Keep Our PACT Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Van Hollen, Chris [D-MD]
- Committees
- Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Jan 30, 2025
Bottom line
The bill seeks to fulfill long-standing federal commitments to education for disadvantaged students and students with disabilities by guaranteeing and gradually increasing federal funding to authorized levels through mandatory appropriations.
What it actually does
This bill mandates specific, increasing appropriations for Part A of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (ESEA) and the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) over a ten-year period, from fiscal year 2026 through 2035. It aims to achieve the 'full funding' levels authorized for these programs by shifting their funding from discretionary to mandatory spending and designating these appropriations as an emergency requirement.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that this bill fulfills a long-overdue federal promise to adequately fund critical education programs, providing much-needed stability and predictability for states and school districts. They contend that consistent, increasing funding is essential to address educational inequities, support students from low-income backgrounds, and ensure that all children with disabilities receive the high-quality education they are guaranteed by law.
Opponents contend
Critics might argue that shifting these significant education programs to mandatory spending removes crucial annual congressional oversight and flexibility in budget allocation. They could also contend that locking in substantial long-term spending increases, especially without identified offsets, could exacerbate federal budget pressures and contribute to the national debt, potentially limiting resources for other critical government functions.
The bill is concise and clearly outlines its core purpose and funding schedules, allowing a reader to quickly grasp its intent and major provisions. However, understanding the full fiscal and policy implications requires a deeper dive into the context of federal education funding.
Section 1
Short Title
This section establishes the official short title of the bill as the 'Keep Our Promise to America's Children and Teachers Act' or the 'Keep Our PACT Act'. This provides a common, easily recognizable name for the legislation.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that a clear and concise short title helps communicate the bill's purpose and intent to the public and policymakers, emphasizing the commitment to children and teachers.
Critics contend
No specific opposition is typically raised against the naming of a bill, as it is a standard legislative practice.
Tradeoffs
None apparent for this provision.
Section 2
Findings
This section outlines Congress's findings, stating that children are the nation's future, high-quality education is vital, and both ESEA Title I, Part A and IDEA are crucial for addressing educational inequity and guaranteeing a first-rate education for children with disabilities. It specifically notes the 2004 commitment to fund 40 percent of the national current average per-pupil expenditure for students with disabilities.
Section 3
Mandatory Funding of Part A of Title I of ESEA
This section mandates specific appropriations for Part A of Title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 for fiscal years 2026 through 2035. The funding amounts are set to increase annually, aiming to reach $54,303,244,000 or the full authorized amount by fiscal year 2035. These funds are appropriated 'out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated,' effectively making them mandatory spending.
Section 4
Mandatory Funding of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA)
This section amends Section 611(i) of IDEA to mandate specific authorized and appropriated funding levels for IDEA Part B (excluding Section 619) for fiscal years 2026 through 2035 and subsequent years. The bill sets a clear path to reach 40 percent of the national current average per-pupil expenditure for students with disabilities by fiscal year 2035, with annual increases in both authorized and appropriated amounts. These funds are also appropriated 'out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated' and become available for obligation on July 1 of the fiscal year prior to the school year they are intended for.
Section 5
Emergency Designation
This section designates the amounts provided by the bill as an emergency requirement. This designation exempts the spending from the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010 (PAYGO) and other budget enforcement rules in the House and Senate for fiscal years 2026 through 2035. This allows the significant increase in spending to occur without requiring corresponding offsets.
The bill specifies that the amount determined for IDEA funding is the product of the total number of children with disabilities (aged 3-21) in all states who received special education and related services in the prior school year, multiplied by the average per-pupil expenditure in public elementary and secondary schools in the United States.
Section 4, amending 20 U.S.C. 1411(i)(2)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for defining a formula-driven appropriation, but its technical nature can obscure the dynamic mechanism by which the 'full funding' target is calculated.
Case for: Supporters argue that linking the funding to the actual number of students with disabilities and the average per-pupil expenditure ensures that the funding levels are responsive to real-world needs and costs, providing a more accurate measure of 'full funding' over time.
Case against: Critics might argue that a formula tied to average per-pupil expenditure could lead to unpredictable and potentially rapidly escalating costs, making long-term budget planning more challenging, especially if per-pupil expenditures increase significantly.
Estimated impact: This formula dictates the ultimate scale of IDEA funding, reaching $69,644,540,000 by FY2035, or 40% of the calculated amount, whichever is greater.