Date: 2001-09-25
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: Califurnia

Mr. Chairman. I want to commend the committee. in particular the gentleman from Michigan . the gentleman from Pennsylvania . and the gentleman from Wisconsin for deleting from this legislation a very unjust restriction on the limit of legal rights of parents of specialneeds children. Mr. Chairman. I want to commend the Committee. and particularly the gentlemen from Michigan . from Pennsylvania and Wisconsin for deleting from this legislation very unjust restdctions that limit the legal rights of parents of special needs children. The DC appropriations law over the past several years has placed a very restricted ceilIng on the legal awards to parents who successfully litigate to winspecial education benefits for their children. As the author of those due process provisions In the 1975 Education of All Handicapped Children Act (P.L. 94142). now knows as IDEA. and the senior Democratic Member of the authorizing Committee. I greatly appreciate the Appropriations Committees decision to delete this punitive and discriminatory provision. The Congress Included attomey fees In the 1975 law specifically because we anticipated that some states would be reluctant to provide children with the special eoucation service the Supreme Court and the Congress declared they have a right to receive. Particularly in the case of low income parents who might be unable to otherwise secure legal representation to challenge Board of Education decisions to refuse to provide special education servicas. the possibility of receiving reasonaole attorney fees Is all that gives these parents a hope of securing a lawyer to win educational services for their children. t is disgraceful that the Congress chose to deprive only the poorer parents of special needs children In the District of Columbia of these rights. The only entity in the continental United States that lacks voting rghts. The only entity with a majority minority population. Yes. some fees awarded to some lawyers were excessive. that Is why the law allows for reasonable fees. And high fees occurred In states other than the District of Columbia. but interestingly. no one suggested that their constituents be denied access to attorneys to secure special education services. We just decided to Impose that restriction on parentnand generally. poor and minority parents--in D.C. These legal fees can run $40.000 or more in Maryland and Virginia. yet the Congress has limited D.C. parents to a fraction of that amount. In effect. that means D.C. parents cannot lind lawyers to represent them In cases against a Board of Education that has run a dreadful special education program for many years. The law granted parents the remedy of attorney fees specifically so that could pressure recalcitrant education officials to providing the services that special needs children require. Instead. the Congress hes Insulated the D.C. Board of Education at the .xpense of students who need special ED services. The D.C. City Council and the Mayor have rightly opposed such a cap and I am delighted that this legislation before us today treats D.C. like every other jurisdiction In the country. It comes as no surprise that some in the education bureaucracy favor retaining a cap. they are the ones being sued. We should not be swayed by the cynical argument that money allocated to lawyers could otherwise go towards educating special needs children. If the D.C. schools were educating these children. there would be no need for suits. and the suits would not be successful and thereby generating attorney fees. If anyone has been misusing the attorney fees section of IDEA. that is a subject to be addressed In the reauthorization of the IDEA law. and It would be raised with respect to all jurisdictions that fall under the law. not just the residents of the District of Columbia who happen to have no vote here in the Congress. I will wait to see who appear before our Committee to recommend that residents of their district or state be denied access to attorneys to protect their childs right to special education services. In the meantime. I congratulate the Committee for treating D.C. fairly and for allowing parents of special needs children In this city the same rights that all other parents in this country have to seek appropriate education services for their children.