    [House Hearing, 115 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

          HELPING STUDENTS SUCCEED THROUGH THE POWER OF SCHOOL CHOICE

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                        SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD,
                      ELEMENTARY, AND SECONDARY EDUCATION

                             COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION
                               AND THE WORKFORCE

                         U.S. House of Representatives

                         ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, FEBRUARY 2, 2017

                                   __________

                                Serial No. 115-2

                                   __________

      Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                       Available via the World Wide Web:
                           www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/
               committee.action?chamber=house&committee=education
                                       or
                Committee address: http://edworkforce.house.gov

                             U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    23-827 PDF                     WASHINGTON : 2017
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
      For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
      Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
             DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
                              Washington, DC 20402-0001

                    COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE

                   VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina, Chairwoman

    Joe Wilson, South Carolina           Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott,
    Duncan Hunter, California                Virginia
    David P. Roe, Tennessee              Ranking Member
    Glenn ``GT'' Thompson, Pennsylvania  Susan A. Davis, California
    Tim Walberg, Michigan                Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona
    Brett Guthrie, Kentucky              Joe Courtney, Connecticut
    Todd Rokita, Indiana                 Marcia L. Fudge, Ohio
    Lou Barletta, Pennsylvania           Jared Polis, Colorado
    Luke Messer, Indiana                 Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan,
    Bradley Byrne, Alabama                 Northern Mariana Islands
    David Brat, Virginia                 Frederica S. Wilson, Florida
    Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin            Suzanne Bonamici, Oregon
    Steve Russell, Oklahoma              Mark Takano, California
    Elise Stefanik, New York             Alma S. Adams, North Carolina
    Rick W. Allen, Georgia               Mark DeSaulnier, California
    Jason Lewis, Minnesota               Donald Norcross, New Jersey
    Francis Rooney, Florida              Lisa Blunt Rochester, Delaware
    Paul Mitchell, Michigan              Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois
    Tom Garrett, Jr., Virginia           Carol Shea-Porter, New Hampshire
    Lloyd K. Smucker, Pennsylvania       Adriano Espaillat, New York
    A. Drew Ferguson, IV, Georgia

                          Brandon Renz, Staff Director
                     Denise Forte, Minority Staff Director
                                     ------

      SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD, ELEMENTARY, AND SECONDARY EDUCATION

                         TODD ROKITA, Indiana, Chairman

    Duncan Hunter, California            Jared Polis, Colorado
    David P. Roe, Tennessee                Ranking Member
    Glenn ``GT'' Thompson, Pennsylvania  Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona
    Luke Messer, Indiana                 Marcia L. Fudge, Ohio
    David Brat, Virginia                 Suzanne Bonamici, Oregon
    Tom Garrett, Jr., Virginia           Susan A. Davis, California
                                         Frederica S. Wilson, Florida

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

    Hearing held on February 2, 2017.................................     1

    Statement of Members:
        Polis, Hon. Jared, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Early
          Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education.............     4
            Prepared statement of....................................     7
        Rokita, Hon. Todd, Chairman, Subcommittee on Early Childhood,
          Elementary, and Secondary Education........................     1
            Prepared statement of....................................     3

    Statement of Witnesses:
        Carter, Ms. Almo J., Parent..................................    15
            Prepared statement of....................................    17
        Kubacki, Mr. Kevin, Chief Executive Director, The
          Neighborhood Charter Network...............................    21
            Prepared statement of....................................    23
        Cherry, Mrs. Nina, Parent....................................    25
            Prepared statement of....................................    27
        Williams, Mr. Michael L., Manager, Former Commissioner of
          Education, Texas Education Agency..........................     9
            Prepared statement of....................................    11

    Additional Submissions:
        Courtney, Hon. Joe, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Connecticut:
            Article: Educational Investment That Works And Is
              Affordable.............................................    98
        Mr. Polis:
            Letter dated March 30, 2001, from the United States
              Department of Education................................   104
            Letter dated June 27, 2003, from the United States
              Department of Education................................   107
            Letter dated July 1, 2003, from the United States
              Department of Education................................   110
            Letter dated June 27, 2005, from the United States
              Department of Education................................   113
            Letter dated August 22, 2007, from the United States
              Department of Education................................   116
            Letter dated August 29, 2007, from the United States
              Department of Education................................   118
        Chairman Rokita:
            Estimated Charter Public School Enrollment, 2016-17......   122
            Letter dated November 7, 2012, from the United States
              Department of Education................................   127
            Letter dated March 30, 2001, from the United States
              Department of Education................................   129
            Slide: #SchoolChoice by the Numbers......................   150
        Scott, Hon. Robert C. ``Bobby'', a Representative in Congress
          from the State of Virginia:
            Letter February 1, 2017, from National PTA...............    31
            Letter February 1, 2017, from National School Boards
              Association (NSBA).....................................    34
            Letter February 1, 2017, from American Federation of
              Teachers (AFT).........................................    66
            Letter February 1, 2017, from Texas Association of School
              Boards (TASB)..........................................    68
            Letter February 1, 2017, from National Education
              Association (NEA)......................................    70
            Letter February 1, 2017, from National Coalition for
              Public Education (NCPE)................................    72
            Questions submitted for the record.......................   152
        Bonamici, Hon. Suzanne, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Oregon to:
            Mr. Kubacki..............................................   155
            Mr. Williams.............................................   157
        Response to questions submitted:
            Mrs. Cherry..............................................   158
            Mr. Kubacki..............................................   160
            Mr. Williams.............................................   162

          HELPING STUDENTS SUCCEED THROUGH THE POWER OF SCHOOL CHOICE

                                  ----------

                           Thursday, February 2, 2017

                           House of Representatives,

                        Subcommittee on Early Childhood,

                      Elementary, and Secondary Education,

                   Committee on Education and the Workforce,

                                Washington, D.C.

                                  ----------

        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:11 a.m., in
    Room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Todd Rokita
    [chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.
        Present: Representatives Rokita, Roe, Messer, Brat,
    Garrett, Polis, Grijalva, Fudge, Bonamici, and Davis.
        Also Present: Representatives Foxx, Allen, Takano, Adams,
    Scott, and Courtney.
        Staff Present: Courtney Butcher, Director of Member
    Services and Coalitions; Tyler Hernandez, Deputy Communications
    Director; Amy Raaf Jones, Director of Education and Human
    Resources Policy; Nancy Locke, Chief Clerk; Dominique McKay,
    Deputy Press Secretary; James Mullen, Director of Information
    Technology; Krisann Pearce, General Counsel; Brandon Renz,
    Staff Director; Mandy Schaumburg, Education Deputy Director and
    Senior Counsel; Alissa Strawcutter, Deputy Clerk; Leslie Tatum,
    Professional Staff Member; Brad Thomas, Senior Education Policy
    Advisor; Sheariah Yousefi, Legislative Assistant; Tylease Alli,
    Minority Clerk/Intern and Fellow Coordinator; Austin Barbera,
    Minority Press Assistant; Jacque Chevalier, Minority Deputy
    Education Policy Director; Denise Forte, Minority Staff
    Director; Mishawn Freeman, Minority Staff Assistant; Doug
    Hodum, Minority Education Policy Fellow; Kimberly Knackstedt,
    Minority Disability Policy Advisor; and Aneesh Sahni, Minority
    Education Policy Fellow.
        Chairman Rokita. Good morning. A quorum being present the
    subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary
    Education will come to order. Welcome to the first hearing of
    the subcommittee for the 115th Congress. I thank everyone for
    their cooperation. We are starting a little bit late, only to
    accommodate the prayer breakfast held today in our Nation's
    Capital. I also want to extend a special welcome to our new
    ranking member, my friend, Representative Jared Polis of
    Colorado. I look forward to working together in the weeks and
    months ahead. I suspect we will continue to have our
    differences, but there is no doubt we share the same goal of
    helping to ensure every child is prepared to succeed in life.
    Congratulations and welcome.
        Mr. Polis. Thank you.
        Chairman Rokita. In recent years, this subcommittee has
    helped advance positive legislative solutions for America's
    students and families. At the center of those efforts has
    always been the desire to make sure every child has the
    opportunity to receive an excellent education. That is a mantra
    we repeat often around here, and for good reason, it is a
    critical goal, and it guides much of the work we do in this
    subcommittee. And it is with that goal in mind that we enacted
    legislation to put K-12 education back in the hands of those
    who know best what students need, their parents, and State and
    local leaders.
        We also made significant progress advancing reforms to
    improve career and technical education, child nutrition
    assistance, and student privacy. Because there is still a lot
    of work to do before we reach our shared goal, we will continue
    working together to deliver the solutions our Nation's children
    and families deserve and need. We are here today to discuss one
    of those solutions: school choice.
        Across the country, efforts are underway to empower parents
    with more options when it comes to their children's education.
    My home State of Indiana, for example, operates a scholarship
    program to help children from low-income families, children in
    failing schools, and children with special needs so, that they
    receive the high-quality education necessary to succeed, both
    in the classroom and in life. The State also provides tax
    credits to individuals and employers who donate to nonprofit
    organizations that award scholarships to these students. And as
    I am sure our witness, Mr. Kubacki, will explain, Indiana's
    charter school community has been helping students succeed for
    years now.
        Because these and similar efforts nationwide -- similar
    efforts nationwide, charter schools are currently serving close
    to 3 million students, and nearly 400,000 kids are benefiting
    from a private school choice program, more than ever before, as
    we can see from the chart above.
        While these numbers will help illustrate the growing
    popularity of school choice, they don't fully capture the hope
    and opportunity school choice provides, in my opinion. At a
    committee hearing last year, we heard from a truly inspiring
    young woman named Denisha Merriweather. Explaining how school
    choice changed her life, Denisha said, quote, ``The cycle of
    poverty is ending in my family, thanks to the Florida tax
    credit scholarship. So many opportunities have been given to
    me, and I want to create the same for other children just like
    me,'' end quote.
        ``The cycle of poverty is ending in my family.'' Those are
    pretty powerful words, and Denisha's is a powerful story. Not
    only did school choice provide her life-changing opportunities,
    but those opportunities have inspired her to help change the
    lives of others. Already, the first in her family to graduate
    from high school and college, Denisha is now working to become
    the first in her family to receive a graduate degree. She has
    committed to using that degree to advocate for expanding
    educational opportunities to other disadvantaged children and
    families.
        Denisha is just one of the countless individuals whose
    lives have been changed because their families had a choice.
    With a new Congress and new administration, we now have an
    opportunity to extend the power of school choice to other
    families as well. We will look for opportunities to advance
    school choice and continue our work to improve traditional
    public schools. But make no mistake, these two efforts do go
    hand in hand. We will never turn our backs on the millions of
    students who attend our Nation's public schools, but we also
    want to ensure parents have the opportunity to choose the best
    school for their children. And this won't be easy.
        In fact, there is already opposition building against the
    idea of empowering parents with more choices. In many ways,
    this explains the smear campaign against Betsy DeVos, the
    President's nominee to serve as Secretary of Education. She has
    shown her commitment to all children through her words, and
    more importantly, through her actions. Mrs. DeVos has dedicated
    her life to helping some of our Nation's most disadvantaged
    students. Because she stands firmly for parental choice, she is
    being attacked, maligned across the country.
        No one on this committee would ever leave their children
    trapped in a failing school. I challenge anyone on this
    committee to say they would. Yet, some would deny other parents
    their very right to do what is best for their children. If we
    are serious about improving K-12 education, we have to demand
    better. The Every Student Succeeds Act is the perfect example
    of what we can accomplish together when we put the interests of
    students above politics -- when we focus on policies, not press
    releases. I remain optimistic that this Congress, we will
    choose students and advance policies to ensure every child
    receives an excellent education.
        With that, I now recognize Ranking Member Polis.
        [The statement of Chairman Rokita follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Todd Rokita, Chairman, Subcommittee on Early
                 Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education

        Good morning and welcome to the first hearing of the Subcommittee
    on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education for the 115th
    Congress. Allow me to extend a special welcome to our new ranking
    member, Representative Jared Polis. I look forward to working together
    in the weeks and months ahead. I suspect we will continue to have our
    differences, but there's no doubt we share the same goal of helping to
    ensure every child is prepared to succeed in life. Congratulations and
    welcome, Ranking Member Polis.
        In recent years, this subcommittee has helped advance positive,
    legislative solutions for America's students and families. At the
    center of those efforts has always been the desire to make sure every
    child has the opportunity to receive an excellent education. That's a
    mantra we repeat often around here, and for good reason. It's a
    critical goal, and it guides much of the work we do on this
    subcommittee.
        It is with that goal in mind that we enacted legislation to put K-
    12 education back in the hands of those who know best what students
    need--parents and state and local leaders. We also made significant
    progress advancing reforms to improve career and technical education,
    child nutrition assistance, and student privacy. Because there is still
    a lot of work to do before we reach our shared goal, we will continue
    working together to deliver the solutions our nation's children and
    families deserve. We're here today to discuss one of those solutions:
    school choice.
        Across the country, efforts are underway to empower parents with
    more options when it comes to their children's education. My home state
    of Indiana, for example, operates a scholarship program to help
    children from low-income families, children in failing schools, or
    children with special needs receive the high-quality education
    necessary to succeed both in the classroom and in life. The state also
    provides tax credits to individuals and employers who donate to
    nonprofit organizations that award scholarships to students. And as I'm
    sure our witness Mr. Kubacki will explain, Indiana's charter school
    community has been helping students succeed for years.
        Because of these and similar efforts nationwide, charter schools
    are currently serving close to 3 million students, and nearly 400,000
    kids are benefitting from a private school choice program - more than
    ever before. While these numbers help illustrate the growing popularity
    of school choice, they don't fully capture the hope and opportunity
    school choice provides.
        At a committee hearing last year, we heard from a truly inspiring
    young woman named Denisha Merriweather. Explaining how school choice
    changed her life, Denisha said:
        ``The cycle of poverty is ending in my family, thanks to the
    Florida Tax Credit Scholarship. many opportunities have been given to
    me, and I want to create the same for other children just like me.''
        The cycle of poverty is ending in my family. Those are powerful
    words, and Denisha's is a powerful story. Not only did school choice
    provide her life-changing opportunities, but those opportunities have
    inspired her to help change the lives of others. Already the first in
    her family to graduate from high school and college, Denisha is now
    working to become the first in her family to receive a graduate degree.
    She is committed to using that degree to advocate for expanding
    educational opportunities to other disadvantaged children and families.
        Denisha is just one of countless individuals whose lives have been
    changed because their families had a choice. With a new Congress and a
    new administration, we now have an opportunity to extend the power of
    school choice to other families as well. We will look for opportunities
    to advance school choice and continue our work to improve traditional
    public schools.
        Make no mistake: These two efforts go hand in hand. We will never
    turn our backs on the millions of students who attend our nation's
    public schools, but we also want to ensure parents have the opportunity
    to choose the best school for their children.
        It won't be easy. In fact, there is already opposition building
    against the idea of empowering parents with more choices. In many ways,
    this explains the smear campaign against Betsy DeVos, the president's
    nominee to serve as Secretary of Education. She has shown her
    commitment to all children through her words, and more importantly,
    through her actions. Mrs. DeVos has dedicated her life to helping some
    of our nation's most disadvantaged students. Because she stands firmly
    for parental choice, she is being attacked and maligned across the
    country.
        No one on this committee would ever leave their child trapped in a
    failing school. No one. Yet, some would deny other parents the right to
    do what's best for their children. If we are serious about improving K-
    12 education, we have to demand better. The Every Student Succeeds Act
    is the perfect example of what we can accomplish when we put the
    interests of students above politics. When we focus on policies--not
    press releases. I remain optimistic that this Congress will choose
    students and advance policies to ensure every child receives an
    excellent education.
        With that, I will now recognize the ranking member, Congressman
    Polis, for his opening remarks.
                                     ______

        Mr. Polis. I want to thank Chairman Rokita. And in
    particular, I wanted to thank him for delaying the opening of
    this committee as we have members, including myself, returning
    from the prayer breakfast. I know there will be many others
    joining us that are still on their way back.
        I applaud the topic of today's hearing. I am certainly a
    strong supporter of high quality public school choice. Choice
    is something that is a fundamental American value in a consumer
    society: we want to choose our clothes; we want to choose our
    food; we want to choose our schools to reflect our values and
    what we value. And before coming to Congress, I have experience
    in this sector, having founded two public charter schools, one
    for recent immigrants and English language learners, and
    another to meet the unique learning needs of homeless and at-
    risk youth in transitional housing.
        Both of those schools, New America School and Academy of
    Urban Learning, meet the unique needs and challenges of
    students meeting them where they are, and provide a chance for
    them to be able to break the challenges they face, and defy
    expectations, and succeed and live the American Dream.
        I am proud of Colorado. I feel Colorado is an example of
    public school choice laws that work and how educational
    opportunities can be a tool for advancing equity and quality in
    our public education system. An example is Denver public
    schools, which was named the best large school district for
    choice in the country by Brookings Institution in 2015. The way
    Denver works really helps empower parents through a transparent
    and non-discriminatory enrollment process, meaningful
    partnerships between charter schools, innovation schools,
    district schools and strong community support.
        We have, among the different types of schools that serve
    children in this country, district-run public schools, public
    charter schools and independent schools. Of course, there is no
    single recipe for success. I can point to schools in any of
    those categories, public charter schools, district schools,
    independent schools, that I would do anything to avoid having
    my child of 5 attend, and I can point to schools in any of
    those categories, independent, district-run, and charter that I
    would be proud to send my child to.
        So clearly there is no silver bullet. We wish there were,
    that simply by having every school run by a district or having
    every school run as a charter, or having every school run
    independently will somehow make every school excellent. It
    doesn't work that way. There are different models, there are
    different advantages and disadvantages to both.
        The shortcoming with many of the school choice proposals
    that are being advanced currently are that they allow
    independent schools to maintain selective admission
    requirements. It requires students with disabilities to sign
    away their rights under the Individual with Disabilities Act,
    or IDEA, and withhold information from parents regarding
    student performance.
        For a market to work, it really relies on two things: under
    the laws of economics, it relies on perfect information, or as
    perfect information as you can have, a/k/a transparency,
    accountability, and it relies on rational choice. I think
    everybody would agree that we highly value that parents are
    always trying to make the best choices for their child. I don't
    think we doubt that. Where some of the choice proposals are
    problematic is they don't afford parents in communities the
    type of relevant information they need in terms of transparency
    into what is and isn't occurring, particularly on the
    independent school side. But that is a criticism that frankly,
    in some areas, has also been valid on the charter school side.
    I would add, in some areas, it is valid on the district side as
    well. Parents should be entitled to more information about how
    schools are doing.
        We have examples of programs that work and don't work. In
    Ohio, which has been noted for having a weak authorizing law
    for charter schools, there have been a number of instances of
    schools that have falsified attendance records. In Louisiana,
    low-quality curriculum and voucher-participating schools have
    produced bad results for students. In Wisconsin, there has been
    double-dipping in general education funds that have supported
    students that were already enrolled in private schools.
        So I hope that today's hearing makes clear to the American
    people that everybody supports and values choice. It's a
    question around what the parameters of choice are, and what
    that market, which needs to be designed to benefit students and
    families first, needs to look like.
        In this 1954 ruling in Brown v. Board of Education, the
    Supreme Court affirmed that education is necessary for personal
    and economic success; saying that ``State-funded education is a
    right that must be made available to all on equal terms.'' If
    we are truly committed to fulfilling the promise of Brown v.
    Board of Education for all of our children, regardless of not
    only race, but income, and ZIP Code, and language status and
    disability, we need to invest in making sure that schools serve
    all kids successfully.
        I join Chairman Rokita in commending this committee and
    this Congress in rewriting the Every Student Succeeds Act,
    ESSA. We look forward to engaging in the oversight of that work
    through this committee. I have seen, of course, Republicans and
    Democrats on this committee join with regard to expressing
    concern for civil rights. But unfortunately, many of us on my
    side of the aisle, myself included, fear that the Republican
    school choice proposals are a back door for undermining the
    civil rights protections that we wrote into ESSA, including
    those for students with learning disabilities.
        Under IDEA, students with disabilities are guaranteed a
    free and appropriate education. But the private school
    education programs that exist, where students are sent to
    independent schools, have no obligation to ESSA, and parents'
    surveys show that too many private schools require parents to
    fully or partially sign away their rights under IDEA. I would
    point that out in contrast to private placement that occurs
    through school districts with private providers where parents
    maintain those rights under IDEA.
        What we need are school choice programs that empower
    parents and students with transparency and the information they
    need and quality choices. Many of the Republican school choice
    proposals that have been presented before us offer false
    choices that could only exacerbate educational inequities by
    requiring that parents sign away their rights, stripping
    parents of their voice and undermining important civil rights
    for students.
        I wanted to address one final concern I have with school
    choice programs. As co-chair of the congressional lesbian, gay,
    bisexual, and transgender equality caucus, I have concerns
    about the rights of our gay and lesbian students in voucher
    programs. A 2013 study found that at least 115 private schools
    that participate in Georgia's voucher program have or promote
    anti-gay or anti-lesbian admission, scholarship, and discipline
    policies. Some voucher participating schools in Georgia, and I
    suspect throughout the Nation, have policies stating that a
    student can be expelled for identifying as gay or lesbian.
        Now our Nation was built on the principle of equality for
    all Americans, regardless of what people think of the way
    people choose to live their lives in our free society. Public
    schools, and that includes schools that are publicly funded,
    and if independent schools are going to be publicly funded,
    they would have to play by these rules, cannot discriminate and
    have to be a safe, welcoming, learning environment for all
    students, regardless of those kind of individual issues in
    their own lives, so their faith, or lack thereof, or their
    sexual orientation.
        Our Nation was built on the principle of equality for all
    Americans. And it is essential that we empower communities
    rather than promote policies that treat various Americans as
    second class citizens.
        I look forward to today's hearing from today's witnesses
    about how we can strengthen our public education system, rather
    than dismantle it. I thank you and I yield back the balance of
    my time.
        [The statement of Mr. Polis follows:]

    Prepared Statement of Hon. Jared Polis, Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
              Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education

        Thank you, Chairman Rokita, for hosting this morning's hearing on
    such an important topic. It's no secret that I'm a strong supporter of
    high-quality public school choice. Before coming to Congress, I founded
    two public charter schools. One school provides education for recent
    immigrants and English Language Learners, and another serves homeless
    and at-risk youth. Both of these schools are meeting the unique needs
    and challenges of its students, and providing a chance at the great
    public education that they deserve.
        Colorado is an example of how public school choice can be done
    well, and how it can be a valuable tool for advancing equity in our
    public school system. That's the school choice I know and the school
    choice I believe in. A great example is Denver Public Schools, which
    was named the best large school district for choice in the country by
    the Brookings Institution in 2015. Denver truly empowers parents
    through a transparent and non-discriminatory enrollment process,
    meaningful partnerships between charter and district schools, and
    strong community support.
        Unfortunately, not all public school choice is made equal. In a
    number of states, weak charter school laws undermine accountability and
    transparency, and for-profit corporations running charter schools put
    profits before students.
        Republican school choice proposals allow private schools to
    maintain selective admission requirements, require students with
    disabilities to sign away their rights under the Individuals with
    Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), and withhold information from
    parents regarding their student's performance.
        There are numerous examples of the failures of this type of system.
    In Michigan, 79 percent of charter schools are run by for-profit
    corporations, and they have some of the worst schools in the nation. In
    Ohio, a school falsified attendance records to receive additional
    taxpayer funding. In Louisiana, low-quality curriculum in voucher-
    participating schools has produced dismal results for students. In
    Wisconsin, general education funds have been drained - largely to
    support students already enrolled in private schools. In Georgia, data
    shows that it is actually upper income families who benefit from the
    state's voucher program, meaning taxpayers are actually subsidizing
    private education for the wealthy.
        I hope that today's hearing makes clear to the American people that
    Republican school choice is not the type of choice that will achieve
    equity of educational opportunity for all children. In its 1954 ruling
    in Brown v. Board of Education, the Supreme Court affirmed that
    education is necessary for personal and economic success, stating that
    state-funded education is a right that must be made available to all on
    equal terms. If we are truly committed to fulfilling the promise of
    Brown for all of our children regardless of zip code, income, race,
    language status, or disability, we should invest in our public
    education system instead of siphoning public dollars away from public
    schools for unaccountable private schools.
        Just last year, this Committee worked in a bipartisan fashion to
    write the Every Student Succeeds Act. Under ESSA, public schools are
    required to transparently report the performance of vulnerable students
    and address issues when schools are not appropriately serving these
    students. I've seen firsthand Republicans' on this committee's concern
    for civil rights. But unfortunately, Republican school choice is a
    backdoor to undermining those civil rights protections we wrote into
    ESSA. Under IDEA, students with disabilities are guaranteed a free and
    appropriate education. But private school voucher programs have no
    obligation to ESSA, and parent surveys show that too many private
    schools require parents to fully or partially sign away their rights
    under IDEA. I deeply believe that all students with disabilities
    deserve the protections and supports to provide them with an equal
    opportunity at a high-quality education as any other student.
        Finally, as co-chair of the Congressional LGBT Equality Caucus, I
    have deep concerns about the rights of our LGBT students in voucher
    programs. A 2013 study found that at least 115 private schools
    participating in Georgia's voucher program have or promote anti-LGBT
    admission, scholarship, and discipline policies. Some voucher
    participating schools in Georgia, and I suspect throughout the nation,
    have policies stating that a student can be expelled for identifying as
    LGBT or coming out as LGBT. Our nation was built on the principle of
    equality for all Americans--including racial minorities, individuals
    with disabilities, and the LGBT community. It is essential that we
    further empower these communities rather than promote policies that
    treat them as second-class citizens.
        Republican school choice does not empower parents or students; it
    is a false choice that only further exacerbates educational inequities,
    strips parents of their voice, and undermines important civil rights
    protections for parents and students.
        I look forward to hearing from today's witnesses about how
    meaningful choice that supports parents and students can be used to
    strengthen our system of public education, not dismantle it. Thank you,
    and I yield back.
                                     ______

        Chairman Rokita. I thank the gentleman.
        Pursuant to committee Rule 7(c), all members will be
    permitted to submit written statements to be included in the
    permanent hearing record. And without objection, the hearing
    record will remain open for 14 days to allow such statements
    and other extraneous material referenced during the hearing to
    be submitted for the official hearing record.
        I will now turn to the introduction of our distinguished
    witnesses. First we have Mr. Michael Williams. He is a former
    education commissioner with the Texas Education Agency. Prior
    to this position, Mr. Williams served as the assistant
    Secretary of Education for Civil Rights with the U.S.
    Department of Education under President George H.W. Bush.
    Currently, Mr. Williams serves as the distinguished leader in
    residence at the University of North Texas at Dallas. Welcome,
    sir.
        Ms. Almo Carter, a mother living and working in Washington,
    D.C. Mrs. Carter's son, who has Fragile X Syndrome, attends a
    D.C. public school and receives services through the
    Individuals With Disabilities Education Act, IDEA. Ms. Carter
    served as the former chair of the interagency coordinating
    council, which is an advisory panel required under the
    Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Welcome, Ms.
    Carter.
        Mr. Kevin Kubacki, serves as executive director of the
    Neighborhood Charter Network, a grassroots organization that
    manages two public charter schools in Indianapolis, in the
    great State of Indiana. Enlace Academy and the Kindezi Academy.
    Prior to this position, Mr. Kubacki served as a school leader
    with Enlace Academy and as a teacher, coordinator, and coach
    with the Indianapolis-based schools, Cathedral High School and
    St. Matthews School. Welcome, sir, I appreciate your
    leadership.
        And finally, Mrs. Nina Cherry is the mother of four
    children who attend Tampa Bay Christian Academy in Tampa,
    Florida. Prior to attending Tampa Bay Christian Academy, the
    Cherry children attended an A-rated public school in Pasco
    County but had to relocate. In order to provide the best
    education for their children, Mr. and Mrs. Cherry enrolled them
    in Tampa Bay Christian Academy with assistance from the Florida
    tax credit scholarship that I mentioned during my opening
    remarks. As a result of the excellent education received at
    Tampa Bay Christian Academy, all four of the Cherry children
    are on the honor roll and excelling. Welcome, ma'am.
        I will now ask the witnesses to raise your right-hand.
        Seeing their hands raised, do you solemnly swear or affirm
    that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the
    whole truth and nothing but the truth?
        Chairman Rokita. Please let the record reflect that all
    witnesses answered in the affirmative.
        Before I recognize you to provide your testimony, let me
    briefly explain our lighting system. It is pretty self-
    explanatory. And I outline it only in addition for you as a
    reminder to those of us up here. When you begin, the light in
    front of you will be green; when 1 minute is left, it will be
    yellow; and when time has expired, the light will, of course,
    turn red, at which time you should have wrapped up your
    remarks. I will hold the members to that same standard, 5
    minutes each for their questions.
        And we will start with you, Mr. Williams. You are
    recognized now for 5 minutes for your testimony.

       TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL L. WILLIAMS, FORMER COMMISSIONER OF
                   EDUCATION, TEXAS EDUCATION AGENCY

        Mr. Williams. Good morning, Chairman Rokita, Ranking Member
    Polis, and I see Chairwoman Foxx and members of the committee
    on Education and the Workforce. Thank you for the opportunity
    to visit with you today. I am Michael Williams, a lifetime
    proponent, beneficiary and servant of America's public schools.
    I am the proud son of two public school teachers. My mother
    retired after 40 years, and worked as a high school counselor.
    My father was a math teacher and football and track coach, and
    retired after 43 years with the honor of being inducted into
    the Texas High School Coaches Hall of Fame.
        I graduated from public schools in Midland, Texas. I'm here
    to tell you something that has become clear to me during my
    years of work in education. School choice, including private
    school choice, is not a threat to strong public schools.
    Parents are a child's first and most important educators, they
    are also a child's best advocates. Allowing parents to choose
    the best education options to meet their child's unique needs
    is good for our education system, and our schools. But most
    important, it is good for our children. That is why the
    education system ought to empower parents to make education
    choices based on what they know their children need to be
    successful.
        My home State of Texas has the second largest K-12 student
    enrollment with over 4.29 million students, and has experienced
    an increase of 1.2 million students over the past 15 years. On
    most majors, graduation rates, NAEP scores, SAT, ACT scores, AP
    participation and scores, Texas student performance is on the
    rise, especially when you compare subpopulations from State to
    State.
        However, deficient student outcomes persist and the
    academic achievement gap remains extremely stark. Only 49
    percent of all white students performed at proficient or above
    on the NAEP 2013 8th grade reading. Academic outcomes are more
    dismal for Hispanic and black students, only 20 and 17 percent
    of whom performed at proficient or above. Texas desperately
    needs high quality seats for these students. And private school
    choice could help serve them without significantly impacting
    public school enrollment.
        Despite what you may have heard, private school choice is
    not at the expense of public school students. In fact, 31 of 33
    empirical studies found that choice improved the performance of
    neighboring traditional public schools. The reality is that
    choice encourages public schools to be more responsive to
    students' needs and parent's preferences.
        In my work, I have come to understand how truly unique each
    State's educational landscape is. As commissioner, I work with
    local school districts to create solutions that fit them best.
    It became apparent how distant some Federal education policies
    were from the children served. It is important to strike the
    right balance between accountability for public dollars and the
    autonomy essential for private schooling, and that is best
    accomplished at the State level. Based on my experience as
    Texas education commissioner, our State's accountability system
    -- and I would dare say that of other States, would not
    appropriately fit private school enrolling choice program
    participants.
        Having been responsible for ensuring equal access to
    education, and the enforcement of civil rights throughout this
    Nation, I am deeply committed to guaranteeing that all students
    are treated with respect and dignity, and are free from
    discrimination in their learning environment.
        Currently, public students with special needs who are
    eligible for services under the Individuals with Disabilities
    Education Act, have rights to a free and appropriate public
    education, and individual services among others. The special
    needs community has fought extremely hard over the decades to
    guarantee these rights. An American education has certainly
    come a long way. Some choice programs are targeted at providing
    students with disabilities, access to high quality educational
    options. When parents of IDEA-eligible students choose to place
    their child in a private school with the help of a State-funded
    choice program, do IDEA rights follow that child?
        If an IDEA-eligible student's parents have chosen to place
    their child in a private school with a choice scholarship, that
    child is considered a parentally-placed private school student.
    That student has the same IDEA rights as all other parentally-
    placed private school students. This is a path parents can
    choose independent from the school district if a private
    school's education program better fits the needs of that IDEA-
    eligible child.
        So in conclusion, this is not about private versus public.
    It is not about -- this is about empowering parents with the
    ability to choose among high quality, diverse opportunities to
    fit the unique needs of their children. The vast majority of
    parents will choose their local public school. Private school
    choice provides additional high quality options for parents.
        Thank you.
        [The statement of Mr. Williams follows:]

      [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Rokita. Thank you, Mr. Williams.
        Ms. Carter, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

                  TESTIMONY OF ALMO J. CARTER, PARENT

        Ms. Carter. Thank you. Good morning also, Chairman Rokita,
    Ranking Member Polis, and Chairwoman Foxx. On behalf of my son,
    Jacob, I am very pleased to be able to speak here, have this
    opportunity for not only Jacob, but all children with
    disabilities. I thank you for this opportunity to speak on the
    issue of school choice and equitable access to quality
    education.
        My name is Almo Carter, and almost 9 years ago, I brought
    home from the hospital a baby boy, who I adopted as a single
    parent. Jacob grew in my heart those 38 weeks before he was
    born in 2008. And I am thrilled to nurture, raise up, and love
    him.
        With my impending return to work fast approaching, I
    selected a wonderful child care center. Immediately following
    placement, I noticed that infants as young as 4 months were
    meeting developmental milestones that Jacob, who was 7 months
    at the time, was barely approaching. Over the next 15 months, a
    series of doctor visits revealed Jacob's underlying diagnosis
    of Fragile X Syndrome, followed by pervasive developmental
    disorder, not otherwise specified.
        During this time, we were introduced to the Strong Start
    D.C. Early Intervention Program. I will stop at nothing to
    ensure that Jacob realizes his full potential, and develops
    into a productive and positively contributing member of
    society. Not every parent has this time, nor the ability and
    wherewithal to do so.
        Shortly after we discovered Jacob's disabilities, I placed
    him at Easter Seals, where Jacob could interact with typically
    developing peers and receive therapeutic services in accordance
    with IDEA. Before Jacob turned 3 years old, we started the
    transition process through early stages. Filled with optimism
    and encouraged by Jacob's prognosis, I wanted to make sure that
    he had -- that I knew what those educational opportunities were
    for him in our community.
        I started with our neighborhood public school, and although
    it had an autism classroom, it was not a placement with which I
    felt comfortable. I also decided to consider some of the high
    performing charter schools, and explore their programming for
    students with disabilities. After attending several charter
    school open houses, I was not convinced that my school choice
    options understood and were equipped to appropriately educate
    Jacob. I ended up applying to a few charter schools through the
    lottery process, but we were unsuccessful in securing a slot.
        With the help of his multidisciplinary team, I placed Jacob
    in the D.C. public schools' Flagship Autism Program, and he
    started public school at age 4. After staffing challenges at
    the school, and changes in Jacob's education requirements as he
    expanded his capacity to learn, we made an immediate change
    through his IEP to a general education classroom where it was
    required he receive specialized instruction, both inside and
    outside the general education setting.
        All schools, whether public, charter, vouchers or virtual,
    must, in my opinion, comply with the same comprehensive
    accountability standards and safeguards in order to be
    equitable. However, right now, only public schools and public
    charter schools are held to these accountability standards and
    safeguards. When evaluating public school choices, it is
    imperative for families to understand the safeguards and
    protections of IDEA and they are given consistent information
    with which to compare and analyze. Each public school choice
    option should be transparent in communication and held
    accountable for their responsibility to educate children. A
    school's number one goal should be the appropriate, effective,
    and successful education of all students, including those with
    disabilities.
        When a violation of IDEA occurs, parents have recourse
    under IDEA to activate their due process rights. In my
    experience, private school choice programs do not provide
    protections and parental rights akin to those that a public
    school system has. In most situations, parents of students with
    disabilities are stripped of their rights when they enter a
    private school with a voucher, if the private school even
    accepts the student with a disability in the first place.
        Candidly, I perceive the risk of private school choice
    options to be too great and not worth the possibility of
    foreclosing Jacob's equitable access to an appropriate quality
    education. For Jacob -- as a mother, I will continue to
    advocate on behalf of my son and other students with
    disabilities to help ensure that they are all afforded
    equitable access to a quality education.
        Thank you for this opportunity.
        [The statement of Ms. Carter follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Rokita. Thanks, Ms. Carter.
        Mr. Kubacki, you are recognized for 5 minutes.

          TESTIMONY OF KEVIN KUBACKI, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE
                      NEIGHBORHOOD CHARTER NETWORK

        Mr. Kubacki. Chairman Rokita, Ranking Member Polis, and
    members of the subcommittee. My name is Kevin Kubacki, and I am
    the executive director of the Neighborhood Charter Network in
    Indianapolis. Thank you for inviting me to discuss how our
    schools, Enlace Academy and Kindezi Academy, illustrate that
    school choice can transform the lives of children.
        I began this work as a charter school leader because I am,
    first and foremost, a father. I know what it is like to hold
    the hand of each one of my three children on the walk on the
    first day of kindergarten. And I remember vividly hoping that
    the school would see my children the way I see them. That the
    school would recognize their individual strengths and truly
    make them the best versions of themselves. It takes incredible
    trust for a parent to hand over their most precious creation to
    a school. And I believe that schools must honor that trust. As
    a father, I refuse to accept that other parents might not feel
    the same trust in their own school. With a dedicated talented
    and diverse board, and equally diverse and talented staff, we
    launched Enlace Academy in 2013 to give those parents another
    choice.
        Enlace is the founding elementary school for the
    Neighborhood Charter Network's growing family of public charter
    schools in Indianapolis that believes that every child can and
    will learn. The schools located on Indianapolis' west side
    serving families living in the international marketplace
    neighborhood were predominantly English language learners.
        In order to address the specific needs of each and every
    one of our students, we use a personalized, blended learning
    approach paired with intentional character development that is
    rooted in core values: lead with love, embrace uniqueness,
    foster character and ignite imagination, so our children can
    become leaders who choose their own futures in high school,
    college, and beyond.
        Enlace Academy is a grassroots charter school whose name
    ``Enlace'' derives from the Spanish word for ``link'' or
    ``connection,'' because the school seeks to be the hub of
    community for her families in creating meaningful connections
    with community partners, so that our whole families can be
    healthy and happy. Enlace currently has 365 students, 93
    percent of whom are living in poverty. Nearly two-thirds of our
    students are English language learners, the highest percentage
    of any school in the State of Indiana.
        As a result of our high levels of family engagement and
    commitment, we have created a stable learning environment for
    our students with a 90 percent retention rate, and 96 percent
    attendance rate. Additionally, on the State assessment, our
    gross score of 115 points far exceeded the State average and
    earned us an A rating, which only 24 percent of the schools in
    Indiana received. We have done all of this without having to
    expel students. We truly believe all children can and will
    learn.
        We are proud of the amazing work our dedicated staff and
    students who are committed to achieving excellence each and
    every day. We also believe that our high student achievement
    results from rigorous systems of accountability. As a public
    school, we are held accountable to the State requirements for
    all schools. As a charter school, we are additionally held
    accountable to our authorizer for high academic achievement,
    strong financial health, and ethical governance practices. Most
    importantly, though, we are held accountable to the families we
    serve, because ultimately, if we don't honor the trust they
    place in us, they can choose another school that better meets
    their needs.
        We are excited to be serving families in Indianapolis right
    now because of the strong school choice legislation that
    exists, paired with the collective responsibility for the
    children that is felt by charter schools in Indianapolis public
    schools, our partner district. Enlace Academy is one of the
    first charter schools to partner with IPS as an innovation
    network school. In this symbiotic partnership, we are able to
    access the economies of scale of the district, and utilize the
    district facility, and in exchange, we have the autonomy to
    educate kids in our innovative school model whose State
    assessment scores are counted for the district.
        Furthermore, after seeing success in Enlace Academy, the
    district extended the partnership by allowing us to implement
    our successful practices in restarting one of their most
    academically challenged schools. We launched this in August as
    our second school, Kindezi Academy. The name Kindezi originates
    as an African philosophy that preaches taking collective
    ownership of the education of the children, an apt name given
    the collaborative educational narrative in Indianapolis today.
        While we did receive the charter school's program grant
    funding when launching Enlace Academy, that option was not
    available in Indiana when we launched Kindezi. And it is only
    through the strong partnership we share with IPS that our
    school's open and profoundly changing lives today.
        I am so proud to be managing schools that provide parents
    with options that can meet the unique needs of their children,
    and ensure they reach their potential. Parents, not ZIP Codes,
    get to decide what school meets the specific needs of their
    children. Charter schools provide parents with options for
    their child to access a high-quality education.
        The charter community now numbers more than 3 million
    students, and continues to grow as more parents see the power
    of school choice. I believe offering parents broad school
    choice helps all students to compete and serve and attract
    students to their schools.
        I thank you for the opportunity to speak to you this
    morning and look forward to your questions.
        [The statement of Mr. Kubacki follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Rokita. Thank you, sir.
        Mrs. Cherry, you're recognized for 5 minutes.

                    TESTIMONY OF NINA CHERRY, PARENT

        Mrs. Cherry. Good morning, Chairman Rokita, Ranking Member
    Polis, and Chairwoman Foxx, and distinguished members of the
    subcommittee. It is an honor to be here to share my family's
    school choice story with you. My name is Nina Cherry. I live
    with my husband, Demetrius, and our four children in Tampa,
    Florida. School choice provided my family with the hope and
    stability my children badly needed. And from the school choice
    community, we were welcomed into, I know my family's story is
    not all that unique. For parents, it is not about public school
    versus private schools. We are just looking for schools that
    meet our children's needs.
        My children were thriving in a wonderful A-rated Pasco
    County public school. When my husband's sales commission
    plummeted, we lost our permanent home. Without our home, our
    children were no longer zoned for the public school where they
    learned and thrived. It was an extremely difficult time for us.
    We spent several months couch-surfing as a family of six,
    staying with friends and family until my husband can find a new
    job. As we bounced from school zone to school zone, I decided
    that I didn't want my children's education to suffer because of
    our family's economic struggles.
        I heard about Florida's tax credit scholarship program from
    a friend, and I immediately applied. I was so relieved and
    beyond thrilled when my children were granted the scholarship.
    I began looking into some of Florida's 1,700 private schools
    that enroll tax credit scholarship students. When I toured
    Tampa Bay Christian Academy, I knew everything was going to be
    okay. The scholarship provided by Florida's program enables us
    to send all four of our children to Tampa Bay Christian
    Academy. During that dark time, I was so grateful that
    Demetrius and I could concentrate on getting back on our feet,
    knowing that we found a school that meets our children's needs,
    educationally.
        Florida's tax credit scholarship program was a lifeline for
    our family, and I am so thankful we live in a State that
    provides school choice. Our entire family has felt welcome by
    the school choice community and our school. Tampa Bay Christian
    provides the family environment I wanted for my children,
    especially during this hard time.
        Since my children enrolled in Tampa Bay Christian Academy,
    I have joined the school staff as the administrative assistant.
    I also serve as a senior class adviser and mentor older girls
    at the school. With my employee discount, we pay some tuition
    for each child, but the scholarship makes educating our
    children in the environment that works best for them possible.
    But the scholarship makes educating our children and the
    environment that works best for my children's needs. Our
    children are thriving at Tampa Bay Christian, and all four of
    them are on honor roll. Some people who don't really understand
    school choice programs claim they don't have enough
    accountability.
        For my children's education the primary accountability
    rests with Demetrius and me. If we don't feel that the school
    is serving our kids well, we are empowered to communicate our
    concerns to the school. If we decide another school would meet
    our children needs better, we can move them to that school.
        In Florida, the tax credit scholarship follows a child,
    even if the child transfers during the school year. One of the
    reasons we chose Tampa Bay Christian Academy is because it
    holds my kids to a high expectation, and there is a culture of
    high achievement. Also, Florida tax credit scholarship students
    have to take an annual test. At Tampa Bay Christian Academy, my
    children are assessed annually in math and reading. And the
    teachers can use the test results to help my kids learn more
    throughout the year.
        I know my school choice story is not unique. There are over
    97,000 students using Florida's tax credit scholarships this
    school year. There are over 400,000 students nationwide
    benefiting from private school choice programs, plus millions
    of students benefiting from charter schools, magnet programs,
    and open enrollment.
        I am very supportive of providing a wide range of options
    for families. Children vary in so many ways. Family situations
    change, and students' academic and emotional needs can change
    as well. School choice programs, like the Florida tax credit
    scholarship program, allow parents to find the environment
    where the children will learn best.
        Chairman Rokita, Ranking Member Polis, and distinguished
    members of the subcommittee, I want to thank you once again for
    holding this hearing and communicating to families across the
    country that you are committed to expanding their educational
    opportunities. I hope that sharing my story here will help make
    an impact on other families.
        [The statement of Mrs. Cherry follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Rokita. Thank you, Mrs. Cherry.
        We will now entertain member questionings. In the interest
    of accommodating as many members as possible in their
    schedules, I am going to go last in my questioning.
        With that, I will recognize the chairwoman of the full
    committee, Dr. Foxx, for 5 minutes.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, Chairman Rokita, and I want to
    thank all of our witnesses for being here today. I noted such
    good time management on your part, too.
        Mr. Williams, not everyone knows this, but my first
    experience in public office was on my local school board, and I
    went to public schools. I served for 12 years on the local
    school board. It is always frustrating to me that advocates for
    public education see parental choice across the full range of
    available educational options as such a threat. It seems to me
    that those of us who support greater educational choice need to
    do a better job of explaining our support. We do not oppose
    public education. Your experience makes it clear you do not
    oppose public education. So how can proponents of school choice
    make it clear that support for giving parents more options to
    find the right school for their children does not arise from
    opposition to public education?
        Mr. Williams. Madam Chairwoman, I think what we have to do
    fundamentally is to have a conversation with the American
    people about the value of learning and that parents are
    entitled to make a decision that they believe is in the best
    interest of their children. Children have different interests,
    children have different learning styles. Some parents may want
    a youngster to be imbued with a certain kind of, perhaps, a
    religious experience during their learning. And what you are
    trying to do is match the student with the proper learning
    environment to be able to make sure that youngster can succeed
    in life. And so, public school -- there is a great value to
    public school, I was a State commissioner. But there is also an
    opportunity and a value for a private learning experience as
    well.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you.
        Mr. Kubacki, you state in your testimony that your schools
    have accountability to States, your authorizer, and most
    importantly, to parents. Can you expound on why the
    accountability to parents is the most important aspect of the
    accountability your schools face? And what does that
    accountability look like?
        Mr. Kubacki. Absolutely. We invite the parents to be part
    of our team for educating the child. It goes back to the
    proverb of ``it takes a village'' to educate children. And so
    what we do is we put a lot of work in the front end before we
    open the school, and then continually, as the school is in
    session, to continually invite the parents in. We have monthly
    family events where families can come in and see what has been
    going on in the school. Parents are invited to -- we have an
    open door policy where they are invited to come to the
    classrooms. We connect with the parents to make sure they have
    a clear understanding of the progress of their students, both
    educationally and in their character development. And we see
    them just as our partners. And we know that if we are not
    serving to meet the needs of the parents, that they are going
    to find a school that does meet those needs. And so for us, we
    pay very special attention to what are the unique needs for all
    of the families. And as the name Enlace suggests, we will also
    try to connect those parents to services that they may be able
    to utilize to help make sure that the home environment is
    stable so that the children can come to school ready to learn.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you very much.
        Mrs. Cherry, you said in your testimony that the primary
    accountability rests with you and your husband, Demetrius. You
    are empowered to find the school that best meets your
    children's needs. What reaction do you have when you hear the
    arguments that parents can't be trusted to make the right
    decision for their children?
        Mrs. Cherry. Thank you for the question. I don't believe
    that's true at all. As a parent, we know our children better
    than anybody. We know what needs they have. We know the
    different unique learning styles they have. So it kind of
    saddens me that there's people that think that parents don't
    know what's best for their child. Because for me and my
    husband, we do know what's best for our children.
        Chairwoman Foxx. Thank you, very much. And Ms. Carter, I
    want to say to you thank you so much for being willing to adopt
    your child. I think anyone who adopts a child is to be
    commended, and certainly what you have done to be an advocate
    is to be commended.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
        Chairman Rokita. I thank the chairwoman. The ranking member
    is going to employ a bit of the same model that I have on my
    side so with that, I would recognize the ranking member of the
    full committee, Mr. Bobby Scott --
        Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Rokita. -- for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First, I would like to
    submit six documents for the record, letters opposing the
    harmful Republican school choice proposals from the National
    PTA, the National School Boards Association, American
    Federation of Teachers, Texas Association of School Boards,
    National Education Association, and finally, a letter signed by
    50 national organizations, including disability advocacy
    organizations and civil rights organizations, all opposing
    private school vouchers.
        Chairman Rokita. Without objection.
        [The information follows:]

        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One of the challenges
    we have as legislators is making the best use of the taxpayer's
    dollars. We know that we don't have enough money for teacher
    salaries and counselors, after-school programs, reading
    recovery programs, programs we know actually work. We also know
    that research on voucher programs are clear, they do not lead
    to academic benefits for low-income students. Studies on school
    choice programs in Cleveland, Milwaukee, in Washington, D.C.,
    found that students in these programs do not perform any better
    than students who do not receive the vouchers. In fact, in both
    in Louisiana and Ohio, students participating in voucher
    programs actually performed notably worse than their public
    school counterparts. So if you have no evidence this is
    actually working, it is a challenge of why we should be
    spending money in that rather than things we know that actually
    work.
        Mr. Williams, in the program -- in the voucher programs
    that you had oversight of, was the number of vouchers infinite
    or were they limited?
        Chairman Rokita. Mr. Williams, why don't you use your
    microphone, please.
        Mr. Williams. As Commissioner of Education in the State of
    Texas, I did not have jurisdiction over private voucher
    programs.
        Mr. Scott. And the programs you are aware of, are the
    vouchers infinite or are they limited?
        Mr. Williams. They are both. I mean -- some of the programs
    are limited, as is, I think, we have --
        Mr. Scott. Then how do you decide who gets a voucher and
    who doesn't get a voucher?
        Mr. Williams. That is going to be decided by the State, by
    the State education agency as it develops its program.
        Mr. Scott. So the choice isn't on the part of the parents,
    the choice is whoever gets to decide who gets a voucher.
        On the programs that you have, have you seen studies that
    show that the number of people in private schools actually go
    up when you have a voucher program?
        Mr. Williams. The number of participants or --
        Mr. Scott. Number of total students in a school system in
    private schools, does the number in private schools go up when
    you have a voucher program, and the number of people in public
    schools go down?
        Mr. Williams. It goes down but slightly. I mean, you think
    about --
        Mr. Scott. Doesn't go down by the number of the people in
    the voucher program. If you have 1,000 vouchers, the number of
    people in public school doesn't go down by a 1,000. Is that
    right?
        Mr. Williams. It does not.
        Mr. Scott. Ok.
        Mr. Williams. And in Texas, it would not because of the
    dramatic increase in terms of enrollment, that we sort of
    enroll about 85,000 new students in Texas schools every year so
    that would not have an adverse impact upon the number of
    youngsters in Texas schools. As I was going to say earlier --
        Mr. Scott. A lot of the vouchers go to people that would
    have been in private school anyway.
        Mr. Williams. It could very -- that could happen, that
    could happen.
        Mr. Scott. Okay.
        Mr. Williams. But it also could go to individuals that
    would not otherwise be in private school.
        Mr. Scott. In fact, two-thirds of the students in Wisconsin
    and half the students in Indiana were already enrolled in
    private schools before they received a voucher.
        On civil rights, people talk about the choice of public
    schools, Mr. Williams. Who gets to choose who gets into a
    school, is it the school or the parent?
        Mr. Williams. Well, it's going to be the parent, going to
    make the determination about which school they wish to go to.
        Mr. Scott. And does the school have to take them?
        Mr. Williams. It depends upon how we established as State
    education administrations, how we establish what the rules of
    eligibility and rules of being able to come into that --
        Mr. Scott. Do any of the rules allow the school to decide
    who gets in and who doesn't get in?
        Mr. Williams. There are certain circumstances under which
    that might occur, yes.
        Mr. Scott. So it's not the parent, it's the school. What
    about disciplinary processes? Does the school get to decide its
    disciplinary processes where they can kick kids out of school?
        Mr. Williams. The rules for discipline will be no different
    whether that youngster is coming to that school with a voucher
    or whether that youngster is coming to school without one.
        Mr. Scott. That's right. The school decides the discipline
    program.
        Mr. Williams. If I --
        Mr. Scott. In IDEA. My time is about to run out. InIDEA --
    if the school does not want to meet the needs of the student,
    it is the parents' obligation to find a school that does want
    to meet those, rather than everybody has to comply with the
    Individuals with Disabilities Education Act?
        Mr. Williams. Those parents will always have the
    opportunity to return to their home public school. That is
    always there.
        Mr. Scott. The point is that the school does not -- thank
    you, Mr. Chairman -- the school does not have to comply with
    Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and that's one of
    the problems with many of these vouchers.
        Mr. Williams. I am sure we'll have an opportunity for me to
    discuss that later.
        Chairman Rokita. Mr. Williams, do you want to answer the
    question very briefly?
        Mr. Williams. It has been longstanding for -- at the
    Department of Education, that IDEA does not attend to those
    privately placed students.
        Chairman Rokita. The gentleman's time has expired. The
    gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Messer, is recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Messer. With all due respect to my friend from
    Virginia, so much information -- so much misinformation and so
    little time. I mean, we as policymakers sometimes make
    uncomplicated things very complicated. The reality is this: we
    work through these policies as a Nation. If we stay focused on
    kids and we stay focused on parents, this all gets really
    simple. Some of the information he put forward -- Mr. Scott put
    forward -- he mentioned the fact that some studies show that
    kids don't improve much in these programs. Firstly, no studies
    show legitimate decline. The fact of the matter is that
    parents' satisfaction in these schools is very high, which is
    another way of saying that the parents that choose to send
    their child to a school feel much better about the life of
    their child.
        Ms. Carter and Mrs. Cherry -- I admire Mr. Williams and
    Kubacki for your leadership and for being here as well. As
    parents, I admire you for coming here and testifying -- Ms.
    Carter, I actually have a nephew who is autistic, and certainly
    empathize with your point that we need to make sure every kid
    in America has the opportunity to go to a great school, and we
    are falling far short of that as a Nation. And what school
    choice is really about is trying to make sure that in an
    imperfect world, we give every kid a chance. And I believe in
    school choice, because I trust America's parents. I trust that
    in the imperfect world we live in, that the best way to figure
    out what is best for a child is to empower a parent. And Ms.
    Cherry, I notice the school that you go to is called Tampa Bay
    Christian, which I would assume has a faith-based component to
    it. Is that -right?
        Mrs. Cherry. Yes, that is correct.
        Mr. Messer. And one of the things I believe that we all
    have to understand in modern America today, that we already
    have school choice if you can afford it. If you can afford to
    move, if you are in a ZIP Code that has a failing school or if
    you can afford to pay for another private school option, you
    have that choice. Would you be able to send your child to a
    faith-based private school without this program?
        Mrs. Cherry. Absolutely not.
        Mr. Messer. Are you finding that, I would think, an
    important element of your education experience for your
    children?
        Mrs. Cherry. Yes. The Step-Up for Students Scholarship and
    Tampa Bay Christian Academy have been an anchor for my family.
        Mr. Messer. I think, again, when we focus on parents and we
    focus on families, we just remember why shouldn't everybody
    have that chance? I don't know that we are ever going to come
    up with a program that is perfect. We sure weren't perfect
    before we started trying to find these alternative solutions.
    But we had parents in many places in America today, let's own
    it, there's a million people on charter school wait lists
    around America, parents who want the chance to send the child
    somewhere else and can't because they can't afford to do it.
    And it's wrong, and it's long past time that we do something
    about it in America.
        Now Mr. Williams, I would love to give you an opportunity
    to respond to some of Mr. Scott's comments, but elaborate a
    little bit on these -- I thought you mentioned at the very
    beginning, but elaborate a little on this idea that when a
    parent chooses to go to a school, a private school, that they
    should be treated like everyone else at that school, but to try
    to turn every school in America into one uniform bland model, I
    think, wouldn't provide better opportunities for our kids.
        Mr. Williams. If I could, I would respond to two things:
    Number one is that a parent is making a fundamental choice, and
    I would go back to what Ranking Member Polis said at the
    beginning, obviously, it is extremely important for them to
    have adequate information.
        Mr. Messer. Yes.
        Mr. Williams. And it is extremely important for them to be
    able to make a knowing and intelligent decision. If we provide
    them with that information, and some parents -- and they do it
    today -- some parents make the decision to take their kid out
    of a public school, and take that youngster with a disability
    to a private school today, because private schools today are
    indeed educating youngsters with disabilities. And they do it
    understanding that fate is not available to them. They do it
    understanding that they won't have an IEP, but they say there
    is something else at that school that -- that is why I want my
    youngster there. Every parent won't make that decision. And
    that is the beauty of what you are deciding, what you are
    working on. Every parent won't make that decision, but some
    parents do and some parents will.
        The other thing is, as I mentioned in my opening remarks,
    there are 31, I think, there is an indication -- 31 of 33
    empirical studies found that choice did improve student
    outcomes. While I was the commissioner in Texas and not
    Louisiana, and not fully conversant in the Louisiana study, I
    realized that was a snapshot in time, that was a study at the
    beginning of that program, and we expect it to get better
    results and better scores as it goes along.
        Chairman Rokita. The gentleman's time has expired. The
    gentleman from Colorado, Ranking Member Polis, is recognized
    for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Polis. Thank you, Chairman Rokita. You know, I want to
    point out as we debate this, that over 90 percent of the
    students in this country go to public schools of some form, so
    we are obviously spending a lot of time debating that other 8
    or 9 percent, but 90 percent of students go to public schools,
    including magnet schools, and neighborhood schools, and charter
    schools, and alternative schools, and from all those and many
    more, there are all sorts of models of public schools from the
    Montessori Sot, to rigorous college prep, to experiential, to
    arts-focused. So, you know, it would be nice for the committee
    to spend at least 90 percent of our time focusing about some of
    the things that are occurring on the public side, as Mr.
    Kubacki runs a public school, I'm sure can attest to as well.
        I want to hone down on something that Mr. Williams said
    along the same lines that Mr. Scott asked. I want to give Mr.
    Williams the opportunity to clarify a statement he made. His
    words, I fear, might have been a bit misleading with regards to
    those who are unfamiliar with requirements of the IDEA, because
    it gets very technical and very legalistic.
        Mr. Williams, in your testimony, you stated that if a
    public school district has made FAPE, Free Appropriate Public
    Education, available to an IDEA-eligible student, and the
    student's parents have, instead, chosen to place their child in
    a private school with a State-funded private school choice
    scholarship, that child is considered a parentally placed
    private school student. That's what you mentioned.
        And you also said that student would then have the same
    IDEA rights as all other IDEA-eligible, parentally placed
    private school students. So I want to hone down on that and I
    want to be clear about which IDEA rights parentally placed
    private school students enjoy.
        Parentally placed private school students give up their
    right to a free and appropriate public education, which we call
    FAPE and related services, an obligation to provide the
    services under Federal law. So parents who use a State-funded
    private school voucher give up their right to FAPE, meaning the
    school district is not required to pay for FAPE, including
    things like private placements. And the private school, then,
    is not required by law to provide any particular special
    education-related service that would meet the requirements of
    FAPE, like speech therapy, or assistive technology, or whatever
    that might be, so long as the student remains in that private
    school.
        The only exception to this would be limited child fine
    services, perhaps an evaluation to determine IDEA eligibility
    if the evaluation had not been conducted previously. But
    Federal IDEA funds, and the right to Free Appropriate Public
    Education and individual services that come with an IEP, do not
    follow parentally placed students to private schools. Only when
    an IEP team determines a private school as the best placement,
    that's a placement through the school district mechanism, and I
    will remind you that parents are part of the IEP team, only
    then do full IDEA funding, and more importantly, rights, follow
    the student to the private school.
        So, Mr. Williams, when a student participates in a State-
    funded private school voucher program, does he or she maintain
    the right to FAPE?
        Mr. Williams. She does not.
        Mr. Polis. Thank you. I just wanted to clarify that.
        Chairman Rokita. For the record, Mr. Williams, she does
    not. Can you use your microphone?
        Mr. Williams. She does not.
        Mr. Polis. I also wanted to quote one other aspect of your
    testimony back to you. You mentioned, quote, ``I am deeply
    committed to guaranteeing that all students are treated with
    respect and dignity, and are free from discrimination of their
    learning environment.'' How can you make that assurance of
    schools that don't allow gay or lesbian students to attend, and
    to the parents of those gay and lesbian students?
        Mr. Williams. I think, first of all, it goes back to what
    the other protections afforded to those students under current
    Federal law, and I would suggest to you that whatever the
    current the Federal law provides those youngsters, those
    youngsters would be entitled to.
        Mr. Polis. And I would point out to my colleagues, we would
    welcome their support to extend the protections of Federal law
    on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity. And I
    welcome my friends on the other side of the aisle to join me
    and Mr. Cicilline in support of the Equality Act, which would
    do just that.
        Ms. Carter, in your testimony, you talked about your own
    extensive search to find the right school for your son. And you
    mentioned you considered many kinds of public schools, public
    charter schools, and other district-run schools. The National
    Center for Special Education in Charter Schools is taking steps
    to help advocate for students with disabilities in charters.
    There is a number of processes around helping parents make the
    right decision for their child, and in your testimony, you
    spoke about applying for a charter, but not being selected in
    the lottery system.
        Can you share more about your own decision-making process?
    And why you personally value school choice and the opportunity
    to consider multiple schools? And I understand your child is
    not in the neighborhood school, but is in the school that you
    found to be most appropriate for your child and with the best
    program. So if you could talk about how your process for
    finding the best public school for your child in 20 or 30
    seconds, that would be great, and you can submit more later.
        Ms. Carter. Thank you, excuse me, member Polis. Yes, we --
    my experience is based on professional and personal advocacy.
    And in that context, it is about research, investigating what
    is available. And so, it's important to be able to understand
    what I am comparing. So I look to the accountability standards
    that are in place. I chose to stay in the public arena simply
    because ``A,'' my child has disabilities, as well as the fact
    that I am a taxpayer, and I am a public school recipient, so I
    support public education. And--
        Chairman Rokita. The gentleman's time has expired. I'm
    sorry.
        Ms. Bonamici, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and
    ranking member, for holding this hearing about school choice.
    Here is an example of some excellent school choices in the
    district I am honored to represent. The Beaverton School
    District has -- in northwest Oregon, has a really diverse
    student body, more than 100 languages, spoken in student homes.
    There's an international IB school, a magnet schools focusing
    on environmental sciences and health careers, science and
    technology program, an arts and communication magnet, which is
    where my own daughter went to school. Two of the district
    public schools have STEAM-focused curriculum. They have two
    districts reported charter schools with language immersion
    programs in Spanish and Chinese. There is a community high
    school, an early college high school with an optional
    partnership with the community college, and an open enrollment
    process for students in neighboring districts.
        Families in Beaverton district have considerable choice and
    don't have to sign away their rights to Federal civil rights
    protections, or give up transparency or student achievement
    when they make that choice. I wanted to mention, when I
    listened to the testimony, parents across this country want a
    school for their children that has high expectations, like Ms.
    Cherry mentioned. And they want a school that recognizes your
    student's individual strengths, like Mr. Kubacki mentioned.
    These are qualities are not exclusive to private or religious
    or charter schools.
        There are great private schools in the district I
    represent, they are not taking tax dollars from public schools.
    And as policymakers, our focus should be on making sure that
    all schools have the resources and the support they need to
    maintain those qualities, and I know that the chairman, in his
    opening remarks, said parents don't want their children trapped
    in a failing school. Now people have different definitions of
    what failing school means, schools are buildings, maybe they
    are schools where many children are having more challenges. And
    we as policymakers should be saying, we don't want any failing
    schools. So that should be our focus to make sure that all
    students have opportunities.
        I wanted to ask you, Ms. Carter, students of color,
    students with disabilities, LBGTQ students like Mr. Polis was
    talking about, are really disproportionately affected by
    suspensions and expulsions. Of course, we don't know the data
    for voucher programs, because private schools are not required
    to publicly report that information. So should public dollars
    be used to fund schools that can discriminate against students?
    And what safeguards do we need to make sure your son receives a
    high-quality education as a student who has rights under the
    IDEA?
        Ms. Carter. Yes, thank you. First of all, no. No school
    should be able to discriminate. We do have laws in place, and
    when you are not in a position where you can have access to
    laws that protect parents and students with disabilities, or
    different students' rights, then--that--therein lies a problem.
    And so with IDEA, there are those protections; the FAPE, Free
    Appropriate Public Education; there's also, in the least
    restrictive environment, so that we don't have students
    educated in segregated classrooms which are called self-
    contained classrooms.
        And we also have the notion of due process, where we have
    access to the law, where we have an opportunity to be heard and
    given that notice with respect to what the rights are.
        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you. And I want to ask Mr. Williams a
    question before my time expires. But thank you, thank you very
    much. Mr. Williams, your testimony didn't discuss the
    challenges of school choice programs in rural Texas. I
    represent a lot of rural Oregon, and it is not surprising that
    rural districts in Texas are some of the strongest opponents of
    the proposal in Texas to shift public education funding to
    education savings accounts, because rural communities often
    have just a single school. It is the community hub that has
    been serving the student's parents and grandparents, and it's
    where people gather and there is no other school in that town,
    or even in a close proximity, so small-town school systems
    don't have the economies of scale.
        So can you explain to my constituents in Oregon's rural
    areas why they should give up needed funding to a handful of
    private schools that aren't near their community, especially
    when these private choice programs have an unproven academic
    outcomes, and do not serve all students?
        Mr. Williams. I will start initially, because it is going
    to give those families more choices to acquire the learning
    that they need for their youngster. We have been having this
    conversation in Texas and elsewhere, as if it's the only thing
    we are talking about, is moving a youngster from one building,
    Thomas Jefferson, to another building, perhaps St. Thomas
    Aquinas. But in rural Texas, and we haven't won this argument
    yet, but in rural Texas, with that education savings account,
    perhaps they can buy Mandarin Chinese from a distance learner -
    - distance provider; maybe they can provide -- acquire some
    kind of math skill because you can't get a master math teacher
    in ``Scatback,'' Texas, maybe you can buy that from --
        Ms. Bonamici. My time is about to expire. I appreciate
    that. But we just got our graduation rates back and our online
    high school had very embarrassing, pathetic graduation rates of
    28 percent.
        Chairman Rokita. The gentlewoman's current time has
    expired.
        Ms. Bonamici. Thank you. I yield back.
        Chairman Rokita. The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Brat, is
    recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Brat. Thank you, Chairman. To the panel and Mr.
    Williams, I'll ask the question. I am an educator. I taught
    Randolph-Macon College down the road a couple of hours for 18
    years, economics and ethics. Went to seminary and then did a
    Ph.D. in economics, so I am a confused person. So I just got
    back from the prayer breakfast. Very nice, bipartisan, across-
    the-aisle stuff. We get along more than the press gives us
    credit. And so, this can be a contested issue, right? I mean,
    we have differences in strategy, but one of the things I saw--I
    taught freshmen--coming into my classroom all the time. And I
    think one of the things some of us on this side of the aisle
    consider is just kind of the one-size-fits-all nature sometimes
    of education. And my public schools are top in the country. So
    my kids both got excellent education. But nationwide, we are
    now competing with the rest of the world. We all want the kids
    to excel, right?
        So you can look at the Ps and test scores. I ran
    regressions on too much of that stuff for too many years, and I
    won't go into all the details. But the point is we have got
    kids that don't know what a business is after they graduate
    from high school. They don't know a price from a cost from a
    profit. They can't define any of it. Right. And then the kids
    get to go to college, that's great. But the kids that don't go
    to college, they don't know what business is, and they are
    going to work.
        So I think we have huge work to do, whatever solutions we
    all agree on. And then I taught ethics and went to seminary, et
    cetera, and there is no such thing as just ethics. Right? There
    is the Aristotelian school of ethics, or Kantian ethics, or
    Christian ethics, or Confucian ethics. Right? There is no
    ethics. And what system of ethics are we teaching in K-12?
    None. The kids come to college, they don't know one system of
    ethics, they can't name one theologian philosopher, et cetera.
    So that's why some on this side of the aisle, we just want to
    see some variety when it comes to the curriculum -- the
    monopoly model -- it is hard to crack up monopolies, right, in
    economics, or monopoly in politics, or monopoly in any business
    that doesn't produce the best outcomes.
        So we just want to see some variety. And Bobby and I are in
    Virginia, we have a tremendous Achievable Dream school that is
    in the inner city, and has just done unbelievable job, charter
    school, public charter, and they do phenomenal. Right? The kids
    are introduced, they walk and meet the police officers, at the
    beginning of the day, they have stock market gains, they learn
    about business, they got a tennis program, all the kids go to
    college and it's phenomenal. And so, we all are trying to find
    that for all of our kids. And then getting to my question,
    right, the political tensions are high. Right after the
    election, everyone's bombing each other on Facebook right now,
    and the tone's not good.
        So I am trying to keep the tone good. And so, one of the
    questions I get back home from constituents that have major
    concerns are, we have some of the best public schools in the
    country in my area, but we all want to see kids in the poorer
    areas, and the inner cities have some choice.
        I think that is part of the issue that is on people's minds
    right now. But then the question from constituents is ``Well,
    won't the school choice movement pull funding from public
    schools?'' What would you say to those suburban moms and dads
    who are concerned and have anxiety that if we move towards
    choice, that money won't come from their public schools? What
    is the variety of funding options available that would ease
    some of the anxiety out there?
        Mr. Williams. Well, depending on how you design it, let us
    keep in mind that most of the school choice plans that I have
    seen, that whatever the per capita spending amount is, the
    voucher, or whatever that is, is less than that, and so there
    is still going to be sort of the delta that is available for
    the public schools, and that body is no longer in that school.
    And so, you are not having to be concerned about that piece,
    because you don't have to educate the child, and some dollars
    are still get to remain with the public school.
        But I think more importantly, what we ought to be doing, I
    mean, to my left are three parents that have children with
    three different sets of needs. And we should be creating
    opportunities for all of those needs to be satisfied in a
    public school, public learning environment, and that includes
    private schools, because everybody can't -- everybody doesn't
    do the same thing. I mean, all these schools aren't designed to
    do the same thing. We ought to put parents in the best position
    to find the school that meets the needs of their child.
        Mr. Brat. That's great. Thank you. I have about 30 seconds.
    I'll just kind of add, I teach economics, and in economics, you
    try to maximize utility. And so, there -- everyone is going to
    debate across the aisle what are the test scores and
    comparisons, and they'll say they are not that great, we will
    say they are great. Even if we compromise and say, let's say
    they are dead even, it seems to me it's kind of analogous to
    working for a firm. Sometimes you just want to go to work for
    that firm instead of that firm. Right? There is a tone at the
    top, you like the CEO, the principal, you like the vice
    principal. Your kid may be socially stigmatized at one school,
    they feel better going to another school, et cetera. And so
    that is my impetus for the school choice option, is I think the
    kids do need some variety, parents need some variety. I worked
    for several years at the State level --
        Chairman Rokita. The gentleman's time has expired. The
    gentlelady from California, Ms. Davis, is recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Brat. Thank you, Chairman. Thank you very much for
    coming in today.
        Mrs. Davis. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank
    you to all of you for being here. We know it is a great effort
    to do that. Ms. Carter, I wanted to ask you a little bit more
    about your experience, I know we have had to cut you off. Just
    -- you had to really navigate a very complex school system as
    you branched out and looked at everything. Could you talk about
    one or two instances where you were testing the transparency of
    the system itself, and access to information for a parent, any
    parent, but particularly a parent who was interested in the
    policies that have been enacted at the Federal level for IDEA
    over the years? How did you learn that? How did you actually
    get a handle on that?
        Ms. Carter. It was challenging.
        Mrs. Davis. As a former school board member, I understand
    that, so --
        Ms. Carter. So it really is searching for opportunities.
    When I look at my child, and for him, it is about equitable
    access to a high quality, excellent education. And so, it is
    understanding who the players are, kind of learning about --
    being clear on what my child's needs are, and then searching
    for those opportunities that can best meet my child's needs.
        Mrs. Davis. Did you have a sense that the school did a good
    job in making sure that they had data -- they had backup
    information, so they could even describe to you how services
    for, say, another child, not by name, but just generally, how
    they really demonstrated that they were doing what you were
    hoping they would do?
        Ms. Carter. The short answer is no. It's about having --
    getting access to information. And admittedly, I am a parent
    who has time, who has information available to me, so it still
    is a pushing, pushing, pushing from the school. And so one of
    the things that I focus on is trying to expose and make
    available, not just to Jacob, but to all students, and
    particularly those with disabilities, asking questions,
    pushing. So it is not something that just happened.
        Mrs. Davis. I wanted to just let you know, because I am
    concerned about this, and I think others are as well. There was
    a recent development last evening where my colleagues actually
    filed the need to move forward to take away some of the
    important protections that children have, which would basically
    say to States, you don't have to file -- follow really any
    guidelines in tracing the improvement, and tracing the
    performance of young people in schools. Would that concern you
    that perhaps we're moving away from that, so that States might
    really be doing this very differently? If you were to move, for
    example, you might move to a State that had decided they
    weren't going to follow up with--
        Ms. Carter. That would be a--
        Ms. Davis. Understanding how we disaggregate data, whether
    children of color, whether children who -- where we must adhere
    to IDEA would be followed?
        Ms. Carter. No. Accountability is key. And so something
    like that, if that didn't exist, then there wouldn't be a way
    to even measure whether or not there is equitable access, or
    even a high-quality education. So these regulations are
    critical as it relates to a high quality education --
        Mrs. Davis. Yeah. Could I ask the rest of you? Would that
    be your concern, or do you think it is important that States
    have guidelines to follow, to be sure that they're -- making
    sure that all children are receiving a high-quality education?
    We disaggregate that data and we know what is going on?
        Mr. Williams. I think it is important for us as States to
    have some guidance. But I will be honest with you, in many
    areas, let's say academic accountability, some of us were there
    before the national government was, and I think some of us were
    designing assessments and accountability regimes beforehand.
    Obviously, No Child Left Behind was birthed somewhere else and
    came here. So in some of these matters, I think the States are
    in very good stead to be able to protect our citizens, and do
    so in a way, that is quite laudatory. But there was no doubt
    that having the participation, and maybe even the leadership
    and the guidance of the national government would be helpful at
    times.
        Mrs. Davis. Anybody else want to comment on that?
        Thank you, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Rokita. I thank the gentlelady for yielding. The
    gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Grijalva, is recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Grijalva. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Like Ms. Davis, my
    colleague, I served on a school board back home in Tucson for
    12 years, and I think my question kind of goes to another part
    of this whole discussion, it is a discussion of how much of the
    Federal dollar, public dollar that goes to public education is
    going to be diverted or sent a different direction in terms of
    vouchers, for profits, private.
        In that position, we had to deal with mandated issues like
    IDEA, mandated, and necessary, by the way. Civil rights
    protections, equal access for all children, Title IX so that
    boys and girls got the same opportunities at all levels, and
    English learners.
        Laws that controlled what we did, open meeting laws,
    financial disclosure in terms of the budget and the audits
    attended to that particular school district, and the list goes
    on. And the public scrutiny that had to be there in order for a
    school district to be functional.
        My question is, as we go forward, there are two standards
    that seem to appear: there is the standard on public education
    in terms of the points I just outlined plus more, and a kind of
    nebulous standard as to what we do for private, for-profit
    charters that is different. Is there -- and I will ask Mr.
    Kubacki and Mr. Williams for a response -- don't you feel that
    the reaction to, I think, the proposition that many of us have,
    that people should play by the same rules, that if on the
    governance of a private for-profit; that there should be
    transparency, there should be rules that apply to the
    financials; there should be disclosure of salaries; there
    should be academic disclosures; and the list goes on, and that
    all children coming need to be taken in, given the mandates
    that the public schools have. Do you feel that would -- do you
    think that is fair to set the same playing field for everybody
    -- Mr. Williams, Mr. Kubacki, either one.
        Mr. Williams. I think that is a fair aspirational goal, but
    I do not believe that is the law you established here. The law
    you established here first of all you haven't exercised
    jurisdiction over private schools generally, and here you have
    exercised jurisdiction in title VI and title IX--
        Mr. Grijalva. Yeah but--
        Mr. Williams. And IDEA as relates to --
        Mr. Grijalva. But Mr. Williams, we are talking about
    extending that jurisdiction, you know, if we are talking about
    the increased prominence of private schools in terms of the
    support they are going to get from the Federal Government in
    terms of money. Should requirements follow the money or should
    it be open-ended?
        Mr. Williams. The recipient of those dollars is not that
    private school. The recipient of that dollar is the mother, or
    the father, the parent, the guardian, and you haven't exercised
    jurisdiction over that individual.
        Mr. Grijalva. And as you said, the final arbiter, the
    ultimate is the empowerment of that parent, okay. And--but as a
    balance, as a check and balance, shouldn't some requirements,
    at the minimum, financial disclosure be required? Investment
    strategies, open meetings? So we know when these schools meet
    and who is governing them? And what decisions they are making-
    at the very minimum shouldn't that be a public acknowledgment
    as opposed to an individual parent acknowledgement? We are not
    eliminating that parent's choice, we are just saying the rest
    of us that are helping pay the bill should know what is going
    on.
        Mr. Williams. You want to have--sort of get to the right
    balance between those issues. But I think we have got to be
    real careful about treating that private school as if it is a
    public school. So is there--
        Mr. Grijalva. Given what the nominee for Secretary of
    Education and her opposition to any reasonable regulation for
    charter schools or for-profit schools, is there a Federal role
    in insuring that taxpayer funds are not being abused? Is there?
        Mr. Williams. That is a conversation for you to have here,
    and there will be some role, of course. The question is how
    much of a role, and how do we reach the right balance of
    allowing that private school to function and to adequately
    serve those youngsters that come to it.
        Mr. Grijalva. Thank you. And I am broaching that
    conversation. I appreciate it.
        Yield back.
        Chairman Rokita. The gentleman yields back.
        The gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Garrett's, recognized for
    5 minutes.
        Mr. Garrett. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        So I think the metric that matters here isn't what day of
    the week these schools meet, it's not how long they meet. The
    metric is student success, right? And so, ultimately, I want to
    introduce myself to this committee and this subcommittee, and
    I'll tell you that I believe in the nature versus nurture
    argument, in nurture. I believe in nurture. I believe that no
    child, regardless of their national origin, regardless of their
    skin color, regardless of their parents' socioeconomic status
    or educational attainment, is more able to succeed or fail than
    another, but that if the child is placed in a circumstance
    where the child can succeed and encouraged and given
    appropriate instruction, that the child will in all likelihood
    succeed.
        And I believe that there is a fundamental entitlement that
    Americans can expect, one fundamental entitlement, and that is
    opportunity. And I see children being left behind every single
    day by virtue of circumstances beyond their control, and that
    is a ZIP Code; that's a parent who loves their child no
    differently than I love my own, but who doesn't have the
    financial wherewithal to place themselves in the circumstance
    where they can assure their children the best educational
    opportunity.
        And we had this fight again and again during my time in the
    State legislature, and there, one party said, look, we have
    really good public schools except for where we don't, and we
    need to ensure that the young people in those areas also have
    an opportunity. Are the children failing those schools? No. The
    schools are failing the children. I understand there's a
    plethora of inputs: socioeconomic status, educational
    attainment of parents, et cetera, et cetera, so forth and so
    on. But if we know to a metaphysical certainty that in one ZIP
    Code schools are failing, then shouldn't we change how we do
    business?
        So I would, Mr. Chairman, direct my questions at this
    juncture to Ms. Cherry.
        Ms. Cherry, you were, in fact -- your children were in
    public school in Pasco County.
        Mrs. Cherry. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Garrett. And you were happy, very happy with the
    outcomes that your children were seeing in Pasco County, your
    husband Demetrius and yourself?
        Mrs. Cherry. That is correct.
        Mr. Garrett. And we've heard conjecture that people might
    flee public schools if these opportunities are made available,
    but you only left those public schools in Pasco County after
    financial calamity, beyond your control, struck your family. Am
    I correct?
        Mrs. Cherry. That is correct.
        Mr. Garrett. Okay. You would have remained in those schools
    with which you were happy.
        Mrs. Cherry. That is correct.
        Mr. Garrett. And so had Florida not had a system wherein, I
    believe, what, 79,000 young people received scholarship
    opportunities, your children would be in school where?
        Mrs. Cherry. I'm not sure, because when it was time to
    enroll, we didn't have a permanent address, so I'm really not
    sure.
        Mr. Garrett. But, ultimately, you ended up at Tampa Bay
    Christian.
        Mrs. Cherry. Correct.
        Mr. Garrett. Do you feel that the educational opportunities
    afforded to your -- was it three or four children?
        Mrs. Cherry. There's four.
        Mr. Garrett. -- four children at Tampa Bay Christian are
    sufficient for them to be able to live successful lives here in
    the United States of America?
        Mrs. Cherry. Yes, definitely.
        Mr. Garrett. Okay. And this was made possible because
    somebody in Florida decided to break from the status quo and
    think outside the box.
        Mrs. Cherry. Yes, sir.
        Mr. Garrett. Okay. And so if somebody hadn't, can you say
    with any certainty whatsoever that your children would be
    receiving what I would argue they're entitled to, which is the
    opportunity provided by a solid education?
        Mrs. Cherry. I couldn't say that.
        Mr. Garrett. Okay. Thank you.
        And -- I talk too fast. Mr. Williams, I would move my
    questioning to you. Ultimately, we look a lot at per-pupil
    expenditures. And what I've seen from the studies that I've
    reviewed in my previous legislative experience, a much smaller
    format, was that the per-pupil expenditure does not decrease
    commensurate to the number of individuals who leave a school.
    In essence that, if we're funding a particular school to the
    tune of $12,000 per pupil and a pupil leaves, that only a
    percentage of that funding leaves with that pupil. Is that
    accurate?
        Mr. Williams. That is true. The only thing that changes is
    the number of students that the school has.
        Mr. Garrett. So, but, if the average per-pupil expenditure
    is $12,000, then let's say that $6,000 follows the student, the
    money follows the child, then that leaves a surplus at the
    school from whence the child came, in most instances. Is that
    correct?
        Mr. Williams. Correct.
        Mr. Garrett. And so, ultimately, now what we have is, if
    resources are the question, a greater number of resources per
    pupil as that child is subtracted from the total number of
    children in the school.
        Mr. Williams. Quite possible.
        Mr. Garrett. And so, if you could help me, because I'm
    completely missing something here, what would the argument
    against having a greater per-pupil resource base at what had --
    some parent might have identified as a school not providing
    their child an opportunity, what would the argument against
    that greater per-pupil resource base be? I'm missing it.
        Mr. Williams. I can't help you much with that. What I think
    it's just simply a fundamental philosophical difference in
    allowing folks to move to private schools.
        Mr. Garrett. And so, Mr. Chairman, I've got about 15
    seconds. Ultimately, though, I'd ask Mr. Kubacki, and I
    apologize if I'm pronouncing your name wrong, should the goal
    not be that every child receives the education they need to
    have the potential to succeed in this Nation?
        Mr. Kubacki. Yes.
        Mr. Garrett. Thank you.
        Chairman Rokita. Wonderful. Yes or no question. The
    gentleman's time's expired. I thank the gentleman.
        My friend, the former ranking member of the subcommittee,
    Mrs. Fudge, you're recognized for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Fudge. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I thank
    you all so much for being here today.
        Let me just make two comments, the one that my colleague
    just made about he couldn't understand why people are concerned
    about a student leaving if they retain a certain amount of the
    money. It's just basic math. Schools are based upon the number
    of kids they project are going to be there. So you still have
    to pay all the bills, you have to pay all the teachers. If you
    lose a student, it makes a difference.
        And as well, Mr. Chairman, I think maybe there comes a
    point where we need to raise our hands up here too about
    telling the truth. My colleague, Mr. Messer, made a blanket
    statement about our ranking member saying that he was not
    correct, but, in fact, Mr. Messer had no basis in fact for
    making the statement.
        Let me just be clear with you. I'm from the State of Ohio.
    We have an EdChoice voucher program. A study by the voucher
    people indicated last year that students who participated in
    that program did considerably worse than similar students in
    the public schools. So, in fact, there is indeed a legitimate
    decline in achievement in some of these programs. So I just
    wanted to make clear to Mr. Messer that , in fact, is the case.
        Ms. Carter, school voucher proponents do not believe that
    private K-12 schools receiving publicly-funded vouchers should
    follow the same rules as public recipients of federal funding.
    For example, the nominee for education secretary, Ms. DeVos,
    refused to say that all schools receiving federal aid should be
    held to the same accountability standards, including IDEA,
    which I don't think she even knew what it was.
        Could you elaborate on your assertion that all schools
    should be held to the same accountability standards and
    safeguards?
        Ms. Carter. Yes. Thank you. So with respect to the same
    standards, that accountability and transparency is something
    that can also be measured. And the standardization of that
    allows for families to make an informed choice, because choice
    is a good thing, but it's about having an informed choice so
    that you know that your child has an equitable access to that
    high-quality education. So targeted professional development,
    training of all the teachers and educators that are going to be
    working with students is critical to have that equity, if you
    will, and to have a measure that supports the delivery of a
    high quality education.
        In addition to that, noting that it's an individualized
    notion, it's based on the needs of that individual student, and
    when you have standardization as it relates to transparency and
    accountability, those safeguards, then again, you have
    something with which to measure, to compare, and analyze.
        Ms. Fudge. Thank you. To you as well, Ms. Carter. We've
    repeatedly heard that the argument that private school choice
    programs provide parents with the opportunity to select the
    best school for their children. When describing your search for
    quality education options, you stated, the panoply of choice,
    this is your words, was narrowed and, in fact, not a viable
    choice for your son. Please explain how your choices were
    limited in your search because of his disability.
        Ms. Carter. Yes. So with respect to a high quality
    education, what's important for Jacob was the fact that
    teachers, again, were trained, they had an understanding of
    what his disabilities are, what the requirements are, and
    that's what IDEA does under FAPE and least restrictive
    environment. So I had confidence that I had an understanding,
    but I also had something with which to measure whether or not
    the particular choices had that.
        And when you're looking at private placements, and not
    through the public school system, but private placements, they
    don't have anything near what would be appropriate for Jacob in
    terms of providing those related services that he needs, the
    specialized instruction that he needs.
        And so, again, our focus was on the public system, because
    there are safeguards in place whereby I can go and see and
    count on there being accountability associated with what those
    services are.
        Ms. Fudge. Thank you very much.
        And I would just say to this committee, I am not an
    opponent of charter schools, I am not an opponent of vouchers;
    I am a proponent of public schools. Ninety-plus percent of the
    children I represent go to public schools. So I need to be sure
    that someone is looking out for the 90-plus percent as well as
    the 8 to 10 percent.
        And with that, Mr. Chairman, I would yield back.
        Chairman Rokita. The gentlelady yields back.
        Ms. Adams from North Carolina, you're recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Ms. Adams. Thank you, Chairman Rokita and Ranking Member
    Polis, for allowing me to visit this subcommittee. I do want to
    thank our panelists for their testimonies.
        And like many of you, the importance of education is
    personal to me. I'm a parent, grandparent, I'm also an educator
    by training. Forty years, four decades I spent as a professor
    at Bennett College in North Carolina preparing students, many
    of whom have gone on to be teachers across the country. So --
    and it's clear that from the nomination of Betsy DeVos for
    Secretary of Education that it appears that the administration
    intends to push a private school choice agenda that will, I
    believe, undermine public education.
        Having said that, Ms. Carter, I want to thank you for
    sharing your experience with us today. Fifty million students
    who make up, as has just been said, 90 percent of America's
    school children attend public schools. All of my children and
    grandchildren attended public schools. And so the choice
    taxpayer funds that would otherwise go to public schools
    serving the vast majority of our students, it diverts them to
    private schools.
        Ms. Carter, you spoke about your strong sense of duty and
    advocacy on behalf of your son, Jacob. Can you speak a little
    bit to the amount of time that it took to navigate the school
    system, how your journey might have been impacted if you knew
    you had a high quality public school in your neighborhood?
        Ms. Carter. Yes. If there was a high quality school in my
    neighborhood, it certainly would have relieved some of the
    anxiety and stress that has gone into the process. And at least
    it's something that would be accessible, and, again, not just
    to Jacob, but what's available in the community, that
    individualized notion that has a place, a centralized place
    where Jacob has a chance, a real chance to be successful and to
    have access to that high quality education.
        Ms. Adams. Okay. The Every Student Succeeds Act requires
    States to develop and implement challenging academic standards
    to ensure that students are career ready or college prepared,
    standards that apply to all students, except for students with
    the most significant cognitive abilities who are assessed on
    the easier alternate assessment. Private schools such as those
    used in many voucher programs are not required to abide by
    ESSA. They do not have to set standards, assess students to
    ensure that they're college and career ready, or provide
    information about academic achievement to parents.
        Ms. Carter, you mentioned that your son is included in the
    general education classroom with peers of his same age. How
    important is it for students with disabilities to be held to
    these standards, and can you describe how this has helped Jacob
    to be successful in school?
        Ms. Carter. Yes. First of all, high expectations, those
    standards that are in place -- I have high expectations of
    Jacob. I think we as parents all have high expectations of our
    children to be successful. And communicating those high
    expectations is critical, because when you set the tone and you
    -- school systems understand that not only are parents taking
    their responsibility seriously, but it's the fact that you are
    helping to promote those high quality standards.
        Jacob is going to college, and it's a particular thing that
    I spend a lot of energy speaking to all the schools, the
    administrators, the educators, kind of that same thing. Jacob
    is going to college. And as a result of that, I have to make
    sure that he is appropriately prepared to be successful in
    college.
        Ms. Adams. Thank you.
        Mrs. Cherry, did anyone inform you of your right under
    Federal law to keep your kids enrolled in their home school
    when your family experienced homelessness?
        Mrs. Cherry. I actually went to the school and told them
    that I was moving. So I had to -- I was actually told that I
    was zoned out of the school. There's a process that you had to
    go through to get back in, but with the time -- I didn't have
    time to do that, so that's why I had to choose.
        Ms. Adams. So were you informed, though, that you could
    have kept --
        Mrs. Cherry. No, I was not. They never told me that.
        Ms. Adams. Well, that's the problem. I think parents do not
    have the necessary information that they need.
        I just wanted to quickly ask Mr. Williams, you know, you
    pointed out that many voucher programs don't test at all,
    others use tests differently. How are you able to approve the
    impact on student achievement and hold schools accountable?
        Mr. Williams. I think what you could do here is to direct
    us as the SEAs that design accountability programs that would
    require some level of testing. And I think most private schools
    would be more than happy to use our basic test or use their ACT
    or SAT for high schoolers.
        What I said in my opening remarks is that our
    accountability system that we use today, and I think that of
    the other 49 states, would not neatly fit on top of private
    schools. That, I would discourage us to do, is to say that the
    exact accountability system that I have now for my public
    schools and traditional charters, that we apply that directly
    to the private schools.
        Ms. Adams. Thank you, sir. I'm out of time.
        Chairman Rokita. The gentleman's time has expires. I thank
    the gentlelady.
        Mr. Takano, you're recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Takano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Betsy DeVos, the nominee for Secretary of Education has
    advocated for a lack of oversight and regulation in Michigan's
    charter school law. As a result, it has 33 for-profit
    organizations that run 79 percent of the State's charter
    schools. Detroit, overwhelmed by bad choices for children,
    produced the worst math and reading results among all U.S.
    cities.
        In my own district, I have a constituent, Sarah Vigrass,
    who works for California Virtual Academies, managed by K12
    Incorporated, a for-profit education company supported by Ms.
    DeVos and her family. In her 10 years there, Sarah has seen
    firsthand the decline in amount and quality of materials and
    high teacher turnover rates driven by K12 Incorporated,
    maximizing their profits and not investing in students.
        My question is for Ms. Carter. Ms. Carter, do you believe
    for-profit entities can serve their bottom line as well as
    their students effectively?
        Ms. Carter. No, I do not.
        Mr. Takano. And why was a for-profit charter school not the
    best option for your son?
        Ms. Carter. As it relates to Jacob, because he has
    disabilities, it's about individual needs, what his needs are.
    And in inquiring these for-profit entities, I discovered that
    they could not tell me what they were going to be able to do to
    support what his needs are. And the fact that there aren't
    standards or there's no accountability as it relates to what
    children with disabilities need, and all children, for that
    matter, that didn't make me comfortable.
        Mr. Takano. Well, it's interesting that the -- I think we
    have a public interest in making sure that schools, this idea
    of competition and accountability that exists among schools,
    but we're not the -- we're totally leaving that out of the
    picture in terms of Federal money being used for these schools.
        The Department of Education collects extensive data on
    public schools, including achievement, enrollment, discipline,
    bullying, harassment, and special education information. These
    data collection procedures provide transparency to stakeholders
    and allow for the Department and State educational agencies to
    intervene, if necessary, to reduce and prevent discriminatory
    practices. Private schools are not required to report the same
    information, even if they accept vouchers in most States.
        Ms. Carter, in your testimony, you said you researched and
    became very informed about public school choice options in D.C.
    Do you feel the transparency of schools about their academic
    outcomes, discipline practices, and special educational
    services are important in determining the best education for
    your son?
        Ms. Carter. Yes, I do. And I do because diversity is
    critical, diversity in terms of what kinds of students are made
    up in the environment, as well as the opportunity for all
    children to succeed. Inclusion is critically important. And so
    knowing that information is a part of the process of
    determining whether or not this particular school choice is
    what would be best for my child.
        Mr. Takano. In your opinion, what other information is
    critical in ensuring your son receives a high quality
    education?
        Ms. Carter. Knowing the background and the training and the
    credentials associated with the educators who are going to be
    providing that kind of support and services to my child; in
    addition to the related services, speech, occupational therapy,
    physical therapy, those kinds of related services that my child
    needs; knowing what those credentials are so that I can
    evaluate whether or not I feel that this is a good choice for
    my child to be successful.
        Mr. Takano. And you're telling me that information wasn't
    always available to you?
        Ms. Carter. Not in a for-profit environment, no.
        Mr. Takano. That's interesting.
        Mr. Williams, it's come to light that several Trump
    appointees to serve in leadership roles at the U.S. Department
    of Education have a history of expressing bigoted comments.
    These appointees have made blatantly racist, Islamophobic,
    transphobic, and homophobic remarks.
        Now, as the former head of the Office of Civil Rights at
    the Education Department, is it appropriate to have individuals
    like this at the helm of ensuring educational equity and
    nondiscrimination based on race, religion, and sexual
    orientation?
        Mr. Williams. Mr. Takano, without accepting the beginning
    of your question that they have indeed made such comments, let
    me go to what I think is the thrust.
        Mr. Takano. I'm just asking you, sir --
        Mr. Williams. Let me go to the thrust.
        Mr. Takano. No, no. These appointees have also -- look, is
    it appropriate for anyone who's made blatant racist,
    Islamophobic, transphobic, and homophobic remarks to serve in
    these capacities, whose job it is to ensure that there's
    educational equity and nondiscrimination? Would you -- would
    you countenance --
        Mr. Williams. I would love to have an opportunity to answer
    the question.
        Mr. Takano. Sure.
        Chairman Rokita. The gentleman's time has expired.
        Mr. Allen, you're recognized for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Allen. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for
    having this hearing today.
        The best example that I know of school choice is a school
    that we developed in my district called Heritage Academy. And
    that school is there for those single parents who can't afford
    to send their children to a private school. And through some
    tax initiatives in the State, business people are able to
    support these children. Now we're up to 200 students. And I
    attended an assembly there over the holidays, and I have not
    seen the energy to learn and to develop musical skills and
    athletic skills and reading skills, I've not seen that anywhere
    in any school that I think I've ever visited.
        And so, again, these are single parents who -- and
    unfortunately, there is a huge demand for this school that we
    can't meet. I mean, it's -- we're topped out at 200. In many
    cases, these kids are actually told that they really don't
    belong in the public school system, and the parents don't have
    a choice. So that is a tremendous success story and why I
    believe that the American people, just like health care, they
    want choice. I mean, don't mandate and don't waste my
    taxpayers' money, you know.
        And so, with that, Mr. Williams, what is your reaction to
    the anti-school choice advocates who argue that we should not
    give families more choice, because too few of the students can
    benefit, and then argue for and actively pursue barriers to
    expand those benefits to more students?
        Mr. Williams. Well, I'm saddened by it, quite frankly,
    because what we ought to be doing, as I've said before, is that
    we should be doing our best to find in a way that we can match
    youngsters and their particular needs. And youngsters have a
    variety of different needs. With our 5.2 million youngsters in
    Texas, I'm not going to say we have 5.2 different kinds of
    needs, but we've got a wide variety of them. And what we should
    be trying to do is to put parents and guardians in the position
    to match needs with schools. Kids are very, very different. And
    the public schools in Texas, I think, do an outstanding job of
    trying to satisfy the needs of those youngsters, but that
    doesn't mean there's not another place in the private school
    community for us to satisfy those needs as well. There's enough
    room and there's enough demand, there's enough challenge for
    both traditional public schools and charters and private
    schools to be present to provide opportunity for our students.
        And going back to something that was asked of me earlier,
    you know, at the end of the day, we haven't seen -- in terms of
    school choice programs around the country, we haven't seen exit
    rates, you know, greater than 8, 9, 10 percent. At the end of
    the day, I would still have almost 5 million kids in Texas
    public schools. And so we have to be focused on enhancing
    public schools while we give parents and guardians the
    opportunity that, if they don't want or choose -- want to make
    a decision for their kids not to go to a traditional public
    school, to find a school that meets that kid's needs somewhere
    else.
        Mr. Allen. And thank you so much for that response. In
    fact, we have a public school, inner city school system in my
    district in Lawrence County in the city of Dublin where they
    have a STEM school and also kind of an economic school in the
    two elementary schools. And parents were there at 5 o'clock in
    the morning on a Saturday morning to sign their kids up for one
    school or the other. That's what I'm talking about. That
    motivates and that is school choice, and it's wonderful.
        I have just a short period of time. Mr. Kuback -- Kuback --
        Mr. Kubacki. Kubacki.
        Mr. Allen. Kuback. Okay. The purpose of school choice is to
    provide parents the opportunity to find the right educational
    environment for their child. Do you believe charter schools are
    the only way to help parents find the right place?
        Mr. Kubacki. No.
        Mr. Allen. Isn't it important to have a variety of options
    for parents to choose from where they're searching for the
    right replacement?
        Mr. Kubacki. Yes.
        Mr. Allen. What are some things that can be done to ensure
    parents have access to the choices they want?
        Mr. Kubacki. One of the really effective things that we've
    started in Indianapolis is our Enroll Indy program, where it is
    -- it's an open enrollment program for parents to be able to,
    they have one place where they can go, they can see the variety
    of options that are available to them. It's one application for
    them to fill out. And it makes it a little bit more of an
    equitable process for all parents to be able to see their
    options and choose in an intelligent way.
        Mr. Allen. Thank you. I yield back.
        Chairman Rokita. Mr. Courtney, you're recognized for 5
    minutes.
        Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for letting me visit
    for a few minutes here.
        And, you know, again, we all have great stories to tell,
    the States that we come from. I come from Connecticut, and I
    just visited a Blue Ribbon school a couple of weeks ago, which
    is an old-fashioned red brick public school with a, you know,
    the locally enrolled kids that are there. It also happens to be
    a population that is kids whose parents work at the Groton Navy
    base. It's the oldest submarine base in our Nation.
        And when you talk about challenges, these are kids whose
    parents are -- whose fathers largely, but now women are coming
    on as part of the submarine force, are deployed and, you know,
    very transitory, in and out. I mean, that is a challenge for
    the school. But with all of the requirements to honor IDEA, you
    know, all the anti-bullying, all the other accountability
    measures, they are still just hitting it out of the ballpark in
    terms of scores, in terms of math and reading, and has, again,
    been recognized nationally in terms of -- so, you know, I think
    it's really -- there's a narrative out there that, you know,
    public schools are hopeless.
        And, you know, visiting that school, you know, a week or so
    ago after they got the Blue Ribbon designation, I mean, the
    fact of the matter is that good leadership, teamwork, involving
    parents, you know, there are public schools that are doing an
    outstanding job out there, and, you know, that's, you know,
    where the 90 percent of kids are enrolled these days.
        Also in Connecticut, since the court ruling came out, Sheff
    v. O'Neill, we've employed a magnet school approach to try and
    break down racial isolation, because, as Ms. Carter eloquently
    stated, you know, trying to, you know, have kids learn in a
    more diverse classroom is, I think, something that the Supreme
    Court recognized in Brown v. Education, and I think most
    thoughtful educators agree is a positive goal.
        The charter school track record in terms of that issue of
    racial isolation, frankly, is just far inferior to the magnet
    school experience. The city of New London, which is one of the
    most distressed municipalities in the State of Connecticut now,
    is all magnet, and they're drawing kids in from communities
    outside of the city limits. They have, again, focuses, because
    we're upgrading the submarine force, we're hiring now in terms
    of the STEM curriculum, and that with the magnet focus, they
    are actually opening doors to both diversity and quality and a
    connection to workforce needs that is, I think, you know, one
    of the models for how we sort of move forward as a Nation, but
    we don't do it by throwing out accountability. These magnet
    schools are public budgets that have to, again, pass muster
    through all of the process that the boards of education have to
    do with their schools, unlike vouchers, which are basically
    just disconnected from accountability.
        And, Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to add to the record an
    article which, again, describes the magnet school experience in
    the State of Connecticut, I ask unanimous consent to have it
    entered.
        Chairman Rokita. Without objection.
        [The information follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Courtney. And, again, just the New York Times actually
    did an analysis of Connecticut's experience with magnet
    school's policy a couple of decades ago compared to the charter
    school experience in the city of New York. And what they found
    is that the goal of diversity has been, again, far more
    successful with the magnet school approach, again, with no
    cherry-picking in terms of what kids can go there.
        My daughter went to one of these. It was a life-changing
    experience for her in terms of just having the opportunity to
    interact with kids from different walks of life that would not
    have happened in, you know, in a charter necessarily or the
    local public school. And, again, there's just no question in
    terms of where the value is as far as achieving those goals.
        So it's not a binary choice here. It is not vouchers versus
    public schools. And, frankly, I am still a believer that we can
    improve education for kids through the old-fashioned way, like
    the Charles Barnum School in Groton, Connecticut, and that we
    can also have a publicly accountable system of attracting kids
    from more diverse backgrounds without just basically throwing
    money up in the air and hoping it lands in the right place.
        And with that, I yield back.
        Chairman Rokita. I thank the gentleman.
        I'm going to recognize myself for 5 minutes to ask some
    questions. Again, I appreciate hearing from the witnesses.
        I want to start with you, Mr. Williams. Your testimony
    talks about the changing behavior of public schools once there
    was competition, for lack of a better word, I guess. And it's
    been my observation, you know, I've probably been to 100
    schools throughout the country, public, private, good, bad,
    everything in between, but it would also be my observation,
    because competition is part of human nature, you know,
    competition works in politics, competition works on a
    basketball court, competition works in nearly every facet of
    our life, yet we heard this morning from some of the
    questioners that they would seem to be desperately afraid of
    competition.
        When you said behavior was changed or the performance of
    neighborhood public schools changed, can you give me some
    specifics about what you're talking about?
        Mr. Williams. I think in many ways imitation is the highest
    form of flattery. What we have seen -- in my experience from
    both as commissioner as well as the president of a Catholic
    school board, what we've noticed is that the public schools,
    let's say, around us at our Mother of Mercy, the public schools
    around us, they started extending the hour, the school hour,
    because we started extending the school hour and getting better
    results. We started having a different kind of parent-teacher
    meeting with our parents where we were giving them more and
    more information about how well their youngsters were doing and
    what we were going to plan for them in the next session or next
    semester, and our public schools around us began doing that.
        What we see sort of statewide is that we see the offerings
    of public schools expand. You now have a charter school, quite
    frankly, which is a public school, the charter school now
    offering Mandarin Chinese. And now we see other public schools
    who are trying to do similar things because they realize that's
    what parents really -- some parents really want that.
        So in terms of offerings, in terms of how the school
    relates to the parents, in terms of sort of how the school
    operates day by day in terms of perhaps its hours, perhaps what
    it does on the weekends, those kinds of things I've seen that -
    -
        Chairman Rokita. Have you noticed increased performance of
    the neighborhood public school since the introduction of --
        Mr. Williams. In that one, I cannot say that the
    performance of the --
        Chairman Rokita. You can't --
        Mr. Williams. -- surrounding the public schools and the
    doughnut around it increased significantly. In large part, I
    can't say that. At that time, I was not commissioner and I did
    not have access to their scores.
        Chairman Rokita. Yeah. So you just don't know? It's not
    that it didn't happen?
        Mr. Williams. Right.
        Chairman Rokita. Thank you, Mr. Williams.
        Now, Mr. Kubacki, your testimony is slightly different, not
    necessarily contradictory, but different in the sense that you
    rely heavily on your relationship with the public school, local
    public school district, in order to claim rightfully your
    success. Critics of school choice, you know, talk about -- they
    don't use the word ``competition,'' they would use a term like,
    quote, ``pitted against,'' unquote.
        What do you think of the concept of competition as it
    relates to your work and your relationship with the public
    school system?
        Mr. Kubacki. So I don't see it as an either/or choice. I
    see that we collaborate with the public schools and are able to
    actually work with them to bring our model into even some of
    their own most academically challenged schools. I think if you
    look at the environment around Enlace when we first started,
    the schools that were around that neighborhood, it was kind of
    hit or miss whether or not it was a good school. Now, 4 years
    into it, all the schools around us have increased. I wouldn't
    be so bold as to suggest that we were the only driver behind
    that, but I would say that because we've been there and are a
    good neighbor, we do collaborate with the schools around us, we
    do share best practices. I think it just has helped with the
    general academic environment of the neighborhood.
        Chairman Rokita. Okay. Thank you. I'm sticking with you,
    Mr. Kubacki, your testimony discussed your second school, in
    Kindezi school, opened because the district came to you to
    restart one of their failing schools. You said that happened
    because of the partnership your school had with the district
    schools. Expound on that partnership just a little bit.
        Mr. Kubacki. Sure. So in Indianapolis, we have legislation
    that allows the district to work with 501(c)(3)s to partner in
    what's called the Innovation Network Schools. And so it's
    symbiotic in that we have access to some of the district
    resources, the most important being facility, and the district
    then gets our accountability scores as well. So it's a payoff,
    and it's granted an added layer of accountability for our
    schools, because we are also accountable to our contract with
    the district, but I think it lends towards that idea of we
    share the collective responsibility for all of the children.
    And if something's working really well in a charter school,
    then it's something that would be worth bringing into the
    public school district.
        Chairman Rokita. Thank you. And I have questions for the
    other two witnesses as well, but I'd be hypocritical if I let
    myself go on, because, as you can see, we're now 14 seconds
    over time. So I want to thank the witnesses again for their
    testimony.
        And I want to recognize the ranking member for his closing
    remarks.
        Mr. Polis. Well, thank you. I want to thank our witnesses,
    and I join Chairman Rokita in that. I want to thank our members
    on both sides of the aisle who joined us. Based on attendance,
    it's clearly a topic that's important.
        Mr. Allen did reference people who are anti-school choice.
    I haven't heard anybody on this panel, Democrat or Republican,
    who voiced anything other than support for the concept of
    school choice and letting parents choose, but, of course, all
    school choice is not created equal, and distinctions need to be
    made. And my Republican colleagues have oversimplified what
    school choice means, even to the point of parents signing away
    their rights.
        There's certainly a difference between public school choice
    and the privatization of education, and we should not lose
    sight, as Ms. Fudge said, that over 90 percent of students in
    our country are served by public schools. Many of us support
    policies that increase choice for high quality public schools,
    policies like open enrollment, magnet schools, that Mr.
    Courtney mentioned, charter schools, and others. Ms. Carter
    eloquently shared her own personal story, of her process for
    finding the right school to meet her son's needs.
        When it comes to education, a one-size-fits-all policy
    simply doesn't work, and choice is important. Ms. Carter did
    extensive research and exercised her choice after meeting with
    a number of schools, traditional public and charter, and
    decided what was best for her son.
        That being said, Ms. Carter spoke about some of the
    challenges she faced choosing the right school, and that's the
    case for many parents. School systems aren't often transparent
    enough about options, transportation remains a barrier to
    making school choice meaningful, and that's why it's important
    that we lift up and support all of our public school options.
    It's also why many of us find some of the options that
    Republicans have put on the table for private school choice
    troubling.
        In her confirmation hearing, Donald Trump's nominee for
    Secretary of Education, Betsy DeVos, refused to say that she
    wouldn't take money away from public schools to pay for private
    vouchers. That should concern any of us who care about public
    schools and the 90-plus percent of students that they serve.
        Today's hearing also brought to light what Republican
    school choice means for students' Federal civil rights
    protections. Private schools are often not subject to
    requirements under Title VI, Title IX, IDEA, ADA, and ESSA. In
    fact, many parents are forced to sign away their rights under
    IDEA. I want to be clear on this. We had some clarifying
    questions, but the law is clear. Under U.S. Department of
    Education guidance, it clearly states that parentally-placed
    private school children, and that's in contrast to private
    placement students under IDEA, have no individual entitlements
    to a fair and appropriate public education. Using the private
    vouchers, which is called parentally-placed private school
    child, does not have those rights, and, in fact, signs them
    away.
        With your permission, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to submit some
    2001 guidance, under President Bush's Secretary of Education,
    on this issue.
        Chairman Rokita. Without objection.
        [The information follows:]

      [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Mr. Polis. And just to quote in part this memo from March
    30, 2001, it's still enforced, ``under IDEA, ``such parentally-
    placed private school students with disabilities have no
    individual entitlement to a free appropriate public education,
    including special education-related services in connection with
    those placements.''
        So, again, it's not about who the provider is. There are
    many private providers that through private school placement
    under IDEA, the parents maintain those full rights. And I would
    add those aren't always private schools; they're often private
    services that are contracted by the school district. They can
    be, in extreme cases, an entire school, even a boarding school
    in another State. And I've heard of that in some cases, if
    that's the only appropriate education, but the parents maintain
    those rights. And under this advisory and the law, they lose
    those rights when they become parentally placed. And so that's
    very important to emphasize.
        Private schools can also deny admission to students with
    special needs and students who identify as LGBT. And for many
    of those reasons, we should be concerned about Federal taxpayer
    dollars supporting institutions that are allowed to
    discriminate.
        I'm a strong supporter of school choice, but not the school
    privatization proposed by my Republican colleagues. Independent
    schools are independent for a reason. They want to remain
    independent, and that's perfectly appropriate and a fine
    decision that they make. If they want to play by the same rules
    as public schools and accept students without discrimination
    and without parents signing away their IDEA rights, there's
    common ground to find a way to work together. And many school
    districts do contract with private providers in their district
    under those terms and conditions.
        My first and foremost priority is supporting the education
    of students across our country, and we want to make sure that
    we encourage rather than discourage transparency and
    accountability, as well as promote civil rights for all schools
    that are publicly funded.
        I yield back the balance of my time.
        Chairman Rokita. I thank the gentleman.
        In closing, I'd like to respond to the gentleman by
    submitting some -- also submitting some records -- or excuse,
    some documents for the record, some of -- at least one of
    which, I noticed, is the same one he referenced. So I'd ask
    unanimous consent to enter into the record a study from the
    National Alliance for Public Charter Schools on the estimated
    enrollment in charter public schools for the 2016-2017 school
    year, and letters from the Department of Education from 1990,
    2001, and from the Obama administration in 2012, each of them
    confirming that parents who choose for their child to attend a
    private school, including as part of a public scholarship
    program, are making a choice, in fact, making a choice that
    school is the right fit for their child, as allowed under IDEA
    and any of our other civil rights laws.
        [The information follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        Chairman Rokita. So, again, when parents have a choice, I
    truly believe every kid has a chance, and that's what this
    hearing is about. It was said earlier in this hearing that we
    tend, up here and in the Federal Government, generally to
    overcomplicate things.
        Ms. Carter, I believe you can make the best choice for your
    child, as you did, just as Kathy and I can make a great choice
    for our Teddy and his little brother Ryan. Teddy, by the way,
    has Angelman syndrome, which is a sister syndrome to what your
    boy has. So please know, I walk in your shoes on a lot of this
    stuff, but I truly believe that we can decide for Teddy what is
    best for him and have the options. And I also understand how
    difficult it is to get information sometimes. And if I had time
    to question Ms. Cherry, I'd ask how she found out the
    information in more detail, because I think that is very
    important. When parents have a choice, kids have a chance.
        So this discussion is going to continue. We're emboldened
    with the opportunity of having a partner in the White House and
    the Department of Education who can see that same value
    proposition and could help us direct more funds, so that
    parents do have that choice.
        Seeing no other business before the committee, we'll stand
    adjourned. Thank you.
        [Additional submission by Mr. Rokita follows:]

     [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        [Questions submitted for the record and their responses

     [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        [Mrs. Cherry's response to questions submitted for the
    record follows:]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        [Whereupon, at 12:14 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

                                     [all]