|
|

News of U.S. educational technology policy and
legislation. Compiled
and edited by Leslie Harris & Associates for ISTE.
|
November, 2004 Contents
Funding Update
FY05 Appropriations Ends with Major Cuts to Education
Technology
During a rare Saturday session on November 20, the House and Senate
passed
the FY05 Omnibus Appropriations bill, which provided over $388 billion
for all
of the remaining unpassed FY05 spending bills. Although the Department
of Education
received $59.7 billion, representing a $1.4 billion increase for FY05,
education
technology programs suffered even worse than had been expected.
Although the
House had approved $600 million in Enhancing Education Through
Technology (E2T2)
funds and the Senate had supported $692 million in their separate
Labor, HHS
and Education spending bills, the final Omnibus legislation contained
only $500
million for the program. It appears that the money removed from E2T2
may have
gone to sustain the State Grants for Innovative programs (Title V), a
$300 million
program which faced zero funding at the beginning of the
appropriations process
but emerged in the final bill with a $200 million appropriation. The
final appropriation
for E2T2 more than doubles the Houses proposed $92 million cut
and represents
a nearly 28% cut over last years funding levels. Moreover, the
final $500
million figure will be reduced by an additional 0.83% cut that
Congress imposed
on all non-defense and non-homeland security programs funded in this
Omnibus
Appropriations bill to keep spending within tight spending constraints
sought
by the White House. As a result, E2T2 will lose nearly $5 million more
in funding,
leaving the program at a funding level for FY05 of approximately $495
million.
The E2T2 program was not the only program to receive less funding
than expected.
Title I received approximately $500 million less than the
Administration requested,
obtaining $12.8 billion in the final bill. The Community Technology
Centers
program saw its appropriation halved, leaving it with a paltry $4.9
million
to continue operations. Star Schools, which faced outright elimination
in the
Presidents FY05 budget and the Houses version of FY05
Appropriations,
survived the budget axe but received only level funding$21
million. The
only piece of positive news was that the State Data program received
its first
appropriations for $25 million. This program will help states develop
and pay
for data systems to comply with No Child Left Behind.
Here are the funding numbers by program:
- Title I $12.8 billion, $500 increase
- Professional Development $2.94 billion, $10,000 increase
- Education Technology Block Grant $500 million, $192 million
decrease
- Education Block Grant $200 million, $96 million decrease
- Star Schools $21 million, level funding
- Community Technology Centers $5 million, $4.9 million
decrease
- Ready to Teach $14.4 million, level funding
- Ready to Learn $23.5 million, $636 increase
- State Data Program $25 million (first appropriation ever)

E-Rate Update
After an intensive lobbying effort on and off Capitol Hill,
legislation that
allows E-Rate funding to begin flowing to applicants at a normal pace
passed
the House and the Senate before they adjourned for the year and will
be signed
into law by President Bush. The legislation, pushed by Senators Snowe
(R-ME)
and Rockefeller (D-WV) exempts for 12 months the E-Rate program and
all of universal
service from the federal Anti Deficiency Act provision that blocked
the Universal
Service Administrative Company (USAC) from mailing out E-Rate funding
commitment
decision letters (FCDLs) without cash on-hand to cover those
commitments. Under
the Anti-Deficiency Act, the federal government is barred from
obligating federal
funds if there is inadequate cash on hand to cover those obligations.
This bill
also includes an exemption for all of universal service out of concern
that
the projection process, by which telecommunications companies and USAC
determine
how much funding will be required for the high cost and low income
telephone
support programs, could also be considered as obligating federal funds
without
sufficient cash on-hand.
The trouble with E-rate funding began more than one year ago when the
FCC ordered
the E-Rate to convert to Federal (Government GAAP) accounting
standards. While
changing over to a new accounting system for E-Rate this past summer,
USAC realized:
1) that the E-Rates funds could be construed as federal funds,
thus bringing
the Anti-Deficiency Act into play; 2) that FCDLs might constitute
obligations,
thus triggering the cash on-hand requirement; and 3) that the fund
would likely
not have sufficient cash on-hand to cover all Program Year 2004
applications
that had been processed and approved and were awaiting the mailing of
FCDLs.
Consequently, USAC suspended mailing out FCDLs in early August and
only resumed
mailing FCDLs in November. Without this exemption, though,
applications seeking
upwards of $400 million in requested support would not have received
letters
because USAC lacked sufficient funds in its accounts to cover them.
The efforts to institute a legislative fix and thereby allow USAC to
issue
FCDLs for all approved applications overcame a variety of competing
interests.
Recognizing an opportunity to free-ride on the universal service
legislation,
three Senators attached three pieces of unrelated legislation to the
E-Rate
bill bills on wireless E-911 service, federal spectrum
relocation, and
boxing reform and attempted to pass them as a package. However,
various
objections on the House side to the boxing bill, championed by Senator
John
McCain (R-AZ), stalled the package and prevented it from being
included in the
FY05 Omnibus Appropriations bill. Just before Thanksgiving, the House
passed
by voice vote a package that included three of the four bills but left
out the
boxing bill. The Senate only followed suit, just prior to adjourning
for the
year, after Sen. McCain received assurances that the House would
consider his
boxing bill next year and Senator Byrds (D-WV) concerns about
oversight
of spectrum relocation funds were addressed.
The E-Rate exemption saga will not end here, though. The ADA
exemption is only
for 12 months, and a more permanent solution is needed. Without one,
Congress
and the Administration may face a rerun of this funding disruption
crisis at
the end of next year. Additionally, USAC and the FCC must figure out
how to
recoup from telephone companies $550 million in E-Rate funds that they
decided
not to collect last year without causing major consumer rate
increases. Finally,
Congress is expected to begin work early next year on rewriting the
Telecommunications
Act of 1996, which will likely lead to some restructuring of the
E-Rate program.

IDEA Update
Congress Passes the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act
(IDEA)
Last week, Congress completed action on the reauthorization of the
Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), H.R. 1350. The bill, which had
been
stalled in the Conference Committee for months, was passed on Friday
by an overwhelming
397-3 vote in the House and by voice vote in the Senate. Perhaps the
biggest
success for educational groups was the bills provision calling
for the
federal government to meet the 40 percent funding match within a
six-year period.
The President is expected to sign the bill into law in the next two
weeks.
Overall, the bill promotes the use of technology to help educate
children with
disabilities by infusing language concerning universally designed
technology,
a concept that seeks to design technology to be accessible right from
the start
rather than retrofitting existing technology to be accessible. The
bill also
supports assistive technology devices. Significantly, the bill finds
that support
is needed to improve technological resources and integrate technology,
including
universally designed technologies, into the lives of children with
disabilities,
parents of children with disabilities, school personnel, and other
through curricula,
and assistive technologies.
Under IDEAs new Part B, entitled Assistance for Education of
All Children
with Disabilities, states are given the opportunity to use funds to
carry out
a number of education technology activities. First, states may use
funds to
better integrate new and existing technologies in the classroom for
students
with disabilities. Second, states may support the development and use
of technology,
including universally designed technologies and assistive technology
devices,
to maximize accessibility to the general curriculum for children with
disabilities.
Third, states may utilize technology to reduce the amount of paperwork
that
is generated in individualized education programs.
Additionally, the bill contains a number of provisions that support
other efforts
to better utilize technology. For example, Section 662 states that
funds may
be used to prepare personnel in the innovative uses and applications
of technology,
including universally designed technologies, assistive technology
devices, and
assistive technology services. In addition, the bill requires the
Secretary
of Education to award competitive grants under the Technology
Development, Demonstration
and Utilization program to entities that conduct research and promote
the use
of innovative and emerging universally designed technologies for
children with
disabilities. This provision favors those technologies that are
accessible to
the broadest range of individuals with disabilities and supports the
use of
Internet-based communications for students with cognitive disabilities
in order
to maximize academic and functional skills.

CALEA Update
ISTE Files Comments on CALEA
On November 8th, ISTE filed comments regarding the FCCs Notice
of Proposed
Rulemaking (NPRM) that sought public input on whether to extend the
Communication
Assistance for Law Enforcement ACT (CALEA) to broadband Internet
services. ISTE
filed these comments with a number of education and library
associations and
with the EDUCAUSE Coalition.
The FCC issued the NPRM at the request of the Department of Justice
and the
FBI to move CALEA from traditional telecommunication networks (i.e.
standard
telephone) to broadband Internet and VoIP providers. CALEA was adopted
by Congress
in 1994, and created a set of statutory obligations for
telecommunications carriers
to assist law enforcement in executing electronic surveillance. Most
importantly,
the law requires carriers to design or modify their systems
usually at
their own cost to ensure that lawfully authorized electronic
surveillance
can be performed. The law imposes additional obligations on carriers
to collect
and deliver this information to law enforcement. The CALEA statute is
specifically
aimed at common carriers on the switched public
telecommunications
network. The law excludes all information services, such as Internet
access,
from coverage. Notwithstanding the current statute, the FCC found that
broadband
services, including VoIP services, were a substantial
replacement
for the public switched telephone network and were therefore subject
to CALEA.
In its comments, the EDUCAUSE coalition asked the FCC to make a clear
and specific
exemption or carve out for educational and library
institutions
and educational networks. While the FCC allowed that
establishments acquiring
broadband Internet access to permit their patrons to access the
Internet do
not appear to be covered by CALEA, this statement does not
encompass educational
institutions such as facilities-based state networks and broadband
Internet
access providers that serve facilities such as hospitals and local
governments
in addition to educational institutions. As a result of this omission,
many
institutions would have to comply with the CALEA provisions barring
any clear
and specific exemption language from the FCC.
The reply comments to the NPRM are due in early December. The FCC is
unlikely
to take final action on this issue until late spring. The NPRM can be
found
here: http://hraunfoss.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-04-187A1.doc

Join the Ed Tech Action Network
If educational technology issues are important to you, then please
join the
ISTE and CoSN Ed Tech Action Network at http://www.EdTechActionNetwork.org.
This online advocacy tool will allow you to easily send important
messages to
your Representative and Senators, learn more about timely education
technology
issues, and receive tips for communicating with elected officials.
Your voice
is critical for impacting the decisions of policy-makers.

Glossary
Conference Committee A committee composed of temporary
panelists
from the House and Senate that meet to reconcile differences between
the House
and Senate versions of a bill.
Fair use - A somewhat nebulous concept that is often misused
by consumer
groups, private organizations, and lawmakers alike. The definition, as
set forth
in Section 107 of the 1976 Copyright Act, states that fair use is the
doctrine
that allows an individual who has violated copyright to justify that
use under
"recognized public purposes." Such public purposes may
include, "criticism,
comment, news reporting, teacher (including multiple copies for
classroom uses),
scholarship, or research."
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) - The 1997
reauthorzation
of IDEA guarantees equal access to public education for people with
disabilities.
IDEA also includes a grant program to states and LEAs aimed at
facilitating
the education of children with disabilities by providing increased
access to
high quality programs and services.
Pay-as-you-go (PAYGO) - A Budget procedure that ensures that
all legislation
affecting direct spending or receipts is budget neutral in each fiscal
year.
Thus, any spending increases must be offset by funding cuts in other
areas or
tax increases.
Universal Design - "The term 'universal design' means a
concept
or philosophy for designing and delivering products and services that
are usable
by people with the widest possible range of functional capabilities,
which include
products and services that are directly usable (without requiring
assistive
technologies) and products and services that are made usable with
assistive
technologies." (Source: H.R. 4278, Improving Access to Assistive
Technology
for Individuals with Disabilities Act of 2004, Section 3)
|