[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 100 (Wednesday, July 27, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: July 27, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                IMPROVING AMERICA'S SCHOOLS ACT OF 1993


                           MOTION TO PROCEED

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, in a hopefully short period of time we 
will begin action on the reauthorization of the Elementary and 
Secondary Education Act.
  It is not an overstatement to say this is the most important 
reauthorization in this legislation's history. Our Senate bill 
incorporates many of the excellent proposals sent to us by President 
Clinton, and it reshapes the manner in which the Federal Government 
supports public schools across the Nation. It authorizes $12.5 billion 
next year for support for local schools, and $60 billion over the next 
5 years.
  At the same time, the committee bill recognizes the need to simplify 
the current programs within the overall framework of the Goals 2000 
education reform legislation that we enacted at the end of March.
  At the heart of both Goals 2000 and the pending bill is one clear 
idea. American students--all students, including those with few 
advantages--can meet high standards of learning if we commit ourselves 
to the task and if all levels of government--Federal, State, and 
local--coordinate their efforts.
  S. 1513 has broad, bipartisan support. It passed the Labor and Human 
Resources Committee on June 15 by a vote of 16 to 1. Since that time my 
colleagues and I have worked to incorporate changes important to both 
sides of the aisle. It is gratifying that in bringing this measure 
before the Senate, Senator Pell and I have the strong support of both 
Senators Kassebaum and Jeffords, and other Members who have made 
important contributions to the legislation.
  Since the last reauthorization in 1988, over 20 reports on ESEA have 
been commissioned by the Department of Education. Five major 
independent studies have been completed. S. 1513 reflects nearly all 
the recommendations of those reports and commissions.
  It also reflects what we were told by the witnesses at the 12 
hearings we held on this measure in the Subcommittee on Education.
  One of our most persuasive witnesses at the hearing was Gary Hocevar, 
a former State legislator who is now the principal of the Van Buren 
Middle School, an award-winning school that serves a very diverse group 
of students in Albuquerque, NM.
  Mr. Hocevar, who is active in the National Urban Reform Network, told 
us:

       You have the opportunity to craft ESEA and other child-
     related initiatives in ways that actually support, rather 
     than hinder, the day-to-day efforts of front line 
     pioneers.*.*.*. If you take this opportunity, our progress 
     will be the mark of your success.

  We have heard Mr. Hocevar and thousands of others across the country 
who are the frontline pioneers--principals and teachers charting a new 
course, working with students every day.
  S. 1513 is based on six principles. First, schools should not hold 
disadvantaged students to a different, lower standard from the standard 
they apply to other students in their school. S. 1513 requires States 
to develop standards in at least reading and math for use by all 
students in the State, including title I students. We also require new 
assessments that measure the progress of students in reaching those 
standards, and these assessments have to be the same for everyone. The 
days of special, dumbed down tests for low-income pupils are over.
  At the same time, we are not dictating to States what standards they 
should have and what tests they should use. Each State will develop 
their own performance standards and test students using a broad range 
of assessment tools.
  Second, S. 1513 increases support for the schools that need it most. 
Without drastically reducing chapter 1 funding to affluent districts 
overnight, we target new money to the neediest schools so that they can 
undertake major reform projects. Research is very clear that low-income 
students attending schools with high concentrations of poverty learn 
the least. The committee formula weights students according to the 
concentration of poverty in their districts. With insufficient dollars 
available to serve all students, it is essential to serve those who 
need help the most.
  Third, the bill recognizes that schools need more flexibility to 
consolidate funds from small programs so that they can design 
comprehensive, coherent reform plans. Today, Federal assistance under 
ESEA is splintered into dozens of different programs, each with its own 
limitations and requirements. As a result, it is difficult for Federal 
aid to be used to fund the kind of large-scale innovative programs that 
schools so urgently need.
  The bill also amends the General Education Provisions Act to 
streamline the waiver process, so that it is easier for States and 
school districts to receive waivers from Federal regulations to carry 
out their reform plans and use Federal dollars more effectively.
  In addition, under the bill, we will no longer have federally 
designed reporting requirements for title I. Instead, we allow States 
to differentiate themselves. Each State will choose or create its own 
assessment to measure the progress of its students. Each school 
district will use its State's assessment, but it can also add its own 
measurements if it chooses.
  Fourth, we have amended chapter 1 so that more students will stay in 
their regular classrooms. Most chapter 1 programs pull students out of 
their regular classrooms to attend special supplemental courses.
  This pull-out approach was intended to ensure that chapter 1 funds 
are targeted only to needy students. But it has also created a new kind 
of segregation in our schools, isolating disadvantaged students from 
their peers and condemning them to a second-class education.
  While these students are attending special courses, they are missing 
the more interesting and demanding work their classmates are doing. 
Research indicates that disadvantaged students actually learn more 
effectively when they are held to the same high standards as all 
students.
  S. 1513 changes the percentage of eligible students needed by a 
school in order to serve all the students in a school from 75 to 30 
percent. Thirty percent is the point were research shows that the 
concentration of poverty affects student learning. To ensure 
accountability, to make sure that disadvantaged students are still 
helped, and to prevent the funds from going into swimming pools and 
sports equipment, we require schools to pull out the test results or 
title I eligible children, so that their parents and all of us can make 
sure they are being served and are making progress.
  Fifth, the bill invests more in the Nation's teachers. It makes no 
sense to provide Federal aid for education, if we neglect the single 
most important component of any education program--the teaching.
  The bill contains two main provisions for teacher development:
  The Eisenhower Math and Science Program and the chapter II Block 
Grant Program become a new Eisenhower Professional Development Program 
authorized at $800 million a year. The funds will be available to each 
State and school district for professional development only.

  Each school must set aside 10 percent of its title I funds for 
professional development activities. Teachers across the country have 
told us that they need time to work together and to find new ways to 
help students reach higher standards. This provision will guarantee 
that funds are available at the school level for them to do so.
  We have also created a small demonstration program at the national 
level to enable the Secretary of Education to develop a few model 
programs for the organizational arrangements and investments that will 
be needed if higher standards and assessments are to lead to improved 
outcomes for all students. These demonstration projects will combine 
the preparation of new teachers with ongoing professional development 
activities in schools.
  Sixth, the bill invests in education technology. New technology is 
transforming all sectors of our economy, from health care to 
manufacturing to retailing, yet most classrooms lack even a telephone, 
let alone a computer. If students are to acquire the skills they need 
in order to function effectively in today's high-technology workplace, 
we must give them the opportunity to work with technology in the 
classroom.
  Title III of S. 1513 is the Education Technology Program that 
Senators Bingaman and Cochran and I sponsored to help the poorest 
schools pay for new computers, electronic network links, and teacher 
training in technology. It will provide technical assistance to the 
schools, and encourages development of new educational software and 
programming.
  Finally, S. 1513 includes provisions that will make it easier for 
schools to coordinate health and social services for their students. If 
a local education district chooses, it can use title I funds for this 
purpose. Education can help offset poverty, but schools cannot do the 
job alone. They must have help from others in the community. Under this 
legislation, schools can use title I funds to make it easier for 
agencies and health centers to coordinate their efforts with schools, 
so that more students can be served.
  The bill also places a great emphasis on making schools safe. It is 
our intention that funds in title V, the Safe and Drug Free Schools 
Act, be used for violence prevention as well as drug prevention. These 
two problems are often interconnected. By acknowledging that fact, we 
hope to give schools support for making classrooms more effective 
places in which to learn.
  S. 1513 continues many specific programs designed for specific 
purposes and for particular students. Because of the budget freeze and 
the need to emphasize new approaches, the administration had proposed 
to eliminate many of these programs, even though some of them were very 
successful and served students well. Among those programs, for 
instance, are measures to increase the achievement of girls and women 
in our classrooms, the Woman's Educational Equity Program. Last week, I 
was very proud to be the Senator from Massachusetts, the State that was 
home to two of the six members of the victorious U.S. team in the 
International Mathematics Olympiad. Two of our students, Noam Shazeer 
from Swampscott and Jonathan Weinstein from Lexington each received a 
perfect score, and helped the United States to defeat students from 70 
countries. Without detracting from their great achievement, I hope very 
soon we will have a Norah and a Jennifer on or team as well as Noam and 
Jonathan. The committee chose to preserve many of these programs, but 
we are continuing to explore various alternatives.
  This legislation is among the most important measures this Congress 
will consider. Public education in America is in more trouble than any 
of us like to admit. A system that has served this country so well for 
so long needs far-reaching reform. Like health care reform, the 
challenge is complex, with no easy answer. The Improving America's 
Schools Act, S. 1513, is an important part of the answer.
  Mr. President, finally, I hope that our colleagues will look at the 
totality of what we on our committee, in a bipartisan way, have tried 
to do in terms of the areas of education and investing in our children. 
We have extended the Head Start Program to provide help and assistance 
to expectant mothers. The extension of the Head Start Program of the 
zero to three will help those young individuals to begin to build some 
self assurance and self confidence and help them in terms of developing 
problem solving skills.
  We have tried to bring about a greater flexibility in the chapter 1 
program, give greater flexibility at the local level, and still try to 
balance and make sure the funding was going to be provided in the areas 
where there is the greatest need in terms of young children who are 
disadvantaged.
  We also see our Goals 2000 to try and find a bottom-up forum with 
support coming from the top, so we are going to be able to get the 
education reform that is generated at the local level from the school 
and school districts that are really going to establish and raise that 
bar in terms of the education standards and challenge the young people 
in our country.
  We have also seen that this is not unrelated to the Community Service 
Program that also is being developed within our school systems in terms 
of the Serve America Program that has the component of a program 
developed by students that has an educational component and also sees 
that the community can get the seed money in order that young people 
are going to be able to serve their community and try and help and 
assist many of their colleagues.
  The Community Service Program, that is an outreach program, has many 
different features to it, but one of them is to try to route and enroll 
400,000 young Americans who drop out of schools every year and be an 
additional kind of net to try to bring them back into the system, both 
in terms of their educational development and also in terms of the 
service to the community.
  There the actions that we have taken at higher education to move 
toward the testing in terms of the direct loan program and also on a 
tuition contingency income payback to permit young people not just to 
be driven to the higher price or higher wage professions but also to be 
able to fulfill their own ideals if they do so want to be of service to 
the community and also the School-To-Work Program to try to help and 
assist those 65 percent of our young people who are moving out of high 
school to move them into the private sector and in a more competent way 
that will give them a greater opportunity in terms of the future.
  All of these components really are part of a total kind of this 
Nation's commitment in terms of the investment in the children of this 
country, and this element in terms of the reauthorization of the 
chapter 1 program is a natural key element. It is really in many 
respects a building block because all of us have come to the 
recognition that the earlier kind of intervention and involvement is 
absolutely key in terms of the young people's development and 
evolution.
  So this is an extraordinarily important piece of legislation. It is, 
as we have indicated, under the leadership of Chairman Pell in that 
subcommittee. It was virtually a unanimous vote of Republicans and 
Democrats alike. Now we had the strong bipartisan, the overwhelming 
majority of the Members of the committee, in reporting to this body.
  So we all are grateful to our Members, grateful to the excellent work 
that so many of our staffs have provided, and I will mention more about 
that later as we move forward.
  I certainly hope that we will move. I know that there are matters 
which will be debated. I am grateful for those Members who have 
indicated that they will offer amendments.
  At the opening session now we are inviting those Members who will 
have amendments to notify us at the earliest possible time so that we 
can give them the consideration and try to work with those Members 
where possible to respond in a positive way, if possible, to 
recommendations and suggestions.
  This has been an evolving process. We had evolution in the 
development of the program in the subcommittee, in the full committee, 
and also great work prior to the time that we have reached the floor, a 
very constructive period of time that we have worked with our 
colleagues. And I am very, very hopeful that we can continue that 
spirit as we go on through the course of the debate.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Kohl). The Chair recognizes the Senator 
from Rhode Island.
  Mr. PELL. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Massachusetts for 
the kind words, and my colleagues for permitting me to go ahead.
  Mr. President, few things in life are more important than the 
education of our children. They are the living legacy we will leave 
behind, and the quality of the education we provide will in no small 
measure determine the future health and strength of the American 
Nation.
  For over 29 years the Federal role in education has been a small, but 
extremely important one. We have sought through the title I Program, 
for example, to help fashion a level playing field upon which all 
children have the opportunity to learn. Our efforts have been focused, 
and targeted particularly upon the educational needs of children from 
less well off families.
  In the past we have sought to ensure that children in need learn the 
basic skills they must have in order to function well in our society. 
Unfortunately, in today's society, as important as the mastery of basic 
skills is, it is not enough. We must make sure that children in need 
are taught to the same high academic and performance standards as other 
children. We must do what we can to ensure that American education, 
overall, is an education of excellence. In essence, that is the thrust 
of the reauthorization bill we have before us.
  Early in the reauthorization hearings, I said from a Federal 
perspective, the Goals 2000 legislation set the stage for education 
reform, but the play would be acted out in this bill. I believe that 
statement when I originally made it, and I believe it to be even more 
true today.
  This is a $12 billion reauthorization. In program after program, in 
provision after provision, we state in clear and unequivocal language 
that we expect all children to be taught to challenging State academic 
and performance standards. We expect new and better assessments that 
measure complex skills, emphasize written work, and serve important 
diagnostic purposes. Forty-four States are already putting such 
standards and assessments into effect, and others would undoubtedly 
soon follow.
  In short, we want American education to be an education of excellence 
and second to none in the world. Given the current state of American 
education, that is a massive undertaking. I believe deeply, however, 
that we should not and, indeed, cannot shy away from that challenge. 
The education of our children demands that we do no less.
  While we expect all children to learn to challenging State academic 
and performance standards, our concern at the Federal level is that 
children who are less well off also do well and do not get lost in the 
shuffle. This is a special Federal responsibility. While the Federal 
contribution to education is small, its contribution to the education 
of poor children is very significant. It may be only 62 percent, but it 
has a very real impact. Today, over two-thirds of all of the money 
spent on compensatory education for poor children comes from the 
Federal Government.
  In some areas, such as dropout prevention, bilingual education, 
magnet schools, gifted and talented education, and women's educational 
equity, we focus on special populations, but we do so within the 
context of high expectations of all children. In other areas, such as 
professional development, safe and drug free schools, and educational 
technology, our concern is an over-arching one. We want the school to 
be a safe haven for learning, one in which teachers and staff are 
constantly upgrading their skills and knowledge, and one where all have 
access to and an understanding of state-of-the-art methods of learning.
  Throughout this legislation we also place a new emphasis on involving 
parents in the education of their children. Parents need professional 
development as much as teachers and staff do. We must have ways of more 
effectively involving the parent in education. Sometimes this will mean 
helping the parent learn. At other times, it will mean showing the 
parent how they can help their children learn. Often it will mean 
bringing the parent to the school in conferences with teachers and 
staff. Sometimes it will mean bringing teachers and staff to the home 
to meet and confer with parents. But no matter what, I believe we all 
agree that more intensive parental involvement in education is an 
absolute necessity.
  We also focus upon several special areas where we believe there is 
considerable merit for special programs. Through Arts in Education and 
the Cultural Partnerships for At-Risk Youth, we seek to bring the rich 
benefits of the arts and humanities into our children's education. 
Through ``We the People,'' ``Close-Up,'' and the mock-student parent 
election, we seek to improve the understanding of our system of 
Government and how it works. Through professional development we seek 
to improve the quality of the teaching, administrative and support 
staff in every school in America.
  In no area is our work more important than in title I, by far the 
most important program in this reauthorization bill. Here we seek to 
ensure that high academic and performance standards are brought to all 
children, but we pay special attention to making sure that less well 
off children, the very children who have been the focus of this program 
since its inception 29 years ago, receive the same high quality 
instruction as other children.
  In title I we also include a special emphasis on professional 
development because we recognize that a good, strong education relies 
upon good teachers and staff, and the meaningful involvement of 
parents.
  We also target funds more precisely than we have ever done before to 
make sure that those districts and schools that need the help most get 
that help from the outset.
  We not only make adjustments to the Orshansky formula but also add 
new incentives linked to effort and equity. The effort incentive 
recognizes States that place high priority on education. The equity 
incentive, which grew out of the school finance hearings held by the 
subcommittee, recognizes States that have brought an important measure 
of equity to their education spending.
  I would be the first to admit that the formula is not perfect. It is, 
however, well-balanced and I believe fair. No State loses, and while 
some States may gain more than others, the gains are reasonable and 
justifiable.
  In State after State, in district after district, and in school after 
school, the winds of education reform are sweeping our country. What we 
have sought to do in this legislation is fashion Federal programs that 
spur, respond to, and aid reform. Equally important, we have sought to 
accomplish our objectives under the umbrella of bipartisanship that has 
traditionally been the hallmark of education legislation. This 
legislation has been approved by both the Education Subcommittee and 
the full Committee on Labor and Human Resources with only one vote in 
opposition.
  Mr. President, all Members of this Chamber share a common concern--we 
care deeply about the education of our children. That concern is the 
hallmark of this legislation, and because of that, I believe it merits 
swift consideration and passage.
  Mr. MITCHELL addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair recognizes the majority leader.


                           Order of Procedure

  Mr. MITCHELL. Mr. President, as I stated earlier, I have given notice 
over several weeks, in writing and orally here on the Senate floor and 
printed in the Congressional Record, that we would be proceeding to 
this bill during this period of time.
  Last evening, I expressed my intention to attempt to proceed to the 
bill at 9 a.m. this morning. I was then asked by our Republican 
colleagues to wait until 9:30, to accommodate a Republican Senator. I 
agreed to do so.
  At 9:30, I was then asked again by our Republican colleagues to wait 
until 10 to accommodate a Republican Senator. I agreed to do so.
  It is now 10 past 10 and I have just been advised that we can have no 
assurance as to any time on this matter. Therefore, we are in a 
position of not being able to proceed to the matter because of a delay 
and I can have no assurance as to the period of that delay; that is to 
say, I am told there is going to be, apparently, an indefinite delay.
  Therefore, I have no alternative but to do that which I indicated 
earlier I would do.
  I will shortly suggest the absence of a quorum. I will then ask for a 
recorded vote on a motion to have the Sergeant at Arms request the 
presence of absent Senators. And I will, as soon as I can get the 
signatures on a motion, file cloture to bring this to a close.
  We have to have this matter resolved one way or the other. We are now 
in a position of doing nothing and we cannot get any assurance as to 
when we may be able to do something.
  Therefore, under the circumstances, no alternative is left to me but 
to proceed in the manner which I have suggested.
  I will state that after the vote on the motion to request the 
presence of absent Senators, if no one is here debating the motion and 
in effect filibustering, then we are going to have the Chair put the 
question. I want every Senator to have ample notice of that before 
acting in that regard.
  So, as soon as the vote on the motion to proceed is over, if no 
Senator is present to filibuster, then we are going to have the motion 
put.

                          ____________________