THE FEDERAL REHABILITATION ACT: NOW AND IN THE FUTURE
                         by Nell Carney

     From the Associate Editor: The first item on the Friday
afternoon agenda of the 1992 convention of the National
Federation of the Blind was an address by Nell Carney,
Commissioner of the Rehabilitation Services Administration (RSA).
Commissioner Carney has attended large portions of the last
several NFB conventions, and she has demonstrated herself to be a
knowledgeable, energetic, and dedicated proponent of the
vocational and rehabilitation rights and needs of people with
disabilities. She is making her mark on the federal
rehabilitation programs that shape our lives, and all of us who
are blind have benefitted by her vigilance. President Maurer
welcomed Commissioner Carney warmly and thanked her for her
dedicated service to the disabled community. Mrs. Carney then
reported on the current RSA programs and activities of most
immediate importance and significance to blind people. Here is
what she had to say:

     Thank you, Mr. President. Members of the Federation, I am
here this afternoon to bring you greetings from George Bush and
his administration as the President's appointed person to advance
rehabilitation policy and programs throughout the United States.
President George Bush is the only President in our history who
has made disability issues a primary concern of his
administration. Yesterday afternoon I received a call from the
White House asking that I please announce at this conference, the
largest gathering of disabled people anywhere in the world that
we know about, that the President yesterday appointed a blind
attorney (Richard Casey of New York City, with the firm Brown and
Wood) to sit on the Seventh District Court in the State of New
York. [applause] Mr. Casey is the third blind person that the
President has appointed to a high-ranking position in the federal
government: I was the first. He then appointed a blind man to sit
on the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, and now Mr. Casey.
     As many of you know, the Rehabilitation Services
Administration is charged with the responsibility of
administering four of the seven titles of the Rehabilitation Act
of 1973 and its subsequent amendments through 1986, as well as
administering the Randolph-Sheppard authorities. As many of you
also know, the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 is this year up for
reauthorization. In reality, it was up for reauthorization last
year, but because of some conflicting information and other
delays in the Congress and in the administration, our
reauthorization was advanced an additional year, but this year we
believe that the act will be reauthorized in this Congress. 
     This afternoon I'd like to discuss with you briefly the
administration's position on reauthorization and the highlights
of the reauthorization bill that was introduced by Senator
Durenberger of Minnesota on Monday of this week. Then I'd like to
talk about the Randolph-Sheppard authorities and some of the
issues concerned with that legislation.
     Being aware that people with physical and mental
disabilities throughout the country are more and more concerned
about choices in the provision of rehabilitation services, the
administration was very concerned that the reauthorization bill
contain some choices language. We covered that in two areas.
     To begin with, in the discretionary programs we're asking
that the reauthorization contain a discretionary model program in
choices, and we're asking that it be funded for this first cycle
at six million dollars. The language we are proposing would
prohibit current, established vocational rehabilitation agencies,
public agencies, from competing for the choices projects. It may
include vouchers, but the language doesn't necessarily say that.
The second area to address choice is that surrounding the
development of the individual written rehabilitation program in
title I of the act. Our language proposes that we strengthen this
requirement by directing that any individual receiving services
from a public rehabilitation program be given full choice in a
vocational goal and training to achieve that goal. 
     Another area that we're fully aware is of tremendous concern
to consumers throughout the country is that of lack of upward
mobility opportunities for people with disabilities who do
receive employment. We're therefore asking for a change in the
Rehabilitation Act that would allow us to demonstrate the need
for and advantage of having upward mobility opportunities for
people with disabilities who are already employed. We are asking
that this authority be funded under one of our discretionary
programs, which is probably less known to you than the Vocational
Rehabilitation Program, the Projects with Industries. Again this
program would not be available for competition through the public
vocational rehabilitation agencies, and those served under the
program would not necessarily be subject to the same eligibility
requirements as those in vocational rehabilitation.
     The third area that we will emphasize in reauthorization
will be accountability. We believe that, because 80 percent of
all of the money spent in public vocational rehabilitation is
comprised of federal dollars--your dollars and mine--there must
necessarily be a high level of accountability. We are, therefore,
proposing changes in section 14 of the Act to allow us to develop
evaluation standards and program indicators for the vocational
rehabilitation programs that look at outcomes of the programs
rather than process. We believe that such standards and
indicators will necessarily create an atmosphere that will
enhance employment opportunities for people with disabilities.
     There are a number of other changes that we are asking in
the reauthorization, but they are of less significance than the
three that I have discussed. Having been here for two days at
your convention, I'm also aware (as I know you are) that there
are some other provisions proposed outside of the
administration's. Two specifically that affect blind people are
the provision for a commission for the blind and the provision to
make the title VII, part C, Older Blind Independent Living
Program a formula grant program.
     I believe that most of you were present when our Secretary
of Education, Lamar Alexander, addressed this audience on
Wednesday and stated that he intends to go back to Washington and
find out why we need another commission. It would be indeed
presumptuous of me to make any predictions about title VII, part
C, given what I've heard at this convention and the obvious tie
between the title VII, part C, legislation and the commission for
the blind. 
     Let me move on and discuss very briefly with you the
Randolph-Sheppard authorities. In the fall of 1991, the Randolph-
Sheppard Vendors of America, a division of the American Council
of the Blind, asked for and was granted a Congressional hearing
on the Randolph-Sheppard Program under the allegation that,
instead of growing as directed by the legislation, the program
had started to shrink. 
     Robert DiVilla, the Assistant Secretary for the Office of
Special Education and Rehabilitation Services, and I offered
testimony for the administration, and it was very clear to the
House panel before the day was done that the allegations that had
been brought against the program were indeed not factual, and the
hearing resulted in no changes and no new direction given to the
administration. 
     There are, however, some issues with the Randolph-Sheppard
Program that you need to be aware of. As some of you know, last
winter we started to send out questionnaires about the
regulations, which have not been changed since 1976. We got a
voluminous amount of information from the constituency about the
regulations. We had one meeting in Washington and decided that we
needed to analyze further the information that we had gathered.
It is my full intention to open the Randolph-Sheppard Regulations
for revision, and the only reason that hasn't happened yet is
because of the President's moratorium on the regulation process
at this time.
     There is now an important court case taking place in the
state of Mississippi, the National Aeronautics and Space
Administration versus the Vocational Rehabilitation Program of
Mississippi, which is the state's licensing agency. NASA is
asking that the vending concessions be given to them to
administer because of some special legislation that pertains to
NASA. In that court preparation and ongoing dialogue, the
Department of Justice filed a brief stating that the arbitration
provisions in the Randolph-Sheppard Act are unconstitutional.
When that issue was brought before the District Court in
Mississippi, it ruled that the arbitration language was not
unconstitutional.
     However, the Department of Justice has advised our attorneys
that it will pursue identifying those provisions as
unconstitutional in additional arbitration suits or cases. It's
something that you need to be aware of as consumers and as
participants in the Randolph-Sheppard Program. At the time that
the Department of Justice filed the brief, we had about decided
that we were going to have to offer amendments to the Randolph-
Sheppard Act. We now have put that activity on hold and will
await the decision of the court. Further developments in the NASA
versus State Licensing Agency in the Mississippi case: no ruling
has been made about the request of NASA to negotiate with the
State Licensing Agency for part of the revenue or commission on
the income that's realized from the facilities at the NASA
installation.
     Elsewhere in the Randolph-Sheppard Program the military
installation in White Sands, New Mexico, is also being considered
for part of the National Industries for the Severely Handicapped
Food Services Program. There is no doubt that this issue will
also end up in a court case. Overall, you should be aware that,
as we get into an era of tighter and tighter financial support
for our programs, more and more other disability groups will
continue to look at the Randolph-Sheppard Program.
     Let me now return to the Rehabilitation Act in combination
with the Randolph-Sheppard Program and take just a couple of
minutes to tell you what I think is ahead of us as blind people,
and ahead of the nation, in the area of rehabilitation and the
Randolph-Sheppard Program. The rehabilitation program was
originally established to provide vocational training and
placement for people with physical and mental disabilities. Over
a seventy-two year history, although we say that we have placed
fifteen million people in employment, the unemployment rate for
people with physical and mental disabilities continues to be
about 66 or 67 percent. In the field of blindness, it's even
worse--it's about 72 percent.
     I did look at the statistics last year for blind and
visually impaired people served by public vocational
rehabilitation and found that only 35 percent of the cases closed
were closed in competitive employment. That figure is absolutely
unacceptable to us at the Rehabilitation Services Administration.
Beginning with the 1992 strategic management plan within RSA, our
number one priority is employment of people with disabilities. We
intend to direct our attention, our discretionary programs, our
policy development, and everything else we do towards this end.
     So far as the Randolph-Sheppard Act is concerned, as the
largest and most forceful organization of blind people known
anywhere in the world, you must be ever vigilant in seeing that
the program is not eroded and over-regulated so that it does not
serve its initial purpose, which was to create employment
opportunities for people who are blind.
     In closing let me thank you very sincerely for the
opportunity to come here a third year in a row and share with you
some of the things that are going on in the Federal
Rehabilitation Program, but most important, to make me feel
welcome to sit in your sessions and listen and learn so that I
can know what direction to take as we look forward to building a
comprehensive and responsive program of rehabilitation services.
Thank you very much.