This is being provided in a rough-draft format. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) is provided in order to facilitate communication accessibility and may not be a totally verbatim record of the proceedings
PRESIDENT RICCOBONO: Good afternoon and welcome to the Resolutions Committee meeting for the 2024 National convention!
(Applause)
Pam Allen.
SPEAKER: Here.
SPEAKER: Denise Avante. Everette Bacon, Ron Brown.
Shawn Callaway.
Marci Carpenter.
SPEAKER: Here.
SPEAKER: Norma Crosby.
SPEAKER: Here, sir.
SPEAKER: Chancey Fleet.
SPEAKER: I'm here.
SPEAKER: Deepa Goraya.
SPEAKER: Here.
SPEAKER: Ever Hairston
SPEAKER: Here
SPEAKER: Anil Lewis.
SPEAKER: Plenty
SPEAKER: Barbara Loos.
SPEAKER: Here.
SPEAKER: Sharon Manecki.
SPEAKER: Here.
SPEAKER: Barbara Manuel
SPEAKER: Here, sir.
SPEAKER: Jim Marks.
SPEAKER: Here.
SPEAKER: Dr. Marc Maurer.
SPEAKER: Present.
SPEAKER: Jason Meddaugh.
SPEAKER: Here.
SPEAKER: Corbb O'Connor.
SPEAKER: Here.
SPEAKER: Give me one quick second. I'm sorry.
SPEAKER: Ronza Othman.
SPEAKER: Here.
SPEAKER: Barbara Pierce.
Casey Robertson.
SPEAKER: Here.
SPEAKER: Jayne Seif.
SPEAKER: Here.
SPEAKER: Tracy Soforenko.
SPEAKER: Plenty.
SPEAKER: Tate Camille.
SPEAKER: Here.
SPEAKER: And Kathryn Webster.
SPEAKER: Here.
SPEAKER: So as I said, welcome to the 2024 Resolutions Committee meeting. Please keep in mind this is a committee meeting, and the committee members will be the only ones that have access to a microphone other than the proponents. Before we get started, I would like to introduce Mark Riccobono, President Riccobono, to the podium, even though we're all sitting down.
But I would like to welcome him to the microphone to give a few words about the Resolutions process and the importance that Resolutions play in terms of the organized blind movement.
(Cheers and applause)
PRESIDENT RICCOBONO: All right, thank you, Mr. Chairman! And for those who are going to be proponents or otherwise, I just wanted to note that the head of the table...
SPEAKER: Is over here!
PRESIDENT RICCOBONO: And to my right, there are many open seats. I think the committee members were afraid of sitting on this side of the table, I don't know.
So there are about three open mics over there if proponents are looking for spots at the table, just on your left side as you are facing the square here, where the committee is meeting.
So first of all, happy Independence Day!
(Cheers and applause)
Always seems very fitting to celebrate our Independence Day here, and especially fun when it falls on the Resolution Committee meeting day. The chairman reluctantly says... reluctantly says there's no controversial resolutions today.
(chuckles)
Which is the standard question that gets asked. This committee plays an important role in the policymaking of the Federation. And a few of our colleagues who are appointed to the committee could not be at the convention. Just wanted to give a shout out. I'm sure they're both listening to Barbara Pierce and Kevan Worley. We miss you both and look forward to having you at next year's convention. I'm certain they're listening in to the virtual experience, but the committee has the role of considering which resolutions go to the floor of the convention. By somewhat tradition now, since our virtual conventions, resolutions need to be to the committee chair within a month of the committee meeting.
So a month beforehand. Resolutions are accepted in final form, and so we do ask that they come to the committee in a position readily to be presented to the committee. The committee does tend to check them for accuracy and factual pieces beforehand. You can still get a resolution to the committee up to an hour before the meeting by having the support of five of the members of the committee, if your resolution is late, and sometimes there are circumstances where resolutions may come late. Of course, the board of directors also can offer a resolution if needed.
The committee's job is to evaluate the policies being considered in the resolution and to vote them up or down. If it's voted up, the resolution will be considered by the convention, most likely on July 7 is when we set aside time.
And if a resolution is voted down, it simply means the committee does not recommend it to the convention. It can reach the floor of the convention for consideration with the support of five delegates to the convention, in which case the convention will consider it.
Once a proponent has presented a resolution to the committee and the committee supports its presentation to the convention, the committee owns the resolution and is bringing it forward, and we will allow a fair opportunity for individuals to speak for or against a resolution at the time we consider it on the 7th.
The convention will consider these potential policy statements. And they only become policy statements if the convention passes them.
So if the convention declines to pass a resolution, it is not creating a policy. It simply is saying, we don't wish to create this policy that has been offered. Sometimes when a resolution is declined, people want to attribute. That means the Federation is taking 100% opposite position on the issue. That is not true.
Policy statements are policy statements and everything else has been considered. The committee here has an important job of vetting those policy statements and making recommendations to the convention. The committee should decline policy. They think it's bad for the movement to set and they should approve policies that you feel are good.
Thank you to the committee for putting yourselves in the line of fire, because undoubtedly, openly debating about policy statements will make you unpopular with somebody along the way. But it does... statements by this organization are serious statements. After 84 years many, many people know that if they're in the line of a resolution, especially one that meets with the popular condemn and deplore, it means something. We don't pass policy statements that are weak. We want them to carry weight.
So thank you to the committee for doing the work. Thank you to the proponents for bringing these policies forward. And I hope everybody is having a wonderful Florida convention. Isn't it great to be back at the Rosen Center?
(Cheers and applause)
I know many of you have already expressed appreciation to the Rosen Center staff. So that's great. Keep it up! And Mr. Chairman... good luck!
(chuckles)
DONALD: Thank you. If Ronza can make sure you have a microphone in front of you, before we get started, I do want to let everybody know that we do post the resolutions on the website prior to the convention. The first 21 resolutions are there. The 22nd, which was a late submission, we were not able to get it posted last night, but we anticipate it will be posted sometime shortly after this meeting, and that, of course, is contingent upon the committee passing it, you know, forward to the full floor. www.NFB.org /resolutions. You can find the 2024 resolution there as well as the resolutions for years going back at least as far as 1993.
(speaker off microphone)
DONALD: And if Maureen Neifelt could get to a microphone as well. So as I said, the committee will be having a debate/discussion, and when we call for the vote, I will be calling for a vote from the committee members only. So with that said... Resolution number 1 regarding the accessibility of theme parks.
Whereas, The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) requires that theme parks be accessible to individuals with disabilities;
And whereas, the United States Department of Justice is responsible for enforcing the ADA; And whereas, large theme parks such as Walt Disney World, Disneyland, and Universal Studios claim to provide accessible theme park experiences, but these experiences are insufficient and often ineffective to provide blind and low vision guests with equal access to the parks' attractions, experiences, and information;
And whereas, Walt Disney World and Disneyland both post tactile maps of their theme parks, but these maps are large and stationary, meaning blind and low vision guests do not have accessible map information while moving about the park; And whereas, both Walt Disney World and Disneyland offer to blind guests a reasonable accommodation of a physical book containing park information concerning rides, attractions, shows, and food venues in large print or Braille, but this book is heavy, cumbersome, and potentially inconvenient to carry around the park and store while riding attractions;
And whereas, neither Walt Disney World nor Disneyland offers an electronic version of this information, meaning those who use a reading media other than Braille or large print have no meaningful access to the information contained in this book; And whereas, Walt Disney World and Disneyland both offer an audio description service using a Disney provided handheld device available for rent, which includes information such as general area descriptions, queue and pre attraction descriptions, real time attraction audio description, nearby restrooms and restaurants, and service animal relief areas;
And whereas, the handheld device uses beacons Disney has installed to trigger the description service, which is supposed to update as a guest navigates the park; And whereas, users report that some of the issues they've experienced with Disney's handheld devices include outdated hardware, short battery life requiring guests to return to guest services to replace their devices, frequently failing to connect to location beacons, attraction descriptions that are not properly synchronized with the attraction experience, descriptions for attractions that have been discontinued for many years, and general unreliability;
And whereas, Walt Disney World and Disneyland both offer mobile applications that enable guests to perform tasks such as scheduling visits, scheduling rides using the Disability Access Service (DAS) and GeniePlus, joining attraction virtual queues, checking wait times for attractions, pre ordering food, getting walking directions to attractions and activities, and more;
And whereas, most of these features and tasks are not accessible to those using the mobile applications with assistive technology; And whereas, Disney's DAS program, with certain limitations, offers guests with disabilities and their traveling parties the ability to schedule ride times without having to wait in the stand by queue;
And whereas, Disney recently changed its DAS program to grant access only to those with developmental disabilities; And whereas, many blind Disney guests also have other disabilities which would make standing in a queue difficult or impossible, such as heart conditions, cancer, being immunocompromised, anxiety, and mobility disabilities;
And whereas, Disney has denied the DAS applications for guests with intersectional disabilities including blindness, telling them they can use scooters, wheelchairs, and companions they bring as alternative accommodations;
And whereas, these guests have communicated that such alternative accommodations are ineffective because many blind guests cannot drive scooters, cannot push themselves in a wheelchair, or cannot provide a companion to push them, but Disney still denied their reasonable accommodation requests;
And whereas, Disney's new DAS approach ignores those with intersectional disabilities related to mental health and immunity; And whereas, Disney's one size fits all approach to disability accommodations fails to ensure that blind guests with intersectional disabilities have equal access as do non disabled guests to their theme parks;
And whereas, the Universal Studios mobile application also has significant accessibility challenges for those accessing the app with assistive technology; And whereas, Universal Studios does not offer an audio description service at all, and instead only offers access to attraction scripts in large print and Braille but not electronic formats;
And whereas, these scripts are only accessible at Guest Services, meaning guests cannot remove the scripts from that location or read the scripts while experiencing the attraction; And whereas, though Universal Studios' attraction scheduling service application process for individuals with disabilities, including those who are blind with intersectional disabilities, is individualized and consistent with ADA disability definitions, the Universal Studios disability scheduling service uses a paper ride scheduling pass that is not accessible to the blind or others with print disabilities;
And whereas, blind guests, including those with intersectional disabilities, have a desire and a right to experience theme parks and their attractions and to be effectively accommodated when visiting: Now, therefore, be it resolved by the National Federation of the Blind in Convention assembled this y, 2024, in the City of that we call upon Disney World, Disneyland, and Universal Studios to establish tactile maps that blind guests can take with them as they move about the parks;
and be it further resolved that we strongly urge Walt Disney World and Disneyland to make available their park information books in an accessible, electronic format and permit guests with disabilities including blindness to access them on their personal devices;
and be it further resolved that we strongly urge Universal Studios to make available to its guests with disabilities including blindness Universal Studios' attraction scripts in an accessible, electronic format and permit guests to access these scripts on their own devices;
and be it further resolved that we strongly urge Walt Disney World and Disneyland to update, modernize, and maintain their audio description services program and devices and strongly urge Universal Studios to implement an audio description service for its parks;
and be it further resolved that we strongly urge Walt Disney World, Disneyland, and Universal Studios to make their mobile applications fully accessible to guests with disabilities and that they consult with the National Federation of the Blind to ensure these apps are accessible and usable by the blind;
and be it further resolved that we condemn and deplore the decision of the Disney Corporation to apply a one size fits all approach to reasonable accommodations for its guests, including those who are blind with intersectional disabilities; and be it further resolved that we demand that the Disney Corporation revise this discriminatory policy to make its DAS program comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act, affording an individualized assessment for guests with disabilities;
and be it further resolved that we strongly urge the Department of Justice and any applicable state entities with jurisdiction to immediately enforce the ADA with regard to theme park accessibility at Walt Disney World, Disneyland, and Universal Studios.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay. Thank you.
(Applause)
SPEAKER: I think the applause is for Jennifer. Good afternoon. I'm joined by my co proponent, Maureen, but I'll address you first. It isn't a coincidence that we're in Orlando talking about Disney and universal theme parks. I bet a number of our members either went to a park or thought about it. I am Ronza Othman, I use she/her pronouns, and I'm a Disney adult. This means I love everything Disney, Disney theme parks, Disney merch, Disney anything. Disney princesses, in fact, I am the next one.
I also love Universal Studios, the theme park, and the jury still out on some of the movies. I'm a definite theme park enthusiast and I have annual passes to Disney and Universal. I visit whenever I get a few hours. In fact, in 2024, I have been here down in Florida, even though I live in Maryland, six times. I find my joy at these theme parks.
But lately Disney and Universal have been giving me and lots of others with disabilities, including blindness, the blues. Their disability access programs are neither reasonable nor equitable. I have intersectional disabilities. In addition to blindness, I have mobility limitations that mean I can't stand or walk for long periods of time. I have severe intolerance to heat and cold. I have anxiety and other mental health disabilities that means I need to have adaptations when I'm in big crowds. I'm also immunocompromised due to cancer. And, of course, I am blind. I love that at Disney I can get an audio device that will tell me where to find a restroom, what restaurants are near me, and provide me be live audio descriptions for some of the shows and attractions.
However, Disney has been using the same technology and hardware for nearly 20 years with little maintenance and virtually no updates.
In fact, if you go to the Magic Kingdom today, you can get the audio description service and it will tell you that there is a ride in Fantasyland called "Enchanted Tales with Belle" this ride was permanently closed in 2010, but the description service doesn't know it and it keeps trying to get you to go there.
This is just one example. And this is neither reasonable nor equitable. The mobile app, which is how information is communicated is not accessible. In fact, the disability access service, or DAS, which allows guests to schedule their attractions and wait in a virtual queue instead of a physical queue, let's be clear, we are not skipping lines. We are scheduling our line in the queue and waiting not in line, but still waiting our turn.
This service is so important to those of us with mobility disabilities and other limitations, including mental health limitations, those who are immunocompromised and so on. But the DAS service can only be used through this inaccessible mobile application. This too is neither reasonable nor equitable. Worse, though, in late April 2024 changed the eligibility criteria for the Disability Access Service to only those with developmental disabilities could get approval someone like me who can't stand for long periods of time is told to rent a scooter. I told them I can't drive a scooter due to blindness. They told me to rent a wheelchair. I told them due to my disabilities I can't push myself in a wheelchair. They told me to bring someone with me, a friend or family member who can push me.
Essentially they denied me this reasonable accommodation. They're forcing us to bring our own, and giving us the pleasure to pay for it upwards of 189 dollars a day. This is neither reasonable nor equitable. These are just a few examples at Disney. Universal has a better eligibility determination system for its virtual queue and reasonable accommodation method, but they don't have any audio description or meaningful information about attractions that can be used when you want it, or when you need it.
They have this massive book. In Braille it's something like 10 volumes. You can look at it when visiting guest services, but you can't take it with you. Even if you wanted to. So if I wanted to know what is happening on the Harry Potter and the escape ride, I have to go to guest services, hope they give me this right volume in Braille, read it while standing in front of the guest services person with a line getting longer and longer behind me with people impatiently waiting for me to move so they can get assistance. Then I have to leave it behind. This is neither reasonable nor equitable. The method for scheduling virtual appointment is done on a physical piece of paper and the attraction staff literally write on it. I can't read print. This too is neither reasonable nor equitable. Blind people, including those of us with intersectional disabilities have a right, just like anyone else, to play, visit and spend our money at theme parks.
(Cheers and applause)
We have a right to access information that nondisabled guests can access. We have a right to expect and receive accommodations that are reasonable and effective, and in today's age of technological advancements, it wouldn't even be hard or costly for Disney and Universal to implement them. This resolution is about equity, and I urge the committee to vote in favor.
Thank you.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: I'm going to give all proponents a cautious reminder that we don't have unlimited time.
SPEAKER: Okay, this Maureen. I'll just add that I just recently was working with Disney to receive an accommodation. I have a syndrome, I have cancer, extreme fatigue, anemia. The host goes on and on and on. Working with them after a three-hour interrogation, basically, they told me that disability access was not a good fit for me. What they did offer me was a huge Braille tour guidebook to which I let them know I also have a limited hand function and limited arm function, and I couldn't read Braille or carry it around, so I requested electronic format, again, which they don't have.
So I thought, okay, I could use the Genie Pass and I'll pay for that. Because I know that I can't stand in lines. Come to find out, you have to purchase it for each individual ride, schedule each individual ride, and the app is completely inaccessible. So that wasn't even an option for me.
So I let them know then, you know, you're basically telling me that I can't come to your theme park, as a blind person with multiple disabilities, you're telling me that I can't come to your park. And they said, which is not a good fit for you. And I just could not believe that a theme park as big as Disney would say that I wasn't a good fit, my family wasn't a fit for their theme park. So please, we urge the committee to pass this. Thank you.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: I believe we have a motion. Is there a second?
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: Is there any further discussion? Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of passing Resolution 2024 01 please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed?
2024 01 will move up to the convention floor.
(Applause) if I can get Amy Porterfield near a microphone.
Resolution 2024 02: Regarding Legislation to Create a National Framework for Fully Autonomous Vehicle Deployment; whereas, the National Federation of the Blind advocates for equality, security, and opportunity for blind Americans in order for us to live the lives we want; And whereas, the right to freely move and travel is a cornerstone of our society, enriching life and fostering economic opportunity;
And whereas, the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) outlines six levels of driving automation starting with Level 0, which is limited to warnings and momentary assistance such as a lane departure warning or automatic emergency braking system, and ending with Level 5, which is fully autonomous driving under all conditions with no geographical limitations;
And whereas, the advent of Level 4 autonomous vehicles, which are fully autonomous but restricted to operation only within specific geographical boundaries, presents a unique opportunity to revolutionize automotive travel, increasing transportation opportunities for the blind to the extent that blind people can now travel alone, in a fully autonomous automobile throughout several cities across the United States including San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Phoenix;
And whereas, twenty-four states have passed legislation expressly permitting autonomous vehicles to operate within their borders; And whereas, many bills that would limit the deployment of fully autonomous vehicles, and even specifically require a licensed driver in every fully autonomous vehicle have been introduced in state legislatures across the country, essentially stripping away a dream that is now a reality;
Now, therefore, be it resolved by the National Federation of the Blind that we call upon members of Congress to work with the National Federation of the Blind to pass legislation that would create a national framework for autonomous vehicles that ensures equal access to transportation for blind and low vision people, addresses potential access barriers to the use of autonomous vehicles by blind and disabled people, and promotes the inclusion of blind people in the testing and continued development phases of autonomous vehicle technology.
SPEAKER: Move due pass.
SPEAKER: Second.
SPEAKER: Amy, are you by a mic?
SPEAKER: I am. Hello, Mr. Chair, members of the committee, thank you for giving us the opportunity to discuss this really exciting resolution. I want us all to imagine getting up for work in the morning and getting ready, maybe you're running a little bit late, maybe you have whatever that happens in the morning when things are not always going the best, and you have the ability to get into a car and not have a discussion with anyone about your service animal or about how long you have been blind, or any of the other millions of things we have to talk about on our way to work that we may not be prepared to do.
Imagine that is an everyday experience for us, where we can get into a car on our own and listen to our own music or audiobook or whatever it is we want to do on our way to work. And that is coming close to being a regular possibility for us. We know a lot about it in Arizona, as we're testing the Waymo in Phoenix, and we have our congressman Stanton, who co sponsored a bill that goes a long way towards this dream.
And so we just really believe it's important that -- we're hoping that everyone will support the idea that people, in any state, across anywhere in the United States, has the ability to make this dream come true for us. There is no reason why one state should have one regulation and another one should have another.
So having a national uniform set of regulations and statutes is the best way to make sure this dream becomes a reality. Thank you.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. We have a motion, and we have a second. Is there any further discussion? Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of passing 2024 02 please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed?
Hearing none, the resolution passes up.
(Applause)
SPEAKER: Resolution 2024 03 regarding raising the Supplemental Security Income Resource Limit and Eliminating the Marriage Penalty.
Whereas, the Social Security Administration (SSA) provides monthly benefit payments to individuals and couples who qualify for Supplemental Security Income (SSI) due to blindness, disability, or old age;
And whereas, in order to be eligible for benefits, a beneficiary who is single must possess resources valued at less than 2,000,or less than 3,000 if the beneficiary is part of a married couple; And whereas, the resource limit, established in 1972, has only been adjusted once, in 1989, and is not indexed to changes in the cost of living;
And whereas, when the monthly SSI benefit was first established it comprised approximately one tenth of the resource limit, but since the resource limit has increased so little in fifty years, the current monthly benefit is nearly half of the resource limit; And whereas, this year, the monthly SSI benefit amount for a single individual is 943 dollars and the monthly benefit amount for married couples is 1,415 dollars;
And whereas, two individual SSI benefit recipients living as unmarried partners currently receive over 450 dollars more in monthly combined benefits than if those same two individuals were to get married, resulting in a marriage penalty;
And whereas, this same marriage penalty also exists in the SSI resource limits for two individual SSI benefit recipients living as unmarried partners versus a married couple: Now, therefore, be it resolved by the National Federation of the Blind call upon Congress to enact legislation that abolishes the marriage penalty associated with SSI monthly benefits and SSI resource limits;
and be it further resolved that we call upon Congress to increase the SSI resource limits to 10,000 dollars for single individuals and 20,000 dollars for married couples; and be it further resolved that we call upon Congress to tie the resource limits to the consumer price index to ensure that resource limits maintain proportional value with inflation.
SPEAKER: Move adoption.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: We have a motion to adopt and a second. Brandy, can you make sure you are by a microphone?
Are you here, Randy?
SPEAKER: Right here, but I don't know which way to go.
CHAIRPERSON: Just come all the way into the room.
SPEAKER: Right this way! This way!
CHAIRPERSON: And Marion, if you can get to a microphone as well.
SPEAKER: Good afternoon, everyone. I would like to thank you for giving me the chance to speak on this resolution, which my wife and I personally feel very strongly on. Thirteen years ago we got married and we were faced with the prospect of losing a significant amount of our earnings, or what we could earn, and what we could save.
And we, of course, wanted to be treated just like every other person who gets married, every other couple who gets married. Mostly -- a lot of it for the benefits of marriage, you know, for medical rights, being able to speak for each other if necessary. In the end we decided to get married regardless of the financial hit we would take. And so this particular resolution gives myself, my wife, and a number of our close friends who are blind and married hope that we can actually achieve the American dream of being able to save money for the things that we both want, and both need.
So this is something that we feel strongly about, and we truly encourage the Resolutions Committee to pass this, so we can be treated just like every other couple in the country.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Any further discussion? Hearing no, all those in favor of passing Resolution 2024 03, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed? Hearing none...
(Applause)
... the Resolution passes.
RESOLUTION 2024 04: Regarding Amazon Employment Practices. Whereas, Amazon promotes itself as building an inclusive culture for employees with disabilities, in part, through the establishment of its Global Accessibility Awareness Month and Amazon People with Disabilities affinity group;
And whereas, Amazon still does not have company wide standard operating procedures in place on a national and global level with regard to accommodations, accessibility, and assistive technology;
And whereas, company wide training for leadership, management, human resources, technical support associates, and employees is minimal or not present;
And whereas, while employment with Amazon is highly desirable, in that Amazon offers industry leading benefits, including comprehensive healthcare, retirement savings plans, tuition reimbursement, and more;
And whereas, Amazon still maintains a practice of refusing to accommodate blind employees in entry level positions;
And whereas, Amazon has established a continuous pattern of shifting these blind employees to leave without pay status or terminating them, rather than providing necessary accommodations or placing them in a temporary position that is currently accessible while accommodations are put in place for other jobs originally applied for or providing an option for temporary or permanent placement in an accessible position, such as Virtual Customer Service Associate;
And whereas, Amazon could provide these accommodations, modifications, and safety features without significant difficulty or expense given Amazon's financial and technological resources;
And whereas, Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits employers from denying employment opportunities to qualified individuals with disabilities when that denial is based on the need to provide reasonable accommodations and requires employers to engage in an interactive process when reviewing accommodation requests;
And whereas, the National Federation of the Blind has advocated strongly on behalf of blind employees by filing suit and supporting administrative complaints against Amazon for its continued disparate treatment of blind workers and job applicants:
Now, therefore, be it resolved that this organization condemn and deplore Amazon's constant pattern of discrimination against blind employees and job seekers in violation of federal and state law;
and be it further resolved that this organization demand Amazon promptly implement and keep company wide processes for reviewing and approving reasonable accommodations and modifications for blind employees, including the use of third-party screen access software at workstations, approval of reasonable assignment modifications, and implementation of nonvisual safety precautions in warehouse settings;
and be it further resolved that this organization demand Amazon immediately cease placing blind employees on leave without pay while Amazon engages in a reasonable accommodation review process;
and be it further resolved that Amazon and the National Federation of the Blind regularly participate in joint discussions to improve accessibility, accommodations, training, timely acquisition of assistive technology, and company wide policies regarding the previously mentioned issues.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: We have a motion and a second.
Mary Ann.
SPEAKER: Good afternoon. I am Mary Ann. I work at Amazon currently and have been for the past three years. I consider myself blessed and lucky to be working there, however, there are numerous issues still today with accommodations, accessibility and acquisition of assistive technology.
I believe there is power in unity, and I appreciate our Federation Family and urge you all to support this resolution. Amazon is a global corporation. If they would do things the right way, it could have such an impact nationally and globally for blind and visually impaired employees.
I'm not the only one affected. This is much bigger than me. And these practices are not okay.
(Applause)
Please support this resolution.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Is there any further discussion? Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed? Hearing none, the resolution passes up.
(Applause)
If I could get Crishelle and Raul to a microphone.
RESOLUTION 2024 05: Regarding Walmart Refusing Shopping Assistance to Blind Customers.
SPEAKER: They're not booing you, Jennifer. Whereas, each week, an estimated 255 million people visit Walmart stores worldwide, resulting in more than 648 billion dollars in total revenue in its most recent fiscal year; And whereas, as a result, Walmart is the largest retail establishment both in the United States and abroad;
And whereas, in 2024, the average Walmart location employs approximately two hundred people and comprises more than 160 thousand square feet; And whereas, according to the 2022 American Community Survey conducted by the United States Census Bureau there are approximately 8.2 million Americans who are blind or low vision;
And whereas, Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 requires places of public accommodation to make their goods and services accessible to disabled Americans unless doing so would constitute either an undue burden or a fundamental alteration;
And whereas, for decades, blind Americans have accessed the goods and services at brick-and-mortar locations by requesting a guide from the staff;
And whereas, a growing number of Walmart stores have begun refusing assistance to blind Americans, in some cases going so far as to tell blind people not to return to their stores unless they bring a sighted shopping assistant of their own;
(crowd responds)
whereas, this is a clear violation of our civil rights and is harming blind Americans' right to live with equity, autonomy, and independence: Now, therefore, be it resolved that this organization demand the Walmart corporation, and all similarly situated corporations, immediately cease refusing shopping assistance to blind Americans in accordance with our rights under Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990;
and be it further resolved that this organization demand the Walmart corporation, and all similarly situated corporations, adequately train their staff as to their obligations under the law.
SPEAKER: Move to adopt.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: We have a motion and a second. Crishelle, are you ready
SPEAKER: Yes, I am. I live in the D.C. area where there are multiple Walmarts within the area. However, when you go to those Walmarts, I have been told, well, why didn't you let us know before you come so we can have someone available. They tell me I need to go online and shop and then come pick up my items so they don't have to be the burden of taking me there, or I even have heard when someone would ask, could you be able to assist this person, and they would say, no, get somebody else to do it.
There have been cases where I have come by myself and they said, why don't you go and bring your aide with you the next time you come, as if I'm not able as an independent person to come by myself and shop. I urge that you pass this bill, as Walmarts are everywhere, including the great state we are in today. And these Super Walmarts, these Walmarts are big, and they're not accessible for us to get around and do things. I urge that you pass this bill.
(Cheers and applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Is there any further discussion? Any further discussion?
Hearing none, all those in favor of passing 2024 05 regarding Walmart's refusal to assist blind customers, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed? The resolution passes up. Thank you.
(Applause)
Resolution 2024 06: Regarding Silent Electric Vehicles Weighing Over 10,000 Pounds. Whereas, in the early years of the twenty first century, blind Americans noticed a new danger posed by silent hybrid and electric vehicles that were nearly undetectable to the ear on the roads;
And whereas, because of this emerging threat, the National Federation of the Blind worked with the automakers and the United States Congress to develop a solution to which all stakeholders could agree; And whereas, that solution came in the form of the Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act, which was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama in 2011, and required hybrid and electric vehicles on American roads to emit a safe level of sound;
And whereas, the United States Department of Transportation limited the scope of the final rule, published in 2016, to vehicles that weigh ten thousand pounds or less because it did not "have enough information at this time to apply the minimum acoustic requirements of this final rule to these vehicles";
And whereas, in 2023, there were more than 1,200 electric school buses and more than 6,000 electric public transportation buses on US roads; And whereas, these electric buses all weigh more than 10,000 pounds, meaning the regulation does not require them to emit an alert sound;
And whereas, these motorized behemoths are silently roaming our streets, putting blind Americans in just as much danger as the quiet cars that were the impetus for the original Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act more than a decade ago: Now, therefore, be it resolved that this organization urge the United States Department of Transportation to update its rules so that all electric vehicles, regardless of weight, are required to emit a safe level of sound.
SPEAKER: Move adoption.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: We have a motion and a second. Raul, are you ready?
SPEAKER: I am. "Behemoth," I love that word.
(chuckles)
Silent, no silent, 10,000 pounds, less or more, the fact is that vehicles can pose a danger, and when you have a silent vehicle like a car that is less than 10,000 pounds and emits a tone, that at least feel a little safer that you know a car is approaching. I rode a bus recently and the driver was proud how all the buses are electric, and they don't make a sound. I posed the question, what about safety? What if somebody doesn't see the bus coming? Hmm...
So it should be pretty... it goes without saying that I urge the committee please consider giving a thumbs up. And danger to blind people exists, and we want it to be -- we want there to be safety, and it shouldn't matter how much these vehicles weigh. The fact is they can pose a danger if they are silent, no matter how big they are.
Thank you!
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
(Applause)
We have a motion and a second. Is there any further discussion? Any further discussion?
Hearing none, all those in favor of passing 2024 06, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed?
Hearing none, 2024 06 passes up.
(Applause)
And if I can get Glen Crosby and David Andrews to the microphones.
Resolution 2024 07: Regarding Accessible Labels for Medication Dispensed Through the Department of Veterans Affairs CHAMPVA Program.
Whereas, the Civilian Health and Medical Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs (CHAMPVA) provides healthcare benefits to spouses, children, widows, and widowers of a veteran who is rated permanently and totally disabled due to a service connected disability, was rated as permanently and totally disabled due to a service connected disability at the time of death, died of a service related disability, or died on active duty and the dependents are not otherwise eligible for Department of Defense TRICARE benefits;
And whereas, as a part of the healthcare services provided through CHAMPVA, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) offers the Meds by Mail program; And whereas, through this program, the VA's Consolidated Mail and Outpatient Pharmacies fill and mail prescriptions to beneficiaries at no cost to them;
And whereas, however, this option is not available to blind beneficiaries who must rely on audible prescription reading devices, such as ScripTalk, to manage their medications safely and independently;
And whereas, audible prescription labels are not merely a convenience for blind patients, they are used to identify medications, provide dosage information, and include warnings and other important information;
And whereas, these accessibility features ensure that the blind patient can take the right medication at the right time and lessen the possibility of errors that might cause injury or death;
And whereas, according to the VA, the Consolidated Mail and Outpatient Pharmacies cannot currently support the use of audible prescription reading devices through the Meds by Mail program due to the complexity of audio label technology and the requirement that specific Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) labels be applied to each prescription bottle; And whereas, the alternative offered by CHAMPVA involves acquiring the blind user's prescriptions from a retail pharmacy, which forces them to incur a 25 percent copay until they meet a 3,000-dollar deductible, a cost not incurred by sighted beneficiaries who can receive their prescriptions through the Meds by Mail program;
And whereas, Paragraph (a)(1) of 38 C.F.R. 17.274 addresses cost sharing exceptions within the CHAMPVA program but does not include an exception for blind beneficiaries who must get their prescriptions filled at a retail pharmacy because they need to use an audible prescription reading device;
And whereas, since there is currently no way for a blind beneficiary to use the free Meds by Mail option if they need to access information about their medication using an audible label, amending the regulations would be a reasonable accommodation for those beneficiaries;
And whereas, amending the regulation is only part of the solution since using a retail pharmacy can also present a transportation barrier that the Meds by Mail program eliminates for blind program participants, making a permanent solution to inclusion in the Meds by Mail program a critical necessity to accessibility for the blind: Now, therefore, be it resolved that this organization call upon the Department of Veterans Affairs to develop a means by which blind CHAMPVA beneficiaries who must use an audible prescription reading device can receive their medications using the Meds by Mail program;
and be it further resolved that we urge the Department of Veterans affairs to amend 38 C.F.R. 17.274 (a)(1) to include an exception to cost sharing for blind beneficiaries who choose to use the option of obtaining medications from a retail pharmacy in order to have access to the important information provided by an audible prescription reading device.
GLEN: Mr. Chairman, this is Glen Crosby, and I urge the adoption of this resolution. I believe it explains the issue pretty well.I am the president of the National Federation of the Blind Senior Division.We have been working Consent Academy this issue for several months, along with our team in our National Center.
And the Veterans Administration simply says we can't provide it.
So I hope we can adopt it and begin to work on it and make this accessible to all blind recipients who are qualified for this program.
SPEAKER: Move do pass
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thank you, Glen. We have a motion to pass and a second. Is there any further discussion?
Lewis: Anil.
ANIL: Thanks for bringing this resolution up. I think we owe the veterans the best that we can offer.
(Applause)
As it is that our advocacy and policy department and blindness initiative department will probably have to work in concert. I love working with John Peret, one of the joys of my life. I just want to get some clarity. The resolution itself says that the ultimate result we are seeking is actual inclusion in this Meds by Mail Program.
But in addition to that, do we want the option to go to the private pharmacy to still exist? Or is that still a temporary fix until we get the Meds by Mail accessibility?
CHAIRPERSON: Is that a question that you hope to get an answer to? Okay, okay...
SPEAKER: So we really don't have a preference. We want the administration to do whatever is necessary to take the steps that are necessary to make this accessible as soon as possible, and we can work on a permanent solution whenever they get ready.
ANIL: We won't wait until they're ready, we're going to do it on our terms. We're going to get it done for our veterans.
(Applause)
SPEAKER: Dr. Maurer.
SPEAKER: The way I understood the resolution, it calls for both, and I think we ought to call for both. We ought to give an option.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Any further discussion? Any further discussion?
Hearing none, all those in favor of passing Resolution 2024 07 up, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed?
Resolution 2024 07 passes up.
(Applause)
And if I can get Kyle Shackmup and Sherry to a microphone.
Resolution 2024 08: Regarding Potential Regulation of the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Visual Interpretation.
Whereas, the National Federation of the Blind is committed to advancing the lives of all blind people by ensuring that we have access to the same opportunities, information, and technology as our sighted peers;
And whereas, because most people can see and the world is full of information that is presented visually, equal access for the blind necessarily involves equal access to visual information in printed documents, scanned and photographic images, and our physical surroundings, and;
whereas, artificial intelligence (AI) technologies, particularly large language models such as ChatGPT, are increasingly being used by blind people and by visual interpretation services, such as Be My AI from Be My Eyes and Access AI from Aira, in order to generate detailed descriptions of images and scenes captured with smartphone cameras or imported from other sources, providing blind people with almost instantaneous access to a wealth of visual information;
And whereas, these AI implementations have proven to be enormously helpful to blind people in any number of situations, including but not limited to exploring unfamiliar locations, identifying items on store shelves, analyzing printed documents, describing vacation photos, and much more;
And whereas, overly restrictive practices and regulations on AI used in this manner, particularly limitations on the description of human faces and other important visual details involving people and places, could significantly hamper the effectiveness of these technologies and diminish their value to the blind community: for example, one iteration of Be My AI would not describe an image at all if it contained any identifiable characteristic of any human being, including the person taking the image, making it useless until the problem was fixed;
And whereas, while such severe limitations can be problematic, it is also essential to balance the benefits of AI technologies with the need to protect the privacy of individuals captured in images, ensuring that identifiable information about them is properly protected from harmful storage, dissemination, and use;
And whereas, other details captured in images may also present challenges, such as images of artwork that is the intellectual property of its creator or images of copyrighted text;
And whereas, the rapid advances in AI technology in just the past couple of years have both excited and alarmed the public, and consequently legislative bodies and regulatory agencies are already considering laws and regulations around the deployment and use of these technologies;
And whereas, the development of AI regulations must consider both the accessibility needs of blind individuals and other rights such as privacy and intellectual property rights;
And whereas, without the voices of blind people providing our expertise and lived experience, the wrong regulatory balance may be struck in addressing the role of AI technology as applied to our needs: Now, therefore, be it resolved that this organization urge Congress and relevant federal agencies to work closely with blind Americans to develop AI legislation and regulations that:
1. Allow AI technologies to continue to be used to provide detailed and meaningful descriptions of scenes, documents, and images to blind and low vision individuals without undue restrictions, ensuring these technologies remain effective and beneficial to the blind;
and
2. Implement sensible protections that prevent images taken, imported, or otherwise collected for the purpose of providing visual descriptions to the blind from being stored, disseminated, or otherwise misused in ways that violate the rights of others.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: We have a motion to adopt. We have a second. Kyle.
KYLE: Thank you, Mr. Chair, members of the committee. Even as many of these technologies are still in beta releases and they're very early adopter phases, they provide immense and empowering capabilities that we haven't had before. They are yet another tool in our toolbox for independence and equality, and they give in some cases just unprecedented access and speed of information that we haven't had previously.
And yet as we saw last year and referenced in the resolution, even giving the benefit of the doubt, well meaning policymakers can take that access away when uninformed about the needs of blind users of these transformational technologies.
This resolution calls for us to participate in, of course, the development of such technologies, but the regulatory regime surrounding them, and demand that they not be able to take such access away from us, and in that way, though the subject of this resolution is artificial intelligence, it's just like our organization has been doing for decades, demanding that blind people have full and equal access to whatever the technology de jure is. I recommend the committee to pass. Thank you.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Is there any further discussion?
Lewis. Anil.
ANIL: I definitely support this resolution. I think anything that anyone can see with their eyes and take a picture with their phone, we should have access to whatever technology we need to get access. My only concern -- and I don't think this is going to deter me from voting and supporting it, be the name of -- I mean, the last resolve where it says "sensible," that is so subjective. I think that's going to be a little problematic, but I think that we can weather through it.
CHAIRPERSON: Any further discussion? Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of passing... Excuse me. 2024 08. Please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed? Hearing none, 2024 08 passes up.
(Applause)
SPEAKER: And Ronza, make sure you have a mic near you again.
Resolution 2024 09: Regarding Inaccessible Insulin Pumps. Whereas, the National Federation of the Blind is dedicated to advancing the lives of all blind people by ensuring equal and dignified treatment in all aspects of life, including healthcare;
And whereas, access to healthcare technology is crucial for the health and well being of individuals with diabetes, including those who are blind or have low vision;
And whereas, nearly all insulin pumps and related devices currently on the market lack accessible nonvisual features, rendering them difficult or impossible for blind individuals to independently use and manage their diabetes effectively;
And whereas, inaccessible insulin pumps not only pose significant barriers to daily diabetes management tasks but also contribute to increased health risks, diminished quality of life, and decreased independence for blind individuals;
And whereas, accessible technology is essential for ensuring that blind individuals have equal opportunities to monitor and manage their healthcare independently, including diabetes management;
And whereas, a 2023 study published by the National Institutes of Health shows that diabetic retinopathy is the leading cause of blindness among working aged adults in the United States;
And whereas, despite the growing prevalence of diabetes among the blind population, insulin pump manufacturers have yet to fully address the accessibility needs of blind users in their product designs and development efforts: Now, therefore, be it resolved that this organization demand insulin pump manufacturers and developers, including Medtronic, Tandem Diabetes Care, Insulet Corporation, Beta Bionics, and other industry leaders prioritize accessibility in the design and development of all insulin pumps and related devices;
and be it further resolved that we call upon insulin pump manufacturers and developers actively to engage with the accessibility experts of the National Federation of the Blind throughout the design, development, and testing phases to ensure that insulin pumps are fully accessible to blind and low vision users.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
SPEAKER: Move adoption.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: We have a motion to adopt. We have a second. Sherry.
SHERRY: I'm Sherry Sherrick. Thank you. I urge the committee to pass this resolution, and I know it's specific to insulin pumps, and there is a reason for that.
So insulin pump technology has been around for decades, and I had a pancreas transplant for 20 years that was rejected in 2022.
And I have had multiple, multiple hospitalizations and problems related to diabetes since my pancreas rejected, and I have to say that I was shocked that after 20 years of pancreas transplantation, that insulin pumps weren't accessible yet. I really thought they would be.
And I also really feel strongly about this, because diabetes is serious, and diabetes, we need every opportunity to make sure that we can have the best blood sugar control and the best quality of life, because now...
(Applause)
Thank you. Here we are. 2024.
And I really hope that we can pass this resolution. Thank you.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Is there any further discussion?
Any further discussion? Hearing none, 2024...
Excuse me, hearing none, all those in favor, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed?
Hearing none... at the right time...
(chuckles)
Hearing none, resolution 2024 09 passes up to the convention.
(Applause)
Resolution 2024 10: Regarding the Accessibility of Destination Oriented and Touch Screen Panel Controlled Elevators.
Whereas, destination-oriented elevators, also known as "smart elevators" or "dispatch elevators" are elevators that typically do not contain destination or floor number buttons inside the elevator car;
And whereas, passengers indicate their destination floors using a common keypad that controls all elevators in the area; And whereas, the technology running such elevator programs assigns the specific elevator that the passenger should take to reach the passenger's desired floor or destination;
And whereas, the elevator car that is assigned to transport the passenger is programmed for the specific destination in advance of the passenger boarding the elevator car, the goal of which is to move passengers more efficiently to their destinations by reducing the number of times an elevator stops per trip;
And whereas, while some smart elevator control panels operate based on floor numbers, others operate based on a directory containing specific offices or individuals rather than floors, meaning an individual seeking to visit a doctor, for example, would have to navigate the elevator directory to find the doctor's name or practice rather than selecting the floor of the doctor;
And whereas, many of the directory-based destination-oriented elevators are not accessible to the blind at all, with many of those claiming to be accessible requiring significantly more time and effort for a blind user to choose a destination or floor than a sighted user, rendering such elevators functionally inaccessible;
And whereas, destination-oriented elevators are a fairly new form of technology, gaining popularity in the last decade, particularly in hotels and recreation facilities, high rise commercial and residential buildings, cruise ships, and government and office buildings;
And whereas, the number of destination-oriented elevators is expected to significantly rise, with a current market value of approximately 22.4 billion dollars, which is predicted to reach 50.3 billion dollars by 2032, the majority of which is in the United States;
And whereas, the accessibility features of destination oriented elevators are often inadequate to be functionally usable for the blind, including such issues as audio announcements that are garbled, tinny, or otherwise hard to hear, audio announcements and non visual chimes that cannot be heard during peak or busy periods, Braille and tactile markings that are missing or not accurate, and/or keypad controls that are not tactilely discernible;
And whereas, there has also been an increase in the installation of traditional on demand destination elevators that contain touch screen destination and floor buttons that are not tactilely discernible;
And whereas, though many of these elevators have an accessibility button, which when activated, enables the passenger to listen to a menu of options, usually hierarchical with multiple levels in the hierarchy, and press the accessibility button once the preferred selection is spoken;
And whereas, the passenger must wait for the entire menu of options to be spoken up to the desired floor before the passenger can make a floor selection, for example having to listen to the audio announcement list floors one through thirty individually as well as the five to thirty seconds of silence in between each floor number, before being able to select floor thirty;
And whereas, this results in the blind passenger spending considerable time, often at least several minutes, waiting for the elevator to cycle through the audio prompts, while a sighted passenger can make their selection in moments;
And whereas, the single accessibility button method for on demand destination elevators with touch screen controls may be technically accessible, but it is functionally inaccessible, inefficient, and demoralizing for blind passengers;
And whereas, The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA) requires that elevators be accessible to passengers with disabilities;
And whereas, the United States Department of Justice is responsible for enforcing the ADA, including violations to elevator accessibility requirements;
And whereas, the United States Access Board is charged with providing accessibility guidelines and standards for certain physical spaces and the built environment including elevators;
And whereas, blind people have the right to move about our communities, hotels, and recreation facilities, and the commercial environment using elevators that are both technically and functionally accessible: Now, therefore, be it resolved by the National Federation of the Blind that we demand elevator manufacturers design destination oriented and traditional destination on demand elevators that are both technically and functionally accessible;
and be it further resolved that we urge elevator manufacturers to work with the National Federation of the Blind to ensure that design and development of both destination oriented and on demand destination elevators is functionally accessible and efficient for blind and low vision users;
and be it further resolved that we strongly urge the Department of Justice to immediately enforce the ADA with regard to technical and functional accessibility of destination oriented and on demand destination touchscreen-controlled elevators, including correction and remediation of functionally inaccessible elevators;
and be it further resolved that we call on the United States Access Board to swiftly promulgate standards for technical and functional accessibility of both destination-oriented elevators and on demand destination elevators including those with touch screen controls.
SPEAKER: Move adoption.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: We have move adoption and second. Ronza.
RONZA: To me, smart elevators just aren't that smart. They're ridiculously frustrating and painful to use. Imagine going to a doctor's office and having to disclose to some random stranger where you are going because the elevator is controlled only by an inaccessible directory. You all likely remember how some of the elevators you've experienced that make you pick your floor before getting on it are hard to hear or you can't get too quickly enough before the doors close.
This spring I used an elevator which has buttons inside that would have let me choose my floor, but they were in inaccessible touch screen. There was an accessibility button that read me the floor numbers, but I had to wait for it to read floor 1 8... then there was a 30 second pause, to which I'm not going to subject you.
(Laughter)
Then it would read to me, "floors 9 16". And then a second 30 second pause that I'm not going to subject you to. And then so on and so on.
Then I pressed the button for my range of floors, and it says to me, "Floor 25". Then there is another 30 second pause to which I'm not going to subject you, because Donald will kill me.
And then "Floor 26". And then another 30 second pause to which again I will not subject you. And on and on and on. It took me literally 6 full minutes to program in to get me to elevator Floor Number 28.
Companies argue this is technically accessible but it's not functionally accessible. Moreover, it's not accessibility. It's torture!
(Laughter)
Elevator manufacturers need to fix this, and the government needs to hold them accountable. For these reasons I urge the committee to support this resolution.
Thank you.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Is there any further discussion? Any further discussion on Resolution 2024 10? 2024 10. Hearing none, all those in favor of passing Resolution 2024 10, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed?
Hearing none, the resolution passes. Let's get some accessible elevators!
(Applause)
And if I can get Ethan...
Resolution 2024 11: Regarding the Adoption of Inclusive Digital Maps by Title IV Higher Education Institutions and Federal Agencies.
Whereas, over thirty million digital maps are currently available on publicly facing websites worldwide for professional and personal use;
And whereas, blind, deafblind, and low vision individuals have extremely limited access to the vital geographic information presented in digital maps;
And whereas, alternatives such as text descriptions, turn by turn directions, tables, and nearby address searches fail to convey the same geographic information inherent to maps;
And whereas, digital maps often have poor contrast, lack full keyboard accessibility, lack a visible focus, lack interface elements that can be programmatically determined or set, contain keyboard focus traps, have buttons and other interactive elements that are too small, and fail to handle zoom up to 200 percent;
And whereas, the paper tactile maps that may be provided as the only alternative to a digital map are not part of the website, require physical contact to view, are simplified, are typically inaccessible to low vision users, take days or weeks to be produced, and are often out of date;
And whereas, visual interpreting services and chat-based alternatives can only provide answers to basic questions about the map, do not facilitate spatial knowledge acquisition, are not available to everyone desiring to view the map, are not part of the website's accessibility, and are not a substitute for compliance to digital accessibility legislation;
And whereas, inclusive digital maps, effectively utilized in over a hundred published research articles and nearly a thousand games over the past two decades, have shown that blind individuals can both independently create maps and attain a level of spatial comprehension equivalent to that of sighted individuals using visual maps, encompassing the ability to accurately grasp survey knowledge, including distance, direction, orientation, shape, size, and the overall layout of a map;
And whereas, inclusive digital maps are fully Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) AA compliant, and allow low vision users to fully manipulate the interface, including, but not limited to, adjusting contrast, using patterns instead of colors, adjusting feature border width, adjusting spacing, using the map as it's zoomed in 200 percent, using the map with the keyboard, and having a clear visible focus;
And whereas, Title IV higher education institutions and federal agencies in the United States currently use digital maps that are not accessible to screen reader users and fail to meet even the basic WCAG A compliance;
And whereas, these current practices by Title IV higher education institutions and federal agencies are in violation of multiple digital accessibility laws, including Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act (as Title IV educational institutions), Section 508
(through being a federal agency), Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (as state or local entities);
And whereas, blind, deafblind, and low vision users have the right not only to fully consume spatial information from digital maps, but have the right to be creators, designers, and editors of digital maps: Now, therefore, be it resolved that this organization call upon Title IV higher education institutions and federal agencies in the United States to, over the next three years, simultaneously with the new ADA Title II rule, implement inclusive digital map technologies that are at least WCAG AA compliant for all geographic content on their websites and mobile applications, including but not limited to campus maps, accessibility maps, parking maps, habitat maps, walking maps, evacuation maps, building maps, topographic maps, road maps, weather maps, voting maps, emergency maps, climate maps, land use maps, cadastral maps, transportation maps, and utility maps;
and be it further resolved that this organization demand that these Title IV higher education institutions and federal agencies also implement an inclusive digital map editor for use by blind, deafblind, and low vision employees and students, ensuring full participation in updating and creating geographic information;
and be it further resolved that this organization urge the United States Department of Education Office for Civil Rights to publish guidance affirming that digital maps are included in their accessibility mandate;
and be it further resolved that this organization urge the United States Access Board to publish systematic criteria for evaluating digital inclusive map accessibility, thereby ensuring that all Title IV universities and federal agencies comply with existing laws to make all content, including digital maps, equally accessible to everyone;
and be it further resolved that we call upon all the Title IV higher education institutions and federal agencies to work with the National Federation of the Blind to implement and evaluate systems which will meet the map reading and creation needs of the blind and low vision citizens of the United States.
SPEAKER: Move adoption.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: We have the motion. We have a second. And Ethan, are you by a mic?
ETHAN: Yes, I am. All right, so I'm going to really quickly tell everyone about a story that I'm sure you guys have all experienced a version of, right?
So I currently attend UC Berkeley in California. One of...
(Cheering)
... supposedly the most forward thinking, most accessible campuses around the world. And I would say that I'm pretty well versed on my campus. And there is one building I need to get to at the beginning of one semester. So you know, I'm using turn by turn navigation, using some of the other navigations apps that I typically rely on.
And the problem with this section of campus is that it curves a lot and turns a lot and there is a lot of elevations, a lot of steps, a lot of lawns, a lot of different obstacles and tables you have to get through. Unfortunately, things like Google Maps, Voice Vista, whatever you have, they just don't tell you a lot of this information, right? I gave myself ample time to get there and I was till 10 minutes late. I was there 25 minutes early so I could scope out that particular area and find my classroom and I walked in 10 minutes late. That's not something that we should have to deal with. It's not something that is fair. It's not something that we should be subject to. We should be given all the information that other sighted users are given when they look at a map. Which is they are given a lot of shapes, sizes, directions, general layouts of things, such as points and lines and polygons and everything in between so we have equal access to what we are feeling and where we are going.
So having said that, like, I was given a tactile map, but, again, that doesn't tell me any of this stuff. So I would urge this resolution to be passed, and I thank you all for your time.
(Cheers and applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Is there any further discussion? Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of passing Resolution 2024 11,
please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed?
Hearing none, Resolution 2024 11 passes up.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: I just want to make sure we get Chris Danielson to a microphone.
Resolution 2024 12: Regarding the Accessibility of Social Media Management Tools. whereas, the National Federation of the Blind champions accessibility as a means of achieving full participation by the blind in all areas of academics, employment, and recreation;
And whereas, social media marketing is an industry in which blind people can excel given accessible technology and other accommodations;
And whereas, social media management tools including Buffer, Hootsuite, Sprinklr, Sprout Social, Zoho Social, and others are an industry standard, allowing professionals to centralize and analyze social media marketing efforts;
And whereas, the vast majority of these managers have web and app interfaces that present accessibility issues, preventing blind people from using them effectively, if at all: Now, therefore, be it resolved that this organization urge social media management products including but not limited to Buffer, Hootsuite, Sprinklr, Sprout Social, and Zoho Social to incorporate blind people's user experiences and expertise when evaluating the accessibility and usability of their products through collaboration with the National Federation of the Blind and others;
and be it further resolved that this organization demand that all social media management product developers remediate their products for accessibility, thus making the social media marketing industry more inclusive for all blind people.
(Applause)
SPEAKER: Move adoption.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: We have a motion. We have a second. Chris.
CHRIS: Thank you, Chair Porterfield.
Fellow Federationists, regardless of what any of us think about the utility and impact on our society of social media, the fact is that -- and I realize the jury is out on that. The fact is that it is a form of mass communication that is used not only by individuals but entities at all levels.
And being able to use the analytical and scheduling and other tools that are available through these social media management tools, which often allow the management of several social media accounts, those are increasingly used by print communications professionals.
So it is desirable, indeed, urgent, that they be accessible if blind people are going to be employed as communications professionals.
So with that said, I believe the resolution speaks for itself and I urge the committee to recommend it to the convention floor.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Is there any further discussion? Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor of passing Resolution 2024 12 up, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed?
Hearing none, the Resolution 2024 12 passes up.
(Applause)
And if I could get Yasmin and Debbie Wonder to a microphone. Resolution 2024 13: Regarding Microsoft's Free New Outlook. Whereas, Microsoft is a company which has, historically, invested a tremendous amount of time and effort to make many of its products accessible to the blind and, by so doing, enabled literally thousands of blind people to succeed in life and employment;
And whereas, examples of accessible programs from Microsoft include, but are not limited to, Microsoft Word (for creating and editing documents), Microsoft Excel (to create and manage spreadsheets), and Microsoft Outlook (to send and receive emails and organize calendar events);
And whereas, the aforementioned software particularly those versions running under the Windows operating system provide a plethora of useful keyboard commands which enhance the productivity for nonvisual users who cannot point and click with a mouse and whose livelihoods, productivity, and independence are directly related to their ability to perform work effectively and efficiently;
And whereas, information available online about keyboard commands for the New Outlook clearly demonstrates that the New Outlook does not contain all of the built in keyboard commands that nonvisual users of the paid version of Outlook have available to them: Now, therefore, be it resolved that this organization call upon Microsoft to ensure that its free New Outlook software contains a set of keyboard commands that are as rich, robust, and as useful to the blind as the keyboard commands available in its Outlook Office software;
and be it further resolved that this organization call upon Microsoft to ensure that new products have the same level of accessibility as products they are replacing.
(Applause)
SPEAKER: Move adoption.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay, we have a motion to adopt and a second. Yasmin.
SPEAKER:
YASMIN: Good afternoon, everyone. So many employers ask you to -- that you know how to use Outlook. And I have seen it in many job descriptions, that you need to have Outlook and you need to know it and you need to learn I and be able to use it.
One of the problems is that us, the blind, we may not have the money to buy 365, which is also have a subscription, and it will be good if you can get the free outlook, which is not right now accessible, to be able to practice and do our training, or whatever we want to do to be ready, in other words, a job ready, to do the job, if you get a job, when we get a job. No "if." "When."
So the problem that I faced a few months ago was -- I tried to download Microsoft products. I had a student in home addiction and there was no Outlook with that. I called Microsoft and they said, well, you can get a free Outlook, but it is not going to be fully accessible. I said, no, that is not going to happen. We will have to do something about it. So that is why this resolution came about. Thank you.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Is there any further discussion?
SPEAKER: Lewis.
CHAIRPERSON: Anil.
ANIL: Definitely supporting the resolution but I did want to reassure, once this was brought to our attention, we immediately reached out to Microsoft and we started to secure some commitments that they are going to address this issue post haste.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Did I hear somebody? Ronza.
RONZA: I appreciate that, but those who have been waiting on SharePoint for 15 years don't trust Microsoft any further than we can throw them.
CHAIRPERSON: Any further discussion or comment? Hearing none... All those in favor of passing Resolution 2024 13 up, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed? Hearing none, the Resolution passes up.
The next resolution was brought to us -- or forwarded to us from the Missouri affiliate. But other than the affiliate, as a proponent, there is no individual proponent for this resolution. Is anyone from Missouri here to speak on this resolution?
SPEAKER: Someone is asking...
CHAIRPERSON: Regarding Continuous Glucose Monitoring by Blind People.
SPEAKER: Debbie.
CHAIRPERSON: I believe Debbie sent word she was not the proponent of this resolution. (overlapping comments)
SPEAKER: She's coming.
CHAIRPERSON: Was it the last resolution that was in reference to?
SPEAKER: She meant the last one.
SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman.
CHAIRPERSON: Dr. Maurer.
DR. MAURER: I was mindful that we've got a policy that says we have to have a physical proponent in the room, otherwise we don't consider them.
CHAIRPERSON: That is correct.
SPEAKER: I am here.
CHAIRPERSON: David, if you can get to a microphone.
SPEAKER: I am here.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Debbie.
Resolution 2024 14: Regarding Continuous Glucose Monitors and Their Use by Blind People.
whereas, Continuous Glucose Monitors (CGMs) are crucial for the effective management of diabetes, significantly reducing the need for fingerstick blood tests, which are particularly invasive for blind people who rely on their tactile sense for reading Braille and performing other tasks;
And whereas, the majority of CGMs come with reader devices that are not accessible to blind people, because these devices provide output solely in a visual format, thereby excluding blind people from independently monitoring their blood glucose levels;
And whereas, Medicare mandates the purchase of a reader device before approving sensor coverage, placing a financial burden on blind people who cannot use these readers, forcing them to seek alternatives and often less accessible means to access their CGM data;
And whereas, Medicare's policy of allowing the replacement or upgrade of CGM devices only once every five years limits access to technological advancements that could offer significant health management improvements for people with diabetes, particularly affecting those who are blind;
And whereas, the reliance on smartphone technology for accessing CGM data, while beneficial for some, excludes those who cannot afford such technology or lack the skills to use it, further limiting the independence of blind people in managing their diabetes;
And whereas, the resolution of these issues requires the attention and action of several entities, including CGM manufacturers, Medicare, private insurance companies, and regulatory bodies: Now, therefore, be it resolved that we urge manufacturers of CGM devices to prioritize the development of reader devices accessible to blind and low vision people, ensuring these essential health management tools are usable by all who need them;
and be it further resolved that the National Federation of the Blind calls upon Medicare to reevaluate its policies regarding the upgrade and replacement of medical devices such as CGMs, to ensure that technological advancements are accessible to beneficiaries, particularly those who are blind, based on functional improvements rather than arbitrary time constraints;
and be it further resolved that this organization call upon relevant authorities, including Medicare, the Food and Drug Administration
(FDA), the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), to enact policy changes that reflect the needs of blind people.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
SPEAKER: Move adoption.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: We have a motion to adopt. We somewhere a second. Debbie.
DEBBIE: Yes, I'm here. So earlier this year -- well, first of all, I am an insulin dependent diabetic, and I have a tendency to drop low during the night when I am sound asleep, risking my life. Earlier this year I was wearing a Libre 2CGM, and that particular unit did not have alarms on it that would wake you up. So very vital.
So when the CGM Libre 3 came out, because I had already been given a reader device within less than five years, Medicare did not want to pay. I was not allowed to advance to the CGM that could actually save my life if I dropped low during the night.
So we had to pay out of pocket before.
So I was able to pay out of pocket, but many blind people cannot afford to do so. And should not have that burden put on us. If they're not going to give us part of a medical device that is accessible to us, then we should not have to pay for it. And so please support this.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Is there any further discussion? Any further discussion?
Resolution 2024 14. Hearing none, those in favor of passing up Resolution 2024 14, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed?
Hearing none, Resolution 2024 14 passes up.
(Applause)
Resolution 2024 15: Regarding Collaborating with Technology Companies on an Accessibility Solutions Framework.
Whereas, in an age where technology plays a critical role in all aspects of society, the National Federation of the Blind has been relentless in its advocacy for accessible technology as one means to advance the lives of all blind people, the effectiveness of this advocacy being evident through a reflection on how much more information to which we have dynamic access today as opposed to forty years ago;
And whereas, accolades mainstream companies receive for their accessibility initiatives are well deserved, as the blind have immediate access to computers, smartphones, and other life changing tools in the palms of our hands for a fraction of what they used to cost;
And whereas, achieving the degree of accessibility we enjoy today required the use of a range of advocacy tools, including building strong relationships, being thought leaders, and, when absolutely necessary, legislative and legal action;
And whereas, while impressive innovation continues at pace, the provision of accessibility by mainstream companies has created new advocacy challenges involving the quality and reliability of some of the tools we use, resulting from a poorer standard of products for the blind consisting of show stopping bugs that significantly degrade our ability to use some mainstream devices and would be unacceptable to the sighted, including:
If your screen reader suddenly and regularly stops speaking, which would be the equivalent of a sighted person's screen flickering and then completely blanking out at random intervals;
If you are typing on your smartphone using Braille Screen Input and you are regularly experiencing unexpected behavior that slows you down or results in you typing gibberish, which would be the equivalent of the virtual keyboard being next to useless for a sighted person;
If you are blind and wear hearing aids, and your screen reader is quiet to the point of being unusable when on a phone call, which would be the equivalent of a sighted person having their screen so dim every time they make a call that they can't see it well enough to use it;
If you, in good faith, install the beta of an operating system and then find that your screen reader doesn't work at all on it, which would be equivalent to a sighted person installing a beta, understanding that there may be defects, but finding with horror that their screen was blank, making their device completely useless;
If you scrimp and save to buy a popular Braille display, only to find you can't connect your smartphone to it via Bluetooth because a protocol about which there was an industry wide consensus, and that the company promised to support, hasn't been implemented, which would be the equivalent of a sighted person buying one of the leading printers on the market today, only to find that the operating system developer hasn't kept their promise to support it;
And whereas, a poorer standard of product for the blind is not merely a legal issue; it is a moral and financial one, because if competent blind people are unable to perform their jobs due to serious accessibility defects in a mainstream product that are not fixed in a timely manner, this perpetuates the myth of incapacity of the blind and threatens our ability to support ourselves and our families;
and
(Applause)
whereas, when the blind, just like the sighted, purchase a product, we have a reasonable expectation that the product is fit for purpose, we integrate the technology into our lives, we come to rely on it, and there should not be such egregious accessibility defects that a blind person is left unable to benefit from the tools readily accessible to the sighted;
And whereas, the National Federation of the Blind recognizes that our active engagement in addressing this problem is essential, but requires information and collaboration to be effective: Now, therefore, be it resolved that we call on any and all technology companies that have built accessibility features into their products to consult with the National Federation of the Blind in the development, implementation, and publishing of a framework that provides a clear definition of the type of accessibility bug that is so critical that it requires extraordinary remedial action beyond the usual software release cycle;
and be it further resolved that with this framework in place, these technology companies should collaborate with the National Federation of the Blind to resolve the under resourcing that is contributing to this situation, which should include employing the talent of more blind employees throughout the product development and testing cycle;
and be it further resolved that each technology company should establish a public database of its accessibility defects, which allows users to identify which bugs have already been submitted and what priority they have been accorded;
and be it further resolved that technology companies making these commitments use Global Accessibility Awareness Day as an opportunity to provide a transparent, independently audited report that demonstrates their progress as measured against the framework that has been established for their products.
SPEAKER: So moved.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: We have a motion. We have a second. David.
DAVE: This is Dave Andrews, the source of much of your email.
(Laughter)
(Cheers and applause)
I have worked in the areas of assistive technology and accessibility in product management, and it seems to me that this is a reasonable resolution, and it pretty much speaks for itself.
The most technology companies have frameworks or other things in place to track bugs and prioritize them and show when they are going to be fixed, and the serious companies have these for accessibility issues. They are sometimes called Accessibility Timelines or other things. And because we are so dependent on this technology, we heard some of these medical resolutions here. Our lives may depend on it. It doesn't seem unreasonable for us to know what the bugs are and when they are going to be fixed, and once they are fixed, that should be acknowledged. Some companies do it and they have these timelines, but not all companies do. In particular a large fruit company, they're not the only one...
(chuckles)
But they won't ever admit that there is a bug. They won tell you that it was fixed or what it involved or anything. As I said, because we are so dependent on this, it is information that will help us. Thank you!
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Is there any further discussion? Any further discussion?
Hearing none, all those in -- did I just hear somebody call?
Okay.
All those in favor of voting to pass Resolution 2024 15 up, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed? Resolution 2024 15 will pass up.
(Applause)
Sounds like our committee is getting a little bigger with the votes. Okay. If I can get Dennis Miller and Michael Richardson to microphones, please.
Resolution 2024 16: Regarding Medicare and Hearing Aids for Deafblind Individuals.
whereas, the National Federation of the Blind is the transformative membership and advocacy organization of blind people in the United States;
And whereas, according to the 2022 American Community Survey conducted by the United States Census Bureau, nearly 65 percent of blind people are either unemployed or underemployed;
And whereas, blind people rely heavily on hearing to obtain information needed for communication, accessing information, orientation and travel, and participation in society and the workplace;
And whereas, the loss of hearing as a blind person renders them as deafblind and significantly affects their access to information, particularly for those who lose hearing in later life;
And whereas, it is extremely difficult, if not impossible, to obtain hearing aids through Medicare, even though they are almost always of benefit to deafblind individuals;
And whereas, research links unaddressed hearing loss with dementia which leads to expensive healthcare needs that far exceed the cost of hearing aids: Now, therefore, be it resolved by the National Federation of the Blind that this organization call upon the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services to establish a uniform exception clause to allow Medicare to provide hearing aids, as prescribed by an audiologist, to deafblind individuals who are eligible for Medicare.
SPEAKER: Move adoption.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: We have a motion to adopt. We have a second. Dennis.
DENNIS: I rise to speak on this resolution as someone who has been battling Medicare seemingly forever. As a deafblind individual, someone who wears hearing aids and currently wearing cochlear implants, I know firsthand the struggle that those of us who need this type of equipment face when trying to get them funded.
Hearing aids and cochlear implants as well are very, very expensive, and most of us cannot afford them.
However, those of us who need them are not in a position where we can function without them. I personally found myself in a situation a few years ago where I was basically totally deafblind. I had lost my ability to hear, and defending did not exist at that time for me to get the equipment that I needed.
So what we are asking for here is just for a straightforward approach to funding hearing aids. I know some people have had success getting their hearing aids through Medicare and others haven't. It seems to depend on who makes the request and how it is made, and the mood of the person who takes it that day at Medicare.
And we are asking that there be a more straightforward, concise approach to Medicare paying for hearing aids, and that Medicare understand that these hearing aids are prohibitively priced, and what is happening is that a lot of individuals are getting cheaper models that they can afford or that they can get friended, or they are not meeting their needs. If a hearing aid doesn't meet your needs, there is really no sense in wearing it.
So I hope that the committee will consider passage of this amendment -- of this resolution, and I thank you for the opportunity to speak today.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Is there any further discussion?
Any further discussion?
Hearing none, all those in favor of passing Resolution 2024 16 up, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed? Hearing none, Resolution 2024 Regarding Medicare and Hearing aids for Deafblind Individuals will pass up to the convention.
(Applause)
Resolution 2024 17: Regarding Audio Described Library Content.
Whereas, the Institute of Museum and Library Services estimates that two thirds of all Americans have library cards;
And whereas, many blind individuals avoid registering for or using their library cards because they believe books and video content will not be accessible to them;
And whereas, an increasing number of public library systems contract with Hoopla and other third-party providers of streaming or downloadable library content that do not pass through audio description or other accessible content information;
And whereas, Hoopla has thus far chosen to build its main streaming software incompletely, so the audio description content originally included with the video content isn't passed on to blind users, ironically shutting blind patrons out from content that has already been made accessible;
And whereas, blind library patrons and allied librarians have been asking Hoopla to add an option for consuming audio description content for nearly eight years;
And whereas, Hoopla has not rolled out this feature and has no estimated timetable on its development roadmap; And whereas, this is out of compliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and many related state laws, which all generally stand for the concept that blind patrons cannot be excluded from programs and services of government, including public library systems: Now, therefore, be it resolved that this organization call upon the American Library Association (ALA) and related state libraries to halt future contracts with Hoopla or other vendors whose software does not permit inclusion of all accessibility features already present in streamed and downloaded content;
and be it further resolved that this organization demand that Hoopla immediately enable audio description in its streaming systems in response to the requests of blind patrons and concerned libraries.
SPEAKER: Move to adopt.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: We have a motion. We have a second. Michael.
MICHAEL: Hello, everyone, my name is Michael Richardson. I'm from California, and I believe that we should have the right for all library services. And Hoopla, if you say that you're a library service, then you need to get right with your audio description, because we're people too.
(Applause)
I'm also the chapter president as well.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay, thank you. Is there any further discussion? Any further discussion?
Hearing none, all those in favor of passing Resolution 2024 17 up, please signify by saying aye. (ayes respond)
Any opposed?
Hearing none, Resolution 2024 17 passes up, and if I can get Justin Salisbury and Sheila Wright to the microphones.
Resolution 2024 18: Regarding the Harmful Namesake of the Perkins School for the Blind.
Whereas, the New England Asylum for the Blind was incorporated in 1829 and opened its doors in August 1832 in Boston, Massachusetts;
And whereas, in 1839, the Asylum was renamed after Thomas Handasyd Perkins after he donated to it, and, after further name changes, that entity is known today as the Perkins School for the Blind;
And whereas, the Perkins School for the Blind, as a collective institution including its library and products, remains an important provider of blindness related services today;
And whereas, born in 1764, T. H. Perkins used money from his wealthy family to start an international trading business, where he traded slaves and the goods produced by their labor, including cotton, sugar, and rum in the Caribbean until the Haitian Revolution in 1791;
And whereas, T. H. Perkins later expanded his fortune by illegally smuggling opium into China;
And whereas, pairing valuable products, services, and educational experiences with the name of a known opium smuggler and slave trader teaches students and community members of all backgrounds that these immoral acts are not disqualifiers for being publicly honored;
And whereas, continuing to honor a known slave trader and opium smuggler perpetuates intergenerational trauma for people of all colors;
And whereas, on its website, the Perkins School for the Blind acknowledges that it has financially benefited from both the slave trade and opium smuggling, and acknowledges the problems caused by this, particularly to those in Black and Chinese communities: Now, therefore, be it resolved that this organization assert that the enslavement of human beings and illegal smuggling of opium are unequivocally immoral;
and be it further resolved that this organization applaud the Perkins School for the Blind for courageously acknowledging how it has benefited from these historical wrongs;
and be it further resolved that this organization urge the Perkins School for the Blind to advance its efforts to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion by changing its name to remove all references to Thomas Handasyd Perkins.
SPEAKER: Move adoption.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay, we have a motion to adopt, we have a second.
SPEAKER: Thank you very much, members of the committee, for taking the time to consider this resolution. My name is Justin Salisbury, and I am here with this resolution, because I believe that having an institution named after someone who has done such harmful things is harmful to people of all colors. And when that institution is a central institution in the blind community, as the Perkins School for the Blind is a major institution in the blind community, then it ends up causing harm to people of all colors in the blind community.
And it perpetuates an idea that in the face of injustice and systemic oppression, if we keep it going and we don't say anything that it's okay to not say anything in the face of that injustice.
So then when something comes around that is more directly and obviously about blindness, like the payment of subminimum wages to workers with disabilities, or the taking of children from blind parents, we are trained not to say anything. Because we have been trained in other ways in our lives to not say anything.
So that is harmful. If it was something like food contamination in the cafeteria in the school for the blind, I think it would be clear that all the children in there are blind, therefore it is our business. And here we have something that is harming everyone associated with it. And all of us generally are blind.
So I want to encourage everyone here not to downplay this issue. It is largely symbolic, but it is still something that we can speak up on. We don't stop speaking up. If we have other things we want to work on with the Perkins school, let's do it. But let's also do this.
I also want to bring up that, you know, given the role this person has had, I am a mixed-race person. It includes being part white, part black, part Indigenous and a few other things. Tapped thing is, it's entirely possible, I don't think I would ever be able to know that Perkins boats actually carried my ancestors to America. It's also entirely possible that I had white ancestors that were working on those boats as employees, I don't know. I don't think I can ever know.
But I don't need to know to know this is perpetuating systemic harm and systemic injustice and I think it's worth something for us to say something. It was named this way 200 years ago almost by people who held power at the time, who were exercising their values at the time. And what we do today is a statement of our values today at this time.
(Applause)
Lastly, I want to say that there is some statement that sometimes we should leave things alone that were not controversial at the time.
But if you say that it wasn't controversial at the time, then you are saying that the opinions of all the people of color that had a problem with this at the time did not matter. And so it was controversial at the time. Because I promise you, there were lots of enslaved people on those boats who did not want to be there.
So as we have lots of talk about increasing our work for diversity, equity and inclusion, my humble request is that we as a movement adopt this resolution and help Perkins do the same.
SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman?
SPEAKER: Lewis. Dr. Maurer.
SPEAKER: I notice that we say that we admire Perkins in this resolution for certain things and congratulate them on this and that. The last time -- they may have changed their mind, I don't know, but the last time I asked the superintendent of the school whether or not he would oppose subminimum wages, he would not oppose subminimum wages, and consequently, I'm not sure that we want to praise Perkins over much.
CHAIRPERSON: Any further discussion?
SPEAKER: Lewis.
CHAIRPERSON: Anil and then Chancey.
ANIL: So off the bat, they changed the name from "the asylum," which I think everybody finds offensive. So nobody had any problem with that. And I'll be honest with you, I had no knowledge of the history of Perkins until this resolution. But my ignorance has gone away.
And I can't sit here and respect myself and not do anything now that I'm enlightened about the history of how they received the money in the first place off of back of my ancestors. I mean, I don't see my family name credited in this institution.
I do think... well, I do think it will have an impact. I think this resolution will hopefully maybe reach some of the funding sources and I think it will give some people an opportunity to make conscious decisions. I would not want to go to the Venable KKK School for the Blind.
I mean, I don't think... I don't think that this may be on the radar of most, but I'm prayerful that it will be on the radar of enough.
So I support this resolution.
(Applause)
CHANCEY:
SPEAKER: Bay Don.
SPEAKER: I want us to concern a modern parallel that made it easier for me to process it all. Which is the Sackler family. The Sackler family, too, has been responsible for drug addiction for human misery at scale and the art museums including the Tate Modern and Met have been asked to reckon with this legacy whether or not that legacy was in their usual lane.
And they found that to foster a welcoming atmosphere to be inclusive and to occupy the world that we live in now with the standards that we have now, taking that Sackler name off the galleries was the right thing to do.
And I think likewise this is our time to lead courageously and embrace collective action as our core values say that we should and rise to
the occasion and reckon with the legacy and invite Perkins to move forward to something that makes everyone feel welcome so that they can focus on the important business of living confident blind lives.
(Applause)
SPEAKER: Everette.
SPEAKER: O'Connor.
SPEAKER: So I've been wrestling with this resolution as well and I definitely hear the discussion from people I respect, like Anil, Justin, and others.
The only question I want to bring is whether are we sliding down a slippery slope? Are we going to ask... are we going to ask the Carol Center for the Blind to change their name? Are we going to ask the American Foundation for the Blind to drop Helen Keller from their whole history because we all know Helen Keller definite literature has controversies. There is a lot of things that I think we have to think about in how we move forward with this. That is the only thing I'm wrestling with this resolution, and I just feel like the discussion needs to happen. I'm not saying I'm against the resolution at this point. I'm just on the fence and kind of struggling with it. And that's why I wanted to bring this forward. Thank you.
SPEAKER: Lewis.
SPEAKER: O'Connor.
SPEAKER: Hold on, folks. O'Connor.
SPEAKER: So I want to second what I have heard from Dr. Maury and from Everette. And the part that leads me to oppose this resolution, unfortunately, is one of the whereases, where it says they are the provider of valuable products, services and educational opportunities. I like my Perkins Brailler, but I don't like the outcomes that I see from students who are at that school.
So I would not say those are valuable educational experiences. And for that reason I would urge us to reject the resolution at this time and come back to it.
SPEAKER: Lewis.
SPEAKER: And before you, Anil, did I hear somebody else call?
SPEAKER: I think it was Hairston.
SPEAKER: Ever.
SPEAKER: I want to say I'm in support of this mainly because we can continue to remain silent or we as an organization can begin to make a difference. Thank you.
CHAIRPERSON: Anil.
ANIL: I think it's a flawed rubric when the criteria we use to make a decision is "is this too big for us? ." If people feel like this is too much... and I agree, it's probably a slippery slope.
But I think we have to draw a line in the sand. Lest people continue to move that bar, and we find ourselves overwhelmed. In today's society, so much history has been unearthed that is really rocked the foundation of our perception around so many things.
And I think that as a society we have woken up to that challenge and started addressing it, and I think we as an organization should as well.
And regarding the one whereas, I just implore that let's not be -- let's not let perfect be the enemy of the good. I'm sure there are some people here who think Perkins had value. That doesn't mean that we all agree. I do think that the substance of what we're trying to accomplish through this resolution outweighs that particular provision.
CHAIRPERSON: Hoffman and then...
SPEAKER: I don't think that anybody in this room can say or oppose the parts of this resolution that say that being a slave trader or being an opioid trader is something that should be recognized or celebrated. I think everyone with any kind of sense knows that that is a dark, dark part of our history in this country and in the world, and it's a shameful part.
Where I struggle with this resolution is when it comes to the scope of our authority as an organization, we are the National Federation of the Blind, and where I'm really struggling is to determine, is it our place to tell another entity what it should call itself?
(Applause)
What if somebody were to come and say to us, you should re name, pick something that we're affiliated with. We also have dark things in our history. We also have people that we were affiliated with or were affiliated with us that we wish maybe things were different.
And so I don't know what to do in this instance, but where I'm really struggling is figuring out, is it the job of the National Federation of the Blind to tell an entity that is not affiliated with the National Federation of the Blind what it should call itself? And I'm not sure.
(Applause)
SPEAKER: I'm actually glad, Ronza, that I got to follow you, because you are one of the people I was thinking about when I was thinking about that. I don't know the right answer as far as the, you know, other underlying issues, but once upon a time when we had the resolution about visual introductions themselves, Ronza pointed out that if it's important to you because of your identity, then it matters. There also have been other instances where we said, if it makes one group of people feel inadequate, doesn't that, therefore, make it important?
So I think that you -- despite the other minutiae of the resolution, you have to consider what does saying "no" make people feel about
SPEAKER: Mr. President, Mr. Chairman, I mean, you gave Anil two shots at it.
(Laughter)
CHAIRPERSON: I will give you another shot.
SPEAKER: Thanks.
CHAIRPERSON: And then we'll see if we can bring this to a...
SPEAKER: Then we'll see if we can vote, okay. You know, the National Federation of the Blind is the largest most representative organization of the blind in the world. If we don't have the right to tell them, nobody does. And I think we have the right to tell them.
I think what they do affects what we are and what people think of us, and if we think they're doing the wrong thing, I think we ought to let 'em know!
CHAIRPERSON: Are we ready to vote?
All those in favor of passing resolution 2024 18 up, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
CHAIRPERSON: This is a large committee.
Any opposed?
(nays respond)
CHAIRPERSON: The ayes have it. Resolution 2024 18 will pass up.
Resolution 2024 19: Regarding Enhancing Self Checkout Accessibility for Blind People.
Whereas, self checkout systems are proliferating across major retailers like Walmart, Target, and Kroger, offering speed and convenience to shoppers;
And whereas, the current design of many self checkout systems, relying on visual interfaces and touchscreens without audible instructions or tactile feedback, poses significant accessibility barriers to blind people;
And whereas, the reliance on barcode scanning exacerbates these challenges, further impeding the ability of blind people to use these systems independently;
And whereas, the reduction of human cashier options in favor of self checkout systems limits the usability of shopping environments for blind people, compromising their independence and right to equal service;
And whereas, adherence to the principles of inclusivity and equality, as well as the legal obligations of stores under the Americans with Disabilities Act, necessitate that retail services be accessible to all customers, including those who are blind:
Now, therefore, be it resolved that this organization demand Walmart, Target, Kroger, and similar retailers implement self checkout options that are accessible to blind people, including but not limited to voice guided instructions, tactile buttons, and interfaces designed for ease of use;
and be it further resolved that these retailers ensure the availability of human cashiers in sufficient numbers to meet the needs of all customers, including those unable to use self checkout stations due to blindness;
and be it further resolved that these entities collaborate with the National Federation of the Blind to understand the needs of the blind and work on developing accessible solutions;
and be it further resolved that all retailers provide staff with ongoing training focused on the accessibility needs of blind customers, including assistance at self checkout stations and throughout the store.
SPEAKER: Move to adopt.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: So we have a motion to pass the resolution up. We have a second. Sheila, are you near a mic?
SHEILA: Yes, sir. Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this resolution. The ADA demands accommodations in retail establishments, which have in the past been provided primarily by people. As retailers cut people, they cut accommodations. As they implement kiosks that do not work for the blind, they cut accommodations. No assistance shopping, no assistance checking out. Their message is bring your own sighted assistant when you come. Our message is clear also. Follow the law, provide accommodations.
(Applause)
Mr. Chairman, the Missouri affiliate urges the committee to pass this resolution. Thank you very much.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
(Applause)
Any further discussion?
SPEAKER: O'Connor.
CHAIRPERSON: Was that O'Connor?
SPEAKER: Yes, sir.
CHAIRPERSON: Go ahead.
SPEAKER: I would encourage us to be mindful as we put the resolutions together, about how we name specific retailers, and it's not lost on me that we're all sitting under the Target logo as one of our sponsors of this convention. That doesn't mean we shouldn't hold Target accountable as we do any other company, but I do know that I have not found a self checkout experience at a pharmacy, at a grocer, or any other retailer that is accessible to me as a blind person. And that's frustrating.
But I also know that there are lots of teams that are involved with these products. In a moment we're going to consider a resolution that very specifically does not name a specific media outlet.
And so while I'm not opposed to this resolution, I do want us to be very mindful, for those who are crafting resolutions in the future, that we name companies where it is absolutely warrantied, and that we are not naming companies where we're just looking for some examples that can have a detrimental impact on our ability to partner with them in the future.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Any further discussion? Hearing none, all those in favorite of passing Resolution 2024 19 up, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed?
Hearing none, Resolution passes.
(Applause)
And if I can get Jordan Moon and Liz Weiscarber to microphones.
Resolution 2024 20: Regarding Inaccessible Retail Kiosks.
Whereas, many retail stores, restaurants, and other businesses are increasingly deploying kiosks for a variety of tasks, including placing orders, checking out after selecting items to purchase, presenting menus, checking prices, and more;
And whereas, these kiosks may partially or fully replace human staff, meaning that there may not be any personnel available to assist blind customers with the tasks for which the kiosks have been deployed;
And whereas, frequently these kiosks lack accessibility features for blind or low vision users;
And whereas, accessibility features can include, but are not limited to, audio-based interfaces, tactile keypads, and Braille signage;
And whereas, the absence of these features can make it difficult or impossible for blind users to place orders, shop, or otherwise fully enjoy the products and services of a business;
And whereas, blind customers deserve to be able to fully participate in the economy and take full and equal advantage of the products and services provided by businesses;
And whereas, accessible kiosks, kiosk software solutions, and alternative devices (e.g., accessible tablets like the iPad and some Android devices) are available and have been deployed by some businesses, including the McDonald's restaurant chain: Now, therefore, be it resolved by the National Federation of the Blind in Convention assembled strongly urge all businesses deploying kiosks to choose and demand accessible devices so that all users can take full advantage of them;
and be it further resolved that this organization urge kiosk manufacturers to work with the National Federation of the Blind to develop accessible kiosks;
and be it further resolved that we call upon Congress and federal regulators to consider solutions to require or facilitate the manufacture and deployment of accessible kiosks.
SPEAKER: Move to adopt.
SPEAKER: Second.
CHAIRPERSON: We have a motion to adopt. We have a second. Jordan, are you there?
JORDAN: Yes, sir. Good afternoon, members of the committee, Mr. Chairman, Federation Family. My name is Jordan Moon, and this resolution is very important. I know the last resolution we were talking about specifically self checkout processes. This one is broader, and it's talking about all kiosks.
Now, stop me if this, you know, has applied to you -- actually, don't stop me, because I know it has, and I need to talk about this.
So you have been in a place, and you go and you're happy, maybe a restaurant or whatever, and you're there and you see, oh, man, there's a kiosk, and there is anxiety that pops up. There is a situation in a restaurant whose initials are OG, and they serve Italian food. And my wife and I, speaking of waiting, I know Chairman often was talking about this, speaking of waiting... my wife and I were waiting 45 minutes for a waiter to come up. Well, the time for waiting is over. We need to make sure that these accessible kiosks -- or these kiosks are accessible.
We weren't able to place our order. I had my daughter there and I couldn't interact with it and play games with her. I'm really tired of this. And one last situation happened that took me over the edge. I was at a facility checking in for a medical appointment and they had a kiosk, and instead of me being able to read it, there wasn't anybody to be found, so my wife, in order to check in, had to ask a fellow patient and told our personal medical information. I was unacceptable. I'm tired of it. It's time that we can live and eat and do the things we want.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you, Jordan.
Is there any further discussion? Any further discussion?
Hearing none, all those in favor of passing Resolution 2024 20 up, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed?
Hearing none, Resolution 2024 20 passes up.
(Applause)
And before we read the last one, if I can also get Mike Kingston and Curtis Chong to the microphone.
Resolution 2024 21: Regarding Calling Upon the News Media to Use the Word "Blind".
whereas, individuals who experience blindness are held back by a common set of misconceptions about being blind, low expectations for blind people, and barriers resulting from a lack of equal access to information and public services;
And whereas, since 1940 the National Federation of the Blind has used the word "blind" as an inclusive term with a functional definition that encompasses individuals with varying degrees of blindness, but who have in common the need to use nonvisual tools and techniques, some or all of the time, in order to learn, work, play, and otherwise live the lives we want;
And whereas, throughout our history, we have rejected the tendency of society to treat the word "blind" as a word to be avoided;
And whereas, for example, in 1993, our convention affirmed in Resolution 1993 01 that "We believe that it is respectable to be blind, and although we have no particular pride in the fact of our blindness, neither do we have any shame in it. To the extent that euphemisms are used to convey any other concept or image, we deplore such use";
And whereas, because of our belief in the normality and capacity of blind people, we reject the idea that eyesight or vision is a requirement for success, and believe that vision centered language focuses on what we are perceived to lack, a negative framing of blindness, rather than on our fundamental normality as people who share a characteristic that, while it does not define us, is a positive part of who we are;
And whereas, increasingly other groups of people with disabilities and the wider society have embraced the idea that "blind" and other words describing disabilities are not words to be avoided, but positive indicators of identity;
And whereas, a common euphemism for the word blind is the phrase "visually impaired," or variants thereof, which is an example of vision centered language that portrays us as broken because of our lack of eyesight;
And whereas, the news media, in all its forms and to varying degrees, uses words to inform and shape the perceptions of those who consume it;
And whereas, the phrase "visually impaired" continues to be used by many media outlets to describe blind people, even in stories about individuals who embrace their identity as blind people and which purport to be positive and affirming: Now, therefore, be it resolved that we call upon all of the major broadcast, print, and digital news outlets, services, and other entities that influence the language used throughout the American news media to stop using the term "visually impaired" to describe blind people, and to instead use the word "blind" in the way that those of us who have the authentic lived experience of blindness use it;
and be it further resolved that we call upon all of these entities to consult with the National Federation of the Blind as they review and revise their guidance to journalists, editors, and producers, and otherwise make decisions about the language they use in describing and characterizing blindness and blind people.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: We have a motion to adopt. We have a second. Liz.
LIZ: Hello, everyone. We all know that "blind" is not a dirty word. But unfortunately many folks who are working in various media outlets are really reluctant to use the word "blind" and may even use sillier things than visually impaired or low vision. I've heard "sight challenged" and "hard of seeing." There's a long list of these. Really the reluctance of saying the word "blind," that is implying that blind itself is negative. We know that is not true. We want to encourage the media outlets to use the word "blind," because it is not a negative term. It's simply a description and it's respectable to be blind. We hope that putting this through will help encourage outlets to educate the public further on blindness. Thank you.
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
Chancey and then Shawn.
SPEAKER: I know that only small and cosmetic alterations are permitted at this stage, but given the topic and given the usual house style, I wonder if we hadn't better change individuals who experience blindness to blind people?
CHAIRPERSON: I think we can do that. Shawn?
SHAWN: I'm in support of this resolution, but it's one of those things that if this resolution passes, we got to clean up our own selves as well. There are members who use the word "I'm visually impaired."
So for example, a lot of our fine affiliates and chapters have events, and sometimes the media shows up, right? So next thing you know they interview a member who says, oh, I'm so proud to be part of this event, being visually impaired. So I think we got to -- you know, if this resolution passes, we got to make sure we clean ourselves up as well and have this discussion on the topic that we're having today.
So that's all I have.
CHAIRPERSON: Is there any further discussion?
Hearing none -- I'm sorry, folks, I only hear out of one ear, so...
SPEAKER: Doing fine, Donald!
SPEAKER: No problem!
CHAIRPERSON: Hearing none, all those in favor of passing Resolution 2024 21 up, please signify by saying aye.
(ayes respond)
Any opposed?
Hearing none, resolution 2024 21 passes up. Now, before we get to the final resolution, a little bit of housekeeping, because I know everybody just is going to run out of here for mock trial as soon as this is over.
And I want to make sure you get to the right room. It's been moved. It is in Ballroom I. Correct, Ronza?
RONZA: That's right!
CHAIRPERSON: Executive Ballroom I. And because everybody is going to leave, I would also like to thank our readers, Patricia Miller...
(Cheers and applause)
And Jennifer Dunham.
(Cheers and applause)
And I want to go a little bit further and thank... there is a tremendous number of individuals that are involved in the process of bringing these resolutions to you as a membership. They start with the individuals that write these resolutions, because they are individuals that want to have an impact on what that forward facing policy of the National Federation of the Blind is, and they put a lot of work and effort into those resolutions. We have a team of individuals. I don't have the list of all the names, but individuals that work in our National Center say that once a resolution comes in its final form, they proof it, they format it, they fact check it. They sometimes send out emails with questions.
But they work very, very hard and take a tremendous amount of responsibility. A lot of them are in the policy and advocacy, the communications team. You know, I know Anil's team as well. So this is a family affair. Those of you that are '60s music fans, the family stone reference there.
SPEAKER: Good job!
CHAIRPERSON: So without further ado, Resolution 2024 22, which is a late submission. So it's not online. If you look right now, it's not online.
All resolutions that pass up will be online prior to the 7th, so that you can review them and if you have questions, you will have an opportunity on the 7th to bring your questions or to state your position, you know, during the Resolutions Committee or resolutions presentation in the general session.
So thank you, everybody. Resolution 2024 22.
SPEAKER: Regarding the use of the term visually impaired when referring to blind people with some vision. whereas language plays a crucial role in shaping society's perceptions and understanding of the different perspectives and aspects of life.
And whereas accurate terminology is an essential factor in the creation of a climate which fosters respect and inclusivity for everyone, including the blind. And whereas at its 1993 convention, the National Federation of the Blind unanimously adopted Resolution 93 01 which says in relevant part, the word "blind" accurately and clearly describes the condition of being unable to see, as well as the condition of having such limited eyesight that alternative techniques are required to do efficiently the ordinary tasks of daily living that are performed visually by those having good eyesight.
Whereas, this resolution clearly declares that the word blind is meant to include people with poor vision or no vision and does not circumvent the use of a word which in other circles either avoided altogether or combined with other terms such as visually impaired, visually challenged or sight challenged or hard of seeing.
Euphemisms which are thought to be more acceptable and less off-putting to the broader community. And whereas the term visually impaired often combined with the word blind, as in blind and visually impaired, is used by many programs an agency serving the blind as an attempt to clarify that their services are available to individuals with limited or no eyesight and not just to individuals who are totally blind.
And whereas the word "impaired" when combined with the word vision or visual, implies a sense of deficiency and inferiority and perpetuates the incorrect notion that people who have lost part or all of their eyesight are automatically less capable or limited in their abilities as compared to people with normal eyesight.
And whereas when referring to a group of people comprised of individuals with varying degrees of sight from total blindness to legal blindness to significant vision loss, the term blind and low vision is a more accurate and positive description in that it correctly indicates less than 20/20 vision without connoting the negative assumptions and stereotypes that have too often been associated with the blind.
And whereas other minorities, such as the Deaf community, have successfully advocated for use of the terms like Deaf or hard of hearing in place of Deaf and hearing impaired, recognizing the value of moving away from terminology that includes the word impaired, And whereas self advocacy and asserting preferred terminology can do much to challenge existing misconceptions and encourage others to adopt more accurate and respectful language.
And whereas raising awareness and educating the public to use appropriate terminology that is free from negative assumptions and stereotypes can be achieved through educational campaigns, media initiatives, and inclusive language guidelines in academic and professional settings.
Now therefore be it resolved that this organization reaffirm the respectability of the word "blind" as articulated in Resolution 93 01 and be it further resolved that this organization call upon organizations, agencies and entities that work with or serve individuals who are blind who feel that it is appropriate to use terms such as blind or visually impaired, visually impaired or similar terminology in their names and promotional materials to instead use blind, blind and low vision, low vision or similar phrasing instead. And be it further resolved that this organization acknowledge and praise the United States Federal Government for making a strong effort to use the term "blind" and "low vision."
SPEAKER: Move adoption.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay, I heard move to adopt. Do I hear a second? Okay, we have a motion to pass up and a second. Curtis and Mike.
SPEAKER: In deference to my friend Shawn Callaway, I want to say that I really do wish this resolution only pertained to people who are blind impaired.
(Laughter)
But we know -- but we know that it does not, and there are way too many people as the resolution says, and other people said, who are blind who call themselves visually impaired. As I said in an article I wrote that appeared in the December 2023 Braille Monitor, words matter. We've got to get "impaired" out of it. And visually is bad. Because we're not visually different just because we're blind.
So the reality is that we need to bring back the whole concept and really reaffirm the respectability of blind. And by adding low vision, which seems like a reasonable thing to do under the circumstances. I think we address the issue. It is something I think we can all move forward with, and I certainly do hope this resolution is passed.
CHAIRPERSON: Curtis, did you want to...
CURTIS: I did. My name is Curtis Chong and live in the great state of Colorado.
(Cheering)
So the question that would come up in many people's mind is we say we respect the word "blind." Yes, we to. Why are we saying it's okay in some instances to use "low vision"? That's not for us. It's for other people who can't stand saying the word "blind" all by itself. It doesn't bother me. It doesn't bother you. It doesn't bother us in this room. But, boy, does it bother other people who are out there not as enlightened as we are. Are we not enlightened, ladies and gentlemen? We are, about blindness. We recognize if we say "blind," we mean people with little vision or no vision.
But some places can't resist the need to say "blind" and something to make it clear in their own minds that they're being all inclusive, right?
So that's why if we have -- if they have to say something, it would be much better for them to say blind or low vision as opposed to blind and visually impaired, because as Dr. Maurer pointed out, we are not broken sighted people. I urge the committee, please, to pass, I urge this resolution to be considered by the floor.
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you.
SPEAKER: Mr. Chairman, we neglected to do something earlier when you were listing the name of people that should be thanked.
So I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for all your efforts.
(Applause)
(Cheers and applause)
CHAIRPERSON: Thank you. Just be thankful they don't have their bells yet.
(chuckles)
Is there any further discussion? Thank you, Sharon. Thank you very much. Jayne Seif.
JAYNE: I get your point about the low vision thing, but I have to say I'm still kind of offended by that, and I don't feel like an organization that has said for years and years, we are going to use the term "blind" and be a proponent of others using the term "blind," that I feel like we kind of water that down if we say we're going to give you a pass and let you say low vision. That bothers me a little bit.
CHAIRPERSON: Are you done, Jayne? Ronza.
RONZA: So low vision is a technical term, a legal term, and a medical term that means anybody who has visual acuity of between 20/80 and 20/200. We're not talking about us.
So I just want to clear up that misconception. I don't think it's a cop out. I think it is akin to what the Deaf community is calling "hard of hearing," because it is a medical and a legal term of art, that it does not mean the legal definition of blindness that we use to be the all-encompassing definition of blindness. And for that purpose, I think it is important to be inclusive of the individuals that don't -- are not medically or legally blind, and to keep that language in. I do support this resolution because I am not, like many of you, or all of you, I hope, at the moment, at least, an impaired person. Drunk people are impaired. Blind people are just blind.
(Laughter)
(Applause)
CHAIRPERSON: And impaired when drunk is also a legal term.
(Laughter)
I heard Michael and I thought one other person.
SPEAKER: O'Connor.
SPEAKER: I'm not on the committee, that's okay.
SPEAKER: Let me go with Corbb real quick.
CORBB: In our marketing if we say this event is for blind people, we have a lot of people who say that's not for me. We know it's for them. We need to find ways to make sure that when we say these words we're not creating an exclusive network that we don't intend.
SPEAKER: Call the question.
CHAIRPERSON: When I heard "call for the question," was that a committee member?
SPEAKER: Yes.
CHAIRPERSON: Okay. All those in favor. (ayes respond)
Any opposed?
(nays respond)
CHAIRPERSON: Did those no’s come from the audience? Tricking me with my lack of depth perception.
Okay, so Resolution 2024 22 passes up to the convention.
(Applause)
Once again, before everybody runs out the door to the executive ballroom I, thank you for being here today. The resolutions process, as President Riccobono said at the beginning, is a very important part of what we do, because it is our policy. It's our forward-facing policy, where we let everybody know what is important to us.
So thank you and enjoy your convention!