[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 38 (Monday, March 30, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2753-S2754]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EDUCATION SAVINGS ACT FOR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SCHOOLS
Mr. COVERDELL. As everybody knows by now all too well, we have been
in the midst of a filibuster going all the way back to last summer on
education reform proposals. We have been battling the White House, the
minority leadership and the status quo. I am pleased to announce--in
fact, I am ecstatic--that the filibuster is over and that a unanimous
consent has been entered into, I think a reasonable agreement, that
does adhere to our view that all amendments should have been related to
education and not extraneous and not broad new tax policy. We will go
to our education reform on the day we return from the recess on April
20 of this year.
Now, the majority leader needs to be commended for the diligence and
the attention he gave to try to end this filibuster. I also am
complimentary of the minority leader and his attempt to bring this
filibuster to an end. But I am especially grateful to the Members on
the other side of the aisle, principally my key cosponsor, Senator
Torricelli of New Jersey, for the attempts and effort they made--under
very difficult circumstances I might add--for an extended period of
time to recommend that a filibuster was not the way to handle education
reform.
Because the filibuster has been ended, America's children are going
to be the major beneficiaries--and their families. At the end of the
day, millions of American families are going to be able to open
education savings accounts to help children in public schools, private
schools and home schools. Now with the suggestions from the other side
of the aisle, we are going to have an opportunity for expanded school
construction and financing that aids and abets school construction
across our Nation.
After all is said and done, bringing this to a favorable conclusion
will lead to a very healthy and wholesome debate about reforming
education and moving away from the status quo. Madam President, the
winners, those who are going to gain the most from the fact that we
have set this filibuster aside, are America's children. They are going
to be the beneficiaries of the fact that the Senate has now, on a
bipartisan basis, agreed to go to an extended and meaningful debate
about reforming education in America, principally grades kindergarten
through high school.
I thank all who have been involved on both sides of the aisle. I
think it will prove most beneficial to America and her children.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from North Dakota.
Mr. DORGAN. Madam President, I will take just a moment. I did want to
respond ever so briefly to the remarks of Senator Coverdell.
I did not object to the unanimous consent request by which we will
consider the Coverdell proposal. Amendments have now been made in order
and the proposal will be considered on the floor of the Senate in a way
that limits the amendments and limits the time for each amendment.
I say the Senator from Georgia puts his own construct on exactly what
has happened. There is another construct, and that is that this was not
a filibuster but a lockout--circumstances where we were told that a
bill was to come to the floor of the Senate, a bill dealing with tax
credits for education, and the only circumstance under which it could
come to the floor of the Senate is if those on the minority side would
be willing to restrict their amendments both as to type of amendments
and as to time.
It is a very unusual Senate procedure. It is not a procedure that has
been followed by the majority side, I might say. As one Member of the
Senate who will not want to see this habit-forming, I simply say to the
Senator from Georgia that I am happy he will get his day on this piece
of legislation. The amendments have indeed been limited. I think he
would not want to be in a similar circumstance on the next issue on
which someone on this side would, if in the majority, say we would like
to bring our bill to the floor, and by the way, we will only do that in
ways that restrict your opportunity to offer amendments, and only do
that in ways that restrict the time of the amendments that you do
offer.
For example, among the ideas that exist here are not just an idea to
provide tax credits for people who send their children to nonpublic
schools--all schools, but especially nonpublic schools; among the ideas
that exist
[[Page S2754]]
here are, for example, a proposal to provide some assistance to repair
some of the crumbling schools in this country, not so that the Federal
Government will be involved in rebuilding local schools--that is the
job of local school districts, State and local governments --but an
incentive in a way that says we can at least pay some of the interest
on the bonds that provide the right incentive to invest in our schools
because so many of them are now 30, 50, 70 years old and more, and some
of them are in desperate condition and need help.
On that amendment, for example, under this agreement there will be, I
believe, 1 hour of debate. A significant amendment of significant
importance, but the Senate will only devote 1 hour to that subject
because to devote more would somehow abridge the interests of those who
want to contain the debate on education here in the Senate.
I use that as an example. There are others. I say to the Senator from
Georgia, I did not, since the first day of this discussion, feel the
problem was a filibuster. I felt and still do feel very strongly the
problem is that the majority leader said this is our bill, this is our
agenda, it is what we feel is important, and we will bring it to the
floor, but you must comply with what we expect of you. Don't you be
offering amendments we don't want. Don't you be demanding time for your
amendment to talk for 3 hours on school construction, for example--and
that was what was happening to us over all of these weeks and what
resulted in a number of cloture votes.
So I see it differently than does the Senator from Georgia. But as I
indicated, he will have his day on his amendment, and I have indicated
previously I have great respect for him, but this ought not be habit-
forming. This is not the way the Senate works with respect to the
current rules of the Senate. It is not the way your side of the aisle
dealt with issues when you were in the minority, and I don't think you
would expect us to deal with these issues in that manner on a routine
basis.
As I said, I did not object to the unanimous consent request after
this had been worked out by the majority leader and the minority
leader. Education is critically important. In my judgment, there aren't
many more important issues than education here in the U.S. Senate. This
ought to be job one for the Senate to deal with the critical education
issues. We have now a list of them, albeit limited in time and scope
with respect to the amendments, but when we get to this issue we will
have, I think, a good and thoughtful and constructive debate.
I stand today to say do not make it habit-forming to say it is our
agenda and we will demand every other Senator in this place who is not
part of the majority conform to our description of how we want to
debate these amendments, because that is not the way the Senate should
work.
I yield the floor.
____________________