[nfb-talk] Fw: Legislative Agenda of Blind Americans:

[Ray Foret Jr]

To return to your first point then, (and mind you it is a very good point.), just how exactly would you propose we convert a bunch of political conservatives who don't understand us in to conservatives like me who do understand us?  My type of conservatism is not what I would call the political conservatism.  That is to say, It's not about cutting everything under the sun because I think all government is evil.  That's what strictly political conservatives tend to do.  So, back to the first issue then.  How do we convince them; or at least make a good hard try?  What's a blind guy like me doing being conservative anyway since most conservatives don't support the blind?  OH wait, that's not really part of this.  Still, maybe eventually, whether we like it or not, and maybe whether we want to admit it or not, we're eventually going to run up against this one.  Well, since my belief is that this one falls outside of list subject matter, I won't tackle it here just now, but, guess what, we blind conservatives exist, and, just maybe, the onus is on us to be the ones to try to come up with those parts of the answer that we can use to better persuade them.  Joseph, I'm taking this one off list from here on out because I suspect we'd do better dealing with this privately.


Sincerely, 
The Constantly Barefooted Ray!!!

Now A Very Proud and very happy Mac user!!!

Skype Name:
barefootedray

On Jan 26, 2011, at 5:45 AM, T. Joseph Carter wrote:

> I find most conservatives need to be educated as to WHY the blind need "more entitlements" as an exit from the entitlements.  I find most Libertarians don’t listen and frankly don’t care.
> 
> To the message you sent, you got a response blasting the ADA and blind people by extension.  I rather suspect you got the latter, whether that was your intended target or not.
> 
> If you’re going to send these things out, you really need to take the time to understand the political landscape a little more.  It’s one thing to stand around waving Gadsten flags and signs, grumbling about irresponsible spending and a tax code that just doesn’t make sense anymore.
> 
> If you do that, you can call yourself a tea partier, and join all of the people looking for a big tent.  We gotta have a big tent.  Big tent, yeah!  As one guy famously put it, "What is this, a circus?"  If that’s your common platform, YES, a circus is exactly what it will be when you start trying to accomplish things.
> 
> The ideal example of a Libertarian is Ron Paul.  Look at his voting record.  If he wouldn’t vote yes, any Libertarian lobbying group you find will likewise oppose it, on principle, in knee-jerk fashion.
> 
> Blind people just aren’t going to be on their radar, because there’s only one thing that is: Stripping the federal government of any power not granted to it in the Constitution, immediately, and without regard for consequence, transition, or even consideration of whether or not it’s a good idea.
> 
> Conservatives who fall outside of Libertarianism will generally reject what the NFB wants, because they don’t understand it.  They see it as federal government involvement, spending increases at a time when we desperately need decreases, and a special interest seeking more entitlements.  But they are not generally fanatical in opposing these things to the exclusion of anything else.
> 
> You’ve got room with a conservative to talk about how the blind want to go to work, pay our taxes, and to live our lives without government telling what conditions we must work under or offering us strong disincentives to sit at home, collecting a paltry entitlement and sponging off of hard-working taxpayers.  If they are truly committed to personal liberty, tax reform, and ending the public entitlement burden, that should get their attention.
> 
> If it doesn’t, it’s perhaps almost diagnostic that they’re looking to ride the "tea party" bandwagon into political power with empty lip-service.  Of four politicians and public figures who’ve not been interested in discussing the problem with me with a mind toward finding the way to eliminate the barriers, three have IMO proven themselves to be posers, and the fourth I still have pretty strong suspicions about.  Guess we’ll see in the new session, won’t we?
> 
> I’ve got a whole lot more to say on this issue, but … this really isn’t the correct forum, since from here it winds up having very little to do with politics.
> 
> Joseph
> 
> 
> On Tue, Jan 25, 2011 at 11:09:48PM -0500, Kenneth Chrane wrote:
>> Hi Ray, I just wanted to get the point of view of some of the people in the newly restored Constitutional Republic.
>> 
>> Ken Chrane
>> 
>> 
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ray Foret Jr" <rforetjr at att.net>
>> To: <blinddog3 at charter.net>; "NFB Talk Mailing List" <nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 8:40 PM
>> Subject: Re: [nfb-talk] Fw: Legislative Agenda of Blind Americans:
>> 
>> 
>>> Sort of makes me wonder why this so-called ambasador was written to in the first place.  "Do not spam this address again"?  I wonder why you bothered in the first place, knowing that was how they felt about our cause.
>>> Sincerely,
>>> The Constantly Barefooted Ray!!!
>>> 
>>> Now A Very Proud and very happy Mac user!!!
>>> 
>>> Skype Name:
>>> barefootedray
>>> 
>>> On Jan 25, 2011, at 7:13 PM, Steven Johnson wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Kenneth, what are they an ambassador of?  I am guessing another blind
>>>> organization that also has an agenda, but probably not one that works toward
>>>> systemic change.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Steve
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org [mailto:nfb-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
>>>> Behalf Of Kenneth Chrane
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 11:01 AM
>>>> To: NFB Talk Mailing List
>>>> Subject: [nfb-talk] Fw: Legislative Agenda of Blind Americans:
>>>> 
>>>> This ambassador sure hates the NFB.
>>>> Ken Chrane
>>>> 
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: Carol
>>>> To: kenneth.chrane at verizon.net
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 11:55 AM
>>>> Subject: Fw: Legislative Agenda of Blind Americans:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: Illinois Ambassador
>>>> To: Carol
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 25, 2011 9:33 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: Legislative Agenda of Blind Americans:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Do not spam this address again.  We do not and will not work with anything
>>>> that is defacto related
>>>> I used to work with EEOC and the American Disabilities Act is filled with
>>>> Constitutional violations.
>>>> If you think it is ok to hinder the growth of one group to cater to another,
>>>> you are mis-guided.
>>>> All you people want is more legislation to enslave the masses with your
>>>> agendas, whether honorable or not.
>>>> There are other ways to help the blind and it sure isn't through more
>>>> legislation and taxation or tax credits.
>>>> YOU   do more harm thank good.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 1/24/2011 9:13 PM, Carol wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Legislative Agenda of Blind Americans:
>>>> 
>>>> Priorities for the 112th Congress, FIRST Session
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> The National Federation of the Blind (NFB) is the oldest and largest
>>>> organization of blind people in the United States.  As the Voice of the
>>>> Nation's Blind, we represent the collective views of blind people throughout
>>>> society.  All of our leaders and the vast majority of our members are blind,
>>>> but anyone can participate in our movement.  There are an estimated 1.3
>>>> million blind people in the United States, and every year approximately
>>>> 75,000 Americans become blind.  The social and economic consequences of
>>>> blindness affect not only blind people, but also our families, our friends,
>>>> and our coworkers.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Three legislative initiatives demand the immediate attention of the 112th
>>>> Congress in its first session.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Initiative 1
>>>> 
>>>> We urge Congress to work with blind Americans to create a Technology Bill
>>>> of Rights for the Blind which mandates that consumer electronics, home
>>>> appliances, kiosks, and electronic office technology and software provide
>>>> user interfaces that are accessible through nonvisual means.
>>>> 
>>>> This legislation should:
>>>> 
>>>>  a.. Mandate that all consumer electronics, home appliances, kiosks, and
>>>> electronic office technology and software be designed so that blind people
>>>> are able to access the same functions as sighted people by nonvisual means
>>>> and with substantially equivalent ease of use.
>>>>  b.. Create a commission within the Department of Commerce to establish
>>>> standards for nonvisual accessibility of electronic devices intended for use
>>>> in the home or office.  Such a commission should represent all stakeholders,
>>>> including:
>>>> -       organizations of the blind;
>>>> 
>>>> -       manufacturers of consumer electronics, home appliances, kiosks,
>>>> and electronic office technology and software, or associations representing
>>>> such manufacturers; and
>>>> 
>>>> -       experts on universal design, electronic engineering, and related
>>>> fields.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> .        Establish within the Department of Justice the authority to
>>>> enforce the regulations promulgated by the commission established by this
>>>> legislation.
>>>> 
>>>>  a.. Authorize the commission to reexamine and rewrite standards
>>>> periodically as consumer electronic technology continues to evolve.
>>>> 
>>>> Initiative 2
>>>> 
>>>> We urge Congress to work with blind Americans to establish a commission
>>>> within the Department of Education to set uniform national standards for the
>>>> education of blind students in grades K-12.  The Individuals with
>>>> Disabilities Education Act and other existing laws and regulations do not
>>>> currently provide objective standards to measure the educational progress of
>>>> blind students.
>>>> 
>>>> This legislation should:
>>>> 
>>>> .        Create a commission within the Department of Education, comprised
>>>> to ensure representation of all stakeholders, to set educational standards
>>>> for blind children, and to promulgate regulations.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Initiative 3
>>>> 
>>>> We urge Congress to increase business opportunities for disabled Americans
>>>> by enacting the Americans with Disabilities Business Opportunity Act.
>>>> 
>>>> This legislation should:
>>>> 
>>>> .        Authorize tax credits to for-profit businesses that purchase
>>>> goods or services from businesses owned by individuals with disabilities
>>>> (including from businesses operated under the federal Randolph-Sheppard
>>>> program),
>>>> 
>>>> .        Amend Section 8(a) of the Small Business Act to include people
>>>> with disabilities as presumptively socially disadvantaged,
>>>> 
>>>> .        Change federal procurement law to provide that businesses owned
>>>> by individuals with disabilities (including businesses operated under the
>>>> federal Randolph-Sheppard program) are included on the list of preferred
>>>> small businesses to which subcontracts must be awarded, and
>>>> 
>>>> .        Create training and technical assistance programs to prepare
>>>> individuals with disabilities to operate businesses capable of securing
>>>> federal and private contracts.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> For more information about these priorities, please consult the attached
>>>> fact sheets.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Blind Americans need your help to achieve our goals of economic security,
>>>> increased opportunity, and full integration into American society on a basis
>>>> of equality.  Enactment of these legislative proposals will represent
>>>> important steps toward reaching these goals.  We need the help and support
>>>> of each member of Congress.  Our success benefits not only us, but the whole
>>>> of America as well.  In this time of national economic insecurity, these
>>>> measures will contribute to increasing the tax base and encouraging the
>>>> purchase of consumer goods.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> A TECHNOLOGY BILL OF RIGHTS FOR THE BLIND
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Purpose:
>>>> 
>>>> To mandate that consumer electronics, home appliances, kiosks, and
>>>> electronic office technology provide user interfaces and software that are
>>>> accessible through nonvisual means.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Background:
>>>> 
>>>> In recent years rapid advances in microchip and digital technology have
>>>> led to increasingly complex user interfaces for everyday products such as
>>>> consumer electronics, home appliances, kiosks, and electronic office
>>>> technology.  Many new devices in these categories require interaction with
>>>> visual displays, on-screen menus, touch screens, software, and other user
>>>> interfaces that are inaccessible to people who are blind or have low vision.
>>>> Settings on the stove, dishwasher, or home entertainment system are no
>>>> longer controlled by knobs, switches, and buttons that can be easily
>>>> discerned and readily identified.  Inaccessibility of these devices is a
>>>> major barrier to a blind person's independence and productivity.  If a blind
>>>> person cannot operate the interfaces of basic office equipment or software
>>>> such as copiers, fax machines, and basic word processing programs, that
>>>> person's opportunity to join the workforce or maintain an existing job is in
>>>> great jeopardy.
>>>> 
>>>> Many popular, cost-effective mechanisms are available for manufacturers to
>>>> create interfaces usable through nonvisual means.  For example,
>>>> text-to-speech technology is inexpensive and more prevalent than it has ever
>>>> been-it is used in everything from automated telephone systems to the
>>>> weather forecasting service broadcast by the National Oceanic and
>>>> Atmospheric Administration.  Apple has incorporated VoiceOver (a
>>>> text-to-speech function) into the touch-screen iPhone, making it the only
>>>> fully accessible wireless handset on the market.  The key is to build in
>>>> nonvisual access at the design stage.  Despite these available accessibility
>>>> solutions, the majority of manufacturers have continued to design interfaces
>>>> that do not include nonvisual means of use.  This trend of inaccessibility
>>>> will continue to grow as technology becomes more advanced and accessibility
>>>> solutions are ignored.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Need for Legislation:
>>>> 
>>>> No enforceable mandates currently exist for manufacturers of consumer
>>>> electronics, home appliances, kiosks, or electronic office technology to
>>>> make their products accessible to blind consumers.  There are also no
>>>> accessibility standards to provide guidance to manufacturers on how to avoid
>>>> creating barriers to access for the blind.
>>>> 
>>>> Congress should enact a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind that:
>>>> 
>>>>  a.. Establishes that manufacturers must create accessible user
>>>> interfaces for their products,
>>>>  b.. Provides a means for enforcement, and
>>>>  c.. Establishes standards that will provide meaningful benchmarks that
>>>> manufacturers can use to make their products accessible.
>>>> The legislation should not mandate a single, one-size-fits-all solution
>>>> for all consumer electronics, home appliances, kiosks, or electronic office
>>>> technology.  Rather it should mandate regulations setting meaningful
>>>> accessibility standards that allow manufacturers to select from a menu of
>>>> potential solutions or create new ones.  This will not only give
>>>> manufacturers the freedom and flexibility they desire, but will also
>>>> encourage innovations that make consumer technology more usable for
>>>> everyone.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Proposed Legislation:
>>>> 
>>>> Congress should enact a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind that:
>>>> 
>>>>  a.. Mandates that all consumer electronics, home appliances, kiosks, and
>>>> electronic office technology be designed so that blind people are able to
>>>> access the same functions as sighted people by nonvisual means and with
>>>> substantially equivalent ease of use.
>>>>  b.. Creates a commission within the Department of Commerce to establish
>>>> standards for nonvisual accessibility of electronic devices intended for use
>>>> in the home or office.  Such a commission should represent all stakeholders,
>>>> including:
>>>> -       organizations of the blind;
>>>> 
>>>> -       manufacturers of consumer electronics, home appliances, kiosks,
>>>> and electronic office technology and software, or associations representing
>>>> such manufacturers; and
>>>> 
>>>> -       experts on universal design, electronic engineering, and related
>>>> fields.
>>>> 
>>>>  a.. Establishes within the Department of Justice the authority to
>>>> enforce the regulations promulgated by the commission established by this
>>>> legislation.
>>>>  b.. Authorizes the commission to reexamine and rewrite standards
>>>> periodically as consumer electronic technology continues to evolve.
>>>> 
>>>> Requested Action:
>>>> 
>>>> Please support blind Americans by sponsoring the Technology Bill of Rights
>>>> for the Blind to ensure that blind people can fully participate in all
>>>> aspects of society.  Increased access leads to increased independence,
>>>> increased employment, and increased tax revenue.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Contact Information:
>>>> 
>>>> Lauren McLarney
>>>> 
>>>> Government Programs Specialist
>>>> 
>>>> NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
>>>> 
>>>> Phone: (410) 659-9314, extension 2207
>>>> 
>>>> E-mail: lmclarney at nfb.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> ENSURING EQUAL EDUCATION FOR BLIND CHILDREN:
>>>> 
>>>> SETTING STANDARDS THAT PROMOTE EXCELLENCE
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Purpose:
>>>> 
>>>> To establish a commission within the Department of Education to set
>>>> uniform national standards for the education of blind students in grades
>>>> K-12.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Background:
>>>> 
>>>> Blind students have been integrated into America's public schools since
>>>> the 1960s, but educators have never made an attempt to quantify or measure
>>>> the quality of their education consistently and effectively.  Although
>>>> school districts are required by law to provide a "free, appropriate public
>>>> education" to all students with disabilities, current regulations and
>>>> practices only establish what services and accommodations blind students
>>>> will receive individually and do not measure or attempt to measure the
>>>> effectiveness of these services and accommodations.  All too often this
>>>> means that blind students are burdened with low expectations and inferior
>>>> educational services.
>>>> 
>>>> To the extent that a blind child's performance is poor, too many educators
>>>> incorrectly believe that this occurs because of the child's incapacity due
>>>> to blindness rather than because of the inadequacy of the services and
>>>> accommodations provided.  The real problem, however, is what former
>>>> President George W. Bush called "the soft bigotry of low expectations." The
>>>> low expectations of educators for blind children become self-fulfilling
>>>> prophecies when blind students receive inadequate Braille instruction; are
>>>> not provided textbooks and other educational materials in specialized
>>>> formats on time; or are not given adequate instruction in the skills of
>>>> blindness including the use of access technology.  Materials supporting the
>>>> Common Core State Standards recently developed by the National Governors
>>>> Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School
>>>> Officers state that students with disabilities "must be challenged to excel
>>>> within the general curriculum and be prepared for success in their
>>>> post-school lives, including college and/or careers" and must receive
>>>> appropriate accommodations to achieve academic excellence.  In order for
>>>> this goal to become a reality, however, uniform national standards are
>>>> needed to ensure that blind students have the skills they need to perform at
>>>> age- and grade-appropriate levels throughout their educations.  Such
>>>> standards will finally put an end to the vicious circle of low expectations
>>>> and inadequate services that has condemned far too many blind children to
>>>> lives of frustration, illiteracy, and ultimately poverty.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Existing Law:
>>>> 
>>>> The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) provides that every
>>>> student with a disability must have an Individualized Education Program
>>>> (IEP), agreed upon by a team that includes the student's parents, teachers,
>>>> and school administrators.  While the IEP sets out what services and
>>>> accommodations a student will receive and sets goals for the individual
>>>> student's progress, the effectiveness of the IEP itself is not measured
>>>> against objective benchmarks in order to determine whether the blindness
>>>> skills being taught and services being provided are allowing the student to
>>>> perform to the same standards as other students of the same age, grade
>>>> level, or level of intellectual functioning.  Procedures exist for a child's
>>>> parents to object if they believe that the IEP is not being followed or
>>>> needs to be changed, but the process is onerous and puts the burden of proof
>>>> on the parents to show that the child is not receiving an adequate
>>>> education, rather than on school administrators to show that the IEP is
>>>> producing good results.  Uniform standards outlining the services and
>>>> accommodations that must be made available to all blind children, as well as
>>>> the specific blindness skills the students need to acquire in order to
>>>> succeed, would solve this problem by establishing benchmarks against which
>>>> each child's performance would be measured, providing a clear and unbiased
>>>> assessment of whether the child is being educated effectively.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Need for Legislation:
>>>> 
>>>> The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and other existing laws
>>>> and regulations do not currently provide objective standards to measure the
>>>> effectiveness of the education of blind students against accepted standards
>>>> like the Common Core State Standards.  Such standards must be set by a
>>>> regulatory body that consists of and receives input from all stakeholders,
>>>> including educators, blind Americans, and parents of blind children.
>>>> Congress should enact legislation that creates a commission within the
>>>> Department of Education, to ensure representation of all stakeholders in
>>>> order to set educational standards for blind children and to promulgate
>>>> regulations providing for the enforcement of the standards throughout the
>>>> United States.  Only through the establishment of objective standards by
>>>> such an independent body will blind children in America finally be freed
>>>> from the chains of inadequate instruction, lackluster educational support,
>>>> and low expectations.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Requested Action:
>>>> 
>>>> Please support blind Americans by sponsoring legislation to establish a
>>>> commission within the Department of Education to set standards for the
>>>> education of all blind children in America.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Contact Information:
>>>> 
>>>> Jesse Hartle
>>>> 
>>>> Government Programs Specialist
>>>> 
>>>> NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
>>>> 
>>>> Phone: (410) 659-9314, extension 2233
>>>> 
>>>> E-mail: jhartle at nfb.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES BUSINESS OPPORTUNITY ACT
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Purpose:
>>>> 
>>>> To unleash the entrepreneurial capacity of Americans with disabilities in
>>>> order to reduce the staggering unemployment rate among these individuals and
>>>> welcome them into the mainstream of American business.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Background:
>>>> 
>>>> According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, more than two-thirds of
>>>> Americans with disabilities are unemployed or vastly under-employed. Strong
>>>> and innovative initiatives are necessary to remedy this problem and put
>>>> Americans with disabilities to work.  To a substantial degree America's
>>>> economic success is tied to the freedom to engage in entrepreneurial
>>>> activity and create one's own wealth.  It has long been the policy of the
>>>> United States to promote the economic well-being of traditionally
>>>> disadvantaged groups by creating a variety of business incentive programs
>>>> that allow these groups to participate in the mainstream of the nation's
>>>> economy.  These programs have not, however, been extended to Americans with
>>>> disabilities.  The Americans with Disabilities Business Opportunity Act
>>>> (ADBOA) would greatly expand the ability of Americans with disabilities to
>>>> secure entrepreneurial opportunities by:
>>>> 
>>>> .        Authorizing tax credits to for-profit businesses that purchase
>>>> goods or services from businesses owned by individuals with disabilities
>>>> (including from businesses operated under the federal Randolph-Sheppard
>>>> program);
>>>> 
>>>> .        Amending Section 8(a) of the Small Business Act to include people
>>>> with disabilities as presumptively socially disadvantaged;
>>>> 
>>>> .        Changing federal procurement law to provide that businesses owned
>>>> by individuals with disabilities (including businesses operated under the
>>>> federal Randolph-Sheppard program) are included on the list of preferred
>>>> small businesses to which subcontracts must be awarded; and
>>>> 
>>>> .        Creating training and technical assistance programs to prepare
>>>> individuals with disabilities to operate businesses capable of securing
>>>> federal and private contracts.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Need for Legislation:
>>>> 
>>>> Each of the four components of the ADBOA would enhance the ability of
>>>> businesses operated by Americans with disabilities to be fully integrated
>>>> into the mainstream of the American economy.  Together these components
>>>> would reduce the unemployment rate among Americans with disabilities and
>>>> make them fully productive members of society.
>>>> 
>>>> 1.    Tax Credits:  One effective method of encouraging and enticing
>>>> business entities to subcontract with, or purchase goods and services from,
>>>> businesses owned or operated by Americans with disabilities is to offer such
>>>> entities tax credits.  These tax credits would allow traditional businesses
>>>> to realize substantial tax savings and also promote the goal of integrating
>>>> businesses owned by people with disabilities into the economic mainstream.
>>>> 
>>>> 2.    Amendment of Section 8(a):  Section 8(a) of the Small Business Act
>>>> is a powerful program allowing businesses owned by racial, cultural, and
>>>> ethnic minorities or women to secure federal contracts.  Anyone seeking
>>>> Section 8(a) certification must prove that he/she is socially and
>>>> economically disadvantaged.  Individuals who are from a racial, cultural, or
>>>> ethnic minority or women are presumed to be socially disadvantaged. It is
>>>> currently possible for individuals with disabilities to secure 8(a)
>>>> certification, but such individuals must prove that they are socially
>>>> disadvantaged.  It is onerous to establish such a disadvantage under current
>>>> laws and regulations.  Placing people with disabilities on the presumptive
>>>> list of those who are socially disadvantaged would create a much easier path
>>>> to 8(a) certification for such individuals and therefore to the opportunity
>>>> to secure federal contracts.
>>>> 
>>>> 3.    Changes to Federal Procurement Practices:  Under current law
>>>> business entities attempting to secure large federal contracts must
>>>> guarantee that they will subcontract a portion of the work to small
>>>> businesses that are owned by traditionally disadvantaged populations.
>>>> Businesses owned by individuals with disabilities are currently not on the
>>>> list of disadvantaged populations.  ADBOA will permit for-profit business
>>>> entities attempting to secure large federal contracts to meet procurement
>>>> requirements by subcontracting with businesses owned by individuals with
>>>> disabilities.
>>>> 
>>>> 4.    Establishment of Technical Assistance and Training Programs:
>>>> Through the award of federal grants, ADBOA would establish technical
>>>> assistance and training programs allowing business owners with disabilities
>>>> to acquire the technical expertise to secure federal contracts and otherwise
>>>> maximize entrepreneurial opportunities.  The purpose for these federal
>>>> grants will be to increase substantially the number of individuals with
>>>> disabilities capable of operating successful businesses.  The emphasis in
>>>> federal disability policy in the past has not been on providing people with
>>>> disabilities the tools and training necessary to support themselves. Rather
>>>> many governmental programs for the disabled have been based on a welfare
>>>> model.  ADBOA would emphasize economic independence for individuals with
>>>> disabilities by training them to run their own businesses.  ADBOA grants
>>>> would also allow entities to create tools to assist individuals with
>>>> disabilities in running a successful business.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Requested Action:
>>>> 
>>>> Please support blind Americans by sponsoring the Americans with
>>>> Disabilities Business Opportunity Act, legislation to increase business
>>>> opportunities for disabled Americans.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Contact Information:
>>>> 
>>>> Jesse Hartle
>>>> 
>>>> Government Programs Specialist
>>>> 
>>>> NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
>>>> 
>>>> Phone: (410) 659-9314, extension 2233
>>>> 
>>>> E-mail: jhartle at nfb.org
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nfb-talk mailing list
>>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> nfb-talk mailing list
>> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
> 
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org