[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 11 (Tuesday, February 8, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: February 8, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                     THE COATS-LIEBERMAN AMENDMENT

  Mr. DURENBERGER. Mr. President, I rise to support the amendment 
offered by my distinguished colleagues from Indiana and Connecticut 
which authorizes a limited demonstration of ways of expanding school 
choices for parents of low-income children--including the option of 
choosing a nonpublic school.
  As my colleagues know, my own State of Minnesota has taken the lead 
nationally in expanding the right of parents to choose which school 
their children will attend. Minnesota has also been at the forefront of 
efforts nationally to expand the number and diversity of schools that 
parents may choose from.
  Along the way, Minnesotans are redefining what we mean by public 
education.
  In Minnesota, for example, public education now includes charter 
schools--schools that are started and run by parents and teachers under 
a contract with a local education agency or the State board of 
education. Several of these schools are designed to serve students with 
special needs, including students who have not succeeded in a 
traditional school environment.
  In Minnesota, public education also includes a program called post-
secondary options under which high school juniors and seniors may take 
college courses at public expense at either a public or private college 
or technical institute.
  In Minnesota, public education also includes a number of schools run 
by nonprofit organizations under contract with the Minneapolis, St. 
Paul and other school districts. These contract schools also include 
several institutions that serve at-risk students, students with special 
needs, or others for whom traditional public schools may not be the 
ideal setting.
  Although these contract schools must be nonsectarian, Mr. President, 
there are also special circumstances under which public schools may 
contract with a sectarian nonpublic school to educate an at-risk high 
school junior or senior.
  My point here, Mr. President, is that, even in a State which is known 
for its leadership on public school choice, we are using a number of 
different ways of delivering what is a new and broader understanding of 
public education.
  Increasingly, that definition focuses on results--on accountability 
for what students actually learn. And, we're also defining public 
education by assurances that all students will be admitted--regardless 
of race, religion, academic ability, income, or other personal 
characteristics.
  Quite frankly, Mr. President, I don't know what role traditionally 
defined nonpublic schools should be playing in this new world of public 
education. I'm not even sure that a lot of nonpublic schools will want 
to be subject to the kind of accountability that will inevitably go 
with receiving public funds.
  But, I do know that the amendment Senators Coats and Lieberman have 
placed before us offers a reasonable and nonthreatening opportunity to 
help answer these questions.
  This amendment authorizes a demonstration that requires the full 
participation and support of the local school district. Only low-income 
students and their families would be allowed to participate. Civil 
rights protections are included, as are assurances that local 
desegregation plans would not be disrupted.
  This Senator believes that sounds like a very reasonable and sensible 
proposal that this body ought to be willing to adopt.
  I intend to support this amendment, Mr. President. And, I urge my 
colleagues to support it, as well.
  I yield the floor.

                          ____________________