Even though federal laws are designed to ensure basic rights for parents of special needs kids nationwide, there are stark differences in educational opportunities depending on whether a state supports school choice.
In states that offer selective disability programs, students have far more options compared to their peers in states that don’t. It seems clear that Congress needs to revise the law to broaden choices for disabled students across the country.
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, a cornerstone of federal special education policy, was enacted 50 years ago. This was a time when reform-minded activists sought to redefine liberalism, moving away from dependency on wealth redistribution through federal administrations and focusing less on relying on due process rights enforced by federal judges and legal organizations.
This law introduces rights for Individualized Education Programs, which are agreements between public schools and parents. However, notably, there is no guarantee of access to high-quality education options based on parental choice.
Because parents don’t have the option to withdraw from the public school system, school administrators often struggle to allocate scarce resources for special education. While the law has improved public education access for disabled children, those who cannot afford legal representation or bureaucratic help typically can’t fight for necessary services.
The school choice initiative provides an alternative for parents, allowing them to opt out of the compliance regulations set by the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. They can use scholarships or educational savings accounts to cover the costs of schools and services tailored to their children’s unique needs. Families in states that support school choice are benefitting from this. According to estimates, 184,450 disabled students are currently engaged in school choice programs, a number expected to rise with the recent introduction of the Educational Savings Account Program, which gives priority to children with disabilities. For instance, a forthcoming educational savings account program in Texas will allocate $30,000 annually for kids with special needs.
Initial reports show promising outcomes from school choice programs for disabled students. States like New York, the District of Columbia, California, and New Jersey—where school choice is prevalent—rank highest in due process complaints under the Disability Education Act. In contrast, states with educational savings account programs for special needs students generally report far fewer of these complaints.
New York, adjusted for its population, has over 100 times more due process complaints than Arizona and Ohio, which were early adopters of school choice for disabled students.
This large gap implies that parents of children with selective disabilities feel less compelled to lodge complaints because the school selection program meets their needs. As a result, many special needs students are opting out. For instance, enrollment in Arizona’s Educational Savings Account Program for students with disabilities surged by 85% from 2022 to 2024, and in Arkansas, 44% of beneficiaries in the first year of the program were special needs students, which is about three times more than their representation in the school-age population.
To achieve optimal success for special needs students, Congress should consider reforming the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. This could include providing scholarships or educational savings accounts to support states that offer these rights outside of public school environments, giving more parents the ability to choose suitable educational settings for their children without the need for legal assistance. Implementing such measures could not only benefit non-selection but also promote educational savings accounts limited to children with special needs, thereby helping millions of families.
A bipartisan reform could be within reach. Congressional Democrats have long pushed for complete funding of special education expenses, with the Disabled Education Act originally promising the federal government would cover 40% of those costs. Unfortunately, that commitment has yet to be fulfilled. Increasing federal funding for special education in exchange for incentives for school choice could create a compromise that serves both parties well.
Critics of the Special Education Choice Program express concern that parents leaving the compliance regulations of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act would lose the ability to sue schools for providing “appropriate” services if they opt for an educational savings account or voucher. Yet, rather than increasing competition through complicated litigation, Congress should focus on expanding options for parents while improving the quality of special education with greater federal funding for children who choose to remain or return to public schools after trying educational savings account programs.
This holistic approach doesn’t just aid countless special needs children; it could also gather widespread support. Recent research from Edchoice indicates that 83% of Americans believe the federal government should fund schools serving disabled students. Additionally, 69% of parents are in favor of reforms for school choice. Congress should heed parental voices and prioritize special education choices in the upcoming midterm elections.
