[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 141 (Friday, October 9, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H10287-H10294]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  1430
                 COMMUNITY-DESIGNED CHARTER SCHOOL ACT

  Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and take from the 
Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 2616) to amend titles VI and X of the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to improve and expand 
charter schools, with a Senate amendment thereto, and concur in the 
Senate amendment.
  The Clerk read as follows:
  Senate amendment:
       Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert:

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Charter School Expansion Act 
     of 1998''.

     SEC. 2. INNOVATIVE CHARTER SCHOOLS.

       Title VI of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 7301 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) in section 6201(a) (20 U.S.C. 7331(a))--
       (A) in paragraph (1)(C), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3); and
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
       ``(2) support for planning, designing, and initial 
     implementation of charter schools as described in part C of 
     title X; and''; and
       (2) in section 6301(b) (20 U.S.C. 7351(b))--
       (A) in paragraph (7), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) by redesignating paragraph (8) as paragraph (9); and
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (7) the following:
       ``(8) planning, designing, and initial implementation of 
     charter schools as described in part C of title X; and''.

     SEC. 3. CHARTER SCHOOLS.

       (a) Purpose.--Section 10301(b) of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8061(b)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in paragraph (1)--
       (A) by inserting ``planning, program'' before ``design''; 
     and
       (B) by striking ``and'' after the semicolon;
       (2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and

[[Page H10288]]

       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) expanding the number of high-quality charter schools 
     available to students across the Nation.''.
       (b) Criteria for Priority Treatment.--Section 10302 of such 
     Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8062) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (c)(2)--
       (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(C) not more than 2 years to carry out dissemination 
     activities described in section 10304(f)(6)(B).'';
       (2) by amending subsection (d) to read as follows:
       ``(d) Limitation.--A charter school may not receive--
       ``(1) more than 1 grant for activities described in 
     subparagraphs (A) and (B) of subsection (c)(2); or
       ``(2) more than 1 grant for activities under subparagraph 
     (C) of subsection (c)(2).''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Priority Treatment.--
       ``(1) In general.--
       ``(A) Fiscal years 1999, 2000, and 2001.--In awarding 
     grants under this part for any of the fiscal years 1999, 
     2000, and 2001 from funds appropriated under section 10311 
     that are in excess of $51,000,000 for the fiscal year, the 
     Secretary shall give priority to States to the extent that 
     the States meet the criteria described in paragraph (2) and 1 
     or more of the criteria described in subparagraph (A), (B), 
     or (C) of paragraph (3).
       ``(B) Succeeding fiscal years.--In awarding grants under 
     this part for fiscal year 2002 or any succeeding fiscal year 
     from any funds appropriated under section 10311, the 
     Secretary shall give priority to States to the extent that 
     the States meet the criteria described in paragraph (2) and 1 
     or more of the criteria described in subparagraph (A), (B), 
     or (C) of paragraph (3).
       ``(2) Review and evaluation priority criteria.--The 
     criteria referred to in paragraph (1) is that the State 
     provides for periodic review and evaluation by the authorized 
     public chartering agency of each charter school, at least 
     once every 5 years unless required more frequently by State 
     law, to determine whether the charter school is meeting the 
     terms of the school's charter, and is meeting or exceeding 
     the academic performance requirements and goals for charter 
     schools as set forth under State law or the school's charter.
       ``(3) Priority criteria.--The criteria referred to in 
     paragraph (1) are the following:
       ``(A) The State has demonstrated progress, in increasing 
     the number of high quality charter schools that are held 
     accountable in the terms of the schools' charters for meeting 
     clear and measurable objectives for the educational progress 
     of the students attending the schools, in the period prior to 
     the period for which a State educational agency or eligible 
     applicant applies for a grant under this part.
       ``(B) The State--
       ``(i) provides for 1 authorized public chartering agency 
     that is not a local educational agency, such as a State 
     chartering board, for each individual or entity seeking to 
     operate a charter school pursuant to such State law; or
       ``(ii) in the case of a State in which local educational 
     agencies are the only authorized public chartering agencies, 
     allows for an appeals process for the denial of an 
     application for a charter school.
       ``(C) The State ensures that each charter school has a high 
     degree of autonomy over the charter school's budgets and 
     expenditures.
       ``(f) Amount Criteria.--In determining the amount of a 
     grant to be awarded under this part to a State educational 
     agency, the Secretary shall take into consideration the 
     number of charter schools that are operating, or are approved 
     to open, in the State.''.
       (c) Applications.--Section 10303 of such Act (20 U.S.C. 
     8063) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by inserting ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph (3);
       (C) by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
       ``(2) describe how the State educational agency--
       ``(A) will inform each charter school in the State 
     regarding--
       ``(i) Federal funds that the charter school is eligible to 
     receive; and
       ``(ii) Federal programs in which the charter school may 
     participate;
       ``(B) will ensure that each charter school in the State 
     receives the charter school's commensurate share of Federal 
     education funds that are allocated by formula each year, 
     including during the first year of operation of the charter 
     school; and
       ``(C) will disseminate best or promising practices of 
     charter schools to each local educational agency in the 
     State; and''; and
       (D) in paragraph (3) (as redesignated by subparagraph 
     (B))--
       (i) in subparagraph (E), insert ``planning, program'' 
     before ``design'';
       (ii) in subparagraph (K), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (iii) by redesignating subparagraph (L) as subparagraph 
     (N); and
       (iv) by inserting after subparagraph (K) the following:
       ``(L) a description of how a charter school that is 
     considered a local educational agency under State law, or a 
     local educational agency in which a charter school is 
     located, will comply with sections 613(a)(5) and 613(e)(1)(B) 
     of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act;
       ``(M) if the eligible applicant desires to use subgrant 
     funds for dissemination activities under section 
     10302(c)(2)(C), a description of those activities and how 
     those activities will involve charter schools and other 
     public schools, local educational agencies, developers, and 
     potential developers; and''; and
       (2) in subsection (c), by striking ``10302(e)(1) or''; and
       (3) in subsection (d)(1)--
       (A) by striking ``subparagraphs (A) through (L)'' and 
     inserting ``subparagraphs (A) through (N)''; and
       (B) by striking ``subparagraphs (I), (J), and (K)'' and 
     inserting ``subparagraphs (J), (K), and (N)''.
       (d) Administration.--Section 10304 of such Act (20 U.S.C. 
     8064) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)--
       (A) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) in paragraph (5), by striking the period and inserting 
     a semicolon; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(6) the number of high quality charter schools created 
     under this part in the State; and
       ``(7) in the case of State educational agencies that 
     propose to use grant funds to support dissemination 
     activities under section 10302(c)(2)(C), the quality of those 
     activities and the likelihood that those activities will 
     improve student achievement.'';
       (2) in subsection (b)--
       (A) in paragraph (5), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (B) in paragraph (6), by striking the period and inserting 
     ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(7) in the case of an eligible applicant that proposes to 
     use grant funds to support dissemination activities under 
     section 10302(c)(2)(C), the quality of those activities and 
     the likelihood that those activities will improve student 
     achievement.'';
       (3) in subsection (f)--
       (A) in paragraph (1), by inserting before the period the 
     following: ``, except that the State educational agency may 
     reserve not more than 10 percent of the grant funds to 
     support dissemination activities described in paragraph 
     (6)'';
       (B) in paragraph (2), by inserting ``, or to disseminate 
     information about the charter school and successful practices 
     in the charter school,'' after ``charter school'';
       (C) in paragraph (5), by striking ``20 percent'' and 
     inserting ``10 percent''; and
       (D) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(6) Dissemination.--
       ``(A) In general.--A charter school may apply for funds 
     under this part, whether or not the charter school has 
     applied for or received funds under this part for planning, 
     program design, or implementation, to carry out the 
     activities described in subparagraph (B) if the charter 
     school has been in operation for at least 3 consecutive years 
     and has demonstrated overall success, including--
       ``(i) substantial progress in improving student 
     achievement;
       ``(ii) high levels of parent satisfaction; and
       ``(iii) the management and leadership necessary to overcome 
     initial start-up problems and establish a thriving, 
     financially viable charter school.
       ``(B) Activities.--A charter school described in 
     subparagraph (A) may use funds reserved under paragraph (1) 
     to assist other schools in adapting the charter school's 
     program (or certain aspects of the charter school's program), 
     or to disseminate information about the charter school, 
     through such activities as--
       ``(i) assisting other individuals with the planning and 
     start-up of 1 or more new public schools, including charter 
     schools, that are independent of the assisting charter school 
     and the assisting charter school's developers, and that agree 
     to be held to at least as high a level of accountability as 
     the assisting charter school;
       ``(ii) developing partnerships with other public schools, 
     including charter schools, designed to improve student 
     performance in each of the schools participating in the 
     partnership;
       ``(iii) developing curriculum materials, assessments, and 
     other materials that promote increased student achievement 
     and are based on successful practices within the assisting 
     charter school; and
       ``(iv) conducting evaluations and developing materials that 
     document the successful practices of the assisting charter 
     school and that are designed to improve student performance 
     in other schools.''.
       (f) National Activities.--Section 10305 of such Act (20 
     U.S.C. 8065) is amended to read as follows:

     ``SEC. 10305. NATIONAL ACTIVITIES.

       ``(a) In General.--The Secretary shall reserve for each 
     fiscal year the greater of 5 percent or $5,000,000 of the 
     amount appropriated to carry out this part, except that in no 
     fiscal year shall the total amount so reserved exceed 
     $8,000,000, to carry out the following activities:
       ``(1) To provide charter schools, either directly or 
     through State educational agencies, with--
       ``(A) information regarding--
       ``(i) Federal funds that charter schools are eligible to 
     receive; and
       ``(ii) other Federal programs in which charter schools may 
     participate; and
       ``(B) assistance in applying for Federal education funds 
     that are allocated by formula, including assistance with 
     filing deadlines and submission of applications.
       ``(2) To provide for the completion of the 4-year national 
     study (which began in 1995) of charter schools.
       ``(3) To provide for other evaluations or studies that 
     include the evaluation of the impact of charter schools on 
     student achievement, including information regarding--
       ``(A) students attending charter schools reported on the 
     basis of race, age, disability, gender, limited English 
     proficiency, and previous enrollment in public school; and

[[Page H10289]]

       ``(B) the professional qualifications of teachers within a 
     charter school and the turnover of the teaching force.
       ``(4) To provide--
       ``(A) information to applicants for assistance under this 
     part;
       ``(B) assistance to applicants for assistance under this 
     part with the preparation of applications under section 
     10303;
       ``(C) assistance in the planning and startup of charter 
     schools;
       ``(D) training and technical assistance to existing charter 
     schools; and
       ``(E) for the dissemination to other public schools of best 
     or promising practices in charter schools.
       ``(5) To provide (including through the use of 1 or more 
     contracts that use a competitive bidding process) for the 
     collection of information regarding the financial resources 
     available to charter schools, including access to private 
     capital, and to widely disseminate to charter schools any 
     such relevant information and model descriptions of 
     successful programs.
       ``(b) Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to require charter schools to collect any data 
     described in subsection (a).''.
       (g) Commensurate Treatment; Records Transfer; Paperwork 
     Reduction.--Part C of title X of such Act (20 U.S.C. 8061 et 
     seq.) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating sections 10306 and 10307 as sections 
     10310 and 10311, respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after section 10305 the following:

     ``SEC. 10306. FEDERAL FORMULA ALLOCATION DURING FIRST YEAR 
                   AND FOR SUCCESSIVE ENROLLMENT EXPANSIONS.

       ``(a) In General.--For purposes of the allocation to 
     schools by the States or their agencies of funds under part A 
     of title I, and any other Federal funds which the Secretary 
     allocates to States on a formula basis, the Secretary and 
     each State educational agency shall take such measures not 
     later than 6 months after the date of enactment of the 
     Charter School Expansion Act of 1998 as are necessary to 
     ensure that every charter school receives the Federal funding 
     for which the charter school is eligible not later than 5 
     months after the charter school first opens, notwithstanding 
     the fact that the identity and characteristics of the 
     students enrolling in that charter school are not fully and 
     completely determined until that charter school actually 
     opens. The measures similarly shall ensure that every charter 
     school expanding its enrollment in any subsequent year of 
     operation receives the Federal funding for which the charter 
     school is eligible not later than 5 months after such 
     expansion.
       ``(b) Adjustment and Late Openings.--
       ``(1) In general.--The measures described in subsection (a) 
     shall include provision for appropriate adjustments, through 
     recovery of funds or reduction of payments for the succeeding 
     year, in cases where payments made to a charter school on the 
     basis of estimated or projected enrollment data exceed the 
     amounts that the school is eligible to receive on the basis 
     of actual or final enrollment data.
       ``(2) Rule.--For charter schools that first open after 
     November 1 of any academic year, the State, in accordance 
     with guidance provided by the Secretary and applicable 
     Federal statutes and regulations, shall ensure that such 
     charter schools that are eligible for the funds described in 
     subsection (a) for such academic year have a full and fair 
     opportunity to receive those funds during the charter 
     schools' first year of operation.

     ``SEC. 10307. SOLICITATION OF INPUT FROM CHARTER SCHOOL 
                   OPERATORS.

       ``To the extent practicable, the Secretary shall ensure 
     that administrators, teachers, and other individuals directly 
     involved in the operation of charter schools are consulted in 
     the development of any rules or regulations required to 
     implement this part, as well as in the development of any 
     rules or regulations relevant to charter schools that are 
     required to implement part A of title I, the Individuals with 
     Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.), or any 
     other program administered by the Secretary that provides 
     education funds to charter schools or regulates the 
     activities of charter schools.

     ``SEC. 10308. RECORDS TRANSFER.

       ``State educational agencies and local educational 
     agencies, to the extent practicable, shall ensure that a 
     student's records and, if applicable, a student's 
     individualized education program as defined in section 
     602(11) of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act 
     (20 U.S.C. 1401(11)), are transferred to a charter school 
     upon the transfer of the student to the charter school, and 
     to another public school upon the transfer of the student 
     from a charter school to another public school, in accordance 
     with applicable State law.

     ``SEC. 10309. PAPERWORK REDUCTION.

       ``To the extent practicable, the Secretary and each 
     authorized public chartering agency shall ensure that 
     implementation of this part results in a minimum of paperwork 
     for any eligible applicant or charter school.''.
       (h) Part C Definitions.--Section 10310(1) of such Act (as 
     redesignated by subsection (e)(1)) (20 U.S.C. 8066(1)) is 
     amended--
       (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ``an enabling 
     statute'' and inserting ``a specific State statute 
     authorizing the granting of charters to schools'';
       (2) in subparagraph (H), by inserting ``is a school to 
     which parents choose to send their children, and that'' 
     before ``admits'';
       (3) in subparagraph (J), by striking ``and'' after the 
     semicolon;
       (4) in subparagraph (K), by striking the period and 
     inserting ``; and''; and
       (5) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(L) has a written performance contract with the 
     authorized public chartering agency in the State that 
     includes a description of how student performance will be 
     measured in charter schools pursuant to State assessments 
     that are required of other schools and pursuant to any other 
     assessments mutually agreeable to the authorized public 
     chartering agency and the charter school.''.
       (i) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 10311 of such 
     Act (as redesignated by subsection (e)(1)) (20 U.S.C. 8067) 
     is amended by striking ``$15,000,000 for fiscal year 1995'' 
     and inserting ``$100,000,000 for fiscal year 1999''.
       (j) Title XIV Definitions.--Section 14101 of such Act (20 
     U.S.C. 8801) is amended--
       (1) in paragraph (14), by inserting ``, including a public 
     elementary charter school,'' after ``residential school''; 
     and
       (2) in paragraph (25), by inserting ``, including a public 
     secondary charter school,'' after ``residential school''.
       (k) Conforming Amendment.--The matter preceding paragraph 
     (1) of section 10304(e) of such Act (20 U.S.C. 8064(e)) is 
     amended by striking ``10306(1)'' and inserting ``10310(1)''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). Pursuant to the rule, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Riggs) and the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Martinez) each will control 20 minutes.
  The gentleman recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Riggs).


                             General Leave

  Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks 
on H.R. 2616.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, it is truly a pleasure to be here on the House floor 
today to vote on H.R. 2616, the Charter School Expansion Act of 1998. 
It represents the end of a rather lengthy and somewhat legislatively 
arduous journey, but I want my colleagues to know at the outset that 
the legislation before us represents as fine a bipartisan, bicameral 
effort as we have seen in this particular Congress.
  It also represents, I think, a very important Federal education 
reform initiative, and I would hope that my colleagues will bear those 
words in mind, particularly as we enter or get closer to the November 
election.
  We are clearly today in, and how do I put this politely, the election 
or political spin cycle, and I understand that it is part and parcel of 
our political process to say and do things for political advantage, but 
it is simply not true to represent that this Republican-led Congress is 
a ``do-nothing'' Congress that has produced no significant educational 
legislative achievements, and I cite this particular bill.
  This bill represents the realization, the achievement, of one of the 
President's primary education proposals. It embodies a request that he 
made of the Congress at the State of the Union address last January 
where he called on us to put Federal taxpayer funding, start-up or seed 
money, if you will, for the creation of more charter schools, these are 
public schools of choice for parents and children, and he called on us 
to enact this legislation that we have before us today. So we have made 
good on the President's request in a bipartisan fashion, and at the 
same time, I want my colleagues to understand that this particular 
initiative represents a very key part of the Republican education 
legislative agenda.
  We have worked hard over the last 2 years of this Congress on 
legislation raising teacher competence, requiring students to meet 
rigorous standards, and allowing more parental choice in education. We 
hope and believe that this will result in greater, higher student 
achievement, better pupil performance, and after all, those are the 
results that everybody wants for our young people and our education 
system.
  I also believe that this legislation responds to a growing public 
demand on the part of our fellow Americans for more choice in 
education. I personally am very heartened by recent public opinion 
polls that show that for the first time in surveying history, a 
majority of Americans now favor allowing parents to send their children 
to any public, private or church-related school. They also favor 
allowing the government, that is to say we, the taxpayers, to pay all 
or part of the tuition at a private school, and that is according to a 
poll conducted in June by the Gallup organization for Phi Delta Kappa, 
a professional association of educators.

[[Page H10290]]

  In that poll, 51 percent, so slightly more than a majority, now 
support the concept of expanded and greater parental choice in 
education. And that poll is not the only one that shows that growing 
public support for more choice in education; more choice for parents 
and guardians who, after all, are the consumers of education. And what 
we are trying to do here is fundamentally change the educational 
paradigm in this country by shifting the focus in our education system 
from the providers of education to the consumers of education.
  I say that and then hasten to add that we have made great strides in 
the higher education bill and in our literacy legislation to strengthen 
the teaching profession, because as I and Speaker Gingrich and many 
other people have said, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), 
we believe that teaching is truly a missionary occupation. It is a 
calling. It is a high calling, a noble calling. Therefore, we want to 
do all that we can to strengthen America's teachers to prepare them for 
an exciting, challenging and rewarding career in the classroom.
  I think we have done that, again, on a number of legislative fronts, 
bearing in mind that wonderful saying that a teacher can affect 
eternity because he or she never knows where their influence on our 
young people might end.
  So I am very pleased to be on the floor to support this legislation, 
and as I go on to conclude my remarks, I also want to thank a number of 
people who were instrumental in working on this legislation. The 
principal author, as is referred to in the other body, the Senate 
Chamber, was Senator Coats. We were delighted to work closely with him 
and his staff in moving this bill through the Senate.
  Denzel McGuire seated next to me, she is an extraordinarily capable 
member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce staff who has 
been supported by her colleagues on the staff in doing a great job on 
this legislation, and the rest of our very ambitious education 
legislative agenda in this particular Congress.
  I was delighted to work very closely with my good friend, my 
classmate from the 102nd Congress, the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. 
Roemer), in crafting this bipartisan legislation; and we would not be 
on the floor today if it were not for the support of that legislation 
by my good friend, the gentleman from California (Mr. Martinez). All of 
us, I believe, have found common ground by forwarding public education 
reform through charter schools, and as the result of the input and 
contribution of all of these different people, this legislation, this 
bipartisan bill, is even a stronger piece of legislation.
  Now, I want to point out that the charter school movement is 
something that is occurring out there, across the land. We are 
beginning to see the first charter schools here in the District of 
Columbia chartered by the District of Columbia public school system, 
but that is something that started years ago in the heartland of 
America.
  In 1991, Minnesota became the first State to authorize charter 
schools. And today, just 7 years later, we have 32 States with charter 
school laws on the books, along with, as I just mentioned, the District 
of Columbia and Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico. We also 
have now today some 700 charter schools serving approximately 170,000 
children across the country, and that is more than the entire student 
population of Rhode Island.
  Charter schools, as I mentioned, are on the cutting edge of education 
reform in public education. They are a fascinating experiment in 
educational innovation. They are deregulated, decentralized, public 
schools that are largely autonomous from any governing body. They are 
schools that I would argue are much closer than most public schools to 
the constituency that they are intended to serve; that is, parents and 
the children, the children who would attend or matriculate at those 
schools.
  The early reports about charter schools are very encouraging. They 
indicate that administrators and teachers are delighted that they are 
being freed up from overregulation, burdensome regulation. The teachers 
are more free to innovate in the classroom.
  Many charter schools have adopted longer school days, longer school 
years, so that they are going above and beyond what they are required 
in terms of the total number of instructional hours, what they are 
required to offer by State law.

  The bottom line here, in terms of the real improvement to the 
education system, is that students are eager to learn at charter 
schools, and parents are thrilled about the results. We have seen a 
correlation in America, American public education, over the last few 
years, between increased parental involvement in education and a 
corresponding increase in the achievement of their children.
  We think that is very, very encouraging, and it is something that we 
here in the Congress want to continue to strengthen and reinforce.
  Since 1994, when Congress authorized the National Charter Schools as 
part of the authorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
Act, and established a Federal taxpayer funding stream to assist 
charter schools with their start-up costs, and incidentally we have 
learned that those start-up costs are the greatest obstacle that 
charter school operators or charter school developers face in trying to 
start a charter school, we have learned a great deal about how the 
Federal Government can best support the charter school movement, and we 
hope that those lessons are incorporated into and represented by H.R. 
2616, which responds to the concerns of students, parents, teachers, 
charter school operators, some of the educational experts that 
testified before our committee, and also represents the Department of 
Education's first-year report of their 4-year study on charter schools.
  The highlights of our bill are as follows: We, first of all, meet the 
President's funding level request that he made in his State of the 
Union and in his subsequent budget proposal to Congress by increasing 
the authorization for Federal taxpayer funding for charter school 
start-ups from $15 million to $100 million, and we articulate a goal of 
trying to move the Congress and the country in the direction of 3,000 
charter schools by the start of the new millennium; again, a goal that 
President Clinton has proposed for the country.
  We drive over 90 percent of the Federal charter school money down to 
the State and local levels to establish more charter schools in those 
States that have strong charter school laws on the books.
  We direct this money. We give priority to those States that provide a 
high degree of fiscal autonomy for charter schools, that can 
demonstrate progress in increasing the number of high-quality charter 
schools that provide for strong academic accountability, and the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer) was a stickler on the 
accountability provisions of the bill, and that provide for more than 
one chartering agency in the State.
  We also try to ensure that charter schools will be treated on an 
equal basis, that they will be on an equal footing with other public 
schools when qualifying and competing for Federal categorical aid for 
the various federally-authorized and federally-funded categorical 
education programs.
  Lastly, we direct the Secretary to help by disseminating information 
on how charter schools can access private capital to supplement their 
taxpayer funding.
  We permit States to reserve 10 percent of their Federal grant money 
to provide assistance to established charter schools with a history of 
improving student performance so that those charter schools can help 
other fledgling charter schools in that State replicate their academic 
programs.
  We ensure that individuals directly involved with the operation of 
charter schools are consulted in the development of any new Federal 
rules or regulations pertaining to charter schools.
  We improve upon existing law by sending more money, as I mentioned 
earlier, directly to charter schools to ensure that parents and 
teachers have the maximum amount of Federal resources and flexibility 
available to them to start up high-quality charter schools.
  This really is an outstanding bill with strong bipartisan support 
across the aisle, and I urge my colleagues to vote for H.R. 2616.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

                              {time}  1445

  Mr. MARTINEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

[[Page H10291]]

  Mr. Speaker, this morning, as the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Riggs) has outlined, we are considering H.R. 2616, the Charter School 
Expansion Act of 1998, and from his talk Members probably see the 
enthusiasm that he has for this particular bill, and maybe it should 
have been named the Frank Riggs Charter School Expansion Act of 1998.
  But I continue to have reservations about charter schools. I do 
support this bill, however. I wholeheartedly believe in the need for 
innovation, for consideration of new approaches to education. But I am 
concerned about efforts to provide an unfettered growth in the number 
of charter schools. I really believe that we have to take a step back 
and evaluate whether charter schools are fulfilling the goals of using 
the flexibility and creativity that we have provided to provide high 
quality education.
  Charter schools are relatively new. The oldest are only 6 years old. 
Much of the information we have about these schools is anecdotal. We 
lack concrete, objective data on their success or failure. However, I 
am glad to see that in H.R. 2616 it has been significantly scaled back 
from the version that originally passed the House, and that the 
language that I was able to incorporate in the legislation has been 
championed by the Senate in the bill before us today.
  One of those provisions requires a description of how local 
educational agencies, that is a charter school or that has a charter 
school in its district will comply the Individuals with Disabilities 
Education Act.
  There have been reports, including information provided at our 
hearings, on several serious problems regarding the admission and 
provision of services to children with disabilities. This language 
would reaffirm a charter school's responsibility under IDEA, and compel 
it to plan for compliance with that statute.
  The other provision requires that in the evaluation of the impact of 
charter schools on students' achievement, the information provided on 
students attending those schools be reported on the race, age, 
disability, gender, limited English proficiency, and previous 
enrollment in public schools. I believe that will go a long way towards 
providing the specific information about the children being served by 
charter schools and the successes they are experiencing.
  As many know, I am cautious yet supportive of the concept of charter 
schools and their possible impacts on the larger public school system 
as a whole. I therefore support this legislation before us and its 
passage, but I do have a question I would like to ask the chairman, if 
he would indulge me.
  Mr. Chairman, this is the last piece of legislation that is scheduled 
to come from our subcommittee. I was wondering, there is another bill 
that we worked on very hard in a bipartisan manner, the Reading 
Excellence Act, that came out of our subcommittee.
  I understand that legislation is at the desk now. I was wondering why 
we are not taking it up, and if there is any possibility to take that 
up now. I imagine, since we did the Native Americans under a unanimous 
consent agreement, that we might ask unanimous consent to take that 
bill up.
  Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. MARTINEZ. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman well knows, I need to defer 
to the chairman of the full committee, the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
(Mr. Goodling), on any question involving unanimous consent.
  I can tell the gentleman that it is my understanding that we hope 
that the literacy bill, otherwise known as the Reading Excellence Act, 
will be incorporated into the omnibus funding measure, the continuing 
resolution, that should be before this body either later today or 
tomorrow, over the weekend, but will certainly be, obviously, for 
purposes of funding the Federal Government, it will be enacted and 
passed through the House and will be enacted into law in the near 
future.
  Mr. MARTINEZ. I am very glad to hear that. As the gentleman knows, 
the Senate passed it overwhelmingly. It would be a shame if we 
adjourned without taking that piece of legislation up, since it is an 
identical bill, and that is all we have to do is take it up and pass it 
for it to be signed into law. The President has already indicated he 
would sign it.
  Mr. RIGGS. Yes.
  Mr. MARTINEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer).
  (Mr. ROEMER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Speaker, first of all, I just want to say that 
oftentimes this institution is targeted for high criticism because we 
engage in too much finger-pointing, not enough cooperation, and not 
enough bipartisanship.
  That certainly can be true on occasion, but I think today the success 
of this charter school legislation points toward another side of the 
story, and points to one where, for a bold, new, exciting idea that can 
influence maybe the single most important issue in our Nation today, 
education, this bill typifies bipartisan support and cooperation, 
bicameral support and cooperation, bold and innovative ideas that have 
come from the local and the State level, and from some of our think 
tanks to this institution here.
  I think it really reaffirms what we can get done on the most 
important problem in America when we join hands and work together.
  I want to give high praise and credit to a number of people. First of 
all, I want to give credit to my friend, the gentleman from California 
(Mr. Riggs), when we started working with Denzel McGuire and on my 
staff Gina Mahony back in April of 1997 to formulate how to work 
together, the Republicans and Democrats, to get this charter school 
bill crafted and get it through our committee.
  I want to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Martinez), who had 
some hesitations and initial concerns about this legislation, where now 
I think, with some caveats and cautionary remarks, he is supportive.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) and 
some people on the Senate side, Mr. Speaker. Senator Coats, a colleague 
of mine from the great State of Indiana, who is retiring, has worked 
and championed this legislation on the Senate side, along with Senator 
Lieberman, Senator Landrieu, and Senator Bob Kerrey. It probably could 
not have found its way through the mazes of the United States Senate 
had it not been for that bipartisan cooperation, so there is a lot of 
credit that needs to go around to bring this truly historic legislation 
through this body.
  Also, Mr. Speaker, the President of the United States, President 
Clinton, has been an advocate of charter schools, and has talked about 
these for a long, long time through his legislative career.
  I also need to give credit to the Democratic Leadership Council, run 
by Al Fromm and Will Marshall, who have talked about schools in our 
Democratic Party for a decade. We have had a great deal of debate in 
our Caucus over how to move this idea in a positive way, with promise 
for our educational system, forward, investing in our public school 
system, investing in our teachers, and thereby helping our children and 
helping our economy and our businesses compete.

  That is what this bill help us accomplish. That is the overriding 
goal with this legislation today, to move this public education system 
boldly forward, and help our businesses compete by getting students 
that can compete in a global economy today through high school and 
college.
  Mr. Speaker, as we have worked on this legislation from April, 1997, 
onward, I want to tell the Members why I am a supporter of charter 
schools. First of all, they provide an alternative to the traditional 
public school system. I am a very strong supporter of public school 
education in America.
  Yet, some of it is not working well enough today. We have too many 
savage inequalities between some of our inner city schools and some of 
our suburban schools. We need to work on discipline and safety in our 
schools. We need to reward and help teachers with professional 
development and resources, so they can continue to be the heroes in our 
classes today.
  Yes, we need charter schools. We need charter schools so we have bold 
experiments to look at ways to get

[[Page H10292]]

some of these schools away from some of the regulations and burdens of 
Federal regulations handed down to the local governments and our local 
schools, and free them up with some new ideas to experiment with the 
curriculum, to experiment with the length of the school year, to 
experiment with the length of the school day; to really drive reform 
and drive change into some of our public schools. That is one of the 
reasons.
  Secondly, I am for strengthening accountability for academic 
achievement. Certainly some of our schools, many of our schools, most 
of our schools in America today are performing very well. Some of them 
are not, and we need to increase the accountability on these schools. 
We need to make sure that when a school is not performing that there 
are consequences. That consequence will happen to charter schools. They 
can and will be shut down. That is not a bad thing. That can be a very 
good thing.
  Mr. Speaker, thirdly, we need to inject innovation and reform into 
the public school system. When we see charter schools, and even used in 
the right fashion, they are not the silver bullet. No Democrat is going 
to claim, or Republican, I hope, is going to claim that there is a 
single silver bullet and a panacea to solve the hard work of fixing and 
reforming and boldly moving forward our education system in America 
today. There are a host of things we need to do, from more parental 
involvement to increased safety and discipline to, yes, charter 
schools.
  But when we try charter schools with a host of these other things, 
such as they are doing in Chicago, Illinois, we see test scores go up, 
we see absenteeism go down, we see parents get more and more involved 
in the system. We see hopefully less threat from outside the schoolroom 
and in the neighborhoods. It takes work to make our public school 
system work. That is what we all need to do today as Americans.
  Mr. Speaker, I think most people know that charter schools have been 
out there for 6 or 7 years. We now have in this academic year 1,129 
charter schools serving 250,000 students in America today. Thirty-four 
States, Mr. Speaker, have passed charter school legislation, and I 
hope, and I think we all hope, that all 50 States will move towards 
embracing charter schools.
  This legislation increases the authorization level for charter 
schools, and I want to commend the appropriators for increasing the 
appropriation this year to $100 million for charter schools throughout 
the country.

                              {time}  1500

  This legislation also provides assistance to charter schools in 
ensuring that they receive information about their eligibility for 
Federal education programs, as well as their commensurate share of 
title I and IDEA funding. Many charter schools have not known that they 
were even eligible for these funds and have had some kind of difficulty 
obtaining these funds. I am pleased, I am proud to say that this bill 
provides assistance in those areas.
  This bill also contains funding for high-performing charter schools 
so they can disseminate, they can share these worthwhile practices with 
other schools.
  One of the reasons I support charter schools is because I think they 
will have a ripple effect into the traditional public school system. 
And, yes, we are seeing results of that too, Mr. Speaker. The charter 
schools office at Central Michigan University is already saying they 
are seeing a secondary ripple effect into the public school system from 
public charter schools. So, we are seeing progress, we are seeing hope, 
we are seeing reform through this bold innovation.
  Again, I want to close by quoting Will Rogers, Mr. Speaker. He once 
said, ``You can be on the right track, but if you are not moving fast 
enough, you are going to get run over.'' I think the American people 
want us to move down the right track on reforming public education, to 
invest in it, to care passionately about our children in these schools, 
to work together, Democrats and Republicans, and to make sure that we 
are working with our business community investing in better vocational 
and technical skills.
  But I think today, instead of the finger-pointing and the jeering, 
instead of the critiques that we see about this institution not getting 
enough done, today with charter school legislation we are accomplishing 
a lot for America.
  Mr. Speaker, I salute the institution in a bipartisan, bicameral way 
for this success.
  Mr. MARTINEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Vento).
  Mr. VENTO. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from California (Mr. 
Martinez) for yielding me this time.
  For most who know me, some 20 years ago, for 10 years I taught, and I 
consider it one of the most important roles that any of us in our 
society can aspire to. But I am concerned about this bill, the 
amendments to the Community Design Charter School Act.
  Make no mistake about it, I support charter schools. In fact, I call 
my colleagues' attention to the fact that the City Academy, the first 
charter school in the Nation, existed and was developed in my 
neighborhood community on the east side of Saint Paul where I hail 
from. We opened our doors there in 1992 to 35 students.
  The State of Minnesota, of course, has been a center for this under 
Governor Rudy Perpich, governor at that time. He instituted a Statewide 
program that, in fact, capitalized on this. But this legislation, which 
I voted against when it was considered in the House initially, had some 
fundamental flaws, all of which I think have not been cured.
  This is, of course, a case I think of symbolism over substance. This 
measure authorizes the use of funds for planning, design, and initial 
implementation of the charter schools. In other words, the funds 
allocated in this legislation are intended to help with startup of the 
schools. This ignores, of course, the needs of districts such as mine 
and States such as mine which already have strong charter school 
systems in place.
  When the Academy opened in 1992, the first charter school in our 
Nation, they were setting up folding chairs and tables to conduct 
classes. The school has worked hard since then to acquire the necessary 
supplies and equipment needed for fully functioning classrooms. But, 
nevertheless, they are struggling.
  As a supporter of charter schools, I understand the importance of 
appropriating funds to innovative schools to assist them in covering 
initial expenses, but also in terms of maintaining their operations. 
States like Minnesota are struggling their best to support rational 
innovation; however, equitable funding for up-and-running schools are 
shortchanged in this particular program. We tried an amendment on the 
floor and we were not able to change that.
  The proponents of this legislation claim they are going to give 
school districts more autonomy. But the bill appears to shift the 
fiscal control from local entities to a State authority. That is the 
language of the amendments. Local schools have too little to say in how 
grant money for charter schools is distributed in this program. Rather, 
the State education agency or its equivalent is given the power of 
being the fiscal agency or funding source. This clearly fragments local 
control. This is contrary to Minnesota's success, where greater support 
comes from the local school district than from the State and Federal 
government combined!
  Additionally, this legislation directs the Department of Education to 
fund one or more contracts to help charter schools obtain access to 
private capital. This is, clear and simple, I understand, something 
that the administration favored. But I am hesitant myself to advocate 
using Federal dollars as seed money and turning a school entity into a 
fund-raising operation. Are the Federal dollars, U.S. taxpayer funds 
going to pay for the bingo prizes?
  If there is not enough nonprofit initiative to fund schools or 
charter schools, or enough gumption to obtain the funds, should this be 
a Federal role? I do not think so. Charter schools are still 
experimental in nature. Promoting funding specifically for schools that 
have a high degree of autonomy over their budgets and expenditures 
without sound accountability is a real problem.
  Funding should be awarded on the school's ability to demonstrate they 
are indeed are able to achieve success

[[Page H10293]]

in educating our students in terms of educational measurement, or 
testing which demonstrates accountability.
  Mr. Speaker, let me reiterate that I am not against charter schools. 
On the contrary, I want to be sure that the local authorities that we 
elect to provide most of the funding for local education, that such 
ideas are models, and that equitable and efficient means to assure 
their success are available and reject detours on the way to such 
innovation.
  Let us reward those who are already fighting the fight, those that 
have earned the right for Federal support rather than promoting a 
measure which superimposes some Washington, D.C. idea of what a charter 
school is. That is what this legislation does. Minnesota has shown us 
how to do it and the Federal policy-makers still cannot seem to get it 
right.
  No doubt this legislation will pass today. It's certainly improved 
over the House passed version, and the bill authorizes more 
appropriation over the 1994 original charter school Federal law that I 
optimistically supported. Hopefully, as this new policy is implemented, 
we will note the concerns I've voiced and they may be corrected in the 
administrative implementation. I reluctantly support this measure today 
and am hopeful that proper oversight will persist regarding the changes 
and policy to accomplish the good intentions I've heard voiced today.
  Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, just to respond to the concerns of the gentleman from 
Minnesota (Mr. Vento), we have tried to be responsive to that 
particular issue by adopting Senate language that will allow the States 
to reserve up to 10 percent of their allocation to help fund existing 
successful charter schools, so they can continue and expand their 
operations.
  They can also act, potentially, as a template for other charter 
schools in that community and in that State, so that those new charter 
school startups can hopefully replicate the success of that existing 
charter school. So, we have tried to be responsive to that.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New York (Mr. 
Forbes).
  (Mr. FORBES asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. FORBES. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2616, the 
Charter Schools Amendments Act of 1998. There is no more compelling 
issue in my mind than the future of our children, and I think most of 
us would surely agree. But our efforts to improve K through 12 
education can and must be an important contribution to this Nation's 
future and the Federal Government needs to pay more close attention to 
this important need.
  Sadly, American students by any measure are ranking much lower than 
their peers around the world in math and science performance. It is 
critical that we pay attention to much-needed reforms and help the 
school boards and the States improve K through 12 education, and the 
Federal Government should play a much larger role in this priority.
  I want to take a moment though and also commend the chairman of the 
subcommittee, the gentleman from California (Mr. Riggs), for has 
leadership on these issues. I am sad to say that he will be moving on 
to other challenges at the conclusion of this year, but his leadership 
on this important issue is to be commended and I thank him.
  The Charter Schools Amendments Act strengthens our public charter 
school programs, without a doubt. I for one am a product of the Long 
Island Public School system, one of the finest in the country, and the 
New York State Public University system. So, I understand and 
appreciate the dedicated professionals who have defined the success of 
our public school systems.
  But we must also recognize that public schools are not always meeting 
the grade. They are not always getting the job done. And this charter 
schools legislation is critical. It allows, frankly, parents the 
freedom to choose the schools based on the best educational environment 
for their children.
  The bill is about giving parents educational choices and putting them 
at the top of the list when it comes to making decisions about what is 
best for their children's future and their children's education.
  But we must also allow other approaches to improving K through 12 
education. Our children need a safe and clean learning environment, and 
I support providing Federal funds to finance the repair and 
modernization of public schools, for instance.
  I support proposals to hire the 100,000 qualified new teachers to 
reduce class size and eliminate overcrowding. And I support voluntary 
national testing so our students' performance can be measured against 
other students across the regions from different parts of the country.
  Recently, we made further progress by passing the Dollars to the 
Classroom Act, again another important tool in this effort to improve K 
through 12 education. The Classroom Act would pump $2.74 billion 
directly into our classrooms, another important part of this effort.
  We must make this commitment. Congress and the Federal Government 
have an obligation to help improve K through 12 education and to allow 
our children to be competitive in the global economy and in the 
competitive 21st century.
  Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Cunningham) my immediate predecessor as the chairman of 
the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Youth and Families.
  Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, first of all I would like to say what a 
fantastic job that the gentleman from California (Mr. Riggs) has done. 
He will be leaving this Congress at the end of the year, and so I do 
not have to say nice things about him because he is going to be back as 
chairman. But I will say it because of what a good job he has done.
  California has taken the lead in charter schools, and has over the 
last 5, 6 years. I would like to also say what we have done, with my 
colleagues' support on the other side, with the charter schools in the 
D.C. bill, the Washington, D.C. bill.
  The schools here are dismal in this particular district that we are 
sitting in. The new school superintendent came out in support of 
charter schools and we fully funded them. One of the problems was some 
of the money was taken out of public schools. Our position was, with 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Riggs) and myself and the chairman 
of the committee, the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Taylor), that 
the schools are doing so well, let us not penalize them. Let us reward 
them for the good work that they are starting to do in the City of 
Washington, D.C.
  So, we were able to fully fund the public schools to, add the money 
for the charter schools. We had 20,000 students to beg for summer 
school. First time. And it is not because they had to go to summer 
school; it is because they wanted to go to summer school. They wanted 
to learn.
  I would like to thank the gentleman from California (Mr. Riggs) and 
the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Chairman Goodling) and the committee 
for that good work, not only in charter schools themselves but in 
Washington, D.C. They are starting to turn the corner. We have a long 
way to go. And I beg my colleagues on both sides of the aisle, let us 
stay focused on it.
  Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume for 
the purposes of closing debate.
  One thing I want to say that follows on what the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Cunningham) just said and that is that we are seeing a 
tremendous and I believe pent-up demand for more choice, more 
selection, if you will, in public education. We are beginning to see 
waiting lists created in charter schools around the country.
  Our legislation stipulates that children must be served on a first 
come, first served basis with a lottery system, if there are more 
students desiring to get into a particular school than there are 
classroom spaces. And that first come, first served system includes 
children with learning disabilities.
  In fact, we have seen charter schools started in many communities 
around the country for the express and sole purpose of serving children 
with learning disabilities and special education needs.

                              {time}  1515

  So the charter school movement, again, is very exciting.

[[Page H10294]]

  In closing, I want to recognize and thank Gina Mahony from the staff 
of the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer), who was a very able 
counterpart to Denzel McGuire, and we like that Irish-American 
connection.
  Again, I urge my colleagues to support this bill. It will infuse more 
competition and more choice into the public education system and make 
that system less monolithic and more responsive to parents and the 
needs of their children. I urge passage of the legislation.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, today we consider H.R. 2616 is amended by 
the Senate, the ``Charter Schools Expansion Act of 1998''. H.R. 2616 is 
a result of extensive efforts by Mr. Riggs and Mr. Roemer to craft a 
charter school bill that enjoys broad bipartisan support.
  I would also like to take this opportunity to recognize Mr. Riggs for 
his fine leadership as Chairman of the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, 
Youth, and Families. Mr. Riggs has had an enormously successful tenure 
as Subcommittee Chairman.
  He has successfully crafted numerous education bills, including but 
by no means limited to the charter school bill we are considering 
today. I regret that Mr. Riggs has decided to retire this year as his 
tireless energy and dedication have been a wonderful asset to the 
Committee. I am sure that I speak for all the Members of the Committee 
in saying that we will miss his leadership and devotion in crafting 
innovative legislation and bettering the lives of children all across 
this country. We wish him well in his future endeavors.
  I would also like to take this opportunity to thank Senator Coats for 
successfully spearheading efforts to get a charter school bill passed 
in senate.
  We passed H.R. 2616 last October with an overwhelming bipartisan 
vote. The Senate recently amended H.R. 2616 and sent it back to us for 
a final vote. I am pleased to say that when the House votes for H.R. 
2616 today, we will be able to send the bill to the President for 
signature.
  As we stand here on the House floor today, about 170,000 children are 
being educated in 700 charter schools across the nation. Clearly, 
charter schools are no longer a fringe idea, rather they represent an 
integral component of public education reform.
  H.R. 2616 builds upon what we have learned about charter schools, 
since 1994 when Congress established a Federal funding stream to assist 
charter schools with start-up costs--the planning, design and initial 
operation costs involved with starting-up a charter school.
  This bill responds to lessons we have learned over the last four 
years, the concerns expressed in five hearings we have held on charter 
schools and the findings of various public and private studies on 
charter schools. It represents a well-thought-out approach to improving 
the existing charter school statute and to spurring the creation of 
more charter schools.
  By all accounts, the number one concern of charter school operators 
is a lack of start-up funds. H.R. 2616 addresses that concern on 
several fronts: it increases the authorization level, it drives more 
Federal dollars directly down to locals to establish high quality 
charter schools, it ensures that charter schools receive their fair 
share of the Federal dollar and it directs the Secretary to disseminate 
information on how charter schools can access financial resources, 
including private capital.
  Charter schools have made great strides in just a few short years. 
The strengths of charter schools lie in their academic performance, 
parental involvement and teacher satisfaction. This bill ensures that 
these innovative schools will have the maximum amount of assistance to 
help them keep up the good work.
  In addition, this bill not only allows charter schools to keep up the 
good work but also encourages charter schools to share their knowledge 
on best practices with other public schools. Under the bill, States may 
provide assistance to established charter schools, with a proven record 
of improving student performance, who wish to replicate their 
successful academic programs so that more children may benefit from 
their innovative curriculums and teaching techniques.
  In closing, I would like to emphasize that we have before us today a 
bipartisan bill that contributes greatly to the charter school movement 
and urge my Colleagues to vote for H.R. 2616.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from California (Mr. Riggs) that the House 
suspend the rules and concur in the Senate amendment to the bill, H.R. 
2616.
  The question was taken.
  Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 5 of rule I and the 
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be 
postponed.

                          ____________________