WASHINGTON – Both Maine congressmen are intensely critical of a key special education law the House passed Wednesday, saying the bill prolongs unfunded mandates that harm state and local special-education efforts and is likely to harm the civil rights of children and parents.

Reps. Michael Michaud and Tom Allen, both Democrats voted against the Republican-led effort to reauthorize the 1975 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, or IDEA, citing strong reservations. It was approved by a comfortable margin along largely partisan lines.

“This is a huge unfunded mandate on Maine,” Michaud said. “Had IDEA been fully funded,” as existing law requires, Maine “would have received nearly $110 million” of the nearly $240 million it now spends annually on special education, he said.

According to data provided by the Maine Department of Education, the state received $36.9 million in federal funding for special education services for Fiscal Year 2003, representing 13.35 percent of the total cost. That is well below the 40 percent federal spending threshold required by the 1997 IDEA amendments passed by Congress.

“There is no doubt special education is very costly,” Michaud said, “but without full funding, we force states across the nation and local school districts in Maine to increase property taxes and shift funds from other programs.”

Allen proposed an amendment to the bill that called on federal authorities to reach the 40 percent threshold immediately, but the amendment was thrown out by the House Rules Committee for procedural reasons. Not surprisingly, Allen opposed the bill vigorously.

“Since IDEA was enacted 28 years ago, Congress has never lived up to [its] commitment and has never provided more than 18 percent of the cost of this federal mandate,” Allen said. His amendment would have provided “immediate relief to local property taxpayers who currently must make up the difference,” according to Allen’s spokesman, Mark Sullivan.

“I will keep reminding Congress of its education funding obligations,” Allen vowed.

The other reasons the congressmen oppose the bill include potential adverse effects on the educational choices enjoyed by students with disabilities and their parents.

“This bill will reduce the civil rights of children with disabilities and those of their parents,” Sullivan said.

The bill limits parents’ influence over the type of special education deemed best for pupils, Sullivan said. It removes the school’s right to consider a student’s disabilities when undertaking disciplinary actions, Sullivan added, and through paperwork reduction provisions, it weakens parents’ ability to hold schools accountable for decisions taken regarding children.