[Tidewater-chapter] Legislative Alert-Washington Seminar Fact Sheets Available
Shirley Confino-Rehder
scr at univdesign.com
Sat Nov 19 13:10:07 UTC 2011
Is there any current data re effective communication on public
transportation, and audio signaling at traffic lights?
Shirley Confino-Rehder
On 1/13/10 11:02 PM, "Gary Wunder (by way of David Andrews
<dandrews at visi.com>)" <gwunder at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Hartle, Jesse
> Sent: Friday, January 08, 2010 1:22 PM
> Subject: Legislative Alert-Washington Seminar Fact Sheets Available
>
>
> Fellow Federationists:
>
>
>
> I am writing to you to let you know that the fact
> sheets for the 2010 Washington Seminar are now on
> the NFB Web site. They can be found on the "NFB
> 2010 Washington Seminar" page at
> http://www.nfb.org/nfb/Washington_Seminar.asp.
> For your convenience, the fact sheets are also
> attached to this e-mail. The hot issues for the 2010 seminar are:
>
>
>
> -- Passage of the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act;
>
> -- Passage of a Technology Bill of Rights for the Blind; and
>
> -- Passage of the Blind Persons Return to Work Act.
>
>
>
> Please review these fact sheets in
> preparation for your appointments during
> Washington Seminar. We expect that bills related
> to the Technology Bill of Rights and a Senate
> companion bill to the Blind Persons Return to
> Work Act will soon be introduced. When these
> bills are introduced, the fact sheets will be
> updated to include that information.
>
>
>
> Should you have questions, I have
> included my contact information at the bottom of
> this message. I look forward to seeing all of
> you at Washington Seminar as we work towards
> passage of these crucial issues. Once again,
> thank you in advance for all of your hard work.
>
>
>
> Jesse M. Hartle
>
> Government Programs Specialist
>
> NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
>
> Phone: (410) 659-9314, extension 2233
>
> E-mail: jharle at nfb.org
>
>
>
> JMH/wmb
>
>
>
> Attachments
>
>
>
> Legislative Agenda of Blind Americans:
>
> Priorities for the 111th Congress, SECOND 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 111th Congress in its second 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 that which
> 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 that consumer
> electronics, home appliances, kiosks, and
> electronic office technology provide user
> interfaces that are accessible through nonvisual
> means. This legislation should:
>
>
>
> ·
> mandate that all consumer electronics, home
> appliances, kiosks, and electronic office
> technology 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 Department of Justice with the
> authority to enforce the regulations promulgated
> by the commission established by this legislation; and
>
>
>
> ·
> authorize the commission to reexamine and rewrite
> standards periodically as consumer electronic technology continues to evolve.
>
>
>
> 3. We urge Congress to promote
> and facilitate the transition by blind Americans
> from recipients of Social Security Disability
> Insurance benefits to income-earning, tax-paying,
> productive members of the American workforce by enacting legislation to:
>
>
>
> · replace the monthly earnings penalty
> with a graduated three-for-one 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 in an amount equal to
> twelve times the 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 enact the Pedestrian Safety
> Enhancement Act, which will establish a motor
> vehicle safety standard to alert blind and other
> pedestrians of the presence of silent hybrid and electric vehicles.
>
>
>
>
>
> 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
> to travel with a guide dog. Blind people listen
> to the sound 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 auditory 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 endanger the safety, not only of blind
> people, but also of small children, seniors, cyclists, and runners.
>
>
>
>
>
> Need for Congressional Action: For several years
> the National Federation of the Blind has been
> concerned about the proliferation of silent
> vehicles. These concerns were validated by a
> recent report from the National Highway Traffic
> Safety Administration, which concluded that at
> low speeds hybrid and electric vehicles are twice
> as likely to be involved in accidents with
> pedestrians as vehicles with internal combustion
> engines. Recently automobile manufacturers have
> acknowledged the dangers posed to blind
> pedestrians by silent-vehicle technology and have
> begun to work with the National Federation of the
> Blind to craft solutions. While participation
> from some manufacturers is an important first
> step, many others continue to take a wait-and-see
> approach on this important issue. 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 (including newly
> blinded veterans), small children, seniors,
> cyclists, and runners shocks the nation.
>
>
>
>
>
> Proposed Legislation: The Pedestrian Safety
> Enhancement Act (H.R. 734 and S. 841) was
> introduced by Congressmen Towns and Stearns in
> the House and by Senators Kerry and Specter in
> the Senate. This legislation directs 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:
>
> a.. In all phases of operation (including
> times when the vehicle is at a full stop),
> pedestrians must be able to identify vehicles by nonvisual means.
> b.. The motor vehicle safety standard must
> also provide pedestrians with the range of
> information that is currently provided by
> combustion engines, including 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 safety
> standard. This approach will encourage
> manufacturers to use innovative and
> cost-effective techniques to achieve the motor vehicle safety standard.
>
> Automobiles that operate in complete silence
> 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,
> and therefore this safety issue must be addressed.
>
>
>
>
>
> 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 motor vehicle safety
> 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 be added as cosponsors by contacting
> Doug Frost in Senator Kerry's office.
>
>
>
>
>
> 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 mandate that consumer electronics,
> home appliances, kiosks, and electronic office
> technology 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 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, and other user
> interfaces that are inaccessible to individuals
> 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 readily
> identified and whose settings can be easily
> discerned. 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
> such as copiers and fax machines, this is a
> potential threat to that person's opportunity to
> join the workforce or to maintain an existing job.
>
>
>
> Many popular nonvisual mechanisms are available
> for manufacturers to create interfaces accessible
> to everyone. For example, text-to-speech
> technology is inexpensive and more 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
> screen, but many manufacturers have continued to
> design interfaces that do not include any
> nonvisual means of use, rendering the devices inaccessible to blind people.
>
>
>
>
>
> Need for Legislation: Currently no enforceable
> mandates exist for manufacturers of consumer
> electronics, home appliances, kiosks, and
> electronic office technology to make their
> products accessible to all consumers. There are
> also 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:
>
> 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.
>
>
> This legislation does not mandate a single,
> one-size-fits-all solution for all consumer
> technology, home appliances, kiosks, or
> electronic office technology. Rather it mandates
> 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.
>
>
> a.. 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, kiosks, and electronic office
> technology, or associations representing such manufacturers; and
>
> - experts on universal design,
> electronic engineering, and related fields.
>
>
>
> a.. Endows the Department of Justice with the
> authority to enforce the regulations promulgated
> by the commission established by this legislation.
>
>
> a.. Authorizes the commission to reexamine and
> rewrite standards periodically as consumer
> electronic technology continues to evolve.
>
>
>
>
> Requested Action: Please support blind Americans
> and cosponsor a Technology Bill of Rights for the
> Blind to ensure that blind people can fully
> participate in all aspects of American
> 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
>
> Email: lmclarney 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. Low societal expectations result in low
> representation of the blind in the workforce.
>
> In addition, governmental programs intended to
> provide economic security to blind workers during
> periods of unemployment, 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.
>
> 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 2010 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 thirty-five 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 (forty hours), her weekly salary
> would go up to $400 a week for a monthly average
> of $1,733. This amount is over the 2010 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 twelve
> times the applicable monthly SGA amount.
>
> Under current law blind workers frequently pay
> for items and services related to their blindness
> 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 of earnings.
>
>
>
> Proposed Legislation: 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: For the House, please
> cosponsor the Blind Persons Return to Work Act
> (H.R. 886) by contacting Michaeleen Crowell in
> Rep. John Lewis's office, and provide a common
> sense work incentive for blind Social Security
> beneficiaries. For the Senate please consider
> introducing companion legislation.
>
>
>
>
>
> Contact Information:
>
> Lauren McLarney
>
> Government Programs Specialist
>
> NATIONAL FEDERATION OF THE BLIND
>
> Phone: (410) 659-9314, extension 2207
>
> Email: lmclarney at nfb.org
> _______________________________________________
> Tidewater-chapter mailing list
> Tidewater-chapter at nfbnet.org
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/tidewater-chapter_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
> Tidewater-chapter:
> http://nfbnet.org/mailman/options/tidewater-chapter_nfbnet.org/scr%40univdesig
> n.com
More information about the TideWater-Chapter
mailing list