Category: Kim Forrest
What’s the Big IDEA?
By Kim Forrest
WASHINGTON–When teachers, school administrators and parents talk about special education, they complain about excessive paperwork, gripe about under-qualified teachers and debate the pros and cons of the curriculum. But there’s one subject on which there seems to be no debate.
Money.
Everyone involved with special education agrees there just isn’t enough of it.
Most fingers point to the federal government. When Congress mandated local school districts provide special education nearly three decades ago, it agreed the federal government would pay 40 percent of the cost. It has never come close.
Washington’s contribution to special education has increased in the last decade, but not nearly enough to meet Congress’ commitment. Federal spending, which amounted to $1 billion to $2 billion in the 1980s and early 1990s, has reached a high point of nearly $9 billion annually in recent years. Still, that is a far cry from the money Congress said it hoped the federal government would pay when it agreed to help states pay for special education in 1975.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which dictates how the federal government doles out special-education money to the states and eventually local school districts, is up for reauthorization this year.
New Hampshire is slated to receive nearly $36 million in federal special-education grants this year, up from slightly more than $10 million in 1996. But the state would receive much more – one estimate sets the rate at about $70 million — if the spending target set by Congress 28 years ago were actually met.
But as members of Congress started to debate potential changes to the law this year, it became clear it wouldn’t be easy to allocate more money for special education. .
WHAT’S THE IDEA?
When it was enacted in 1975, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act guaranteed a “free, appropriate public education” to students with disabilities and to help states meet their legal and financial obligations to those students.
Much of the debate with IDEA funding stems from the promise Congress made when IDEA was enacted: that it would provide the states with 40 percent of their special-education expenses. Currently, more than 6 million students nationwide are served by IDEA funds.
But almost three decades later, the federal government pays only 18 percent. That’s almost triple the 7 percent Washington contributed in 1996, but still less than half of what Congress promised.
“We’re far from what was promised in 1975,” said Lynda Van Kuren, a spokeswoman for the Council for Exceptional Children, a special-education advocacy group in Arlington, Va. “I would say while we’re grateful for the increases, we’re very disappointed that the [federal government] has not done more to live up to its promise of the full funding.”
Many efforts have been made in recent months to bring IDEA spending closer to the 40 percent target.
In March, New Hampshire Sen. Judd Gregg, a Republican, sponsored an amendment to the budget resolution for fiscal 2004 that would increase IDEA funds by $3.29 billion over the next six years. The amendment passed; if it becomes law, it would bring the total federal contribution to more than $11 billion next year and more than $13.5 billion in 2005. Though this would increase the federal share of special-education costs to only 26 percent, it would put the government on what Gregg called a “direct glide path” toward the promised 40 percent by 2009.
Gregg voted against an amendment offered by Sen. Mark Dayton (D-MN) to provide the full 40 percent by next year and pay for it by delaying President Bush’s proposed tax cut. Dayton’s amendment was rejected, and Gregg called it unrealistic and merely “put[ting] forward a show.”
At least one large group agreed with Dayton that Bush’s proposed tax cuts could eat up money that might otherwise go to special education.
“If we keep going willy-nilly towards these enormous tax cuts, there’s not going to be enough money for anything,” said Charlotte Fraas, director of legislation for the American Federation of Teachers.
New Hampshire Rep. Charles Bass, a Republican, has authored legislation in the House that would provide the promised 40 percent by 2010, with $70 million going to New Hampshire that year.
A LOCAL PERSPECTIVE
Local special-education directors in New Hampshire insist they need more federal money to adequately teach the more than 30,000 students – representing more than 14 percent of all public-school students in the state – in their programs.
“Why can’t we fund these kids in need with federal money?” asked David Beauchamp, special-education director for school administrative unit 47, which serves Jaffrey and Rindge.
School administrative unit 29, which serves Keene and its surrounding towns, has about 905 students with special needs. Bruce Thielen, the unit’s special-education director, said schooling for a special-education student normally costs twice as much as for a student without learning disabilities. On average, it costs about $12,000 a year to teach a special-education student, he said.
However, Tamara Drozin, special education director for the Conval school district, which serves Greater Peterborough’s 474 special-education students, said that costs for some students with special needs could go as high as $200,000.
“Usually they have multiple disabilities that include severe mental retardation, sometimes vision or hearing problems,” she said.
New Hampshire supplements the federal aid to help those students.
Under its catastrophic aid program, the state will reimburse a school district for 80 percent of a special-education student’s costs that exceed 3.5 times the state average per student and all of the costs that exceed 10 times the state average, Drozin said.
Schools also receive money from Medicaid for some students, said Dick Cohen of New Hampshire’s Disabilities Rights Center.
“Schools can pull down Medicaid money for things like speech, occupational therapy, evaluations, for a number of things, and they only have to come up with 50 percent of that cost,” he said.
For the Conval district, federal funds pay for a preschool program, a school psychologist, a speech and language pathologist, an occupational therapist, a life-skills teacher and training for teachers and staff.
MORE STUDENTS WITH SPECIAL NEEDS
One reason the money falls short is that more students are being placed in special-education classes than in the past. There has been a steady increase over the past ten years, which Beauchamp said is “rocking the system.”
The U.S. Department of Education reported that the number of students served by IDEA funds rose from 5,081,023 during the 1992-93 school year to 6,487,429 during the 2001-02 school year, an increase of nearly 28 percent.
Many experts say because of medical improvements, children who might have died years ago are living, but with special-education needs.
“We have medical advances that we did not have even five years ago, so students who would not be in our schools are not only surviving through elementary schools, but through our middle schools and our high schools,” said Van Kuren, of the Council’s for Exceptional Children. “That’s a good thing, but that also takes more dollars and special services to educate these children.”
Van Kuren added that with the rising poverty rate in America, more children are coming to school without the early exposure to language that children from higher-income households receive. Students from low-income families may be behind and classified as special-needs pupils.
Furthermore, Thielen said, more children are being classified as autistic than were in the past, which adds to the special-education rosters.
Cohen, of the Disabilities Rights Center, said some schools may “over-identify kids who could be served by the regular education system,” adding that some schools under-identify children with special needs as well.
Drozin said more parents than in the past want their children to be classified as special-needs students so that they can receive extra help in school.
“I think for a long time there was a stigma attached to special education, where people did not want their children identified and receiving special-education services,” she said. “And now I think it’s come around to that’s the way to get extra attention, extra help, individualized support for your child. [Parents] feel like their children are being left out if they’re not identified and all the attention is going to the identified students.”
Drozin added that about 15 percent of the students in her district are special-education students but that in some districts the number can be as high as 20 or 25 percent.
PARENTS AS ADVOCATES
Many experts say parents who know how to work the system often are able to get their child more services.
“Parents who are the most savvy often get more for their children, while parents with little access, parents who don’t speak up, may not,” the Cato Institute’s Gryphon said.
Carole Armstrong, a Windham resident who is the secretary of the Autism Society of New Hampshire and the parent of three children with special needs, said that she has trained herself to advocate for her children.
“I went through the advocacy programs that they have…. It takes years to get that education,” she said. A lot of kids, because the parents don’t know how to advocate, don’t get what they need.”
Armstrong added that she has to be a strong advocate for her son, who is autistic and in seventh grade, because the aide who works with him “doesn’t have the proper training” and is punishing him for behavior that is part of his disorder. During the 2001-02 school year, according to the U.S. Department of Education, 17 percent of teachers who worked with special-education students were not fully certified to do so.
“I’m practically in school with him every two weeks,” Armstrong said. “But I’m in a position that I’ve been doing this for so long, I bring in the information that [the school] needs and give it to them. A lot of parents aren’t in the same position.”
Drozin said some students get more help not because they need it, but because their parents demand it.
“In many instances we go beyond equal access and we go beyond free, appropriate public education, and that bothers me, because I think sometimes it’s whoever has the most resources, the strongest advocacy, the most skilled parents, who can advocate for more,” she said.
AN IDEA FOR THE FUTURE
The Bush administration has proposed spending $9.5 billion on special education in the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1. That’s $1 billion more than it sought for the current fiscal year and $2 billion more than Congress appropriated last year.
In 2001, Bush established a Commission on Excellence in Special Education, which published its report last July. The commission said the current special-education law has too many requirements and too much paperwork. It said children are not properly identified for special-education programs and that districts are not held accountable for students’ performance.
Gregg, who is chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, which will vote on the IDEA reauthorization, said that the Bush administration has significantly increased special-education spending.
On the other side of the aisle, Jim Manley, a spokesman for Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA), the senior Democrat on the education committee, said the current administration has “failed to adequately fund the Individuals With Disabilities Act.”
Manley said that Kennedy is working with Gregg and others to draft a bipartisan bill that would move toward that 40 percent federal-spending promise. Still, many are still doubtful about the program’s future.
“I guess I have to say that I’m not too optimistic about the reauthorization,” Drozin said. “What would help us in the schools would be a reduction of paperwork…and increased funding…. I don’t know that either one of those things is going to happen any time soon.”
Fraas, of the American Federation of Teachers, said those concerned about special education must look closely at what the government is doing.
“We can’t just be Pollyanna-ish about the future of the funding and the way its going,” she said.
Published in The Keene Sentinel, in New Hampshire.
Nitrogen, Ozone Levels Up for the Northeast
By Kim Forrest
WASHINGTON--As New Hampshire's ozone levels hit their highest mark for this early in the year in 20 years of readings, a new study showed that increased nitrogen pollution not only is raising the ozone readings but is damaging the state's forests and waterways as well.
On Tuesday, ozone levels were the highest they've been this early in the year during the two decades the state has been monitoring them, according to the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services. The previous earliest date that pollution approached what the state calls "unhealthy levels" was on April 29, 1984. Ozone is a by-product of nitrogen pollution and is accentuated by warm temperatures.
Throughout the state, the ozone levels came very close to exceeding the eight-hour health standard, with the highest levels in Laconia and high levels at the air-monitoring system at Pack Monadnock Mountain, said Jeff Underhill, a state air quality analyst. Last summer was an "unprecedented" ozone year for New Hampshire, with five consecutive days of harmful levels in August, he said.
"This episode is from pure out-of-state transport," Underhill said, pointing the finger at the large East Coast cities of New York, Philadelphia and Boston as well as at the Midwest and the West. Other New England states also experienced high ozone levels.
New Hampshire is one of 10 states challenging new federal regulations that state officials contend would exempt some industries, including coal-fired power plants, from Clean Air Act requirements to reduce emissions.
Underhill said the ozone levels "jump up and jump down." He said the monitoring system has detected levels that exceeded both the one-hour and the eight-hour ozone standards several times in one week. Although ozone levels are heightened by the presence of sunlight - he called ozone a "summertime pollutant" -- the levels will remain high at night if a great deal of pollution is coming from other regions of the country, Underhill said.
"That's often the case in New Hampshire," he said. "We're at the tail end of the exhaust pipe."
Emissions from automobiles and utility plants are the source of the harmful nitrogen pollution analyzed by the Hanover-based Hubbard Brook Research Foundation (HBRF) in a study released Tuesday.
According to Kathy Fallon Lambert, spokeswoman for HBRF, forests and waterways in the Northeast, such as the White Mountains and the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest in New Hampshire, are experiencing increased nitrogen levels.
While forests need nitrogen to grow, too much of it can harm the soil, decrease tree growth and produce acidic runoff to water sources. As a result, 15 percent of New England's lakes have become acidic, killing fish and wildlife.
Nitrogen pollution also has contributed to the release of ground-level ozone, which harms plants. It also has exposed about 26 million people in the Northeast to high ozone levels.
According to the HBRF study, 39 percent of nitrogen emissions are from vehicles and 26 percent from utility plants.
Sewage also is causing more pollution, the study reported. It said that as much as 81 percent of the nitrogen pollution in watersheds comes from human sewage, or wastewater. That, in turn, reduces the level of oxygen in the water and kills fish. David Whitall, the study's co-author, said people are contributing to pollution simply by consuming meat and dairy products, which contain nitrogen. He said that while equipment is available to remove nitrogen from wastewater, most treatment plants do not have the technology.
"So a lot of this nitrogen is making it from your kitchen table into the streams and, eventually, the estuaries," Whitall said.
The study also said current public policy is not enough to control the damage.
"We know that the current regulation of the 1990 Clean Air Act is not adequate to bring about recovery from this problem," Lambert said. She added that some legislation in Congress, including a clean-air amendment sponsored by Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH), would reduce emissions.
New Hampshire Attorney General Peter Heed, who read the HBRF study, said it demonstrates that action must be taken to reduce pollution.
"We believe the nitrogen study provides the evidence that we really have to do something to decrease nitrogen emissions blowing into New Hampshire," he said in an interview. "These emissions really continue to hurt the New Hampshire environment. It's going to take decades to recover."
He added that while he recognizes that it might be expensive for power plants to install equipment to reduce emissions, failing to do so would have a negative economic impact on the Granite State.
"Certainly I understand economic arguments about the cost of making improvements to power plants, [but] they pale in comparison to the economic harm to New England states, namely New Hampshire," he said. "We're very dependent on tourism, for maple sugaring…our lakes and rivers are recreational."
Published in The Keene Sentinel, in New Hampshire.
On The Fast Track
By Kim Forrest
WASHINGTON--Kate Käufer moves fast. She's run a marathon, loves to cycle and participates in any sporting event she can.
But her athletic prowess is not the only thing that makes Käufer speedy.
In less than five years, Käufer, 28, has gone from being a congressional aide to an analyst on homeland security issues. She is about to get her master's degree in security policy studies at George Washington University, and she has received a fellowship to work for the federal government.
Käufer was born in Germany to a German father and an American mother, Christopher and Marie Käufer, who now live in Roxbury. She said her love of global politics stems from her own mixing of cultures.
"Growing up as an American in Germany, you're by default part of international relations. There's a world that opens up to you," she said with a smile. "That's where I got my start, I guess. Just reading a lot of [news]papers."
She also gained her tenacity from fending off four older brothers.
"Older brothers usually meant a lot of teasing," she said. "But I also toughened up."
Käufer earned an earlier master's degree in linguistics, political science and U.S. history from the University of Cologne. Then she obtained a congressional fellowship offered by the American Political Science Association - her ticket to Washington.
After more than two decades in Germany, Käufer said getting used to the fast-paced U.S. capital - she called it "a shark pond" -- was tough.
"I would say that I grew up in a more reserved surrounding in Germany, and it took me a while to adjust to what I would describe as American frankness," she said. "It wasn't exactly difficult, but it took time to transition and adjust to the different mentality and social interaction."
Washington, she said, is "a strange city. It took me a while to get used to the style of it. But I like it a lot; it has a lot to offer. It can be very intellectually stimulating. It can also be very partisan."
Her major complaint, however, has nothing to do with politics.
"The weather," she said with a scowl. "It's horrible."
Käufer came to the muggy capital city in 1998 to work as a legislative assistant for then- Rep. Bill Luther (D-MN). She specialized in defense, international affairs and trade issues.
"There's always something going on. You have to be able to think on the run," Käufer said. "I liked working for [Luther]. He was a good person and a good member, and that means a lot."
Luther had equally praiseworthy words about Käufer.
"She was just outstanding. A wonderfully committed young person who worked in my office," he said. "I know that she ahs a great future ahead of her. She loved the legislative process in Congress. Everyone in my office relied on her for knowing minute to minute what was going on on the floor."
After working for about three years on Capitol Hill, Käufer became a policy analyst at the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, an independent organization that analyzes the federal government's work on such issues as arms control, weapons of mass destruction, ballistic missile defense and terrorism.
Käufer helped write the center's Terrorism Prevention Handbook. Released last October, the handbook reviews federal programs aimed at combating terrorism and how they were funded. She said the goal was to make the handbook easy for ordinary citizens to understand.
"We sort of started it from a concerned citizens' perspective," Käufer explained. "As a citizen living in D.C., I obviously want to be protected from a terrorist attack. And I want to know what the government is doing to protect me from a terrorist attack."
Käufer's boss, Erik Floden, director of the center's terrorism project, said she was an integral part of the project.
"She's doing great," he said. "She and I work more as a team, more than a boss- subordinate kind of thing."
Käufer said that the government is trying to prevent terrorist attacks by safeguarding buildings and improving airline security. But she said it also is important for the United States to help economically struggling countries where terrorism could grow.
"You can make the case that poverty, disenchantment and not having freedom of speech fosters, or at least creates a culture that could support, terrorism," she said.
Käufer, who lives near the Capitol, said she is not afraid of another attack.
"What are you going to do? Live your life in fear?" she asked rhetorically. "There could be a terrorist attack, but people are dying of other causes every day. Am I not going to drive my car because I'm afraid of car accidents? I can't do that."
Despite a jam-packed schedule - or maybe because of it -- Käufer tries to make time to unwind by listening to classical music, an interest she inherited from her father. She also visits her parents in New Hampshire a few times a year.
"I love going up there," she said. "It's beautiful."
Although she's been in Washington most of her adult life, Käufer still is energized by the capital. She remembers feeling humbled and excited the first time she walked down the halls of congressional office buildings.
"I hope I never ever lose that fascination in government," she said.
There's one thing Käufer has gotten used to.
"You do see 'important' people all the time, and it gets kind of normal. I'll go to my cleaner, and there'll be a senator standing there," she says. "If you live in Hollywood, you see all the movie stars. Well, if you live here, you'll see government officials all the time."
So what's next? Käufer seems certain about the direction of her career.
"I want to work for the federal government and I will be working for the federal government," she said, bluntly.
When Käufer receives her master's degree, she will begin the Presidential Management Intern Program, which will allow her to work for a federal agency. She hopes to continue her focus on national security.
That's for now. Käufer has bigger, long-term plans.
"National security adviser Käufer," she said with a laugh. "Sounds pretty good to me."
Published in The Keene Sentinel, in New Hampshire.
Democratic Candidates Speak Out in First Joint Forum
By Kim Forrest
In their first joint forum, the 2004 democratic presidential candidates spoke out on issues ranging from education to the war in Iraq Wednesday night.
The forum, sponsored by the Children's Defense Fund, a non-profit children's advocacy group, was purported to focus on issues relating to children, but talk of the American success in the war on Iraq was on everyone's minds and lips.
While the democratic candidates agreed on many issues, the war was a subject where the candidates were divided. Five of the candidates had previously expressed their opposition to military action in Iraq and maintained their beliefs in the forum.
"[The war] opens up a new dangerous preemptive doctrine," Former Vermont Governor Howard Dean said.
Sen. Bob Graham (D-FL), former Senator from Illinois Carol Mosley Braun, Rev. Al Sharpton of New York, and Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), expressed similar sentiments in their opposition to war, saying that the war took the focus away from domestic issues.
"I'm glad Saddam was toppled," Sharpton said. "But I would also like to see things toppled in this country."
Sens. Joe Lieberman (D-CT), John Edwards (D-NC), John Kerry (D-MA), and Rep. Dick Gephardt (D-MO) all voted for the resolution that entitled President Bush to attack Iraq. They defended their position, stating how action in Iraq is part of protecting the homeland, and also noting that domestic programs should not suffer because of the money and attention paid on the war.
"This is not an either/or choice. It is actually the responsibility of the President of the United States to be able to do two things at the same time," Edwards said, gaining laughter and applause from the crowd.
After discussing the war, candidates were asked questions on a variety of topics. The Democrats were many times placed on the defensive, as was Kerry, who defended his announcement this week that, if elected, he would only appoint justices to the Supreme Court who supported a woman's right to have an abortion.
"Women have the right to make that critical, painful, and difficult decision," Kerry said. "And the government has no business intervening in it.
When Lieberman was asked why he did not serve in the military during Vietnam, he explained that he was exempt for two reasons, the fact that he was a student, and because he was a father.
"And do I regret it? I do," he said, and added later, "But in some sense, I hope that my service in public office and particularly my backing of the military has helped, in some ways, make up for that."
As the program dictated, children's issues ranging from education and school testing to foster care were highlighted in the discussion.
Like the other candidates, Gephardt was critical of the current administration's handling of such issues.
"This President and this administration has made a fraud of Leave No Child Behind," he said, referring to the current administration's education program, "We need new leadership in this country to really Leave No Child Behind."
The final question, relayed to all of the candidates, was about the current affirmative action case, a program that all of the candidates support.
"The University of Michigan was trying to…create diversity, to give opportunities, in ways that did not entail quotas," Braun said.
While all the candidates drew applause and laughter from the crowd throughout the two hour forum, it was Lieberman who stood out with the most resounding response of the evening, as he expressed that the Democrats would be successful in the 2004 presidential campaign, despite skepticism about beating the incumbent President.
"I want to tell you why I know we can beat George W. Bush," he said. "Because Al Gore and I did it."
Published in The Keene Sentinel, in New Hampshire.
Gas Prices to Decrease for Summer Travelers
By Kim Forrest
WASHINGTON--It looks as if the worst gasoline prices are behind us, though the best are not yet to come.
Gas prices already have peaked for the year, according to a forecast released Tuesday by the Energy Information Administration. But the average summer gas price will be 17 cents per gallon higher than last year's, though similar to those of the summers of 2000 and 2001.
With the war in Iraq, political turmoil and oil strikes in Venezuela and ethnic strife in Nigeria, experts have been concerned that gas prices would rise, especially during the summer, when vacationers take to the roads.
EIA administrator Guy Caruso predicted that gas prices peaked year, at an average of $1.72 per gallon nationwide in mid-March.
The current national average is $1.63. But by the time summer rolls around, Caruso said, the average price should be down to $1.56 per gallon, and it is likely to decrease from there.
The price forecast for this summer is significantly lower than the all-time summer high of $2.77 (adjusted for inflation) in 1980.
Still, despite the projected prices, Caruso said, summer gas prices could range from $1.40 to $1.72 per gallon, because of record-high demand -- 91.8 million barrels a day -- and uncertainty in both the crude oil market and the domestic refining and distribution systems.
California really will be feeling the heat. Because the state banned the polluting gas additive MTBE and is replacing it with more expensive ethanol, Californians are expected to pay about 50 cents per gallon above the national average.
And while Iraq is not exporting oil and is not expected to for several months, countries such as Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates have increased their output to keep prices down.
Still, Caruso said, America's crude oil inventory is "at the low end of normal."
In New Hampshire Wednesday, gas prices were slightly below the national average at $1.58 per gallon, down from $1.62 a month ago, according to the Web site, newhampshiregasprices.com. Still, these prices are higher than a year ago, when prices were $1.12 per gallon.
According to Lauri Klefos, director of the state's Division of Travel and Tourism Development, 80 percent of visitors coming to the Granite State travel by car.
Still, Klefos said she did not think high gas prices would have a big impact on New Hampshire tourism this summer. It's more important, she said, that people know they will be able to buy gas, something drivers were unsure of during one stretch of the 1970s.
"I think the interesting thing is most of the research shows us it's not so much the price of gas as it is a stable a source of gas," she said.
Klefos added that while gas costs more, it probably would not discourage people from traveling. Other national issues may, however.
"I think this summer, we're all a little bit nervous because of the economy," Klefos said. "But in New Hampshire we're not worried about safety concerns…. People [may be] looking for a destination that's not so urban and busy…. It's the economy that I worry about."
Still, she said, what most affects New Hampshire tourism is something that no one can control.
"The weather makes or breaks us all the time," she said. "If we have a nice, hot, sunny summer it'll be great."
Published in The Keene Sentinel, in New Hampshire.
Gregg Legislation to Reduce Air Pollution
By Kim Forrest
WASHINGTON--New Hampshire's Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) is co-sponsoring legislation aimed at decreasing the emission of harmful pollutants by power plants. The bill has won the praise of New Hampshire's attorney general but has cast Gregg as an opponent of the Bush administration's "Clear Skies" air pollution control initiative.
Gregg co-sponsored the Clean Air Planning Act of 2003 with Sens. Lincoln Chafee (R-RI) and Tom Carper (D-DE). The legislation would cap the amounts of carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and mercury that power plants can emit while giving the plants flexibility to decide how best to stay within the caps. One option would be to buy pollution "credits" from plants that are within the caps. This market-based "cap and trade" method has proven effective in dealing with acid rain.
In a statement, Gregg said that "New England and the Northeast have long suffered as the 'tailpipe' of the nation when it comes to air pollution and its detrimental effects on our environment. The pollution produces smog, haze and acid rain, threatening the health of those most susceptible to sickness, including the young, disabled or elderly, and greatly damaging the quality of our ecosystem."
The cap and trade method would give companies a variety of ways to comply with the standards. For example, companies already well within the compliance rates can gain "credits" that they can sell to companies that exceed the limits.
"The net effect will be cleaner air at minimal cost to the industry," Gregg's statement reads.
According to Gregg, the reductions in pollution should be significant because his bill is similar to legislation enacted in New Hampshire that has resulted in fewer emissions.
"Specifically, emissions of sulfur dioxide will be reduced by 80 percent, nitrogen oxide by 69 percent and mercury by 80 percent," Gregg said in his statement. "These reductions are aggressive, but realistic…"
His measure also is directed at reducing carbon dioxide emissions; President Bush's Clear Skies Initiative does not include carbon dioxide in its regulations.
"Carbon dioxide is one of the leading causes of climate change, and legislation dealing with clean air must address carbon dioxide emissions," Gregg said.
Gregg's bill would also provide an air-quality forecasting service that would provide warnings to transportation planners, power generators and people who are sensitive to air pollution Gregg already has secured $6 million to start such a program late next year in New Hampshire.
Peter Heed, New Hampshire's Attorney General, praised Gregg's legislation, saying he hoped it would be a big help to Granite Staters.
"I'm very supportive of what Sen. Gregg and the other senators have done," he said in a phone interview Thursday. "It mirrors legislation we have already in this state." He expressed concern that carbon dioxide "has been left out of other bills. In New Hampshire, [these pollutants] have had a devastating effect on us."
Catherine Corkery, spokeswoman for the New Hampshire Sierra Club, said that while the group is still reviewing the legislation, it is likely to support the bill.
"The New Hampshire Sierra Club has always been encouraged by the senator's efforts," she said. "We're concerned that there might be holes…but we're still trying to piece it through…. We're definitely encouraged by [Gregg's] interest."
Published in The Keene Sentinel, in New Hampshire.
New Hampshire Delegation – It’s Business As Usual, With a Few Changes
By Kim Forrest
WASHINGTON--Nearly two weeks after the war began in Iraq, the offices of New Hampshire's congressional delegation on Capitol Hill are trying to keep to business as usual despite increased security and their need to keep a close watch on the Middle East.
District Two's Rep. Charles Bass says the biggest change has been more security in congressional office buildings.
"Over the last month, they have implemented a much more coordinated security plan for evacuation," he said in a telephone interview Wednesday.
He noted that loudspeakers have been placed in the office buildings, cars are being checked more carefully as they enter the Capitol grounds, a barrier has been placed around the Capitol and Congress members are encouraged not to walk outdoors. Still, he said, his day in Congress is still structured pretty much the same as it was before the war began.
"As for day-to-day life," he said, "there's really the same mechanics of it. Obviously, everybody's more focused on the hour-by-hour events in Iraq."
Bass said that members of Congress do get a special briefing at 10:30 each morning from the Armed Services Committee, the State Department and the Joint Chiefs of Staff and then another briefing on the House floor from Gen. Richard Myers, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. But Bass said he also follows the war in the same way his constituents do.
"I watch television when I get a chance, just like every other American," he said.
Sen. John Sununu (R-NH) said that senators, too, receive exclusive briefings each day.
"On a day-to-day basis, we're receiving top-secret briefings each morning that help ensure senators have any information they need in making good policy decisions," Sununu said in a statement.
Jeff Turcotte, press secretary to Sen. Judd Gregg, said that senators continue to go about their business. For Gregg, that meant presiding as chairman at a Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee hearing Wednesday.
Turcotte also said that even as the Senate continues to deal with the budget and other domestic issues, the war is on everyone's minds.
"The mood on the Hill is not run-of-the-mill by any means," he said. "While the budget process is a predictable, annual event, obviously the thoughts and prayers of Sen. Gregg are with the troops in Iraq."
Sununu, in his statement, expressed similar sentiments, saying that the work on the Senate floor is focused on keeping Americans safe, especially during this time of war.
"National security issues and homeland security spending are at the top of the priority list," he said.
On a more local level, Bass discussed two ways he is helping Granite Staters who are affected personally by the war.
He has placed a link on his Website titled War Time Services and Information, which connects family members of those who are in military service in the Middle East to various help organizations.
And, in all four of his district offices, in Keene, Concord, Nashua and Littleton, he has created a military help desk, in which Second District families with a member on active duty can call in with any problems, financial or administrative, and get specialized assistance.
"I've instructed my staff to accept requests and make them top priority," Bass said. "I feel it's very important to do everything we can to limit the obvious anxiety that many families are feeling right now."
Published in The Keene Sentinel, in New Hampshire.
Gregg, Sununu Vote Against Special Education Amendment
By Kim Forrest
WASHINGTON--Sens. Judd Gregg (R-NH) and John Sununu (R-NH), both notably strong supporters of federal grants for special education, voted against an amendment Wednesday that would have provided the full 40 percent of local costs next year that Congress had promised when it adopted the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) in 1975. Their vote prompted much disapproval from the New Hampshire Democratic Party.
The Senate, by 27-71, rejected the amendment to the fiscal 2004 budget resolution offered by Sen. Mark Dayton (D-MN).
The vote came only days after the Senate accepted Gregg's amendment, which would place the IDEA law on what Gregg described as a "glide path" toward full promised 40 percent of special-education costs in six years, with 26 percent funded by 2005. Gregg's amendment was approved, 89-10.
In a statement, Dayton called for removing the President's proposed dividend tax exemption from the budget or retaining current rates for the top three tax brackets to compensate for the increase in special-education funds. He noted that the federal government currently meets less than 17 percent of the IDEA target.
"The need for more funding is so urgent that surely we can postpone half of the tax cut this budget provides the wealthiest people in America," Dayton said in the statement.
On the Senate floor Wednesday, Gregg expressed concern that Dayton's amendment would increase IDEA spending by 250 percent in one year and cost $229 billion over 10 years. That, he said, would boost the federal share to more than 60 percent, much more than the 40 percent Congress committed to in 1975.
"At some point, we have to recognize that what is happening here is not an attempt to have fiscal responsibility or proper budgeting but simply to put forward a show," Gregg said on the floor.
Jeff Turcotte, Gregg's press secretary, said Gregg's view is that government spending "simply has to be put under control," emphasizing that the vote against the Dayton Amendment was bipartisan, including liberal Democrats.
"Full funding [for special education] is something [Senator Gregg] is still committed to on aggressive levels," Turcotte said.
Sununu agreed with Gregg's take on the Dayton's amendment, saying that it would cause excessive spending and a substantial tax increase.
"Since I was elected to Congress in 1996, I have voted consistently to increase special- education funding - from $3.1 billion in 1997 to $8.6 billion in 2003," he said in a statement. "Additionally, the budget resolution just passed by the Senate funds IDEA at its highest level ever. This represents real results, not partisan rhetoric, and I will continue working toward full funding as we reauthorize IDEA this year.
In his statement, Sununu expressed continued support for the Gregg amendment,, saying it "places the federal government on a direct path to full funding of special-education costs and it does so while controlling the growth of the overall budget."
Kathy Sullivan, chair of the New Hampshire Democratic Party expressed disappointment in the Granite State's Senate delegation, saying that if special education was receiving the promised 40 percent, it would mean lower taxes for New Hampshire residents, who, she said, must pay to compensate for the inadequate federal funds for special education.
"It's another case of Senators Gregg and Sununu making the wrong choices for New Hampshire," she said. "… If they voted to fully fund special education, it would mean a local property tax break for every one in New Hampshire."
She also noted that while the Senators support the tax cut for the wealthy, they did not vote in favor of an amendment that would
"[The New Hampshire Senators] are very happy to give away money to a few, but…by not fully funding special education, it shows that their priorities are not right," she said.
Published in The Keene Sentinel, in New Hampshire.
Gregg Amendment to Increase Special Ed. Funding
By Kim Forrest
WASHINGTON--Keene schools' special-education director praised Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) on Tuesday as Gregg continued his push for increased federal funds for special education that would add to the increases New Hampshire has seen during the past seven years.
"I'm glad something passed," Bruce Thielen, School Administrative Unit 29's director of special education said. "We've been short on [federal] money for a couple of dozen years."
The Senate has approved an amendment to the fiscal year 2004 Senate budget resolution sponsored by Gregg that would increase federal funds for special education by $3.29 billion over the next six years. The vote last Friday was 89-10.
These funds would be allocated under Part B of the 1975 Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), which gives states money to provide special-education services to preschool and school-age children with special needs.
While the Senate Budget Resolution had already incorporated a $1 billion IDEA increase through Fiscal Year 2009, the Gregg Amendment would increase IDEA grants to more than $11 billion for 2004 and more than $13.5 billion for 2005.
"Passage of the Budget Resolution clearly demonstrates that the Senate puts a high priority on meeting the needs of special education, and doing so in a fiscally responsible way." Gregg said in a statement.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act authorized the federal government to provide 40 percent of the cost of special education. But Congress has never come close to appropriating funds to meet that promise. The Gregg amendment would increase the federal share to 26 percent, but Gregg, in a news release, said it would also put the federal spending on a "direct glide path" toward 40 percent in six years. IDEA is up for reauthorization by Congress this year.
The money for the Gregg Amendment would come from a commensurate cutback in the overall budget.
New Hampshire has seen a major increase in money for special education since 1996, when it received just over $10.1 million. This year, it expects to get almost $36 million.
According to the National Center for Education Statistics, in the 2000-01 school year, 30,077 New Hampshire students ages 3-21 were in special-education programs, about 14.4 percent of the state's 208,461 students. In Keene's School Administrative Unit 29, there are approximately 905 students in special-education programs, the district's Thielen said.
He said that each school district uses the IDEA money for whatever special-education purposes it chooses, so long as it fits the federal government's basic guidelines. For School Administrative Unit 29, he said, the funds would allow the unit to hire additional teachers at the preschool level, institute special-education programs related to speech pathology, bring in academic evaluators and help with staff development.
Thielen added that the extra money would help meet the increase in special-education students, so that administrators can "convert time and energy over to the kids."
New Hampshire's junior Senator, John Sununu (R-NH), expressed praise for Gregg's amendment, saying that he, too, hopes for the full promised 40 percent of special- education costs in the near future.
"I commend Senator Gregg's leadership in helping to bring additional special-education resources to local school districts in New Hampshire and across the nation," he said in a statement. "The resources will go directly to local school districts for their immediate education priorities."
Published in The Keene Sentinel, in New Hampshire.
Any Day Now
By Kim Forrest
WASHINGTON--My parents are sending me a gas mask.
The typical care package of cookies and extra sweaters has become a thing of the past. Phone calls from home are more urgent and more frequent. The color orange suddenly is not simply a color that makes my skin look green. Whenever a plane flies overhead, I look out my window and stare at the sky. When I stand on the underground platform of the Metro, my eyes wander, analyzing every inch of the station. What I'm looking for, I can't say. But I'm watching and waiting.
Who knew that living in the world's most powerful city, our nation's Capital, could make me feel so powerless?
They tell me it could happen any day now. What "it" will be, no one really knows, although everyone seems to have a theory. Chemical weapons, biological attacks, dirty bombs, weapons of mass destruction, thoughts that were once only found in my nightmares, have become potential realities. And as much as I put on my brave face and smile and laugh with my friends, deep down inside I can't help but feel fear.
The monsters that once spent the night under my bed on sleepless nights could suddenly be lurking around every corner.
All I know for sure right now is that we're at war. And watching the news day and night, I can see missiles and bombs exploding in Baghdad as though I am looking out my front door. If I had stayed at school this semester in rural Williamstown, Mass., I think I could be detached from it all, and the TV pictures flashing before me would just be of a faraway land, a place that had no bearing on me or my life. It would, I think, be like watching a movie.
Instead, though, I'm here. And those televised images, it turns out, mean so much more.
They mean that being in Washington, I'm at a greater risk than ever before; that I must be "vigilant," whatever that means:. that there is a "near certainty" of an attack. But no one can tell me where or when or what. No one can tell me that it's going to be okay either.
I am told that I have to live my life without fear, to go about my daily business. That means I should go to the Capitol, to the House and Senate office buildings, as I always do. Just grab my congressional press pass and be the tough reporter that I know I should be.
I watch reporters on television from Baghdad and Kuwait and am amazed at how they can pull it all together. As anxious as I am in Washington, I sometimes wonder how journalists courageous enough to be working in the Middle East during a war must feel. I know they've been through extensive training before they follow the action, but watching them often leaves me astounded.
Sometimes I think that I could have used some training before I came to Washington-training in how to be normal during a high alert, during a war; Training in how to be in control when I know that I can't.
In a city where a man on a tractor stuck in a pond brought traffic to a virtual shutdown, along with the fears he planted in the minds of many, I wonder what I can laugh off and when I should really be concerned.
A suspicious package was found the other day only blocks from where I work, and when I was told by my boss to go investigate, I dutifully complied but couldn't help wanting to run away.
But I didn't run.
As a girl who was often called a "scaredy-cat" by friends, who cried at horror movies, who hid under the covers during thunderstorms, sometimes I feel like I have something to prove by living in the eye of the storm, as they call it. And as tense as everything gets, I know that there's a reason I'm here.
I was talking the other day to a friend who expressed her fears about my studying in Washington
"You could come home any time you want, you know," she said. "You could go back to Williams and you would definitely be safe there. Why don't you just get out of there?"
I paused for just a second. "I can't," I said.
"Why not?" she asked, her voice rising.
And for the first time in a long time, I smiled for real. Among all the uncertainties about life nowadays, there was one thing I could say with confidence:
"Because there's no place I'd rather be."
Published in The Keene Sentinel, in New Hampshire.
