[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 139 (Wednesday, October 8, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H8708-H8716]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 7, 1997, the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. McGovern] is 
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.

[[Page H8709]]

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, we in the Congress are charged with the 
task of finding the best course for our Nation, and the debate on this 
floor is the compass with which we chart that course.
  None of the issues debated in this Chamber has an easy answer, and 
very often agreement does not guarantee an immediate solution. 
President Clinton, during his State of the Union address in January, 
called upon us to act on behalf of children, saying that politics 
should stop at the schoolhouse door.
  Well, I certainly agree. I would add to the President's sentiment by 
declaring that that effort to improve the climate of learning and 
development for our children must start long before our children ever 
reach the schoolhouse door. Partisan politics should play no role in 
the development of our children. Politics should stop at the foot of 
the crib.
  Newspapers across the Nation have highlighted new scientific findings 
in the field of early childhood development. For years, conventional 
wisdom taught us that if a child was intelligent, she must have been 
born intelligent. But, as an April 28 editorial in the New York Times 
so appropriately stated, ``After birth, experience counts even more 
than genetics.''
  Talking to our children from birth, holding and playing with 
newborns, and even looking them in the eye during play can have a 
profound impact on the development of their intellect, making them 
better students and making them more confident and productive members 
of society. These early years are critically important to our 
children's full and healthy development.
  That is why we must invest more time, more study, and more resources 
in our efforts to promote a healthy start to life for our kids. Getting 
this message out to the public today will play a key role in our 
Nation's ability to compete in the global economy of the future.
  Imagine, a child's ability to relate to others is a permanent part of 
a child's personality by the age of 2, and the brain connections needed 
for math and logic are formed by the age of 4. Who would have thought 
that so much about our kids' future and social, academic performance 
would be determined by such an early age? But yet, it is.
  When I visit with people in my district of Massachusetts, parents and 
child-care providers did not miss these news stories. The people in my 
district care deeply about this issue. Let me give my colleagues just 
one example.
  Over the past several months, a working group of parents, child-care 
providers, education specialists, and medical personnel have developed 
a parent and provider survey under the auspices of the Central 
Massachusetts United Way ``Success-by-Six'' program. The survey is an 
effort to gather information about conditions affecting young children 
and their families in the Greater Worcester area. The survey seeks to 
discover what is working well, what the strengths in the community are, 
and how things can be better.
  The overwhelming response to the survey thus far has resulted in a 
need for second printing, and the response from both parents and 
providers who have mailed in responses to the survey has been a 
phenomenal 50 percent.
  Parents from central Massachusetts are no different from parents all 
across the Nation. And do parents across America think we are doing 
enough? Well, according to a Newsweek poll, over half of our Nation's 
parents do not believe that the Government and business policies 
adequately support families with very young children.
  Mr. Speaker, the studies that I have mentioned regarding early 
childhood development indicate that environmental factors affect 
children's intelligence and healthy development much more than we have 
ever believed. These environmental factors are largely under our 
control. I repeat, these environmental factors are largely under our 
control.
  I strongly believe that we cannot look at these findings and simply 
do nothing. The issue here is children, children all across the Nation, 
who need more than we have given them to date. The debate here in this 
House should be how best we can help our children or families in our 
Nation.
  Let us look at the facts. In the United States, over five million of 
our youngest children are cared for by other adults while their parents 
work. According to a 1995 national study conducted by the University of 
Colorado Economics Department, many of the child-care centers to which 
we entrust our children are unlicensed, staffed by poorly-paid adults, 
and over 90 percent of these facilities lack adequate services to 
respond to the developmental needs of each child in their care. About 
half of these facilities actually provide care that is deemed unhealthy 
for our Nation's children.
  In some of America's poorest neighborhoods, some 70 percent of 
children have difficulty with simple communication. This deficiency can 
be directly attributed to poor nutrition, a lack of health education, 
and inadequate personal care.
  Nobel Laureate economist Robert Solow estimated that the cost of 
child poverty to the United States is as high as $177 billion per year. 
I would argue that the cost of the most basic principles of our society 
is far higher if we ignore the basic needs of our youngest children.
  The suffering is felt in economic as well as human terms. I have met 
with business owners who tell me that finding people equipped with the 
necessary skills to compete in today's economy is increasingly 
difficult. Without giving our kids the help they need at an early age, 
it will get no easier.
  Mr. Speaker, the child poverty rate here in the United States is 
among the highest in the developed world.

                              {time}  1945

  According to the General Accounting Office, studies estimate that of 
the approximately 100,000 American children who are homeless, nearly 
half are under the age of 6 years old. These children will not be on an 
even footing developmentally and they are likely to lag behind their 
peers for the rest of their lives.
  No resident of Westport, MA, which is in my district, would sail the 
waters of Buzzard's Bay with an anchor dragging behind their boat. 
Neither can we allow our children to hang off the stern of this Nation. 
We have work to do, we have much more work to do. Parents want us to 
address these issues now and the call to action could not be more 
clear.
  I am proud to have joined with my distinguished colleagues in this 
House, the gentlewoman from Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro] and the gentleman 
from Maryland [Mr. Hoyer] in introducing a bill to address the issues 
of early childhood development. Our legislation provides greater 
funding like Head Start and Early Start and various family support 
services. Our bill also offers State competitive grants to identify and 
reward those early childhood programs that are working today, that are 
working.
  We are reaching across the aisle to address the needs of children, 
and I hope that this call will be answered by my colleagues on the 
other side of the aisle. Let us enter into the debate on this issue and 
make early childhood development a national priority today.
  Mr. Speaker, I would just like to add that we should also applaud the 
interest and the leadership that the President of the United States and 
the First Lady have demonstrated on this issue. On October 23 there 
will be a White House Conference on Child Care similar to the one held 
earlier this spring on early childhood development. I would urge the 
President to continue his leadership, to continue his interest on this 
issue, and I would further urge that these issues be the centerpiece of 
his State of the Union Address and of his agenda next year.
  At this point, Mr. Speaker, I would like to yield to my colleague 
from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone] who has been a strong advocate for early 
childhood development issues and all other education issues.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I want to thank the gentleman 
for leading this special order tonight, because as he mentioned, the 
topic is early childhood development, but this is really part of the 
overall Democratic education agenda. As Democrats, we as a party from 
the very beginning of this Congress, and even before this Congress, 
have said that it is important that we prioritize education.
  I know our colleagues before were talking about the budget, and the 
gentleman and I and my colleague here

[[Page H8710]]

from Maine and others were all very insistent that during that balanced 
budget debate, that education, primarily higher education, be 
prioritized. We managed to basically tell the Republicans on the other 
side that if they did not put in programs so that there would be more 
money available for higher education, we would not agree to the budget, 
the proposal that they put forward.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would just say, I wish our colleagues on 
the other side of the aisle would appreciate that one of the ways to 
save money, one of the ways to keep the budget in balance and to have a 
healthy economy is by investing in our children, by investing in 
education, beginning at age zero.
  We had to fight tooth and nail, as the gentleman knows, to get them 
to agree to modest concessions on education and the budget. What good 
there is in this budget on education is due to the efforts of the 
Democrats, and I would like to point that out to my colleagues on the 
Republican side of the aisle.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, there is no question about that. Not to 
keep being partisan, because I do not want to just say bad things about 
our Republican colleagues, but the bottom line is that the Republican 
leadership in the last few years has repeatedly tried to cut back or 
even eliminate some of the education programs that impact the secondary 
schools, impact the kindergarten-through-12 grade level.
  For example, Goals 2000, which provides a small amount of money to 
local school districts to try innovative programs in the public 
schools, they have repeatedly said that they did not want to fund any 
more. But tonight, as part of this education agenda, we are stressing 
early childhood development.
  I know that the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Allen] has been a 
leader. The bill that he mentioned, the Early Learning and Opportunity 
Act, is a tremendous piece of legislation, and if we do manage to get 
it passed in this Republican Congress, I think it will go far towards 
helping basically low-income families, primarily, but a lot of people, 
get an early start in teaching their children to read, speak and 
interact with others. It basically dovetails with the existing Head 
Start program, but starts the kids at an earlier age.
  Head Start, from what I understand right now, is strictly above 3 
years old. There is the Early Start program that the gentleman 
mentioned which deals with kids under 3, but that is a very small 
program. I think the statistics show that Early Start impacts or 
enrolls less than 2 percent of the eligible kids, whereas Head Start 
reaches about half of the eligible kids. So both programs need to be 
expanded, but the gentleman is zeroing in on the zero-to-3.
  I just wanted to say from my own experience, right now I have a 4-
year-old, a 2\1/2\-year-old, and a baby that was just born 10 days ago, 
my daughter, Celeste.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Congratulations.
  Mr. PALLONE. I thank the gentleman.
  I listened to what the gentleman said, and I have watched this 
amazing development with the 3 children, in Celeste's case, only 10 
days now, and what the gentleman said is true. I feel bad because I am 
not always there and my wife has to do the interaction most of the 
time, because we are down here in Washington and they are back in New 
Jersey. But it is amazing how they begin to learn from the very 
beginning, and the environmental factors are so important.
  I watch my wife, who just insists on reading to them and having books 
around all the time, and stressing the importance of learning the 
alphabet and watching programs on TV that provide instruction in pre-
reading skills, and it is just so crucial. We can just see that they 
are absorbing everything every day, and if they are not constantly 
involved in some way in an effort to learn, they will not learn as 
quickly.
  So that really has brought home to me the value of what we are trying 
to do by expanding Head Start to reach out to children from zero to 3. 
I think it is so crucial. It is just one of the most important things 
we can do in terms of investing in education, and in the long term 
providing children as they are growing up with a really good start, so 
to speak, so that they learn and they can become valuable members of 
society.
  I have a lot more to say about the gentleman's bill, but there are 
other Members here, and maybe I can defer to them and come back to some 
of the other things that I wanted to point out.
  Mr. McGOVERN. I yield at this point to the gentleman from Maine [Mr. 
Allen], my distinguished colleague who has also been a champion on 
these issues and on all education issues.
  Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. I want to 
thank the gentleman for the bill that the gentleman and the gentlewoman 
from Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro] have put forward. I am proud to be a 
cosponsor of that bill.
  I would like to talk a little bit about the science. What the 
gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone] was just saying about his child 
and what he is seeing in a baby that is only now a few days old, we 
know a lot more about the brain of infants than we ever did before.
  About 15 years ago, neuro scientists assumed that brain structure was 
genetically determined at birth. They did not recognize how important a 
child's early years are and how the experiences of those early years 
have an effect on the brain itself, and how important environmental 
conditions are, such as nourishment, care, surroundings and 
stimulation.
  The impact of the environment is particularly compelling and it 
affects how the brain is wired. To explain that, during the first 3 
years of life the number of synapses in the brain increase rapidly, all 
of these connections between different parts of the brain. But then the 
number of those synapses holds steady through the first decade of life, 
and those that are not used decline and atrophy and basically 
disappear. So the formation of neuro pathways in the brain is directly 
related to the quality of care that young children receive.
  I went to the White House Conference on Early Childhood Development a 
few months ago, and one of the speakers said quality child care is 
brain food. The fact is that too many of our young people today are not 
being fed enough brain food, and in fact, for too many working parents 
in this country, the cost of quality child care is really not 
affordable. It is too high for many of them, and we need to do more 
than we have.
  I want to connect that research with some of the stories that I am 
hearing back in Maine. When I go and talk to superintendents or 
teachers right now, they are telling me that when kids come to them in 
kindergarten, there are now an increasing number who seem unable to sit 
still. They will spit at their classmates, they will fight with their 
classmates. They are really not ready for school because they are not 
able to interact productively with other kids in that kind of session.
  What they are saying is, we need to do something about these kids, 
because most kids have good parents, most kids get a decent start in 
life, but there are some, some really who do not.
  It points out the need as a matter of Federal policy, as a matter of 
State policy, as a matter of policy for every school board that we look 
to what happens before kids come to school. In Bath, ME, there is a 
program called Success By Age Six, and part of that program involves 
home visits, prenatal, postnatal, the kind of encouragement for 
parents, the kind of help for parents so that they can be productive in 
stimulating their children, helping them develop the skills that they 
will need to get along with adults, to get along with other kids, to 
start to have the ability and interest in learning to read or start to 
have the ability and interest in learning mathematical concepts.
  When we think about our children, when we think about the kind of 
stimulation they need in those early years, we need a set of Federal, 
State and local policies that makes sense, that reflects what we know 
in terms of science and what we know in terms of our own common sense, 
what we are hearing around the country. I think that is the direction 
we need to go in.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I would just say to the gentleman that he 
is right on target when he says the science exists, the science is 
there. We know how important those early years are.

[[Page H8711]]

  The White House conference that occurred earlier this year 
highlighted how important those early years are, those years, zero to 
3, and yet this Congress right now is not doing nearly enough to help 
complement that science.
  We are trying very desperately to get Republican support for the bill 
that the gentlewoman from Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro] and I have 
introduced. We are trying to build a bipartisan consensus here that 
more Federal resources need to go into helping States, for example, 
support innovative programs that help early childhood development, that 
help promote child health care. Those things are vitally important, and 
yet it is a constant struggle to try to get that bipartisan support.
  Again, I wish my colleagues were still here. They talk very 
passionately about numbers. They talk very passionately in a very 
sterile way about numbers, but I would suggest to them, as I said 
earlier, that investing in our children, investing in these programs 
that help our children develop into healthy adults and into productive 
adults is a wise and important investment that will save this country 
tons of money in the future.
  Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, an earlier speaker on the other side said 
that he had a dream, and that his dream was that the President called 
him and he was given an authority to exercise the line-item veto.
  Well, I have a dream as well. I think we on this side of the aisle, 
we as Democrats have a dream as well, and it is to leave no child 
behind, and that what we need to do as a country is recognize that the 
Cold War is over. We have balanced the Federal budget. We look out 
ahead for the next 10 years and we see a Federal budget that is close 
to balance, either a modest surplus or a modest deficit for 10 years.
  It is time for people in this country to say that the great mission, 
the great challenge that we have as a country in the next 10 years is 
to leave no child behind, to make sure that children in this country 
have adequate health care, a solid education; that they are prepared 
before they ever get to kindergarten with the appropriate child care 
and the kind of stimulation they need, and that we are going to make 
this country strong for our children. If we do that, I think our 
prospects for the next century are very, very bright indeed, but we 
need the national will.
  Rob Reiner, who has been a leader in promoting child care, quality, 
affordable child care, has said what is missing today is that we do not 
have the national will to treat this problem with the seriousness that 
it deserves. I believe on this side of the aisle we are determined to 
do that, and I look forward to working with all of my colleagues on 
that.

                              {time}  2000

  Mr. McGOVERN. I just wish my colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle had the passion with regard to children that they do about B-2 
bombers. The fact of the matter is that we should be able to, in a 
bipartisan way, be able to come together and to support these kinds of 
programs that help our children develop into healthy adults.
  I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. Pallone].
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, I do not mean to keep using my own 
experience, but I cannot help it. When I listen to my colleague, the 
gentleman from Maine, talk about the interaction, he pointed out how it 
is important for kids at that age not only to interact with their 
parents, but even to interact with other kids.
  One of the things that I notice with my son, who is 2\1/2\ now, is 
how much he has learned from just interaction with his older sister, 
who is 4. And she did not have that advantage because she was by 
herself. She was not able to have somebody who was teaching her. But it 
is just constant.
  She will pick up a book and she will say, can we read? And neither 
one of them can read, but they sit there and try to make up the stories 
as they look at the pictures, and just the advantages that some kids 
have. Obviously we can buy them the videotape and they will learn 
something from the videotape. We have books we can provide them.
  If a kid is at home and does not have the books and the opportunity, 
maybe if they go and spend some time in child care, where there is 
someone who provides them with the educational materials and has other 
children there who will interact with them, it makes such a difference. 
I can just see it myself. I just want to stress that, because it is 
really crucial.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut [Ms. Rosa DeLauro], who has been a leader on this whole 
issue to promote early childhood development legislation here in the 
House.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleagues. I am 
delighted to join with them. I am really excited about this piece of 
legislation, and about introducing it along with my colleague, the 
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. McGovern], and with my two colleagues 
here, the gentleman from Maine [Mr. Allen] and the gentleman from New 
Jersey [Mr. Pallone], who are aboard this very exciting effort.
  Mr. Speaker, it is trite, but these are exciting times with what the 
science has uncovered. Think back to your own childhood. I can remember 
my father used to read to me all the time. It got so sometimes you are 
tired, and you figure you skip some of the pages because you are tired, 
and you want your son or daughter to go to sleep. But he would tell me 
later on that I would just trip him up. He would start to leave 
something out, and I would say, oh, you missed that piece, or something 
like that. But that is the kind of thing.
  When the gentleman said he hated to bring it back to his own 
experience, that is what the experience needs to be about. When we take 
a look, I think the science is so exciting, not for the science itself 
but for what it translates into, and what we are able to do. We are 
given a wonderful opportunity here to do something with this.
  Before age 3, the brain has the ability to learn and organize new 
information 10,000 times more effectively than the brain of a 50-year-
old. This is these little, teeny people. They have all of this 
capacity, and the kinds of experiences that affect the brain.
  I think it is important for parents to know this, for grandparents, 
for child care providers, for public officials, that when children 
under a year old experience severe stress, that is whether they are 
hurt or whether they have a fear or something, or whether they are 
hungry, that the brain changes, the brain changes. You have what they 
say, and I am not a scientist. I do not know if some of my colleagues 
are scientists. But the way the neurons are patterned and so forth, 
some are used more and some are used less, so the physical surroundings 
that a child has can often explain the later link, if you will, to some 
of the problems that we have today like school failure, juvenile 
delinquency, antisocial behavior.
  I think it is important for us to realize that, again, in terms of 
our own obligation as elected officials, one-third of America's victims 
of child abuse are babies under 1-year-old. That is not only the 
problem for today, that is the problem in the future.
  Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, I want to raise a fascinating study that I 
heard about a couple of weeks ago in Sacramento County, California. The 
study period looked at all of those 9- to 12-year-olds who had been 
arrested for a crime.
  During the study period there were 132 9- to 12-year-olds who were 
arrested for a crime. It turned out that exactly one-half, 66 of those 
children, were already known to the California Department of Human 
Services as being alleged victims of abuse or neglect, and half of them 
were not known to the department. That is very interesting, because in 
Sacramento County at that time there were 1,100 children between the 
ages of 9 and 12 who were known to the Department of Human Services as 
being victims of abuse or neglect. There were 73,900 other children who 
were not so known.
  So if we think about the likelihood that someone who has been a 
victim of abuse or neglect will commit a crime, it is not double or 
triple or ten times or 20 times or 50 times. On the basis of that 
study, you are 67 times more likely to commit a crime between the ages 
of 9 and 12 than a child who is not a victim of abuse or neglect.
  Every conservative, every person who believes we have to conserve our 
public money, ought to support investment in children, because dollars 
put into taking care and improving the lot of kids

[[Page H8712]]

who are victims of abuse or neglect will pay off a thousandfold down 
the road.
  Ms. DeLAURO. The opposite pole is if babies do have trusting and 
reliable relationships, and that is with parents, grandparents, and 
caregivers, because we know today that men and women are in the 
workplace. Families cannot afford to stay home all of the time with 
their children. So we want to make sure that when they have day care, 
that needs to be sound and solid, where parents can trust the quality 
of that day care, the quality of the individuals who are providing that 
care.
  The one thing that really, excuse me, just blows my mind is that 
while babies have an enormous capacity to learn, as I understand it, if 
it is not used, it is not that you can draw on the reserve and use it 
at another time. It goes away. It is gone. It loses the ability.
  They have studies in animals, for instance, that if their eyes are 
covered right after birth, the brain then loses the ability to deal 
with visual information. So just to sum that up, with the brain, you 
either use it or you lose it. That is why, given the information, what 
we do not want to do with this information is put it on a shelf.

  Mr. PALLONE. If I could just interrupt for a moment, one of the 
things that I often notice with little kids, and I do not know how 
young we can go, but obviously very small kids, is if the parents are 
bilingual, or if they know one, two, three or more languages, that the 
kids very easily go back and forth between the languages. Yet if you go 
a few years later, you cannot learn the language. It is much harder.
  Is that basically the explanation for that?
  Ms. DeLAURO. It is, because you are not using, and again, I am not a 
scientist, but you are not using the part of the brain that 
differentiates those sounds. So children can learn languages, they 
learn languages easier at a much earlier age. Again, if we think about 
ourselves, or if we had that experience or learned a language in high 
school or earlier, if you had that experience at home, you can draw on 
both pieces.
  My colleague, the gentleman from Maine, said if we miss this 
opportunity to provide children who are from the zero to 3, some places 
have programs that are from zero to 6, and you get that interaction 
with parents and caregivers, and you read to children, and you may 
think it is not coming through, but it is in many ways. I think if we 
do not take advantage of this opportunity we are not doing our jobs. We 
are not doing the job we were sent here to do.
  Mr. McGOVERN. I fully agree with my colleague, the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut. I just want to pick up on one thing that the gentleman 
from Maine said about the cost effectiveness of early childhood care. I 
want to read two statistics.
  Long-term studies of the Perry Preschool Program for poor children 
found that after 27 years, each $1 invested saved over $7 billion by 
increasing the likelihood that the children would be literate, 
employed, and enrolled in post-secondary education, and decreasing the 
likelihood that they would be school dropouts dependent on welfare or 
arrested for criminal delinquency.
  Another study of the short-term impact of the Colorado pre-
kindergarten program found it resulted in a cost savings of over $3 
million over 3 years in reduced special education costs alone. So there 
is a very conservative, fiscally conservative argument to be made in 
favor of investing more in these preschool programs, in these early 
childhood care programs, because we save money. It is the fiscally 
responsible thing to do.
  I do not think we can stress that enough, because there are some who 
would say, well, we are just talking about more taxpayers' money being 
invested into education, more into kids, and for what? Well, the reason 
why we are doing it is because these programs work. They also save us 
money in the long term.
  Mr. PALLONE. The other thing that I think is so crucial is that a lot 
of people are not even aware of the fact that right now we are not 
providing the funding even for Head Start. My understanding is that 
only about even less than half of the kids that are eligible for Head 
Start, which basically goes from 4 to 5, are now in a program.
  So even if we were just able to expand the amount of money available 
for Head Start and allow those eligible kids to be participating in 
that, that would go far. Early Start, less than 2 percent who are 
eligible are being cared for.
  So the gentleman, and my colleague also, the gentlewoman from 
Connecticut, they are talking about, really, trying to make a major 
investment here that we need to make, but it is not being made. I do 
not want our constituents out there to think that right now Head Start 
is fully funded, because it is not. There are long waiting lines. I 
know in my district a lot of these Head Start programs, they have long 
waiting lines for the kids to get in, and they have not been able to 
accommodate even half of the kids that want to participate and are 
eligible.
  Mr. McGOVERN. What we are doing here is a call to action, urging our 
colleagues here, urging the White House, to continue its leadership on 
this issue. Much more needs to be done, much more needs to be invested. 
It is the right thing to do.
  As my colleague, the gentleman from Maine [Mr. Allen] pointed out, we 
know the science. We are not making this all up. There are studies too 
numerous to mention that document the importance of these programs and 
the importance of focusing attention on those early years.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Sometimes people say, why should the Federal 
Government--some of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle say, 
why should the Federal Government get involved in this? The Federal 
Government, in terms of preschool education, has been involved, for the 
very serious commitment in terms of Head Start. Head Start works. We 
know we have to make sure that it has continued quality, and that is 
the effort.
  Therefore, this is a natural progression, even the wealth of 
information that we have, to look at how we then can expand this effort 
and be able to get to our children as quickly as possible, to have them 
get a good start on life and an ability to be able to ultimately 
compete.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to our colleague, the gentleman 
from North Carolina [Mr. McIntyre]. I welcome him.
  Mr. McINTYRE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
  As we look ahead to the continuing of what we do with young children 
coming up through the schools, there are programs like Head Start that 
are making a big difference in counties such as I come from, in Robeson 
County, N.C. Also there are other programs that I wanted to briefly 
address that will help us in this continuum from the young, early 
childhood right through growing up, children in elementary, middle, 
junior high, and high school, and even our community colleges and 
universities.
  As a former chairman of a weekday school and day care program in my 
own church back home in Lumberton, NC, I share this great endeavor to 
help our children get a good start and a head start and great start in 
life.
  As we look at our children getting a head start in living and 
learning, we can also look at exemplary programs we have here in our 
Nation. One of them was referred to by President Clinton in his State 
of the Union Address back in early February, when he referred to Gov. 
Jim Hunt of North Carolina, a program called Smart Start that our State 
legislature has endorsed and that is growing by leaps and bounds in 
counties throughout our State. I commend this exemplary program on 
giving young children that smart start to get going in life, such as we 
have in North Carolina.
  There is also another program that we have been directly involved in 
at the Federal level that we can support. I hope that in the conference 
committee that will be coming forth with its report very soon, that we 
will support the Communities in Schools Program. As the old adage goes, 
if something is not broke, let us not try to fix it.
  The Communities in Schools Program is one that has worked. In my home 
county of Robeson County, we are the only county that has a fully 
federally funded program that works with at-risk youth and also young 
children to help keep them on the right path. So as those young 
children have

[[Page H8713]]

the opportunity to go into school from their early years to their early 
school years, they can be involved in computer programs, they can be 
involved in learning programs, they can be involved in constructive 
programs to help prepare them, not only as better students, but 
ultimately as better citizens.

                              {time}  2015

  The Communities in Schools program in Robeson County is one that has 
worked with educators, local community leaders, law enforcement 
officers, and students working together. And it has helped in the 
health, social, education, and cultural aspects to give support for 
youth who may not have the advantages at home that we all would hope 
that our children would have but, in reality, so many, unfortunately, 
do not have.
  The Communities in Schools program in our area has benefited more 
than 10 schools, starting with young children coming into the 
elementary schools right on through the elementary, middle schools, 
junior highs, and even at my alma mater, Lumberton Senior High School, 
where we had part of the Internet Learning Program, which I spoke on to 
several students back in February of this year.
  When we look at the successes of a program like the Communities in 
Schools, we realize this is one area where the Federal Government can 
help on the local level. We all know we do not want Federal 
intervention and the Federal Government telling us how to run our 
schools. I do not believe anybody really wants that. We know what is 
best for our local communities. But the local communities need help 
from a Federal level. Whether it is from a program like Head Start or 
Smart Start like in North Carolina or where it is a situation where we 
can come in with a Federally funded program in a low-wealth county such 
as Robeson County and work to help children who are trying to maintain 
that Smart Start or that Head Start, we can carry it forward with a 
program like Communities in Schools.
  When something is already helping families, already helping youth, 
already helping teenagers push them in the desire and direction that we 
all would have for them to be constructive, positive citizens for 
tomorrow, then it is a program that we should continue to support. And 
I am urging my colleagues in the conference report to support this 
program.
  Another thing I wanted to mention is that we are having an education 
forum in my district on November 3. It is a day before a bond 
referendum is being voted on in part of our district, and we had 
another bond referendum voted on in my district today to support 
schools. But we realize there are three essential elements to help 
support our kids move through these years as they prepare and go 
through school. And that is supporting a commitment, supporting 
construction where necessary, and supporting the age of technology in 
computers.
  First of all, when we talk about commitment, it is ourselves having 
that commitment. One thing we are going to do in our district is have 
an education forum to bring together those who have worked with young 
children right on through high school, parents, teachers, school 
volunteers, as well as those who are professionally equipped to work 
with young people to talk about what can we do to sustain this 
opportunity for young people.
  As one myself who has volunteered the last 17 years in the classroom 
of both public and private schools throughout my area, I have sought to 
teach these kids the attributes of good citizenship which I call the 
``Three R's of Citizenship'': Understanding their ``Rights,'' something 
we all love to hear about and want to maintain as children and youth 
and definitely as adults, but also matching those rights with 
``Responsibility,'' that for every right that we claim, there is a duty 
or responsibility that we also must sustain. And then third, as we 
teach our young people to balance these rights and responsibilities, 
they will then come to the perspective of understanding what we all 
want, and that is ``Respect.''
  So as we work with young people in our area in teaching them their 
rights and their responsibilities to ultimately lead to respect, we 
realize that that is the goal of so many of these programs, that we are 
working with kids to give them that start so that they ultimately can 
fulfill their role as a good citizen.
  When we talk about, in addition to commitment, we talk about 
construction, making sure that our outdated school buildings in a lot 
of rural areas and inner city areas especially cannot sustain a 
positive learning environment if there is not a positive facility in 
which to learn.
  There are several bills pending now we have in the Congress which I 
am cosponsoring that I hope we will join together with our other 
colleagues to push through: The Partnership to Rebuild America's 
Schools Act and also the sponsorship of the State Infrastructure Bank, 
which would allow States to decide where their greatest concern is with 
local school boards and then support and get the revolving loan funds 
that a poorer county may not have to make sure that school construction 
occurs where needed.
  And then, finally, the other area besides commitment and construction 
is that area of knowing that we can move forward with computers and 
technology, when we realize that there is an opportunity to allow 
businesses to donate to the schools computer equipment and get a tax 
deduction, like they currently get for charitable institutions but they 
do not get it when they give it to a school. And I believe that in 
order to give incentives to businesses in the private sector to support 
our schools, that we can give them that opportunity to work with that.
  So often when we talk about looking ahead, and we are all concerned 
about jobs, we are all concerned about the economic environment that 
families have, we realize that as new industry moves into an area, they 
will talk a lot about rail and utilities and water and the other kind 
of things to bring in positive employment. But then they always lean 
over and say, ``Tell me about your schools,'' because not only will the 
management bring their children into that school district, but they 
will be drawing their labor pool for the future from those very 
schools.
  And when we decry the lack of role models today in society for our 
young people, they are not all going to be the movie stars or athletic 
stars. The other 99 percent of our children are crying for role models. 
And where are they? They are standing right here in this Congress. They 
are back home in our communities and our businesses. They are in all 
aspects of our community leaders.
  Mr. Speaker, if we will take the time ourselves to call up the 
teacher and say, I will come talk to your class about law or government 
or health or private enterprise, or if I cannot get up and talk well on 
my feet to a classroom, I will come read to little Johnny, or, better 
yet, I will come listen to little Janie read to me, that kind of 
private, personal involvement that all of us as citizens can take will 
make a big difference in supporting our children for the future.
  Robin Cooke once wrote that, ``Education is more than a luxury, it is 
a responsibility that society owes to itself.'' And I hope and pray 
that, with God's help, we will have the wisdom to make the tough 
decisions not only to understand that responsibility but to have the 
courage to fulfill that responsibility beginning right here in the 
highest halls of government, to our going back to the halls of our 
schools at home to work with children. Our children, our Nation, our 
future require that we do no less.

  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for his very 
eloquent and passionate statement. And he said something that I think 
is worth repeating, and that is that what we are advocating here today 
is not having the Federal Government dictate to the States and 
localities what they should be doing in their respective school 
districts, but what we are advocating here today is that we step up to 
the plate and provide the resources necessary so they can do their 
jobs.
  I, like the gentleman, have traveled my district and talked to 
schools at every grade level. I have been impressed and inspired by the 
intelligence of these young kids, by the quality of the teachers. But 
what has concerned me in some of the visits that I have made is the 
lack of equipment, the crumbling schools.

[[Page H8714]]

  Mr. Speaker, there are schools in my district in Massachusetts that 
were built when Ulysses Grant was President of the United States. That 
is a great tribute to the architect and the builder. But when Ulysses 
Grant was President of the United States, they did not think about the 
Internet, about the need to rewire classrooms and all the things that 
we have to deal with in this day and age.
  So what we here are all advocating is that the Federal Government do 
what it can to help our local school districts. We know how expensive 
it is to rebuild a school. It can cripple a community. I have been 
impressed by the fact that a number of small towns and cities in my 
district have made the sacrifices to try to finance new school 
buildings. But they need help, and we should be here to help them.
  Mr. Speaker, we spend a lot of money on things that I think are 
foolish. I think that our defense budget, for example, is way over 
budget. The fact of the matter is, it is so big that I think even Dr. 
Strangelove would be impressed by the incredibly high number. Why are 
we not investing more in our kids?
  I think the quality of education that we provide our young people is 
just as essential to our national defense as some of these newfangled 
weapons that we keep hearing about. Again, I commend the gentleman for 
his statement and I agree with everything he said.
  Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman will yield, I came to this 
Congress from the Portland City Council, 1 year as mayor and 6 years on 
the Portland City Council. And while I was there, I heard from, I 
think, almost every person in my district about the significance of 
high property taxes.
  I have only been here for 9 months, but I will bet that in the course 
of the debates in this Chamber over the last few years about education, 
that no one has stood up and said, ``I am for abolishing the Department 
of Education,'' or, ``I am for cutting funding for Head Start or other 
education programs,'' and in the same breath said, ``And I will 
advocate at the local level for an increase in property taxes to 
support additional education programs.'' I bet that has never happened, 
because the same people who would say we want the Federal Government 
out of education would say also that we are not going to support 
increases in local property taxes to fund education.
  The fact is that when it comes to 0 to 3, 0 to 6, the Federal 
Government is the funding agency. This Government, we already fund Head 
Start, and, as the gentleman from New Jersey said, we do not provide 
Head Start for all the kids who need it or for all the kids who qualify 
according to our regulations. What we have to do is to make sure that 
we take seriously the problems around this period, 0 to 3, 0 to 6.
  But it is going to be a partnership between the Federal Government 
and the State governments and local governments and school boards and 
the private sector. We cannot do it alone here, but we have to set the 
goals and urge the people in this country to take this issue seriously.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield for a second, 
we all represent different areas and different parts of the country, 
whether they are urban or suburban or rural areas.
  I keep going back to the fact that we have been privy to some of the 
most recent, the most up-to-date, the most scientific data about how we 
can make the biggest impact on our children. Startling data. We cannot 
have it more clearly, as my colleague from Massachusetts pointed out 
earlier. This is it. We have this period of time when we can make the 
biggest impact for this child's future.
  And all that research is wonderful, again, wherever we live, but if 
it does not spur us to action, the kind of action that we are talking 
about, and the gentleman from New Jersey and the gentleman from North 
Carolina have spoken about, if we do not act on that, then, one, I 
think we are derelict in our responsibility, and I think that we really 
are shortchanging our kids.
  Just two or three statistics that I think are important to note which 
then trigger off a number of things that say, what are the responses? 
What ought to be the responses? One-third of victims of child abuse are 
children under 1 year of age. Parents of all ages and income levels say 
they need more information on care for their children and how to 
stimulate their healthy development.
  The United States is the only industrialized country in the world 
which does not have paid maternity leave. We have got millions of 
mothers and fathers who have to leave their kids and return to their 
jobs in those critical years. We are talking about the 0 to 3, the 0 to 
6 years, and those early months of a child's life.
  No one is suggesting that folks do not have to work today. Families 
have two people in the work force because they need to. But talking 
about tools, government cannot do everything. Government should not do 
everything. Government should provide some tools to people.
  More than half of the mothers of babies under 1 year of age work 
outside of the home. But studies show that nearly half of the child 
care available for these infants is of such substandard quality that it 
threatens those babies' health and safety. We are not talking about 
bells and whistles; we are talking about basics for good development.
  Mr. Speaker, if we do not take advantage of the scientific 
information, of that national will that has been talked about, to take 
some of the resources that have been the tradition of the Federal 
Government in early childhood education now with what we know, and as 
we extend it to help the families from 12 years of education to 14 
years of education with the tax bill that was passed, and we provided 
some help there to make 14 years of education universal, what we now 
have to really apply ourselves to and commit ourselves to is looking at 
those ages from 0 to 6 so that that period of time is accounted for and 
all of the positive stimulus that a child can have to develop needs to 
happen, which is why I am so excited, not the legislation itself, but 
it is the science and what the legislation can do together for early 
learning and opportunity.
  And I think this kind of a conversation is just the kind of thing 
that we need to do, and all Members on both sides of the aisle ought to 
be engaging in this kind of discussion.
  Mr. PALLONE. Mr. Speaker, if the gentlewoman would yield, the other 
thing I wanted to mention, I know that my colleague from North Carolina 
touched upon it as well, is that Head Start now and Early Start and the 
legislation that the gentleman has proposed for expanding Early Start, 
basically it is not just a situation where we are providing child care; 
we are also providing parents with parenting skills and families with 
support skills.

                              {time}  2030

  I have seen in the Head Start programs where they try to get the 
parents involved. It is amazing to me sometimes how little some parents 
know about basically raising kids or doing certain things.
  I remember when I was, going back to my own experience again, I 
remember when I was in the hospital when my first child was born, my 
daughter Rose Marie. And at that time they had not changed the 
insurance yet so you were able to stay a few extra days in the hospital 
and then, of course, we got into the whole thing with the HMOs and the 
managed care tried to cut back on that. We had to pass a law to extend 
the days again.
  But they would have programs with the mothers and some fathers, too, 
where they would teach you how to bathe the child or do different 
things. I was surprised because a lot of people really did not know how 
to do some of these things.
  One of the nice things about the Head Start program and Early Start 
is not that we are just talking about bathing skills, but they really 
do try to get the parents involved and teach them skills so it is not 
just a question of just providing funding for child care. This is a way 
of providing support and getting people together so that they become 
more self-sufficient ultimately. There are even programs involved in 
some of the Head Start programs where they will get involved in 
employment and help people find jobs, that type of thing. So it is a 
whole, there is a lot involved.
  I just think it is so wonderful that you are talking about expanding 
this. I just wish that it were possible one day that every child who 
was eligible for

[[Page H8715]]

Head Start and every child who is eligible for Early Start was able to 
take advantage of it. We know how successful it is, not only for the 
child but also for the whole family experience.
  Mr. McGOVERN. I think that is the type of bold thinking that we need 
more of in this Congress. I again will commend the President and the 
First Lady for their leadership on this issue. Head Start is a program 
that works. We should fully fund it.
  The gentleman is absolutely right about some of the skills and 
support that these programs provide. There was a front page story in 
the Los Angeles Times a few weeks ago discussing the alarmingly high 
number of young children who do not brush their teeth on a regular 
basis. I mean very simple things that we all kind of take for granted 
here, but it is a disturbing statistic, and programs like Head Start 
help combat that kind of trend. They deserve our support.
  Mr. ALLEN. Mr. Speaker, I do not know that we have talked enough 
about one of the conclusions of the White House Conference on Early 
Childhood Development, which is, and I gather there is a new report 
coming out that will also emphasize the importance of this particular 
point, home visits, prenatal and postnatal home visits are critical to 
helping parents cope.
  Let us face it, in this country today we have too many teen parents, 
too many youngsters who are parents at a time when they still need 
parents themselves. If they are going to be able to bring up their 
kids, parenting skills are essential.
  In the Bath-Brunswick area in Maine, the Bath-Brunswick child care 
agency has started a program of home visits. It works. It is very 
helpful.
  In the Charlotte-Mecklenburg area in North Carolina the school system 
has developed a series of brochures that they will give, they will do 
prenatal visits and postnatal visits, and a series of brochures that 
will help young parents sort of get some basic information about how to 
encourage stimulation in their kids.
  In Hawaii there is, I am told they have a very comprehensive 
prenatal, postnatal set of home visits. There is one statistic out of 
what Hawaii has done that just amazes me. It has to do with usefulness 
of home visits, not just as a matter of parenting education, not just 
as a matter of improving our kids' chances in life, but as a way of 
reducing child abuse.
  That number is this. As a result of this program, repeat instances of 
child abuse have been reduced from 62 to 3 percent. Repeat instances of 
child abuse have been reduced from 62 to 3 percent. That is a large 
part of the reason, home visits.
  The fact is if we are going to deal with the phenomenon of young 
people today growing up in the kinds of families with all the stresses 
and strains that modern families have, we need to focus like a laser on 
zero to three and zero to six and make sure that all our kids have a 
chance to grow up in a healthy, productive home.
  Ms. STABENOW. On that point, if the gentleman will continue to yield, 
I congratulate all of my colleagues for standing up for children and 
for public education. These are such important issues. We will have in 
front of us tomorrow issues dealing with public education.
  But to share with my colleague from Maine, we in Michigan have been 
focused on those very same issues. I was very proud back in 1982 to 
sponsor something called the Children's Trust Fund in Michigan, 
focusing on parent education and child abuse prevention. We have done a 
10-year study of the dollars spent on working with young parents when 
children come home from the hospital.
  It is a Big Brothers, Big Sisters kind of concept. The fancy name is 
perinatal coaching, but it is based on the idea of giving support to 
young parents from the moment they step into their own home with that 
newborn, to help them as they learn new parenting skills and be able to 
work with them through the first year of the child's life to raise that 
child, to give it the kinds of skills you talked about.
  Michigan State University followed this kind of effort and the 
efforts of working with parents of young children up through Head Start 
for 10 years. And they compared the amount of money spent on prevention 
with the amount of money spent in school later on, on substance abuse 
problems, mental health, dropouts, and ultimately crime. And they were 
able to measure that for every $1 we put into the kinds of things you 
are talking about this evening, we saved in Michigan $19. We literally 
have an ounce of prevention worth a pound of cure.
  We now can demonstrate. One of the frustrating things about 
prevention is that folks always say you cannot measure it. When you 
lock somebody up, you know you are creating a safe community. When you 
are doing preventing on the front end and stopping abuse in the first 
place, so children do not grow up and potentially end up in those 
prisons, we do not have a way to measure it. In Michigan, in working 
with important efforts in Lansing, important efforts around the State, 
we have measured that and can demonstrate that from a taxpayer's 
standpoint, as well as just plain common sense for children and 
families, focusing on what we are talking about tonight makes sense.
  Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from North 
Carolina [Mr. McIntyre].
  Mr. McINTYRE. I was going to mention this briefly to tie in with the 
coordination and cooperation not only from the Federal level but State 
and local. I think it is important to emphasize that the support 
mechanisms cannot of course come up from here in Washington. We want to 
target help where we can try to give the maximum use of any Federal 
dollars that are spent in situations to help those on the local level 
best meet those crying needs of our young children in early childhood.

  A practical way to do this is something that I know we have done in 
North Carolina. Ten years ago I had the privilege of being a charter 
member of the very first North Carolina Commission on Children and 
Youth. One of the key things you can do is bring together concerned 
private citizens and those who serve in the public sector, as well as 
those from social agencies and churches and synagogues, other houses of 
faith, to come together and tackle the problem on the State level and 
then of course to bring it down to the local.
  Our Commission on Children and Youth was so successful that just 
within two years the State legislature redesignated it and started a 
new commission called the Commission on the Family. Then we dealt with 
these issues that would carry from early childhood right on through the 
sunrise right on through the sunset of life.
  But when we looked at that, we took it yet another step. We 
encouraged local communities to start commissions on children and youth 
and the family, to help support these kind of programs so that when we 
come into an area and make a difference, you have local leaders 
involved from the public and the private sector.
  In my home town of Lumberton, we were one of the first four 
communities in North Carolina 8 years ago to start a local commission 
on children, youth and the family. I served as a charter member of 
that. What we sought to do is exactly what my good friend from Maine 
was just talking about, and that is, we offered programs not only to 
help support families and offer them ways to increase their parenting 
skills but we actually said to the local churches and the local civic 
organizations, if you would like to offer a class on parenting skills, 
we will offer it for a set time and you can become involved.
  That brought it right home. It was amazing the number of people that 
signed up and said, ``Yes, I want to be a good parent. I want to help 
my kid in those early years, but show me how because I have never been 
a parent before.''
  I think when we can find ways to bring the Federal, State and local 
level together and encourage these types of local commissions, it will 
make all the difference.
  Mr. McGOVERN. I would say to my colleague that he is absolutely 
right. We need to reach out to the local level. There are some amazing 
things going on in my district in Worcester and Attleboro and Fall 
River. It is inspiring, some of the programs that are now being 
implemented. But they need the help. They need the support.

[[Page H8716]]

  When I go back home, what they tell me is, ``We would like to 
duplicate our efforts and triplicate our efforts but we do not have the 
resources.'' We will have a forum on November 1st in my home city of 
Worcester to try to bring people together to try to find ways to 
promote some of what works. I hope we can bring that message back here 
to Washington and get the necessary resources and backing.
  I thank all my colleagues for joining in this special order tonight.

                          ____________________