Therefore. there is a great probability that funds will be shifted from these education programs into general school aid which would appeal to the middleclass voter or other local education power structures. These fears are confirmed by the history of the community development block grant program. general revenue sharing. and by the historic vulnerability of poor and disadvantaged people to local pressure groups. Perhaps the most neglected group in education are migrant children. In 1966. Congress expanded title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to meet the special needs of the migrant child. The administrations proposal would block grant all title I funds. including those funds for migrant children. to State and local education agencies. Prior to 1966. the education of migrant children was virtually ignored by local education officials. To presume that the education of migrant children would now become a priority with these same education officials is simply not rational. Yesterday. in testimony before the House Education and Labor Committee. David Randall. director of the Migrant 79059 0 - 84 - 75 (Pt. 5) Education Center in Sunnyside. Wash.. graphically Illustrated the implications for migrant children if the administrations block grant proposals are adopted for education programs. I am submitting his testimony for the benefit of my colleagues:
Keywords matched
migrant Migrant