If you're wondering how the House majority justified cutting back on funding for key family supports while giving wealthy investors even more tax breaks in its just-approved (218-210) budget blueprint, here's a clue. If you're a family of two making $40,000 you don't get a tax cut because you don't pay any taxes.

That may be news to many wage-earners looking at their pay stub deductions, but that's what Speaker of the House Hastert said in the late night debate on the House majority's budget plan: "Well, folks, if you earn $40,000 a year and have a family of two, you don't pay any taxes. So you probably, if you don't pay any taxes, you are not going to get a big tax cut."

It may not seem like real money to Speaker Hastert, but families who work for a living do indeed pay taxes. Isn't it time they got something back for their money, instead of supporting another round of tax breaks for investors?

The House passed its budget plan, which is heavy on tax cuts for wealthy investors and light on investments in schools, health care and job training supports in the wee hours of Thursday morning, May 18. The next step in the process is to reconcile the far-apart House and the Senate plans.

It's unsettling to feel inspired and angry at the same time. Last week, I was lucky enough to be able to spend some time on the phone with Kala Clark, a high school senior in Maine who succeeded in having the state legislature pass a new law recognizing the right of siblings separated in foster care to visit and spend time together. Kala, who was moved to action by being separated from her two little brothers when she went into care, is articulate, motivated, intelligent -- and still sad about what she and her brothers missed.

This morning, I found the May/June issue of Represent! in my mailbox. Represent!, a publication of Youth Communication, is written by teens in foster care. This new issue zeroes in on the same painful reality: while keeping siblings together when possible, and maintaining contact between them when it is not, is a stated priority of child welfare departments around the country, the truth is that in most places, not enough is being done to safeguard this important relationship. These young people write powerfully about how they experienced the loss of contact with their brothers and sisters, how angry they were, how damaging it was to their efforts to succeed in school and life, how much it still hurts years later.

Something that came out both in my talk with Kala and in several of the stories in Represent! is that the sibling bond in troubled families is often extra strong. Before kids are taken into care, they've often spent years raising each other. The older children become the ones who change the diapers, pack the lunches, go to the school plays, clean the clothes and kiss the skinned knees of their little brothers and sisters. So when child welfare agencies step in and separate these sibling groups, the pain is intense -- as is the guilt, especially among the older sibs.

Certainly many agencies and child welfare workers do a lot to try and keep the connection alive, and it's not a simple assignment. But this is an issue that needs to move further up the priority list...along with the legal issues around sibling visits after a child is legally adopted. These kids lose so much, they should be allowed to hang on to each other.

The Coalition on Human Needs says the House of Representatives may vote today, May 17, on their budget blueprint, but the House leadership is not sure they have the votes. Moderates are under intense pressure to abandon their call for $3 billion more in order to prevent cuts in education, health and other services -- cuts that could affect energy assistance, K-12 and higher education, child care, job training, services to protect children from abuse or neglect, Head Start and more.

Instead of tax handouts to the rich, we could be investing more in schools, health care and job training. But not if this bad budget passes. The American Friends Service Committee is sponsoring a call-in number to reach your Representative -- 800-459-1887.

Is Brian Woods of Akron, Ohio a) a great dad, or b) a scofflaw?

Daniel Woods, Brian's autistic son, probably would go for a). Unhappy with the quality of Daniel's education, Brian sued the school board and won several changes in Daniel's educational plan and about $160,000, according to a recent article in the New York Times

But the Cleveland Bar Association leans towards b). That's because Brian pursued his lawsuit without paying an attorney. Brian Woods was thus engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, in the view of the bar, which sued Woods seeking $10,000 in fines, lawyers fee, and a promise that he would not assist other parents seeking to represent their own children in court.

The Ohio Supreme Court was skeptical, and the association withdrew its complaint -- for now. Whether it's resurrected will depend on how the United States Supreme Court decides to rule in a pending case involving another set of Ohio parents with an autistic son. Jeff and Sandee Winkelman are pursuing a lawsuit against the Parma, Ohio school district. A federal appeals court ordered the Winkelmans to find a lawyer or face dismissal of the court, but Justice John Paul Stevens issued a stay of that order in December 2005.

The issue of parents representing their children "pro se" (without counsel) in IDEA cases won't go away without clear guidance from the Supremes. Some kind of ruling in the case could come soon.

The Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates has filed a brief in support of the Winkelman's, noting that the cost of representation in a federal appeal can easily soar past $10,000, and that lawyers with expertise in special education are in short supply.

The position of those who insist that parents must hire lawyers in these cases would probably sit a lot better with parents and advocates for children if it was accompanied by a major commitment to providing such services pro bono for families that don't have that kind of money to spend. There's plenty of evidence that low-income and minority children are already under-served and over-identified for special education.

Ask Congressional leaders what we need to keep the economy strong and they'll say more tax cuts for investors. Whatever happened to the idea that we need a well-educated workforce to keep the economy strong?

A lot of parents and students -- who recognize the value of a good education -- are going deeper into debt to pay higher college fees and tuition. They would welcome some relief. But Mobilize.org says last year's federal budget included tax handouts but cut $12 billion from student loan funding. That means that the typical student debt will jump from $19,000 to $26,000 come July 1, when the federally subsidized interest rate will increase from 4.75% to 6.8%.

The FY06 appropriations bill also froze the maximum Pell Grant, the federal government’s key grant program for low-income students, and cut other student aid programs by $31 million.

Advocates say it's time to tell Congress to stop the raid on student loans.

Congress has just approved a costly tax package with billions of dollars in more tax cuts for investors. Congressional leaders say this is really a boon for the common man (who can expect some $20 to $50 from the deal) because it will grow the economy.

While Congress did a one-year patch on the Alternative Minimum Tax, they postponed work on tax breaks for college tuition and other breaks that make a difference for ordinary families.

I don't get this logic. Passing one big millionaires' tax cut after another hasn't seemed to strengthen our economy much over the last 4 years. Job growth has been anemic and wage growth has not kept pace with productivity.

Instead of improving the prospects of working Americans, we've turned a federal budget surplus into a debt that will ultimately put a drag on the economy and impose a greater burden on the next generation.

Meanwhile the feds (the Federal Reserve--where Greenspan used to be) are so worried about "wage inflation" that they've put the brakes on the economy with a series of interest hikes. I thought you weren't supposed to apply the brakes at the same time you pushed on the gas!

Families with debt--a variable mortgage, car loans, college loans--can expect higher interest rates.

And Congress isn't done yet.

After passing more investor tax cuts, the House leadership has proposed a budget plan that will require cuts in areas important to ordinary families -- education, health, housing, etc. The Senate's budget plan does not require such cuts.

Having locked in the millionaire tax breaks, this is no time for Congress to turn around and cut investments in improving the schools, health care and job training that ordinary families want. The budget plan would also allow fast-track cuts in Medicaid and Food Stamps.

According to press accounts, some moderate House members are holding firm for more funds for health and education programs.

Congress should forget about passing a bad budget plan and get to work on the appropriations bills that provide adequate funding for the ordinary services we need to keep kids safe, healthy and well-educated.

Last month, I wrote about Florida's welcome decision to shut down its four remaining "boot camps" for juvenile offenders, in favor of somewhat gentler approaches to young kids in trouble with the law. The closure was the latest fallout from the death of 14-year-old Martin Anderson while in the custody of one of the camps.

Now, the investigation into Martin's death has taken a giant step forward with the release of a second autopsy report, which concludes that Martin did not die as the result of sickle-cell trait, a blood disorder which is only rarely fatal, as the first autopsy concluded. Instead, says the new report by Hillsborough County chief medical examiner Vernard Adams, "Martin Anderson's death was caused by suffocation due to the actions of guards at the boot camp. The suffocation caused by manual (blockage) of the mouth, in concert with forced inhalation of ammonia fumes that caused spasm of the vocal cords resulting in internal blockage of the upper airway."

The author of the original autopsy report, Bay County Medical Examiner Charles Siebert, is still standing by his sickle-cell story, but he seems to be standing alone.

Martin's family is said to be taking some comfort in the new findings, and in the hope that someday, someone might be called to account for the brutal treatment Martin suffered at the hands of state authorities. A videotape of that treatment is available online, at the Justice for Martin website.

Instead of budgeting for more child care subsidies needed by working families or expanding health care coverage, Congress is hard at work on a tax package that gives the wealthiest households the bulk of new tax cuts. House and Senate Republicans have worked out which tax cuts will be included in the tax reconciliation package, a process that is filibuster-proof in the Senate.

An analysis by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities finds that the bulk of the tax reconciliation tax cuts will flow mostly to the richest of the rich. Households with an average annual income of $35,940 will get a break of about $20 from this tax cut package. Millionaire households will of course get a much bigger tax break -- closer to $42,000.

Tax cuts that have bipartisan support in Congress, like research and development credits, tax credits for employers who hire low-income workers, and the sales tax deduction for individuals (all set to expire at the end of 2006) have been left out of the tax reconciliation process. They don't need filibuster protection and will presumably be introduced after the rich get their share.

The tax reconciliation bill is likely to be voted on within the next few weeks. It will add to the deficit and lock in refunds for the wealthiest while increasing the fiscal pressure to cut government programs that benefit low-income households.

Gov. Haley Barbour of Mississippi delivered a sharp lesson this week to the students of Adlai E. Stevenson High School in Lincolnshire, Ill. -- which was, being right is no guarantee you'll be treated right.

Meanwhile, Barbour has demonstrated his own failure to learn a lesson most of us learn way before high school -- which is that it's never too late to say you're sorry.

Barbour declared that there will be no posthumous pardon for Clyde Kennard, a black man who was falsely accused of stealing $25 worth of chicken feed, sentenced to seven years in prison, and died of cancer three years later -- all for having tried to enroll in Mississippi Southern University, which at the time was all-white. The whole thing was a set-up, and files of the Mississippi Sovereignty Commission show that state officials had openly discussed either framing Kennard, or killing him, to prevent his enrollment.

Three Stevenson High students -- Mona Ghadiri, Agnes Mazur, and Callie McCune -- collaborated with Professor Steven A. Drizin and the Northwestern University School Of Law Center On Wrongful Convictions on a campaign to try to convince Barbour to issue a posthumous pardon and expunge Kennard's record. They put together a comprehensive web site in support of Kennard and collected support from around the country.

Barbour and the state of Mississippi have acknowledged that Kennard was wronged. March 30 was Clyde Kennard Day in Mississippi, and on that date Barbour issued a proclamation honoring Kennard's determination and his role in the history of the civil rights movement. But it seems an actual pardon would be an apology too far....

Barbour's spokesman said that such a pardon would be "an empty gesture," adding, "There's nothing the governor can do for Clyde Kennard right now."

Kind of makes it sound like Kennard's life, wrongful conviction, and death are ancient history. But in fact, Kennard was convicted in 1960 and died in 1963. We're still listening to some of the same songs on the radio that he would have heard. So no, it isn't too late for Mississippi to say it's sorry. Maybe it's too soon.

Recently, I've seen a few widening cracks in the stubborn resistance of many teachers I know to the use of electronic communications technology. One in particular, who used to almost boast of her inability to send, receive, open or otherwise connect with e-mail, now is in regular touch through her school-based e-mail account.

The problem is, she and her colleagues are chasing a fast-moving target. A new NetDay survey of how teachers and students use technology reveals the sad truth: just as the percentage of teachers who use e-mail to communicate with students is finally reaching critical mass -- more than a third -- students are leaving e-mail behind for the real-time charms of Instant Messaging.

There is a touch of cause-and-effect at work, I suspect. Teens are always figuratively posting that "Keep Out" sign on the door. And this means you, parents and teachers. So as teachers embrace e-mail, students flee to a new technological island they can call their own. According to the NetDay survey, about 65 percent of students in grades 6-12 use e-mail or IM every day. But students are much more likely to use IM to communicate with each other. E-mail is now mostly used for communicating with adults.

The question now is what comes next -- will teachers and parents break the IM barrier? Don't expect to find me among the advance guard -- what I love about e-mail is that it doesn't get in your face, tug on your sleeve, or otherwise pester you for an immediate response. But hey, you go on ahead without me, and send me an e-mail to tell me what you find.