[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 10 (Monday, February 7, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: February 7, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
THE SHOOTING OF PATROLMAN STEVEN SHAW
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, last Thursday in Providence, a terrible
tragedy occurred: a fine young Providence policeman was killed in the
line of duty, shot by a suspect using a handgun.
Steven Michael Shaw and other officers were responding to a call
involving a search for three men who were suspected of committing two
robberies earlier that afternoon. After entering the house where the
suspects were believed to be, Patrolman Shaw was shot in the head by
one of the suspects, who had hidden himself in a bedroom closet.
Patrolman Steven Michael Shaw, just 27 years old, began his career
with the Providence police in January 1989, working in the patrol
bureau and the community policing unit. Steven Shaw was an officer well
recognized for his work: he had been involved in a 1991 capture of an
armed man who at the time was shooting at him. In 1992 he also played a
key role, at some significant personal risk, in securing the release of
a hostage held by five armed--and actively firing--men.
These events and his work in handling armed robberies, break-ins, and
shootings made him a decorated officer: he received the Police Chief's
Medal, given for ``an outstanding act in the performance of duty;'' the
City Council Medal, and the Hostage Situation Medal. Moreover,
Patrolman Shaw was a member of the U.S. Marine Corps Reserve, and
indeed had served in the Persian Gulf war.
Steven Shaw did not shy from dangerous situations in the course of
duty. He had experience in dealing with armed criminals; he had the
skills to handle a dangerous and tense situation.
But on February 3, he didn't have a chance.
How long are we going to allow our officers to face the kind of
danger posed by the number of handguns out there in circulation? Every
year, dozens of police officers are killed while carrying out their
official duties--and every year, the vast majority of them are killed
by handguns. Since 1982, a staggering 70 percent of the 802 officers
killed in the line of duty were fatally shot by handguns. Due to the 72
million handguns out there, our officers face the threat of death every
time they leave the station. Due to the presence of handguns, any
routine police call can result in tragedy.
No Providence police officer has been killed in the line of duty
since 1928, more than 65 years ago. But regretfully, due to the growing
number of handguns, it is becoming increasingly dangerous for our
officers. In March of 1989, three officers were shot but thankfully not
killed in a gunfight. And just last September, a Providence patrolman
was shot while investigating a disturbance; his life was saved when the
bullet bounced off the bulletproof vest he was wearing.
Every day the men and women of our police force take their lives in
their hands on our behalf. We cannot allow the proliferation of
handguns to continue to needlessly threaten their lives.
Steven Shaw, this young man of great courage, died in the act of
performing his duties. He was a kind, thoughtful, and considerate young
man. His friends and family say he had a zest for life, enjoying
rafting, hunting, foreign travel, and car racing. His partners say that
he enjoyed a challenge; one described a training day where Patrolman
Shaw tried to outdo his fellow officers, saying that Shaw was a ``150-
pound man with a 300-pound heart [who] wouldn't quit.''
My deepest condolences go out to Steven Shaw's parents, Robert and
Judith Shaw; to his five brothers and sisters; and to his other
relatives and his many friends. My heart goes out especially to his
young wife, Mrs. Maria Angela Conte Shaw, to whom Patrolman Shaw was
married just 1 year ago. On behalf of Mrs. Chafee and myself, I want to
offer her and the entire Shaw family my heartfelt sympathy. And on
behalf of all Rhode Islanders, I want to convey to Mrs. Shaw and to
Steven Shaw's parents the thanks and gratitude that each and every
Rhode Islander feels for the service that Steven Shaw gave
wholeheartedly to our State.
Flags are at half-mast in Rhode Island in honor of this brave young
man. He deserves no less, and indeed, much more. We must not lose
another Steven Shaw to the slaughter arising from handguns. In his name
and the name of all those officers who have been gunned down, we must
act.
I thank the Chair. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Wofford). The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Simon). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, for the benefit of Members, even though
we have not been involved in extended debate on the floor, we have been
making good progress in the areas in which a number of our colleagues
have been interested and concerned, such as addressing issues about the
length of the authorization and the kinds of flexibility that we have
provided in this legislation to be able to deal with some of the
existing rules and regulations and even laws.
We have found a consistent position both in the education programs
and, hopefully, in this program to provide a degree of flexibility
which had not existed previously. I think there are some Members who
desire to go even further than that. But we have been working with our
colleagues.
Then there are some other issues involving the questions of
employment and the paying of certain employees. We have been addressing
that. Others want to have some limitation in terms of the total amounts
that are going to be authorized and a few other matters as well.
Nonetheless, we have been working with our colleagues. There are
several who have been listed on this list of amendments who have common
positions, so we have been working through on the substance of those
issues.
We want to give assurance to our colleagues that we are proceeding
along and making good progress. We will have the opportunity to address
the areas where there still remain some differences, but all of us are
appreciative of the amount of cooperation that we have been able to
achieve so far.
Mr. President, earlier in the debate, my good friend, the Senator
from Illinois, had mentioned the hearings that we had on America's
Choice, the very outstanding group of men and women who reported to the
Congress over a year ago on some of the activities that were taking
place in a number of the other industrial countries that were assuring
those countries of high skills, high-wage employees and the steps they
were taking to make sure that their employees were going to be able to
be competitive in the new world markets.
Actually, one of the members of that group was Mrs. Clinton. I can
remember very clearly her testimony before our committee when she, Ray
Marshall, Bill Brock and actually Ira Magaziner, who has now been
working with the President and Mrs. Clinton on the issues of our health
care, made an excellent presentation.
As the Senator from Illinois has pointed out, and others, one of
their key recommendations for young people in this country was the kind
of School-to-Work Program which is now before us. For those who really
are interested in the justification of this program, any review of
their report is enormously compelling and incredibly persuasive. They
really were enormously interesting and challenging recommendations
which a number of us worked on to try and ensure that the legislative
efforts were going to incorporate the recommendations.
Another very important aspect of that report is the continuing
education and training programs of most of the important industries in
the European Community.
(Mr. BAUCUS assumed the chair.)
Mr. KENNEDY. They commit from about 1.5 percent up to about 3 percent
of their payroll costs for training programs to upgrade employee skills
including continuing training programs with certificates establishing
what the content of those training programs actually was.
I think there was reluctance by the administration to talk about some
kind of requirement by the companies and corporations to move into that
kind of encouragement for those plants and factories. But nonetheless,
that has been the policy in those countries and is widely embraced by
all the political parties, by business as well as workers, and that
continues to function.
What we have seen in the United States is that about anywhere from
$30 billion to $40 billion a year goes into training programs. Two-
thirds of that is for white-collar workers, not the blue-collar
workers. A number of the companies that have had those programs have
been willing to do that even though there is a reasonable chance that
after their employees actually gain the training, there is enormous
interest in those employees by some of the competitors of those
companies and then they move and become hired by those competitors.
That is a condition which does not exist by and large in most of the
other industrialized nations in the world.
I know that is not the issue before us, but I do think it does
describe the very modest but important initiative which we have at this
particular time. We are taking a very important aspect of the
recommendations which have been made by that Commission and putting
them in place, and I think, as the Senator from Illinois has pointed
out, with very broad support from the private sector and from business
and from labor. I think it is enormously encouraging. For anyone who
did not have the opportunity the other evening to see Rick Smith
interview President Clinton, he spent about an hour talking about what
was necessary to have a highly skilled, well-paid, competitive work
force--the matter before the Senate--addressing how the President and
his administration viewed the importance of this very program, and also
how it related to the other programs and plans of other industrialized
nations.
The President made it very clear that we are not attempting to
replicate the programs in these other countries. We have our own
economy. We have our own traditions. We have our own labor-management
relations. But there are fundamental and underlying concepts which have
demonstrated time in and time out the importance of these kinds of
programs and cooperative efforts.
The President, I thought, in that program--as well as at other times
when many of us have heard him speak, has clearly indicated his strong
commitment to this area. As recently as last week at a training
conference here in Washington, a training conference of those who are
interested in continuing training programs in the private sector,
programs conducted by unions and by others--heard the President of the
United States, over a period of about 2 hours, moderating a panel on
these training issues. I think that is a very clear indication of his
strong commitment in this area, and the support of the administration
for training.
As I mentioned earlier, this is in harmony with Goals 2000 that
establishes the skills standards. It will also help establish world-
class standards in the areas of learning, with the more effective kinds
of assessments of what young people know and what they should know.
Parents in our country need to know how effective our high schools
are in preparing our young people. This legislation is all part of this
interest in young people and making sure that they are going to have
productive and contributive lives in terms of our economy.
I will take just a few moments of the Senate's time to illustrate
some of the programs we are working on in our own State which I believe
demonstrate what might be able to be achieved in other communities.
We have in Massachusetts relatively high unemployment. We have in New
England 5 percent of the Nation's population. Almost 25, 28 percent of
all the job loss over a 5-year period was in that area. We are one of
the highest States, in the top five States, with individuals who have
lost their jobs and who have been unable to recover them. So when we
find that people lose employment without the other kinds of
opportunities, of having additional kinds of skills and training, it is
an enormous personal burden on those workers, men and women, and upon
the families.
I thought I would just, for a few moments, mention a few of the
programs that appear to be working which, I think, incorporate this
concept. They are only affecting maybe a few hundred people now, but
what we are very hopeful about is that we will affect thousands, tens
of thousands, hundreds of thousands, including the hundreds of
thousands of people who actually drop out from the school systems. With
effective kinds of programs, we will be able to reach out to some of
those individuals and bring them back into a process which hopefully
sets some opportunities for their own future.
In my own State, we are experimenting with a number of different
approaches to assisting young people in making the transition from
school to work.
In Boston, we have three different models: A youth apprenticeship
program called Pro-Tech, which prepares high school students for
careers as health care specialists; three national academy programs
which operate as schools within schools which offer programs in travel,
tourism, finance, and public service; and restructured vocational
education programs which integrate vocational and academic programs.
Project Pro-Tech is a collaborative effort with the Boston public
schools, the Boston teaching hospitals, the Bunker Hill Community
College, and Jobs for the Future, a nonprofit organization. It is that
kind of coordination which is so essential to produce an effective
program and why the support for those different elements being brought
together is a critical part of this whole legislative effort.
Under the program, which got underway in September 1991,
participating students combined work at participating hospitals with
on-site classroom training by health professionals and a specialized
school curriculum emphasizing math and science courses specifically
designed to complement their work experience.
We heard earlier in the day about the importance of the Tech-Prep,
which we very strongly support. We have evidence of that in my own
State. But that is different from this kind of program.
What this legislation is intending to support is the diverse kinds of
ways of equipping young people with both the academic wherewithal and
the technical skills.
The program I just mentioned was designed for students to enter the
program in the 11th grade, continuing after high school graduation with
course work at Bunker Hill Community College, with a goal at the end of
the 4 years that they would have a professional certification
establishing their qualification as health care professionals and an
associate's degree from the community college.
Pro-Tech students spend 15 hours per week in the workplace as part of
a restructured and extended learning program. Teachers and workplace
supervisors have jointly developed new curricula for clusters of 25 to
50 students. That is going to be necessary, the developing of new kinds
of curricula which will be supported with this kind of an effort.
Participating employers have committed to supporting these students
beyond high school graduation through at least 2 years of additional
education and potential entry into a career path within their
organizations.
Although project Pro-Tech is still in the pilot stage, the results so
far have been highly encouraging. All 38 of Pro-Tech's first class of
high school graduates successfully have begun their postsecondary
education at 17 different area community colleges and universities,
while continuing their apprenticeship jobs at local hospitals.
The program has reached out to a number of the community colleges and
universities, not only in my State but in other States.
Interestingly enough, the results in some respects have turned out
differently than what was envisioned on the theory that this was a
program primarily for kids who would otherwise be unlikely to go to
college. The program was originally set up to terminate with a 2-year
community college associate degree. Instead, contrary to expectations,
almost a third of the Pro-Tech's first class of high school graduates
have entered 4-year colleges rather than community colleges. This is
obviously an encouraging development. It should help to alleviate
concerns that school-to-work programs will turn out to be just another
way to attract students who are considered to be poor achievers away
from the goal of 4-year college and limit their future opportunities
and earning potential.
The project Pro-Tech Health Care Program now has 150 students working
in seven area hospitals. The program has recently extended from health
care to financial services, providing an additional 70 students with
youth apprenticeships at seven different banks, insurance companies,
and investment companies. That clearly also is different from what we
developed in the Pro-Tech area.
Boston now has three national academy programs that together enroll
more than 200 students--the Travel and Tourism Academy; East Boston
High School, the Financial Academy, Hyde Park, a Public Service Academy
of Dorchester High School. These academies provide participating
students with 4-year programs and upgrade academic learning with the
study in the particular industry in which the students plan careers.
Students in these academies are grouped together for many of their
high school courses, and their academic courses use curriculum that
relates to the academy's occupational field. Area employers promote
mentor and summer internships to introduce students to the academy's
field.
Again, in terms of the mentoring, we accepted the mentoring amendment
on our Goals 2000 program. We can see now how this community service
program has an important role.
A third model for school-to-work programs is being implemented at the
new Madison Park Vocational Technical High School, Cambridge Language
and Latin. There, additional vocational-educational programs have been
completely restructured to provide students with earlier and broader
opportunities to learn about varied careers and explore those careers
through job shadowing, visits to the workplace, and closer linkages
between communities' occupational and academic courses.
Each of these programs has its own special strengths. Boston and
other communities should be encouraged to continue to experiment with
these and other models under the legislation we are considering today.
Because this legislation does not describe one rigid model for all
communities to follow, we expect schools and employers to continue to
combine and adopt new ideas that meet local needs.
That is what this legislation is really about. We have seen fewer
dropouts taking place in a number of the other communities, which has
resulted in very positive experiences for many young people who, in too
many instances, may drop out of school and involve themselves in a more
negative direction. These programs have been a lifeline in many
different areas.
What we are seeing in a number of the schools and colleges is that
they are developing their academic courses and relating those to some
of the work experience courses and doing that in a very demanding
academic fashion. This, in turn, has awakened a great deal of interest
in a number of different areas. This has been very, very encouraging as
well.
Mr. President, I see my friend and colleague from Pennsylvania [Mr.
Wofford], who has worked in this area as well as in many other areas
and is a real leader in his State in terms of the creation of jobs,
skills, and voluntary services.
As has been pointed out, Paul Simon has been enormously involved in
these kinds of programs and has been very, very much involved, as was
recognized earlier today, in the shaping and fashioning of the program.
We have worked very closely on this effort together.
I know Senator Wofford has some comments. So I will yield the floor.
Mr. WOFFORD addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Mr. WOFFORD. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Massachusetts,
our distinguished chairman. I suppose I should accept his kind words
because it takes one to know one, and he has been in the forefront of
this effort, as has Senator Simon, for a long, hard time; a creative
time, too.
Mr. President, I rise in full support of the School-to-Work
Opportunities Act of 1993 because this bill will create a diverse,
national system of apprenticeship-style programs from the grassroots
up, it will increase the skills of our young people, the success of our
schools, the competitiveness of our businesses, and the productivity of
our work force.
School-to-work and youth apprenticeship programs are built on a
simple truth: People learn best by doing. It is like the old Chinese
proverb: ``What I hear I forget. What I see I remember. What I do I
understand.'' We must empower young people to become active, not
passive, in learning the skills they will need to get good jobs and be
productive workers. Real learning requires more than textbooks. You
have to get your hands dirty.
Let me give you two examples of how these apprenticeships are already
working in Pennsylvania. At Osram Sylvania, a tool and die manufacturer
in York, PA, three young men are learning hands-on skills that they
need to be part of the work force in the future. And at Flinchbaugh
Engineering, also in York, Ryan Crowl is developing proficiencies in
math and science while learning how to read a blueprint, operate a
lathe, and adjust machinery. They are developing a work ethic and a
sense of personal responsibility for the quality of the products they
turn out and for getting them to the customers on schedule.
Once they complete this work, a 4-year program as part of their high
school curriculum, these students will not only have the skills and the
high school degree but also the real workplace experience and solid
employer references that they can apply to a job in any industry.
But apprenticeships are not only good for young people who need jobs.
Business needs apprenticeship programs to train the skilled workers
they need. My friend, Robert Valentini, president and chief executive
officer of Bell of Pennsylvania, offered us some time ago some powerful
reasons why in our Pennsylvania economic development partnership just
before I got sent down on this mission to the Senate of the United
States.
About 10,000 Bell workers in Pennsylvania, over 30 percent of their
total work force, are in three separate entry-level jobs within the
company: Telephone operators, service representatives, and technicians.
All these jobs offer a career ladder and progressive pay scales, health
care benefits, and opportunities for long-term employment. Most of the
workers are hired right out of high school with no college experience.
At the time of Bob Valentini's report--and he told me the other day
the situation still has not improved--Bell of Pennsylvania was hiring
1,100 employees in these three jobs each year. But to get that number,
they had to interview and test over 9,000 applicants just in order to
identify 1,100 qualified workers to hire.
Many candidates scored reasonably well on writing and math tests, but
most scored low on critical thinking and applied problem solving. A
high proportion quit or had to leave in the first year--in fact, in the
first 6 months--because they lacked the motive or the work ethic to
succeed.
Last April I held a roundtable discussion with students,
manufacturers, teachers, and union representatives at a pilot
apprenticeship program in Williamsport to talk about how we can use
Pennsylvania's experience to expand apprenticeship nationwide. Area
manufacturers--Precision Metal Forming, Keystone Friction Hinge, and
Textron Lycoming--told me that apprentices like the ones I met there,
Jason Huff and Jamie Rakestraw, were filling a critical need they had
for trained toolmakers.
In Pittsburgh, Bill Bleil, vice president of manufacturing at
Scheirer Machine Co., found that apprenticeship was the answer to the
question that he and his competitors have been wrestling with. ``Where
are we going to get trained, skilled workers? Where are our future
technicians going to come from? Because right now we are stealing
workers from each other.'' Scheirer Machine is employing a student now
from Peabody High School in Pittsburgh. Peabody High has 14 apprentices
placed in local businesses, and the students are the ones who choose
which businesses they go to work in.
Many American companies want this legislation. It has been endorsed
by the Business Roundtable, the National Alliance of Business, the U.S.
Chamber of Commerce, and the National Association of Manufacturers. As
some of us know who are working hard on the health care reform effort,
getting endorsements from those groups is not so easy.
Schools, teachers, and students want the bill, too. One such student,
Stacey Coleman, a junior at Peabody High in Pittsburgh, wanted to
pursue a career in printing. Now she is working at Hoechstecher
Printing learning computer technology and how to read a blueprint while
creating a real work product. Her response to her experience so far
echoes our Pennsylvania Economic Development Partnership's
recommendation that ``This program should be in every school.''
We all want cost-effective education reform that improves how
students learn and teachers teach. But no one could have said it better
than Rick Miller, a machinist and teacher, who heads the program at
Peabody High. He admits: ``We have a harder time nowadays teaching high
school students. They think they know everything. But through the
apprenticeship program, kids quickly see that they don't,'' he said.
``It shows them why they need to learn.''
As I discovered when I was our State's secretary of labor and
industry, the mismatch between what our schools and job training
programs are teaching and what our businesses need is growing. It is
estimated that 30 percent of 16- to 24-year-olds nationwide lack the
skills necessary for entry level employment. That is why Senator Simon
and I worked together to develop the Career Pathways Act of 1993 and
why I join him so enthusiastically in supporting the School-to-Work
Opportunities Act, which is based in large part on our original bill.
The United States lags way behind our competitors in Europe and Asia
in preparing young people--especially those who choose not to go to
college--for the world of work. Germany and Japan have developed
extensive, integrated youth education and job training programs to
succeed in the high-technology global economy of the 21st century.
As a former college president, I think it is critical for us to open
the doors of opportunity to college to every young person through
grants and loans. My first bill in the Senate made college more
affordable for middle-income families. Our national service bill
includes college aid as a key component. But it is wrong that this
country spends $55 on college aid for every dollar we spend on
opportunities for those who do not go to college, especially when such
a small percent of today's high school freshmen will graduate from both
high school and college. That is penny-wise and dollar-foolish.
As we have learned over and over again, what we do not invest today
in giving our young people the skills, discipline, and sense of
personal responsibility to be productive workers and good citizens, we
pay tomorrow in the costs of unemployment, welfare, drugs, crime, and
prison. Only about half of our high school graduates enter
postsecondary education or training programs and, of these, only half
will complete their degrees. Too many of these people move from one
low-skilled job to the next with periods of unemployment and sometimes
welfare in between. Fifty percent of adults in their late twenties are
estimated not to have found a steady job. Think of the wasted
productivity, talents and skills. We can do better.
As the examples in Pennsylvania that I gave demonstrate, we know we
can do better. So if you want to see the future of where we must take
this Nation in youth apprenticeships, look at where Pennsylvania has
already been. Under Governor Casey's leadership, we now have more than
450 students participating in Pennsylvania's Youth Apprenticeship
Program at 14 sites, including 152 businesses, across the Commonwealth.
They are learning practical skills in metalworking, manufacturing,
electronics and health care. Contrary to what my distinguished
colleague from Kansas suggested this morning, many of these businesses
that are participating in initiating and leading this program and
supporting it are, in fact, small businesses.
Philadelphia is just one of the cities where this apprenticeship
program is having extraordinarily good results under the joint
leadership of the Philadelphia Federation of Teachers, the Philadelphia
High School Academies, and the Philadelphia School District. And in
this Philadelphia partnership, I salute particularly Natalie Allen and
J. Lawrence Wilson and Ted Kirsch. In one of their programs we have 135
students in 15 hospitals and community health centers around the city.
At Jefferson, Hahnemann, Einstein, Temple, and Abington hospitals, and
other medical centers, students are learning the technology needed to
work in areas such as radiology, nuclear medicine, and pulmonary
therapy from mentors on the job.
The Philadelphia academy system itself, schools within schools, is
the Nation's oldest and biggest program linking school and work. It is
representative of the type of programming and school reform the School-
to-Work Opportunities Act will help foster. Recently, I visited with
some of the over 250 students and teachers from the Environmental
Technology and Horticulture Academy at Philadelphia's Abraham Lincoln
High School. That is a 4-year specialized program in an emerging growth
industry. This program teaches chemistry, biology, and geology, and it
is the only one of its kind in the country. They teach by doing as well
as by studying.
The Philadelphia academy system, serving less than 10 percent of the
city's high school population, has an impressive 54 percent of its
students going on to college. It has a dropout rate less than half of
the rest of the school district. Businesses contribute $1.5 million a
year to the program, and executives volunteer to help oversee and
manage the operations.
One final example: In Hershey, PA--where I started this very day--an
innovative partnership between the school district and Hershey Medical
Center is now giving 21 Hershey and Lower Dauphin High School students
the opportunity to work alongside doctors, nurses, and medical
technicians at Penn State's Hershey Medical Center. In their junior
year of high school, they go through 16 clinical rotations, including
radiology, physical therapy, patient transport, orthopedics, and even
surgery. In their senior year, students choose two fields to specialize
in.
The program is so popular that they are nearly doubling it to include
40 students next year. The response from the medical center has been
equally enthusiastic. They have asked the school district to bring the
students in for longer periods of time.
Most important, the experiences on the job are translating into
better performance at school, higher confidence, and stronger
motivation. Formerly average students are now earning above-average
grades and moving into accelerated courses. During the past 9 weeks,
nearly every student in the program has had perfect attendance. The
young people's enthusiasm and motivation is contagious. As Priscilla
Fair, the program coordinator and assistant superintendent of Hershey
school district said, ``The other kids now look up to them.''
The efforts I have described, when taken together, represent a still
small but very promising start. Now it is our turn to do our job so
that teachers, students, business and community leaders can do theirs.
These pilot programs I have described have worked. They are working.
But the purpose of pilot programs is when that happens, they ignite the
whole, and that should be our purpose today.
The House has already passed the School-to-Work Opportunities Act. I
note with particular appreciation the support of my Pennsylvania
colleague, Representative Bill Goodling, the ranking minority member of
the House Education and Labor Committee.
It is my hope that this bill will pass the Senate with the votes of
many of my colleagues from both sides of the aisle tomorrow, because
this legislation has nothing to do with party or politics. It offers us
another chance to show the American people that we can come together to
empower citizens and schools, communities and companies to help each
other. It is part of the business education partnership that is the key
to good education for the good jobs of the future, not with more
government bureaucracy, but with support for education that works.
So this is the time to support on-the-job, school-to-work training
that will give young people--especially those millions of young people
who do not go to college--the chance to build prosperous careers and
better lives for themselves and their families.
That is our job right now. That is the idea behind the School-to-Work
Opportunities Act.
So I urge my colleagues to support this creative and vital
legislation.
Mr. SIMON and Mr. D'AMATO addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
Mr. SIMON. I will be just 1 minute. I know my colleague from New York
has been on the floor.
I simply want to commend my colleague from Pennsylvania who has
provided real leadership in this area. I mentioned in my opening
remarks this morning my gratitude to him. He has worked in this area as
Secretary of Labor in Pennsylvania. He understands it. He knows this is
really the key to our Nation moving ahead as we should, and I am very
grateful to him.
Mr. WOFFORD. I am grateful, from someone who has played such a
pioneering role, to hear those words.
I ask unanimous consent to print in the Record a letter about this
program from our Governor, under whose leadership it was instituted in
Pennsylvania, Gov. Robert Patrick Casey.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Office of the Governor,
Harrisburg, PA, February 7, 1994.
Hon. Harris Wofford,
U.S. Senate, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Harris: I am writing in support of the School-To-Work
Opportunities Act which I understand is now under
consideration by the Senate. This program, which tracks the
Pennsylvania Youth Apprenticeship Program, has the potential
of reinventing vocational educational curricula across the
nation.
Pennsylvania's Youth Apprenticeship Program that you were
instrumental in developing as Secretary of Labor and Industry
is aimed at meeting the growing demand for skilled workers in
technical occupations and providing students with the
advanced capability and flexibility they will need in the
high technology workplace of tomorrow. We believe that we
have developed more than a program; we have created a means
to unleash the energy and creativity of our youth and prepare
them for the global marketplace.
We are working to make our program available throughout the
Commonwealth. Last year the program included six sites with
105 apprentices and the participation of 79 metal working
companies. This year we have 450 apprentices at 14 sites with
programs that now include health care, general manufacturing,
printing, and finance. Our programs are in the urban settings
of Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, rural communities of Lycoming
County and the Northern Tier counties, and suburban sites in
Montgomery, Allegheny and Dauphin counties.
Pennsylvania's experience has demonstrated the value of a
competency based curriculum which includes paid work
experience and work site monitoring. I understand that there
has been opposition to the requirement of paid work
experience; in Pennsylvania we have found that while paid
work experience may be a challenge for school administrators,
it is as fundamental to the curriculum as algebra. I would
encourage the Senate to maintain these critical elements in
the program.
Harris, I want to commend you for successfully moving the
concept of our Youth Apprenticeship Program from a program
which we started in Pennsylvania into a means for changing
the face of vocational education throughout the nation. I
wish you much success with the School-To-Work Opportunities
Act.
Sincerely,
Robert P. Casey,
Governor.
Mr. D'AMATO. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I might be
permitted to proceed as if in morning business
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________