Assistive Technology News Blog

By John M. Williams               

        I am late in writing this blog. I am frustrated because it has taken me this long.           

        I do not know whether to laugh or cry when I heard the Republicans talk about their reasons for not supporting an economic-stimulus spending bill totaling $787 billion. “It’s too big they are shouting.” “It’s laden with pork.” “The unemployment problem can be solved through tax cuts alone.” “The tax cuts are not big enough.” “Let the free market solve the crisis.”  They gave other reasons.                

        The Herculean economic Armageddon challenging the country is very serious. Daily thousands of Americans are losing their jobs. Monthly, hundreds of thousands of workers are losing their jobs. This means they are losing their savings. This means they are losing their pensions. They are losing their healthcare.  They are losing their homes. They are losing their families. In some cases they are losing their lives.  

              While these catastrophes are happening, Republican members of the House and Senate played with peoples’ lives. Why not? They are being paid by tax dollars. Their health care is paid for by tax dollars. They aren’t in danger of losing their houses even though taxpayer dollars are paying their mortgages. They won’t lose their pensions. Their friends aren’t losing their jobs. Since they have job protection at taxpayers’ expense, why should they help the people paying their salaries?                

              Even though they are supported by tax dollars, the Republican haves don’t want the have nots to have the benefits their taxpayer position gives them. Why Republicans have taken this position is easy to understand. They don’t want America’s multi-ethnic color middle class and poor to move themselves upward because that means more people would be their equals. I suspect that racism among some of the Republicans is a motivation for not supporting the stimulus. That racism still exists is evident from the silence from Republicans regarding the cartoon showing two policemen killing an ape and one of them saying, “I guess we will have to find someone else to write the next stimulus bill.”                

          A conservative mayor in California mailed an e-mail showing rows of watermelons growing outside the White House with the caption, “I guess there will not be any Easter Egg hunt this year.”               

          There was a racist parody using a well-known song directed at President Obama.               

           When is the Republican outrage against these racist acts? Does their silence condone these acts?           

            Another reason for opposing the stimulus is the Republicans do want the president and the Democrats to succeed. The Republicans also despise unions, and they don’t want union laborers to be paid higher wages than non-union workers. They would prefer that the hourly wage earner be paid a sub standard living wage.     

            Listening to the Republicans talk about fiscal responsibility when talking about the stimulus is like listening to Richard Nixon defend the Watergate criminal activities. He was defending the indefensible. The Republicans were silent when controlling Congress as they sky rocketed trillions of dollars in deficits. Now that they are out of power, suddenly they have deficit concerns. Now that people are suffering suddenly they want to debate the limits of government spending. Now that people are suffering they want the government to retreat and let the middle class and poor fend for themselves. Now that the economy is tanking, they want more tax cuts for their wealthy friends.                  

          The Republicans laissez faire business politics under George Bush have produced higher unemployment, a Wall Street meltdown, gargantuan income gaps between the rich and the middle class and poor, stagnant wages, unsafe food, toys and drugs, the buying of their government, skyrocketing health care costs, an unhealthy environment, a drowning in the public’s confidence in their government, two endless and unaffordable wars, a worldwide ugly anti-American image and run away defense budget.              

          I respect differences of opinion. A lively debate among people with different opinions can produce better legislation, provided opposing parties are receptive to accepting new ideas. If an opponent is not open to new ideas, as the Republicans showed, but instead still embraces failed past policies then debate is useless.  

        It is time for the have nots to rise up and throw the Republican Haves out of office.                

        It is time to bring real change to America.               

       It is time for America to expand opportunities for all Americans. History show us that this can only be achieved though government intervention.                 

By John M. Williams

                It was never a difficult choice for me to endorse Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) to be president of the United States. I believe Senator Obama is not a perfect candidate. He has flaws, and so does Senator John McCain (R-AZ). I pick Obama because I believe he is more honest than John McCain. McCain lies when he says he does not question Obama’s patriotism but then says, “Obama would rather win an election and lose a war.” To me that statement is treasonous.

                Obama showed he has excellent judgment by picking Senator Joe Biden (D-DE) as his vice president. Biden is his own man. He brings foreign and domestic policy experiences to an Obama administration.

                McCain’s ad saying that Obama would raise taxes on every American is a lie, according to the press. Obama would ask Congress to raise taxes on people making $250,000 and above.

                McCain’s web site does not have anything on it supporting programs for people with disabilities.

                McCain is willing to keep U.S. troops in Iraq anywhere from 4 years to infinity. A president Obama will define the mission of the troops and   try to get most combat troops out of Iraq in 16 months.

                Contrary to the evidence, McCain sees Iraq as the central battle field in the war on terror against extreme Islamic fundamentalists. Obama has picked the central battlefields on the war on terror as Pakistan and Afghanistan.

                McCain is being fiscally irresponsible by calling for the continuation of the “Bush” tax cuts and a reduction in corporate taxes. Obama wants to end the “Bush” tax cuts, maintain corporate rates and return to a sound fiscal responsible policy of balancing .the federal budget.

                McCain would not support civil rights laws as strongly as Obama would. Enforcing civil rights translates into advancing economic rights.

                McCain would give the Pentagon and the Department of Homeland Security all the money they ask for in fighting the war on terror. Obama would ask questions related to costs and priorities.

                McCain’s interest in rebuilding the infrastructure of this country is not as committed as Obama’s. Obama recognizes, far more than McCain, the inherent dangers of injury and death associated with not repairing the decaying infrastructure.

                While McCain and Obama are committed to making the country energy independent, McCain’s program would give energy companies more say in developing an energy policy probably at a slower speed than an Obama’s.

                McCain’s program of providing universal healthcare for everyone will never work because it relies too much on insurance companies to change their business philosophies. Obama wants legislation passed covering health care for all.

                McCain talks about Obama lacking judgment in foreign affairs. McCain supported the invasion of Iraq. He is on record numerous times saying we have won the war in Iraq. Obama opposed the war from day 1. He has called for a new mission and has never called for surrender as McCain says.

                McCain when asked which of the nine justices on the U.S. Supreme Court he would not have nominated, he picked the four liberal justices (David Souter, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, John Paul Stevens and Stephen Breyer).McCain’s answer showed contempt for the U.S. Constitution and the judges upholding it. When asked the same question, Obama picked Clarence Thomas. Thomas has not distinguished himself as a justice.

                Contrary to evidence, McCain believes the economy is strong and that we import and export more goods than any country in the world. Obama knows the economy is weak and we are not the world’s largest importer and exporter of goods.

                McCain is running a negative campaign against Barack Obama. It will get nastier after the Republican campaign. Dirty presidential campaigns mirror how an administration will run. Does the country want another four years of the dirty, sleazy, narrow-minded politics that the Bush administration has run?

                Barack Obama and John McCain are patriots. They want what’s best for the country. Obama’s policies have the potential to benefit more people and to rebuild the infrastructure. Obama wants to give more power to the people. McCain wants the power structure to remain the same.

                The John McCain of today will say almost anything to please his conservative base so he can win an election. He is a flip flopper on immigration, taxes, the environment, etc.

                For the reasons cited above, I support Barack Obama’s candidacy to be the next president of the United States.

By John M. Williams

          I have heard it said many times that people deserve the govenrment they elect. I believe this is true. I believe before we vote we should know where the candidates stand on issues we are concerned about and then observe the type of campaign they are running.

          Voters have a responsibility to make sure their candidates campaign literature is accurate and not glorified fiction. Voters have a responsibility to know whether TV, radio and Intenet campaign ads are accurate. Voters, who accept fiction as gospel, are irresponsible and undeserving to be called Americans. 

          If the government they elect does not care about their quality of life then voters are complicit in all the ills that befall them.  If the environment becomes more dangerous to live in voters can blame themselves. If there community lacks enough police because the government wants to reduce federal money for more police and crime rises, again they have to blame themseleves because they elected the officials.  If lax safety occurs in the workplace and their fellow workers are injured and maybe die, they can blame themselves. If the government refuses to tackle health care issues and health care becomes unaffordable they can blame themselves. If roads, bridges and dams aren’t repaired when thye should be and accidents happen, the voter is complicit in the making of the policy.

          If the campaigns are run dirty, such as appealing to racial predjudices, or lying about an individual’s war record, or lying about a person’s character or children they never had, then, if your party wins, you can expect a total disregard for the rule of law when governing. And so voters can blame themselves. 

          Richard Nixon’s administration ran a criminal enterprise from the White House. Its criminal activities were foreshadowed by the illicit presidential campaigns it ran in 1968 and 1972. Hubert Humohrey was a better man than Richard Nixon. He had more character and was more honest than Nixon. The voters chose the evil one.  

         We know what happened to the law and order candidates in the Nixon Administration. The vice president and president resigned.

          In 2000 when Governor George Bush was running against Senator John McCain (R-AZ) in South Carolina, the Bush campaign smeared McCain’s personal life and character. Voters believed the smears and voted for Bush. What did their votes tell you about their character and principles?

         In 2004, John Kerry’s (D-MA) honorable military record was smeared by 527 organizations. The Bush canpaign did not protest the 527 attacks. Bush won, Kerry lost. Today, you have an administration that believes it is not accountable to anyone — Congress, U.S. Supreme Court and we the people — for any action. Bush voters are complicit in the administration’s activities and failures.

        As we enter the 2008 presidential camapign, voters have a clear choice on the future of  their country. They should pay attention to the truthfulness of the campaign literature, campaign ads and the way the campaigns are run. They should, but many won’t,  demand honesty from their candidates. They should demand that every citizen have access to the voting booth. They should demand access to every presidential candidate. They should get the candidates to pledge they will run an open and honest administration. They should get the candidates to pledge they will respect the U.S. Constitition and recognize that we are a government of three co-equal branches of government and a nation of laws,

        Blame the voters if they elect a government who runs the dirtiest campaign. They know what to expect, and they have given their endorsement.                   

By John M. Williams

       I count myself lucky. I have been fortunate to have met and shaken hands with John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy and Ted Kennedy. I met John Kennedy in 1960 in Wilkes-Barre, PA when he was running for the presidency of the United States.  I was 15, and I distributed campaign literature for him.  My mother was a Democratic precinct captain, and she asked me to do it.

       In November 1963, I was in the mail room of the Wilkes-Barre Times Leader when Mike Napkori walked in and said, “President Kennedy is dead.” He said it so solemnly that everyone believed him. The whole room went quiet. Almost everyone produced tears.  His death crushed the people in the room, as it did the nation.    

        I met Senator Robert Kennedy in 1966 on a spring trip to Washington, DC. He was walking down the hall with two men in one of the Senate buildings. As he passed me, I said, “Senator Kennedy.” He stopped and asked, “Yes. Who are you?” I introduced myself. We shook hands. I remember thinking he was a small man, but possessed great charisma. He was pushed forward by one of the men with him. I never said more than my name.

      I followed Bobby Kennedy’s career. When he ran for president, I supported him. The night he was assassinated, I was coming home from a date. I was listening to the radio when I heatd he had been assasinated. I was mortified. I almost hit the car in front of me.  Another Kennedy assasinated.  I could not believe it.  

       When I arrived home, I turned on the TV and listened. I was angry. Another American with great potential murdered. I stayed up for hours and listened to the news on the killing. His death numbed me.

        Both Kennedy assassinations produced negative feelings in me regarding gun control. I support the right of citizens to own guns. And I support background checks on people buying guns at gun shows or elsewhere. I do not see backgrounds checks as an intrusion on the Second Amendment right to bear arms.   

         Moving forward. I have met Senator Kennedy many times in Wahington, DC. When I was working for the American Coalition of Citizens with Disabilities in the 1970s, we wanted his support on legislation we wanted passed. He gave it.

          I met Senator Kennedy again while the disability community was working on getting the Americans with Disabilities Act passed. Another time I met him at a National Press Club softball game and once when he appeared at the National Press Club..

         In my meetings with Senator Knnedy, he has always been very friendly, inquisitive, and forward looking. He is the epitome of the liberal lion, as were John and Robert. His leadership, courage and sense of humor are legendary, as were his brothers. 

       While I remember my meetings with Senator Kennedy, I’m sure that he does not remember me.  Senator Kennedy has always seemed to me to be a man possessing tremendous appetites for justice and equality for every citizen. A ferocious batttler, he is a superb legislator, a man of principal, a diplomat politician, a real humanitarian and a loving patriarch. He is a great American.   

        The news that Senator Kennedy has a cancerous brain tumor was as shocking as the deaths of John and Robert. I want Senator Kennedy to survive. I want to see his senatorial career continue. I am praying that he does.

       I am lucky to have met the three Kennedy brothers.

By John M. Williams

          The National Council on Independent Living (NCIL) has asked Congressman Henry Waxman (D-CA), Chairman, Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, to conduct a hearing on the status of employment of people with disabilities in the federal government, which should include review of the Schedule A Hiring Authority. Schedule A enables hiring managers to hire qualified applicants with disabilities expeditiously through a non-competitive process.

By John M. Williams

This is the third and final article on the impact of stuttering in my life.

I loved  college. I attended King’s College in Wilkes-Barre, PA between 963 to 1967. It is an excellent school. 

During college, I never had the feeling that I was different because I stuttered. I loved the independence I gained and the knowledge that my future was in my hands. My teachers called on me often. I joined the French Club and the Logos Society, a club composed of students who loved philosophy. Since I majored in philosophy, I fit right into the club.

During the second semester of my junior year, I started taking job intreviews. My grades were good, and I could write. I was stunned, stunned, shocked when interviewer after interviewer during my junior and senior years told me their company would not hire me because of my stuttering. Finally, I stopped taking interviews after at least 15 rejections, maybe more 

I garduated from King’s College in June 1967 with a Bachelor of Arts in Philosophy, It wasn’t until August 1967 that I got ny first job working at a Youth Camp in White Haven, PA. I worked with jeuvinile delinquents. It was a state civil service job. I left the job a year after I started. I was not suited for it.

In April 1969, I was hired by Army Times Publishing Company as an assistant production editor. The company is located in Washington, DC. Later I became senior production editor for Federal Times, one of four newspapers published by Army Times. My bosses and peers treated me as an equal. I never felt discriminated against. No one ever told me I could not do  my job. 

Between 1973 and 1975, I worked for Raytheon Services Company as a senior technical writer and editor. Twice my top boss denied me the opportunity to do indepth interviews with senior Navy oficers because I stuttered. He told me so. Each time, I told him he was wrong.  

Between 1975 and 1978, I was senior staff writer for United Way of America. My boss Mario Pellegrini was a gifted writer and movie director.  He utilized my writing talents as a press release writer, script writer, magazine writer, editor, speech writer and newsletter writer. I have never had a job that challenged my writing and creative abilities.

However, I knew of numerous circumstances in which he fought for my right to do my job before CEOs, football athletes, movie stars, labor leaders. Some of the higher bosses did not want me conversing with the CEOs, politicans, athletes and other well-knowns who visited United Way of America headquarters. Mario knew what I could do, and for him, it was my abilities that counted.

Between August 1978 and April 1981, I was the communications director for the American Coalition of Citizens with Disabilities. By 1978, my stuttering was atrocious. I was stuttering 90% of the time. My blocks were lasting longer than 30 seconds, and I was not fullfilling my responsibilities by refusing to testify before Congressional Committees on Capitol Hill. I was ashamed to stutter in front of others,

In Soetmber 1978, I started speech therapy lessons at George Washington University in Washington, DC. For 18 months, two-to-three times a week, 90 minutes a session, I worked with a speech therapist and a computer named Hal who resembled R2D2 in the Star Wars movies. I was connected to Hal through electrodes on my face, neck, arm and stomach. Hal spoke to me graphically. He graphed my blocks. I saw where my stuttering started, gradualy rose and then finally exploded. 

Over the 18 months, I learned to control my stuttering. I learned to stutter in a relaxed manner. I built confidence in my goal to achieve fluency.  In a yeat after I started  th therapy, I was apppearing on TV and radio, testifying before Congess and speaking before advocacy groups. I also had more energy.

Eighteen months after I started the therapy program, The director of the program came to me and said, “John. I can’t teach you any more. Go out into the world and stutter no more.” 

While I stutter, there are many, many times when I do not. There are times when I have 90% or higher fluency rate. The course changed my life.

In the 1980’s, I met Dr. Charles Van Riper, one of the titans in the stuttering field. He gave me great advice. He said, “Never allow stuttering to control you. You control it.” That’s great advice for people who stutter.

One incident that happened in 1989 is deeply imbedded into my memory. A good friend of my told me that a national organization working with terminally ill people was looking for a writer 20 hours a week. He arranged for me to be interviewed. 

About 10 minutes into the interview, the woman doing the interview shook her head and asked me the dumbest question I have ever been asked. It was, “Do you write the way you talk?” She was serious. I left abruptly.    

One of the greatest eras of my life was between 1997 and 2001 when I wrote a weekly column for Business Week On-Line Magazine titled Assistive Technology News. Four months after I started writing the column, we were flooded with praise. My editors allowed me to go after every story I wanted. During the 2000 presidential primary season, I interviewed Vice President Al Gore, then Governor George Bush and Senator John Mc Cain (R-AZ) on where they stood on disability issues that impacted 56 million people. While I stuttered during the interviews, none of these men said, “hurry up.”    

In 2006, I was introduced to the Speech Easy, a fluency device (http://www.speecheasy.com/). I use it when I speak before groups. It makes a difference in my fluency. 

I have had the privledge in my life of working 30 years in the disability field. During these three decades, I have interviewed presidential candidates, actors, U.S. Senators and Congressmen and women, well-known writers, scientists, advocacy leaders, chief executive officers and labor leaders. I have learned that successful people judge people on their abilities and not disabilities. 

In 30 years, I have also received 9 awards, mostly as a writer.  

I have learned I that my stuttering is only a part of who I am. It is not the sum of my abilities.       

By John M. Williams

This is the second of three articles on my struggles with stuttering.

My eighth grade year in school is memorable for two reasons. The first is I was sick half of the year, and I was lucky I passed onto high school.

The second memorable event is I met Chris Manfre, a life-long friend of 50 years.  No one could ask for a better friend.

As a freshman in high school, I had the good fortune of making another  life long and true friend, Mark McDonough.

My high school years were the toughest years in my life when dealing with stuttering. Entering high school was a unique experience. I had five teachers instead of one to deal with. Throughout high school, each teacher treated me differently.  My French and Latin teachers never called on me to read either language after my first stuttering experience in their classes. I went two years in each class having read only once. In French class, even when I knew the answers, my French teacher ignored my hand waving. Several times I spoke to her about calling on me. They were fruitless efforts.

I never had a high school teacher call on me too much. My biology teacher Sister Mercia had the good sense to asked me if I wanted to be called on to answer questions and read. I said yes.

A huge disappointment happened during my second year in high school. I have always been interested in politics, the art of persuasion and debating. I asked to try out for the debating team as a sophmore and junior. Both times I was rejected and told it was due to my stuttering. The deate teacher and my peers were adamant in their refusal. They told m they were looking out for my best interest. I believe they thought they were right. I believed they were wrong then, and I believe so now. Their ignorance showed me they were excluding me from fully participating  in a school event without knowing anything about stuttering. 

There was a long-term dividend resulting from my association with my French teacher. She introduced me to John Seamon, a speech pathologist who became a life-long friend and confidant. I was a junior in high school when I met him. He worked with me for years, and he made a significant contribution in developing a positive attitude regarding my abilities and the impact if stuttering in my life. A positive impact was he arranged for me to attend a summer course on stuttering therapy at Bloomsburg State Teachers’ College in Bloomsburg, PA during the summer of 1962. It was one of the greatest summers of my life. 

Twelve of us, who either stuttered or had severe articulation problems, attended classes eight hours a day, Monday through Friday, for 12 weeks. We received individual and group therapy and social therapy.

When I started school that summer, my stuttering rate was 90%. I had stuttering blocks that lasted 30 seconds or longer. My self esteem was at rock bottom. My body and mind were worn out from three years of high school and working 35 hours a week during high school. I made first and second honors almost all the time during high school. I knew if I wanted to go to college, I needed good grades. And so I studied as hard as I could.      

By the end of the summer, dramatic changes occurred. My stutteirng rate dropped dramatically. All but seven or eight of my 70 secondary symptoms were gone. Physically, I had never felt better in my life. Severe stuttering wears the individual down physically. I was a new person. I was ready for 12th grade.

The most difficult task for me during high school was socializing. I was shy and embarrassed to speak, especially around female classmates. Until near the end of my senior year, I never had a date. Twice as a junior I asked girls for a date. I was told no. Shortly after the second refusal, I overheard the girl I had asked tell her friends that I had asked her. She mimicked my stuttering and told her friends that she did wouldn’t go out with someone who could not talk. I was deeply offended. I vowed to myself that I would not let that incident keep me down.

An incident, that I shall always remember, happened a few days before graduation. I believed I had a calling to the priesthood. I had spoken to one of the sisters at school and to a priest about my vocation. I was in school and I was asked to meet with the pastor of the parish. I did. He told me that I would never be accepted into the priesthood as long as I stuttered. It was a personal blow and humiliation to me. I could not understand how God could reject someone from serving Him.  

My senior year was my best year in high school. I worked as a usher at the Comerford movie theatre. My grades improved. I had my first date. My stuttering rate declined significantly, and I was accepted into numerous colleges.  When I graduated from high school, I was ready for college.

By John M. Williams

This is the first of three articles. The second one deals with stuttering’s impact as a teenager, and the third article covers stuttering’s impact as an adult. 

I started stuttering around my eighth birthday. All the speech therapists and counselors I have seen over many years contributed the probable to a traumatic incident that happened to me during my second grade year on St. Valentine’s Day at a public school. I have relived that horrible incident in thousands of nightmares over 50 years. I do not wish to recite that horrible incident here.

When I first started stuttering, my parents, brothers and sisters and other relatives did not pay much attention to it. Neither did I. By the end of my third grade year, my stuttering was noticeable. I was stuttering all the time. My family decided that I needed to see a speech therapist. During my fourth grade year at St. Agnes Catholic School, I started seeing a speech therapist. I remember the man was bald, short and used steel crutches. I saw him once a month on Fridays. I remember Fridays because I would get out of school an hour early. I don’t remember much about the therapy. I know I did not make much progress. My parents thought so too and decided after a year to stop the therapy.  

I know that going into my fifth grade year, I was stuttering worse and my parents spent a lot of time trying to help me. They read a lot on books on stuttering therapies. They tried some of them on me. For example, one therapy was to think before I said anything and then speak slowly.  Another therapy was to practice speaking and reading in front of a mirror for 30 minutes a day. Another therapy was to memorize what I was going to say and then say it. Another therapy was to swing my arms forward and backward and speak in a rhythm. None of these therapies worked. 

 However, there was a positive development. At the start of my fifth grade year, my teacher Sister Francis Regis convinced my father and me it would be good for me to become an altar boy. I did and remained one until I graduated from college. I discovered that memorizing Latin prayers was a confidence booster. I also discovered that memorizing school work decreased my stuttering and increased my confidence as a speaker and student. 

The first time I blocked on my last name was in the fifth grade. I was introduced to a new priest after Mass. When he asked me my name, I stuttered severely on Williams and did so for decades afterwards. I have always been extremely embarrassed when stuttering on Williams.       

My fifth grade year was also the year I learned that peers my age in my class and my neighborhood could not play with me because I stuttered. It was their parents’ decision. They told their children there was something psychologically wrong with me because I stuttered. Parents also told their children that stuttering was contagious and, therefore they could not play with me.  Some of my classmates laughed at me. Some mimicked me. It was a difficult year. 

My sixth grade teacher Sister Mary Timothy was different from my teachers in grades three through five. She took n active interest in my growth as an individual. She started calling on me a lot to answer questions. When I was called on to read, she would keep me reading until I could read two or more paragraphs fluently. She encouraged me to memorize answers. Her methods worked. My reading improved to where I could read with minimal stuttering.  I won a school medal that year for knowing religious and history facts.  

Despite my gains in Sister Timothy’s class, I still stuttered. Classmates and neighborhood children still shunned me.  Through all of these situations, my parents, brothers and sisters and other relatives stuck by me. My parents always encouraged me (and my other siblings) to excel academically and to participate in sports. I played little league baseball and loved it. I was a switch hitter and averaged about five home runs a season. We played almost the entire summer. I knew I was accepted by my peers.  

During my sixth grade year, I tried out for our school basketball team, but I wasn’t even a mediocre player. One season was enough. Still, I found that I was accepted by the other players for trying. 

The most traumatic and dramatic incident in my life happened on February 12, 1958, My father died. He had been a rock in my life. He was there when I needed him. He consoled me. He encouraged me. He held me when I needed to be held. He would never let me get down on myself when I was struggling with my stuttering. Neither would my mother.  

My seventh grade teacher Sister Andrew also took an interest in me. She urged me to participate in school plays. She encouraged me to read out loud in class. She made me Reading Captain of our group. My responsibility was to pick books for members of my group to read and then to give an oral report in front of the class. My job was also to introduce the student giving the report  and give the title of the book. I was always nervous when doing this and I stuttered. Still, I did not asked to be relieved of the responsibility.  

During the summers when we lived in Cleveland, we would spend a week in Philadelphia, PA with my mother’s parents nd three aunts and uncles and an army of cousins. None of my relatives made a derogatoy remark about my stuttering. I loved visiting them.  

Speech therapy was to play a larger role in my life during high school. When I was taking speech therapy technology to achieve fluency did not exist. Technology would come into my life later.   

 In June 1958, my mother, my brothers, sisters and I moved from Cleveland, Ohio to Wilkes- Barre, PA, Wilkes-Barre was our hometown. One part of my life was over. A new life was beginning.       

By John M. Williams

In electing the next president of the United States, voters will decide if they want to enhance their quality of life or experience a steady erosion. Should voters elect Senator John Mc Cain (R-AZ) President of the United States they will see their quality of life decline. Should voters elect either Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) or Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) they can expect their quality of life to improve.

If elected president, all three senators have said they will tackle global warming. The three Senators deserve credit for tackling this issue. They will exercise international leadership in dealing with this crisis. Improving the enviroment will see a worldwide decline in the number of people dying and becoming sick due to environmental illnesses. This is a win-win policy. Whether they stand equally committed to solving this pending global disaster remains to be discovered. 

By electing a Democrat commited to bringing home U.S. trooops  from Iraq,  the U.S. will see the elimination of U.S. soldiers dying and being wounded, the end of veterans’ suicides, a decline in the break up of veterans’ families, a united country and a policy that takes care of all the ills of our veterans from the time they are diagnosed until their deaths.

If elected president, John McCain promises to continue the war until a military victory is achieved, without defining the elements of a victory. The war could continue another five, 10, 20 or more years. As the war drags on, so do all the ills associated with it.

Senators Obama and Clinton reocgnize the decaying infrastructure challenges this country must address to butress our quality of life, and they have promised to deal with them by redirecting the money spent on fighting the war in Iraq to domestic challenges. They may even have to ask Congress to deal with this horrendous situation. They recognize that by improving the infrastructure at home they are reducing deaths, injuries, car repairs, slow downs in commerce transportation and other pitfalls. They also recognize that rebuilding the infrastructure creates tens and tens of thousands of jobs.

Senator McCain lacks a plan to rebuild the infrastructure in the country.

The Democrats will make Herculean efforts to make health insurance available to and affordable to everyone. They see the need for greater federal involvement in solving tis national crisis.  A president McCain won’t foster federal involvement because the insurance industry does not want the status quo changed. McCain is willing to allow 50 million to remain uninsured and to allow bankruptcies asociated with astromnomical high helathcare costs to continue. His healthcare program relies heavily on the free market with the market dictating prices and the level of care. His approach to dealing with this issue is not working now, and it won’t if he is elected.

Senators Obama and Clinton have programs to improve the quality of life for people with disabilities. Except for dealing with autism, Senator McCain does not have a plan. He should be asked, “Where is your program to promote opportunities for people with disbailities?” How can he ignore 56 million people, or more? 

Every presidential election is important. This one will determine whether we want more people to have their quality of life enriched on whether we want fewer to enrich their lives. I want more people to benefit.

By John M. Williams

Two or three times a year, I receive calls from people asking me, “What can assistive technology products for people with disabilities?” I am always pleased to learn that people want to discover what these products can do for users with disabilities. Because, I know they can do a lot personally, physically and psychologically. 

 Assistive technology is technology used by individuals with disabilities to perform functions that might otherwise be difficult or impossible. Assistive technology can include mobility devices such as walkers and wheelchairs, as well as hardware, software, and peripherals that assist people with disabilities in accessing computers or other information technologies.  

Assistive Technology products breakdown traditional communication barriers that have kept blind people from having access to information they need; they provide visual opportunities to people with low vision; they give voice to the speech challenged; they give fluency to the person who stutters; they allow people who are deaf to use the Internet and telecommunications products; they provide learning tools to people with intellectual disabilities; and they provide individuals with physical or dexterity an opportunity to use a computer.  They are empowering tools. 

For example, Braille Note and Braille Display user William McKay tells me, “Without Braille, I could not read by myself. I could not learn by myself. I could no write by myself. I could not be employed. I could not be independent.”   A Braille display is a tactile device consisting of a row of special ’soft’ cells. A soft cell has 6 or 8 pins made of metal or nylon; pins are controlled electronically to move up and down to display characters as they appear on the display of the source system - usually a computer or Braille note taker. Soft Braille cells have either 6 or 8 dot pins depending on the model. Advanced Braille code features 8 dot Braille, but most will probably only use the 6 dot code. Dots 7 and 8, if present. can be used to show the position of the cursor in the text or for European 8 dot Braille. They can also be used for advanced math work and for computer coding. 

McKay uses Braille three-to-four hours daily. He wishes his Braille printer wasn’t so expensive. He will not say what he paid for his Braille printer. A mid-westerner, McKay is a free-lance technical editor. He says he is never without work, and he is thrilled at being his own boss.

McKay is not alone in his praise of assistance technology products. Juan Martinez has Cerebral Palsy. “Most people do not understand me when I talk. Their inability to understand me is beyond my comprehension,” he says laughingly. He uses a text-to-speech product to speak for himself. He says, “The ability to communicate is precious to me. I could not communicate to others except by writing until I was 17 because I did not have access to this technology. Thank God. I do now.”   A shy Martinez has a Master’s degree in computer science from the University of Maryland. He is unemployed, though he says he has several job offers and will accept one shortly. 

Cecelia Pulaski stutters. Sometimes severely. She is upset when she stutters before more than two people. Stuttering has produced struggles for her personally and professionally. Using a variety of speech therapy devices, she says, “I have achieved a degree of fluency that I never thought was possible.”     A lawyer, Pulaski does not mind using the devices in either a professional or social situation. She says fluency builds her confidence and increases her stamina.              Suzanne Aldrich is legallly blind. A researcher, she uses a CCTV (Closed Circuit TV) at work and carries a portable handheld magnifier in her pocketbook. Legal blindness is defined as having vision acuity of Visual acuity of 20/200 or worse in the better eye with corrective lenses (20/200 means that a person at 20 feet from an eye chart can see what a person with normal vision can see at 200 feet.

Aldrich uses her CCTV as many as five hours daily. She says she could not do her work without it.  When asked how she feels about it she says, “I am self-conscious of the fact that I use it, and so are my clients. But without it, I could not do my work.”        

Aldrich uses her handheld magnifier sparingly in public because it draws attention to her and her disability. However, she admits she would be lost without it. Aldrich also uses a small tape recorder in lieu of taking notes.   Aldrich believes that technology puts her on an equal footing with her sighted pairs.

Cleveland, Ohio’s Jason Cord is dyslexic. Dyslexia is a term that has been loosely applied to reading disabilities. Specific definitions for dyslexia vary with disciplines. Those in medicine define dyslexia as a condition resulting from neurological, maturational, and genetic causes, while those in psychology relate dyslexia on the basis of the specific reading problems evidenced and give no reference to causation. All disciplines would probably agree that dyslexia is evidenced by persons of otherwise normal intellectual capacity who have not learned to read despite exposure to adequate instruction.

A software engineer, Cord has always had to struggle with reading comprehension. As a child he thought he was stupid because he had severe difficulty reading and understanding. At 10 years old, he was in the third grade. When he was almost 11, he was diagnosed as being dyslexic. The term frightened him because he thought it was an incurable disease. When he understood he did not have an incurable disease he was relieved.            

At 33, Cord uses software that reads material to him at a speed that he picks. He can adjust the background color on the screen, and adjust the height and color of the text. These simple functions increase his understanding of the material he is reading. While he still has some difficulty reading and some comprehension challenges, he says, “My reading and comprehension have improved dramatically. These tools allow me to do my work.”              

Cord’s boss, Carl Gardner, says, “Cord has done remarkably well in adjusting to his challenges. He asks no special favors. His work is as good as anyone here.”   

Cord belongs to a support group comprised of people with intellectual disabilities. The group meets twice monthly, and he says, “We learn from each other.” 

Learning from each other is what Barry Haroldson does. A 26-year-old paraplegic, Haroldson has been investigating AT products for 12 years. From his laptop on his wheelchair, using voice recognition software, he can write, turn on and off all the appliances in his house, make telephone calls and design brochures and other materials.  

Over a decade, Haroldson has talked to a score of people with disabilities about the types of hardware and software they use. He heard about alternative style keyboards, voice recognition programs and other products. He is delighted to have learned so much. He says, “Assistive technology gives me the independence I need to know that I do not have a disability.”