Racial Inequity in Special Education

Foreword
by Senator James M. Jeffords

I was a freshman member of Congress in 1975, one of only seventeen Republicans elected to the House of Representatives in the wake of Watergate. As such, I was named the ranking Republican on the Select Education Subcommittee and charged with helping to write what would later become the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

As you will learn from reading Racial Inequity in Special Education, the benefits of special education are not always extended equally to students with disabilities, despite the best intentions of the law. These alarming disparities suggest that we need to do better. We must do better.

I commend the authors for taking a hard look at this subject. This book provides important direction, for those of us in Congress and for those in our schools. The authors show us where we need to do better to ensure equal educational opportunities for all of our students, whatever their race or socioeconomic status. Where school leadership fails to address those issues that have an adverse impact on children of color and children with disabilities, we must bolster our efforts to protect every child’s civil rights.

There is no doubt that successfully addressing the issues raised in this book, particularly as they relate to children of color, will require an infusion of funding for higher quality teaching in both general and special education, early intervention, increased training for school administrators and teachers, and greater access to effective special education supports and services in the least restrictive environment. We must also ensure that even the highest poverty school districts have the means necessary to provide the free appropriate public education that all children with disabilities are entitled to.

I see this as part of a larger issue—to get adequate resources properly targeted for all children who need them. When the initial special education legislation was being drafted in 1975, twenty-six federal court decisions had been consolidated to make the case that children with disabilities had a constitutional right to receive a free and appropriate education. We had to see that this was enforced, and it was not an easy task. As we labored over the details, those of us who worked on the bill agreed that this was a difficult but extremely important step.

We knew it would be costly, and we all believed that since it was a federal constitutional guarantee, the federal government should bear a good portion of the cost. In the end, we agreed that 40 percent of the additional costs of special education would be paid by the federal government.

We have seen much progress since we passed the initial legislation. Children with disabilities are now being educated alongside their peers in unprecedented numbers. We have shown that education helps these children lead more independent and fulfilling lives. We have learned that investing in special education enriches society as a whole.

But we have fallen woefully short on our funding commitment. Today, the federal government pays only 17 percent of special education costs. The chronic underfunding of special education is inexcusable. It was also a major factor in my decision to leave the Republican Party in 2001 and declare myself an independent.

When I went to battle with the Bush administration last year over reaching the 40 percent funding figure, the administration argued against approving any increase until the overidentification of special education children, specifically minorities, was fully studied. I countered that by not fully funding special education we were robbing other vital educational programs, such as early education, which are such a critical part of our system.

The evidence overwhelmingly shows that quality early education dramatically reduces the need for special education placement in later years. Therefore, it could be said that the lack of early educational programs such as Head Start is more likely the reason for high identification of special education needs. My arguments were made to no avail.

States and towns are left to bear the burden of the federal government’s failure to live up to its long-ignored promise. In my home state of Vermont, and in the nation, this is a trend that cannot be sustained. If we had met our 40 percent commitment, Vermont’s share of special education funding would have been $32.6 million in fiscal year 2002, rather than $13.2 million. I have heard the cries for help, from parents, teachers, local school boards, and legislators. In fact, state legislatures throughout the country have made full funding of IDEA a top priority.

This problem will only grow worse as the number of children enrolled in special education continues to grow. Figures recently released by the U.S. Census Bureau suggest that one out of every twelve children in the United States has a physical or mental disability, a sharp increase from the previous decade. Special education enrollments have spiraled in the past decade, and more children are being diagnosed with multiple disabilities.

The solution is not difficult. I have proposed legislation to boost special education funding by $2.5 billion each year until 2007, at which time Congress will have met its 40 percent commitment. I will continue these efforts for as long as I serve in the U.S. Senate, and I remain hopeful that we will eventually succeed. The gaps in our system are not entirely about money, but fully funding special education would ease the pressures on schools throughout the country.

We have come a long way since 1975, but there is still much work to be done.

SENATOR JAMES M. JEFFORDS
Independent-Vermont