THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO
Next Hit Forward Next Document New CR Search
Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help
Doc Contents
Mr. WELDON of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I rise today as an original cosponsor of H. Con. Res. 84 which would make fully funding special education on e of the highest priorities in the Federal elementary and secondary education fu nding. It is imperative that we meet the objective of paying the 40 percent of the average per pupil expenses associated with educating ch ildren with disabilities.
[Page: H2569] GPO's PDF
I encourage all my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to not only support this resolution but as well to vote for the funding when we do the appropriations bills.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Illinois (Mrs. BIGGERT).
Mrs. BIGGERT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution of the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman GOODLING).
In 1975, IDEA, which mandated every child, regardless of disability, w ould be given a free public education, C ongress promised to fund up to 40 percent of the cost. Mr. Speaker, Congress and the President have not kept their part of the bargain. Today we fund 12 percent of the cost to educate ch ildren. Twelve percent is not 40 percent. Twelve percent is not enough.
Mr. Speaker, there are those who would say that increased IDEA funding will come at the expense of other high-priority programs, but if we in Congress fulfill our promise by picking up the slack, these other educational priorities will be funded on the local level, where they belong. Illinois alone would receive four times more than the $103 million we received last year.
I urge Members to support the resolution on behalf all of our Nation's children.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
The beauty of this resolution is, there are several, as a matter of fact. First of all, the resolution says that we do not take money from existing programs to fund this program. We heard a lot about how we will take money from existing programs to fund this. Well, if one reads the resolution, it does not do that.
Secondly, the resolution does not say fund immediately. What it says is, continue the drive that we have had the last 3 years. Forget the 20 years prior to that, where nothing was done, but continue the drive that we have had going the last 3 years, getting two billion over the last 3 years.
Then the beauty also is we do not pit one child against another child. As a matter of fact, by trying to get this money for special ed, we make sure that we take away that battle that is going on out there at the present time because the local districts have to use their money in order to fund special ed. They must take it away from other students. So we are giving an opportunity to help all students.
Yes, we are sending a get-well card, the same get-well card we sent last year; and that get-well card got us a half a billion dollars. The same get-well card we sent the year before, that get-well card got us $600 million. I am hoping that this get-well card, when the appropriators read it, will also get us another billion.
I would say that is a pretty good investment in a get-well card. I wish I could get some other get-well cards going out there that could get those kinds of returns that our get-well cards have gotten us in the last several years.
I want to make sure that everybody understands, yes, it was the Court who determined all children deserved an equal and a quality education. I t was the Federal Government then who came along, as they generally do, and said, do it our way, do it our way, and we will give you 40 percent of that excess cost.
How attractive that is. Forty percent, that is better than trying to go it alone, but they should have known better. They should have known that that 40 percent was just a gimmick. It was not anything else.
Now, in the last 3 years we have changed all of that, and we are going to continue to change all of that because we are going to step up to the plate as we have the last 3 years and put our money where our mouth was and help all children by helping local districts fund special education.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to express my opposition to H. Con. Res. 84, the resolution calling for full-funding of the Individuals wi th Disabilities Ac t (I DEA). My opposition to this act sh ould in no way be interpreted as opposition to increased spending on education. H owever, the way to accomplish this worthy goal is to allow parents greater control over education re sources by cutting taxes, thus allowing parents to devote more of their resources to educating th eir children in such a manner as they see fit. Massive tax cuts for the American family, not increased spending on federal programs should be this Congress' top priority.
The drafters of this bill claim that increasing federal spending on IDEA will allow local school districts to spend more money on other educational priorities. However, because an increase in federal funding will come from the same taxpayers who currently fund the IDEA mandate at the state and local level, increasing federal IDEA funding will not necessarily result in a net increase of education fu nds available for other programs. In fact, the only way to combine full federal funding of IDEA with an increase in expenditures on other programs by state and localities is through massive tax increases at the federal, state, and/or local level!
This bill further assures that control over the education do llar will remain centered in Washington by calling for Congress to ``meet the commitment to fund existing Federal education pr ograms.'' Thus, this bill not only calls on Congress to increase funding for IDEA, it also calls on Congress to not cut funds for any program favored by Congress. The practical effect of this bill is to place yet another obstacle in the road of fulfilling Congress' constitutional mandate to put control of education b ack into the hands of the people.
Rather than increasing federal spending, Congress should focus on returning control over education to the American people by enacting the Family Education Fr eedom Act (H .R. 935), which provides parents with a $3,000 per child tax credit to pay for K-12 education ex penses. Passage of this act wo uld especially benefit parents whose children have learning disabilities as those parents have the greatest need to devote a large portion of their income toward their child's education. < p> The Family Education Fr eedom Act wi ll allow parents to develop an individualized ed ucation pl an that will meet the needs of their own child. Each child is a unique person and we must seriously consider whether disabled ch ildren's special needs can be best met by parents, working with local educators, f ree from interference from Washington or federal educrats. After all, an increase in expenditures cannot make a Washington bureaucrat know or love a child as much as that child's parent.
It is time for Congress to restore control over education to the American people. The only way to accomplish this goal is to defund education pr ograms that allow federal bureaucrats to control America's schools. Therefore, I call on my colleagues to reject H. Con. Res. 84 and instead join my efforts to pass the Family Education Fr eedom Act. I f Congress gets Washington off the backs and out of the pocketbooks of parents, American children will be better off.
Mrs. FOWLER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of this resolution urging Congress, and the President, to fully fund the Federal Government's obligation under the Individuals wi th Disabilities Ed ucation Ac t. < p> In 1975 the Federal Government committed to provide 40 percent funding aid for the mandate to educate th ose students with disabilities. A s most of my colleagues know, federal funding for IDEA has never risen above 12 percent.
On average, local school districts currently spend 20 percent of their budgets on special education se rvices. Once the Federal government begins to pay its fair share, local funds will be freed up, allowing local schools to hire and train additional high-quality teachers, reduce class size, build and renovate classrooms and invest in technology.
In my district, the Duval County School District receives about $7 million. If IDEA were fully funded, this school district would receive over $37 million, an increase of over $30 million.
It is time for us to send a clear message that the Federal government must honor our commitments to help our state and local school districts educate ch ildren with disabilities. < p> I urge my colleagues to support this important resolution.
Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Individuals wi th Disabilities Ed ucation Ac t. < p> When special education le gislation was first enacted in 1975, the federal government, recognizing the extraordinary costs of inclusion, pledged to provide state and local education ag encies with forty percent of the excess costs associated with educating st udents with disabilities. < p> Sadly, the federal government has not come close to meeting this obligation, with annual appropriations never exceeding twelve percent of excess costs.
The chronic underpayment of this federal mandate has left state and local governments with a burden of more than $146 billion in lost funding over the past twenty-two years--a staggering shortfall that has forced education ag encies to shift resources our of lower-priority, but important necessities such as building maintenance and upkeep.
[Page: H2570] GPO's PDF
Special education de partments end up eating large portions of local and state school budgets, which creates a competitive relationship between regular and special education, a s they vie for the same scarce funds. This situation is not the fault of school districts, but a direct result of Congress's inadequate funding of IDEA.
Special education ha s received a billion dollar increase over the past two years. Yet even with this substantial increase, funding is still substantially below Congress's 40 percent promise. This means that states and districts will continue to be unfairly burdened by these excess costs.
Congress is simply being unfair to our local school districts by not living up to our end of this bargain and we are taking needed resources away from regular education. < p> I hope the Congress will live up to its obligation, and fully fund IDEA. If we do not, all students across this country will suffer.
Mr. CLAY. Mr. Speaker, H. Con. Res. 84 calls for increased funding for IDEA at the expense of initiatives like the Clinton/Clay Class Size Reduction Act. W hile I support increased funding for IDEA, we should not be robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Achieving the goal of 100,000 new teachers will ensure that every child receives personal attention, gets a solid foundation for further learning, and is prepared to read by the end of the third grade.
I am disappointed that the Republicans have continued their attempt to torpedo this critical program. On the Ed-Flex bill, Republicans tried to raid class size funds for other programs. We should never pit one program against another--we should support overall increases in education sp ending.
I believe that reducing class sizes with well-qualified teachers is the single most significant action we can take to enhance student achievement.
We should increase funding for IDEA, but not at the expense of class size reduction.
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this resolution to fully fund the Individuals wi th Disabilities Ed ucation Ac t (I DEA).
IDEA ensures that all children with disabilities re ceive a free appropriate public education. P rior to IDEA, 2 million children were excluded from receiving their right to a public education. A nother 2.5 million children received an inadequate education. < p> IDEA has served as a civil rights initiative for our Nation's children for more than 22 years.
Fully funding this educational program is important to the millions of learning disabled st udents in our districts across the country. It is important to our communities that benefit from the achievement level of all these students.
IDEA is another example of how government support of an educational program provides the foundation for states and local educational agencies to work together. Funding this initiative for the sake of our children is important for the future success of our schools and communities.
In addition to fully funding IDEA, Congress should also better fund other educational programs that are seriously underfunded. For example, consider Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSI's).
We have charged these institutions with ensuring the academic success of the Hispanic students that are at their institutions. Similar to IDEA, these institutions cannot fulfill their duty to the students and the community at large without adequate funding.
The funding of IDEA is critical along with the funding of all our education pr ograms that aim to serve every child that has the right to fair, and equitable access to a quality education.
Ms. ESHOO. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to highlight one of the most important issues for our nation: educating ou r young people. Everyone agrees that a good education is critical for the future success of our children, and yet are not providing the financial resources that make this possible. This is especially true for the education of children with disabilities. < p> School districts are struggling with how to provide the best education po ssible for all children within often very tightly constrained budgets. I applaud their efforts. In many cases, however, school districts can not reduce class sizes, build needed schools, or hire new teachers while still providing the services so important to students with disabilities. I n my home state of California, over 600,000 students receive special education an d related services in public schools at a reported cost of $3.4 billion. Without federal assistance, local school districts are forced to use their general funds to the detriment of other programs.
This is not to say that the IDEA hasn't been successful. It has. By providing children with disabilities wi th the same educational opportunities as their abled peers, we now have a system supporting happier and more productive adults. According to the Department of Education, d isabled yo ung people are three times more likely today to attend college than prior to 1975 and twice as many of today's twenty-year olds with disabilities ar e working. But we must do more to make sure there are more success stories than setbacks.
I applaud my friends on the other side of the aisle for bringing to the floor House Concurrent Resolution 84, which urges the Congress and the President to fully fund the federal Government's obligation under IDEA. This must be more than just words in a Resolution though. I call upon this Congress, this year, to fulfill its pledge for full funding of IDEA. It is time that the federal government make good on its obligation to the school districts and our children across the country.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. SHIMKUS). 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, H. Con. Res. 84, as amended.
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.
THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT THIS CR ISSUE GO TO
Next Hit Forward Next Document New CR Search
Prev Hit Back Prev Document HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Daily Digest Help
Doc Contents