[Congressional Record Volume 145, Number 99 (Wednesday, July 14, 1999)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1537-E1538]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   FINANCING EDUCATION; FREEDOM AND PRIVACY RESTORATION ACT; AND GAY 
                                MARRIAGE

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. BERNARD SANDERS

                               of vermont

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, July 14, 1999

  Mr. SANDERS. Mr. Speaker, I insert for the Record statements by high 
school students from my home State of Vermont, who were speaking at my 
recent town meeting on issues facing young people today. I am asking 
that you please insert these statements in the Congressional Record as 
I believe that the views of these young persons will benefit my 
colleagues.

                          Financing Education

(On behalf of James Lucas, Caitlin Stone-Bressor, Jesse Pixley and Kim 
                                Junior)

       Kim Junior: We are talking about financing our education.
       Education is a paramount concern because it affects 
     everyone. Hilary Clinton said that it takes a village to 
     teach a child, and it does. Currently, the United States 
     educational system is going through a rebirth. Many states 
     are attempting to improve their education systems. Vermont 
     has recently shed itself of its old education system and has 
     donned a new, more equal method. This new educational plan, 
     led by Act 60, has helped equalize the percent a property 
     owner is taxed towards education.
       Now that the state has money coming to the schools that are 
     in need of funding, the state, the school and the community 
     have to decide how they want to improve their school. The 
     consensus believes that better facilities will make better 
     schools. They think a new gym, arts center or a classroom 
     will make children more capable in that particular area. A 
     new building, however, does not change students.
       Jesse Pixley: Teachers are needed to change students and 
     help them to become more educated. But to improve how 
     educators teach is difficult.
       Many teachers feel that they are not competent. In a 
     January 29th New York Times article, William Honan said that 
     only one in five full-time public school teachers said they 
     felt qualified to teach in a modern classroom. This is a 
     scary revelation. There is a definite need to enhance the 
     qualifications of teachers and to help them gain sufficient 
     confidence to be able to teach.
       The New York Times printed an article on April 23rd telling 
     of over 4,000 Washington teachers and educators who protested 
     because they are not being supported in their pursuit of 
     higher education. Deben Gruber, a special education teacher 
     in Highland School District, said ``I can't afford to have a 
     computer, the Internet or a newspaper anymore''. The teachers 
     in Washington were not given the opportunity, financially, to 
     attain a greater level of learning.
       Caitlin Stone-Bressor: A recent addition for $75.9 million 
     is being added to the $159 million that is already promised 
     to school districts under the Education Reform Act. Of this 
     $76 million addition, only an eighth of it will be given to 
     teachers. The proposal also calls to give $4.2 million to 
     school nutrition programs. While school nutrition is 
     certainly important, America is setting its priorities in the 
     wrong position when it gives so much to food and so little to 
     educators.
       Tenureship is also an important issue because it allows 
     unqualified teachers to keep teaching. Established because of 
     the frequent changes in the administration, it allowed 
     teachers to have faith that they would be able to keep their 
     jobs despite changes in authority. Yet the system is proven 
     to have flaws.
       James Lukas: Many teachers who are granted tenureship are 
     not fully qualified. The school system then finds that it 
     would cost less to keep these teachers than to get rid of 
     them. The most prominent and meritorious suggestion to remedy 
     this problem is having teachers paid on the basis of skill 
     and quality, and not on seniority. The education system 
     should be run as a private enterprise, and if a teacher is 
     not making the standard, they should not be favored as well 
     as the teacher who excels in his or her area.
       Reform is needed to improve our education system. The 
     current system needs to enhance teachers, special education, 
     advanced learning, sports, arts, and all the other aspects of 
     education to make sure Vermont's education system is as good 
     as it can be.


     
                                  ____
                  Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act

 (On behalf of Stacy Pelletier, Jessica Cole, Amy Clark, Sarah Kimball 
                         and Christine Miller)

       Stacy Pelletier: Do you want the government of the U.S. to 
     be able to find out any information about you whenever they 
     want to? The proposed medical ID and the Know-Your-Customer 
     Act make your medical information open for their viewing and 
     allow banks and government to monitor your financial 
     transactions. Along with these two items, social security 
     numbers have become a huge violation of your privacy. 
     Luckily, the Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act of 1999 
     looks to make your private life private again.
       Jessica Cole: We agree with the Freedom and Privacy 
     Restoration Act of 1999, which forbids the federal government 
     from making any identifiers which can be used in 
     investigating, monitoring, overseeing or regulating private 
     things, like sales or transactions between U.S. citizens. One 
     of these identifiers could be national ID cards.
       If Congress doesn't take action, federal officials could 
     soon keep citizens from traveling, getting a job, opening a 
     bank account, or even getting medical treatment unless all 
     their papers are in order according to the federal 
     bureaucracy.
       Amy Clark: One example of invasion of our privacy are 
     social security numbers. These identification numbers usually 
     have to be shown for anything from getting a job to getting a 
     fishing license. The Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act 
     prohibits the use of social security numbers as an 
     identifier. In order for parents to get a birth certificate 
     for their children and claim them as dependents, they are 
     forced to get a security number for them. We find that this 
     is abusing our right to privacy.
       Sarah Kimball: In 1996, the Department of Health and Human 
     Services was told to come up with a unique health identifier. 
     Their proposed plan includes a giant database for the total 
     medical history of every American, and a medical ID card one 
     would have to show in order to fill a prescription, leave the 
     country, or even check into a hotel. The police could also 
     request to see this card at any time, and many fear that 
     hackers would break into the medical files, destroying 
     doctor-patient confidentiality.
       Many of the problems presented are in violation of the 
     Fourth Amendment of the Constitution, but, thankfully, the 
     Freedom and Privacy Restoration Act would prohibit such an 
     act and identification tool from being put into action.
       Christine Miller: In conclusion, we value our privacy, 
     which is violated by social security, medical cards, and 
     medical IDs, and the Know-Your-Customer Act.

[[Page E1538]]

       Congressman Sanders, can we urge you to support the 
     legislation of the Freedom and Privacy Act in the future?


                              Gay Marriage

(On behalf of Vera Catherine Wade, Alex Hastings, Stephanie Ladd, John 
                        Nichols and Mark Boyle)

       John Nichols: As Vera already said, we are all members of 
     the Gay-Straight Alliance at BFA. Namely, that is a group of 
     both gay and straight people, and our main purpose is to ease 
     some of the tensions that exist in high school life between 
     hetero and homosexual people that is sometimes the result of 
     perhaps ignorance and other such things that can easily be 
     mended.
       However, the reason we are here today is, when we became 
     aware of the possibility of legislation in Vermont being 
     suggested that would ban gay marriage, we saw that as a great 
     concern, as infringing upon the rights of people of the 
     homosexual persuasion.
       Vera Catherine Wade: The suggested antigay marriage bills 
     state that a valid marriage consists of a man and a woman. We 
     believe people should have the right to marry whomever they 
     choose. In the past, the question wasn't gender, it was race. 
     To deny anyone the right to marry is a step backwards in 
     equal rights to all peoples.
       In addition, Who is to say what a good family is? A man and 
     a woman in an abusive relationship can bring a child into the 
     world without planning, and where is the child supposed to go 
     with that? A homosexual couple have no choice but to plan.
       We aren't saying that everyone should get married, and we 
     aren't saying that it's the right thing for these people to 
     marry; we aren't encouraging anything but the right to marry 
     for everyone.
       Mark Boyle: Another issue that's a really big problem for 
     homosexuals in many cases is the right to insure your 
     partner. Its okay for a man and a woman in a monogamous 
     relationship outside of wedlock to claim people on taxes or 
     their insurance, and yet it is not okay for homosexuals to 
     claim a partner as a person of their family, and it's not 
     allowed for them to get married so as to be able to include 
     them on any type of taxes or insurance.
       The issue of having somebody choose what they want to do is 
     very at hand here. I think that a lot of people tend to stop 
     and think of this as a moral issue, when it is more of an 
     issue of just plain tolerance. You don't have to agree with 
     it or disagree with it or be part of it; all that you have to 
     do is to give people the opportunity to be Americans and to 
     be given the rights and privileges, and the expansion of 
     those privileges to any and all pursuits they choose, as long 
     as it is not infringing on the rights of other humans.

     

                          ____________________