Education

Child-Advocacy Group Rebuts Reagan’s Claims About Budget

By Eileen White — February 23, 1983 2 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print

Changes in federal education programs enacted under the Reagan Administration have adversely affected disadvantaged and handicapped children, and changes proposed “threaten” the future of those children, the Children’s Defense Fund charged last week.

In an analysis of the Administration’s actions during the past three fiscal years, the child-advocacy organization said that “thousands” of disadvantaged children served by the Education Department’s Chapter 1 program “have lost services entirely or had their services reduced.” If the President’s fiscal 1984 budget is enacted, 200,000 more students would be eliminated from the program, the organization claimed.

For children in federally funded education programs for the handicapped, “state and local officials have already begun cutting back services ... because of the Administration’s past proposals and the general turmoil created by the anticipation of federal changes,” it said.

In releasing the 244-page study, the organization’s director, Marian Wright Edelman, said the Administration was “misleading the American public about the real impact of the cuts on the poor and on American children.”

“States and cities cannot close all the gaps,” she said in the study. “Some have invested more in their children because of federal example. Some will invest less because of federal example.” City school districts in particular, the study pointed out, are having difficulty making up for federal budget cuts because they have “suffered dramatically under the Reagan budget cuts.”

Urban districts lost approximately 25 percent of their federal funds due to the elimination of the Emergency School Aid Act and the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act, reductions in funding for nutrition programs, and cuts in other programs, the study said.

Overall, the organization’s study examined the effects of budget cuts on 20 programs for the poor and for children. The programs included, in addition to those for the handicapped and the disadvantaged, the Head Start preschool program and child-nutrition programs.

Taken together, the 20 programs received $9 billion less this year than they would have under Carter Administration policies, and they would be reduced by an additional $3.5 billion if the Administration’s latest budget proposals were accepted by the Congress, the study said.

The document, “A Children’s Defense Budget,” included an alternative budget proposal--which Ms. Edelman said she will try to have introduced in the Congress--and suggestions for increasing federal revenues by repealing tax reductions and cutting the military budget.

Gary L. Bauer, the Education Department’s deputy undersecretary for planning, budget, and evaluation, challenged the study’s implications, if not its figures.

“There are a lot of nuances that explain some of the things in the budget. Someone who ignores them either doesn’t know or is exploiting a political viewpoint,” he said.

Mr. Bauer said he conceded that the Chapter 1 program was slated for a 4-percent budget cut, but “they didn’t point out that there was a dispute over Census Bureau figures last year. On a one-time basis, the Congress appropriated an extra $148 million so states could use either the 1980 or 1970 census in counting children eligible for the program. And we didn’t even ask for those funds to be taken away this year.”

“There’s a certain amount of partisanship involved in these charges,” Mr. Bauer claimed. “These are not changes forced down anybody’s throats. These were accepted by the Congress.”

A version of this article appeared in the February 23, 1983 edition of Education Week as Child-Advocacy Group Rebuts Reagan’s Claims About Budget

Events

This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Student Achievement Webinar
How To Tackle The Biggest Hurdles To Effective Tutoring
Learn how districts overcome the three biggest challenges to implementing high-impact tutoring with fidelity: time, talent, and funding.
Content provided by Saga Education
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Student Well-Being Webinar
Reframing Behavior: Neuroscience-Based Practices for Positive Support
Reframing Behavior helps teachers see the “why” of behavior through a neuroscience lens and provides practices that fit into a school day.
Content provided by Crisis Prevention Institute
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of Education Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Mathematics Webinar
Math for All: Strategies for Inclusive Instruction and Student Success
Looking for ways to make math matter for all your students? Gain strategies that help them make the connection as well as the grade.
Content provided by NMSI

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
View Jobs
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
View Jobs
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
View Jobs
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.
View Jobs

Read Next

Education Briefly Stated: March 20, 2024
Here's a look at some recent Education Week articles you may have missed.
8 min read
Education Briefly Stated: March 13, 2024
Here's a look at some recent Education Week articles you may have missed.
9 min read
Education Briefly Stated: February 21, 2024
Here's a look at some recent Education Week articles you may have missed.
8 min read
Education Briefly Stated: February 7, 2024
Here's a look at some recent Education Week articles you may have missed.
8 min read