From: Al and Masha Sten-Clanton 
Subject: Re: Why The NFB
On Sat, 18 Apr 1998, Harvey Heagy wrote:
> 
> 
> On 1998-04-18 NFB-Talk@NFBnet.org said:
>  NF>As a close and long-time friend of Jamal, I think I can vouch
>  NF>safely for his sincerity.  It is also perfectly sensible for him or
>  NF>anybody else to push for a different policy on coalitions: 
> Yes, provided they work within channels.
Agreed, as with any other issue, though you and I and others have
suggested here that those channels should be easier to use.
 I personally
am opposed > to us becoming part of coalitions as it is a proven mistake.
> The A.C.B. tried it in the early 80's and it didn't work for them and it 
won't
> work for us.  The blind will become swallowed up and not considered.
> Now, if we can work along side coalitions on certain issues for the 
betterment
> of disabled people that's another thing entirely.  That we should do
> if and when we can.
I think our national policy on coalitions should be to allow chapters and
affiliates to use their own best judgment, as the anti-coalition
resolution adopted in 1974 apparently allows us to do on the national
level.  The necessary limitation must be that a chapter or affiliate can't
violate the constitution or policies of the national organizations, or its
own constitution or policies, when it acts in coalition.  (The second part
of that can get fuzzy, I know.  I mention it to stress that an affiliate's
coalition representatives should not be allowed to combine with those from
other organizations and become less attuned to their own membership.) 
I'll leave it at that for now, thinking that this topic would be better
having its own thread.
Al
---
 # Origin: NFBnet  Internet Email Gateway (1:282/1045)
---------------