[blindlaw] National Federationof theBlindRejectsNelson-CollinsAmendment

[T. Joseph Carter]

Probably the fastest way to reach people is via email.  I received no 
less than five emails about the Nelson-Collins amendment in the span 
of about nine hours.  But then, I am on the right lists and check my 
email frequently.

To that extent, what can be easily done is already being done.  What 
more could be done is a complex problem, I think.  I am not surprised 
it has been on the back burner waiting for someone with the energy 
and drive to step forward and make it happen.  You might have 
successfully volunteered yourself to be that person.  *grin*

My point in discussing this particular amendment is that is that 
there wasn't time to discuss it.  We had pretty much one day to take 
whatever action was to be taken.  And we did, based on what time we 
had.  There's not much that can be done when a near supermajority 
starts trying to cram legislation down our throats with hundreds of 
pages and dozens of amendments unless you are right there and 
watching it constantly.  You don't have time to get the word out, and 
the people you want to get the word out to probably haven't got time 
to respond.  It's unfortunate, but this is what we've got.

Joseph

On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:50:03PM -0800, ckrugman at sbcglobal.net wrote:
> I'm not sure that I understand this logic in that the issue here is 
> methods in which members can effectively be mobilized to take action to 
> support the NFB philosophy when advocating for legislation. When chapter 
> meetings are held once a month and state bulletins and publications such 
> as the Monitor are published once a month this does not provide for 
> timely action on the part of members. The Nelson-Collins Amendment is not 
> really the issue here it was the means that the broader issue came to 
> light as there was a need for immediate action to be taken by members and 
> an inadequate method of members to take such action. While many questions 
> have always been raised regarding the quality of VR services limiting 
> funds for such services will not improve them on any account. Perhaps the 
> NFB needs to spend some time and money on modernizing the way it relates 
> to members and how effective existing methods of communication are in 
> mobilizing its members. Is the current method of distributing legislative 
> information through audio tapes played at chapter meetings the most 
> effective method? I for one would prefer to receive legislative email 
> alerts as is done with most other advocacy organizations as it is much 
> more expedient with regard to use of time at chapter meetings and the 
> fact that it is available in an accessible format for immediate action by 
> members. This does not preclude the use of information published in 
> Braille but it would result in a greater degree of member participation 
> and involvement.
> Chuck