[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 28 (Tuesday, March 6, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1889-S1890]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
IDEA FULL FUNDING
Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, today may be just another day in
Washington, but it is a special day in Vermont. Today is town meeting
day, when towns throughout Vermont go over their budgets line by line.
This includes a review of school budgets in many towns. In Vermont,
where special education referrals grow at a rate of about 3.5 percent
per year. With the cost of special education rising at a rate that
Vermont's 287 school districts can not sustain, the number one
education issue that will be discussed at these town meetings will be
Federal funding of special education. Vermonters, like so many
Americans across the country, understand that these costs must be paid.
All of our children, those with disabilities and those without, need
and deserve the services and supports that will ensure that they meet
their educational goals.
In 1975, responding to numerous Federal Court decisions involving
lawsuits against a majority of the States, and growing concerns about
the unconstitutional treatment of children with disabilities, Congress
passed Public Law 94-142, now known as the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act. IDEA rightly guaranteed all children with
disabilities a constitutionally required ``free and appropriate public
education.'' As a freshman Congressman, I was proud to sponsor that
legislation and to be a member of the Conference Committee that
negotiated the differences in the House and Senate bills.
In passing Public Law 94-142, Congress recognized that education is
not free. We recognized that children with disabilities often require
specialized services to benefit from education. Congress assumed that
the average cost of educating children with disabilities was twice that
of educating other children. At that time, 25 years ago, Congress
authorized the Federal Government to pay up to 40 percent of the
additional costs associated with educating children with disabilities.
That amount--often referred to as the IDEA ``full-funding'' amount--is
calculated by taking 40 percent of the national average per pupil
expenditure, or APPE, times the number of children with disabilities
being served under IDEA Part B in each state.
While some may question whether Congress made a commitment or set a
goal, I am here to tell you, as someone who was there at the time, we
definitely made a pledge to fully fund the Federal share of special
education. Thanks to teachers and administrators, advocacy
organizations, parents of children with disabilities, and the children
themselves, I believe that together we have made tremendous strides in
assuring that we keep that promise.
Since I became Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions
Committee in 1997, there have been significant increases in special
education funding. In fact, special education funding has increased by
174 percent since 1996. For Vermont, the Federal share has increased
from $4.5 million to $13.2 million. Even with this substantial
increase, the Federal Government still contributes less than 15 percent
of the APPE.
Failure to live up to the commitment of Congress means that the
majority of the funding for special education for 8,000 Vermont
students, and 6.1 million students across the country, currently comes
from the States and from local school budgets.
Last year, I led three congressional efforts to increase special
education funding. In April 2000, I sponsored an amendment to the
budget resolution. This amendment would have mandated that the Federal
Government increase spending for special education by $2 billion each
year, for 5 years. The amendment, which would have raised Federal
special education funding from $5 billion per year to close to $16
billion per year, failed by three votes. In its place, the Senate
approved, by a vote of 53 to 47, a substitute amendment that made my
amendment a nonbinding sense of the senate resolution to fully fund
special education. This was definitely not the outcome I was seeking.
However, it was the second time the Senate has gone on record in
support of fully funding the Federal Government's share of special
education costs. After two decades in which full funding of IDEA was
regarded as more of a pipe dream than a commitment to be honored,
Congress finally seems to be taking its obligation seriously.
Today, I am pleased to join my colleagues in introducing legislation
that will provide for mandatory increases in special education funding
at $2.5 billion a year for each of the next 6 years. This bipartisan
effort sets the course to achieve full funding for Part B of IDEA by
fiscal year 2007. The enactment of this bill will give relief to school
districts, resources to teachers, hope to parents, and opportunities to
children with disabilities. It will free up State and local funds to be
spent on such things as better pay for teachers, more professional
development, richer and more diverse curricula, reducing class size,
making needed renovations to buildings, and addressing other needs of
individual schools. To me, passage of this bill will provide the
ultimate in local educational flexibility.
Last week, Representative Burton, Chairman of the House Committee on
Government Reform, held a hearing on IDEA. Every witness that testified
identified insufficient special education funding as the number one
barrier that prevents schools from fully meeting the needs of children
with disabilities. Every congressional Representative who attended the
hearing spoke to the issue. Representative Hooley and Representative
Bass have both introduced bills in the House to fully fund Part B of
IDEA.
In 1975, we made a commitment to fully fund the Federal Government's
share of special education costs. If, 25 years later, in this era of
economic prosperity and unprecedented budgetary surpluses, we cannot
meet this commitment, when will we keep this pledge?
School districts are demanding financial relief. Children's needs
must be met. Parents expect accountability. There is no better way to
touch a school, help a child, or support a family than to commit more
Federal dollars for special education. Personally, I do not believe
anyone can rationally argue this is not the time to fulfill our
promise.
In America, education is viewed as a right. Across the country, our
Governors, school boards, education professionals, and families of
children with disabilities identify fully funding for special education
as their number-one priority. The American people have a right to ask
us, ``if not now, when?'' Six million American students with
disabilities have a right to a free and appropriate public education.
They deserve to participate in the American dream.
This issue will not go away and neither will I. I intend to do all I
can to make sure we keep our promise to fully fund the Federal share of
special education. As we proceed with new initiatives and requirements
for schools, let us also dedicate increased Federal funds to meeting
our existing obligations to children with disabilities, families, and
the State and local education agencies that serve them. I believe this
is the most important education issue before our Nation, and I will
continue to fight for it.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I strongly support the ``Helping Children
Success by Fully Funding the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act, IDEA, Act.'' This is a bi-partisan effort to help our states
provide a free and appropriate public education to children with
disabilities. As I've said time and again, disability is not a partisan
issue. We all share an interest in ensuring that children with
disabilities and their families get a fair shake in life.
Currently, the State Grant program within IDEA receives $6.34
billion. Estimates by the Congressional Research Service suggest that
the program needs to be funded at $17.1 billion for fiscal year 2002 to
meet the targets established in 1975. Our amendment would obligate
funding for IDEA annually in roughly $2.5 billion increments over the
next six years and would put us on track to meet our goal of 40 percent
funding.
In the early seventies, two landmark federal district court cases,
PARC v.
[[Page S1890]]
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and Mills v. Board of Education of the
District Court of Columbia, established that children with disabilities
have a constitutional right to a free appropriate public education. In
1975, in response to these cases, Congress enacted the Education of
Handicapped Children Act, EHA, the precursor to IDEA, to help states
meet their constitutional obligations.
Congress enacted PL 94-142 for two reasons. First, to establish a
consistent policy of what constitutes compliance with the equal
protection clause of the 14th amendment with respect to the education
of kids with disabilities. And, second, to help States meet their
Constitutional obligations through federal funding. The Supreme Court
reiterated this in Smith v. Robinson: ``EHA is a comprehensive scheme
set up by Congress to aid the states in complying with their
constitutional obligations to provide public education for handicapped
children.''
It is Congress' responsibility to help States provide children with
disabilities an education. That is why I strongly agree with the policy
of this bill and the infusion of more money into IDEA. As Senator
Jeffords has said before, this is a win-win for everyone. Students with
disabilities will be more likely to get the public education they have
a right to because school districts will have the capacity to provide
such an education, without cutting into their general education
budgets.
The Supreme Court's decision regarding Garret Frey of Cedar Rapids,
Iowa underscores the need for Congress to help school districts with
the financial costs of educating children with disabilities. While the
excess costs of educating some children with disabilities is minimal,
the excess costs of educating other children with disabilities, like
Garret, is great.
Just last week, I heard from the Cedar Rapids/Iowa City Chamber of
Commerce that more IDEA dollars will help them continue to deliver high
quality educational services to children in their school districts.
This bill would provide over $300 million additional dollars to Iowa
over the next six years. I've heard from parents in Iowa that their
kids need more qualified interpreters for deaf and hard of hearing
children and they need better mental health services and better
behavioral assessments. And the additional funds will help local and
area education agencies build capacity in these areas.
In 1975, IDEA authorized the maximum award per state as being the
number of children served times 40 percent of the national average per
pupil expenditure, known as the APPE. The formula does not guarantee 40
percent of national APPE per disabled child served; rather, it caps
IDEA allotments at 40 percent of national APPE. In other words, the 40
percent figure was a goal, not a commitment.
As the then ranking minority member on the House Ed and Labor
Committee, Rep. Albert Quie, explained: ``I do not know in the
subsequent years whether we will appropriate at those [authorized]
levels or not. I think what we are doing here is laying out the goal.
Ignoring other Federal priorities, we thought it acceptable if funding
reaches that level.''
One of the important points in the Congressman's statement is that we
cannot fund IDEA grant programs at the cost of other important federal
programs. That is why historically the highest appropriation for
special education funding was in FY79, when allocations represented
12.5 percent APPE.
Over the last six years, however, as Ranking Member on the Labor-H
Appropriations Subcommittee, I have worked with my colleagues across
the aisle to almost triple the IDEA appropriation so that we're now up
to almost 15 percent of the funding formula.
This bill would help us push that number to 40 percent without
cutting into general education programs.
We must redouble our efforts to help school districts meet their
constitutional obligations. And this increased funding will allow us to
increase dollars to every program under IDEA through appropriations.
Every program under IDEA must get adequate funds.
As I said, we can all agree that states should receive more money
under IDEA. I thank Senator Hagel, Senator Jeffords, Senator Kennedy
and Senator Dodd for their leadership on this issue. I encourage my
colleagues to join us in support of this bill.
____________________