October 18, 2004

The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) has finally gone to a conference committee. The House and Senate leadership have named conferees on this very important piece of education legislation that governs special education services to students with disabilities. The Conference should be convened during the lame duck session of Congress after the November 2, but staff is working on issues as this is being written.

IDEA first passed as the Education for All Handicapped Act (94-142) has always been legislation that has ignited activism around sections of the bill. In the original legislation Congress included language that stated the Federal government would pay up to 40 percent of the average state cost for educating disabled students. This has been at the center of the controversy because the Federal share has not come close to reaching this percentage. The disagreements have not only between House and Senate, and Democrat and Republican, but also the various interest and stakeholder groups during this reauthorization. The differences are directed at specific parts of the bill and not the appropriation level, but indirectly some of the issues include appropriations because there a cost implications to some of either houses bill requirements.

Some of the issues where there has been the strongest disagreement that need to be settled during the Conference are:

1. The definition of a highly qualified special education teacher. The definition is not fully addressed in either bill. There is a question as to what standards a special education teacher will be held — to just the IDEA bill; to the requirements in No Child Left Behind; or to both.

2. The percentage of funds available for state and other administrative costs and activities. The state administrative and activity funding has been frozen at the 1997 appropriation level and not increased to the level of appropriation for the current fiscal year. This will also affect data collection and ability to enforce the statute.

3. The requirements for Monitoring and Enforcement within the Senate Bill and the Administration's Statement of Administrative Policy (SAP). This includes questions about requirements of state activity given less funding to conduct it and the funding of protection and advocacy agencies that are funded in other legislation to protect the rights of disabled students.

4. There are several concerns about sections of the statute that can be interpreted as a preemption of the state's authority.

The expressed interest is to complete the Conference and send a bill to the President during the lame duck session.