[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 33 (Monday, March 23, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2389-S2390]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         THE EDUCATION IRA BILL

  Mr. GRAMS. Mr. President, as you know, the Senate has before it and 
is debating a very important bill to promote educational alternatives. 
It is a bill which advances educational options, one which would 
encourage families to be actively involved in their children's 
education.
  It comes at a critical time. Test results released last month show 
that American high school seniors score far below their peers from 
other countries in math and science.
  Education Secretary Riley called the scores ``unacceptable,'' and 
indicated that schools are failing to establish appropriate academic 
standards.
  S. 1133 is the Senate's version of the education-IRA which has 
already passed in the House. The bill, commonly referred to as the A+ 
savings accounts, would expand the college education savings accounts 
established in the Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 to include primary and 
secondary students.
  A+ accounts would also increase the maximum allowable annual 
contribution from $500 to $2,000 per child. The money could be used 
without tax penalty to pay for a variety of education- related expenses 
for students in K-12, as well as college expenses.
  The Senate bill closely resembles what is currently happening at the 
state level in Minnesota. Our state is establishing itself as a leader 
in bringing educational opportunity, authority and choice to parents. 
Last summer, the Minnesota legislature approved Governor Carlson's two-
year package of tax cuts valued at $160 million. The package includes a 
250% increase in educational tax deductions. Parents can now deduct 
between $1,625 and $2,500 each year per child, depending on the child's 
grade. These deductions may be used for all education expenses, 
including tuition.
  Senate consideration of the A+ legislation comes at a notable time, a 
time of increasing focus on the future of America's children. Last 
October, the White House held a summit intended to bring children's 
issues into the forefront as a national priority.
  Well, what better way to turn consensus-building into action than to 
give parents practical tools, such as the A+ accounts, which enable 
them to better provide for their children's education.
  Unfortunately, tired, groundless attacks against the A+ accounts 
continue to hang on. The charge I hear most frequently is that 
``education savings accounts and tax breaks for parents would shift tax 
dollars away from public schools.'' That is simply not the case.

[[Page S2390]]

  More education dollars under parental control would promote education 
by encouraging parents to save, invest in, and support programs and 
materials that facilitate and provide the right option for child's 
education. Nothing would be taken away from public education resources.
  The A+ accounts help working families. They encourage savings and 
enable families to make plans which shape a child's future. They are 
directed at low and middle income families, not wealthy families which 
currently have more education options. It seems ironic to me that some 
of the loudest opponents of these savings accounts are high-income, 
high-option individuals, who can afford to send their own children to 
private schools.
  According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, the great majority of 
families expected to take advantage of the education savings accounts 
have incomes of $75,000 or less. These are the families who need 
savings options and incentives the most.
  Mr. President, the A+ accounts simply provide a modest, tax-free 
savings plan for families. This is a common-sense approach to the 
serious issue of educating our children. It offers a real solution for 
America's working families, and I urge my colleagues to give it their 
support.
  Thank you, Mr. President. I yield the floor and suggest the absence 
of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. STEVENS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that I be 
permitted to speak as if in morning business and to introduce two 
amendments to be considered at the time the NATO expansion issue is 
before the Senate for consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Alaska is recognized.

                          ____________________