Lynn Woolsey

Ms. WOOLSEY

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Tierney), another important member of the committee.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong opposition to this rule because it will not allow Members of this Congress to vote on an amendment and to debate an amendment that would fully fund IDEA and make the funding mandatory. We all know how the funding process works around here. Authorization levels may be fine, budget numbers may help, but what really counts is appropriations. There are many, many competing demands on appropriations, so we should remove that competition when the Federal Government has made a commitment to fund an education program at any level because our schools need to be able to count on those funds. We have told them they are coming. They need to be able to count on them. To that end, Mr. Speaker, two amendments were submitted to the Committee on Rules, one by three Democrats and the other by three Republicans. Those amendments would have phased in full funding for the part B State grants in IDEA and at the same time made all new funding mandatory. Neither of these amendments were accepted; neither will be considered today. Without the opportunity to debate and vote on one or the other of these amendments, a vote for H.R. 1350 is a vote against fully funding special education programs, which in turn leaves our schools and our parents competing for scarce funds for needed programs that are needed equally for our special ed kids and for the rest of kids that need to be educated. Mr. Speaker, I urge Members to vote down this rule and in so doing demand the opportunity to vote on an IDEA reauthorization bill that includes mandatory full funding.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer).

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis), a member of the Committee.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the ranking member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote, and pending that, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Boehner) and the gentleman from Delaware (Chairman Castle), and certainly my ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), for what has gone into this legislation. We truly have worked hard to make this be something that we could all vote for, and I believe in your sincerity and I know you believe in our's and our passion on all of this. There are reasons why I will not be able to vote for this. Reason number one is the discipline provisions. This bill will allow students to be moved indefinitely to alternative placements for any violation of a school code of conduct, and we have gone over that. That could severely affect a disabled child. This bill has no guarantee of full funding. We can say we want full funding, but if we do not guarantee it, it probably is not going to happen. And, yes, we have done a much better job over the last few years. We have just gone through some really good prosperous years in this country. Now this country is in an economic downturn and the challenges for the same dollars are going to be much, much greater. This bill weakens due process protection for parents. It would bar parents from raising new issues at due process hearings, even if new evidence has surfaced since the hearing was scheduled. This bill has a pilot program for 10 State waivers. It permits the Secretary of Education to waive IDEA provisions to reduce paperwork. Criteria for the approach of these pilot programs are completely open- ended and would be defined by the Secretary. Mr. Chairman, the other thing this bill does that will make it impossible for me to vote for it is it puts a cap on attorney fee reimbursements, which makes it even more difficult for low income parents to get their due process. Mr. Chairman, I am hoping Democrats and those on the Republican side who want full funding and want that funding to be mandatory, who want our children's discipline provisions not to go backwards, but to go forward, will vote against this bill. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time,

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I object to the vote on the ground that a quorum is not present and make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume to say that we do not, on this side of the aisle, oppose the amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the remainder of my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Amendment No. 4 would change the definition of a free appropriate public education, the language changed in the Supreme Court decision known as Rowley, which states that the goal of a child with disabilities is the same as all other children, to have educational and related services necessary for that child to access the general curriculum. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY. For the time being, yes.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to the rule, I offer amendment No. 4.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the ranking member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose this amendment. Federal funds should not be used for private school vouchers for any children, but it is particularly dangerous to do this for children with disabilities. Vouchers undermine the very foundation of IDEA. IDEA guarantees children with disabilities a free and appropriate public education and provides important safeguards to the child and the parents to ensure that education is received. When a special education child takes a voucher to a private school, all guarantees of rights under IDEA are lost. The McKay voucher program in Florida, which allows children with disabilities to use vouchers to go to private schools, is a perfect example of the pitfalls of an IDEA voucher program. In the Florida special education voucher program, there are no State reviews of the education and services being provided, and there are no civil rights protections if the parents are not happy with the education and services their child is receiving. Under the Florida IDEA voucher program, private schools can and do charge parents additional tuition and fees above the voucher, making it difficult or impossible for low-income parents to benefit from a voucher program. Contrary to what people claim, vouchers do not increase parents' choice. Private schools can and do discriminate for a variety of reasons. They can refuse to take a student for any reason, including the student's disability. So when it comes to vouchers, it is not the parents who have the choice; it is the private school. Whatever choices a private school makes, it does not have to let parents or the public know why. Vouchers give private schools public taxpayer dollars, but the private schools are not held to any of the same standards of accountability that public schools are held to. Public schools must hold open meetings and make their test scores, dropout rates, and other basic information public. Private schools are subject to no public oversight. Accountability to the child, to the parents, and to the public is the touchstone of IDEA, and also, supposedly, No Child Left Behind. We must not allow vouchers to jeopardize that accountability. I urge my colleagues to reject this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman very much. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY. I yield to the gentleman from Washington.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Clyburn).

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the amendment, and I yield myself such time as I may consume to have a colloquy with the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Nethercutt). Mr. Chairman, I first want to thank the gentleman for his amendment and for his support of young children and their families. I understand this amendment retains the integrity of the team process. We want to preserve the team approach and the philosophy that the decisions of the IFSP team are to be made in partnership with the family and the providers in determining together what is appropriate for the child. I also understand that this amendment is not meant to understate the importance of even the youngest children with disabilities being able to be with their peers in their neighborhoods, child care or Head Start, or in other settings that will give them both the special services they need but the opportunities to be part of their communities. Is this correct?

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the Musgrave amendment and I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose this amendment. Vouchers undermine the very foundation of IDEA. IDEA guarantees children with disabilities a free and appropriate public education and provides important safeguards to the child and the parents to ensure that education is actually received. When a special education child takes a voucher to a private school, all guarantees and rights under IDEA are lost. The McKay Voucher Program in Florida, which allows children with disabilities to use vouchers to go to private schools, is a perfect example of the pitfalls of an IDEA voucher program gone wrong. In the Florida special education voucher program, there are no State reviews of the education and services being provided, and there are no civil rights protections if parents are not happy with the education and services their children or their child is receiving. Under the Florida IDEA voucher program, private schools can and do charge parents additional tuition and fees above the voucher making it difficult and usually impossible for low income parents to benefit from vouchers. Contrary to what some people claim, vouchers do not increase parents' choice. Private schools can and do discriminate for a variety of reasons. They can refuse to take a student for any reason including the student's disability. So when it comes to vouchers, it is not the parents who have the choice. It is the private school. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the DeMint amendment.

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, how much time is remaining?

Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne), a member of the committee.