Nancy Bailey: Project 2025: Ending Public Education for Students with Disabilities
Nancy Bailey takes a look at one troubling feature of Project 2025– a call to end federal funding for special needs student. Reposted with permission.
The whole people must take upon themselves the education of the whole people and be willing to bear the expense of it.
~John Adams, President and Statesman, 1758
The Fourth of July always makes me think of freedom and free public schools for all America’s children, including students with disabilities.
The Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 is generally troubling, and its education plan is worrisome. It involves Milton Friedman’s undemocratic ideas to privatize public education, and its voucher plan for students with disabilities will continue to end public school services as we know them.
Project 2025 will eliminate the costs and hard-fought legal protections for children with special education needs instead of strengthening the public school programs.
The All Handicapped Children Education Act
Since its start in 1975, The All Handicapped Children’s Education Act, now called the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), has opened public schools to children with disabilities. Before then, children had limited services, and many were mistreated in poor institutions.
The momentous passage of this act was a proud moment for America! For years afterward, public education focused on improving education for students with disabilities.
However, many politicians and policymakers have worked to undermine these school programs, believing this law is too expensive or wanting to privatize those services.
They reauthorized the Act in 1997 and 2004, when it changed to IDEA. They shuttered long time programs, turning a blind eye to states and local school districts that have pushed children out of services.
Consider how Texas officials denied children services for years, as did New Orleans by converting public schools to charters after Hurricane Katrina. Those reading this might have their own examples of how their local schools reneged on the necessary services.
In these cases the U.S. Department of Education (USDOE) did not perform due diligence to stop states from rejecting students. A stronger federal department should have ensured that students who needed disability services got them.
As disability services have been whittled down throughout the years, parents have become increasingly frustrated with public schools and convinced they should remove their students with a voucher, even though other school options lack accountability and are often less than ideal.
Project 2025 is correct that there are too many lawsuits by parents unhappy with public school programs, but without public schools, parents will have no rights!
The Danger of Eliminating the U.S. Department of Education
Project 2025 wishes to eliminate the U.S. Department of Education (USDOE). The USDOE should not be eliminated, but serve as a vital bridge, a unifying force, and a check on local and State education departments, ensuring the cohesive and well-rounded development of our public education system.
In recent years, the USDOE has failed, opening its doors to corporations wanting to end public education and funding elite-driven, unproven programs like Common Core State Standards. It hasn’t supported teachers, students, and parents like it should and has reduced student privacy protections.
However, the USDOE is still responsible for vital programs, like special education, ensuring students from infancy to age 21 have services, Title I programs, and more, to ensure that there are no barriers for children educated in America.
The Heritage Foundation wants to transfer this responsibility to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, reconfiguring funding so it goes to parents instead of schools, putting those programs and public schools at greater risk.
They want funds to be block-granted to states without strings, eliminating the need for many federal and state bureaucrats (p. 320, Project 2025). Without strings is another way to say disregard the law.
Why were these laws put in place to begin with? To protect the rights of children with disabilities. With no strings attached, school districts will be free to use the funding for anything, and children will have an even harder time finding affordable schools with credentialled teachers.
Instead of eliminating the USDOE, this department should be restructured, with its boundaries clearly set, to support America’s public schools and the students and their teachers in those schools, including children with disabilities.
Vouchers or Educational Savings Accounts are Not Real Choice
Vouchers are problematic for students with disabilities as the Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates (COPPA) describes here:
Families encounter financial strain because the funding provided by the voucher program does not cover transportation or other necessary services and supports that a student needs.
Private or religious schools push out children they determine too hard to educate. There is little to no protection if the child is asked to leave the private/religious school.
Special-education specific voucher programs typically fail to include all students with disabilities and it is rare for programs to accept students who are twice exceptional.
There is often no accountability for student outcomes in a private or religious school. Typical “consumer” accountability does not always work as students with disabilities are often counseled out or found not eligible for private school due to the complexities or challenges of their needs.
Too little data exists to compare the academic outcomes of students with disabilities [and other students] participating in voucher programs to public school students.
The Fallacy of Choice: The Destructive Effect of School Vouchers on Children with Disabilities by Farrel and Marx, also states:
School voucher programs require students with disabilities to sign away their robust federal rights and protections in the public school system. Under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)—the preeminent legislative safeguard for students with disabilities—these rights include the right to a “free and appropriate public education” delivered through an “individualized education plan.” By giving up these protections, children with disabilities are left at the mercy of private schools that have no legal obligation to provide them with an appropriate education, and, in the vast majority of cases, are not legally prohibited from discriminating against them on the basis of their disability.
And then there’s this from The Emory Law Journal with Claire Raj’s Coerced Choice: School Vouchers and Students with Disabilities:
While states claim that vouchers for students with disabilities are justified by better educational outcomes, many states are, in fact, motivated by their desire to eliminate the costs and burdens associated with educating students with disabilities in public schools. Moreover, far from providing a benefit, vouchers have the potential to resegregate students with disabilities—an ironic outcome given that federal disability rights law was founded on the principle of inclusion for all children.
Project 2025 looks like it will end public school services for children with disabilities, completing the dismantling of public schooling that we’ve seen for years.
Our public schools aren’t perfect. Much has been done to them in the name of privatization. But Americans might want to think twice before rejecting them. Instead, they might want to roll up their sleeves and see how to save their schools. If not, the loss will have repercussions for years to come, especially for our children with disabilities.