[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 52 (Tuesday, May 2, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H2367-H2374]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
{time} 1600
SUPPORTING A NATIONAL CHARTER SCHOOLS WEEK
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the
concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 310) supporting a National Charter
Schools Week.
The Clerk read as follows:
H. Con. Res. 310
Whereas charter schools are public schools authorized by a
designated public body and operating on the principles of
accountability, parent flexibility, choice, and autonomy;
Whereas in exchange for the flexibility and autonomy given
to charter schools, they are held accountable by their
sponsors for improving student achievement and for their
financial and other operations;
Whereas 36 States, the District of Columbia, and the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico have passed laws authorizing
charter schools;
Whereas 35 States, the District of Columbia, and the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico will have received more than $350
million in grants from the Federal Government by the end of
the current fiscal year for planning, startup, and
implementation of charter schools since their authorization
in 1994 under title X, part C of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8061 et seq.);
Whereas 32 States, the District of Columbia, and the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico are serving approximately 350,000
students in more than 1,700 charter schools during the 1999
to 2000 school year;
Whereas charter schools can be vehicles both for improving
student achievement for students who attend them and for
stimulating change and improvement in all public schools and
benefitting all public school students;
Whereas charter schools in many States serve significant
numbers of students with lower income, students of color, and
students with disabilities;
Whereas the Charter Schools Expansion Act of 1998 (Public
Law 105-278) amended the Federal grant program for charter
schools authorized by title X, part C of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8061 et seq.) to
strengthen accountability provisions at the Federal, State,
and local levels to ensure that charter public schools are of
high quality and are truly accountable to the public;
Whereas 7 of 10 charter schools report having a waiting
list;
Whereas students in charter schools nationwide have similar
demographic characteristics as students in all public
schools;
Whereas charter schools have enjoyed broad bipartisan
support from the Administration, the Congress, State
governors and legislatures, educators, and parents across the
Nation; and
Whereas charter schools are laboratories of reform and
serve as models of how to educate children as effectively as
possible: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That--
(1) the Congress acknowledges and commends the charter
school movement for its contribution to improving our
Nation's public school system; and
(2) it is the sense of the Congress that--
(A) a National Charter Schools Week should be established;
and
(B) the President should issue a proclamation calling on
the people of the United States to conduct appropriate
programs, ceremonies, and activities to demonstrate support
for charter schools in communities throughout the Nation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Petri) and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri).
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I reserve my time.
Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
[[Page H2368]]
(Mr. ROEMER asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Petri) for giving me the courtesy of going first.
Mr. Speaker, as the gentleman and my friend from Wisconsin (Mr.
Petri) noted, I introduced H. Con. Res. 310, which is a resolution
supporting a National Charter Schools Week. It is also a bipartisan
resolution introduced by myself, but with the support of the gentleman
from Michigan (Mr. Upton), the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle),
the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), the gentleman from
Maine (Mr. Allen), the gentleman from California (Mr. Dooley), the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Moran), the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Kind), the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez), the gentleman
from Wisconsin (Mr. Petri), and others. So we are acting in the best
spirit of this House in trying to go forward with a bipartisan
resolution on charter schools.
Mr. Speaker, Mark Twain once said that there is a big difference
between using the right word and the almost right word, like the
difference between ``lightning'' and a ``lightning bug.'' There is a
big difference there, just as there is a requirement as we approach
public education today in America that we have the right ideas; the
right reforms; the right bold, creative initiatives to help move this
country in public education forward in this brand new century. Charter
schools are part of that right reform and right-now idea.
This National Charter Schools Week seeks to recognize the many
accomplishments of charter schools around the country. Seven out of ten
charter schools currently have waiting lists.
I also joined in 1998 with the gentleman from California (Mr. Riggs),
to draft a bill that was signed into law to strengthen the
accountability provisions, to provide even new support for charter
schools around the country.
Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not recognize the role that
President Clinton and Secretary Riley have played in supporting this
innovative new idea of charter schools. In 1994 there were less than a
dozen charter schools through the whole Nation. In 1999, there are over
1,700 charter schools, and we will probably have over 3,000 charter
schools by the year 2002.
Charter schools in many States serve significant numbers of students
with lower incomes, students of color, students with disabilities. They
are not schools that attempt to cream the best students or cherry pick
the best students; they are public schools that attempt to educate in
innovative new ways all of the available students.
Mr. Speaker, I think one of the big areas we have seen progress in
for charter schools, and I will give a example, to dismiss one of the
myths about charter schools, is that we recently had a hearing on the
growth of charter schools in our Subcommittee on Education last month.
We had Irene Sumida, the Director of Instruction at the Fenton Avenue
Charter School in California, testify before the committee. Her school
has a population in which about 84 percent of the students are
identified as Title I students, meaning many of the poorest students.
Sixty-four percent of the students at Fenton are limited English
proficient. Ninety percent of the students qualify for free and reduced
meals. Eighty-one percent are Hispanic, 14 percent African American.
That is the demographics and the composition of the Fenton school.
Since they have been chartered, since they have public school choice,
since they have more parental flexibility, here are some of the
astounding results that we have seen in that charter school.
Fenton had the highest rate of gain in student attendance of all the
schools in the Los Angeles Unified School District, the highest rate of
gain in student attendance of all schools in the L.A. Unified School
District. A great accomplishment.
Parental participation has increased from a handful of parents
attending school meetings to over 400 parents a week, 400 parents a
week utilizing Fenton's Family Center to participate in that inner-city
school.
Then, you might say, what about the academics? On the California Test
of Basic Skills, the number of students scoring at or above the 50th
percentile has increased by 383 percent in reading, 253 percent in
mathematics, and 280 percent in language.
When we talk about, Mr. Speaker, new ideas, and my constituents at
home in Indiana want us to come up with new ideas for public education,
it is probably the most important issue to my constituents today, they
also want, secondly, better accountability of our schools, better
quality in our schools, better achievement from the students. When you
get those first two components, thirdly, they are willing to put more
resources in to our public schools.
So when you see the results of the Fenton Avenue Charter School in
California, which is one example of many of the 1,700 charter schools
across the country, you can see why charter schools are part of the
reform effort of public school choice in America, of new ideas, of
helping all students achieve, regardless of where they live, regardless
of income, regardless of color, regardless of religion, charter schools
can be part of that effort. So that is one of the reasons that we have
targeted and I have introduced this National Charter Schools Week, to
provide more information and more knowledge about what charter schools
can do.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, let me conclude and simply say this: In America
today, and I spent the last 2 weeks going door-to-door, farm-to-farm,
factory-to-factory, back home in Indiana, in the north central part of
the State, education is the most important issue to our parents. We do
not have a more important issue in America today than investing in our
children, making sure they have a good public education system.
At the same time, we are going through a technological revolution in
America, maybe more significant than the agricultural revolution or the
industrial revolution. We must make sure that our public schools are
ready and equipped with the technology and the computers, and that we
do not have a huge digital divide between rich and poor in access to
this technology.
Thirdly, our businesses everywhere are saying we need more workers.
We have a 2.5 percent unemployment rate in northern Indiana and our
businesses are saying, across the board, public education reform is
part of the effort to get us more workers.
So, for these three reasons, parental involvement, the most important
issue in America today; secondly, the technological revolution;
thirdly, the businesses need more workers, we bring this charter school
resolution before the floor today, in a bipartisan way, with bipartisan
support, and we hope that we continue to see a lot of support from
Congress, from the Republican and Democratic side, for more resources
for start-up costs of more charter schools across the country, and we
hope to work with the Committee on Appropriations to achieve that
objective.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Nebraska (Mr. Terry), and, pending that, I ask unanimous consent that
the time I control be controlled by the gentleman from Colorado (Mr.
Tancredo).
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). Is there objection to the
request of the gentleman from Wisconsin?
There was no objection.
Mr. TERRY. Mr. Speaker, I stand before you in support of the National
Charter Schools Week. Thirty-six states and the District of Columbia
currently allow charter schools to operate. Nearly 1,700 charter
schools around the country are open, serving some 433,000 children.
They have become an increasingly popular alternative among educators
and local communities concerned about the effectiveness of traditional
standards of public education. It provides alternatives for parents.
We are here to celebrate those States that have adopted that, those
37, but my hope is that it also sheds light on the 13 States, such as
mine, Nebraska, that have yet to pass effective charter school
legislation. So my State is not able to stand with President Clinton
and celebrate charter schools. This is truly a bipartisan issue.
[[Page H2369]]
I got a letter just a few weeks ago from some parents in my district
whose child was having difficulty learning in his home school,
especially reading, under the traditional methods, and they had to send
their child to a private school that would have met all the criteria of
a traditional public charter school. Now, this is why for those 13
States we need to really heighten the discussion about why we need
charter schools. Yet for all these parents in my district, with the
needs for their children, the Nebraska legislature has refused to
provide charter schools as an option for our students.
Political leaders from both sides of the aisle here today, from top
to bottom, from President Clinton to local districts, openly embrace
this new concept. I am hopeful that in the next legislative session
legislators in Nebraska will make it a priority, bringing our school
children in our State the type of educational reform supported by
parents, educators, and politically elected officials alike.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Wisconsin (Mr. Petri).
Mr. PETRI. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to speak in support of this bill which
commends the charter school movement for its contribution to improving
our Nation's public schools. I have been a supporter of the charter
school movement since 1992, when former Representatives McCurdy and
Penny and I introduced the Public Schools Redefinition Act of 1992.
This bill was based on legislation introduced the previous year by
Senators Durenberger of Minnesota and Lieberman of Connecticut. That
was the very beginning of Congressional efforts to encourage charter
schools.
I am delighted to say that the bipartisan efforts of a handful of
dedicated individuals resulted in the subsequent creation by Congress
of a Federal public charter schools program in 1994. Later, the Charter
School Expansion Act of 1998 revised the public charter school statute
by, among other things, increasing its authorization and giving
priority for grants to states, providing charter schools with financial
autonomy.
We should remember that the charter school movement is a true
grassroots movement. It is a movement that was started in the early
1990's by worried parents and frustrated teachers who were sick and
tired of the status quo, sick and tired of battling the bureaucracy
that strangles educational innovation, and sick and tired of seeing
their children wallow in mediocrity and, in some cases, in failure.
It is, therefore, important to keep in mind that Congress should shy
away from federally prescribing requirements such as teacher
certification. According to the Charter Friends National Network,
``More than two-thirds of the states--with more than 80 percent of the
charters--currently have some degree of flexibility in allowing use of
teacher qualifications other than traditional certification.''
Any attempt to apply a teacher certification mandate to charter
schools would jeopardize their very nature, which is based on autonomy
in exchange for academic excellence.
In my State of Wisconsin, I am proud to say we have a strong charter
school and school choice program, particularly in the City of
Milwaukee, where we have the prominent support of our Governor and
other education reform-minded individuals, such as former School
Superintendent Howard Fuller and Milwaukee Mayor John Norquist.
{time} 1615
Mr. Speaker, the bottom line is that charter schools work. They work
because they are free from burdensome regulations; and in return, they
are held accountable for academic results. I want to commend the
gentleman from Indiana for introducing this resolution; I thank him for
the opportunity to speak in support of this measure. I urge all of my
colleagues to sport and promote this week as the national charter
school week.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
South Carolina (Mr. DeMint).
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. Speaker, imagine an educated America where all
children get a world-class education and the opportunity to achieve
their dreams. Can we imagine a great school in every community for
every child, or the best and brightest teaching our children? How about
graduating 95 percent of high school seniors and enabling every willing
child to receive a higher education. That is our dream for education,
and that is why we believe so strongly in charter schools.
Charter schools are springing up throughout the Nation as innovative
minds create new ways to offer students a quality education that meets
their individual needs. Why do charter schools work? Because they are
public schools which receive public support, but they are free from the
red tape and the bureaucracy which hinders the success of so many of
our schools in the public education system.
Charter schools allow folks who care about their community to bring
their ideas together and to create new ways of educating our children.
At present, there are over 1,700 charter schools around the Nation, and
10 of these are in my home State of South Carolina. It is my dream and
goal to help charter schools flourish in South Carolina, to revitalize
our education system.
Today, I rise to praise an excellent charter school in my district
which opened its doors last fall, the Greenville Technical Charter High
School. This charter high school does an outstanding job of integrating
solid academics with a project-based learning curriculum which allows
students to experience hands-on learning. Greenville Tech Charter
School has over 50 percent of parents participating in various
committees and support groups. Schools that are accountable to parents
produce a better education product for their students.
The business community has rallied around this new school; and the
students from this school have, in turn, returned tremendous
contributions to the Greenville community by logging over 1,500 hours
of community service. The Greenville Tech Charter High School addresses
the needs of a diverse student body. There are currently 100 9th and
100 10th graders enrolled in this school. Twenty-five percent are
classified as special education students and 32 percent qualify for
free or reduced lunch.
I am proud to say that Greenville Tech Charter High School is
creatively tackling the challenges of providing students of many
backgrounds the opportunity to receive a superior academically
challenging education. This strong education will launch these students
into higher education or to success in the working world. Is that not
what we all want, educated children who excel in an ever-changing
world?
We may have different ideas how to get there, but let us not dispute
the fact that charter schools are helping lead the way in making
America an educated and prosperous Nation.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
North Carolina (Mr. Burr).
Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from
Colorado for yielding me this time.
Let me take this opportunity to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Goodling) and the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer) for their
hard work on this issue. The fact is that education should be
bipartisan. Every minute that we talk about education, we should spend
looking for those new ideas that the gentleman from Indiana talked
about, those ideas that affect our children, the children in this
country.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to stand before my colleagues today as a
sponsor of this legislation, this small token, a resolution to create
recognition for the success of charter schools. As a matter of fact,
Mr. Speaker, North Carolina is a participant in the charter school
program. This year we ranked 11th out of the 37 States, so we have a
great deal of success in this. North Carolina permits 100 charter
schools to be created. Currently we have 75 schools chartered and up
and running; and I believe this year, 20 additional schools will be
added. One that has been tremendously successful is the kindergartners
at Healthy Start Academy in Durham, North Carolina. They achieved an
average test score in the 99th percentile for reading and the 97th
percentile for math. What an amazing statistic, given that just about
all of the children at that school are eligible for the Federal free
lunch program and come from low-income families.
[[Page H2370]]
What does this resolution do? Quite simply, it recognizes the success
of new ideas, the success of people willing to put politics away and to
let policy take over. In North Carolina alone, let me share with my
colleagues some brief successes, some things that will happen this
week. The America Renaissance Charter School in Statesville, North
Carolina, is celebrating this week with a proclamation from the mayor,
positive news articles, and National Charter School Week logo shirts.
In Raleigh, North Carolina, at SARC Academy, the teachers there plan to
go and meet with the general assembly members as our short session of
the general assembly starts. In Chapel Hill where Village Charter
School is, those students have been invited to a special performance of
the University of North Carolina's Opera Work Shop just for the charter
school kids.
Mr. Speaker, this is a week that we ought to be proud of, a week that
complements the work of this body, and really the creativity and the
passion of the American people. I hope every State has the opportunity
in the future to introduce charter schools to their communities; and I
hope that this Congress stays focused on the bipartisanship that we
approached this issue with. I thank the chairman and the gentleman from
Indiana (Mr. Roemer) for their great success.
Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I want to wrap up on my side by thanking the gentleman from North
Carolina (Mr. Burr), a friend of mine, for his kind comments. He is
absolutely right, that what we need to do in this Congress and for this
country is to try to work in bipartisan ways, with new ideas, with
accountability, with increased quality, with better resources and
improved public education in America today. Today, with this resolution
that I have introduced, I give a lot of credit to the bipartisan nature
today that we have achieved. I hope it continues into the future, and I
too want to thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), the
chairman of our committee; and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Petri), the second ranking member on the Republican side, for their
help and sponsorship. I want to thank on my side the gentleman from
California (Mr. Miller) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee)
and the gentleman from California (Mr. Martinez) and others for their
help. I want to particularly thank the new Democrats, the gentleman
from California (Mr. Dooley) and the gentleman from Kansas (Mr. Moran)
and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Kind) and the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Sanchez) and a host of other new Democrats that have
been very supportive of the whole initiative to start charter schools
across the country and support them from a policy perspective.
Mr. Speaker, I would conclude and say again, thanks to my colleagues
for the spirit that we see today, the spirit of bipartisanship. I hope
it can continue into the Elementary Secondary Education Reauthorization
Act. We will be bringing that vote to the floor soon. It was not
particularly bipartisan in committee, and I hope we can rekindle the
bipartisanship that we saw in the first part of the bill on title I,
where an amendment that I offered on increasing the resources and the
quality for title I kids, the poorest kids in America; and we were able
to get a number of Republicans on to support that amendment and
increase title I resources by $1.5 billion, $1.5 billion. When we can
increase the quality of a program, we also might look at increasing the
resources and quality of that program.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra).
Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague from Colorado for
yielding me this time. I also would like to applaud the work of our
colleague on the other side of the aisle, the gentleman from Indiana
(Mr. Roemer), on his strong support for the charter school movement.
I think what we are talking about today is we are talking about an
aspect of the total package of public education; not pointing this out
and saying this is the best version of public education, but
recognizing that this is a reform in public education that ought to be
highlighted, as well as reinforcing the solid public education that has
gone on in this country day after day, year after year, for so many
years. I want to make sure that our constituents recognize that this is
an aspect of the total package of public education that is offered to
our children around the country.
This resolution commends the charter school movement for its
contribution to improving our Nation's public education system. Charter
schools have made tremendous progress in improving and reforming public
education. Reports show that parental satisfaction is high, students
are eager to learn, teachers and administrators are free from
bureaucratic red tape, and more dollars are getting to the classroom.
As these innovations and these improvements are highlighted through the
charter school movement, we also see that a number of our other public
schools are asking for the same kind of freedom and the same kind of
relief from bureaucratic red tape, so that as we learn through the
charter school movement about reforms and changes that can help public
education, I am hopeful that the people who are administering the rest
of public education or the legislators take a look at it and say, these
things are helping our kids, let us take some of these reforms and let
us move them into all of public education.
That is why charter schools in many cases are being seen as the force
that is driving change in schools around the country. Parents are given
new choice for their children, and other schools have responded by
increasing emphasis on parental involvement and high academic
standards. That has been going on. But I think also what has been
happening is that the charter school movement has been accelerating
this pace in certain of our schools. Charter schools have an
unprecedented amount of accountability to parents, school board
members, and State governments. A school can be closed if it does not
do its job and if it does not improve student performance. This method
of accountability is spreading to traditional public schools and to the
Federal education program.
In the State of Michigan we have 173 charter schools, educating more
than 50,000 students. More than 70 percent of these schools have
waiting lists. This clearly indicates the success of charter schools in
these communities and the desire on the part of parents to have more
options in public education. Charter schools represent reform; they
represent innovation in public education. I hope all of my colleagues
will join me in honoring them and also recognizing the work of all
public schools for their important contributions to educating our kids
and that they will do that by supporting this resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to the important comments that my
colleague, the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo), will now make.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I too wish to commend the gentleman from Indiana for his work on this
resolution. It is an incredibly important advance that this Nation is
observing in the entire area of educational improvement. I certainly am
in strong support of House Concurrent Resolution 310, which
acknowledges and commends the charter school movement for its
contribution to improving our Nation's public school system and calls
for National Charter Schools Week to be established.
As a former public school teacher at Drake Middle School in Colorado
and as the Secretary of Education's regional representative in both the
Reagan and Bush administration, I have firsthand experience in the
trials and tribulations of teaching in the public school system in
general. I also had the opportunity just recently, just over the break,
to visit two charter schools in Colorado in my district; and it was a
pleasure to be there and see how these schools are operating. One has
been around since charter schools started in Colorado and Colorado was
one of the first States in the Nation to have a charter school law on
the books, and they are doing very well.
{time} 1630
They are doing very well.
I have also seen the results on the other side of inflicting the many
unfunded mandates on our Nation's public schools and believe the
charter
[[Page H2371]]
school movement is a direct result of the desire for parents to
increase their involvement and control over their children's education.
New charter schools have swept the country to the point of including
35 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico, and represent a
clear change in how education is disseminated across this great Nation.
There are nearly 1,700 charter schools across the country serving
almost 400,000 children.
Laboratories of learning are being established from coast to coast
and the common denominator between them all is the staunch desire for
local hands-on control by parents and teachers. From ``back to basic''
schools in Arizona to ``magnet programs'' in Colorado and even
``outcome-based education'' programs, they are all proving that there
is not just one way to teach.
This resolution supporting National Charter Schools Week must be used
as a means of celebrating true diversity. Diversity in education,
diversity in learning, diversity in thought.
I would like to point out some of the results of Colorado's Charter
School Program. In reading proficiency, the charter schools are at
least 10 percentage points above the State average. In writing
proficiency, they are significantly above the State average in both the
fourth grade and seventh grade levels.
While performance is not yet what it should be in the charter
schools, they have proven to produce a significant increase in
proficiency, resulting in a minimum 10 percent advantage over the
average of the entire State. These same results can be found all across
the country when charter schools and schools of choice are made
available as an option.
We will recall that 10 percent is the difference between two full
letter grades in most schools. It takes students from average to above
average and there is no better way to enhance self-esteem than to earn
better grades.
Mr. Speaker, I have here an article on Colorado's charter schools
which appeared in the April 4 edition of the Colorado Springs Gazette;
an article on charter schools which appeared in the April 12 edition of
The Hill; and a briefing paper entitled, ``How Washington Can Really
Help Charter Schools,'' prepared by the Lexington Institute. I would
like to submit all three of these into the Record.
Mr. Speaker, I also have a list of States with laws supporting the
implementation of charter schools and the strengths and weaknesses of
each charter school program, and I will submit those for the Record as
well.
Supporting National Charter Schools Week lends credence to the
proclamation that not everyone thinks alike and not everyone learns
alike. Combined with the Charter Schools Expansion Act from the 105th
Congress, it acknowledges the success of thinking out of the box by
supporting and commending those communities who have chosen to take
control of their own destiny.
Mr. Speaker, I should also say there are attempts whenever we have
something good happening in education, there is somebody out there that
is going to try and stop it. And we have to make sure that the U.S.
Department of Education and State departments of education throughout
the Nation do not take advantage of the options they have in regulating
State bureaucracies and State charter schools to try and stop it.
[From the Colorado Springs Gazette, Apr. 4, 2000]
Colorado Charter Schools Aren't Perfect, But They Get The Job Done
(By Robert Holland)
A recent report from the U.S. Department of Education
documented the phenomenal growth of charter schools. But it
took a state-level evaluation in Colorado to show how these
largely autonomous public schools can work at their best.
The federal Department of Education reported that 421
charter schools opened in the 12 months before September
1999--a 40 percent jump, the sharpest increase yet. In all,
more than 1,700 charter schools have come into existence
since 1991, and they serve a quarter of a million students.
Organizers receive exemption from many bureaucratic rules in
exchange for a written pledge that they will deliver academic
results.
In Colorado, charter schools clearly are living up to that
promise. On average, charter students were scoring 10 to 16
percentage points above statewide averages, and three-fourths
of charter schools also were out-performing their home
districts and schools with comparable demographic profiles.
Colorado is a hotbed of activism for school choice. Were it
not for the vigorous ongoing advocacy of private-school
vouchers by business leaders like Steve Schuck and political
leaders like Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., it is doubtful that
the public school establishment would be embracing charters
nearly as ardently. Charters don't provide a full range of
educational choice, but they are a start.
The Colorado Education Department evaluated 51 charter
schools that had been in operation at least two years. These
schools constituted 3.3 percent of Colorado's public schools
and served 13,000 students (1.9 percent of total enrollment).
The Core Knowledge curriculum developed by University of
Virginia English professor E.D. Hirsch Jr., a prominent
critic of the school-of-education mentality, was by far the
most popular model among Colorado charter organizers. Twenty-
two of the 51 schools used Core Knowledge. And the study
shows that their confidence was not misplaced: According to
the study, 14 of them ``exceeded the expectations set for
their performance,'' and the other eight ``generally met''
the expectations.
On the whole the evaluators found the charter schools
``enjoy striking (some times extraordinary) levels of parent
involvement,'' a factor universally valued as an ingredient
in school success. As for reasons, the evaluators said that
being able to seek out the school best for their child gave
parents ``a greater sense of commitment'' to the school. In
addition, parents appreciated that their schools welcomed
their involvement and created opportunities for their
participation.
Here are comparisons of the proportions of students who
scored ``proficient'' or higher on the Colorado Student
Assessment Program:
Third-grade reading: 77 percent of charter students; state
average, 67 percent.
Fourth-grade reading: 73 percent of charter students, state
average, 59 percent.
Fourth-grade writing: 49 percent of charter students, state
average, 34 percent.
Seventh-grade reading: 66 percent of charter students,
state average, 56 percent.
Seventh-grade writing: 57 percent of charter students;
state average, 41 percent.
The charters exhibited a kind of diversity that is
sometimes overlooked: They ``were diverse in size,
educational programs, educational philosophies, approach to
governance, and assessment strategies. The diversity met the
intent of the Colorado Charter Schools Act to offer new
educational options to students and their parents.''
In the wake of distressing outbreaks of violence at large
schools, many educators are calling for a return to small
schools. Colorado's charter schools fill the bill: Only 6
percent of the charters had more than 500 students, while 51
percent enrolled fewer than 200 pupils.
How much of a hand do parents have? Consider: Parents were
represented on the governing boards of 90 percent of charter
schools, and in 34 of the 47 charters reporting the
composition of their boards, parents held a majority of
seats.
____
[From The Hill, Apr. 12, 2000]
Charter Schools, School Choice Gain Bipartisan Steam
(By Robert Holland and Don Soifer)
Creating charter schools as a way to foster family choice
and competition within public education is an idea gaining a
bipartisan head of steam on Capitol Hill.
But taking the next big step--tax credits or vouchers that
could extend parental choice to private schools, as the G.I.
Bill and Pell Grants do for college students--remains largely
a Republican cause, with defections by ``moderate'' GOP
lawmakers and threatened vetoes by President Clinton posing
formidable obstacles.
Charter schools are a not-to-be-sneezed-at response,
though, to education consumers' desire for more choices than
a government monopoly typically will allow.
Their phenomenal growth from one school in Minnesota in
1991 to more than 1,700 nationwide today has been the hottest
education story of the past decade. Entrepreneurs who
organize charter schools get exemptions from stifling
bureaucratic rules in exchange for a promise they will
deliver academic results.
The biggest obstacle facing charter-school organizers is
securing necessary financing for safe and functional
facilities. With that concern eased, charters likely would
pose even more of a competitive challenge to orthodox public
schools. To address the facilities crunch, Rep. Heather
Wilson (R-N.M.) in March introduced the Charter School
Financing Act of 2000.
Through the Small Business Administration, the bill would
distribute $600 million for FY2001 in federal loan guarantees
to eligible charter schools. Congress likely will have no
more important piece of charter-school legislation before it
this year. (The charter section of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act [ESEA] was reauthorized in 1998.)
The concept of providing tax advantages to parents who put
money in Education Savings Accounts (ESA) to facilitate their
totally free choice of schools has not yet gained nearly as
much traction as charter schools.
On March 2, the Senate passed, 61-37, an ESA bill sponsored
by Paul Coverdell (R-Ga.) and Robert Torricelli (D-N.J.).
However, on the House side, a revolt in late March by 15
[[Page H2372]]
``moderate'' Republicans may have killed ESAs for this
session.
Still alive, though facing an almost-certain Clinton veto,
is the idea of letting federal aid follow needy children to a
school of the family's choosing. ``Portability'' received a
significant boost when the Senate Committee on Health,
Education, Labor and Pensions passed it as an amendment to
the ESEA offered by Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.).
His measure would permit up to 10 states and 20 school
districts to disburse their Title I aid in the name of
individual needy children, and the money would go with the
child to whatever public school the parents or guardians
chose. Eventually, the choice could be extended to private
schools also.
Despite expenditures of more than $130 billion since Title
I was passed 35 yeas ago in the heyday of President Johnson's
War on Poverty, numerous federal evaluations have shown the
massive has had little or no impact on closing the
achievement gap for underprivileged children. Gregg voiced
the hope that portability will create a competition to serve
these children that will boost results.
Even in bilingual education, long a captive of special
interests, elements of parental choice are catching on.
The Senate is about to take up House-passed reforms,
proposed by House Education Committee Chairman Bill Goodling
(R-Pa.) and Arizona Rep. Matt Salmon (R), that would require
school districts to obtain informed parental consent before
placing children in bilingual programs.
They also would eliminate the current rule mandating that
at least 75 percent of federal bilingual dollars be spent to
support instruction in students' non-English native
languages, with the remainder reserved for ironically termed
``alternative'' programs--that is, classes teaching English,
in English.
Republican Sens. Coverdell and Jon Kyl of Arizona are among
those championing parental consent and notification
provisions like those passed in the House.
Connecticut Democrat Joseph Lieberman also has a plan that
would include sweeping bilingual education reforms, such as
mandating that teachers of English learners be fluent in
English and placing a three-year limit on federally funded
bilingual programs.
Many parents new to this country have found that public
schools have consigned their children to a kind of linguistic
ghetto rather than teaching them promptly the language of
jobs and citizenship. Bilingual reform can give the most
humble parents the clout to change that.
____
[From the Lexington Institute, Issue Brief, Apr. 14, 2000]
How Washington Can Really Help Charter Schools
(By Don Soifer, Executive Vice President)
Charter schools' extraordinary growth--from one school in
Minnesota in 1991 to over 1,700 nationwide today--may well be
America's biggest education success story of the past decade.
In Arizona one in six public schools is a charter school. In
North Carolina, Michigan and elsewhere urban charter schools
are bringing choice and accountability to families
unaccustomed with either. ``When we look back on the 1990s,''
First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton proclaimed to the National
Education Association's 1999 national convention, ``the
charter school movement may well be one of the ways we have
turned around the entire public education system.''
With the President's most recent call for a further
dramatic increase in the number of charter schools, and with
charters at or near the top of many education reform agendas,
it seems that Washington expects to play an increasing role
in this unfolding story. The critical task will be to foster
the development of charter schools without interfering in
their effectiveness.
These proposed federal remedies address many, though
certainly not all, of the most formidable challenges facing
the nation's charter school entrepreneurs. But they are just
that, federal remedies, to advance a movement that is
intrinsically local. Many charter school leaders argue that
the best thing the federal government can do to cultivate
their movement is to stay away while local education
providers and state policymakers lay the essential
groundwork. The threat of federal over-regulation looms large
for charter schools, as revealed by recent intrusions by the
Department of Justice's Civil Rights Division.
So how can Washington really help charter schools? The
following policy recommendations were written with the
guidance of charter school experts and leaders from around
the country.
Require states to provide charter schools with their per-
pupil share of Title I and other federal funding streams
within months of the school's startup. The current process
often takes a full year to get these funds to charter schools
and can require state officials to engage in shaky
guesswork--all at the expense of our most at-risk children.
Increase availability of financing for facilities,
frequently the greatest obstacle facing charter school
entrepreneurs. Safe and functional housing for charter
schools can be hardest to find in urban areas where their
mission is most vital. Financing opportunities, low-cost or
otherwise, are often just as scarce. Second-hand facilities,
perhaps those which previously housed public schools, post
offices, or downsized military bases, could provide excellent
homes for charter schools if available. Representative
Heather Wilson's proposed Charter School Financing Act
addresses this crunch by distributing $600 million in federal
loan guarantees to charter schools for facilities through
the Small Business Administration.
Reallocate to the states the 5 percent of federal charter
school funding currently set aside for the U.S. Department of
Education to pursue ``national activities'' such as research
and dissemination of information. Putting the money in
states' hands would enable them to directly address financing
or other practical issues.
Protect charter schools' flexibility from rigid teacher-
certification requirements. The Clinton Administration boasts
of its pro-charter agenda, claiming credit for the remarkable
growth of charter schools during its tenure. But the rigid
teacher-certification requirements in its current Elementary
and Secondary Education Act reauthorization proposal threaten
one of charter schools' most vital characteristics--the
ability to hire effective teachers with real-world experience
outside of traditional teacher-preparation schools and union-
embraced professional development. Such a mandate could
render futile the autonomy crucial to charter schools'
success.
Offer grants beyond the first 3 years of a charter school's
existence. This is enough time for some charters to gain
necessary traction, but not others. Grants of 5-6 years would
also provide successful charter schools with the boost to
expand to meet an even greater need.
Ensure that only states with charter school laws on the
books receive federal charter school funding. States that
produce more charter schools deserve more federal charter
school dollars. It is essential that charter school policy
decisions should made at the state level. Sending federal
funds to non-charter school states does more than just lessen
their impact--it provides Washington bureaucrats with a
vehicle to circumvent state laws.
Encourage startup grants which foster for-profit
organization partnering with local groups. Arizona, which
hosts the nation's most mature charter school movement, has a
wide range of innovative private-sector funding sources and
approaches. Officials there are quick to acknowledge that
many of the state's best charter schools are run by, or
through partnerships with, for-profit entities. In much the
same spirit as enterprise zones that helped reinvigorate
inner cities during the 1980s and 90s, private-sector
leadership for the charter school movement can bring critical
education growth to the urban settings where the need is most
urgent.
With so much momentum on the side of America's charter
schools, many in Washington, D.C. understandably want to get
involved. Some, like Massachusetts Senator John Kerry, have
called for making every public school in America a charter
school. But as the charter school movement grows rapidly
beyond its infancy, Washington must maintain the right middle
ground between neglect and smothering. It will be a difficult
balancing act.
____
[From the Center for Education Reform, Apr. 28, 2000]
Making Schools Work Better for All Children
Charter School Highlights and Statistics
There are 37 charter school laws in the United States,
Nearly 1,700 charter schools opened this fall in 31 states
and the District of Columbia, serving over 400,000 students.
New Charter School States (Currently Unranked): Oklahoma
(1999), Oregon (1999)
Charter School States That Have Strong to Medium Strength
Laws (23): Arizona (1994), California (1992), Colorado
(1993), Connecticut (1996), Delaware (1995), District of
Columbia (1996), Florida (1996), Illinois (1996), Louisiana
(1995), Massachusetts (1993), Michigan (1993), Minnesota
(1991), Missouri (1998), New Hampshire (1995), New Jersey
(1996), New York (1998), North Carolina (1996), Ohio (1997),
Pennsylvania (1997), South Carolina (1996), Texas (1995),
Utah (1998), Wisconsin (1993).
Charter School States That Have Weak Laws (12): Alaska
(1995), Arkansas (1995), Georgia (1993), Hawaii (1994), Idaho
(1998), Kansas (1994), Mississippi (1997), Nevada (1997), New
Mexico (1993), Rhode Island (1995), Virginia (1998), Wyoming
(1995).
Charter Schools in Operation, 1999-2000 School Year
State (year law passed) Total opened
Alaska ('95).........................................................17
Arizona ('94).......................................................352
Arkansas ('95)........................................................0
California ('92)....................................................239
Colorado ('93).......................................................65
Connecticut ('96)....................................................16
Delaware ('95)........................................................5
District of Columbia ('96)...........................................31
Florida ('96).......................................................111
Georgia ('93)........................................................32
Hawaii ('94)..........................................................2
Idaho ('98)...........................................................8
Illinois ('94).......................................................19
Kansas ('95).........................................................15
Louisiana ('95)......................................................17
Massachusetts ('93)..................................................39
Michigan ('93)......................................................173
Minnesota ('91)......................................................59
Mississippi ('97).....................................................1
Missouri ('98).......................................................18
Nevada ('97)..........................................................5
New Hampshire ('95)...................................................0
New Jersey ('96).....................................................46
[[Page H2373]]
New Mexico ('93)......................................................3
New York ('98)........................................................7
North Carolina ('96).................................................75
Ohio ('97)...........................................................49
Oklahoma ('99)........................................................0
Oregon ('99)..........................................................4
Pennsylvania ('97)...................................................47
Rhode Island ('95)....................................................2
South Carolina ('96)..................................................8
Texas ('95).........................................................167
Utah ('98)............................................................3
Virginia ('98)........................................................0
Wisconsin ('93)......................................................55
Wyoming ('95).........................................................0
________
Nationwide total.................................................1689
This information has been compiled through state
departments of education and charter school resource centers.
In some instances, however, there may be slight
discrepancies.
For more information, see CER's overview of current charter
school laws, including state-by-state rankings of charter
school laws and 32-point legislative profiles of each state's
charter provisions.
Mr. Speaker, how much time do I have remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Pease). The gentleman from Colorado (Mr.
Tancredo) has 2 minutes remaining.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), the honorable chairman of the Committee on
Education and the Workforce.
Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Speaker I ask unanimous consent to reclaim 2 minutes
of the time that I yielded back in order that I may also yield 2
minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), so that the
chairman of the committee would have more than 2 minutes to speak.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Indiana?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Goodling) is recognized for 4 minutes.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I want to congratulate all of the brave
parents and pioneering educators who have taken part in the charter
school movement over the last 9 years, and I certainly want to
congratulate those who are here today promoting this legislation. There
is no question that their commitment to educating our Nation's youth
has made all the difference in the world to thousands of children.
About 7 month ago, I had the privilege of seeing a successful charter
school in action when I visited Edison Friendship Public Charter School
here in D.C. I will tell my colleagues, it was a privilege. It was a
privilege because, number one, the school had just celebrated its first
anniversary and during that year, student test scores had doubled. And
number two, the parents of the students were actively engaged.
Mr. Speaker, these students have to get to that school on their own.
There is no transportation provided. The parents must, of course, sign
in relationship to discipline, and must sign in relationship to
checking homework to make sure that as a matter of fact the homework is
being done. The parents of the students were very actively engaged.
In fact, children are learning in charter schools in some 32 States
all across the country. They are learning because, by their very
nature, charter schools are free from burdensome rules and regulations
and because charter schools increase parental involvement by promoting
choice in public education. In exchange for this freedom, charter
schools are held accountable. If they do not do the job, they cease to
exist.
I firmly believe that it is this do-or-die mentality that empowers
students, parents, and teachers alike to perform at a high level. It is
this do-or-die mentality this has made the charter school movement so
successful, and it is this do-or-die mentality in the name of education
that I applaud here today.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage all of my fellow colleagues to support H.
Con. Res. 310, ``Supporting a National Charter Schools Week,'' which
commends the charter school movement for its contribution to improving
our Nation's public school system. And improve it we must, because at
the present time, we are losing probably 50 percent of our students
each year who will never have an opportunity to get a piece of the
American dream because they will not be prepared to do it.
We will be voting in the near future again to increase the number who
come in from other countries to do our high-tech work. We need to
prepare our own to do that.
Mr. SCHAFFER. Mr. Speaker, in recognition of ``National Charter
Schools Week,'' May 1-5, and in support of H. Con. Res. 310, I rise to
acknowledge and congratulate the phenomenal growth and success of
charter schools in the United States and the remarkable success they
have achieved. Colorado charter schools, I am particularly pleased to
report, are among the nation's leaders when it comes to academic
performance, parental satisfaction and accountability.
According to a recent study by the Colorado Department of Education
(CDE), charter school students significantly outperformed state and
local district averages in reading and writing. Other indicators,
including parent satisfaction and participation, were also very
positive. As the proud parent of three children attending Liberty
Common School, a charter school in Fort Collins, Colorado in the Poudre
School District, and one of the 51 Colorado charter schools
participating in the CDE study, I can attest to the fact that charter
schools work, are a catalyst for improvement in our nation's schools,
and are in great demand across the country.
On this celebration of charter schools, I hereby submit a letter by
Dr. Kathryn Knox, headmaster of Liberty Common School, on her
experience testifying before the Subcommittee on Oversight and
Investigation of the Committee on Education on the success and
challenges facing charter schools. Mr. Speaker, it clearly and
persuasively addressed the opportunities and challenges facing charter
schools today.
Notes from Dr. Knox: Washington, D.C. Testimony
The question was asked, ``Where were you the two days prior
to Spring Break?'' Though it would have been fun to say, ``I
was in Hawaii,'' actually, something else more important
happened. I had the wonderful opportunity to be part of a
bipartisan hearing on charter schools in Washington, D.C. for
the Congressional subcommittee on Education and the
Workforce. Four of us from different parts of the nation were
invited. My colleagues on the panel were Ms. Sumida from
Fenton Charter School in California (a district school that
had become a charter school by choice, and one in which all
continuing teachers resigned from the union in order to form
a charter); Ms. Salcido from the Cesar Chavez Charter High
School in Washington, D.C. (high population of at-risk
students), and Mr. Schroeder from the Charter Friends Network
in Minnesota. The chair of the committee was Representative
Peter Hoekstra, and the bipartisan representatives were
Congressman Bob Schaffer and Congressman Tim Roemer. I was
honored to be able to present, with this panel, information
about charter successes and challenges and respond to what
the federal government was doing to help or hinder charter
schools. In addition to the presentation at the Rayburn
House, our testimony was taped by CSPAN and broadcast to
about 9 million people, so we had the benefit of high
visibility for Liberty across the nation. I thought Liberty
parents would like to hear a bit about this experience. There
were several questions from the members for which I will
summarize a response.
Ms. Salcido noted some characteristics of charter schools
which we all agreed on including freedom of choice,
accountability for results, high standards for all involved
in the school, doing away with bureaucracy, supporting
innovation and a team-building spirit. Our common goal is to
retain our autonomy and clear responsibility to the students,
while obtaining fair funding and support of equal capital
financing opportunities for the children's sake. Equal
capital funding continues to be a challenge for most charter
schools. At Liberty, for example, though we officially have
95% of per pupil operating revenue, if the building costs,
maintenance, grounds, custodial costs, etc., are subtracted,
and into the equation are added the lack of access to other
revenue sources including capital reserve funds, mill levy
funds, public bond monies, and even vehicle licensing fees,
Liberty is operating on about 73% of each dollar given to
other public schools.
The Department of Education will have a budget exceeding
$120 BILLION, and though we all want equality in funding, and
want accountability for results, we don't want strings
attached that allow subtle and increasing federal direction
and control of local schools. The momentum for charter
schools comes locally, and culture is positively different in
a good charter school because of the local control. For one
example of this: In our case, we received a substantial grant
last year from the federal government. Later, we were told
that because we had received and accepted federal monies,
we had to eliminate our first-come/first-served waiting
list and replace it with a lottery. Our charter states
that we would hold slots for at-risk students to increase
our socioeconomic diversity, but a lottery precludes this
desire to reach a more diverse population.
The question about whether teachers feel professional or
not in charter schools is responded to by considering the
current reality of government-monopoly schooling. Under union
contracts, all teachers are treated the
[[Page H2374]]
same and paid the same, and after a few years, are allowed to
remain whether they are doing an excellent job or not. Prior
to the three-year tenure period, teachers are often fired or
simply laid off after a year in a school, depending on
factors including current financing or the number of tenured
teachers at a certain level of salary. In good charter
schools, some teachers rise to the top as in any enterprise
and should be paid more for their extra work, training, and
professional responsibility. Teamwork, trustworthiness and
collegiality are required for the development of a good
school culture in which all teachers are involved in
promoting the entire vision and mission of the school. The
current paradigm of separation and isolation must be changed,
and negative influences must be able to be removed from the
enterprise so that student achievement and collegial teamwork
is not hindered. Charter schools allow excellent teachers to
develop skills and talents for the good of the students and
the school. The entrepreneurial spirit is alive and well for
the good of students at Liberty and the whole school. Parent
concerns and ideas are also valued here, and parents should
always feel welcome to participate actively in the school.
The question about accountability and whether the state
should have the ability to shut down a charter school if the
school were not performing well, was expanded by Congressman
Schaffer, who noted that the few charter schools that have
closed may not have responded well to their client's needs
and charter expectations, and that is a good thing, but that
interestingly, other public schools that are not performing
well are not similarly challenged to keep their doors open,
but rather often receive MORE financing and help.
Overall, the hearing was fruitful and an opportunity
included sharing information about Liberty's successes and
challenges, in written form with 125 people, while responding
to questions publicly. I am very grateful for this greater
visibility for our wonderful school, and very grateful for
each of your ideas, time, commitment and care.
Mrs. ROUKEMA. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in support of H. Con. Res.
310, the resolution that honors National Charter Schools Week and
commends the charter school movement for its contribution to improving
our Nation's public school system.
Charter schools have been instrumental in demonstrating that
accountability and innovation work together to improve our Nation's
schools. This is because of the special agreement that these schools
make with their state agency or local school board. The agreement is
simple: the school is allowed to determine the best way to provide a
quality education and, in exchange, it must produce results.
Charter schools have demonstrated that achievements can be made when
local school districts are given the flexibility to shape their
education programs in ways that work best for their teachers and
students. Of course, in allowing flexibility, charter schools must
produce real, accountable results.
And that is the bottom line--results.
In fact, an overwhelming majority of the initial reports on charter
schools have demonstrated that charter schools are achieving their
academic goals. But not only are academic results promising. Reports
show that parental satisfaction is high, students are eager to learn,
teachers are enjoying teaching again, administrators are set-free from
administrative red-tape, and more dollars are getting to the classroom.
I am not here today to only tout the successes of individual charter
schools. The Public Charter Schools Program has a purpose greater than
just creating new schools. The larger purpose of this program is to
create a dynamic for change and improvement in our public school
system. In the eight years since the first charter school opened its
doors, we have seen the benefit that charter schools have had for the
education system as a whole. Reports have found that wherever large
numbers of charter schools are clustered, system-wide academic
improvement has been accelerated.
Let us take a lesson from the charter schools experience that local
flexibility and accountability are essential elements in the formula of
successful schools.
The federal government has invested over $120 billion in the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965. We have spent all of
that money and can't say definitively that it has led to an increase in
academic achievement. We must do something to ensure that the hard-
earned money of the American people is spent wisely. Charter schools
provide evidence that we should emphasize local flexibility and
accountability in our federal education reforms.
The bottom line is that charter schools work because they are freed
from burdensome regulations and held accountable for academic results.
I commend these schools for their innovation in achieving academic
results and for the contribution they have made to our nation's public
school system. As we move forward in reforming our federal education
programs, let us not forget the lessons learned from the charter
schools experience.
Mr. TANCREDO. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Tancredo) that the House suspend the rules
and agree to the concurrent resolution, H. Con. Res. 310.
The question was taken.
Mr. ROEMER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________