[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 9 (Friday, February 4, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: February 4, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                      UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENT

  Mr. MITCHELL. Madam President, I will now propound a unanimous-
consent request. After I complete the request, but prior to action on 
that request by the Chair, I would like to make a brief explanatory 
comment and then invite the comments of the minority leader in that 
regard.
  Madam President, I now ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed 
to the consideration of S. 1361, the school-to-work bill, no later than 
10 a.m. on Monday, February 7, and that it be considered under the 
following limitation:
  That there be 1 hour for debate on the bill equally divided in the 
usual form, with an additional 20 minutes for debate under Senator 
Gregg's control; that the only first-degree floor amendments in order 
be the following, and that they be subject to second-degree amendments 
if they are relevant to the first-degree amendment, and limited to the 
following time limitations if applicable:
  An amendment by Senator Kassebaum that is relevant; an amendment by 
Senator Kassebaum that is relevant;
  An amendment by Senator Simpson regarding vocational education;
  An amendment by Senator Coverdell that no new programs be funded 
until the earthquake supplemental is paid for;
  An amendment by Senator Nickles regarding funding, 2 hours equally 
divided in the usual form;
  An amendment by Senator Gorton regarding privatization, 2 hours 
equally divided in the usual form;
  An amendment by Senator Dole that is relevant;
  An amendment by Senator Thurmond that is relevant;
  An amendment by Senator Pressler that is relevant;
  An amendment by Senator Thurmond that is relevant;
  An amendment by Senator Chafee that is relevant;
  An amendment by Senator Kerry of Massachusetts that is relevant;
  An amendment by Senator Lautenberg that is relevant;
  An amendment by Senator Kennedy that is relevant;
  An amendment by Senator Kennedy that is relevant;
  That all first-degree amendments must be offered by 6 p.m. on Monday, 
February 7; that all time is to be equally divided in the usual form; 
that upon the disposition of the above amendments and the committee 
substitute, the bill be read a third time; the Senate then proceed to 
the House companion H.R. 2884, as amended; that all after the enacting 
clause be stricken and the text of S. 1361, as amended, be substituted 
in lieu thereof, and the Senate proceed to vote on passage of H.R. 
2884; that the Senate then insist on its amendment, request a 
conference with the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses, 
and the Chair be authorized to appoint conferees, with the preceding 
all occurring without any intervening action or debate; and that upon 
the disposition of H.R. 2884, S. 1361 be indefinitely postponed; 
further, that the second-degree amendments, if offered to a first-
degree amendment which had a time limitation, be under the same time 
limitation as the first-degree amendment.
  Madam President, that concludes the request. Before I ask the Chair 
to act on it, I would like to put it in context.
  We are now on the Goals 2000 education bill. This agreement deals 
with the school-to-work education bill and, as stated, it contemplates 
proceeding to the consideration of the school-to-work education bill by 
no later than Monday, February 7. That means, obviously, that we have 
to complete action on the Goals 2000 bill now pending before we go to 
the school-to-work bill.
  We are now working to try to get an agreement that would permit us to 
do that by completing action on the pending amendments today, with 
votes on those amendments to occur on Tuesday.
  If we get that agreement, then we will proceed today to the school-
to-work bill and begin consideration of it because the agreement states 
no later than 10 a.m. Monday, leaving open the possibility of 
proceeding to it today. If we are unable to get that agreement, then we 
will remain in session with amendments and voting in an attempt to 
complete action through final passage of the Goals 2000 education bill 
today.
  It is my hope and my intention that the latter course of action not 
occur; that is to say, that we not be required to continue and have the 
votes on amendments and final passage today but, rather, that we reach 
an agreement that will permit us to complete consideration of the 
amendments, but have the votes set over until Tuesday with final 
passage on that.
  That is the context in which we are operating. We do not yet have a 
final agreement. We are awaiting a response from one Senator, but as 
soon as that occurs, I hope we can get an agreement of the type and of 
the content I have just described with respect to the Goals 2000 
legislation.
  I ask, before the Chair acts on the pending unanimous-consent 
request, that the minority leader be recognized for any comments he may 
wish to make.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority leader is recognized.
  Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I think the majority leader stated it 
correctly. I just urge my colleagues to cooperate. We are trying to 
accommodate colleagues on both sides who are on official business in 
some cases, and in other cases have serious illnesses in their family 
or family in the hospital.
  So it is going to depend on cooperation today and, as I said, it is 
also going to depend on cooperation on Monday.
  I see some of these amendments have a couple hours to complete. I 
guess as long as they are offered before 6 p.m., they can be debated 
after 6 p.m. So I guess that will not be a problem.
  I urge my colleagues on this side of the aisle to try to cooperate 
with the managers. They have done an excellent job. Both of these are 
very important pieces of legislation.
  It is my hope that we can work out the agreement on the pending bill, 
Goals 2000.
  As I add it up, that may mean as many as 10 votes on Tuesday. But 
that would at least give us the agreement today, give us the agreement 
Monday, and move these bills out of here as we go to the supplemental. 
I assume that will take a day or two next week.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Madam President, reserving the right to object, if I 
may, I would just ask what the intention of the majority leader will be 
with this particular amendment, 1386, on which the time will be 
expiring in 15 or 20 minutes. Is he desirous to go ahead with the vote 
on that at this time?
  Mr. MITCHELL. Madam President, if we can reach an agreement that will 
permit us to complete action on the Goals 2000 bill today and set the 
votes over until Tuesday, I am prepared to include the vote on the 
pending amendment as one of those that will be set over to Tuesday. 
That would accommodate the maximum number of Senators.
  I want to repeat and make it clear so there can be no 
misunderstanding: If we cannot reach such an agreement, then we will 
vote on this amendment today, and we will stay here until we finish 
this bill today, including votes on all pending amendments and voting 
on final passage.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. I guess my question is, should we defer voting on this 
in a half hour or so, or until we have an opportunity to do so, so that 
we do not inconvenience those who are not here?
  Mr. MITCHELL. My answer is yes. My hope and understanding is we are 
just waiting for a response from one Senator.
  My hope is, in the remaining time of debate on this amendment, we 
will get that response so we will then be able to get the agreement on 
the Goals 2000 prior to the time when the vote would otherwise be 
scheduled.
  If that does not occur, then I will consult with the managers and the 
Republican leader prior to the time the vote occurs.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. I withdraw my reservation.
  Mr. MITCHELL. Madam President, I would like to modify the request to 
add two amendments by Senator Byrd that are relevant.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. MITCHELL. I thank my colleagues for their cooperation. I hope we 
do not disadvantage the Senator from Massachusetts, who as usual has 
demonstrated his leadership and legislative skill in handling these 
education bills, and the Senator from Vermont likewise has been of 
tremendous assistance.
  We are now continuing debate on this amendment, and then hopefully we 
will have a response and be able to make a decision and announcement 
with respect to the rest of the day.
  But, Madam President, I want to make clear so there can be no 
misunderstanding on anyone's part, any Senator who leaves here now 
leaves at his or her risk. If we do not reach an agreement, as I have 
described, and there are going to be votes today, Senators should be 
aware of that until such time as we reach an agreement.
  I thank my colleagues.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, if I could address the majority leader, 
has the unanimous-consent request been approved with regard to the 
school-to-work program?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The request has been approved.
  Mr. KENNEDY. I thank the Senator.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Madam President, first, I want to state that I 
understand very clearly what the majority leader has said, and it is 
our intention to finish this bill today. Anyone who does leave leaves 
at his or her peril, to offer amendments as well as to such votes as 
may occur.
  Mr. DODD. I yield myself 5 minutes.
  Madam President, let me begin by saying to my colleague from Indiana, 
who I have worked on many issues with, and my colleague from 
Connecticut, for whom I have the highest regard and respect, that I do 
not have any disagreement with their comments about the value of 
private or parochial education. I am a product of St. Thomas the 
Apostle, a Jesuit boys' school. I am very proud of the fact that my 
parents made this choice. However, they never felt, in making that 
choice, that public schools did not deserve their support or that they 
should have been subsidized by the Federal Government. And that is 
really what we are talking about here.
  There is a fundamental difference of view as to whether or not we 
ought to be in the business of funding a dual system of education, 
whether it is a pilot program in 1 district or in 10 or in 100. My view 
is this is fundamentally a bad idea, and bad ideas do not need to be 
demonstrated.
  One might suggest that perhaps we ought to increase the speed limit. 
Why not try out a 100 miles-per-hour speed limit in certain districts 
to see how it works? Or others might wonder if people who said they 
were damaged by nuclear testing were really damaged and test again? I 
think this notion of taking $30 million to test something which we know 
is detrimental to our primary responsibility, public education, is 
simply a bad idea and needs no demonstration.
  Our primary responsibility is and must be to public education. That 
has been a common commitment of Republicans and Democrats alike for a 
century. We have worked to support education and we must continue to 
work to improve the quality of public education in this country. We 
must not pit one system against another. We made a decision long ago 
that we had limited resources and we had to allocate those resources as 
effectively as we could.
  What we are asked by this amendment to do is to take $30 million out 
of a fund that would otherwise go to public education and test an 
idea--the idea that we can support two school systems.
  In 1980, 9.1 percent of the money spent on elementary and secondary 
education in this country came from the Federal Government. That was 14 
years ago. Last year, only 5.6 percent was contributed by the Federal 
Government. We have nearly halved our responsibility. At a time, when 
it is clear that the cost of education has not gone down. They have 
gone up.
  And, who is bearing the larger costs? Our States and our local 
communities.
  Yesterday, I offered an amendment here, which was carried by a 
unanimous vote, to put $20 million into making our schools safer. We 
all know, and the Senator from West Virginia articulated it very 
clearly, of the violence in our schools--130,000 kids with guns and 
knives coming to school everyday. And yet, all we could come up with 
was $20 million for every school district in this country to try to 
grapple with the problem of violence.
  The amendment we are considering now asks us to spend $30 million in 
six school districts to test funding of private and parochial 
education. I would like to get that $30 million and spend it in 
communities in my State and across this country to stem the tide of 
violence. I cannot get that kind of money. Yet we are being asked to 
spend $30 million in six school districts.
  Where are our priorities? The Senator from West Virginia is 
absolutely correct. We all sense the frustration of what is going on in 
our public school systems. It is angering to see our schools struggling 
simply to keep children safe, when learning is what they should be 
about.
  I have a sister who teaches in the largest inner-city elementary 
school in my State. To listen to her week after week talk about what is 
going on with these children and infants who are just starting school. 
It is frightening what happens in their homes.
  The Senator from West Virginia is once again correct. It begins with 
parents. That is where discipline begins. It should not be the job of 
my sister or some other teacher to become a police officer, a religious 
leader, or a psychologist. That should happen at home. Unfortunately, 
there has been a tremendous breakdown there.
  But to say now, because our schools are struggling to keep up with 
the problems of the 21st century, we are going to wipe our hands, walk 
away, and start funding private education with public taxpayer money. 
This is ridiculous.
  Now a number of States have examined this idea. The most recent was 
the State of California. It was overwhelmingly defeated. Seventy-three 
percent of the voters in that State said, ``Absolutely not. You are not 
going to use my hard-earned tax dollars to subsidize private schools.''
  Oregon has said the same; Colorado has said the same. In every State 
where this idea has been brought to a by referendum, it has been 
soundly defeated, because people honestly believe that we have to do a 
better job in public education.
  So my plea here is that I admire tremendously what private and 
parochial education does. These schools provide an important 
alternative to parents. And we must continue to be supportive of 
private education.
  But, with limited, scarce dollars--dollars that have been halved 
effectively in a decade--we cannot allow six school districts in 
America to try an idea that has been tried and brought up in other 
places and has been rejected.
  So I urge my colleagues, when this vote come up, to reject this 
amendment. It was rejected 2 years ago, when offered by Senator Hatch, 
by a vote of 57 to 36, I believe the vote was. My hope is this 
amendment would be rejected, as well, when the vote occurs.
  Madam President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. JEFFORDS. How much time is remaining on both sides?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are 9 minutes remaining for the 
proponents of the amendment and 18 minutes remaining for the opponents 
of the amendment.
  Mr. METZENBAUM. I ask for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DODD. I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Ohio.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio is recognized for 5 
minutes and the Senator from Rhode Island for 3 minutes.
  Mr. METZENBAUM. Madam President, I thank my colleague from 
Connecticut. I commend him for his very stirring and very explicit and 
very well thought-out speech. I think it was very persuasive.
  I join him in strong opposition to this amendment. I, frankly, am 
dismayed that we must once again consider an effort to shift scarce 
Federal fund from our public schools to private and religious schools. 
We are talking about taking $30 million away from our public schools to 
spend on private school voucher programs in six school districts.
  I want to remind my colleagues that the House and Senate have 
recently gone on record against this ill-conceived policy.

  In the last Congress, during consideration of the Neighborhood 
Schools Improvement Act, the Senate soundly defeated, by a vote of 57 
to 36, a similar amendment which would have provided vouchers for 
students attending private and religious schools.
  And, just last October, by a decisive vote of 300 to 130, the House 
rejected an amendment to their Goals 2000 legislation which would have 
earmarked funds for choice programs which could include private 
schools.
  Now we are faced once again with a proposal to benefit private and 
religious schools at the expense of our public school system.
  This Senator is a product of the public school system. This Senator 
believes very strongly in the public school system and believes that we 
can take no action on the floor of the Senate or in the Congress in 
order to deter that battle that is being made in this country to bring 
about a decent and effective public school system.
  There are problems that exist in the public school system. There is 
just no argument about that. But because we have those problems, do we 
take $30 million away from the public school system and put it into the 
private school system? This Senator very strongly thinks not.
  And once again, Mr. President, this is the nose under the tent 
amendment. While this proposal may be limited in scope, make no 
mistake, passage of this amendment would set a dangerous precedent and 
open the door to unlimited expansion of funding for private and 
religious schools.
  I cannot say too strongly that passage of this amendment would be a 
terrible mistake, which would unwisely break down the barrier between 
church and state and distract our attention from the real needs of our 
public schools.
  This amendment would divert scarce Federal resources to private and 
religious schools at a time when public schools throughout our Nation 
are facing serious financial problems.
  In every region of the country, we have urban school districts which 
lack the funds to make desperately needed building repairs. Class sizes 
grow as budget crunches force teacher layoffs.
  Many schools have had to eliminate sports and physical education 
programs, art and music, and even essential counseling programs for at 
risk children. Students lack access to computers and science labs, and 
even basic textbooks, while teachers have to buy paper and pencils out 
of their own pockets.
  Many public school systems have great problems with violence in the 
schools and guns in the schools. Are we going to be taking the money 
away from those schools which face such challenges and put it into the 
separate private and religious school system?
  When we are asking our schools to deal with the increasingly 
difficult problems caused by a rise in child poverty and other ills of 
the society at large, it simply does not make sense for the Federal 
Government to shift support from public education to private schools.

  Supporters of vouchers argue that somehow competition will lead to 
overall school improvement. Yet the competition is inherently unfair, 
since it will not be conducted on a level playing field. Why? Because 
private schools do not have to meet all the requirements imposed on 
public schools.
  Public schools are accountable to the community and must accept and 
keep all children who want to attend, including those with behavior 
problems, low achievement levels, severe disabilities, lack of English 
skills, or lack of motivation. The public schools must accept all those 
children, and rightfully so. They should. Private schools can select 
students based on virtually any criteria they wish. In fact, although 
proponents claim that private school voucher plans offer parental 
choice, this is misleading. In reality, it is the private schools which 
ultimately make the choice about admission, not the parents.
  Under a voucher plan, private schools will be able to skim the best 
students, and the dollars to support them, leaving those with the most 
severe problems for the public schools to deal with. This is likely to 
lead to even greater inequity between rich and poor, and encourage 
further divisions in our society along religious, racial, and economic 
lines.
  I would like to know how this can be considered a fair competition, 
or how it will lead to public school improvement.
  And that, President, is the bottom line. This amendment will do 
nothing to improve our public schools, which the majority of American 
students attend.
  Throughout our Nation's history, public schools have played a 
fundamental role in preparing children from diverse backgrounds to take 
their place in our democracy. And never before have we asked as much of 
our schools as we do at this moment.
  We ask schools to deal with all the problems of our society--poverty, 
drugs, violence, teen pregnancy, and disintegrating families. And, at 
the same time, we expect our schools to turn out students with the 
advanced skills they will need to compete in the high tech, global 
economy of the future.
  Is it any wonder that despite heroic efforts, some of our schools are 
in crisis and are not doing as well as they should by our children?
  But the solution is not to abandon them. The solution is to commit 
the support and the resources necessary to help those schools improve 
so that all our Nation's schools are worth choosing, rather than 
provide $30 million to the private and parochial school system.
  That is the approach taken by President Clinton's Goals 2000: Educate 
America Act. The Goals 2000 legislation demonstrates our commitment to 
the national education goals and establishes a program to help all our 
public schools achieve those goals. Instead of quick fixes and easy 
answers like vouchers, the President has proposed a sustained 
commitment to helping our public schools improve through comprehensive, 
systemic reform. The Goals 2000: Educate America Act will help all our 
schools to become worthy of choice, so that all American children have 
access to an excellent education.

  This amendment, by contrast, proposes to save our schools by 
abandoning them. It will do nothing to help our public schools or to 
solve our education crisis.
  And the American people apparently agree that choice is not the magic 
bullet which will solve our education problems. When given the 
opportunity to vote on the question, Americans have consistently turned 
down proposals to establish voucher programs in their States.
  Just last November, 70 percent of California voters said no to a 
school voucher proposal. Referenda on vouchers were defeated in 
Colorado in 1992 and in Oregon in 1990, both by 2-to-1 margins. In 
1991, the voters of Portsmouth, NH, turned down a voucher proposal by a 
margin of almost 5 to 1.
  This amendment is opposed by the Clinton administration and by a 
broad coalition of education and religious groups. A partial list of 
these groups includes: the American Association of School 
Administrators, the American Association of University Women, the 
American Federation of Teachers, the American Jewish Committee, the 
American Jewish Congress, the Baptist Joint Committee on Public 
Affairs, the Council of Great City Schools, the General Board of 
Church and Society of the United Methodist Church, the General 
Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, the National Association of 
Elementary School Principals, the National Association of State Boards 
of Education, the National Council of Jewish Women, the National 
Education Association, the National PTA, the National School Boards 
Association, the Union of American Hebrew Congregations, and the 
Unitarian Universalist Association.

  The American voters, the administration, and these respected 
organizations are exactly right on this issue. If we want to remain 
competitive as a Nation and give all our children the tools they need 
to succeed in life, we must direct all our resources and efforts toward 
improving our system of public education. We must not allow ourselves 
to be diverted by voucher amendments which will ultimately do nothing 
to help our Nation reach its education goals.
  I believe very strongly that, if we believe in our public school 
system we cannot, here, today, do anything to detract or deter the 
public school system from doing the job we so much want it to do. It 
calls upon all of us, whether we think it is right or wrong to help the 
private and parochial school systems, to first concern ourselves about 
the public schools. That is our primary responsibility, our primary 
obligation. I do hope this amendment will be defeated.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Rhode Island.
  Mr. PELL. Madam President, as we all know, the Federal Government is 
not the major player in education. That is a role played by State and 
local government. The Federal role is a small but highly targeted one, 
providing assistance primarily in areas of clearly defined needs. 
Because of that, I believe our emphasis should be upon those schools 
that serve the vast number of students in our Nation, namely the public 
schools.
  Basically, I am of the mind that the way to achieve educational 
excellence nationwide is to have the schools that are open to all 
students be second to none in the world. The investment we make in 
public education will unqestionably determine our future strength as a 
nation.
  Make no mistake about it, our public schools are in trouble; they 
need our help. Teachers are overburdened with large classes and need 
opportunities to upgrade their skills. Many schools lack adequate 
science facilities. Students go without updated textbooks and a safe 
environment in which to learn. These are the needs where we should be 
directing Federal resources to make our schools the best in the world.
  There are some who say that competition with private schools will 
cause public schools to become more responsive to parents and more 
likely to make needed improvements. Unfortunately, public and private 
schools do not compete on a level playing field.
  Public schools must serve all students. Private schools choose who 
they serve and may ask students to leave if they have behavior problems 
or other difficulties. Public schools often do not have that luxury, 
and must deal directly with problems that private schools do not.
  Private schools, as we all know, make extremely valuable 
contributions to American education. They give a quality of excellence 
that is truly needed and important to the Nation. But precisely because 
the Federal role is a small and targeted one, the public schools should 
be our first concern, and to make them schools of excellence must be 
our first responsibility.
  I urge my colleagues to join me in opposing this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, how much time remains in opposition?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts has 
approximately 3 minutes remaining.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Three minutes? Madam President, I will yield--how much 
time does the Senator from Indiana have?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The proponents of the amendment have 18 
minutes remaining. The opponents of the amendment have approximately 3 
minutes remaining.
  Mr. KENNEDY. I yield such time as the Senator from Washington 
requires--the remaining time to the Senator from Washington.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington is recognized.
  Mrs. MURRAY. I thank the Senator from Massachusetts. Would it be 
possible at all for the opponents to request additional time?
  Mr. COATS. This agreement was worked out over a period of 2 days. If 
the Senator from Washington wants to go speak to the majority leader--I 
think he is insistent we move forward today. We have an hour of time of 
which we have used--most of it. I cannot make that decision.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Can we ask consent that 5 minutes more be added for the 
Senator from Indiana and an additional 5 minutes for the Senator from 
Washington?
  Mr. COATS. I have no objection to that. But I do not know----
  Mr. MACK. Reserving the right to object. It really is not my 
intention to object, but I am interested in being able to offer an 
amendment myself and, like many of my colleagues, I have other demands 
at my State later on in the day.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Objection has been heard. I yield the remaining time to 
the Senator from Washington.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I rise to speak about the amendment 
before us, offered by Senators Coats and Lieberman, which provides for 
private school vouchers.
  There has been so much talk recently about the need to improve public 
education. Our President pro tempore spoke eloquently just a few 
moments ago. I know from firsthand experience the challenges our 
schools face today. There is no doubt that our public schools are in 
need of help. Many are overcrowded and underfunded. Many must deal with 
violence, drugs, and health issues. They need our help and to abandon 
them now with the passage of this amendment is the wrong message. We 
should be sending a message to our youth that we are committed to 
quality education for all Americans.
  Some of my colleagues believe that private school choice is the 
solution to many of our problems in education. Some are not certain 
what private school choice would do to our education system but have 
somehow decided it is all right to spend some of our precious education 
dollars on this to see what happens. As a former school board member, I 
have always had serious reservations about private school choice, 
particularly from a Federal standpoint, and am convinced that choice 
would not improve our current system. It will do more harm than good. 
Let me tell you why.
  Choice is based on the idea that competition between public and 
private schools is healthy and can weed out the weaker schools. I agree 
that competition is healthy when it is based on an even playing field. 
The problem is that public and private schools are not equal because 
they follow two very different sets of rules and regulations.
  Public schools must take all children, private schools can select who 
they want. Public schools must obey due process and public disclosure 
rules when they need to suspend or expel their students; private 
schools are under no such obligations. Public schools must obey 
Federal, State, or local regulations pertaining to health and safety, 
civil rights, bilingual and special education, curriculum and 
textbooks, and credentials of staff. Private schools are either wholly 
or largely exempt from such regulations. Private and public schools are 
not, nor should they be considered equals.
  As for the argument that choice would increase accountability in 
education, again we must realize that private schools follow different 
rules. Private schools do not have to account to the public. They do 
not have to account for their admissions procedures, the nature and 
quality of their educational programs, or the source of their funds or 
how they spend them. Our tax money under the voucher system could go to 
building hot tubs at private schools or to schools teaching bizarre 
rituals and there would be no school board or constituents or taxpayers 
who could do a thing about it. Is that what we want? At a time when we 
are understandably looking for more accountability in education, there 
is justification for giving public funds to schools that are not 
accountable to the public.

  We also must recognize the potential impact such legislation would 
have on States, such as Washington, that constitutionally prohibit 
public funds from going to sectarian institutions or public funds for 
private use which would prohibit funds from going to academies and 
nonsectarian schools. We could be opening our States to lengthy and 
expensive legal battles they can ill afford.
  Transportation costs, costs of educating parents on the choices they 
have, concerns over the possibility that choice would create segregated 
schools, and administrative problems, the list is endless of the issues 
we would be concerned with if this amendment were to pass
  I believe in our public schools. As a product of Washington State 
public schools and as a mother of two public school students, I am 
proud of what our schools are doing today. This amendment undermines 
our public schools by diverting scarce public resources to private 
schools. This amendment I believe takes us away from what we are really 
here to do and that is to improve our public schools. I urge my 
colleagues to vote against this amendment.
  To charge that public schools have no control over discipline is to 
forget that discipline and control begins at home.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.
  Mr. COATS. Madam President, I yield myself 5 minutes. Madam 
President, it seems the argument we are hearing from those who oppose 
the amendment that Senator Lieberman and I are offering is that we have 
to save the system. I do not hear anybody saying we have to save the 
student. The purpose of this amendment is to test an idea that is 
directed toward giving the student a better opportunity, giving low-
income students on opportunity that others have because they have the 
financial means to opt out of a school that is not meeting their 
children's educational needs or other needs. What is a low-income 
parent do to, in an inner-city location where there is only one public 
school available if that school is not teaching their child 
sufficiently; if that school jeopardizes their health and safety 
because of violence or because of lack of discipline, if that school 
lacked the kind of things the Senator from West Virginia talked about?
  Parents of means can do what Senator Dodd's parents have done, and 
many other parents have done, by saying, ``We're going to send our 
child to a school that we feel gives them a better education.''
  But low-income parents, parents from the inner city, do not have that 
choice. Why should that choice be available to those who have the funds 
to make that decision but not available to those who do not? Why should 
a mother from an inner city who is scared to death about her child's 
health and safety and is convinced that her child is not getting one 
whit of education or cannot begin to compete with other children who 
have options of going elsewhere because the particular school in that 
area is simply not doing the job, why should that mother not have the 
same choice that other parents have?
  I do not understand this idea that we have to save the system. The 
system is broken in some places and needs to be changed. I am saying 
this as a parent who sent all three of his children to public schools, 
and as one who has benefited from and supported public schools.
  Mr. MACK. Will the Senator yield?
  Mr. COATS. For goodness sake, for those who are not happy with their 
schools, can we not give them a choice? I think it makes the public 
schools better. I think it gives the parent a choice. We must decide 
what is in the best interest of the student, not the system.
  I will be happy to yield to the Senator from Florida.
  Mr. MACK. Madam President, I want to make a point with respect to 
saving the system. I met an educator out in California by the name of 
Anyim Palmer who was a public schoolteacher and became so angry because 
everyone was interested in protecting the system and not in providing 
an education to the children that he quit and several years later 
started his own private school to give the benefits that you have been 
talking about to those who so desperately need them.
  I thank the Senator for yielding.
  Mr. COATS. I thank the Senator from Florida.
  Madam President, we are not talking about an amendment which 
eliminates the public school system or mandates choice for anybody. We 
are talking about an amendment that sets up a pilot program on a 
voluntary basis for six school systems in this country--six. A $30 
million program to be administered by the Secretary of Education to try 
and see if it makes a difference, to see if it works.
  All I am saying to the opponents of this measure, for those who are 
coming down here like Horatio at the bridge and defending the public 
school system is, it is an idea that some people think has merit. Why 
do we not try it to see if it does? What are you afraid of? The 
results? If the results come in and they are positive, should we not 
then use it as a basis to make some changes? After all, it is going to 
benefit the students who are the recipients of those changes.
  Our goal here should not be to save some system. Our goal should be 
to ask the question: How can we improve education for our young people 
in this country? Why not try some innovative programs on an 
experimental basis to see if they work? I think our attention and focus 
ought to be on the students and what is best for them, not on the 
system and what might preserve it when I think unanimously, or almost 
unanimously, most acknowledge that system is in dire need of some 
repair.
  I yield back--I do not know if I used my 5 minutes or not.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has just expired.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Will the Senator yield me 5 minutes?
  Mr. COATS. I will be happy to yield whatever time the Senator from 
Connecticut needs.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. Madam President, I thank my friend and colleague from 
Indiana. I think the Senator from Indiana has really put his finger on 
the appropriate focus. Too often when people talk about choice--and it 
has happened here again this morning--they talk about a battle between 
the public schools and the private and parochial schools. That really 
is not and should not be the issue.
  In the first place, that battle is settled. Our primary 
responsibility is to public schools. It is not the time nor the reason 
to discuss it here, but I have spent a lot of my public career 
supporting public schools, and I intend to continue to do so. That 
issue is decided.
  But when you get into that kind of conflict, it masks what the 
Senator from Indiana has correctly said should be our primary focus, 
which is the children; what is the best way to reach and educate our 
children.
  Again, this amendment is totally within the spirit of the underlying 
bill, Goals 2000, which sets some goals about how to educate our 
children and then I think not only suggests some paths but provides 
some money to local school systems around the country to try to 
innovate, to try to reform because everyone knows--and the bill accepts 
the premise--that the current system of education is failing too many 
of our children. It is in that spirit that Senator Coats and I have 
offered this as an amendment.
  Some say that school choice is the solution to our problems. We are 
not saying that. We are saying that this is a positive, creative idea; 
that there seems to be some very good things happening in the private 
and parochial schools and let us test it, let us see how choice works. 
Let us see how a true choice system in only six communities in our 
country--incidentally, again, it is only $30 million out of the 
hundreds of billions that are spent every year--Federal, State, and 
local--on the public schools, let us test and see what works, let us 
see how the choice affects the children, let us see how the choice 
affects their parents, let us see how the choice affects the public 
schools and then let us come back and make a reasoned judgment.
  Madam President, on the question of the money, again, it is a small 
amount of money that we are investing in this test which could have 
enormous implications positively for our children. But let us remember 
also that every boy or girl educated in a private or parochial school 
is one less child educated in the public school system and, therefore, 
in that sense reduces the cost of public school education. And every 
time a parochial or other religious-sponsored-based school system 
closes, as I said before, as they have with alarming frequency in my 
State because they do not have the money to go forward, then by and 
large, those children, particularly the poorest of them go to the 
public schools and that costs the public school more money.
  So I say that an investment in the private and parochial school 
system, as we are going to test here, really could be not a subtraction 
of an enormous amount of money available for the public schools but in 
fact make more money available to them because of this.
  The question was raised about, OK, the private and parochial schools 
are doing a good job but why should the public support them? I think we 
have spoken to that. Let me add a few more points on that. One is that 
there are significant Federal, State, and local programs of education 
support that do go now to children at the private and parochial 
schools. Chapter One, a special program in the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act, is aimed at helping children and it helps children who 
qualify at private and parochial schools. Unfortunately, there was a 
Supreme Court decision, a ridiculous one, in my opinion, that said the 
money can go to the kids at the parochial schools so long as they were 
not inside the parochial school buildings when they receive the special 
assistance that poor children are eligible for. So schools have had to 
buy or lease trailers which they put alongside the parochial school and 
take the kids out for that special education. But the fact is that this 
is not a precedent creator. This exists now.
  Let us take the GI bill which is just about the most popular and 
admired program the Federal Government has had for education.
  Nobody told the recipients of the GI bill they could only go to a 
public school of higher education. They went to wherever they wanted to 
go, including the religiously sponsored colleges and private colleges. 
Why? Because the aim of that program was to educate people, not to 
support a particular set of institutions. This is another way to do the 
same.
  Finally, reference was made to California and the rejection of a 
school choice proposal initiative there. I wish to say, very briefly, 
that was a big proposal that was controversial and it went much further 
than this proposal.
  This amendment is modest, both in scope and in dollars committed to 
it, and it is again just a way to test. Incidentally, the test will be 
evaluated by the Department of Education of the United States of 
America--to put it mildly, not biased in favor of school choice 
perhaps. I do not say that to denigrate the Department. I do it to say 
the evaluation of the test under this program will be an extremely 
impartial one.
  So let us not be defensive about what exists now. Let us acknowledge 
in the spirit of the Goals 2000 bill that we have a long way to go to 
see that our kids are better educated. We ought not worry so much about 
the camel's nose under the tent, but we ought to be anxious to open the 
door of the tent a little bit to let some fresh light in to see whether 
it can better educate our children. That is what our goal is in 
submitting this amendment.
  I thank the Chair. I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. COATS. May I inquire, Madam President, how much time is 
remaining?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana has 6 minutes 
remaining.
  Mr. COATS. I do not know whether we need to use all that time. Let me 
summarize the amendment, and then if there is time remaining we can 
yield it back.
  I wish to make sure my colleagues understand what we are talking 
about here is a pilot program. It is a test concept that has been 
discussed at great length across the country in educational circles. 
Many believe, as do I, that it is an option that all parents ought to 
have; that it should not be reserved just for the wealthy; that low-
income parents, if they are unhappy with the education their child is 
receiving at the local public school, ought to have an option to secure 
an education for their child at the school of their choice as wealthy 
parents have the opportunity to do.
  This amendment is modest. It is $30 million. It goes to six 
demonstration projects around the country. Those projects have to be 
directed toward low-income students. This money is not going to go to 
anyone except those who qualify for subsidies under the school lunch 
program. There are even directions that the Secretary favor those 
applications which have a considerable number of the lowest income 
students.
  It is strictly a voluntary program. No educational agency or parent 
will have to participate in this program if they do not want to apply 
for this program. So if a community is applying, it simply means that 
the public educators in that community have decided they want to 
participate in the program.
  As I mentioned, there are public and private school educators in 
Indiana who have met and begun to discuss the idea. The public schools 
should not be afraid of it. In many instances public and private 
schools exist side by side and are complementary to each other rather 
than one pulling the other one down.
  I also want to point out that there are civil rights and racial 
discrimination and desegregation protections built in our amendment. 
There is also a very specific prohibition protecting any public school 
that participates in this project from being denied one cent of money 
that is otherwise available to it from the Secretary of Education. 
Because some of their students opt out of the school, the amount of 
funds going to that school from the Federal Government may not be 
reduced by a penny. So nobody is going to be hurt by this project.
  What we will do is end up with some information that will allow us to 
evaluate the concept to enable us, as a body, to decide how we may want 
to build on the results. It will also provide information and a good 
test to all those other educational systems and State educational 
agencies around the country that may be wondering if some of the fears 
that are raised about choice valid or not. Similarly, are the claims 
about the benefits of choice valid or not valid? It will give them an 
opportunity to evaluate these questions.
  This amendment has bipartisan support. I hope we can make a decision 
not on the basis of what saves the system, because the system, I think 
everybody agrees, needs to be modified and changed if we are going to 
provide better educational opportunities for our children. Rather, we 
should make a decision based on what is in the best interest of 
children and, in this case, what is in the best interest of low-income 
children from primarily urban areas that simply do not have the choice 
as many of the rest of us.
  So with that, I hope we could at least give this a test and support 
this amendment when it comes up for a vote on Tuesday.
  Madam President, I yield back whatever time I have remaining.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 1 minute 45 seconds remaining. 
The time is yielded.
  Mr. HOLLINGS. Right to the point, we are again considering a proposal 
to add private schools to the public tab. We considered this issue in 
the Senate in 1978, in 1983, and again in 1992. Each time we rejected 
it in a bipartisan manner.
  But we are back at it. This drumbeat for vouchers, tuition tax 
credits, and privatization comes from an economic theory that we have 
an equal duty to give taxpayer dollars to public schools and private 
schools. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Government's duty 
to the public is to provide public schools. The duty of the Government 
toward private schools is to leave them alone. That way we guarantee 
all our children a school system and keep government out of private 
education and religion.
  Again, we hear the drumbeat for ``competition.'' First, let us look 
at the unfair playing field on which this competition would take place.
  Your public school is required by law to take all comers. It must 
educate every child. It takes the rich, the poor, the smart, the slow, 
the one that has an attention deficit, the one that speaks Spanish. 
This makes sense because we want every child in this country to have 
access to elementary and secondary education. We invest every child. 
The alternative is to have a system that chooses winners and losers 
from the start, that chooses who will rule and who will serve. That is 
the importance of universal education. It is why we have dedicated 
ourselves in this country to a system that provides free, public 
education to all children.
  The private school, however, does not take all comers. It supports 
itself and makes its own policies. For example, 71 percent of Catholic 
high schools require an entrance exam, as do 43 percent of other 
religious schools and 66 percent of independent private schools. Those 
who can't get past these exams are accepted into the public school. I 
am not speaking about theory here. In the Milwaukee voucher experiment, 
40 percent of the poor children seeking to participate could not find a 
private school that would accept them. So a voucher system would have 
parents paying for schools that could reject their children. It would 
have children not accepted into school in the first place. And it would 
have the public school that takes all children competing against the 
private school that can limit access to a select group of bright, well-
balanced, motivated children.
  These different admissions policies--and, of course, tuition and 
religious convictions--produce different student bodies. The parents of 
a public school child are more than twice as likely to have less than a 
high school education. The parents of a private church school are half-
again as likely to have a college education as the parents of a public 
school child. Parents at nonsectarian private schools, are three times 
more likely to have a college education.
  The public school parent is about three times as likely as the 
private school parent to have an income below $15,000. The private 
school parent is more than twice as likely to have an income above 
$50,000. We hear about Catholic schools doing good work in cities, and 
that is true. However, only 2 percent of Catholic schools overall fall 
in the lowest income quartile for students, and in the urban areas 
where nearly a fifth do, the public schools are twice as poor.
  The amazing thing is that these stark differences do not result in 
significantly different education outcomes. On our National Assessment 
for Educational Progress, high school seniors in private schools were 
only 7 points higher on a 500-point scale in math. And a larger 
percentage of the public school seniors actually scored at the top 
achievement level. This slight overall private school edge disappears 
completely when you control for the education levels of the parents. 
Even Chester Finn--President Reagan's Assistant Secretary for 
Education--said ``With differences that large in parent education, it 
is conceivable that there is no (private) school effect showing up here 
at all.'' This man is a voucher advocate, and the National Assessment 
of Educational Progress results are backed up by another national test: 
The Federal High School and Beyond survey.
  These general findings are driven home in the Milwaukee experiment. 
After evaluating the program for 3 years, Professor John Witte writes 
that ``When we controlled for other relevant variables, however, the 
effect of being in a choice school was insignificant.''
  So two aspects of this call for competition have become clear. One is 
that public schools take all comers while private schools pick and 
choose. The other is that public schools and private schools achieve 
much the same results, though I would add that neither is doing well 
enough. We can never do well enough, but the idea that we will improve 
the system by draining funds from public schools to fund private 
schools that aren't any better is ridiculous. It also is obviously a 
direct threat to the public schools that give most people in this 
country opportunity.
  Then, there is the issue of religion. Eighty-one percent of private 
schools are religious schools. You can argue about whether the aid goes 
to the parent or the child or the school, but this is an obvious 
constitutional concern when millions of dollars flow to pervasively 
sectarian institutions that will then lobby this Congress for yet more 
funding.
  Again, you can consider not only the theory, but also our experience 
in Milwaukee. The Milwaukee program does not allow sectarian religious 
schools to participate. So one school dropped its religious emphasis in 
order to join the voucher program. Then the school's parents rebelled, 
so it reinstated religious instruction and backed out of the voucher 
program. Sixty-three voucher children were returned to the public 
schools. Then the school went bankrupt.

  This example shows why we have safeguards for the public through 
regulations that require public decisionmaking. The academic planning 
and financial soundness is on the table for public debate and 
development. But we cannot implement similar safeguards on a private 
school sector that is 81 percent religious without risking dangerous 
entanglement of church and State. We either spend taxpayers' money 
without accountability, or we have accountability that interferes with 
religion, or we entice the private schools to choose between money and 
their beliefs. Mr. President, this voucher movement invites the snake 
into the garden--not just of public schools--but of private schools 
too.
  Finally, we can't ignore the fact that no voucher plan I know of 
covers transportation. Tuition is not the whole story by a longshot. 
Ask any State legislator what the perennial issues are in education, 
and you will hear ``the bus fleet.'' We worry about quality drivers, 
aging buses, and adequate routes. This massive effort ensures that the 
children--particularly of parents with full work schedules, who may 
work an early morning or night shift, or who may live miles from a 
rural school--can get the public education to which they are entitled. 
Tuition grants usually are not proposed to cover all of tuition, much 
less transportation. Particularly in a State like South Carolina, 
transportation is essential.
  On that note, what have the States said about this private school 
voucher idea? Well, while the U.S. Senate has said ``no'' to the 
private school lobby three times, but the States have said ``no'' 19 
times. In 19 of the 20 times private school funding has been considered 
statewide since 1966 it has been defeated. It has been defeated twice 
since we last considered it in the Senate--in Colorado and most 
recently in California. In both places it lost 2-to-1. Mr. President, 
we have a lot of needs out there and scarce funds. I don't know why we 
at the Federal level continue to consider providing tax money to States 
for something they don't want and parents don't want. The only poll 
that counts is the ballot box, and private school funding is a 
significant loser there.
  Mr. President, the States have the primary responsibility, but I am 
proud to say that the Federal Government has not been idle. Go down to 
The Mall and read the wall of the memorial to Thomas Jefferson: He 
urged his colleagues to ``Establish the law for educating the common 
people * * *. That it is the business of the State to effect and on a 
general plan.'' And what was his proudest achievement? His epitaph 
reads: ``Here was buried Thomas Jefferson, author of the Declaration of 
American Independence, of the Statute of Virginia for Religious 
Freedom, and father of the University of Virginia.'' Becoming President 
of the United States was left off, founding a public university was 
left in.
  We have James Garfield, accepting his nomination to be President:

       Next in importance to freedom and justice is popular 
     education, without which neither freedom nor justice can be 
     permanently maintained.

  We have President Kennedy:

       Education is the keystone in the arch of freedom and 
     progress. Nothing has contributed more to the nation's 
     strength and opportunities than our traditional system of 
     free, universal elementary and secondary education, coupled 
     with widespread availability of college education.

  We have President Johnson:

       The American people, among their notable contributions to 
     the arts and crafts of civilization have insisted that 
     education not be the prized possession of the few.

  We have the Federal judiciary, in interpreting the law: ``Today, 
education is perhaps the most important function of State and local 
government,'' said Chief Justice Warren. ``The public school was the 
true melting pot * * *'' said Justice Douglas. ``The public school is 
at once the symbol of our democracy and the most pervasive means for 
promoting our common destiny,'' said Justice Felix Frankfurter.''
  And we have the Congress, encouraging the establishment of public 
schools, colleges, and universities through the Northwest Ordinance of 
1787, and the First and Second Morrill Acts of 1862 and 1890.
  Mr. President, after the Federal Government has spent 200 years 
urging States to build, maintain, and improve a public school system, 
let's not put termites in the foundation. There are always those, who 
when a public commitment runs into problems, say ``let's privatize 
it.'' But we would not have built a public school system in the first 
place if it were not fundamental to our democracy.
  My colleagues know that history often repeats itself. In the 
Dictionary of American Biography that Horace Mann became Secretary of 
the Massachusetts Board of Education in 1837. At that time, the public 
schools had ``a multitude of evils, including disastrous 
decentralizations, a decline in public interest, and a decrease of 
financial support.'' We read that ``Free schools, the one-time glory of 
colonial Massachusetts, were now regarded with contempt by the well-to-
do-classes, who more and more patronized private schools * * * One-
sixth of the children of the State were being educated in private 
schools and academies and one third were without any educational 
opportunities whatsoever.'' We read that ``His first task was to arouse 
and to educate public opinion with reference to the purpose, value, and 
needs of public education.''
  By the time he left, standards and salaries were raised, numerous 
improvements were made, the budget was doubled, and ``fifty new high 
schools were established * * * opportunities for free public secondary 
education became widely distributed throughout the State.'' State after 
State sought his advice to follow suit.
  Mr. President, Horace Mann is not remembered in history for 
abandoning the commitment to a free education for all children. We 
should not be either. I hope today that we will agree with the 
taxpayers, the voters, and the parents to keep our commitment to public 
schools and leave private schools alone.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I am opposed to this amendment for many 
reasons: Public school dollars should not support private schools.
  It is wrong to shift money from public schools which serve the common 
good--all children in all communities--to pay for a few to go to 
private or parochial schools. This is especially true in these times of 
fiscal stress and shrinking budgets.
  Basic education has a greater impact on social progress, economic 
productivity, and political participation than any other public 
service. We need a strong common school, reflecting the values of the 
Nation, to provide a quality education--for any student, regardless of 
race, class, or ethnic background--and to be accountable to the public.
  We should reform our public schools, not abandon them. Private school 
choice undermines our much-needed commitment to improving the public 
schools and replicating successful State and local initiatives all 
across the United States.
  The Federal Government has a limited but important role to play in 
school reform: to encourage public school reform through proven 
strategies. We know what good schools contain. The task at hand is to 
produce more exemplary schools. In schools like the Mason School in 
Roxbury, MA, every student in the school, no matter what his or her 
background, is learning and making progress. Now it's time to encourage 
and support the replication of schools like the Mason School.
  Critics are right when they say that educational bureaucracy and top-
down management contribute to the present difficulties. The solution 
lies in encouraging the characteristics which distinguish good public 
schools: excellent local leadership, a sense of purpose shared by the 
principal and staff, teacher professionalism, and the use of proven, 
effective teaching practices.
  We should also support strategies like charter schools, magnet 
schools, and interdistrict public school choice plans that encourage 
creativity and innovation.
  The best available evidence suggests that private school choice 
neither improves student achievement nor stimulates school renewal.
  In 1992, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 
after a yearlong study in which they visited schools nationwide, 
studied the literature, and conducted a survey of 1,000 parents, 
published a comprehensive and substantive report on choice. They found 
that there is no evidence that either competition or vouchers improves 
education. The educational impact of school choice is ambiguous at 
best.
  Choice is based on a flawed assumption that schools are like markets, 
and that markets ensure quality.
  In the first place, education is not a commodity. It is a uniquely 
human experience, influenced by dozens of factors besides the threat of 
being overcome by competitors.
  In the second place, lots of junk survives the consumers' taste test. 
Proponents of this legislation assume that schools are like cars: bound 
to improve under competitive pressure. But people don't always go for 
quality. For instance, in the limited choice system in Fall River, MA, 
a 1990 survey revealed that the main reason parents select their first-
choice school is proximity to home. Others give reasons such as 
convenience, social atmosphere, or family tradition. Competitive sports 
programs are also a big draw. But high academic standards actually send 
kids running; students in one Minnesota district transferred to another 
school with easier graduation requirements.
  Private schools do not have to accept all students who choose them.
  Public schools take all comers. Private schools don't. Private 
schools may choose whom to admit and they may discard students who 
misbehave or who have learning disabilities. Private schools may not 
admit a child unless he or she is a member of the right socioeconomic 
class, ethnic group, religion, or has the right combination of 
intellectual, athletic, and creative abilities or otherwise fits into 
the market niche the private school has established. We should not 
subsidize education which is only available to the lucky ones who fit 
this niche.
  The most recent poll shows that most Americans oppose school choice.
  In the 1993 Phi Delta Kappa/Gallup Poll of the public's attitudes 
toward public schools, 74 percent of Americans opposed allowing 
students and parents to choose a private school at public expense.
  In the referendum on vouchers in California last November, the public 
rejected vouchers by over 73 percent.
  For all these reasons, Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to reject 
this amendment.
  Mr. KENNEDY addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I see our colleague, the Senator from 
Iowa, in the Chamber at this time, so I would ask unanimous consent 
that the Senator's amendment be temporarily set aside. We are prepared 
to move ahead on a vote, but following the recommendation of the 
leader, we will temporarily hold on that request, although we expect to 
continue the debate on various amendments.
  The Senator from Iowa has an amendment we will consider. Following 
that, the Senator from Florida, Mr. Mack, has an amendment. Then 
possibly Senator Gregg. We are moving along and, hopefully, that issue 
can be resolved. Then, quite frankly, we are very close to--I 
understand at the present time Senator Helms might be considering 
additional amendments. There are others who have amendments that are 
very important and we have had the opportunity to talk about. They want 
to make some kind of statement or expression.
  But I give that kind of update of where we are. As the leader said, 
we will remain here during the course of the day and then after the 
discussion on this legislation we may begin the debate on the school-
to-work program. I know Senator Coverdell has an amendment he may want 
to address.
  That is at least our hope about the way we proceed. That judgment 
will ultimately be made by the leaders.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Will the Senator yield for an inquiry?
  Have the yeas and nays been ordered on the Coats amendment?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. They have not been ordered.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. I would ask for the yeas and nays on the Coats 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. KENNEDY. I have asked unanimous consent that the Coats amendment 
be temporarily set aside.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. If it is okay with the managers of the bill, I would 
defer for 4 minutes to the Senator from Arkansas--if it is okay with 
the managers.
  Mr. KENNEDY. It is always okay with the Senator from Massachusetts.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Arkansas.


                           Amendment No. 1387

     (Purpose: To provide for intergenerational mentoring programs)

  Mr. PRYOR. Madam President, the graciousness of my colleague from 
Iowa and my colleague from Florida, Senator Mack, I deeply appreciate.
  Today, Madam President, I send an amendment to the desk in behalf of 
myself, Senators Levin, Pell, Feingold, and Reid.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Pryor], for himself, Mr. 
     Levin, Mr. Pell, Mr. Feingold, and Mr. Reid, proposes an 
     amendment numbered 1387.

  Mr. PRYOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       On page 6, between lines 23 and 24, insert the following:
       (6) the term ``intergenerational mentoring program'' means 
     a program that--
       (A) matches adult mentors, with a particular emphasis on 
     older mentors, with elementary and secondary school age 
     children for the purposes of sharing experience and skills;
       (B) is operated by a nonprofit organization or governmental 
     agency;
       (C) provides opportunities for older individuals to be 
     involved in the design and operation of the program; and
       (D) has established, written mechanisms for screening 
     mentors, orienting mentors and proteges, matching mentors and 
     proteges, and monitoring mentoring relationships;
       On page 7, line 4, strike ``(7)'' and insert ``(8)''.
       On page 7, line 9, strike ``(8)'' and insert ``(9)''.
       On page 7, line 15, strike ``(9)'' and insert ``(10)''.
       On page 7, line 20, strike ``(10)'' and insert ``(11)''.
       On page 7, line 23, strike ``(11)'' and insert ``(12)''.
       On page 8, line 3, strike ``(12)'' and insert ``(13)''.
       On page 8, line 5, strike ``(13)'' and insert ``(14)''.
       On page 8, line 8, strike ``(14)'' and insert ``(15)''.
       On page 80, line 2, insert ``integenerational mentoring 
     programs,'' after ``agencies,''.
       On page 90, line 10, strike ``and''.
       On page 90, between lines 10 and 11, insert the following:
       (I) supporting intergenerational mentoring programs; and
       On page 90, line 11, strike ``(I)'' and insert ``(J)''.

  Mr. PRYOR. Madam President, I understand this amendment has been 
cleared on both sides of the aisle. I wish to thank the Chair and 
ranking minority member and also the distinguished manager of this bill 
for allowing this amendment to be accepted.
  This amendment is going to pave the way for an exciting new thing to 
happen in Goals 2000. It will mean that for the first time schools are 
going to be able to tap into the vast pool of resources represented by 
our older citizens. It is the very first step toward creating a 
National Mentor Corps that will place trained, mature adults into the 
public school system. It will match the needs of the young with the 
talents of seniors in the effort to revitalize education in America.
  Last spring, I introduced the National Mentor Corps Act with 29 
cosponsors, to encourage our schools to use the experience and wisdom 
of our mature adults in the classroom. By making the National Mentor 
Corps a part of Goals 2000, we can provide our schools with an 
important tool in their efforts to provide our young people with the 
day-to-day guidance they need from us.
  Growing up has always been hard. Growing up in America today is 
especially hard.
  Today's children are less likely to finish high school, and more 
likely to get pregnant, die violently, or be arrested for violent 
crimes. When our children leave the classroom at the end of the school 
day, they are likely to encounter an empty home. In the fifties, 11 
percent of America's children found no one home at the end of the day. 
Today, 65 percent of our children go home to an empty house.
  The job of being a parent today is also hard. Many of our parents are 
struggling to raise their children, hold down a job, be active in their 
community--in many cases, without the help and support of a spouse.
  Is it any wonder that many of them find they have less time than they 
would like to pass along to their children the special skills and 
values they need to make it in this world?
  As the Goals 2000 effort acknowledges, today's schools also face 
special challenges. The individuals on the very front lines of this 
uphill battle to educate America's students are the teachers, who have 
some of the most difficult jobs imaginable.
  If our schools are to succeed in turning out young adults who will 
meet the challenges they face in the work force, they must be supported 
in every way possible. This includes being able to supplement their 
efforts in the classroom, and perhaps before and after school, with 
help from individuals who have so much to offer--our older adults.
  The purpose of Goals 2000 is to give our Nation's schools standards 
to live up to so they can produce students who are prepared to enter 
the work force, and to give them the tools they need to meet these 
standards. I can think of no better way to strengthen their arsenal for 
this fight than to give them the National Mentor Corps.
  The intent of this amendment is to encourage States to use 
intergenerational mentoring for State educational improvements. First, 
it would ask States, in developing State improvement plans, to describe 
strategies for utilizing programs such as intergenerational mentoring 
in helping students meet State standards. Second, it authorizes that 
funds be used for State activities designed to implement the State 
improvement plan that would include programs such as intergenerational 
mentoring.
  These provisions encourage, but do not require, States to take 
advantage of intergenerational mentoring as an important part of their 
strategy to revitalize the educational process.
  This action is not meant to replace current mentoring programs but to 
encourage others like them to develop and to grow. Intergenerational 
mentors are already playing important roles in the educational process 
by serving as special math and science mentors, listener mentors for 
pupils in the primary grades, oral historians, and tutors. They work 
with our children in schools, community centers, Head Start facilities, 
and even in homes.
  I urge you to support this amendment that will encourage our schools 
to tap into the rich pool of resources our older adults offer.
  Madam President, I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. I 
thank my colleagues on the other side of the aisle and the 
distinguished managers for allowing me to send the amendment to the 
desk and have it considered at this moment.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, if the Senator will yield for a moment, 
I want to commend the Senator for this amendment. Many of us have 
witnessed mentoring programs in the schools. I mentioned earlier in the 
debate how teachers in Dade County are mentoring young students to 
interest them in pursuing careers in teaching. They are making a very 
powerful impact. They have been able to gain many of the most gifted 
students in their classes, who continue their educations and then 
return to teach in their communities.
  We have seen a variety of different mentoring programs for individual 
students conducted by the schools, the communities, and by the private 
sector as well. The cost incurred is a very small expense for what has 
been demonstrated as a very effective program.
  I welcome these recommendations, and the opportunity to support 
effective mentoring programs.
  I thank the Senator very much.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Madam President, I can say no more than the Senator 
from Massachusetts has already said.
  I want to thank the Senator for bringing this to us. I look forward 
to working with him.
  Mr. PRYOR. Madam President, I thank my colleagues from Massachusetts 
and Vermont.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there further debate on the amendment? If 
not, the question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  The amendment (No. 1387) was agreed to.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I move to reconsider the vote by which 
the amendment was agreed to.
  Mr. PRYOR. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, I think we are prepared to consider the 
amendment of the Senator from Iowa, Senator Grassley, and then 
following that, the amendment of the Senator from Florida, who has been 
willing to enter into a time agreement of 40 minutes. I will propound 
that time agreement when we address the amendment. But we are thinking 
of 40 minutes equally divided. We are moving along. If it is the desire 
of the Senator from Iowa to offer his amendment, I will be glad to 
proceed.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, I thank the Senator and the 
distinguished managers of the bill. These two managers are very good 
about being efficient and making those of us who are sponsoring 
amendments toe the line, get down to work, and expedite the process of 
the Senate.
  Even though I may disagree with exactly how they approach that job, 
they do a very good job of being good taskmasters. I want to compliment 
them on it. We need more of that leadership in the Senate.
  I have a very simple amendment from some standpoints, but a very 
complicated amendment from others, dealing with the use of Goals 2000 
money. But it also goes beyond that, quite frankly and candidly, to how 
a school district might operate from the standpoint of testing for 
values and eliciting information from children. So I want to be very up 
front with my colleagues.
  Yet, it goes back to a very basic problem that Senator Hatch tried to 
deal with in 1978. I think at the time it did deal with the issue very 
effectively, on some of the misuse of Federal money as it involved or 
did not involve parents in the education of their children, and parents 
as an interested party in what their children might be exposed to in 
their local schools. In 1978, Senator Hatch was able to have passed a 
very good amendment that required the consent of parents for certain 
psychological and aptitudinal testing in schools that would be of a 
nonscholastic nature.
  But what we have found happen since that time is that there is a lot 
of bureaucratic red tape and regulations that make the Hatch amendment 
very ineffective from the original intent of Senator Hatch.
  His amendment was an amendment requiring parental consent for 
nonscholastic and nonachievement-oriented testing. He pointed out in 
that debate on August 23, 1978, that most of the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act money was going for very worthwhile and 
necessary forms of tests, surveys, and other scholastic and aptitude 
examinations which he said were above reproach.
  But then he mentioned some parent concerns at that time:

       Parents have serious reservations about some of the 
     nonscholastic or aptitude tests, the psychiatric probing and 
     other nongermane, often mind-bending surveys, being conducted 
     in elementary and secondary schools without the knowledge, 
     much less the consent, of the parents or guardians.

  He pointed out that he had nothing to argue about regarding the use 
of these surveys in the school. He was only dealing with whether or not 
there was parental knowledge of their use and parental consent about 
their use. His amendment dealt with seeing that parents were informed, 
able to consent to their child's participation. Because he said that:

       Simply stated, our amendment requires that before any 
     elementary or secondary age child is subjected to psychiatric 
     behavior, probing, or other nonscholastic and nonaptitude 
     testing, there must first be obtained the written consent of 
     the respective child or parent.

  He went on to express some problems in the school at that time. He 
said:

       The whole problem came about when schools started becoming 
     more concerned with children's attitudes, beliefs, and 
     emotions rather than providing them with basic education--

  Remember, this is 1978, I might add parenthetically.

     in the schools, a situation where dramatically fewer young 
     children can read, write, or count but who become worldly 
     wise to stories about sex and drugs and violence. This does 
     not speak well of the long-term emotional stability of the 
     child and such implicit value changes which attend teaching 
     very young children about drugs or sex, and which challenge 
     their faith in their parents, constitutes the most vile 
     threat to the American family.

  That was 1978. He went on to say that this is a distortion of the 
purpose and legislative intent of the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act. ``It is not what Congress intended when this legislation 
was first enacted, and I am sure that is not on the minds of my 
colleagues.''
  Well, his amendment was accepted by Senator Pell at that time, who 
was managing that legislation. As I said, the regulations drafted to 
implement the amendment kept Senator Hatch's intent from being 
accomplished. But there are other problems that evolve with those 
regulations that make it very difficult for a family to appeal to the 
Secretary of Education and to get, what they hope to get, some 
satisfaction.
  In the 10 years since the regulations were drafted, Madam President, 
only 17 cases have successfully gotten through all the hoops and loops 
that a parent has to go through just to get an investigation by the 
Family Compliance Office. Only 17 cases.
  I want to say to you, Madam President, that I start with a very basic 
principle: Parents are primarily responsible for the upbringing and 
education of their children, and our Supreme Court recognizes that. 
They recognized it beginning in the 1920's, and they recognized it as 
late as 1972, and they recognize it later than that, as recently as 
last year in a lower court of our system, which cited the Pierce case 
and the Yoder case.
  There is a series of three Supreme Court decisions that are the 
foundation for the constitutional right of parents to be primarily 
responsible for the upbringing and education of their children. It was 
firmly established very early in some of these cases that parents 
retain the primary control over a child's education.
  In Meyer versus Nebraska, 1923, the State of Nebraska had forbidden 
the teaching of all languages other than English in the schools. 
Apparently, the law at that time resulted from some antiforeign 
sentiment flourishing because of World War I. A private school teacher 
was convicted for teaching German to one of his pupils. The Supreme 
Court reversed the conviction. According to the Supreme Court, parents 
have a right to engage someone to teach their children as they think 
appropriate without interference from the State.
  This doctrine was further strengthened in the Pierce case of 1925, 
which held that a State cannot prohibit all education outside the 
public schools. Equivalent private schooling is a satisfactory 
alternative. Parental rights today are largely dependent on this case 
for their foundation. The court said that parents have a right to 
direct, first, the upbringing and, second, the education of their 
children.
  Additionally, the Supreme Court held in Farrington versus Tokushige 
in 1927 that parents have a liberty interest in choosing their 
children's teachers, curriculum, and textbooks without unreasonable 
interference from the State.
  This doctrine was affirmed most recently in Wisconsin versus Yoder in 
1972. That is an Amish case regarding the right of parents to conduct 
the education of their children separate and apart from the mandatory 
school attendance laws of a particular State. The Supreme Court said: 
``The primary role of parents in the upbringing of their children is 
now established beyond debate as an enduring American tradition.''
  Let me remind some people about the picture of Amish children in 
Iowa. The case involves Wisconsin, but it is very similar in Iowa. 
During the tenure in our State of Governor Harold Hughes--who went on 
to become a very outstanding Member of this body from 1968 to 1974, 
until he voluntarily retired--we had a truant officer going to a rural 
school of Amish children. You had these children, on the front pages of 
every major newspaper in the State of Iowa, running to the cornfield to 
hide from the truant officer. Well, that sparked a lot of attention to 
the cause of the education of Amish children in America and the 
constitutional rights of their parents to be involved in their 
education.
  I was in the legislature under Governor Harold Hughes' leadership. We 
passed a law that solved the problem for the Amish people of the State 
of Iowa. But it did not solve the problems for the Amish in a lot of 
other States, including Wisconsin. That is why we ended up with the 
Yoder case. But, very definitely, the Yoder case just 22 years old now 
and still legal precedent with the Supreme Court, establishes the 
primary role of the parents in the upbringing of their children. The 
Court goes beyond the cases of the 1920's which I mentioned earlier. It 
says that parental authority in the upbringing of their children is now 
established beyond debate as an enduring American tradition.
  Finally, in December of 1993, the supreme court of the State of New 
York, appellate division, in the matter of Alfonzo versus Fernandez, 
stated that ``The petitioners enjoy a well-recognized liberty interest 
in rearing and educating their children in accord with their own 
views,'' and cited both the Pierce and Yoder cases.
  The Alfonzo case involved a lot more controversial stuff today than 
with the Amish in 1972. It involved the distribution of condoms without 
parental consent, and that involves a lot of controversial stuff today 
that people are trying to deal with, and, quite frankly, you know there 
is a lot of disagreement over the issue. A lot of people with good 
intent say it should be done.
  But here the court deals with the issue--not whether or not it is 
right or wrong to distribute condoms in the schools and the schools' 
good-faith efforts to do that to solve a social problem or a medical 
problem as well, but it involves whether or not parents ought to have 
something to say about that. The court, very clearly, said,

       The petitioner parents are being compelled by State 
     authority to send their children into an environment where 
     they will be permitted, even encouraged, to obtain a 
     contraceptive device which the parents disfavor as a matter 
     of private belief. Because the Constitution gives parents the 
     rights to regulate their children's sexual behavior as best 
     they can, not only must a compelling State interest be found 
     supporting the need for the policy at issue, but that policy 
     must be essential to serving the interest as well.

  So you have the test of compelling State interest. You have the test 
of it being essential to what the State wants to accomplish.
  The court went on to say that it did not find the compelling State 
interest, and it reiterated the Pierce and Yoder doctrines. So clearly 
this is still the foundation of our U.S. Supreme Court. While Alfonzo 
is not a Supreme Court case, it is a recent appellate court decision 
which affirms the doctrines established by Pierce in 1927 in the 
Supreme Court and by Yoder in 1972 by the Supreme Court.
  Thus it is clear that the basis for my amendment is the 
constitutional right of parents to be primarily responsible for the 
upbringing and education of their children.
  Together these cases guarantee that parents have certain rights with 
respect to their children's education. While a State government has an 
interest in the proper education of children within its borders, and we 
do not deny that interest, parents are primarily responsible for this 
education.
  Thus the State not unreasonably interfere with this parental right. 
Absent a showing of abuse or neglect the parental right to direct and 
control the upbringing and development of their minor children remains 
very substantial and may be subject to governmental interference only 
when such interference is supported by a significant government 
interest.
  I raise this balance of parental and State rights because, as my 
colleagues are fully aware, I have been a defender of State and local 
control of education. This has been a principle over time that I have 
advanced and protected, not only in the State legislature but, here as 
well.
  However, what happens when States and localities are not fulfilling 
their responsibility to protect another basic constitutional foundation 
of our society? Then I think we can raise questions, and Congress ought 
to be concerned.
  Obviously, we ought to have a concern in the same way of whether or 
not the door is open in a public school to all children regardless of 
race or religion.
  What happens when parents' rights are being trampled and State and 
local government, through its public schools, is the one trampling 
those rights? Well, Congress ought to be just as concerned about the 
violation of constitutional rights of parents in the schools as it is 
concerned about other sorts of constitutional violations which occur in 
that school.
  I firmly believe that education should be controlled on the State and 
local level. However, I also firmly believe that the parents' right to 
control the upbringing and education of their children is paramount and 
the courts have declared it. Congress should protect this right as much 
as they protect the civil rights of students access to the school door.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Madam President, will the Senator yield?
  Mr. GRASSLEY. I yield to the manager as long as I do not lose my 
right to the floor.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Would the Senator be willing just to permit us an 
opportunity to counsel with him on the Senator's amendment? There are a 
number of provisions. The basic thrust of the proposal we are in great 
sympathy with and Senator Kassebaum is in great sympathy with.
  I was just wondering whether at this time the Senator would be 
willing to just withhold for a brief period of time and temporarily set 
aside that amendment and permit to accommodate the schedule of the 
Senator from Florida, and have an opportunity to visit with the 
Senator, and we can proceed with the debate on the amendment of the 
Senator from Florida?
  We think we can expedite the Senator's amendment, and the Senator 
from Florida is willing to enter into a time agreement.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. What is that time agreement?
  Mr. KENNEDY. Forty minutes evenly divided.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts should be 
advised the amendment offered by the Senator from Iowa has not been 
sent to the desk yet.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Fine.
  We are in the process of consulting with Senator Kassebaum, and we 
believe we have a proposal for the Senator which I think would 
certainly reach his goal.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Are they some very simple changes? Is the Senator 
talking about changing a few words or a complete rewrite of the 
amendment?
  Mr. KENNEDY. No. Basically, I think it carries the thrust of the 
Senator's purpose. We will be glad to share that language with the 
Senator. We believe that it would. We believe that we would accomplish 
the objective the Senator would like to do. I quite frankly think we 
might be able to achieve the Senator's objective in a more expeditious 
way. I am not interested in leaving. I plan to be here for whatever 
period of time it takes. I thought we might be able to accommodate the 
Senator's schedule first and then come right back to the Senator's 
amendment.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Madam President, I might address where I understand the 
suggestion to the Senator of Iowa would be to amend existing law which 
would make it much more simple rather than the language that the 
Senator presently has.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. That will not. I have heard about that approach. That 
will not solve the basic problem with the 1978 statute.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. If the Senator is amending the 1978 statute, would that 
not solve the basic problem with it?
  Mr. GRASSLEY. No, because of the inability to satisfy the Department 
of Education that there is a direct relationship between the problem in 
the local school and a Federal dollar being spent.
  I will make that very clear. I am in the process now. I know it takes 
a long time to get to the point that the Senator raises because of a 
very key element, and I have an answer for that.
  But I needed to establish the constitutional basis of the right of 
the parents in the education of their kids. I have done that now, and I 
wish to move on. I thought the Senator from Florida was satisfied with 
how long it was going to take my amendment because it would have been 
better for me to accommodate him at 11:30 a.m. than now. I spoke to the 
fact that Senator Kennedy asked me to do this Thursday and I was 
responding to Senator Kennedy. I wanted to be able to go through this 
and do it without any problem.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Time runs on, and I defer at this point. I think the 
suggested amendment might meet the Senator's requirements. However, I 
suggest he proceed so we do not lose any more time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Iowa.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, in essence, the epitome of local 
control, the control by the most basic institutions of our society, is 
parental control.
  Recent studies show that many of society's problems, such as drug 
abuse, juvenile delinquency, teen pregnancy, low self-esteem, and low 
academic achievement to some extent is the result of the breakdown of 
the family.
  With this in mind, should we not be taking steps to strengthen 
parents and the family? Should we not be protecting their rights and 
responsibilities as outlined by the Supreme Court cases that I 
discussed?
  Schools are taking on activities traditionally in the purview of the 
family. Because schools are taking on these additional activities, they 
have less time to teach the basics.
  I would like to give some examples. As Senators, we live very busy 
lives, and I suppose for most of us we do not have young children still 
in school, but most of us have staff members who still have children in 
school.
  Madam President, some of us are a lot older than you are.
  I would like to have my colleagues consider the following in terms of 
their own relationship with their children or that of the children of 
staff because we are one big happy family. We have to be in each 
separate office here, staff and Member alike. The questions to my 
colleagues:
  Have you ever driven too fast? Have you ever neglected to complete a 
child's school form? Have you ever let your child stay overnight at a 
friend's house without speaking with the parents? Have you ever worked 
so much that you do not have time to spend with your children? Have you 
ever refused to let your child participate in outside activities of the 
school because it was inconvenient? Have you ever missed a parent-
teacher conference or other school activity?
  The point about these questions is that if any of my colleagues, or 
any other busy parent that might be listening, have done any of these 
things you might be guilty of what is called ``passive child abuse.''
  I ask unanimous consent to print the full questionnaire that those 
few questions were taken from and the letters from the mother who sent 
it to me and the child who took the questionnaire in the Record at this 
point.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                Davenport, IA,

                                                 January 26, 1994.
     Hon. Charles Grassley,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Grassley: Thank you so much for your efforts 
     to guide the education system in our country in a direction 
     that will benefit our children. I have become increasingly 
     concerned as I see the results of Goals 2000 and outcome-
     based education come home each day in my childrens backpacks.
       The attached ``Passive Child Abuse'' listing was, in fact, 
     distributed and discussed in my daughter's seventh grade 
     Health class last spring (1993). She attends Walcott Junior 
     High School, which is in the Davenport Community School 
     District, Davenport, Iowa. The students were instructed to 
     leave the copies on their desks when they left the room at 
     the end of class. My daughter is aware of my concerns and 
     chose to bring her copy home to me instead.
       Needless to say, I was shocked and quite upset at the 
     message being sent to our children through this lesson. As 
     you read through the list, you can see that virtually every 
     parent has violated at least one of these criteria! I see 
     this as a clear attempt to dissolve parent rights and usurp 
     parental authority in the child's mind. The fact that this 
     was presented ``in secret'' from the parent only adds to the 
     suspicions being raised in the child's mind.
       I see this as psychological testing (for responses) and 
     treatment of my daughter. Since this was completed without 
     prior informed written consent by my husband or myself, I 
     feel our own rights have been violated.
       Please be diligent in your efforts to insure that parents 
     and families are protected from this breach of our rights as 
     you debate ``Goals 2000''. I appreciate your thoughtful 
     consideration.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Rita S. Peterson.
       Enclosures.
                                                 January 26, 1994.
     Hon. Charles Grassley,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Grassley: I am glad that you have taken this 
     position regarding education. Before I start, I will tell you 
     about myself. I am thirteen years old and I am in the eighth 
     grade at Walcott Jr. High. My school is in the Davenport 
     School District, Iowa.
       I was the student that obtained this sheet titled ``Passive 
     Child Abuse''. I took it out of my seventh grade health class 
     last year. There was class discussion about the list. We were 
     instructed not to take it out of the classroom, but, I 
     thought that it was probably not something we should be 
     looking at in a health class.
       This isn't the only example of psychological testing and 
     attitude-changing. In the same health class, we took a 
     questionnaire twice (once at the beginning of the course, 
     once at the end of the course). Our teacher said it was to 
     see if our attitudes had changed over the length of the 
     course. Though we did not put our name on it, we wrote on it 
     our age, gender, race, parental status, etc. It had multiple 
     choice questions like ``Do you often feel depressed?'', 
     ``What would you do if a friend was contemplating suicide?'', 
     ``How do you feel about your current weight?'', and, How do 
     you feel about yourself now?''
       Also, all of a sudden our schools can't have anything to do 
     with religion. In our Spanish and chorus class, we can't sing 
     Christmas songs. We can't go caroling to different classes in 
     our school because, as we were told, caroling is a Catholic 
     tradition. My American studies teacher says that Puritans 
     were ``always constipated trying to think their high, good 
     thoughts.'' They are trying to change out attitudes about 
     religion.
       I am editor of my school paper, and in the last issue I 
     wrote an editorial about how I was against a grade 
     restructuring plan that was approved by our school board. My 
     principal called me into his office and intimidated me. He 
     tried to tell me that all of my opinions were wrong. Even 
     though all of the facts I used in my editorial were true and 
     well checked, he told me those were wrong, too. One of the 
     facts was told to me and my class by a teacher and he still 
     insisted it was wrong. I think it is wrong for a principal to 
     intimidate a student and tell the student her opinions are 
     wrong.
       I think it is wrong that they are trying to change and 
     monitor our attitudes. I want to go to school to learn facts 
     and not learn what opinions my school administration wants me 
     to know. I want to form my own opinions. I urge Congress to 
     help make sure kids can form their own opinions.
           Sincerely,
                                                Michelle Petersen.
                                  ____


                          Passive Child Abuse*

       There are many ways to abuse children other than actively 
     hitting, pushing, pinching, and name-calling them. The 
     following is a list of ways in which children may be 
     passively abused.
       1. Allowing children to stay up late watching TV on school 
     nights.
       2. Failure to have children's Classes fixed or teeth 
     repaired.
       3. Failure to have a will made or to designate a guardian 
     for your children.
       4. Staying with a partner who is an active and abusive 
     alcohol or drug user.
       5. Dating or living with someone who hates and is abusive 
     to children.
       6. Driving too fast, carelessly, or under the influence of 
     alcohol or drugs.
       7. Not fastening children into automobile child restraints, 
     seat belts, and shoulder harnesses when driving.
       8. Abusing alcohol or drugs or selling illegal drugs.
       9. Being very critical of mate and talking against him or 
     her to children.
       10. Neglecting to fill out or sign children's school forms.
       11. Having no idea who your children's friends are or where 
     your children hang out.
       12. Sending children to school when ill or letting them 
     fake illness to avoid school.
       13. Not providing clean clothes and a clean home.
       14. Not having children immunized.
       15. Never following through on punishments given to 
     children.
       16. Letting children stay overnight at a friend's home 
     without talking to the parents.
       17. Bringing one partner after another into your life.
       18. Never doing anything alone with your children.
       19. Working so much that there is no time to spend with 
     children.
       20. Promising to do something with your children and then 
     canceling out because you have lost interest.
       21. Treating yourself to new things but expecting children 
     to make do with what they have.
       22. Refusing to allow children to participate in outside 
     activities because it's inconvenient.
       23. Allowing children to watch adult (sex and violence) 
     movies.
       24. Smoking cigarettes.
       25. Never taking children's side against a teacher or 
     always taking children's side against a teacher.
       26. Never attending parent-teacher conferences or other 
     school activities.
       27. Making children late to school by not getting up in the 
     morning.
       28. Having extremely high or low expectations of children.
       29. Allowing your children to skip school because you want 
     their company or because you do not feel like getting them 
     dressed.
       *Adapted from ``Are You A (Passive) Child Abuser?'' an 
     article in the April 29, 1991, Quad-City Times by Doris Wild 
     Helmering of the Scripps Howard News Service.

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President this questionnaire was discussed in a 
Davenport, IA, seventh grade health class, and children were 
specifically told not to take a copy out of the classroom or discuss 
this exercise with their parents. Fortunately, this mom has trained her 
kids that when this kind of thing happens, it is exactly the kind of 
thing that a parent ought to know about and the child took the 
questionnaire home.
  Another mother wrote me a letter from which I will quote directly.

       Last year, my 15-year-old daughter, who was a student in 
     Colorado School District 11, came home from school one day 
     and told me about a survey she had been given instructions to 
     complete during algebra class. I would not have known about 
     this survey if she hadn't mentioned it since the school did 
     not notify parents they were administering it. The survey was 
     unrelated to the subject of mathematics; instead, questions 
     were asked about students' emotions and out-of-school 
     behavior, attitudes about parents, home life (including 
     behavior of parents and siblings), and a variety of other 
     invasive inquiries. The purpose of this survey, the students 
     were told, was to identify those students who would 
     ``benefit'' from a therapeutic support group. My daughter who 
     was reluctant to submit to this type of non-academic 
     exercise, refused to respond to the survey. She wrote ``none 
     of your business'' across the questionnaire and signed her 
     name to the incomplete form.
       Two weeks later, she was told to leave at the end of her 
     first period class and go to another room; she was not given 
     the reason for this order. When she arrived, she was told to 
     sit down and participate in a ``support group,'' for which 
     she had been selected, based on her ``responses'' to the 
     above-mentioned survey. By way of introduction, the students 
     were told to state their name and their favorite season of 
     the year. When it was my daughter's turn, she said, ``My name 
     is Sara and I have better things to do than to sit here and 
     let you analyze me.'' She then rose from her seat and 
     returned to her civics class.

  But the mother goes on to ask in her letter that the Senate please 
ensure that this type of psychological manipulation will not continue 
to be a part of the school system.
  I ask unanimous consent to have the full text of that letter be 
printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record as follows:

                                      Allen, TX, October 30, 1993.
       Dear Senator Grassley: I am writing to express my intense 
     concern about the non-academic subjects, invasive 
     questionnaires, and psychological therapy being forced upon 
     students in our public schools without either the permission 
     or knowledge of parents--a subject in which, I believe, you 
     are also interested. Please allow me to give you an example.
       Last year, my 15-year-old daughter, who was a student in 
     Colorado School District 11, came home from school one day 
     and told me about a survey she had been given instructions to 
     complete during algebra class. I would not have known about 
     this survey if she hadn't mentioned it since the school did 
     not notify parents they were administering it. The survey was 
     unrelated to the subject of mathematics; instead, questions 
     were asked about students' emotions and out-of-school 
     behavior, attitudes about parents, home life (including 
     behavior of parents and siblings), and a variety or other 
     invasive inquiries. The purpose of this survey, the students 
     were told, was to identify those students who would 
     ``benefit'' from a therapeutic support group. My daughter who 
     was reluctant to submit to this type of non-academic 
     exercise, refused to respond to the survey. She wrote ``none 
     of your business'' across the questionnaire and signed her 
     name to the incomplete form.
       Two weeks later, she was told to leave at the end of her 
     first period class and go to another room; she was not given 
     the reason for this order. When she arrived, she was told to 
     sit down and participate in a ``support group,'' for which 
     she had been selected, based on her ``responses'' to the 
     above-mentioned survey. By way of introduction, the students 
     were told to state their name and their favorite season of 
     the year. When it was my daughter's turn, she said, ``My name 
     is Sara and I have better things to do than to sit here and 
     let you analyze me.'' She then rose from her seat and 
     returned to her civics class.
       When she told me about this incident, I was proud of her 
     willingness to stand up for her beliefs, in spite of 
     potential disciplinary action by her school. I have instilled 
     in my children the meaning of the Bill of Rights and what 
     these rights mean to us as citizens. Our family does not 
     necessarily subscribe to the tenets of popular psychology, 
     and as citizens of the United States, our family should be 
     allowed to choose not to participate in coerced support group 
     therapy in a public school.
       After my daughter's refusal to participate in this support 
     group occurred, she was treated differently by some of her 
     teachers--they viewed her as disrespectful and 
     uncooperative--and I was finally forced to remove her from 
     the Colorado state school system. Please ensure that this 
     psychological manipulation will not continue to be part of 
     our public school system, or added to the new education 
     strategy, Goals 2000: Educate America Act.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Susan L. Gabriel.

  (Mrs. MURRAY assumed the chair.)
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, these things simply should not happen 
without parental knowledge or consent.
  Let me clarify here that my amendment does not deal with the right of 
the school districts to conduct these sorts of surveys or support 
groups. That decision is up to the local school district. My amendment 
only deals with the parents' right to know that their child might be 
involved in that activity and consent to the activity.
  Some will argue that there is really not much wrong with Senator 
Hatch's amendment of 1978, the protection of pupil rights amendment--
section 439 of the General Education Provisions Act. They will argue 
that we can manipulate that law a little bit to solve the problem.
  Well, I think that is a very reasonable place to start. What I want 
the managers of the bill, Senator Kennedy and Senator Jeffords, to be 
concerned about are the problems that we have with that approach; and 
that their attempts to change that law, as legitimate as it might be, 
will not solve the problem because of the inability to show the direct 
relationship between Federal funding and the activity in question.
  I checked into the 1978 law. If it is not working, why is it not 
working? We just ran into this terrible regulatory black hole, let me 
call it.
  So I wrote a letter to Secretary Riley at the Department of Education 
and raised some questions to clarify the 1978 law and its implications 
for parents.
  Remember, in 10 years, since the regulations were promulgated, we 
have only had 17 cases reach the threshold of an investigation. Many 
other parents have not been able to get through all the burdensome 
hoops.
  The law, as introduced by my colleague, Senator Hatch, in 1978 has 
two major provisions. First, to ensure that schools allow parents to 
review instructional materials used in Department of Education funded 
research or experimentation programs or projects; and, second, to 
ensure that parents give written permission before Department-funded 
psychological and psychiatric testing or treatment is undertaken 
involving minor children who are thereby required to provide elements 
of personal information listed in the law.
  Let me explain why the 1978 law usually proves ineffective in 
practice. The regulations drafted to effectuate the purposes of the 
protection of pupil rights amendment simply place an undue burden on 
parents. First, parents must prove that they attempted a resolution at 
the local level. They must prove that the development and/or 
administration of the program is supported by the U.S. Department of 
Education funds.
  They must prove that the activity that they find offensive meets the 
definition of a research or experimentation program or project under 
the regulations.
  There is nothing wrong with going to local people to solve this, but 
a terrible burden when you have to prove that you have attempted to 
resolve the conflict locally.
  If the conditions appear to exist that are spelled out in the law, 
then parents must get through each and every one of the following hoops 
for the Family Compliance Office at the Department of Education to 
investigate.
  Parents must prove that the specific activity that they find 
offensive is funded with Department of Education funds. They must prove 
that their child is directly affected by the activity in question. They 
must prove that the activity meets the definition of psychiatric or 
psychological testing or treatment in the regulation. They must prove 
that the primary purpose of the activity is to reveal private 
information protected under the act.
  They must prove that the school has not received their written 
consent. They must prove that they attempted to resolve the conflict at 
the appropriate State and local levels before filing a complaint with 
the Family Compliance Office at the Department of Education in 
Washington.
  Madam President, with all due respect to the spirit and the intent of 
this 1978 law, unfortunately, the burden on parents is so heavy, so 
terribly heavy, that they understandably feel powerless to protect 
their children.
  I ask unanimous consent that the portion of Secretary Riley's letter 
dealing with the protection of pupil rights amendment be printed in the 
Record at this time.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                     U.S. Department of Education,


                                                The Secretary,

                                                  October 7, 1993.
     Hon. Charles E. Grassley,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Grassley: Thank you for your letter of August 
     9. In response to your questions, my staff has prepared the 
     enclosed set of responses. I hope you will find this 
     information useful and will contact me if I may be of further 
     assistance.
           Yours sincerely,
                                                 Richard W. Riley.
       Enclosure.

                          Pupil Protection Act

       The Family Policy Compliance Office also administers the 
     Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA) and is 
     responsible for investigating alleged violations of PPRA and 
     its implementing regulations, the Student Rights in Research, 
     Experimental Activities, and Testing Regulations. Section 439 
     of the General Education Provisions Act, 20 U.S.C. 
     Sec. 1232h. See also 34 CFR Part 98.
       The law has two major purposes. These are:
       To ensure that schools allow parents to review 
     instructional materials used in U.S. Department of Education 
     funded research or experimentation programs or projects (34 
     CFR Sec. 98.3); and
       To ensure that parents give written permission before 
     Department-funded psychological and psychiatric testing or 
     treatment is undertaken involving minor children who are 
     thereby required to provide elements of personal information 
     listed in the regulations (34 CFR Sec. 98.4).
       The specific questions you raised with regard to PPRA are 
     addressed below.
       Issue: What must a parent do to trigger enforcement under 
     the Act?
       Response: Parents who believe that their rights under PPRA 
     may have been violated may file a complaint with the 
     Department by writing the Family Policy Compliance Office. 
     Complaints must contain specific allegations of fact giving 
     reasonable cause to believe that a violation of PPRA 
     occurred. The regulations require the Family Policy 
     Compliance Office to undertake a review of a complaint 
     alleging a violation of Sec. 98.3 if the following conditions 
     appear to exist:
       (1) The development and/or administration of the program is 
     supported with funds, in whole or in part, provided by the 
     U.S. Department of Education.
       (2) The complainant is a parent or guardian of a student 
     directly affected by the activity;
       (3) The activity meets the definition of research or 
     experimentation program or project found in Sec. 98.3(b);
       (4) The complainant has attempted to resolve the apparent 
     conflict at the appropriate local and State levels (if a 
     State complaint procedure exists) before filing the compliant 
     with the Department.
       For complaints alleging violation of Sec. 98.4, the 
     Department is required to investigate a complaint only if all 
     of the following conditions appear to exist:
       (1) The activity that is the subject of the complaint is 
     supported with funds supplied, in whole or in part, by the 
     U.S. Department of Education.
       (2) The complainant is either a parent or guardian of a 
     student, or the student if an adult or emancipated minor, who 
     is directly affected by the activity.
       (3) The activity meets the definition of psychiatric or 
     psychological examination, test, or treatment in 
     Sec. 98.4(c)(1) and Sec. 98.4(c)(2) of the regulations.
       (4) The primary purpose of the activity is to reveal any of 
     the information listed in Sec. 98.4(a)(1)-(7).
       (5) The school district or other recipient of funds has not 
     obtained prior written consent of the student's parent.
       (6) The complainant has attempted to resolve the apparent 
     conflict at the appropriate local and State levels (if a 
     State complaint procedure exists) before filing the complaint 
     with the Department.
       Once the Department receives a valid complaint--one that 
     meets the conditions described above--the Family Policy 
     Compliance Office provides written notice to the educational 
     agency that includes the substance of the alleged violation. 
     The written notice also informs the educational agency that 
     the Office will investigate the complaint and that the agency 
     may submit a written response to the allegation(s). The 
     Office will provide the educational agency with a ``response 
     form'' that, when completed, will aid in the investigation. 
     If the agency does not submit a written response to the 
     allegation(s) presented, the Office may at that point make a 
     determination based on the available information as provided 
     by the complainant.
       Following the receipt of the complaint and the notice to 
     the educational agency, the parties may submit further 
     written or oral arguments. The evidence received by the 
     parties will be examined in light of the criteria explained 
     above to determine whether a PPRA violation has occurred.
       The Family Policy Compliance Office provides the 
     complainant and the educational agency a written notice of 
     the findings and the basis for the findings. If a violation 
     has occurred, that office will provide the agency with a 
     statement setting forth the specific steps that it must take 
     to come into compliance with the law. The educational agency 
     is given a reasonable amount of time to achieve voluntary 
     compliance.
       If the educational agency does not comply during the period 
     of time set by the Family Policy Compliance Office, the 
     Department may, at its discretion, initiate one of the 
     following actions: (1) withhold further payments; (2) 
     issue a complaint to compel compliance through a cease-
     and-desist order; or (3) terminate eligibility to receive 
     funding under an applicable program. However, as in the 
     Department's experience in administering FERPA, we have 
     never had to take such action because voluntary compliance 
     has always been secured.
       Issue: What is the standard of proof required under the 
     Act? How does a parent meet the necessary standards of proof? 
     How is a parent protected if he or she cannot meet the 
     necessary standard of proof?
       Response: As explained above, complaints must contain 
     specific allegations of fact giving reasonable cause to 
     believe that a violation of PPRA occurred and must appear to 
     meet the conditions listed above before an investigation is 
     initiated by the Department. Following its investigation, the 
     Family Policy Compliance Office provides to the complainant 
     and the educational agency a written notice of its findings 
     and the basis for its findings. 34 CFR Sec. 98.9(b). The 
     regulations provide that ``[i]f the Office finds that the 
     recipient . . . has not complied with [PPRA]'' it notifies 
     the recipient of the specific steps that it must take to 
     comply. 34 CFR Sec. 98.9(c) (emphasis added). There is no 
     other ``standard of proof'' set forth in the statute or 
     regulations, and the Department interprets this as equivalent 
     to the ordinary ``preponderance of the evidence'' (more 
     likely than not) standard used in civil litigation. That is, 
     the Office will determine whether it is more likely than not 
     that the educational agency has not complied with PPRA's 
     requirements. If the ``standard of proof'' has not been met, 
     it means that the Department has found that PPRA was not 
     violated.
       Issue: How many cases have been filed since passage of the 
     Act?
       Response: The Family Policy Compliance Office has received 
     numerous requests for investigation of allegations of 
     violation since the regulations were promulgated. However, 
     valid complaints are restricted to those programs, projects, 
     and testing that meet the above criteria. ``Complaints'' 
     received in writing that do not meet the above delineated 
     criteria are treated as inquiries for information about PPRA 
     requirements. Additionally, the Family Policy Compliance 
     Office responds to numerous calls of concern and requests for 
     information by telephone from parents regarding the 
     applicability of PPRA to certain programs and for information 
     regarding our investigation procedures. The Department has 
     initiated investigation into 17 formal complaints alleging 
     violation of PPRA.
       However, no school district or State educational agency has 
     had funding withdrawn as a result of our investigations. The 
     school districts or State educational agencies in question 
     voluntarily brought their activities into compliance with 
     PPRA. Additionally, some of the complaints investigated 
     were later found to be invalid because no Department funds 
     were found to be involved in the activities in question, 
     although it may have been initially believed by the parent 
     that Department funds were involved. As a matter of note, 
     the last three investigations conducted by the Family 
     Policy Compliance Office resulted in two State departments 
     of education and one local school district adopting 
     agreements with the Department to implement policies in 
     compliance with PPRA.
       Issue: How many cases were deemed inconclusive because the 
     parents were unable to meet the necessary standard of proof?
       Response: We understand your question to be how many 
     allegations of violation of PPRA have been deemed 
     inconclusive because we determined the conditions necessary 
     for an investigation were not satisfied. Our records are not 
     kept in such a way that we can provide this information.
       Issue: Are there other federal educational laws, beyond the 
     Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment, which grant protection 
     to specific parties? (Such as, but not limited to, the 
     Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.) If so, what is 
     the standard of proof under those laws?
       Response: It would take us additional time to review all 
     the education laws in order to provide you with a summary of 
     the statutes that grant protection to specific parties.
       Issue: How are the funds tracked so that it is possible to 
     know which activities are federally funded and thus, must 
     follow the notice requirements of the Protection of Pupil 
     Rights Amendment?
       Response: PPRA and the implementing regulations apply to 
     programs, projects, and testing if Department funds are 
     involved in either their development or implementation. The 
     Department maintains information about the award of grants 
     (discretionary and formula) and contracts to States and local 
     educational agencies. However, the Department does not 
     maintain a listing of specific programs, projects, or other 
     activities conducted with these funds. The Department relies 
     on the States to account for the use of such funds. In 
     conducting a PPRA investigation, we work with the school 
     district and/or State department of education to make this 
     determination.
       As noted above, complaints filed with the Department under 
     PPRA must include evidence of attempted resolution at the 
     local level--and at the State level if a State resolution 
     process exists. Should the above conditions exist, however, 
     parents may file a complaint with the Family Policy 
     Compliance Office, providing adequate information to 
     substantiate their allegation that a violation of PPRA has 
     occurred.

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, one mother attempting to come under 
the protections of the Pupil Protection Act, wrote a letter to her 
local school district superintendent asking that her child not be 
involved in any school activity listed under the Pupil Protection Act 
unless she was first given access to the relevant materials and her 
written consent was obtained.
  In other words, this parent was doing exactly what she thought the 
1978 law gave her a right to do. Her letter describes the 
superintendent's answer as follows:

       Both the Mentor Board and staff are committed to full 
     compliance with all applicable laws governing the District. 
     However, we [meaning the school superintendent and the school 
     district] cannot and will not modify our entire approach to 
     education in the District based upon a Federal statute which 
     has only limited application to our program.

  I ask unanimous consent to have that letter printed in the Record at 
this point.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                                 November 2, 1993.
     Hon. Senator Grassley,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Grassley: I am writing you to express my 
     frustration with the present condition of our education 
     system. There was a time, not so long ago, when our 
     communities and schools were very close * * * functioning as 
     one and benefiting all. We sent our children off to school 
     where they could acquire all of the tools necessary to 
     function as a responsible and contributing adult. They 
     learned of the academics * * * English, Math, Science, 
     Geography * * * etc. from textbooks. They learned social 
     graces * * * fairness, politeness, compassion, civic duty, 
     etc. through participation in activities with other children 
     and by following examples set by fine teachers. That was 
     their environment * * * a kind, compassionate, knowledgeable 
     teacher leading by example and focused on rigorous academics. 
     Parents worked hand-in-hand with teachers, reinforcing what 
     they had learned that day in school * * * trusting their 
     children's schools and teachers. This system built, and will 
     continue to build, America * * * or so we were taught.
       Early this century ``social engineering'' utilizing the 
     tools of the psychologist's trade began to find it's way into 
     our classrooms. It was harmless enough at it's inception * * 
     * just a way of more formally instructing the social skills. 
     Time spent in this area was minimal. But as the decades 
     rolled by, it began to ``eat into'' the time set aside for 
     academics * * * the primary reason for the children being 
     there. True academics moved further and further into the 
     background while psychological assessments and later, 
     manipulations, moved to the foreground. It happened so 
     gradually * * * most parents were lulled to sleep * * * 
     comfortable in their trusting relationship with the schools. 
     This, after all, was a better way to build America * * * or 
     so we were told.
       Today * * * our students, teachers and administrators alike 
     * * * spend the overwhelming majority of time pursuing the 
     psychology of it all. Our schools, once the place of 
     academics, are now devoting most time, energy and money to 
     the ``feel-good'' curriculum. I would wager that it is for 
     this reason alone that our schools have deteriorated in their 
     ability to teach. Our schools are producing illiterate adults 
     * * * but ones that feel good about being so.
       School administrators were quick to see this as a wonderful 
     way to run the schools * * * a reduction in measurable 
     academics, accompanied by an increase in unmeasurable 
     psychological assessments and counseling. Remember, these are 
     not just measurable and unmeasurable as it applies to the 
     student, but also as it applies to the schools * * * who all 
     the time demand (and get) larger budgets. It is by their 
     implicit design that there is no real means of accounting 
     when our school administrators fail. We parents can no longer 
     measure the successes and failures of our school systems * * 
     * all we're to do is feed it more money and more children.
       All this has come to a head recently throughout the country 
     and it has driven a powerful wedge between the schools and 
     the community. No longer can the schools be given our trust 
     ``Carte Blanche'', and for good reason * * * our privacy and 
     the sanctity of our families have been breached by the 
     psychological assessing and the recording of these 
     assessments in computer databases throughout the nation. 
     Technology has made it a snap.
       Who knows what future uses (or misuses) of this information 
     will be * * * who knew of what use (or misuse) the recording 
     of information in Germany would bring to the world? Much of 
     that data was collected by documenting the results of 
     harmless ``mental'' testing (currently referred to as 
     ``counseling'') done in the 1920's and 30's. Can what 
     followed there happen here? Probably not, thankfully * * * 
     but none of us can answer definitely not. A decade ago it 
     would have been ridiculous to presume that the Berlin wall 
     would no longer stand * * * that the USSR would disassemble 
     itself. Who knows for certain what our future is? What will 
     the seemingly innocent aspects of this ``classroom 
     psychology'' mutate into in the coming years?
       Many parents have recently submitted ``Hatch'' letters (a 
     copy of which is enclosed) to their children's schools in an 
     effort to combat this problem. The response that my husband 
     and I received from our district superintendent includes the 
     following paragraph, which pretty well sums up their lack of 
     respect for the parents of those students entrusted to them:
       ``Both the Mentor Board and staff are committed to full 
     compliance with all applicable laws governing the District. 
     However, we cannot and will not modify our entire approach to 
     education in the District based upon a federal statute which 
     has only limited application to our program.''
       What a reply. We express our genuine concerns and 
     respectfully request a review of curriculum, and this guy 
     crawls into a legal shell. Perhaps that shell is one of our 
     problems. Imagine the frustration and mistrust that this kind 
     of response breeds in our community. I know how it affected 
     us * * * I can only imagine how it affected those with 
     religious convictions, who take very seriously many of the 
     items on the list that my husband and I had no problem with.
       Is this all only a mistrust of the schools by the parents? 
     Is this a one-way street? No * * * as parents have awakened 
     to what's happened, they are increasingly viewed as threats 
     to school budgets. We see the schools' mistrust of parents 
     demonstrated through actions like the earmarking of $10 
     million by the NEA for campaigning in opposition to the 
     ``voucher'' initiative in California. What does the NEA fear? 
     If parents choose another school for their child, won't the 
     child's new teachers be members of the NEA, as well? Or do 
     they fear that new schools will spring up dedicated to 
     measurable academics? Is that perhaps more work? Is it too 
     measurable? Do they fear that a precedence is being set by 
     the upward-spiraling numbers of ``home schoolers''?
       The mistrust, in both directions, is the destructive force 
     that needs to be dealt with. One way of dealing with it is to 
     strengthen one of the core philosophies of America * * * our 
     rights to privacy. What harm can come of creating laws that 
     enhance the sanctity of the family * * * that reaffirm our 
     rights * * * that secure further our freedoms? This will be 
     the first step in healing the division between community and 
     school * * * we could once again hand over our most treasured 
     gifts * * * our children * * * to go and learn to love 
     learning * * * secure in knowing that the right to privacy 
     within our family unit is protected by ``We, the people * * * 
     This is the way America was built * * * this we know.
       We must enact much stronger legislation at the local, State 
     and Federal levels of our country to halt this invasion of 
     our homes. Will the passing of new laws, or the strengthening 
     of existing ones, stop the sapping of time from true 
     ``academics''? Will it stop the foolish waste of money? No * 
     * * but what it can do is to stop the erosion of our rights 
     and freedoms, the rest of what ails the learning community 
     will be taken care of in the home, at local board meetings 
     and at the polls * * * perhaps that's why I decided to write 
     this on election day. We, the parents, are taking our schools 
     back. But we need help from those legislators who still truly 
     believe that serving the public's interest is an honor.
           Sincerely,
                                                Mrs. Jane F. Ponn,
                                                           Parent.
                                  ____


The Rights of Parents and Students Regarding Public and Private School 
                               Education

       Considering the diversity of curricular matters being 
     discussed in both public and private school today, it is of 
     vital importance that parents know their rights and the 
     rights of their children under law. It is equally important 
     that parents inform the school authorities, in the 
     institution where their child attends, that they desire to 
     have access to and opportunity to approve or disapprove of 
     the curricula their child will be taught before the child is 
     subjected to the material in class.
       It does not go without saying that much of what is being 
     taught as ``truth'' and ``fact'' in schools today is directly 
     contrary to measurable scientific thought and traditional 
     family values.
       The recent upsurge of parents in New York City regarding 
     materials of a perverted sexual orientation that were being 
     thrust upon their children at the first grade level, is 
     itself only the tip of the iceberg.
       Educational institutions are not a law unto themselves. 
     They are accountable to local school boards, which in turn, 
     are accountable to parents and the public-at-large. Given the 
     overall mobility of our society, whether a student in one 
     state is correctly taught ought to be the concern of the rest 
     of us. Thus, New York's problems are ours as well.
       The following letter is a model by which you may legally 
     inform your school officials of your rightful desires with 
     respect to the education of your child. Read it carefully; 
     then copy and submit it to your local school officials. Be 
     certain that they not be allowed to ignore your request for a 
     copy of their ``policy statement on procedures for parental 
     permission requirements.''
       This is your right under the law.
       The original letter was reprinted from How Good is Your 
     School? by Sally D. Reed. National Council for Better 
     Education, Capital Headquarters, Washington, DC 20070-0158
       Some minor modifications were made to the original letter 
     by the SYSOP of the OHPIN BBS. These changes were additions 
     to the original text, and were included to eliminate what we 
     considered to be potential loopholes.
       Parents' Name(s):
       Date:
       Street Address,        City,        State,        Zip:       

       I am the parent of       , who attends        school. Under 
     U.S. legislation and court decision, parents have the primary 
     responsibility for their children's education, and pupils 
     have certain right which the schools may not deny.
       Parents have the right to be assured that their children's 
     beliefs and moral values are not undermined by the schools. 
     Pupils have their right to have and to hold their values and 
     moral standards without direct or indirect manipulations by 
     the schools supplementary assignments.
       Under the Hatch Amendment, I hereby request that my child 
     not be involved in any school activities or material listed 
     below unless I have first reviewed all the relevant materials 
     and have given my prior written consent for their use:
       Psychological and psychiatric treatment or testing that is 
     designed to affect behavioral, emotional or attitudinal 
     characteristics of an individual or designed to elicit 
     information about attitudes, habits, traits, opinions, 
     beliefs or feelings of an individual or group;
       Values clarification, use of moral dilemmas, discussion of 
     religious or moral standards, role-playing or open-ended 
     discussions of situations involving moral issues, and 
     survival games including life/death decision exercises;
       Contrived incidents for self-revelation; sensitivity 
     training, group encounter sessions, talk-in, magic circle 
     techniques, self-evaluation and auto-criticism; strategies 
     designed for self-disclosure including the keeping of a diary 
     or a journal or a log book;
       Sociograms, sociodrama; psychodrama; blindfolded walks; 
     isolation techniques; Death education, including abortion, 
     euthanasia, suicide, use of violence, and discussions of 
     death and dying;
       Curricula pertaining to drugs and alcohol;
       Nuclear war, nuclear policy and nuclear classroom games;
       Globalism, one-word government or anti-nationalistic 
     curricula;
       Discussion and testing on interpersonal relationships; 
     discussions of attitudes towards parents and parenting;
       Educating in human sexuality, including pre-marital sex, 
     extra-marital sex, contraception, abortion, homosexuality, 
     group sex and marriages, prostitution, incest, bestiality, 
     masturbation, divorce, population control, and roles of males 
     and females; sex behavior and attitudes of student and 
     family;
       Pornography and any materials containing profanity and/or 
     sexual explicitness;
       Guided fantasy techniques; hypnotic techniques; imagery and 
     suggestology;
       Discussions of witchcraft, occultism, the supernatural, and 
     Eastern mysticism;
       Political and/or religious affiliations of student or 
     family;
       Income of family;
       Non-academic personality tests; questionnaires on personal 
     and family life attitudes.
       The purpose of this letter is to preserve my child's rights 
     under the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (The Hatch 
     Amendment) to the General Education Provision Act, and under 
     its regulations as published in the Federal Register of 
     September 6, 1984, which became effective November 12, 1984.
       These regulations provide a procedure for filing complaints 
     first at the local level, and then when the U.S. Department 
     of Education. If a voluntary remedy fails, federal funds can 
     be withdrawn from those in violation of the law.
       I respectfully ask you to send me a substitute written 
     response to this letter, attaching a copy of your policy 
     statement on procedures for parental permission requirements, 
     to notify all my child's teachers, and to keep a copy of this 
     letter in my child's permanent file.
       Thank you for your cooperation.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Note, please, what the superintendent said. He said 
that the Pupil Protection Act had only limited application to his 
programs.
  Secretary Riley's response to my questions about the protection of 
the pupil rights amendment, combined with Mrs. Ponn's letter about the 
response from her local school superintendent, confirms my belief that 
this law provides little practical protection for parents. And my 
statistical proof that in 10 years since the regulations were 
promulgated, only 17 requests have gotten through all these hoops to 
even be investigated. Only 17 cases have been investigated since the 
regulations were completed in 1984.
  However, I have received more than 17 letters of complaint in just 
the last 10 days, since my amendment has been out for public 
discussion.
  So, turning then, to my amendment, it takes a more concrete approach. 
It says that a Goals-2000-funded school cannot do activities involving 
surveying, analyzing, or evaluating the personal values, attitudes, 
beliefs, or sexual behavior of a student unless it gets prior written 
consent of the student, if emancipated, or parent if the student is not 
emancipated. It further requires that the parent or guardian have 
access to curriculum materials or information regarding activities 
relevant to the development or assessment of personal values, 
attitudes, beliefs, or sexual behavior of a student before the 
implementation of such curriculum, use of such materials, or occurrence 
of such activity.
  The school districts can do anything they want to with Federal money 
or their own money. They can offer all these approaches that they want. 
I would not presume to interfere in a school district's right to do 
that.
  I only say--based upon the constitutional rights which the Supreme 
Court has stated for parents to be chiefly responsible for the 
upbringing and education of their children--that the parent has a right 
to know about these activities and look at the material.
  I would like my colleagues to note what my amendment does not 
require. Some of this will be for purposes of emphasis because I have 
stated it before. It does not require that parents prove the activity 
in question is federally funded or what the primary purpose of the 
activity is. That is a very major stumbling block to getting the relief 
that Senator Hatch meant to get for parents in the 1978 law.
  It does not require that the parent prove that the activity is 
research or experimental in nature. That is a very difficult thing for 
a parent to show to get relief. All the parent has to demonstrate is 
that the activity in question involves personal values, attitudes, 
beliefs, or sexual behavior of their child and that their written 
consent was not obtained. As a parent, do you think that you ought to 
have the right to know that your child is being questioned about their 
personal values, about their attitudes, and about their beliefs about 
their sexual behavior? I think most parents would want to know that. 
Actually, I think most parents think they would have that right now.
  Madam President, it is not my intent to unduly burden school 
districts. Note that my amendment does not tell school districts how 
they are to gain written consent from parents. Some school districts 
will probably simply add a form at the beginning of the year for 
parents to sign, telling them that their children will be involved in 
these kinds of activities at times. Most parents would probably sign 
such a form carte blanche. But for parents who truly want to be 
involved on a daily basis in their child's educational activities, the 
school would need to contact them before this particular activity took 
place.
  The latest social science research shows what many of us have 
believed all along, that the family is the best available institution 
to foster healthy, happy and well-adjusted children. These children are 
best able and most likely to excel in every area of life, including 
school. True education reform must foster the family as the most basic 
unit of our society. In fostering the family, children will learn and 
become fruitful citizens. When schools are acting behind the backs of 
parents to influence the values, attitudes, beliefs, or sexual behavior 
of their children, that does not foster the family. And that would be 
true even if there is no ill intent. And I do not know that there is 
any ill intent on the part of schools to do that.
  So I urge my colleagues to join me in providing this needed 
information for parents and families. I have received additional 
letters from parents in Arkansas, Georgia, Indiana, my home State of 
Iowa, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, 
Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Virginia and Washington, who have had 
activities of this nature take place without their knowledge or 
consent.
  I thought I would go into just one survey that was being given in my 
State, just to point out some of the things that parents might have 
some concern about. I am not going to go through all the questions.
  There were questions like:

       Do you regard yourself as a bigot?
       Do you think homosexuality is a problem society must deal 
     with as strictly as possible?
       Do you think people are born homosexual or do you think 
     they choose to be homosexual?
       Do you think the United States was stolen from Native 
     Americans or do you think that it was rightfully colonized by 
     Europeans?
       Have you ever rolled up your car windows in a predominantly 
     minority neighborhood?
       Have you ever rolled up your windows in a predominantly 
     poor white neighborhood?
       How would you feel about having a minority as a physician?

  Then it lists a whole bunch of nationalities and religions: Irish-
Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Italian-Americans, African-Americans, 
Eastern-Indian-Americans, British-Americans, French-Americans, Polish-
Americans, German-Americans, Eastern-European-Americans, Nordic-
Americans, Japanese-Americans, Vietnamese-Americans, native Americans, 
Middle-Eastern-Americans, Jews, Catholics, Protestants, and then, last, 
``Others--Please specify.''
  Then it asks a whole series of questions where you are supposed to 
put down the number from these nationalities or religious groups.
  I wonder what the purpose of this questionnaire is in a school 
system? You know, the American school system is the greatest 
institution of the democratization of American society that exists. It 
is even more basic than our churches. That should not be, but there is 
more democratization of American society that goes on in the schools 
than even in the churches of America.
  So schools ought to be pulling American society together, not leading 
to the Balkanization of American society. It seems to me the questions 
I am going to read emphasizing whether you are an Irish-American, a 
Hispanic-American, an Italian-American, an African-American, or whether 
you are a Jew or a Catholic do not send the right signals to our 
schoolchildren. The questions are:

       Which of the above--

  Meaning all these divisions of American society based on 
nationalities and religion--

       Which of the above do you think is responsible for the 
     decline of the U.S. economy?

  When are we in the business, Madam President, of making a case that a 
particular subdivision of America is responsible for the economic 
decline or for a depression?

       Which of the above do you think is more susceptible to 
     alcoholism?

  When I was in school, there was not a teacher who tried to lead me to 
believe that one division of America, based on nationality or religion, 
was more prone to alcoholism than another one. Is that the sort of 
signal we are supposed to be sending through our educational system, 
that we ought to look for certain nationalities that might be more 
prone to alcoholism than others?

       Which of the above do you think is the most likely to raise 
     a large family?

  Is that geared toward Catholics, maybe? Is there something bad about 
Catholicism? Or is that geared toward Italians? Or would that be geared 
toward African-Americans? Is that not a nice attitude to put in the 
minds of our young people? Is that going to bring America together, or 
is that going to tear America apart?

       Which of the above do you think is most subject to 
     suspicion of criminal activity?

  I will let you guess what that is geared toward.

       Which of the above are you most likely to assume does not 
     speak fluent English?
       Which of the above do you think is most likely to have any 
     connection to organized crime?

  Think about that one. We all know where that one is geared.

       Which of the above do you think is most likely to have 
     incomes over $50,000?

  I do not know whether that necessarily implies hatred or not.

       Which of the above do you think would be most likely to 
     eliminate an entire race?

  Here we have kids in school being asked to think in terms of what 
division of America--Irish-American, Hispanic-American, Italian-
American, African-American, Eastern-Indian-American, British-American, 
French-American, Polish-American, German-American, Eastern-European-
American, Nordic-American, Japanese-American, Vietnamese-American, 
native American, Middle-Eastern-American, Jews, Catholics, or 
Protestants--would want to eliminate an entire race.
  Do I raise any questions about the school being able to test this way 
if they want to? No. Under my amendment, the school can test this way 
if they want to. All I say as a parent, Madam President, is you have a 
right to know that the school is asking these questions of your child. 
If you do not want to know that, then you do not have enough concern 
about your kids and you do not have to exercise your rights.
  Then the questionnaire goes on to ask:

       Who has most influenced the way you feel about other races? 
     With whose influence have you most strongly disagreed?

  Here is a question:

       If you could eliminate an entire race, would you?

  Do we want our kids to think in terms of the possibility of 
eliminating an entire race, to indicate that it is a good thing to be 
doing? What I would want to teach in my school is that it was wrong, 
absolutely wrong, for a guy like Adolf Hitler to do what he did to the 
Jewish population of Europe. No question about it.
  If we are concerned about racism in our schools, do you want our kids 
to think about the elimination of an entire race? We want to teach 
people to get along with each other. I hope it is not constitutionally 
impermissible to say that it is wrong not to love a person that is a 
little bit different than you. Agape love, meaning that you have an 
intense interest in the well-being of your fellow man or woman. That is 
what we should be teaching in school.
  We had an amendment before us earlier today about violence in 
schools. We are going to adopt an amendment, I believe, that will say 
that there cannot be any Federal rule or regulation that keeps a 
teacher from protecting himself or herself from criminal activity that 
might be going on in a school.
  If we start using our schools to bring people together as opposed to 
emphasizing the things that this questionnaire emphasizes, we might not 
have the problems of criminal activity in our schools. We in America 
have to pull together, cooperate, work together, love each other, and 
be tolerant toward each other.
  Then it goes on to ask after the question, ``If you could eliminate 
an entire race, would you? If yes, which one?''
  Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the entire survey be 
printed in the Record, along with a letter from the mother who sent it 
to me.
  There being no objection, the survey was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                                 January 31, 1994.
       Dear Senator Grassley: I have been asked to submit a letter 
     stating my experience with the Assessment Test given in the 
     Bettendorf Schools.
       In the school year of 1991-1992 my sophomore son was 
     administered the test in his Social Studies class. as I 
     understand it, the test was not always administered in any 
     one certain class. My son informed me that he only chose a 
     certain few questions to answer. After reviewing the 
     questions on the test and becoming totally upset about the 
     kind of questions being asked of our youth I would have 
     definitely requested that my son not partake in the test 
     taking process had I known this was to be given. In the 
     future I will request my children going through the system be 
     excluded from this testing.
           Sincerely,
                                            Mrs. Susan Gruenhagen.
                                  ____


                           Bettendorf Survey

       Note: This poll is entirely anonymous except for your sex 
     and graduation year. Please answer as honestly as you can.
       Are you male or female?
       What year are you?
       Do you regard yourself as a bigot?
       Do you think homosexuality is a problem society must deal 
     with as strictly as possible?
       Do you think people are born homosexual or do you think 
     they choose to be homosexual?
       Do you think everyone who wishes to become a United States 
     citizen should be made to speak a minimal/function amount of 
     the English language?
       Do you think the United States was stolen from native 
     Americans or do you think it was rightfully colonized by 
     Europeans?
       Have you ever rolled up your car windows in a predominantly 
     minority neighborhood?
       Have you ever rolled up your windows in a predominantly 
     poor white neighborhood?
       How would you feel about having a minority as your 
     Physician?
       Nationalities and religions:
       (1) Irish-Americans
       (2) Hispanic-Americans
       (3) Italian-Americans
       (4) African-Americans
       (5) Eastern-Indian-Americans
       (6) British-Americans
       (7) French-Americans
       (8) Polish-Americans
       (9) German-Americans
       (10) Eastern-European-Americans
       (11) Nordic-Americans
       (12) Japanese-Americans
       (13) Viet Namese-Americans
       (14) Native-Americans
       (15) Middle-Eastern-Americans
       (16) Jews
       (17) Catholics
       (18) Protestants
       (19) Other (please name)
       All ``Which of the above'' questions should be answered 
     with the numbers of the nationality or religion:
       Which of the above do you think is responsible for the 
     decline of the U.S.'s economy?
       Which of the above do you think is more susceptible to 
     alcoholism?
       Which of the above do you think is the most likely to raise 
     a large family (8 or more children)?
       Which of the above do you think is most subject to 
     suspicion of criminal activity?
       Which of the above are you most likely to assume does not 
     speak fluent English?
       Which of the above do you think is most likely to have any 
     connection to organized crime?
       Which of the above do you think is the most likely to have 
     an income of over $50,000?
       Which of the above do you think would be most likely to 
     eliminate an entire race?
       Who has most influenced the way you feel about other races?
       With whose influence have you most strongly disagreed?
       If you could eliminate an entire race, would you?
       If yes, which one? (Responses will not be published.)
       Have you ever put someone down because they were of a 
     different religion than you?
       Have you or would you ever physically assault someone 
     because of their sexual preference?
       Would you ever associate with someone of the same sex who 
     was either rumored or a self-declared homosexual?
       Why or why not?
       What do you think about racism in general?
       What do you think about individuals who use violence to 
     support their bigoted beliefs?
       Would someone else regard you as a bigot?


                           amendment no. 1388

 (Purpose: To prohibit the use of certain funds for activities related 
to a student's personal values, attitudes, beliefs, or sexual behavior 
 without certain consent, notification, access to information, and an 
     opportunity for a hearing; to provide for enforcement of such 
prohibition; and to require the Secretary of Education to designate or 
     establish an office and review board within the Department of 
                               Education)

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Madam President, I send my amendment to the desk and 
ask for its immediate consideration. Then I am about to yield the 
floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Iowa [Mr. Grassley], for himself, Mr. 
     Thurmond, Mr. Burns, Mr. Wallop, Mr. Mack, Mr. Nickles, Mr. 
     Faircloth, and Mr. Helms, proposed an amendment numbered 
     1388.

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       At the end of title IV, insert the following:

     SEC.  . PROHIBITION.

       (a) In General.--No funds shall be made available under 
     this Act to any State educational agency, local educational 
     agency, or school--
       (1) that directly or indirectly engages in surveying, 
     analyzing, evaluating, or any other activity relating to, the 
     personal values, attitudes, beliefs, or sexual behavior of a 
     student without the written consent of--
       (A) in the case of a student who is an adult or an 
     emancipated minor, such student (hereafter in this section 
     referred to as an ``adult student''); or
       (B) in the case of a student who is an unemancipated minor, 
     such student's parent or guardian (hereafter in this section 
     referred to as a ``parent'' or ``guardian'').

     after such adult student, parent, or guardian has been 
     informed of the purpose of such survey, analysis, evaluation 
     or activity;
       (2) unless the parent or guardian is given access to any 
     curriculum, materials, or information regarding activities 
     relevant to the development or assessment of personal values, 
     attitudes, beliefs, or sexual behavior of a student prior to 
     the implementation of such curriculum, use of such materials, 
     or occurrence of such activities;
       (3) that fails to ensure that an adult student, parent or 
     guardian--
       (A) is given written notice of their rights under this 
     section; and
       (B) is provided with an opportunity for a hearing, in 
     accordance with regulations promulgated by the Secretary, to 
     enforce paragraph (1) or (2).
       (b) Enforcement.--The Secretary shall take such action as 
     the Secretary determines appropriate to enforce this section, 
     except that action to terminate assistance provided under 
     this Act shall be taken only if the Secretary determines 
     that--
       (1) there has been a failure to comply with such section; 
     and
       (2) compliance with such section cannot be secured by 
     voluntary means.
       (c) Office and Review Board.--The Secretary shall establish 
     or designate an office and review board within the Department 
     of Education to investigate, process, review, and adjudicate 
     violations of the rights established under this section.

  Mr. GRASSLEY. I ask unanimous consent to put the additional letters 
in support of my amendment in the Record and then I would like to yield 
the floor.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                  Davenport, IA, January 26, 1994.
     Hon. Charles Grassley,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Grassley: Thank you so much for your efforts 
     to guide the education system in our country in a direction 
     that will benefit our children. I have become increasingly 
     concerned as I see the results of ``Goals 2000'' and outcome-
     based education come home each day in my childrens' 
     backpacks.
       The attached ``Passive Child Abuse'' listing was, in fact, 
     distributed and discussed in my daughter's seventh grade 
     Health class last spring (1993). She attends Walcott Junior 
     High School, which is in the Davenport Community School 
     District, Davenport, Iowa. The students were instructed to 
     leave the copies on their desks when they left the room at 
     the end of class. My daughter is aware of my concerns and 
     chose to bring her copy home to me instead.
       Needless to say, I was shocked and quite upset at the 
     message being sent to our children through this lesson. As 
     you read through the list, you can see that virtually every 
     parent has violated at least one of these criteria! I see 
     that as a clear attempt to dissolve parent rights and usurp 
     parental authority in the child's mind. The fact that this 
     was presented ``in secret'' from the parent only adds to the 
     suspicious being raised in the child's mind.
       I see this as psychological testing (for responses) and 
     treatment of my daughter. Since this was completed without 
     prior informed written consent by my husband or myself, I 
     feel our own rights have been violated.
       Please be diligent in your efforts to insure that parents 
     and families are protected from this breach of our rights as 
     you debate ``Goals 2000''. I appreciate your thoughtful 
     consideration.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Rita S. Petersen.
       Enclosures.

                                                 January 26, 1994.
     Hon. Charles Grassley,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Grassley: I am glad that you have taken this 
     position regarding education. Before I start, I will tell you 
     about myself. I am thirteen years old and I am in eighth 
     grade at Walcott Jr. High. My school is in the Davenport 
     School District, Iowa.
       I was the student that obtained this sheet titled ``Passive 
     Child Abuse''. I took it out of my seventh grade health class 
     last year. There was class discussion about the list. We were 
     instructed not to take it out of the classroom, but, I 
     through that it was probably not something we should be 
     looking at in a health class.
       This isn't the only example of psychological testing and 
     attitude-changing. In the same health class, we took a 
     questionnaire twice (once at the beginning of the course, 
     once at the end of the course). Our teacher said it was to 
     see if our attitudes had changed over the length of the 
     course. Though we did not put our name on it, we wrote on it 
     our age, gender, race, parental status, etc. It had multiple 
     choice questions like ``Do you often feel depressed?'', 
     ``What would you do if a friend was contemplating suicide?'', 
     ``How do you feel about your current weight?'', and, ``How do 
     you feel about yourself now?''
       Also, all of a sudden our schools can't have anything to do 
     with religion. In our Spanish and chorus class, we can't sing 
     Christmas songs. We can't go caroling to different classes in 
     our school because, as we were told, caroling is a Catholic 
     tradition. My American studies teacher says that Puritans 
     were ``always constipated trying to think their high, good 
     thoughts.'' They are trying to change our attitudes about 
     religion.
       I am editor of my school paper, and in the last issue I 
     wrote an editorial about how I was against a grade 
     restructuring plan that was approved by our school board. My 
     principal called me into his office and intimidated me. He 
     tried to tell me that all of my opinions were wrong. Even 
     through all of the facts I used in my editorial were true and 
     well checked, he told me those were wrong, too. One of the 
     facts was told to me and my class by a teacher and he still 
     insisted it was wrong. I think it is wrong for a principal to 
     intimidate a student and tell the student her opinions are 
     wrong.
       I think it is wrong that they are trying to change and 
     monitor our attitudes. I want to go to school to learn facts 
     and not learn what opinions my school administration wants me 
     to know. I want to form my own opinions. I urge Congress to 
     help make sure kids can form their own opinions.
           Sincerely,
                                                Michelle Petersen.
                                  ____


                          Passive Child Abuse*

       There are many ways to abuse children other than actively 
     hitting, pushing, pinching, and name-calling them. The 
     following is a list of ways in which children may be 
     passively abused.
       1. Allowing children to stay up late watching TV on school 
     nights.
       2. Failure to have children's glasses fixed or teeth 
     repaired.
       3. Failure to have a will made or to designate a guardian 
     for your children.
       4. Staying with a partner who is an active and abusive 
     alcohol or drug user.
       5. Dating or living with someone who hates and is abusive 
     to children.
       6. Driving too fast, carelessly, or under the influence of 
     alcohol or drugs.
       7. Not fastening children into automobile child restraints, 
     seat belts, and shoulder harnesses when driving.
       8. Abusing alcohol or drugs or selling illegal drugs.
       9. Being very critical or mute and talking against him or 
     her to children.
       10. Neglecting to fill out or sign children's school forms.
       11. Having do idea who your children's friends are or where 
     your children hang out.
       12. Sending children to school when ill or letting them 
     fake illness to avoid school.
       13. Not providing clean clothes and a clean home.
       14. Not having children immunized.
       15. Never following through on punishments given to 
     children.
       16. Letting children stay overnight at a friend's home 
     without talking to the parents.
       17. Bringing one partner after another into your life.
       18. Never doing anything alone with your children.
       19. Working so much that there is not time to spend with 
     children.
       20. Promising to do something with your children and then 
     canceling out because you have lost interest.
       21. Treating yourself to new things but expecting children 
     to make do with what they have.
       22. Refusing to allow children to participate in outside 
     activities because it's inconvenient.
       23. Allowing children to watch adult (sex and violence) 
     movies.
       24. Smoking cigarettes.
       25. Never taking children's side against a teacher or 
     always taking children's side against a teacher.
       26. Never attending parent-teacher conferences or other 
     school activities.
       27. Making children late to school by not getting up in the 
     morning.
       28. Having extremely high or low expectations of children.
       29. Allowing your children to skip school because you want 
     their company or because you do not feel like getting them 
     dressed.
       *Adapted from ``Are You A (Passive) Child Abuser?'' an 
     article in the April 29, 1991 Quad-City Times by Doris Wild 
     Helmering of the Scripps Howard News Service.
                                  ____

                                                 January 25, 1994.
       During the first semester of my daughter's eighth grade 
     year she was asked to fill out a series of questions for her 
     Career Orientation Class. She brought these papers home and 
     upon reviewing them, we found questions which were an 
     invasion of her privacy. We wrote her teacher relating our 
     concerns and informing her that our daughter would not be 
     filling this out. The teacher had told the students they 
     would not be graded but she wrote us that she would have to 
     adjust my daughter's grade if she didn't fill it out. This to 
     me constitutes grading. The papers to be filled out were 
     ``Self Awareness'', ``Identifying Values'' and ``Occupational 
     Exercise.'' This happened last year 1993.
                                                 Rebecca Garrison,
                                                         Arkansas.
                                  ____


                  Activity 2-1 Identifying Your Values

       The purpose of this activity is to help you identify and 
     rate the importance of your values so that you can select a 
     career goal that matches well with your values.
       As you know from reading Chapter 2, values are those things 
     that you feel are important in your life. You need to know 
     what your values are when it comes time to select a long-
     range career goal. Otherwise, you might choose a career that 
     conflicts with your values.
       Below and on the next few pages are one hundred statements 
     that deal with the ten values discussed in Chapter 2. Read 
     each statement carefully. Then rate the statement as it 
     applies to you.


                           Values Statements

       1. I have a physical checkup every year.
       2. I will take my children to church services regularly.
       3. I enjoy attending musical concerts.
       4. It is important to me to have a lot of friends.
       5. I donate to charities that I feel are worthwhile.
       6. I envy the way movie stars are recognized wherever they 
     go.
       7. I would like to have enough money to retire at fifty.
       8. I would rather spend an evening at home with my family 
     than out with friends.
       9. I enjoy making decisions that involve other people.
       10. If I had the talent, I would like to write songs.
       11. I have a close relationship with at least one of my 
     parents.
       12. I have taught a Sunday school class or have otherwise 
     taken an active part in my church.
       13. I am willing to spend time helping fellow students who 
     are having difficulty with their studies.
       14. Even at the same salary. I would rather be the boss 
     than just another worker.
       15. I have a special appreciation for beautiful things.
       16. If I had the talent, I would like to appear regularly 
     on television.
       17. I would like to counsel people and help them with their 
     problems.
       18. I would enjoy associating with movie stars and other 
     celebrities.
       19. I have a dental checkup at least once a year.
       20. I enjoy writing short stories.
       21. I would rather spend a summer working than going on a 
     paid vacation.
       22. I like to go to parties.
       23. I think it would be fun to write a play for television.
       24. I believe in a Supreme Being.
       25. I would rather be an officer than just a club member.
       26. I would rather spend my last $100 for needed dental 
     work than for a vacation at my favorite resort.
       27. I enjoy giving presents to members of my family.
       28. If I were a teacher, I would rather teach poetry than 
     math.
       29. I often have daydreams about things that I would like 
     to do if I had the money.
       30. I enjoy giving parties.
       31. I am willing to write letters for old or sick people.
       32. It would be very satisfying to receive a lot of 
     publicity for acting in movies or television.
       33. When I feel ill, I usually call a doctor.
       34. I believe that it is important to support a church by 
     giving time and/or money.
       35. I enjoy taking part in discussions at the family dinner 
     table.
       36. I enjoy visiting art museums.
       37. I like to write poetry.
       38. I like to be around other people most of the time.
       39. I like to be the one who decides what we will do or 
     where we will go when I'm out with friends.
       40. Someday I would like to live in a large, expensive 
     house.
       41. Each day I try to set aside some time for worship.
       42. If I knew a family that had no food for Christmas 
     dinner, I would try to provide it.
       43. I like to spend holidays with my family.
       44. I like to see my name in print (in the newspaper).
       45. I would rather take a class in freehand drawing than a 
     class in math.
       46. I do not like to spend an entire evening alone.
       47. If the salary were the same, I would rather be a school 
     principal than a classroom teacher.
       48. I have expensive tastes.
       49. I can tell the difference between a really fine 
     painting or drawing and an ordinary one.
       50. If I had regular headaches, I would consult a doctor 
     even if aspirin seemed to lessen the pain.
       51. I have several very close friends.
       52. I expect to provide music lessons for my children.
       53. It is important to me that grace be said before meals.
       54. I sometimes miss sleep to visit late with company.
       55. I usually get at least eight hours of sleep each night.
       56. I like to design things.
       57. I would rather be well-known throughout the country 
     than highly respected by my co-workers.
       58. I would get a sense of satisfaction from nursing a sick 
     person back to health.
       59. I care what my parents think about the things I do.
       60. I daydream about making a lot of money.
       61. I like to be the chairperson at meetings.
       62. It is thrilling to come up with an original idea and 
     put it to use.
       63. I believe there is life after death.
       64. If someone is hard to get along with, I try to be 
     understanding.
       65. If I were in the television field, I would rather be a 
     celebrated actor than a scriptwriter.
       66. I enjoy decorating my room at home.
       67. I enjoy a picnic with my family.
       68. As an adult, I want to earn a much higher salary than 
     the average worker.
       69. I am careful to have a balanced diet each day.
       70. I often influence other students concerning the classes 
     they enroll in.
       71. I would like to be written up in Who's Who.
       72. I read the Bible or other religious writings regularly.
       73. If I were in the clothing industry, I would enjoy 
     creating new styles.
       74. I look forward to an evening out with a group of 
     friends.
       75. When I am with a group of people, I like to be the one 
     in charge.
       76. I dislike being financially dependent on others.
       77. When a friend is in trouble, I feel I must comfort him 
     or her.
       78. I love my parents.
       79. I almost never skip meals.
       80. I have a collection of phonograph records.
       81. I have a particular friend with whom I discuss 
     problems.
       82. I am interested in and respect others' religious 
     beliefs.
       83. I enjoy buying clothes for members of my family.
       84. I would enjoy having people recognize me wherever I go.
       85. I like planning activities for others.
       86. I do not smoke.
       87. I feel good when I do things that help others.
       88. Someday I would like to write a novel.
       89. I would put up with undesirable living conditions in 
     order to work at a job that paid extremely well.
       90. I belong to several clubs and organizations.
       91. I believe in the power of prayer and 
     meditation.
       92. I would enjoy having my picture in the school yearbook 
     more than it has been in the past.
       93. I often organize group activities.
       94. When I see a newly constructed building, I consider its 
     beauty as much as its practical use.
       95. I respect my father and mother.
       96. I like to design or make things that have not been made 
     before.
       97. Some of the hobbies I would like to have are quite 
     expensive.
       98. I enjoy classical music.
       99. I would never use potentially harmful drugs because of 
     what they might do to my body.
       100. I am kind to animals.

       This unit on cartooning was introduced by the `Search' 
     teacher to the 8th grade talent-proof at Bartlett Middle 
     School in October of 1992.
       Upon our conference Diane Saturday showed me the Benchmark 
     Orientation and Fall Testing guide. She used page 12, 
     comprehension section-line on stereotypes and bias as the 
     basis for the cartooning segment.
       The cartoons were duplicated, handed out and discussed and 
     taken back up. My daughter was the only child to keep a copy. 
     (She asked permission.) Because of our strong stand on one of 
     the issues and our family discussions she knew we would be 
     interested.
       Let me emphasize this is 8th grade and I question the 
     material because of its bias, (pg 30, 31, 32, 33) age 
     appropriate level and because of its very detailed discussion 
     questions. Who would lead the discussion, control the 
     discussion or dominate their opinions during it. I consider 
     this an attempt to undermine the values of our religious 
     faith and that more personally, of our family.
       I especially concentrated my disapproval of the `Memo to 
     the Apostle Paul.' My Bible is sacred and I consider the 
     authors men of God.
       The booklet was purchased and ordered by the teacher with 
     funds the county made available to her.
           Concerned parent.
                                      Sarah M. Middleton, Georgia.
                                  ____


             Dilemma Debate No. 15: The Nature of Prejudice

       In the last problem we observed that prejudice and 
     discrimination usually go hand-in-hand. But they can occur 
     independently of each other. For example, a person may retain 
     his or her belief that all Spanish-speaking people are drug 
     dealers. If, in spite of this belief, that person lets 
     Spanish-speaking people move into his or her neighborhood 
     without interference, s/he is displaying prejudice without 
     discrimination. Any effort to block them from moving into the 
     neighborhood would be prejudice with discrimination. On the 
     other hand, a person may think that his/her neighbors are 
     ridiculous for believing such slanderous things about 
     Spanish-speaking people. Because one does not, however, want 
     the neighbors as enemies, s/he freely signs a petition to 
     keep them out of the neighborhood. This is discrimination 
     without prejudice.
       In general, prejudice and discrimination are mutually 
     reinforcing. Most prejudices among people are acted on either 
     personally or institutionally--they are put into the 
     religious, educational, or legal system of the society. This 
     result is discrimination. Today, most forms of discrimination 
     have been legally abolished, but because many people have 
     deep-seated prejudices, they have discovered ways to avoid 
     full compliance with the law and thus, discrimination still 
     flourishes among us.


                                cartoons

       In the first cartoon, a man (Senator Jesse Helms of North 
     Carolina) demonstrates the inconsistencies which can arise 
     because of conflicting prejudices. In the struggle over the 
     issues of abortion and welfare, the result of his strident 
     opposition to welfare and to abortion is contradictory for 
     the unborn children. He is concerned to protect the right to 
     life of the unborn child but will not do anything to help 
     ensure the fetus is healthy, is properly cared for, or has 
     adequate nourishment. Is there prejudice toward women in this 
     position? what should we do as a nation which professes the 
     highest degree of morality about women's rights?
       In the second cartoon, we bumped head-on into two major 
     fallacies in our reasoning processes, inconsistency (self-
     contradiction) and name calling (attacking the person rather 
     than the argument). Are the attitudes expressed in this 
     cartoon consistent with Christian ethics? Do they show 
     prejudice? What we seem to need is a method for retaining our 
     consistency in argumentation and a way of keeping our 
     emotions in check as the debates begin to heat up.


                                activity

       When we focus on equal rights for women, two major issues 
     often come to the top of our thinking: abortion and salary 
     discrimination. Using problem-solving strategies outlined in 
     Section One of this book, choose one of these issues, divide 
     the class into research teams, and seek a solution to these 
     problems. As you reach your final solutions and bring into 
     the class of discussion, refer to the section in this book 
     entitled ``Planning For Classroom Discussion.'' Following the 
     steps and idea provided for you in these sections will help 
     you avoid fallacious arguments and discover more useful and 
     acceptable solutions.
       When you have finished with this activity, answer the 
     following questions.
       1. In your research, did you carefully seek out factual 
     information from your ``doctor'' the facts to suit your 
     preconceived purposes?
       2. While debating with other members of the class, did you 
     keep emotions in check? That is, did you avoid name calling, 
     screaming and the like?
       3. Did you follow the problem-solving method outlined in 
     Section * * * of this book? Did you document each step along 
     the way? Did * * * for you?
       4. Was the class solution a compromise of differing 
     positions or did the group dominate? Explain your answer to 
     this question.
       5. Were you personally satisfied with the solution agreed 
     upon by the class? If not, what changes would you make in it?


                   mind builder who should be spared?

       The purpose of this exercise is to have students think 
     about the values and beliefs about what is desirable for a 
     person to do and be in American society.
       Ten people are trapped on the top of a skyscraper which is 
     on fire. There is only one possible escape route: a small 
     tunnel leading to safety. Only one person at a time can enter 
     the tunnel and crawl to safety. Not very much time is left 
     for the group to escape.
       The task of the students is to arrange the people below in 
     the order they would have them escape. Remember that at any 
     time the escape route may be closed.
       Let the students work individually on the problem. Have 
     them carefully and systematically record their thoughts about 
     why they lined the people up as they did.
       Arrange the students in groups to discuss their solution 
     and the reasons for their choices.
       Are some people consistently at the front of the line and 
     others at the end of the line?
       Discuss what might be the reasons for this.
       What does this tell us about status and prestige in 
     American society?
       What, if any, were the assumptions made about these people?
       People on Top of the Skyscraper: Television preacher, Small 
     child, Businessman, Policeman, Famous poet, Pregnant female, 
     Congressman, Professional athlete, Engineer, Medical doctor.
                                  ____



                                               Huntington, IN,

                                                 January 24, 1994.
       Dear Senator Grassley: I'm pleased to hear of your concern 
     for our children. Please find attached an in class assignment 
     for home room for my sixth grade middle school daughter. 
     There have been many others similar to this that the teacher 
     keeps in her possession. All involving feelings and emotions. 
     It seems that the schools through curricula have appointed 
     themselves as surrogate parents for all children because of a 
     lack of parental concern by a few irresponsible parents.
       Teachers have no business being involved in the intentional 
     formation of my child's emotions, feelings and values.
       Teachers have no business conditioning my child's emotions 
     and feelings.
       Teachers have no business attempting to talk to my child in 
     a parent like manner in which trusting parent like bonds 
     would be encouraged and nurtured.
       This child was placed in my trust and I will protect my 
     child from any threat to covertly transfer that trust to any 
     other. So help me God!
       Teachers are to be academic educators. Not parents. Not 
     psychological conditioners. Not values evaluators. Not 
     emotion guides.
       Please help protect our children from the New World Order.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Steven L. Bailey.
                                  ____


                               This Is Me

       1. I am happiest when?
       2. I get angry when?
       3. I am frightened by?
       4. I feel love when?
       5. I feel sad about?
       6. I get excited when?
       7. I am bored when I?
       8. I am most proud of?
       9. I get satisfaction out of?
       10. I put trust in?
       11. I get ``hung up'' over?
       12. I feel safe when?
       13. I feel peaceful when?
       14. I feel hurt when?
       15. Things that make me happy are?
       16. I am annoyed when?
       17. When I'm by myself I like to?
                                  ____



                                                  Glasgow, KY,

                                                 January 20, 1994.
       Dear Senator Grassley: Your office has requested examples 
     of tests involving values, attitudes, and beliefs given 
     students without parental knowledge.
       Enclosed is a computer lab writing assignment for a two-day 
     class period given by a computer aide to my eighth-grade 
     daughter. She realized the very personal nature of these 
     completions and that her responses were being recorded on her 
     computer file, so she brought the worksheet home to ask me 
     about it. (Please note the margin type which reads 1990 by 
     the Center for Applied Research in Education.)
       I contacted the principal the next morning and asked him to 
     exempt her from the second day of writing on this assignment 
     and erase her first day of responses. I asked that an 
     assignment of a more academic nature be substituted.
       To justify my request, I showed him statements proving 
     sentence completions to be psychological tests which should 
     only be administered by the professional psychologist. I also 
     knew from local newspaper articles that this new middle 
     school is already 90% compliant with KERA (Kentucky Education 
     Reform Act) in computer technology which means there is the 
     potential to store such personal student material as this.
       The principal was cooperative and said since this was not 
     for a grade it could be erased. He was also defensive and 
     said it was not meant as a psychological test nor were her 
     responses being stored on file.
       My daughter found her whole file erased upon getting to 
     class and the teacher ``was really ticked off with me.'' She 
     did touch typing practice that period as did everyone else in 
     her class.
       I also remarked to the principal on the very personal 
     nature of the journal and portfolio entries for the year thus 
     far. After recording each assigned topic, there appears to be 
     a pattern toward eliciting personal data. (See second 
     enclosure.) He responded that students could write best about 
     personal topics as they would be most familiar with 
     themselves. I suggested that academic research which leads a 
     student beyond himself should be the purpose of regular 
     school writing assignments.
       I hope this information will be helpful toward 
     documentation of your amendment to Goals 2000. Please let 
     your fellow senators know that Kentucky students are being 
     dumbed down by current mandated state education reform which 
     is a mini-version of the national reform proposed.
       The financially-backed cheerleading which has accompanied 
     the implementation of KERA has suppressed voices of 
     opposition from students, parents, and teachers. We need help 
     in Kentucky to uncover the truth about KERA and to make it 
     known. Please don't let our hands be further tied with the 
     passage of Goals 2000. America may never recover if we give 
     up our children's rights and minds.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Martha Hodum.
                                  ____


          [Grade 8, Glasgow, Ky Middle School, Dec. 14, 1993]

                           I'll Never Forget

       Part One--Getting in Touch: When something happens that 
     makes you have strong feelings, you probably remember that 
     event for a long time--perhaps forever! This activity will 
     help you recall some of these times, even if you think you've 
     forgotten them.
       All you have to do is fill in the blanks in the sentences 
     below: You'll be surprised at how much you'll begin to 
     remember.
       1. I'll never forget the first time I
       2. I remember how angry I was when my father
       3. No one knew that I cried when
       4. I was so surprised when my friend
       5. Once, when I was alone in my house, I
       6. I was so ashamed when
       7. I was really scared when
       8. My happiest day of the past year was when
       9. I'll never tell anyone about the time
       Part Two: Choose one of the events in the list above and 
     write about it in your journal. Use lots of details as to 
     where it happened, who was there, how they looked, what was 
     said, how you felt, etc. The more details you use, the more 
     you will remember.
       Journal and Portfolio Assigned Topics:
       8-93--Things I Fear Most. My Most Memorable Experience.
       9-28-93--I Get Angry When . . . Makes Me Sad . . . Makes Me 
     Happy.
       If I knew I had only one day to live, I would . . .
       A Major Decision You've Dealt With in Your Life.
       10-18-93--A person who made an impression on me. My Idea of 
     a Perfect Person.
       10-25-93--I knew I wasn't supposed to, but . . .
       10-26-93--Teacher instructions: ``An opinion is a belief 
     that you hold about something. Example--Cheating is 
     dishonest.'' Write an opinion of your own. Give 3-5 reasons 
     for holding this belief.
       (Parent Note--from Webster's Dictionary--``Cheating is the 
     act of fraudulently deceiving; an intentional active 
     distortion of the truth.'' The teacher did not give an 
     example of an opinion. Cheating is dishonest by definition.
       A Long Period with No Journal Writing.
       12-13-93--A Christmas Memory.
       Social Studies Portfolio Assignment:
       10-93--You go back in time in an H.G. Wells machine. Write 
     what would be different today if an historical event had 
     turned out differently. This should be done in first person 
     as if you changed history.
       (Parent Note--My child chose to write on George 
     Washington's divine protection during the French and Indian 
     Battles and what our country would have missed if Washington 
     had not been protected. The teacher instructed that this 
     should be written in first person as if ``she'' killed 
     Washington. *``Imagine telling a child to kill someone (even 
     in a story) when the child is trying to lift him up as a 
     hero,'' I commented to the principal. He does not comment.
       Math Portfolio Explanation:
       Teacher: You must record use of a tool such as calculator, 
     charts, or graphs used to help solve the problem.
       The problem does not have to obtain the correct answer to 
     score well but must show good documentation.
                                  ____

                                                     Mt. Airy, MD.
       As of September, 1992 my first wife and I had been 
     separated for two years. We have two sons, ages 6 and 9, at 
     New Market Elementary School. Without my prior knowledge or 
     approval the school included my youngest son in a discussion 
     group for children of broken homes.
       The purpose of the group was to allow the children to 
     discuss their problems, if any, and vent whatever negative 
     feelings they had. I found out about this group one year 
     later when they tried to include my son in the next session--
     when he got into 2nd grade. I spoke with the individual in 
     charge of this program. I told her my son would not attend 
     and that neither me nor his teachers felt he had any 
     problems. Both my sons do very well in school--all A's and 
     B's, they work hard and are well liked by their classmates 
     and teachers.
       I have no idea how my son was chosen for this group nor do 
     I know why I wasn't advised prior to the first session.
                                                 Richard H. Allen.
                                  ____

                                       Maryland, January 28, 1994.
     Hon. Charles Grassley,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Grassley: This is the sixth year my children 
     have been in Maryland's public schools. In that time, I have 
     often been disappointed in some of the teaching methods and 
     materials used. Some have taught or encouraged attitudes and 
     ideas for real-life problemsolving which conflict with what I 
     have taught at home. This undermines the parent/child 
     relationship in our home, as values and attitudes have been 
     taught without my knowledge and certainly without my consent, 
     and I have witnessed the despair, sadness and confusion that 
     some of the teaching has put in my children's minds.
       At times I only became aware of what was being taught by 
     listening to my child express concern and by questioning my 
     child or the teachers. Information was not given to me in 
     advance concerning the nature of the lessons. I had to 
     aggressively seek information, and have withdrawn my child 
     from certain exercises, sometimes risking that my child would 
     not receive a grade in the subject (science or social 
     studies).
       Enclosed are some examples of programs which I find 
     offensive:
       ``Chase Your Monsters'' from the drug awareness program 
     ``Here's Looking at You 2000:'' My second grade son was 
     taught that monsters greet him at school trying to tear down 
     his opinion of himself and make him feel like a failure. He 
     was to learn how to talk back to those monsters in order to 
     cope with life, so that he would feel good about himself and 
     become successful. My child should not be taught to believe 
     in monsters or any other imaginative creature at all, much 
     less as a strategy for dealing with life. And I, as a parent, 
     was not advised by the school of what my child would be 
     taught to believe.
       ``Galleon:'' I thought this to be social studies. By 
     comments my daughter made concerning the daily ``Galleon'' 
     experiences, I realized that collaborative decision-making, 
     team effort (which encouraged cheating and compromise for the 
     best outcomes of the crew), and critical thinking skills were 
     integral parts of ``Galleon.'' The class had advanced far 
     into the program before I realized my child was being called 
     upon to creatively evaluate the scenarios, which included 
     life and death situations, potential starvation, Fate 
     Bulletins, and other hazards filled with despair and 
     hopelessness. She was also to tell how she would handle some 
     of the situations, causing her to make value judgements based 
     on what she was being taught in the classroom. (Fifth Grade)
       In our elementary school, the guidance counselor has met in 
     group sessions as well as individually with students, without 
     advising the parents. I discovered that she was planning to 
     counsel my first-grade son periodically in a group with three 
     to five other boys. When I questioned her about this, she 
     said she does not tell parents about this because that would 
     be a breech of confidentiality (toward my seven-year-old 
     son). She said she would help them deal with their feelings 
     about themselves. I should be advised prior to any such 
     meetings, and should have the opportunity to refuse the 
     counseling if I disagree with the attitudes taught. 
     Presently, the same guidance counselor is meeting with 
     another student periodically, and refuses to notify the 
     parents, again stating to me that it will breach the 
     confidentiality she has with the student.
       Parents should have the right to know about the values and 
     attitudes which are being taught to their children, as well 
     as the right to decide who will teach beliefs, values, and 
     attitudes to their children. I believe this personally, as a 
     parent and a PTA member who serves on the Legislative 
     Committee of our local PTA unit.
           Sincerely,
                                             Cynthia L. Sharretts.
                                  ____



                                                  Liberty, MO,

                                                 January 24, 1994.
       I am a seventeen-year-old junior in high school. The summer 
     before my freshman year at Liberty, MO, I was chosen to 
     attend a leadership conference sponsored by the school. I 
     arrived at the conference excited. I had heard good things 
     about it from upperclassmen who had attended in previous 
     years. However, the conference that year was very different.
       To start things off, we had a meeting and the leaders 
     introduced themselves. They said they were citizens of the 
     world first and citizens of America second. We were 
     instructed to recite a pledge to the world flag before we 
     said the Pledge of Allegiance. I was disgusted, but decided 
     not to say anything. We were then divided into groups that 
     were to be our ``families'' for the two days. We had a father 
     figure and a mother figure. I did not like that either 
     because I already have a father and mother. During one of the 
     breaks the man running the conference came to talk to me. He 
     had heard that I was a Christian and wanted to know what I 
     believed. I was perplexed because I did not think my faith 
     had anything to do with a school-run function. They put us on 
     a diet that eliminated sugar, salt, meat, and caffeine. That 
     was a little weird, but I did not mind too much. We did not 
     get to bed until late that night and we had to get up very 
     early the next day. Many of us were very tired during the 
     next day.
       The teacher who was my ``father'' had to leave about noon 
     on the second day. He was replaced with the teacher who was 
     the head of the program sponsoring the conference. That 
     afternoon we were brought into the theater that was our big 
     meeting room. Everyone was there except for the teacher who 
     had left. Everyone received a piece of paper and a pencil. 
     The man in charge put a tape on and told everyone to close 
     their eyes. On this day he told us to hypnotize ourselves 
     (the day before the had taught us how this is done), listen 
     to the tape, and do what it said. I sat in my seat, listened 
     to the tape and took notes on what it said. I did not 
     participate. The tape instructed us to pretend we were a 
     stream, a tree stump, and a cabin. It was guided imagery or 
     transcendental meditation. After the tape was over, we were 
     told to write a story about what had happened and how we felt 
     when we were the different objects. We then broke up into our 
     ``families''. I waited until the theater was empty and then 
     went to talk to the teacher in charge. I asked her if I could 
     call home. I wanted my parents to know what was going on 
     before they came that night. She said that she did not know 
     if I could, that she would have to ask the man in charge. 
     When he heard what I wanted to do, he started asking why. I 
     answered him repeatedly that I only wanted to talk with my 
     mother. This man and the teacher were not satisfied with that 
     answer. They harassed me so much I started to cry. After that 
     they relented. When I told my mother what had happened, she 
     was upset because I was at a school sponsored function and 
     the people in charge did not want me to talk to my parents. 
     After I spoke to my mother, the teacher asked to speak to 
     her. The teacher told my mother that everything we had done 
     in the two days would be explained to the parents when they 
     came for the ending program. That night nothing was said 
     about transcendental meditation or anything else that had 
     happened.
       My parents rights were ignored as were mine. I was very 
     offended with what happened at this conference. A teacher of 
     the district got away with the harassment of a student 
     because nothing was ever done about it despite repeated 
     letters from my parents to the superintendent and the school 
     board trying to get them to address the issue.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Rebekah Anderson.
                                  ____



                                                  Liberty, MO,

                                                 January 23, 1994.
       My children are in first and third grade at Manor Hill 
     Elementary in Liberty, Missouri. When my oldest son started 
     kindergarten, I became very involved at the school. I worked 
     in his classroom every week, served on PTA, and read every 
     paper that came home. I have continued this involvement over 
     the years. Therefore, I was shocked to find out last year 
     that my children were involved in ``counseling club.'' During 
     ``counseling club,'' district counselors come to the 
     classroom on a regular basis. They sit with the children and 
     discuss feelings, issues related to self-esteem, and decision 
     making. This is a regular part of the district's elementary 
     curriculum, but this fact is not included in any of the 
     information that is given parents regarding curriculum. In 
     fact, there has been no effort on the district's part to 
     inform parents about this aspect of their children's 
     education. Most parents have no idea this is happening. 
     Further, I have learned that children can request a visit 
     with the counselor, and be taken out of the class to see the 
     counselor one on one without prior parental consent or 
     knowledge. As a parent, I feel that my child's emotional well 
     being is my responsibility, therefore when the school 
     involves my children on this type of counseling, they have 
     infringed on my rights by assuming a role that I have not 
     authorized.
                                                     Lori Elliott.
                                  ____



                                                   Deming, NM,

                                                 January 20, 1994.
     Re amendment to America 2000.

       Dear Senator Grassley: I was excited to hear about your 
     amendment. I support you completely. I am a divorced mother 
     of two young daughters. Motherhood is my top priority and 
     then my job. I have taken my children to work with me for 
     nine years now and it is not easy, but God put me here to 
     raise them, not anyone else. That leads me to our concern. 
     The Deming Public School system has decided it can counsel 
     our children on any subject without our permission. I have 
     been told personally if they feel my girls need counselling 
     about divorce, they will do it, without contacting me. Or 
     about death or any other subject they see fit. They are even 
     going so far as to counselling a whole classroom. In my 
     daughter's kindergarten class, they are using the horrifying 
     DUSO program, and have been without the parents' permission 
     or even passing the curriculum through the school board.
       It has been an ongoing battle here. I have even shown the 
     school officials some laws the New Mexico State Senate have 
     passed, but they still refuse to listen and continue doing 
     what is desperately wrong. I hope and pray your amendment 
     will help solve this matter.
           Sincerely,
                                                      Becky Allen.
                                  ____

                                     Dayton, OH, January 19, 1994.
     Hon. Charles Grassley,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Grassley: I am deeply concerned with the Goals 
     2000 proposal now up for a vote. Frequently in the public 
     school system my children have been ask and required to 
     submit personal information regarding their beliefs, 
     feelings, attitudes, and values. Having done consider 
     research into the Goals 2000 proposal, it is my belief that 
     these actions on the part of the public schools will 
     escalate.
       Two years ago when my oldest daughter was 13, she was 
     required to fill out a ``Values Questionnaire'' (enclosed) by 
     her Health teacher. The children did not have to put their 
     names on them however, each questionnaire was numbered so 
     that the teacher was aware of how each student had answered. 
     When I contacted the proper officials about what had 
     happened, the only response I received was from the principal 
     who ask me not to tell anyone as we wouldn't want to blacken 
     the eye of the school. I proceeded to contact every parent 
     who had a child in the class to ask them if they were aware 
     of what had taken place. It led to one of the biggest school 
     board meetings in the schools history, however because of my 
     involvement in making the parents aware, I was immediately 
     labeled a troublemaker and accused of belonging to some right 
     wing organization that was attempting to take over the 
     schools. These labels came after 7 years of being in the 
     district and volunteering on committees, PTO, and being a 
     head home room mother for several classes. I have since 
     learned that this is quite common if you protest anything 
     that the system does.
       Due to this incident I decided that I must become deeply 
     involved in what was happening in the classroom with regards 
     to my children. I found that these type of things were 
     happening all over the country and began to keep an account 
     of what was taking place in my system.
       The following year my daughter again received another 
     survey to fill out ``Symptoms of Stress'' (enclosed) that ask 
     her if she became frigid or impotent or had a loss of sex 
     drive when she was under stress. She was 14 years old at the 
     time and had never had a boyfriend.
       During that same year, my daughter was given a journal 
     assignment that ask what I considered very personal 
     information regarding our family and home life. The 
     English teacher told her students (in writing) that these 
     were their journals and that she would not be reading 
     them. I had my daughter write down all of the questions 
     that she was ask that she considered an invasion of 
     privacy along with the date they were posted on the board. 
     At the end of the semester the teacher collected these 
     journals to be graded. I cannot claim that the teacher 
     read through these journals. I do however find it suspect 
     that she felt the need to collect and grade them after she 
     promised the students she would not read them. I have 
     enclosed a list of the questions and the date they were 
     posted on the board for the students to answer.
       Senator, that same year my twins (age 9) entered the second 
     grade of school in this same system. A mandatory guidance 
     program was started. A guidance counselor come to each 
     classroom on a regular basis to discuss their feelings. I 
     obtained a copy of the curriculum from the district so that I 
     would be aware of what this program entailed. The curriculum 
     guide stated that they would be discussing their attitudes 
     and beliefs. It also stated that they would be using 
     experimentation in this program and keeping files on the 
     children. I applied in writing to have my children excused 
     from this program, and my request was granted. However, 
     unless I came up to the school during that period and 
     physically removed my children from the classroom they were 
     made to sit in the office. The school would not allow them to 
     go to the library or participate in an extra art or phys. ed. 
     class at that time. I would come up to the school and remove 
     the children and spend 40 minutes reading with them or 
     working on Math. A place was not provided for me to go and 
     often times I had to sit on the front porch of the school 
     with them. I have enclosed some of the papers that were 
     handed out in guidance to be filed out by the children, along 
     with a letter from another parent in the district. Senator, I 
     removed my children from this class because of what the 
     curriculum guide stated was going to take place. I did not 
     send my children to school for counseling, but for a factual 
     academic education. In October of this year, my husband and I 
     made the decision to pull our twins from the public school 
     system because of the emphasis being put on ``affective 
     education'' rather than academics. It was one of the toughest 
     decisions we ever had to make. I am currently Home Schooling 
     our children with the hopes of being able to afford private 
     school in the near future.
       Senator in closing, I would like to state that I do not 
     live in a ``poor, inner city area'' but supposedly am 
     supporting one of the finest schools in the State with my tax 
     dollars. Three months ago when I pulled my twins from the 
     system my son could hardly read and could not subtract. In 
     the past three months with Home Education, he is reading on 
     grade level and this past week competed three 200 page books. 
     Both of my twins have gone from barely understanding 
     subtracting to comprehending that along with multiplication, 
     division with remainders, and small equations. I am not a 
     certified teacher. I am aware however that being smart 
     ``feels good'' to these children.
       I am deeply concerned that the Goals 2000 proposal will 
     only further invade the privacy of families and fail to 
     educate our children. It is time for the public schools to 
     get back to the job of educating our children in the 
     classroom and stop the attempts at coming though my front 
     door.
       Anything you can do to help would be deeply appreciated.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Christy D. Helm.
       Enclosures.

                          Values Questionnaire

       Okay or not okay:
       Sex before marriage.
       Having sex so I will be popular.
       Having sex so I won't be lonely.
       Having sex so I won't be unhappy.
       Having sex because ``I got carried away.'' (Lost control.)
       Thinking about sex.
       Having sex because ``everybody's doing it.''
       Waiting to have sex until I'm married.
       Masturbation (touching yourself for sexual pleasure).
       Not having sex because I'm not ready for that yet.
       Having sex because it's ``right for me.''
       Having sex when I am in love.
       Having sex for fun.
       Having sex to repay a favor.
       Bragging about having sex with someone.
       Getting pregnant so my boyfriend knows I really love him.
       Using birth control.
       After completing this exercise, I learned ------.
                                  ____


                           Symptoms of Stress

       It's important to learn to recognize your own signs of 
     stress. If you are experiencing some or any of the symptoms 
     below you should heed the warnings that your body may be 
     giving you. Of course, stress is only one of the possible 
     causes of these symptoms.
       Nervous tic.
       Muscular aches (especially the neck, shoulders, back, or 
     legs).
       Increased appetite or loss of appetite (or overeating or 
     not eating).
       Increased smoking or chain-smoking.
       Inability to sleep or nightmares.
       Increased sweating.
       Stuttering.
       Nausea or stomach pain.
       Grinding teeth.
       Headache, dizziness.
       Low-grade infections.
       Rash or acne (especially on face or back).
       Desire to cry or crying.
       Constipation or diarrhea.
       Frigidity or impotence.
       Loss of sex drive.
       High blood pressure.
       Dry mouth or throat.
       Irritability or bad temper.
       Lethargy or inability to work.
       Cold, clammy, or clenched hands.
       Sudden bursts of energy.
       Finger-tapping, foot-tapping, pencil tapping.
       Depression.
       Fear, panic, or anxiety.
       Hives.
       Coughing.
       Excessive snacking.
       Nagging.
       Fatigue.
       Pacing.
       Frowning, wrinkling forehead.
       Restlessness.
       Unnecessary hand-waving, making wild gestures.
       Other Symptoms:------.
       Given to a 9th grade health class. Students were to fill 
     out and return.
                                  ____


                Journal Questions for 9th Grade English

       09/08/92 Describe your most perfect day
       09/09/92 Looking into the future where can you see yourself 
     in 15 years?
       09/14/92 What remembrance of your past has made a 
     significant change in your life?
       09/16/92 Pick one word that bests describes yourself. How 
     does the word reflect your personality? Would your best 
     friends and your parents pick the same word?
       09/17/92 What makes you happy?
       09/18/92 What does the word family mean to you? Is there 
     such a thing as a typical family? What do you consider your 
     family?
       09/21/92 What was the most embarrassing moment you have 
     ever experienced? How did it make you feel?
       09/30/92 Here's your chance to gripe! What do your parents 
     or parent do that drives you crazy?
       10/02/92 If a physician told you that in one year that you 
     would be dead, what would you want to be remembered for? What 
     would you want your surviving friends and family to say about 
     you?
       10/08/92 You're planning a year long trip to another 
     galaxy. What items would you take with you? If only one 
     person was allowed to travel with you, who would you bring?
       10/09/92 Why do you dress the way you do? Do your friends 
     influence your style?
       10/12/92 Pretend you believe in reincarnation; who were you 
     in a past life? Were you famous? Were you of the same sex? Is 
     your life better now?
       10/15/92 Music has a very therapeutic effect on many 
     people. What kind of music do you listen to? Why do you like 
     it? Is it a sort of therapy for you?
                                  ____

                                 Kittanning, PA, January 26, 1994.
     Hon. Charles E. Grassley,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Grassley: I am very concerned about the 
     increasing invasion of privacy issues that I see in our 
     educational system. I am concerned about interference by some 
     teachers in our parenting and family relationships.
       My wife and I have seven children each three years apart. 
     The oldest just graduated from college and the youngest will 
     start kindergarten this Fall. Over the last fifteen years we 
     have been able to observe differences in educational 
     philosophy in the various age groups. Despite the laws 
     against psychological testing and invading the privacy of 
     students I have seen education turn away from cognitive 
     learning to a strong focus on affective education. I'm told 
     by teachers that affective learning is more successful--they 
     must get the students involved at an emotional level or they 
     will not choose to learn. As a pastor and religious teacher I 
     use affective education and I know that those who choose to 
     view the Bible simply from a cognitive level will not learn 
     to use what they know. The major difference is that people 
     come to me or my church on a voluntary basis and I am free to 
     use the foundations, morals, and values that I believe are 
     true to engage others in affective learning. Public education 
     is different. My child is a captive audience held by an 
     authority figure who is increasingly undermining my values, 
     for example, the concept of parental authority. Allow me to 
     offer several illustrations. Here are two incidents from our 
     local school district during last school year, one from the 
     1992-93 Iowa test, and one from the 1992 Pennsylvania TELLS 
     test.
       1. During the two school weeks of October 12-23, 1992, Miss 
     Smail, 7th grade English teacher in Kittanning--Armstrong 
     School District, gave a series of writing assignments to her 
     class. One of her students was Ryan Schwartz, son of Mr. and 
     Mrs. James Schwartz of RD #2 Box 75A Kittanning, PA 16201. 
     The writing prompts were assigned one day and the essay was 
     to be completed the next day in class. Among the writing 
     prompts were these statements: (1) ``Write about something 
     your parents did to embarrass you or that you did to 
     embarrass your parents.'' (2) ``Write about something weird 
     your parents do that you will probably do some day.'' (3) 
     ``Write about a change that has happened in your family, 
     something that you do now that you didn't do when you were 
     smaller.'' After writing similar essays for nine days the 
     last writing prompt was assigned: ``What don't you like about 
     yourself and why.'' Ryan struggled with what he would write 
     about. However the greatest injustice was about to occur. 
     That Friday in class after these last absurd essays were 
     written, Miss Smail instructed the students to exchange their 
     papers with their classmates and then she had the essays read 
     aloud to the class. I can only wish that I had been there. 
     7th graders, at the most emotionally fragile time of their 
     life, being subjected to the abuse of their teacher and 
     classmates! All this while we are spending huge dollars for 
     programs that we need to ``build the student's self-esteem.'' 
     I wish I could tell you that this teacher was disciplined 
     or better relieved from her responsibilities so that she 
     could pursue something she is more suited for. The sad 
     fact is that these parents felt intimidated and therefore 
     were unwilling to approach the teacher or principal with 
     their concerns for fear their son would be adversely 
     affected. I did communicate this situation to the 
     Superintendent of the school district, but no official 
     action has been taken.
       2. During early October, 1992, Mrs. Brewer, 9th grade 
     English teacher in Ford City-Armstrong School District, gave 
     a writing prompt to her students. One of her students was 
     Kendra Neale, daughter of Rev. and Mrs. James Neale of RD #8 
     Kittanning, PA 16201. The writing prompt was: ``Write an 
     essay about the lie you told your parents.'' Again in this 
     case the teacher was not confronted for fear of retribution.
       3. On October 23, 1992, I went to our elementary school to 
     preview the Iowa Test my son was to receive. This test for 
     fifth grade contained a writing prompt that I did not approve 
     of. I was not permitted to copy the prompt verbatim so I must 
     paraphrase: ``There is something that you would like to do 
     which your parents will not allow. Write an essay explaining 
     how you are going to be able to do this thing.'' I removed my 
     son from this testing and complained to the school 
     administration who said they had no control over the test 
     questions.
       4. My last illustration is a little different, but again 
     points to what I believe is a spirit of rebellion and 
     antagonism being promoted among our students. Pennsylvania 
     puts together an assessment test which they call TELLS and 
     added a ``Health'' section for the Spring 1992 test. Later we 
     would find seven or eight versions for each age group, with 
     variations in the controversial questions, but the edition my 
     fourth grade son was to take contained this question: ``What 
     do you think about our country's laws on marijuana?'' I 
     believe my fourth grader needs to learn what the law is and 
     why it is illegal, rather than asking him for an opinion when 
     he is not mature enough to have an opinion based on the 
     facts.
       I sincerely desire the freedom to guide my children's 
     education and instill values in them without this type of 
     interference. As President Clinton said toward the end of his 
     State of the Union address, ``Government doesn't raise 
     children, parents raise children.''
           Respectfully,
                                         Ronald and Linda Lithgow.
                                  ____


 Today's Families--11th Grade Home Economics Test From November 2, 1992

       Answer the following questions as directed--true or false:
       In order to be part of a family, you have to be related to 
     other people by blood, marriage, or adoption.
       You're not part of a family unless you and the other 
     members live in the same house.
       A couple isn't really a family unless they have children.
       College roommates (two people of the same sex) could be 
     considered a family.
       If a young person is living with his parents and sister but 
     doesn't feel the group shares love, trust; and respect, then 
     according to our definition, he doesn't really have a family.
       A family is a group of people who work together solve 
     problems and who never argue.
       Couples today are spending fewer years having children than 
     couples did in the past because they're having fewer 
     children.
       Today, it's likely that couples will easily have thirty or 
     more years to spend together as a couple after the children 
     leave home.
       The family of the 1890's commonly lived on the farm, 
     producing what it needed to survive. Today's family has moved 
     off the farm and buys most of what it needs to survive.
       One hundred years ago, few women worked outside the home 
     for pay.
       (Source: Jamestown HS, Jamestown, PA.)
                                  ____

                               Harleysville, PA, January 26, 1994.
     Hon. Charles Grassley,
     U.S. Senate Post Office,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Grassley: As parents of three public school 
     children, ages seven, eleven and fourteen, we have learned 
     through personal experiences that there is a strong need for 
     more effective parental rights legislation. Such legislation 
     would serve to protect the integrity of our children's 
     learning environment and also to elevate parent confidence.
       While this sentiment has evolved from many experiences, we 
     would like to specifically relay to you some details 
     regarding a particular counseling program that ignored some 
     very basic parental rights.
       Parents discovered that the federally funded Lincoln Center 
     program was administered to our children long after the fact. 
     In June of 1992, we came across several worksheets used in 
     this program during the 1991-1992 school year. When we 
     discovered the Group Guidance Rules, our son was reluctant to 
     talk to us because of his concern that he was breaking the 
     rules. These rules stated, ``What is said in the group stays 
     in the group.'' and ``I will not talk with anyone outside of 
     my group about what other members have shared.'' This written 
     agreement was signed by our child and the counselor. We also 
     came across a worksheet where the children had to rate their 
     stress on a scale from one through five: The children 
     answered: ``Fear of parents' divorcing. Not getting enough 
     attention, Other family members hurting me, Fighting between 
     parents, Having so little supervision that it is easy to get 
     in trouble, etc.'' The children that circled a five (the 
     highest rating) were asked to raise their hands and tell the 
     class what it was they were stressed about.
       The counselor from this outside agency, Lincoln Center, 
     came into the children's English. Math, Science, Social 
     Studies, and Reading classes to administer this program for 
     the entire North Penn 6th grade student body. Through talking 
     with our child about this outside group guidance program, we 
     discovered that a school counselor had come routinely into 
     his classrooms for the last 3 years.
       It was also discovered at this time, that the Lincoln 
     Center program was funded by federal grant money for Drug-
     Free Schools and Communities Act of 1986 (DFSCA). This 
     Lincoln Center program was approved by the school directors 
     to give ``drug and alcohol services'' for ``at risk students 
     and those returning from treatment.'' Contrary to this formal 
     approval of school directors, it was given to the entire six 
     grade student body. Then, the administrators sent home a 
     letter to parents, by way of the children, describing the 
     program to be ``Curriculum-based Group Guidance'' not ``Drug 
     and Alcohol Services.''
       Points that are worthy of noting are:
       1. The parental notification letter was distributed, by way 
     of students, after the program began without approval from 
     parents. This parent letter is not in accordance with the 
     DFSCA terms (pg. 12, II) that requires all announcements to 
     clearly identify DFSCA programs.
       2. During this program, eleven and twelve year old children 
     signed a contract/agreement with an adult counselor without 
     parents knowledge or permission.
       3. Children were encouraged to have discussions in the 
     group. These discussions invaded the privacy of a family's 
     home life. (When we asked our child what was discussed, he 
     told us about families that were having marital problems.)
       4. It is stated on page five (5) of the DFSCA application, 
     that such programs must ``clearly'' teach our children that 
     drugs and alcohol are illegal. Nowhere within this Lincoln 
     Center program or the counselor's outlined objectives is this 
     stated. (The children received a ``Certificate of Completion 
     for Group Guidance Lessons'', not for ``Saying No to 
     Drugs,'')
       While the personal and legal violations of this program, 
     were many, it has nonetheless been delivered with taxpayers' 
     dollars with impunity. Clearly, stronger and more concise 
     legislation is needed to give parents their right to secure a 
     family's right to privacy, protect children from entrapment, 
     and to safeguard the quality of education curriculum.
           Sincerely,
                                          Gary and Janet L. Volpe.
                                  ____

                                   Tarentum, PA, January 26, 1994.
       Dear Senator Grassley: I am writing in regards to my 
     children and the future of their education in ``Goals 2000''. 
     Thank you so much for what you are trying to do with your 
     amendment.
       There are several things that I am very concerned about. 
     For one, I have great concern as to the lax enforcement of 
     the Hatch amendment. I am sending you a copy of a test done 
     on my child last year without my knowledge. I only was able 
     to find out because my son came home to my wife saying, 
     ``What a strange test I had today.'' My wife then went to the 
     school asking for this test and why it was done. Shouldn't we 
     as parents be able to decide whether our children should be 
     subject to these kinds of questions.
       Another matter of concern that I have is children being 
     told, by the teachers, not to mention various things going on 
     at school. These children are our responsibilities, not the 
     state's or the nation's. We would like to see them brought up 
     to trust and respect us as parents. I realize some children 
     are subjected to parents who don't care and appreciate them, 
     and the option should be there for those children to talk and 
     discuss things with counselors who care. Yet, my children 
     should not be forced to give information about personal 
     feelings.
       I hope you can use some of the information from this letter 
     and the copy of this test. Thanks for what you are doing to 
     support better quality education in the United States.
           Sincerely,
                                                   David M. Smith.

       1. I spend a lot of time daydreaming.
       2. Boys and girls like to play with me.
       3. I like to spend most of my time alone.
       4. I am satisfied with my school work.
       5. I have lots of fun with my mother.
       6. My parents never get angry at me.
       7. I wish I were younger.
       8. I have only a few friends.
       9. I usually quit when my school work is too hard.
       10. I have lots of fun with my father.
       11. I am happy most of the time.
       12. I am never shy.
       13. I have very little trust in myself.
       14. Most boys and girls play games better than I do.
       15. I like being a boy/I like being a girl.
       16. I am doing as well in school as I would like to.
       17. I have lots of fun with both of my parents.
       18. I usually fail when I try to do important things.
       19. I have never taken anything that did not belong to me.
       20. I often feel ashamed of myself.
       21. Boys and girls usually chose me to be the leader.
       22. I usually can take care of myself.
       23. I am a failure at school.
       24. I find it hard to make up my mind and stick to it.
       25. My parents make me feel that I am not good enough.
       26. I never get angry.
       27. I often feel that I am no good at all.
       28. I have many friends about my own age.
       29. Most boys and girls are smarter than I am.
       30. Most boys and girls are better than I am.
       31. My parents dislike me because I am not good enough.
       32. I like everyone I know.
       33. Children pick on me very often.
       34. I like to play with children younger than I am.
       35. I like to be called on by my teacher to answer 
     questions.
       36. I would change many things about myself if I could.
       37. There are many times when I would like to run away from 
     home.
       38. I am as happy as most boys and girls.
       39. I can do things as well as other boys and girls.
       40. I often feel like quitting school.
       41. I worry a lot.
       42. My parents understand how I feel.
       43. When I have something to say, I usually say it.
       44. I never worry about anything.
       45. I am as nice looking as most boys and girls.
       46. Other boys and girls are mean to me.
       47. I know myself very well.
       48. I am doing the best school work that I can.
       49. People can depend on me to keep my promises.
       50. My parents thing I am a failure.
       51. I always tell the truth.
       52. I need more friends.
       53. I always know what to say to people.
       54. My teacher feels that I am not good enough.
       55. My parents love me.
       56. I never do anything wrong.
       57. Most boys and girls are stronger than I am.
       58. I am proud of my school work.
       59. I often get upset at home.
       60. I am never unhappy.
                                  ____

                                   Tarentum, PA, January 26, 1994.
       Dear Senator Grassley: Thank you so much for the amendment 
     you are proposing for ``Goals 2000'' because parent's rights 
     need to be protected.
       I am a mother of three boys, ages 14, 11, and 5. I have 
     lived in my area all of my life and I have never questioned 
     my children's education until last year. I always believed 
     that my children were being properly served by my district, 
     until a question arose from one of my sons. I decided to look 
     into the matter and ask if I could review the curriculum 
     (which was granted). To my dismay, I found questionable 
     material throughout two different courses. One being Guidance 
     and the other being Advisory (Lions Quest). There were 
     several questions pertaining to cigarette smoking, drugs, 
     sex, suicide, and most puzzling of all were questions 
     undermining parental authority.
       After gathering information on the curriculum, I approached 
     the Administration with several questions. (never did I 
     approach them in a threatening manner, but that of a 
     concerned parent.) Through the process of several written 
     letters to the Superintendent, I was told that they would 
     take these courses, even though various information was 
     presented to them as to the harm that this could cause my 
     sons. As a mother, I wonder what ``Goals 2000'' will bring. 
     It seems as if we are losing our rights to our children with 
     the exception of caring for their material needs. I believe 
     that we should have the right to teach our children values, 
     and not have them undermined by questions such as ``Ask 
     students to think about a families rights to privacy vs. 
     society's right to intervene?'' or another example ``Ask 
     students how they feel when they do what they are told, even 
     though they don't want to''. Point out that Holly does this 
     with just about everything, and ask them to imagine how this 
     would feel. Note: Holly tries to commit suicide, in this 
     material.
       I was told that if my children didn't participate, they 
     would not be graded on as favorably. Should my children have 
     to discern what questions they can and cannot answer, so 
     young in life, to protect their own privacy. The ``Hatch 
     Amendment'' was made as a protection for our children. I 
     would like to see it enforced.
       I will enclose several pieces of information that I have 
     compiled, as examples for you. Thank you for what you are 
     trying to do to better our children's education.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Nancy Jean Smith.
                                  ____

                                       Tarentum, PA, May 18, 1993.
     Highlands School District,
     Natrona Heights, PA.
       Dear Dr. Baldassare: We are writing in regards to the 
     matter of our sons taking the Advisory and Guidance courses. 
     We have discussed this with various administrators throughout 
     the district. As you know, we feel that both of these courses 
     could be harmful to our children, and we would like to have 
     our children opted out completely.
       From information we have obtained the whole non-
     judgemental, non-directive approach has been proven to be 
     ineffective. We are not against drug education in the 
     directive form, but these classes are clearly non-directive 
     in every subject matter including suicide. Since when is it 
     legally right for a minor to do drugs, drink alcohol, smoke 
     cigarettes or commit sucide? Our laws cleary state that these 
     practices are illegal; thus, we would like our children to be 
     directed in this way.
       Another contention we have with this program is the fact 
     that many of the questions asked are of a personal nature. 
     Even though some of the questions are implied for someone the 
     child knows, a child in 6th grade knows of no other 
     experiences other than his or her own. In our view this is a 
     violation of our rights as parents to consent to any 
     psychological or personal questioning and can be, as a 
     result, in direct violation of the Hatch amendment.
       As we have stated before, we want nothing more then to have 
     our children challenged academically. They are good students 
     in the district and we want them to have a sound and positive 
     education, with this, the things they will learn at home and 
     in school can be applied later on in their lives. We are 
     sorry for any inconvenience this may cause; however, we feel 
     these courses could lead our children to make the wrong 
     decisions morally and spiritually.
       We won't go into details over the curriculum specifically 
     since we had to return it. Also, we do not wish to 
     inconvenience you anymore than we already have. I will attach 
     the information I have already provided concerning some of 
     the most offensive sections of Mill River in particular. 
     Please remember we were unable to receive the student guides 
     to evaluate them individually. We only obtained two lessons 
     and the teachers guide.
       In closing we ask you to review the information we have 
     already delivered to you concerning Quest and Mill River and 
     the whole non-directive approach. We are not asking you to 
     change anything you are now doing but we are asking you to 
     consider the research we have provided to the district as a 
     whole. We have not solely cited the views of one researcher, 
     but that of several sources. Research done particularly on 
     Quest has not been favorable. Please understand, we do not 
     want to cause the district undue grief, we are merely 
     attempting to look out for our children's best interests.
       Thank you for the time you have set aside to read this. We 
     ask you again to please opt our children out completely from 
     Advisory and Guidance. We feel if they are not opted out 
     completely they may have to endure undue peer pressure from 
     those who know that they are being opted out for sections. 
     Thank you again for your time and consideration.
           Sincerely,
                                    David M. and Nancy Jean Smith,
                           (Parents of Jonathon and Daniel Smith.)
       Enclosure.

                               Mill River

       Episode 2: Just average.
       Suggested activity--have student write a classified ad 
     [mostly positive and including a price] for selling or buying 
     one of their siblings.
       Episode 3: My summer vacation
       Worksheet--4. Ask students to think about a family's right 
     to privacy versus society's right to intervene.
       Episode 8: The baddest and the best.
       Worksheet--ask students if they would rather be known for 
     something bad than not known at all
       Episode 9: I see you see
       Worksheet--6. Ask students how they feel when they do what 
     they are told, even though they don't want to. Point out that 
     Holly does this with just about everything, and ask them to 
     imagine how this would feel.
       Episode 10: A choice in the matter.
       Suggested activity--have students write their own 
     obituaries. They should include their accomplishments, and 
     how they achieved them.
       Episode 12: All's fair.
       Champ believed he had an obligation to Rhett as a friend in 
     his dispute with Tony. But Jack felt no obligation to Champ. 
     Have students discuss the extent of their obligations to 
     others.
       1. In discussion, ask if Jack can be excused because of his 
     drunkenness. If Tony had missed with the bottle, do students 
     think Jack should still have warned Champ?
       2. Similar to question 1, with two exceptions: Champ and 
     Rhett are friends while Jack and Champ are not going to use a 
     bottle to fight. Ask students if it would be all right for 
     Tony to stick up for Rocko if Champ had picked a fight with 
     Rocko. Ask them if Champ had a ``right'' to intervene on 
     Rhett's part, since he had a score to settle with Tony from 
     the football game.
       3. Have students discuss whether ``anything goes'' in a 
     fight. Should Champ have jumped on Tony once he knocked him 
     down?
       4. There is not necessarily a right answer. Point out that 
     this is not unusual. That kids often don't like something 
     about their parents, but as they get older they are likely to 
     do the same thing.
       5. Holly and Gina seem to have a very superficial 
     relationship.
       Episode 15: Court's in session.
       Worksheet--1. Those who agree with this question probably 
     have a great deal of difficulty trusting others. Adults often 
     say that students must do things they don't want to do 
     because it is ``good for them.'' Let students debate the 
     question. Acknowledge the truth that people sometimes do 
     trust others and get hurt as a result. Also, recognize that 
     sometimes adults use the ``best for you'' statement when they 
     are trying to control kids.
       Episode 17: Hot stuff.
                                  ____

                                                   Greenville, PA.
     Hon. Charles Grassley,
     U.S. Senate.
       Dear Senator Grassley: I am writing to you in relationship 
     to a situation that occurred in our school system concerning 
     my forester-boy Richard Smith.
       Rich was a sophomore at Greenville High School. Every 
     sophomore is enrolled in a class that is run by the guidance 
     counselor entitled ``Life Skills''. It was in this class that 
     an incident took place without the prior knowledge or consent 
     of parents.
       On a Friday evening Rich came home after a night out roller 
     skating with friends. Everything seemed fine. We both went to 
     bed. Twenty minutes later I had an uneasy feeling. I wanted 
     to check up on Rich. I went downstairs because I noticed some 
     lights on that I had previously turned out. I went back 
     upstairs to turn out the bathroom light when I found Rich's 
     note. ``Please don't be mad at me, I just took all the rest 
     of my medication.'' Rich was on medication for depression.
       To make a long story short, I got Rich to the emergency 
     room where they pumped his stomach and kept him overnight for 
     observation. I didn't think anything unusual about this 
     because we were told that Rich may have tendencies to attempt 
     suicide due to his depression.
       However, on Monday afternoon my wife received a phone call 
     from another sophomore who was a friend. She informed her 
     that she might know why Rich had attempted suicide on Friday. 
     That day in Life Skills class they had shown a movie on 
     suicide entitled ``Why did Jenny have to die?'' In tears she 
     described for my wife what a depressing movie it had been.
       You can imagine how shocked we were! And as much as I felt 
     for Rich, I couldn't help but think how I would feel if this 
     had been one of my own boys. My emotions ranged from shock to 
     fear to anger! Todays teenager doesn't need much of a reason 
     to attempt suicide. Especially after seeing a movie which 
     truly romantisizes suicide. (I have since viewed the movie) 
     And again, without any prior knowledge or consent of the 
     parents.
       This kind of situation does not belong in our school 
     systems and is something that should be handled by a 
     profesional. I thank you and encourage you to do all you can 
     to remove this kind psychological counselling from our 
     schools.
           Sincerely,
                                               Michael A. Coleman.
                                  ____



                                                 Dry Fork, VA,

                                                 January 22, 1994.
     Re amendment to President Clinton's education Goals 2000.

     Hon. Charles Grassley,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Grassley: Although many in the education field are 
     sincere in their efforts to educate and help children, there 
     are still many others within the system who are clearly 
     moving away from respecting parental rights. We have 
     experienced the supremacy of the home being replaced by the 
     school as more and more within education endeavor to attend 
     to the needs of the psychological development of school 
     children without seeking nor acknowledging the importance of 
     parental involvement. It is this thinking that has America on 
     a slippery slope and is the antithesis of true freedom and 
     liberty.
       My husband and I have twice experienced the blatant 
     disregard of our authority and legal responsibility for our 
     child, Michael, within the first two years he was in school. 
     In 1990, approximately four months after the death of our 
     infant daughter, our son entered Kindergarten. It was during 
     this year (the 90/91 school year) that he was counseled 
     against my expressed wishes on the topic of Death & Dying. 
     Not only was he counseled privately on more than one 
     occasion, but the entire classroom was lead into discussions 
     to sharing their feelings and emotions on the deaths of their 
     family members and other loved ones and not one single parent 
     had prior knowledge or given any consent to this form of 
     counseling. Not one single parent was told of this form of 
     counseling ever taking place until after I discovered it 
     myself.
       When I did, my son's teacher was moved to tears as she 
     shared with me what it was like to hear all these children's 
     stories. I couldn't help but wonder what emotions were 
     aroused in the hearts of those young five-year olds. Our son 
     had told the class about how his little sister had died. 
     Although our entire family had coped with the losses of other 
     family members over the previous years and had managed to 
     cope quite well without psychiatric intervention, this death 
     was more difficult for our little son because he came to the 
     realization that sometimes children die. I wondered how many 
     of his classmates suddenly came to that realization 
     themselves as he shared his experiences before the classroom, 
     and how many of those children went home more fearful than 
     when they came to class that day. I also wondered how the 
     teacher and counselor responded to any of their comments 
     and questions without the infusion of religion or their 
     own religious beliefs. And again, no note was sent home to 
     as much as express to the parents, ``You may need to talk 
     with your child about death and dying this evening as it 
     was the topic of discussion this afternoon.''
       I thought this was just an isolated instance. I was angry 
     and disturbed, but kept telling myself the school was just 
     trying to help.
       In the following weeks, however, my son began having 
     nightmares. Thinking these were probably to be expected 
     considering the grief he was experiencing, we simply became 
     more careful with what we permitted him to watch on TV or 
     read in books. Never in our wildest dreams did we expect to 
     discover the source of his nightmares would turn out to be 
     directly from the counseling he had received in school--but 
     they were. I would later discover our school used a program 
     which delved very deeply into psychotherapy specifically 
     geared to help children cope with their feelings, fears, and 
     emotions regarding Divorce/Separation, and Death/Dying. His 
     nightmares matched detail-for-detail the last story written 
     in the Counseling program entitled ``Bright Beginnings'' 
     written by Jill Anderson.
       The last story is about a monster visiting a little girl 
     six nights in a row. Finally on the 6th night the little girl 
     overcomes her fears and speaks to the monster only to find 
     out he wants to be her friend and learn how to dance. Isn't 
     that delightful?! This horror story is purported to be 
     helpful in assisting young children (of Kindergarten age) how 
     to distinguish warnings to be sure the children know the 
     difference between good fears and bad fears as confusion in 
     this area can be psychologically damaging as they get older!
       In the 91/92 school year, we discovered once again our son 
     (then in 1st grade) being counseled without our prior 
     knowledge or consent in a program using coercive thought 
     reform techniques.
       A curriculum expert's review of this program describes the 
     methods as a ``form of indoctrination''. I contacted several 
     psychiatrists as well. Two leading psychiatrists in the field 
     of hypnotherapy have critiqued this program and have issued 
     strong warnings against its use within schools because it 
     goes so deeply into psychotherapy, and they went as far as to 
     identifying the guided imagery exercises within the program 
     as being indicative of self-hypnosis which could induce an 
     altered-state-of-consciousness in young children.
       We lead parents in our country forcing the removal of this 
     program after our local school superintendent refused to 
     offer written protective guidelines or restrictions 
     concerning the techniques we found in this program. (He 
     offered to remove the techniques, but would not put this in 
     the form of a written policy statement.) Since then we 
     have discovered multiple programs with the same 
     manipulative methods and guided imagery/hypnotic 
     techniques--and we are very alarmed at the indifference of 
     some within the education field. And please note we say 
     ``some,'' because we have found many teachers objecting to 
     the infusion of psychotherapy into the classrooms as well.
       But we no longer have trust in our schools as they have 
     since labeled us and other concerned parents as ``book 
     censors.'' We are now working statewide with parents and 
     concerned education personnel, trying to obtain protective 
     restrictions as more aggressive forms of psychotherapy are 
     becoming more commonplace in the classroom. And we have the 
     documentation to verify this for anyone desiring to see it.
       Please do everything you can, everything within your power, 
     to re-establish our trust in public education. The courts in 
     our nation still recognize the supremacy of parents in the 
     upbringing and nurturing of their children, but our schools 
     are in desperate need of strong reminding of this fact today.
       My husband and I will not be as naive again. If necessary 
     we will have our rights upheld through the legal process if 
     we ever encounter a similar circumstance again. Except for it 
     exposing our children to potential harm, we would almost 
     relish the opportunity taking place.
       You have my sincere regards, and appreciation for your 
     efforts in having at least some restrictions implemented in 
     this area of education.
           Sincerely,
                                     Michael and Judy C. Rominger.
                                  ____

                              Mountain Home, AR, January 22, 1994.
     Hon. Charles Grassley,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator: I have recently learned of your amendment 
     regarding parental approval prior to obtaining some types of 
     personal information from schools receiving America 2000 
     funding. My husband and I are in full support of this 
     legislation and would like to provide some examples of the 
     need for it.
       When my son was in the 6th grade, he was registered for a 
     mandatory class entitled ``Skills for Adolescence''. Upon 
     inquiry, I was told by the principal that this was a ``study 
     skills'' class. Many parents became concerned when their 
     children reported class discussions on their personal family 
     situations, i.e., alcoholism and abuse. Parental discipline 
     techniques were critiqued and the positive aspects of 
     shoplifting were taught. I obtained the student text and was 
     disgusted with the anti-family values portrayed. Parents were 
     depicted in a negative way consistently while students were 
     urged to seek counsel apart from the family structure. I felt 
     the curriculum undermined the values we were instilling in 
     our children. When 40 parents objected to the material, an 
     alternative was offered but not without some intimidation.
       Enclosed you will find a copy of a Health Track Survey. 
     During my son's 7th grade year, he was part of a ``health 
     awareness week'' that featured blood testing and other health 
     care services along with this survey. Many citizens objected 
     to the personal nature of the questions and the fact that the 
     responses were elicited at school without their prior 
     knowledge.
       We hold traditional Judeo-Christian values and send our 
     children to school to get an education rather than be 
     psychoanalyzed or screened for potential health problems. We 
     object to these invasions of privacy and parental rights and 
     feel it is only reasonable to at least obtain parental 
     permission before performing these non-traditional functions.
       I will be in touch with my Senators regarding this issue 
     and hope to appreciate the protection this amendment offers 
     in the future. Thank you.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Jennifer Jones.
       Enclosure.

                Junior High School Health Risk Inventory

       This questionnaire asks about your health habits and will 
     give you a computer printout based on your answers.
       It is completely confidential, so don't put your name 
     anywhere on the questionnaire or answer card.
       Before beginning--you must darken in the Junior H.S. circle 
     at the top of the answer card.
       D1. Which are you? (1) male; (2) female.
       D2. What is your race? (1) White (non-Hispanic); (2) Black 
     (Afro-American); (3) Hispanic/Puerto Rican/Latin; (4) Asian; 
     (5) Other.
       D3. Which adults do you live with now? (1) 2 parents; (2) 1 
     parent/1 step parent; (3) 1 parent only; (4) other.
       D4. Compared to other students in your school, how are your 
     grades? (1) the best grades; (2) above average grades; (3) 
     average grades; (4) below average grades.
       D5. How old are you now? (1) twelve or younger; (2) 13; (3) 
     14; (4) 15; (5) 16; (6) 17 or older.
       D6. How many brothers and sisters do you have? (1) none 
     (only child); (2) 1; (3) 2; (4) 3; (5) 4 or more.
       D7. What is the highest grade you plan to reach in school? 
     (1) may not finish HS; (2) plan to finish HS but not go to 
     college; (3) plan to go to college; (4) other.
       Grade: What grade are you in now?
       Height: How tall are you (without shoes).
       Weight: How much do you weigh (without clothes).
       Answer the rest of the questions on the bottom portion of 
     the answer card.
       1. How often do you brush your teeth? (1) more than once a 
     day; (2) once a day; (3) 3 to 6 days a week; (4) less than 3 
     days a week.
       2. Have you been to the dentist or dental clinic in the 
     last year? (1) yes; (2) no.
       3. Are you now on a diet to lose weight? (1) yes; (2) no.
       4. How many days a week do you usually eat breakfast? (1) 
     almost every day; (2) 3 times a week; (3) 1-2 times a week; 
     94) almost never.
       5. How often do you eat ``junk-food'' (chips, candy, snack 
     foods, etc.)? (1) almost every day; (2) 3 times a week; (3) 
     1-2 times a week; (4) almost never.
       6. How often do you eat fruits and vegetables? (1) almost 
     every day; (2) 3 times a week; (3) 1-2 times a week; (4) 
     almost never.
       7. How often do you play or exercise hard enough to sweat 
     and breathe heavily for at least 30 minutes at a time? (1) 
     almost every day; (2) 3 times a week; (3) 1-2 times a week; 
     (4) almost never.
       8. How often do you join in recreational activities--such 
     as basketball, baseball, tennis, bowling, bike riding, 
     swimming, etc.? (1) almost every day; (2) 3 times a week; (3) 
     1-2 times a week; (4) almost never.
       9. How many cigarettes have you smoked in your life? (1) 
     none; (2) less than 100 (5 packs); (3) 100 or more.
       10. Do you smoke cigarettes now? (1) no; (2) yes, but not 
     every day; (3) yes, every day.
       11. Do you use ``smokeless tobacco'' (snuff or chewing 
     tobacco)? (1) I never have (or only tried it); (2) I did, but 
     quit; (3) I do but not every day; (4) I do every day--once or 
     twice; (5) I do every day--3 or more times.
       12. Do you drink beer, wine, wine coolers, or other 
     alcoholic drinks (other than for religious reasons)? (1) no, 
     I don't (or only tried it); (2) yes, but not often; (3) yes, 
     but not every week; (4) yes, 1 or 2 days a week; (5) yes, 3 
     or more days a week.
       13. About how many alcoholic drinks do you drink in a week? 
     (1) none, or less than 1 a week; (2) 1 or 2 drinks a week; 
     (3) 3 to 5 times a week; (4) 6 to 12 drinks a week; (5) more 
     than 12 drinks a week.
       14. In the past 2 months, how many times have you been 
     drunk? (1) I don't drink; (2) none in the last two months; 
     (3) once or twice in last 2 months; (4) three or more times 
     in last 2 months.
       15. Has anyone ever asked you to try a drug such as 
     marijuana, cocaine, or crack? (1) no; (2) yes; (3) not sure.
       16. Have you ever smoked marijuana? (1) no, I never tried 
     it; (2) yes, but only to try it; (3) yes, I used to, but 
     quit; (4) yes I do now, less than once a week; (5) yes I do 
     now, more than once a week.
       17. Have you ever used cocaine (other than crack? (1) no, I 
     never tried it; (2) yes, but only to try it; (3) yes, I used 
     to, but quit; (4) yes I do now, less than once a week; (5) 
     yes I do now, more than once a week.
       18. Have you ever used crack? (1) no, I never tried it; (2) 
     yes, but only to try it; (3) yes, I used to, but quit; (4) 
     yes I do now, less than once a week; (5) yes I do now, more 
     than once a week.
       19. Have you ever used a drug other than marijuana, 
     cocaine, or crack to get high? (1) no, I never tried it; (2) 
     yes, but only to try it; (3) yes, I used to, but quit; (4) 
     yes I do now, less than once a week; (5) yes I do now, more 
     than once a week.
       20. What is the main reason you think people your age might 
     try a drug such as marijuana, cocaine, or crack (mark only 
     one answer)? (1) to feel older; (2) to have a good time; (3) 
     to get over feeling bad; (4) to fit in with their friends; 
     (5) some other reason.
       21. Do you ever ride with a driver who has been drinking or 
     using drugs? (1) no, never; (2) yes, once or twice in 6 
     months; (3) yes, less than once a week; (4) yes, once a week 
     or more.
       22. How often do you use seatbelts when you drive or ride 
     in a car? (1) always; (2) most of the time; (3) sometimes; 
     (4) never.
       23. Do you ever carry a gun, knife or other weapon for 
     protection? (1) yes; (2) no.
       24. In the past year, how many times have you hit or beat 
     up anyone? (1) never; (2) once in the last year; (3) 2 or 3 
     times in the last year; (4) 4 or more times in the last year.
       25. Do you turn to friends or relatives when something is 
     troubling you? (1) yes, almost always; (2) yes, sometimes; 
     (3) no, not usually; (4) no, never.
       26. In the past six months, have you had feelings that life 
     wasn't worth living? (1) yes, often; (2) yes, sometimes; (3) 
     yes, but rarely; (4) no, never.
       27. Are you under much stress because of pressures at 
     school? (1) yes, a lot; (2) yes, sometimes; (3) no, not much; 
     (4) not at all.
       28. Are you under much stress because of pressures at home? 
     (1) yes, a lot; (2) yes, sometimes; (3) no, not much; (4) no, 
     not at all.
       29. Do you ever worry that one of your parents will hit you 
     or hurt you? (1) yes, often; (2) yes, sometimes; (3) no, 
     never.
       30. Are you under much stress because of a boyfriend or 
     girlfriend pressures? (1) yes, a lot; (2) yes, sometimes; (3) 
     no, not much; (4) no, not at all.
       31. In the past six months, have you had long periods (2 
     weeks or more) when you were depressed or felt really 
     unhappy? (1) no, not really; (2) yes, but I feel OK now; (3) 
     yes, but things are getting better; (4) yes, and I still feel 
     depressed and unhappy.
       32. How many friends do you have? (1) No close friends-I'm 
     a loner; (2) I have one close friend; (3) I have a few close 
     friends; (4) I have many close friends.
       33. In the past six months, have you had any serious 
     personal losses (broke up with boy/girl friend, your parents 
     got divorced, someone close to you died, etc.)? (1) no; (2) 
     yes, one serious loss; (3) yes, two or more serious losses.
       34. Have you ever had a friend or classmate who killed 
     himself or herself? (1) yes; (2) no.
       35. In the last year, have you thought about or tried to 
     kill yourself? (1) no; (2) yes, but not seriously; (3) I've 
     thought about it seriously once or twice; (4) I've thought 
     about it seriously often; (5) I've made an attempt at 
     suicide.
       36. Do you feel pressure on you to be sexually active (have 
     sexual intercourse)? (1) yes, a lot; (2) yes, a little; (3) 
     no; (4) I don't know.
       37. Do you every have questions about sex that you don't 
     know who to ask? (1) no; (2) yes, a few questions; (3) yes, a 
     lot of questions.
       38. Do you know the ways a person can protect him/herself 
     from getting AIDS and other sexually transmitted diseases 
     (VD)? (1) no; (2) yes, I think so; (3) yes, I'm sure.
       39. Do you worry about whether your body is developing 
     (growing and changing) in a normal way? (1) yes, I worry 
     about that a lot; (2) yes, I worry about that sometimes; (3) 
     I worry about that a little; (4) I don't worry about that at 
     all.
       40. In general, how honest have you been in filling out 
     this questionnaire? (1) very honest; (2) mostly honest; (3) 
     somewhat honest; (4) not very honest at all.
       Special Questions: Do you have a first degree relative: Mom 
     Dad Brother Sister with Diabetes? With High Blood Pressure? 
     With heart disease before age sixty?
                                  ____

                                 Fairfield, IA, November 26, 1993.
     Charles E. Grassley,
     Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Grassley: I am a concerned parent writing to 
     inform you of something which has happened in our local Iowa 
     school district, which may be of interest to you. This may 
     have something to do with an upcoming discussion on ``Goals: 
     2000'' coming up after the January recess.
       I am enclosing a copy of the ``IOWA YOUTH SURVEY'' which 
     was distributed this November to sixth, eighth, and tenth 
     graders in the Fairfield School District. I was told by the 
     local administration that not all students in those three 
     grades were given the survey.
       Students were asked not to put their name on the survey and 
     they were also (supposedly) told it was purely voluntary.
       Notes were supposed to have been sent home to inform 
     parents this was happening, not to ask their permission in 
     any way. However, many parents I have spoken with knew 
     nothing about the survey, and upon further investigation 
     found out that indeed their children did complete the survey 
     without their knowledge or consent. Some parents did receive 
     the notice, but the survey had already been completed by 
     their children.
       After reading thru the survey, I personally feel these are 
     very private and inappropriate questions to ask your average 
     teenager! A child in a private counselling session 
     (professional, not through the school) may need to be asked 
     these questions, but not the average teenager.
       I question the motive behind any type of survey--especially 
     when parents are not informed or even asked for their 
     approval.
       Senator Grassley, please consider this issue as you discuss 
     ``GOALS: 2000'' after the January recess; especially when the 
     point of PARENTAL KNOWLEDGE AND CONSENT is brought forward.
       For some reason our wonderful Iowa schools are getting 
     further and further away from teaching the basics and getting 
     closer and closer to trying to raise our children for us!! 
     Please, Senator Grassley, re-read the ``GOALS: 2000'' Plan. 
     Does Iowa want to buy into this? Does Iowa have to buy into 
     this?
           Most sincerely,
                                             Victoria L. Eastburn.
       Enclosure.

                           Iowa Youth Survey

       This survey is designed to help educators understand the 
     behaviors and attitudes of students in your area and in the 
     state of Iowa. DO NOT put your name on this survey. Your 
     answers are strictly confidential, and no one will be able to 
     find out how you or anyone else answered. The reports that 
     are issued will combine many students' answers together and 
     will help educators plan effective programs.
       Thank you very much for the time and attention you give to 
     completing these questions honestly and thoughtfully.
       Part A. This first section of the survey asks some general 
     questions about you.
       1. In what grade are you? 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 10th, 11th, 
     12th.
       2. Are you male or female? Male, Female.
       3. How do you describe yourself? American Indian; Asian or 
     Pacific Islander; Black or African American; Latino or 
     Hispanic; White or Caucasian; Other/Mixed race.
       4. With whom do you live most of the time? Both birth 
     parents; Adoptive parent(s); Mother only; Father only; Mother 
     and step-father; Father and step-mother; Relatives other than 
     the above; Guardian/foster parents; Other.
       5. Are your birth parents divorced or separated? Yes, No, 
     I'm not sure.
       During an average week, how many hours do you spend . . .?
       6. In band, choir, orchestra, music lessons, or practicing 
     voice or a musical instrument.
       7. Playing sports on a school team.
       8. In clubs or organizations at school, such as student 
     government, debate or drama, science clubs, language clubs, 
     chess clubs, journalism.
       9. In clubs or organizations outside of school.
       10. At church or synagogue worship services, programs, or 
     activities.
       11. Doing homework.
       12. During an average week, on how many evenings do you go 
     out for fun and recreation? None, 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5, 6 or 7.
       Part B. The questions in this section ask about your 
     attitudes and feelings regarding school, self, and others.
       How much do you agree or disagree with each of the 
     following?
       13. At school I try as hard as I can to do my best work.
       14. My teachers really care about me.
       15. It bothers me when I don't do something well.
       16. I don't care how I do in school.
       17. My teachers don't pay much attention to me.
       18. I get a lot of encouragement at my school.
       19. How long do you expect to go to school?
       Would like to quit school as soon as I can.
       Plan to finish high school but don't think I'll go to 
     college.
       Would like to go to some kind of trade school or vocational 
     school after high school.
       Would like to go to college after high school.
       Would like to go to college and then go on after college to 
     study to be something like a lawyer, professor, or doctor.
       20. Compared with others your age, how well do you do in 
     school?
       Much above average.
       Above average.
       Average.
       Below average.
       Much below average.
       21. Have you felt you were under any strain, stress, or 
     pressure during the past month?
       Yes, almost more than I could take.
       Yes, quite a bit of pressure.
       Yes, some/more than usual.
       Yes, a little/about usual.
       No, none at all.
       22. How often have you felt anxious, worried, or upset 
     during the past month:
       All the time.
       Most of the time.
       Some of the time.
       Once in a while.
       Not at all.
       How much do you agree or disagree with each of the 
     following statements?
       23. I have a number of good qualities.
       24. My neighborhood is a safe place to live.
       25. At times, I think I am no good at all.
       26. I care about people's feelings.
       27. All in all, I am glad I am me.
       28. My parents often tell me they love me.
       29. I feel I do not have much to be proud of.
       30. It is against my values to have sex while I am a 
     teenager.
       31. My family life is happy.
       32. On the whole, I like myself.
       33. There is a lot of love in my family.
       34. I get along well with my parents.
       35. If I break one of my parents' rules, I usually get 
     punished.
       36. My family has enough money to meet our basic needs for 
     food and clothing.
       37. My parents give me help and support when I need it.
       How often have you felt sad or depressed during the past 
     month?
       All the time.
       Most of the time.
       Some of the time.
       Once in a while.
       Not at all.
       39. In the last year, how often, if at all, have you 
     thought about killing yourself?
       Never.
       Once.
       Twice
       3-5 times.
       6 or more times.
       40. Have you ever tried to kill yourself?
       No.
       Yes, once.
       Yes, twice.
       Yes, more than 2 times.
       Part C. In this section, the questions deal with the use 
     and non-use of alcohol and other drugs.
       In questions below, a ``drink'' is defined as a glass of 
     wine, a bottle or can of beer, a shot glass of liquor, or a 
     mixed drink.
       41. In an average month, how often (if ever) do you drink 
     beer, wine, ``coolers,'' or liquor?
       I never drink alcoholic beverages.
       I used to drink but don't now.
       Less than once a month.
       About once a month.
       2-3 times a month.
       About once a week.
       2-4 times a week.
       About once or more each day.
       42. When you drink alcoholic beverages, how many drinks do 
     you usually have at any one time?
       I don't drink.
       Less than 1 drink.
       1-2 drinks.
       3-4 drinks.
       5-6 drinks.
       More than 6 drinks.
       43. Think back over the last two weeks. How many times have 
     you had five or more drinks in a row?
       None, Once, Twice, 3-5 times, 6-9 times, 10 or more times.
       44. How old were you the first time (if ever) you had your 
     own glass of beer, wine, shot of liquor, or a mixed drink?
       I have never used alcohol, 8 or younger, 9 or 10, 11 or 12, 
     13 or 14, 15 or 16, 17 or 18, I don't remember.
       45. In an average week, how often (if ever) do you usually 
     smoke tobacco (cigarettes, pipes, cigars)?
       I never smoke tobacco.
       I have smoked but don't now.
       1-6 times a week.
       7-25 times a week.
       4-10 times a day.
       More than 10 times each day.
       46. How old were you the first time (if ever) you tried 
     tobacco?
       I have never tried tobacco, 8 or younger, 9 or 10, 11 or 
     12, 13 or 14, 15 or 16, 17 or 18, I don't remember.
       47. How often (if ever) do you use smokeless tobacco 
     (snuff, plug, dipping tobacco, chewing tobacco)?
       I never use smokeless tobacco.
       I have used smokeless tobacco but don't now.
       1-5 times a month.
       6-20 times a month.
       About once or more each day.
       48. In an average month, how often (if ever) do you usually 
     use any amount of marijuana (pot, grass, hash)?
       I never use marijuana.
       I have used marijuana but don't now.
       Less than once a month.
       About one a month.
       2-3 times a month.
       About once a week.
       2-4 times a week.
       About once or more each day.
       49. How old were you the first time (if ever) you tried 
     marijuana (pot, grass, hash)?
       I have never tried marijuana, 8 or younger, 9 or 10, 11 or 
     12, 13 or 14, 15 or 16, 17 or 18, I don't remember.
       50. In an average month, how often (if ever) do you usually 
     use any amount of cocaine (coke, rock, crack)?
       I never use cocaine.
       I have used cocaine but don't now.
       Less than once a month.
       About one a month.
       2-3 times a month.
       About once a week.
       2-4 times a week.
       About once or more each day.
       51. In an average month, how often (if ever) do you usually 
     use any amount of amphetamines (speed, meth, crank)?
       I never use amphetamines.
       I have used amphetamines but don't now.
       Less than once a month.
       About one a month.
       2-3 times a month.
       About once a week.
       2-4 times a week.
       About once or more each day.
       52. In an average month, how often (if ever) do you usually 
     use any amount of other drugs such as hallucinogens (LSD), 
     heroin, or barbiturates.
       I never use other drugs.
       I have used other drugs but don't now.
       Less than once a month.
       About one a month.
       2-3 times a month.
       About once a week.
       2-4 times a week.
       About once or more each day.
       53. How old were you the first time (if ever) you tried 
     drugs other than alcohol or marijuana?
       I have never tried other drugs, 8 or younger, 9 or 10, 11 
     or 12, 13 or 14, 15 or 16, 17 or 18, I don't remember.
       54. In the last month, how many times, if any, have you 
     sniffed glue, breathed the contents of aerosol spray cans, or 
     inhaled any other gases or sprays in order to get high?
       0 times, 1 or 2 times, 3-5 times, 6-9 times, 10 or more 
     times.
       55. In the last month, how many times have you driven a car 
     or other motor vehicle after using any amount of alcohol or 
     other drugs?
       I don't drive, 0 times, 1 or 2 times, 3-5 times, 6 or more 
     times.
       56. In the last month, how many times have you ridden in a 
     car or other motor vehicle whose driver had been using 
     alcohol or other drugs?
       0 times, 1 or 2 times, 3-5 times, 6 or more times.
       In the past year, how many times have you?
       57. Drunk alcohol (wine, beer, or liquor) at home with your 
     parents or other adult family members (such as having wine 
     with a meal).
       58. Been to a party where other kids your age were 
     drinking.
       59. Taken steroid pills or shots without a doctor's 
     prescription.
       60. Have you ever used alcohol or other drugs so much that 
     the next day you could not remember what you had said or 
     done?
       61. Do you find that you use more alcohol or other drugs 
     now than you used to, without feeling the same effects?
       62. Have you ever hit anyone or become violent while 
     drinking or using other drugs?
       63. Have you ever wanted to stop drinking or using drugs 
     but could not?
       64. Have you ever lost any friends because they didn't 
     approve of your alcohol or other drug use?
       65. In the past year, how often (if ever) did you use 
     alcohol or other drugs at school or on school property?
       Never, 1 or 2 times, 3-5 times, 6 or more times.
       66. In the past year, how often (if ever) were you 
     disciplined at school for breaking school rules about alcohol 
     or other drugs?
       Never, 1 or 2 times, 3-5 times, 6 or more times.
       How much do you think people risk harming themselves 
     (physically or otherwise) if they . . .?
       67. Take 1 or 2 drinks of alcohol nearly every day.
       68. Smoke marijuana regularly.
       69. Smoke one or more packs of cigarettes a day.
       70. Take amphetamines regularly.
       71. Take 4 or 5 drinks of alcohol nearly every day.
       Part D. The next questions are about other experiences you 
     may have had.
       How often in the past 12 months have you:
       72. Had your things (clothing, books, bike, car) stolen or 
     deliberately damaged on school property.
       73. Been threatened or injured by someone with a weapon 
     (such as a gun knife, or club) on school property.
       74. Been involved in a service project at school that 
     helped make life better for other people.
       75. Given money or time to a charity or organization that 
     helps people.
       76. Been disciplined at school for fighting, theft, or 
     damaging property.
       77. Used a weapon, force, or threats to get money of things 
     from someone.
       78. Bet on the outcome of sports events, card games, or 
     horse/dog races.
       79. Spent time helping people who are poor, hungry, sick, 
     or unable to care for themselves.
       80. Beaten up on someone or fought someone physically 
     because he/she made you angry.
       81. Bought lottery tickets, pull tabs, or scratch-off 
     tickets.
       82. When you gamble, (if ever,) how much money do you 
     usually bet?
       I never gamble, Less than $5, $5-$10, $11-$25, $26-$50, 
     More than $50.
       83. About how often in the last month have any of your 
     classroom teachers had to stop teaching in order to deal with 
     a major student disruption or behavior problem?
       0 times, 1 or 2 times, 3-5 times, 6-9 times, 10 or more 
     times.
       84. Have you ever had a course on peer helping or peer 
     counseling?
       Yes, at school; Yes, outside of school; No.
       85. Have you ever been physically abused by an adult (that 
     is, where an adult caused you to have a scar, black and blue 
     marks, welts, bleeding, or a broken bone)?
       Never, Once, 2-3 times, 4-10 times, More than 10 times.
       86. Have you ever been sexually abused by someone (that is, 
     someone in your family or someone else did sexual things to 
     you that you did not want or forced you to touch them 
     sexually)?
       Never, Once, 2-3 times, 4-10 times, More than 10 times.
       87. On the average, about how many hours per week do you 
     spend doing volunteer work to help other people (such as 
     helping out at a hospital, day care center or nursery, food 
     shelf, youth program, community service agency, etc.)?
       None, 1-2 hours, 3-5 hours, 6-9 hours, 10 or more hours.
       Part E. In this final section, the questions relate to 
     peers, parents, and other resources.
       Among the people you consider friends, how many would you 
     say...?
       88. Do well in school.
       89. Drink alcoholic beverages (liquor, beer, wine).
       90. Smoke cigarettes.
       91. Help other people.
       92. Smoke marijuana (pot, grass) or hashish.
       93. Get drunk at least once a week.
       94. Are involved in band, choir, or other musical 
     activities.
       95. Are involved in clubs, organizations, or sports 
     programs outside of school.
       96. Get into trouble at school.
       97. Really care about you and your feelings.
       98. Do you think your mother, father, or step-parent has a 
     serious problem with alcohol or other drugs? Yes, No, Maybe; 
     I'm not sure.
       99. Do you think another member of your family such as a 
     brother, sister, or grandparent has a serious problem with 
     alcohol or other drugs? Yes, No, Maybe; I'm not sure.
       100. Do you think one of your friends has a serious problem 
     with alcohol or other drugs? Yes, No, Maybe; I'm not sure.
       101. How upset do you think your parents would be if you 
     came home from a party and they found out you had been 
     drinking? Not at all upset, A little upset, Somewhat upset, 
     Very upset, Extremely upset.
       102. How upset do you think your parents would be if you 
     came home from a party and they found out you had been using 
     illegal drugs (such as marijuana or cocaine)? Not at all 
     upset, A little upset, Somewhat upset, Very upset, Extremely 
     upset.
       103. If you had an important question or concern about 
     alcohol, other drugs, sex, or some other serious issue, would 
     you talk to your parent(s) about it? Yes, Probably, I'm not 
     sure, Probably not, No.
       104. How often does one of your parents ask you where you 
     are going or with whom you will be? Practically never, 
     Seldom, Sometimes, Often, Very often.
       105. How often does one of your parents talk to you about 
     what you are doing in school? Practically never, Seldom, 
     Sometimes, Often, Very often.
       106. About how often in the last month have you had a good 
     conversation with one of your parents that lasted 10 minutes 
     or more? 0 times, Once, Twice, 3 times, 4 or more times.
       107. If you were having a problem with alcohol or other 
     drugs and you wanted to talk with someone about it, where 
     would you most likely go first for help?
       Close friend.
       Parent(s) or guardian.
       Brother, sister, or other young relative.
       School counselor or teacher.
       Minister, priest, rabbi, or other religious leader.
       Family doctor.
       Crisis line or alcohol/drug treatment center.
       Trusted adult (other than those named above).
       Please rate the following in terms of how helpful they have 
     been as sources of information about alcohol and other drug 
     issues.
       108. Parent(s).
       109. Friends.
       110. School classroom teacher.
       111. School counselor.
       112. Someone who is now using alcohol or other drugs.
       113. Police or other law enforcement person.
       114. Counselor at an alcoholism/drug treatment center.
       115. Person from an alcohol/drug abuse prevention program.
       Now rate these additional factors in terms of how helpful 
     they are as sources of information about alcohol and other 
     drug issues.
       116. TV or radio.
       117. Telephone ``hotline.''
       118. Books, magazines, or pamphlets.
       119. Instruction or a course in a class such as health.
       120. School assembly.
       121. Personal experience.


                                                 Danville, KY,

                                                 October 12, 1993.
       Dear Senator Grassley: The attached ``Piers-Harris 
     Children's Self Concept Scale'' was administered to the 6th 
     graders in Danville's Bate Middle School during the week of 
     October 4, 1993. It was administered without the notification 
     or permission of the parents. In addition, the results were 
     not sent to the parents.
       Although the students were told that this was not a test, 
     expected scores for successful outcomes were posted on the 
     board during the exercise. After the exercise, the students 
     reviewed the results with the counselor, who told them what 
     the correct answers were. Many students, realizing that their 
     answers did not match the ones that the counselor said were 
     correct, changed answers for fear of failure. This created a 
     dilemma in many of the student's minds. They felt that 
     despite what they knew to be true about themselves, they had 
     to lie to get a successful score.
       The scale was not administered by a trained psychologist. 
     This is evidenced by its poor administration. Posting scoring 
     ranges on the board during the exercise, using self grading, 
     and describing answers as right or wrong are extremely 
     questionable testing procedures which, without doubt, 
     invalidate any conclusions that could be drawn.
       I also do not know if this scale was even designed for the 
     6th grade age group. Many of the questions do not appear 
     appropriate for 6th graders and others seem to link self 
     esteem directly to physical beauty. The following yes/no 
     questions are examples: I am popular with boys, I have pretty 
     eyes, I am good looking, and I have a good figure. I do not 
     understand how the answers to these questions have a right or 
     wrong answer, nor do I see how this information is important 
     to the education of our children.
       I hope that you find this information helpful and I would 
     be happy to discuss this matter with you personally.
           Sincerely,
                                          Victoria and Walt Nyzio.
                                  ____


 The Piers-Harris Children's Self Concept Scale--The Way I Feel About 
                                 Myself

       Here are a set of statements. Some of them are true of you 
     and so you will circle the yes. Some are not true of you and 
     so you will circle the no. Answer every question even if some 
     are hard to decide, but no not circle both yes and no. 
     Remember, circle the yes if the statement is generally like 
     you, or circle the no if the statement is generally not like 
     you. There are no right or wrong answers. Only you can tell 
     us how you feel about yourself, so we hope you will mark the 
     way you really feel inside.
       1. My classmates make fun of me.
       2. I am a happy person.
       3. It is hard for me to make friends.
       4. I am often sad.
       5. I am smart.
       6. I am shy.
       7. I get nervous when the teacher calls on me.
       8. My looks bother me.
       9. When I grow up, I will be an important person.
       10. I get worried when we have tests in school.
       11. I am unpopular.
       12. I am well behaved in school.
       13. It is usually my fault when something goes wrong.
       14. I cause trouble to my family.
       15. I am strong.
       16. I have good ideas.
       17. I am an important member of my family.
       18. I usually want my own way.
       19. I am good at making things with my hands.
       20. I give up easily.
       21. I am good in my school work.
       22. I do many bad things.
       23. I can draw well.
       24. I am good in music.
       25. I behave badly at home.
       26. I am slow in finishing my school work.
       27. I am an important member of my class.
       28. I am nervous.
       29. I have pretty eyes.
       30. I can give a good report in front of the class.
       31. In school I am a dreamer.
       32. I pick on my brother(s) and sister(s)
       33. My friends like my ideas.
       34. I often get into trouble.
       35. I am obedient at home.
       36. I am lucky.
       37. I worry a lot.
       38. My parents expect too much of me.
       39. I like being the way I am.
       40. I feel left out of things.
       41. I have nice hair.
       42. I often volunteer in school.
       43. I wish I were different.
       44. I sleep well at night.
       45. I hate school
       46. I am among the last to be chosen for games.
       47. I am sick a lot.
       48. I am often mean to other people.
       49. My classmates in school think I have good ideas.
       50. I am unhappy.
       51. I have many friends.
       52. I am cheerful.
       53. I am dumb about most things.
       54. I am good looking.
       55. I have lots of pep.
       56. I get into a lot of fights.
       57. I am popular with boys
       58. People pick on me.
       59. My family is disappointed in me.
       60. I have a pleasant face.
       61. When I try to make something, everything seems to go 
     wrong.
       62. I am picked on at home.
       63. I am a leader in games and sports.
       64. I am clumsy.
       65. In games and sports, I watch instead of play.
       66. I forget what I learn.
       67. I am easy to get along with.
       68. I lose my temper easily.
       69. I am popular with girls.
       70. I am a good reader.
       71. I would rather work alone than with a group.
       72. I like my brother (sister).
       73. I have a good figure.
       74. I am often afraid.
       75. I am always dropping or breaking things.
       76. I can be trusted.
       77. I am different from other people.
       78. I think bad thoughts.
       79. I cry easily.
       80. I am a good person.


                                                    Tulsa, OK,

                                                  January 4, 1994.
     Hon. Charles Grassley,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator: Thank you for your interest in protecting 
     students and families from the ever persistent involvement of 
     government in personal lives. May you succeed in including 
     the ``Parental Rights Restoration Amendment'' philosophy into 
     the Goals 2000 push.
       Enclosed is a copy of ``Computer Daze Questionnaire'' taken 
     last year by my son and essentially all other students at 
     Jenks High School, Jenks, Oklahoma. This ``Questionnaire'' 
     was not shown to parents before being taken, was officially 
     sponsored by a student group, but strongly pushed by High 
     School staff and faculty providing time for all students to 
     participate as specifically scheduled event. When I found out 
     my son had taken the Questionnaire as a Freshman, I wrote the 
     school to complain and requested my son's form to be returned 
     and not submitted for whatever analysis is done. If not 
     possible to retrieve his form, I requested they provide me 
     any and all data from his profile so obtained. I received 
     nothing for my request . . . too late, already submitted . . 
     . you've heard the line.
       Last year my same son took the Iowa Test of Basic Skills, a 
     standardized norm-referenced, academic test, right? One of 
     his questions on that test was basically this: ``Teenagers 
     like to wear different kinds of clothes. Who influences what 
     you wear? A. Parents, B. Church, C. School, or D. Peers.'' 
     What is the correct answer if this is academic? If it is a 
     personal profile question, what right does the testing 
     company have to intersperse this underhanded probe into a 
     required ``academic'' test, and to whom does the information 
     go, and why do they need it, and what do they plan to do with 
     it?
       Thank you for your concerns in this area and may your 
     efforts be blessed.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Wayne K. Taylor.
       Enclosure.

                      Computer Daze Questionnaire

       Complete this survey so that you will have a chance to 
     obtain a list of your best matches in this school.
       1. I am: (1) Male; (2) Female.
       2. At amusement parks or carnivals, I have the most fun 
     with: (1) the rides; (2) just hanging out with friends; (3) 
     the games to win prizes and stuffed animals.
       3. If I were invited to a costume party I'd: (1) turn down 
     the invitation; (2) plan my costume carefully; (3) go 
     absolutely wild.
       4. You're out with friends when you realize there is no way 
     you'll make it home on time. You'd: (1) call home and tell 
     them you'll be late; (2) call home and beg for more time; (3) 
     try to sneak in the house.
       5. You hand the checkout person $5 for a purchase. She 
     gives you change for $20. You'd: (1) gently point out the 
     error; (2) quickly pocket the mistake; (3) quickly pocket the 
     mistake but feel pretty rotten.
       6. When it comes to giving speeches or reports in front of 
     class: (1) I don't mind it as long as I'm prepared; (2) I 
     enjoy it; (3) It scares me; (4) I hate it.
       7. Driving to school, you run into the mailbox on the 
     corner. You would: (1) skip school and get the car fixed; (2) 
     trust that your parents will understand; (3) tell everyone 
     the car got dented in the parking lot.
       8. To me, love is: (1) a bad joke; (2) an emotional high; 
     (3) a reason for much confusion; (4) nice with the right 
     person.
       9. If you walked out of the house and saw a beautiful duck 
     with a badly injured wing, you would: (1) take it home and 
     nurse it back to health; (2) leave it alone; (3) have roast 
     duck for dinner.
       10. If your friends were looking for you after school, they 
     would probably find you: (1) at practice; (2) at your job; 
     (3) shopping at the mall; (4) at home.
       11. If I end up very successful in life, the ONE most 
     important factor I would attribute it to would be: (1) I'm 
     smart; (2) I'm competitive; (3) I work hard; (4) I'm lucky.
       12. When I have the TV remote I: (1) flick through the 
     channels often; (2) use it once in a while; (3) hardly even 
     touch it.
       13. If you found out that your friend got the best grade on 
     a test because he saw the questions ahead of time, you'd: (1) 
     let the teacher know someone cheated; (2) express your anger 
     to your friend; (3) pay no attention to the matter; (4) 
     convince your friend to share the questions with you next 
     time.
       14. If I had a long way to go on a major assignment due 
     tomorrow I'd: (1) stay up all night and get it done; (2) do 
     as much as I can and turn it in; (3) ask for an extension; 
     (4) call in sick.
       15. If I said something really dumb in class and everyone 
     laughed I'd: (1) die of embarrassment; (2) shrug it off; (3) 
     laugh with everyone else.
       16. When a lot of people try to change my mind about 
     something I feel strongly about I usually: (1) Get more 
     stubborn; (2) Listen and consider their opinion; (3) Often 
     end up agreeing with them.
       17. If I saw a new girl/guy in the hall that I would like 
     to meet I would: (1) Go right up and introduce myself; (2) 
     Get one of my friends to do it; (3) Walk nearby and hope he/
     she notices me.
       18. When I go out to eat with friends, I prefer to: (1) pay 
     exactly what I owe; (2) throw in a few dollars and estimate; 
     (3) split the bill evenly among each person.
       19. Recycling is: (1) too much trouble for me; (2) 
     something I'll do if convenient; (3) something I'm totally in 
     to.
       20. I will go to a teacher for help in a class: (1) only 
     when I realize I'm totally lost; (2) rarely because I don't 
     want to seem dumb; (3) I never have to; (4) at any stumbling 
     block.
       21. At the movies you pick the best seat until Miss Big 
     Hair sits down right in front of you. You'd: (1) move to 
     another seat; (2) ask her to sink down in her seat; (3) flick 
     popcorn at the back of her head.
       22. Suppose you made the team and felt that your good 
     friend deserved to make it too, but didn't. What would you 
     do? (1) do your best to console your friend; (2) plead with 
     the coach to change his mind; (3) quit the team; (4) nothing, 
     that's life.
       23. When told a secret I usually end up: (1) letting 
     everyone else in on it; (2) telling one other friend; (3) 
     keeping it.
       24. The worst thing a teacher can do is: (1) accuse an 
     innocent person of cheating; (2) put down a student in front 
     of the class; (3) play favorites; (4) waste my time.
       25. Whether it is sports or a project, I prefer: (1) to be 
     involved in a team or group activity; (2) one that depends on 
     my own performance; (3) no preference--depends on the 
     activity.
       26. Busted. You get your first traffic ticket. You would: 
     (1) pay it quickly before anyone finds out; (2) show up at 
     court alone and try to beat it; (3) tell your parents and ask 
     for their help getting it taken care of.
       Answer questions 27-33 with: (1) Always (2) Sometimes (3) 
     Rarely (4) Never.
       27. I exercise.
       28. I keep informed about current events.
       29. I get bored during summer vacation.
       30. I play jokes on my friends.
       31. I eat at fast food places.
       32. I watch music videos.
                                                 Simpsonville, SC.
     Hon. Charles E. Grassley,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Grassley: I am writing as a concerned parent 
     of children in Public School. The trend of education in the 
     last several years seems to be a shift away from academics to 
     focusing on what my child thinks and feels about personal and 
     social issues.
       I am enclosing two surveys that were given to students, 
     here in Greenville, S.C. One of the surveys was given to my 
     son, the other to my nephew. On the personality Questionnaire 
     that was given to my son notice question number 5. In 
     general, how do you feel about your family? 1. I love them to 
     death 2. They're nice. 3. I can put up with them. 4. I hate 
     them. Why are schools asking such personal questions to my 
     children? The questionnaire also asks for the child's name 
     and other identifying information, this is not an anonymous 
     questionnaire.
       My question is, who has access to this information, and 
     where is this tabulated and is this part of student's 
     personal records. I was told that this information was 
     tabulated at a local college by their ``super'' computer. I 
     am concerned about the capability that computers have to 
     store such information and make is available to unidentified 
     people or organizations.
       My question is, what are parents rights and is it legal to 
     do these types of surveys without parents knowledge or 
     consent. Thank you for addressing these issues.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Patty Stoner.
       Enclosure.

                       Personality Questionnaire

       1. You think that in the future the world will be: (1) 
     Better; (2) Worse; (3) About the same.
       2. What do you look for in a friend? (1) someone to have 
     fun with; (2) some I can talk to; (3) someone who shares my 
     interests.
       3. In school, your favorite nonphysical) subject area is: 
     (1) math/science; (2) English/literature; (3) social 
     sciences; (4) art; (5) none of the above.
       4. Your favorite activities are: (1) Adventurous, 
     dangerous; (2) Physical, such as sports; (3) Intellectual.
       5. In general, how do you feel about your family? (1) I 
     love them to death; (2) They're nice; (3) I can put up with 
     them; (4) I hate them.
       6. In your opinion, which is the biggest problem facing the 
     world? (1) global warming; (2) hunger; (3) class barriers; 
     (4) minority problems (5) none of these.
       7. The first thing you look for in a girlfriend/boyfriend 
     is: (1) Appearance; (2) Intelligence; (3) Status.
       8. Your favorite pet would be: (1) a cat; (2) a dog; (3) a 
     fish; (4) something else; (5) I hate pets.
       9. You think that modern society, with all its high 
     technology, is: (1) terrific--I love all the conveniences; 
     (2) too impersonal and insensitive.
       10. How large a problem is pollution today? (1) It is a 
     major problem that needs to be addressed immediately; (2) It 
     is a problem, but we'll be fine for a long time;; (3) It is 
     not a big problem; (4) It is not a problem.
       11. How fast is the environment deteriorating? (1) 
     Extremely fast; (2) Slowly; (3) It's not deteriorating; (4) 
     It's improving.
       12. What do you consider the ideal age for marriage? (1) 
     less than 20 years; (2) 20-25; (3) 26-35; (4) 36-45; (5) more 
     than 45.
       13. Should it be legal to give a prayer at school 
     gatherings? (1) Absolutely; (2) Yes, but only for prayers 
     that apply to all religions; (3) No.
       14. Which do you think know best how to improve our 
     country? (1) Republicans; (2) Democrats; (3) Independents.
       15. You are happiest when you are in groups of size: (1) 2-
     4 people; (2) 5-10 people; (3) 11-15 people; (4) 15 or more 
     people.
       16. What kind of watch do you usually wear? (1) Digital; 
     (2) Analog; (3) Both; (4) I don't wear a watch.
       17. If you could live anywhere in the world, you would 
     live: (1) on a beach; (2) in a city; (3) in the mountains; 
     (4) in a rural area; (5) somewhere else.
       18. The most oppressed group in America is: (1) Negroes; 
     (2) women; (3) Native Americans; (4) the poor; (5) none of 
     the above.
       19. You think of big business as: (1) corrupt and 
     impersonal; (2) a necessity that is put up with; (3) 
     wonderful--free enterprise in action.
       20. Which of the following is the most important in your 
     life? (1) school; (2) your career; (3) your relationships 
     with others; (4) the world's problems.
       21. How are you with money? (1) I spend it right when I get 
     it; (2) I keep it shortly, then spend it on something nice; 
     (3) I save it for long periods of time.
       22. What do you think about killing animals? (1) no big 
     deal; (2) It's OK if you eat them; (3) I don't like it at 
     all.
       23. When is it OK to say something that is not true? (1) 
     any time you can get away with it; (2) if it's a ``white 
     lie''; (3) It is never acceptable to lie.
       24. What kind of music do you like best? (1) Rock; (2) 
     Alternative; (3) Soul or Gospel; (4) Classical; (5) Something 
     else.
       25. On the average, how much TV do you watch in a week? (1) 
     0-5 hours; (2) 6-10 hours; (3) 11-20 hours; (4) 21-35 hours; 
     (5) more than 35 hours.
       26. How many children would you like to eventually have? 
     (1) 1; (2) 2; (3) 3-4; (4) five or more; (5) none.
       27. Do you think that drugs should be legalized? (1) Yes; 
     (2) No.
       28. Should women be allowed into the military? (1) Yes; (2) 
     Yes, but only in non-combative positions; (3) No.
       29. When you leave high school, you plan to: (1) go 
     straight to college; (2) get a job; (3) take a year off.
       30. Which do you prefer? (1) Coca-Cola; (2) Pepsi; (3) RC; 
     (4) They are all the same; (5) I despise all three.
       (Note: Given to high school students at Southside High, 
     Greenville, SC, on December 8, 1993.)


                                                Kennewick, WA,

                                                 January 17, 1994.
     Hon. Charles Grassley,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Grassley: From November 1991 to February 1992, 
     my school district participated in a program designed to 
     identify ``at-risk'' children in our district. The program, 
     sponsored by a local psychiatric center and our district, 
     required behavioral risk assessments to be completed on 
     kindergarten through 4th grade children. After elementary 
     school teachers completed the assessments, the originals were 
     given to the psychiatric center without parental knowledge or 
     consent. Please note that all children, regardless of their 
     risk score were identified by name on the assessments.
       I and over 200 parents (from a wide variety of backgrounds) 
     viewed this action as a violation of our privacy and civil 
     rights. It was only after public outrage erupted that our 
     district took steps to modify the program. To my knowledge, 
     however, no party was held accountable for these infractions 
     nor were any legal or written guarantees created (outside of 
     this particular program) that would protect parents from 
     future violations of their privacy rights. I was personally 
     devastated when I became aware that my school, which I trust 
     with my children up to 6 hours per day, had violated my right 
     to privacy. Because of my intimate involvement in this 
     controversy, I am convinced we do not have adequate 
     protection of our Constitutional rights within our public 
     school system.
       I have enclosed copies of supporting documents for your 
     review. If you have any further questions, please do not 
     hesitate to contact me.
       Thank you for your commitment to protecting parental rights 
     in Iowa and nationwide.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Beth J. Smith.
       Enclosures.

                                                Kennewick, WA,

                                                 February 4, 1993.
     Re Desert Quest Program.

     Greg Fancher,
     Principal,
     Canyon View Elementary.
       Dear Greg: Recently I became aware of Canyon View's 
     participation in the Desert Quest program sponsored by 
     Kennewick and Richland School Districts, Benton-Franklin 
     County Head Start and Carondelet Psychiatric Center.
       I am concerned that a child's behavior can be assessed, 
     without parental knowledge or permission, and subsequent 
     assessments are being released to a third party outside the 
     district. I feel this is a serious breach of privacy and 
     confidentiality. I am in the process of researching this and 
     would like to request the following information:
       When was the testing done?
       Was a release ever sent to the parents which gave 
     permission to assess the child's behavior? If not, why not?
       Why are you reassuring parents the original assessments 
     were destroyed when I have personally seen them?
       Was there a policy regarding the handling of the documents? 
     When was the policy adopted? If there is a policy, I would 
     like to see it.
       How many people or agencies have had access to these 
     assessments and in what capacity and for what reasons?
       I would like to have a full and complete listing of the 
     Desert Quest donors, both corporate and individual.
       Was the Kennewick school district or Paul Pigulski advised 
     that this program could result in such a severe privacy 
     breach?
       What is going to be done to correct this situation and 
     ensure the privacy of past assessments and future sensitive 
     student information?
       This is just a short list of several questions and concerns 
     I have regarding this severe privacy breach. Please answer 
     any questions and supply me with the requested information as 
     soon as possible. I would appreciate the information prior to 
     the February 10th school board meeting.
       My intend is not to cause a deluge of lawsuits or create a 
     disabling distraction for the Kennewick School District from 
     it's primary focus of education. However, there is a serious 
     problem I plan to pursue until my concerns are addressed to 
     my satisfaction.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Beth J. Smith.
                                  ____



                                Canyon View Elementary School,

                                  Kennewick, WA, February 8, 1993.
     Beth Smith,
     Kennewick, WA
       Dear Beth: In this letter you will find your questions from 
     your letter of February 4. It is my sincere hope that this 
     letter provides the information you have requested.
       1. When was the testing done?
       The students were not given a test. The teachers were asked 
     to complete a screening instrument to determine if students 
     from their classroom might qualify for the Special Friends 
     Program. This was done in October.
       2. Was a release ever sent to parents which gave permission 
     to assess the child's behavior? If not, why not?
       No, a release was not sent home. The screening instrument 
     is simply a tool to determine eligibility. If a student is 
     eligible for the Special Friends program, then parents are 
     contacted.
       3. Why are you reassuring parents that the original 
     assessments have been destroyed when I have seen them?
       I was under the impression that the screening instruments 
     were destroyed after the data had been entered into the 
     computer. I was wrong. Each school now has the original 
     screening tools at the school site.
       4. Was there a policy regarding the handling of documents? 
     When was the policy adopted? If there is a policy, I would 
     like to see it.
       The school district has a letter of agreement with 
     Carondelet. A copy of the letter is attached.
       5. How many people or agencies have had access to these 
     assessments and in what capacity and for what reasons?
       The information in the screening tools can be accessed by 
     Paul Pigulski, the Desert Quest supervisor. Desert Quest 
     specialists may only access information from the school(s) 
     they serve. These are the only people who have access to the 
     information.
       6. I would like to have full and complete listing of the 
     Desert Quest donors, both corporate and individual. Please 
     contact Paul Pigulski at Carondelet for this information.
       7. Was the Kennewick School District or Paul Pigulski 
     advised that this program could result in severe privacy 
     breach?
       I would again refer you to the attached letter of 
     agreement.
       8. What is going to be done to correct this situation and 
     to insure the privacy of past assessments and future 
     sensitive student information?
       At this time all documents are being returned to their home 
     schools. In the future when the screening tools are used, 
     parents will be notified and the information will be given to 
     Cardondelet in coded form. Only the home schools will have 
     information with student names.
       I hope this information addresses at least some of your 
     concerns. I am willing to sit down with you at any time to 
     discuss this program, its benefits, pitfalls, and its future 
     development at Canyon View. Please feel free to contact me.
           Sincerely,
                                                     Greg Fancher,
                                                        Principal.
       Enclosure.

  Desert Quest Carondelet Psychiatric Care Center Letter of Agreement

       Carondelet Psychiatric Care Center and the Kennewick School 
     District agree to cooperate in the installation and 
     administration of the early intervention program known as 
     Desert Quest. Specifically, they agree as follows:
       Carondelet agrees to provide intervention services to 
     identified children to the fullest practical extent. 
     Carondelet agrees not to bill any child, parent, school, or 
     the Kennewick School District for any of these services, 
     while reserving the right to bill any insurance companies, 
     Title XIX, etc. (while waiving any/all deductibles, 
     coinsurance, etc.). Carondelet agrees to serve children based 
     on need and without any financial considerations whatever. 
     Carondelet agrees to furnish all supplies--clinical and 
     administrative--necessary to execute the Program. Carondelet 
     agrees to respect the privacy/confidentiality of all 
     students, families, and Kennewick School District employees. 
     Carondelet agrees to provide unlimited professional 
     consultation regarding identified children and/or Program 
     dissemination.
       Kennewick School District agrees to provide a site 
     coordinator at each school to function as a liaison between 
     that school and Carondelet. Kennewick School District agrees 
     to provide dedicated space at each school for Desert Quest 
     sessions to be held. Kennewick School District agrees to 
     assist each participating school in meeting the $80 (one-
     time) match contribution for the furnishing of this room. 
     Kennewick School District further agrees to cooperate in the 
     screening, staffing, and statistical representation of data 
     collected, and to being recognized as a participating school 
     district.
     Marlin M. Lendbloom,
       For Kennewick School District.
     Paul Pigulski,
       For Carondelet Psychiatric Care Center.

  Mrs. KASSEBAUM addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kansas.
  Mrs. KASSEBAUM. I wanted to ask the Senator from Iowa a couple of 
questions if I might. I will be very brief, because Senator Mack is 
waiting and has a commitment in Florida, and I know he wants to offer 
his amendment.
  I just say to the Senator from Iowa that I am very sensitive to what 
he is trying to address regarding parental rights, and we have talked 
back and forth. I would not want to answer the questionnaire the 
Senator read myself.
  Was that a Federal questionnaire?
  Mr. GRASSLEY. No, it was not. That is one of the problems for us, to 
guarantee the U.S. constitutional established right of a parent to be 
involved in their education. If they want to exercise the statutory 
fulfillment of that through Senator Hatch's amendment, they are not 
able to do it because they cannot show a direct correlation. But money, 
being fungible as it is, you surely know that it is very difficult to 
prove that and, so consequently, the parent cannot exercise their 
right.
  Then what that means is where we have $1 of Federal money, where we 
have $1 of Federal money in a school system, we are going to apply all 
civil rights laws to that institution and let people get relief under 
the civil rights laws. Then a parent has the same constitutional right 
under the Constitution for parental rights, and unless they can show a 
direct relationship they are not going to be able to exercise that 
right, and so that direct relationship in the regulations is the 
problem that I am trying to overcome with my amendment.
  Mrs. KASSEBAUM. I realize that. Let me just ask, or restate it again. 
I think it has been stated. But as the Senator knows, under the 
protection of pupil rights in the law, it says all Federal material is 
available for inspection and no student is required to participate in 
the survey or activity.
  So I guess what I am asking the Senator is whether he really wants to 
apply to the States this same prohibition. There are many drug-free 
school programs, for instance, with both Federal money and State money. 
Many of these things, such as the drug-free school initiative have a 
mix of Federal and State moneys. Unless the Senator is wishing to tell 
the States as well that they adopt these same practices as apply to 
Federal programs, it is going to be very difficult.
  As I mentioned to the Senator, in the example where the student was 
told not to discuss the questionnaire with their parents, those parents 
should have gone right to the school and said, yes, indeed, we want to 
see that questionnaire.
  That is where I personally believe this should be addressed. I have 
some difficulty--and I know we are discussing it and maybe we can find 
some way to get at this, but we have to be careful we are not going to 
dictate to the States what they do. We have always had a very fine line 
to walk between Federal and State jurisdiction.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. If the Senator from Kansas will yield, the Senator 
would not use the argument on this floor on a civil rights debate that 
we are not going to dictate to the States the protection of a 
constitutional civil right. If there is $1 involved, the institution is 
covered. So why would she make that argument that we are not going to 
tell the States when a parent wants their constitutional rights 
protected, parental rights to be involved in education?
  Mrs. KASSEBAUM. That was a constitutional decision of the courts in 
the civil rights case.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. I also say that I hope I have established with the 
Yoder case, the other cases that I have cited--the Yoder case as 
recently as 1972--that the parents have a constitutional right to be 
involved in the education of their kids. It is a liberty right, the 
same as what people would have under their civil rights.
  Mrs. KASSEBAUM. I say to the Senator from Iowa, because I know the 
Senator from Florida wants to offer his amendment, it is a concern to 
both of us. The Senator cares about education. I care about education. 
We all care about education. But how do we best get at this in such a 
way that we are not trying to say to the Iowa schools as well as 
perhaps the Kansas schools what they can or cannot do?
  I think we have to think it through very carefully. I am certainly 
willing to work on this. I do not think students should be forced to be 
involved and every parent should be able to see material that they 
consider important to their understanding of what is taking place in 
their school. And I believe that most school boards honor that. But how 
we put it into legislative language is I think what we are struggling 
with. I hope perhaps between now and Tuesday when we vote we can find 
some way to work this out. But I just wanted to raise the question 
before yielding.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. I want the Senator to know that along the lines of what 
the Senator just stated, I wish to acknowledge that the Senator has 
talked to me about that and has worked to do that. Earlier today I had 
some conversations with my colleague from the State of Iowa, Senator 
Harkin, who is also on the parent committee involved here in which he 
suggested certain changes. If he is a leader in the direction of 
bringing about some of this change, I think it is a very reasonable 
starting point.
  But I wish to make sure that that is the direction we are headed 
because I think it has to deal with a very definite problem we have 
under the regulations of showing a direct relationship because you can 
imagine, only 17 cases in the 10 years since the regulations have been 
out just is not very many with all the concerns we have had expressed. 
I have already listed 11, 12, or 13 States where, just since this 
amendment is up, I have had parents tell me they have had problems with 
the regulations.
  Mrs. KASSEBAUM. I say to the Senator from Iowa, I very much 
appreciate what he is trying to say. It is a great concern to parents, 
and I hope we might find some language we can work out. I thank the 
Senator.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. I emphasize for the Senator from Kansas, and then I 
will yield the floor, we are only talking about the rights of parents 
to have access to the information to know what information is being 
used and to know that it is being done. There is nothing in my 
amendment that is going to tell a school that they cannot do this.
  Mrs. KASSEBAUM. I thank the Senator from Iowa.
  I believe I had the floor, Madam President. I yield the floor.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. President, I rise today to express my support of the 
Grassley amendment.
  I am an original cosponsor of this important amendment because I feel 
strongly that the rights of parents should not be overlooked or taken 
for granted by schools.
  Many, many concerned parents have called me to express their concern 
about educational philosophies that focus more on attitudes, feelings, 
and values than academics.
  I have heard of examples of extreme forms of this philosophy where 
students are rated on their sense of self, appreciation of change, and 
the like instead of receiving letter grades on the 3R's.
  And I am concerned, like these parents are, to hear that some school 
systems have been introducing values clarification surveys into the 
classroom. With some of these surveys, children are being asked 
questions about their home life and personal values.
  These parents believe, as I do, that the teaching of values belongs 
in the home, and that the teaching of academics belongs to schools.
  This amendment will prohibit the use of Goals 2000 funds for values--
related activities without parental notification, consent, and access 
to the relevant information.
  Parents have the right to know that their children will be taking 
part in surveys or activities that may run counter to their beliefs or 
values.
  I also believe that parents have the right to remove their children 
from participating if they choose to.
  I urge my colleagues' support for this amendment.

                          ____________________