Let me be clear. What I am about to say in no way represents an endorsement. I will remain neutral as far as any endorsement, although I plan to vote in Virginia's primary. But I do pay attention to what candidates say, and when something important is offered, I want to affirm it.
Today Hillary Clinton became the first of the Democrats to overtly support full funding of the federal share of special education, and on that specific point I want to comment here.
I had no intention of doing a diary, but when I heard those words, I thought I needed to, and will, below the fold, explain why this is so important.
The governing act for special education is called IDEA, which stands for Individuals With Disabilities Education Act. When it was passed into law, it represented a legislatively established civil right, which required expenditure of funds. Insofar as the federal government has not paid its share, this is truly an unfunded mandate, which as a matter of law No Child Left Behind is not, since a state can choose to forgo Title I funds and thus not be required to meet the mandates of NCLB, whether of teacher quality or of meeting the Adequate Yearly Progress standards of testing.
IDEA in theory committed the federal government to providing the funding for 40% of the average additional costs imposed by the mandates of the act. But that level has never been met. For much of the history of the law, the fedral government's share has been at or below 15%, or only a bit more than 1/3 of what it should be. The peak level was FY 2005, at 19%, for FY 2007 it had slipped to 17% (and as no funding bill has yet been passed for FY 2008 we cannot say what the current percentage is). I will note that in Virginia, where I reside, the FY 2005 level of 19% meant a shortfall in what should have been provided by the federal government of $350 million to the Old Dominion. Now, because you are dealing with a civil right and hence a mandate, one of two things happens. In some cases states and localities have to raise local taxes to come up with the funds to replace wht the federal government is not providing. That's fine if the tax base and the structure of taxation allows that to happen. If not, then the funds to cove special ed are provided by cutting funds fro general education, wich can lead to resentment towards the special education kids meeting whose needs causes a shortfall of funds for the education of everyone else.
This is not a cheap issue. And it is not that other candidates totally ignore it. But this was a clear statement - full funding - in an important venue - a national debate - on a critical educational issue that far to often is totally ignored.
So I think tonight, on this point, praise is due to Mrs. Clinton. Which is why I offered this diary, to make that point clear.
Peace.