[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 33 (Tuesday, March 12, 1996)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1810-S1815]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  BALANCED BUDGET DOWNPAYMENT ACT, II

  The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, as I said, I had sought recognition to 
talk about a second-degree amendment, which shortly will be offered on 
behalf of myself and Senator Harkin, which has been crafted very 
carefully after very, very extensive discussions among many parties. I 
thank the distinguished chairman of the committee, and I thank the 
distinguished chairman of the Budget Committee, Senator Domenici, for 
his cooperation. I thought we might save some time by talking about the 
amendment for a few minutes while some final language change is being 
incorporated to accommodate some concerns which have arisen.
  There had been extensive discussion yesterday and today--I did not 
hear it yesterday because I was traveling in my home State of 
Pennsylvania--but I heard the discussion this morning about the need 
for education. I think there is a consensus in America about the 
importance of education, about the priority of education and about our 
doing everything we possibly can to stretch Federal dollars as far as 
we can along the education line. I know that is something the 
distinguished Presiding Officer, the Senator from Vermont, feels very 
strongly about.
  What we have done is structured an amendment with offsets, where we 
preserve the balanced budget so that we do not encumber future 
generations with more deficit spending. The amendment, while raising 
funds for education, job training, and head start, which is a very high 
priority, obviously, second to none--but it also is offset so as not to 
encumber future generations with our spending money that they have to 
pay for--another high priority also second to none. These are very top 
priorities.
  What we are submitting is an amendment in the second degree which 
will provide additional funding for education, Head Start and job-
related issues.
  We have heard from many, many mayors and many, many commissioners in 
local government. A comment was made this morning about summer jobs 
being a very important anticrime program, which is widely recognized, 
not really disputed at all. This amendment would add $635 million for 
Summer Youth Employment Programs in the Department of Labor, a high 
priority item.
  We are adding $333 million in additional funds for the Dislocated 
Worker Retraining Program, which brings the total to $1.2 billion, a 
very, very important item in an era where there is so much downsizing, 
where we have seen so many layoffs, we have seen so much anxiety in 
America, and people in the prime of their working lives losing their 
jobs which they have held for 10, 15, 20, 30 years but still with many 
good years ahead of them. So the Dislocated Worker Retraining Program 
will have that additional funding which also impacts upon base 
closures, something which is very important to my State and very 
important all over the country.
  We are adding $182 million in additional funds for the School-to-Work 
Program jointly administered by the Departments of Labor and Education. 
This brings the School-to-Work Program to a total of $372 million.
  We are adding $137 million to restore fully the Head Start Program 
for the 1995 level. We will be adding $60 million in additional funds 
for the Goals 2000 program, bringing the total in the bill to $350 
million. This is a matter which has produced some controversy, but I 
think that ultimately we may be in a position to eliminate strings so 
that we do not have the objection of too much Federal intervention and 
too much Federal control.
  I personally believe that education ought to be left to the local 
level, but the idea of standards and goals is one which has great 
merit. Those standards and goals can be figured out at the local level; 
they do not need to come from Washington.
  The Secretary of Education has testified of his willingness on behalf 
of the administration to give up some of the bureaucracy and some of 
the councils. Last September, the subcommittee had a hearing on Goals 
2000, where we listened to people who were opposed to the program and 
might even be able to strike an accommodation of the disparate points 
of view by eliminating some of the Federal strings. Perhaps if the 
States do not wish to take Goals 2000 money, as some have so stated, 
that the funds might go directly to the local level.

[[Page S1811]]

  We will be adding $814.5 billion in additional funds for title I 
Compensatory Education for the Disadvantaged Program, bringing the 
total to $7.3 billion. This is a very, very healthy, substantial 
contribution to that very important program.
  We will add $200 million to the Drug Free Schools Program, bringing 
the total in the bill to $400 million. We would have liked more, but 
that is a very substantial increase.
  And $10 million in additional funds has been added for the 
educational technology program, bringing the total in the bill to $35 
million; $82.5 million in additional funds for vocational educational 
basic grants, bringing the total in back to last year's level.
  If the Chair will indulge me for one moment, I have an additional 
item which I would like to comment upon.
  We have added an additional $32 million in State student incentive 
grants program and with respect to the Perkins loans, an additional $58 
million has been added, bringing the total to $158 million. We have 
worked this out as we have proceeded to try to get all of these items 
in order, Mr. President.
  We have offsets which we have worked out for some $1.3 billion in the 
sale of the U.S. Enrichment Corporation, and $92 million from the sale 
of oil from the strategic petroleum reserve oil, $616 million from the 
FAA rescission, $159 million from unobligated balances in the Pell 
grant program, $166 million of unused budget authority in left in the 
committee allocation, $200 million in year-round youth training, and 
$25 million in the unemployed trust fund, AFDC jobs rescissions.
  I want to thank my distinguished colleague, Senator Harkin, for his 
cooperation, and thanks especially to the staff who worked around the 
clock last night, and counsel, for drafting, producing this bill, 
really, at the very last minute.
  I think I am in the position now with the final additions having been 
made, Mr. President, to send this bill to the desk--before doing so, I 
want to add one addendum. That is that Senator Harkin and I have 
discussed our agreement, having crafted this as carefully as we have, 
to try to accommodate education, that this accommodates the total 
program and if there are any other amendments--any Senator can offer 
any amendment at any time--that Senator Harkin and I are unified in 
opposing any additional amendments.
  It is always easy to add money, which we would all like to do, but 
without offsets it is impossible to do. And we have added as much as we 
think can be done. So that our agreement is that this is an excellent 
appropriations bill for education, and we are going to stand behind it. 
And that is it. If any additional amendments are offered, Senator 
Harkin and I are unified in our determination to reject them because 
this is a comprehensive bill.


                Amendment No. 3473 to Amendment No. 3467

   (Purpose: To revise provisions with respect to the Departments of 
            Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education)

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Harkin and myself, I 
send this second-degree amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. Specter] for himself and 
     Mr. Harkin, proposes amendment numbered 3473 to Amendment No. 
     3467.

  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that further 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under 
``Amendments Submitted.'')
  Mr. SPECTER. A summary has been given. I now yield to my 
distinguished colleague from Iowa.
  Mr. HARKIN addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The minority manager is recognized.
  Mr. HARKIN. I again want to express my appreciation to Senator 
Specter for his leadership in this area and for working not only with 
me personally but our staffs working very closely together to craft 
this amendment.
  This really does bring us to the point--maybe it is not all of what 
every one of us wants. I mean, we never get that around here, but at 
least it fills the need for getting the money out now to the school 
districts so that they know what to do next year.
  For summer youth, there are all the things that Senator Specter spoke 
about that we have to get through. We have the offsets to pay for it.

  Again, I want to thank Senator Specter for all of his diligent work 
in this. I want to again join Senator Specter in thanking our staffs. I 
know they worked long hours in putting these numbers together and 
working with Senator Domenici and Senator Hatfield and Senator Byrd on 
our side. So I think it is a well-crafted amendment, and I agree with 
Senator Specter that it deserves the support from both sides of the 
aisle.
  Mr. President, let me just in way of talking about this amendment 
talk a little bit about the past weekend in Iowa. Right now all of the 
basketball tournaments are taking place in the State. There is a lot of 
anxiety about who is going to win and who is going to lose. I would 
like to deviate a little bit, if I could, from the debate on this 
amendment, just for a moment, Mr. President, to recognize the newly 
crowned State champions in what we call the premier high school 
tournament in Iowa, the annual Girls State Basketball Championships. 
Winfield-Mount Union in class 1A, Sibley-Ocheyedan in class 2A--I saw 
that; it was a great game--Carroll in class 3A, and that was also a 
great game that I got to see. I missed the last game because I was not 
there for it, but it is my alma mater, West Des Moines Dowling girls, 
who won the State championship in class 4A.
  So I just want to say to all the teams that competed in the 
tournament, congratulations on your accomplishments, and to the 
winners, congratulations on winning.
  I might add, this week the best high school boys basketball teams 
make their annual trek to Des Moines for the final winner tournaments 
for the boys basketball games. So, again, there is a lot of anxiety in 
the State right now about who is going to win and who is going to lose.
  But I must say, Mr. President, the anxiety extends well beyond the 
gymnasium. In school after school in Iowa and across this country, 
school administrators and school boards are worrying about which 
teachers will lose their jobs and which students will not get title I 
reading assistance. They are contemplating what vocational education 
activities will go by the wayside and how to deal with the cuts for the 
safe and drug-free schools program.
  The list goes on. In January, I worked as a title I teacher at 
Johnson Elementary School in Cedar Rapids. I learned firsthand the 
value of title I, and my concern about the cuts were heightened.
  Late last month this article appeared in the Cedar Rapids Gazette: 
``6 Schools to Lose Remedial Reading: Cedar Rapids District Sites 
Expected $350,000 Cut in Federal Funds.''
  Mr. President, if we do not pass this amendment to that Senator 
Specter and I have joined on, if we do not pass this, nine teachers in 
Cedar Rapids will lose their jobs; 350 students who need extra help 
with reading at six elementary schools in Cedar Rapids will not get it 
next year.
  In Council Bluffs on the other side of the State, five teachers will 
lose their jobs, 113 fewer students will be helped. Of equal concern is 
the fact that the district will lose the investment they made to train 
three teachers in reading recovery, a short-term, intensive, one-on-one 
teaching technique that is showing great promise of quickly bringing 
first graders up to grade level in reading.
  The Iowa Department of Education estimates that across the State 
7,300 fewer students will get title I assistance and 200 teachers will 
be laid off if this amendment is not adopted.
  This scenario will be repeated in every State and school district 
across the country. Secretary Riley estimates that 40,000 teachers will 
be laid off nationwide as a result of the $1.1 billion cut in title I.
  Mr. President, the sixth national education goal calls upon us to 
ensure that by the turn of the century every adult American will be 
literate and will possess the knowledge and skills necessary to compete 
in the global economy. But the deep cuts in job

[[Page S1812]]

training programs will not lead us toward this goal. It signals a fast 
retreat.
  Next year, without this amendment, funding for dislocated worker 
training will be cut by 29 percent, and summer jobs for youth is 
totally eliminated. These cuts could not come at a worse time. You can 
hardly pick up a newspaper or turn on the evening news without seeing 
yet another story about worker dislocations caused by downsizing.
  Last year, Federal JTPA funds assisted 105 workers who lost their 
jobs at Tyson Foods in LeMars, IA, and 85 individuals formerly employed 
by MCI in Sergeant Bluff, IA. The planned cuts in retraining for 
dislocated workers means next year 300 fewer Iowans will benefit from 
such assistance.
  However, the number of worker dislocations has not abated in my 
State. FDL Foods has announced layoffs in Dubuque and Eveready Battery 
is closing its plant in Red Oak, IA. Unfortunately, with cuts of this 
magnitude in job training, many of these people will not get the 
assistance they need.

  Mr. President, the bill before the Senate restores many of these 
cuts, but only if we pass some other bill in the future to pay for 
them. That is the underlying bill. That is a mistake. Schools cannot 
budget based on a contingency. School districts need to know now what 
they will receive next fall. In Iowa, the final deadline for making 
decisions on teacher hires is April 30, but many districts are already 
making those decisions. Without a firm commitment now, across the 
country thousands of teachers will get the pink slip for next year.
  Mr. President, we should pay for this up front, not based on some 
contingency that might happen, but pay for it now. That is what this 
compromise bipartisan amendment does that Senator Specter and I are 
introducing. Again, Senator Specter and our staffs have worked long and 
hard to craft this compromise. It is certainly not everything that I 
would like or anyone else would like, but it is a giant leap from where 
we are. The offsets were difficult to come by this late in the fiscal 
year, but we did it. I wish we could do more, but I believe this is an 
honest and reasonable effort to avoid devastating cuts in education and 
job training. I urge all of my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. President, Iowa's schools stand to lose almost $12 million in 
education funds next year. Title I will fall by $8.6 million. These 
cuts would be devastating to my State. Those are not my words. In a 
February 27 news article announcing the plan to cut title I from Cedar 
Rapids' Van Buren School, this is what the school's principal, Mary 
Lehner, had to say: ``It's just going to be devastating for kids. I am 
very concerned about those students who need the extra help with those 
reading skills.''
  These concerns are not only being expressed by school officials but 
by business owners. Mr. President, I got an interesting letter here 
from a business owner in Carroll, IA, Mr. Tom Farner, of the Farner-
Bocken Co. It is interesting what he said:

       It has come to our attention that the Federal Government is 
     planning to cut title I Reading Program by 17 percent. We 
     feel this will hurt the quality of our labor force not only 
     for the State of Iowa but in the Carroll region. Our business 
     does not require a lot of skill but it does demand for our 
     employees to be able to read picking labels and invoices.

  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent this letter from Mr. Tom 
Farner be printed in the Record, along with other pertinent 
correspondence from Iowa constituents.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                            Farner-Bocken Co.,

                                                      Carroll, IA.
     Senator Harkin,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Harkin: It has come to our attention that the 
     Federal Government is planning to cut the Title I Reading 
     Program 17%. We feel this will hurt the quality of our Labor 
     Force not only for the State of Iowa but in the Carroll 
     region. Our business does not require a lot of skill but it 
     does demand for our employees to be able to read picking 
     labels and invoices.
       Our company is a part of a food buying group called 
     Pocahontas Foods with companies all over the United States. I 
     just attended a show in Colorado Springs where the owners of 
     the companies got together to discuss issues and problems 
     that we face in our industry. One of the main problems talked 
     about was the percentage of errors on orders that are 
     delivered to customers. They were discussing that their 
     percentage rate was around 70-75% and that 80% was great. Our 
     companies percentage rate is between 80-85%. This demands the 
     skills of people to read labels, invoices, etc.
       Reading is a very essential tool for people to survive in 
     today's fast growing world and economy. Let's not jeopardize 
     our children's future by cutting back on Title I.
       Please vote no to cutting back Title I.
           Sincerely,
     Tom Farner.
                                                                    ____



                                                   Carroll, IA

                                                February 26, 1996.
     Senator Tom Harkin,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Harkin: It has come to our attention that the 
     Federal Government is planning to cut the Title I reading 
     program by 17%. This will mean drastic cuts in our local 
     program. This also means a reduction of teachers, not as many 
     students in need of reading assistance will be served. To me, 
     this makes no sense. Why cut back on education when Title I 
     has a proven track record? What will this mean for our 
     students? I am a second grade teacher in a Catholic School 
     near Carroll. I also have a son in the Title I program. I see 
     the benefits on both sides, as a parent and a teacher. These 
     teachers are so very good at what they do; each student is 
     made to feel a success! Why make these children pay for these 
     cutbacks? Because, ultimately, that is what will happen. If 
     they do not get the help they need when they're young, you 
     will be investing in them in the future in welfare and other 
     government programs. Please, save yourself the money now and 
     do not cut back on education. It is our future and your 
     future that you are playing with. Thank you for your 
     consideration.
           Sincerely,
     Mary Ann Brincks.
                                                                    ____



                                                 Kathy Behrens

                                   Carroll, IA, February 20, 1996.
       Dear Senator Harkin: I am writing to you in regards to the 
     proposed funding cuts to the Title 1 Program. As a Title 1 
     teacher, I personally witness the value of this program and I 
     encourage you to vote against the proposed cuts.
       In our Title 1 program students are given individual, 
     small-group instruction. These are the kinds that would fall 
     through the cracks if not given the extra reading instruction 
     with a reading specialist. So many of these kids' parents are 
     ``too busy'' to spend the extra time at home.
       I realize that Title 1 funds are under question as to 
     whether or not the funds are being used properly. I can tell 
     you that in our school district the Title 1 program is using 
     the funds very wisely. We have six teachers who serve 
     approximately 190 students at 5 buildings. If the proposed 
     cuts were to take effect, 60 students would not receive the 
     help they need.
       I sincerely believe that this proposed cut would turn a 
     nation of readers into a society of illiterate children. 
     Please vote ``no'' for the proposed budget cuts!
           Sincerely,
     Kathy Behrens.
                                                                    ____



                                                 Linda Wetter,

                                     Floyd, IA, February 26, 1996.
     Tom Harkin,
     Hart Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Harkin: I am writing in regard to the government 
     plan to cut funding for the Title 1 program for our schools.
       As a parent of a son with a learning disability, I have 
     learned over the past five years how important this program 
     is. My son, with the help of this program is finally gaining 
     the confidence to reach out and set his goals high--not to 
     accept this disability as a life sentence, but to overcome 
     it.
       I have spent years telling my son that this learning 
     disability is not his fault--that everyone learns differently 
     and that the extra help he needs is available to him.
       Please do not let him or his future or our countries future 
     down. There MUST be another place to make a cut back.
       Remember--a learning disability does not discriminate--it 
     could affect your family too--a son, a daughter or maybe a 
     grandchild.
       Please reconsider and keep my son's future bright. Do not 
     add to his burden. His future is in your hands.
       Thank you for your time. Your help in this matter is 
     greatly appreciated.
           Sincerely,
     Linda Wetter.
                                                                    ____



                                                  Clinton, IA,

                                                February 25, 1996.
     Senator Tom Harkin,
     Des Moines, IA.
       Dear Senator Harkin: I am writing this letter as a 
     concerned parent and teacher, regarding the cuts in Title I 
     funding. I cannot believe that the government would even 
     consider cutting the funds of such a beneficial program.
       As a Reading Recovery Title I Teacher, I believe that many 
     disadvantaged children would not make it in the regular 
     classroom without the support of the Title I teacher. I can 
     think of one family in particular that I have dealt with 
     personally. One brother is in third grade and did not receive 
     the benefits of Title I in the early grades. Now as a third

[[Page S1813]]

     grader, he is being tested for special education. I am 
     serving his first grade brother in my Reading Recovery 
     program and can see that he is making tremendous gains--he's 
     reading. I believe that the Title I program has saved him 
     from special education, and will help him to live a better 
     life. How many other lives has Title I changed?
       I know I speak for many parents and teachers when I say 
     that we would really appreciate your support in seeing that 
     the funding is not cut for the Title I program.
           Sincerely,
                                                Cynthia S. Cramer,
     Title I Teacher.
                                                                    ____

     Senator Harkin,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Harkin: It has come to my attention that the 
     Federal Government is planning to reduce the Title I reading 
     program funds. As a mother of a student who has participated 
     in this program in 1995, I am asking you to please reconsider 
     this action.
       This intervention program in 1st grade has helped my child 
     considerably with his reading capabilities. Because of the 
     program, he is able to keep up in his current class without 
     continued help. I know the program gave him a positive 
     attitude toward school and has helped his self esteem. With a 
     good start in the early years, all children will benefit 
     tremendously in the future. Our children are the future!
       Please reconsider the cut in funds for the Title I reading 
     program. It has been a valuable asset to our son and to our 
     school.
           Sincerely,
     Lois M. Behrens,
       Mother.
     John E. Behrens,
       Father.
                                                                    ____

                                                     Renee Genter,
                                   Carroll, IA, February 21, 1996.
       Dear Senator Harkin: My name is Renee Genter and I am the 
     mother of a title one reading student. Recently I was 
     informed the Federal Government is planning to cut back 17% 
     of our local schools reading program, which is very upsetting 
     to my husband and I. We are the parents of four wonderful 
     little boys who unfortunately have problems with reading. Our 
     oldest child who is eight years old has struggled with 
     reading since he started school. About two years ago we were 
     introduced to the title one reading program and it has been a 
     life saver to our son. At one point he was feeling different 
     from the other children in his class and now he is able to 
     read in the same level as his classmates, which has done 
     wonders for his self-esteem. Knowing that some of our other 
     children will have the same problems and knowing that the 
     program may be canceled makes me wonder what are we to do 
     about extra help for them. I am writing in hopes that the 
     Government will change its plans for cutting back on such a 
     great program. I know I am not alone on these feelings. 
     Parents and our school programs are our only help for our 
     children and their children. Thank you for taking the time to 
     read my letter. I hope we can make a difference. Our children 
     are depending on us.
           Sincerely,
     Renee Genter.
                                                                    ____



                            Carroll Community School District,

                                   Carroll, IA, February 13, 1996.
       Dear Business Leader(s): It has come to our attention that 
     the Federal Government is planning to cut the Title I reading 
     program 17%. This will mean drastic cutbacks in our local 
     program, both in the public and parochial schools. The 
     equivalent of two teachers may need to be cut, which will 
     mean we will not be able to serve the number of students we 
     have in the past. It will be unfortunate if some students in 
     need of reading assistance could not be served due to lack of 
     funding. We, as educators, are very aware of the importance 
     of having employees in your business with good reading 
     skills. We believe our program can help accomplish that.
       As a business person in this community, we are asking you 
     to send a short note to the legislators who represent you. 
     You might want to mention how Title I can benefit your 
     business and your concern about what will happen if such 
     drastic funding cuts occur.
       The legislators and their addresses are:

     Senator Harkin, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. 20515

     Senator Grassley, U.S. Senate, Washington D.C. 20515

     Rep. Tom Latham, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. 
         20515

       Thank you for your efforts in this matter. Unless we voice 
     our opinions, this funding cut will be passed. We are sure 
     that you feel as we do--Our children and their futures are 
     very important!
           Sincerely,
                                                    Title I Staff.

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, it is not just the teachers who are saying 
this, but business people say they need people who can read. Although 
they may not need highly skilled people, at least they have to be able 
to read and understand.
  Mr. President, our amendment will provide the offsets to pay for the 
increases in education and training programs recommended by title IV of 
this legislation. Again, we believe we have to provide for these now, 
not at some possible point in the future, as is in the underlying bill. 
The last thing we need to do is get mired down in the same old stuff 
that has already shut down the Government twice before.
  I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, to match the desire 
to avert the education cuts with the resources to make sure the cuts 
will not happen. We need to make sure that the add-ons are paid for now 
so that teachers will not lose their jobs, children will continue to 
get title I services, and workers will get the training assistance they 
need to remain competitive.
  In closing, Mr. President, I want to thank Senator Specter for his 
work in this area and thank our staffs for putting this together. No 
one likes to make cuts, but we have made these offsets, and I believe 
the offsets are good and the money will go to all of the things that 
Senator Specter mentioned: Summer youth employment program, dislocated 
workers, school to work, Head Start, Goals 2000, of course title I, 
which I talked a lot about, drug-free schools, educational technology, 
Perkins loan and SSIG for higher education.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Senator Wellstone be 
added as a cosponsor of this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. SPECTER. Mr. President, I thank my distinguished colleague from 
Iowa for his comments. I believe this is a well-crafted bill that 
accommodates education while maintaining the balanced budget principle. 
As Senator Harkin has pointed out, people now in school districts know 
what they can do by way of planning if this finally becomes law.
  I ask for the yeas and nays on the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Ms. MOSELEY-BRAUN. Mr. President, the need to balance the Federal 
budget must be driven by more than just numbers; it must also reflect 
sound priorities. Our budget must not only be fiscally responsible; it 
must also reflect the priorities of the American people.
  A survey conducted in January found that 82 percent of Americans 
oppose cutting education spending.
  A different poll in January found that 67 percent of voters rank the 
quality of education in public schools as their top priority.
  Last year, 75 percent of Americans polled said that aid to education 
should be expanded.
  Unfortunately, the omnibus appropriations bill before us today does 
not reflect these priorities. It makes more than $3 billion in Federal 
education and job-training programs--programs that provide 
opportunities for America's children and students--contingent on a 
future budget agreement. The bill essentially says to our children and 
students: Your education will be a priority later--maybe.
  The Daschle-Harkin amendment doesn't wait--because today's children 
will grow up regardless of whether or not there is a budget agreement, 
and tomorrow's economy will not be any kinder to them if there is not.
  It is easy to understand why so many Americans make the quality of 
education one of their top priorities. Education is related in a 
positive way to almost every index of domestic and social well-being.
  The average earnings of a college graduate are 75 percent higher than 
those of someone with only a high school education, and 150 percent 
higher than the earnings of a high school dropout.
  Sixty-two percent of small children whose parents have not completed 
high school live in poverty. By contrast, only 4 percent who have at 
least one parent with a high school diploma live in poverty.
  More than 80 percent of prison inmates are high school dropouts.
  The American people place such a high priority on education because 
education is an essential investment in our future. A quality education 
has always opened the door to the American dream--the chance to achieve 
as much as your ability, talent, and brains will take you.
  Education is much more than a private benefit to individual students. 
Education funding is an investment in America. Quality education 
affects the

[[Page S1814]]

entire community, and it is as much a part of our national defense as 
any missile system. As Laura Tyson said, a country's people are its 
most precious resource.

  Yet, under this bill, if the contingency funds do not become 
available, the bill:
  Cuts the Safe and Drug-Free Schools Program--which helps to provide a 
safe environment conducive to learning--by almost 60 percent;
  Cuts the Title I Program--which provides basic assistance to low-
income children and school districts--by 10 percent;
  Cuts Goals 2000--which helps fund innovative, locally driven efforts 
to raise the quality of education--by 22 percent.
  The bill also targets programs that make it possible for more 
Americans to afford a higher education. Without the contingency funds, 
the bill cuts the Pell Grant Program by 6 percent, the Perkins loans by 
37 percent, and the State student incentive grants by 50 percent.
  The cost of college has risen more than 230 percent in the last 15 
years. Yet, according to the Department of Labor by the year 2000, 52 
percent of all new jobs will require more than a high school education. 
Diminishing access to higher education is not one of the priorities of 
the American people, and it should not be one of the priorities of this 
Congress.
  This bill also cuts billions from programs that provide young people 
with summer employment and job training, and that help prepare 
dislocated workers for new careers. Without the contingency funds, this 
bill cuts the JTPA Program by 25 percent, training for dislocated 
workers by 29 percent, and the summer jobs program by 100 percent.
  Education and job training programs are about knowledge, about 
competitiveness, and about being able to adapt to a changing economy. I 
am reminded of a quote from one American philosopher, who wrote: ``In 
times of change, learners inherit the Earth, while the learned find 
themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer 
exists.''
  The Daschle/Harkin amendment reflects that philosophy by truly 
putting the $3.1 billion for education and job training back into the 
budget.
  Thirty-five percent of the American people believe that education 
funding should be Congress' No. 1 legislative priority. Let us not let 
them down--or the 82 percent who oppose education cuts period--by 
failing to enact this amendment.
  Mr. BINGAMAN. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Harkin 
education amendment. This amendment aims to restore funding for the 
Department of Education, and for all education and training to fiscal 
year 1995 levels.
  This amendment is fully paid for. It adds back funds to the fiscal 
year 1996 appropriations with offsets scored by CBO. This amendment, 
unlike the Republican addbacks, do not depend on future contingencies 
at an unspecified time in the future of a congressional-Presidential 
agreement on an overall budget. This will allow schools, now in the 
process of planning their budgets for next year, to know the funding 
level for which they can budget.
  The amendment represents addbacks that both parties agree to: $151 
million for education reform; $1,279 million for title 1; $208 million 
for school improvement programs; $82 million for adult and vocational 
education; and $10 million for education research and statistics. This 
will provide funds for Goals 2000; title 1; safe and drug-free schools; 
charter schools; vocational and adult education; education technology; 
Head Start; dislocated workers; adult training; school-to-work; summer 
jobs for youth; and one-stop career centers.
  The Harkin amendment would maintain the fiscal year 1995 level of 
$18.4 billion for Department of Education funding except Pell grants, 
and funds for Pell grants, including the fiscal year 1995 surplus 
carried forward to fiscal year 1996, would also remain level.
  This amendment maintains fiscal year 1995 levels of funding for 
education by identifying offsets, not by adding anything to the 
deficit.
  These addbacks support programs needed by everyone, and especially 
those in New Mexico. Title 1 supports teaching basic reading and math 
skills to disadvantaged students. Every school district in New Mexico 
would be hurt if these funds are not restored. Albuquerque public 
schools alone would lose almost $2 million if House cuts are not 
restored.
  Education reforms funds support school-industry cooperation in 
developing programs that teach students going directly to work from 
school those skills they need to perform a job; and Goals 2000 supports 
professional development and raising standards of literacy to 
internationally competitive levels. The grant awards in New Mexico for 
these programs have provided great local control and pride and initial 
signs of success. Vivian LaValley of Bernalillo High School was here 
last Thursday describing her School-to-Work Program and it was very 
impressive.
  The need for such Federal support is sorely felt both by my 
constituents and other leaders across the country. In 2 weeks Lou 
Gerstner of IBM and Gov. Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin will host the 
Nation's Governors and business leaders in an education summit to 
discuss the need for education standards and technology. The addbacks 
provided in this amendment provide States and communities the resources 
they need to pursue these efforts as they see fit.
  For the last 6 years the Federal Government, on a bipartisan basis, 
has increased funding for education each year. Congress was right to do 
so. As our future depends increasingly on the competitiveness of our 
work force in the global economy, improving our education performance 
and investing in education should be top U.S. priorities. Unfortunately 
this amendment does not increase funding for education. But it does 
provide at least level funding for education.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I rise in support of the Daschle-Harkin 
amendment restoring funds cut from education. This amendment stands for 
something; it stands for a continuing commitment to learning for all 
Americans.
  One program the amendment would restore is the School-to-Work 
Program. I would like to tell you how this program has helped one 
student in my State to turn her life around and avoid the effects of 
violence.
  Mr. President, we all hear about the epidemic of violence in America. 
The people most affected by this epidemic, and the people who sometimes 
end up contributing to the problem, are our young people. Too 
frequently, a young American's world of love, tenderness, and growth is 
replaced by a world of hate, abuse, and death.
  The homicide death rate in Washington State has more than doubled 
since 1970, for children between 15 and 19 years old. Significant 
numbers of younger children are also becoming victims of homicide in 
recent years.
  Juvenile drug and alcohol offenses have declined in my State since 
1991, but were too high to start with. Violent crimes are on the rise 
among youth, and more young people are being incarcerated than ever 
before.
  Mr. President, I want to make sure we do not misplace the blame for 
this epidemic, however. Adults are the ones capable of making the 
changes that will prevent adult violence and child abuse.
  Adults are also capable of preventing youth violence. Young people 
tell me: Adults don't seem to care about them; they don't have access 
to youth activities; they can't get summer jobs; adults don't set a 
good example for kids; adults don't encourage positive behaviors--so 
young people get attention by exhibiting bad behavior.
  This should not be allowed to happen, because it has an immediate 
effect on the lives and psyches of our young people, and a longer term 
effect on the economy and social fabric of our Nation.
  The good news is: Adults can do something about these problems, and 
adults set good examples every day. Just being willing to talk with, 
and listen to, young people is a great start.
  Last week, as part of his ongoing response to this problem for young 
people, the President hosted a White House Leadership Conference on 
Youth, Drug Use, and Violence. He brought together people from around 
the country to talk about problems and solutions for today's youth.
  Mr. President, one of the people in attendance at the conference was 
a former high school dropout from Washington State, who has turned her 
life

[[Page S1815]]

around through a program in vocational skills training.
  This young woman is named Jessica Shillander. She spent her young 
life in a two-parent family, but later experienced a difficult family 
breakup. After this happened, this soon got very difficult for Jessica, 
and she had to prove how capable and resilient she really is--a thing 
we shouldn't ask from any child in America.
  Jessica was kicked out of her mother's home as a seventh grader. Not 
surprisingly, she almost immediately got involved with gangs, drugs, 
and an abusive boyfriend almost twice her age.
  Jessica dropped out of school, and if it were not for the help of 
caring adults, and a special program funded with Federal School-to-Work 
funds, she would not be the success story she is today.
  However, due to a dropout retrieval program run by the New Market 
Vocational Skills Center in Tumwater, WA, Jessica started having 
success in school.
  At New Market, Jessica felt the support from adults which allowed her 
to improve her academic and job skills. Thanks to the program, Jessica 
has almost graduated. She has turned away from violence.
  She is now working a paying job as a student advocate, and looks 
forward to a career helping young people. Last week she spoke to 
applause at the White House Conference, letting adults and youth learn 
from her story.
  This dropout retrieval program would not be possible without Federal 
School-to-Work funds. Run through the vocational skills centers in 
Washington State, the program is unique in the country. High school 
dropouts--kids from lower- and middle-class working families--get 
special assistance to get them involved in instruction which is 
relevant to their lives.
  If they need help with transportation, or child care, or just need 
someone to care enough those first few days back at school to give them 
a wakeup call or see that they get an alarm clock or work clothes--the 
help is there.
  And, like most Americans, these young people respond well to high 
expectations and a caring attitude--they need less help as they become 
more confident in their own abilities. These programs have an average 
placement rate of 90 percent--either in jobs, higher education, or the 
military.
  At a time when our world is more complex than ever, when all 
employees, young or old, are finding the working world more difficult, 
when all schools need to be more relevant, Congress is about to cut the 
very School-to-Work funds that make Washington's School-to-Career 
program possible.
  Here's Jessica's reaction: ``School-to-work transition needs to begin 
as early as kindergarten, to help all students find value and self-
worth. I want all students to have this opportunity.''
  Mr. President, I just held four children's forums in my State, in 
Yakima, Vancouver, Spokane, and Tacoma. In every one of these meetings, 
adults and young people came out in the winter weather to confirm that 
all schools need to be more relevant, and that School-to-Career 
programs are exactly the kind of thing this country needs more of.
  But, instead, we are here today debating an amendment to restore 
these funds after they have been cut. This is folly. We must invest in 
our future, not bankrupt it. The Daschle-Harkin amendment will restore 
School-to-Work funds for programs like the one that helped Jessica.
  I believe, as did President Franklin Roosevelt, that ``The only real 
capital of a nation is its natural resources and its human beings.'' 
America cannot continue to act like a business having a fire sale, we 
must continue the investments which will give our country a future. 
Education is paramount among these. I want my colleagues to support the 
Daschle-Harkin amendment in this light.
  Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, I wish to speak as in morning business for 
up to 10 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________