[nfb-talk] Fw: Legislative Agenda of Blind Americans:
ckrugman at sbcglobal.net
ckrugman at sbcglobal.net
Mon Dec 20 20:51:23 UTC 2010
as this organization is not a valid political entity why would the NFB even
bother with them?
chuck
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kenneth Chrane" <kenneth.chrane at verizon.net>
To: <peeps-talk at yahoogroups.com>; "NFB Talk Mailing List"
<nfb-talk at nfbnet.org>
Cc: <pschmuck at wbal.com>; <shari at wbal.com>; <brian.kroneberger at rbc.com>;
<ddurian at wbal.com>; <c4 at wbal.com>; <ehrlichs at wbal.com>; <rsmith at wbal.com>
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 2:59 AM
Subject: [nfb-talk] Fw: Legislative Agenda of Blind Americans:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Republic Questions
> To: 'Kenneth Chrane'
> Sent: Monday, December 13, 2010 12:06 AM
> Subject: RE: Legislative Agenda of Blind Americans:
>
>
> Dear Kenneth,
>
>
>
> Thank you for sharing your agenda for the 111th Congress. As you know we
> are re inhabiting the Republic and do not share the same values, vision
> nor goals of the current de facto federal corporation that runs things.
>
>
>
> I wish you every success in making headway with the 111th Congress, but it
> is not a shared goal for what we are about. I don’t honestly know how
> the interests of Blind Americans will be served in the Republic for the
> united States; I just know that the principles of freedom and liberty will
> be championed for all; and the milking of the wealth of the people by the
> power elite will cease.
>
>
>
> Blessings.
>
>
>
> Robert A Zuluaga
>
>
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> From: Kenneth Chrane [mailto:kenneth.chrane at verizon.net]
> Sent: Sunday, December 12, 2010 6:42 PM
> To: Republic Questions
> Subject: Legislative Agenda of Blind Americans:
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nfb-talk mailing list
> nfb-talk at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nfb-talk_nfbnet.org
More information about the nFB-Talk
mailing list