paper,
"Blindness: Handicap or Characteristic," he challenged us to look
upon blindness as only one of many characteristics that make us
what we are. He demonstrated that some characteristics are
positive, some negative, and others neutral, depending on what it
is we wish to do. If most of us had been given the choice, we
would not have elected to be blind; but given that we are, what
problems and possibilities does this characteristic present?
     What group's members today in American society can receive a
monthly maintenance check while attending college with books and
tuition paid by the Government? What group can request and
receive special equipment simply by expressing the intention to
use it in pursuing employment?
     Having won through the law so much of what we have sought,
we must now shift our emphasis from what society must do for us
to what we as blind people can do for ourselves. It is critical
that we understand what the organization we have created can and
cannot do for us. Organizations are well equipped to spotlight a
problem, to bring injustice to the attention of the public, and
to work collectively to remove the barriers that block whole
classes of people from full participation. We can march together,
united in our demand that the colleges and universities of
America let us in. We can mobilize the anger of the public in
fighting the injustice that exists when a qualified blind woman
is denied a place in the classroom. What we cannot do is
accompany her into her freshman composition class and ensure
through our collective action that she will do the work
competitively. We can articulate the injustice which exists when
a blind man is denied participation in his chosen field of study
because some administrator mistakenly believes the sciences to be
off-limits for the blind. What we cannot do is ensure that the
blind man seeking entrance to an electrical engineering program
will have developed the Braille skills that will enable him
efficiently to take notes, manipulate equations, and communicate
his answers to an anxious professor.
     Our challenge in this decade is to use the incomes we have
been provided to advance, and not merely to exist. We must take
advantage of the educational resources placed at our disposal,
not simply as a method of planning the way we will spend the next
four or five years, but as a means to provide our own support.
When we elect to attend a technical school or an institution of
higher learning, we must do so with the clear intention of
pursuing a career once the training is complete.
     The agreement we make with our fellow Americans is not a
God-given right which we accept without obligation. By our
acceptance of training, we are agreeing to make the task of
finding a job our first priority, meaning that we will not place
so many artificial restrictions and conditions on our prospective
employment that we never find a job we think we want to do. How
many unemployed sighted people can argue that they turned down a
$15,000-a-year job because it would require a move? How many out-
of-work sighted people could turn down a $25,000 job because they
felt it just wasn't worth the trouble? How many sighted people
without a job could turn down work because commuting took an hour
each way and just didn't seem worth the bother? I have personally
helped blind people find entry-level jobs, only to have them tell
me they rejected the job offer because they didn't have time to
start at the bottom. Where do they believe most people make their
entry into the work force? But, of course, this question really
misses the point because the real issue is not inconvenience or
even economics, but confidence.
     As an organization we can do much when those who oppose us
tell us no; but when we reach the point where society says yes,
it must be the individual who goes forth to take advantage of the
rights we have secured. Can he proceed in the knowledge that
others have gone before? Can she work to win a degree, confident
that we will stand by her should she encounter discrimination
when she looks for her first job? Can the blind graduate move to
another town, knowing that he is one of many who have dared to
live independently, the protection of family and friends being
hundreds of miles distant? The answer to these questions is yes,
but the choice to risk must be made by the individual, and only
through the positive choices of individuals can we remain strong.
     Having said all of this, am I making the case that the world
is now an easy place in which to be blind and that the only
barriers standing between us and first-class citizenship are
issues of individual choice? No. As long as there are more
sighted people than blind ones in the world, we will have special
problems with which we must cope, and we will always have need of
our organization to solve problems requiring collective action.
Am I saying that everyone here is capable, if he or she decides
to do so, of going out of this room and getting an education and
a job? No, I am not, for nothing I can say will undo the scarring
some of us have endured, and no matter how hard it is to admit,
for some of us it is too late.
     Our job as Federationists is to do many things for many
different people, and no one prescription will serve us all in
this task. Some Federationists desperately need our honest
assessment of their strengths and weaknesses. Some Federationists
need our encouragement as they undertake this painful assessment
themselves. Some Federationists deserve our understanding of
where they have been and of the life experiences which have
placed them where they are. All Federationists, ladies and
gentlemen, can benefit from two things we can give in abundance:
love and hope. These two ingredients have bound us together for
more than fifty years, and they will continue to unify and
strengthen us through the 90's and through the many decades to
come. As we celebrate our past and embrace our future, let us
rededicate ourselves this evening to the work which has brought
us to this place. When we do, there is no force on earth which
can stand against us.
     I would like to leave you with a thought from Ralph Waldo
Emerson which I find both inspirational and instructive: "There
is a time in every man's education when he arrives at the
conviction that envy is ignorance; that imitation is suicide;
that he must take himself for better or worse as his portion;
that though the wise universe is full of good, no kernel of
nourishing corn can come to him but through his toil bestowed on
that plot of ground which is given him to till. The power which
resides in him is new in nature, and none but he knows what that
is which he can do, nor does he know until he has tried."




[PHOTO: Scott LaBarre stands at podium microphone. CAPTION: Scott LaBarre.]


             GEORGIA EDUCATOR TEACHES SCHOOL SYSTEM
                       NOT TO DISCRIMINATE
                        by Scott LaBarre

     From the Editor: Scott LaBarre is the Assistant Director of
governmental Affairs for the National Federation of the Blind. He
often works with people who are facing discrimination of various
kinds. In recent months he has spent a good bit of time working
with Carol Ducote, a high school administrator from Georgia who
recently lost her sight. Here is the story:

     As I write this article, the National Federation of the
Blind is celebrating its fifty-fourth year as an organization.
Our history is filled with victories, both large and small, that
have changed what it means to be blind. But despite our many
successes, we still have a long road to travel before blind
people can say that we are truly equal and first-class citizens,
but the fact that the Federation is strong and healthy means that
one day our dream of first-class citizenship will without doubt
be realized. Ignorance and misconception about blindness are
certainly two of the most significant barriers we face because
they often lead directly to discrimination and injustice.
     In the coastal town of Brunswick, Georgia, last year a blind
woman found herself facing a major case of discrimination of the
sort with which we have become all too familiar. Carol Ducote is
an assistant principal at Brunswick High School. She is now
serving her eighth year in that position, but she would not be
doing so if it were not for the National Federation of the Blind.
     Several years ago Ms. Ducote contracted Stevens-Johnson
syndrome as a result of an adverse reaction to medication. Over
time her vision grew worse, and she lost almost all of her sight
in 1992. She received a little training in the alternative skills
of blindness and returned to her job at the Brunswick High School
in the fall of 1992.
     Before proceeding with Ms. Ducote's story, it might be
helpful to review briefly the protections which the law
guarantees blind people. Both the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA) and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 apply in Carol Ducote's
case. These laws clearly state that it is unlawful for an
employer to discriminate against a disabled individual on the
basis of that person's disability. Additionally, both laws make
it clear that refusing to provide reasonable accommodations is a
form of discrimination. What is a reasonable accommodation? The
answer is not always clear, but for a blind person it often means
that he or she may be entitled to a reader or some assistive
technology.
     From the start in Carol Ducote's case there was virtually no
doubt that the Glynn County School System had a duty to provide
her with reasonable accommodations. When she returned to school
in the fall of 1992 after having lost virtually all her sight,
the school system made no effort to accommodate her in any way.
There was never any talk about providing her with a reader or
assistive technology. Despite this fact Carol Ducote did what it
took to get her job done. Her friends and others volunteered to
read to her in their free time. She spent many extra hours making
sure that she fulfilled her duties. In other words she was
determined to do her job and to do it well. She simply would not
allow her blindness to hold her back.
     As the year progressed, Ms. Ducote received no indication
that her work was in any way inferior or not up to her previous
standard. In fact all evidence indicated exactly the opposite. In
the Glynn County School System all administrators and teachers
are signed to one-year contracts. In April of 1993 the School
System and Carol Ducote entered into a contract for the '93-'94
school year. If the School System had felt that Ms. Ducote had
not been doing her job, there is no reason why it should have
entered into yet another contract with her. At the end of the
school year Ms. Ducote received her annual review. In it the
Principal, Derrick Hulsey, indicated that every aspect of her job
had been carried out satisfactorily or better. The only unusual
item in the review was the statement that Ms. Ducote had done her
job with some assistance. In other words Mr. Hulsey had included
the fact that Ms. Ducote's friends and colleagues had offered her
assistance on a completely voluntary basis during their
unscheduled and free time. Ms. Ducote would never have needed
such assistance if the school system had met its obligation under
the law to provide reasonable accommodation.
     Over the summer Ms. Ducote discovered that the school system
had developed reservations about her employment. Dr. Weaver, the
Superintendent of Schools at that time, met with Carol to discuss
the perceived difficulties she had on the job. He said that Carol
could not fulfill her disciplinary roles at school functions like
dances and football games. According to the School System it was
unsafe for a blind person to maintain discipline among high
school students. Furthermore, school officials alleged that Carol
could not properly evaluate teachers because she could not see
them. They further concluded that Ms. Ducote was no longer
qualified for her job because other people had helped her do her
reading. At this meeting Dr. Weaver informed Ms. Ducote that she
had two choices. Either she could retire and take her disability
pension, or she would be terminated. At that point Ms. Ducote
contacted the National Federation of the Blind to learn about her
rights. After speaking to us, she informed the school system that
she had no intention of taking her disability pension and that
she had every intention of returning to school and doing the job
for which she was under contract.
     On August 24, 1993, Dr. Weaver wrote the following letter to
Ms. Ducote:

Dear Ms. Ducote:
     Based on Mr. Hulsey's recommendation relative to your
responsibilities as Assistant Principal/Registrar of Brunswick
High School, it has been determined that you cannot effectively
and efficiently fulfill those responsibilities. You are hereby
notified that you are immediately placed on administrative leave
with full pay and benefits. The administrative leave will not be
subtracted from any other form of authorized leave. The
administrative leave will continue until such time as the Board
of Education can formally act on a recommendation that you be
terminated.
     In the near future you will receive a formal letter of
recommendation that your contract be terminated. The letter will
detail your rights under the Fair Dismissal Act.

                                                      Sincerely,
                                        Jeffrey W. Weaver, Ph.D.
                                        Superintendent of Schools
                      ____________________
     After Ms. Ducote received that letter, she again called upon
the NFB, and we became deeply involved in her case. Both Pat
Munson, President of the National Association of Blind Educators,
and Sharon Gold, President of the NFB of California and a member
of the Board of Directors of the National Federation of the
Blind, spoke to Ms. Ducote about her case. As a result James
Gashel, NFB Director of Governmental Affairs, and I became active
in the case. We immediately contacted the school system to
determine whether or not the matter could be amicably resolved.
As soon as we spoke to the school's lawyers, Foster Lindberg and
Jim Bishop, school officials immediately suspended their plans to
terminate Ms. Ducote. It is no coincidence that they suddenly
wanted to begin talking as soon as the National Federation of the
Blind became involved in the case.
     One afternoon in early September I had a long conversation
with Foster Lindberg. I explained to him that both the ADA and
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act made it unlawful to
discriminate against a blind person based on disability.
Furthermore, I reminded Mr. Lindberg that the school system had a
duty to provide reasonable accommodations to Ms. Ducote. After
this conversation Mr. Lindberg went back to talk seriously with
the school board. When he called again, he said that the school
system was leery of hiring someone to read for Carol. They
apparently believed that she would need a full-time reader. We
explained that she would require only a part-time reader and some
assistive technology.
     Despite this the school system apparently concluded that
reasonably accommodating Ms. Ducote would be far too expensive.
Furthermore, it became obvious that they believed that no blind
person could ever do the job of an assistant principal.
Consequently Mr. Lindberg wrote to us in September saying that
the school system thought that Ms. Ducote needed a psychological
evaluation and training at a rehabilitation center and that after
she completed such training the school system might be able to
place her in a comparable job elsewhere in the district. We
informed the School System in no uncertain terms that Ms. Ducote
had already received some training and that she therefore already
possessed the skills necessary to fulfill her job
responsibilities. Furthermore, we told Mr. Lindberg that
blindness in and of itself was not such a tragedy that it
required Ms. Ducote to undergo psychological counseling.
     At this point Mr. Lindberg and the school board realized
that their proposal was not going to be successful. Consequently
they came forward with yet another one. This time they did not
suggest that Ms. Ducote go through psychological counseling, but
the school system still did not offer to return her to the
position of assistant principal. Instead, they proposed that she
become the head of vocational counseling. This is what their
letter said:

                                               Brunswick, Georgia
                                                 October 25, 1993

Dear Mr. LaBarre:
     Pursuant to your recent telephone conversations with Jim
Bishop and myself, I wanted to confirm in writing that we are
authorized to discuss with you the possibility of Carol Ducote
becoming the head of vocational counseling for all high schools
in the Glynn County Public School System (Brunswick High School,
Glynn Academy, and the Night High School). Ms. Ducote would have
a salary comparable to her salary as Assistant
Principal/Registrar of Brunswick High School. Additionally, she
would be provided with a secretarial assistant.
     Of course this written communication is offered in the
context of settlement negotiations and does not constitute an
admission of liability on behalf of the Glynn County Board of
Education or admissible evidence in any administrative or court
proceeding in the event this matter cannot be resolved among our
clients.

                                                     Very truly,
                                               C. Foster Lindberg
                      ____________________
     That is what it said, and although the letter makes it sound
as if Ms. Ducote would be assuming many responsibilities, we knew
they had no intention of giving her any significant authority.
The school system already had a guidance counseling program in
place, which included a vocational component. Furthermore the
position of head of vocational counseling actually represented a
demotion from her original position in that it carried with it
fewer overall responsibilities. We also feared that the position
would be created for one year only and then Ms. Ducote would be
released on the grounds that the position was no longer needed.
Most important, we rejected the school system's offer because Mr.
Lindberg had informed me that school officials felt that as a
blind person Ms. Ducote simply was not up to the challenge of
being an assistant principal. Based on the school system's
position, we sent them the following letter:

                                              Baltimore, Maryland
                                                 October 26, 1993

Mr. C. Foster Lindberg
Bishop and Lindberg
Brunswick, Georgia

Dear Mr. Lindberg:
     I have received your letter of October 25, 1993, and I have
shared its contents with Ms. Ducote. After considering the
matter, Ms. Ducote has decided that the position of head of
vocational counseling is unacceptable primarily for the reason
that a counseling position is not in line with the career track
which she has established with the Glynn County School System. As
you may know, in addition to her experience, Ms. Ducote has
acquired additional educational qualifications in the area of
school administration. Currently she is under contract with the
Glynn County School System to serve as an assistant principal.
She desires to continue in such a position and to take advantage
of the promotional opportunities which come with it.
As both a sighted and a blind person, Ms. Ducote has fulfilled
the responsibilities assigned to her. By moving her to a position
with fewer overall responsibilities or by refusing to offer her
reasonable accommodations to her current position, the Glynn
County School System is discriminating against Ms. Ducote on the
basis of blindness. Unless the Glynn County School System honors
its contract with Ms. Ducote or offers to place her in a position
which is truly equivalent, she will have no recourse but to
secure her employment rights under the law.
                                                       Sincerely,
                                                 Scott C. LaBarre
                       Assistant Director of Governmental Affairs
                                 National Federation of the Blind
                      ____________________
     As our letter stated, we began exploring legal options. If
we filed under the ADA, we would be restricted to filing a charge
with the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission, a process
which would take months before even a preliminary investigation
would begin. If, however, we brought a lawsuit in federal court
under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, we could seek
immediate relief in the case and request that the judge order the
school system to place Ms. Ducote back on her job. We hired the
Baltimore law firm of Brown, Goldstein, and Levy to handle the
case. Andrew Levy flew down to Brunswick, Georgia, to meet with
Ms. Ducote and the school system's lawyers. They began by telling
Mr. Levy that we did not have a case and that the school system
would clearly win any legal battle. Mr. Levy pointed out to Mr.
Lindberg that the school system had never consulted Ms. Ducote
about her accommodation needs and that officials had never lifted
a finger to provide reasonable accommodations. After seeing that
we simply were not impressed by the attorney's attempts at
intimidation, Mr. Lindberg acknowledged that the school system
may have fallen short of its responsibilities under the law. He
further suggested that it might be helpful for a representative
from our organization to address the school board directly to
explain the situation.
     On Monday, November 8, 1993, Mr. Gashel and I flew down to
Brunswick to meet with the school board. That afternoon we met
with Carol Ducote; our local counsel, John Bumgartner; Foster
Lindberg; and school officials. Again Mr. Lindberg began by
telling us that the school system had an airtight case, but we
dispelled that myth rather quickly. We made it clear to everybody
present that Carol Ducote had been discriminated against and
that, when one blind person faces discrimination, all of us face
it together. We further told the school officials that the NFB
could not and would not tolerate such discriminatory actions
against this blind woman. We were prepared to do whatever it took
to secure a victory for Carol Ducote or for any other blind
person facing such flagrant discrimination. At the conclusion of
that meeting, the school officials suggested that we make the
same sort of presentation to the district's board of education.
     Because the school board had to conduct all of its public
business before discussing a personnel matter, we had to wait
until midnight to make our case. Mr. Bumgartner began by
introducing Mr. Gashel and me. He then pointed out to the board
that the school system had clearly violated the law by
discriminating against Carol Ducote. Then Mr. Gashel delivered an
impassioned presentation. He explained what the National
Federation of the Blind is and why we are dedicated to protecting
the rights of blind persons all across this country. He made it
clear that we were prepared to stand beside Carol Ducote and to
fight for her rights until she was back at work. He went on to
say that the biggest problem blind people face is the perception
that we are incapable of participating in the mainstream of life.
He pointed out that the school system had never once described a
specific problem Carol Ducote had experienced in fulfilling her
job duties; rather all of the problems raised were merely
perceived difficulties based on the school officials'
misconceptions and stereotypes about blindness. But Mr. Gashel
also expressed our willingness to work with the school system to
ensure that Ms. Ducote could receive and use all the tools she
needed to be competitive on her job, but we had no intention of
doing so until the school system had agreed to return her to her
former position. Then he said very clearly that the school system
had about one week to make up its mind; otherwise, we would see
them at the federal courthouse.
     After we left the meeting, the board took a few moments to
discuss the issue. Then they voted to place Ms. Ducote back on
the job by Monday, November 15, 1993. The board further
instructed the school system to work with both her and the
National Federation of the Blind to ensure that she would receive
proper accommodations.
     Needless to say, we were all very happy that the school
officials had changed their minds and decided to give Ms. Ducote
a true opportunity to succeed, but we knew that our work was far
from finished.
     Shortly after Ms. Ducote returned to her position, Mr.
Hulsey informed her that she could not enlist the support or help
of any other school personnel to complete her job duties. In
other words it appeared that Mr. Hulsey was determined to make
Ms. Ducote's job so difficult that she was bound to fail.
     After Thanksgiving Allen Harris, Treasurer of the National
Federation of the Blind and an experienced high school teacher in
Michigan, flew down to Georgia to work with Ms. Ducote and the
school system. Mr. Harris met with all the appropriate school
officials, including Mr. Hulsey, to explain the way in which
particular accommodations would allow Ms. Ducote to fulfill her
job duties. He explained that these accommodations would not be
particularly expensive. All she needed was someone to read for
her on a part-time basis and a few pieces of assistive
technology.
     Apparently school officials finally got the message. In mid-
December they sent Carol Ducote and the district's technology
expert to our National Center to spend two days in the
International Braille and Technology Center for the Blind
evaluating which pieces of technology would be most helpful for
her to use on her job. Based on their visit to Baltimore, they
recommended that certain devices be purchased, and the school
system has pledged to do so.
     Even though it took several months for the school system to
recognize its responsibilities under the law, school officials
now seem willing to work with Carol Ducote and the National
Federation of the Blind to give her a full and fair opportunity
to fulfill her responsibilities as an assistant principal at the
Brunswick High School. The Glynn County School System has learned
that it cannot make personnel decisions based on old and
unfounded stereotypes about the abilities of the blind.
Furthermore, they have learned that, if they give Ms. Ducote the
opportunity to succeed, she is likely to do her job as well as
she did it when she was sighted.
     Carol Ducote has learned firsthand about the power and
effectiveness of collective action. Before the NFB became
involved, the School System stood ready to terminate Ms. Ducote,
but when we entered the case, school officials learned that they
simply could not terminate a blind person based on discriminatory
and unfounded reasons.
     Carol Ducote has learned that when you face discrimination
alone, it is frightening and very hard (if not impossible) to
win, but with the support and experience of the organized blind
movement behind you there is virtually no discrimination that
cannot be defeated. Carol Ducote is now ready to help other blind
people in Georgia learn about their rights so that they will not
have to face the same problems which she has already confronted.
     As an educator Carol Ducote wants to teach everyone one
lesson she has already mastered: when it comes to knowing about
and securing the rights of blind people, there is no greater
force for justice than the National Federation of the Blind.
Through collective action we as blind people will take our place
as first-class citizens in our society. The Carol Ducote case
clearly demonstrates that a great deal of discrimination is still
aimed at the blind and that we still have a long way to go before
we can rest, but the fact that we have won her case also shows
that we will ultimately be victorious.
     For the past fifty-four years members of the National
Federation of the Blind have worked tirelessly to spread the
message that, once we are given the chance, we can be just as
successful as any other members of society. We must continue our
work; otherwise, employers like the Glynn County School System
will be able to discriminate and destroy the dreams of the blind
without having to account for their actions. As long as we remain
vigilant and true to our cause, we will continue to secure the
rights of blind people in all areas of life. As Carol Ducote will
tell you, the key to first-class citizenship for the blind is the
National Federation of the Blind.



[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Carla McQuillan.]

                    THE OREGON BRAILLE BILL:
                   AN EXERCISE IN COOPERATION
                       by Carla Mcquillan

     From the Editor: Carla Mcquillan is the President of the
National Federation of the Blind of Oregon. Like the presidents
of many other Federation affiliates, she has led a statewide
effort to pass legislation that would protect the right of blind
children to receive appropriate and timely instruction in Braille
from teachers competent to teach it and to have Braille text
materials at the same time that their sighted peers receive print
ones. That passage of such common-sense legislation should be a
battle is astonishing to any objective observer, but many of us
know firsthand just how bitter, almost hysterical, the resistance
to this concept can be. Yet occasionally an affiliate has an
experience that renews one's faith in the education,
rehabilitation, and legislative establishments. Passage of the
Oregon Braille bill is such a story. It is not lengthy or
particularly dramatic, but it provides hope to us all. This
article first appeared in the December issue of the Oregon
Outlook, the publication of the National Federation of the Blind
of Oregon. Here it is:

     In the spring of 1992 a task force determined that the
Oregon State School for the Blind (OSSB) and the Oregon State
School for the Deaf (OSSD) were serving far too few children for
the total dollars spent. The recommendation from the task force
was that both schools be closed and all the students in those
facilities be mainstreamed. In an effort to preserve the
programs, Superintendent of Education Norma Paulis developed a
plan wherein the two facilities would co-exist on a single
property, without compromising the integrity of either of the
programs. For more than ten years the School for the Blind has
been a target in budget wars, and this year's proposed cuts were
the deepest yet. Closure of the school had been prevented in the
past because of the protests of the blind community. For the
battle this time, however, we believed that some creative
negotiating would be needed to preserve the program.
     At our Members' Seminar in the fall of 1992 we took a
careful look at the quality of education for blind children in
Oregon. We agreed that there was room for improvement,
particularly with regard to the programs and curriculum through
OSSB. We considered the ramifications of relocating the blind
school and concluded that the greatest loss would be the physical
building itself. We concurred that a major restructuring might
well be the best way to make sweeping improvements in the
program. Our primary concern was to insure that the two programs
(OSSB and OSSD) remain totally separate and intact.
     We approached Norma Paulis, offering support for her
proposal to relocate the School for the Blind, if the Department
of Education would involve us in the restructuring and planning
of the new facility and if they would help improve the quality of
education of all blind children in Oregon by working with us on a
Braille Literacy Bill.
     We worked closely with Maurine Otis from the department on
the language of the bill, using the Texas bill as our model. In
February, 1993, Senator Bill Dwyer of Springfield sponsored the
bill. In early March eighteen members of the NFB of Oregon
visited the offices of all ninety Oregon legislators. We were
prepared with folders containing a copy of the Braille bill; a
Braille alphabet card; a few pieces of NFB literature on Braille
literacy; an NFB of Oregon brochure; letters of support from the
Commission for the Blind, the director of OSSB, the director of
the Oregon Textbook and Materials Center for the Visually
Impaired, and the President of the Alliance for Blind Children;
and a fact sheet describing the Braille bill and the proposed
relocation of the OSSB.
     Representatives from the Text Book and Materials Center, the
Department of Education, and the National Federation of the Blind
of Oregon testified at each of the hearings on the Braille bill.
The Confederation of School Administrators (COSA), was present at
one of the hearings in the Senate and testified in support of the
bill, focusing on the untimely fashion in which Braille textbooks
are made available to blind students. The President of COSA
testified that the textbook section of this bill would expedite
the process of textbook production and improve teacher
effectiveness tremendously.
     The proposal to use the money from the sale of the School
for the Blind to fund the building of the new school on the
fifty-two-acre School for the Deaf campus was brought before the
legislature. The legislators felt that they had insufficient data
to determine the feasibility of the relocation, so they deferred
the decision to close or relocate the Schools for now.
     But following all the debate and discussion, the Oregon
Braille Bill passed unanimously through the Senate and with only
four dissenting votes in the House. On July 14, 1993, Senate Bill
934 was signed by Governor Roberts, eloquent testimony to the
power of cooperation. It will take effect September 1, 1994.



[PHOTO: Norm Peters stands in office at New Mexico Commission for the Blind.
CAPTION: Norm Peters displays the t-shirt and medallion he was presented as a
participant in the White Sands Alamogordo Marathon Walk.]

        WALKING ALONE AND MARCHING TOGETHER IN ALAMOGORDO

     From the Editor: The philosophy of the National Federation
of the Blind inspires thousands of blind men and women to stretch
themselves and grow in new ways every day. Our struggles against
fear and uncertainty are often unique. But although the
expression of this struggle may be highly individual, the actual
process each person faces is usually similar to the experiences
of others. We learn about things that other blind people do every
day that we would dearly love to do. We come to realize that
these people believe blindness need not stop them from going
about their daily lives or even dreaming great dreams or
accomplishing ambitious goals. Then, with attention firmly fixed
on the example before us, we step out in some new way and dare to
do something that we have never tried before. And, as we discover
that we actually can succeed in new ways, we begin to find
ourselves serving as role models for other blind people.
     For some time Norm Peters has been the President of the San
Diego County Chapter of the National Federation of the Blind of
California. In the June, 1993, issue of the Braille Monitor he
described how he lost 130 pounds by eating healthily and walking
significant distances every day around his neighborhood. His most
recent project was walking the distance to Baltimore, home of the
National Center for the Blind. Because the Federation had come to
mean so much to Norm, he enjoyed imagining himself actually
traveling to see its headquarters.
     In the meantime he was providing his neighbors with an
excellent example of the way in which blind people walk safely
through the streets of their communities. He has worn out many
cane tips in the process of walking those thousands of miles, and
he has also demonstrated to everyone just how good a cane
traveler he has become.
     When the time came for the NFB of California to begin
planning for the opening of the Lawrence Marcelino Orientation
Center for the Blind, it was not surprising that Sharon Gold,
President of the California affiliate, asked Norm if he would be
interested in training to become the Center's cane-travel
instructor. Norm said yes and departed several months ago for
intensive training at the Adult Orientation Center at the New
Mexico Commission for the Blind.
     Whether one is a new student, mastering the skills of
blindness for the first time and learning about NFB philosophy,
or a veteran Federationist preparing for some challenging
assignment, spending time as a student at one of the NFB training
facilities is an exhilarating and stimulating experience. The
challenges are very real and often difficult, but one comes to
understand that in the Federation one is never alone, that there
is always a cheering section to help one over the hard places,
and that every victory one wins strengthens us all. Those are the
lessons that Norm Peters learned in early December. Here is the
story he told President Maurer in a letter he wrote two days
after the experience:

                                           Alamogordo, New Mexico
                                                 December 6, 1993

Dear President Maurer:
     I have thoroughly enjoyed my staff training at the
Orientation Center here in Alamogordo, New Mexico, in preparation
for becoming the cane-travel instructor at the Muzzie Marcelino
Orientation Center in Sacramento, California. I want to add my
voice to those of the many others who have had the opportunity to
attend NFB centers. Being here has changed my life in many ways,
not just because of having the chance to do things I have never
done before and now know I can, but because everything I have
learned in and out of class has helped to raise my self-esteem
and my recognition that it is respectable to be blind.
     Because of the way I feel about myself and the training I
have been getting here, I want to tell you of an experience I
participated in this last Saturday, December 4. I do not believe
I would ever have considered taking part in it before my training
here at the Orientation Center. Perhaps you remember from reading
the article about my weight loss in the June, 1993, issue of the
Braille Monitor that I have done a fair amount of walking daily
for the past few years. About a week before the Thanksgiving
break here in Alamogordo, I heard an ad on the radio that said on
Saturday, December 4, 1993, Alamogordo would sponsor various
walks and runs--everything from a one-mile competition to a
marathon walk or run.
     When I heard this ad, I began to think long and hard. I had
done a lot of walking for exercise before, mostly 5.75 miles a
day, sometimes twelve. I wondered, should I, could I attempt the
marathon walk?
     I talked to the physical education instructor here to get
his advice on whether I should try such a distance, never having
done it before. He told me that, if I had walked as much as
twelve miles at a time in the past, I should be able to do a
marathon walk. So with his advice and my determination to go for
it, I paid my $5.00 and entered the White Sands Alamogordo
Marathon Walk.
     Once I had put down the money, not only did I begin to
prepare myself mentally and physically for the event, but I began
to think about all the blind people in this country and around
the world who are better off because of the National Federation
of the Blind. I also began thinking about the many blind
individuals who are still struggling, not understanding or
believing that it really is respectable to be blind. I thought
maybe it would be good for them to have a blind person do
something to show them that blind people can achieve any goal we
really set our minds to.
     With these thoughts in mind, I determined that I would
finish this race, knowing full well that I would not be first. I
also made up my mind that I would dedicate this race to all the
blind people in the world to let them know that it is respectable
to be blind and that we really can do what we want to.
     The marathon walk began in the White Sands Monument Park at
7:00 a.m. The temperature was a crisp 16.5 degrees. The first ten
miles were in the White Sands Monument Park. The next thirteen
miles lay along Highway 70, a major highway in this part of New
Mexico. The last 3.2 miles brought us back to the city, and the
finish line was right inside the Alamogordo Zoo.
     I began at 7:00 a.m. and finished at 6:07 p.m. Yes, I was
one of the last participants to cross the finish line, but the
fact that I did it was the important thing. The thing that kept
me going mile after mile was the Federation. I knew that, if they
had been here, thousands of Federationists around the country
would have been cheering me on to the end. With those thoughts in
mind, I finished the White Sands Alamogordo Marathon Walk.
     I do not know whether I will ever do a marathon again. But I
do know that in this instance it was a privilege for me to be
walking alone and marching together, marching with Federationists
all over the country to further the independence of blind people.
     Seasons greetings to you and Mrs. Maurer, David Patrick,
Diana Marie, and the entire Center staff.
                                                       Sincerely,
                                                      Norm Peters







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

                        THE NFB IN ACTION
                         by Kevan Worley

     From the Editor: Kevan Worley is a member of the Board of
Directors of the National Federation of the Blind Merchants
Division. At the 1993 convention of the National Federation of
the Blind of Colorado Kevan was elected Vice President of the
Colorado NFB Merchants Division and was also elected to the Board
of Directors of the National Federation of the Blind of Colorado.
He made the following remarks to that convention in September,
1993. Here they are:

     I am very happy to have been asked by our state president
Homer Page to participate in our affiliate's traditional Sunday
morning presentation, "The NFB in action," for to me the NFB
means action. The first time I really paid attention to the
National Federation of the Blind was in the late 1970's while
working at a small radio station in west Texas. Stories began to
come over our wire services about these blind people led by a
charismatic Dr. Kenneth Jernigan. These blind folks were
picketing the Federal Aviation Administration. They were taking
action to demand the right to carry long white canes on
airplanes. At that time I was twenty-two years old, insecure with
myself and my blindness, and that was a little too much action
for me.
     As the Nobel-Prize-winning poet Mellosch has observed, "We
have a command to participate actively in our history." So by
1982 I realized that it was in my best interest to learn about,
join, and become active in this dynamic organization. My reasons
for choosing to become involved in our social action movement
were probably as complex, varied, and personal as yours. I
joined, began to learn, and have been more or less active over
the years.
     I wonder now, without the National Federation of the Blind,
what I would have done this past spring when the job I had
relocated to take was apparently snatched away from me by an
insensitive and unknowing governmental bureaucracy.
     Let me briefly tell you the story and by doing so provide
another example of why it was necessary to form an organization
in 1940, as Dr. tenBroek put it then, "...for creating the
machinery which will unify the action and concentrate the
energies of the blind, for an instrument through which the blind
of the nation can speak to Congress and the public in a voice
that will be heard and command attention."
     In May of 1993 Paul Pichardo, a licensed blind vendor in
Colorado Springs, Colorado, was granted a promotion to manage a
business at Falcon Air Force Base, a high-security installation
just outside of Colorado Springs. I was then awarded the vending
facility at Kaman Sciences/Instruments, vacated by Mr. Pichardo.
My fiancée, Karen Cox, and I relocated to Colorado Springs and
settled in to begin our new business venture. But one week prior
to our taking over, I received a call from the state licensing
agency informing me that the Air Force had just told Paul that he
would not be able to start at his new location. It would take
nine to fifteen months for the Defense Investigative Service to
grant him a security clearance, which is necessary for him to
operate his new facility on the base. Paul's initial response
was, "Well, I guess there's nothing we can do about it." While
the agency did make a phone call or two to the Air Force, their
posture was much the same: sympathetic yet powerless.
     I told you earlier that I joined the NFB in 1982. I had
joined, I had learned, and I had been more or less active over
the years. My first reaction was, "Nine to fifteen months for a
security clearance to operate a convenience store to sell soda
pop, chips, and Gummy Life Savers--come on! There must be
something we can do." The state agency assured me that I could
temporarily manage a cafeteria which was then being operated by a
colleague of ours who is with us this weekend, Mark Meusborn.
     "Now," I thought, "let me see if I have this straight. For
the next year or so I am to take a job for much less money; I am
to take some of Mr. Meusborn's livelihood away from him; Karen
Cox will not have her job, or will get very few hours of work at
most; and the promotion earned by Paul Pichardo will be
significantly delayed." The ripple affect would have impact on
four people--only four blind people. No sighted people were
affected at all. After discussing the matter with the state
licensing agency and officials at the U.S. Air Force in Colorado
Springs; San Antonio, Texas; and Washington, D.C., I determined
that working alone I could not move the great weight of
bureaucratic apathy. It was time for the NFB in action.
     I called my state president, Homer Page. I consulted with
our Director of Governmental Affairs, James Gashel, and his
assistant, Scott LaBarre. We decided that the best action we
could take at this point was to contact our Congressional
delegation to enlist their assistance. President Page suggested
this course of action and agreed to write letters to our Senators
and House members detailing the situation and urging their
assistance. With the support of the organized blind behind us,
Karen and I each wrote letters to our Congressional delegation.
     Then I told Paul Pichardo that he could have some impact if
he, too, would write letters. This he did with our assistance.
Paul wrote to Congressmen Hefley from Colorado Springs and
McGinnis from Pueblo. I then made personal phone calls to both
Congressmen whom, incidentally, I had met at our February
Washington Seminar--all part of the NFB in action.
     The legislative aides from Congressman Hefley's office and
Congressman McGinnis's office assured us that others had had
their delays caused by the Defense Investigative Service. They
said there was cause for optimism because they were often
successful in expediting security clearances. Paul and I received
phone calls several times over the next few weeks to assure us
that both offices were still working on the problem. By the way,
when we wrote our letters to the Congressional delegation, we
copied our colleagues in the movement: President Maurer,
President Emeritus Dr. Jernigan, Jim Gashel, and state President
Homer Page. We also copied Stan Boxer and Ron Landware from our
state licensing agency, just so they would know someone could
take action.
     The letters we received from our legislators were reassuring
and supportive. They told us that they understood our plight,
were sympathetic to our situation, and had great respect for the
National Federation of the Blind. As Dr. tenBroek had put it
fifty-three years ago, "...an instrument through which the blind
of the nation speak to Congress and the public in a voice that
will be heard and command attention."
     Six weeks from the day I had received the news from the
state licensing agency that Paul's security clearance would be
delayed from nine to fifteen months, Paul was granted his
security clearance--not nine to fifteen months, but six weeks!
Two weeks later he took over his new job at Falcon Air Force
Base, and Karen and I took on our present jobs, running a small
cafeteria at Kaman Science/Instruments. Mark Meusborn took back
his temporary satellite, and the lady from the Congressman's
office in Pueblo called to make sure I would still get my
promotion.
     Stan Boxer, the director of the Business Enterprise Program
in Colorado, commented on the depth and "reasoned tone" of our
letters. I, of course, expressed my feeling that the state
licensing agency should have done more to lend their voices to
our attempt to speed up the process, rather than taking a
business-as-usual attitude. Perhaps it was that the lives of four
blind people were affected and not their own which caused their
failure to act.
     It was the National Federation of the Blind which took
action. Thank you, Homer. Thank you for writing the letters.
Thanks for your advice and support. Thanks to Jim Gashel and
Scott LaBarre for taking time to talk to me and for researching
the issue. Thanks to all of you. Whether you knew it or not, you
were with us as part of our great collective, the NFB in action.



[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Faots Floyd.]

               BASIC RIGHTS AND HIGHER PRINCIPLES
                         by Fatos Floyd

     From the Editor: Fatos Floyd is one of the leaders of the
National Federation of the Blind of Missouri and a dynamic and
energetic Federationist who works to assist blind people wherever
she goes. She was born and received her early education in
Turkey, and she maintains close links with friends and family in
Istanbul. The following is a report she made shortly after
returning from a visit to Turkey last year. Here it is:

     For my vacation this year I went to Turkey for six weeks to
visit friends and family. I also spent a lot of time with the
blind community. As you may remember from President Maurer's 1993
Presidential Report, in September of 1992 the Federation provided
some training to several of the leaders in Turkey's blind
movement. After my visit I can assure you that our assistance to
those leaders is paying off.
     As a result of my observations in Turkey, I begin to realize
the size and number of the obstacles Federation leaders and
members had to overcome in the past to create a better future for
all blind people in the United States. Today we are no longer
fighting for simple survival but for higher principles because
for the most part our basic rights have been established by law.
On the other hand, in Turkey the fight for fundamental rights is
just beginning. There it is hard to talk about important issues
like information access when by law a blind person's signature is
not acceptable. As you can imagine, this law causes lots of
problems for blind people, who are denied the privilege of
writing checks, getting a bank card, receiving credit cards, and
even getting phone service.
     But do not worry. The seeds of Federationism that we planted
through the training of the Turkish blind leaders are
flourishing. An organization with the same philosophy as the NFB
is working to make changes in Turkey that will affect the future.
I was proud to be with this group and work with them for a short
time while I was in the country. When I was there, I attended the
opening of their computer training center. They are in the
process of establishing English, Braille, and telephone operating
training for the blind. They believe that the way to change the
system is to train blind individuals to get competitive jobs and
be taxpayers. At the same time they are working to change the
demeaning laws that control the lives of blind people.
     As I have said, it was great to be part of this movement,
even for a short time. I conducted workshops for blind women
dealing with the issues of marriage, cane use, and the future of
women in the blindness movement. Although Turkey has its first
woman prime minister, in the blindness movement women are still
in the background. I talked with the parents of blind children
about integration, Braille materials for the students, cane use
in the school and outside it, and the effect on blind kids of
parental sheltering. After the workshop we went out with our
canes and had an independent travel experience. These women and
children had never had a cane in their hands. For the first time
in their lives they were walking freely in Istanbul traffic. Of
course, this was just a start. With time, training, and equipment
they are going to be as independent as many of us here because
they have the same spirit.
     You may wonder whether any exciting things happened to me
while I was in Turkey. The answer is yes. Of course, no one
hesitated to accept the Visa card of a blind individual, even
though I had been the one to sign it. I guess that the prospect
of payment in dollars overrode the signature law. Since blind
people in Istanbul can ride buses free, I had to argue constantly
with the bus drivers about taking my ticket. But the big
challenge came just before I left the country. I went to a notary
public to give my power of attorney to my brother. Of course,
knowing the law, I took two witnesses with me. But even so, the
head clerk almost threw me out of the office, saying that as a
blind person I could not give power of attorney to anybody. I
explained to her that I had done it three times before and that,
according to the law, I can give it to anybody, as long as I have
two witnesses. She was loud and ugly about the whole matter, so I
took her name and left. In the same block I went to a second
notary and got the power of attorney with no difficulty. After
this incident I filed a formal complaint against the first notary
for her violation of my rights.
     Overall, the trip was exciting, motivating, and thought-
provoking. It is wonderful to see the effect of the Federation's
love, friendship, and philosophy growing in my own country. I
would like to thank you all for the changes that you have brought
about in me and for the help you are giving people thousands of
miles away.



[PHOTO: Family portrait. CAPTION: Fred and Cathy Schroeder with their children
Matthew and Carrie.]

                EXPECTATIONS: THE CRITICAL FACTOR
               IN THE EDUCATION OF BLIND CHILDREN
                     by Fredric K. Schroeder

     From the Editor: The following is a banquet address
delivered at the eighth International Conference on Blind and
Visually Impaired Children which took place in Edmonton, Alberta,
Canada, on October 1, 1993. Fred Schroeder, who is the Executive
Director of the New Mexico Commission for the Blind and a member
of the Board of Directors of the National Federation of the
Blind, also serves as President of the International Council on
English Braille and is a noted expert in the education of blind
children. Readers of the Braille Monitor will be familiar with
some of his ideas from previous articles in these pages, but,
given the current debate over full inclusion, this speech seems
particularly relevant. Here it is:

     Perhaps no issue has been more hotly debated than the
question of which educational placement or array of services
represents the best alternative for blind children. We tend to
view this debate as a contemporary issue--full inclusion versus
residential placement. Yet this debate is not new in character or
substance. In 1865 at the laying of the cornerstone of the New
York State Institution for the Blind at Batavia, Samuel Gridley
Howe stated:


          I am constantly applied to by teachers to know how to
     proceed with a blind child; and I always encourage them to keep it
     at home, and let it go to the common school as long as possible.
     (1866, in Blindness 1865, p. 185)

While Howe suggests that public school education is preferable to
residential placement, his lifetime devotion to establishing
schools for the blind reflects his understanding that neither
system is wholly adequate to meet the educational needs of blind
children.
     Perhaps the real difficulty in the debate stems from the
complexity of its issues. Residential schools have certain
natural advantages in designing and implementing programs for
blind children. With the students concentrated in one place,
curricula can be adapted and special media prepared, allowing for
instruction comparable to that available to sighted children.
Residential schools offer Braille libraries and are generally
noted for their athletics programs. Additionally, by being in an
environment with other blind children, the blind child has better
prospects for social interaction than is often the case in public
schools.
     Alternatively, inclusionists put forward the compelling
argument that segregation from society fosters separation and
isolation. They believe that blind and other disabled children
are part of a diverse society and should not be separated from
it. They assert that our educational system can and must be
available to all and must adapt itself to varying needs rather
than excluding those with differences.
     There is a tendency to view the individual placement as
responsible for the blind child's positive or negative
experience. Yet the quality of the individual child's experience
is not fully explained by the placement model itself. Children
going through the very same program frequently have dramatically
different feelings about the education they received. Individual
children bring with them individual human characteristics. Some
adjust readily to change, while others have great difficulty. In
other words, the particular placement is only part of the
equation.
     I believe that the debate over residential versus integrated
placement asks the wrong question. There is no one structure or
particular type of program placement that is best for blind
children. All models and all systems will inevitably succeed with
some children and fail with others. What is needed, therefore, is
not the refinement or fine tuning of this system or that.
Instead, all systems must be premised on a fundamental belief in
the ability of blind children to compete--each system must begin
with this belief and translate it into expectations.
     Without a clear vision of what can be achieved by blind
children, no reasonable planning can take place. Without certain
fundamental values, no overarching philosophy can emerge. Since
its founding the National Federation of the Blind has embodied a
clear philosophy of blindness rooted in the basic belief that the
blind can compete on terms of equality with the sighted. Marc
Maurer, President of the Federation, has stated:

          In 1940 we organized to speak for ourselves through the
     National Federation of the Blind.... 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. (1990, in Walking Alone
     and Marching Together, p. 718)

     I administered a public school program for five years. What
distinguished our program was our fundamental belief in blind
children. When I speak of a fundamental belief in blind children,
I mean just that--a shared personal conviction that our children
are inherently normal and capable of assuming an active role in
society, a belief that they can grow up and marry and have jobs
and raise families and live a normal life, a belief that they
will have strengths and weaknesses and, if encouraged to build on
those strengths, can excel, establishing for themselves a place
of real equality.
     It is important to distinguish what I call a fundamental
belief in the ability of blind children from the less-defined,
generalized belief which exists throughout our educational
system. Certainly teachers as a whole seek to train and encourage
their students to learn and achieve. What separates a fundamental
belief in the ability of blind children from a generalized belief
is the matter of clear expectations.
     In the program I administered we strove to put into practice
our fundamental belief in blind children. We believed that, given
the right training, our students could compete in all subject
areas on terms of real equality. We were not satisfied with the
methods we used to teach the students unless they met this
criterion. For this reason we concentrated intensively on the
basic skills needed by blind children. We instructed them in
Braille reading and writing, cane travel, typing, handwriting,
and use of the abacus. These core skills represented the natural
expression of our philosophy of blindness. We believed that our
children could compete and therefore gave them the tools
necessary to put that belief into action. By giving them skills
and holding high expectations for them, we enabled our students
to develop the self-confidence to participate fully, both
socially and academically.
     We held a fundamental belief in the ability of our students
and translated that belief into action. We believed that our
children could compete and gave them the skills necessary to make
this belief a reality. When they were given the skills to meet
our expectations, they developed confidence and learned to
achieve. By succeeding and believing in themselves, they began
the process of internalizing our belief in them. In time our
expectations of them became their expectations of themselves; our
fundamental belief in their inherent normalcy became their own.
     What blind children lack is not access to services, but
access to high expectations. Society holds only minimal
expectations for blind people. Consequently the blind child is
rewarded for virtually any level of performance. Even the most
forward-looking people rarely hold more than tenuous and
uncertain expectations for the blind. It is not surprising,
therefore, that blind children lack a clear image of their own
potential. To develop a real sense of their own ability, blind
children must be in an environment with clearly defined
expectations.
     When I began administering a public school program, I found
a lack of clear expectations for blind children. The staff
certainly had good intentions for their students and were doing
their best to train and motivate them. Yet they had a generalized
rather than fundamental belief in their students. None of the
children used canes, and therefore they were at a real
disadvantage in getting around the school. They had been taught
to trail walls and use their feet to find steps. Blind children
were allowed to start out five minutes early for recess so that
they could get to the playground before the other children. By
and large, partially sighted children were responsible for
leading the totally blind ones. At lunch time they went early to
the cafeteria and sat together while the cafeteria workers
brought them their trays. They were integrated primarily into
non-academic subjects, except for those students who had enough
vision to use print. This program was not, and is not, uncommon.
Personnel in these programs did not have bad motives, were not
poorly trained, and were not lazy. In fact, they had the very
best of intentions. In other words, they had a generalized rather
than fundamental belief in their students.
     In restructuring our program, we began by integrating a new
philosophy about blindness. Our fundamental belief in blind
people expressed itself through high expectations. We believed
that, if blind children were to compete, we must first
demonstrate (through our actions) our belief in their ability. We
stopped the practice of having partially-sighted children lead
the totally blind. Rather we taught children to use white canes
and encouraged them to walk quickly and confidently. Wall-
trailing went by the wayside. We stopped releasing our children
early for recess, believing that, if we treated them as though
they were vulnerable, they would learn to act as though they were
vulnerable and would begin to believe it.
     School personnel had some initial difficulty adjusting to
these changes. I remember the principal's telling me that we
needed to build a sidewalk leading from the main building to the
swings. She said that our students liked to swing during recess;
but, since we no longer let them go early, the swings were all
taken by the time they arrived. She thought a sidewalk would help
them find the swings more quickly. When I asked how the children
were currently getting to the swings, she told me that they had
been taught to trail the fence around the perimeter of the
playground. At the point closest to the swings, a rag had been
tied into the chain-link fence. When they found the rag, the
children were to stand with their backs to the fence and walk
straight out to find the swings. No wonder our children were
always the last to arrive at the swings.
     I told her that what the children needed was, not a sidewalk
across the playground, but more practice orienting themselves in
large open spaces. When leaving the building, the children should
head out across the playground in the general direction of the
swings. Over time they would learn to recognize certain natural
landmarks such as other playground equipment and slopes in the
ground. With practice they would get better at judging the
distance and direction to travel. Additionally, since swings are
a high-interest activity stimulating much competition, our
students would have to be quick if they were to nab a swing.
     The principal was apprehensive at the prospect of a half
dozen blind children running at top speed with their canes in a
crowd of three hundred youngsters. What she had not considered
was that, when the recess bell rang, there were three hundred
children running at top speed, but they were all running in the
same direction--from the building onto the playground. Expecting
that the blind children in our program could compete on terms of
real equality and giving them the tools to make it possible, we
found that they met and surpassed our expectations. When the
blind children in our program first learned to use canes, we did
not teach them to run. They taught themselves to run because they
felt a compelling need to get to the swings first. When they were
released early from class, they walked slowly and carefully--
those with some sight helping those with none. They had no need
to run and no belief that they could. When they learned to use
canes and went to recess with everyone else, they found a need to
run and hence learned to do so.
     But this was only the beginning. Sometimes they weren't fast
enough. Sometimes the swings were all taken when they got there.
Consequently, they looked for other things to do. They found and
used other pieces of playground equipment. They met other
children and made new friends. They began to believe that they
were normal children; acted accordingly; and, as a result, were
viewed by others as normal.
     We also stopped the practice of letting the children go
early to lunch. We taught them how to get in line with the other
children and use their canes (gently) to keep track of the person
in front of them. We taught them how to carry a tray while using
a cane and how to find an empty seat. Finally, we taught them to
bus their own trays on their way out of the lunchroom. By being
part of the crowd, they naturally ended by sitting with a variety
of students, which contributed to expanded circles of friends.
     In academic areas we applied the same fundamental belief in
the basic equality of our students. When I was in graduate
school, the concept of social integration was very popular. The
basic concept was that placing blind children in an age-
appropriate setting, we were assured, would facilitate social
integration. Yet this concept was incompatible with our overall
philosophy. If we believed that blind children were normal and
that, given proper training, they could compete on terms of
equality, then social integration would send a contradictory
message. If blind children are in classrooms and unable to
perform the same work as the other students, how can they learn
to believe that they are equal?
     We determined, therefore, to concentrate first on the skills
of blindness and mainstream children only in those areas in which
their skills allowed them to function competitively. This meant
that our children received intensive training in Braille reading
and writing, as well as training in typing, handwriting, use of
the abacus, and of course cane travel. As children were able to
read at grade level, they were integrated into language arts and
social studies. As they became skilled in the use of the abacus,
they were integrated into math. Consequently, they were able to
perform competitively and thereby internalize a vision of
themselves as inherently normal.
     Let me reiterate that the key was not the educational
placement; the critical element was our belief in their essential
normalcy and the tangible demonstration of our belief through our
actions. By believing in blind children and having high
expectations for them, we enabled them consistently to reach and
surpass our expectations.
     One day one of our students came to his teacher to complain
that his friends had begun playing tag during recess. When
playing tag, one child is "it," and his or her objective is to
tag or touch another child, thereby making the other child "it."
Since none of the children wishes to be "it," the game moves at a
fast pace. The problem for a blind child is that it is difficult
to know who "it" is at any given moment and, more important,
where "it" is. This blind child complained that, since he didn't
know where "it" was, he didn't know which way to run and thus
spent much of the game being "it."
     We had spent considerable time and energy convincing our
children that they were normal and could compete on terms of
equality. We had taught them through our words and deeds that,
given the right training, they could function competitively with
their sighted peers. We now had a seven-year-old putting our
philosophy to the test. In the game of tag he didn't feel very
equal, yet he had an expectation that he was capable of full
participation, so he came to us in the absolute certainty that a
technique must exist which would allow him to compete. After
considerable soul-searching, we determined to talk to the
youngster and explain to him that the world had been constructed
largely by the sighted with sight in mind, and after all there
are some things that the blind cannot do (such as driving)
because the activity itself is premised on the ability of the
driver to see. We hoped we could explain to him that tag was like
driving--constructed by the sighted for the sighted and that it
did not mean that he was inferior. We hoped that we could
explain, in a way that a seven-year-old would understand, that
the blind were not less capable merely because there were some
activities in which sight was an overwhelming advantage.
     In the meantime this young fellow had grown tired of waiting
for us to come up with a solution. He believed he was as capable
as anyone else and believed that full participation was a product
of having or thinking up the right technique. He realized he
could not see, but, rather than feeling bad about it, he had
learned to meet the situation head-on. Soon thereafter, before we
had a chance to talk with him, he came to school with a small
glass jar. At recess he put a few pebbles in it and replaced the
lid. He told his friends that, when they were playing tag,
whoever was "it" had to shake the jar; and, if he or she did not,
the tag did not count. He still did not know who "it" was, but at
least he knew where "it" was.
     All of us with our master's degrees and years of experience
were prepared to sell a seven-year-old blind child short--not out
of malice, poor training, or even lack of imagination. Presumably
as a group we had at least average powers of creativity. What
limited us was a subtle, almost unrecognizable, internalization
of society's diminished view of blindness. Even though we
actively worked to promote a positive philosophy of blindness, we
were subject to the negative conditioning of society. No matter
how hard we fought it, we were still ready to accept partial
participation while intellectually wishing to believe in full
participation.
     This student solved his own problem primarily because he
believed in himself. The critical factor was his own expectation
and fundamental belief in himself as a blind person. He believed
that he was equal and acted accordingly. He would not settle for
a lesser role but thought and questioned and tried until he had
an answer. Our challenge is to develop a clear vision in
ourselves of what we believe about blindness. We must replace our
generalized belief in blind children with a fundamental belief.
This represents an overarching philosophy guiding our programs
but, more important, guiding our expectations. If we have a clear
vision of what blind children can achieve, they will invariably
reach and surpass our highest expectations for them.
     Inevitably our programs and services develop from our
beliefs, explicitly and implicitly reflecting our expectations.
The real problem with today's programs for blind children is
their lack of an effective philosophy. Education of the blind has
become trapped by its own thinking, which has resulted in a
system in which children are encouraged to progress from where
they are, without a vision of where we want them to be. We have
become complacent, using progress as our measure of success. We
have taken this lack of clear vision and embraced it as a virtue.
We have become the champions of individualized programs without
clearly defined expectations. Yet doing better today than
yesterday is simply not good enough. By using progress as the
measure of success, we mislead ourselves into believing that our
educational systems are working effectively. The real problem of
a generalized belief in blind people is that it lacks definition.
The progress measure of success rewards forward movement
irrespective of whether it is constructive.
     Today's Braille literacy problem did not emerge from a
negative view of blindness, but rather from a lack of any
specific view at all. If a child has some sight and is struggling
to read print and if he or she begins to read better by using a
CCTV or stronger magnifier, the goal of progress is achieved. The
child is reading better, which is of course what we want. This
satisfies our generalized belief in blind children. The progress
standard is not so much wrong as incomplete. A child's making
progress is good, but only if it is progress toward a worthy
goal, premised on a fundamental belief in the ability of blind
people to compete. I believe that blind children are
fundamentally normal, so I expect that they can become literate.
Since I believe that they are normal, my expectation for their
literacy is that they will read and write like their sighted
peers. For this reason I am not satisfied by a child's
progressing from reading ten words per minute to twenty or thirty
words per minute if this is the best that he or she will achieve,
given a particular medium.
     Progress is not enough. It must be coupled with expectation.
If a child is trained to read Braille knowing that it is
reasonable to expect that child will learn to read at a rate
comparable to that of his or her sighted peers, then progress
takes on a new and positive dimension. Progress in response to
substantive expectation is progress worth applauding. Progress
from a position of inferiority to a position of less inferiority,
without the prospect of full participation, is not only
insufficient but damaging because it erroneously teaches the
child that, due to blindness, he or she is less capable. Dr.
Kenneth Jernigan, President Emeritus of the National Federation
of the Blind, expressed it best:

          We have learned that it is not our blindness which has put
     us down and kept us out, but what we and others have thought about
     our blindness. (1990, reprinted in Walking Alone and Marching
     Together, p. 428)

     As educators, teacher trainers, and parents we must actively
work toward developing a strong and positive conception of
blindness within ourselves. This can only be accomplished by
spending time with blind adults who can help us reshape and
redefine our expectations. Ruby Ryles, a nationally recognized
teacher of blind children in the United States, pointed out:

          The average V.I. teacher has had little or no contact with
     competent blind adults and therefore does not imagine, cannot
     imagine, the tragic results of the omission of basic skill
     training. (June, 1989, in the Braille Monitor, p. 308)

     We must strive to replace our generalized beliefs with
fundamental beliefs in the capacity of blind people. With these
fundamental beliefs our philosophy of blindness will guide us
intuitively to do what is right. Through our philosophy we will
naturally hold high expectations for our students and replace
undirected progress with that which is goal-driven. We will
automatically know whether a decision or strategy is the right
one by the degree to which it accomplishes the objective of full
participation for the child.
     But, most important, a personal fundamental belief in the
ability of blind people will result in the passing on of this
belief to our children. If we believe in them and demonstrate
that belief in all that we do, they too will learn to believe in
themselves, internalizing our expectations. The skills we teach
are not a complete package, but a starting point. If our children
learn to believe in themselves, they will draw from these skills,
applying them in new ways and in new situations. They will build
on this foundation and integrate themselves into society. No
master's-level educator will have to teach them the correct
method for playing tag. By believing in themselves and assuming
that they can function competitively, they will automatically
look for the techniques to put their beliefs into action. The
critical factor is expectations--expectations stemming from an
overarching philosophy rooted in a fundamental belief in the
capacity of blind people to live full and productive lives.



[PHOTO/CAPTION: The Ambassador Bridge, linking the city of Detroit with
Windsor, Ontario, Canada.]

                    1994 CONVENTION BULLETIN
         MICHIGAN: THE FIRST, THE BIGGEST, AND THE BEST

     From the Editor: The members of the National Federation of
the Blind of Michigan are working to make this summer's
convention truly memorable. Certainly our rates at the Westin
Hotel in the Renaissance Center are extraordinary. They are
singles, $38; doubles and twins, $43; and quads, $48. In addition
to the room rates, there will be a tax, which at present is
twelve percent. There will be no charge for children in a room
with parents as long as no extra bed is required. Make your
reservations by writing Westin Hotel, Renaissance Center,
Detroit, Michigan 48243, Attention: Reservations; or call (313)
568-8000. Westin has a national toll-free number, but do not use
it. Reservations made through this national number will not be
valid. They must be made directly with the Westin in Detroit. The
hotel will want a deposit of $45 or a credit card number. If a
credit card is used, the deposit will be charged against your
card immediately, just as would be the case with a $45 check. If
a reservation is cancelled prior to June 20, 1994, the entire
amount of your deposit will be returned to you by the hotel.
Requests for refunds after June 20, 1994, will not be honored.
And just to spur you on to make your plans to attend the 1994
Convention of the National Federation of the Blind, here are some
things the members of the NFB of Michigan think you should know
about their state:


     As you read in the December Monitor, the Michigan affiliate
is ready for the "Roar of '94." We are busy with plans to make
sure that the 1994 convention of the National Federation of the
Blind is the biggest and best convention ever.
     When we were in Dallas last July, we kept hearing that
"everything in Texas is big." While this may be true, Michigan is
also the biggest, the first, or the oldest in many areas. Since
our affiliate President, Allen Harris, is a history teacher, we
feel obliged to teach each of you a little history about Michigan
and the Detroit area while at the same time having some fun with
Michigan trivia. We hope you enjoy the following facts which we
have dug up. If you are a Trivial Pursuit fan, you know that the
categories of that game are geography, sports and leisure,
science and nature, arts and literature, entertainment, and
history.
     In the category of geography, did you know that--
  Michigan is the only state that touches four of the five Great
Lakes?
  Lake Superior is the largest fresh water lake in North
America?
  Detroit is one of the five largest ports in the country?
  Michigan boasts over 3,000 miles of shoreline?
  The Mackinac Bridge connecting the Upper and Lower Peninsula
is the largest expansion bridge in North America?
  The Detroit/Windsor border crossing is the busiest
international border crossing in North America?

     In the category of entertainment (and shopping is certainly
entertainment), did you know that--
  Detroit's Northland Mall was the first shopping mall in the
nation?
  Michigan is home to Bronner's, the world's largest and most
famous year-round Christmas store?
  Michigan's State Fair is the oldest continuously running state
fair?
  Detroit is the birthplace of the Motown Sound and Motown
Record Company?
  Interlochen, Michigan, is the world's largest music education
school?

     In the category of history, did you know that--
  Michigan State University in East Lansing, Michigan, is the
country's oldest land grant college?
  Detroit was the site of the first traffic light?
  The Ford Rouge plant is the largest industrial manufacturing
complex in North America?
  Detroit is the birthplace of the Model A Ford and the home of
the first automobile assembly line?
  The largest stove in the world is at the Michigan State
Fairgrounds in Detroit?
  The Detroit Department of Transportation operates one of only
four street car systems in the world using double decker
trolleys?
  Detroit's Ponchartrain Hotel is built on the site of Detroit's
first permanent settlement?
  The Westin Hotel, where our convention will be held, is the
tallest hotel in North America at 747 feet, and it houses the
highest revolving restaurant in North America?
  St. Anne's Catholic Church in Detroit is the second oldest
continuous Catholic parish in the nation?
  America's largest indoor/outdoor museum is the Henry Ford
Museum and Greenfield Village in Dearborn? It has twelve acres of
exhibit space in the museum itself and eighty-one acres of land
in the village?
  The Cobo Hall Conference Center in Detroit is the fifth
largest in the country?
  Selfridge Airbase in Mt. Clemens, Michigan, is one of the
nation's oldest and most historic military museums and operating
air bases?

     In the category of sports and leisure, did you know that--
  Detroit is the home of the country's first ice cream soda,
made by an employee of the Sanders company in 1875?
  Detroit is the home of the world's first automatic
coffeemaker?
  Michigan has the most registered bowlers in the country as
well as the largest number of recreational boats registered?
  Detroit leads the nation in potato chip consumption?
  Detroit is the pizza capital of the world?
  The Pontiac Silverdome, home of the Detroit Lions, is the
world's largest domed stadium?
  Battle Creek, Michigan, is the cereal capital of the world?
  The University of Michigan in Ann Arbor boasts the largest
football stadium operated by a university, holding over 106,000
people?

     In the category of arts and literature, did you know that--
  The Detroit Institute of Arts is one of the largest museums in
the country?
  The Fox Theater opened as America's largest movie theater in
1928 and was recently renovated to its original form for theater
and concert productions?
  The Chene Park outdoor music amphitheater ranks as the
country's most beautiful?

     In the category of science and nature, did you know that--
  Traverse City, Michigan, is the cherry capital of the world?
  The Atheneum Hotel in Greektown is home to the world's tallest
indoor waterfall?
  Belle Isle Park in Detroit is the largest island park within a
city in the country?
  The Aquarium on Belle Isle is the nation's oldest, dating back
to 1904?
  The Uniroyal tire, located above I-94 in Detroit, is the
world's largest tire?
     But most important of all, Detroit, Michigan, is the only
site of the biggest and best 1994 convention of the National
Federation of the Blind. We hope to see you all here. We are
planning exciting tours and excursions during convention week.
Details will appear in the Monitor next month.



[PHOTO: Tony Burda and daughters seated at table during award ceremony.
CAPTION: This picture of Tony Burda and his daughters Natalie and Valerie was
taken by photographer Steve Gadomski at the Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's
Hospital award ceremony. Photo by Steve Gadomski]

                      FEDERATIONIST HONORED

     From the Editor: Tony Burda is a long-time leader of the
National Federation of the Blind of Illinois. His commitment to
the organization goes back to the days when he was fighting for
the right to take the Illinois licensure examination which all
pharmacists in the state must pass in order to hold any job that
requires a licensed pharmacist. The NFB assisted Tony in that
fight, and the result was that, when he eventually took the test,
his was one of the highest scores in the state. The battle did
not end there, however. State officials continued to refuse to
issue Tony's license until, working together, we forced them to
do so.
     Through the years, Tony Burda has more than justified the
Federation's faith in him. His work in the poison control center
of one of Chicago's busiest hospitals has been exemplary. His
coolness in emergencies and wide knowledge of pharmacology have
saved who knows how many lives.
     But in addition to the professional contribution Tony has
made to his community, he is also an impressive athlete. Tony has
used his interest in physical fitness to raise funds for the
National Federation of the Blind, first in a triathlon and then
in a nearly 500-mile bicycle ride across Iowa and Illinois.
     At the moment Tony and his cycling partner are preparing to
take part in the Denver Post's competition, Riding the Rockies.
This event will begin June 17, 1994, and wind its way across 400
miles of Colorado, some of the way at 9,000 feet. As with his
other activities, Tony will use this event to demonstrate that
blind people are like everybody else, and he will also be raising
money for the NFB.
     Tony Burda is an outstanding member of his community and a
fine Federationist. Last September he was presented with the
Thonar Award by Rush Presbyterian Hospital. Here is the story
that appeared in the October, 1993, issue of RushRounds, a
publication of the Rush-Presbyterian-St. Luke's Medical Center:

             Thonar Award Goes to Rush Poison Expert
                      by Sara Parker Floyd

     Anthony Burda, R.Ph., wonders what the fuss is all about.
Burda is the winner of the Eugene J.M.A. Thonar, Ph.D., Award,
which honors individuals who have overcome disabilities to
distinguish themselves in their careers.
     "I'm flattered and humbled by the award. But, from the
bottom of my heart, I consider myself just an average person,
doing the best I can for my family and my profession," says
Burda, a poison information specialist in the Poison Control
Center.
     On September 23, Burda--blind since 1975--accepted the award
in the second annual ceremony organized by the Rush Americans
with Disabilities Act Task Force. The award gets its name from
its first recipient, Rush biochemist Eugene Thonar.
     By all accounts, Burda, thirty-eight, is not average.
Blinded in an accident while a student, he nonetheless pushed to
complete the program at the University of Illinois College of
Pharmacy, where he was enrolled. He finished at the top of his
class and scored a 91 percent on the licensing exam, one of the
highest scores in the state. He then had to wage a two-year court
battle to get his pharmacist license, which he was at first
denied because he was blind, he says.
     A poison information specialist at Rush since 1981, Burda
uses his expertise as a pharmacist in handling the thousands of
calls that come into the Poison Control Center each year.
     "The majority of the calls come from parents with young kids
who have been exposed to household toxic substances. I have to
calm and relax the parent," he says. "To do well on this job, I
have to have a good handle on pharmacology as well as have good
communication skills."
     Burda must also work fast. Often juggling many frantic calls
at once, he has stored in his memory information about thousands
of poisonous substances people can be exposed to at home or on
the job.
     Calls often come in from emergency room physicians treating
people who've overdosed on drugs.
     "I want to do the best I can and always be conscientious
about the people who are entrusted to my care," says Burda.
     His colleagues respect him for his wealth of knowledge.
"He's anybody's definition of an expert," says Jerrold Leikin,
M.D., medical director of the Poison Control Center. "He's well
aware of the toxicology literature and easily translates
scientific findings into layperson's terms."
     Burda keeps up a busy pace outside of work, too. An avid
athlete, he took part in a twelve-hour, 175-mile cycling marathon
in August. Three years ago, he completed a triathlon. Both events
raised money for the National Federation of the Blind, in which
Burda has been active for several years.
     Fellow pharmacist Jon Lager, R.Ph., has been a partner in
these endeavors. In the bicycling events, the two share a tandem
bicycle, with Lager in front, navigating the way.
     "It's a reality check for me to see what can be accomplished
when you put your mind to it," says Lager. "Tony humbles me. He's
simply amazing. There's nothing he wouldn't try to accomplish at
least once."
     A little flustered by the recent attention given him, Burda
says he's not one to seek awards and praise. Rather, he's
grateful for the blessings in his life--which, he emphasizes,
include his wife and two daughters.
     "Seventy percent of all employable blind people are either
unemployed or underemployed," says Burda. "I'm blessed because
I'm one of the thirty percent who have a satisfying career."


[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Dr. John Smith.]

                        RACE AND REASON:
               A BLACK PERSPECTIVE ON A DARK ISSUE
                        by John W. Smith

     From the Editor: Dr. John Smith is Assistant Professor of
Speech Communication at Ohio University. He is an active
Federationist and a member of the board of directors of the NFB
of Ohio. He has thought long and hard about the Federation and
racial and ethnic relationships among Federationists. Here is
what he has to say:

     I often refer to myself as belonging to a double minority. I
am a blind African American. This double minority status presents
me with both obstacles and opportunities--fortunately, more
opportunities than obstacles. Since joining the National
Federation of the Blind, I have come to realize that many others
share this distinction with me. It is from this perspective that
I want to address the issue of race within the NFB.
     First, let me explain why I am using the term African
American. Of course, it is politically correct; but more
important, some African Americans find the term "black" or "the
blacks" offensive. However, African Americans active in the
sixties insisted on being called "black" rather than "colored" or
"Negro." Therefore, it seems okay to me to use the term. Some
black Americans still prefer to have it that way. Throughout this
article I will use the terms interchangeably. Strictly speaking,
no one is really black or white. The correct terms of description
are "caucasoid" or "negroid."
     Racial differences have too often, and increasingly of late,
preoccupied the communities in which we humans live. But we in
the Federation must not allow the issue of race to fracture the
unity and solidarity of our movement. We must address this issue
openly and frankly and cut off its ugly head whenever and
wherever we find it. Racial bigotry (regardless of which race
practices it and regardless of whether the terminology used is
nigger and honky, black and white, or African-American and Euro-
American) is a poison that, left untreated, will corrupt the very
essence of a person, group, organization, or movement. It will
debilitate and destroy.
     I want to dispel two myths about this issue as it relates to
the Federation. Myth number one is that no racism exists in the
NFB. I have heard well-meaning Federationists exclaim, "I have a
hard time telling a person's race, especially those from the
South." Can a blind person discriminate based on the sound of
someone's voice? Yes, indeed. Sometimes we make bad choices based
on erroneous information or at least incomplete information,
e.g., someone sounds black or white or acts in accordance with
the cultural stereotypes attributable to a given ethnic group. We
as individuals choose (sometimes unintentionally or because we're
not sure) to include or exclude this or that person from our
circle of friends. I think this unintentional discrimination is
easier to forgive than the intentional discrimination that occurs
when we validate our information and knowingly choose to include
or exclude on the basis of race, but it is still racism.
     And if you think I am only talking about whites, you are
wrong. Racism can be practiced by any group or individual. It
comes from the caste of the mind, not the pigment of the skin. In
some senses I believe that all of us to one degree or another are
racists, because I define racism as the making of choices based
on race. Such choices can be either positive or negative. They
are positive when they are grounded in pride, mutual advancement,
and the reinforcement of a sense of belonging and self-worth.
     The problem occurs when we cease to concentrate on race-
based pride, dwelling instead on our ignorance and bigotry
concerning other people. I define bigotry as the belittling of
another's race to enhance one's own race and culture. It's
appropriate to have pride in one's own ethnic and cultural
identity and achievements, but not at the expense of any other
ethnic or cultural group.
     If nothing else, our coming together as members of the
National Federation of the Blind has demonstrated to all of us
that we are simply people who cannot physically see. Despite what
some have thought and written, we are first and foremost human
beings with all of the shortcomings and inadequacies that plague
mankind. Let us then agree as Federationists that, while it is
possible for us to practice bigotry, we should make every effort
not to do so.
     The second myth is that everyone in the Federation is a
bigot and that most of the organizational decisions made are
racially motivated and designed to keep one group from succeeding
in the movement. This classic song of victimology has become
tiresome and evermore discordant in our society at large. I don't
like to hear African American Federationists sing it, but sing it
some of us do. In fact, some black Federationists are saying that
we need a black caucus within the NFB. At the risk of being
labeled an Uncle Tom, I want to go on record as strongly opposed
to this idea. We have too many battles to wage as blind people to
allow our energies and focus to be fractured. Besides, compared
to the sighted, our numbers are few. Our common bond and burden
are our blindness and society's misconceptions about it. The
sighted see us as blind people first and then as black or white.
     My fellow Federationists, we cannot afford to discriminate
against each other. If (whether you are black or white) you are
guilty of racial bigotry in your chapter or state affiliate, I
urge you to rethink your behavior. Most social movements that
have been destroyed have been torn apart from within. Rome was
not built in a day, and it was not destroyed in a day either.
Over the course of almost two centuries, its very foundations
were pulverized and hammered to pieces by inner conflict and
strife so that, when the barbarians came, there was little to
overrun.
     Our strength in the Federation is rooted in our unity of
purpose and our capacity to bring undivided commitment and
attention to issues affecting the blind. We have too much to
fight for and against to allow ourselves to get bogged down in
contentious matters that could divide us into warring factions.
Those of you who are familiar with our history are aware of the
civil war of the late 1950's. It was the greatest threat that our
movement has ever faced, one that almost destroyed us. Let
history not record that we had a second civil war, one based on
racial conflict.
     Those Federationists who claim to find racism in every
corner of our movement should decide now whether or not to
continue in it. Why should people who vehemently and
unconstructively criticize the movement and its leaders remain in
the organization? I suspect that down deep inside, even these few
Federationists know in their hearts that in this movement we
cannot be divided or separated into racial or ethnic units but
are inextricably linked together by our blindness. They know that
each victory and each defeat impacts the entire blind community,
regardless of race, ethnicity, or cultural identity.
     To all true Federationists I would say in the strongest
possible terms: Never use racism as an excuse for lack of
initiative or integrity. Among the attractions of this movement
for me were the integrity of its leaders and the genuine
commitment to working together of the rank-and-file members. It
is this emphasis on honesty, openness, and unity that will
continue to serve us well as we enter the twenty-first century. I
challenge each one of us at every level of our movement to take a
good, hard look at our attitudes about racism--not practicing it,
not condoning it in others, and not using the claim of its
existence in somebody else as an excuse for practicing it
ourselves. Let us agree to continue to be united as one to ensure
equality, security, and opportunity for all blind people. We can;
we must; and I pray that we will.








          NEW FACULTY MEMBER MAKES A PLACE FOR HIMSELF

     From the Editor: Dr. John Smith joined the faculty at Ohio
University in Athens, Ohio, in September of 1993. The January,
1994, issue of Outlook, the university's faculty publication,
carried an article about this dynamic young blind professor. Dr.
Smith says that the student newspaper will also soon do a story,
this one focused on his efforts to organize a new NFB chapter in
the Athens area. Here is the newspaper story published in early
January:

          INCO's Smith Overcomes Challenge of Blindness
                        by Emily Caldwell

     Present John Smith with a challenge, and he will embrace it
as he has embraced life.
     Add a little music to the mix, and Smith considers himself
inspired.
     Smith, a first-year assistant professor of interpersonal
communication who has been blind since he was a toddler, now is
in a position to be a source of inspiration. He accepts that
being the only blind faculty member on the Athens campus might be
inspiring in itself, but he says his talent as a teacher is what
counts in the classroom.
     "Blindness is just a nuisance. It's just a characteristic,"
says Smith, thirty-four. "It's not the issue, but it's something
I don't avoid.
     "All I'm doing is living my life the best I can. I don't get
up and say, `Who can I inspire today?' (But) I do make it a goal
to brighten anybody's life that I happen to come in contact
with."
     By many accounts, Smith is doing just that. Junior Richard
Cornell, who took Smith's School of Interpersonal Communication
(INCO) 206 class--Communication in Interpersonal Relationships--
fall quarter calls him a "great teacher" who "cares about the
students."
     Students say Smith's impaired sight doesn't hinder his
teaching; instead, his dynamic style livens up lectures and group
projects.
     Smith is also open to questions about his blindness, senior
Cori Yost says.
     "He mentioned it right away. He always encouraged people to
ask about it," Yost says. "I just think he was a great
instructor, whether he was blind or not. For the first couple of
weeks it was interesting, but after that I didn't think about it
any more."
     Smith was born with glaucoma and was blind in one eye at
birth. When he was three, he lost sight in his good eye in an
accident while playing with his brother.
     Smith, who says he comes from a Chicago family of talkers
and singers, has known since his sophomore year in college at
Indiana University's Gary campus that he wanted to teach college
speech communication.
     That was in 1979. He completed a double major in history and
speech communication, received a master's degree in speech
communication from Purdue University, and earned a doctorate in
speech communication at Wayne State University in Detroit.
Finishing his Ph.D. included the one and a half years it took to
dictate his dissertation to his wife, Regina.
     Smith taught at Indiana University's South Bend campus for
five years before coming to Ohio University this fall.
     As in the fall, Smith will teach two sections of INCO 206
winter quarter and then add a course in the history of rhetorical
theory this spring.
     Outside the classroom Smith is trying to organize a
Southeast Ohio chapter of the National Federation of the Blind.
About 500 Ohioans are members of the advocacy and peer-support
organization. The closest existing chapter is in Columbus.
     Smith credits the organization, which he joined four years
ago, with filling a void in his life and helping boost his
career.
     "All my life I've been a blind person who hung out in the
sighted world," Smith says. "When I found the organization, I
discovered there are blind people all over the world who have
done things I never dreamed of. They gave me incentive to go on
and do even greater things."
     The College of Communication and the Affirmative Action
Office combined to buy a $10,000 voice-synthesized computer that
allows Smith to read mail and student assignments by transferring
printed words into sound. Smith also receives E-Mail through the
computer. The computer is the only special accommodation Smith
needs.
     "He's very independent," says INCO Director Sue DeWine.
"He's really fascinating. You forget he's blind. You just
forget."
     It took Smith only one tour of Lasher Hall with DeWine and
he was able to get around without guidance or a cane. "One trip
will usually do it for me," he says.
     The school offered to convert memos and handouts into
Braille, which takes about four or five pages for each type-
written page. Smith says after he received a memo in seventy-five
pages of Braille, he told the school's support staff to convert
only those documents he requests.
     But the extra effort by the INCO staff on his behalf is part
of the accommodation and flexibility he praises.
     INCO also has provided a work-study student to read for
Smith and a graduate student to help with Smith's research on
rhetoric and issues dealing with the African-American community.
     When he's not teaching, Smith delivers motivational speeches
and conducts workshops in interviewing, motivation, and stress
management throughout the country. He also is a singer and
songwriter and has recorded a gospel tape titled "One Day" under
the name "Dr. John" and on his own independent label.
     Smith says his motivational messages are aimed at the
sighted as well as the blind.
     "Everybody is handicapped in some way, either physically or
emotionally," he says. "If I put you in the right circumstances,
you'll be handicapped.
     "My message is that you can overcome anything.... I don't
let anybody or anything get me stressed out. I'm just having a
ball, enjoying life."




        SOCIAL SECURITY, SSI, AND MEDICARE FACTS FOR 1994

     The beginning of each year brings with it adjustments in
Social Security programs. The changes include new tax rates,
higher exempt earnings amounts, Social Security and SSI
cost-of-living increases, and changes in deductible and
co-insurance requirements under Medicare. Here are the facts for
1994:
     FICA and Self-Employment Tax Rates: The FICA tax rate for
employees and their employers remains at 7.65%. This rate
includes payments to the Old Age, Survivors, and Disability
Insurance (OASDI) Trust Fund of 6.2% and an additional 1.45%
payment to the Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund from which
payments under Medicare are made. Self-employed persons continue
to pay a Social Security tax of 15.3% which includes 12.4% paid
to the OASDI trust fund and 2.9% paid to the HI trust fund.
     Ceiling on Earnings Subject to Tax: During 1993, the ceiling
on taxable earnings for contributions to the OASDI trust fund was
$57,600, and the ceiling on taxable earnings for contributions to
the HI trust fund was $135,000. The taxable income ceiling for
contributions to the OASDI trust fund during 1994 is $60,600.
Beginning with January, 1994, there is no ceiling on earnings
subject to the HI trust fund tax contribution of 1.45% for
employees or 2.9% for self-employed persons.
     Quarters of Coverage: Eligibility for retirement, survivors,
and disability insurance benefits is based in large part on the
number of quarters of coverage earned by any individual during
periods of work. Anyone may earn up to four quarters of coverage
during a single year. During 1993 a Social Security quarter of
coverage was credited for earnings of $590 in any calendar
quarter. Anyone who earned $2,360 during the year (regardless of
when the earnings occurred) was given four quarters of coverage.
In 1994 a Social Security quarter of coverage will be credited
for earnings of $620 during a calendar quarter. Four quarters can
be earned with annual earnings of $2,480.
          Exempt Earnings: The earnings exemption for blind
people receiving Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI)
benefits is the same as the exempt amount for individuals age
sixty-five through sixty-nine who receive Social Security
retirement benefits. The monthly exempt amount in 1993 was $880
of gross earned income. During 1994 the exempt amount will be
$930. Technically, this exemption is referred to as an amount of
monthly gross earnings which does not show "substantial gainful
activity." Earnings of $930 or more per month before taxes for a
blind SSDI beneficiary in 1994 will show substantial gainful
activity after subtracting any unearned (or subsidy) income and
applying any deductions for impairment-related work expenses.
     Social Security Benefit Amounts for 1994: All Social
Security benefits, including retirement, survivors, disability,
and dependents' benefits are increased by 2.6% beginning with the
checks received in January, 1994. The exact dollar increase for
any individual will depend upon the amount being paid.

     Standard SSI Benefit Increase: Beginning January, 1994, the
federal payment amounts for SSI individuals and couples are as
follows: individuals, $446 per month; couples, $669 per month.
These amounts are increased from individuals, $434 per month;
couples, $652 per month.
     Medicare Deductibles and Co-insurance: Medicare Part A
coverage provides hospital insurance to most Social Security
beneficiaries. The co-insurance payment is the charge that the
hospital makes to a Medicare beneficiary for any hospital stay.
Medicare then pays the hospital charges above the beneficiary's
co-insurance amount.
          The Part A co-insurance amount charged for hospital
services within a benefit period of not longer than sixty days
was $676 during 1993 and is increased to $696 during 1994. From
the sixty-first day through the ninetieth day there is a daily
co-insurance amount of $174 per day, up from $169 in 1993. Each
Medicare beneficiary has sixty "reserve days" for hospital
services provided within a benefit period longer than ninety
days. The co-insurance amount to be paid during each reserve day
is $348, up from $338 in 1993.
     Part A of Medicare pays all covered charges for services in
a skilled nursing facility for the first twenty days within a
benefit period. From the twenty-first day through the one
hundredth day within a benefit period, the Part A co-insurance
amount for services received in a skilled nursing facility is $87
per day.
     For most beneficiaries there is no monthly premium charge
for Medicare Part A coverage. Persons who become ineligible for
Social Security Disability Insurance cash benefits can continue
to receive Medicare Part A coverage premium-free for thirty-nine
months following the end of a trial work period. After that time
the individual may purchase Part A coverage. The premium rate for
this coverage during 1994 is $245 per month.
          The Medicare Part B (medical insurance) deductible
remains at $100 in 1994. This is an annual deductible amount. The
Medicare Part B basic monthly premium rate will increase from
$36.60 charged to each beneficiary and withheld from Social
Security checks during 1993 to $41.10 per month during 1994.
Medicare Part B coverage may be continued for people who complete
a trial work period and become ineligible to receive Social
Security Disability Insurance cash benefits. This monthly premium
rate is $41.10, the same amount paid by Social Security
beneficiaries through withholding from their monthly Social
Security checks.



[PHOTO: Marie Cobb holds infant baby. CAPTION: Marie Cobb holds Michigan
Federationist Paul Posont.]

[PHOTO/CAPTION: Arthur Segal (right) shakes hands with Baltimore Mayor Kurt
Schmoke in President Maurer's office.]

                             RECIPES

     The recipes this month come from Maryland and are
contributed by two of the affiliate's best gourmet cooks, Marie
Cobb and Arthur Segal. Anyone who has attended a seminar or
committee meeting at the National Center for the Blind can attest
to Mrs. Cobb's culinary talents. She offers three favorite
seminar recipes. Arthur Segal, who is famous for his role as
Santa Claus at the Baltimore Chapter Christmas parties,
concentrates on the delicacies that make Maryland famous.
     In May and June raspberries and strawberries from the
Eastern Shore are plentiful. During the summer white silver queen
corn, tomatoes, and many other vegetables are available. In the
fall the northern and western parts of the state produce great
apples for both eating and making cider. In addition to
strawberries, the Eastern Shore has melons in the summer,
pumpkins in early fall, and yellow and white peaches. White
peaches are extraordinary. However, it is the Chesapeake Bay that
gives Maryland its greatest reputation and most delicious
products, for in the Chesapeake are found the famous blue crabs,
rockfish, soft shell crabs, and a wide variety of oysters.


                       MARYLAND CRABCAKES

Ingredients:
1 pound crabmeat
1 teaspoon Old Bay seasoning
1 tablespoon mayonnaise
1 tablespoon chopped parsley
1 tablespoon Worcestershire sauce
1 tablespoon baking powder
generous grinding of fresh white pepper
1 ½ teaspoon dried ground mustard
2 generous size pieces of bread with crust removed, broken into
     small pieces moistened with milk so that bread is moist but
     not sopping wet

     Method:  In a large bowl mix all ingredients thoroughly and
form into 8 patties for sandwiches with a 2-patty presentation; 4
large patties for a dinner serving; or 32 small balls for
appetizers. Heat ½inch oil (preferably peanut) in an iron
skillet, frying cakes or balls on both sides until golden or
crisp to touch. Marylanders eat their crabcakes on crackers or
hamburger buns and with mustard or hot sauce.


                          CRAB IMPERIAL

Ingredients:
1 pound blue crab backfin meat
1 cup mayonnaise
2 tablespoons ketchup
2 tablespoons prepared mustard
1 tablespoon Worcestershire sauce
2 tablespoons chopped parsley
2 tablespoons chopped dill
a generous grinding of fresh white pepper
8 to 10 drops hot sauce (approximately)

     Method:  In a large bowl combine all ingredients. Butter a
2-quart baking dish and put mixture in it. Sprinkle with a small
amount of bread crumbs and dot with butter;  bake at 375 degrees
for 20 minutes. You can also use individual dishes and handle in
the same manner. Crab Imperial also makes a good stuffing. This
recipe can be used to stuff 8 Cornish hens, 8 squab, or fish
fillets.

                        MARYLAND ROCKFISH

     Have your fishmonger debone rockfish. Get individual fillets
or large fillets that would serve two people.

                       Blackened Rockfish

     Generously season with Old Bay or New Orleans blackened fish
seasoning. Heat cast iron skillet with nothing in it; drop in the
fillets and cook 2 minutes on each side or until fish feels crisp
at the edges.


                         Baked Rockfish

     Butter and season the rockfish in the same manner as above.
Arrange fillets on a large baking sheet. Cook them at 440
degrees. If using a gas oven, start with it cold. If using an
electric oven, preheat it. If the fillets are over an inch thick,
cook them approximately 12 minutes; if they are under an inch
thick, cook them for approximately 10 minutes.

               Rockfish Stuffed With Crab Imperial

     Spread the crab imperial mixture on rockfish fillets,
approximately ½ inch thick and to the edges; pack it firmly on
the fish fillets. Sprinkle surface lightly with bread crumbs and
dot with butter. Bake them in the same manner as rockfish but add
an additional 1 to 2 minutes to allow for cooking the crab
imperial topping. Crab Imperial can be used to stuff any kind of
good fish, including flounder, salmon, and swordfish, three of my
favorites.

                             DESSERT

     Use some of Maryland's famous fresh fruit such as sliced
fresh strawberries or peaches. Serve in large wine goblets with
champagne. For dessert pour one ounce of Grand Marnier over the
same two fruits. For an extra special gourmet dessert, mix heavy
whipping cream until half whipped; add two teaspoons of Grand
Marnier and finish whipping until stiff peaks form. Top the
strawberries with the whipped cream.
     To serve raspberries, put them into large wine goblets; pour
an ounce of Chambord Liqueur over berries. Follow same
instructions for whipping cream as above but replace Grand
Marnier with Chambord Liqueur.

                       SEMINAR TUNA SALAD
                          by Marie Cobb

Ingredients:
1 large can water-packed tuna
4 hard-boiled eggs chopped fine
1 medium onion chopped fine
1½ cup chopped green olives
1½ cup chopped dill pickles
salt and pepper to taste
1½ cup mayonnaise--more if desired


     Method: Mix all ingredients together and chill before
serving.

                       SEMINAR ROAST PORK

Ingredients:
1 6- to 9-pound boneless pork loin roast, rolled and tied
2 cups olive oil
1 cup coarse ground black pepper
1¼ cup salt

     Method: Use a roasting pan with a rack and enough space
under the rack to place two inches of water in the pan and still
have the rack at least an inch above the water. Preheat the oven
as hot as possible. Prepare the pan before preparing the roast.
Combine the oil, salt, and pepper. Rub this mixture all over the
roast to make a good coating. Place the roast on the pan and
insert a meat thermometer. Place the pan in the middle of the
oven. Roast for 20 minutes and then reduce the heat to 425
degrees. Cook until meat thermometer reaches 120 degrees. Remove
roast from oven and wrap tightly in foil. Let stand for one hour
before slicing.


                     SEMINAR BANANA PUDDING

Ingredients:
1 small box instant vanilla pudding
2 cups milk
1 can Eagle brand condensed milk
1 carton (9 or 10 oz.) Cool Whip, thawed
10 bananas, peeled and sliced
1 pound vanilla wafers

     Method: Beat together the pudding mix and milk. Stir in the
sweetened condensed milk and Cool Whip. Blend until smooth. Line
a large dish with vanilla wafers. Add a layer of sliced bananas.
Pour a layer of the pudding over the cookies and bananas.
Continue this process until all the ingredients have been used.
Chill for at least 12 hours.




                   ■ ■ MONITOR MINIATURES ■ ■

[3 PORTRAIT PHOTOS. CAPTION 1) Don and Nancy Burns. CAPTION 2) Kathy and Kevin
Carpenter. CAPTION 3) Peggy and Doug Elliot stand with Dr. Jernigan at their
wedding reception.]

■ Wedding Bells:
     This fall and early winter have been filled with the sounds
of wedding bells around the Federation. Don Burns of New Mexico
and Nancy Marcello of California write to advise their Federation
friends of their marriage. The wedding took place in Reno,
Nevada, on October 9, 1993. Don and Nancy first met at the
National Convention in Charlotte and were reunited at the Dallas
convention. Nancy has relocated from Burbank, California, to
Alamogordo, New Mexico. Both she and Don are employed by the New
Mexico Commission for the Blind. Nancy is a field teacher, and
Don teaches mobility at the Commission's adult rehabilitation
center. Then, on November 20 Kathy Kannenberg, President of the
National Federation of the Blind of North Carolina, and Kevin
Carpenter were also married. And, as if this wasn't enough
excitement for the close of 1993, on December 28 Peggy Pinder,
Second Vice President of the National Federation of the Blind and
President of the NFB of Iowa, and Doug Elliott, President of the
NFB of Nevada, were married at Peggy's home in Grinnell. We all
wish the three couples much joy in their new lives together.

■ Resource Directory Being Compiled:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     The American Association for the Advancement of Science
(AAAS) Project on Science, Technology, and Disability invites
scientists and engineers with disabilities to be included in the
third edition of the Resource Directory of Scientists and
Engineers with Disabilities. Potential candidates for the
directory must hold, or be working toward, a degree in a
scientific, engineering, or medical discipline or currently be
employed in a scientific field.
     Funded by the National Science Foundation, the project's
Resource Directory of Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities
has assisted hundreds of individuals to enter and advance in
scientific disciplines. The directory helps to connect persons
with disabilities and their families with professors, teachers,
and counselors who can serve as role models and mentors.
     The Resource Directory lists scientists, mathematicians, and
engineers from all parts of the country with their disciplines,
degrees, and disabilities. Individuals include professionals who
were born with a disability and those who acquired their
disability mid-career. Those listed in the directory are also
asked to consult for academia, government agencies, and industry
as well as serve on peer-review panels and symposia.
     Established in 1975, the AAAS Project on Science,
Technology, and Disability has sought and shared expert advice
from scientists and engineers with disabilities. Since the
passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the AAAS
Resource Directory has become a valuable source of expertise.
     To be included in the directory or for more information,
please contact Laureen Summers, Program Associate, or Patricia A.
Thompson, Editorial Specialist, AAAS Project on Science,
Technology, and Disability, AAAS, 1333 H Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20005; or call [phone] (voice or TDD).
Information can also be sent by fax to [phone].

■ Elected:
     Ruth Swenson, President of the National Federation of the
Blind of Arizona, reports the following election results from the
November 13 meeting of the Phoenix Chapter: Captain Lewis,
President; Carrie Taylor, First Vice President; Hazel Plummer,
Second Vice President; Tom Johnson, Secretary; Donna Silba,
Treasurer; and Fred Rockwell and Harlene Anderson, members of the
Board of Directors.

■ Hoping To Buy:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     I would like to buy a second-hand Braille English dictionary
in good condition. I am also looking for a used dictionary of
idioms and proverbs. In addition, I would like to borrow or be
given any Braille or recorded notes or books on linguistics or
other directly or loosely related material. If you have any of
these items, please contact Muhammad Fazil, 1802 S.W. Tenth
Avenue, Apt. 322, Portland, Oregon 97201; [phone].

■ New Chapter:
     Don Capps, President of the NFB of South Carolina, reports
that the National Federation of the Blind of South Carolina
continues to be the national pacesetter in chapter development
and membership growth. The Dillon County Chapter became the
forty-first chapter of the NFB of South Carolina on December 2,
1993. An election was held, and the following are the new
officers: Melvin Barrentine, President; and Margaret McDaniel,
Treasurer. Congratulations to the Dillon County Chapter and to
the entire South Carolina affiliate.

■ Elected:
     At a recent meeting the Southern Maryland Chapter of the
National Federation of the Blind of Maryland elected the
following: Kenneth Silberman, President; Polly Johnson, Vice
President; Gerelene Womack, Secretary; Wilma Smith, Treasurer;
and Alfred Wilson and Mary Skattie, Board members.

[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Cherie Heppe.]

■ New Baby:
     Cherie Heppe, a long-time Federation leader in Connecticut,
recently wrote to announce that she and William Schiavo became
the parents of a baby daughter, Tiara Michelle, born on August
13, 1993. She weighed nine pounds, five ounces and measured
twenty inches long. Congratulations to the proud parents.


■ Attention Braille Proofreaders and Transcribers:
     Mary Donahue, an active Federationist from San Antonio,
Texas, writes to say that, following the great success of the
networking breakfast for Braille proofreaders and transcribers at
the 1993 Convention, the group is planning another breakfast at
the Detroit convention. Mary also hopes to include people who
work in the bindery departments of Braille production facilities
at the breakfast. Look for information about a network breakfast
at this year's convention in upcoming issues of the Braille
Monitor. She is interested in hearing from those interested in
this network. Contact her at 100 Lorenz Road, Apt. 1205, San
Antonio, Texas 78209; or call [phone] (evenings and
weekends) or [phone], extension 322 (during the day).

■ Information Needed:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Graduate student doing dissertation research involving
disability interest groups urgently seeks information about the
following organizations which have been instrumental in pursuing
disability legislation in the past:

     Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund
     American Coalition of Citizens with Disabilities
     National Council of Independent Living Programs
     Open Doors for the Handicapped
     Consortium of Citizens with Developmental Disabilities
     Rehabilitation Coalition
     National Association of State Directors of Special Education
     Vermont Coalition of the Handicapped
     Metropolitan DC Candlelighters Childhood Cancer Foundation
     Association for the Advancement of Rehabilitation Technology
     Coalition on Technology and Disability
     National Council on Independent Living
     Americans Disabled for Accessible Public Transportation
          (ADAPT)

     Information about the organization's current status (does it
still exist?), a knowledgeable point of contact, and the group's
operations and objectives are of particular interest. Anyone with
such information about any of these groups is asked to contact
Cheryl Allee at 3921 Seminary Road, Apt. 1201, Alexandria,
Virginia 22311; telephone [phone].

■ Elected:
     Paul Howard, President of the National Federation of the
Blind of Indiana, reports that at its state convention the
following officers were elected: Paul Howard, President; Ron
Brown, First Vice President; Anthony Schnurr, Second Vice
President; Sylvia Fadden, Secretary; and Pamela Schnurr,
Treasurer. Mamie Harris, John Stroot, Harold Bradley, and Barbara
Schmidt were elected to serve as board members.

■ Assistance Needed With Sleep Research:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Men and women, ages eighteen to eighty-five, without light
perception and using no prescription medications, are invited to
participate in a study on circadian rhythms and sleep patterns in
the blind. The study is being conducted at the Brigham and
Women's Hospital and the Harvard Medical School. The study
involves wearing an ambulatory monitor while you live at home and
spending four to five days in the laboratory each month.
Participants will be paid for their efforts and may also find out
valuable information about their eyes and their sleep-wake
patterns. For more information, call Dr. E. Klerman at (617) 732-
4012, extension 3948. Calls at all times of day are welcomed.

■ Nutrocookies Available:
     Dorothy Goodley, Secretary of the NFB of Southwest Georgia
Chapter, has asked us to carry the following announcement:
     Would you like to try a Nutrocookie? These are large cookies
made from various types of grains, honey, and chocolate chips.
They do not have additives, are nutritious, and make a whole meal
in themselves, as well as being convenient to carry around in
your briefcase or pocketbook. For further information contact in
Braille or cassette Dorothy Goodley, 615 Fifth Street, S.E.,
Moultrie, Georgia 31768; [phone].

■ Elected:
     Belle Rousseau, Secretary of the Reno Chapter of the
National Federation of the Blind of Nevada, reports the following
election results: Melissa Lisfield, President; Julie Deming,
First Vice President; Michael Kirkpatrick, Second Vice President;
Belle Rousseau, Secretary; and Dennis Deming, Treasurer.

■ Home Products Delivered:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Interested in having laundry detergent, paper towels, and
other paper and home products delivered to your door? Call (302)
366-8060 and ask for Charlotte, or write to Michael Greenway, 234
Cherry Street, Second Floor, Sharon Hill, Pennsylvania 19079-
1308.

■ New Technology Available:
     We have been asked to carry the following press release:
     Until now it has been difficult for blind people to take
advantage of voice recognition systems (voice-activated
computers). Terry Martin, who is blind, has built a system that
will allow blind people to use a voice-activated computer. The
system is called MetaVOICE■, and it provides an audio
confirmation of what the computer has heard, making it possible
for print-disabled people to access the computer by voice.
     MetaVOICE is an add-on product for Kurzweil VOICE■. It has
been under development for over ten months. Kurzweil VOICE is a
voice-recognition system. It is typically used for dictation--by
emergency room physicians, for example. Such computer systems
rely heavily on displaying the dictated information on the
computer screen. Martin thought that a voice output component
would be a tremendous help to a blind person who wanted to use a
voice-recognition program. Because blind people process
information by listening instead of by using their eyes, he began
working on MetaVOICE to provide voiced confirmation of the
commands spoken to the computer.
          For more information about this product call Adaptek
Systems at [phone] or [phone] and ask for Terry
Martin or Dr. Robert Hill. The address is Adaptek Systems, 2320
Brighton-Henrietta Town Line Road, Rochester, New York 14623.

■ Elected:
     Ray Sewell, Secretary of the Merchants Division of the
National Federation of the Blind of Maryland, reports that the
division has changed its name to the National Federation of the
Blind Maryland Business Division. At a recent meeting an election
was held with the following results: Barry Hond, President; Ken
Canterbery, Vice President; Ray Sewell, Secretary; and Don
Morris, Treasurer. Ray Lowder and Leon Rose were elected to Board
positions. Joe Byard merits a sincere thank you from Maryland
vendors for his service and much hard work while President of the
Maryland Merchants Division.


[PHOTO: Portrait. CAPTION: Dottie Neely.]

■ New Chapter:
     On October 9, 1993, the Greater Greensboro Chapter of the
National Federation of the Blind of North Carolina held its first
meeting. The following officers were elected: Dottie Neely,
President; Martha Deloatch, Vice President; Jackie McNeely,
Treasurer; and Jerry Moton, Board member.

■ For Sale:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     I have a used Perkins Braille Writer that has been serviced
and cleaned and is in good working condition. I would like to get
$300 for this equipment. For more information contact Martin
Howe, 1164 Cherry Street, Green Bay, Wisconsin 54301; or call
[phone].

■ Elected:
     On September 11, 1993, Bonnie Peterson, President of the
National Federation of the Blind of Wisconsin, was elected by
acclamation to Chair the Council on Blindness, which is a nine-
member advisory body, appointed by the Secretary of the
Department of Health and Social Service (DHSS) in Wisconsin.
Wisconsin Act 435, Sec. 47.03(9) states as follows: "The Council
on Blindness shall make recommendations to the Department and to
any other state agency concerning procedures, policies, services,
activities, programs, investigations, and research that affect
any problem of blind and visually impaired persons."
Congratulations to both Bonnie and the Council.

■ Resource List Available:
     An (adult) toy resource list addendum for 1993 is now
available from the National Federation of the Blind Parents of
Blind Children Committee on the Blind Multiply-Handicapped Child.
The list gives ages for toys using the developmental age rather
than the chronological age of the child. Families and
professionals with a special interest in the blind multiply-
handicapped child or adult are cordially invited to write to us
for information and materials. We also match families and
professionals who wish to network. Our newsletter, "Update," is
published bi-monthly. To request information or materials, write
or call NFB POBC Committee on the Blind Multiply-Handicapped
Child, 1912 Tracy Road, Northwood, Ohio 43619; [phone].

■ Returned to Office:
     Peggy Pinder was re-elected a Councilwoman in Grinnell,
Iowa, in November, 1993. Peggy Elliott will take her seat in
January, 1994.

■ Elected:
     Kerry Smith, Secretary of the St. Louis Chapter of the
National Federation of the Blind of Missouri, reports the
following election results: Daryel White, President; Susan Ford,
Recording Secretary; Kerry Smith, Corresponding Secretary; Thelda
Borisch, Treasurer; and John Ford, member at large.

■ A Movement for All Seasons:
     Ramona Walhof, Secretary of the National Federation of the
Blind and President of the NFB of Idaho, reports the following:
     We know that the blind are a cross section of society and
that the NFB is made up of all kinds of people. This was
demonstrated vividly by the group that gathered December 11,
1993, for the Christmas party of the Western Chapter of the NFB
of Idaho in Boise. Thirty-two people attended. Of these, three
were in their nineties, one in the eighties, three in the
seventies, two in the sixties, one in the fifties, six in the
forties, seven in the thirties, and four in the twenties. In
addition there were one teenager and four children under ten.
Thus we had ten decades represented. One couple brought a huge
hubbard squash from last summer's garden, and every bit was
eaten. I was struck by the diversity of the group. It occurred to
me to wonder if most of our chapters are not very much like this
one. I believe they are. But it is especially at Christmas time
that we take the time to appreciate one another and turn
acquaintance into friendship.

■ BANA News:
     We have been asked to carry the following information:
     At the annual meeting of the Braille Authority of North
America (BANA) in November, 1993, officers were elected for 1994.
Dr. Hilda Caton (Association for the Education and Rehabilitation
of the Blind and Visually Impaired) was re-elected as
chairperson. Also confirmed were Fred Sinclair (California
Transcribers and Educators of the Visually Handicapped), Vice-
Chair; Eileen Curran (National Braille Press), Secretary; and
Phyllis Campana (American Printing House for the Blind),
Treasurer.
     English Braille American Edition, which is the official
literary Braille code book of BANA, is being reprinted and will
be available in the spring of 1994. This reprinting will
incorporate the appendices containing the 1980, 1987, and 1991
code changes. There will be some editorial changes, but no other
significant alterations.
     BANA established a new committee, the Public Relations
Committee. Mary Lou Stark, the BANA representative from the
Library of Congress, will chair it. It will be working hard to
provide as much information as possible about what BANA is and
what it does.
     Darleen Bogart, who chairs the Ad Hoc Unified Braille Code
Research Committee, reported on the International Council on
English Braille (ICEB) meeting held in Sydney, Australia, in
June, 1993. The ICEB voted on, and unanimously approved, a
proposal presented to them by BANA which recommended that the
Unified Braille Code Research Project (UBC) become international.
International members were added to all the UBC committees and
are now working with the previous members to attempt to develop a
unified Braille code for all English-speaking countries.
     The spring, 1994, BANA meeting will be held on April 24-27,
1994, in Costa Mesa, California, in conjunction with the
California Transcribers and Educators of the Visually Handicapped
meeting.

■ Specialized Mail Order Pharmacy Services Available:
     We have been asked to carry the following announcement:
     Orphan Medical introduces a specialized mail order pharmacy
service for patients requiring hard-to-find medicines and those
needing unique medicines seldom stocked by traditional
pharmacies. Services include:
 Consultation with specially trained pharmacists.
 A unique system for finding and purchasing any prescription
medicine sold in the U.S. Once requested, these medicines will be
stocked for future rapid delivery.
 Competitive prices due to efficiency and low overhead.
 Assistance with insurance billing and acceptance of insurance
co-payments.
 UPS or Federal Express delivery.
 Full-service pharmacy assures patients of access to all
prescription medicines.
 Total commitment to service and customer satisfaction.
     Orphan Medical is a division of CHRONIMED, Inc. (CHMD).
CHRONIMED is a health care company specializing in the unique
needs of patients with chronic diseases. CHRONIMED provides
patient education materials, pharmaceuticals, nutritionals, and
general medical products directly to the individual and to the
patients of managed care companies nationwide.
     To place an order, call the toll-free number, (800) 636-
1133. For additional information about Orphan Medical services,
write Bert Spilker, Ph.D., M.D., Executive Director, 13911
Ridgedale Drive, Suite 250, Minnetonka, Minnesota 55305; or fax
[phone].

■ Elected:
     Roberta Jensen, Secretary of the Tucson Chapter of the
National Federation of the Blind of Arizona, writes that the
following Federationists were elected to serve as chapter
officers during 1994: Wayne Miller, President; Lee Kerr, Vice
President; Roberta Jensen, Secretary; and Mary Miller, Treasurer.
Cindy Heun and Joe Mora were re-elected to serve on the board.