painting, and sign painting contract work. Immediately after blindness there was an initial period of idleness and complete frustration. There seemed to be nothing left for me to do. This initial period did not last long, however. The greatest single factor in getting me back on my feet was my contact with individual blind persons and with organizations of the blind, especially the local affiliate of the National Federation of the Blind. I saw blind persons leading normal, useful lives and earning their own living. Their encouragement and example were an invaluable source of inspiration and strength. What is even more to the point, there were living proof of what I had always thought impossible-namely, that the average blind person could function with average competence as an average worker in an average job.

Contrast this with my first contact with an agency (and I put this next phrase in quotes) "doing work for the blind." The agency did not contact me. I found their name in the phone book and called them. They sent out a young sighted college junior or senior who was training to be a social worker and who was using the visit as a part of her casework training in connection with a class. As soon as she arrived, I got right down to business. Before my blindness I had been doing quite well financially-that is, I had been making $90 or $100 a week, which was not bad for 1941 and 1942. Of course, the biggest worry I had was whether I could continue to earn a living for myself and my family. I was married and had two small children and I had just bought a comfortable brick home (not yet paid for) in a good middle-class neighborhood. When I tried to discuss my prospects for continuing to earn a living with this agency worker she was very evasive and noncommittal. It was painfully clear that she was convinced that I would never be able to be self-supporting again and that she felt it her duty to bring me (and again I put this phrase in quotes) "to a realistic appraisal" of my situation and probable future, and to do so as quickly as possible. Among other things, she recommended that I sell my home because, as she put it, it was in too expensive a neighborhood for the income I could anticipate as a blind man Also, it was eight blocks from the busline, and she said it would be extremely difficult for me to get to the bus and keep my appointments unless When I asked her, "What appointments." she seemed nonI moved closer. plussed and became inarticulate. The total effect of her visit was to leave me so completely depressed that I felt absolutely desperate and wondered if life was finished for me.

Several comments might be in order concerning this situation :

(1) Undoubtedly I did not handle myself as well as I might have in this interview with the agency worker. I was, perhaps, too edgy and aggressive and not as tactful as I might have been. On the other hand, I was a newly blind person and needed help. The agency worker, if she had really known anything about blindness, should have anticipated my attitudes and at least some of my questions and comments and should have been able to offer constructive She handled herself in the poorest possible manner and did me a suggestions good deal of harm. The agency should not have sent such a person.

(2) I have walked the eight blocks to the bus probably thousands of times since the day of that visit, and without difficulty. I do not walk to the bus anymore, In this connection it however. There is no need. I now have two cars in my garage, both bought and paid for in cash out of my earnings as a blind man

is somewhat ironic that my present average earnings considerably exceed those of the worker in question. Of course, it goes without saying that I did not sell my house and that it is now paid for.

(3) Since early 1944 I have been completely self-supporting. I was an assembly worker at the Ford Motor Co. from 1944 to 1948, and I have been a piano technician ever since. My income at the present time is as good as it ever was when I was sighted.

(4) At the same time that the agency was handling my case in the manner described, it was holding itself out to the public as the spokesman for the blind of the Detroit area and as the interpreter to the community of their needs and capacities. The total effect of the program which it was carrying on and of the publicity which it gave to that program was to confirm the community at large in its erroneous belief that blindness and helplessness are synonymous terms Further, the total effect of its program and publicity was (even though not intended to be so) discouraging to the blind individual seeking to gain independence and self-support It emphasized basket weaving and other forms of low-paying, noncompetitive, subsidized employment in its television and other advertising and in general portrayed the blind as inferior and incapable of any thing more than a limited existence. Moreover, its activities were financed by a public wishing to help rather than hinder the blind.

I have brought out all these details to contrast two different philosophies. My story is not unique. It is a part of a pattern too often repeated.

The agency worker I have referred to visited me several times after that first interview. She was not helpful, and I did not encourage her to return. Because of the support and stimulation I received from organizations of the blind, I actively sought contact with them and their members. If the agency in question had really been in touch with the rank-and-file blind members it was supposedly serving, it might well have developed a different philosophy about blindness. If there had been an active effort on the part of the leaders of the agency to consult with organizations of the blind and if the blind had been thought of as equals and partners in a joint effort, the entire orientation and thinking of the agency would have been different, and it might have been of real help to me instead of being a hindrance.

I believe that every agency doing work for the blind should actively encourage the blind to organize and speak for themselves even if this leads at times to criticism of agency programs and policies. I believe that every agency doing work for the blind should, as a matter of regular procedure consult with organizations of the blind. This will not, as some have claimed, lead to conflict and disruption of programs. Instead, it will inevitably lead to long-range harmony and unprecedented adjustment. The objectives and interests of the organized blind and of the agencies established to serve the blind may not always now be the same, but they can be the same. They can and will be the same when the agencies recognize the right of the blind to organize and speak for themselves and have a voice in programs affecting them. As long as some agencies believe that there may be a chance of wiping out the independent organizations of the blind in their communities and of thus having an unchallenged empire, the temptation will simply be too great, and there will certainly be conflict. When the right of the blind to organize and be consulted about programs has been written into the law, the situation will be different. The basis for harmony will be established.

This is why I so strongly support the bills before this committee. These bills are right, and they are practicable. They will benefit every blind person in the United States. They should be passed into law.

Mrs. GREEN. This will conclude the hearings for today and we will resume hearings tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock. The meeting will be in room 312.

The meeting is adjourned.

(Whereupon, at 5: 10 p. m., Tuesday, March 10, 1959, the subcommittee adjourned, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Wednesday, March 11, 1959, in room 312, House Office Building.)

EDUCATION AND ASSISTANCE TO THE BLIND

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, 1959

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPECIAL EDUCATION

OF THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR,

Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, in room 429 Old House Office Building, at 10 a.m., Hon. Edith Green (acting chairman of the subcommittee), presiding.

Present: Representatives Green, Daniels, Giaimo, Lafore, and Wainwright.

Also present: Mary P. Allen, subcommittee clerk, and Charles Backstrom, research assistant to subcommittee.

Mrs. GREEN. The subcommittee will be in order.

The chairman of this subcommittee, Mr. Carl Elliott, of Alabama, is unable to be here this morning, not because of any lack of interest in this legislation, certainly, but because of previous commitments in his speaking engagements in his own State of Alabama.

I think there is no Member of the House who has been more interested in legislation to meet the needs of the blind and in other legislation that is before the subcommittee, than is Mr. Elliott. This is not a recently acquired interest, it is one he has had over a period of years. Mr. Clifford McIntire, Congressman from Maine, and Mr. Robert L. F. Sikes, Congressman from Florida, wanted to be here this morning to give testimony before the committee and, without any objection, I would ask that their remarks be inserted at this point in the record. (The material referred to follows:)

TESTIMONY SUBMITTED BY HON. CLIFFORD G. McINTIRE

Mr. Chairman, I think the great number of bills that have been introduced on the subject of aid for the blind cogently attests to the urgent need that exists for this type of legislation.

In short, it appears that the matter to be resolved is not one of whether such aid should be extended, but, rather, just how it should be extended.

My legislation-H.R. 3737-which is similar to other bills introduced on this subject, is designed to set up a temporary national advisory committee. Such a committee would, within 24 months, report to the President and the Congress after an intensified study into existing aid-to-the-blind services. Thirty days after it submits its report, the committee would dissolve.

In essence, then, my legislation establishes a temporary device that is designed to effect permanent and long-range aids for the visually handicapped.

Our Federal, State, and local governments have. through a recognition of the needs of the blind, set up a variety of services for those who cannot see. My bill would set forth to coordinate these various aids, endeavoring to bring them together in such a manner as to bring to the blind a maximum of benefits.

I sincerely hope that this committee will, in its wisdom, endorse that type of legislation which will advance the greatest benefits to our sightless citizens. By

so doing, it would make a big step in the direction of lightening the burden of those who now walk in darkness.

It is with this thought in mind that I submit my bill for this committee's consideration.

Mr. Chairman, I deeply appreciate having this opportunity to be heard by this committee on my legislation.

STATEMENT BY CONGRESSMAN BOB SIKES, DEMOCRAT, OF FLORIDA, BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SPECIAL EDUCATION

Mr. Chairman, my distinguished colleague, Congressman Billy Matthews, of Florida, appeared before this committee on March 9 and presented what I consider to be an outstanding statement in behalf of his bill, H.R. 1855. Since I have introduced a companion bill, H.R. 3502, I would like to add my support to the statement by Congressman Matthews who has had considerable experience in working with and for the blind.

Mr. Chairman, there is no need for me to take the time of the committee to give a detailed description of the purposes of my bill since others have already done so. However, I would like to point out that for years we have been operating under varied laws and regulations for blind assistance in many Government departments and agencies. With the establishment of a National Advisory Committee for the Blind, I feel we will see evolve a more uniform and coordinated program which will reduce duplication of services and be more effective in the overall programs of aid to the blind.

I sincerely hope the members of this distinguished committee will make it possible for a national advisory committee to be established by giving a favorable report to this legislation.

Mrs. GREEN. Mr. McIntire also has been a person who has been interested in this type of legislation for a considerable period of time. He did come to the commmittee a few moments ago and expressed again his interest in it.

Now the first witness to be heard this morning is Mr. Richard Wilburn, of Utah, and, Mr. Wilburn, you may proceed as you would like to.

STATEMENT OF RICHARD WILBURN, DUGWAY PROVING GROUND, DUGWAY, UTAH

Mr. WILBURN. Madam Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Richard Wilburn and I am Chief of the Physical Chemistry Section of the Chemical Warfare Operations at the Army Chemical Corps' Proving Ground, Dugway, Utah. I have been totally blind since I was 4 years old.

When I received my Ph. D. in chemistry from the University of Washington in 1954, there were many who said I would never find a job as a working chemist. If it had not been for my association with the National Federation of the Blind, they might have been right. As it is, I am working along with other chemists in a program that is considered an important part of our scientific defense effort.

I received my elementary education at the Illinois School for the Blind, and then moved to the State of Washington, where I attended. the State school for the blind for 2 years.

I completed by high school education at Bremerton Public High School in 1945. That fall I enrolled as a chemistry major in the University of Washington.

At this point I would like to tell you about an experience I had with an agency doing work for the blind. I applied to the State welfare agency for financial assistance in attending the university to meet the costs of tuition and readers' fees. When the agency learned

that I intended to study chemistry, they refused to grant the aid. The agency officials did not believe that a blind person could become a chemist, and they told me that they would give me financial assistance if I could secure a letter from the university stating that I would be accepted as a chemistry major. I secured the letter and sent it to the State agency. For a period of 3 months I heard nothing from the agency. Just before school started, I received notification that aid had been denied. The reason given was that my parents were able to take care of my expenses.

This was difficult to understand in view of the fact that other blind persons (not majoring in chemistry) whose parents had more means than mine, were receiving State assistance.

It seemed clear that the real reason for the denial was the fact that the State agency officials continued to believe that a blind person could not become a chemist, and that they were protecting me from my own folly.

I entered the university anyway. After 2 years of appeals, I finally received the aid. In 1949, I got my bachelor's degree in chemistry. The work was not at all impossible for a blind person to do, and the irony of the situation was that the very agency which should have encouraged my efforts discouraged them.

Two years later I obtained my master's degree and after 3 more years, my Ph. D.

In 1954, I left the State of Washington and moved to California. I was blind. I had a Ph. D. in chemistry and I had no prospects for getting a job.

I contacted literally dozens of colleges and universities and many private companies, but got no offers. I had little money and things looked pretty discouraging.

About 2 months after I arrived in California, I learned about the National Federation of the Blind and met its president and many of its members. They gave me the kind of encouragement and boost in morale which kept me trying to get a job. It was the first time in my life that I had ever come into contact with a group that really believed that blind people could do things and that I could be a chemist. They were willing to do more than just believe in me. They arranged for me to have interviews with executives in the chemical industry, and when difficulties arose in connection with my application for a position in the Federal civil service, they really went into action.

I applied to be put on the register as a chemist in the 12th civil service region. My qualifications were fully adequate, and the rating was issued.

Within a month, however, my name was removed from the register, solely on the ground of my blindness. The National Federation of the Blind immediately appealed the case. In the meantime I got a job in private industry as a research chemist.

In the fall of 1955 my appeal was successful, and my name was restored to the civil service register.

Early in 1956, I was offered a position as a research chemist at the Dugway Proving Ground. I accepted the offer. Since that time I have received several promotions and have taught courses for the University of Utah.

It is probably not hard for you to understand why I am a member of the National Federation of the Blind and why I believe that the