[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 116 (Tuesday, September 26, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H8180-H8184]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
QUALITY TEACHER RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION ACT OF 2000
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 5034) to expand loan forgiveness for teachers, and for other
purposes.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 5034
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Quality Teacher Recruitment
and Retention Act of 2000''.
SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.
(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
(1) Over the next 10 years, a large percentage of teachers
will retire, leaving American classrooms, particularly urban
and rural classrooms, facing a serious teacher shortage.
(2) The Nation will need 2,000,000 new teachers over the
next 10 years. Unfortunately, in the past this need has been
met by admitting some unqualified teachers to the classroom.
(3) There is also a chronic shortage of fully certified
special education teachers, averaging about 27,000 per year.
While the demand is ever present, institutes of higher
education are graduating fewer teachers qualified in special
education.
(4) High quality teachers are the first vital step in
ensuring students receive a high quality education.
(5) Potentially valuable teacher candidates are often lured
into different careers by higher compensation.
(6) Moreover, the burdensome paperwork and legal
requirements are factors which lead special education
teachers to leave the profession. More special education
teachers move into the general education realm than vice
versa.
(7) High-quality prospective teachers need to be identified
and recruited by presenting to them a career that is
respected by their peers, is financially and intellectually
rewarding, and contains sufficient opportunities for
advancement.
(8) Teacher loan forgiveness gives high-poverty schools an
effective incentive for recruiting and retaining much-needed
high quality teachers.
(9) Loan forgiveness for high-need teachers, including
special education teachers, can be a critical link in
increasing the supply of these essential educators.
(b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to encourage
individuals to enter and continue in the teaching profession
in order to ensure that high quality teachers are recruited
and retained in areas where they are most needed so students
attending school in such areas receive a quality education.
SEC. 3. EXPANDED LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM FOR TEACHERS.
(a) Program.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary of Education (in this
section referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall carry out a
program of assuming the obligation to repay, pursuant to
subsection (c), a loan made, insured, or guaranteed under
part B of title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 or
part D of such title (excluding loans made under sections
428B and 428C of such Act or comparable loans made under part
D of such title) for any borrower who--
(A) is a new teacher;
(B)(i) is employed, for 3 consecutive complete school
years, as a full-time teacher in a school that qualifies
under section 465(a)(2)(A) of the Higher Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087ee(a)(2)(A)) for loan cancellation for a
recipient of a loan under part E of title IV of such Act who
teaches in such schools; or
(ii) is employed, for 3 consecutive complete school years,
as a full-time special education teacher, or as a full-time
teacher of special needs children;
(C) satisfies the requirements of subsection (d); and
(D) is not in default on a loan for which the borrower
seeks forgiveness.
(2) Award basis; priority.--
(A) Award basis.--Subject to subparagraph (B), loan
repayment under this section shall be on a first-come, first-
serve basis and subject to the availability of
appropriations.
(B) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority in
providing loan repayment under this section for a fiscal year
to student borrowers who received loan repayment under this
section for the preceding fiscal year.
(3) Regulations.--The Secretary is authorized to prescribe
such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the
provisions of this section.
(b) Loan Repayment.--
(1) Eligible amount.--The amount the Secretary may repay on
behalf of any individual under this section shall not
exceed--
(A) the sum of the principal amounts outstanding (not to
exceed $5,000) of the individual's qualifying loans at the
end of 3 consecutive complete school years of service
described in subsection (a)(1)(B);
(B) an additional portion of such sum (not to exceed
$7,500) at the end of each of the next 2 consecutive complete
school years of such service; and
(C) a total of not more than $20,000.
(2) Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be
construed to authorize the refunding of any repayment of a
loan made under part B or D of title IV of the Higher
Education Act of 1965.
(3) Interest.--If a portion of a loan is repaid by the
Secretary under this section for any year, the proportionate
amount of interest on such loan which accrues for such year
shall be repaid by the Secretary.
(c) Repayment to Eligible Lenders.--The Secretary shall pay
to each eligible lender or holder for each fiscal year an
amount equal to the aggregate amount of loans which are
subject to repayment pursuant to this section for such year.
(d) Application for Repayment.--
(1) In general.--Each eligible individual desiring loan
repayment under this section shall submit a complete and
accurate application to the Secretary at such time, in such
manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may
require.
(2) Years of service.--An eligible individual may apply for
loan repayment under this section after completing the
required number of years of qualifying employment.
(3) Fully qualified teachers in public elementary or
secondary schools.--An application for loan repayment under
this section shall include such information as is necessary
to demonstrate that the applicant--
(A) if teaching in a public elementary, middle, or
secondary school (other than as a teacher in a public charter
school), has obtained State certification as a teacher
(including certification obtained through alternative routes
to certification) or passed the State teacher licensing exam
and holds a license to teach in such State; and
(B) if teaching in--
(i) a public elementary school, holds a bachelor's degree
and demonstrates knowledge and teaching skills in each of the
subject areas in which he or she provides instruction; or
(ii) a public middle or secondary school, holds a
bachelor's degree and demonstrates a high level of competency
in all subject areas in which he or she teaches through--
(I) a high level of performance on a rigorous State or
local academic subject areas test; or
(II) completion of an academic major in each of the subject
areas in which he or she provides instruction.
(4) Teachers in nonprofit private elementary or secondary
schools or charter schools.--In the case of an applicant who
is teaching in a nonprofit private elementary or secondary
school, or in a public charter school, an application for
loan repayment under this section shall include such
information as is necessary to demonstrate that the applicant
has knowledge and teaching skills in each of the subject
areas in which he or she provides instruction, as certified
by the chief administrative officer of the school.
(e) Treatment of Consolidation Loans.--A loan amount for a
consolidation loan made under section 428C of the Higher
Education Act of 1965, or a Federal Direct Consolidation Loan
made under part D of title IV of such Act, may be a qualified
loan amount for the purpose of this section only to the
extent that such loan amount was used by a borrower who
otherwise meets the requirements of this section to repay--
(1) a loan made under section 428 or 428H of such Act; or
(2) a Federal Direct Stafford Loan, or a Federal Direct
Unsubsidized Stafford Loan, made under part D of title IV of
such Act.
(f) Additional Eligibility Provisions.--
(1) Continued eligibility.--Any teacher who performs
service in a school that--
(A) meets the requirements of subsection (a)(1)(B) in any
year during such service; and
(B) in a subsequent year fails to meet the requirements of
such subsection,
may continue to teach in such school and shall be eligible
for loan forgiveness pursuant to subsection (a).
(2) Prevention of double benefits.--No borrower may, for
the same service, receive a benefit under both this section
and subtitle D of title I of the National and Community
Service Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12571 et seq.).
(3) Definition of new teacher.--The term ``new teacher''
means an individual who has not previously been employed as a
teacher in an elementary or secondary school prior to August
1, 2001, excluding employment while engaged in student
teaching service or comparable activity that is part of a
preservice education program.
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this
Act such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2001 and
for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal years.
[[Page H8181]]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms.
Sanchez) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling).
General Leave
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks on H.R. 5034.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5034, the Quality Teacher
Recruitment and Retention Act of 2000, and I thank the gentleman from
South Carolina (Mr. Graham), who has worked diligently on our committee
for many years to try to ensure that we have quality teachers in every
classroom throughout the United States.
It has been well noted that schools will need to hire 2 million new
teachers in the next decade in order to accommodate growing enrollments
and to offset the projected increase in teacher retirements. But it is
more than just hiring more teachers. At the same time schools are
compelled to hire the best teachers. Parents, business leaders, and the
general public are all demanding more from our Nation's schools.
However, as we have heard through the course of many hearings held by
the Committee on Education and the Workforce, finding and retaining
quality teachers has become more and more difficult, especially in
light of the many other opportunities available to potential teachers
in today's marketplace.
A front page New York Times article on August 24 underscores the
difficulty facing many schools: ``A growing number of States and school
districts are short-circuiting the usual route to teacher certification
with their own crash courses that put new teachers in the classroom
after as little as three weeks. Officials say they are driven by a
severe teacher shortage.''
In response, many schools are implementing innovative solutions. Last
week during a hearing on this issue in our committee, we had the
opportunity to hear from Micheline J. Bendotti, executive director from
the Arizona Teacher Advancement Program. This program is being
implemented in several schools across Arizona and provides teachers
with market-driven compensation, multiple career paths, and
performance-based accountability, along with high quality ongoing
applied professional development.
For our part, Republicans in Congress are assisting States and local
school districts to meet the challenges of a competitive marketplace.
Through initiatives such as the House-passed Teacher Empowerment Act,
we have expanded the flexibility of current education programs to allow
more schools to have the Federal resources necessary to carry out these
types of innovative programs.
Additionally, we are providing assistance targeted directly to
prospective teachers through student loan forgiveness. Specifically,
under the Higher Education Amendments of 1998, we established a program
for qualified teachers who commit to teaching in a low-income school
for 5 years. The program is only available for new student loan
borrowers, and the total amount of loan forgiveness is limited to
$5,000 per student.
The fact is teacher loan forgiveness can be a highly successful
incentive for encouraging some of our best and brightest graduates to
enter the teacher profession. Teacher loan forgiveness also enjoys wide
public support, as evidenced by a 1998 Lou Harris poll, which found a
majority of Americans favored providing such assistance to teachers.
Business groups have also been outspoken on the need for teacher loan
forgiveness.
For example, the California Business for Education Excellence has as
one of its top priorities to support expanding teacher loan forgiveness
programs. Specifically, they believe the amount and rate of loan
forgiveness should be accelerated in order to recruit and retain
teachers for hard-to-fill openings.
That is exactly what has been done under legislation passed by the
Committee on Education and the Workforce earlier this year.
Specifically, H.R. 4402, the Training and Education for American
Workers Act of 2000, directs 25 percent of the fees collected through
H-1B visa applications to be used for new student loan forgiveness
programs to attract more math, science and reading teachers who agree
to teach for 5 years. Benefits under this program are in addition to
any benefits a student may receive under programs established as part
of the Higher Education Act Amendments.
H.R. 5034, the legislation we are considering today, builds upon both
of the other teacher loan forgiveness programs. This important
initiative also expands upon the current programs by not limiting
forgiveness to just new borrowers.
Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentleman from South Carolina for working
so hard on this important legislation. He has been a leader and an
advocate for quality teaching in the years he has served on the
committee. I encourage all Members to support its passage.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to give management
duties on this bill to my colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr.
Holt).
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentlewoman from California?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New
Jersey (Mr. Holt).
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and
I thank my colleague from California and rise in support of H.R. 5034.
As my friend and colleague from Pennsylvania mentioned, this bill of
our colleague from South Carolina provides up to $20,000 in student
loan forgiveness to fully qualified teachers teaching in high-need
schools and districts. I certainly view loan forgiveness as one of a
number of strategies to ensure that we have enough highly qualified
teachers, especially in the critical areas of science and math.
This bill expands upon a Democratic initiative included under Title
IV of the Higher Education Act during the last reauthorization that
guarantees $5,000 in student loan forgiveness to any teacher who
teaches in a high-need school for a period of 5 years. Now, $20,000 is
obviously a more powerful incentive than $5,000; and given the looming
teacher shortage, high-needs schools and districts will need all the
help they can get in recruiting and retaining qualified teachers, and I
applaud the gentleman from South Carolina for his interest in improving
and expanding the existing program.
I would be remiss, however, if I failed to mention some of my
concerns about this legislation. For although I am disappointed that
Democratic offers to work with our friends on the other side of the
aisle to improve this legislation before it came to the floor were
rebuffed, it is still my hope that some of my concerns and some of the
concerns of my colleagues can be remedied should this bill be taken up
in the Senate.
To begin with, the bill is written in such a way that it is really
unclear as to the relationship between this loan forgiveness program
and the existing loan forgiveness program. I worry this could be
confusing for students and school officials. We need to simplify
student aid, not make it more complicated.
In addition, funding for this program does not kick in until 3 years
after the date of enactment, meaning that teachers could not benefit
from it, as I understand it, until 2004. We are losing teachers to more
lucrative professions today, and will in 2001 and 2002 and 2003. If we
want to keep these talented individuals in the classroom, it seems to
me prudent to provide them with loan forgiveness today.
And perhaps most important, funding for this program is discretionary
rather than mandatory, as is Title IV of the Higher Education Act. So
depending on the spirit and generosity of the appropriators 3 years
from now, although I presume we will have generous appropriators 3
years from now, but depending on that spirit of generosity, some
teachers might benefit while others, though equally qualified, might
not. In
[[Page H8182]]
fact, should the appropriators decide not to fund the program at all,
no one will benefit, and we will be no closer to addressing the teacher
shortage than we are today.
So I would like to work with my colleague to see if there is some way
we can ensure that all eligible teachers can benefit from this valuable
program. After all, his intention, I am sure, is to provide an
incentive that will be meaningful to recruit and to encourage teachers.
Finally, I feel I must make one last point. For although it is not
directly related to this bill, I think it is an essential part of this
debate. We will not be able truly to address the problem of poor
teacher recruitment and retention rates, particularly in high-need
urban and rural communities, until we improve conditions faced by
teachers in the classroom. For no matter how tempting the monetary
incentive, good teachers will be unlikely to remain in the classroom if
they are overcrowded, lacking supplies, and have buildings falling down
around them.
However, despite all this, I believe that H.R. 5034 is a good first
step, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from
South Carolina (Mr. Graham), author of the legislation and a valuable
member of the committee.
{time} 2145
Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Speaker, before we start discussing the bill, I would
like to offer a debt of gratitude to my colleagues on the other side
for allowing this bill to go forward. And we can make it better, I am
sure. But I have a few points that were mentioned.
This bill is building on existing programs that our Committee on
Education and the Workforce in a bipartisan fashion passed a couple
years ago. There is a $5,000 student loan forgiveness program in
existence today if they will go into teaching in a Title I school.
What does that mean? A Title I school is a school where 30 percent of
the students are at the poverty level or below. That is usually a rural
poor school, an urban poor school, the places that is very hard to
recruit.
As the chairman said, there is going to be a two-million person
teacher shortage facing this Nation. And how do we get the best and the
brightest into the teaching profession and how do we get them into the
hardest-to-recruit area, rural poor, urban poor? We give them a signing
bonus.
But the law that exists today has the same requirement as this bill.
We just do not want to get bodies into the classroom. We want to have
quality teachers in the classroom. Under the current program, they
cannot get any loan forgiveness until they teach 3 years.
That is exactly what this bill does. But what it does is it goes
beyond $5,000. It will allow a person who will go into teaching in a
Title I school, a hard-to-recruit area, if they will teach for 3 years
in the area that they major in in college, math teachers teaching math,
science teachers teaching science, if they will go into this school
district and keep their certification up, in the fourth and fifth and
sixth year of their career, we will forgive their student loan up to
$17,750 in additional loan forgiveness.
And it is a discretionary program. We worked hard to try to find the
offset. But let me just assure my colleague this, that the projections
are that we will recruit 35,000 new teachers a year if we pass this
bill.
I would argue that every Member of this body, Republicans and
Democrats, appropriators, non-appropriators, will put money into this
program if it is bringing in the best and the brightest in areas that
are hard to recruit under today's standards.
A Newsweek article called ``Teachers Wanted'' is a great expose of
what communities are doing all over the country to try to get people in
the teaching profession to fill these voids in the classroom. But we go
one step further. We just do not want bodies. We want people committed
to the teaching profession to keep their certifications up and have a
commitment to these schools. And once that commitment is shown, we are
going to meet them more than halfway.
The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), the gentleman from
California (Mr. Miller), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt) and
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez), I really appreciate them
joining with us to get this bill out of the House. And if we can make
it better, we will.
But the bottom line is that there are a lot of folks getting ready to
decide what career to choose and they want to go into teaching, and one
of the biggest problems they face as a college graduate is a big
student loan. The average is almost $17,000 now.
What we are saying, in a bipartisan fashion, is, if they will make a
commitment to teaching and they will keep their certifications up and
they will do a good job, we will take that debt away from them in a
very quick period of time. I think people are going to respond in
droves.
The article called ``Teachers Wanted,'' I would just like to let the
people of the United States know that we disagree a lot in this body
and we have different views of what the Federal Government should do in
education. But this is a good day. We are approaching the end of a
contentious Congress, but we are coming together as Republicans and
Democrats and we are putting into place a program that will help real
people in a real way to put a new generation of teachers in classrooms
where it is very hard to recruit. And this applies to anybody with a
student loan that is willing to go into a Title I school.
Let me mention one other facet about this bill. The special education
teachers are included. I would like to thank my colleague the gentleman
from South Carolina (Mr. DeMint). We all know how hard it is to get
people to go into special ed. So if they are a special-ed teacher,
regardless of the school district they go to, we will help forgive
their student loan if they will stay in there and help the kids.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman for the leadership he has
shown in allowing this bill to come to the floor and my colleagues on
the Democratic side of the aisle in the Committee on Education and the
Workforce. This is a good day for the committee. I think it is a good
day for the Congress, and I urge support of this bill.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman
from North Carolina (Mr. Burr).
Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for
yielding me the time.
Mr. Speaker, I am honored to stand before this House today in support
of my good friend the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Graham) and in
support of his legislation that would expand the current loan
forgiveness program for teachers in high poverty schools.
As chief architect of the original program in 1998, the gentleman
from South Carolina (Mr. Graham) is a tremendous advocate for teachers.
I appreciate his work on this behalf.
I am increasingly concerned about the state of our Nation's education
system, more specifically with regard to the quality of teaching. Just
today, there are newspaper reports about teacher turnover in North
Carolina schools.
Mr. Speaker, I can assure my colleagues that the news is not good and
it is getting worse. According to the North Carolina Department of
Instruction, last year's teacher turnover rate was 13.59 percent, up
from 13.4 in 1999 and 12.3 percent in 1998. This means that over 12,000
out of 89,000 teachers in North Carolina left their job for one reason
or another.
Perhaps a more startling figure is that about 30 percent of these
teachers had tenure. While these numbers are unsettling, I must share
with my colleagues that North Carolina is making improvements. We have
the most National Board Certified teachers in the country. We are
recognized as one of the top two States in improving teaching. North
Carolina has made the most gains on SAT test scores, more than any
other State in the last 10 years.
And finally, the National Education Goals Panel said that North
Carolina is one of the top States in business and community support for
public education.
Even with this outstanding recognition, I think that we can all agree
that
[[Page H8183]]
it just is not enough. If North Carolina is making such improvements
and our numbers are this high, I shudder to look at the States who have
higher turnover rates. We must try harder, we must work harder to give
our children an education that will provide them with the tools
necessary to make solid choices in their lives.
Sadly, many of our students are not able to make these choices. I
believe that we can change that. In North Carolina, teachers in 1,459
elementary and secondary schools are eligible for loan forgiveness
under the current program. Of this number, teachers in 178 schools in
and around my district are eligible.
An especially attractive piece of this package is that all special
education teachers are eligible for loan cancellation under the Graham
bill. I am pleased that my district's most at-risk schools have a
program to help them attract quality teachers, and I think this loan
forgiveness program is a good foundation for us to build upon.
Mr. Speaker, our Nation's most precious resource is our children. I
believe that this bill gives our children, especially our disadvantaged
children, the chance to have a better education.
When I spoke on the floor yesterday about the 25th anniversary of the
IDEA bill, I reminded my colleagues that every student has a right to
free public education. I believe that we have secured access to
education. Loan forgiveness for qualified teachers brings us one step
closer to improving quality in the classroom.
To close, it seems that the latest trend in Washington is to see who
can buy the most teachers or who can spend the most on education. I
cannot stand by and watch Congress and the President poor billions into
the Title I program and cross their fingers any longer and hope that
education gets better and student achievement goes up. I think we can
do better. We will do better.
We need to give teachers a reason to go to Title I schools and invest
their time, their energy and their talents. Support this bill, and we
are well on the way.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\3/4\ minutes to the gentleman
from South Carolina (Mr. DeMint) another important new member on our
committee.
Mr. DeMINT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Quality Teacher
Recruitment and Retention Act. I am a cosponsor of this legislation.
I have had the good fortune to work with my good friend the gentleman
from South Carolina (Mr. Graham) on it. I want to emphasize a specific
part of the bill which has already been mentioned.
This bill would allow the loan forgiveness program to all teachers
who choose to go into the special education field regardless of
teaching location.
The field of special education faces special challenges. There is not
only a shortage of special-ed teachers, but some teachers in the field
are not qualified.
Additionally, special education teachers are burdened by the need to
comply with complex Federal laws and paperwork requirements in the
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act.
While the law is filled with good intentions, it is widely
acknowledged to be a complicated process which leaves less time for
teachers to go about the business of teaching. Teachers are discouraged
by the paperwork requirements and spend hours working on checklists
rather than lesson plans. They do this because they fear lawsuits if
somehow they fall short of a dotting an ``I'' or crossing a ``T.''
Local school districts must pay for this underfunded mandate for
special education, which strains their budget. This bill does its part
in a small way by giving local school districts an incentive to attract
special-ed teachers.
If teachers are qualified, they can receive loan forgiveness over
time if they teach in the special-ed field. While the number of
special-ed students is rising, the number of teachers qualified to
teach special-ed kids is not keeping pace with demand. Each year there
is a chronic shortage of fully certified special-ed teachers, averaging
about 27,000 per year. While the demand is ever present, institutions
of higher education are graduating fewer teachers qualified in special
ed.
Mr. Speaker, the Quality Teacher Recruitment and Retention Act is one
step we can take to help local school districts by recruiting qualified
teachers to enter and remain in the special education field.
I thank my colleague for his willingness to craft this legislation in
such a way that addresses the important need for special education
teachers across the country.
Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to repeat that we support this bill. It
does need some perfecting, but it gets at the heart of what we must
address in education.
Teachers are indeed the key. Teachers are the key for special
education. Teachers are the key for languages. Teachers are the key for
science and math.
In fact, tomorrow the Glen Commission, the National Commission on the
Teaching of Mathematics and Science, will be issuing our report; and
that will also highlight the need to recruit good teachers, to provide
them training before they go in, mentoring as they enter their field,
and life-long professional development.
Loan forgiveness is part of the number of steps that we must take in
order to have the kind of teaching that we need to give our students
the education they need for fulfilling lives in the 21st century.
We must recruit teachers. Loan forgiveness will help with that. But
we also must look at the environment where they will teach, the class
sizes, the facilities, and we must make sure that the environment
provides an atmosphere of continuous improvement and professional
development. With that, we can find the teachers we need, train them,
and give our students the education they deserve.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
{time} 2200
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder), a seasoned, important member of
our committee.
Mr. SOUDER. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, I am a proud conservative cosponsor of the gentleman
from South Carolina's bill to provide loan forgiveness to teachers in
title I schools and special ed. Sometimes, just once in a while, our
liberal friends accuse conservatives of not caring about improving
education because we do not favor a Federal takeover in education. In
fact, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), the gentleman
from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), and I were leaders in the fight
against national testing standards. We fought against the national
curriculum and national teaching standards. But the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) has committed his entire career to trying
to provide better quality with local control, and this bill is yet
another example.
We Republicans say everyone should compete. Yet we do not believe in
guaranteeing absolute equality. Parents' education differs, their
income differs, some kids are going to have computers at home, some
kids are going to have parents who can teach. There is not just a whole
lot we can do about that. But we do believe that there ought to be
basic opportunities for all kids in America. And so we support title I
and we support IDEA. The chairman has been a leader in Even Start, in
Head Start. We have had many such bills.
This bill combines many of the principles that we as conservatives
believe are valuable in trying to help low-income students. It does it
with incentives, not mandates. It does not tell people what they
actually have to do; it forgives their loans and gives them the
flexibility; and it requires them to serve first. Often we give money
to somebody, and they may or may not serve. In this case if they serve
the 3 years, then they get 3 years forgiven; 4 years, then they get
more forgiven the fifth year. If we give the money up front, we find
that many times in other programs where we have done this we may or may
not get people to serve, and we may battle over that forgiveness. That
is a conservative principle.
We also say that when you give it to an individual student who then
goes and teaches, it does not come with the Federal strings. It gives
the teachers
[[Page H8184]]
the flexibility to determine what they are going to do, special ed or a
title I school; it gives the school the flexibility without the strings
that come from many of this administration's proposals. When people ask
what conservatives are doing to help those who are hurting, to those
who are behind, those who potentially can be left behind, this is yet
one more example of what this Congress has done. It is a small step,
but it is an important step.
My daughter is currently teaching at a title I school. It is a new
job. She has found that as opposed to a suburban school she gets less
money to help in the classroom. Fewer of the parents show up. It is
hard even to get as many parents to participate in bringing
refreshments for the kids because they do not have the income. We need
to do some special steps in America to make sure that those who are
college graduated even though we support alternative certification,
even though we support creative ways to fill those gaps, we need
creative ways like the gentleman from South Carolina's bill to
encourage our young people in college today to take at least part of
their career, many of whom will then fall in love with these kids who
so much need their help to work in our title I and special ed programs.
I commend the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling); I commend
the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Graham) for his great work and
add my enthusiastic support to this bill.
Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Quality
Teacher Recruitment and Retention Act.
Just this week, Newsweek's cover story asks ``Who will teach our
kids?'' Since one half of all teachers in America are slated to retire
by 2010, this is a question on the minds of millions of families across
this country.
In my home State of California, we are already feeling the teacher
crunch where as a result of the State's class size reduction program,
there are 35,000 uncertified teachers in our classrooms.
Over the past two years, the Subcommittee on Postsecondary Education,
Training, and Life-long Learning (which I serve as Chairman and the
bill's sponsor, Lindsay Graham, serves as vice chairman) has devoted
substantial time and effort toward the issue of teacher quality and
recruitment.
We have held numerous hearings and have had an active hand in shaping
legislative proposals aimed at getting teachers into our classrooms.
Those proposals include:
The teacher quality enhancement grants--established in the higher
education amendments of 1998;
Language in H.R. 2, the ``Education Options'' Act to boost the
qualifications of the 180,000 teachers and paraprofessionals who teach
in our Nation's poorest school districts;
The Tech-for-Success Program in H.R. 4141 to help better prepare
teachers in how best to use technology to improve student academic
achievement;
The Bipartisan Teacher Empowerment Act to enable schools to focus on
a host of initiatives including bonus and merit pay, tenure reform,
teacher mentoring programs, and professional development; and
Increased flexibility in the ``100,000 New Teachers'' Program so that
schools experiencing a high percentage of uncertified teachers can use
funds to focus on boosting teacher training as opposed to hiring
additional teachers.
H.R. 5034 builds on these significant efforts by expanding another
important provision in the higher education amendments--loan
forgiveness for teachers.
This legislation enhances loan forgiveness by increasing the number
of those qualified for the program while retaining the current
requirements so that we not only get qualified teachers into the
classroom but keep them there.
The bill also addresses the need across the country for special
education teachers by granting them loan forgiveness no matter where
they teach.
To conclude, in order to combat the shortage of teachers, we must
continue to look at innovative ways to motivate thousands to come into
the teaching profession.
The new loan forgiveness provided under H.R. 5034 is one such
incentive and, as such, I urge all my colleagues to support this
important legislation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Shimkus). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) that the
House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5034.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________