The Supreme Court will hear arguments about the use of public money for the private schooling of children with special needs. It’s interesting to note what’s not at issue: namely, that when a public school system is unable to provide an appropriate education, it is obligated to pay the costs of private school. Too bad poor children don’t have that unshakable right; if they did, there would be no controversy about the District program that gives vouchers to low-income children to attend private schools.
The case to be heard by the court hinges on whether parents have to enroll a child with special needs in public school before the child can attend private school at public expense. Special-education advocates say students shouldn’t have to waste time before being placed in a setting that best suits their needs, while school boards worry about a ruling that could amount to an unfettered fight to private schooling at public expense. What strikes us about the emotionally charged debate is the acceptance by both sides that sometimes it is appropriate to use public money to pay for a child to go to a private school. So, why all the arguments about the approximately$14 million for a federally funded program that lets 1,700 D. C. students attend private schools instead of failing public schools
To hear critics of the D. C. Opportunity Scholarship Program tell it, the use of public money for private schooling is as unprecedented as it is undesirable. In addition to the billions of dollars spent annually on private school tuitions for students with disabilities, private schools get public money for books, technology and teacher training. As long as the money is seen as benefiting the child, it is considered a proper, even desirable, use of public dollars.
Don’t get us wrong. We’re not arguing for the unilateral right of parents to enroll their sons and daughters in any school they wish with the taxpayers picking up the bill. Abuse of special-education policies has contributed to increased costs that threaten to take needed money from general public education funds. Safeguards are needed. Public schools should be pressed to do a better job for students with disabilities and students without. But there are schools in Washington where statistics show that failure is almost guaranteed. If a school system can’t educate a child—whether because of acute special needs or its own historical failings—why should that child not have options for a " free appropriate public education "
What can be inferred from the arguments at the Supreme Court（）
A. Too much public money is put into the private schools for children with special needs
B. Public schools are of very poor education quality
C. People consider it is reasonable to use public money for certain students’ private schooling
D. People find it is amusing arguing about spending public money for private schooling
参考答案：C
解析：
推理题。由题干关键词the arguments at the Supreme Court定位到文章前两段。第一段提到，最高法院将庭议使用公共资金资助有特殊教育需求的孩子到私立学校读书的问题，第二段对人们存在的争议做了进一步解释。第二段第三句提到：但令我们吃惊的是，这场激烈辩论的双方都同意，有时用公共资金支付孩子们去私立学校接受教育的费用还是恰当的，即人们认可使用公共资金让有特殊需求的学生接受私立教育，C选项符合这层含义，故为答案。法庭争论中并没有提到是否花钱太多，因此排除A；本段也没有提到公立学校的教育质量问题，故排除B；而D项在文章中没有任何依据，也应排除。