Cutting education funding is harmful and shortsighted
By Marilyn Jonas
I have worked as a speech pathologist in Lowell, Mass., for the past 27 years. Lowell is a midsized urban city with a high poverty rate — over 80 percent of students in our district are considered high needs by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. Nearly all qualify for free and reduced-price lunch, and many of their families rely on MassHealth, our state’s version of Medicaid, for healthcare. I remember the days before Romneycare — Massachusetts’ precursor to the Affordable Care Act — when many of our students lacked health insurance. Back then, kids came to school sick because they had nowhere else to go for medical care. They struggled with undiagnosed hearing impairments and vision problems simply because their families couldn’t afford tests or glasses. Thanks to Medicaid expansion, we’ve been able to change that reality for many of our students. But now, that progress is at risk.
If Medicaid funding is slashed, our students will suffer. Plain and simple. Our district relies on federal funding and Medicaid reimbursements — Lowell alone receives about $1 million annually from Medicaid billing for occupational therapy, physical therapy, speech services and nursing support. Without that funding, how do we provide these critical services? How do we ensure that every child gets the interventions they need to succeed?
I provide speech services to children from preschool through fourth grade, sometimes to kids as young as two and a half. Early intervention is everything.
I provide speech services to children from preschool through fourth grade, sometimes to kids as young as two and a half. Early intervention is everything. When we work with students at age three or four, we can help them develop the skills they need to succeed in school. Many of these children make so much progress that they no longer need an individualized education program (IEP) by third grade. But if funding disappears, we’ll lose that opportunity. Instead of helping students catch up early, we’ll see more children struggling for years — because we didn’t have the resources to support them when it mattered most.
Even with current funding, our district is stretched thin. The Massachusetts median caseload for speech pathologists is 38 students. My caseload? 53. And I have one of the lowest caseloads in Lowell. We’ve been asking for more support, but instead of relief, I worry we’ll see cuts. Without federal funds, will states prioritize special education funding? Some states may choose to look the other way, using the lack of federal mandates as an excuse to cut corners even further.
We already see disparities between wealthy and low-income districts. Parents have a lot of power, especially in Massachusetts and for special education, but our parents don’t always know just how much power they have and how much say they have on their child’s special education plan. In wealthier communities, parents can be more vocal, they know their rights and they push for smaller caseloads and better services. But in places like Lowell, where parents are working multiple jobs just to keep food on the table, advocacy isn’t always possible. That’s why we fight for them.
When we fail to invest in early childhood services, cutting special education and Medicaid funding isn’t just harmful — it’s shortsighted.
One of my biggest fears is the push for federal voucher programs. Instead of strengthening public schools, these programs divert money away, worsening inequities. We serve some of the neediest children in Massachusetts, and they make incredible progress because of the support we provide. But what happens when that support is taken away? When we fail to invest in early childhood services, cutting special education and Medicaid funding isn’t just harmful — it’s shortsighted. These are real children, real futures at stake.
My other major concern is for our most vulnerable families, especially our large immigrant population, including many from Haiti. Their status is now under threat, and I worry that fear will keep some of them from sending their children to school. Our district has reassured families that we don’t share their information and that if immigration authorities show up, we have procedures in place to ensure safety and protect their rights. But I can’t imagine working in a state where both the federal and state governments are hostile toward these communities. I’m grateful to be in a state where we have stronger protections.
Marilyn Jonas is a speech pathologist and a member of the United Teachers of Lowell.
Want to read more inspiring stories about the AFT’s members? Sign up for our e-newsletters.
