[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 13]
[House]
[Pages 19232-19237]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



 TWENTY-FIFTH ANNIVERSARY OF EDUCATION FOR ALL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN ACT

  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to 
the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 399) recognizing the 25th 
anniversary of the enactment of the Education for All Handicapped 
Children Act of 1975.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                            H. Con. Res. 399

       Whereas the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 
     1975 (Public Law 94-142) was signed into law 25 years ago on 
     November 29, 1975, and amended the State grant program under 
     part B of the Education of the Handicapped Act;
       Whereas the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 
     1975 established the Federal policy of ensuring that all 
     children, regardless of the nature or severity of their 
     disability, have available to them a free appropriate public 
     education in the least restrictive environment;
       Whereas the Education of the Handicapped Act was further 
     amended by the Education of the Handicapped Act Amendments of 
     1986 (Public Law 99-457) to create a preschool grant program 
     for children with disabilities 3 to 5 years of age and an 
     early intervention program for infants and toddlers with 
     disabilities from birth through age 2;
       Whereas the Education of the Handicapped Act Amendments of 
     1990 (Public Law 101-476) renamed the statute as the 
     Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA);
       Whereas IDEA currently serves an estimated 200,000 infants 
     and toddlers, 600,000 preschoolers, and 5,400,000 children 6 
     to 21 years of age;
       Whereas IDEA has assisted in a dramatic reduction in the 
     number of children with developmental disabilities who must 
     live in State institutions away from their families;
       Whereas the number of children with disabilities who 
     complete high school has grown significantly since the 
     enactment of IDEA;
       Whereas the number of children with disabilities who enroll 
     in college as freshmen has more than tripled since the 
     enactment of IDEA;
       Whereas IDEA has raised the Nation's expectations about the 
     abilities of children with disabilities by requiring access 
     to the general education curriculum;
       Whereas improvements to IDEA made in 1997 changed the focus 
     of a child's individualized education program from procedural 
     requirements placed upon teachers and related services 
     personnel to educational results for that child, thus 
     improving academic achievement;
       Whereas changes made in 1997 also addressed the need to 
     implement behavioral assessments and intervention strategies 
     for children whose behavior impedes learning to ensure that 
     they receive appropriate supports in order to receive a 
     quality education;
       Whereas IDEA ensures full partnership between parents of 
     children with disabilities and education professionals in the 
     design and implementation of the educational services 
     provided to children with disabilities;
       Whereas IDEA has supported the classrooms of this Nation by 
     providing Federal resources to the States and local schools 
     to help meet their obligation to educate all children with 
     disabilities;
       Whereas, while the Federal Government has not yet met its 
     commitment to fund part B of IDEA at 40 percent of the 
     average per pupil expenditure, it has made significant 
     increases in part B funding by increasing the

[[Page 19233]]

     appropriation by 115 percent since 1995, which is an increase 
     of over $2,600,000,000;
       Whereas the 1997 amendments to IDEA increased the amount of 
     Federal funds that have a direct impact on students through 
     improvements such as capping allowable State administrative 
     expenses, which ensures that nearly 99 percent of funding 
     increases directly reach local schools, and requiring 
     mediation upon request by parents in order to reduce costly 
     litigation;
       Whereas such amendments also ensured that students whose 
     schools cannot serve them appropriately and students who 
     choose to attend private, parochial, and charter schools have 
     greater access to free appropriate services outside of 
     traditional public schools;
       Whereas IDEA has supported, through its discretionary 
     programs, more than two decades of research, demonstration, 
     and training in effective practices for educating children 
     with disabilities, enabling teachers, related services 
     personnel, and administrators effectively to meet the 
     instructional needs of children with disabilities of all 
     ages;
       Whereas Federal and State governments can support effective 
     practices in the classroom to ensure appropriate and 
     effective services for children with disabilities; and
       Whereas IDEA has succeeded in marshalling the resources of 
     this Nation to implement the promise of full participation in 
     society of children with disabilities: Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 
     concurring), That the Congress--
       (1) recognizes the 25th anniversary of the enactment of the 
     Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975 (Public 
     Law 94-142);
       (2) acknowledges the many and varied contributions of 
     children with disabilities, their parents, teachers, related 
     services personnel, and administrators; and
       (3) reaffirms its support for the Individuals with 
     Disabilities Education Act so that all children with 
     disabilities have access to a free appropriate public 
     education.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Kildee) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling).


                             General Leave

  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks on House Concurrent Resolution 399.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania?
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Today, I am pleased to bring to the floor for consideration House 
Concurrent Resolution 399, which recognizes and honors the 25th 
anniversary of the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities 
Education Act on November 29, 1975. I am pleased so many of my 
colleagues from both sides of the aisle have joined me in cosponsoring 
the resolution.
  Since 1975, when Congress first authorized the original IDEA law, we 
have refined and improved the law several times. In 1990, the statute 
was named the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. As most 
everyone knows, this act assists States and local school districts with 
the excess costs of educating students with disabilities.
  In each reconsideration of the law, we have worked to ensure greater 
access to education for all students with disabilities. We also have 
worked increasingly to improve the quality of the education that 
children with disabilities receive. I am especially interested in 
quality education and am pleased by the progress that children with 
disabilities are making. For instance, children with disabilities are 
increasingly completing their high school education and embarking on 
postsecondary educations.
  I believe strongly in the goal of IDEA, that every child should have 
the opportunity to receive a quality education. I note that teachers 
and school administrators also support this goal. However, we all 
realize that schools need additional funds to make this goal a reality. 
To this end, I have consistently fought for increased funding for IDEA 
during my years in Congress.
  As a matter of fact, for the first 20 years in the minority, my 
colleague, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), and I were the 
only two who were seeking additional funding, yet we all realize what 
it means to the local school districts to go without that funding, that 
40 percent of the excess cost. That 40 percent is based on the per-
pupil cost to educate children nationwide, and 1 or 2 years ago that 
was $6,300, which means we should have been sending $2,500 plus 
dollars. Instead, local districts have had to make up the money because 
we have not done the job.
  This is why I kept saying to the President, like every other 
President, ``You do not need some new thing for a legacy; all you have 
to do is help me get this 40 percent, then the local districts could do 
everything they want to do because they would have the money to do it 
locally.''
  Just a couple of examples. We have New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, 
Miami, and Washington, D.C. If Los Angeles had been getting 40 percent, 
they would be getting an additional $118 million a year. If New York 
City were getting their 40 percent, they would get $170 million extra 
every year. Now, imagine what they could have done in all these years 
to reduce class size, if that is what they wanted to do; or to maintain 
their buildings or even build new buildings?
  These are big dollars we are talking about. Unfortunately, that did 
not happen. In fact, 2 years in a row the President sent budgets up to 
the Hill that actually cut the amount of money that would go to special 
ed. In the last 6 years, I am happy to show, and I am happy to show it 
because I have been chairman the last 6 years, but I am happy to show 
that we have doubled the amount of money that has gone back to local 
school districts, as my colleagues can see on this chart. On this chart 
we can see the President's request is in yellow and what the Congress 
has done is in red. So we have been able to double that funding, which 
means so much to that local school district.
  We still have other work to do in relationship to having a perfect 
IDEA, if there is such a thing as perfect. In our 1997 amendments, we 
focused the law on the quality education a child with disabilities is 
to receive rather than upon process and bureaucracy; gave parents 
greater input in determining the best education for their child; and 
gave teachers the tools they need to teach all children well.
  For instance, these amendments, the Individualized Education Program, 
is developed with the general curriculum in mind; and students with 
disabilities are taking district and State-wide assessments in greater 
numbers. Both of these improvements mean children with disabilities 
will receive a higher quality education.

                              {time}  1415

  We decreased the amount of paperwork required of teachers so that 
they have more time to spend with their students. We also dealt 
somewhat with the discipline problem.
  So I am happy to say that, on this anniversary, we are now moving in 
the right direction both in how we present the program and also in the 
amount of funding that we are providing, getting closer to that 40 
percent based on the per-pupil expenditure in each district.
  I am also happy to say that during the first 20 years, as I 
indicated, there were only the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) and 
myself preaching, I thought, to the choir; but we were not preaching to 
the choir. I guess we were preaching to the heathen, as a matter of 
fact. But I am happy to say, in the last 6 years, we have people coming 
out of the woodwork on all sides of the aisle to get this money.
  Why? Because I imagine they are hearing from their local school 
districts what a burden this is to a local school district to try to 
meet our mandate. It is not actually a mandate. However, if they do not 
provide a quality education to all children with disabilities, they are 
going to be in real trouble. So naturally they are going to take the 
Federal program because they hope they are going to get some Federal 
support.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I join the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman 
Goodling) in urging support for H. Con. Res.

[[Page 19234]]

399. I want to commend the chairman for bringing this legislation 
before the House today.
  Several years ago when we both sat on the Committee on the Budget, 
the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Goodling) and I had the 
courage to voice support for full funding of IDEA. We were pretty 
lonely voices in those days, but we worked very closely together.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) is one of 
the very best friends I have here in the Congress of the United States. 
For several years, I was his chairman on the subcommittee. But in 1994, 
I discovered at about 2 in the morning that, for the first time in 40 
years, the Republicans had taken control of the Congress of the United 
States. And I was a survivor, but I was a survivor in Cornwallis' army 
rather than in Washington's army. And I realized that the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) now was going to be my chairman and 
not of a subcommittee, he was going to be my chairman of the full 
committee, of the full Committee on Education and Labor.
  So I thought I should give him a call. I called him at 7 o'clock in 
the morning. And one never calls a politician at 7 o'clock in the 
morning the day after the election because we are pretty well wiped out 
from the day before and the night before. But I knew he would be up 
because the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) is a farmer and 
he would be up. So I called him at 7 o'clock in the morning. He 
answered the phone at his home in York, Pennsylvania. I did not 
identify myself. I said, ``Mr. Chairman.'' And he responded, ``How 
sweet it is.'' And it was sweet. And I have enjoyed working with him as 
a member of the committee and he as chairman.
  Despite opposition to our early efforts, we have doggedly pursued 
this goal together; and it has been a joy working with him.
  While I am aware that IDEA is presently set to receive a $1.3 billion 
increase for the coming fiscal year, it is my hope that in the 
remaining days of this Congress that we can meet the goal of a $2 
billion increase that the House established for the passage of the 
Goodling bill, H.R. 4055.
  Clearly, the educational needs of children with disabilities and 
their access to a free, appropriate public education is a critical 
issue in ensuring that they become productive members of our society.
  The work that we have done on IDEA in the past few years, Mr. 
Speaker, and the work that we will do in the coming Congresses has been 
so crucial to ensuring that children with disabilities receive the 
education to which they are entitled.
  All of these efforts started with the passage of Public Law 94-142 on 
November 29, 1975. Prior to the passage of the Education for All 
Handicapped Children Act, IDEA's predecessor statute, millions of 
disabled children received substandard education or no education at 
all. Some were refused admission into our public schools.
  After the passage of 94-142, disabled children were literally brought 
out of the closets and educated in regular classrooms.
  Many individuals have had a role in creating and improving IDEA. I 
want to especially thank and recognize the parents and advocates of 
disabled children, for without their tireless efforts, we would not be 
where we are today.
  As a matter of fact, when Michigan passed its Education for the 
Handicapped, it was passed only because of the advocacy of parents; and 
their advocacy has persisted to this day. This resolution is a fitting 
tribute to their many years of work.
  In closing, I want to urge Members to support this bipartisan 
legislation and again commend my very, very dear friend, the gentleman 
from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), for constantly, constantly bringing 
this issue before us.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Upton), a very important member of the committee.
  Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I know that my good friend, the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), and the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Chairman Goodling), I was part of that choir that they were preaching 
to. They had me convinced early on that this bill and funding for IDEA 
was certainly the right way to go, particularly as I talked to my local 
school districts, parents, and families back home.
  This bill, H. Con. Res. 399, recognizes and honors the 25th 
anniversary of the passage of IDEA. We strongly believe, everyone I 
think in this Chamber believes strongly, in the goal of IDEA that every 
child, every child, should have the opportunity to receive a quality 
education. We have worked hard to ensure greater access to education 
for all students with disabilities. We have also worked increasingly to 
improve the quality of the education that children with disabilities 
receive.
  Over the last 4 fiscal years, IDEA has seen a dramatic increase of 
$2.6 billion. That is 115 percent increase in the Federal contribution. 
Prior to that, the Federal contribution was only 7 percent.
  Now, in fact, the Federal Government contributes 13 percent of the 
average per-pupil expenditure to assist with the excess cost of 
educating a child with a disability. A lot of us would like to see that 
be increased even beyond 13 percent and get quite a bit closer to the 
original goal, which is 30 or 40 percent.
  During this Congress, the House passed H. Con. Res. 84, the IDEA 
full-funding resolution that passed 413-2. The resolution stated that 
IDEA is the highest priority among Federal elementary and secondary 
education programs and that, in fact, it should provide full funding to 
school districts as originally promised by the Congress.
  The House also passed H.R. 4055, the IDEA Full Funding Act of 2000, 
by a vote 421-3. This provides an authorization scheduled for reaching 
the Federal mandate to assist States and local school districts with 
the excess costs of educating children with disabilities. This bill 
sets a schedule for meeting the Federal Government's IDEA funding 
commitment within an achievable time frame.
  In the last Congress, we completed the reauthorization of IDEA. The 
amendments of 1997 brought many improvements to the education that 
children with disabilities receive. It focused on three things. It 
focused the law on the education to a child it is to receive rather 
than upon process and bureaucracy. Amendments gave parents greater 
input in determining the best education for their children by boosting 
the role of their parents; and they gave the teachers the tools that 
they need to teach all children well by reducing the amount of 
paperwork expected of teachers so that now they will have more time to 
spend with the students.
  This is important legislation. It is an important program, and the 
Congress should step up to the plate to help our local schools deal 
with the pressing need that continues to grow in all of our 
congressional districts.
  Again, I compliment Members on both sides of the aisle, particularly 
the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Goodling), for getting this 
bill to the floor; and I look forward to its passage.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Burr) who apparently took one of our basketball 
prospects from the University of Maryland over the weekend, I am sorry 
to say.
  Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for 
yielding me the time. And to steal a recruit from Maryland is an easy 
thing for those of us in North Carolina.
  Mr. Speaker, I was not here 25 years ago; but our good chairman, the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), was. Under his leadership, 
his commitment, and his determination, he has helped shape education 
policy for the better. He has been a teacher, a principal, a 
superintendent. We are lucky to have him fighting not just for disabled 
children but for all children.
  Here we are today celebrating the enactment of the Education for All 
Handicapped Children Act, otherwise known as the Individuals With 
Disabilities Education Act, IDEA. As a result,

[[Page 19235]]

we have more children with disabilities graduating from high school and 
at least three times the students with disabilities entering college.
  When I read over the committee's report and floor proceedings from 
the 94th Congress for this legislation, I realized that this bill laid 
a foundation for the proper relationship between States and the Federal 
Government on the subject of education. Clearly, the right to a free 
public education is basic to equal opportunity and is vital to secure 
the future and prosperity of our people. The failure to provide this 
right was criminal and, thankfully, was corrected 25 years ago.
  As we turn to the future, we must fulfill our commitment not just to 
the States but ultimately to the children. We must not simply vote to 
fully fund IDEA, but we must make sure that the money gets there.
  We have increased funding for this program 115 percent since 1995, 
well over $2.6 billion. However, we can do better. We should be funding 
40 percent of the average per-pupil expenditure to the State and not a 
penny less.
  As leaders of this Nation, we expect so much from our teachers, our 
administrators, and our children. It is their turn to expect no less of 
us. We cannot let them down.
  As we celebrate the 25th anniversary of this landmark legislation, we 
must remember its intent and continue to press for full funding.
  Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman 
Goodling) for his dedication, for his focus, for his commitment not 
just to disabled children but to all children.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Nevada (Mr. Gibbons).
  Mr. GIBBONS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for yielding me the 
time.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate and commend the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Chairman Goodling) and the ranking minority member, the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), for their hard work on this very 
important part of our children's education.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in proud support today of H. Con. Res. 399, to 
recognize the 25th anniversary of the Education for All Handicapped 
Children Act, later renamed the Individuals With Disabilities Education 
Act, or IDEA.
  This law currently benefits 200,000 infants and toddlers, as well as 
600,000 preschoolers and over 5.4 million school-aged children in the 
United States.
  Mr. Speaker, these numbers are indeed impressive, but we must do 
more. We must look beyond these numbers to see how IDEA has improved 
and enriched education in America. IDEA has enabled millions of 
students with disabilities to stay in public school and receive a 
quality education. These students have the opportunity to learn and 
interact with other children in the classroom and on the playground. 
And these same children grow up and enroll in college and graduate 
programs, fully recognizing and realizing their potential and making a 
real difference in their communities and families.
  IDEA has also united parents, teachers, and school administrators who 
work together to develop quality education programs that fully meet the 
needs of every child. IDEA provides the funds for these accomplishments 
to occur every day in every school across this country.
  Mr. Speaker, as we celebrate this 25th anniversary, it is my hope 
that we can continue our work to fully fund IDEA so that millions more 
children will have the opportunity to receive the same quality public 
education.

                              {time}  1430

  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, we have come a long, long way in the last 6 years toward 
meeting that goal of helping to fund special education back in the 
local school districts. Now that the ball is rolling, I will not be 
here but I hope those Members who will will keep that ball rolling so 
that we can get an extra $95 million to Los Angeles each year, an extra 
$76 million to Chicago, an extra $170 million to New York City, an 
extra $16 million to Dallas, an extra $23 million to Houston, an extra 
$8 million to San Antonio, an extra $5 million to Fort Worth, an extra 
$13 million to Tallahassee, an extra $30 million to Jacksonville, an 
extra $26 million to Orlando, an extra $29 million to Tampa, an extra 
$12 million to Washington, D.C., an extra $8 million to St. Louis, and 
yes, an extra $1 million to the little city of York of 49,000 people.
  My colleagues have a big job ahead of them; and I know that those who 
will be left behind, I do not know whether that is being left behind 
because they are still here or not but those of them who will remain in 
the Congress have a big job to make sure that we get to that 40 
percent.
  All of those who spoke today, I would encourage them to lead that 
fight. It will be the greatest thing they can do, bar none, to help a 
local school district.
  Mr. LANTOS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to join my colleagues in 
honoring the 25th anniversary of the enactment of the Education for All 
Handicapped Children Act. This legislation was a great achievement in 
the fight for equality of education for all American children. For too 
long, children with special educational needs were neglected, ignored, 
or even confined to institutions. Congress made necessary and 
appropriate revisions to the law in 1997, renaming it the Individuals 
with Disabilities Education Act or IDEA. These amendments to the law 
kept the spirit of the original Education for All Handicapped Children 
Act, by reaffirming that handicapped and special needs children have 
the opportunity to the free public education that is available to other 
American children.
  Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, Congress has not lived up to its end of 
the agreement to provide an important part of the funds necessary to 
carry out the provisions of the legislation. As you know, Mr. Speaker, 
on May 2nd of this year, the House overwhelmingly adopted H.R. 4055, 
which authorized Congressional appropriators to increase fiscal year 
2001 funding for IDEA by two billion dollars, and to continue to 
increase the funding for IDEA in each subsequent year until the year 
2010 when the federal government should fund IDEA at 40% of the cost of 
the program. As you are aware, this is level of funding that is 
required by the 1997 revisions to the Education for All Handicapped 
Children Act.
  Sadly, Mr. Speaker, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle have 
ignored the overwhelming support for meeting the federal obligation set 
under IDEA and instead offered a lower amount in the appropriations 
legislation being considered this year. The budgets of our school 
districts are being decimated because Congress is not funding IDEA at 
the mandated level. In California the budget gap state-wide is 
estimated to be 1.2 billion dollars. The San Mateo County School 
district has had to cover the 19 million dollars that full IDEA funding 
would have provided.
  Mr. Speaker, I cannot fathom why Congress would want to make local 
school districts chose between education children with special needs or 
eliminating music and art programs, yet this is the path we are 
following. I urge my colleagues who are working on the Labor, Health 
and Human Services appropriations legislation to accept the funding 
levels established in H.R. 4055 and add the necessary 2 billion dollars 
to IDEA funding this year, and to ensure that IDEA is funded at the 
mandated level by 2010.
  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, as a long-time supporter of fulfilling the 
Federal Government's commitment to fund the Individuals with 
Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) at 40 percent, this Member rises in 
strong support of H. Con. Res. 399, recognizing the 25th Anniversary of 
the enactment of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 
1975.
  According to the Committee for Education Funding, before enactment of 
the Education for All Handicapped Children Act into law, more than one 
million children with disabilities were denied an education in 
America's public schools. This law incorporated all levels of 
government to ensure that children with disabilities had access to a 
``free appropriate public education'' that requires special education 
and related services. Currently, more than 6.2 million children, ages 
3-21, with disabilities ranging from speech and language impediments to 
emotional disturbances, have benefitted from these services.
  Within the State Grant Program of the IDEA, approximately $240 
million is sent to 407 Nebraska school districts or approved 
cooperatives that serve children with disabilities, ages birth to five 
years. About $4.3 million supports discretionary projects to help meet 
IDEA requirements for children with disabilities, ages birth to 21 
years, and approximately $800,000

[[Page 19236]]

is available for school improvement projects. In the 1999-2000 school 
year alone, 43,531 children and youth in the State of Nebraska 
benefitted from the IDEA State Grant program.
  Mr. Speaker, while this improvement is good news, this Member will 
continue full funding of the Federal Government's forth percent 
commitment to IDEA. Meeting the IDEA requirements set by Congress 25 
years ago will provide relief to our local school districts and will 
ensure the continued success of IDEA and its goal of creating 
productive members of society within the disability community.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise today as 
cosponsor and supporter of H. Con. Res. 399, which recognizes the 25th 
anniversary of the Education for All Handicapped Children Act, now know 
as the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA.
  When the Education for All handicapped Children Act was first signed 
into law on November 29, 1975, it marked an historic milestone for 
children with disabilities. For the first time, special needs children 
were guaranteed access to a free and appropriate education.
  Unfortunately, since this legislation was first signed into law, the 
Federal government has been remiss in paying for its full share of the 
costs associated with educating special needs children. The original 
act set forth a framework whereby 40 percent of the average costs of 
educating a special needs child would be paid by the Federal 
government. To date, that level has never been reached. As a result, 
state and local school districts have been forced to divert money from 
other needed services, including school construction and teacher 
training, to pay for the government's share of IDEA.
  Congress, over the past six years, has done incredible work to 
provide additional funding for IDEA over and above the Administration's 
requested level, doubling the amount of money the Federal government is 
providing to state and local school districts to pay for the costs 
associated with this program. Unfortunately, the funding still falls 
short of the 40 percent the Federal government committed to paying for 
IDEA.
  I am pleased that the House of Representatives passed H.R. 4055, the 
IDEA Full Funding Act, earlier this year. However, despite the 
importance of fully funding our obligation under IDEA, H.R. 4055 is 
still pending in the Senate.
  I would hope that my colleagues in the other body will take the 
opportunity of the 25th Anniversary of this critical education program 
to pass H.R. 4055, and once and for all meet the Federal government's 
funding obligation to IDEA.
  I thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Goodling, for 
introducing this legislation, and for all his hard work toward ensuring 
the Federal government honors its commitment to special needs children. 
I urge my colleagues to support this bill.
  Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to explain why I 
must oppose H. Con. Res. 399, which celebrates the 25th Anniversary of 
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). My opposition 
to H. Con. Res. 399 is based on the simple fact that there is a better 
way to achieve the laudable goal of educating children with 
disabilities than through an unconstitutional program and thrusts 
children, parents, and schools into an administrative quagmire. Under 
the IDEA law celebrated by this resolution, parents and schools often 
become advisories and important decisions regarding a child's future 
are made via litigation. I have received complaints from a special 
education administrator in my district that unscrupulous trial lawyers 
are manipulating the IDEA process to line their pockets at the expenses 
of local school districts. Of course, every dollar a local school 
district has to spend on litigation is a dollar the district cannot 
spend educating children.
  IDEA may also force local schools to deny children access to the 
education that best suits their unique needs in order to fulfill the 
federal command that disabled children be educated ``in the least 
restrictive setting,'' which in practice means mainstreaming. Many 
children may thrive in a mainstream classroom environment, however, 
some children may be mainstreamed solely because school officials 
believe it is required by federal law, even though the mainstream 
environment is not the most appropriate for that child.
  On May 10, 1994, Dr. Mary Wagner testified before the Education 
Committee that disabled children who are not placed in a mainstream 
classroom graduate from high school at a much higher rate than disabled 
children who are mainstreamed. Dr. Wagner quite properly accused 
Congress of sacrificing children to ideology.
  IDEA also provides school personal with incentives to over-identify 
children as learning disabled, thus unfairly stigmatizing many children 
and, in a vicious cycle, leading to more demands for increased federal 
spending on IDEA also IDEA encourages the use of the dangerous drug 
Retalin for the purpose of getting education subsidies. Instead of 
celebrating and increasing spending on a federal program that may 
actually damage the children it claims to help, Congress should return 
control over education to those who best know the child's needs: 
parents. In order to restore parental control to education, I have 
introduced the Family Education Freedom Act (HR 935), which provides 
parents with a $3,000 per child tax credit to pay for K-12 education 
expenses. My tax credit would be of greatest benefit to parents of 
children with learning disabilities because it would allow them to 
devote more of their resources to ensure their children get an 
education that meets the child's unique needs.
  In conclusion, I would remind my colleagues that parents and local 
communities know their children so much better than any federal 
bureaucrat, and they can do a better job of meeting a child's needs 
than we in Washington. There is no way that my grandchildren, and some 
young boy or girl in Los Angeles, CA or New York City can be educated 
by some sort of ``Cookie Cutter'' approach. Thus, the best means of 
helping disabled children is to empower their parents with the 
resources to make sure their children receives an education suited to 
that child's special needs, instead of an education that scarifies that 
child's best interest on the altar of the ``Washington-knows-best'' 
ideology.
  I therefore urge my colleagues to join with me in helping parents of 
special needs children provide their children with a quality education 
that meets the child's needs by repealing federal mandates that divert 
resources away from helping children and, instead, embrace my Family 
Education Freedom Act.
  Mrs. KELLY. Mr. Speaker, in anticipation of the 25th Anniversary of 
the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, I rise today to urge 
my colleagues to join with me in acknowledging the good this program 
has done for our children and their future.
  Almost twenty-five years ago, Congress passed the Education for All 
Handicapped Children Act. This landmark legislation established the 
federal policy of ensuring that all children, regardless of nature or 
severity of their disability, have the right to a free appropriate 
public education in the least restrictive environment. Throughout the 
years, Congress has seen fit to update this legislation, first to 
create a preschool grant program and an early intervention program to 
serve the needs of children starting at birth and going through the age 
of five. Since 1990, this program has been known as the Individuals 
with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). Improvements made to IDEA in 
1997 changed the focus of the educational process of disabled children 
from the procedural requirements to individualized education programs 
to better serve our children. In 1997, we also implemented behavioral 
and intervention strategies for those children whose behavior impedes 
the learning process.
  Today, IDEA serves approximately 200,000 infants and toddlers, 
600,000 preschoolers, and 5,400,000 children from 6 to 21 years old. It 
is through efforts of this program that we have seen a substantial 
increase in the numbers of disabled students graduate high school, and 
the number of disabled students who enroll in college.
  However, much still needs to be done to make this program reach its 
potential. Almost twenty-five years after its enactment, this program 
is only being funded at 13% of the federal share. Originally Congress 
committed itself to covering 40% of the costs of this program. Since 
1995, the funding for this program has increased by almost 115%, which 
is an increase of over $2.6 billion. Yet, even after this sustained 
funding increase, this program is still grossly underfunded.
  When I arrived in Congress in 1995, I began working with Chairman 
Goodling to fight for increased funding for this program. Throughout 
the past six years, full funding for this program has remained one of 
my top education priorities. If the federal government fully funded its 
share of the costs of this program, my own state of New York would have 
received $1.087 billion for fiscal year 2000, instead of the $344.3 
million it did get. Fully funding our part would help to ease the 
burdens on our local taxpayers who bear the brunt of education costs.
  Mr. Speaker, I greatly appreciate the opportunity to have worked with 
Chairman Goodling over the past several years. His commitment to 
education is clear through his long history as a school teacher, 
principal and superintendent and his efforts on behalf of our children 
and our nation will not soon be forgotten.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this resolution and 
continue to make full

[[Page 19237]]

funding of IDEA a priority in the future. Our children deserve no less.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) that the 
House suspend the rules and agree to the concurrent resolution, House 
Concurrent Resolution 399.
  The question was taken.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________