[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 36 (Friday, March 25, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: March 25, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
GOALS 2000: EDUCATE AMERICA ACT--CONFERENCE REPORT
The Senate continued with consideration of the conference report.
Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I rise to address concerns about Goals
2000. While there will be differing views as to whether or not to
include the provision with regard to prayer, I am sure every Senator in
this body joins me in looking for a dramatic change in the way our
education system works.
Everyone must have asked themselves why Americans seem to fall behind
in this category. It is particularly amazing because the American
experience is one which has resulted in excellence in almost every
discipline. Indeed, our educational achievements at the graduate level
and postgraduate level are remarkable and lead the world. The United
States remains the place to come for graduate school and advanced
degrees. Yet, for some reason our K-12 education experience has not
remained competitive with many other countries around the world, some
of the same countries that supplied the population that makes up
America.
Do people lose intellectual capacity when they cross the water to
come to America? I think not. Is there something inferior about this
Nation that would result in the lack of achievement in the K-12 area? I
think not, Mr. President. Everything we can look at seems to indicate
exactly the opposite. The freedom and democracy that has blessed this
shore has showered achievement in almost every area of human endeavor.
To be sure, it has brought out the best in all of us.
Then why the failure of achievement in the K-12 area? Many of the
comparative studies seem to indicate that our high school graduates may
be as much as 2 years behind their counterparts in Europe or Japan or
China or other countries around the world. Some would say it is because
we attempt to educate the entire population while others are more
restrictive and selective. Yet the figures do not seem to bear that
out. While that may well be a factor, it is not by any means the only
factor. In fact, there are some studies that show that other countries
have very broad educational policies as well. No, the answer lies
somewhere else. I do not pretend to be the Nation's expert in this
area, but the studies have shown some differences in the K-12 area, and
I think those differences are worth looking at.
The first is the number of school days. Quite simply, how many days a
year do our children go to school and how does that compare with their
competitors around the world? The studies are very dramatic and quite
clear. Our children go to school a significantly fewer number of days
per year than other students around the world. Could this be part of
the explanation? I think so. We simply are not going to have the same
educational achievement if our students are not in school.
One of the things that clearly needs to change if we are to become
competitive again is that the length of the school year must be
extended. We must be competitive in the length of time our students
commit to education if we are to be competitive in their achievement
levels.
The second dramatic difference between the American schools and
others is the length of the school day. Several months ago I had the
privilege of chatting with a young man in a school in Adams County, CO.
He had endured difficult problems. Indeed, he was a year behind those
people in school of similar age. At one point, he had dropped out.
Thanks to what I thought was a very progressive program, he had been
recruited to come back to school and was finishing the 8th grade.
He is a delightful young man. When I chatted with him about the
program, he expressed optimism about his future because of the special
attention he received. I asked him many questions about the program,
but I remember one of his answers particularly well. I asked him when
his school day was completed. He finished school at 1:15 in the
afternoon.
He attended somewhere around 4 hours of classroom instruction a day
and he was free from 1:15 p.m. on. Interestingly, he did not have
homework, or at least any significant amount he felt compelled to spend
a meaningful amount of time doing. His day, in terms of academic
preparation, ended at 1:15 in the afternoon. His mother did not get
home until 6 o'clock. While he was clearly an active, vigorous young
man with lots of energy, he led an unstructured and unsupervised life
between 1:15 and 6 o'clock.
That is the comparison between ourselves and other countries. Their
school days are longer. One of the reasons we do not achieve the same
way other countries achieve is simply because we ask our children to
stay in school a shorter amount of time. Can we learn more on less
time, fewer hours? I think not. As creative and productive as Americans
are, they still have to put in the time and the effort to compete. So,
the second difference is not simply matching our competitors with the
number of school days, but it has to be asking our children to put in
the same amount of time during the school day.
Mr. President, I particularly believe that length of time in the
school day is extremely important. Young men and women who are going
through our school system are filled with energy and enthusiasm, and if
their time is not filled with productive pursuits, it may well be
filled with pursuits that result in trouble and, yes, even crime.
The explosion of violence in our society and the increase in the
number of gangs is in part related to the fact that there are not
productive, active pursuits available for our children during the
daytime. This particular young man is free from 1:15 to 6 o'clock. He
is filled with energy and excitement. He has the potential for getting
into trouble.
We have restricted children from working part-time jobs, even ones
that would help them when their family needs help, even ones that would
help fill time in productive pursuit. Perhaps there is something we can
do to allow young men and women who want to work part time to fill
their time with work. Perhaps we ought to look at the restrictions we
have on such jobs. I, for one, am convinced that good healthy work can
help fill time in a productive way and serve a useful productive
function for our society. It can also constitute the some of the
strongest and best training that a young person can receive. Learning
how to work is every bit as important as any single academic enterprise
that we have. Tragically, some of our laws at the State level, perhaps
even at the national level, restrict that opportunity.
Mr. President, there was another difference between our schools and
those of our competitors, that is the lack of homework in American
schools. While we have some schools that provide significant and
meaningful homework responsibilities and assignments, a large majority
of our public schools simply do not have purposeful, challenging
homework assignments for our students. However, I can guarantee you the
Japanese do. The Japanese care about their children; they care about
their academic success. And part of that caring is the assignment of
homework that both challenges the student and brings out the best in
them.
There is nothing wrong with Americans. We can compete with the best
in the world. But we cannot compete if we do not show up for the race,
and we are not showing up for the race when there is no homework.
A fourth area that I am convinced is very important is discipline. It
is clear that while levels of discipline and methods of discipline vary
dramatically around the world, the United States may be at the bottom
rung in terms of imposing discipline upon their students. Certainly
discipline is a function that must go far deeper than our schools. It
must begin with the family and parents; it must involve society as a
whole. But our schools have a part to play, and tying the disciplinary
hands of the teachers and the principals, who are required to
administer those schools, is a disservice to the students. No one would
accept cruel or hateful treatment of our students, and there is no
question that discipline can be overdone. But it also can be underdone.
Lack of discipline invites chaos in many of our schools.
Those are four differences, Mr. President, that I think make a
difference in American education. As we talk about the future of
education, we see many plans drawn up and many suggestions made. That
is part of the richness of this country. It is part of the value I hope
will come forth. But this Senator believes that until we deal with
these four basic fundamental differences between our schools and our
competitors' schools, we will not have addressed the reason why
Americans fall behind in K-12 education.
I am one who believes that there is nothing wrong with Americans;
that we are capable of competing and excelling. We have the ability not
only to catch up with the rest of the world in K-12 education, but to
outshine them all as, indeed, we have through much of our history. But
it must involve fundamental changes and, at a minimum, it must involve
a longer school year, a longer school day, more homework and stronger
discipline. Those four pillars will help support a resurgence of
education in this Nation.
Mr. President, I cannot help but recollect the very enlightening and
helpful discussions that you have brought to this Chamber in your
discussions of the history of Rome and of world history. The University
of Colorado library has chiseled over it a saying I think is
particularly appropriate, particularly since I have had the pleasure of
listening to your many eloquent talks on the floor concerning Roman
history. It says: ``He who knows only his own generation remains always
a child.'' Indeed, I believe it is so.
As America faces troubling times, it perhaps is worthwhile for us to
take a moment to look back at the lessons of history.
One particular interesting story from William Durant I want to
relate. It involves a period of French history just prior to the French
Revolution. These were tumultuous times not only for France but also,
as the President knows well, the United States. This was a time, during
and after our revolution, where we held the torch of liberty aloft for
all to see. And those stirrings of independence and liberty swept the
European continent as well. No, they did not change governments
immediately, but they did something just as important or perhaps more
important. They influenced and impacted the minds of the men and women
who would direct the future.
France had enormous problems during this period. They had a runaway
budget deficit. Expenditures exceeded income in dramatic fashion. They
had a huge military. They had a queen that, while beautiful, was
extravagant. The annual budget for jewelry was a horrendous sum by any
measurement.
They had tolls on the roads, ones that restricted commerce and
industry throughout France. Those tolls made it more difficult for
imports and exports to go through the country, made it much more
difficult for farmers and merchants to deliver their goods and compete
throughout the country. They had enormous trade barriers. So, as a
result, many of their industries were not competitive.
Further, the guilds within Paris and other parts of France restricted
competition; restricted competition not just for the benefit of the
guilds but to the detriment of consumers. Moreover, the French found it
more and more difficult to compete in world markets, such as they were
at that time, because lack of competition within the country made it
more difficult for them to compete outside the country.
The French also had a tax code that was dreadful by any measurement.
It imposed on the working men and women of the country a horrendous
burden. Yet the church lands, which were numerous and significant, and
the royalty of the country were largely exempt from paying taxes. The
burden paying fell on those who could least afford it and on those who
were called upon to do the work.
The country went from bad to worse. The deficit skyrocketed. Unable
to face the various interest groups that plagued them even in that day,
the problems rolled on and grew. Finally, the French had incurred such
horrendous problems in financing their debt that they were forced to go
to the Dutch to refinance it. They got to the point where, to finance
that debt, as Durant relates, they drew interest rates of 12 percent,
14 percent, and even 16 percent as the problem spiraled out of control.
In desperation, the King turned to a new finance minister, and gave
him very broad powers. Turgot was brought in as finance minister and
given wide powers to deal with the economic and fiscal problems of the
country. What he did was to bring tough medicine to France. But he
established a model for what one must do to bring an economy in line
and to straighten out a country's fiscal crisis.
What Turgot did was address the problems. He took on all of the
interest groups. The toughest interest group of all was the Queen. He
eliminated her budget for jewelry; it was a major item, and it was not
unnoticed by the King and the Queen. He cut back on household expenses
for the King. He went to the military and cut it back significantly. He
eliminated the tolls on the roads so competition and commerce could
expand. He eliminated the trade barriers and, indeed, while they
received many imports from England, they were able to export more wine
and other products.
France, when they eliminated their trade barriers, instead of
becoming less competitive, became more competitive. Turgot restricted
the ability of the guilds to corner markets and restrict trade. He was
an early forerunner of our antimonopoly concept, pioneered by
Americans. It was not called that. Trusts were not involved. But Turgot
quickly understood that the concentration of economic powers under the
guild system harmed and dramatically injured the competitiveness of the
French economy.
Turgot took on the exempt areas of taxation and, indeed, insisted
that the royalty pay taxes. At any rate, he took on many of the
exemptions that they held. And while he did not go as far as he wished,
he did make some progress in broadening the tax base.
In short, in 18 or 19 months Turgot was able to balance the budget, a
task that people had thought impossible. He was able to dramatically
reduce the trade deficit. He was able to significantly spur and
increase the competitiveness of their economy. He was able to refinance
the debt. Astoundingly, a debt that was loaned or borrowed at 12, 14,
and 16 percent was refinanced at 4\1/2\ percent after only 18 or 19
months.
After he achieved the refinancing, he found that every single
interest group that he had offended, or taken on, had teamed up against
him. The Queen, the military, those who owned the toll highways, the
guilds, the royalty, even the church, they took Turgot and threw him
out of office. Within a brief time, the French Revolution occurred.
There are many reasons the French Revolution occurred. I do not mean
to pretend that the return to the old ways of tax and spend were the
only ones, or the unwillingness to live with competitiveness, or the
unwillingness to curb appetites for military, jewels, and other
household trappings. But one has to wonder how different history might
have been if Turgot had not been thrown out of office but had stayed.
What happened, of course, is the inflation that Turgot had quieted
returned; inflation came back, the economic instability returned,
shortages occurred, and the economic crisis facilitated a political
crisis.
The reality was that Turgot had the right answers. Turgot's instinct
or willingness to make sacrifices and to bring budgets into line, his
willingness to make tough choices, his willingness to take on special
interests, his willingness to broaden the tax base, his willingness to
stand up for good, for what his country was and for what the special
interests were against, could have saved France a bloodbath.
Perhaps, in all, the democracy that eventually came to France was
worth it. But one has to wonder if there was not a better way. One
wonders if Turgot 's vision and foresight and courage could not have
saved many lives and meant a different destiny for Europe than the
years of bloody wars brought on by Napoleon and the instability that
spread far beyond French borders. It is an answer no one will know, but
I cannot help but think this country, with our inability and our
unwillingness to face up to the terrible budget deficits that lie
before us, does not face great instability as well.
The blessing of liberty and the enormous outpouring of spirit and
creativity that have come from the American people are part and parcel
of what I believe our freedom is all about. And yet this last year we
had over 70,000 pages of new regulations published in the Federal
Register. We have adopted a form of central planning in this Nation
which may be more efficient than any country in the world has ever
placed upon its people. It may be more efficient because it is more
numerous and more detailed with stricter enforcement.
The creative spirit of this country will not be dampened by thousands
of pages of new regulations, or even 70,000 pages of new regulations,
or even 20 years of 70,000 pages of new regulation per year. But it
will be impacted. The spirit and the enterprise of this country will
not be eliminated by taxes that rise higher and higher and penalize
people for working harder and harder. But it will be affected by it.
The willingness of our citizens to save and plan for the future and
prepare for their children will not be eliminated by a Tax Code that
penalizes savings, but it will be impacted.
The fact that we have the lowest net savings rate of any major
industrialized country in the world speaks volumes about what we have
done to incentives in America. There are those in this Congress who
come here with a deep and abiding commitment to make sure that the
wealth of the Nation is redivided in a way that gives all a chance and,
indeed, this Nation is committed to make sure each one has a chance.
But in our enthusiasm to redivide the wealth in the Nation, we must
never forget the engine that drives America is that spirit of free
enterprise. It is that ability to keep a fair share of what one
produces for themselves and their family, that ability to make
decisions about their own lives--yes, even when they might make
mistakes. We do not want to kill off the engine that sparks this
Nation, that drives this Nation, that makes this a creative phenomenon,
with our enthusiasm for giving all a chance.
In the last analysis, giving all a chance is a valuable and important
goal, but it is dramatically different than making everyone equal in
the final result. Our Founding Fathers and our leaders, since the time
this Republic began, believed that America was all about giving
everyone a chance and an opportunity. Our commitment to education is
part and parcel of that concern. We have long believed, and I believe
rightly so, that education should be available to all of this land
because it is fundamental to having a chance to make it up the rungs of
the ladder of success, to climb the rungs that provide greater
opportunity.
But making all come out the same, is not making them the same. Those
who work harder deserve to live better, and if they do not, we send a
message that hard work and achievement are not to be rewarded in
America. Have we gone too far? Have we begun to slow the engine of
creativity of progress? The numbers sometimes tell the story.
Our rate of growth of productivity has lagged and lagged for many
years now. True, we are still the most productive people on the face of
the Earth. But the rate of our productivity growth is slow when you
look at it over the long-term. That has to be reversed. Our rate of
savings has fallen from one of the highest in the world to one of the
lowest in terms of the large industrialized nations.
Our willingness to face up to tough problems has also suffered in
recent years. The reality is that those who would be concerned about
America's future and draw from the lessons of history should be
concerned about our failure to deal with the problems that are before
us.
I would add this: That the observations of Polybius and Cicero about
the cycles of government can apply to America just as they applied to
ancient Greece and to ancient Rome. The observation is that the
tendency toward a greater and greater concentration of power occurred
both in Greece and later in Rome. Now it indeed applies to the United
States. We have gone from a country where power was widely spread to
where it has become more and more and more concentrated in the hands of
a few.
When Washington begins to control the details of our daily lives,
when a small number of men and women take on the power to spend the
fruits of what working men and women produce in our country, when they
take on the power to decide how we live our daily lives in detail, when
they issue 70,000 pages of new regulations in the Federal Register last
year, we begin to see a society where the power of the Nation is taken
from the individual citizens and concentrated more and more in the
hands of a few elite in Washington, DC.
Polybius and Cicero knew what was going on when they saw the same
tendencies and the same cycles appear in their societies. They also saw
the danger and the lack of vigor, trust, and creativity result when a
few try and control the majority.
I, for one, am convinced that the tendency of our Government in
Washington to concentrate the power of this Nation in the hands of a
few in this city is a great mistake. There is a valuable and important
purpose for our levels of local and State government, there is a
valuable reason for the tenth amendment of the Constitution. The best
repository of our power and our strength is in the hands of the
individual citizen, not in the hands of the elite who decide how their
money is spent, how they live their daily lives and the details of
their daily work.
My impression is that the economy shows that same tendency. Giant
businesses are often not as competitive as ones of individual
entrepreneurs, who have the flexibility and creativity to move quickly
on opportunity and with the motivation coming from having your own
destiny in your own hands.
____________________