Essence of Maturity

Essence of Maturity

THE ESSENCE OF
MATURITY

by Marc Maurer

Mr. Maurer, President of the National Federation of the

Blind, delivered the following keynote address at the NFB

annual convention, Anaheim, California, July 4, 1996.

Maturity is the exercise of intelligence in the fourth

dimension--time. As Dr. Kenneth Jernigan, who was then

serving as President of the National Federation of the

Blind, said in 1986: "To the extent one ranges backward in

time to understand the causes of present conditions, and to

the extent one ranges forward to anticipate future

consequences of present acts, one is mature. Maturity is

intelligence in depth." So Dr. Jernigan said in 1986.

Not only individuals need maturity, but civilizations,

organizations, and cultures need it as well. Whether a

society can reach maturity depends on the maturity of the

people within it and its capacity to internalize their

maturity. If a society is to mature, it must balance two

competing interests. It must welcome diversity and

experimentation and at the same time maintain stability and

order. Experimentation and diversification diminish

stability, but they are essential for growth. However, if

stability is lost, there will be no structure in which to

experiment. Both the instability of experimentation and the

stability of order are required.

Maturity for a society or an individual cannot be

achieved without reaching new understandings and

perspective. This requires effort and a tolerance for

pain--sometimes financial, sometimes emotional, and

sometimes physical. Individuals and societies that are

unwilling to expend effort or tolerate pain to achieve a

desirable goal in the future cannot attain maturity.

The maturity of the individual and the maturity of the

society are related. One cannot develop without encouraging

the other. One cannot diminish without inhibiting the

other. To build a strong society it is essential to enhance

the maturity of its members, to incorporate that maturity

into the group as a whole, to tolerate pain in the interest

of achieving desirable goals, to welcome diversity, and to

maintain order.

In the minds of certain people today the blind in some

respects are regarded as children. We resemble children,

they would have us believe, because we lack the two

qualities that give significance to individuals or

groups--the capacity to make substantial contributions and

the capacity to cause serious trouble. But the blind and

children, in this formulation, are not the same. The

children will grow up; the blind will not. The children may

commit indiscretions and be forgiven; the blind will be

inactive, with no indiscretions to forgive. Maturity may

come to the one, but not to the other. Growth and

development are to be expected with children, but the blind

(though we will grow physically) will not achieve the

development or perspective required for decision making--we

will not gain maturity. Rather we will remain, according to

this view, as children in need of custody and care.

Those who believe that the blind should be viewed as

children have tacitly accepted the misguided notion that for

us there can be no future because there has been no past.

Since they are part of the society in which we live, their

maturity affects our maturity--our growth, our

development--our capacity to exercise intelligence in time.

But there is another side to that coin. Since we are part

of the society in which they live, our maturity affects

their maturity--their growth, their development--their

capacity to exercise intelligence in time. If we are to

gain maturity and if we are to enhance the maturity of our

society, we must demonstrate that this conception of

blindness is wrong. We who are blind have the

understanding, the energy, and the will to direct our own

lives, to make our contributions, and (if need be) to meet

confrontation head on; and we will permit no one else to do

this for us. Our past, though sometimes filled with

misunderstanding and misery, is the precursor of today. Our

future is what we will make it. We will act, recognizing

that the consequences will be determined by our capacity to

comprehend, our judgement, our courage, and our faith in

each other. But above all we will act!

In 1940 the brilliant blind scholar and professor Dr.

Jacobus tenBroek, and a small group of other like-minded

blind people, brought into being in Wilkes-Barre,

Pennsylvania, the National Federation of the Blind. With

that one act, the future of the blind was altered for all

time. As we came to organize, conditions for blind people

were bleak. Employment for the blind was virtually unknown.

Education occurred at schools for the blind, but the

administrators of those institutions rarely expected blind

students to continue their instruction at the university

level. Libraries for the blind existed, but the collection

of books available for distribution was not large. The

adult rehabilitation program operated jointly by federal and

state governments had been created, but the blind were not

part of it because it was felt that they couldn't benefit

from rehabilitation. As rehabilitation officials said, we

were not "feasible." The Social Security Act had been

adopted in 1935, providing some measure of support to the

blind, and the Randolph-Sheppard act to create vending

opportunities for the blind had been adopted in 1936, but

the small number of vending stands which had been

established were tiny operations selling (for the most part)

tobacco products, newspapers and candy. In certain places

sheltered workshops for the blind had been in existence for

decades (some for as long as a century), but these offered

only repetitive hand assembly work at pitifully low wages in

miserable working conditions.

A top-quality education; a career in government service

or the professions; employment in industry or the private

sector; a standard of living sufficient to permit dating,

marriage, the establishment of a family, and the purchase

of a home; training and support to begin a private business;

and participation in politics--none of this was for the

blind. However, Dr. tenBroek

and his small band of colleagues thought otherwise. He and

the others with him believed that conditions for the blind

would not change unless the blind themselves controlled the

events of their own destiny. He believed that blindness

need not be the determining factor of our future. He

believed that unemployment and lack of opportunity could be

changed and that the future for the blind could be

different--but only if we made it happen. He set the

Federation on the road we have followed ever since. He gave

us a standard to follow and a method for achieving the goal.

He told us it would not be easy--that it would require

effort and a tolerance for pain. But he promised the effort

and the pain would bring results. Look about you! We the

blind have gathered here tonight in our thousands. Dr.

tenBroek said that we could make a difference, and if he

were with us tonight, he would be pleased with what the

National Federation of the Blind has become--the strongest,

most positive, most vital force in the affairs of the blind

today.

In the fall of 1995 members of the National Federation

of the Blind hosted a black-tie dinner at the National

Center for the Blind in Baltimore to support and promote one

of the most innovative developments in our history,

*NEWSLINE for the Blind*. As Federation members know, this

is the completely automated digital network that brings

daily newspapers to the blind by touch-tone telephone.

National Newspapers such as "USA Today", the "New York

Times", and the "Chicago Tribune" can be read by phone any

time during the day or night. This development has

far-reaching implications. The absence of knowledge

signifies the absence of the possibility for choice. The

presence of knowledge indicates the exact opposite--the

awareness of opportunity, the possibility for choice, and

the freedom to act.

We invited the press to be present at our black-tie

dinner; we described the vital work of the National

Federation of the Blind; we demonstrated *NEWSLINE for the

Blind*, and we discussed the impact that broad-ranging

information services would have on the lives of blind

people. But the story that appeared in the newspaper the

next day did not contain the drama of the work of the

Federation or the potential alteration in the future of the

blind. Instead, to be perfectly frank, the reporter didn't

get it. He reiterated the old, familiar theme, the

stereotype--the blind can become good musicians. The

importance of the NEWSLINE event was not, he seemed to say,

the development of opportunity for the blind or enhanced

access to information. It was music. The item in the

newspaper began with the headline, "Boy upstages NEWSLINE."

The text reads:

The star of NEWSLINE night at the National Federation

of the Blind was, of course, NEWSLINE, a system that

converts newspapers into synthetic voice and delivers it

through phone lines to blind people. It's an exciting new

on-ramp to the information superhighway, allowing the

nation's blind to "read" newspapers first thing in the

morning, the way the rest of us do.

During the black-tie dinner at the NFB headquarters in

South Baltimore [the reporter writes] guests heard a

demonstration; a synthesized voice read excerpts of stories

fresh from "USA Today", one of the first newspapers to agree

to participate in the system.

As impressive as NEWSLINE was [the article continues],

a kid in dark glasses and tails almost stole the show.

Jermaine Gardner, a 12-year-old boy, was called to the

Yamaha grand in front of the dining room, then proceeded to

dazzle us with performances of classical selections, from

Mendelssohn to Beethoven, scherzo to sonata.

I'm telling you, he was fabulous [says the reporter].

He was accompanied to the dinner by his "managers," James

and Jacqui Gardner. They should be right proud. Jermaine,

who was born blind, has been playing classical music since

he was two, performing since he was four. By the way [says

the article], his business card notes that Jermaine is

available for weddings, socials, and "children's Barney

parties"

This is what the newspaper said, and it is not that the

details are incorrect but that the perception, the tone, and

the depth of understanding are wrong. Is it really

impressive that a blind boy of twelve can play the piano,

even that he can play it extremely well, even that he can

play it like a genius? Maybe-- but the musical performance

fades into relative insignificance compared to the

revolutionary impact which NEWSLINE will make on the lives

of thousands and tens of thousands of blind people

throughout the nation, and ultimately the world. NEWSLINE

was the star, of course, and the reporter simply missed it

and flubbed his opportunity. And what was it that the

reporter thought was "fabulous"? A blind kid playing the

piano.

Did the reporter believe that blind people are unable

to play the piano? Is that why he found the performance so

enthralling? Or is it that he thought there was nothing

else in the evening worth reporting--nothing else that would

strike a chord with his readers? Suppose he thought

NEWSLINE would change the world for the blind -- what

difference could it possibly make in the broader society?

What difference could it make to the people who really

matter? Unstated but always present is the silent assertion

that the future of blind people is not worth the trouble to

report. Just give us the piano player -- that's where blind

people excel. It never occurred to the reporter that blind

persons have already made contributions to society

(contributions he not only wants but needs) and that we will

continue to do so. Apparently it never occurred to him that

we, who are part of the society in which he lives, will

necessarily help share his future. He thought of NEWSLINE

as an impressive new toy with which the blind could amuse

themselves, but the blind (according to his understanding)

have nothing to give -- except a little music. He thought of

us as children. In fact, he concludes his newspaper item by

telling us that the blind musician is available for socials

and children's Barney parties. It matters very little how we

spend our time -- unless, of course, we can be entertaining

-- unless we can play the piano.

This newspaper account completely misses the point.

There are some of us who do play the piano -- play it well

-- and are proud of our ability. However, this is not what

defines us as human beings. *NEWSLINE for the Blind*, on

the other hand, is opening to the blind entirely new vistas

of knowledge, of thought, and of experience. Our capacity

to participate in the activities of our day is increased by

NEWSLINE. No one can predict how important this is because

the impact that it will have has not yet been realized. But

we are certain that it will add to our capacity to

contribute to our society. It will give us the knowledge to

shape a better future not only for ourselves but also for

the very reporter who misunderstands us. Our past, even our

recent past, though sometimes filled with misunderstanding,

is the precursor of today's conditions. We will act,

recognizing that the consequences, even though not always

wholly anticipated, will be determined by our capacity to

comprehend, our judgment, our courage, and our faith in each

other. But above all, it is certain that we will act.

We should not be surprised by newspaper reporters who

lack the perception and experience to understand the

importance and drama of our struggle to move from

second-class status to full equality in society. But we

should expect something better from programs for the blind

-- something more knowledgeable, more in tune with reality.

The purpose of governmental and private agencies for the

blind is, after all, to help blind users of their services

achieve their highest potential.

It is gratifying that an increasing number of the

agencies for the blind are working ever more closely with us

with positive results. However, there are, in a few

instances, still some so-called professionals in agencies

for the blind who regard the organized blind movement not as

a welcome partner but as an interfering adversary. In such

agencies it is not astonishing that services for the blind

are minimal and poor.

An article which appeared in the Sunday, April 21,

1996, edition of the "Hartford Courant", one of the most

widely-distributed newspapers in the state of Connecticut,

describes with pride the services of the Board of Education

and Services for the Blind (BESB), the state-run

rehabilitation agency. Keep in mind that we are not talking

about ancient history. The article was written less than

three months ago.

It begins with the headline, "Jobs for the Blind," and

contains photographs of three workers who have been employed

at the workshop for from nine to 15 years. The theme of the

article is contained in the subtitle, which reads: "At BESB

Industries, visually impaired workers gain self-esteem." The

impression conveyed by these statements is that blind

employees are offered long-term employment, job security, a

high level of self-esteem, recognition of their innate

normality and capacity, and a level of pay sufficient to

provide a livelihood. This impression is reinforced by the

portions of the article that describe manufacturing in the

workshop. The business at BESB is not trivial. The article

puts it this way:

"Each month the employees, some using special sewing

machines, sew up to 20,000 pairs of sweat pants for the

Army, 1,200 life vests for the Navy, and 5,000 "kit bags"

for the Air Force, bags used as soft-sided luggage.

In March, the company was awarded a $13 million

government contract to sew up to 800,000 T-shirts a year for

the Army."

This is what the newspaper says, and with all of these

thousands of items being produced for all of these millions

of federal dollars, what do the blind get? The newspaper

tells us. Here are excerpts from the article:

Inside a concrete and brick building the Board of

Education and Services for the Blind, or BESB Industries,

offers about 115 people--the majority of whom are completely

blind--the chance to hold a job and earn a salary. For many

of the workers the program has provided something more: a

chance to feel useful again.

[The newspaper continues] "This job has given me the

opportunity to do the things I didn't think I would ever be

able to do" [said one of the sewing machine operators].

"It's a challenge," he continued, "and it's good for

people to know blind people can be productive members in

society."

The 25,000-square-foot building housing BESB [the

article continues] is filled with people who strongly

believe that. And they show up for work each day--some

making as little as $1.50 an hour -- to prove it to

themselves, and sometimes to others."

I interrupt to observe that they are also coming to the

workshop to produce 800,000 T-shirts a year so that the

agency can get thirteen million federal dollars, but back to

the article:

Overall, the average pay rate [says the article] is

$3.50 an hour, less than the minimum wage, now at $4.25 an

hour. But for some of the employees at the West Hartford

workshop, pay is not an issue.

Howie Schwartz, 59, of Southington [the article

continues], who has worked there for the past nine years,

said that his job has given him so much, he would work for

free.

"Don't tell them, but I'd come here for nothing,

because this place has given me back some of my

self-respect. What I do counts."

Schwartz [the article continues] lost his sight in

1985. When he had his sight, he was in charge of more than

80 employees in a manufacturing plant.

Let me interrupt the article to emphasize what I just

read to you. This man was in charge of more than 80

employees in a manufacturing plant, and now he is working

for substandard wages--and in an environment that has so

conditioned him that he would feel grateful to have the job

even if it gave him no pay at all. Yet some people have the

nerve to tell us that we are being negative when we point

out the abuses of this kind of operation. He supervised 80

employees! Eighty employees--and now he works for a

pittance and has been conditioned to think so little of

himself that he is grateful. But back to the article:

Schwartz said he did not work for a year after losing

his vision. "You don't know what bored is until you've sat

at home for a year."

"Now I'm using my past experiences and past contacts,

and I know I'm making a contribution," said Schwartz, who

worked for five years sewing various products before

becoming responsible for purchasing.

"I'm useful."

These are statements from the "Hartford Courant". They

promise jobs and self-esteem for the blind. But the promise

is false, and the dream is a nightmare. One of the

essential characteristics of a job is that the person doing

the work gets paid--and at a salary commensurate with

ability and performance. There is nothing wrong with

volunteering time and effort. Most of the work of the

National Federation of the Blind is done through volunteers.

However, we know when we are volunteering. We don't pretend

that it is something else. How different it is at the

agency for the blind in Connecticut. At Services for the

Blind the choices are apparently simple. Blind people who

want to work can sit at home and be bored or produce

T-shirts in the workshop at an average of $3.50 an hour.

But they do get self-esteem. Let me ask you this, shall we

offer to trade? Will the supervisors at the workshop take

the subminimum wages and the self-esteem and let us have

their salaries? Are they willing to work for $3.50 an hour?

That comes to less than $7,500 a year.

But there is more in the article. Consider the

description of services provided to a woman who has been

receiving the benefit of this rehabilitation program for

over three decades. She became blind in her twenties, and

she was understandably afraid. What did the agency do to

help? This is how the newspaper tells it:

[Kathy] Lunge, 57, of Wethersfield, was 23, with a

newborn baby, when she was diagnosed with a brain tumor that

eventually took her vision.

After she recovered from treatment for the brain tumor,

she was afraid to leave home.

"It was hard to cope. I wouldn't leave the house" [the

blind mother said].

Then she was told about a special program BESB runs for

blind people who are homebound. Those in the program work

on crafts and other projects at home, and the products are

eventually sold, mainly through a joint program with local

Lions Club organizations.

[The article continues] The program is designed to be

therapeutic, [Fred] Zaiko [BESB director of industries]

said, and give participants a feeling of self-worth.

Today the program is solely for people who can't, and

probably won't ever, leave their homes [the article says].

But when social workers approached Lunge in the 1960s, they

hoped she would eventually be able to [you guessed it] work

at the workshop.

She did. [I interrupt the newspaper story to ask how

long did it take for Services to the Blind to assist this

blind worker to get out of the home and into the workshop?

The article tells us. Remember that services began for this

blind woman in the 1960s.]

After gaining confidence while working in the home

program [says the article], Lunge in 1981 began traveling to

the workshop to sew. Now she's a receptionist there.

In 1991 Lunge was chosen as the National Blind Worker

of the Year.

"If you don't have any goals, you just sit and feel

sorry for yourself. That's what I did," Lunge said. "Here

you don't have a chance to do that. Here you are a busy,

normal person going off to work. That is a gift you cannot

imagine."

This is the description of services for the blind

printed in the newspaper. A young woman with a baby suffers

serious medical problems in 1962 and eventually becomes

blind. She remains homebound, being served by the agency for

the blind until 1981. In 1981 she begins sewing at the

workshop and finally becomes a receptionist. The lowest

wage for the blind at the workshop is $1.50 an hour. The

average wage for blind people is $3.50 an hour. She is

grateful for her job. She does not believe she deserves such

good fortune. Those who work at the agency have given her a

gift of such great value that it is hard to imagine.

However, viewed in proper perspective, such a gift

might be known by the ugly name of exploitation. If Kathy

Lunge is today capable of being a receptionist, is it

believable that she was only capable of sitting at home year

after year? The images clash. The professionals at the

Connecticut agency for the blind have discovered that there

are blind people who believe that there is no alternative to

the boredom of sitting at home except work at the workshop.

Maybe these professionals don't know any better. Maybe

they don't have any incentive to know any better. Maybe if

their own lives were involved, they would find a way to know

better.

In their despair (in the circumstances, how could it be

otherwise?), many of the blind caught in this trap are

prepared to take any alternative they can get--no matter how

small. And they are prepared to be grateful for it. The

professionals at the agency encourage that attitude.

The situation in Connecticut is further complicated by

the fact that the volunteer board responsible for the

operation of the agency seems both responsive and sensible,

but the professionals who administer the program have all

the advantages in their effort to maintain the status quo.

I met the chairman of the board this spring. He is an

intelligent, sensitive human being--and he has the strongest

possible motivation to see that programs for the blind in

Connecticut function imaginatively and well. He has a blind

son. But he is not knowledgeable in the complexities of the

federal/state bureaucratic maze, a maze in which the

professionals can hide and dodge and double talk. Moreover,

he does not have an extensive background in dealing with

blind people. What is he to do when he is told, "Yes, but

your son is different--your son is not like these other poor

helpless blind people, who can do nothing else but spend

their days in the workshop or at home!" He will have to be

strong, indeed, to go up against the odds--to resist the

seduction of the flattery, to ferret out the facts from the

fiction, and to find the time and the courage to match wits

with the bureaucrats, who have nothing better to do all day,

every day but to wage the contest and build their image of

sensitive expertise. Maybe he can do it. I hope he can. It

sometimes happens. But the odds are against him. It goes

without saying that we will help him and the other members

of the board if we can, but it will be a race between

whether he can bring the professionals into line before they

get there first and poison him against the organized blind

movement.

The professionals at the agency for the blind in

Connecticut may believe that the blind are unimportant--that

we resemble children. But we know better. We who are blind

are not inactive; we are not inferior; and we will not

behave as if we were. Perhaps there was a time when

second-rate jobs and substandard wages in the sheltered shop

were all that the blind could hope to get, but that time is

no more. We have the understanding, the energy, and the

determination; and we are prepared, if need be, to meet

confrontation with confrontation. We recognize that future

conditions will be the consequences of present acts. But

above all, we will act.

A master's degree program to instruct teachers of the

blind at Northern Illinois University distributes to the

candidates for advanced degrees information about how to

assist the blind and those with low vision. This course of

study is euphemistically known as "Programs in Vision".

Apparently the word blind is not to be used by the

professionals because it connotes inferiority. One of the

teaching tools in the program is a document entitled "Over

65 Tips & Tricks for People with Low Vision to Use in the

Home." The abstruse nature of this educational program and

the depth of understanding required to comprehend it are

indicated by its so-called tips.

Keep in mind that this information is not offered in

undergraduate school but only in the master's program. Here

are some of the tips for you--if you're not totally blind,

that is--if you have enough remaining vision to be able to

perform these complex maneuvers. Those who are totally

blind will have to wait.

Here is tip number one: "Place the cat's food and water

on a small table to avoid stepping in it."

That's not a bad idea. Maybe you could place the cat on

the table along with the food and water to avoid stepping on

it. But back to the tips.

"Tie brightly colored ribbon bows to the ends of TV or

radio antennae."

Why would a person want to do that? Is it easier to

locate the television if there's a bright red bow on the end

of the antenna? Or do the professors in the vision program

at Northern Illinois University think that these bright

colors will cheer us up? When I have visited blind people

in their homes, I haven't found any such bows--and there

aren't any in mine. But then, of course, I am totally

blind. But there is more.

"Staple drinking straws onto cupboard shelves or

drawers [the document tells us] to create organizational

areas."

[Or here's an imaginative one:] "Floating objects such

as ice cubes or a clean ping-pong ball help in determining

whether a glass is full."

Think about this one for a moment. Your company comes

over, and you want to offer refreshments. So you fetch out

glasses and a bowl of ping-pong balls. You pour in a little

liquid and drop in a ping-pong ball. If the ping-pong ball

thumps on the bottom of the glass, you can be sure more

liquid is needed. If not, you have a choice. You can pour

more liquid or add more ping-pong balls. But there are

unanswered questions which have not been addressed in this

list of helpful hints. How many ping-pong balls should go

into the glass? Do you give the glass to your guest with or

without ping-pong balls? At Northern Illinois University

there is a program to study these weighty matters, and

professors to teach such things. But here is another

tip--this is for the bathroom:

"Use a contrasting color toilet seat cover so it's very

obvious whether the lid is up or down."

The assumptions in these suggestions about the ability

of the blind would be amusing if they were not so serious.

We can't figure out if the toilet seat is up or down, can't

find the TV without a big red bow, can't avoid stepping in

the cat food unless it's on a table, and can't organize

cupboards or drawers without stapling drinking straws to

them. What do the professors at Northern Illinois

University think blind people are like? If you still have

doubts, perhaps this suggestion about making the bed will

make the matter clear:

Make the bed once with great care [the document says];

mark each sheet and blanket where it touches the corners of

the bed with safety pins--each time thereafter when the bed

is made up, simply line up the corners."

I don't know when the professors at Northern Illinois

University learned to make their beds, but I remember doing

it when I was four or five years old. My mother didn't know

it was so complicated. She taught me to do it without the

pins. Now that you have been informed by those who teach

the teachers of the blind that this task is more intricate

and difficult than you had imagined, you can go back to your

hotel rooms, locate the corners of your beds, and insert the

safety pins. And for all of this you can thank the

professors at Northern Illinois University.

Can they really believe it? Do they imagine that blind

people are so backward that teachers of the blind should

study bed-making for the blind at the post-graduate level?

Do they think we resemble small children? Oh, but I am

being presumptuous! It is not the blind that they are

talking about. They believe you have to have a little sight

to do the things they prescribe. They don't believe the

totally blind can do these things at all. If the

high-powered educators think this way, is it any wonder that

newspaper reporters and the general public sometimes

misunderstand? We are not children, and we will not be

treated as children. Let them teach bed-making to each

other if they want. But let them leave us out of it, and let

them leave educational programs for teachers of the blind

out of it. We prefer peace and goodwill, but we are prepared

to meet confrontation with confrontation if we must. We

have the determination, the understanding, and the

energy--and we will act.

In 1996 are there still people who believe that the

blind resemble children? Indeed there are, and sometimes

the message is being driven home with such force that it is

accepted and internalized even by some of the blind. The

myth is powerful and destructive. But no matter how

powerful or destructive, it can and will be changed. We of

the National Federation of the Blind are determined to make

it so, and we will not be swayed from the purpose.

There are newspaper reporters who fail to comprehend

that we are coming to be as much a part of society as they

are and that this trend must and will continue to

accelerate. There are professionals in agencies for the

blind who use us for their own ends--who tell us that

services for the blind are adequate when they get blind

people out of the home and into the workshop at subminimum

wages. There are professors at the university who insist

that we tie bright ribbons on our television antennae and

put ping-pong balls in our glasses. They say that matters

of such moment should be elevated to the university

classroom at the postgraduate level. There are still blind

people who are beaten down and kept out--forced to sit at

home and accept custody and, moreover, made to like it.

Since some may (either deliberately or otherwise)

misunderstand what I am saying, let me sort some things out

for the record. Not all university programs that train

teachers for the blind are negative or trivial in their

performance. Far from it. Not all state agencies for the

blind are regressive in their behavior. And not all

newspaper reporters are lacking in perception. In fact, I

am glad to say that many of the universities, most of the

state agencies, and a growing number of reporters are living

in today's reality and working with positive and

constructive attitudes. It is for this very reason that we

must call attention to those that are not. A few (I

emphasize, a few) professionals in the field of work with

the blind still live in the yesterday of limited

understanding and negative concepts about the capacity of

the blind. These we are determined to change, and we will

not be swayed from the purpose. We are just as determined

to support and work in partnership with those who live in

the present and look to the future.

Yes, the things I have described are still occurring in

1996; and if that were all of the story, the picture would

be bleak beyond bearing. But that is not all of the

story--not even the most important part of it. You and I,

the National Federation of the Blind, are the other part of

the equation--the element that is making the difference, the

factor that has been of increasing importance since 1940 and

that today is the moving force.

Maturity demands that we be prepared to expend effort

and tolerate pain. It also requires that we range backward

in time to understand the causes of present conditions and

that we look forward to anticipate future consequences of

present acts.

If the professors in Illinois, the agency officials in

Connecticut, and the reporter in Maryland are correct in

their assessment, blindness is intolerable and so is our

future. But of course they are not correct. Their logic is

false, and their perceptions are those of a bygone era,

totally failing to take into account the realities of today

and the possibilities of tomorrow. Their maturity is at the

level of the children they believe we resemble.

Let us leave it at that. Ultimately our concern is not

with them but with what lies ahead. Our progress toward full

participation in society is accelerating, and our goal of

full citizenship is near at hand. What stretches before us

will not be easy (none of the travel on our road to freedom

has been), but we have come a great way farther than we

still have to go.

Let me conclude, as I have so often done, by reminding

you of the commitment that holds us together and guides our

actions. As we go forward, you have the right to expect

that I as President will never ask you to make sacrifices

that I am not willing to make, that I will not ask you to

take risks that I am not willing to take. You have the right

to expect that I will lead and that I will do it decisively.

You have the right to expect that I will give to you and our

movement my time, my effort, my devotion--and, yes, my love.

And I have the right to expect certain things from you.

This week you elected me again as President, and by that act

you undertook by implication an equal commitment. You gave

me the responsibility of standing in the front ranks to lead

by example and not just with words. Here in your presence I

publicly pledge to bring all that I have to the effort. I

made that commitment ten years ago when you first elected me

to be your President, and I repeat it tonight. I have tried

to live up to it every day that I have been in office, and I

will try to live up to it every day in the future.

That is my unequivocal commitment. Now let me say a

word about what is required of you. I have the right to

expect that you will support me in my efforts, that you will

share with me our triumphs, and also that you will stand by

me in time of trouble and disappointment. These mutual

commitments are what make us a family and not just an

association, a movement and not just an organization. As we

look to the year ahead, let us go with pride; let us go with

confidence; let us go with maturity. My brothers and my

sisters, we will make it come true.