On this episode of Change Makers, we’re heading to Washington, D.C. to hear the latest news from Capitol Hill, more about APH’s recent testimony before the Labor, Health and Human Services, Appropriations subcommittee, and what you can do to stay involved and make a difference.
On this episode (in order of appearance)
Additional Links
Emails
On this episode of Change Makers, we’re heading to Washington, D.C. to hear the latest news from Capitol Hill, more about APH’s recent testimony before the Labor, Health and Human Services, Appropriations subcommittee, and what you can do to stay involved and make a difference.
On this episode (in order of appearance)
Additional Links
Emails
Welcome to Changemakers, a podcast from a p h. We're talking to people from around the world who are creating positive change in the lives of people who are blind or have low vision. Here's your host.
Sara Brown:Hello and welcome to Change Makers. I'm APH's Public Relations Manager, Sara Brown. On this episode of Change Makers, we're taking it to Washington, D.C. I'm gonna hand this episode over to Paul Schroeder, that's APH's Vice President of Impact and Outreach. He's going to talk about the latest news from Capitol Hill in regards to accessibility, APH's, recent testimony before the Labor Health and Human Services Appropriations Subcommittee, and what you can do to stay involved and make a difference. Take it away, Paul.
Paul Schroeder:This is Paul Schroeder, the American Printing House for the Blind Vice President for Impact and Outreach. Very excited to start what I hope will be an occasional series of updates on activities in Washington, D. C. That affect the blindness in low vision communities, and particularly with a focus on policy. Very pleased to start this with my colleagues from the National Federation of the Blind and the American Council of the Blind, to talk about two legislative policy areas that, uh, priorities, that are priorities for both organizations. For 2023, I'm gonna start to have John Pare introduce himself, he's with the National Federation of the Blind. Welcome, John.
John Pare:Hey, Paul, it's great to be here. Thanks for having me. I said, this is John Pare. I'm the Executive Director for Advocacy and Policy, and look forward to our discussion.
Paul Schroeder:Thank you so much, John. I'm also glad to be joined by Clark Rachfal, who's with the American Council of the Blind, Clark.
Clark Rachfal:Good morning, Paul, and thank you so much for having ACB as a part of this podcast. Hi everyone. My name's Clark Rachfal. I'm the Director of Advocacy and Governmental Affairs for the American Council of the Blind. Have been in this role for over four years now based out of our national office in Alexandria, Virginia.
Paul Schroeder:Great to have a couple of good, good policy hands with me on the podcast. I wanna start with the websites and software applications Accessibility Act. This is something that I think our entire community is quite excited about. It's an area of, uh, certainly a great deal of accessibility challenges, both in terms of the websites as well as the applications that we use on a regular basis. And there really are a couple of components to this that I want to touch on. One, of course, is the legislation. The other, uh, area I'm hoping we can get a quick update on is the regulatory front, uh, because though they're, they're sort of moving on separate paths for the moment. Uh, if of course the legislation passes, it will spawn its own set of regulations. But we'll clarify all this in just a second. Clark, I'm gonna start with you to just quickly explain what is this Website and Software Accessibility Act?
Clark Rachfal:Thanks, Paul. So, the, the websites and software Applications Accessibility Act is a legislative imperative for the American Council of the Blind. It's a priority that's shared by our partners at NFB as well as the American Foundation for the Blind. And, uh, as you stated, many organizations and individuals across the disability community. Um, so Paul, you kind of, uh, jumped the gut on me a little bit because as typically what I start by saying is that, uh, this bill underlines or codifies what we, what we in the community all already know that the inaccessibility of websites, software applications, online services, this poses a tremendous barrier to education, employment, and really full inclusion for people who are blind and low vision. In the employment setting, you could have inaccessible, uh, to HR or business management systems in the classroom, inaccessible e-learning platforms. And what this legislation would do is create enforceable regulations to say yes, in fact, that is against the law, and it would give a legal recourse to people with disabilities as well as covered entities. Um, those entities that under the Americans With Disabilities Act are obligated to make their goods services systems accessible to people with disabilities. It would give them recourse against the, uh, the commercial providers of this technology as well, because far too often at advocacy organizations, and when talking to individuals, we hear, uh, folks share stories from their employer, from a, a business or a place of com public accommodation that, uh, we would love to make our system accessible, or we thought we had an accessible system. Uh, but the, the vendor, the third party, uh, can't do it or won't do it. So this would provide recourse to, to reach those third party providers of the technology to ensure that accessibility is part of the conversation from beginning and not an afterthought.
Paul Schroeder:And we are gonna probably be digging into this a couple of times, I would imagine, uh, not just the on this podcast, but on future podcasts, because there is a lot to unpack. But let me come to you, John, for a second, because I, I, I alluded and Clark alluded to, to, um, the fact that this isn't a new issue. There have been many, many, many lawsuits under the Americans with Disabilities Act, uh, citing web accessibility as an area, um, and, and a, a, a complaint. Um, and there have been court settlements and cases, and in fact, uh, I think probably both organizations have been involved in some of these suits. So, John, can you unpack a little bit, um, more the distinction? So we, there's a piece of legislation, this one that we've just started to talk about, and there's also a regulatory path. Um, and I wanna try to help unscramble this a little bit for folks who might be confused about what's, what's what. So there's a, there is a, there is an Americans with Disabilities Act path that already, uh, has been explored to cover website accessibility, and now we have this legislation. So maybe you could help us unpack that a little bit.
John Pare:Sure. Uh, very happy to do that, and thrilled to be here. So, the Americans with Disabilities Act, certainly our organization, the National Federation of the Blind, and and both of you would say, applies to, uh, websites and software applications. So, uh, Title II, which applies to state and local government, we would say that the, uh, a d a requires that state and local government websites and software applications be accessible to people with disabilities, including non-visual accessibility. Uh, the same for Title III, which applies to places of public accommodation. Now, companies have said that it is maybe challenging to them for them to be compliant. Uh, not nobody disagreeing that it's the law because there aren't very specific regulations about exactly what accessibility means. Uh, that's because the Department of Justice has never put out a regulation for defining exactly what someone accompany or entity, or state or local government needs to do to be compliant with the, uh, Americans with Disabilities Act. Uh, good news is, at least for Title II, the Department of Justice has announced that they plan to put out, uh, a bit. It's taken quite some time, but they are putting out, uh, notice of Proposed Rulemaking in effect. Think of that as a draft rule, and think of rule and regulation as synonymous. So they'll be saying, here's exactly what a company or in this case, state or local government needs to do to be compliant. Folks will then have an opportunity to comment, this is both state and local government could com comment, and anyone else here in the United States can comment. And then shortly after that, they'd put out the final rule or final regulation, those being synonymous that would say exactly what state and local co uh, governments need to do. It's unfortunate that they, they have not announced plans yet to do Title III, which would apply to places of public accommodation. So that's where, as Clark was describing, the Website and Software Applications Accessibility Act could help come into play. We certainly want the Title III, uh, regulations regarding, uh, the ADA, but there isn't a specific regulatory schedule called out in the ADA for such regulations. The Website Software Applications Bill would call out for a specific regulation, and in fact, would, would help create a statutory definition of accessibility as it applies to websites and software applications, which, which doesn't currently exist. Some folks might think, well, are these in competition or they complimentary? Well, they're complimentary. So we, along with 180 plus other organizations, uh, have urged the DOJ to move forward with Title two and Title three regulations as they apply to the Americans' Disabilities Act. And we're also urging Congress to move forward with this legislation because while there's some overlap, uh, there are a number of, uh, small differences or just differences that, that Clark, uh, described, for example, with third party, uh, responsibilities that we think makes it important to do both of these things.
Paul Schroeder:We're going to try to make sure we provide some, some links in the, in the notes so people can track down a little bit more information on this. Some people might know that there, of course, is something called the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines delivered by the W3 Consortium. And of course, Section 508, which is a separate law that applies to government procurement, federal government, procurement of technology, but it does include, uh, web accessibility, uh, requirements. So the, the, I think the point you were likely making, um, is that it's not as though this area isn't known, unfortunately. It just hasn't been spelled out under ADA in terms of what, what rules and what guidelines apply.
John Pare:Agreed.
Paul Schroeder:The, um, I wanna, uh, just close this portion because as I said, we're going to probably come back to this. The, uh, Clark, the ACT has not been introduced in this session of Congress. Um, as regular listeners know, uh, every two years, Congress gets a new session, uh, at the end of the last session, which closed at the end of 2022. Uh, this act was introduced, uh, as kind of a, a, a what sometimes they call a Message Bill, but a but a, but a bill that, that sort of created, uh, to, to get people to the table talking about it. Well, you can say more about it, but what are the, what are the prospects for introduction this year and what can, what can people do if they're interested?
Clark Rachfal:Thanks, Paul. We are, uh, our organizations are working diligently on Bill reintroduction. We're having conversations with our partners in the, the disability community as well as our corporate partners. And we are continuing to work with the offices of Senator Tammy Duckworth, as well as representative, uh, Sarbanes in the, in the House from, uh, Democrat from Maryland for Bill Reintroduction here in the 118th Congress. If folks would like to learn more, uh, you can always visit the ACB website, um, as well as the NFB website. And, uh, you can check out the, the bills from the 117th Congress. So that was S.4998 in the Senate in H.R. 9021 in the representatives. And I mean, here we are all, all blindness organizations, right? But this bill has, this legislation has broad support. Last year when it was introduced, there were over 20 organizations from the cross disability community representing, uh, people with all types of disabilities. Not just blindness, but, uh, hearing speech, cognitive dexterity, mobility impairments. So across the board now, there are over 140 organizations at the national, state, and local level supporting this bill. So, as we will continue to work to build support as we work towards bill introductions, if folks are interested to learn more or to, uh, want to know how they can support this legislation, you can always reach out to the American Council of the Blind by emailing advocacy@acb.org. We have information about this legislation, again, on our website, and you can always contact your member of Congress to let them know that this is a priority for you, that this legislation, uh, is, is necessary. It should be passed and turned into, uh, into law. Um, because Paul is, as you just stated it, the Americans with Disabilities Act, we certainly believe it applies, but the ADA was passed in 1990, and here we are in 2023. So rather than waiting another 30 years for regulations to be implemented, uh, enforcing the ADA for websites and software applications, we need to pass the websites in Software Applications Accessibility Act, uh, which has a, uh, tight regulatory timeline for action by the Department of Justice and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Paul Schroeder:And one other point on this, Clark, uh, you say software applications is part of this, does that include mobile apps? The things we use on our smartphones?
Clark Rachfal:It does include applications. Um, so whether it's mobile applications, desktop applications, uh, I'd, I'd refer folks to the bill. There are definitions included. Uh, in many cases, the definitions mirror those of the ADA as well as the web content accessibility guidelines, um, and other international standards as well as, uh, regulatory frameworks. But there are aspects of the bill that are, that are new as well. So I'd refer folks to the, the findings in the bill as well as the definitions. Uh, one final point that I'll make, um, you know, we, we touched on WCAG just a little bit, uh, Section 508, uh, which are the, the standards for federal government. One other area that makes this bill, but really interesting for people with disabilities is that it doesn't codify a single standard or guideline into law. Um, because again, ADA was passed 30 years ago, we don't want a rigid standard in place for 30 years as technology evolves and people with disabilities are left behind. So this bill creates a functional definition of accessibility, uh, much like the, the ADA has the definition for effective communication. You know, the, the law doesn't say how you must provide effective communication. This legislation doesn't, uh, tell businesses or covered entities how you must provide accessibility. But it says that your, your systems, your services must be accessible, must provide same levels of privacy and independence and access for people with disabilities. So that covered entities can, uh, meet the, the goals of this legislation in the way that makes the most sense for their business, as well as for individuals with disabilities.
Paul Schroeder:Thank you. That's Clark Rockfall. Just completing a little point about the, uh, uh, major point about the Web and Software Applications Accessibility Act, and we'll have information available, um, that folks can link to. I wanna switch gears and come back to you, John, on another priority that's part of the 2023, uh, priorities for both organizations, I think, and that's the Medical Device Non-Visual Accessibility Act. Uh, this is an effort to address, I gather, uh, all of these various kinds of medical testing and diagnostic and therapeutic devices. But you can say a little bit more about what, what the intent of this act would be.
John Pare:Great. Thanks, Paul. Yes. It's to provide non-visual access to medical devices. Now, we, uh, had to limit or describe that in some way. It turns out that the FDA divides medical devices into three classes. This is something that companies know well. And so, uh, class one is, uh, very simplistic devices that probably don't have a digital display. And class two are progressive, way more complicated. So this bill applies to class two and class three medical devices, which for the moment is, is most devices, uh, with a digital display and says that, uh, they would have to be accessible, uh, to blind people, non visually accessible. So think about the idea that you might have a blood pressure cuff, or you might have a continual glucose monitor or something of that that provides, uh, an important in it's important medical information, medical safety. How could a blind person, uh, utilize this to the level of safety and efficacy if it's not accessible? So this, this bill would require that they, these things are accessible. It requires that a Food and Drug, Food and Drug Administration would go through, uh, a regulatory process to describe the company's, uh, these are the manufacturers of medical devices, exactly how to make their, uh, devices non visually accessible or what the standard would be. Uh, similar in a sense, the rulemaking process would be similar to what we described with the previous bill, and the, then, uh, it would apply to new applications. So it's not retroactive only to new applications. I mentioned that because that helps make sure that it's not too onerous or expensive to companies as far as existing devices, but certainly medical devices are something that are, are, there's a lot of rapid development in that area. So there are a lot of new applications being submitted, which, uh, once this bill was passed, then the rule went into effect, uh, would apply to those new applications. This has the potential to dramatically improve the accessibility for blind people. So it's something that's really exciting, especially with the really increased amount of telehealth that people are doing. So, so much more people are doing this sort of thing from their home, which this could help with.
Paul Schroeder:Um, and this bill, I believe, has been introduced in this session of Congress? Yes.
John Pare:Yes. It's, uh, H.R. 13, uh, 1326, H. R. 1326, uh, with Congresswoman Jan Schakowsky from Illinois. And, uh, currently has 42 co-sponsors. The bill reflects some changes from the last Congress based on feedback we received from, from members of Congress and others. So, uh, I think that the possibility of it getting passed and the current Congress is a dramatically improved, uh, as a result of some of the changes that we've made. One is the clarification that it applies to only new applications as I just described. The other two changes are that this, uh, says that if it, there's an exemption that a company could file for if they thought the accessibility would result in, um, a fundamental alteration of the product. And also if it was just, uh, gonna be so expensive that they thought it'd be an undue hardship, then they could apply for an exemption and, uh, the FDA would potentially grant it.
Paul Schroeder:And I should note that those exemptions are both, uh, not uncommon. They're both available to communications companies as part of requirements for communication device accessibility that were, that have been in place in a couple of different forms for a while. Clark, is it accurate that the American Council of the Blind is also supporting this bill and, and maybe add a comment or two?
Clark Rachfal:That is very accurate, Paul? Yes. This, this legislation is also a priority for the American Council of the Blind. Uh, it was in the 117th Congress. It remains a priority in the 118th Congress, and as John stated, it has, the bill has already been reintroduced and reintroduced on a bipartisan basis. So it's really exciting that both of the bipartisan co-chairs of the Congressional Disabilities Caucus, representative Dingle and Representative Fitzpatrick, uh, Democrat and a Republican are co-sponsors of this legislation. Uh, so by having the, the co-chairs of a major caucus supporting the legislation, we think that demonstrates the importance of this legislation, uh, for our community. And as, as John stated, one of the, I think one of the long tail benefits from the pandemic was underscoring just how important it is for everyone in the United States to be able to have access to healthcare and have access to healthcare where they are. Um, you know, that in the pandemic transportation became a barrier for nearly all Americans or people in the United States. Well, that's existed for people with disabilities for quite some time. Access to, uh, in-person medical care became a hardship for nearly all people in the United States, and that's been an issue for people with disabilities for a long time. So by making these devices accessible, uh, by giving folks access to these devices to use privately and independently in their, uh, in the safety of their own homes, will have a tremendous impact on our members and on our community as a whole.
Paul Schroeder:I couldn't agree more. And I know that, uh, for example, people with diabetes have been, um, very, very out front and and outspoken about the need for improved accessibility on, on glucose monitoring and insulin delivery systems, uh, where accessibility has been a challenge. We're gonna close, and I want to ask, uh, both of you a quick point. You've both had, uh, members in town doing legislative visits over the last couple of months, the early months of 2023. Um, gonna go to you first, um, Clark, any, any quick, uh, comments about what you're hearing from Congress? Are, are, are, are legislators interested in these disability issues? There's, uh, uh, you know, I think if you read the news, you hear a lot of, of angst and anger, uh, among, among members of Congress. There, there doesn't seem to be a lot of room for cooperation, but are you, what are you hearing from your members?
Clark Rachfal:Sure. So, ACB had our DC Leadership Conference in the beginning of March of 2023. Our members took these two priorities, uh, as well as two others. The exercise and Fitness for All Act, and the communications video and Technology Accessibility Act to the Hill. We're still gathering feedback from those meetings. But I, I think one thing is clear that was a great way to start the conversation on these priorities. Uh, but it can't be the end of the conversation on these priorities. So, uh, we always encourage our members and our partners to, to build those relationships with congressional staff, with their members of Congress, uh, to keep the conversation going, uh, to demonstrate our commitment to these issues. And I'd say, uh, proof is in the pudding so far as, as John stated, the medical device Non-Visual Accessibility Act has been reintroduced with, uh, over 40 bipartisan co-sponsors. We are working with our partners for the web access bill, as well as the CBTA on bill reintroduction later this year. So I think that there's often the, the misnomer that the Republicans and Democrats can't get can't get along or always disagree. And certainly that's, that's the message that's conveyed out to the rest of the country. Uh, certainly if there's a, an election coming up and there's, uh, hay to be made, but in Washington, D. C. I, I think it's pretty common for members of both parties to, to come together, uh, to try to find common sense solutions to big problems. And we think that the two bills that we discussed today, as well as our other priorities, uh, kind of fit that mold of being, you know, thought out, discussed, debated, uh, potential solutions to these big problems that are facing our community.
Paul Schroeder:John, I'm gonna ask you essentially the same question. Your members were in town as well, doing meetings. And also, um, if you could, uh, I know Clark mentioned advocacy@acb.org as a way to get a good quick note into him and the, the ACB team about legislation. I don't know if NFB has a similar, uh, email box of that nature, but, uh, go ahead and, and if you wanna provide any contact info, that would be great as well. But what, what's, uh, what's, what are your members hearing, uh, in their conversations with members of Congress?
John Pare:Uh, uh, very similar to what Clark said. One, uh, I do wanna address the, you know, disability issues are very bipartisan and, uh, as demonstrated with the Medical Device Non Visual Accessibility Act, the fact that that is bipartisan. And that's also another issue that we're working on. I know ACB is also is the Transformation to Competitive Integrated Employment Act. Uh, this is a bill that's introduced in both the House and the Senate that would phase out, uh, sub minimum wages for people with disabilities over a five year period. It is bipartisan in both the House and the Senate, and there's been a lot of bipartisan work done on that at the state level. So, uh, on these various issues, we do look forward to working, um, in a bipartisan matter to improve opportunities for people with disabilities in the United States as far as, uh, our, what, what a lot of people would generically refer to as a fly-in or a week in Washington. Our terminology here at the National Federation of Blind is our Washington seminar. That's where we have, uh, this year, lucky back in person, about 500 people came to Washington, DC the first week of February. It was exciting to be back in person. I think, uh, members of Congress were very excited to, to be back with constituents back in person with constituents, and to be able to talk about in-person, uh, issues that would affect, uh, people who live in their district or their state. Uh, it just seemed to be a lot of positive excitement on the Hill and being back in the, in the halls of Congress. So we, um, had many productive conversations, many with, uh, senior staff, many with the, uh, actual elected official always. Uh, both are important, both are exciting. And we kind of, as you alluded to, uh, earlier, Paul, you know, there's a two year cycle. We're in the beginning of this really, we're just three months into the 118th Congress. Congress lasts for two years. So this is, uh, an important time. This is, we're, we're in the still, sort of in the launch phase of legislation for this Congress. And maybe say that, I hope we can give you some progress reports here, uh, every couple of months as we work to get these and, and other bills enacted.
Paul Schroeder:And how would you like people to reach out to you if somebody wants to be in touch with you at N F B?
John Pare:Well, let's do, we do have some generic email, but let's say, I'll give my email address. So it's, uh, johnpare@nfb.org. Uh, welcome to email. Love to hear from you.
Paul Schroeder:Hope to have you both back to update on these in any other, uh, priority topics that are happening. John Pare, with the National Federation of the Blind, Clark Rachfal with the American Council of the Blind. Thank you both for joining me on the APH podcast.
Speaker 4:Thanks, Paul. Thank you.
Sara Brown:Now Paul is talking to Laura Kaloi about funding and appropriations.
Paul Schroeder:We are talking about ACT activities in Washington, D.C. specifically policy work that's happening. We're fairly early in the new Congress, the 118th Congress, it'll last for two years. So we're a couple of months in and it's a good time to touch base on some of the issues that are before Congress and being looked at by the president as well. I'm thrilled today to be joined by a good friend of mine and a colleague I've worked with for many years, Laura Kaloi. Laura, welcome. And tell us a little bit about who you are.
Laura Kaloi:Hi, Paul. I'm really happy to be here today. I am a consultant, uh, but a long time advocate and policy expert in the education and special education space. I'm also the parent of a 22 year old son with learning disabilities. And, uh, I am working with several nonprofits that are focused in the education, special education, assistive technology space. I am the Policy Advisor to the Assistive Technology, Industry Association, ATIA, where I get to work with you directly again, which is really great. And I'm also a co-chair with the largest coalition here in Washington, D. C. For disability organizations. It's called the Consortium for Constituents with Disabilities, CCD. And I'm a co-chair on both the Education Task Force and the technology and telecommunications task force. And so we do some work there, of course, related to pre-K to 16 education. And, uh, it's just really great to be here.
Paul Schroeder:Well, thank you. And I'm gonna, I'm just gonna plug that, um, Laura also has a, a little bit of a March Madness connection with, with one of your other children who's a basketball player. I believe.
Laura Kaloi:I do. My daughter is number 23 on the Christopher Newport University Captains, and she is playing in the final game on Saturday, uh, in Dallas for the Division Three finals. And so it's pretty exciting.
Paul Schroeder:Well, that of course, will have happened by the time we air, so that will be exciting to hear how that goes. Um, this is the time of year when there's a lot of attention in Congress given to appropriations and funding. Uh, they, they tend to front load a lot of that work in the February, march, April timeframe. A lot of discussions and hearings. Some of you may know that the American Printing House for the Blind usually submits some kind of comments or information to the Appropriations Committees in Congress to describe what APH does. We receive a federal appropriation, so it's important for Congress to be aware of that work. And I think we'll have a, a, a link in the notes, uh, to some testimony, uh, that I was able to provide on behalf of the American Printing House to the blind. This was to the House subcommittee on Labor Health and Human Services education and related agencies. That's the way the appropriation subcommittees are divided. They're divided by federal agency. There are 12 of them, uh, and the one that APH happens to work with. It has education as well as the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services. And then some smaller, um, accounts as well, uh, in that related agency category. And actually, we're gonna talk a little bit more about that subcommittee. Uh, there's one in the House and Senate, so they both will be looking at, uh, funding levels for the federal government over the next few months, and as a subcommittee making a decision, passing that up to the appropriations committee. And then on, um, and we'll, we'll talk a little bit about that. But a lot of that work, Laura, starts with, uh, the submission by the president of the budget request for the fiscal year. Of course, fiscal 24 starts in October. So that's the work they're doing now. They're looking at the fiscal 24, um, appropriation, and the, the president does submit a budget for that. So let's talk a little bit about the funding levels, the funding priorities, and what you think is, and what you see happening. Um, we'll, we'll talk a little bit about technology and we'll talk a little bit about special ed. Those will be our two areas of focus today on the funding side. Does that sound good?
Laura Kaloi:Sure. So yes, the President's budget was a little bit delayed this year, so usually a President's budget comes out in February, but this budget came from the Biden Administration around March 9. And so there is still some analysis going on, and the hearings are being scheduled on Capitol Hill and both the House and the Senate and groups, um, including all these advocacy and coalition work that we do here in D. C. Are working to make their recommendations and correct. Congratulations, Paul, that you got to actually go testify in person. That's really wonderful. Uh, it's a very small, uh, group of folks that get to be selected for Public Witness day. I'm really happy that they chose you. Yeah,
Paul Schroeder:17, uh, witnesses. So that's a, that's a very small number of the groups that are interested in funding, of course, as you pointed out. So thank you.
Laura Kaloi:Yeah. And then, you know, lots of groups submit testimony and then lots of letters go up to Capitol Hill. And then there's another thing happening within members of Congress. They write these letters to appropriators called Dear Colleague Letters, and there are letters, um, underway and being submitted to appropriators from the member's perspective what their priorities are. And so we're gonna talk about what a few of those are in this climate. Just a little bit of context setting quickly. Remember, the House, uh, turned over to the Republicans this year. They are in charge. And so there are new, uh, new speaker, new chair and ranking members in these committees. And the House Republicans have a very strong message right now. It'll be interesting to see how the negotiations ensue, but they are prepared and would like to take the appropriations funding back to fiscal year 22, which, you know, we're in fiscal year 23 now, so they wanna take it back to the prior year's funding levels, which would be about 140 billion in cuts. And so it would be, it'll be interesting to see, um, what that looks like when you really need a bipartisan package coming out of the Senate to have all of this come together by a September 30 deadline, because the federal government's fiscal year starts on October one. So just putting that in context, the House and the Senate are gonna have very different processes to work this through.
Paul Schroeder:And, and I think it's fair to say right, that they are really working differently because the Senate very much seems to have a very bipartisan, um, at these relationship among the top members, uh, all of whom are, are women, uh, in, in the Senate.
Laura Kaloi:Yes. In fact, we have all four. We have all four in the House and the Senate are women working together for the first time in our nation's history. The Chair of the Full Appropriations and the Ranking are our women, um, leaders in our Congress. You're correct in the Senate, uh, Patty Murray and, uh, Susan Collins. So Patty Murray's from Washington and Susan Collins is from Maine, and they have publicly issued a press release and have reiterated over the last several weeks that they are committed to working together to use regular order, a regular process, uh, and that they will try and stick to a timeline and come together with some kind of bar bipartisan agreement that is, um, easier said than done<laugh> when there's a lot of politics around this. But having them commit at the chair and the ranking member level to do that makes it a lot more comfortable to have some tough discussions. Um, Kay Granger is the chair in the House, and Rosa DeLauro, she's from Texas, and Rosa DeLauro's from Connecticut. While they have a good working relationship and are very respectful toward each other, the dynamics in the house are very different. And so, uh, Ms. Granger has a lot of, uh, you know, politics there with the Republicans and, and this need in the, within the body to cut as much as they wanna cut. And she's gonna have to navigate and manage that while the Democrats want to have the highest funding levels that, you know, that they can see in the programs for women, children, families, schools, et cetera.
Paul Schroeder:Well, we'll certainly come back later in the year and talk about whether, whether they were able to keep to that. And we'll try to, we'll try to not get into too much of the Washington speak of who's who, but it is important, I think, to hear a little bit of the change, cuz it is very different this year. But, um, getting into some of the specific areas, there's a, a, a group that I know you work closely with as funding for, uh, the, uh, uh, technology Act, the at Assistive Technology Act. Um, and maybe you can say a little bit more about that and, and, and what happens with that program and what is that program?
Laura Kaloi:So that program, the Assistive Technology Act programs, there, there is a program in every state, and this is a program that gets federal funding in the state to provide assistive technology to any individual with a disability. And so this formula provides funds and there is also a program in each of the territories. And so the ASK this year from the president is$44 million, and they're currently at about a$40 million level. And so that would be a$4 million plus up. And so there is a unified message, uh, both on the Hill and within the community to try and have the AT ACT is what the acronym, you know, with a short, uh, hand of that is to have the AT Act funded at this$44 million that's been requested by President Biden. And so we'll see if the appropriators will support that. The other program I would just mention is for specifically related to students with disabilities, the Part B money, this is the big state grant funds that come to states to provide, uh, special education and services to students with disabilities that is consistently, you know, well under the funding that was promised to states when IDEA was passed in 1975, but the president has proposed a$16.3 billion level, which would be a plus up of about$2.1 billion and would help really infuse and support, um, an ongoing increase to IDEA so that states can get, receive those monies to support districts and providing special education. So we're watching that pretty closely. And then there are lots of other programs related to special education, but that is the biggest one.
Paul Schroeder:Part B of course, as you said, is the, is the part that funds the state, uh, provision of special education under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. And it has received some increases, hasn't it, in the last couple of cycles?
Laura Kaloi:It has, and they are, it's to the tune of about, you know, one or$2 billion per year. Well, that sounds like a lot of money when you spread that across 50 states and across, you know, nearly 8 million children. It's, it's, um, it's still, we still need a lot more, but it is, um, we do appreciate these increases and we really are going after, you know, supporting them with appropriators.
Paul Schroeder:And I know something that a lot of us care about, of course, are, uh, special education teachers and personnel. Uh, and I, uh, people may not know this, but there is a, a funding provided through the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and, and other areas to help with personnel preparation and what's going on with that funding?
Laura Kaloi:So we actually have a really great community in D. C. For all of the provisions in the education budget related to general educators, related to special educators, and related to the specialized personnel and instructional support, uh, team, the professionals that we know are part of that team that, you know, educate our kids. And so there is a coalition called the Coalition for Teacher Quality. They work together to make recommendations to Congress for all of these programs because we know that there is a shortage across the board and we want all of these programs to be infused and we're not gonna pick one over the other. And so there is this concerted effort to have the entire pipeline to be infused to help states recruit and retain a qualified workforce for their schools.
Paul Schroeder:Well, very good. Um, the, the, the, that appropriations process is in place now, uh, was there money included in the president's budget to increase the support for personnel, uh, preparation and work?
Laura Kaloi:Yes, in fact, um, so in personal preparation for IDEA, I'll just give you one example. There's a, a request to plus it up by$185 million. So it would get a, if, if the president's budget was honored, it would get a substantial increase. And that is representative in that same, you know, those same types of monies are being proposed in all of the loan programs that teachers can receive. Like I said, all of the ways that we have pockets of money throughout the federal budget that do support and help states, um, educate and, you know, infuse their teacher pipeline. And so we're trying to work in many of these ways to get, get the personnel plused out.
Paul Schroeder:One of the popular comments that you'll hear, uh, around Washington and people across the country probably hear this too, is the, the saying the president's budget is always dead on arrival. And that that tends to be true sort of in a macro perspective way, the president, whichever party, uh, and e e even if their party controls Congress, often the, that some of the larger budget initiatives aren't really listened to. But, uh, would you agree that in some of these areas that, that aren't getting national attention, special education funding, personnel prep funding, certainly the American Printing Apps of the Blind Funding Tech Act, um, the president's budget does have some value because it does set a, a, a, a guide, a standard, a a a sense of what, um, what spending would be appropriate for these programs?
Laura Kaloi:Yes, generally the president's budget is just a recommendation. Uh, but we do find in these programs for vulnerable, uh, children, families, these types of programs, the domestic policy issues, the president's budget can be provide a great guide, uh, for appropriators as they consider and contemplate because they will set what's called a top line number and then they have to make decisions within that top line of how to allocate all those funds. And so the president's budget can be a guide related to what those allocations can look like. So we're hopeful, you know, you have to be optimistic and you have to, uh, use the tools that you have. And the president's budget is one of those tools.
Paul Schroeder:Well, we'll certainly, I'm sure revisit appropriations. And before we close on this topic, I'll circle back to where I started, and that's just to mention the folks that, um, we've heard earlier on earlier podcasts I should say about this new product called the Monarch that APH has been investing in and working on the multiline braille, uh, in tactile graphics device. And that's a, a large part of the increase that APH is asking for, uh, for fiscal year'24, is to help make sure that we're able to distribute this, uh, this device and get it into the hands of students. Uh, braille technology as anyone in the blindness world knows perfectly well is is expensive. Uh, and yet it is, uh, so critical for education for students. So that's a, a large part of the request. And again, we'll have a little bit of information about that for people to know what, um, the American Printing House, so the Blind was seeking in the, uh, fiscal year'24 appropriation. I'm gonna thank you, Laura, for the opportunity to be part of this conversation. There's a lot to talk about. We'll have a lot to revisit and for, for folks to take a look at. Um, it's a busy congress and even though there's a lot of partisan disagreement, um, there is a lot of work that we'll need to get done somehow, particularly on the appropriation side. So they're gonna have to find a way to work together.
Laura Kaloi:I appreciate the opportunity. Paul,
Sara Brown:Thank you so much for listening to this episode of Changemakers. We will have check-ins with Paul Schroederfrom Washington, D.C. throughout the year whenever there's news and information available, so be sure to listen as we continue 2023. I've also put links in the show notes to all the House Bills his colleagues mentioned and additional information and email addresses in the show notes. So be sure to check those out as well. As always, thank you so much for listening to this episode of Changemakers. Be sure to look for ways you can be a changemaker this week.