[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.



                          ____________________