Developing Partnerships for Assistive and Universally Designed Technologies for Persons With Disabilities

SPEAKERS       CONTENTS       INSERTS

 Page 1       TOP OF DOC

DEVELOPING PARTNERSHIPS FOR ASSISTIVE AND UNIVERSALLY DESIGNED TECHNOLOGIES FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES
TUESDAY, AUGUST 4, 1998
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Science,
Subcommittee on Technology,
Washington, DC.

    The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:06 p.m., in room 2318, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Constance A. Morella, Chairwoman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
    Mrs. MORELLA. I'm going to call to order the Technology Subcommittee of the Science Committee, and I want to welcome all of you to the Technology Subcommittee's second hearing on assistive technologies.
    The Subcommittee held its first hearing last July [Serial No. 105–26], focusing on the transfer of federal technologies to meet the needs for those with disabled conditions. We learned from the hearing that these technologies, which we know as assistive technologies, are being used to increase, maintain, and improve the functional capabilities of individuals with disabilities.
    An assistive technology is a device, whether acquired commercially, off-the-shelf, modified, or customized, it is used to increase, maintain, or improve the functional capabilities of individuals with disabilities.
    Throughout the United States, Americans are using assistive technology to achieve greater independence and to enhance the quality of their lives. Examples of assistive technologies which provide for more independent, productive, and enjoyable living range from items as basic as velcro in adapted clothing; a computer that can be used by an individual with cerebral palsy; a motor scooter, or a hearing aid for an individual who is aging, and enhanced voice recognition for someone with multiple sclerosis, to items as intricate as using the global positioning satellite system in conjunction with the Department of Defense to assist visually-impaired individuals and a talking signs project in conjunction with the Department of Transportation using infrared transmitters and receivers to provide orientation to low vision or learning disabled individuals.

 Page 2       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    These assistive technologies are providing a disabled individual the means to function better in the workplace or the home. For the 49 million people in the United States who have disabilities, as well as for Americans who are able-bodied, assistive technologies have yielded a tremendous number of quality-of-life enhancements. These technology solutions improve an individual's ability to learn, compete, work, and interact with family and friends.
    As a result of our first hearing, the Technology Subcommittee was impressed with the need for a greater emphasis to develop assistive technologies, and yet I'm concerned that the area of assistive technology has been overlooked by both the Federal Government and the private sector. While assistive technologies assist all age and disability classifications, assistive technologies still don't have the recognition in the Federal Government necessary to ensure they are a priority for federal research and development, and, further, because of the relatively small market for specific assistive technology products, the private sector generally lacks adequate incentives to produce assistive technologies and users generally lack adequate resources to acquire assistive technology. There are insufficient links between federally-funded assistive technology research and development programs and the private sector entities that are responsible for translating research and development into significant new products for users of assistive technologies.
    Fostering partnerships to promote assistive technologies is, I believe, the key to the future for improving the disabled citizen's quality of life and providing the citizen the means to acquire a job.
    These are some of the issues we'll be addressing today as we hear from our distinguished panel and discuss methods to enhance the creation, implementation, and commercialization of assistive technologies.
    We have with us today a panel of five distinguished witnesses representing a broad spectrum of large and small assistive technology companies; representing, also, disabled organizations, and representing, also, assistive technology users. I look forward to engaging in a discussion with our panel today about how we can remove the barriers to the development of assistive technologies.

 Page 3       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Finally, I hope everyone had an opportunity to attend the assistive technologies exhibition earlier this afternoon in the room next door. It was very well done, and I do want to thank the people who put it together. I also want to—as I thank everybody—those companies that participated in this informative demonstration of the latest assistive technologies deserve great accolades.
    By reviewing and operating examples of the state-of-the-art assistive technologies, this Subcommittee, Members of Congress, and staff have been provided with an invaluable opportunity to be educated on the technology that aids the physically or mentally disabled.
    I want to extend a special thanks and appreciations to Tyrone Taylor, Angela Brown, and the Federal Laboratory Consortium for all of their hard work in coordinating the exhibition and their invaluable assistance to make this hearing a success. I'd like them to stand—I see them right there in the first row. Thank you very much for doing this.
    [Applause.]
    I'd now like to turn to my Ranking Member, the gentleman from Michigan, the distinguished Mr. Barcia, for his opening remarks.
    Mr. BARCIA. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I want to also thank our witnesses for appearing before the Subcommittee today, and, more importantly, for their continued efforts to help persons with disabilities lead productive lives.
    Today's hearing is especially important, because it serves to remind us of the important role that technology plays in improving the day-to-day lives of persons with disabilities. While technological innovation has improved the lives of the disabled, what is missing in both the private sector and our federal labs is a greater understanding of how new technologies could be used by persons with disabilities. In fact, the Office of Technology Assessment updated its landmark 1982 report on technology and people with disabilities by noting an absence of overall coordination at the federal agency level as well as an absence of cooperation with the private sector. These comments underscore the continued need for federal coordination and the nature of this need.

 Page 4       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    What I hope the witnesses will focus on today is, first, what is the market demand for these technologies? Do the majority of end users have adequate financial resources to purchase these technologies? And then, secondly, to give specific recommendations to us today for action by the Federal Government. What can we on this Subcommittee, in the Full Science Committee, and as Members of Congress do to be more supportive of your efforts to create the incentives and inducements to continue the flow of advanced technology that will be able be applied in the daily lives of people who are physically challenged and who need assistive technologies as outlined by Chairwoman Morella.
    Once again, I want to thank our witnesses for the outstanding work that you're doing, and I want to especially commend Chairwoman Morella for bringing this very important topic to the attention of this Subcommittee where I'm sure we'll be working in the months and years ahead, in cooperation with you, to help break down more barriers in terms of regulations and statutes, so that we can see an even greater future for those who are physically challenged throughout this country and the world. Thanks.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Thank you, Mr. Barcia. You can see this is a bipartisan effort. I'm now delighted to recognize Mr. Ehlers from Michigan.
    Mr. EHLERS. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. In the interest of time, I will forego a statement, but I do want to thank you and also the Vice Chair for sponsoring this hearing. I think it's a very good thing to do. Thank you.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Thank you, Mr. Ehlers. Mr. Etheridge from North Carolina.
    Mr. ETHERIDGE. Madam Chairwoman, thank you, and I'll forego a statement too, and as one who is temporarily challenged, I look forward to the comments you have. But one of the things I hope you will touch on—and certainly the last couple of months have made me more aware—is not only what we do for the physically challenged, but how we reach out to those who are currently, who might be, and make the technology available and their understanding of it. Having served as superintendent for 8 years, I know the critical need out there, and I hope you'll touch on that. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.

 Page 5       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Barcia, I want to recognize him for another brief comment.
    Mr. BARCIA. Chairwoman Morella, while it wasn't part of my opening statement, I, too, just want to say that for those of us who have been blessed with our health, with good health and in our daily lives with not having any impairment or infirmity of any type, it's so easy for us to take for granted that the challenges that we face as we go about our daily duties and responsibilities in our careers and with our families and getting around, are sometimes not that difficult.
    I see my good colleague from South Carolina who has had an accident, and I know back in 1989, I was involved in an automobile accident which I was hospitalized for 4 weeks, in a wheelchair for 6 weeks, and then on crutches for 6 weeks, and I just want to share with the Subcommittee who have maybe never had the unfortunate circumstance to be involved in an accident of that magnitude or as my colleague from South Carolina has, you get just a brief exposure in a very, very mild, I guess, form to how difficult it is sometimes to deal with what the rest of us take for granted—getting about, getting in and getting laundry and groceries and having to contend with public buildings and private settings that are not barrier-free, but also just thinking about the technologies for those that really with, in my case, that could have just as easily been a permanent versus a temporary situation. Fortunately, I had an excellent medical team, and I was able to fully recover and recuperate from those injuries.
    But, certainly, if we haven't yet, at some point, if we're fortunate to live long enough, we will have to struggle with, perhaps, diminished vision, diminished hearing, other infirmities that will come as part of the aging process if we don't have calamitous accidents or other things that will drastically change our ability to do our daily tasks sometimes in an instant.
    So, I just want to say I'm delighted, Madam Chairwoman, that you're having this Technology Subcommittee hearing on this topic today, because I think it's certainly timely and a very important issue for us to deal with.

 Page 6       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mrs. MORELLA. I agree that it's important. Thank you. I now want to recognize the Vice Chair of this Subcommittee, Mr. Gutknecht.
    Mr. GUTKNECHT. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and, again, thanks to you and the staff for assembling the panel, and I look forward to the hearing.
    Very briefly, I would say that Paul Harvey in his radio shows frequently says if ever there were a time and a place to live, that time would be now and that place would be here, and I think that is never more true than as it relates to technological advances and, particularly, as they relate to health and to the physically challenged. So, I appreciate this hearing and look forward to the testimony from our distinguished panel. Thank you.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Thanks, Mr. Gutknecht. We've been joined by Mr. Davis from the great State of Virginia.
    Mr. DAVIS. Madam Chairwoman, I'll be brief, but I want to thank the witnesses for taking the time to come here today and educate all of us on the future of technology that's being used to improve of life for disabled people.
    With nearly 1,000 companies working to bring assistive technologies within the reach of millions of disabled Americans, I think this hearing gives us a great opportunity to explore ways that the Federal Government can continue to foster innovative partnerships that will move this technology forward. Although they're not testifying before this Subcommittee today, I also want to note the informative exhibits displayed by LC Technologies and DataHand Systems at the assistive technologies exhibition that was held earlier. Mr. Joe LaHoud of LC Technologies in Fairfax, Virginia has led the way in developing Eye-Gaze technology which uses a video camera and a computer monitor to interpret eye motion. His company's work was featured last year on the ABC news show, 20/20. And Mr. Joe Austin of Fairfax Station, Virginia, demonstrated along with Mr. Don Patterson, the DataHand keyboard system which has targeted repetitive stress injuries through the development of a palm-sized, ergonomic keyboard. Featured on numerous news shows including CBS Weekly News and CNN, the DataHand keyboard system is already showing marked increases in work productivity in several industries.

 Page 7       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    There were many other exciting products at the exhibition which are making giant leaps in developing assistive technologies that are genuinely enhancing the lives of the disabled, and this hearing is timely in its purpose. I look forward to hearing from all of our witnesses this afternoon.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Thank you, Congressman Davis. I also wanted to point out from Montgomery County, Maryland, we also had as part of the exhibit a firm called Envision with Gary Steis who was there, and we've been joined also by the Maryland Technical Assistance Group who are here too, so, a lot of people who are very cognizant of the need for assistive technologies.
    And, now, to introduce the panel very quickly, Mr. John Lancaster, Executive Director of the President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities. Mr. Lancaster was appointed as Executive Director on August of 1996 to the President's Committee, and the Committee, as many of you know, is an independent federal agency that promotes public-private partnerships of national and state organizations and individuals working together to improve the lives of people with disabilities by increasing their opportunities for employment. He is a disabled Marine Corp veteran who sustained a spinal cord injury during combat in Vietnam. Mr. Lancaster served as a civil rights attorney, a long-time advocate for disability rights, and I knew him many years ago when I was in the state legislature in Annapolis and he was on the Governor's commission for the disabled, so it's nice to see him again. He's just as handsome as he ever was.
    Also, on our panel today, Mr. James R. Fruchterman, President and Founder of Arkenstone, Inc., in Sunnyvale, California. Dr. Fruchterman is a Silicon Valley engineer and entrepreneur. He's dedicated the past 9 years of his life to building a non-profit organization that is dedicated to breaking down the barriers to information access for people with disabilities, and he started Arkenstone in 18—1989—I was just thinking Y2K comes again.

 Page 8       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    [Laughter.]
    He's a bachelor's and a master's graduate of Caltech. He received a Ph.D. from Stanford, and I had the opportunity to see his exhibition next door, and I appreciate very much his coming from such a distance.
    Dr. Gary Moulton is the Product Manager of the Accessibility and Disabilities Group of Microsoft Corporation in Redmond, Washington. Dr. Moulton represents Microsoft which officially adopted in July 1995 an accessibility policy that recognizes its responsibility to develop products and information technology that address the needs of people with disabilities. Microsoft has been an industry leader in creating new initiatives to make computers more accessible, and, again, I thank you also for your role in the exhibit.
    Mr. John Fales is President of the Blinded American Veterans' Foundation in Washington, DC. He's also known to many by his nom de plume, Sergeant Shaft, for the Washington Times. He's the author of the Sergeant Shaft column, providing an outlet for the concerns of active military veterans and their families in a national newspaper and as a columnist and his role as the President of the Blinded American Veterans' Foundation, he is a user of assistive technologies. Mr. Fales served in the Marine Corp until his retirement on disability. He's been awarded the Purple Heart and a number of declarations and commendations for his service, and I notice here in the room is his wonderful, brilliant wife watching to make sure he behaves.
    And, Dr. Mark Lohman, President of Bartimaeus Group in McLean, Virginia. Dr. Lohman is the co-founder of the Bartimaeus Group, an assistive technology corporation serving Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, DC. It is a small, privately-owned firm. The Bartimaeus Group is involved primarily with providing access solutions to individuals who are blind or visually impaired.
    Again, delighted to have all of you here. It is the custom of the Science Committee and its Subcommittees to swear in our panelists. So, I would ask you just to raise your right hands. Do you solemnly swear that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?

 Page 9       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. LANCASTER. I do.
    Mr. FRUCHTERMAN. I do.
    Mr. MOULTON. I do.
    Mr. FALES. I do.
    Mr. LOHMAN. I do.
    Mrs. MORELLA. I notice affirmation from everybody on the panel.
    So, we will now begin and give you about 5 minutes, so that we'll have time to ask questions. We'll start off with you, Mr. Lancaster. Again, welcome.
TESTIMONY OF JOHN LANCASTER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, PRESIDENT'S COMMISSION ON EMPLOYMENT OF PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
    Mr. LANCASTER. Good afternoon, Honorable Madam Morella and Mr. Barcia, other members of the Subcommittee. I'm John Lancaster, and I am the Staff Director at the President's Committee on Employment of People with Disabilities, and I'm honored to be here to testify before you today on behalf of our Chairman, Tony Coelho, and the other members of the Committee.
    I want to be brief, so if you do have any questions, you can answer them. We have submitted a written statement for the record, and we would like to emphasize the purpose of this hearing and to bring to your attention some of the things that we're doing at the President's Committee in the way of private and public sector initiatives to try and ensure that technology addresses the needs of persons with disabilities.
    And I'll talk about that in a minute, but, first, I just want to frame for you very briefly a little bit of the background of the President's Committee. We are a committee. We were formed by Executive Order by President Harry Truman in 1947 to address the employment needs of disabled veterans returning from World War II, and over the years, our mission has grown to look at the employment issues facing all people with disabilities. We are truly a committee made up of people from the private sector and private employers, union members, the national veteran service organizations, like the American Legion, the Disabled American Veterans, The Blinded Veterans' Association, and others, rehab agencies, agencies serving people with disabilities, people with disabilities themselves, and people from print and electronic media, and we believe in forming partnerships to work on issues such as we're addressing today and, indeed, we are happy that we now have on board heading our business leadership network, Tom Donohue, the President and CEO of the United States Chamber of Commerce and we have Linda Chavez-Thompson who's one of our vice-Chairs and giving a strong focus on technology issues for us, Wells Fargo Bank and many, many of the largest corporations in this country work with us.

 Page 10       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    This is an important topic that we are addressing. We need to have access for everyone, and it's too often taken for granted when we come to things like picking up our telephone or accessing our cell telephone—I apologize that I had not remembered to turn mine off, if you heard it ringing there while you were talking, and the computer which we're beginning to increasingly take for granted, but, so often, people with disabilities, because of blindness or a hearing impairment or a severe mobility impairment or a cognitive disability, have trouble accessing and using those technologies, and it's becoming a more and more important problem; one that needs to be addressed as we accelerate into this age of information and technology.
    It's particularly important for people with disabilities, because these tools are becoming tools of industry, tools of employment, tools of self-employment which we simply cannot live without anymore, and a recent Harris Poll shows that only 3 in 10 working-age adults with disabilities are employed, and that's compared to 8 in 10 within the non-disabled population. The government says it's somewhat the same. The government says among people with severe disabilities, the employment rate is only 26 percent. So, we have a huge problem in this country that needs to be addressed, and accessible technology can help us get beyond that problem. It helps open up employment opportunities that we have never seen before for people with disabilities, and it's becoming just as increasingly important that we look to these issues as ways of solving the severe employment problems facing people with disabilities. And it's important that we look at developing accessible technology from the get-go in the design phase; that we work and develop assistive technology and the mainstream technology so that it's designed universally.
    And what do we mean by universal design? The disability community calls this approach universal design, and it is defined as the process of designing, developing, fabricating, making, and technically supporting products and services that are designed to be accessible to and usable by the largest number of people regardless of their physical or mental conditions and to take those aspects into account from the beginning.

 Page 11       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    We have a changing nature in our economy, as I alluded to. The importance of these changes in terms of creating jobs is immense. The information industries have driven over one-fourth of real economic growth according to the Commerce Department in the last several years, and the trend is growing. The growing number of telecommuters is projected to be over 15 million people within the next 10 years. Self-employment is one of the fastest growing sectors of our job market there is. It's estimated within the State of California alone there are over 1.2 million people who are self-employed, and most of those are working from their home, often with a computer, using fax machines, telephones, and other telecommunications and technology devices.
    These are important developments, and we need to understand that there's a huge shortage of workers as well within the whole information technology field. The demand is clearly outstripping the supply; we hear that all the time from companies that are developing information technologies, and, particularly, from banks, from insurance companies, from other technology-oriented, and science-oriented companies that are crying out and looking for workers to fill their technology positions and their information technology positions. Over 2 million information technology workers are needed between now and the Year 2004 to even begin to fill the jobs that are available and almost 400,000 jobs right now in the information technology field in this country are available for people to be accessing right now, and the question is why can't people with disabilities access those jobs? It's because too often they cannot with ease because voice menus are needed or instructions are needed to come up on computer screens that they can't see. They're often unable to access printed information on screens or wheel up to devices to use them. We need to have voice recognition systems. There's all kinds of different devices that we need. And it's easy to be achieving this level of access right now, particularly, when you understand the importance of digital technology.
    We are in the process of creating a task force at the President's Committee made up of industry leaders from, hopefully, places like Microsoft and IBM and AT&T and, indeed, Woody Kerkeslager, a Vice President with AT&T has agreed to head up this technology task force, and he has been advising us about the future of this important digital technology age, and he has pointed out to us that this digital technology is transforming the creation, the processing, the storage, communication, and use of information in all aspects of life. Woody is fond of explaining that almost every bit of information is now being moved digitally except when you and I actually speak to one another. Even television is going digital. If we, through this task force, with the assistance of this Committee and with the assistance of other agencies in government, pull together the appropriate people to get them to work on voluntary standards, we can really start creating some meaningful, universal design in this country. And we're going to need to have at that table and in that conversation people who manufacture the appliances, the computers, the cell phones, the telephones, the televisions, the radios, the microchip pads that are in all kinds of devices. We're going to need the software developers at the table; we're going to need all the network providers, long distance telephone, regional telephone, cable TV operators, Internet, intranet, cell phone, telegesic, and whatever else is coming down the line. We're going need the network providers at the table, and, even more importantly, we're going need the people who entered the content into these systems—entertainment companies, governments, banks, major industries, are all going to need to be at the table, and they're going to have to start agreeing to move information in a multi-media, multi-modal form.

 Page 12       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    If you take this sentence, for example, ''The quick brown fox jumps over the lazy dog,'' and you enter it into the system in several different modes—visual, sound, graphic, text, and one for holograms, and whatever else they have coming next—and everybody agrees to move it that way, to manipulate it that way through their machines and with their software, then, ultimately, all you're going to have to do is put a device at the end user that translates it to the mode that they need for themselves to use, whether they might be blind or deaf or physically impaired or whatever it is that they need to access the information. It's something that we have the capability to do right now. Obviously, to get there takes tremendous industrial and political will and many, many issues to overcome.
    But what we're going to try and do through that task force is bring the right players to the table to talk about these issues to see how we can start creating voluntary compliance and how we can start leveling the playing field, so to speak, in this age of information technology and telecommunications for people with disabilities, and we just urge and hope that the Committee—the Subcommittee here will be able to give us your support and help us in this endeavor in trying to create this national dialogue and achieving the results that we hope to achieve.
    [The prepared statement and attachments of Mr. Lancaster follow:]
    Insert offset folios 1-14

    Mrs. MORELLA. We're glad to hear about the task force. Thank you, Mr. Lancaster.
    We are going to recess for about 15 minutes. We have two votes; one right now where we've got about 5 minutes left to vote, and then there will be one other vote, and then we will return. So, thank you for your patience. You can unwind and relax.
    [Brief Recess.]

 Page 13       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. DAVIS. [presiding] The meeting will resume. This hearing will resume, and we'll go to Mr. Fruchterman, the President of Arkenstone—I think we'll go to him. Who's our third—Dr. Moulton, why don't we go with you?
TESTIMONY OF GARY MOULTON, PRODUCT MANAGER, MICROSOFT CORPORATION
    Mr. MOULTON. Good afternoon. My name is Gary Moulton, and I'm here representing Microsoft Corporation on behalf of our Chairman and CEO, Bill Gates, and our President, Steve Ballmer. I want to thank the Committee for its invitation to participate at this afternoon's hearing. Another member of Microsoft's Accessibility and Disabilities Group, Dr. David Bolnick, is here with me, seated behind me.
    Bill Gates recently said the personal computer is one of the most promising assistive technologies there is today, and he reaffirmed Microsoft's commitment to be an industry leader in making our software products accessible to all users. Microsoft's earliest efforts involve adding access to our personal computer operating systems that trace R&D center with the grant from the National Institute on Disability Rehab and Research developed the access pack which was a set of accessibility aids for DOS, Windows, and Windows NT users, and I can't emphasize enough how important such a cooperation between the Federal Government, academia, and corporate America is to obtaining universal accessibilities.
    Starting with Windows 95 and continuing with Windows NT, the features of the access pack were built into the operating system. Windows 98 contains additional accessibility options, and we were demonstrating those in the exhibit this morning and early this afternoon. Windows NT 5.0, when it comes out, will contain even more of those accessibility options being built in. These accessibility features are electronic curbcuts, as we call them, and the hundreds of adaptive hardware and software products have enabled individuals with disabilities to use PCs in their everyday activities, the classroom and the workplace. In fact, you've seen a number of those adaptive hardware and software products in the exhibit this morning and early this afternoon.

 Page 14       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    However, the evolution of the PC operating systems and applications is occurring so rapidly that the use of PCs as a sister technology fails to keep up with the rest of the industry. In some cases, individuals with disabilities do not have access to the latest and greatest technology. This is not acceptable, and this is the problem that Microsoft has dedicated itself to solving. And toward that end, we have developed a technology called Microsoft Active Accessibility. Microsoft Active Accessibility will standardize the way Windows, PCs, and adaptive hardware and software products communicate with one another. Like the access pack, active accessibility will be integrated into the operating system so that all users on any Windows PC can benefit from technology.
    The Internet also represents another speed bump to access for individuals with disabilities. There are literally thousands of Web pages that are designed on a daily basis, even as we speak, and only a fraction of those Web pages are designed to be accessible. Thus, Microsoft Internet Explorer has built-in accessibility options to help tailor Web pages to the needs of users. In addition, we've created software called SAMI, Synchronized Accessible Media Interchange, which we were demonstrating over in the exhibits this morning and which Dr. Bolnick is directly responsible for, and this technology enables Webmasters and software developers to easily add close-caption and audio descriptions to multi-media that employs Internet standards.
    These represent only a few accessibility features built into our products, yet, all of these electronic curbcuts are worthless if those who need them are not aware of their existence. People with disabilities need to be aware so that they can develop competitive, academic, and workplace skills. Likewise, educators, professional service providers, and employers need to be aware so that they are able to tap this undertapped resource.
    No one company, organization, or agency can assure that products are accessible and available and that the world knows about them. Thus, to make progress, partnerships must be formed and focused, I think, on two specific objectives: to promote and provide an incentive for the development of accessible products, and to raise the awareness of what is possible with assistive technology.

 Page 15       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    We have done a couple of things in 1998 to directly impact on that. We have formed independent access review boards which will be looking at our product, and we also form a disability advisory council composed of individuals with disabilities who will periodically meet with us to look at our products and track our products against the needs of individuals with the disabilities. We also have a logo program, the Design for Windows Logo Program, that is industry standards for the design of software for the PC industry. So, software developers who want to use our logo on their packaging must follow certain accessibility recommendations and requirements in the design of their products. This will help, because this compliance is assessed and tested by a third party testing lab.
    When computers are accessible, everyone benefits, employment in particular is one of the greatest examples of what an accessible PC can make possible. Mr. Lancaster, earlier, alluded to the fact that a recent survey from the National Organization on Disability found that individuals with disabilities are not employed in any greater number than they were several years ago, so there's an awful lot of work needed to be done in this area.
    At the same time, information technology industry sorely needs qualified individuals, and accessible PC will enable many individuals with disabilities to be employed in the industry, and imagine how that will impact not only society but our economy as well.
    Microsoft is making another opportunity to bring this to a reality. Our Skills 2000 initiative which has the overarching goal to help remediate the information technology workforce shortage by recruiting and training people for the IT industry, and these programs are open to individuals with disabilities.
    Make no mistake about it, Microsoft is committed to making our products accessible to the widest range of users. We are committed to help drive the industry towards universal, accessible designs. Finally, we are committed to raising the awareness of what is possible with assistive technology. It is truly magic. But, again, Microsoft recognizes that other business entities, federal and state governments, relevant organizations, and individuals must all work together to make these fundamental changes, and we trust that this hearing will help further this larger goal, and we look forward to an ongoing dialogue with the Committee on how to foster these relationships. Thank you very much.

 Page 16       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    [The prepared statement and attachments of Mr. Moulton follow:]
    Insert offset folios 15-25

    Mrs. MORELLA. Thank you very much.
    I note that we did not hear from Mr. Fruchterman. Would you like to speak now, sir?
TESTIMONY OF JAMES R. FRUCHTERMAN, PRESIDENT AND FOUNDER, ARKENSTONE
    Mr. FRUCHTERMAN. Certainly, thank you very much. Chairwoman Morella and members of the Subcommittee, I'm Jim Fruchterman, President and founder of Arkenstone. Arkenstone is a unique Silicon Valley non-profit that's dedicated to providing access to information for everyone. Arkenstone reading systems scan books and other materials, recognize the text, and speak it aloud to the user. We, basically, try to help break down the barriers to accessing text for people who are blind, low vision, or who have learning disabilities such as dyslexia. Even though I've started other high tech companies in the past that have had far greater sales, doing this sort of work, using our technology to help people read, is my passion. It's a great application of this technology.
    It's not lucrative, but that's one of the reasons why we started Arkenstone as a non-profit. There is tons of technology all around this country that could be put to socially beneficial use, but the economic case isn't there, and as a non-profit, instead of having to make tremendous amounts of money for investors who are risking their money with us, we need to only break even, and so even though Arkenstone hasn't been successful by Silicon Valley standards, we think we've been very successful in human standards, helping over 20,000 people attain independence in reading using our reading systems.
    Arkenstone is partnership-based. We don't have the funds to develop core technology. We, instead, act as scouts for the disabled community trying to find great commercial, military, or government technology, and we adapt it into tools for our disabled users. To a great extent, the challenge of helping a blind person access the world requires some very advanced technology, and we've borrowed a lot of it from the military. For instance, the area of pattern recognition was first used to blow up enemy tanks, and now we're using it to read text for blind people. Voice recognition and voice text-to-speech, voice synthesis, was used in fighter airplanes, and the global positioning system was designed to help our military, and, yet, we're using it to help blind people find out where they are. We think the application of these technologies to assistive technology is a terrific dividend for our country's investment in these technologies.

 Page 17       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    We've had very good experience in the partnership area with different federal entities. One of our most successful ones, I think, has just begun. Last month, Arkenstone relocated to NASA Ames Research Center in Silicon Valley. We're occupying an empty Navy building that was left behind in base closure, and now we're going to have improved access to NASA's ideas and researchers to use that technology to help people with disabilities. We're also very excited about the Internet infrastructure out on the West Coast that happens to be centered at NASA Ames, because we think the Internet is the key to a lot of information access.
    Later this week, I'm going to be attending a National Science Foundation workshop on text-to-speech where we'll be talking about how to make text-to-speech more natural and more accessible so that more people who are uncomfortable with mechanical-sounding synthesizers will find them accessible and more pleasant, because that's a significant barrier to the use of this technology.
    Also, because of the Federal Government's dedication to employing people with disabilities, our major funding source is actually derived from the sales of our products, and the Federal Government is one of our largest customers through its provision of technology for disabled employees and veterans.
    Based in Silicon Valley, we've had exemplary reactions from the high-tech community there, and I can point to a number of partnerships that we've had. First of all, IBM has been a major force in getting our latest product off the drawing board and into the hands of people with learning disabilities. It's called WYNN, for What You Need Now, and IBM has helped us both financially with access to market research, loan of their engineers and also publicity and marketing assistance to bring out WYNN to the people who have learning disabilities and to their teachers and speech pathologists the fact that this solution exists. And, so we've had a terrific experience with our partnership with IBM.
    At the core of all the technology we develop is the personal computer. The microprocessor has made possible a sort of a general-purpose tool. I call it the Swiss Army Knife for people with disabilities. By just adding a little adaptation, suddenly a disabled person can use that Swiss Army Knife to accomplish just about any task that a person uses a Swiss Army Knife normally. And I don't want to push this analogy too far, but the PC really is the general purpose tool that makes a great deal possible.

 Page 18       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    And at the core of that is an Intel microprocessor, and Intel has given millions of dollars of microprocessor chips to power our reading systems over the past few years, and we've been greatly appreciative of that. The eyes of our reading systems are made by Hewlett Packard. They've given us scanners, great tech support, donated obsolete equipment, and given us incredible assistance in making it possible to make reading systems. And lastly, the company that I used to be affiliated with, that invented the core recognition technology, is now part of Caere Corporation. And Caere has made great efforts to support the application of technology to reading systems.
    So there's some challenges to partnerships though. It's rare for assistive technology to be lucrative, and that's one of the reasons why I just gave up on that, and started it as a non-profit. But, it's a very difficult field to make it in, because the markets are small, and because the needs are great, and in general, our customers aren't economically well-off. Technology costs money, both to develop and purchase.
    So this brings me to some of the solutions that we might recommend. My number one issue, and the number one issue of the users that I've talked to, is financing. They can't afford to buy the equipment because they're unemployed. When we've had low cost or no interest financing in the past, we've been greatly oversubscribed. And I think we need to give people the tools they need to be independent, to help educate themselves, and help have employment. So I think that's very important.
    Technology transfer—there's great technology we could be using in the federal sector, but the models don't tend to work for such small companies as tend to be in the assistive technology fields. So if we could have some more help there, that would be great.
    And lastly, I'm a strong supporter of universal design. If the need for our assistive technology industry were to disappear because the general market products were designed with everybody in mind, I think that would be a great thing. I think these products should be built so that they adapt to the consumer, rather than forcing the consumer to adapt to them.

 Page 19       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Thank you very much.
    [The prepared statement and attachments of Mr. Fruchterman follow:]
    Insert offset folios 26-31

    Mrs. MORELLA. Thank you very much. It's excellent testimony.
    And now we turn to Mr. Fales.
    Thank you all, incidentally, for being so patient too in offering your testimony. Mr. Fales.
TESTIMONY OF JOHN FALES, PRESIDENT, BLINDED AMERICAN VETERANS' FOUNDATION
    Mr. FALES. Thank you, Madam Chair. Is that correct? Is that what they say, Madam Chair—Madam Chairman—Madam Madam——
    Mrs. MORELLA. Whatever you want, as long it's not ''Madam Table.''
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. FALES. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to appear before you today. Technology has had a wonderful, wonderful impact on the disabled community. And it has a very positive effect on my life. I use a scanner, a talking computer, ''pocket talk.'' And it's not only helped me professionally, but advocationally.
    I must mention, while I was writing this speech and putting it in the computer, the electricity went out, and it kind of softened what I was saying in regard to technology. I think that happened in Montgomery County, Madam Chairwoman. Can you mention something to PEPCO?
    [Laughter.]
    John Lancaster mentioned the Harris Poll—I think the gentleman from Microsoft mentioned it also—I think they mentioned that there was only 29 percent of those who are disabled work, and that's full time and temporary, even more devastating. And this great economy that we're having, which everyone brags about, 34 percent of the households are below $15,000. And it's so important that these individuals have access to this technology.

 Page 20       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    We know that the jobs are there—Microsoft—the gentleman from Microsoft mentioned that. He needs individuals who are—to work in those technical areas. I think, if I'm not mistaken, you just have legislation trying to increase the ceiling for legal immigrants to come into this country to take these positions, and the Harris survey points out that we have individuals here. What we do need is to be able to train them, to utilize this wonderful technology. And in addition to that, in some ways, I would like to see Microsoft and many others provide this equipment to this underclass of our society who we know, with proper training, with proper education, and a helping hand, will assist our fellow citizens. I hope that is done.
    I think it was mentioned that the National Organization on Disability commissioned that report. And what that survey also mentioned was that 20 percent of individuals with disabilities haven't graduated high school. And I know, Madam Chairwoman, you're very interested in the educational system. It's important that we have this technology in the schools to ensure that those individuals with disabilities have that access to the technology available to them, that each computer that is given by—you know, for your coupons, is also—have some coupons for accessibility to ensure that these individuals with disabilities are trained.
    I know we're running short, but I did want to mention a special quirk, and since Microsoft is here and many other technologies are here. Public Law 93–112, the Vocational Rehabilitation Act and Americans with Disabilities Act, says that companies must provide materials in alternative format. I have yet to get—when I get something from Windows 95—nothing on audio cassette. If I get something from IBM about the computer to try to get equipment to install, nothing in alternative format. You get a lot of paper.
    But, I implore—not only for myself, because I could always my wonderful wife, who you mentioned, and say, would you please read this to me—but what we do need is independence and to be able to ensure that we can do it more independently. I would like that things to be provided on alternate format, audio cassette.

 Page 21       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    And in closing, Madam Chairwoman, I just—there has been concern about Microsoft taking over the entire enchilada, as they would say. And it's important that those screen reader corporations, people who have worked in this area of synthesized speech, that they're not left behind by the giant; that Microsoft and others work very closely to get the technology—the software technology—to us immediately, not 6 months or a year down the road. It's very important that it's available, and it's available quickly, and that cooperation between the big guy and the little guy will help all of us.
    I'll close with that, Madam Chairwoman. Thank you very much.
    [The prepared statement and attachments of Mr. Fales follow:]
    Insert offset folios 32-36

    Mrs. MORELLA. Thank you, Mr. Fales, and the others on the panel will have an opportunity to respond to your request as a user. I think it's most appropriate.
    Dr. Lohman, delighted to recognize you finally and hear what you have to say.
TESTIMONY OF MARK R. LOHMAN, PRESIDENT, BARTIMAEUS GROUP
    Mr. LOHMAN. Madam Chairwoman, thank you for inviting me to appear before your Subcommittee. My name is Mark Lohman, and I am the President and co-founder of a small privately-owned firm, called Bartimaeus Group, located in Northern Virginia. Founded just 8 months ago, in January of this year, 1998, Bartimaeus Group focuses it's energy on providing access solutions to individuals who are blind and visually impaired. Now, Madam Chairwoman, you might say in a way we are a version of Arkenstone 8 years earlier. And during our brief period in existence, we have learned how to spend money very admirably. We're hopeful that in the future, we can learn how to make some money.

 Page 22       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Our trainers are themselves blind or severely visually impaired. We have a support staff of professionals providing administrative, driving, and accounting assistance to these men. Finally, our firm has assembled a unique group of multi-media computer experts, who've developed a new, state-of-the-art interactive training CD for the blind computer user. This training CD, called NavigAide, teaches the blind computer user how to operate the basic functions of a personal computer in the Windows 95 environment.
    There are many ways to conceptualize the most pressing needs of the blind and visually impaired community. Some would say we need additional and more reliable technology; others will emphasize the lack of information; and some will talk about more training; and almost everyone will to say to you that there's not enough money to provide the needed technology training and service to those who are in need. But I believe there's a very simple and direct statistic, which you've heard almost every other speaker refer to, that gives a more powerful indication of how well opportunities are available for the blind and disabled individual.
    That one statistic is the current rate of unemployment among the working age blind. Their unemployment rate hovers around 70 percent, and when compared to the current rate of 5 percent, a tragic national story is captured. More than any other advancement, the personal computer, armed with appropriate assistive technology, can open up employment world to large numbers of blind adults in a way never before imagined.
    As some of you have read recently, the blind young man who graduated valedictorian in his class from Notre Dame University, is headed for medical school at the University of Wisconsin. And he did so with his native intelligence, hard work, and a laptop computer armed with a screen reader and voice synthesizer.
    Professor Dan Meador, fully blinded during adulthood, a constitutional law expert serving on the law faculty at the University of Virginia, continues to lecture and write voluminously with the aide of a Toshiba notebook, DECtalk Express, and a software package called JAWS for Windows.

 Page 23       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    These two bright shining lights demonstrate that the blind individual can attain the highest level of cognitive and professional attainment and compete effectively side-by-side with their sighted peers.
    How then can government-aided research and private enterprise partnerships turn the exceptional into the normative? Because the number of blind and visually impaired individuals are scattered thinly throughout the larger United States population, and because technology requirements are diffused, it's a major challenge for any new enterprise to emerge and become successful.
    Our company hopes to demonstrate that a range of employment opportunities can be created through a successful private enterprise startup firm that offers comprehensive solutions for the blind individuals we serve.
    A child who grows up with blindness, or the adult who suddenly develops a severe loss of vision due to macular degeneration, retinitis pigmentosa, diabetic retinopathy, and a host of other low vision conditions, faces several significant hurdles to attain or maintain their professional employment status. They need sophisticated adaptive technology, the means to purchase it, the right training, technical assistance for when breakdowns occur, and a supportive work environment.
    To say that our society is prepared to make the necessary investments for the million-plus blind in our community and in our country remains a mountain to be climbed.
    The technology is expensive. Personal computers configured with adaptive technology attachments can cost anywhere from $2,000 to $20,000, depending upon the complexity of the solutions proposed. Few of the blind students leaving college have access to that amount of money, and how many employers do you imagine will make a $10,000 investment in new technology for an untried, blind college graduate?
    Assembling these technological pieces into a coordinated working unit is an almost impossible and daunting task for the technological novice. If you add visual impairment, it's almost impossible, except for the most gifted.

 Page 24       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Finding the right equipment and piecing together is only part of the solution. Learning to use the personal computer in a manner applicable to one's workplace, requires extensive training. Training at $300 to $500 a day for 5 to 10 days, the usual requirement, may be out of reach for most blind individuals if paid for personally. And advancement in one's job usually means additional training.
    Program crashes and hitting the wrong key that may take the blind user to another planet, are always dreaded events that can happen daily. Technical support lines may be nearly impossible to reach on some days. Most sophisticated sighted users of the computers do not know how to configure that equipment for the blind user. The blind worker does not perform his job in a vacuum. The sighted supervisors and co-workers may all have fears about what types of accommodations may be required.
    For a young company such as ours, breaking down these barriers to provide assistance to the blind, is formidable. Our company offers the following services: We represent seven different manufacturers; we sell an array of their technology products to the visually impaired professionals; we go onsite and install those products; we provide technical assistance; and we train the blind and visually impaired professional onsite. All of these services are provided by our blind and low vision staff.
    Where does a company such as ours, aiming to service three States, Virginia, Maryland, and the District of Columbia, raise the necessary capital to purchase $40,000 worth of demonstration equipment, carry a credit line of $100,000, and meet a $20,000 per month payroll? For startup companies, such as ours, where an individual personally risks all of his own startup funds, some form of tax credits would provide an added incentive for us to invest.
    At Bartimaeus Group, we have developed the first of its kind, an interactive training CD. This technology product, which costs the user $250, supplants or reinforces a training program that costs $2,000. If our training CD works, it places training at an affordable price for blind users in the most remote regions of our country.

 Page 25       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    But to produce this training CD costs our company $80,000. Who would risk this necessary amount of investment capital? No bank would lend us this money to develop it, and the venture capitalists, as Dr. Fruchterman has pointed out, find our market too specialized and too small to be of interest to them.
    Here we are, ready to produce a family of interactive, multi-media training CD's for use on additional Windows applications, such as Word, WordPerfect, searching the Internet, e-mail, and other advanced office applications. We believe these training CD's will make a major difference in the lives of thousands of blind users. The question for our company is can we attract the necessary to capital to develop these products, and can we sell them in sufficient quantity to earn a reasonable profit?
    A bill such as the one you are considering hopefully will provide the seed money to attract hundreds of small businesses, styled like the Bartimaeus Group, aimed at providing the link between technology and successful career advancement for the blind user.
    As Helen Keller once remarked, ''Security is mostly a superstition; it does not exist in nature; nor do the children of men as whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run that outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure or nothing. To keep our faces toward change and behave life free spirits in the presence of fate is strength undefeatable.''
    I thank you, Madam Chairwoman, for permitting me to testify.
    [The prepared statement and attachments of Mr. Lohman follow:]
    Insert offset folios 37-41

    Mrs. MORELLA. Thank you very much, Dr. Lohman. I was wondering, what does Bartimaeus mean?
    Mr. LOHMAN. Bartimaeus is a little-known figure drawn from the Bible. He was the blind individual on the side of the road, and was healed of his blindness and we felt that our company, trying to create new visions and new opportunities, it would——

 Page 26       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mrs. MORELLA. Excellent.
    Mr. LOHMAN. Thank you.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Excellent name; that was very good.
    I'm going to fire away at all of you, questions, sort of general questions. I'm going to ask each of you to respond as quickly—as succinctly—as you can, so that I can get through the whole range of maybe about four questions.
    As originally was mentioned by Dr. Lancaster, your entire statements will be in the record. I know that many of you gave comments that were not part of your statements and your statements were longer. So they're all included in the record. And those members who would like to ask questions, we have invited them to submit questions that we will forward on to you for response, if that's okay. Great.
    All right, I'm going to ask you, how do we make sure that those people who may be most in need of assistive technologies, know about it? It seems to me it's one of those areas where people are not really aware of everything that may be available. How do we introduce such technologies to those who are not aware of it's existence?
    Maybe we could start this way, and then the next question, we'll go that way.
    Mr. LANCASTER. I would say, Mrs. Morella——
    Mrs. MORELLA. Is that a problem, though, too? Do you think it is?
    Mr. LANCASTER. Yes, it's a huge problem, and I'd say, Mrs. Morella, there's a variety of ways to get at that, not the least of which is to look at the existing infrastructure that serves people with disabilities, the rehab programs, the assistive technology programs, the independent living centers, etc. And to make sure, number one, that they have the knowledge and are passing it on to the people that they serve. And that includes state partners like we have, Governors' committees, unemployment of people with disabilities, etc. So I think we need to look at that existing infrastructure and make sure that it's available to deliver that service.

 Page 27       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Then I think there's also other places that are less traditional that we ought to going to, and that's professional associations of things like, for example, eye doctors, and ophthalmologists. You look at someone who's losing their sight, they're being treated by someone, etc—do these doctors ever make a referral to a place where people can get assistive technology? And we've done a little investigation in that regard, and for the most part, they do not.
    And so I think there's lots of things that can be done, looking at the existing infrastructures, and looking at various professional associations, and folks that are in the private sector, to help move that information out to the public.
    Mr. FRUCHTERMAN. I think it is a very important problem, and it's a great difficulty that we face, is because blind people are spread out throughout the whole community. And it's not cost effective for us, for instance, to advertise in mass media. It just doesn't make any sense at all.
    So we rely to a great extent in trying to get the word out into the network, whether it be the state tech. act organizations, or let's say the Trace Center, which has a big Web site on disabilities access, so that when someone actually makes a linkage with some part of the disability community, they find someone who can get them plugged into the right place.
    Quite often when, let's say a television spot runs on our Talking GPS locator for blind people, I get calls from all sorts of people with lots of different disabilities, saying, well, if you can do that, can you do something for my friend who can't speak. And because I'm part of that network, I can say, oh, yes, talk to Prentke Romich, or here's a place that you can go learn about that.
    So basically, supporting the information dissemination organizations that do exist, I think is really important, and continuing to bring up this topic in public discussions, so that the word gets out and people think, oh, I know someone who probably needs to know that.

 Page 28       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mrs. MORELLA. Dr. Moulton.
    Mr. MOULTON. I would agree with Mr. Lancaster. Having been trained as a clinician, the importance of pre-service and in-service training in this area is absolutely essential. But putting on my marketing hat for a moment, around each person with a disability, our research has shown, are 5 to 7 individuals who care very passionately about what happens to that person with the disability. I think those are the people that we need to get the information to.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Probably true. Mr. Fales, how did you find out about any assistive technology?
    Mr. FALES. Well, you know, what you do have is a community of disabled individuals who share the wealth, so to speak. But what I was thinking is you have 2,000 job service offices out there, and those who are seeking employment; that would be an area where we should tap in. It's 2,000 throughout the country. In addition, many of the individuals who are disabled are on SSI or SSDI. And maybe in their stubs that tell them that they're going to be getting their check or maybe through the VA in a check. One of the greatest programs on Capitol Hill associated with the Congress is the Library of Congress—the blind and physically handicapped are supplied with talking books. That's another area where technology and devices can be outreached, especially if Microsoft is going to be giving them away free.
    These are just some ideas. A word of mouth is also very good.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Dr. Moulton quiet about that one. Dr. Lohman.
    Mr. LOHMAN. I will just reinforce two comments. Certainly our experience—our experience has taught us that the blind community tends to trust one another, more than they trust lots of other professionals. And to the extent that technology through the Internet can open up that communication, that potentially will be a great source of information, because they will find that here's an inexpensive way for them to communicate with one another and say, by the way, this really worked for me, or try this.

 Page 29       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Our experience has been that once the blind begin to use the Internet, they use it a lot. They are terrific consumers of that technology. So we're caught in a little bit of a catch-22. How do we get the larger community to use that technology? But once that technology's widely available, trust me, they will communicate with one another very actively, as to what works and what doesn't.
    And it's worth reinforcing John Lancaster's point, Madam Chairwoman. It is absolutely surprising the number of physicians—and I know a number of them—ophthalmologists, specialists—who are meeting individuals who are losing their sight, and they are so trained in the direction of they want to be able to provide an answer, a solution. And as their patients begin to slip away in the way of sight, they almost don't want to see them. And they are very unlikely, at this point, sources of recommending all these other technologies. So we've got our work cut out for us, to encourage physicians to make this information, make this knowledge, available to them that they will refer their patients. You would be very, very surprised their reluctance to refer outside of their offices when they can't provide the answer.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Whether they're concerned about liability, whether they just don't feel confident in terms of the knowledge they have—I think it also implies that we as a Nation should establish that culture of knowledge with regard to assistive technology and assisting those people who are disabled in any way we can.
    That gets into how expensive assistive technologies are to the end user. Are such technologies available to—or affordable, I should say—to a disabled person, I guess—is there is an average disabled person? And are there further actions that could make these technologies more affordable? I often hear people talking about well, it's not really affordable, or we can make it affordable by expanding it. Will you start off, Dr. Moulton?
    Mr. MOULTON. I think that one idea that would offer is this. As a company, because we are often supplying those products to the end user, so we come face to face with that cost issue with the end user, and I think that if we could begin to find some low cost financing, maybe a credit system, that if a disabled person had somehow access to something like—I'm just going to toss a figure out, but something like $10,000 worth of credit—that could be easily available and paid over time, this would make a great difference.

 Page 30       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Because, for the most part, the requirements of the manufacturers that I buy from, all want payment either that day or within 30 days. None of those manufacturers will extend time to me. So if I'm providing that equipment to the end user, what do I have to do? I have to collect it from them. And if they don't have $6,000 or $8,000—and much of the most sophisticated technology is going to cost somewhere between $3,000 and $10,000. So if there could be some type of low cost loan program, credit system.
    Because I will say this, they are wonderful payers. I mean, this technology is very, very important to them—essential to them. They will pay that loan. And the technology would very useful to them.
    Mr. FALES. Madam Chairwoman, the Department of Veterans' Affairs supplies eligible blinded vets with computer equipment. In many instances, voc rehabs, state voc rehabs supply the civilian blind and civilian disabled with similar equipment. But that's just the tip of the iceberg. I think it's important that we get this technology, get the cost down to where everyone can use it. And I think it was mentioned that it's just a small community of people who use it. Well, the disabled community is a large group of people with money out there, if tapped into it.
    But, in addition to that, I mentioned in my written testimony that the voice synthesizers were first created for the blind. Ray Kurzweil developed it with the help of the VA. Right now, all that technology's being used by the entire world. You have your voicemail. Every time—I think the telephone system now has something—what you do is you just talk into it, and all of a sudden, you get your telephone number.
    So it's important to be able to—as American citizens and people of the world, we should ensure that anyone who needs a computer and assistive technology is to get it down to a viable cost and to be able to make sure that everyone gets it.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Thank you. Dr. Moulton, I guess you've been working on this through Microsoft.

 Page 31       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. MOULTON. Well, I think there's a couple of things here. First of all, the expectation as a person has a disability. If they can't use the keyboard, the mouse, they can't see the screen, they can't use a personal computer. And as a result of that, it's an awareness issue, so you don't realize the economy of scales that you need. As a result, the prices stay fairly high.
    But in addition to that, and I'm sure Dr. Fruchterman would agree with this, it's not easy to develop these access products for personal computer technology. And I think that's why a company like Microsoft, and IBM, and other major companies in the personal computer field, needed to focus on what can we do to make it easier to develop, what kind of tools can we create for the developers of adaptive hardware and software manufacturers. And that's where our SAMI effort, the synchronized accessible media interface, and Microsoft active accessibility come in.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Right. Dr. Fruchterman.
    Mr. FRUCHTERMAN. Thank you. For a point of clarification, while I appreciate the honorific, I actually dropped out of Stanford Ph.D. program to join a startup company in Silicon Valley. So I didn't actually make it all the way to my thesis.
    [Laughter.]
    Mrs. MORELLA. So didn't a lot of other billionaires do the same thing.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. FRUCHTERMAN. For many startup companies, partial Ph.D.'s are the best hires, actually. Because, they would work for cheap and they were pretty smart.
    But anyway, about the payment issue, I think I want to emphasize what Mark Lohman said about paying. We've had a no interest loan program for awhile, and a low interest loan program, and our payment records have been exemplary. And these are from people who can't get commercial credit, because they tend to be unemployed. They're pulling $100 a month out of their Social Security check, so that they can get this equipment that they need to get back to work, or whatever it is that's their personal objective.

 Page 32       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    The studies that we've done said about one-third of our equipment is bought by the government in some form, whether it's the VA, or a school system, or voc rehab. Probably one-third by employers and one-third by the individual and their families themselves. So the need to get the money out there is pretty distributed.
    But one of the things we've done to make the equipment more affordable, is hitch ourselves to the major engine of the computer industry. Ten years ago, a reading system cost $20,000. Today, we have a reading system that costs under $2,000 that's far better than that system. And that decrease in cost has put it within the affordability range of a lot of families, and make employers consider seriously that it's not that big an investment, because they would spend that kind of money on other people.
    So really, on the affordability side, we're most concerned with those people who are unemployed and can't tap those resources, and that's where we think microloans is quite important, as well as, hopefully getting these people employed. And also the market is not as small.
    One of the reasons why we're doing products for people with learning disabilities, is we found that about 20 percent of our blindness products, were actually people who weren't blind, but had dyslexia. So, that's a huge market, and it's a market doesn't know that this technology exists. People believe that dyslexia's an educational problem, or a mental problem, whereas it's just as real a disability as blindness is; it just affects a different part of your body. And as people begin to think that way, they'll begin to realize that the people with most severe dyslexia should be able to tap into adaptive technology tools to help them with that.
    Mrs. MORELLA. And that's a very good plan about dyslexia. I think you know that the microloans were authorized, and that I did write to Chairman Porter, in terms of trying to get some funding in the appropriations bill for it. Because it links up with what all of you basically have said—that these people pay back, but if you can show that you believe in them and give them an opportunity—it's kind of like the micro-enterprise loans that work so well in other countries.

 Page 33       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. Lancaster.
    Mr. LANCASTER. Yes, several things. I really commend you for that, and would encourage to continue looking at microloan funds for people with disabilities for assistive technology, particularly as the need for that technology relates to employment and work, or setting self-employment, or setting up a small business.
    I think another thing that we might want to look at would be research and development tax incentives for manufacturers that could help them offset some of their costs in terms of developing assistive technology and accessibility, and hopefully that would help drive costs down.
    I think a third thing you might want to be looking at would be some sort of, as was suggested I think by Dr. Lohman and several others, some sort of national loan fund for people with disabilities to purchase assistive technologies, especially if it's going to be related to employment. I would encourage that not be a government loan fund; that be private sector, but possibly that government could guarantee on some level the loans.
    If we enter down that road of sort of the microloans which we're already doing and maybe some sort of national loan fund, there's one thing that I would caution—is that we need to be looking, as I know the Presidential Task Force on Employment Adults with Disabilities is, and other government agencies, that the need to maybe be adjusting some SSI income limit rules to make sure that by giving someone a loan, or assisting them with technology, we're not knocking them off the roles prematurely. So I think there's some things that we need to consider and need to proceed carefully there, so that in our attempt to provide someone access to technology and a job, we're not prematurely knocking away their source of income.
    Mrs. MORELLA. How frightening, by virtue of that kind of scare tactic.
    Mr. LANCASTER. Yes, scaring them off.

 Page 34       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mrs. MORELLA. It shows counseling could also be very, very important. And the concept of communicating through the mails to those people who are the recipients, if it's done well, might also help in some way.
    Dr. Lancaster, you just kind of suggested another question with regard to the economic impact of assistive technologies on employment of the disabled. The question being, if you were to increase the federal support, would you increase the employment at the same time?
    Mr. LANCASTER. I believe that you would. I'm not sure that we could prove that at this point. But if people have access to that level of technology, and also support and learning how to use it, then I think it opens up tremendous possibilities. Just to give you an example.
    We recently heard of a medical publication type company down in Virginia that was doing a massive transcription project of data that had been in manuals, etc., onto CD–ROM's and computer disks. And they needed to farm this job out to anybody that would be willing to be some basic data entry, etc—stuff that could have been done by people at home.
    They searched around and could not find any company or set of individuals that would be willing to take on this work. And ended up farming the job out to an outfit in Scotland to do all the work, and interestingly enough, that outfit happened to employ over 50 percent people with disabilities to do the work.
    Why couldn't that have been done right here? And so it's the type of thing where I have to think that if that type of support was provided, it would start having a tremendous positive impact in terms of getting people into employment opportunities, or self-employment opportunity.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Unless somebody else wants to respond, I'll go into another question—unless somebody would like to? Dr. Lohman.
    Mr. LOHMAN. Yes, if I could just add one point to that. In my firm, we hire several individuals who are blind. And so we come face to face with the question of their SSI payments. And although it's probably a subject for another committee in another hearing, but I think it's worth noting, it seems to me what we need help with is a transition period and a sliding scale.

 Page 35       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Under the current system, it's really a red-light-green-light system. You continue to get your benefits as long as your income does not exceed a certain level. The minute it does, a red light comes on, and that benefit ends. And for many people who have grown—who have become used to seeing that check each month for several years, the prospect of losing that, may be a deterrent for them to enter into the private workforce.
    We need some transition months, we need some sliding scale. That will make a big difference in our ability to provide employment opportunities.
    Mr. FALES. Madam Chairwoman?
    Mrs. MORELLA. Yes.
    Mr. FALES. I don't think it's the monthly check that is the biggest barrier, it's the medical insurance that many of them are very concerned about losing. And they don't know if during this period of time, if they are successful, will they have comparable medical insurance. And those with serious disabilities—paraplegics, MS, some cancers, people going onto treatment—their biggest concern is catastrophic health costs that they would have, which are covered now under SSI. Critical barrier.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Good point. Dr. Lohman wants to respond, and then Dr. Moulton.
    Mr. MOULTON. I think the expectation in corporate America is that individuals with disabilities can't use the technology. It's so complicated and so difficult to use in some cases, that certainly a person with a disability can't use it. So I think it's incumbent upon companies like Microsoft—and we've already begun to do—to educate corporate America about the fact that technology—this personal computer technology—is accessible.
    Mrs. MORELLA. How do you it? How do you educate corporate America—by example?

 Page 36       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. MOULTON. Example certainly is the number one thing that will pull things along, but actually getting in the face of the Fortune 500 companies and saying, this same technology that use for your workforce to be more productive, is the same technology that can enable individuals with disabilities to be employed for the first time.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Dr. Lohman, you wanted to add to——
    Mr. LOHMAN. I think it's important to reinforce this point about the health insurance. As you're well aware, in other sectors of our society, health insurance premiums are expensive. And when you're receiving that medical benefit via some form of Social Security assistance, it makes it affordable. If there's the risk of losing that coverage, and these individuals have to enter into the private market, it rapidly—you're looking at premiums at anywhere from $400 to $600 a month—not likely to be affordable for most of those individuals.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Okay, thank you.
    Mr. FALES. Madam Chairwoman?
    Mrs. MORELLA. Yes, Mr. Fales.
    Mr. FALES. You know, I've kind of been needling Microsoft, but they have been doing some good stuff. My only concern is that America Online is not here. That is one server with which a voice synthesizer cannot interface. And I just wanted to mention that.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Maybe we should write to them, and tell them that. Maybe you'll help us.
    Mr. FALES. I sure will.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Maybe you'll get us the information and we'll write a letter.
    Mr. FALES. That's right. My electricity is working.
    [Laughter.]

 Page 37       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mrs. MORELLA. Okay. Great opportunity for you to comment on a number of little problems. What I—yes, we already have listed the alternative format.
    I also want to ask you about how many firms compete in the field of assistive technologies. And, are they small or medium, or large firms? And, does the size of the firm have an effect on the price of the application? Maybe you don't know, but since you're in the field, you may have some ideas. Maybe Dr. Lancaster is the one who——
    Mr. LANCASTER. I'm not sure I can give a real good answer to that, but I know that there's some eight or nine companies in this country now that are dealing with voice recognition systems. Some of them are doing very, very well. We just gave an award to a company in Florida that—Hunter, Joyce—that has one of the systems actually developed by an individual who's blind himself and his company has turned into a multi-million company doing quite well selling these systems and others related to assistive technologies. So there may not be a lot, but at least in that area there are some.
    There are also firms starting to pop-up that are writing softwares for people with cognitive disabilities, like mental retardation—Parrot software is one, I know, that does that and there are others. So there's starting to be a little bit of a burgeoning field here. I wish there were more. But I think it is developing, particularly as we have an aging population. We have more and more people that are getting involved in our society and participating in all levels. So——
    Mrs. MORELLA. There are not many, I mean with the exception of maybe Microsoft—there aren't that many big, high-tech companies involved though. Are there? If that is true, why not? Is this——
    Mr. LANCASTER. Some are. Some of the hardware companies have been doing this on some level for some time. AT&T, IBM have been innovators at least on some level. Maybe we'd all like to see them do more, but certainly they have had a focus on this—as has Apple.

 Page 38       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mrs. MORELLA. Yes. Dr. Moulton, do you want to comment on that?
    Mr. MOULTON. When I was Manager of Disability Resources at Apple, we tracked 43 adaptive hardware and software products that provided access to the MacIntosh Operating System for individuals with disabilities a couple of years ago. At Microsoft, there were well over 125 adaptive hardware and software companies that provided access to the personal computer. Those are the figures that I know of.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Yes. Dr. Fruchterman—I mean Mr. Fruchterman.
    Dr. FRUCHTERMAN. Yes. I think I can remark on that.
    Mrs. MORELLA. I give you an honorary job.
    [Laughter.]
    Mr. FRUCHTERMAN. Oh, thank you. I think in our part of the visual impairment field, the experience varied widely. One of the reasons I started our Arkenstone is because the only reading machine for the blind, 10 years ago, was made by Xerox. Now, I think there's still—even though companies are coming in and out—still only a couple of makers of reading machines because as we've said, it's not a very lucrative field. I don't believe, however, that pricing suffers because of the lack of the number of companies in the industry. I think that, especially the big companies, tend to do this kind of work at a loss or at a break-even at best. I know that's true of IBM. I was certain it was true at Xerox. I think it's really part of their corporate responsibility that they're carrying this out rather than trying to gouge people.
    The reason sometimes the prices are high is because when you make 500 units of a product, the price is very different than if you were making 50,000 or 500,000 units of the same product. So I think it's—it is an issue. But because people are interested and because technologists are really fascinated by the technology application, new small companies keep popping up.

 Page 39       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mrs. MORELLA. Yes. I'm going to ask you all about what role do you think would be the best role for the Federal Government in terms of assistive technology innovation. You've mentioned some incentives. You've mentioned tax credits—infrastructure as a direct funding. What is your advice in terms of where you think the Federal Government best serves the promotion of assistive technology? If anybody wants to comment on it.
    Mr. LANCASTER. Well, I would. To start with, I think there's several areas in which the Federal Government can really help move this forward. Two of those are its existing enforcement responsibilities under section 508 of the Rehab Act and section 255 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. We need to have strong, vigorous standards in that regard. We need to have strong—very strong—enforcement mechanisms. In particular, section 508—that one's on the table now for the Federal Government. That provision calls on the Federal Government to make sure that when they're purchasing information technologies and telecommunications, that they're doing so in a way that's accessible to all workers, including those with disabilities. The agencies simply have to do what they need to do there and be responsible in doing that. We're looking forward to a very effective and strong standard in that regard.
    I think the Federal Government needs to continue to look at incentives for the private sector to be doing this, as well. I don't think it should be strictly a hammer, so to speak. I think we need to look at encouraging them to do these things. Tax incentives—if they will help—I think, are a very important way. The other thing is I think we need to do what we're trying to do at the President's Committee and that is to provide a forum where we can bring the different players and parties in to start dialoguing. How do we do this in a voluntary way beyond what may already be mandated in law, and to bring people to the table, and to also share innovation—hopefully, without getting into sensitive areas of, you know, propriety and competition, etc., but still to bring people to the table in a forum that's going to encourage them and assist them in moving forward in a way that we can do it?

 Page 40       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Ultimately, it's to corporate America's benefit to make this happen. Because if it's going to help get people into work, it's ultimately going to help drive down their workers' comp costs, their share of the FICA that their paying, and all the other costs that they have related this huge unemployment problem anyway.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Does the legislation that we pass—the Technology Transfer in Advancement Act that was in 1995 and the one this year which is a Technology Transfer bill—does that help with assistive technology?
    Mr. LANCASTER. Oh, I think so. It certainly opens up the door for innovation, sharing, and a lot of other things. I would say a tremendous encouragement.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Okay. Okay. Open to anyone else who wants to comment on it. Okay.
    Mr. FALES. Can I—Madam Chairwoman?
    Mrs. MORELLA. Mr. Fales? Right.
    Mr. FALES. You know, we mentioned the unemployment rate of the disabled. The Federal Government has, over the past 8 years and probably even before then, a terrible hiring rate of those with severe disabilities. Their technology, assisted technology programs, are really very not well run. There has to be—number one, they should outreach to those with disabilities and set an example for the private sector. But in addition to that, there isn't any central area such as GSA if you have—say a blind person—working at a federal agency and they leave. What happens to the equipment? It just leaves there and it's not being used by some other person. It's so important that they have—I mean, maybe if someone in the Federal Government is not going to use it, then maybe it can be given to some low-income individual and maybe refurbish it a little bit. Then get it out to them. Equipment, no matter how great it is, is not good unless it's used.
    Mrs. MORELLA. We used to say waste not, want not.

 Page 41       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. FALES. Shakespeare.
    Mr. FRUCHTERMAN. I think I want to get back to your question of what the Federal Government can do. To a great extent, it's encouraging people to do the right thing. As John Lancaster spoke about—taking some of the existing legislation and making it real—not overly burdensome, but encouraging people to do the right thing. I mean, I think, to a great extent the reason why Microsoft is making such a major commitment in this area is because of the procurement policies of state and federal agencies is pushing them to do more for people with disabilities. I think that's a very good force for encouraging our corporate—people who are developing products—to think in terms of people with disabilities and to do the right thing. So I think that that's a very important thing. Then, anything else that can improve the environment—either by doing some of the different tax credits we've talked about or micro loans—all these things help people help themselves. The majority of our blind users do not want to be on social security; do not want on welfare—they would rather be employed. We want to give them the tools and creative environment in which they can go and do that.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Since you forced me into this question—this was not to be a hearing necessarily on specific legislation, but I have introduced legislation and Senator Bond has on the Senate side. I don't know whether you're familiar with it, but it would offer federally-supported incentives in all the areas of assistive and universally-designed technology, need identification, RND, product evaluation, technology-transferred commercialization. I mean, improving the peer review process. Also, improving the role of the Inter-agency Committee on Disability Research. I don't know whether any of you are familiar with it at all. It's 46—4603—or 4063. Are any of you familiar with it, or do you think—if you're not, do you think the concept of a piece of legislation like that would be helpful? Yes.

 Page 42       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    Mr. FRUCHTERMAN. Yes, certainly when I heard about this hearing, I dug it up on the Web—which is one of those great things—and read through it. I'm not as familiar with the Washington aspects of how things work in the Federal Government. The parts that caught my eye were the micro loans, encouragement of universal design, and the tax credits. I thought those were all excellent things. So that certainly stuck out when I did a quick reading of the bill and certainly strongly support them as I've said already.
    Mr. MOULTON. Tying in training, I think, would be important, as well. The Bilkis training is definitely fundamental
    Mrs. MORELLA. Yes, that's true.
    Mr. MOULTON. To a lot of this, as well. But I think the importance of both the House and the Senate bill again is something to point to. You know, a leaderly step forward that, you know, that corporate America can take a look at and say—you know, this stuff really does matter and it's important.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Yes, because it does have the tax incentives for businesses, too. I'd particularly be interested in what Dr. Lancaster has to say.
    Mr. LANCASTER. Yes. Obviously, I can't speak for OMB——
    Mrs. MORELLA. I realize that.
    Mr. LANCASTER. Or the whole Administration. But we have looked at the bill. We're very encouraged with what we see and definitely think that this is an appropriate direction. Things that are in that bill from our small agency's point of view would be very productive.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Okay.
    Mr. LANCASTER. We would certainly support that.
    Mrs. MORELLA. Anybody have any final words because otherwise I'm going to adjourn the hearing.

 Page 43       PREV PAGE       TOP OF DOC

    I think it's been a wonderful hearing because of you. Thank you for bringing your expertise and thank you for you presence and the kind of work that you've done and will continue to do. So therefore the Technology Subcommittee—the Science Committee meeting is now adjourned. Thank you.
    [Whereupon, at 4:16 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
    [The following material was received for the record:]
    Insert offset folios 42-45