[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 130 (Thursday, September 25, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1870]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND 
               RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS ACT, 1998

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                        HON. MATTHEW G. MARTINEZ

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                     Wednesday, September 17, 1997

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2264) making 
     appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human 
     Services, and Education, and related agencies for the fiscal 
     year ending September 30, 1998, and for other purposes:

  Mr. MARTINEZ. Mr. Chairman, the amendment which Representative Riggs 
offered to the Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and related 
agencies appropriations bill regarding the enforcement options 
available to the Department of Education pertaining to youth with 
disabilities in adult correctional facilities under the Individuals 
with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) is an ill-advised and 
inopportune amendment. As a member of the bipartisan working group 
which developed the IDEA amendments of 1997, I am strongly opposed to 
this amendment, as it would contravene the carefully crafted 
bipartisan, bicameral legislation signed into law only 3 months ago.
  The IDEA ensures that all children with disabilities receive a free 
appropriate public education. During the bipartisan negotiations on the 
IDEA amendments, several provisions were added to the statute to give 
States increased flexibility in serving the portion of disabled youth 
who are incarcerated in adult correctional facilities. These provisions 
are: Through State statute or Executive order a State may assign any 
public agency in the State responsibility for ensuring compliance with 
the obligation to provide a free appropriate public education to youth 
with disabilities incarcerated in adult prisons; States are permitted 
to exempt the participation of youth with disabilities incarcerated in 
adult prisons on State-wide assessments; States are permitted to exempt 
youth with disabilities whose eligibility under part B will end, 
because of their age, before they will be released from prison from 
transition planning; and States may modify a youth's individualized 
education plan or the act's provisions related to least restrictive 
environment if the State has demonstrated a bona fide security or 
compelling penological interest.
  In addition to the exemption of these planning and administrative 
requirements which will result in huge cost savings, States no longer 
have to serve those youth with disabilities, aged 18 through 21, who 
were not identified, or did not have an individualized education 
program, prior to their incarceration in an adult correctional 
facility. With these additional provisions there should be no obstacle 
to serving this population.
  Despite the acceptance of these numerous provisions, Congressman 
Riggs, having signed off on this deal during the bipartisan 
negotiations on this bill, has sought to reopen the debate over whether 
youth with disabilities in adult correctional facilities should be 
served purely due to political pressure from the Governor of our State, 
Governor Wilson of California. The Riggs amendment would reduce the 
enforcement options of the Department of Education under the statute, 
thereby completely contradicting the bipartisan manner used to craft 
the amendments. Section 616(a) of the statute provides two enforcement 
actions available for use by the Department to ensure that States serve 
youth with disabilities in adult correctional facilities: The 
withholding of a pro-rata share of Federal funding attributable to the 
population of youth with disabilities in adult correctional facilities 
and the referral of the matter for appropriate enforcement action, 
including referral to the Department of Justice. This amendment would 
limit the enforcement action available to the Department to only the 
reduction of funds thereby ensuring that many States would forgo the 
vital funds, and violate the act, to avoid serving this vulnerable 
population.
  Throughout the exchange of debate over this issue both prior to and 
during floor consideration, Mr. Riggs asserted that the Department is 
overstepping its bounds by considering which option, reduction of funds 
or referral to Justice, to use in enforcing compliance with the 
statute. As Members can see, this assertion is clearly false. The 
statute clearly provides for the Department to use either option in 
ensuring that this population will be served. I will remind Members 
that since the act requires that all children with disabilities, 
including those incarcerated in adult correctional facilities, receive 
a free appropriate public education, the Department is required to use 
every means at its disposal to enforce the law. Congress should not be 
in the practice of limiting the enforcement options, especially through 
the appropriations process, of this vital civil rights legislation. For 
too long, disabled individuals have been left without assurance of 
educational opportunity. Now is not the time to turn the clock back and 
lessen our commitment.
  The process used to reauthorize the IDEA during the early portion of 
the 105th Congress was strongly bipartisan and produced legislation 
which received nearly unanimous support because Democrats and 
Republicans worked together. I am strongly disappointed that Mr. Riggs 
has sought to mischaracterize and undermine the bipartisan process we 
used to craft this historic legislation through the statements he has 
made regarding this amendment.