Court rules paper money discriminates against the blind

motivez · 05-21-2008, 05:27 PM

"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 W. Rogers wrote for herself and Judge Thomas B . Griffith, referring to Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr., the nominal defendant.

What happens next is not certain. The government could appeal to the full 13-member appeals court (one of whose judges, David S. Tatel, is blind), or it could seek quick review by the Supreme Court, a step it has 90 days to take.

"We're reviewing the court's ruling at this juncture, and no determination has been made as to the government's next step," said Charles Miller, a spokesman for the Department of Justice, which argued the case on behalf of the Treasury Department.

The Treasury Department said it, too, was reviewing the ruling. In the meantime, the department has been working "to improve the nation's paper currency to best serve the needs of all Americans, including those who are blind or visually impaired," said Brookly McLaughlin, deputy assistant secretary for public affairs.

McLaughlin said the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, the Treasury agency that makes paper money, had already contracted with a research firm to study ways to help those who are blind or have poor vision. The results of the study will be available early next year and will be considered when new currency-production equipment is introduced, she said.

Further, in a limited step to help those with some vision, the most recent $5 bill, introduced this year, features an extra-large "5" on one side.

A lawyer for the American Council of the Blind, which brought the lawsuit in 2002, said he hoped that the government, "instead of litigating the issue, would solve the problem." The Treasury Department has the means and technology to change the design of American currency to help the blind, said the lawyer, Jeffrey A. Lovitky of Washington.

"It's just a question of willingness," he said.

Even in an era when "greenbacks" are already printed with traces of peach or violet, the ruling could propel startling changes.

While the appeals court did not tell the Treasury what kind of money to turn out, it noted that scores of countries used different predominant colors and shapes for different denominations, in addition to different sizes and various "tactile features."

The dissenter Tuesday was Judge A. Raymond Randolph, who said the majority had too quickly accepted the plaintiffs' assertions and rejected evidence that retooling or replacing the approximately 7 million food-and-beverage vending machines in the country could cost $3.5 billion if bills of different size were introduced.

Other parties that would be affected included manufacturers of money-dispensing automatic teller machines and, for that matter, makers of wallets and purses, Randolph said.

The suit was brought under the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which addresses discrimination in federal programs. The appeals court said Paulson had acknowledged that the present currency system made blind people "dependent on the kindness of others." And, it said, their plight is not satisfactorily remedied by currency-reading devices, which can be expensive and quite cumbersome: One costs $270 and has trouble reading $20 bills.

The decision upheld a 2006 ruling by Judge James Robertson of the U.S. District Court in Washington, to which the case will be returned for consideration of remedies unless the government succeeds on further appeal.

"Of the more than 180 countries that issue paper currency," Robertson wrote in his decision a year and a half ago, "only the United States prints bills that are identical in size and color in all their denominations."

Robertson rejected the government's arguments that making bills identifiable by touch would create an undue financial burden: an estimated $178 million for new printing presses, for instance, and up to $50 million for new plates. Those costs are not significant, he said, given that the government spent more than $4 billion producing currency in the decade before his ruling.

In any event, the appeals court noted that the Bureau of Engraving and Printing occasionally redesigned currency to thwart counterfeiters. The appeals court quoted one plaintiff, Otis H. Stephens, a blind professor at the University of Tennessee College of Law.

"I cannot emphasize enough," Stephens declared in the district court in 2005, "the feelings of insecurity and vulnerability which I experience whenever I engage in currency transactions, due to my inability to distinguish between denominations."

Court: Paper money discriminates against blind -- -- chicagotribune.com

What do you guys think about this?

I mean, obviously it's "discriminatory" for the blind and visually impaired in that it doesn't take their limitations into account during the creation process.. but what I have remembered from this discussion in the past is that many blind people come up with their own system of folding the bills differently depending on the denomination of the bill

Of course, that only works if they know what it is before they fold it, so getting change for something is a little different.

Obviously it's going to cost quite a bit of money to redo the bills, not just the manufacturing cost of the new bills themselves, but you wouldn't be able to use them in old vending machines, new ones would have to be created.. which would cost companies quite a bit of money

So, good ruling or bad?

thewise1 · 05-21-2008, 05:32 PM

Is there a reason they can't be embossed as they are created? I suppose that might wear out quickly though.

motivez · 05-21-2008, 05:41 PM

Yeah, and then there's the problem of people defacing the bills to add dots or whatever...

thewise1 · 05-21-2008, 05:41 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

Yeah, and then there's the problem of people defacing the bills to add dots or whatever...

touche

motivez · 05-21-2008, 05:49 PM

So what do you think though? Is it a good ruling?

I mean, I expect it's going to cost companies a lot to re-tool their vending machines, etc, if moving forward the bills are different sizes

thewise1 · 05-21-2008, 05:53 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

So what do you think though? Is it a good ruling?

I mean, I expect it's going to cost companies a lot to re-tool their vending machines, etc, if moving forward the bills are different sizes

It's going to be irritating to my sense of organization in my wallet, too.

I don't really have much of an opinion on it, honestly. It's all monopoly money anyway

Spideynw · 05-21-2008, 05:54 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

So what do you think though? Is it a good ruling?

This ruling is garbage. First of all, the government should not be involved in producing money. Second of all, if the private market were in charge, people should not be forced to produce money that panders to blind people.

motivez · 05-21-2008, 06:00 PM

Originally Posted by Spideynw

This ruling is garbage. First of all, the government should not be involved in producing money. Second of all, if the private market were in charge, people should not be forced to produce money that panders to blind people.

"panders to blind people"?

How about makes it possible for them to know what it is when using it?

Why shouldn't government be involved in producing money?

Spideynw · 05-21-2008, 06:37 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

"panders to blind people"?

How about makes it possible for them to know what it is when using it?

This is a slippery slope argument. Should we force people who build walls to put dots on it so a blind person "knows" what it is? Blind people have survived for thousands of years with regular money. There is no need to put dots on our money.

Why shouldn't government be involved in producing money?

Have you noticed the price of gasoline recently?

WickedLou9 · 05-22-2008, 09:16 AM

It's a bad ruling.

Who uses paper money anyway? Pull out your debit card, and it will pay whatever the amount is. That is a perfectly acceptable means to pay for things and it does not put a blind person at any disadvantage.

motivez · 05-22-2008, 06:02 PM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

It's a bad ruling.

Who uses paper money anyway? Pull out your debit card, and it will pay whatever the amount is. That is a perfectly acceptable means to pay for things and it does not put a blind person at any disadvantage.

So you don't think it discriminates, or you just think there's other options available to blind people that make this a stupid ruling?

I mean, I think our money should be accessible for anyone to use, including the blind.. I don't see any real valid reason it can't be different sizes or whatever.

As far as debit cards, how do they know it's the amount that the cashier tells them it is? What if they want cash back?

Shouldn't we try to accommodate those with disabilities when possible?

Ardentfrost · 05-22-2008, 06:06 PM

We need money cubes!

Smull · 05-22-2008, 10:39 PM

Its a nice sentiment and I think the court means well and all, but really theres only so much we can do to help people, and this kinda puts us on a slippery slope. All kinds of things "discriminate" against the blind, the money we print, the documents the government issues, signs on the street (for blind pedestrians), I mean it seems to me you just kinda have to accept that life is a lot harder if your blind/deaf/mute/missing some limbs or what have you because there is just no way we can accommodate for every possible disability.

Wouldn't it be possible to use the technology inside vending machines which reads the bills to make some sort of handheld scanner that blind people could be given and it makes a certain sound when a certain bill is scanned? I would be fine with the government providing these devices (if they could ever be built) to the every blind American free of charge. Seems like a much simpler way of solving the problem than changing our entire currency.

WickedLou9 · 05-23-2008, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by motivez

So you don't think it discriminates, or you just think there's other options available to blind people that make this a stupid ruling?

I mean, I think our money should be accessible for anyone to use, including the blind.. I don't see any real valid reason it can't be different sizes or whatever.

As far as debit cards, how do they know it's the amount that the cashier tells them it is? What if they want cash back?

Shouldn't we try to accommodate those with disabilities when possible?

Yeah we should try and accomodate them but I think this goes a little bit too far. It's fairly easy to check your debit card balance and everything is recorded with the bank. It tells you when you made the charge, who you were paying and how much it was. If the cashier charges an extra amount it will be recorded and can easily be checked out. I don't think the likelyhood of that happening is any greater than the same cashier doing it to someone else who just isn't paying attention like a mother shopping with a couple of screaming kids or something. And Getting cash back isn't really a right. They usually have ATM's on site anyway and ATM's have braile on them.

This may have been an issue 20 years ago but not today. Not enough to force the government to change all of our currency anyway.

Stylerod · 05-23-2008, 10:21 AM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

Yeah we should try and accomodate them but I think this goes a little bit too far. It's fairly easy to check your debit card balance and everything is recorded with the bank. It tells you when you made the charge, who you were paying and how much it was. If the cashier charges an extra amount it will be recorded and can easily be checked out. I don't think the likelyhood of that happening is any greater than the same cashier doing it to someone else who just isn't paying attention like a mother shopping with a couple of screaming kids or something. And Getting cash back isn't really a right. They usually have ATM's on site anyway and ATM's have braile on them.

This may have been an issue 20 years ago but not today. Not enough to force the government to change all of our currency anyway.

I agree. And discriminate is such a hateful word. Like the government is doing this for the sole purpose of pissing blind people off or not doing anything about it because the just don't give a shit about blind people.

The costs involved compared to the amount of people that will benefit from it doesn't make it worthwhile. Like Lou said. 99% of establishments accept credit cards/bank cards now, including all fast food places. Blind people can use their cards and if they want to keep "cash" in their pockets for small purchases they can still use dollar coins.

Scrum · 05-23-2008, 10:40 AM

It's not like they are going to change the money to something that blind people can better use today. This was just so the next time they change money they will look into it.

Other countries use raised watermarks, I don't see why we can't do that. It would also work well as another counterfeit deterrent.

Phantom · 05-23-2008, 10:45 AM

It seems like changing the paper, maybe with raised portions of the bills is a fairly simple remedy.

Compared to forcing builders/owners to make everything wheelchair accessible, this seems pretty reasonable to me.

WickedLou9 · 05-23-2008, 11:06 AM

Originally Posted by Scrum

It's not like they are going to change the money to something that blind people can better use today. This was just so the next time they change money they will look into it.

Other countries use raised watermarks, I don't see why we can't do that. It would also work well as another counterfeit deterrent.

I woudlnt have a problem with it if we assumed that the changes would be gradual over time and would only be implemented when changes were going to be made anyway. We redesign our currency now and again, and if you could roll up the costs to be included with changes that were going to be made anyway thats fine. BUt I don't think we should force an immediate redesign to add braile or something to all bills.

Dispatcher · 05-23-2008, 09:04 PM

First of all, I agree with the ruling. During the 70s, I dated a girl that went blind due to diabetes. I watched helplessly as she went from perfect vision to total blindness. A larger "5" on the 5 dollar bill won't do shit for people who are completely blind. However, even just a slightly raised number or perforation on all the bills would help people to distinguish one bill from another, regardless off the severity of their sight problem.

Dispatcher · 05-23-2008, 09:09 PM

Originally Posted by motivez

So you don't think it discriminates, or you just think there's other options available to blind people that make this a stupid ruling?

I mean, I think our money should be accessible for anyone to use, including the blind.. I don't see any real valid reason it can't be different sizes or whatever.

As far as debit cards, how do they know it's the amount that the cashier tells them it is? What if they want cash back?

Shouldn't we try to accommodate those with disabilities when possible?

Well said