[Njabs-talk] Issues for washington seminar

Mary Fernandez trillian551 at gmail.com
Thu Jan 29 18:55:02 UTC 2009


You know you are my favorite people in the whole world. Although
Georgia claims to have adopted me! Smile.
Have fun in DC!!
Mary

On 1/28/09, Quintina M. Singleton <qmsingleton at comcast.net> wrote:
> Once a NJABS secretary; always a NJABS secretary. (smile)
>
> Thanks Mary,
>
> Tina
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mary Fernandez" <trillian551 at gmail.com>
> To: <1misterdre at gmail.com>; <Adam_stm at yahoo.com>;
> <albinoprincess at gmail.com>; <arriandra at yahoo.com>; <Arron.boone at gaggle.net>;
> "Ashley Whitley" <babyashleyw at gmail.com>; <Awlynb_1293 at yahoo.com>;
> "bjwilliams1989" <bjwilliams1989 at gmail.com>; <braillegurl at yahoo.com>;
> <brailleprincess at yahoo.com>; <cacho804 at gmail.com>;
> <Carolinecutbirth at charter.net>; "Courtney" <courtney.boylan at gaggle.net>;
> <Deric.tuff at gaggle.net>; <Grecia2009 at yahoo.com>; <gregg.rivera at gmail.com>;
> <gscott at nfbga.org>; "Isaiah Wilcox" <iwilcox2011 at gmail.com>; "Isaiah Wilcox"
> <isaiahzeek at gmail.com>; <iveytina at bellsouth.net>; <JABARISMORAN at gmail.com>;
> "Jasmine Cook" <jasminecook17 at gmail.com>; "Jason Mandarino"
> <jmandari at aug.edu>; <Jorob909 at yahoo.com>; <Joseph.dingle at gaggle.net>;
> <Josh.wells at gaggle.net>; "Keisha Holmes" <k16_2005 at yahoo.com>;
> <Maria.vasileva at gaggle.net>; <Michael.ross at gaggle.net>; "New Jersey
> Association of Blind Students" <njabs-talk at nfbnet.org>;
> <Nicolesept30 at gmail.com>; <quint.thomas at gaggle.net>;
> <sami.bubble at gmail.com>; "Samuel T" <samueltaylor08 at yahoo.com>; "Sarah"
> <Sarah.pergola at gaggle.net>; <sharonball1024 at yahoo.com>; "Shelby Ball"
> <shelbyaball at hotmail.com>; <taey06 at gmail.com>; <uwantjaz_10 at yahoo.com>
> Cc: <Megan.Harvy at gaggle.net>; <robert.mckay at gaggle.net>;
> <Brown.David at gaggle.net>; <Shereon.Reaves at gaggle.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 5:23 PM
> Subject: [Njabs-talk] Issues for washington seminar
>
>
> Hey All. For your information. A brief summary,
> basically, one has to do with being safe when walking. (quiet cars)
>
> 2. Electronics, such as I'm assuming, microwaves and such should be
> designed so that blind users can utilize them.
> 3. Has to do with SSI, from what I can gather, and i might be
> completely wrong, they are trying to let blind people earn more and
> take less out of SSI. Don't take my word for it though. So here they
> are.
>
>
>
> LEGISLATIVE AGENDA OF BLIND AMERICANS:
> PRIORITIES FOR THE 111TH 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 present 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
> 111th Congress in its first session:
> 1. We urge Congress to ensure the safety of blind and other
> pedestrians by passing the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act.  This
> legislation would require the U.S. Secretary of Transportation to:
> • Begin a study within ninety days of its enactment to determine the
> most practical means of assuring that blind and other pedestrians
> receive essentially similar information to what they now receive from
> sound emitted by internal combustion engines;
> • Determine the minimum amount of sound necessary to offer sufficient
> information for blind pedestrians to make safe travel judgments based
> on appropriate scientific research and consultation with blind
> Americans and other affected groups;
> • Within two years of beginning the study, promulgate a motor vehicle
> safety standard to address the needs of blind and other pedestrians by
> requiring either a minimum level of sound or an equally effective
> means of providing the same information as is available from hearing
> internal combustion engines; and
> • Apply the standard to all motor vehicles manufactured or sold in the
> United States beginning no later than two years after the date it is
> promulgated.
>
>
> 2. We urge Congress to work with blind Americans to create a
> Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind that mandates consumer
> electronics, home appliances, and office equipment to provide user
> interfaces that are accessible through nonvisual means.  This
> legislation should:
>
> • Mandate that all consumer electronics, home appliances, and office
> equipment be designed so that blind people can access the same
> functions as sighted people through nonvisual means and with
> substantially equivalent ease of use;
>
> • Create a commission comprised of essential stakeholders to establish
> standards for nonvisual accessibility of electronic devices intended
> for use in the home or office;
> • Endow the commission with enforcement powers or locate it within a
> government agency having such powers; and
> • Authorize it to reexamine and rewrite standards to keep pace with
> the evolution of consumer electronic technology.
>
> 3. We urge Congress to promote and facilitate the transition by blind
> Americans from recipients of Social Security Disability Insurance
> benefits to income-earning, taxpaying, productive members of the
> American workforce by enacting legislation to:
>
> • Replace the monthly earnings penalty with a graduated 3-for-1
> phase-out (i.e., a $1 reduction in benefits for each $3 earned above
> the limit);
>
> • Replace the monthly earnings test with an annualized earnings test
> with an amount equal to twelve times. Substantial Gainful Activity
> amount; and
>
> • Establish an impairment-related work expense deduction for blind
> Social Security Disability Insurance beneficiaries equal to the amount
> applicable for this deduction when determining an appropriate income
> subsidy under Medicare Part D or 16.3 percent of earnings, whichever
> is greater.
>
>
> 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.
>
> ENHANCING PEDESTRIAN SAFETY:  ENSURING THE BLIND CAN CONTINUE TO
> TRAVEL SAFELY AND INDEPENDENTLY
>
>
> Purpose:  To require hybrid, electric, and other vehicles to emit a
> minimum level of sound to alert blind and other pedestrians of their
> presence.
>
> Background:  Until recently independent travel for the blind has been
> a relatively simple matter, once a blind person has been trained in
> travel techniques and has learned to use a white cane or travel with a
> guide dog.  Blind people listen to the sounds of automobile engines to
> determine the direction, speed, and pattern of traffic.  Sounds from
> traffic tell blind pedestrians how many vehicles are near them and how
> fast they are moving, whether the vehicles are accelerating or
> decelerating, and whether the vehicles are traveling toward, away
> from, or parallel to them.  With all of this information, blind people
> can accurately determine when it is safe to advance into an
> intersection or across a driveway or parking lot.  The information
> obtained from listening to traffic sounds allows blind people to
> travel with complete confidence and without assistance. Studies have
> shown that sighted pedestrians also use this information when
> traveling.
>
> Over the past few years, however, vehicles that are completely silent
> in certain modes of operation have come on the market, and many more
> silent vehicles are expected in the near future.  These vehicles are
> designed to have many benefits, including improved fuel efficiency and
> reduced emissions, but they do not need to be silent in order to
> achieve these intended benefits.  An unintended consequence of these
> vehicles as they are currently designed is that they will reduce the
> independence of blind Americans and endanger the lives, not only of
> blind people, but also of small children, seniors, cyclists, and
> runners.
>
> Currently the most popular of these vehicles is the gasoline-electric
> hybrid, which alternates between running on a gasoline engine and on
> battery power (although a few electric automobiles are already on
> America's roads and new all-electric models are planned).  The blind
> of America do not oppose the proliferation of vehicles intended to
> reduce damage to the environment, but for safety these vehicles must
> meet a minimum sound standard.
>
> On April 9, 2008, Congressmen Ed Towns and Cliff Stearns introduced
> H.R. 5734 (the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2008).  This
> legislation sought to solve the problem of silent cars by authorizing
> a two-year study to determine the best method for allowing blind
> individuals to recognize the presence of silent cars, and by requiring
> that, two years after the study was completed, all new vehicles sold
> in the United States must comply with the solution determined by the
> study.  In the 110th Congress, eighty-eight members of the House
> cosponsored this legislation.
>
> Need for Congressional Action:  For several years the National
> Federation of the Blind has been concerned about the proliferation of
> silent vehicles.  Recently automobile manufacturers have acknowledged
> the problems posed to blind pedestrians by silent vehicle technology
> and have begun to work with the National Federation of the Blind to
> seek solutions.  However, federal regulators have indicated that, in
> the absence of statistics on injuries or deaths caused by hybrid
> vehicles, nothing can be done.  Congress must therefore direct the
> Department of Transportation to take action.  It is crucial that this
> problem be addressed before the inevitable avalanche of tragedies
> involving blind people, small children, seniors, cyclists, runners,
> and newly blinded veterans shocks the nation.
>
> Proposed Legislation:  Congressmen Towns and Stearns have reintroduced
> the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act to direct the Secretary of
> Transportation to conduct a study and establish a motor vehicle safety
> standard that provides a means of alerting blind and other pedestrians
> of motor vehicle operation, based on appropriate scientific research
> and consultation with blind Americans and other affected groups.  This
> national motor vehicle safety standard must have the following
> characteristics:
> • In all phases of operation (including times when the vehicle is at a
> full stop) vehicles shall be required to emit an omni-directional
> sound with similar spectral characteristics to those of a modern
> internal combustion engine.
> • The sound should vary in a way that is consistent with the sound of
> vehicles with combustion engines to indicate whether the vehicle is
> idling, maintaining a constant speed, accelerating, or decelerating.
> The standard need not prescribe the apparatus, technology, or method
> to be used by vehicle manufacturers to achieve the required minimum
> sound level.  This approach will encourage manufacturers to use
> innovative and cost-effective techniques to achieve the minimum sound
> standard.
> The addition of components to emit a minimum sound discernible by
> blind and other pedestrians will not negatively affect environmental
> benefits of gasoline-electric hybrids and other automobiles running on
> alternate power sources, and the emitted sound need not be loud enough
> to contribute to noise pollution.  Automobiles that operate in
> complete silence, however, endanger the safety of all of us; silent
> operation should be viewed as a design flaw comparable to the lack of
> seat belts or air bags.
>
> Requested Action:  Please support blind Americans by cosponsoring the
> Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act to authorize the U.S. Department of
> Transportation to establish and promulgate regulations specifying a
> minimum sound standard for all new automobiles sold in the United
> States.  In the House of Representatives, members can be added by
> contacting Emily Khoury in Congressman Towns's office, or James Thomas
> in Congressman Stearns's office.  In the Senate members can support
> independence for blind Americans by sponsoring companion legislation.
>
>
> Contact Information:
> Jesse Hartle
> Government Programs Specialist
> NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
> Phone:  (410) 659-9314, extension 2233
> Email:  jhartle at nfb.org
>
> A TECHNOLOGY BILL OF RIGHTS FOR THE BLIND
>
>
> Purpose:  To create a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind that
> mandates consumer electronics, home appliances, and office equipment
> to provide user interfaces 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 like consumer electronics, home appliances, and
> office equipment.  Many new devices in these categories require user
> interaction with visual displays, on-screen menus, touch screens, and
> other user interfaces that are inaccessible to individuals who are
> blind or have low vision.  No longer are settings on the television,
> home stereo system, or dishwasher controlled by knobs, switches, and
> buttons that can be readily identified and whose settings can be
> easily discerned, with or without the addition of tactile markings by
> the user.  Moreover, the use of inaccessible interfaces on office
> equipment such as copiers and fax machines makes these devices
> unusable by the blind and therefore a potential threat to a blind
> person's existing job or a barrier to obtaining new employment.
>
> This growing threat to the independence and productivity of blind
> people is unnecessary since digital devices can function without
> inaccessible interfaces.  Today text-to-speech technology is
> inexpensive and more nearly ubiquitous 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.  Indeed, a few manufacturers have incorporated this
> technology into their products to create talking menus or to
> articulate what is on the display; there is no reason why other
> manufacturers cannot do so as well.  And text-to-speech technology is
> not the only mechanism by which consumer electronics, home appliances,
> and office equipment can be made accessible to blind people.
>
> Need for Legislation:  Currently there are no enforceable mandates for
> manufacturers of consumer electronics, home appliances, or office
> equipment to make their devices accessible and no accessibility
> standards to provide guidance to manufacturers on how to avoid
> creating barriers to access by the blind.  Congress should therefore
> enact a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind, which clearly
> establishes that manufacturers must create accessible user interfaces
> for their products, provide a means for enforcement, and establish
> standards that will provide meaningful benchmarks that manufacturers
> can use to make their products accessible.
>
> Congress need not mandate a single, one-size-fits-all solution for
> all consumer technology.   Rather any such legislation should mandate
> regulations that set meaningful accessibility standards, while at the
> same time allowing manufacturers to select from a menu of potential
> solutions that, singly or in combination, will allow blind users to
> operate the technology easily and successfully.  This will not only
> give manufacturers the freedom and flexibility they desire, but
> encourage innovations that make consumer technology more usable for
> everyone.
>
>
> Proposed Legislation:  Congress should enact a Technology Bill of
> Rights for the Blind that:
>
> • Mandates that all consumer electronics, home appliances, and office
> equipment  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; and
>
> • Creates a commission 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, and office equipment or associations
> representing such manufacturers; and experts on universal design,
> electronic engineering, and related fields.  This commission should
> have enforcement powers or be housed within a government agency having
> such powers (e.g., U.S. Department of Commerce), and should be
> authorized to reexamine and rewrite standards periodically, as
> consumer electronic technology continues to evolve.
>
> Requested Action:  Please support blind Americans by introducing
> legislation to create a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind (or by
> cosponsoring once legislation has been introduced) so that blind
> people will be able to participate fully in all aspects of American
> society.  Increased access leads to increased independence, increased
> employment, and increased tax revenue.
>
>
>
> Contact Information:
> James McCarthy
> Government Programs Specialist
> NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
> Phone:  (410) 659-9314, extension 2240
> Email:  jmccarthy at nfb.org
>
> REMOVING THE EARNINGS PENALTY:  A COMMON SENSE WORK INCENTIVE FOR
> BLIND SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFICIARIES
>
>
> Purpose:  To promote and facilitate the transition by blind Americans
> from Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) beneficiaries to
> income-earning, taxpaying, productive members of the American
> workforce.
>
> Background:  The unemployment rate for working-age blind people is
> over 70 percent.  Part of the reason for this disproportionately high
> statistic is the myths and misconceptions about the true capacities of
> blind people.  These erroneous perceptions are manifested when
> employers refuse to hire the blind.
>
> In addition, governmental programs intended to help blind people meet
> their basic economic needs, especially the SSDI program, have had the
> unintended consequence of creating an incentive for blind people to
> remain unemployed or underemployed despite their desire to work.  Low
> societal expectations result in low representation of the blind in the
> workforce.  This low representation of the blind reinforces low
> societal expectations—it is a vicious circle that perpetuates systemic
> employment discrimination against the blind.
>
> Despite the efforts of the National Federation of the Blind,
> blindness still has profound social and economic consequences.
> Governmental programs should encourage blind people to reach their
> full employment potential; they should not encourage economic
> dependence.
>
> Existing Law:  Title II of the Social Security Act provides that
> disability benefits paid to blind beneficiaries are eliminated if the
> beneficiary exceeds a monthly earnings limit.  This earnings limit is
> in effect a penalty imposed on blind Americans when they work.  This
> penalty imposed by the SSDI program means that, if a blind person
> earns just $1 over $1,640 (the monthly limit in 2009 following a Trial
> Work Period), all benefits are lost.
>
> Section 216(i)(1)(B) of the Social Security Act defines blindness as
> a disability based on objective measurement of acuity and visual
> field, as opposed to the subjective criterion of inability to perform
> Substantial Gainful Activity (SGA).  For blind people, doing work
> valued at the SGA earnings limit terminates benefits but does not
> terminate disability.  Only blind people not working or those with
> work earnings below an annually adjusted statutory earnings limit
> receive benefits.
>
> Need for Legislation:  When a blind person enters the workforce, there
> is no guarantee that wages earned will replace SSDI benefits after
> taxes are paid and work expenses are deducted.  For example, Jane
> worked as a customer service representative with an annual income of
> $35,000 until she became blind from diabetic retinopathy.  Jane meets
> the criteria for SSDI benefits, which provide income of $1,060 a month
> (or $12,720 a year) tax-free while she is not working.  Jane wants
> additional income to meet her financial needs.  After an adjustment
> period and blindness skills training, she finds employment as a
> part-time representative making $10 an hour for 35 hours a week.  Jane
> grosses $350 a week for an average of $1,517 a month.  Using a
> conservative 25 percent withholding tax, Jane nets $1,137.50 from her
> work, combined with her $1,060 disability benefit, for a net total of
> $2,197.50 a month.  If Jane should have the opportunity to work full
> time (40 hours), her weekly salary would go up to $400 a week for a
> monthly average of $1,733.  This amount is over the 2009 earnings
> limit, so Jane loses all of her disability benefits.  Using the same
> 25 percent tax level, Jane nets only $1,300 a month—working an extra
> five hours a week has cost Jane $897.50 net income (over $10,500 a
> year).  This example illustrates the work disincentive contained in
> current law.
>
> A gradual reduction of $1 in benefits for every $3 earned over the
> earnings limit would remove the earnings penalty and provide a
> financial incentive to work.  The benefit amount paid to an individual
> will gradually decrease, while the individual's contribution to the
> Social Security trust fund increases over time.  Under this approach,
> as Jane earns more, she pays more into the trust fund, and her
> dependence on benefits decreases.
>
> Monthly earnings evaluations are unnecessarily complicated for both
> the beneficiaries and the Social Security Administration.  Since the
> medical prognosis for blind people rarely changes, and because
> blindness is objectively measurable, blind people should be subject to
> an annual earnings test with the limit equal to the twelve times
> applicable monthly SGA amount.
>
> Under current law blind workers frequently pay for items and services
> related to their disabilities that are necessary for them to work, and
> they are permitted to subtract these Impairment Related Work Expenses
> (IRWE) from monthly earnings when determining monthly income.
> Properly crediting IRWE poses a serious challenge to the SSDI program
> and creates a lack of predictability for the blind person trying to
> determine whether benefits will be available.  To address both issues,
> Congress should permit SSDI recipients to claim the same amount used
> when determining an income subsidy under the Medicare prescription
> drug program, currently 16.3 percent.
>
> Congress should enact legislation to:
> • Provide that earnings of blind SSDI beneficiaries in excess of the
> annual earnings limit result in a gradual benefit reduction of $1 for
> each $3 earned over the limit;
> • Establish an annual earnings test for blind SSDI beneficiaries; and
> • Establish one standard IRWE deduction for blind SSDI beneficiaries
> equal to the amount presently applicable for this deduction when
> determining an appropriate income subsidy under the Medicare
> prescription drug program or 16.3 percent of earnings, whichever is
> greater.
>
> Requested Action:  Please support blind Americans by cosponsoring
> legislation that provides a common sense work incentive for blind
> Social Security beneficiaries.
>
> Contact Information:
> James McCarthy
> Government Programs Specialist
> NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
> Phone:  (410) 659-9314, extension 2240
> Email:  jmccarthy at nfb.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> njabs-talk mailing list
> njabs-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/njabs-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> njabs-talk:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/njabs-talk_nfbnet.org/qmsingleton%40comcast.net
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> njabs-talk mailing list
> njabs-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/njabs-talk_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> njabs-talk:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/njabs-talk_nfbnet.org/trillian551%40gmail.com
>




More information about the NJABS-Talk mailing list