OPPOSITION TO REAGAN'S EDUCATION BLOCK GRANT BILL

The American Federation of Teachers has long sought simplification of the structure of federal aid to education. During consideration of the Education Amendments of 1978, the AFT pursued changes in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act that would have permitted the use of Title I compensatory education funds on behalf of all the students in schools with high concentrations of disadvantaged students. This feature was enacted in a modified form that unfortunately is yet to be implemented.

In addition, the AFT supported changes in Title I that would have eliminated features of that law that produce paperwork but no educational benefits, including:

• a modification of the comparability provisions of Title I that would have allowed federal compensatory education funds to be used in conjunction with state and local compensatory education efforts. This would have allowed a more coordinated use of federal, state and local compensatory education funds on behalf of more students.

• sought and achieved changes in the "supplement and not supplant" requirements of Title I in order to permit equal treatment of all school personnel regardless of the source of funds for their employment.

In addition, the AFT proposed to the Congress several consolidations that would have resulted in a unified and accountable system for research and evaluation.

We believe that the creation of many small categorical federal programs is not the best way to distribute federal funds. The existence of so many small programs results in confusion as to national priorities and a reliance on grantsmanship for federal aid.

The AFT's goals for program consolidation are not yet achieved, and we stand ready to work with the adminis­tration and the Congress to improve and simplify federal programs in ways that result in ease of administration, less paperwork, and more time for teachers to spend with children.

Unfortunately, the administration's block grant bill will not achieve these goals. Instead of improving education for disadvantaged and handicapped children, this bill will result in millions of children being denied educational services.

In addition, the block grant program is deceptive in that it promises to eliminate federal education mandates but, in fact, will not result in any lessening of federal requirements.

In the area of Education for the Handicapped, the administration seeks repeal of 94-142, the Education for All Handicapped Children Act. While the AFT has been critical of many of the features of 94-142 and has sought changes in the law that would improve that program, we have never worked for the repeal of such an important piece of educational legislation. In fact, by repealing 94-142, the administration will simply return the issues of educating handicapped children to the courts. The mandates spelled out in 94-142 also exist in the federal regulations which implement Section 504 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act of 1973. Federal mandates for least restrictive environment, individualized written education programs, and for the quasi-judicial placement procedure currently in vogue are spelled out in the 504 regulations.

The only difference a classroom teacher would notice is the fact that there is less federal money available to carry out the expensive and complicated mandates that would continue to be required by the federal government for educating handicapped children. There would also be an avalanche of litigation as the legal questions put to rest in 94-142 are reopened in the courts.

The Reagan block grant bill would also repeal Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Title I of ESEA is the backbone of the structure of federal aid to elementary and secondary education. Recent studies show beyond any doubt that students who receive Title I assistance respond by showing significant and encouraging improvements in their basic skills achievement. It is clear that Title I works to help students who need help the most. Any reasonable evaluation of the evidence would result in increased resources for this outstanding program. Instead, the administration's block grant bill will reverse the progress that Title I has produced by cutting funds 25 percent and allowing the states to distribute Title I funds wherever a state wished to. Local education programs would be required to petition the state for their share of federal compensatory education funds; this is a curious way to foster local control. In addition, the so-called maintenance of effort re­quirements of Title I would be lost, states and localities would encouraged to shift funds out of their education budgets and to make up the loss with federal funds, the result would be a supplanting of state and local funds with federal aid and a massive loss of funds for education.

It is important to note that under this proposal the money goes directly to the governor of the several states and would be distributed by state legislatures. What this will mean is that federal funds will no longer be distributed to local school districts on a need-based formula, but will become part of the state treasury to be distributed according to the whim of the several states. There is already a program on the books that operates in this fashion-the Vocational Education Act. It is well documented that cities with high concentrations of poverty and unemployment receive far less vocational education funds than other areas of the state that do not have nearly as many problems. Cities are drastically shortchanged under the Vocational Education Act.

The block grant bill fails in other ways as well; it is designed as a vehicle to slash federal aid to education. While the Congress is currently voting large cuts in programs including education, the laws currently on the books would allow aid to go back up should the Congress become convinced of the necessity for doing so. The Reagan block grant bill will put an ironclad cap on authorization levels for education, and would make it virtually impossible to appropriate additional funds for education as the need develops.

The AFT sees some merit in the proposed block grant for state education agencies. With two glaring exceptions, the programs slated for the state block grant would not be damaged by consolidation. The two exceptions are Teacher Corps and teacher centers. Putting these two programs in a state block grant is a transparent ploy designed to kill these programs off. The AFT is willing to work with the states to help achieve a consolidation of state-operated programs, but we insist that Teacher Corps and teacher centers be excluded from that consolidation. Teacher Corps and especially teacher centers produce something far more important for education than the limited dollars appropriated for them would suggest. Teacher centers are the hope of millions of teachers around the country who seek a voice in their inservice training, and who wish help from their colleagues with professional problems.

Teacher centers-contrary to the irresponsible propaganda sent out by the Heritage Foundation-are places where teachers meet to improve their skills and to learn from their colleagues for the benefit of their students. They are professional in nature-not political-and produce benefits for children as well as for teachers.

Teacher Corps, while another small program, is oriented toward providing aid through inservice programs for currently-practicing teachers. In the final analysis, education is something that occurs between teachers and children. Teacher Corps and teacher centers are important programs that produce real benefits for children and teachers alike. For all these reasons:

RESOLVED, that the AFT strongly oppose the block grant bill submitted by the Reagan administration. Any bill that is simply a vehicle for eliminating billions of federal dollars for millions of handicapped and disadvantaged children is not in the interest of American education; and

RESOLVED, that the AFT especially oppose the consolidation of Title I and the Education for all Handicapped Children Act into one block grant. This proposed consolidation would generate destructive battles on the state and local level over how a greatly-reduced federal pie would be divided to meet the needs of the handicapped and disadvantaged; and

RESOLVED, that the AFT work with the Congress and the Administration to achieve needed consolidation that would improve the structure of federal aid, the programs that serve our children and reduce unneeded paperwork and administration.