[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.
____________________