AP Article

Here is a really good article I found on the subject.

The ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Circuit upholds
a decision by a lower court in 2006. It could force the Treasury
Department to redesign
its money. Suggested changes have ranged from making bills different
sizes to printing
them with raised markings.
The American Council for the Blind sued for such changes but the
Treasury Department
has been fighting the case for about six years.
"I don't think we should have to rely on people to tell us what our
money is," said
Mitch Pomerantz, the council's president.
The U.S. acknowledges the design hinders blind people but it argued
that blind people
have adapted. Some relied on store clerks to help them, some used credit
cards and
others folded certain corners to help distinguish between bills.
The court ruled 2-1 that such adaptations were insufficient. The
government might
as well argue that, since handicapped people can crawl on all fours or
ask for help
from strangers, there's no need to make buildings wheelchair accessible,
the court
said.
"Even the most searching tactile examination will reveal no difference
between a
$100 bill and a $1 bill. The Secretary has identified no reason that
requires paper
currency to be uniform to the touch," Judge Judith W. Rogers wrote for
the majority.
Courts can't decide how to design the currency, since that's up to the
Treasury
Department. But the ruling forces the department to address what the
court called
a discriminatory problem.
Pomerantz says it could take years to change the look of money and
until then, he
expects that similar-looking money will continue to get printed and
spent. But since
blindness becomes more common with age, people in the 30s and 40s should
know that,
when they get older, "they will be able to identify their $1 bills from
their fives,
tens and twenties," he said.
Officials at the Treasury Department and the department's Bureau of
Engraving and
Printing, which prints the nation's currency, had no immediate comment
on the ruling.
The government could appeal to the Supreme Court.
While the government has been fighting to overturn the lower court
ruling, it has
been taking some steps toward modifying U.S. currency for the visually
impaired.
The most recent currency redesign of the $5 bill introduced in March
features a
giant "5" printed in purple on one side of the bill to help those with
vision problems
distinguish the bill.
The appeals court also ruled that the U.S. failed to explain why
changing the money
would be an undue burden. The Treasury Department has redesigned its
currency several
times in recent years, and adding features to aid the blind would come
at a relatively
small cost, the court said.
Other countries have added such features, the court said, and the U.S.
never explained
what made its situation so unique.
Not all blind people agreed the money needed to be changed. The
National Federation
of the Blind sided with the government and told the appeals court that
no changes
were needed.
Charlie Richardson, the legally blind manager of Charlie's Express Stop
inside the
Capitol in Albany, N.Y., said he doesn't oppose changing the money but
disagrees
with the ruling.
"To actually be discriminated against is to have something denied to
you," Richardson
said. "We're not denied the use of money."
__
Associated Press writer Valerie Bauman in Albany, N.Y., contributed to
this report.

Article on earlier blog post

> Melanie Brunson
>
>>WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Treasury Department discriminates because
>>it
>>has failed to design and issue paper currency readily distinguishable to
>>people with poor sight, a federal appeals court ruled on Tuesday.
>>
>>
>>
>>By a 2-1 vote, the court upheld a ruling by U.S. District Judge James
>>Robertson in a lawsuit filed by The American Council of the Blind against
>>the U.S. Treasury Department.
>>
>>The council accused the department and Treasury Secretary Henry
Paulson of
>>violating the Rehabilitation Act, which was meant to ensure that people
>>with
>>disabilities can live independently and fully participate in society.
>>
>>The appeals court rejected the Treasury Department's arguments that
>>accommodating the Council's proposals would impose an undue burden on the
>>government, and sent the case back to Robertson to address the group's
>>request for relief.
>>
>>The American Council of the Blind has proposed several possible
changes to
>>U.S. currency, including different size bills for different
denominations,
>>embossed dots and raised printing.
>>
>>"A large majority of other currency systems have accommodated the
visually
>>impaired, and the secretary does not explain why U.S. currency should be
>>any
>>different," Judge Judith Rogers wrote in the appeal court's opinion.
>>
>>(Reporting by James Vicini; Editing by Frances Kerry and David Storey)

The Blind Identifying Money

Recently, the American Council has taken greater issue with the fact
that blind individuals are unable to access paper money in the United
States. The treasury is saying that they do not need to replace the
money with something that is more accessible because it costs money, and
that money can be spent on other things such as educating the blind.
Organizations such as the National Federation of the Blind has
stated that they, although condoning the lack of accessibility, support
the treasury in their decision because blind individuals have used other
means of identifying their money such as folding it.
And still others say that blind individuals do not need their money
to be accessible because there is technology out there that allows the
blind individual to tell what money he/she has.
First, there are other countries that have accessible currency, so
why can't the United States?
Second, just because I can fold my money, I don't want to hold up the
line asking the Cashier to tell me what bills he/she has handed me.
Finally, why should I have another piece of technology just to tell what
money I have? I carry a phone, a computer, a cane, and other devices
already. Why is it that I have to carry another piece of technology just
to be able to scan a bill and it can tell me that it is a five? And,
would this not be a waste of time? Should I stand there in line, pull
out my piece of technology with a pair of headphones, plug it in, pull
out my wallet, and go through every single bill just to find the one
that says five?
If other countries have adapted their currency to aid the visually
impaired, why can't the US?

Who is the best candidate for the presidency?

Mr. Obama is inexperienced, but yet is a great orator. Mrs. Clinton
claims she's got experience, but she believes that the minute she gets
into office, she can implement a healthcare plan. Mr. McCain proposes to
continue the administration of Mr. Bush. How high will oil and gas
prices go up to if Mr. McCain becomes president?
As you see, there is no clear-cut candidate for president that is
best for leading the free world. Our next president will be faced with a
multitude of issues, such as the war on terror, particularly the
Republic of Iran which, according to Israeli intelligence, which is
seldom wrong, is on full-scale production of weapons-grade uranium.
Israel has made it clear that they will not wait until Iran has nuclear
weapons to act. If they believe Iran to possess nuclear weapons, they
will act with catastrophic results. Our next president is going to have
to deal with this threat by either attempting to talk with Iran, or by
aiding Israel by dropping a couple of Nukes on Tehran and where ever
they believe the weapons to be contained.
Our next president is also going to have to find a way to deal with
Iraq. If we stay, more US forces will continue to be killed. If we
leave, there is a good chance that Iraq will be taken over by terrorists.
Due to Obama's lack of experience, I would vote for him, as he would
not know how to deal with what he plans on doing. He states that he will
immediately pull US forces out of Iraq. What he does not understand is
that it takes more than just the president to decide to pull out
immediately. There are logistics that Obama has not yet considered. Iran
is sending terrorists over to Iraq to attack US troops. Should the US
send some people into Iran to destroy some of their military
installations? Would there, however be repercussions if the US did that?
The director of the FBI has already stated that there are Iranian
terrorist cells here in the US. Would Iran order them to blow up stores
and buses here in America? Would Americans have the stomach to deal with
that, or would they protest some more?
Those are all questions that voters must think about before hitting
the voting lines this November when they vote for their next president.

The statements above are the opinions of Nimer Jaber. I will not be
held liable for any information that has been presented above. If you
have any questions as to the relevants or reliableness of this
information, please contact me, or use other resources. If you believe
that any of this information is not reliable, please feel free to email
me with your concerns.