[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 157 (Wednesday, October 11, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S14961-S14962]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                               GOALS 2000

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I have sought recognition to discuss 
further legislation which I introduced yesterday to amend Goals 2000 to 
make some changes which may satisfy a number of States which are 
concerned about excessive Federal intrusion under Goals 2000.
  It is my view that there are no excessive intrusions at the present 
time. But in order to eliminate any concern about that issue, it was my 
thought that legislation might ease the concerns of some in the country 
who think there are too many intrusions.
  The House of Representatives, in the Labor, Health and Human Services 
and Education appropriations bill, has eliminated the funding for the 
Goals 2000 Program. President Clinton has asked for an appropriation of 
$750 million and the Appropriations Subcommittee, which I chair, which 
includes funding for Department of Education, has recommended an 
appropriation slightly more than one-half of what the President has 
requested. This is because of the overall budget constraints.
  But as we move forward in the legislative process and look ultimately 
to a conference with the House of Representatives, it is my view that 
we can ease many concerns, regarding Goals 2000, by a number of 
amendments which are incorporated into my proposed legislation, and at 
the same time make moneys available to a number of States which have 
not taken the funding.
  Last year, two States, New Hampshire and Virginia, declined to 
participate in the Goals 2000 Program, and this year notice has been 
given by Montana and Alabama that they will not be participating.
  The Labor-HHS-Education Subcommittee held a hearing on September 12, 
1995 to bring together Secretary Riley and Mr. Ovide Lamontagne, who is 
the chairman of the Board of Education of the State of New Hampshire, 
to consider the matter before we had the markup by the subcommittee. At 
that time, a number of suggestions were made which might bridge the 
gap.
  Again, I wish to emphasize my own personal view that there are not 
excessive strings, but in order to satisfy any concerns, we are seeking 
to move in a number of directions.
  One of them would be to eliminate the National Education Standards 
and Improvement Council, which was designed to certify national and 
State standards. Some view this as a national school board, which I do 
not think it is, but the Secretary of Education, Richard Riley, thought 
we 

[[Page S 14962]]
might eliminate it and still maintain the central thrust of the 
legislation; and that is that there ought to be some standards and 
goals, but to let the States establish their own standards and goals.
  This program, Goals 2000, was very carefully crafted after a 1983 
report by then-Secretary of Education Terrell Bell, a very conservative 
educator, who found something we all know: That the American 
educational system is in a state of disarray.
  Some schools are very good, like the high school I went to in 
Russell, KS, with 400 people, small classes, a good debating team, and 
a first-rate education. Notwithstanding other distinguished 
universities which I have attended--the University of Oklahoma, the 
University of Pennsylvania, Yale Law School--I think my best 
educational days were in high school, which underscores, at least my 
view, that some schools are very good. It also emphasizes the 
importance of elementary school.
  But educational standards across the country are in a state of 
disrepair. Remedial action is necessary. Some of the items coming out 
of our subcommittee involve experimentation with privatization to take 
over the public school system, not competing with private school 
systems, but trying to eliminate the bureaucracies in schools in cities 
like Washington, DC, or in Baltimore, MD, Boston, MA, Hartford, CT, 
some schools in Florida.
  I am not saying that privatization is the answer, or the charter 
school concept, which is also a program contained in the bill coming 
out of my subcommittee. But I think it is clear that the basic concept 
of goals is a valid one; that there ought to be a measurement, 
illustratively into the 4th year, at the end of the 8th year, at the 
end of the 12th year, but they do not have to be necessarily Federal 
standards.
  I compliment a distinguished legislator in the State of New 
Hampshire, the Honorable Neals Larson, who is the chairman of the house 
of representatives education committee. Representative Larson is trying 
very, very hard to see to it that New Hampshire would accept funding 
under Goals 2000 in its current form.
  Candidly, I agree with Representative Larson that there are no 
strings attached which are intrusive and that, if you take a look at 
other Federal funding for the disadvantaged, for school to work, that 
it is not unusual to have some articulation of standards. But 
notwithstanding all of that, let us see if we cannot move ahead and 
find a way to accommodate those who may have a contrary view.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under a previous order, time is limited to 5 
minutes and time has expired.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to be permitted 
to proceed for 2 additional minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SPECTER. I thank the Chair. Mr. President, stated very briefly, 
and the statement which was submitted yesterday will amplify these 
comments, this legislation will eliminate the requirement that the 
Secretary of Education approve and review State plans. Secretary Riley 
has been very accommodating and cooperative. He has expressed some 
concerns about this legislation. There may be others who will have 
concerns, others who were involved in the original Goals 2000 
legislation, and we will make an effort to work with them on those 
concerns.
  As a result of a public meeting which I participated in at Nashua 
High School back on September 9, an interesting thought was advanced, 
and that is to have funds go directly to local school boards for those 
States which decline to accept Goals 2000 funds.
  Mr. Ovide Lamontagne, the chairman of the New Hampshire State Board 
of Education, thought that was an idea which would be acceptable. I am 
not suggesting that he made a final commitment to it, but at least from 
his point of view, it had merit subject to the power of the State to 
intervene if something extraordinary was done which was contrary to the 
State's views.
  So, Mr. President, I urge my colleagues to take a look at the 
legislation as a way to amend Goals 2000, as a way of seeking an 
adjustment and accommodation with the House on the appropriations 
process and encouraging States which are not now entering into 
compliance with the ultimate view that we have to better the education 
of school children in America.
  I thank the Chair and yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a 
quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. KASSEBAUM. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________