Posted on 03/29/2002 11:07:41 AM PST by John Jorsett
California educators were finally rewarded for their lobbying efforts when the federal government sent $135 million to the state to reimburse school districts for money they've been forced to spend on federally mandated special education programs.
Educators were thrilled, but the celebration was brief. Upon receiving the money, Gov. Gray Davis chose not to pass it through to the school districts but rather decided to apply the funds to help ease the state's budget shortfall.
By usurping the money, some say Davis betrayed the education community, stole from the children of California, and broke faith with those who have trusted and supported him all these years.
This disappointing decision is particularly disheartening, because this governor has done so much in the past to champion California's public education system.
Over the years, educators have been pressuring national leaders to fund special education programs, which Congress began mandating in the 1970s. At the time, Congress promised to pay 40 percent of the costs.
Yet since then, the most the federal government has paid for these mandatory services has been 15 percent, forcing school districts to dip into their general funds for the difference. This has meant less money for regular education for all K-12 students and for daily instructional resources like textbooks, library books, supplies, equipment, field trips, and teacher aides.
Finally this year, Congress authorized an increase to states for special education programs, and California's share came to $135 million – still a fraction of actual costs but a significant chunk of change by anyone's standards. But educators were left to wring their hands in frustration, as they saw the money vanish under the governor's rearranged budget priorities.
Children with learning disabilities or other special needs have the unquestionable right to equal opportunity in education. No one would disagree with this.
However, the cost of providing these programs, many of which are extremely expensive, greatly exceeds the funding that state and federal governments give. And the programs, more and more each year, are mandated. Districts can be sued for not providing appropriate educational services for children with special needs.
Transportation for special education students is one of the services mandated by the state. In Del Mar, for example, the annual cost of transporting 28 special education students to and from school is $225,000, according to the superintendent. This comes to a staggering $8,035 per child per year.
The San Diego County Office of Education said that, this year, $615 million is being spent on special education programs and services for the 42 school districts in the county. The federal government pays back $34.6 million, and $275 million comes from state and local sources. This leaves an encroachment of $309 million that San Diego school districts must absorb.
School districts provide special education services willingly and feel they are worthwhile, but they'd like some help paying the bills. Although that $135 million was to be distributed to districts throughout the state, San Diego County's portion, however small, would surely have been welcomed by local school districts.
With this disreputable act, the long tradition of ignoring students with disabilities and taking their educational needs for granted continues. And when districts have to pay huge sums of money from their own general funds to support these costly, mandated programs, there's considerably less money for all the other students who do without. So their needs too are being disregarded.
By diverting federal money earmarked specifically for special education, Davis has committed a grave injustice to the education world, and he has broken an unwritten promise with the children of this state who count on him to be fair and honorable.
Return the money to the schools, governor, and restore faith.
Sometimes I do disagree with the 'special' opportunities given to those with 'special' needs; when it lowers the quality of education for the 'vast majority' of students.
VOTE SIMON!!!
Dan
Good campaign issue for Simon!
Special education children range from those with a learning disability to those with severe and profound disorders. Many, many of them can learn (and do learn) and will be contributing members of society.
I teach children with learning disabilities in a middle school and every year I have a half dozen or so enter a mainstream class--and experience success.
Yes, some of these children will need life-long care, but many will not. As far as the gifted/talented children being shortchanged--I don't see that in my district, if anyone gets shortchanged it's those considered to be "slow learners" Not smart enough to be learning disabled and too smart to be considered mentally retarded. That is the group with little to no services
It just annoys me to no end when people perpetuate the "cold-hearted conservative" stereotype on FR
.
.
And no I am not a member of a union.
That about covers it, except it probably went into his campaign fund.
I doubt you'll see so much as one word written by the major papers, and nothing reported by the electronic media.
One can only hope that Davis is finished. But if he wins, that only proves this state is hopeless. With as bad a candidate as Davis is, they might as well raise the red star over Sacramento if his smear campaign against Bill Simon succeeds.
I doubt that Ronald Reagan at his best could win in California these days.
The average per pupil cost of education is about $5,000 or so. The average cost of special education is $15,000 or so. So for the price of educating three people who will probably succeed, you're educating one person who most likely won't.
I often hear rhethoric such as "Education is an investment in our kids". That makes us less unhappy when we send our tax checks out around now; we're getting something for our money in terms of future generations. But if we're making large "investments" in people who will most likely fail, what we're really doing is selling out kids who have greater ability. As you said, the people who are worse off are those who don't qualify for special education, but aren't smart enough to do well.
The whole idea of spending this much money to help people who, in the aggregate, cannot be helped strikes me as an enormous waste of our "investments". What we really need from our "investment" is people who can read, write and do a sum or two. Nothing fancy, but from what I'm seeing, we're not getting it.
I certainly think we should try to get it before we put our "investments" in the people least likely to benefit from them.
D
Before you assume that special education children can't succede, remember, success looks different to different people. The kids I work with read/write at about a 4th grade level (these are middle schoolers) and their best case scenerio is probably a 7th grade level assuming they get some pretty good instruction in high school. (The reasons for their lack of ability in reading are as varied as the children. That is an entirely different thread though!) You would probably be appalled if your own child graduated with this level of literacy, but this is enough for them to be gainfully employed at some point. Are they going to be lawyers or doctors? Doubt it, but do we need a world of all professionals? Nope.
You say it costs more to educate them, and you are correct. I don't know the most current numbers; yours are probably low. However, any of these numbers will be a bit skewed however. Remember that special education runs the gamut from those in wheelchairs needing IV's, to deaf, blind, physically disabled, Down's syndrome, autistic, mentally retarded, and those just needing extra instruction in reading or math. Within the special education field, the severe/profound take up over 70% of the total funds allocated. The learning disabled (with which I work) generally take only a bit more than the average student.
So, we have a fact here, the severely and profoundly disabled, with IQ's of 40 or below take up a great deal of money. Some require more than $1,000,000 of instruction and care before they are 21. But what's the answer? Should they stay at home for their whole lives? Institutions? Should they not be allowed to live because they take up more than their share of resources? I don't have the answer and don't pretend to as I don't work with that population--I only work with learning disabled, emotionally disturbed, and autistic children.
Of course the severe/profound take tax payer dollars to care for during their whole lives, but what would it say about our society if we refused to give them the best we could?
I'll bet the soccor moms will flip over this ... and with everything else Davis has done. It's HIS fault we have such a serious budget crisis in the first place!
Go Simon!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.