[Ct-nfb] FW: Letter to the Courant

Tue Feb 23 20:34:54 UTC 2016

Very well done letter Beth, good luck with a shorter version.

 Deb Reed, President
National Federation Of The Blind
Central CT Chapter
Phone - 860-973-3679
Email - deb.reed57 at gmail.com

> On Feb 23, 2016, at 2:18 PM, Elizabeth Rival via Ct-nfb <ct-nfb at nfbnet.org> wrote:
> 
>  
>  
> From: Heidel, Kenneth [mailto:KHeidel at courant.com] 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 23, 2016 1:42 PM
> To: Elizabeth Rival
> Subject: RE: Letter to the Courant
>  
> Thanks again … your letter is posted here: http://www.courant.com/opinion/letters/hc-ugc-article-state-senate-bill-would-interfere-with-the-wa-2016-02-23-story.html. Also likely to make the newspaper.
>  
> KH
>  
> From: Elizabeth Rival [mailto:erival at comcast.net] 
> Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 9:30 PM
> To: Heidel, Kenneth
> Subject: RE: Letter to the Courant
>  
> Sorry, I did not see a trimmed version, I am sure it would be great. All I can do is try again.  See below, Beth Rival    
> February 16, 2016
>  
> Dear Editor,
> I write to ask the general public’s help in defeating a new State Senate Bill that would medicalize the way blind people currently acquire our guide dogs.
> We have learned about the detrimental effects that this bill could have on the guide dog industry:
> As it is currently written, the bill in question, SB 35, will see medical service providers making the decisions about what types of rehabilitation services we need, something they are absolutely not trained to do. Health insurance and medical personnel need to leave it to experienced rehabilitation professionals.
> SB 35 Will take us away from the philanthropic funding model, which is already working quite well, and stack yet another cost onto health insurance. The current guide dog system isn’t broken and I don’t want the Connecticut General Assembly to try to “fix” it.  Dog guide Schools only suggest a donation.
> I expect to pay for my dog’s physicals, food, and health.  Since we are not experts on other types of service dogs, we will not speak for them. By the same logic, we are the only ones that can speak for ourselves when it comes to guide dogs.
> In conclusion: Right now, guide dogs are funded through charitable donations. No doctor is required to say I need one, and no unit of government says where I must go to get a dog. Please do not let SB 35 change that! Please vote against Senate Bill 35 until the language about guide dogs has been removed! 
> Sincerely,
> Elizabeth Rival
> 2nd Vice President of National Federation of the Blind
> 33 Parish Drive
> Kensington Ct. 860 828 8378
> erival at comcast.net
>  
>  
>  
> From: Heidel, Kenneth [mailto:KHeidel at courant.com] 
> Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 8:21 PM
> To: Elizabeth Rival
> Subject: RE: Letter to the Courant
>  
> I don’t see how this is an improvement over the trimmed version I bounced back to you, and it is 302 words long.  “Roughly 200 words” means 210 or so. There are a lot of extra words here -- you would not state your name in a letter that is signed by you, and you don’t need to explain what the organization is.
>  
> I’m happy to use a letter from you, but it can’t be this long.
>  
> Regards,
>  
> KH
>  
> From: Elizabeth Rival [mailto:erival at comcast.net] 
> Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 8:06 PM
> To: Heidel, Kenneth
> Subject: RE: Letter to the Courant
>  
>  
> February 16, 2016
>  
> Dear Editor,
> I write to ask the general public’s help in defeating a new State Senate Bill that would medicalize the way blind people currently acquire our guide dogs.
> My name is Elizabeth Rival. I am a board member of the National Federation of the Blind of Connecticut, a statewide organization of blind consumers, and I have also served as president for 4 years. We have learned about the detrimental effects that this bill could have on the guide dog industry: 
> As it is currently written, the bill in question, SB 35, will see medical service providers making the decisions about what types of rehabilitation services we need, something they are absolutely not trained to do. Health insurance and medical personnel need to stay out of a process that is the domain of experienced rehabilitation professionals.
> SB 35 Will take us away from the philanthropic funding model, which is already working quite well, and stack yet another cost onto health insurance. The current guide dog system isn’t broken and I don’t want the Connecticut General Assembly to try to “fix” it. The cost of obtaining a guide dog is not obstructive whatsoever for blind people, schools only suggest a donation.
> I expect to pay for his physicals, food, and health.  Since we are not experts on other types of service dogs, we will not speak for them. By the same logic, we are the only ones that can speak for ourselves when it comes to guide dogs.
> In conclusion: Right now, guide dogs are funded through charitable donations. No doctor is required to say I need one, and no unit of government says where I must go to get a dog. Please do not let SB 35 change that! Please vote against Senate Bill 35 until the language about guide dogs has been removed! 
> Sincerely,
> Elizabeth Rival
> 2nd Vice President of National Federation of the Blind
> 33 Parish Drive
> Kensington Ct. 860 828 8378
> erival at comcast.net
>  
>  
> From: Heidel, Kenneth [mailto:KHeidel at courant.com] 
> Sent: Monday, February 22, 2016 6:40 PM
> To: erival at comcast.net
> Cc: Pach, Peter
> Subject: Letter to the Courant
>  
> Hello and thanks for writing. However, letters are ordinarily limited to roughly 200 words. We don’t mind if they run a little long, but yours is more than twice that length.
>  
> If you’d care to cut it down and resubmit it, please feel free to bounce it back to me here. The suggested trims I’ve made below take your letter down to a length we could accept.
>  
> Regards,
>  
> KH
>  
> Community Contributor kjurgens01
> Feb. 19, 2016, 4:20 p.m.
>  
>  
> February 18, 2016
>  
> Dear Editor,
> I write to ask the general public's help in defeating a new State Senate Bill that would medicalize the way blind people currently acquire our guide dogs.
> My name is Elizabeth Rival. I am Second Vice President of National Federation of the Blind of Connecticut, a statewide organization of blind consumers, and I have also served as president for 4 years. We have learned about the detrimental effects that this bill could have on the guide dog industry: 
> As it is currently written, the bill in question, SB 35, will see medical service providers making the decisions about what types of rehabilitation services we need, something they are absolutely not trained to do. Health insurance and medical personnel need to stay out of a process that is the domain of experienced education and rehabilitation professionals.
> SB 35 Requires would require guide dogs to come from an "accredited, non-profit organization," even though common standards do not yet exist. And, though ADI (Assistance Dogs International) has attempted to create common standards, they fall short of what's needed, especially in the areas of consumer participation and consumer advocacy and rights.
> SB 35 Takes autonomy away from guide dog schools by telling them that they must affiliate with other school. This robs schools of their independence and the freedom to innovate as they serve their particular consumers.
> SB 35 Will take us away from the philanthropic funding model, which is already working quite well, and stack yet another cost onto health insurance. The current guide dog system isn't broken and I don't want the Connecticut General Assembly to try to "fix" it.
>  
> The cost of obtaining a guide dog is not obstructive whatsoever for blind people, especially as some guide dog schools only suggest a donation.
> On a personal note, I own my third guide dog from the Seeing Eye school. I expect to pay for his physicals, food, and health care. I also take responsibility for my two retired guide dogs at home. While the National Federation of the Blind of Connecticut appreciates well-meaning people have authored SB 35 to help us, it poses serious potential to do a lot more harm than good. Since we are not experts on other types of assistance dogs, we will not speak for the consumers of other types of assistance or service dogs. By the same logic, we are the only ones that can speak for ourselves when it comes to guide dogs.
> In conclusion: Right now, guide dogs are funded through charitable donations. No doctor is required to say I need one, and no unit of government says where I must go to get a dog. Please do not let SB 35 change that! Please vote against Senate Bill 35 until the language about guide dogs has been removed! I am eager to be of any assistance you need.
> Sincerely,
> Elizabeth Rival
> 2nd Vice President of National Federation of the Blind
> 33 Parish Drive
> Kensington Ct. 860 828 8378
> erival at comcast.net
> _______________________________________________
> Ct-nfb mailing list
> Ct-nfb at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for Ct-nfb:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org/deb.reed57%40gmail.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/ct-nfb_nfbnet.org/attachments/20160223/d37f541f/attachment.html>