[nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort

Marion & Martin swampfox1833 at verizon.net
Sun Dec 27 03:30:25 UTC 2009 

Steve,
Unfortunately, legislators do not always get the best advice, as can be seen 
in the bill that started this thread.

Fraternally yours,
Marion



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Steve Johnson" <stevencjohnson at centurytel.net>
To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
<nagdu at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2009 8:22 PM
Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort


> Marion,
>
> Yes, Florida's protectsions seem very well-laid out.  I am curious though 
> how airlines got into this as a public accommodation?  I am assuming that 
> this is for in-state travel only, or perhaps the Air Carrier Act 
> superceeds this at some point?  Just curious.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Steve
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Marion & Martin" <swampfox1833 at verizon.net>
> To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users" 
> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2009 4:23 PM
> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>
>
>> Albert,
>>    I believe that Florida's law is one of the best, though not perfect. I
>> have attached it for your information.
>>
>> Fraternally yours,
>> Marion
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Albert J Rizzi" <albert at myblindspot.org>
>> To: "'NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users'"
>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2009 2:53 PM
>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>
>>
>>> And which states afford the best interpretation and protections which 
>>> was
>>> layed through the establishment of the acts of 73 and 90>?
>>>
>>> Albert J. Rizzi, M.Ed.
>>> CEO/Founder
>>> My Blind Spot, Inc.
>>> 90 Broad Street - 18th Fl.
>>> New York, New York  10004
>>> www.myblindspot.org
>>> PH: 917-553-0347
>>> Fax: 212-858-5759
>>> "The person who says it cannot be done, shouldn't interrupt the one who 
>>> is
>>> doing it."
>>>
>>>
>>> Visit us on Facebook LinkedIn
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On 
>>> Behalf
>>> Of Cindy Ray
>>> Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2009 2:05 PM
>>> To: NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users
>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>
>>> If we think a specific state needs to strengthen its laws concerning us,
>>> then each of us in those states need to lobby our legislatures for that,
>>> and
>>>
>>> if necessary, we can bring in experts from NAGDU.
>>> Cindy Lou
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: "Albert J Rizzi" <albert at myblindspot.org>
>>> To: "'NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users'"
>>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>>> Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2009 1:05 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>
>>>
>>> True, but when and where could we as an organization facilitate that to
>>> happen on a state by state basis, when and where necessary?
>>>
>>> Albert J. Rizzi, M.Ed.
>>> CEO/Founder
>>> My Blind Spot, Inc.
>>> 90 Broad Street - 18th Fl.
>>> New York, New York  10004
>>> www.myblindspot.org
>>> PH: 917-553-0347
>>> Fax: 212-858-5759
>>> "The person who says it cannot be done, shouldn't interrupt the one who 
>>> is
>>> doing it."
>>>
>>>
>>> Visit us on Facebook LinkedIn
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On 
>>> Behalf
>>> Of Marion & Martin
>>> Sent: Saturday, December 26, 2009 12:25 PM
>>> To: NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users
>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>
>>> Buddy,
>>>    As I stated in my previous message, this is the difficulty I have 
>>> with
>>> this proposed legislation. Once we open the proverbial can of worms to
>>> those
>>>
>>> who are not disabled, where would it lead? I think it is best to allow 
>>> the
>>> states to allow trainers access, rather than to place it in a federal 
>>> law
>>> prohibiting discrimination on the basis of disability.
>>>
>>> Fraternally,
>>> Marion
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: "Buddy Brannan" <buddy at brannan.name>
>>> To: "NAGDU Mailing List, the National Association of Guide Dog Users"
>>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 6:45 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>
>>>
>>>> By the way, before we go a whole bunch further, I think it's important
>>>> that I point up a distinction here. It is not the animal which is 
>>>> granted
>>>> or denied access. Not in the law and not in reality. It is, rather, the
>>>> disabled person (or, perhaps, not disabled trainer) who is allowed to 
>>>> be
>>>> accompanied by a task trained service animal (or, perhaps, an animal in
>>>> training for said service related tasks).
>>>>
>>>> That is all.
>>>> --
>>>> Buddy Brannan, KB5ELV - Erie, PA
>>>> Phone: (814) 860-3194 or 888-75-BUDDY
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Dec 25, 2009, at 4:49 PM, Steve Johnson wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I think it is best to keep the "companion" animal out of this mix as 
>>>>> it
>>>>> is
>>>>> is defined simply as a pet.  See Delta Society.org, and JAN.wvu.edu.
>>>>>
>>>>> And, this everyone, is where the whole issue of abuse of such a law
>>>>> comes
>>>
>>>>> in
>>>>> to play if such an allowance were to be.  Perhaps, better 
>>>>> understanding
>>>>> of
>>>>> the current laws would be the better approach than trying to fix
>>>>> something
>>>>> that there is no solid evidence that it is even broke?  Albert, you
>>>>> refer
>>>
>>>>> to
>>>>> animals being trained that are being denied access.  Please show me 
>>>>> the
>>>>> hard
>>>>> data on this.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd bet you anything that most formal agencies do not have any problem
>>>>> with
>>>>> accessing places of public accommodation with dogs in training before
>>>>> they
>>>>> are matched with the new master.  All of my guides have been from
>>>>> Leader,
>>>>> and it is amazing how open the communities are in allowing access from
>>>>> everything ranging from restaurants to public transit. These cities 
>>>>> and
>>>>> towns include little ol' Rochester to Detroit.  So, where's the 
>>>>> problem,
>>>>> or
>>>>> is this just another piece of make me feel good legislation that will
>>>>> hurt
>>>>> us more than it will actually help us?
>>>>>
>>>>> Unless one can show me that there is an actual need for this with
>>>>> something
>>>>> concrete to back it up, then our tax payer dollars are again being
>>>>> wasted
>>>
>>>>> on
>>>>> a Federal legislator wasting all of our time with something frivelous
>>>>> and
>>>
>>>>> really, nothing to back it up.
>>>>>
>>>>> again, JMO
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Albert J Rizzi"
>>>>> <albert at myblindspot.org>
>>>>> To: "'NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users'"
>>>>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>>>>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 1:37 PM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I would think then we need to qualify and quantify the verbiage 
>>>>>> which
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> being considered for amendment because all to often trainers of 
>>>>>> guides
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> being denied access.  What would be a suitable wording which would 1.
>>>>>> protect and ensure that trainers of service animals are included in 
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> a.d.a., which as you  yourself presented, can be interpreted to 
>>>>>> prevent
>>>>>> such
>>>>>> access unless and until the service animal is being used by a person
>>>>>> using
>>>>>> the same for the intended purpose?  And what of our peers who use
>>>>>> companions
>>>>>> for a diagnosable  condition where a companion animal/service animal 
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> needed? The manner of the wording at present does not seem to afford
>>>>>> them
>>>>>> the same protections, or do they?  I think that trainers should be 
>>>>>> held
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> a
>>>>>> higher measure so people like many of those on this list who got bum
>>>>>> dogs
>>>>>> do
>>>>>> not live through that pain again.  there is something to say for the
>>>>>> consideration of certification  provided that a standard  of national
>>>>>> proportions  could be meaningful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Albert J. Rizzi, M.Ed.
>>>>>> CEO/Founder
>>>>>> My Blind Spot, Inc.
>>>>>> 90 Broad Street - 18th Fl.
>>>>>> New York, New York  10004
>>>>>> www.myblindspot.org
>>>>>> PH: 917-553-0347
>>>>>> Fax: 212-858-5759
>>>>>> "The person who says it cannot be done, shouldn't interrupt the one 
>>>>>> who
>>>>>> is
>>>>>> doing it."
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Visit us on Facebook LinkedIn
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nagdu-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
>>>>>> Behalf
>>>>>> Of Steve Johnson
>>>>>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 2:14 PM
>>>>>> To: NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Cindy,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> PWD = People or Persons with disabilities.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think that the points being made are very strong, and the
>>>>>> certification
>>>>>> issue does not broaden as Albert eluded to, but does indeed restrict
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> definition of who who could eventually access a place of public
>>>>>> accommodation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, if only a certified trainer, which the points are well-expressed 
>>>>>> on
>>>>>> this, is allowed to access a place of public accommodation, then
>>>>>> would'nt
>>>>>> this essentially mean that unless an animal trained by a certified
>>>>>> entity
>>>>>> could only then access a place of public accommodation?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are a lot of frauds out there, and again we are speaking about
>>>>>> places
>>>>>> of public accommodation.  The fair housing amendments act already
>>>>>> provides
>>>>>> for any person to have an emotional support, or even companion 
>>>>>> animals
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> Federal assisted housing, and this can also move into private housing
>>>>>> where
>>>>>> emotional support animals can be granted access through a request for
>>>>>> reasonable accommodation.  The underlying problem is that these are 
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> highly trained animals that are specifically trained to provide a
>>>>>> functional
>>>>>> support/service for the individual whether it be through a 
>>>>>> professional
>>>>>> entity or an individual who chooses to self-train.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have to disagree with Albert in that his comment that this would
>>>>>> expand
>>>>>> the coverage of access as it clearly discriminates against those who
>>>>>> self-train and again, I will point out that this language is
>>>>>> specifically
>>>>>> stated in the ADA.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Furthermore, if the word certification were deleted from this, then 
>>>>>> we
>>>>>> are
>>>>>> where we are at now, and is this a bad thing?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> While this proposed legislation specifically addresses service 
>>>>>> animals,
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> problem herein is that it creates this slippery slope that I mention 
>>>>>> in
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> there will be a push like you have never seen by other groups to 
>>>>>> expand
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> include emotional support, therapy, and companion animals.  Mark my
>>>>>> word.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Let's go back to the intent of the ADA, and you will further 
>>>>>> understand
>>>>>> that
>>>>>> this narrows, not expands as these other types of animals are not
>>>>>> providing
>>>>>> a service.  A support yes, a service no.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Steve
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Cindy Ray" <cindyray at qwest.net>
>>>>>> To: "NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users"
>>>>>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>>>>>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 12:20 PM
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What is PWD?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And you make a good point. Who certifies? If the schools where the
>>>>>>> people
>>>>>>> train certify them, then what about these independents, particularly
>>>>>>> those
>>>>>>> who train their own dogs. And, of course, NAC was a certification
>>>>>>> outfit
>>>>>>> that certified places, but any of us who knows the history of NAC
>>>>>>> knows
>>>>>>> what
>>>>>>> certification meant for agencies and schools serving the bolind. So
>>>>>>> why
>>>>>>> bother if you can't certify better than that? Suppose the Guide Dog
>>>>>>> School
>>>>>>> Association, whose official name I don't remember, certified 
>>>>>>> trainers?
>>>>>>> Would
>>>>>>> they be willing to certify an independent, and would such a person 
>>>>>>> be
>>>>>>> willing to do that (be certified by such a certifying body?)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> CL
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "The Pawpower Pack"
>>>>>>> <pawpower4me at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> To: "NAGDU Mailing List,the National Association of Guide Dog Users"
>>>>>>> <nagdu at nfbnet.org>
>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2009 12:15 PM
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [nagdu] Fw: [buddy-l] A very bad legislative effort
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and who certifies the trainers?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is no certifying body for dog trainers.  If I want to call
>>>>>>> myself a dog trainer, I can.  There are outfits like CPDT who are
>>>>>>> trying to certify pet dog trainers but it's all voluntary.  The 
>>>>>>> guide
>>>>>>> and service dogs, with the exception of California, may "certify"
>>>>>>> their trainers but it's about as valuable as the paper it's printed
>>>>>>> on.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> California "certifies" it's trainers but frankly, I would hate to 
>>>>>>> see
>>>>>>> an outfit like the California guide dog board become the norm.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I also think it's a step awy from certifying trainers to certifying
>>>>>>> PWD.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rox and the Kitchen Bitches
>>>>>>> Bristol (retired), Mill'E SD. and Laveau Guide Dog, CGC.
>>>>>>> "Struggle is a never ending process. Freedom is never really won, 
>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>> earn it and win it in every generation."
>>>>>>> -- Coretta Scott King
>>>>>>> pawpower4me at gmail.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Windows Live Only: Brisomania at hotmail.com
>>>>>>> AIM: Brissysgirl Yahoo: lillebriss
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> nagdu mailing list
>>>>>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> nagdu:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/cindyray%40qwest.net
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> nagdu mailing list
>>>>>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info 
>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> nagdu:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/stevencjohnson%40cent
>>>>>> urytel.net
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> ----
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>>>> Version: 9.0.722 / Virus Database: 270.14.119/2586 - Release Date:
>>>>>> 12/25/09
>>>>>> 03:33:00
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> nagdu mailing list
>>>>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>>> nagdu:
>>>>>>
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.
>>>>>> org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> nagdu mailing list
>>>>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>>> nagdu:
>>>>>>
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/stevencjohnson%40cent
>>> urytel.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> ----
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>>>>> Version: 9.0.722 / Virus Database: 270.14.119/2586 - Release Date:
>>>>> 12/25/09
>>>>> 03:33:00
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> nagdu mailing list
>>>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>>> nagdu:
>>>>>
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/buddy%40brannan.name
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nagdu mailing list
>>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>>> nagdu:
>>>>
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/swampfox1833%40verizo
>>> n.net
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nagdu mailing list
>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> nagdu:
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.
>>> org
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nagdu mailing list
>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> nagdu:
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/cindyray%40qwest.net
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nagdu mailing list
>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> nagdu:
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/albert%40myblindspot.
>>> org
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nagdu mailing list
>>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>>> nagdu:
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/swampfox1833%40verizon.net
>>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nagdu mailing list
>> nagdu at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
>> nagdu:
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/stevencjohnson%40centurytel.net
>>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 9.0.722 / Virus Database: 270.14.120/2588 - Release Date: 
> 12/26/09 13:02:00
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nagdu mailing list
> nagdu at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nagdu_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nagdu:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nagdu_nfbnet.org/swampfox1833%40verizon.net

More information about the NAGDU mailing list