From: Lloyd.Rasmussen@f432.n109.z1.fidonet.org (Lloyd Rasmussen)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: Maryland braille bill pas
Date: 14 Apr 92 18:23:35 GMT
Reply-To: Lloyd.Rasmussen@f432.n109.z1.fidonet.org
Organization: FidoNet node 1:109/432 - The Idea Link, Wheaton MD

Index Number: 21133

[This is from the Blink Talk Conference]

Yesterday the Maryland Senate passed a braille literacy bill.  This
was the culmination of more than six months of work.  Before
January, all parties attended meetings to try to work out common
language.  By the time we got in to legislative session in January,
a draft bill was ready.  Representatives from the ACB went to
Annapolis on the same day as the NFB to talk with delegates and
senators about the need for better braille instruction and a
greater likelihood that instruction would be included in the
Individualized Educational Plans of kids.  The Superintendent of
the SChool for the Blind even worked with us this time.  (five
years ago, Dr. Welch led the opposition to a similar bill in
Maryland.)

In February we had the first hearing on the bill, in a senate
committee.  The school for the blind wanted a small amendment, and
the department of education wanted a major one.  The bill said that
"it is the presumption" that braille instruction would be given
under certain conditions.  The Education DEpartment wanted to just
say that braille would be considered in the formulation of the I E
P.

The Education Department got their way in the Senate, but we fought
harder in the House.  A few of us went to Annapolis another time to
inform the members of the house committe hearing the bill that if
they went along with the Senate amended version, we wanted a
further amendment that the rejection of braille instruction must be
documented, not just a check-off box on a form.  The House
committee asked for an attorney-general's opinion as to the
legality of a "presumption" in favor of braille, and would this
contradict the federal law about this being an individualized
plan.  The AG's office saw it our way, that there is already a
presumption in favor of print.  The House passed the unamended
version that we wanted. Now it was time to go back to the senate
committee, since this bill would have to go to conference committee
if differences continued to exist between the senate and house
versions.  Another trip to Annapolis, to talk to the members of the
senate committee; it looked promising that they would go along with
the house version, but not certain.

So last Monday we flooded those committee members with phone calls
asking them to support H.B.859.  By the end of the day, they did.

The association of school districts, association of school
superintendents were both opposed to the bill altogether, saying
they were already doing what it provided.  The education department
wanted to emasculate the bill with its amendments.  I think the NFB
did most of the work on this legislation, but the ACB did provide
some valuable testimony and some unity on this issue, and did not
waver in its support.  As I said at the beginning, the Senate has
now passed the unamended version as well.  The Governor still needs
to sign it.  More annual leave required to go to the signing
ceremony.

What will we get out of this bill?  School systems are going to
have a harder time if they try not to provide braille instruction
to kids who are having great difficulty working with print or have
such a prognosis.  Teachers of the blind (vision teachers) will
finally have to become certified in braille (not required
currently!).  LybCiC~?"~pow3e

--
Uucp: ..!{decvax,oliveb}!bunker!hcap!hnews!109!432!Lloyd.Rasmussen
Internet: Lloyd.Rasmussen@f432.n109.z1.fidonet.org