[Colorado-Talk] Fact Sheets for the 2022 Washington Seminar

Thu Feb 3 22:32:21 UTC 2022

Hello everyone:

The four fact sheets shown below contain important information about the
issues we are raising with Colorado’s Congressional Delegation. I thought it
would be convenient for us to have these in one place. Here goes.

Best wishes,

Curtis Chong

******************************

Access Technology Affordability Act (H.R. 431/S. 212)

Issue—The cost of critically needed access technology is out of reach for
most blind Americans.

The high cost of access technology creates a difficult economic reality.
Most access technology ranges from $1,000 to $6,000. For example, a leading
screen reader is $900, a popular Braille notetaker is $5,495, one model of a
refreshable Braille display is $2,795, and a moderately priced Braille
embosser is $3,695. According to the United States Census Bureau 69.1
percent of blind Americans are either unemployed or underemployed.
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/access-technology#a1> 1 Consequently, most blind Americans
do not have sufficient financial resources needed to purchase these items.
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/access-technology#a2> 2 These financial barriers can
ultimately lead to a loss of employment, insufficient education, or even
isolation from community activities.

Medical insurance will not cover the cost of access technology. Current
definitions of "medical care," "medical necessity," and "durable medical
equipment" within common insurance policies do not include access
technology. These definitions were adopted in the 1960s “when medical care
was viewed primarily as curative and palliative, with little or no
consideration given to increasing an individual's functional status.”
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/access-technology#a3> 3 Many states’ Medicaid programs and
individual health insurance plans have adopted similar definitions and
likewise will not cover the cost of access technology.
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/access-technology#a4> 4

Access technology enables blind Americans to participate in today’s
workforce. Blindness is well-defined and measurable,
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/access-technology#a5> 5 but affects each person differently
and at different ages. Since individuals’ needs differ, manufacturers have
designed various tools that enable each blind American to perform tasks that
they were once unable to accomplish themselves due to their blindness.
Braille notetakers are frequently used in schools, screen-reading software
allows workers to check their email at home, and screen-magnification
software can help seniors losing vision learn about community activities.
Access technology equips blind Americans to seek employment and stay
employed. For the 69.1 percent of blind Americans who are either unemployed
or underemployed, it is a vehicle that facilitates the job seeking process.
Despite this critical need, public and private entities struggle to meet
consumer demand.
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/access-technology#a6> 6 This leads to untimely delays in
the delivery of necessary technology and ultimately harms the blind
consumer.

Solution—Access Technology Affordability Act (H.R. 431/S. 212):

Makes access technology more affordable so that blind Americans can procure
these items for themselves. It establishes a refundable tax credit for blind
Americans in the amount of $2,000 to be used over a three-year period to
offset the cost of access technology. The credit created by the Access
Technology Affordability Act will sunset after five years and will be
indexed for inflation.

Provides flexibility for individuals to obtain access technology based upon
their specific needs. Accessibility requires an individualized assessment of
one’s own skills and needs. Therefore, blind Americans should be given the
opportunity to procure access technology on their own to ensure that they
are receiving the tools that are most useful for them.

Will increase federal income tax revenue. More blind Americans working means
more people paying taxes. It also means that those blind Americans who
obtain gainful employment through this tax credit will no longer need to
draw from federal programs such as Supplemental Security Income or Social
Security Disability Insurance and will instead be paying into the Social
Security Program.

GOAL—IMPROVE AFFORDABILITY OF CRITICALLY NEEDED ACCESS TECHNOLOGY NECESSARY
FOR EMPLOYMENT AND INDEPENDENT LIVING.

Cosponsor the Access Technology Affordability Act (ATAA)

To cosponsor the ATAA in the House of Representatives (H.R. 431), contact:
Crozer Connor, Senior Legislative Assistant for Congressman Mike Thompson
(D-CA)
Phone: 202-225-3311, Email:  <mailto:crozer.connor at mail.house.gov>
crozer.connor at mail.house.gov

To cosponsor the ATAA in the Senate (S. 212), contact:
Ron Storhaug, Legislative Aide for Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD)
Phone: 202-224-4524, Email:  <mailto:Ron_Storhaug at sbc.senate.gov>
Ron_Storhaug at sbc.senate.gov

For more information, contact:
Jeff Kaloc, Government Affairs Specialist, National Federation of the Blind
Phone: 410-659-9314, extension 2206, Email:  <mailto:jkaloc at nfb.org>
jkaloc at nfb.org, or visit  <https://www.nfb.org/> www.nfb.org

1.	United States Census Bureau, American Community Survey. “The
percentage of non-institutionalized persons aged 21-64 years with a visual
disability in the United States who were employed full-time/full-year in
2018.” Compiled by Cornell University.
<https://www.disabilitystatistics.org/reports/acs.cfm?statistic=4>
https://www.disabilitystatistics.org/reports/acs.cfm?statistic=4
2.	Erickson, W., Lee, C., von Schrader, S. (2016). "Disability
Statistics from the 2014 American Community Survey (ACS)." Ithaca, NY:
Cornell University Employment and Disability Institute (EDI). Retrieved
November 11, 2016, from  <http://www.disabilitystatistics.org/>
www.disabilitystatistics.org
3.	National Council on Disability, “Federal Policy Barriers to
Assistive Technology,” (May 31, 2000) 8,
<http://www.ncd.gov/rawmedia_repository/c9e48e89_261b_4dda_bc74_203d5915519f
.pdf>
http://www.ncd.gov/rawmedia_repository/c9e48e89_261b_4dda_bc74_203d5915519f.
pdf
4.	Assistive Technology Industry Associates, “AT Resources Funding
Guide,”
<https://www.atia.org/at-resources/what-is-at/resources-funding-guide/>
https://www.atia.org/at-resources/what-is-at/resources-funding-guide/ (last
accessed December 10, 2018).
5.	See 26 U.S.C § 63(f)(4).
6.	See e.g. Department of Education, Rehabilitation Services and
Disability Research, “Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Request,”
<https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget20/justifications/i-rehab.p
df>
https://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/budget/budget20/justifications/i-rehab.pd
f, p. I-50.

****************************************

Medical Device Nonvisual Accessibility Act (H.R. 4853)

Issue—Inaccessible digital interfaces prevent blind individuals from
independently and safely operating medical devices that are essential to
their daily healthcare needs.  

Medical devices with a digital interface are becoming more prevalent and
less accessible for blind Americans. The rapid proliferation of advanced
technology is undeniable. Most new models of medical devices, such as
glucose and blood pressure monitors, along with the emergence of in-home
devices that offer medical care options, such as chemotherapy treatments and
dialysis, require consumers to interact with a digital display or other
interfaces. This new technology has been and continues to be developed and
deployed without nonvisual accessibility as an integral part of the design
phase, which creates a modern-day barrier. The inaccessibility of these
medical devices is not a mere inconvenience; if accessibility for blind
consumers is omitted from the medical technology landscape, the health,
safety, and independence of blind Americans will be in imminent danger.

Telehealth currently makes up 20 percent of all medical visits, and more
healthcare providers are looking to expand telemedicine services.
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/medical-device#a1> 1 Unfortunately, these visits assume
that a person has easy access to accessible medical devices in order to take
their own vitals. As a result of inaccessibility, blind and low-vision
Americans are at a distinct disadvantage when it comes to receiving the same
virtual healthcare as their sighted counterparts.

Nonvisual access is achievable, as demonstrated by a number of mainstream
products. Apple has incorporated VoiceOver (a text-to-speech function) into
all of their products, making iPhones, Macbooks and Mac desktops, and iPads
fully accessible to blind people right out of the box. Virtually all ATMs
manufactured in the United States are accessible, and every polling place is
required to have a nonvisually accessible voting machine. Frequently, a
simple audio output or vibrotactile feature can make a product accessible at
little to no additional cost for manufacturers.

Current disability laws are not able to keep up with advancements due to the
expeditious evolution of medical technology and its incorporation into
medical devices. Although the Americans with Disabilities Act and other laws
require physical accessibility for people with disabilities (e.g.,
wheelchair ramps, Braille in public buildings), no laws protect the blind
consumer’s right to access medical devices. The National Council on
Disability concluded that accessibility standards lag behind the rapid pace
of technology, which can interfere with technology access.
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/medical-device#a2> 2 This trend of inaccessibility will
continue if accessibility solutions are ignored. Only a fraction of medical
device manufacturers has incorporated nonvisual access standards into their
product design, while others continue to resist these solutions.

Solution—Medical Device Nonvisual Accessibility Act (H.R. 4853):

Calls on the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to promulgate nonvisual
accessibility standards for Class II and Class III medical devices. The FDA
will consult with stakeholders with disabilities and manufacturers and issue
a notice of proposed rulemaking no later than twelve months after the date
of enactment of the act. No later than 24 months after the date of enactment
of the act, the FDA will publish the final rule including the nonvisual
accessibility standards.

Requires manufacturers of Class II and Class III medical devices to make
their products nonvisually accessible. Manufacturers will have twelve months
following the publication of the final rule to ensure that all of the Class
II and Class III medical devices they produce are nonvisually accessible.

Authorizes the FDA to enforce the nonvisual access standards for Class II
and Class III medical devices. Any manufactured device found to be out of
compliance, whether by a public complaint to the FDA or by an independent
FDA investigation, will be considered an adulterated product under the
Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.

GOAL—END UNEQUAL ACCESS TO MEDICAL DEVICES FOR BLIND AMERICANS.

Cosponsor the Medical Device Nonvisual Accessibility Act (H.R. 4853)

To cosponsor H.R. 4853 contact:
Gidget Benitez, Health Policy Counsel, Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL-09)
Phone: 202-225-2111, Email:  <mailto:gidget.benitez at mail.house.gov>
gidget.benitez at mail.house.gov

For more information, contact:
Jesa Medders, National Federation of the Blind
Phone: 410-659-9314, extension 2207, Email:  <mailto:jmedders at nfb.org>
jmedders at nfb.org
 <https://www.nfb.org/> www.nfb.org

1.	See Center for Connected Medicine, Telehealth utilization settles in
at 20% or less of medical appointments, available at
<https://connectedmed.com/resources/post-pandemic-telehealth-utilization-set
tles-in-at-20-or-less-of-medical-appointments/>
https://connectedmed.com/resources/post-pandemic-telehealth-utilization-sett
les-in-at-20-or-less-of-medical-appointments/
2.	See NATIONAL COUNCIL ON DISABILITIES, National Disability Policy
Progress Report: Technology that enables access to the full opportunities of
citizenship under the Constitution is a right at 19 (October 7, 2016),
available at
<https://ncd.gov/progressreport/2016/progress-report-october-2016>
https://ncd.gov/progressreport/2016/progress-report-october-2016

****************************************

Twenty-First Century Websites & Applications Accessibility Act

Issue—Websites are required by law to be accessible, but without
implementing regulations, most businesses and retailers have little
understanding of what accessible means.

Websites and mobile applications are an essential part of modern living.
More than 313 million Americans use the internet,
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/twenty-first-century#a1> 1 and 81 percent of Americans say
that they access the internet at least once each day.
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/twenty-first-century#a2> 2 The need to access websites and
mobile applications doesn’t stop when it reaches Americans with
disabilities. According to the American Community Survey, conducted by the
United States Census Bureau, there are approximately forty million Americans
who currently have a disability.
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/twenty-first-century#a3> 3 Based on the numbers above, it
is more than reasonable to assume that the vast majority of them are trying
to use websites and mobile applications.

The Department of Justice announced its intention to publish accessible
website regulations more than a decade ago. On July 26, 2010, the twentieth
anniversary of the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), the
government published an advance notice of proposed rulemaking to address
website accessibility.
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/twenty-first-century#a4> 4 After that initial announcement,
no further action was taken to substantially advance website accessibility.
Without regulations in place, blind and disabled Americans are not reliably
able to electronically access businesses, apply for jobs, and work at places
due to the barriers created by inaccessible websites and mobile
applications.

The past few years have seen a significant increase in the prevalence of
so-called “click-by” lawsuits. Accessibility is readily achievable, but many
businesses that are required by law to make their websites accessible claim
to have no clear-cut definition of what “accessible” actually means.
Meanwhile, people with disabilities must cope with inaccessible websites.
ADA Title III lawsuits, which include website accessibility suits, hit
record numbers in 2019, topping 11,000 for the first time.
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/twenty-first-century#a5> 5 The number of lawsuits has been
increasing steadily since 2013, when the figure was first tracked.
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/twenty-first-century#a6> 6 Businesses yearn for a clear
definition of accessibility standards and to be able to expand their
potential customer pool to consumers they were not reaching before.

Solution—Twenty-First Century Websites & Applications Accessibility Act
will:

Direct the US Access Board to promulgate accessibility guidelines. The US
Access Board will have six months following the enactment of the legislation
to issue a notice of proposed rulemaking regarding website and mobile
application accessibility, then an additional six months to issue the final
rule.

Promulgate guidelines that strive to harmonize with Section 508 standards.
The Section 508 standards promulgated by the US Access Board on January 18,
2017, are established regulations for website and technology accessibility.
Therefore, the guidelines promulgated by the Access Board should harmonize
with these standards.

Authorize the Department of Justice and the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission to investigate the accessibility of websites and mobile
applications. Either of its own volition or via a logged complaint
pertaining to inaccessibility, the Department of Justice and the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission will have the authority to investigate
accessibility concerns and commence civil action if necessary.

GOAL—END WEBSITE AND MOBILE APPLICATION INACCESSIBILITY FOR BLIND AMERICANS.

Cosponsor the Twenty-First Century Websites & Applications Accessibility Act
when introduced.

For more information, contact:
Jeff Kaloc, Government Affairs Specialist, National Federation of the Blind
Phone: 410-659-9314, extension 2206
Email:  <mailto:jkaloc at nfb.org> jkaloc at nfb.org
 <https://www.nfb.org/> www.nfb.org

1.	Statista. “Countries with the highest number of internet users as of
December 2019.” June 2020.
<https://www.statista.com/statistics/262966/number-of-internet-users-in-sele
cted-countries/>
https://www.statista.com/statistics/262966/number-of-internet-users-in-selec
ted-countries/  
2.	Andrew Perrin & Madhu Kumar. “About three-in-ten U.S. adults say
they are ‘almost constantly’ online.” July 25, 2019.
<https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/07/25/americans-going-online-alm
ost-constantly/>
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/07/25/americans-going-online-almo
st-constantly/
3.	United States Census Bureau, American Community Survey. “The number
of non-institutionalized, male or female, all ages, all races, regardless of
ethnicity, with all education levels in the United States reported a
disability in 2018.” Compiled by Cornell University.
<https://www.disabilitystatistics.org/reports/acs.cfm?statistic=1>
https://www.disabilitystatistics.org/reports/acs.cfm?statistic=1
4.	Federal Register. “Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Disability;
Accessibility of Web Information and Services of State and Local Government
Entities and Public Accommodations.” July 26, 2010.
<https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2010/07/26/2010-18334/nondiscrimi
nation-on-the-basis-of-disability-accessibility-of-web-information-and-servi
ces-of-state>
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2010/07/26/2010-18334/nondiscrimin
ation-on-the-basis-of-disability-accessibility-of-web-information-and-servic
es-of-state
5.	Minh Vu, Kristina Launey, & Susan Ryan. “2019 Was Another
Record-Breaking Year for Federal ADA Title III Lawsuits.” February 20, 2020.
<https://www.adatitleiii.com/2020/02/2019-was-another-record-breaking-year-f
or-federal-ada-title-iii-lawsuits/>
https://www.adatitleiii.com/2020/02/2019-was-another-record-breaking-year-fo
r-federal-ada-title-iii-lawsuits/
6.	Ibid.

****************************************

Transformation to Competitive Integrated Employment Act (H.R. 2373/S. 3238)

Promote competitive, integrated employment for people with disabilities.

Section 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act allows employers to
discriminate against people with disabilities. Passed in 1938, Section 14(c)
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/transformation#a1> 1 authorizes employers to pay workers
with disabilities subminimum wages while they perform mundane tasks that do
not transfer into skills necessary to transition to other employment
options. This law only reinforces stigmatic misconceptions of people with
disabilities and creates an artificial barrier to future employment
opportunities.

The misconception that the elimination of 14(c) will displace workers with
disabilities is based on speculation and rhetoric. A growing number of
employers have already stopped relying on Section 14(c) and have voluntarily
withdrawn their certificates. In 2011 420,000 people with disabilities were
paid subminimum wages under the 14(c) program.
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/transformation#a2> 2 Today, only 39,386 people with
disabilities continue to receive subminimum wages.
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/transformation#a3> 3 During that same time period
(2011-2017), the employment rate for people with disabilities has steadily
increased every year from 33.4 percent to 37.3 percent.
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/transformation#a4> 4 Additionally, ten states have passed
legislation limiting or barring the payment of subminimum wages for people
with disabilities.

Bipartisan consensus supports the phase out of Section 14(c). The Republican
and Democratic parties’ 2016 platforms both called for an end to subminimum
wages for people with disabilities.
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/transformation#a5> 5 In 2016 a committee tasked by Congress
to increase employment opportunities for people with disabilities also
recommended the phase-out of Section 14(c).
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/transformation#a6> 6 In addition, in an October 2018
report, the National Council on Disability, an independent federal agency
charged with advising Congress, recommended “the phase out of Section
14(c).”
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/transformation#a7> 7 Furthermore, in September 2020, the US
Commission on Civil Rights recommended that “Congress should repeal Section
14(c) with a planned phase-out period to allow transition among service
providers and people with disabilities to alternative service models
prioritizing competitive integrated employment.”
<https://nfb.org/programs-services/advocacy/washington-seminar/washington-se
minar-priorities/transformation#a8> 8

The Transformation to Competitive Integrated Employment Act (H.R. 2373/S.
3238):

Discontinues the issuance of new Special Wage Certificates. The Secretary of
Labor will no longer issue Special Wage Certificates to new applicants.

Creates a grant program for states and individual 14(c) certificate holders
to assist with their transition to competitive, integrated employment. This
grant program will be available to all states and individual 14(c)
certificate holders who transition their business models to support
competitive, integrated employment for people with disabilities. States that
receive grants must establish an advisory committee that includes employers,
organizations specializing in employment for people with disabilities,
Medicaid agencies, AbilityOne contractors, people with disabilities, and
vocational rehabilitation agencies.

Creates a technical assistance center to support all 14(c) holders in their
transition to competitive integrated employment. Under the Department of
Labor, the technical assistance center will disseminate information about
best practices to facilitate transition of entities to competitive,
integrated employment.

Requires reporting and evaluation of the progress of creating and expanding
support for workers with disabilities. States and 14(c) certificate holders
will be required to report on their grant activities, evaluate changes in
employment for people with disabilities, report average wage information,
and evaluate employer actions taken to comply with the phase out of 14(c).

Sunsets Section 14(c) of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Five years after
enactment of the TCIEA, employers will no longer be permitted to pay workers
with disabilities subminimum wages.

REMOVE ARTIFICIAL BARRIERS TO EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES.

Cosponsor the Transformation to Competitive Integrated Employment Act

To cosponsor H.R. 2373 in the House of Representatives, contact:
Phoebe Ball, Disability Counsel, House Committee on Education and Labor
Phone: 202-225-3725, Email:  <mailto:phoebe.ball at mail.house.gov>
phoebe.ball at mail.house.gov
or
Kristin Flukey, Senior Legislative Assistant for Representative Cathy
McMorris Rodgers (R-WA)    
Phone: 202-225-2006, Email:  <mailto:kristin.flukey at mail.house.gov>
kristin.flukey at mail.house.gov

To cosponsor S. 3238 in the Senate, contact:
Michael Gamel-McCormick, Disability Policy Director, Senate Special
Committee on Aging
Phone: 202-224-4193, Email:
<mailto:Michael_Gamel-McCormick at aging.senate.gov>
Michael_Gamel-McCormick at aging.senate.gov

For more information on the Transformation to Competitive Integrated
Employment Act, contact:
Jeff Kaloc, Government Affairs Specialist, National Federation of the Blind
Phone: 410-659-9314, extension 2206, Email:  <mailto:jkaloc at nfb.org>
jkaloc at nfb.org

1.	29 U.S.C. § 214(c)(1).
2.	National Council on Disability, “Report on Subminimum Wage and
Supported Employment,” (August 23, 2012),
<http://www.ncd.gov/sites/default/files/NCD_Sub%20Wage.pdf>
http://www.ncd.gov/sites/default/files/NCD_Sub%20Wage.pdf
3.	U.S. Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division, Certificate
Holders, (October 1, 2021),  <https://www.dol.gov/whd/specialemployment/>
https://www.dol.gov/whd/specialemployment/
4.	United States Census Bureau, “The percentage of
non-institutionalized, male or female, with a disability, ages 21-64, all
races, regardless of ethnicity, with all education levels in the United
States who were employed [2011-2017].”
<http://www.disabilitystatistics.org/reports/acs.cfm?statistic=2>
http://www.disabilitystatistics.org/reports/acs.cfm?statistic=2
5.	The 2016 Republican Party platform stated, "Our TIME Act
(Transition[ing] to Integrated and Meaningful Employment) will modernize the
Fair Labor Standards Act." The 2016 Democratic Party platform stated, "We 

support 
 ending the sub-minimum wage for 
 people with disabilities."
6.	Advisory Committee on Increasing Competitive Integrated Employment
for Individuals with Disabilities. “Final Report,” (September 15, 2015),
<http://www.dol.gov/odep/pdf/20150808.pdf>
http://www.dol.gov/odep/pdf/20150808.pdf
7.	National Council on Disability, “National Disability Employment
Policy – From the New Deal to the Raw Deal: Joining the Industries of the
Future,” (October 11, 2018),
<https://ncd.gov/sites/default/files/Documents/NCD_Deal_Report_508.pdf>
https://ncd.gov/sites/default/files/Documents/NCD_Deal_Report_508.pdf
8.	U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Subminimum Wages: Impacts on the
Civil Rights of People with Disabilities, (Washington, DC: 2020), 223.
<https://www.usccr.gov/files/2020-09-17-Subminimum-Wages-Report.pdf>
https://www.usccr.gov/files/2020-09-17-Subminimum-Wages-Report.pdf

****************************************

End Of Fact Sheets

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/colorado-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20220203/33b66364/attachment.html>