Arrogance or Desperation

Arrogance or Desperation

The Braille Monitor

July 2003

(back)

(next) (contents)

Arrogance

or Desperation?

by

Peggy Elliott

From

the Editor: Peggy Elliott is second vice president of the National Federation

of the Blind and a former member of the Architectural and Transportation Barriers

Compliance Board (Access Board). Here is her commentary on recent activities

by an employee of the board:

Monitor

readers will remember that the U.S. Architectural and Transportation Barriers

Compliance Board (Access Board) conducted hearings last October in Portland,

Oregon, on proposed changes to its regulations that would compel universal installation

of audible pedestrian signals and detectable warnings at essentially all intersections

at an astronomical and as‑yet‑uncomputed cost to local governments.

Sensibly enough, federal agencies normally complete the final rule‑making

process as defined in federal law before beginning to train the people to be

regulated by those rules on compliance with them.

Put

another way, the changes supported by Ms. Lois Thibault, director of research

for the Access Board, and nowhere required by federal law, are being sold to

the public under false colors. Not only is there no requirement for installation;

no rule has yet been formally proposed that would mandate such installation.

Last year's hearing concerned a report of an advisory committee of citizens

whose recommendations have not yet been turned into proposed regulations. But

the proposals suit Ms. Thibault's low opinion of blind pedestrians, people in

her view who need her kind and sighted help as well as a vast expenditure of

tax dollars to get around the country safely. Federationists know Ms. Thibault's

position ignores the overwhelming evidence that blind people get around safely

every day, which makes these changes to federal law unnecessary and probably

illegal.

Under

her guidance the Access Board has apparently decided not to bother with the

niceties of federal procedure. On April 16, 2003, Ms. Thibault provided three

hours of training to more than fifty employees of Montgomery County, Maryland,

on compliance with the proposed changes which will, Ms. Thibault devoutly hopes,

eventually become the final rules. To put the matter simply, such training sessions

jump the gun and smack of deception. Without actually breaking the law, conducting

training sessions on proposed changes certainly violates federal procedures.

Could

it be that the Access Board is so unsure of public acceptance of its regulations

that it has decided to conduct brief training courses around the country in

an effort to convince people that the proposed changes are widely accepted and

required by law in order to lend credibility to its final rules, thus shaping

the reactions of the local government entities that will have to comply with

them? This is particularly unfair to local governmental officials, who typically

just want to know what's required. As they usually put it: Don't explain why;

just tell us what to do, and we'll do it. Get it down in black and white, in

measurements and standards, and we'll build it that way. Ms. Thibault's approach

is apparently to disguise her personal opinions as federal law and hope no one

asks too many questions. Local governmental officials aren't likely to; they

just want the specs, which Ms. Thibault with her prestigious-sounding federal

title is seemingly providing.

Federationists

will be interested to know that, as part of this training, Ms. Thibault devotes

time to attacking and attempting to refute the position of the National Federation

of the Blind on the placement of audible pedestrian signals and detectable warnings.

One is left to conclude either that Ms. Thibault feels threatened by the NFB's

position or that our arguments have such innate sense and attractiveness to

the public that getting a head start on imbedding her wishes in the final rules

by attacking us is her only recourse.

One

can also hope that Access Board members, Ms. Thibault's actual bosses, will

put a stop to her running around the country, pretending her opinions are federal

law. Unfortunately the Access Board does not have a strong record of controlling

Ms. Thibault. This leads to yet another question: why? The blind and local governments

everywhere are apparently about to be hoodwinked and our rights as citizens

to have a voice in our government trampled by one determined, wrongheaded federal

employee. It's democracy backwards--federal employees imposing their opinions

on the entire country by guile and grit. And it's wrong!

(back)

(next) (contents)