by Melanie Brunson
This month, I would like to share a message with you that was circulated to the ACB computer lists on June 8 by Ralph Sanders and me. It summarizes ACB’s recent activity aimed at thwarting the latest attempt by some members of Congress to undermine the Randolph-Sheppard priority. It illustrates that when blind people act swiftly and decisively on behalf of a common purpose, they are a force to be reckoned with. That force can compel decision-makers to take note and change direction in a significant way. I hope the text below will serve as an encouragement to all of us to stay the course and persist in our advocacy efforts, even when the time seems short, the issues seem complex, and the odds seem unfavorable.
The following update on Sec. 867 of the Defense Reauthorization Bill is submitted by Ralph Sanders on behalf of RSVA, and Melanie Brunson on behalf of ACB.
A New Look at Section 867
Less than 30 days after the shock attack of May 12, when the Senate Armed Services Committee reported out its version of the Defense Authorization Act for FY 2005 containing Section 867, a provision which would have eliminated the Randolph-Sheppard priority for cafeterias on military bases, so much has happened so quickly that it sometimes seems hard to believe.
Now, instead of a frontal assault on one of the nation’s oldest entitlement programs for the blind, we are looking at language that in some ways actually strengthens the Randolph-Sheppard priority on military bases. Not only is this an amazing turnaround on legislative prospects for the Randolph-Sheppard program, the single largest employment program for blind and visually impaired individuals, but it seems to be a clear victory for the Congressional tradition of establishing and maintaining special programmatic benefits for blind and visually impaired individuals. When the ACB national office sounded the first legislative alert on May 12, it was clear that we faced a major Congressional challenge.
With tremendous speed and strength, the blind of America responded with phone calls, e-mails, and faxes to every Senate office urging the striking of Section 867. And, in an unprecedented air of cooperation, the entire blind community acted together. ACB, the NFB, the AFB, BVA and AER all marshaled efforts and sent strongly worded messages to the United States Senate.
The Randolph-Sheppard Vendors of America (RSVA), the ACB and the NFB, NIB, BVA and the AFB had been engaged in months of negotiations with the National Industries for the Severely Handicapped (NISH) to resolve conflicts between the Randolph-Sheppard priority and the JWOD preference on military bases. These discussions had been organized under the auspices of the Congressional staff of Sens. Ensign and Kennedy.
In less than a week, the pressure brought to bear by the blind of America had brought about a new sense of the need for a negotiated settlement. After frantic exchanges of e-mails and phone calls, a revised Section 867 was forged which all parties can accept.
We encourage you to call or write your senators to thank them for their assistance in bringing about this resolution to the issues raised in the earlier language of Section 867 and to urge them to vote for the substitute language in the new Section 867.
The price paid by the blind is high. The agreement permits NISH participating local non-profits to keep the 90-plus troop dining contracts it now has, presumably into perpetuity. That means the loss of more than 90 jobs, really good jobs, for blind men and women. The 36 military contracts currently held by the Randolph-Sheppard program remain in place in perpetuity.
On the other hand, the new language makes it clear that all troop dining contracts, whether full food service, or mess attendant, when they come on the market, are available to the Randolph-Sheppard priority if the state agency asserts it. That could mean several hundred new jobs for blind men and women.
There are other important technical details included in the proposal which will be helpful to the blind. It is by no means a perfect piece of legislation. It is, however, something we can not only live with, but be pleased that we were able to achieve in the face of all odds.
NFB’s Jim Gashel, with the active involvement of the ACB, drafted a statement which Sen. Ensign will have placed in the Congressional record to further clarify the broad outlines of the agreement.
The most important victory which arises from this Congressional campaign is the certain knowledge that we, the blind, can control our own destiny when we are willing and able to take clear, decisive, joint action.
Statement by Sen. Ensign on Sec. 867 of S. 2400
Mr. President, I wish to make a few comments to explain the amendment I have offered that will modify Section 867 of S. 2400 in regards to military troop dining services. This section as now amended resolves a long-standing statutory conflict arising from two important laws — the Javits-Wagner-O’Day (JWOD) Act and the Randolph-Sheppard Act. These laws provide meaningful employment and entrepreneurial business opportunities to severely disabled and blind people in meeting the food service needs of members of the armed forces serving in the United States.
The solution to this conflict, as expressed in the amendment, is a tribute to all interests concerned. The amendment reaffirms the priority for the blind expressed in the Randolph-Sheppard Act, while safeguarding employment opportunities for severely disabled persons in all military dining facilities now operated under the JWOD Act. Future contracts will also be awarded under either law in accordance with the priority set forth in the amendment.
Mr. President, it is important to point out that, when Sec. 867 becomes law as part of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2005, this new statutory language is intended to replace existing policies, regulations, or other guidance issued by components of the Department of Defense relating to application of either the JWOD Act or the Randolph-Sheppard Act. Much of that guidance has been based on efforts to harmonize conflicting statutory interpretations.
The importance of the compromise amendment is to explain when each law must be applied. Concurrent application of both laws is not called for by the amendment. This will be true in the case of both full food service contracts and mess hall attendant service contracts as well. In order to be consistent with existing practices under the JWOD Act, the term “contracts” should be understood to refer to services placed on the procurement list when troop dining services are provided by a non-profit agency under the JWOD Act.
Finally, Mr. President, the amendment provides for advance notification to be given to the Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration in order to determine if a state licensing agency wishes to have the priority of the Randolph-Sheppard Act applied to any particular procurement of troop dining services. We expect that this determination will be made promptly and that state licensing agencies will be given sufficient time to prepare proposals for consideration through direct negotiations or the competitive solicitation process.
This agreement has been a long time in the making, and I am very pleased that all sides have come together to create this agreement. It is clear that we need to continue this work and ensure that all individuals with disabilities have meaningful opportunities for employment.