It is my view, Mr. Chairman, and it is the intent of my amendment, that States should not be forced to spend their very precious and limited Federal and State special education money on education services, special education services, for adult prisoners if the States so elect. If a State does not serve these felons, it is and was the intent of our amendments earlier this year that the U.S. Department of Education should only withhold a pro rata share of the State's total Federal funding for special education. I hope Members will look at my amendment, I hope that they will vote for my amendment and help protect children with disabilities.
Frank Riggs: “It is my view, Mr. Chairman, and it is the intent of my amendment, that States should not be forced to spend their very…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing an amendment related to special education funding for adult prisoners.
Share
More from Frank Riggs
Our concern is that we do not want Federal law to necessarily override State law with respect to the day-to-day administration of bilingual education programs. I think the gentleman from California (Mr. Martinez) would acknowledge that…
Now, what did the United States 5th Circuit Court of Appeals decide in the Hopwood case? Hopwood v. The University of Texas, I quote: ``The 5th circuit ruled that diversity does not justify preferential admissions based on race.''
I believe affirmative action is outdated. Affirmative action, contrary to what several speakers have suggested, is no longer a black and white issue, certainly not in California, the largest, most diverse State in our Union. Because the…
I am very comfortable with language that would say that a court order, Federal court order would take precedence over State and local law with respect to bilingual education or State local policy. But, Mr. Chairman, I cannot support an…





