[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 15 (Tuesday, February 22, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: February 22, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
    THE PRIVATE SCHOOL AND HOME SCHOOL FREEDOM AMENDMENT INTRODUCED

                                 ______


                         HON. RICHARD K. ARMEY

                                of texas

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, February 22, 1994

  Mr. ARMEY. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of a large number of my colleagues, 
I am proud to introduce an amendment to H.R. 6, which we call the 
Private School and Home School Freedom Amendment. This amendment would 
accomplish two things. First, it would clarify that H.R. 6 would not 
require nonpublic school teachers to be State-certified. Second, it 
would make clear what we all agree is the policy of H.R. 6, namely, 
that it is not intended to establish any new Federal control over any 
nonpublic school that does not take funds under the act.
  As you know, public concern about the so-called Miller amendment has 
made this a politically sensitive issue. The Miller amendment requires 
all teachers in schools under the jurisdiction of a local school 
district to be State-certified. In many States, private schools and 
home-schooling parents are legally considered to be under the 
jurisdiction of the local school district. The Miller language would 
overturn the laws and jurisprudence of 50 States. To put this in 
perspective, right now all 50 States already require public school 
teachers to be State certified, only 12 States require private school 
teachers to be certified, and no State require home-schooling parents 
to be certified. Since Mr. Miller has said he had no intention of 
applying a new Federal requirement to nonpublic schools, it is 
necessary to amend his provision to make that intention absolutely 
clear.
  Amending the Miller language, however, is not enough to guarantee the 
independence of nonpublic schools. Because the definition of the word 
``school'' has been changed in the definitions section of H.R. 6, other 
provisions of the act could, and likely would, fall over nonpublic 
schools that do not take funds under the act. Under current law, a 
school is defined as a day or residential school that provides 
education as determined under State law. This definition has enough 
slack in it to leave some ambiguity as to whether nonpublic schools are 
covered. H.R. 6 eliminates this ambiguity. The authors of H.R. 6 have 
inserted the word ``nonprofit'' into the definition, dispelling any 
question as to whether this law is intended to apply to nonpublic 
schools. To resolve this problem, my amendment would add a new sentence 
after the definition of ``school'' to clarify that this definition 
shall not apply to any nonpublic school that does not receive funds 
under the act. That is a policy I think we can all agree on. If you 
don't take Uncle Sam's penny, you don't fall under Uncle Sam's rules.
  Finally, my amendment adds a new general provision applying this 
principle to the entire act. This is necessary to ensure that any other 
potential time bombs in the bill are defused preemptively, rather than 
being discovered at some later date to our mutual regret.
  A vote for the Private School and Home School Freedom amendment will 
be a vote for the continued integrity and independence of America's 
thriving private education system.
  Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

                          ____________________