[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 115 (Thursday, September 4, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H6904-H6909]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      DEMOCRATIC EDUCATION AGENDA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 7, 1997, the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone] is 
recognized for half the time until midnight as the designee of the 
minority leader.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, tonight I wanted to take our Democratic 
time to discuss the Democrats' education agenda. I have a number of my 
colleagues who are here to join me. We basically want to talk about 
what we have accomplished to date in this Congress and what we likely 
will focus on in the wake of these accomplishments.
  First, I think most of my colleagues are aware that in July 
congressional leaders and the White House reached a historic budget 
agreement that will balance the Federal budget by 2002. Included in 
this agreement were a host of tax breaks designed to help the average 
working American family meet the runaway costs of education in this 
country. The inclusions of these tax breaks, Mr. Speaker, I believe was 
a great victory for both the American people, but also for the 
Democratic Party because the education tax breaks have long been at the 
center of the Democratic education agenda, and I think it is important 
to remember as we move toward the next phase of this agenda that 
Republicans only agreed to the education provisions of the budget 
because the Democrats basically drew the line in the sand and said that 
these were the provisions that we wanted. Of course, President Clinton 
played a major role in that effort.
  The problem was that many of the education tax breaks that the 
Republicans had initially proposed benefited more wealthy Americans 
than they would have the middle or lower income individual. I just 
wanted to give an example of that.
  In June, the U.S. Student Association, which has been around for 
about 50 years, wrote that students around the country are registering 
their disappointment with Republican Chairman Archer's plan for 
education tax initiatives because that package, the Republican package, 
would do nothing to expand access to education. They were concerned 
about the fact that the Republicans were not looking at the President's 
education tax proposals and that the Republican plan shifted benefits 
away from middle-income families and basically funneled aid to those 
with greater resources. But I do not want to keep prolonging this 
debate. Essentially the Democrats won and we are happy with the result.
  One of the most important tax benefits included by the Democrats was 
the HOPE scholarship, something again that President Clinton pushed 
for. As a result, students will be eligible for 1,500 dollars' worth of 
tax credits to help pay for the first 2 years of postsecondary 
education. But the HOPE scholarship, even though it received a lot of 
acclaim, was by no means the only initiative that was included as a 
result of Democratic efforts. Also included is a tax credit covering 20 
percent of tuition costs, up to $5,000 ceiling through the year 2002 
and after 2002 the ceiling rises to $10,000 for the third and fourth 
year of college. Under this plan, to basically state it in more human 
terms, in 2003 a student in a college with a tuition of $12,000 would 
receive a $2,000 tax credit.
  Another important provision included in the budget agreement, again 
as a result of Democratic efforts, was a large increase in funding for 
the Pell grant, for that program which many students rely on.

                              {time}  2215

  As a result of the Democrats, the fiscal year 1998 education 
appropriation bill provides a $1.5 billion increase in the Pell grant 
program. That is an increase of about 26 percent.
  And there are a lot of other programs, I am not going to get into 
them all, but there are other things that are in the budget that the 
Democrats pushed for, like the Education Technology Challenge Fund, the 
America Reads Initiative. Again, these were top priorities of the 
Democrat's ``Family First'' agenda and also highly recommended by the 
President.
  I am not mentioning these Democratic success stories on education 
just to, as my colleagues know, crow about it, but also to say not only 
that we are happy about what we accomplished, but that we think a lot 
more needs to be done; I mean, the fight is far from over.
  One area where Democrats will be focusing their attention in the 
weeks to come is the implementation of rigorous academic standards. 
Indeed, we will be seeking to continue to expand upon the progress made 
in this area through the Goals 2000 program, a program that I should 
point out has long been a target of the Republican Party. I do not know 
why Goals 2000 is often targeted for extinction by the Republican 
leadership, because actually, if you look at it, it was first developed 
under President Bush. He actually suggested national goals for 
education, and it was approved by both Houses of Congress under his 
administration.
  But President Clinton really has done the most to try to move Goals 
2000 forward, and he signed a bill that basically tries to move Goals 
2000 to the next step, provide significant resources for it, but I also 
have to stress because I know that the Republicans on the other side, 
even this morning here in the well, started to talk about the fact that 
the Democrats with their national standards were ignoring the State and 
local responsibility for education, and I would say just the opposite 
is true. The President, when he signed Goals 2000 in 1994, specifically 
stressed that education is primarily a State and local responsibility.
  Democrats understand that, but at the same time we believe that there 
is a Federal role and that Federal dollars can be used and the Federal 
Government can basically help State and local governments to implement 
tougher standards that will lead to better academic achievement.
  Essentially what we are trying to do with the Federal Government is 
to challenge the States and the local governments to do better, and I 
think that that is a goal that certainly makes sense for the Federal 
Government.
  Just wanted to say, and I am going to yield to my colleagues who are 
here to join me tonight, that in my home State of New Jersey we have 
seen improved academic performance as a result of more rigorous 
standards. Just to give my colleagues an example, results from the 
October 1995 and April 1996 administrations of a high school 
proficiency test that we had in New Jersey for 11th and 12th graders 
revealed improvements in student achievements in reading, writing, and 
mathematics.
  You can have more rigorous standards, it does work, and the 
partnership with the Federal Government, the State and local 
governments, I think, is the way to go.
  And I would like to now yield to the gentleman from Arkansas who has 
joined me before in talking about some of these education goals that 
the Democrats have put forward.
  Mr. SNYDER. I thank the gentleman, and I once again thank the Speaker 
for being with us here late into the evening.
  You know, I went home during the break, and as so many Members of 
Congress do, and it gives you a good chance to get out in the district, 
and one of the places that I went to was to northern Arkansas, which is 
home of the great Arkansas pig-out for those of you who have not been 
there before. It is also the home, however, of Petit Jean College, and 
I want to just tell a story, if I could, about Petit Jean College.
  I notice that the gentleman from North Carolina is here with us this 
evening because it is actually a North Carolina connection. Petit Jean 
had been a VO-TEC in the not too many years ago, and a group of State 
senators in the early or late 1980s, 1990, decided that we needed to 
bring Arkansas' VO-TEC schools into the 21st century so that it could 
prepare our students and our adults for those kinds of activities and 
skills that they were going to need in the future. And one of the 
places they went to to study was North Carolina.
  I notice the gentleman from North Carolina is with us here this 
evening. And what they came up with was a

[[Page H6905]]

plan of converting a great number of our VO-TECs into 2-year colleges, 
technical colleges and community colleges depending on what the local 
community wanted, and this was passed in my first session as a senator 
in 1991, and it was supported, of course, and signed into law by our 
Governor who was then Bill Clinton.
  And as part of President Clinton's package in that legislative 
session was HOPE scholarships, giving opportunity for all families to 
get their kids into college, giving opportunities for all adults to be 
able to go on to college. And his platform complemented a group of 
State senators, including one Senator Gordon from the home of the great 
Arkansas pig-out in northern Arkansas who is a leader in this effort, 
complemented their activity very, very well.
  And over the break I went to visit Petit Jean College, it was my 
first visit there, and they had just blossomed under this new program. 
And it was great to talk with the President of that college about what 
this Congress and President Clinton has done for them with these HOPE 
scholarships. Their tuition on an annualized basis is about a thousand 
dollars a year, quite a bargain for a lot of colleges around the 
country, but our tax credits that we passed, thanks to the insistence 
of Bill Clinton, are going to really make the difference for a lot of 
the citizens in that rural county, Conway County, to be able to take 
advantage of Petit Jean College.
  Another campus I visited during the break was Central Baptist College 
in Conway, Arkansas, which is in Faulkner County. Faulkner County has 
three colleges, University of Central Arkansas, which is a 4-year State 
school, Central Baptist College, which has a 2-year associate degree, 
but its 4-year programs are religious training, musical education 
afternoon, training folks to go on to become pastors, and we also have 
Hendrix College, which is a very fine 4-year liberal arts private 
school. All three of these campuses are going to benefit from the 
passage of help and aid for families trying to get themselves and their 
children through college.
  I remember talking with one of the fellows in one of the classes at 
Central Baptist College. He said, ``Well, wait. What about us folks 
that are 27 years old? What about us who have waited to go back later 
in life? We're not 18 and just out of high school.'' And I can assure 
you that the Democratic package, and thanks to the leadership of Mr. 
Pallone and the President and others, definitely makes opportunities 
available for folks that are adults trying to go back to college.

  But I think that is what Democrats have stood for, I know that that 
is what this President stood for in Arkansas and worked so hard on in 
the last several years, is quality education for all families, 
opportunities to go on to college, 2-year colleges, 4-year colleges, 
VO-TECs, whatever type of higher education. We all need opportunities 
for all families. And we all know that if it had not been for President 
Bill Clinton insisting on these educational tax credits and this 
program for college being in this recently signed budget deal that it 
would never have come about.
  And so I commend the President, I commend the Democrats for taking 
the lead on fighting for education for all families, and, you know, now 
it is up to America to take advantage of it. It is up to the good 
citizens of Conway County and Faulkner County and all the counties 
across the country to go to the financial aid officers as the weeks go 
by, understand these new laws, take advantage of them, make them work, 
and recognize whether you are 18 or 28 or 48, these are meant for you 
to help in making all families compete in this very robust global 
economy.
  And I thank the gentleman for being here tonight.
  Mr. PALLONE. I want to thank the gentleman from Arkansas, and it is 
really particularly interesting to note how President Clinton, when he 
was the Governor, actually implemented a lot of these ideas that now 
are forming a part of his education initiative on the Federal level as 
President.
  Mr. SNYDER. If the gentleman might yield, you know, it was such a 
great honor to be here. I was sitting right over there the night 
hearing my first State of the Union Address, and when I heard the 
President's list I thought I have heard these lists before on the floor 
of the Arkansas General Assembly.
  Mr. PALLONE. I yield now to the gentleman from North Carolina who, 
again, is one of the best spokesmen on the issue of education within 
our Democratic Party.
  Mr. ETHERIDGE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend from New Jersey for 
organizing this special order and the opportunity for me to participate 
this evening and to the Speaker and the others for being here, and as 
he knows I had the distinct privilege before joining this special body, 
people's House, to serve as the elected Superintendent of Schools for 8 
years in the State of North Carolina, a State that has really been 
actively involved in setting high quality educational standards 
statewide, and that is really showing some promise in our State, and I 
know firsthand from having visited with students and their family how 
important education is and what a major security issue it is for this 
country and how it will pull us forward, and I am grateful that the 
President, and I was very pleased to be here in my first session and 
make it a national priority for our Nation, because I truly believe 
that education is the one thing that levels the playing field for all 
young people, and there is still an awful lot of young people in this 
country who will be the first in their family to attend an institution 
beyond high school, and I was awfully pleased that the bipartisan 
balanced budget, that it contained a significant investment in 
education.
  Truth is, it was the largest investment, as you know, in education 
for education beyond high school since the GI bill in 1945. Roughly $35 
billion, and that GI bill, of course, in 1945 enabled an entire 
generation of Americans who came home from the war and others who 
fought during Korea and other times. It really laid a groundwork for an 
unprecedented economic growth in this country, and it allowed for 
upward social mobility, and ushered in an era that has really been 
called the American century in the world.
  And I truly believe that the educational investment that the 
Democrats helped push, the President laid out, and was enacted will lay 
the groundwork for providing for a lifetime of learning opportunities 
for all American citizens as they approach the 21st century and really 
will make the 21st century, again in my opinion if we follow through 
with it, the American century again.
  And I think this balanced budget package with the tax cuts is good 
news for middle class families and students. As I said, it contained 
$35 billion in tax relief for higher education, and it will help break 
down the barriers of opportunity for many families because there are a 
lot of children who would not have had that opportunity.
  And as you talked about it a little earlier, the HOPE scholarships, I 
will not get into them, but $1,500 will actually pay for a community 
college education for a lot of children. In our State, we have about 64 
of them plus 16 public universities and a large number of private. So 
it will make a difference there. And the tax credits beyond the first 
and second year will provide for a lifetime of learning for adults. But 
they also provide for an opportunity to get good quality jobs because 
we know an education translates into economic opportunity for the 
people who have it, and if you do not believe it, just look at the 
people who have an education and look at their economic opportunity, 
how it improves the health and quality of life for their children, et 
cetera.
  And according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, three out of five 
jobs in the 21st century, those jobs that will be created, certainly 
beyond 2005, are going to require education beyond high school. So I 
think the passage of this legislation and the commitment the Democrats 
made in this Congress really continues their legacy of a commitment to 
education in making sure those who have not had the opportunity will 
have an opportunity to benefit and realize the American dream and the 
opportunity for a quality education.
  During the recess that we have just completed, I had the privilege of 
joining Secretary Riley in traveling in my district. We really 
participated in a forum on quality education, and then

[[Page H6906]]

we traveled to a community college, met with students and 
administrators to talk about the positive difference that these 
investments will make in the lives of real people, people who are in 
school, people who want to go to school, and as we met with a number of 
students and administrators at Vance-Granville Community College 
outside our capital city in Raleigh, it was really refreshing to hear 
how this would impact students.
  But let me share with you, if I may, Mr. Speaker, what Stacy 
Marshburn, a 23-year-old mother of two children who is going to college 
full-time and working part-time, what she had to say, and I quote:

                              {time}  2230

  ``The tax cut is wonderful. It will help my family, and me, and many 
others, at Vance-Granville Community College.''
  She continued, ``I thank the Congress for passing the tax cuts. I 
think it will really help people who are trying to raise a family and 
still go to school. Being a full-time student with two small children 
to support, I feel that these will go a long way toward helping me 
achieve my educational goals.''
  The truth is, for Stacy Marshburn, it will allow her to finish her 
education and get a job and change the lifestyle she is enjoying, but 
more importantly, it will change a whole generation for her children 
who will now have an opportunity to enjoy the benefits of a mother who 
is well educated, the quality of life she can attain from better 
income.
  And the president of that community college, Dr. Ben Currin, said, 
``I think the changes we see in this agreement are perhaps the most 
important educational changes that we have seen since the Pell grants 
were started,'' because, as you know, the Pell grants for our colleges 
and community colleges are really the dollars for those most-needy 
students.
  We haven't talked about it this evening, but this package, with the 
President's request and commitment and standing behind it and the 
Democrats pushing it, we have the largest Pell grant increase in 
history.
  So what we have done is made sure that all students, those in the 
middle, those at the bottom, those who have the great need, all will be 
beneficiaries of this legislation.
  Let me cover a couple of more points before I turn it back to you, if 
I may.
  As you know, we have an Educational Task Force in the House, and I 
have had the distinct privilege of having cochaired that. We met many, 
many times. We have generated a great deal of ideas and a lot of 
support, with your help and your sharing the bully pulpit here in the 
House and others talking about education and the President using the 
power of his office.
  And I am grateful for that this evening, because without him standing 
up and making it a major issue, as he did in the State of the Union 
Address, and sticking by his guns and negotiating for sound, secure 
educational policy, I am not so sure we would be standing here talking 
about it this evening.
  Democrats can take a great deal of pride in leadership and standing 
up.
  Let me say a word before I sit down on the things we need to do, 
because I think as we talk about where we are, we need to talk about 
what we have yet to do. As we move forward in education, I see that 
there is a lot that needs to be done, and these are some things that 
certainly are local responsibilities, but we at the Federal level can't 
walk away from.
  I learned, as superintendent, we can stand here and argue about whose 
role it is, but last time I checked and went into a classroom, a 
student never asked me who paid for their textbooks or who built the 
building or who paid their teachers or who provided any of the services 
they get. A child only knows what they do not get or what little they 
may get.
  I think sometimes those of us in public office get too carried away 
by whose responsibility it is and forget that it is all of our 
responsibility.
  With that, I am talking about the crumbling schools that we have in 
some of our inner cities and some of our rural areas across this 
country; that we have to get beyond the dialog of whose responsibility 
it is and say, it is all of our responsibility, it is our country and 
they are our children. We have to deal with that.
  There are some communities that cannot do it without some help, 
without some leveraging. I think that is an issue we have to grapple 
with, and we had better get on with the business of dealing with it, 
because if we do not, those are the young people that I think will not 
get the opportunity they need.
  Certainly the issues of providing support for our teachers and our 
communities who are working to build a strong base for character 
education in our schools, to help our young people deal with the 
challenges, that is important. We have to take advantage, I think, of 
the ground-breaking research on early childhood development. We know 
what works; we need to get beyond the dialog and get involved. The 
sooner we have children, the better off they are going to be later on.
  They have to come to school ready to learn. I have been there, talked 
with too many teachers and know the problems, as you do, that we have 
to help them early, because they are not getting it in many cases.
  I think we also must support educational standards of excellence. On 
another day I would like to talk about that in length, because North 
Carolina has invested about 8 years, while I was superintendent and 
they are still in it. And the NAEP scores that came out, National 
Assessment of Educational Progress and sampling you volunteer for, 
North Carolina was one of the leading States in the Nation in terms of 
growth.
  I believe our fourth graders are about three times the national 
average, and the eighth graders, about four times. It really is a 
focus. And I think we have to give our children that focus and help our 
teachers and others.
  I have drafted a resolution for a number of these things on 
educational standards, and a lot of Members have already signed it. We 
haven't dropped it in yet, but we plan to, because in North Carolina, 
we have achieved results as it relates to standards, and I happen to 
believe that it is important. We are one of several States that have 
already volunteered to do the statewide, when the nationals come out, 
because we are on the sampling now.
  What we are really talking about in this is extending the sampling to 
every student. That is really what you are talking about. We do the 
fourth and eighth grades on a sampling basis. We are talking about 
doing it for every student.
  Let me close by saying that North Carolina was the one State that was 
singled out this past spring on the national assessment. We are quite 
proud of it. But the truth is, the people who deserve the credit are 
the students and teachers, because North Carolina was the one State 
that received the most improvement award of all the States because of 
their progress in that over the last several years.
  I think it is important. But it is not important that we talk about 
that; it is important that we go about the business of helping every 
student in every State and every community, every child, no matter 
where they live, to be a part of that progress of being part of the 
most improved as the time goes on. Because achievement is some evidence 
that raising standards will work to raise performance; if you expect 
more, you get more.
  We must learn that lesson and support educational standards of 
excellence. I think it is important.
  The last time I checked, when we look at batting averages, we measure 
the batting average of all players against the standard. I played a 
little bit of basketball in college. They did not lower the 
hoop because you were shorter, they did not raise it because you were 
taller. You played against the same hoop at the same height, and the 
basket is the same size. And the same is true of all our students. We 
do them a disservice if we do not help them achieve the highest level, 
because when we do not do that, we do not open the door of opportunity 
to the whole world.

  Mr. PALLONE. I want to thank the gentleman, because I think that you 
really bring forth the practical problems that we face. You have been 
in the trenches in your home State, and you understand what needs to be 
done.
  One of the reasons that we are here tonight is because we really 
believe that we need to move to the next phase on education issues. We 
have done the

[[Page H6907]]

budget, we are done with the tax breaks, and a lot of the impact of the 
budget affects, I would say, college and university training.
  But we need also to address secondary schools. We need to go from 
preschool right up to graduation from high school.
  One of the things that you kept stressing is that if you look at this 
practically, you understand that there has to be a Federal role as 
well. There is a Federal role, there is a State role, and there is a 
local role.
  The two things that the Democrats have been talking the most about in 
the last couple of days since we got back here, one is the issue of 
raising education standards across the country, because Democrats 
really would like to see education standards so that students from 
Maine to Alaska can master the basics of reading and math. That is what 
they need, those skills, to succeed.
  The other thing you mentioned, which I think we have also been 
stressing as Democrats, is the need to rebuild crumbling and 
overcrowded schools. As you remember, during the budget debate, we 
actually proposed an initiative, I think a $5 billion initiative, to 
help localities rebuild schools and to address overcrowding. That was 
something that the Republicans, unfortunately, did oppose, and so it 
did not get into the final budget bill. But I think that is an issue 
also that is across the board, not only in urban and rural areas, but 
suburban areas.
  It is interesting, because suburban areas probably face more 
overcrowding than any other localities because so many new students 
have gone into those suburban areas, and they do not have the 
facilities for them.
  Mr. ETHERIDGE. If the gentleman will yield, you touched on a point 
that is important, because when you think in terms of standards, I 
certainly agree and understand where we are headed. When you think in 
terms of facility quality and where people go to work every day, I have 
been into buildings where teachers worked. We forget, they are our 
employees. We are paying them Federal and State moneys, depending on 
how you look at it, or local funds.
  I say to Chambers of Commerce, I have said to any group I speak to, 
when they say to me, the quality of building does not make any 
difference, I say, well, if that is true, then the next time you invite 
an industry in and you really want to impress them, take them down to 
the docks down here or down to one of the warehouses that you have 
closed up, and say to them, it really does not make any difference, the 
quality of the building you make your products in, and we want you to 
move in here, and see how many of those industries you get to come to 
your business. They will not come.
  I think it is important that children see the quality, that you do 
care about where they go, and that they do have the quality of facility 
they need, because it does have an impact. I know. I have seen it, I 
have been there. It has an impact on their attitudes, their learning. 
There is a whole list of things we do not need to go to.
  But you are absolutely right, and I think that is one we should 
revisit. I plan to be a part of that. I think we should. That, in 
conjunction with standards, is an important place.
  I thank the gentleman for taking the time to be here.
  Mr. PALLONE. I appreciate the gentleman's comments.
  I yield to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Green].
  Mr. GREEN. I would like to thank my colleague from New Jersey for 
taking this special order this evening. Also my colleague from North 
Carolina [Mr. Etheridge], who again was the State superintendent, in 
talking with him, since he is a first-termer, about educational 
opportunity.
  Also, having played basketball with the gentleman from North Carolina 
[Mr. Etheridge], I think they need to lower the hoop for me and maybe 
raise it for him, because he is quite a bit taller. But thank goodness 
he has always been on my own team, so we will keep the hoop the way it 
is.
  What the gentleman said is right and what our colleagues said was 
correct, in that over a month ago we reached a bipartisan agreement on 
helping parents and helping students in college, whether it be the Hope 
scholarship program, the tax deductions for parents with children in 
college, or the Pell grants for children who are too poor to be able to 
benefit from tax cuts or the scholarship programs.
  We addressed that in a bipartisan effort, although I have to admit 
before July 30, if you would have told me in June or May it would have 
been bipartisan on the quality, or the total amount of the tax cuts 
that had been provided for education, I would not have believed it. But 
I think on a bipartisan basis, and I know one of our colleagues got a 
lot of press saying we were all breaking our arms patting ourselves on 
the back for it. It was a bipartisan agreement that I supported, and 
because it was bipartisan, it addressed higher education needs in our 
country.
  As our colleague said, we need to think about tomorrow and the future 
of our country, the college graduates, the assistance for those 
students. That is why it is so important. Again, I was proud of this 
Congress for addressing that in a bipartisan way.
  My concern here is, and here today we debated the Labor-HHS 
appropriations bill and up until today the biggest concern we heard was 
there was an amendment by our colleague from Pennsylvania to take away 
the national test.
  Well, frankly, I supported that amendment, because I do not know if 
we need a national test. I know we might need some voluntary national 
standards, and for my two terms previous to this in Congress I have 
worked for some national standards that the States could voluntarily 
adopt. I am proud to say, Texas is one of those who adopted those 
goals, with a bipartisan legislative effort, a Republican governor and 
Democratic legislature, who did that.
  But now we need to address on a bipartisan basis pre-K through the 
12th grade, because again, as our colleagues said, we know what is 
wrong with the system. We know we need to have a standardized test.
  Texas has a standardized test. It has taken us a number of years to 
get to that point. A student in our high schools, unless they pass that 
exit level exam, they do not receive a diploma. That is tough, because 
I have had parents and students who have said, wait a minute, I worked 
12 years, maybe 13 years to get that diploma, but they could not pass 
that test that supposedly is on basic skills.
  It is a little tougher than basic skills now, because over the last 
few years it has been made tougher because the course level is harder 
now.

                              {time}  2245

  But we have gone through that. So we do need some type of test 
instrument. I am not a big proponent of tests because I worry about how 
they treat students who may not have the same opportunity.
  Last night I was using a special order to recognize a school district 
that my two children graduated from that were recognized in the State 
of Texas, and in my own county. It is an urban school district with 
easily a majority minority district, but they were recognized because 
of their increase in their test scores, their low dropout rates, and 
also their high attendance records; that they had to have a 94 percent 
average attendance record. They were recognized for that, and because 
of the quality education.
  What we need to do though, is to say, now we need to do for 
kindergarten or pre-K through 12, what we did bipartisanly for higher 
education. We need to talk about a voluntary national standard, because 
again, the child may be educated in the Alvino School District in the 
State of Texas but they very well may move to New Jersey. Frankly, New 
Jersey or Texas wants to know if a student is educated in the other 
State, that they have a certain level of educational quality; again, 
not that we want to set those standards, but we want to have a 
nationwide standard that districts and States all across the country 
will say, yes, we measure up to those standards. But they will be 
adopted locally by that State board of education, that State 
superintendent, however the State structures it.
  So we can do it. But again, we need to make sure it is not the 
Federal Government turning our backs on the future of our Nation.
  We talk on this floor a lot of times about the defense of our 
country. We

[[Page H6908]]

need to look to the future and see how we can defend our country in the 
future, where the best way we can defend our country is not just by 
additional bombers and additional troops and better trained troops, but 
it is a better educated populace. It is an educated populace who can go 
into military service and maybe make a career out of it, since we have 
career military, and are educated to the point that they can defend our 
Nation. But again, an educated Nation, high skills, higher education, 
is what will make our country powerful, even in addition to our 
military power. That is what is so important.
  The voluntary national standard issue is not whether to implement a 
national test, the issue is to set a national standard for students, 
and we need to focus on providing quality education for students. We 
know the system is not working as best it should. That is why we need 
to put our shoulder to the grindstone with those school board members, 
with those State school board members, with those legislators, and with 
the parents and those teachers who are providing that education every 
day.
  I learned as a State legislator in Texas for 20 years that we did not 
educate students in the halls of the State legislature. We do not 
educate students here on the floor of the Congress. The education of 
those students is by those teachers in that classroom. Any help we can 
give with whatever power we have, whether it be funding, whether it be 
assistance to those teachers, to have smaller class sizes, to have more 
adequate books, to provide that assistance; and again, through title I, 
that is a great program that has been with us since the 1960's. I would 
like to see it continued. We expanded it in 1994 when we reauthorized 
title I funding, Federal help for schools. But we need to do more of 
that.
  The crumbling school buildings, we know even if we had gotten the $5 
billion that was talked about, that again, leveraging that across the 
country, we could spend $5 billion in the State of Texas alone and it 
would not have helped that much. But again, it is the effort, and that 
little bit of Federal assistance to the local taxpayers who have had to 
vote those bonds to build those schools, to some of the States who 
provide building assistance. But mainly, it is also saying, we are all 
in this together and we are all Americans, whether you are from North 
Carolina, New Jersey, or from Texas. That is what is so important.
  The question is, are we providing children today the best education 
and the best learning environment, with the best facilities? Of course 
not. We would not see the problems we are having. That is why we need 
to make it even better.
  This year specifically we have 52 million students who have entered 
school this fall. This is a record number, surpassing those of us who 
are the baby boomers. There are 52 million students. Are these children 
going to receive the best quality education to take our place here as 
Members of Congress, or as doctors, lawyers, engineers, whatever 
profession they may go into, or whatever trade they may have? 
Obviously, we cannot say yes tonight.
  Students from kindergarten to high school need a good learning 
environment, an environment where students feel comfortable asking 
questions, where teachers are accessible for individual tutoring if 
needed, and where teachers want to teach, and more importantly, where 
students want to learn.
  Students are not receiving enough personal attention. We need to 
lower the pupil-teacher ratio. In Texas in 1984, when we went through 
our reform in public education, we lowered our class size in 
kindergarten through fourth grade to 20 students, 22 students per 
teacher. That has been a tough standard. In fact, we have had to grant 
waivers because of the growth. In every session, we will have 
administrators come back and say, we need to take that away.
  But we learned that the lower, the smaller class sizes--in fact, the 
ideal class size is 15 to 1, but we could not afford it. But we did say 
22 to 1, to those most important years of K through 4.
  I introduced a bill as a State senator to make 22 to 1 from K through 
12th grade. Of course, the cost of that was astronomical, but it made 
us talk about it. So whatever we can provide on the Federal level to 
make sure those teachers can work with those students in smaller class 
sizes. But again, it is a Federal concern and it is a State 
responsibility, but it is our job as Members of Congress to make sure 
we are planning for tomorrow.
  The schools are overcrowded. Buildings are unsafe. Even as we stand 
here tonight, in the District of Columbia we know that the schools have 
not reopened because of the hazardous conditions that they have. But 
that is not just in D.C. It is easy to pick on D.C. when you are around 
the country, and sometimes they give us very fertile ground to pick on 
them. But it is not just in the District of Columbia, it is all over 
the country that we have problems with buildings and deteriorated 
conditions.
  As the gentleman said earlier, it is not just in the urban areas, it 
is not just in a district like I represent. It is also in my suburban 
districts that I represent, but it is also in the rural facilities. 
That is why I think whatever bill we can craft needs to address both 
the rural, the suburban, and the urban needs to provide that leverage 
that will help that local school boards and those local taxpayers to 
approve a bond election, maybe, or that State to provide a little extra 
     money for building and construction that a lot of States 
     do not provide.
  Teachers are stretched to their limits. Like I said, some teachers 
have 40 students in their classroom. My wife is a high school algebra 
teacher. Last year she had over 40 students in an algebra class. How do 
you teach algebra students? I had enough trouble when I sat through 
geometry twice during the day to learn. Obviously, that is why I became 
a business major and a lawyer.
  But you cannot teach students when you have 40 in a classroom, and 
that is what is so sad. You have to have smaller class sizes and 
buildings to match that, so teachers can do it. A lot of our schools 
are going through a building boom, if their taxpayers support the bond 
elections. Again, using the Alvino School District as an example, they 
passed the bond election that provided for a great many more classrooms 
for our school. Selena Park ISD in my district passed a bond election, 
the voters did. The Houston Independent School District, over 200,000 
students every day attend. The bond election failed, so we have 
problems there, but they are trying to come up with facilities.
  I have a high school that is in ISD that I went to high school with. 
Years ago they decided to do away with the library because they needed 
the classrooms, so they use the city library across the street. They do 
not have a cafeteria at that high school. They use a junior high 
cafeteria that is a block away. That is wrong. We ought to provide 
those facilities for the high school students and junior high students 
without them having to use a city library. I at one time thought that 
was great because we could leverage the funding. The problem is that 
city library is not equipped like a school library would be, 
particularly a middle school library or a junior high and a high school 
library. So we have problems with buildings, we have problems with 
pupil-teacher ratios, and we in Congress need to do something 
bipartisanly. That is why we are talking about this.
  Let us just not talk about tests, and say the President wants 
national tests, let us be against that. Let us talk about what we can 
do constructively, and that is why we can have some voluntary national 
standards, and also put our money where our mouth is. That is why I was 
proud of this Congress in July, and I hope I will be proud of this 
Congress when we address putting funding in the kindergarten through 
the 12th grade for public education, so we can prepare those students 
for tomorrow.
  I will close, I say to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone], 
thanking him. Some of us in 1992, we heard Fleetwood Mac too often 
singing ``Don't stop thinking about tomorrow,'' but if we as Members of 
Congress stop thinking about tomorrow, then we are not doing our job. 
Our job is to make sure our country is as great tomorrow if not greater 
than it is today.
  If we are derelict in our duty in not providing for educational 
opportunity and better opportunity for our children, then we are doing 
a disservice to our Nation and we are doing a disservice to those 
students, those 452 million

[[Page H6909]]

students, who started school this year. That is not what I came to 
Washington to do.
  Again, I want to thank the gentleman for allowing us tonight to give 
this special order. I know we have taken up most of his time, it seems 
like, but the gentleman has heard a lot of accents tonight, from North 
Carolina to Texas to the Northeast. That is because it is a national 
problem. It is not just a localized problem. I thank the gentleman 
again for allowing me to participate.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the gentleman's comments, and 
believe me, my purpose tonight was to get everyone to participate, and 
use as much time as they like.
  I guess there is not a lot of time left, but I just wanted to say, 
the gentleman mentioned particularly at the end about the use of 
resources. We all know we have scarce resources around here. We just 
passed the Balanced Budget Act. I think our whole purpose is to use 
those scarce resources on the Federal level as wisely as possible. This 
idea of having or raising education standards around the country really 
is a way of using very little resources to achieve a great effect.
  I know that in New Jersey, I was given today a document from the New 
Jersey Department of Education, very recent, that is the annual report 
of Goals 2000, Educate America. It shows basically how New Jersey, I 
think New Jersey in the last fiscal year, received about $8 billion for 
Goals 2000. What they essentially used it for, or a lot of it, was to 
put together this strategic plan on a State level to achieve higher 
standards.
  It was very interesting to see, this is a long document, but to see 
how they put together curriculum content standards, they developed a 
partnership with private organizations, in other words, some of the 
universities, some of the corporations, to do joint programs within the 
schools. The list goes on and on. I was just amazed to see, $8 million 
sounds like a lot, but on the State level it really is not very much, 
how they were able to use that $8 million and basically leverage it to 
really do a lot toward achieving higher standards within the New Jersey 
schools.
  Of course, we have, as the gentleman mentioned in Texas, we have 
these standardized tests we give in New Jersey, and they have shown 
that the proficiency has actually improved in the last few years, so it 
is very possible, really, to leverage some of these Federal dollars in 
a way that really makes a difference.
  I think the same thing is true with the infrastructure of schools, as 
well, because oftentimes, as the gentleman knows, the local school 
districts, if they can get some money to, say, underwrite the bonds, 
oftentimes they will use bonding to build a new school or replace a 
school. If they can get funding to underwrite the bonds, they are able 
to do things.
  So even though $5 billion does not sound like a lot nationwide over a 
period of years for crumbling schools, it can be used to leverage, and 
it can be leveraged also to make a big difference. So those Federal 
dollars can mean something, even though they may not seem like a lot. I 
know the gentleman mentioned about the wise use of funds, and that is 
what we have to look at here over the next few months.
  Mr. GREEN. If the gentleman will continue to yield, Mr. Speaker, we 
have an interstate highway system that we build with predominantly 
Federal dollars, with some State dollars, and of course, we have 
different levels, depending on what the level of the highway system is. 
We could not build those highways if it was just Texas and New Jersey.
  We could not build as many, but we have to leverage it between the 
two, and I wish I could tell the gentleman I was talking about a 
program like the Federal highway system for education, but under our 
budget constraints we cannot do that. But we can provide some funding 
to help those districts, just to help provide those.
  Maybe that will be the extra help to convince the local taxpayers to 
provide a bond election to build those schools, because very few 
districts can build schools out of current revenue. They just do not 
have that ability. You cannot do capital improvements without 
leveraging over a number of years, and even a small amount of money 
from the Federal Government would help to--and again, we are not going 
to tell them how to build those schools, we are going to just let them 
be a partner with them for a little bit, to make sure --maybe they can 
afford 95 percent and we can do 5 percent or something like that, or 
even less, but it will make a difference.
  That will show that we are all in this together as Americans, again, 
across our country, worrying about and addressing the issue of 
educational opportunity for our children and quality. Again, like our 
colleague, the gentleman from North Carolina, said, the education is in 
the classroom with those teachers and those parents who participate. 
All we need to do is make sure we are partnering with them to help 
them.

                              {time}  2300

  Mr. PALLONE. Our main purpose, of course, is to continue to point out 
that as Democrats we want to make education a top priority and we think 
we have done a lot as you mentioned with the Balanced Budget Act, but a 
lot more needs to be done.

                          ____________________