>
>Words from Washington
>March 29, 2002
>Vol. 107 No.19
>
>In this issue. . .
>
>         Senate Begins IDEA Hearings
>         FCC Rebuffs Industry Request for Delay in Implementation of Video
>Description Rules
>         Broadband: What Does It Mean for People Who are Blind or Visually
>Impaired
>
>Senate Begins IDEA Hearings
>
>On March 21 the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions
>held its first hearing on the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (
>IDEA) reauthorization receiving testimony from Special Education and
>Rehabilitation Services Assistant Secretary Robert Pasternack, the National
>Council on Disability, and a panel of public witnesses including parents.
>While emphasizing strong support for IDEA, Dr. Pasternack outlined some
>major concerns including a shortage of qualified special education
>teachers, an overly regulatory approach resulting in paperwork burdens not
>directly related to outcomes for the IEP student, and concerns relating to
>special education teacher training. Addressing training, Dr. Pasternack
>asserted that such training may not provide new teachers with the skills
>needed in the classroom including those directly related to the needs of
>the IEP student.  Dr. Pasternack also indicated that the Department of
>Education is awaiting the final report of the Presidential Commission
>before finalizing its recommendations for IDEA reauthorization. The
>Commission's report is expected in July, 2002.
>
>The Committee has scheduled an additional hearing on April 25 to examine
>the issue of discipline in special education.
>
>A projected schedule for IDEA-related activity:
>
>This spring:    Senate and House hearings on ways to improve IDEA;
>Early July:       recommendations from the President's Commission on
>Excellence in Special Education, and;
>By early fall:  submission of the Bush administration's final
recommendations.
>
>On September 30, 2002, certain provisions of IDEA expire; it is these
>provisions that Congress must "reauthorize" and it is likely that Congress
>will buy some time for further work by simply extending these provisions
>for another year.
>
>FCC Rebuffs Industry Request for Delay in Implementation of Video
>Description Rules
>
>On March 22 the Federal Communications Commission denied a request from
>several industry trade associations to delay the implementation of video
>description requirements while a court considers their earlier appeal to
>overturn the rule altogether. The trade associations also went to court to
>request a delay in implementation which was denied today. Because the rule
>goes into effect beginning in April 2002, the Court apparently expedited a
>decision on the request for a delay. Last year, the Motion Picture
>Association of America, the National Association of Broadcasters, and the
>National Cable Television and Telecommunications Association brought suit
>to overturn the requirement in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C.
>Circuit. (See WFW 040501) The National Television Video Access Coalition,
>of which AFB is a member, has filed an opposition to this further request
>for stay. A copy of the FCC order is available at
>http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-90A1.txt.
>
>Broadband: What Does It Mean for People Who are Blind or Visually Impaired?
>
>Recently, there has been an unusual amount of discussion of "broadband" in
>Congress and at the Federal Communications Commission.  What does this
>policy debate mean to people who are blind or visually impaired? First,
>broadband refers to technology that allows much faster speeds for
>connecting to the Internet, several times the current dial-up rate that
>most users are familiar with. Telephone, cable and even satellite companies
>are anxious to sell these new high-speed connections. Since people who are
>blind or visually impaired have the opportunity to access more information
>through the Internet than through other means, there is likely a high
>interest in faster, more effective connections to this information. And,
>the prospect of accessing audio files also makes a faster connection very
>valuable. However, changes in broadband policy may effect accessibility for
>people with disabilities in two ways. First, the telecommunications access
>provisions of Section 255 could be weakened as more communication services
>are provided over broadband platforms. Second, broadband-based equipment
>and services may not be required to be accessible to people with
>disabilities since the FCC is proposing to consider broadband to be an
>"information service" rather than a "telecommunications service." This
>distinction is critical since Sec. 255 covers telecommunications services
>not information services.
>
>Two recent Notices of Proposed Rulemaking issued by the FCC are of
>particular importance.
>1.      On February 15, 2002 the FCC issued a Notice of Proposed
>Rulemaking, (CC Docket Nos. 02-33, 95-20, 98-10, FCC 02-42) requesting
>comments on broadband Internet access services provided over traditional
>telephone lines. The FCC tentatively concluded that wireline broadband
>Internet access services -- are information services, with a
>telecommunications component, rather than telecommunications services.  The
>Notice seeks comment on the implications for disability access.  Comments
>are due April 15, 2002.  Reply Comments are due May 14, 2002. A copy of the
>Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is available at:
>http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-42A1.txt.
>
>2.      On March 15, 2002, the FCC issued a declaratory ruling that cable
>modem service is an information service with no telecommunications
>component. The Commission adopted a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (GN
>Docket 00-185, CS Docket 02-52, FCC 02-77) to address the appropriate
>regulatory framework for cable modem service under the information service
>classification.  It asks for comment on the interaction of this decision
>and the wireline broadband proposal. The notice has not yet been published
>in the Federal Register.  Comments will be due 60 days after publication in
>the Federal Register.  Reply Comments are due 90 days after publication in
>the Federal Register. A copy of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking is
>available at:
>http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-02-77A1.txt.
>
>
>
>Paul Schroeder, Alan Dinsmore, and Barbara LeMoine are contributors to WFW.
>
>WFW is published by the American Foundation for the Blind, Governmental
>Relations Group, 820 First Street, N.E., Suite 400 Washington, DC 20002,
>202-408-0200, Fax: 202-289-7880, E-mail: [log in to unmask] Address questions
>regarding subscriptions or content to Barbara Jackson LeMoine.
>
>This report focuses on the most significant issues currently being
>addressed by AFB's Governmental Relations Group, and is delivered to you
>approximately biweekly via the Topica "Words from Washington" list. WFW is
>available shortly after publication at www.afb.org/gov.asp.
>
>==^================================================================
>This email was sent to: [log in to unmask]
>
>EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?b1dhdS.b1Gk1R
>Or send an email to: [log in to unmask]
>
>T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
>http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
>==^================================================================
>Attachment Converted: "c:\mspg30\eudora\attach\Wordsfr1.htm"
>