[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 146 (Wednesday, October 14, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S12538-S12539]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                               EDUCATION

  Mr. GREGG. Mr. President, we have heard a lot of talk about education 
in the last few days, especially from the White House, and about 
adequate funding for education. I think no item more clearly defines 
the difference between the two parties on the issue of funding 
education than the issue of special education.
  This White House has been so enthusiastic for creating new programs, 
that are controlled here in Washington, which tell the teachers, 
principals, parents, and students back in my State, and in the State of 
Mississippi, where the occupant of the Chair comes from, and every 
State of this country, how they shall run their schools on a day-to-day 
basis, how to manage curriculums, whom they shall hire, when they shall 
hire them, what they will do after school. This administration has been 
so insistent in trying to move the control of education to the Federal 
level and now has come forward with a new series of efforts to 
accomplish that. But this administration has failed consistently to 
fund the most fundamental obligation of the Federal Government in the 
area of education--specifically, the obligation under special 
education.
  Back in 1976, I think, when the special education bill was passed, 
which was a major step forward in this Nation toward caring for kids 
who have special needs, the Federal Government committed to the local 
communities of this country that it would pay 40 percent of the cost of 
those children's educational needs. But what has happened? Well, when 
the Republican Congress took control of Congress 4 years ago, at that 
point, the obligations being paid by the Federal Government weren't 40 
percent of the cost of special ed needs, they were only 6 percent of 
the costs. The difference, 34 percent, which was supposed to be picked 
up by the Federal Government, was being borne by the local taxpayer.
  What was the practical effect of that? The practical effect of that 
was that the local tax burden was skewed and the local school 
districts' ability to support their educational agenda was controlled 
not by what they wanted to do but by their need to meet a Federal 
mandate that was not being paid for by the Federal Government--
specifically, special education. So where a local school board might 
have wanted to add new teachers, or an afterschool program, or a new 
language program, or put in new computers, they could not do it. Why? 
Because they had to pay the cost of the special education students, 
which costs were supposed to be borne by the Federal Government, at 
least to the extent of 40 percent.
  So you would have thought that this ``education Presidency''--as it 
tries to proclaim itself--would have wanted to correct that problem, 
would have recognized that as the first step in its efforts on 
education, and would have fulfilled the underlying obligation to 
special needs kids and paid the 40 percent the Federal Government is 
obliged to pay under the law.
  What actually happened? In every budget that the President of the 
United States has sent up to this Congress since this Congress was 
taken over by the Republican Party, there has been essentially no 
increase in funding for special education. As a result, what this 
administration has said is: Rather than funding the needs of special ed 
kids, we want to create brand new programs, we want to go out and tell 
the school districts what they are going to have to do with Federal 
dollars, rather than using the Federal dollars to fund the needs of the 
special needs kids the way we are supposed to under the law.
  So they set up this scenario where they say to local school 
districts: We are not going to pay you what we are supposed to and 
allow you to free up your money to spend it on what you need, such as 
books and teachers--or whatever the local school district thinks it 
needs. Rather, we are going to tell you what you need, and we are going 
to make you come to the Federal Government, come to the Federal 
bureaucrat, and say, ``Please, Federal bureaucrat, give us back some of 
our money so we can pay for new educational initiatives.'' But we have 
to do exactly what you tell us in initiating those initiatives. It 
obviously makes no sense.

  What did the Republican Congress do? It said let's live up to our 
obligations as a Congress first. So we made a priority. In fact, S. 1, 
the No. 1 bill of the Senate, made as its priority setting a course to 
fully fund special education at the 40 percent required under the law. 
We made great strides in this under the leadership of the majority 
leader, under the leadership of the Senator from Pennsylvania, who is 
the head of the appropriations subcommittee, with the strong effort of 
the coalition here on our side of the aisle.
  We have increased funding for special education dramatically in the 
last 3 years, with no help from the administration. Three years ago, we 
put it up; we increased special education funding by almost $700 
million. Last year, we increased it by almost $690 million. This year, 
we have increased it again by $500 million. So we have taken the 
percentage which the Federal Government is paying for special education 
from 6 percent when we took control of the Congress up to over 10 
percent now, and it is moving in the right direction.
  Now, one more time this week, we hear this disingenuous argument 
coming from the administration that if we are going to have good 
education, we have to create a new program where the Federal 
Government, the President, and his friends at some national labor union 
and down here at the Department of Education tell local educators how 
to spend their dollars and what they must spend their dollars on.
  If the President really wanted to address the educational needs of 
this country, he would say to local school districts: I want another $1 
billion, but I want to give it back to the local school districts to 
help them with special education, and that will free up the local 
school districts to be able to spend money for what they think they 
need.

[[Page S12539]]

  Not every school district in this country needs more teachers. Not 
every school district in this country has a terrible school building. 
Some school districts need more computers. Some school districts want 
to expand their language programs. Some school districts want to expand 
their dance programs. Some may want to expand their math programs. That 
decision should be made at the local level. Only the parents, only the 
teachers, only the principals really know what a local school district 
needs in order to make it a better place for kids to learn in. We don't 
know in Washington.
  Yet, the President and his friends and his supporters seem to feel 
that they know best, that they can run all the school districts in this 
country out of some building down here on Constitution Avenue. It 
doesn't work that way.
  If we really want to help out local school districts, what we will do 
is relieve them of having to fulfill the obligations of the Federal 
Government by paying the costs of special education and free up those 
dollars so that the local school districts can spend them where they 
see fit, where they feel they will get the best return. If we really 
want to help local education, what we will do as a Congress and what 
the President should be suggesting is that we will fund the special 
education needs of kids in this country to the tune of 40 percent, 
which we committed to.
  Ironically, if you take the dollars being proposed by the President 
to be spent on his new categorical programs where he tells everybody in 
the country how to run their school districts, and you add them up, in 
5 years--which is the goal that we have set as a Republican Congress--
in 5 years, you will be at just about the 40 percent that the Federal 
Government said it was going to spend on special education. If you take 
those dollars and you move them over to special education, you will be 
accomplishing what we said we were going to do back in the 1970s. But, 
more importantly, we will be freeing up the local school districts to 
educate kids the way they know they must be educated rather than the 
way some bureaucrat down here in Washington thinks they should be 
educated.
  That is the difference. That is what the debate is about. The 
Republicans believe that schools should be operated at the local level, 
that it should be the parents, the teachers, and the principals who 
make the decisions on education. Regrettably, some of our colleagues on 
the other side, and clearly the people down on Pennsylvania Avenue, 
feel that they know better than parents, teachers, and principals--they 
should be the ones operating our schools.
  This is not a dollar fight. It is not a question of putting more 
dollars in education. It is a question of where the dollars go, how 
they are better managed, how they can give the best return for the 
dollars spent for education which we need.
  So there is the difference.
  The Republican Congress is showing the right way. We have put our 
money in the right programs. We have committed to special education the 
huge increase in spending. I just wish the President would join us in 
that.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.

                          ____________________