[PACapitalChapter] [NFBP-Talk] concerning a resolution for 2021

Justin Salisbury PRESIDENT at alumni.ecu.edu
Sat Jul 10 12:47:32 UTC 2021

Hi Christine,

That is a very common talking point by those of privilege.

Not everyone lives with an equal playing field, and the democratic process is supposed to be a vehicle to level that playing field.

While it is theoretically possible for everyone to obtain a state-issued ID, sometimes things happen in our lives where we don’t have one anymore. Maybe our ID is lost or stolen. Maybe we do not have the documents we need to obtain an ID. It’s not impossible, but some of us encounter other barriers that chip away at how convenient that acquisition and maintenance of an ID is. Maybe it is because we work for subminimum wages in a sheltered workshop, and fees that look small to an attorney look huge to us. Maybe it is because We work three part-time jobs at minimum wage, raising three kids as a single parent, living in the projects, where getting away to get an ID replacement just never comes ahead of making sure our kids are fed. Until blind people stop being disproportionately poor, poor people’s problems are blind people’s problems.

At its core, even if you don’t believe that racism and classism are bad, maybe we can all agree that participating in democracy should be as easy as possible for everyone. Creating extra barriers that make it harder for people to vote make it harder for democracy to exist. Maybe we can also use our Federation philosophy to think about this like accessibility of websites. Just because we can, with extra work, use a website, it doesn’t mean that the website is equally accessible. The NFB will continue to advocate for websites to be made as accessible as possible, just as we continue to advocate that voting should be as accessible as possible.

Of course, if we believe that minorities (people who are not white men with enough wealth to own stolen land) should not be voting—as if our right to vote was a mistake that was not desired by our founding fathers—then I guess my vote should not count.

I grew up in a mix of two rural Appalachian communities, where I was taught to believe that my vote should count equally to those of everyone else. The Federation has made it as easy as possible for our members to vote, and we will use our right to vote today to decide if we believe that other people should have the right to vote. Should we require IDs for the people who vote today on the resolution?

Even though I am opposing your stance, I still send you my aloha.


Justin Mark Hideaki Salisbury

Phone: 808.797.8606
Email: President at Alumni.ECU.edu<mailto:President at Alumni.ECU.edu>
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/justin-salisbury
ResearchGate: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Justin_Salisbury

“Once social change begins, it cannot be reversed. You cannot un-educate the person who has learned to read. You cannot humiliate the person who feels pride. You cannot oppress the people who are not afraid anymore.”

Cesar Chavez

From: NFBP-Talk <nfbp-talk-bounces at nfbnet.org> On Behalf Of Christine Boone via NFBP-Talk
Sent: Friday, July 09, 2021 10:12 PM
To: NFB of Pennsylvania Talk, state list <nfbp-talk at nfbnet.org>
Cc: Christine Boone <christineboone2 at gmail.com>; nfbp-brandywine at nfbnet.org; pacapitalchapter at nfbnet.org; keystonechapter at nfbnet.org; nfbp-erie at nfbnet.org; greaterphilly at nfbnet.org
Subject: Re: [NFBP-Talk] concerning a resolution for 2021

Three cheers for sharing this information Marsha! It is absolutely insulting to suggest requiring an identification card is onerous to any class, race, religion or otherwise distinctive group of individuals. IDs are available for free to those who need them, and today in this country and every other developed nation on earth, you cannot visit a doctor, ride public transportation, transact business at any financial institution or otherwise engage in the exercise of social, economic or entertainment activity without an identification card. The idea that requiring an ID constitutes voter suppression is an insult to the intellectual capacity of the individuals who are supposedly oppressed by such a requirement.
Christine Boone  Sent from my iPhone

On Jul 9, 2021, at 12:51 PM, Marsha Drenth via NFBP-Talk <nfbp-talk at nfbnet.org<mailto:nfbp-talk at nfbnet.org>> wrote:
 saw this on Facebook and thought it was important that folks from the affiliate read it.

Original poster is Joe Orozco: There is a provision in NFB resolution 2021-02 that makes it difficult to support. It states, in part:

“WHEREAS, the time and expense in obtaining state issued ID or other forms of identification can be onerous and therefore create a barrier for voters with disabilities”

This provision is counterproductive to an organization whose mission proclaims equality and independence and feels more like a nod toward a political agenda that would have you believe that people with disabilities are incapable of obtaining a state ID. We cannot argue blind people are capable of holding down gainful employment, raising children, traveling, and cooking but somehow fall flat when it comes to obtaining government identification.

It’s ironic the provision makes reference to time and expense during convention season when, under normal circumstances, blind people would spend ample time and expense attending a convention in person. Surely the author was not suggesting blind people can make arrangements to travel across the country once a year but experience an undue burden getting themselves to a DMV across town once every several years, and maybe not even then considering some states allow you to renew your ID online.

Obtaining an ID is onerous? Flipping over to the REAL ID could be considered onerous, not just for the blind but for the population at large. Unless the author was suggesting blind people would find it taxing to fly in future, we should probably rethink this provision or come up with a proclamation demanding the blind be excluded from this federal mandate, something an organization like the NFB would be hard pressed to support considering how hard we have fought to be included.

This provision is not about voter suppression. Blind people as a whole have not been blocked from polling places or intimidated or physically attacked for attempting to exercise their right to vote. This is a poor attempt to squeeze blind people into a minority class with legitimate claims to voter suppression. With few exceptions, elections are predictable, and if a blind person chooses not to obtain the proper identification to be able to vote, it is their prerogative but not an indication of a suppressed right.

The NFB should not become a political party’s soundbite. If the Democratic party believes strongly in ensuring the equality for persons in the electoral process, they should be taking the lead in pushing for accessible ballots. Anything less is nothing more than lip service and a gross emotional marketing attempt, using your disability to score political points.

Stop serving as somebody else’s pawn. Keep politics out of the resolution. Don’t use language that shoves us back by decades.


Marsha drenth
Sent with my IPhone
Please note that this email communication has been sent using my iPhone. As such, I may have used dictation and had made attempts to mitigate errors. Please do not be hesitant to ask for clarification as necessary.
NFBP-Talk mailing list
NFBP-Talk at nfbnet.org<mailto:NFBP-Talk at nfbnet.org>
To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for NFBP-Talk:

More information about the PACapitalChapter mailing list