[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 21 (Tuesday, February 20, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1274-S1275]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                               EDUCATION

  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, on January 26 the Congress passed the so-
called continuing resolution which temporarily funds the Government 
through March 15. This was greeted by headlines across the country. The 
headline that touches this ran in the Washington Post saying that the 
Congress had approved a funding extension averting the third shutdown 
of Government.
  The focus of the press and media was understandable because, in fact, 
that continuing resolution did allow us to continue the Government 
through March 15. But what was not really known to the public and did 
not become clear until later was that embedded in that continuing 
resolution was a massive cut in education, hitting programs which I 
think most of us on a bipartisan basis in this Chamber know work.
  There was an effort made to restore those education funds in the 
continuing resolution. That effort received more than a majority of the 
votes: 51 of us voted to restore those education funds and 40 of us 
voted against. But, because of the technicalities of the Budget Act, 
there had to be a waiver which required 60 votes. So a majority did not 
rule on that effort to restore these education funds.
  When I traveled around my home State of Michigan in these last few 
weeks, I must tell you I find amazement when the public realizes, I 
think for the first time, that in that resolution that was passed to 
keep the Government going until March 15 were historic cuts in 
education. This was not about cuts in the growth. That is not the issue 
in this one.
  Sometimes there is a debate around here as to whether you are slowing 
growth or cutting the program. On these education cuts, these are 
dollar reductions from current spending levels of a historic proportion 
in programs that most of us I think believe in. I am going to get into 
some of those cuts in a moment.
  But what was truly ironic is that the same day that we were cutting 
funding for math and science teaching by $1 billion, that we were 
cutting Pell grants, and School to Work grants, which is a newer form 
of vocational education, that we were cutting college loan programs and 
a whole host of other programs including Head Start, the same day that 
we were cutting education by $3 billion on an annualized basis, we 
passed a new version of a conference report on defense spending which 
increased it by $7 billion above the Pentagon request mainly for planes 
and ships that the Pentagon did not ask for.
  So, on the one hand, within hours of each other we cut programs for 
education, which are critically important, by over $3 billion on an 
annualized basis and increased defense spending by $7 billion for items 
that the Pentagon did not request. That is a pretty dramatic 
juxtaposition, it seems to me, and terrible priorities.
  When my people back home found out about this in a whole host of 
meetings which I held around Michigan, they are truly against what 
happened and are pleading with me when we come back to try to reverse 
these cuts, because this is not a done deal. These cuts are cuts in 
programs through March 15, which, if annualized, lead to a $3 billion 
cut. They do not have to, and they should not.
  When this resolution was presented to us, the chairman of the 
Appropriations Committee, Senator Hatfield, said the following. He 
said:

       I cannot for the life of me understand the action of the 
     House [of Representatives]. I believe it is wrong. It puts 
     the gun to our heads.

  He went on to say:

       We have found ourselves in an extraordinary parliamentary 
     situation that requires unanimous consent to take further 
     action. Unable to secure that consent, we have been unable to 
     once again uphold a Senate position or even to have the 
     Senate consider a compromise.

  Senator Hatfield pointed out correctly that the gun is to the 
Senate's head, which resulted in the passage of a resolution which will 
have a dramatic negative impact on the funding of education in America. 
We have to remove that gun from our head before March 15.
  We should be here during these few weeks negotiating these issues so 
that gun is not again put at our head, so that it is removed, and so 
that we can try to repair the damage that resulted the last time it was 
placed to our head.
  The title I program, which provides crucial help in reading, math, 
and writing to over a million American children, which I think has the 
support of the education community across the land, that title I 
program was cut by $1 billion. That was a 17-percent cut in title I. By 
the way, one of the ships which was added which was not requested by 
the Pentagon was slightly less than $1 billion.
  The innovative School-to-Work Program was cut by 22 percent. This is 
a program which helps young people in high school make the transition 
from school to work. The new part of this program, which was missing in 
the old vocational education days, is that the business community is 
working with the high schools to design programs which will prepare 
young people for real jobs.
  I have been to these programs all over the State of Michigan. I have 
been in a number of places where businesspeople at a meeting with 
students are telling the students, ``When you complete this program, 
when you achieve these skills that you are going to get in these 
school-to-work programs in your high school, we guarantee you a job.''
  I never remember anything like that happening when I was in high 
school in the vocational education days of yore, when the business 
community was deeply involved in a partnership with the schools and was 
so confident that the skills which would be provided to students would 
be useful to them that they would sit in a room--in one case with 50 
students--and tell every one of them, ``If you graduate from this 
program, you've got a job with our company.'' That program, that 
innovative School-to-Work Program, was cut by 22 percent.
  These are not 2- and 3-percent cuts across the board to help us 
reduce the deficit. These are massive reductions in programs that are 
working. It is a 22-percent reduction in School-to-Work money.
  Head Start was cut. In higher education, Pell grants were cut by 7 
percent. The Perkins Loan Program was cut by 25 percent. State student 
incentive grants were cut by 25 percent. Again, I emphasize these are 
not just slowdowns in the rate of growth; these are actual reductions 
from the level of funding in the last year.
  I know there are some candidates out there who have recently 
discovered that middle-income Americans are in the middle of a long-
term economic squeeze. As the Senator from Iowa said, middle America's 
income has dropped over the last 20 years in real terms after inflation 
and after taxes. There is a real squeeze that has been going on for a 
long time.
  The fact that some folks out there are discovering it for the first 
time is not the point of my remarks this morning. What is the point of 
my remarks this morning is that I am glad they have finally discovered 
it and that one of the ways to address it is through education.
  We know that there is a clear relationship between the educational 
achievement of people in general and their incomes. As a matter of 
fact, the relationship between education, training, and income is 
clearer than ever and more dramatic than ever. The gap between a lack 
of education and income is greater than ever. In the last 15 years, the 
difference in pay between college-educated workers and those with a 
high school education has just about doubled. There has always been a 
difference, but that difference in just a 15-year period has about 
doubled.
  So we know what education can do. We know what training can do in 
terms of income. We know we face an income squeeze. So what is the 
response of this Congress? A significant reduction in education 
programs that are working.
  Head Start is working. This is not a program that has failed. This is 
a program that has produced demonstrable achievement across the 
country. The surveys of Head Start programs show that people who 
graduate, these 3- and 4-year-olds who are in Head Start, 10 

[[Page S1275]]
years later and 20 years later do much better in their careers. In just 
about every other measurable way, the 3- and 4-year-olds who had Head 
Start 10 years ago and 20 years ago or 15 years ago are doing much 
better than those who did not. Yet only about half of our children who 
are 3 and 4 years old who are eligible for Head Start get Head Start 
because of the lack of funding.
  So what did this bill do? It cut Head Start, a program which I think, 
if not universally applauded, is about as supported a program as any I 
know of. This is not a case where we are cutting programs which are not 
working. This is a case where we are cutting programs which are working 
and which are essential to this country.

  I know some of these cuts were used as threats, particularly by some 
people over in the House who are determined to get their way on bigger 
budget issues. These Members of the House who take the position, ``It 
is my way or else; it is my way or else the Government is coming to a 
halt; it is my way or else we are going to have major cuts in 
education; it is my way or else our debts are not going to be paid, 
we're not going to pay interest on the national debt or on the 
obligations of this country,'' those ``my way or else'' Members of the 
House got their way in this continuing resolution. They should not 
have.
  We should not let them have their way again. I think there are enough 
people in the Senate on a bipartisan basis who object deeply to these 
cuts in education that, if we will pull together, we can let the House 
know, particularly those 60 or so Republicans in the House who have 
taken this position that unless they get their way the Government is to 
shut down, it has to be their way or else the full faith and credit of 
the United States is going to be damaged--they had their way in this 
continuing resolution.
  These cuts are a reflection of a tactic, an extreme tactic, an 
irresponsible tactic of closing the Government down unless they get 
their way. That tactic had, I think, negative and damaging results in 
this continuing resolution which we tried to repair. Fifty-one of us 
voted to repair it. Then ultimately the resolution passed because, I 
think, as the chairman of the Appropriations Committee felt, there was 
no choice. The gun was at our head.
  We have to take that gun away, not just on keeping the Government 
going and restoring these education cuts, but also on the full faith 
and credit of the United States. This is a pattern which should not be 
repeated.
  I hope that the Senate, on a bipartisan basis, sends a strong signal 
to Speaker Gingrich that we are not going to tolerate this again and 
that we are going to seek to restore the cuts which have so damaged 
education programs and so left educators in a quandary as to what the 
funding is going to be for next fall. They do not know. There is no way 
for them to plan either in the K through 12 level or in college.
  They do not know what the funding is going to be for college loans, 
for Pell grants, for student incentive grants. They do not know what 
the funding is going to be for Head Start for 3- and 4-year-olds. They 
do not know what the School-to-Work funding is going to be. And here we 
are approaching spring now, when the planning is done, with all of this 
up in the air.
  So, Mr. President, I hope we will take a strong stand to restore 
these cuts, to repair the damage and to remove the gun which has been 
placed at the head of the economy and at Members of the Senate.
  I thank the Chair and I yield the floor. I suggest the absence of a 
quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Hatch). The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Coats). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.

                          ____________________