The Braille Forum Vol. XVIII November, 1979 No. 5 Published Monthly by the American Council of the Blind Mary T. Ballard, Editor President: Oral O. Miller 3701 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 236 Washington, DC 20008 National Representative: Durward K. McDaniel 1211 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 506 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 833-1251 Editor: Mary T. Ballard 190 Lattimore Road Rochester, NY 14620 (716) 244-8364 ** ACB Officers * President: Oral O. Miller, Suite 236, 3701 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20008 * First Vice President: Delbert K. Aman, 115 Fifth Avenue, S.E., Aberdeen, SD 57401 * Second Vice President: Robert T. McLean, 2139 Joseph Street, New Orleans, LA 70115 * Secretary: M. Helen Vargo, 833 Oakley Street, Topeka, KS 66606 * Treasurer: James R. Olsen, 6211 Sheridan Avenue, S., Minneapolis, MN 55423 ** Contributing Editors George Card, 605 S. Few Street, Madison, WI 53703 Elizabeth Lennon, 1315 Greenwood Avenue, Kalamazoo, MI 49007 The Braille Forum seeks to promote the independence and dignity of all blind people; to stress responsibility of citizenship; to alert the public to the abilities and accomplishments of the blind. The Braille Forum carries official news of the American Council of the Blind and its programs. It is available for expression of views and concerns common to all blind persons. ***** ** Contents ACB Officers Contributing Editors Report from the ACB President, Oral O. Miller Will the Real Uncle Tom Please Stand Up?, by Kathy Megivern From the Archives: The Booth Resolution -- And What Now?, by Hollis Liggett And They're Off -- Derbytown Convention, 1980, by Carla S. Franklin NLRB Rules in Workshop Cases, by Kathy Megivern HEED -- Handicapped Employment and Economic Development Library Service to the Blind, by James G. Chandler Legislative Roundup Hyde Park Corner: Accessible versus Demand-Responsive Transportation, by Yoshiaki Nakamoto ACB Affiliate News: A Change in Wisconsin, by George Card Iowa Council of the Blind Tenth Annual Convention Arizona Council Convention Highlights, by Bud and Frances Bigger Vermont Council Convention, by Al Nichols Here and There, by George Card Notice to Subscribers ***** ** Report from the ACB President, Oral O. Miller A famous radio newscaster of the 1940's started his nationwide broadcasts many evenings with the exclamation. "There's good news tonight!" And I am pleased to begin this report with the same statement. We have just received the news by telephone that the Maine Fraternal Association for the Blind has voted to affiliate with the American Council of the Blind! The president of the organization, which was established more than 75 years ago and which has almost 150 members, is Mr. Richard Bennett. We are most assuredly looking forward to receiving the organization's application for membership in the very near future. If it is received in time, the application will be acted upon by the ACB Board of Directors at its meeting in Louisville on December 8, 1979. More good news! During the weekend of September 23, 1979, the provisional officers and board of directors of the Mountain State Council of the Blind met in Morgantown, West Virginia, to take the next step needed in the formation of an affiliate in West Virginia. Many ACB members and friends who attended the 1979 ACB national convention in Grand Rapids, Michigan, had an opportunity to meet the charming ladies from West Virginia who were there as observers to gather information about the American Council and its democratic way of operating. The provisional president is Mrs. Carla Matthews, a very energetic, imaginative, and hard-working young woman who lives in Morgantown. We are looking forward to the growth of the Mountain State Council, and we are confident that it will be sufficiently organized to apply for affiliation in the very near future. By the time you receive this issue of The Braille Forum, you will have received a general mailing distributed by the American Council of the Blind during early October, 1979, in response to a plea for assistance by the blind of Minnesota to prevent the National Federation of the Blind from taking over the Board of Directors and the considerable assets of the Minneapolis Society for the Blind. Since we are interested first and foremost in quality service to the blind, we asked all ACB members and friends to become members of the Minneapolis Society and to send their proxy votes to Messrs. James Olsen and Raymond Kempf, in an effort to elect qualified blind people of Minnesota to a majority of the seats on the Board of Directors of the Society. We are now insisting that those blind people must be members of the American Council of the Blind, because, as a realistic matter, the use of cumulative voting in the upcoming special election of officers and directors will almost certainly result in the election of blind people who are affiliated with different organizations of the blind. As indicated in the statement which accompanied the membership application and proxy forms, we are not defending any actions of the Minneapolis Society that might have been technically improper in the past, but we are most assuredly fighting hard to keep a well-established rehabilitation agency such as the Minneapolis Society from falling into the hands of a militant organization which, despite loud protests to the contrary and much beating of its chest concerning many issues which are contrived, at best, has shown it is just as interested in promoting its own organizational ends and attempting to hide its serious internal problems as it is in genuinely working for the welfare of the blind. With the November, 1979 issue of The Braille Forum, we are beginning a series of interesting articles from the archives, and I recommend strongly that, if you have not already done so, you read the article of some twenty years ago, entitled "The Booth Resolution -- and What Now?" Since the vast majority of the current members of the American Council of the Blind did not belong to the ACB or any other national organization of the blind in the late 1950s and early 1960s, one of the aims of this series is to bring into proper and accurate focus the sequence of events which led to the formation of the American Council of the Blind in 1961. Efforts have been made over the years to accumulate documentation concerning those events, and a significant amount of material has been collected. However, due mainly to a lack of funds during the earlier years of the ACB, it has not been possible to piece together a complete record. Therefore, we are now asking for your assistance in completing our archives. The project is being undertaken jointly by the editor of The Braille Forum and Mr. Chris Gray of the ACB Board of Directors. They would like to obtain any taped issues of The Braille Forum before 1972, any braille issues of The Braille Forum before 1973, any print issues of The Braille Forum before 1973, print and braille issues of The Federation Free Press and The Braille Free Press (published from 1959 through 1961 ), print or braille issues of The Braille Monitor from this period, ACB national convention tapes (especially 1961 through 1963 and 1967 through 1972), any print or braille ACB convention programs, NFB national convention tapes for 1956 through 1961, and any other relevant correspondence or miscellaneous materials from the late 1950s and early 1960s. If it is not possible for the original materials to be donated to the archives, arrangements can be made for them to be copied and returned. Anyone having any of the above-mentioned materials should contact the Editor of The Braille Forum, Mary T. Ballard, 190 Lattimore Road, Rochester, New York 14620; telephone (716) 244-8364. I cannot over-emphasize the importance of this project, in the interest of historic truth and accuracy. Over the years, the ACB has, contrary to the claims of a few of its critics, looked ahead and concentrated upon working for the rights and welfare of the blind. It is now time for ACB to set the record straight with reference to some of the slanderous allegations that have been made concerning its members, its officers, and its policies. ***** ** Will the Real Uncle Tom Please Stand Up? By Kathy Megivern For a number of years now, certain people have been fond of calling the American Council of the Blind the "Uncle Tom" of the organized blind movement. They substantiate this accusation by pointing to such things as ACB's willingness to work within the system and the reluctance of ACB members to parade up and down -- "on the barricades" -- carrying silly signs and singing cultist songs. The most recent issue which these people use as proof positive of ACB's Uncle Tom-ism is our refusal to demand the full minimum wage immediately for every blind person at every workshop in the country, regardless of productivity and in spite of the consequences. According to these "true believers," there is no room for reasoned debate on this issue. Minimum wage is the panacea, the answer to all problems, the guarantee of first-class citizenship for all blind shop workers. Imagine our surprise, then, when we first learned of the lawsuit against Mississippi Industries for the Blind. We have been told that this is a "model" workshop, the ideal to which all others should strive -- a place which ardently refuses accreditation and proudly pays all workers the minimum wage. Robert Sibley, executive director at Mississippi Industries, is one of their favorite champions in the struggle, and he traveled to Washington last June to testify in favor of the National Federation of the Blind's petition for rule-making to the Department of Labor concerning subminimum wages. That testimony demonstrates that he is a man who is proud of his accomplishments. "And I think when I go home at night, I done a little more than make a living for myself. I helped other people not quite as fortunate as I am." What Mr. Sibley failed to mention is that one of the reasons some of these people are "not quite as fortunate" as he is that they are prevented from advancing to supervisory positions solely because of their blindness. Mr. Sibley's deep regard and respect for his unfortunate workers is obvious from some of the other remarks he made during this testimony. For instance, "It's true I ain't got anybody that is working for me that's in a coma, but I got some of them that is just about that slow." When asked what proportion of the blind workers are multi-handicapped, he replied: "Probably 25 percent. Then I got another 25 percent that's just too lazy to work ... " The lawsuit mentioned above was filed by three blind workers in Mr. Sibley's shop. They alleged that they were denied the opportunity to apply for supervisory positions solely because of their blindness. A trial was held, at the conclusion of which the judge requested briefs from the parties. At that point, the American Council requested and was granted permission to file a brief as amicus curiae (friend of the court). ACB believes that the "first-class citizenship" so frequently promised by Mr. Sibley and his comrades should include truly equal opportunities to advance in one's chosen profession. One can never be a full citizen when he or she is being pre-judged on the basis of visual impairment and never allowed the opportunity to demonstrate individual abilities. ACB's brief emphasized these principles, and excerpts appear at the end of this article. Discrimination charges are always difficult to prove. But no matter what the outcome of the individual claims involved in this case, just as in his testimony at the Department of Labor, Mr. Sibley again provided some fascinating insight into his attitudes -- this time in a deposition dated March 13, 1979. Mr. Sibley is unequivocal when asked about what types of jobs a blind person can do. For instance, when describing the duties of the Military Resale Administrator, he says: "They would have to be good on the phone. They would have to be able to take orders on the phone. They would have to be able to keep the inventory of the M. R. products ... They would have to be a good typist." When asked if a blind person could do that work, Mr. Sibley's answer is a resounding no. He goes on to proclaim that a blind person could not perform secretarial duties, could not supervise the day care center, could not head the industrial engineering department, could not be personnel manager, could not be plant manager, could not be a shipping supervisor. In fact, the realm of activities beyond the capability of blind people is, in Mr. Sibley's opinion, limitless. And his reasoning is powerfully persuasive. For example, when asked why he believes that a blind person could not do the accounts receivable job, he responds, "They have to see to get the work done." Perhaps the most fascinating of Mr. Sibley's assertions is his response to whether a workshop executive director could be blind. "The duties of the executive director, to be successful, you have got to go out in your plant; you have got to see what is going on. Now, there has been two or three different cases that I know of where a blind person was executive director; and three of these companies went broke ... " Presumably, the moral of that story is: Don't put a blind person in charge or you'll end up bankrupt. Perhaps Mr. Sibley's problem is that he has been keeping company with the wrong blind people. It is interesting to note that the list of those witnesses scheduled to testify on behalf of Mr. Sibley and the other defendants included the Leader of a national organization, one of those people most fond of tagging ACB as an Uncle Tom. We anxiously awaited to hear how He would explain why a mere "inconvenience " such as blindness automatically disqualifies one for so many jobs. Much to our disappointment, He did not testify. Now we'll never have the opportunity to know how support of Mr. Sibley's cause makes one a radical advocate for the rights of blind people. Following is the Conclusion of the brief filed by ACB in support of full equality for blind persons: "As a national organization of blind and visually impaired persons, we frequently hear reports from visually impaired citizens who have been the victims of discrimination. Many of the instances involve blatant acts which are as disturbing because of the attitudes they reveal as because of the results they produce. The actions and attitudes of the management at Mississippi Industries for the Blind are particularly distressing. This is a non-profit organization whose very purpose is to provide employment opportunities for blind persons. If ever there was a place where the abilities and talents of blind persons should be particularly appreciated and given an opportunity to flourish, it should be a facility such as Mississippi Industries. And yet, we find that the defendants operate under the very stereotypes and misconceptions which visually impaired persons are striving to overcome. "Mr. Sibley testified in his deposition dated March 13, 1979, at page 6: 'I don't like the word "workshop." It sounds like sweatshop to me, so I have taken it out of all my literature.' Unfortunately, removing a word which he deems offensive from MIB literature has done little to promote or protect the interests of visually impaired persons who have been, and continue to be, denied the opportunity to advance in their careers, an opportunity guaranteed by law. The 'workshop' would be far less like a 'sweatshop' if blind employees were allowed to apply for supervisory positions and demonstrate their abilities, rather than being relegated to direct labor only for the sole reason that they are visually impaired. The equal protection and due process clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment, as well as Sections 503 and 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, all require that equal employment opportunities be offered to all employees (and all other qualified persons) by Mississippi Industries for the Blind. Not only has MIB failed in the affir­mative action duties imposed by the regulations implementing Section 503, but its policies of blatant discrimination on the basis of visual impairment constitute a violation of Section 504, as well as the Constitutional provisions cited above." We ask: Will the real Uncle Tom please stand up? ***** *** From the Archives The Booth Resolution -- And What Now? By Hollis Liggett The following article is the first in a series of reprints from The Federation Free Press and The Braille Free Press. Distributed quarterly from 1959 through 1961, The Free Press was published by the Free Press Association and is the forerunner to today's Braille Forum. The Free Press Association was formed by a group of individuals from within the National Federation of the Blind who had become dissatisfied with organizational philosophy and policies. Its officers were: President, Floyd Qualls of Muskogee, Oklahoma; Vice President, Arnold Sadler of Seattle, Washington; Secretary, June Goldsmith of Memphis, Tennessee; Treasurer, Ufemon Segura of New Orleans, Louisiana; Committee-at-Large­Robert W. Campbell of Berkeley, California; Frank Collins of Idaho Falls, Idaho; Rosario Epsora of Baltimore, Maryland; John Hebner of Hollywood, California; and Earl Scharry of Chevy Chase, Maryland. The magazine was edited by Hollis Liggett of Memphis, Tennessee, with Durward McDaniel of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, as associate editor. The following excerpt from "Another Braille Magazine?" by Floyd Qualls is helpful in putting the need for such a publication into perspective: "In presenting this, the first issue of the publication offered by the Free Press Association, Inc., a few words of explanation are perhaps needed. The first statement of purpose set forth by the Free Press Association is: 'It shall publish and distribute a periodical.' This statement of purpose was not made merely to get another magazine into circulation. It was made because we believe a special type of periodical is needed. ... "Through a free expression of ideas and opinions, we can find better solutions to our problems. The 'right to disagree' is equally important as the 'right to organize.' Some of us have paid dearly for our belief in the right to disagree, but our belief in it is unshaken. No one's views will be denied in these pages merely because he disagrees with the opinions of the editorial staff ... " "The Booth Resolution -- And What Now?" appeared in the November, 1959 issue of The Braille Free Press and is 20 years old this month. Written by Editor Hollis Liggett, it presents a critical look at the causes for and the consequences of the Booth Resolution (the "Georgia Compromise"), which was adopted at the 1959 NFB convention in Santa Fe. The resolution states: "'The Georgia Compromise' "1. That all officers and members of the executive committee resign their positions immediately. If any one does so, the remainder shall be recalled. "2. That all present officers and members of the executive committee shall be eligible for re-election. "3. That if after this convention any member of the organization is found, after a fair hearing by the executive committee, to have made public charges against the Federation or its elected officers without substantial evidence, the member shall be expelled by the executive committee." Mr. Liggett's article is here reprinted in full: ** The Booth Resolution -- And What Now? The N.F.B. convention in Santa Fe saw fit to adopt what was termed "the Georgia Compromise." The intent of the first two parts of this resolution was quite clearly to rid the executive committee of certain undesirable persons, without waiting for the expiration of their legal terms of office. Dr. tenBroek complained bitterly that the minority wished to force him out of office without waiting for the due process of election. This action leaves no doubt as to who was trying to force whom out of office. The legality of such a recall motion, without charges or a trial, is in serious question. But the part to which I wish to devote particular attention here is the third part of the Booth Resolution. Section 3 is pure and simple, a law against criticism -- a law to perpetuate those in power by expelling any who would find fault in them. This publication is a deliberate challenge to that law. The administration claims the purge and the sedition law were necessary in order that N.F.B. might be unified and go forward with its constructive programs. Let us see if they are really serious, or if the executive committee will spend the next two years entangled in the infinite intricacies and pitfalls of trying and expelling Federationists. I share the hope expressed by many that the Miami convention will not be characterized by the bitter partisan struggles which have ruined the last two. But was it really the minority who introduced the Card amendment and the Illinois censure resolution in Boston? And was it really the minority which planned that the entire Santa Fe convention should be devoted to internal conflict? We were told before the convention that Saturday would be "the day of decision." And George Card told us afterward that no outside speakers were invited because it was expected that internal problems would consume most of the time. People are not led to adopt such extremely undemocratic laws through fear of lies or false accusations. There are courts and libel laws to protect them from such attacks. The truth is that we are frightened and panicked into this action when we fear that our facts, our philosophy, or our ideology is no longer able to compete in the open market of ideas. This is one way to win a debate without ever having to answer a single argument. But the very existence of democracy in the world is a living demonstration that no thought-control system will ever work. One cannot legislate what people will think or what they will say. This resolution which the Federation adopted is not aimed at curbing profanity, obscenity, nor any other illicit traffic, but, rather, it is aimed at preventing certain ideas from being expressed. If one says he believes the Federation has been dominated entirely by one individual, then he must be expelled. A good Federationist could not think such evil. If one says he believes the Federation treasury was squandered for the political advantage of the present administration, he certainly must be expelled. How far is the administration prepared to go with these expulsions? In most instances, will it not be compelled to expel an entire state affiliate in order to get rid of one individual? Is this law not tantamount to a constitutional amendment, since the constitution does not empower the national administration to expel individual members of state affiliates? Are we so rich in leadership and so powerful in numbers that we can now afford to drive some of the best talent from our movement because they question the established way of doing things? Is it likely that many capable blind people will be attracted to an organization which holds the threat of expulsion over them? Can there longer be any doubt as to what will happen to the dissenters? We now stand at the crossroads. We may have one strong, unified organization which can be the greatest force for good in the history of the blind; or, we may have two or more weak, ineffective organizations, which must contend not only with the agencies and the misinformed public, but with one another as well. Has there ever been any real effort to sit down together and work out our differences in the true spirit of give and take? Maybe some Federationists really believe that the resolution adopted at Santa Fe was a genuine compromise. But who ever heard of a compromise in which one of the participants had no part? Or who ever heard of a compromise in which one of the disputants established the terms, made all the demands, and got everything he wanted? George Card said in a letter written shortly after the Boston convention that both sides had employed tactics "not above question." I don't know how he knew about the tactics of the minority, but certainly he was in a position to know about the tactics employed by the administration. Earl Scharry has stated that when he was a Federation staff member, he was told: "When you get in a fight, you use any weapon you can." Dr. tenBroek made it unmistakably clear in Santa Fe that he preferred a small organization which he could control to a large one with which he would have to come to terms. Frank Collins put it beautifully simple when he said to the convention: "Our problems are not big ones; they have been made big." There are no basic differences which divide us. Essentially we are working for the same goals -- the lessening of discrimination against blind men and women, and the opening of new economic and social opportunities to them. Are these goals and our great movement itself, not worth a genuine attempt to work out the minor differences which divide us? ***** ** And They're Off! -- Derbytown Convention, 1980 By Carla S. Franklin The gates are up. The race is on. And it's a fast track, because just waiting in the winner's circle is the 1980 American Council of the Blind convention in Louisville, Kentucky. The dates: July 13-19. This month, we want to ask for your help in making convention plans. * Special-Interest Organizations Many of you belong to special-interest organizations which are affiliated with ACB and which hold their annual conferences and meetings just prior to the ACB convention. To make Convention Week more enjoyable and meaningful for everyone, it is imperative that we know the needs of each special-interest organization as soon as possible. For example: Does your group plan to host a breakfast, luncheon, or banquet in Louisville? How many people do you anticipate will attend your meetings? Will your group charge a pre-registration or registration fee? These and many other details must be worked out now. Here's how you can help. Contact the president or other individual in your group who is in charge of convention plans. Ask him -- urge him -- to write Mrs. Mary Worley, Special-Interest Group Coordinator, at P.O. Box 306, Louisville, KY 40201, concerning the 1980 convention. Or, you may write to Mrs. Worley, giving her the name of your group's convention chairman, and she will contact the individual immediately. Your cooperation, and the cooperation of the group to which you belong, will be much appreciated by the Convention Management Committee. * Exhibits Exhibits will be an integral part of the upcoming 1980 ACB convention. A spacious exhibit area is planned close by the meeting rooms and hospitality room. The area will feature: (a) air-conditioning and carpeting; (b) outstanding acoustical qualities; (c) security and janitorial services; (d) booths marked for easy identification by blind and visually impaired persons; (e) other features, as specified in the Exhibit Information Sheet. Additional information and an Exhibit Reservation Form may be obtained by writing Mrs. Verna L. Dotson, Finance Director, P.O. Box 306, Louisville, KY 40201. * ACB Boutique -- A Shopper's Delight Every ACB affiliate has from time to time needed to find a project that would help raise funds for organizational activities. The 1980 Convention Management Committee has just such a project waiting for you. At the 1980 convention, ACB chapters can participate in the ACB Boutique and thus raise money for affiliate programs. Here's how. 1. Request Boutique details from Mrs. Verna L. Dotson, Finance Director, at P.O. Box 306, Louisville, KY 40201. 2. Your affiliate should decide what item or items it wishes to sell in the Boutique. Keep in mind price, margin of profit, appeal to other ACBers, etc. 3. Send your idea to Mrs. Dotson for approval. This is extremely important, as we wish to prevent several organizations from offering the same item and thus reducing the income potential for each affiliate. 4. Ask members of your ACB affiliate to give a few hours at the 1980 ACB convention to help your organization man its booth. The Boutique area will be carpeted and air-conditioned, and will be accessible to all ACBers. It will offer security and janitorial services. It will give conventioneers a chance to shop for souvenirs at their convenience -- right in the convention hotel. Best of all, it provides a means whereby special-interest organizations and other ACB affiliates can raise funds for upcoming projects. If your affiliate would like to participate in the Boutique, contact Mrs. Dotson at the above address right away. Ask for more details, and reserve your Boutique space. Boutique booths are limited, and they will be assigned on a first come, first serve basis. ***** ** NLRB Rules in Workshop Cases By Kathy Megivern On September 18, 1979, the National Labor Relations Board handed down two decisions involving workshops for the blind. The two workshops are operated by the Cincinnati Association for the Blind and the Lighthouse for the Blind of Houston. Both cases arose as a result of attempts by locals of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters to unionize the shop workers. The Houston case was an appeal of the regional director's finding that the workshop is an "employer" within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act and, therefore, subject to the provisions of that Act. The Cincinnati case involved a charge of unfair labor practices under the Act. In an earlier decision, the NLRB had ordered an election at the Cincinnati Association. Subsequently, the workshop employees had voted, and the local unit of the Teamsters was elected to be the exclusive bargaining representative of the employees. However, for over a year, the management at the Cincinnati Association for the Blind has refused to bargain with the union. The September 18 decision orders the Association to cease and desist from refusing to bargain collectively or in any other way interfering with or coercing employees in the exercise of their rights under the Act. The Association is appealing this NLRB decision in Federal Court, where it will once again challenge the validity of including such a non-profit operation under the coverage of the NLRA. An underlying issue in both cases was the question of whether such workshops are "employers" within the meaning of the National Labor Relations Act and, therefore, under the jurisdiction of the NLRB. Prior to 1976, the NLRB had a blanket policy of excluding non-profit, charitable organizations from the coverage of the Act. Board members believed that Congress did not intend such operations to be governed by the law, and, additionally, it was assumed that non-profit entities did not really "affect commerce" enough to justify bringing them within the NLRB's jurisdiction. However, in 1976, in the case of The Rhode Island Catholic Orphan Asylum, A/K/A St. Aloysius Home, the Board overruled previous decisions and found that it could assert jurisdiction over certain non-profit, charitable organizations. The employer in the Houston case argued that the Act was not intended to cover an operation such as itself, whose purpose is to "provide rehabilitation or clinical type work training programs for handicapped persons." The Board did not totally reject that argument, and, in fact, some of its decisions continue to exempt certain non-profit organizations. But it is clear from a reading of the decision in the Houston case that the NLRB is far more impressed with the commercial and business aspects of the workshop than with its charitable purposes. After reviewing the production and income figures for the workshop division of the Lighthouse, the Board concluded that: "the Employer satisfies our Jurisdictional standards for retail enterprises." An additional argument made by the workshop was that it does not have "employees" within the meaning of the Act, but, rather, "clients" who are there strictly for rehabilitation. The NLRB found the facts far more persuasive than the workshop's assertions: "The record in the instant case shows that the Employer operates Workshop A under normal business conditions and that Workshop A employees are treated essentially as are regular employees in the private sector. Employees in Workshop A are paid at least the minimum wage, the range being from $2.89 to $3.40 per hour, based on performance. These employees are paid overtime rates when working more than eight hours a day. Moreover, they are eligible to receive merit raises based on productivity, and these merit raises are subject to rescission if the employee does not demonstrate that this productivity can be sustained at that level. Employees in Workshop A receive a retirement program, vacations, and health benefits. They are covered under workmen's compensation and unemployment compensation. They punch a time clock. They have nine paid holidays per year. Social Security deductions are made from their pay checks. While the Employer maintains that its relationship to a person in Workshop A is one primarily of rehabilitation, the record shows, for example, that with respect to discipline, the Employer resolves these problems using normal economic and business considerations. Thus, there is undisputed evidence that employees have been terminated and suspended for, among other things, fighting, insubordination, low production, refusal to work, excessive tardiness, and excessive absenteeism. Moreover, although the Employer attempts to place employees in private industry, the record shows that many of these employees return to the industrial division Workshop A. We also note that a large proportion of the employee complement of Workshop A has worked for Employer for at least ten years, and some for as many as twenty years." An election has already been held at the Houston workshop, but the ballots were impounded pending the Board's decision on review. Having concluded that the regional director had correctly asserted NLRB jurisdiction. the Board directed that the ballots be opened and counted, and it is reported that the employees voted by a wide margin to have the Teamsters represent them. It should be noted that both the Cincinnati and Houston decisions were three to two. The dissenting Board members felt that a recent Supreme Court decision which held that the Board had no jurisdiction over lay teachers in a Catholic school was an indication that the High Court does not wish the NLRB to assert jurisdiction over any non-profit, charitable institution. However, a majority of the Board is clear on this point in the Houston case. "It is now beyond dispute that the Board will no longer distinguish between profit and non-profit organizations for jurisdictional purposes." It is obvious that the Soard will look to the facts, and when it finds circumstances such as in the Houston case, where the workshop generated $4,620,000 worth of revenue in 1977 and netted a profit of $237,000 which was utilized in other areas of the Lighthouse, it will rule that the employer is "affecting commerce" and thus is covered by the National Labor Relations Act. The only way in which the Houston Lighthouse can have the NLRB's decision reviewed in a Federal court is to refuse to bargain with the union, be charged and found guilty of an unfair labor practice, and appeal that decision to the courts. This is the same path taken by the Cincinnati Association, and, as noted earlier in this article, that case is now being appealed in Federal Court. ***** ** HEED -- Handicapped Employment and Economic Development As a result of a successful pilot program carried out in 1978, Management Woman, Inc., has established a new division, HEED, INC. (Handicapped Employment and Economic Development, Inc.). HEED operates as a separate retainer search division and specializes in the recruitment of disabled men and women into corporations. To this end, HEED has been actively contacting affirmative action managers and directors of personnel to explore new areas of potential employment for professionals with disabilities. A brief overview of HEED's services is outlined below: HEED works with men and women who are visually impaired, hearing impaired, and have some mobility limitation. HEED recruits the professional who has attained at least a college degree. HEED operates a clearing house, monitoring all new technological advances as they relate to the employment of the disabled. HEED recruits on a nationwide basis. All fees are charged directly to the corporation, with no cost to the potential candidate. All resumes and credentials are kept in confidential files until we receive a search assignment in your field of expertise. At that time, we will contact you to arrange for an in-depth discussion about the new career opportunity. We urge all who are interested in HEED's service to send an updated resume and a cover letter outlining career objectives salary range, and ability to relocate to: Mr. Gerard Guarniero, Associate, HEED, a Division of Management Woman, Inc. 115 E. 57th Street, New York, NY 10022; (212) 888-8109. ***** ** Library Services to the Blind By James G. Chandler, Chairman ACB Library Committee (Report to the 1979 Annual Convention, American Council of the Blind) From time to time, the Office of the President calls a conference on issues of general interest. These White House Conferences assemble consumers and citizens-at-large, as well as technical and professional experts. Some of you were at the White House Conference on Handicapped Individuals a couple of years ago, as delegates or alternates or observers. I managed to get in through a side door by serving as a captain of volunteers. Now, this title was somewhat over-blown, as are the titles and expectations of many conferences. But I am glad that I went, and I am glad that the conference was held, because senior officials of the U.S. Government were reminded of problems of the handicapped and learned a few specifics that they will not forget. At the same time, millions of citizens gained an elementary awareness that was long overdue. Persons with handicapping conditions did not need to be reminded of their problems. In fact, they could be lulled into complacency by the flowery speeches and promises that accompany the conferences. The implementation of the findings and recommendations will not lead to improvements unless consumers and other concerned persons keep the topic alive. Another White House Conference has been scheduled this fall. This one will deal with library and information services. It will be held in November at the Sheraton Park Hotel in Washington, D.C. The scope of this conference is very broad -- so broad, in fact, that it is easy to concentrate on one area and miss some of the new directions. Delegates to the conference will come from all over the country. ... Guidelines were set up at the outset to avoid complete domination by professional librarians. (I am a librarian but even so I think this was a good idea.) Librarians are limited to approximately one-third of the total delegates. Library trustees state and local officials, etc., make up nearly another third, and library-users and the general public the remainder. The purpose was to provide as much input as possible from patrons of library services. In this field, as in many others, it is extremely difficult to find typical readers who will speak up. Some localities had more candidates than they could accept, but others had to scrape the barrel to fill their quotas. Too many people ducked out by saying that they didn't know enough about how libraries are run. Of course, they are missing the point. They do know something about how libraries are used -- or not used. This partial vacuum was filled by persons who are right on the edge of library practice. ... The representation among blind and visually handicapped is encouraging. Just before I left Washington last week (late June), I checked with the staff and at that time, 234 delegates and 89 alternates had been certified. Of these, ten delegates and six alternates are blind. This amounts to 5%, which is a very good showing. I don't know how it will come out in the final tally. Certainly, there is representation. I know of three ACB members who are delegates and one who is an alternate. ... It's interesting to note that three of the delegates and one alternate are deaf. ... The agenda for the White House Conference on Library and Information Services is basically the topics reviewed and voted on at the individual Governor's Conferences in the States and the dependencies. Traditional library services and funding are covered, but two areas of emphasis are relatively new. Please remember that this is not just another library conference. It's a conference on library and information services. The information covers a whole lot -- data processing, data transmission, etc. There will be considerable discussion of automated circulation systems, computerized catalogs, and electronic transmission of data. I hope that the courteous and efficient charging out of a book by a human being will not be crowded out from the agenda. A second major area that will receive new emphasis is access to libraries. That word access has been a slogan of mine as long as I have been in library work, which is quite a few years. Wheelchair delegates are quite outspoken and highly visible. In the past, this subject was dealt with at architectural conferences, but was only incidentally touched on at meetings that were primarily concerned with library service. But isn't this something beyond physical access? Access to information and access to specialized library services are equally basic and needed. They are seldom available to the blind and physically handicapped. ... Unfortunately, most blind and physically handicapped library patrons never expected such service. They were accustomed to doing without. And all too fre­quently, they were not familiar with the services that sighted persons take for granted. A sighted taxpayer would be appalled to walk into a library and not find a catalog of books and periodicals. They may complain if their library has not installed modern, printed catalogs, or catalogs on microfilm. Nothing comparable is directly available to blind persons. Even the small public library has a major resource in the form of a reference collection, where sighted readers can explore a city directory, a phone book of New York City, seasonal schedules for planting flowers or vegetables, or stock market prices for high-flying communications satellites. A blind person must ask for help, even to use a dictionary or a list of quotations. And if the library for the blind is not co-located with a public or academic library, a helpful staff member will not be able to provide anything like full and equal library service. The resources will not be at hand. Now, I could talk for hours about what the authorities, the administrators, could do -- ought to do -- to improve the situation. But that wouldn't prove anything. I prefer to suggest a few steps that we, as individuals, can do. First, let it be known that blind persons are real, are living right here in our own home town; that they are readers as demanding and appreciative as anyone else. Second, cultivate your regional or subregional librarian. It is important to speak to them frequently, even if only a few words. You may be surprised to find out how much impact you could make with a spontaneous note of appreciation or constructive criticism. ... Third, be an occasional presence in your general public library. Go there with a friend who is returning a book. Drop in to ask a general information question. ... Visit the periodical room with a friend to locate a particular magazine article. Of course, you can give yourself double credit if you do any of this solo ... The library system may or may not learn about you through summary statistical reports. But the impact is many times greater if general librarians see you and serve you in person. Finally, and most immediately, do whatever may be necessary to see that your delegates to the White House Conference keep service to you in mind ... None of this need be in terms of asking for special favors. It can all be aimed at bringing library service to the blind and physically handicapped up to a reasonable level. Do you need a specific subject to bring up in your contacts with all these channels of influence? Well, I would suggest you mention the need for a recorded dictionary and for other reference works in voice-indexed form. Of course, you already know about the need for these things, and the question is whether you will let your voice be heard. Pleasant reading to you! ***** ** Legislative Roundup As reported in last month's issue of The Braille Forum, H.R. 3236, the Disability Insurance Amendments of 1979, was passed by the House of Representatives on September 6. The American Council of the Blind, along with nearly every other major organization of the disabled and elderly, worked hard for the defeat of this regressive legislation. The battle has moved to the Senate, where the Finance Committee announced hearings on H.R. 3236 as well as H.R. 3464 and other Supplemental Security Income program amendments. These hearings were set for October 9 and 10, and ACB requested to testify. However, our request was refused, as were the requests of the American Coalition of Citizens with Disabilities, the National Council of Senior Citizens, the AFL-CIO, and numerous other organizations. The Finance Committee did invite Wilbur Cohen, former Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare, and chairman of the Save Our Security Coalition, to testify on behalf of those groups in the Coalition. (ACB is a member of SOS.) Mr. Cohen urged the committee to proceed favorably on the SSI amendments, but to delay action on the very negative provisions in H.R. 3236. (The SSI amendments would not affect provisions relating to the blind, but would liberalize the program for the disabled.) The Administration is exerting a great deal of pressure for passage of the so­called "reforms" contained in H.R. 3236, and as we go to press, it is feared that these amendments will be pushed through without proper consideration by the Senate. Despite the Finance Committee's seeming reluctance to hear from us on this issue, ACB filed a written statement for the record, and we intend to continue this important battle. On September 27, the House of Representatives approved the conference report on S. 210, establishing a new Department of Education. The creation of this Cabinet-level department has been a top priority of the Carter Administration, and passage of this bill was quickly followed by an endorsement of Carter by the National Education Association. The bill transfers the Rehabilitation Services Administration to the new Department of Education, under the authority of a new Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitation Services. Also transferred are the National Institute for Handicapped Research and the National Council on the Handicapped. The Braille Forum will report further in future issues as this new department is set up and begins operations. The President has signed into law the Amtrak Authorization Bill. This legislation includes a provision which mandates that Amtrak establish a program of reduced fares for the elderly and handicapped. The Braille Forum will inform readers as details on this program are developed. As we go to press, there is no further progress to report on S. 446, the bill to amend Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to include the handicapped. ACB continues to work closely with the Senate staff people, and we are hopeful that this major civil rights legislation will receive favorable action soon in the Senate. The Fair Housing Amendments, which ACB has been firmly supporting, are bogged down at the present time. In addition to greatly strengthening existing legislation, this proposal would amend Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act to include the handicapped. Title VIII is that section prohibiting discrimination in the sale or rental of housing. After holding hearings during the summer, the Subcommittee on Civil and Constitutional Rights of the House Committee on the Judiciary began mark-up of the original bill. The "clean" bill, H.R. 5200, was introduced with the addition of language stating that no landlord would have to make any facility accessible to handicapped persons. While there had previously been some introductory remarks concerning the fact that this bill would not impose any additional costs on landlords, the addition of statutory language to this effect is extremely negative. The Subcommittee on Constitution of the Senate Judiciary Committee has also held hearings and is currently in the process of marking up S. 506, the Senate version of the bill. It is the hope of advocates for the handicapped that the Senate version can be kept free of the severely limiting language in the new H.R. 5200. If this move succeeds and each bill passes, then vigorous attempts will be made to reach a favorable compromise. ***** *** Hyde Park Corner (Editor's Note: This column exists to provide a forum for the expression of divergent views of writers on timely subjects. Views expressed need not necessarily be concurred in or endorsed by the publisher.) ** Accessible Versus Demand-Responsive Transportation By Yoshiaki Nakamoto (Mr. Nakamoto is an active member of both the Aloha Council of the Blind and the American Blind Lawyers Association.) For the record, I would like to state that I take issue with two articles in The Braille Forum requiring that public transit buses be made accessible to the handicapped (Transbus) by the Federal Government so that handicapped persons may be able to utilize the public transit system. I construed the two articles as favoring the adoption of Section 504's requirement for the transbus by the American Council of the Blind. I am of the opinion that the American Council of the Blind, if it is to take a position, should remain neutral on the subject. That is, each affiliate should be allowed to make a choice whether it favors the transbus or "demand-responsive transportation" (Handi-Van). As far as I am concerned, I advocate the use of the Handi-Van for the handicapped for the following reasons: 1. Accessibility of buses will not assure that a fixed-route bus transit system can be "effectively utilized." The City and County of Honolulu has learned from experience over the past year that merely making all regular transit buses accessible will not transform Honolulu's transit system into one which most semi­ and non-ambulatory handicapped can effectively utilize (from observations of and interviews with our Handi-Van users). For the most part, this is because buses operating on a fixed route will not accommodate those persons requiring curb-to-curb service who do not live in close proximity to a bus stop or whose destination happens to be some distance from a bus stop. Further, those who require driver assistance in boarding, alighting, and with seatbelt and wheelchair tie-down are not accommodated. 2. Modifying Honolulu's base-period bus fleet with lifts and related special equipment is expensive and decidedly not cost-effective, and attempting to accommodate all elderly and handicapped on regular buses would degrade the regular fixed-route service. C.F.R. Sec. 27.101 (a) states that either one-half of the fleet or the equivalent of the number of buses scheduled during the base period (whichever is greater) must be rendered accessible within six years. To achieve fixed-route, off-peak bus fleet accessibility in Honolulu means that 194 buses (off-peak vehicle assignment schedule effective June 12, 1978) must be modified to accept wheelchairs. The City has no accessible buses at the present time. The esti­mated cost per bus (in Honolulu) to install lifts and related "accessibility modifications" is expected to be approximately $20,000 at 1980 prices. Total cost would be $20,000 times 194, or $3,880,000 -say $4 million. To achieve total fleet accessibility in six years would mean that 106 additional buses would require retrofit, at an estimated cost of $25,000 each (at 1983 prices, figuring 6% per year inflation). (This assumes that the 100 replacement buses due to be purchased in 1980-81 will be accessible.) The above costs are capital outlay only and do not include added annual operating costs which are expected to result from increased boarding and alighting time, route/schedule changes, increased maintenance costs, etc. We maintain these costs are prohibi­tive, in light of anticipated limited use by the handicapped. On the other hand, demand-responsive transportation is probably the most cost-effective public transit for low-demand density (such as the elderly and handicapped population scattered throughout the city). 3. It is possible to provide transit for elderly and handicapped patrons who require lifts or other special equipment by using the Handi-Van, at a fraction of the cost of accomplishing the same objective with regular transit buses. At present, a private entrepreneur has a contract to provide the Handi-Van service, and the amount budgeted for this operation by the City is approximately $600,000 annually. The City does not incur any initial capital costs because the private entrepreneur provides the capital expenditures for the specially equipped vans. At this writing, fourteen vans make up the Handi-Van system, and the number of handicapped utilizing this system is approximately 4,200. 4. Since Honolulu's special Handi-Van service is more responsive than accessible regular transit buses on fixed routes and since it would be much less costly from both the capital and operating cost standpoint, as shown above, Honolulu strongly recommends that the local government or transit authority be allowed to choose between accessible buses on fixed routes and the Handi-Van system in providing service to the elderly and handicapped which they can effectively utilize. 5. In addition, I am concerned with the probable negative or downright hostile attitude toward the handicapped which may result because of the proportionate imbalanced expenditure in contrast to the handicapped population, to retrofit the existing buses and to purchase the transbus at a higher cost. Added to the expenditure, the time in accommodating the handicapped to board the buses (or in the case of wheelchairs, the tie-down) taken by the bus driver will result in non­handicapped bus patrons being delayed in reporting to work, or disrupting other timetables, which will only increase any hostility toward the handicapped. In conclusion, I reiterate that the affiliates should be given the choice to support the local government with respect to its position regarding the implementation of the transbus or the Handi-Van .... ***** ** ACB Affiliate News * A Change in Wisconsin By George Card After struggling bravely for survival for over five years against what proved to be hopeless odds, the American Council of the Blind of Wisconsin held its annual convention on August 25 and voted almost unanimously to dissolve as of the end of this year. It had attempted to become the ninth statewide organization of the blind in the state. Some of us belong to three, four, and even five of these, and the burden of attending so many meetings just proved too much. We like at least an occasional weekend at home. But the American Council of the Blind will be no means be the loser. The affiliateship is being taken over by the big, long-established, and thoroughly established Badger Association of the Blind. It has more than 400 voting members and has a proud history of almost 60 years. It conducts the famous Badger Home for the Blind in Milwaukee and has carried on many other worthwhile programs. Its president, serving his third two-year term, is the dynamic Adrian De Blaey. Among its well-known members are the award-winning Edna Schmidt, Gordon Haldiman (who served for two successive ACB conventions as chairman of the Resolutions Committee), and H. Joseph Brown, widely recognized authority on workshop problems. I am proud to have been one of its members since 1937. * Iowa Council of the Blind Tenth Annual Convention The Iowa Council of the Blind held its tenth annual convention in Cedar Rapids, June 8-10. Hosted by the newly formed Vinton Area Council of the Blind, the meeting was called to order by President Noma Hochstatter. The keynote address, "The Second Mile," by Phyllis Walk, pointed out the qualities needed as stepping stones to accomplish organizational goals and to make ICB's second ten years ever better than the first. Bill Brown of Des Moines fascinated those in attendance by his account of the needs of the blind in Old Mexico. He also spoke of the benefits of belonging to the Joint State Council of Handicapped Individuals. Reporting for the Legislative Committee, Nellie Groen told of the many hours spent in legislative chambers and with the Governor, working to improve and broaden the function of the Iowa Commission for the Blind. Lorna Powers' membership report reflected continued growth of the Iowa Council over the past year. The Cedar Valley Council of the Blind presented a sound system to ICB as a memorial to the late Joseph Klostermann. A charter member of the organization and a member of its Executive Committee since 1970, Mr. Klostermann was serving as president at the time of his death in October, 1978. Approximately 75 members and guests were present at the Saturday night banquet. Guest speaker was Mr. Harold Henningsen, a 1950 graduate of the Iowa Braille and Sight-Saving School. His topic was individual and group responsibility of members. The Joseph Klostermann Award for unselfish service and concern for the blind was presented this year to Norbert Schrage. The Chester A. Hill Order of Merit was presented to Mrs. Dorothy Petrucci for her dedication, service, and inspiration to students and staff members at the residential school for the blind. On July 6, she retired from ISSB after 41 years of service, first as teacher and finally as principal. "In order to make my retirement meaningful," she said, "it's necessary to have one thing in a person's day, week, month, or life in which you can completely lose yourself and you can become completely absorbed." * Arizona Council Convention Highlights By Bud and Frances Bigger The Arizona Council of the Blind annual convention was held June 9 in Phoenix. The day was a scorcher, hovering around 110 degrees Fahrenheit. Thank heaven for central air-conditioning! An outstanding presentation concerning the new radio reading service shortly to begin operation in Arizona was made by Ms. Jean Joines, the newly hired director and manager of the service. She announced that the radio reading service would begin with a pilot program in August, primarily for the Consumer Advisory Committee, with regular programming beginning hopefully in September. The remainder of the morning was spent in discussing such important topics as workshops for the blind, housing, and transportation. Resolutions were passed empowering the president to appoint committees to further examine these problems individually and report back to the Board of Directors, and ultimately to the entire organization, as to what action should be taken. A representative from the State Legislature spoke during lunch and urged Arizona Council members to become more involved in telling the Legislature what our needs are and what we, as an organization of the blind, think should be done to bring about necessary changes. During the afternoon session, a representative from the Phoenix Fire Department spoke on the subject of fire prevention and asked for input relative to what the Fire Department can do to prepare handicapped individuals to meet emergency situations. At the annual business meeting, Dick Bailey of Glendale was unanimously elected the new president of the Arizona Council of the Blind, to serve a two-year term. Later, at the annual banquet, the new Tucson affiliate of the Arizona Council was presented with a charter of membership. There is a good chance that next year's convention will be held in Tucson. And our newly elected president, Dick Bailey, stated that he hopes to be able to add at least two new chapters by the time of the next state convention. * Vermont Council Convention By Al Nichols The Holiday Inn in White River Junction was the site of the 1979 convention of the Vermont Council of the Blind, held Saturday, September 22. Approximately 25 members and guests were present, with President Al Nichols presiding. Mr. Robert Lagor, Chief of Special Services, Vermont Department of Vocational Rehabilitation, expressed his view relative to the role consumers should play in the decision-making process in affairs which affect their lives. He stated that counselors and other human service personnel should get over their paternalistic attitude and look upon clients not as clients, but as participants in the various programs. Handicapped individuals, he urged, should organize into strong groups and demand what they feel is their due from the service-delivery agencies. Pamela Kraynak, Executive Director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Vermont, outlined the history of the ACLU and some of its accomplishments in the areas of civil rights and freedom of speech. She pointed out that the ACLU does not necessarily agree with what people say, but it will defend the right of individuals to express themselves. Presently, the Vermont ACLU is handling a discrimination case involving VCB Legislative Chairman Stan Beauregard. This concerns his right to refuse to declare his religious persuasion as a prerequisite to assuming a school-board position to which he was elected. As the official representative of the national American Council of the Blind, Kathy Megivern brought greetings from President Oral Miller and the ACB National Office. She reported on the status of bills currently being considered by Congress which are of concern to blind persons and upon a number of discrimination cases currently in litigation. This was the first time Kathy has represented ACB at an affiliate convention, but it should not be the last. She is welcome to return to Vermont any time! During the business session, the matter of the retirement of Howard Walbridge, Director of the Vermont Division of Services for the Blind, was discussed at length. It was felt strongly that the blind people of the state should have a voice in selecting his successor -- a real voice, not just a token voice. The VCB legislative chairman is making this forcefully clear to the administration. The matter of changing the name of the American Council of the Blind to American Council of the Blind and Visually Impaired was discussed. It was voted unanimously to support retention of the present name. The following officers were elected: President, Hayden Nichols of Fairhaven; Vice President, Kathy Rossier of Montpelier, Secretary, Joann Nichols of Brattleboro; Treasurer, Dorothy Cassidy of Vernon; and Sergeant-at-Arms, Norman Case of Bethel. Al Nichols was appointed editor of The Vermont Informer. ***** ** Here and There By George Card From Parade: If you have one of those complicated insurance policies written in incomprehensible legalese, don't give up. There is an agency that will help you with a claim or an insurance-related problem. It's called "Professional Insurance Answers," or PIA, and is run by the National Association of Professional Insurance Agents. You can write to PIA at Box 6803, Washington, DC 20020, or phone (703) 836-9349. No charge for the service. — No private company or agency selling Medicare supplemental insurance is connected with the Federal Government. To help Medicare beneficiaries decide whether they need private supplemental insurance and, if so, which kind is best for them, the Health Care Financing Administration is making available a free informational pamphlet entitled "Guide to Health Insurance for People with Medicare" (HCFA Pamphlet No. 02110). From Visually Handicapped Views (South Dakota): Have you heard about REPEL? You clip the REPEL on your coat, and should you be attacked, you squeeze the tiny container. This releases upon yourself the dreadful scent of skunk. As soon as the attacker flees from your repugnant fumes, you neutralize yourself with another vial which you also carry. Your assailant doesn't have the benefit of this, however, and he can't get rid of the skunk smell as you have done. When a blind person is robbed or attacked, it is next to impossible for him to describe the attacker, but he can be easily traced if the attacked person has used his REPEL. This little device costs $8.95. Write to REPEL Industries, P.O. Box 1993, Scottsdale, AZ 85252. From The Badger Informer (Wisconsin): Trying to squash a rumor is like trying to unring a bell. ... Progress is never brought about by contented people. From Hoosier Star-Light (Indiana): Bill Irwin, popular organist, arranger and educator, has developed a modern harmony course especially for blind and physically handicapped persons, under a contract with the National Library Service. Designed for keyboard players, the new course is now available on cassette from the Music Section, NLS. -- "Services for Special Needs" is a booklet put out by the Bell System. It describes special services and equipment by Bell to help those with hearing, sight, speech, or motor impairment. If you have a problem using the telephone, perhaps one of these services will solve it, or Bell may be able to arrange a special combination of services. Just call your local Bell business office for more information or for a copy of the booklet. -- According to the ACBI Newsletter (Indiana), word games such as "Search and Find" and crossword puzzles in large print are available from Ronco Products, c/o B-K, Inc., 332 N. Water Street, Milwaukee, WI 53202. From "Wanton Rhetoric," The Braille Free Press (1960): Question: What happens when the "blind" lead the blind? Answer: There may come a time when some will say, "It would have been better had we fallen in a ditch." From the CCB Outlook (Canada): When you buy a pair of prescription lenses or sunglasses, make sure that the lenses are made of impact-resistant glass or plastic, in order to avoid eye injuries. Remember, though, shatter-proof lenses are not totally unbreakable. Once the surface of the lens is scratched or pitted, the lens becomes less resistant and should be replaced. The Blind Advocate (London) contains an inspiring article describing the outstanding effort of the organized blind of Germany to extend help of many kinds to the blind people of the developing countries of Asia, Africa, and South America. From The Stylus (Oregon): With the close of the 60th legislative assembly, we are very pleased to report a successful year. We were successful in creating a seven-member board for the Commission for the Blind. The Commission is now operating under Acting Administrator Chuck Young. We anticipate many changes for the better under Mr. Young and the seven-member board. A bill was also passed prohibiting insurance companies from discriminating in rates on the basis of a handicap condition. From The Vermont Informer: Early last January, a group of persons representing four private organizations of and for the blind in this state met to discuss matters important to all blind Vermonters. This group has had four meetings so far and more are planned for the future. The Missouri Chronicle contains a letter from Jack Murphey, editor of Good Cheer, a struggling magazine for the deaf-blind, as follows: "Thanks to the marvelous generosity of some readers and friends of Good Cheer, our magazine, though somewhat reduced in size, is still going strong. When one recalls that as little as eight months ago Good Cheer was close to extinction, our survival is truly remarkable, even providential, a wonderful release from nagging anxiety -- and we are most grateful for every gift received from individuals and organizations, including the gift of $100 from dear Father Boni and friends and the $75 gift from the Ozark Association of the Blind. Yet we are particularly indebted to the Wisconsin Council of the Blind, which paid for our December issue, and to the Missouri Federation of the Blind, who paid our March bill, $590." An AP dispatch dated June 6, 1979, describes the situation of a blind teacher, Judith Gurmankin, whose job was supposedly made secure by a Federal court order two years ago. She has been rated "unqualified to teach" high-school English by Olney High School principal because of her refusal to accept a teacher's aide, which the young lady says she does not need. Due to the order, her pupils have been directed to another teacher, so she is shown by a news photo sitting in an empty classroom reading her braille. Oral Miller, our national president, is one of six distinguished citizens chosen to the Board of the American Foundation for the Blind. From GRIT: John Fioravanti, blind since birth, is assistant public defender in Bucks County, Pennsylvania. John is a member of the American Blind Lawyers Association. A tiny bit of iron-rich tissue found in the heads of pigeons may explain how the birds find home. It is the same magnetic substance that has been found in bees, which also are known for their navigational ability. Experiments indicate that pigeons use the earth's magnetic field for navigation, although on clear days they apparently use the sun instead. The TCB News (Tennessee) tells of how, when Mrs. Johnson Bradshaw's 20-year-old stove gave out, she discovered that the knobs on her new model didn't click when they were turned on. She said it is impossible for a blind person to get the right temperature when there is no sound. After some phoning, she found a sympathetic person at General Electric who agreed that blind people have every right to have their stoves made usable. -- The same issue contains news of Bill Ferrell, who was highly honored by ACB a few years ago. Bill reports that he and Dorothy are retired in Florida with nothing to do. I think this was said tongue in cheek, for Bill has been appointed to the Governor's Committee on the Employment of the Handicapped, he is serving as a consultant to the Division of Blind Services, and he is a member of the on-site review team which keeps its eye on the facilities which the agency operates for older people under Title XX of the Social Security Act. Now enjoy sending attractive Christmas and holiday greeting cards with raised pictures and authentic braille messages. Choose from seven religious and fifteen popular designs. Cards may be personalized for a small extra charge. For full information, write Slaughter Enterprises, 8053 S. Phillips, Chicago, IL 60617. The July "Here and There" column contained an announcement by the American Foundation for the Blind listing research findings for a number of presentations which could be made to state, regional, and national meetings of ACB. According to a letter received recently from AFB Associate Director Marvin Berkowitz, the findings for Report No. 4 in that listing, "characteristics of persons eligible to use services of the National Library Service," will instead be distributed by the National Library Service. Expectations 1979, the annual braille anthology of current children's literature published by the Braille Institute of America, is available free to any blind American child in grades 3 through 6. This 31st edition, which commemorates the "International Year of the Child," contains eight complete reprinted books representing many lands and cultures, embossed pictures, poems, and a page of microfragrance labels. Children and organizations for the blind serving blind children who wish to receive the volume (which should be in the mail shortly after Thanksgiving) should write to Betty Kalagian, Braille Institute of America, 7 41 N. Vermont Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90029. "Speaking Out -- Voices of Disabled People," is the theme of the 32nd annual Ability Counts contest, sponsored by the President's Committee on Employment of the Handicapped and by participating state Governor's Committees on Employment of the Handicapped. Cash prizes totaling $5,500 for five national winners are being donated by the Disabled American Veterans, and trips to Washington, D.C. are being awarded winners on the state level, courtesy of the States Federation of AFL/CIO. Junior and senior high-school students are eligible to enter. For further information, contact the chairman of the Governor's Committee on Employment of the Handicapped in the state where you reside. ***** ** Notice to Subscribers The Braille Forum is available in braille, large-type, and two recorded editions -- flexible disc (8 1/3 rpm), which may be kept by the reader, and cassette tape, which must be returned so that tapes can be re-used. As a bimonthly supplement, the flexible disc edition also includes ALL-O-GRAMS, newsletter of the Affiliated Leadership League of and for the Blind of America. Send subscription requests and address changes to The Braille Forum, 190 Lattimore Road, Rochester, NY 14620. Items intended for publication may be sent in print, braille, or tape to Editor Mary T. Ballard at the above address. Those much-needed and appreciated cash contributions may be sent to James R. Olsen, Treasurer, c/o ACB National Office, 1211 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 506, Washington, DC 20036. You may wish to remember someone by sharing in the continuing work of the American Council of the Blind. The National Office now has available special printed cards to acknowledge to loved ones contributions made in memory of deceased persons. Anyone wishing to remember the American Council of the Blind in his or her Last Will and Testament may do so by including in the Will a special paragraph for that purpose. If your wishes are complex, you or your attorney may wish to contact the ACB National Office. ###