[Page: S9259]---
Mr. SMITH of Oregon. Mr. President, I rise to make a few remarks concerning the IDEA Full Funding Act of 2000.
Mr. President, before I begin, I would like to take this opportunity to thank
[Page: S9260]
I rise today to lend my support to S. 2341, the IDEA Full Funding Act of 2000. One of my top priorities as a United States Senator has been to provide equal access to high quality public education for all children, including those with special needs. My commitment to education for those with special needs began while I was a State legislator and worked with the Oregon Disabilities Council to ensure that children with special needs had equal access to a quality education. I have continued that work here in the Senate, but realize that we have a long ways to go.
This legislation takes a step in the right direction by funding the federal mandates put forth in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). These federal funds will free up state and local dollars that can then be used in the classroom for new textbooks, pencils and computers that are necessary for students to learn.
In 1954, the Supreme Court established, in Brown v. Board of Education, that all children are guaranteed equal access to education under the 14th Amendment of the Constitution. Despite this decision, it was estimated that one million children with disabilities were being denied access to public education. It was not until 1975, with the passage of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, that equal access to education was extended to children with disabilities.
The purpose of the 1975 IDEA legislation was ``[T]o assure that all children with disabilities have available to them, a free appropriate public education which emphasizes special education and related services designed to meet the unique needs, to assure the rights of children with disabilities and their parents or guardians are protected, to assist States and localities to provide for the education of all children with disabilities, and to assess and assure the effectiveness of efforts to educate children with disabilities.''
With the passage of IDEA the federal government promised to assist states with 40 percent of the national average per pupil expenditure for disabled children. Based on the national average per pupil expenditure for the year 2000, 40 percent of that average would represent approximately $2,500 per student. However, since 1975 the federal government has not met this commitment. In fact, the federal government gets an ``F'' in arithmetic in this instance, currently paying only 12.7 percent of the per pupil expenditure.
But, we are slowly working to improve this grade. In 1997, funding for IDEA was only $2.6 billion. In the last 3 years, the Republican-controlled Congress has nearly doubled Federal funding on IDEA to approximately $4.9 billion. Although Congress has allocated more money to IDEA, current funding levels are 3.1 times less than what is needed to fully fund the forty percent commitment.
The purpose of providing this additional funding to the IDEA program is to free up local and state dollars. Currently state and local education agencies have been forced to divert their precious resources to pay for the additional costs, due to federal mandates, of educating children with disabilities.
As a result, Washington has created an inappropriate and unfair conflict between children with disabilities and children without. We owe it to all children to live up to our responsibility and resolve this conflict.
This important legislation would take a step in that direction by authorizing funding for Part B of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act to reach the Federal government's goal of providing 40 percent of the national average per pupil expenditure to assist states and local education agencies with the excess costs of educating children with disabilities.
By steadily working to increase IDEA funding to $2 billion each year annually until 2010, Congress would increase opportunity and flexibility for local school districts to fund the programs that they feel are best for their students, whether it be school construction, teacher training or smaller classrooms.
I was pleased to see that the House of Representatives passed similar legislation, H.R. 4055, on May 3, 2000 with a 421-3 vote. It is my hope that the Senate can follow the strong lead of the House and work for swift passage of this necessary legislation.
END