Statements on Introduced Bills and Joint Resolutions

STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS

By Mrs. MURRAY (for herself, Mrs. COLLINS, and Mr. KENNEDY):

S. 890. A bill to amend the individuals with Disabilities Education Act to provide grants to State educational agencies to establish high cost funds from which local educational agencies are paid a percentage of the costs of providing a free appropriate public education to high need children and other high costs associated with educating children with disabilities, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Finance.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I am pleased today to introduce the Supporting Success for High Need Students Act, and I thank Senator COLLINS and Senator KENNEDY for joining me in offering this legislation. In recent years, I have come to this floor many times to talk about special education, often in the context of the need to fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Act, or IDEA as it is often known.

Mandatory full funding of IDEA is an important issue that should have been settled many years ago. The Federal Government should be meeting the commitment it made over 25 years ago to fund 40 percent of the excess cost of special education. Two years ago, this body finally recognized that reality and passed an amendment to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act that would have fulfilled that promise for students, schools, districts and States struggling to make up where we fall short. I was disappointed that the President made it clear that he did not support funding this long-standing mandate, and that the House voted not to accept the Senate amendment. At that time I voiced my commitment to continuing to fight to provide the full funding that is long overdue, and I will continue that fight. Unfortunately though, there is a small minority of students whose educational needs will not be adequately supported even when IDEA is fully funded.

[Page S5351]

High-need students, whose disabilities may make education an extremely expensive endeavor, must nonetheless have the services and supports they need to receive a full, appropriate public education. Children who are severely autistic or have severe developmental disabilities, for example, may need special facilities, equipment, educational tools, medical services, professional individualized attention and other resources in order to get the education they need to succeed. These needs often far exceed those of most students with disabilities, and so do their costs. The National Center for Education Statistics estimates that the average per pupil expenditure to educate a child in the United States was $7,156 in the 2000-01 academic year. The cost of educating a high-needs student can far exceed that. Costs occasionally exceed $150,000 per year—more than 20 times the average—to provide students with disabilities the education they need. However, no price is too high to fulfill the civil rights of America's children.

With so many Americans out of work, and State and local budgets squeezed to the brink of disaster, these costs can be a prohibitive burden for school districts to shoulder. Small, rural school districts or districts near specialized medical facilities—which are often in our major cities, but can be in unexpected locations such as near a major military base—are most heavily impacted by these costs. But in the right combination of circumstances, such as a family with quadruplets who are all severely developmentally delayed, any district can feel the pinch of the costs incurred from educating these high-need children.

I know that educators, administrators and elected officials at every level want to do the right thing. They are trying to give students with disabilities the best education they can. But too often, they simply lack the resources to do so, or they find themselves faced with a no-win situation—choosing between implementing an after school program for the entire district or funding one high-need student's Individualized Education Plan. The losers in this equation are the students—with or without disabilities—their parents, and our society as a whole. The resulting tensions do a grave disservice to our communities.

The bill I am introducing today—the Supporting Success for High Need Students Act of 2003—is a carefully crafted bill that would address this problem. This legislation adds funding to IDEA targeted specifically for high-need students. It authorizes $750 million in fiscal year 2004 for grants to be administered by the States. This funding would be allocated to the States using the same formula that apportions funding for IDEA part B. If a high-need student's education costs more than four times the average per pupil expenditure, the school district would be able to apply for a grant to offset those costs. I believe that we should preserve incentives for school districts to manage those costs, so my bill would allow districts to recover three-quarters of the costs above that 400 percent threshold to educate high-needs students. Districts could not be reimbursed with these funds for any legal costs incurred through due process proceedings, or costs that should be reimbursed by Medicaid. The funds would only cover education and related services included in an appropriately formulated Individualized Education Plan.

To illustrate, let's assume that four times the average per pupil expenditure is $25,000. If a school district were serving a student whose education cost $45,000 a year, that district could recoup about $15,000 from the State grant. If a district were serving a student whose education cost $225,000, that district could recoup about $150,000. This bill would not make up all the additional costs of educating high-need students, but it would give struggling districts a much-needed lifeline by making them a lot more manageable.

It has often been noted that the moral test of a society is how it cares for its weakest members. It is the government's appropriate role and duty to protect the basic human dignity of all its citizens to ensure that even the neediest among us have a fair opportunity to realize their dreams and potential. That is why we passed the special education law over 25 years ago, and that is why we should pass the Supporting Success for High Need Students Act his year.