An intergovernmental panel spending time over a ten year period doing
nothing but saying that nothing could  be done.  is, in my mind, the best
reason for a suit.  Many things which intergovernmental panels and
industries have said couldn't be done have turned out differently when the
spotlight of a court is turned on them.  One of the things that this suit,
or any other suit, will do is to force both sides to put their best
arguments forward and have them judged by an outside observer.  Or, it might
force both sides to come up with an innovative solution that was heretofore
not considered because there was no compelling reason to "think out of the
box."  And, if the suit fails as well it might for all the reasons cited in
this thread, we will at least be able to say that the outcome was decided by
somebody other than a bureaucrat or lobbyist with a vested interest in the
status quo.

Someone suggested that we need to "reexamine the problem."  It seems to me
that the problem is as defined.  What we need to do is examine all possible
solutions.  Accommodation almost always costs something, the goal is to
accommodate the most people with the minimum amount of cost and disruption
to the economic systems affected.  This is where bringing the courts into
the picture can help.


          Bud Kennedy


-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Fowle [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 1:10 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [VICUG-L] ACB seeks change of bills:


Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>

I suppose I wasn't clear about the current situation with the possible
accessibility of currency.

Over the past 10 years there has been an intergovernmental panel on
the changes to be made in U.S. currency.

All the points made here and many more were made and done to death.

The upshot was that the treasury was not about to make major changes in the
currency, mostly because of the manufacturers of currency handling
equipment.

This is both the machines we know about and other equipment used inside
banks and the like.

After lots and lots of time and money were spent, the gov simply said
something like:
We are not making any changes, the designs for the new bills have been
complete
since 1963 and will not change.

The fact that bills wear out in 18 months and that printing engraving plates
are not hard to make is irrellivant.

It is the currency handling equipment and procedures which are hard to
change.

It is a waist of time to file a suit which is a foregone failure.

Particularly considering the pro money attitude of the current supreme
court,
filing this suit merely shows how far from reality all the
blindness groups are.  You only "go to the wall" on
truly important issues.

Now I'll stop, enough allready!
Tom Fowle



Net-Tamer V 1.12.0 - Registered


VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask]  In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
 VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html


VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask]  In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
 VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html