Bonus points if it has:

- an audiobook version
- an ebook/audiobook available from Libby on the King County Library system
- an ebook available for purchase DRM-free from Kobo or elsewhere
**OR**
- an ebook available for purchase direct from the author.

Other stuff I’ve liked in this vein:
- Time to Orbit: Unknown by Derin Edala derinstories.com/
- Do You Dream of Terra-Two by Temi Oh www.theonlytemioh.com
- #Murderbot by @marthawells.com

I just really like the “oh shit it’s broken and I’m the one who’s gonna have to fix it, aren’t I?

Assigning a cost to services needed and provided is crazy. If it snowed last night I want my street plowed. I don't care if the town "loses" $50 every time it has to be plowed. I pay for that service just as I pay for the USPS. I'm more worried about the cost of ballrooms that provide no service.

But to me, all of this adds up to:

* In general, the parents “gaming the system” probably also have a kid with genuine accommodation needs.

* The “doctor shopping” is probably just trying to find someone who will actually listen.

- Speech or Occupational Therapy - horribly boring for any kid who doesn’t need it. And the parents aren’t gonna pay to pull their kid out of productive class time unless they NEED the extra therapy.

I’m probably missing something.

Genuinely, please tell me what I’m missing. I want to understand.

- Equipment - Maybe? Buying specialized stuff could use up funds. But the specialist equipment is not helpful enough for a kid to risk singling themselves out by using it, unless they have a real medical reason to get it.

- 1-on-1 aide - not helpful unless you’re disabled in a way that needs them.

What I’ve thought of is:

- Extra time on tests - no resource reason they’d limit the number of people.

- Tutoring - wealthy people could hire better general tutors than the school can. If they’re using the school’s tutors, there’s probably a specialist disability reason for it.

I still don’t understand what accommodations are being hoarded though.

I’ve considered a few, and what I’ve thought of either aren’t resource-limited accommodation, or there are significantly better options for people who have the resources to get the services outside of the public school system.

Yes.

And in this case, the Texas GOP lawmakers were pretty open about the racial motivation. That's why the district court ruled against them, and wouldn't have if they could've identified it as a partisan gerrymander.

To presume good faith in that regard requires willful denial of the evidence.

The court repeatedly acknowledged the presumption of good faith, but explained that all of the evidence pointing to racial motivations overcame it. The bill's authors compiled a legislative record "replete with racial statistics!"