immediate response needed to attack on separate agencies
     Most of you who receive this message will recall the
position against specialized services for the blind which was taken by the 
National Council on Independent Living.  Now the National Council on 
Disability, a federal agency, has taken up the challenge to separate 
agencies, as well.  
     The National Council is established pursuant to title IV of the 
Rehabilitation Act of 1973.  In recent times a growing number of its members 
have been drawn from independent living centers. Therefore, it is not 
surprising that the National Council on Disability has taken the same 
position about agencies for the blind that the National Council on 
Independent Living previously expressed.  
     On Thursday, March 20, the House appropriations committee,subcommittee 
on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies will hold 
its annual hearing on the National Council on Disability's budget request for 
fiscal year 1998. This event, while not directly related to approval of the
Council's position on separate agencies, does provide an
opportunity for members of Congress to rais questions about anything they 
care about.  For that reason, I have prepared the letter which follows to be 
sent to the chairman and all members of the subcommittee.  
     Similar communications from each of you and others you can reach would 
be helpful.  Never mind the fact that your
communications will probably reach the members after the hearing,scheduled 
for Thursday afternoon.  Letters, faxes, or other
communications which get to committee members later will still do a great 
deal of good.  The actual appropriations bill will not actually be prepared 
until sometime in May or early June.  At that time Committee members may want 
to take the National
Council's position on blind services into account in deciding on the 
appropriations amount for the next year.  Therefore, they need to continue to 
hear from people who feel that the position is unwarranted and unacceptable.  
     Aside from the appropriations matter, which in some ways is not directly 
on point, the real issue is what could happen to the law on separate agencies 
for the blind when the Congress gets down to work on reauthorization of the 
Rehabilitation Act later this spring.  At that time, the recommendation of 
the National Council on Disability will be before the authorizing committees 
in the House and the Senate which have the power to change the law or let it 
alone.  I will provide more information concerning this aspect of the issue 
before us in a subsequent communication to you.  
     The committees involved in consideration of the
reauthorization of the rehabilitation act are the House Committee on 
Education and the Work Force and the Senate committee on Labor and Human 
Resources.  We will need to begin the process of
contacting the members of these committees quite soon. 
Meanwhile, it would certainly be helpful to begin the effort to defeat the 
National Council's proposal by contacting the members of the House 
appropriations subcommittee.  Their names and
contact information are provided after the text of a letter which I am 
sending on behalf of the Federation.  Information on the authorizing 
committees and some thoughts on what to say will come later.  
     All of us should remember that the National Council's
recommendation to phase out separate agencies for the blind has no particular 
value or validity on its own.  Most of the members of Congress have never 
heard of the National Council on
Disability.  However, most of them are aware of the National Federation of 
the Blind.  The final decision as to whether or not the Council's 
recommendation begins to amount to anything other than the paper it is 
written on will be made by the Congress through the political process.  In 
that arena the National
Council on Disability should take a lesson from others who have tried to take 
us on in the past and not succeeded.  Even so, a response must be made, and 
that is what we must be about right now.  
     Please do what you can to get the word out on this, but remember that 
those who do not wish us well have no particular need to receive our 
arguments from us.  That is by way of saying that care ought to be taken in 
the further redistribution of this and related e-mail messages.  This is an 
area in which blindness and disability sharply diverge.  Enough said.  Let's 
go to work.
The letter text and member list follows:
Dear Chairman Porter:
     A Presidentially appointed federal disabilities panel is preparing to 
recommend a new mandate against state discretion in the administration and 
funding of services to the blind.  The panel, known as the National Council 
on Disability, receives an annual appropriation under the funding bill for 
the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and related
agencies.
     Under the Council's proposal, states would be forced to adopt a 
single-agency service model, rather than having a
"commission for the blind" or similar specialized program.  The twenty-six 
states with laws on the books for serving the blind would have to conform to 
the Council's approach or lose support for all rehabilitation programs.  
States would also be required to phase out targeted services to older blind 
people.
     While as a federal agency the National Council on Disability is 
certainly authorized to issue reports on matters affecting disability policy, 
it is the responsibility of members of
Congress to evaluate the Council's work as it may effect a
state's discretionary powers.  Also, the actions of a federal agency are 
certainly proper matters to be raised in the annual appropriations process, 
especially if the authority of states to design their programs is being 
abridged by the federal agency in question.
     The recommendation for a federal mandate against agencies serving the 
blind is the result of an effort being made to
diminish the visibility and independent status of blindness services in favor 
of a generic approach to disability. 
Unfortunately, the disabilities Council has chosen to become involved on one 
side of this issue, rather than following the well-settled Congressional 
policy of deferring to the states.
     I am bringing this matter to your attention at this time in view of the 
National Council's appearance for its annual
appropriations hearing scheduled for today.  If you would like more 
information to raise questions pertaining to this matter in any way, I will 
be happy to help you obtain it.  Meanwhile, thank you for considering this 
issue and the significance it has for blind people.
     
     Having the specialized services available that are now provided through 
state and federal programs is of critical
importance to us.  Please join us in helping to see that these programs are 
able to continue.
 HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE
Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related 
Agencies
John Edward Porter; IL; 202-225-4832--CHAIRMAN
C. W. Bill Young; FL; 202-225-5961; FAX: 202-225-9764 
Henry Bonilla; TX; 202-225-4511  
Ernest Jim Istook; OK; 202-225-2132; FAX: 202-226-1463
E-mail:  istook@hr.house.gov
Dan Miller; FL; 202-225-5015; FAX: 202-226-0828 
Jay Dickey; AR; 202-225-3772; FAX: 202-225-1314
E-mail:  jdickey@hr.house.gov
Anne Northup; KY; 202-225-5401  
Roger Wicker; MS; 202-225-4306; FAX: 202-225-3549 
E-mail:  rwicker@hr.house.gov
David R. Obey; WI; 202-225-3362--RANKING
Louis Stokes; OH; 202-225-7032; FAX: 202-225-1339 
Steny H. Hoyer; MD; 202-225-4131  
Nancy Pelosi; CA; 202-225-4965
Nita M. Lowey; NY; 202-225-6505; FAX: 202-225-0546
E-mail: nitamail@hr.house.gov
Rosa DeLauro; CT; 202-225-3661
--- Maximus/2 2.02
---------------