The truth about IDEA - Who is Deborah Blair Porter?

<h1>The truth about IDEA - Who is Deborah Blair Porter?</h1>Author: <a title="Ericha Parks" href="http://www.articlesbase.com/authors/ericha-parks/161152.htm">Ericha Parks</a> There is a shocking mole in the world of journalism. Deborah Blair Porter appears to have an impressive resume, writing for Edweek, The Los Angeles Times and The Daily Breeze. She might have even had a local council position in the South Bay of Los Angeles at some point. Ms. Porter has a "secret" that creates a journalistic bias in the most egregious way. Keep reading for more. Ms. Porter clearly supports the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act (IDEA), this is not unusual. I have never heard of anyone who has ever been against it. I recently read an article authored by Ms. Porter that was published in Edweek. The content and comments in her article were disingenuous and embarrassing at least. Many sarcastic comments precede her accusation of letter writing campaigns en masse by the PTA to their legislatures to oppose IDEA. She claims that the PTAs are, "blaming special education students and their parents" for the budget crisis in California. Before I comment on the balance of Ms. Porter's article, I will address her letter writing campaign statement. I searched the California PTA's website where I reviewed all information about special education. I found nothing about letter writing campaigns for special education. What I did find was an informational packet instructing parents how to identify learning disabilities to discover if they're student is eligible for IDEA benefits. There are two bills that the PTA supports regarding IDEA, AB661 Toralkson and AB826 Buchanan. These bills attempt to apportion more state money to IDEA. Apart from the state PTA, I did find a proposed letter writing campaign from Mission Viejo asking its membership to bring to the attention of the legislature that their school district had spent an additional $13.7 in mandated IDEA services. The letter to the membership was authored by Caroline Paltin, Ph.D., Special Education Chair for the Special Education Committee. Hardly an attack on IDEA; Special Education Chair, Dr. Paltin, clearly is trying to mitigate the damage of financial requirements by asking the federal government to properly fund the IDEA programs, instead of having the funding come from the local school districts. <a href="http://www.svpta.org/newsletters/march08.pdf"><a target="_blank" href="http://www.svpta.org/newsletters/march08.pdf">http://www.svpta.org/newsletters/march08.pdf</a></a> Another local PTA, in a school district in Santa Barbara, stated that the PTA strongly supports increasing federal funding for IDEA. I am not sure how that is a letter writing campaign, but perhaps it should be. Is it possible that Ms. Porter does not understand that a PTA asking for federal funding for IDEA services does not equate to "blaming special education students and their parents"? She goes on to negatively point out that some people "believe the responsibility for educating [special education] lies elsewhere." That statement is accurate, but I am not sure why she puts a negative spin on it, well - maybe I know why. More on that later. The reason why people believe that the responsibility lies elsewhere is because ... the responsibility lies elsewhere in the case of IDEA. IDEA, a federal act has defined and imposed services and mandates on the states for special education. IDEA again are mandates and not suggestions. However, the federal government only funds about 19% of the cost of IDEA services and other costs, the state (SELPA) kicks in another 28% leaving school districts to use its own unrestricted funds to cover the balance of the costs, this fund is called an encroachment fund. The aforementioned school district in Mission Viejo had an encroachment fund for IDEA in the sum of $13.7 million, and that's about average. That encroachment fund comes straight from school districts' budgets and from other school education programs, library and PE, including the lay off of teachers which will cause larger class sizes in 2009-10. I am not sure why Ms. Porter assesses any of the PTA positions as, "a new level of blame [sec] being directed squarely at parents of kids with special needs." Ms. Porter further attempts to make the claim that: "According to the U.S. Department of [sec] Education is primarily a State and local responsibility in the United States." Good grief. This was her best analysis of why the states should be paying the bill for IDEA? First of all, the parents who are concerned about the funding are not mad at the state for not funding the program, it's about the inequity of the school districts having to pay over 50% of the services from their own local budgets. In any event, her explanation about states and education is unimpressive and unreliable in her context. States having responsibility to educate its students is attributed to the 10th Amendment of the Constitution (Bill of Rights) establishing that because education is not mentioned in the Constitution, therefore the responsibility belongs to the states to decide education priorities. Although she failed to properly analyze the states' rights on education, or she willfully slanted the truth, she provided the perfect example to illustrate why the federal government should not be making mandates and acts that require outside funding from states and school districts. As prescribed by a case in 1992, the Supreme Court made a ruling on a case alleging a violation of the 10th Amendment, New York v. The United States of America (1992), 505 U.S. 14. The Supreme Court, in a 6–3 decision, found that federally mandated programs violated the states rights under the 10th Amendment. In her decision, Justice <a href="http://www.articlesbase.com/people/Sandra_Day_O'Connor">Sandra Day O'Connor</a> found that the federal government can encourage but cannot mandate conditions for a federal Act and that the federal government cannot directly compel states to enforce federal regulations by forcing the funding. The federal government has no business mandating federal acts on the states. That's the point. Yes, the states need to balance their own budgets and make cuts according to their revenues. Yet the federal government mandates IDEA programs without consideration of the hardship that the mandates cause and the required cuts elsewhere. The state should be able to educate all of the students including those with disabilities. Ms. Porter is correct that it's the state's right, but then why defend IDEA mandates handed down from the federal government? You cannot have it both ways, Ms. Porter. Ms. Porter woefully failed to appropriately analyse any of her legal findings. This is odd for a reporter to do. Why did she do this? It becomes apparent when you find that Ms. Porter sued the Manhattan Beach Unified School District for IDEA inadequacies and found herself a millionaire with a nearly $8 million settlement that came directly from the Manhattan Beach school district budget. The case is entitled, Porter v. Board of Trustees, Manhattan Beach Unified School District 307 F3d. 1064. Indeed, incorporated in the IDEA statutes, there is an affirmative proviso for assumed conflicts followed by legal entitlements for those who are not satisfied with the school's adherence. Ms. Porter, in her lawsuit, claimed time and again that the special education services for her son were not provided to her satisfaction. Though her child has delayed learning and a mild spectrum of autism, she insisted on a one-on-one aid and other benefits for which her child was not qualified to receive. According to the Manhattan Beach special education department, the school district offered other remedies as prescribed for his condition, however, Manhattan Beach was unable to satisfy Ms. Porter's demands for additional IEPs, programs and services. I guess she received a settlement because she exhausted everyone, driving up legal fees for the district - when she should have been exhausting her other remedies, in my opinion. In an article that I wrote back on May 13, I unwittingly profiled the case of Porter, having had no inkling of who Porter was, I wrote: "Case in point, Porter v. Board of Trustees of Manhattan Beach Unified School District et al., 307 F. 3d 1064 (9th Cir. 2002), 537 U.S. 1194, 123 S. Ct. 1303, 154 L. Ed. 2nd 1029 (2003). In the case of Porter, the parents of a student, who had been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, charged that Manhattan Beach Unified School District failed to provide their child with a "free appropriate public education." This lawsuit resulted in the school district paying over $6.7M to the family of the student. In addition, as part of the settlement, control of the student's education was transferred to a Special Master, Ivor Weiner, Ph.D., resulting in the cost of just under $1.1M to pay for the education of the student at the direction of the Special Master." After I published this article, I began receiving sarcastic and nasty comments from someone defending the Porter v. Manhattan Beach case, 70 comments in 10 days. I am informed and believe that these comments came from Ms. Porter who was anonymously trying to discredit me on my own site and other sites. Ms. Porter even embarrassingly uses her own case in her Ednews article to attempt to make a point about IDEA and defend this litigation, yet never tells her readers that she is the plaintiff in the case. I really don't know what to say beyond that because it's such a blow to the world of journalism and the sanctity of the truth. Why she keeps this a "secret" is beyond the stretch of my imagination. I think Edweek should give me a shot at her job, at least I would do it with honor, dignity and accuracy. <a href="http://ednews.org/articles/whats-the-big-idea.html"><a target="_blank" href="http://ednews.org/articles/whats-the-big-idea.html">http://ednews.org/articles/whats-the-big-idea.html</a></a>About the Author: Article Source: <a href="http://www.articlesbase.com/">ArticlesBase.com</a> - <a href="http://www.articlesbase.com/education-articles/the-truth-about-idea-who-is-deborah-blair-porter-1012167.html" title="The truth about IDEA - Who is Deborah Blair Porter?">The truth about IDEA - Who is Deborah Blair Porter?</a>

There is a shocking mole in the world of journalism.

Deborah Blair Porter appears to have an impressive resume, writing for Edweek, The Los Angeles Times and The Daily Breeze. She might have even had a local council position in the South Bay of Los Angeles at some point. Ms. Porter has a "secret" that creates a journalistic bias in the most egregious way. Keep reading for more.

Ms. Porter clearly supports the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act (IDEA), this is not unusual. I have never heard of anyone who has ever been against it. I recently read an article authored by Ms. Porter that was published in Edweek. The content and comments in her article were disingenuous and embarrassing at least. Many sarcastic comments precede her accusation of letter writing campaigns en masse by the PTA to their legislatures to oppose IDEA. She claims that the PTAs are, "blaming special education students and their parents" for the budget crisis in California.

Before I comment on the balance of Ms. Porter's article, I will address her letter writing campaign statement. I searched the California PTA's website where I reviewed all information about special education. I found nothing about letter writing campaigns for special education. What I did find was an informational packet instructing parents how to identify learning disabilities to discover if they're student is eligible for IDEA benefits. There are two bills that the PTA supports regarding IDEA, AB661 Toralkson and AB826 Buchanan. These bills attempt to apportion more state money to IDEA.

Apart from the state PTA, I did find a proposed letter writing campaign from Mission Viejo asking its membership to bring to the attention of the legislature that their school district had spent an additional $13.7 in mandated IDEA services. The letter to the membership was authored by Caroline Paltin, Ph.D., Special Education Chair for the Special Education Committee. Hardly an attack on IDEA; Special Education Chair, Dr. Paltin, clearly is trying to mitigate the damage of financial requirements by asking the federal government to properly fund the IDEA programs, instead of having the funding come from the local school districts. http://www.svpta.org/newsletters/march08.pdf

Another local PTA, in a school district in Santa Barbara, stated that the PTA strongly supports increasing federal funding for IDEA. I am not sure how that is a letter writing campaign, but perhaps it should be.

Is it possible that Ms. Porter does not understand that a PTA asking for federal funding for IDEA services does not equate to "blaming special education students and their parents"?

She goes on to negatively point out that some people "believe the responsibility for educating [special education] lies elsewhere." That statement is accurate, but I am not sure why she puts a negative spin on it, well - maybe I know why. More on that later. The reason why people believe that the responsibility lies elsewhere is because ... the responsibility lies elsewhere in the case of IDEA. IDEA, a federal act has defined and imposed services and mandates on the states for special education.

IDEA again are mandates and not suggestions. However, the federal government only funds about 19% of the cost of IDEA services and other costs, the state (SELPA) kicks in another 28% leaving school districts to use its own unrestricted funds to cover the balance of the costs, this fund is called an encroachment fund.

The aforementioned school district in Mission Viejo had an encroachment fund for IDEA in the sum of $13.7 million, and that's about average. That encroachment fund comes straight from school districts' budgets and from other school education programs, library and PE, including the lay off of teachers which will cause larger class sizes in 2009-10. I am not sure why Ms. Porter assesses any of the PTA positions as, "a new level of blame [sec] being directed squarely at parents of kids with special needs."

Ms. Porter further attempts to make the claim that: "According to the U.S. Department of [sec] Education is primarily a State and local responsibility in the United States."

Good grief. This was her best analysis of why the states should be paying the bill for IDEA? First of all, the parents who are concerned about the funding are not mad at the state for not funding the program, it's about the inequity of the school districts having to pay over 50% of the services from their own local budgets. In any event, her explanation about states and education is unimpressive and unreliable in her context. States having responsibility to educate its students is attributed to the 10th Amendment of the Constitution (Bill of Rights) establishing that because education is not mentioned in the Constitution, therefore the responsibility belongs to the states to decide education priorities.

Although she failed to properly analyze the states' rights on education, or she willfully slanted the truth, she provided the perfect example to illustrate why the federal government should not be making mandates and acts that require outside funding from states and school districts. As prescribed by a case in 1992, the Supreme Court made a ruling on a case alleging a violation of the 10th Amendment, New York v. The United States of America (1992), 505 U.S. 14. The Supreme Court, in a 6–3 decision, found that federally mandated programs violated the states rights under the 10th Amendment. In her decision, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor found that the federal government can encourage but cannot mandate conditions for a federal Act and that the federal government cannot directly compel states to enforce federal regulations by forcing the funding.

The federal government has no business mandating federal acts on the states. That's the point. Yes, the states need to balance their own budgets and make cuts according to their revenues. Yet the federal government mandates IDEA programs without consideration of the hardship that the mandates cause and the required cuts elsewhere. The state should be able to educate all of the students including those with disabilities.

Ms. Porter is correct that it's the state's right, but then why defend IDEA mandates handed down from the federal government? You cannot have it both ways, Ms. Porter. Ms. Porter woefully failed to appropriately analyse any of her legal findings. This is odd for a reporter to do. Why did she do this?

It becomes apparent when you find that Ms. Porter sued the Manhattan Beach Unified School District for IDEA inadequacies and found herself a millionaire with a nearly $8 million settlement that came directly from the Manhattan Beach school district budget. The case is entitled, Porter v. Board of Trustees, Manhattan Beach Unified School District 307 F3d. 1064. Indeed, incorporated in the IDEA statutes, there is an affirmative proviso for assumed conflicts followed by legal entitlements for those who are not satisfied with the school's adherence. Ms. Porter, in her lawsuit, claimed time and again that the special education services for her son were not provided to her satisfaction. Though her child has delayed learning and a mild spectrum of autism, she insisted on a one-on-one aid and other benefits for which her child was not qualified to receive. According to the Manhattan Beach special education department, the school district offered other remedies as prescribed for his condition, however, Manhattan Beach was unable to satisfy Ms. Porter's demands for additional IEPs, programs and services. I guess she received a settlement because she exhausted everyone, driving up legal fees for the district - when she should have been exhausting her other remedies, in my opinion.

In an article that I wrote back on May 13, I unwittingly profiled the case of Porter, having had no inkling of who Porter was, I wrote: "Case in point, Porter v. Board of Trustees of Manhattan Beach Unified School District et al., 307 F. 3d 1064 (9th Cir. 2002), 537 U.S. 1194, 123 S. Ct. 1303, 154 L. Ed. 2nd 1029 (2003). In the case of Porter, the parents of a student, who had been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, charged that Manhattan Beach Unified School District failed to provide their child with a "free appropriate public education." This lawsuit resulted in the school district paying over $6.7M to the family of the student. In addition, as part of the settlement, control of the student's education was transferred to a Special Master, Ivor Weiner, Ph.D., resulting in the cost of just under $1.1M to pay for the education of the student at the direction of the Special Master."

After I published this article, I began receiving sarcastic and nasty comments from someone defending the Porter v. Manhattan Beach case, 70 comments in 10 days. I am informed and believe that these comments came from Ms. Porter who was anonymously trying to discredit me on my own site and other sites.

Ms. Porter even embarrassingly uses her own case in her Ednews article to attempt to make a point about IDEA and defend this litigation, yet never tells her readers that she is the plaintiff in the case. I really don't know what to say beyond that because it's such a blow to the world of journalism and the sanctity of the truth. Why she keeps this a "secret" is beyond the stretch of my imagination. I think Edweek should give me a shot at her job, at least I would do it with honor, dignity and accuracy.

http://ednews.org/articles/whats-the-big-idea.html

Rate this Article:

1 / 5 stars - 10 vote(s)

Re-Publish

Article Source: http://www.articlesbase.com/education-articles/the-truth-about-idea-who-is-deborah-blair-porter-1012167.html

Article Tags: Budget, Idea, California, Programs, Special Education, Deborah Blair Porter

Related Videos
Related Articles
Ask / Related Q&A

Play

Tracy Porter Decorating video - Porch Living

Play

Tracy Porter Be Extraordinary Video - Sharing of Yourself!

Play

Tracy Porter Kitchen Design Tips

Play

Quick and Easy Buffet Ideas

Play

Holiday Display Ideas

1. Betsy (14:28, 25.07.2009)

Ericha wrote: "I think Edweek should give me a shot at her job, at least I would do it with honor, dignity and accuracy."

EXCUSE ME?
Here's an example of Ericha's "honor, dignity, and accuracy": (from her hissy fit on allvoices.com)

"Are you saying that because I have perfect boobs?"

"By the way, they really are perfect. My husband loves them ...."

"I think that you have size 4 envy. Are you bitter that you're ugly and overweight? Don't blame me. Get a trainer.You live in Manhattan Beach. I have some leads for you."

"With bimbo boobs like mine, who needs commas?"

"By the way, they're D cups and perfect."

"My bimbo boobs are typing this right now!!!"

"Anderson Cooper is following this with me right now and he's laughing at you ... He might
not like the PR, but he loves the D cups."

Honor, dignity and accuracy ???

2. Moggy (14:02, 09.07.2009)

"Though her child has delayed learning and a mild spectrum of autism, she insisted on a one-on-one aid and other benefits for which her child was not qualified to receive."

Obviously there was great merit to Ms. Porter's case because she WON the lawsuit. Obviously, because Ms. Porter won the lawsuit, her child WAS qualified to receive those services. Because Ms. Porter was writing the article as a parent of a child getting special education services, an intelligent reader would assume that the case of Porter vs. Manhattan Beach WAS about her own case. Perhaps it could have been more clearly stated, but such a venomous and catty response to Ms. Porter's Edqweek piece is not warranted.

Ms. Parks appears to "have-it-in" for Ms. Porter and this hateful tirade can hardly be described as an "article", it is just libelous mud-slinging. Ms. Parks, on all-voices.com, (her articles have been removed now, thank God) referred to Ms. Porter as "fat and ugly", suggested she get hire a personal trainer, called Ms. Porter "a gross person" (what are we --8 years old???) and then Ms. Parks posted several bizarre responses to comments, telling everyone what perfect breasts she had, how she loved her D cups, and how she typed with her breasts. Ms. Parks also appeared obsessed with the idea that every negative comment written in response to her libelous tirades were written by this Deborah Porter person. I am not Deborah Porter, and I do not know Deborah Porter. Ms. Parks has angered many parents of children with special needs for her accusations that we are making "school districts suffer" because we advocate for services for our children. Everyone agrees I.D.E.A. should be fully funded, but making us scapegoats for all the problems school districts face is doing nothing more than fanning the flames of hatred and pitting parents against parents. If school districts obeyed the law, we wouldn't win lawsuits.

Latest Education Articles
More from Ericha Parks

Some Comparisons Between Private Schools And Public Schools In Canada

By: Adriana Noton | 08/11/2009
In Canada, children are required by law to attend school until they reach the age of 16. They can attend their local public school for free, as paid for by tax dollars. However, some parents choose to send their kids to private school instead of public school, with the belief...

Learn Conversational Hypnosis Techniques Online

By: Ricky Lim | 08/11/2009
The Conversational hypnosis technique was founded by Milton Erickson who was born in 1901, 5th of December.

Understanding Environmental Services

By: Wolf Krammel | 08/11/2009
An explanation of environmental services and why they are important.

Cabin Crew Recruitment - A Special Job For Special People

By: Tobay Dytham Swifft | 08/11/2009
Cabin crew recruitment is something that airlines do, but it does not happen all the time, an you need to know they are looking for very special staff. It takes unique qualities to become a cabin crew member and it not the easiest work field to get into.

The Visigoths and Spain

By: John Lewis | 08/11/2009
Spanish history is a rich tapestry of many cultures and peoples. Some from Central Europe,Africa and the Middle East.

Free Online Degree: Does This Really Exist?

By: David Patullo | 07/11/2009
Let's face it; the internet has revolutionized our reality. Without the World Wide Web western world would be completely and utterly different. With the internet online education has not only evolved, but has exploded on the scene. There are a lot of promises out there, made by a lot of...

Boost Your Career - Fast Online Degree

By: David Patullo | 07/11/2009
Everyone knows that time is a valuable feature of every aspect of life. You need time to spend with your families, time to deal with your work, time for yourself, and somehow advance your life to the next step. Online education can afford a lot of luxuries in this aspect...

Online University Degree - a Decision One Must Make

By: David Patullo | 07/11/2009
What are the factors I have to weigh when getting an online university degree? This question is not so complicated to answer. The first and major question is this, "What online universities grant accredited degrees?" This is the imperative decision maker. The consequences are easy: id you do not attend...

The truth about IDEA - Who is Deborah Blair Porter?

By: Ericha Parks | 03/07/2009 | Education
IDEA is also known as Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act. Though it is only 19% funded by the federal government, the federal government mandates all of the services. The school districts pay over 50% out-of-pocket.