|
| |
Wisconsin BEP Home > Laws & Regulations >
BEP Issues
What are the Problems with Randolph-Sheppard in Wisconsin?
 | The problem isn't with the law. The real problem rests with
compliance and enforcement |
| Blind vendors do not have real access to many state contracts, making it
difficult for more of them to compete or thrive |
| Both the state and federal acts clearly stipulate that blind vendors have
priority in contractual bids at government buildings |
| The only exception granted in federal law is, "When it may adversely
affect the interests of the United States" |
| Section 2.12 of the Wisconsin Administrative Code clearly states, "No
other concession stand or vending machines may be operated in state office
buildings and facilities" |
| Despite such clarity in the law, blind vendors are often shut out of
places like the University of Wisconsin, DNR's state parks, and federal army
bases |
| DWD agrees that blind vendors have an exclusive right to place vending
machines at state parks and facilities, but they are still being kept out |
| The real problem of blindness is not the lack of eyesight. It is
misunderstanding and lack of information in the sighted community |
| With proper training and opportunity, blind people can compete on terms of
equality with their sighted peers |
Return to top
Why Do Some Agencies Refuse, While Others Find the BEP Program Works So Well?
| The Randolph-Sheppard Acts--both state and federal--give blind vendors the
right of first refusal, and some agencies do not like mandates |
| These agencies would rather subcontract to a franchise like
McDonald's--instead of blind vendors--in order to generate revenue for that
particular agency |
| When agencies subcontract to a fast-food franchise, this creates
offsetting societal welfare costs needed to support unemployed blind persons |
| Essentially, the agency is putting money into the government's left
pocket, while another agency then pays out of the right pocket |
| The Randolph-Sheppard Act isn't optional. Circumventing the law by
creating artificial barriers is a clear violation and may have future costs |
Return to top
How Do Government Agencies Keep Out Blind Vendors?
| Exclusion often rests on absurd technicalities manufactured by the
agencies that do not wish to comply |
| For example, the Army attempts to argue that a "mess hall" does not fit
within the statutory definition of a cafeteria |
| Blind vendors have specific difficulty navigating new regulations and
excessive paperwork |
| These artificial barriers created by agencies are extremely effective in
keeping the blind out of contracts, and out of the entire Randolph-Sheppard
program |
| Arbitration is often difficult, lengthy and expensive |
| Legal fees are not covered for vendors, and often they are not able to
effectively serve as their own representatives |
| Like many of us, these people are working, and don't have the time or
energy to fight a costly legal battle |
| When resolved, the arbitration ruling may apply to only one facility, and
not be worth the time |
| Randolph-Sheppard could work much better in Wisconsin if we allowed it to
flourish, like in Tennessee |
Return to top
|
