[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 120 (Monday, October 2, 2000)]
[House]
[Pages H8606-H8610]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             EDUCATION IS AT THE CENTER OF AMERICA'S FUTURE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 6, 1999, the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
  Mr. OBEY. Mr. Speaker, before I proceed to the remarks that I had 
intended to make tonight, as a Member of this House who represents 
rural America, or at least a significantly rural district, I would 
simply note a few facts.
  In 1979, the last year of the Carter administration, agriculture 
programs cost the taxpayer less than $4 billion in direct payments to 
farmers and prices paid to farmers at the marketplace were considerably 
higher than they are today.
  This year, under Freedom to Farm, better known in rural America as 
freedom to fail at farming, which was rammed through this House by the 
Republican leadership a number of years ago, the cost to taxpayers has 
risen to well above $20 billion a year, almost 30 if we count all 
costs, and the prices paid to farmers have fallen through the floor.
  I think most farmers, at least in my area, recognize that rural 
America cannot thrive unless family farmers get a decent price for 
their product and until the so-called Freedom to Farm Act is radically 
changed, rural America will continue to decay. Both parties need to 
face up to that fact. Major elements of my party have begun to. I wish 
I could say the same for major elements on the part of the other party.
  But who knows, time may produce miracles. I hope that they will 
realize that they must undo what they did if farmers are to really have 
a decent shot at making a decent living through the marketplace.
  Having said that, I would now like to turn to the subject that I 
wanted to talk about tonight, which is education. Because more than any 
other subject, education and what we do about it and what this entire 
country does about it lies at the center of the question of how well we 
will prepare for our country's future.
  This is going to be a fairly dull speech. It will be filled with 
exactly what political consultants say we should not have in our 
speeches. It will be filled with numbers and facts. It will not be 
exciting. It is not meant to be. It is meant simply to state in a clear 
way who has tried to do what to education over the last 5 years.
  We will undoubtedly hear in the Presidential debates tomorrow night; 
and we will have certainly seen across the Nation, Republican 
candidates giving speeches and running ads pretending to be friends of 
education. Those speeches fly in the face of the historical record of 
the past 6 years. That record demonstrates that education has been one 
of the central targets of House Republican efforts to cut Federal 
investments in programs essential for building America's future in 
order to provide large tax cuts that they have been promising their 
constituents for years.
  Six years ago, in their drive to take control of the House of 
Representatives, the Republican leaders, then led by Newt Gingrich, 
produced the so-called Contract with America, which they claimed would 
balance the budget while at the same time making room for huge tax 
cuts.
  They indicated that one of the ways that they would do so was by 
abolishing four departments. Eliminating the Department of Education 
was their new number one goal. They also wanted to eliminate the 
Departments of Energy, Commerce and HUD.
  Immediately upon taking over the Congress in 1995, they proposed cuts 
below existing appropriations, not just below the President's request, 
but below previous appropriations in a rescission bill H.R. 1158. That 
bill passed the House on March 16, 1995, reducing Federal expenditures 
by nearly $12 billion.
  Education programs accounted for only 1.6 percent of the Federal 
expenditures in fiscal year 1995. But they made up 14 percent of the 
spending reductions in the House Republican package. That package was 
adopted with all but six House Republicans voting in favor of cuts 
totaling $1.8 billion.
  Next, H.R. 1883 was introduced, which called for ``eliminating the 
Department of Education and redefining Federal role in education.''
  The legislation was cosponsored by more than half of all House 
Republicans, including as original cosponsors the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Hastert), the current Speaker; the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Armey), the majority leader; and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
DeLay), the majority whip.

[[Page H8607]]

  The desire to eliminate the Department of Education was stated 
explicitly in both the report that accompanied the Republican budget 
resolution passed by the House and in the conference report on the 
budget that accompanied the final product agreed to by both the House 
and Senate Republicans.
  That conference report, a sized-up copy of which I have here, for 
House Concurrent Resolution 76, the fiscal year 1996 budget resolution, 
states flatly: ``In the area of education, the House assumes the 
termination of the Department of Education.''
  That is what they voted for. The fiscal 1996 budget resolution not 
only proposed the adoption of legislation to terminate the Department 
organizationally, but it put in place a spending plan to eliminate 
funding for a major portion of the Department's activities and programs 
in hopes of partially achieving the goal of elimination even if the 
President refused to sign a formal termination for the Department.
  The conference agreement adopted on June 29 proposed cuts in funding 
for Function 500, the area of the budget containing all Federal 
education programs, of $17.6 billion, or 30 percent below the amount 
needed to keep pace with inflation over the 6-year period starting in 
fiscal 1996.
  The House passed resolution had proposed even larger cuts. Every 
House Republican but one voted for both the House resolution and the 
conference report.
  Then the budget resolution established a framework for passage of the 
13 appropriations bills. The Labor, HHS education appropriation bill, 
which contained the vast majority of funds that go to local school 
districts, was the hardest hit by that resolution.

                              {time}  2115

  The fiscal 1996 appropriations bill for Labor, Health and Education 
was adopted by the House on August 4 of 1995. It slashed funding from 
the $25 billion level that had been originally approved for the 
Department in fiscal 1995 to $20.8 billion for the coming year. That 
$4.2 billion, or 17 percent cut below the prior year's levels, was even 
larger when inflation was considered and was passed in the face of 
information indicating that total school enrollment in the United 
States was increasing by about three-quarters of a million students a 
year.
  The programs affected by those cuts included: title I for 
disadvantaged children, reduced by $1.1 billion below the prior year; 
teacher training reduced by $251 million; vocational education reduced 
by $273 million; safe and drug-free schools cut by $241 million; and 
Goals 2000 to raise student performance reduced by $361 million. 
Republicans in this House voted in favor of that bill 213-18. The bill 
was opposed by virtually every national organization representing 
parents, teachers, school administrators, and local school boards.
  The Republican leadership of the House was so determined to force the 
President to sign the legislation and other similar appropriations that 
they were willing to see the government shut down twice to, in the 
words of one Republican leader, ``force the President to his knees.'' 
Speaker Gingrich said, ``On October 1 if we don't appropriate, there is 
no money. You can veto whatever you want to but as of October 1, there 
is no government. We're going to go over the liberal Democratic part of 
the government and say to them, we could last 60 days, 90 days, 120 
days, 5 years, a century. There's a lot of stuff we don't care if it's 
ever funded.''
  It is clear that the Labor, Health and Education bill and the 
education funding in particular in that bill was at the heart of the 
controversy that resulted in those government shutdowns. Cutting 
education was an issue that Republicans felt so strongly about that 
they literally were willing to see the government shut down in an 
attempt to achieve this goal. Speaker Gingrich said, ``I don't care 
what the price is, I don't care if we have no executive offices and no 
bonds for 60 days, not this time.''
  House Republican whip Mr. DeLay said, ``We are going to fund only 
those programs we want to fund. We're in charge. We don't have to 
negotiate with the Senate. We don't have to negotiate with the 
Democrats.''
  When the government shut down, the public reacted strongly against 
the Republican House leadership's hardheadedness and that led to the 
eventual signing of the conference agreement on Labor, Health and 
Education funding as part of an omnibus appropriations package on April 
26, 1996, more than halfway through the fiscal year. That action came 
after nine continuing resolutions and those two government shutdowns. 
That agreement restored about half of the cuts below prior year's 
funding that had been pushed through by the Republican majority, 
raising the original House Republican figure of $20.8 billion for 
education to $22.8 billion.
  So on that occasion, as you can see, pressure from the Democratic 
side of the aisle forced restoration of about $2 billion in education 
spending.
  Later in 1996, the Republican House caucus organized another attempt 
to cut education funding below prior year's levels in the fiscal 1997 
Labor-Health-Education bill. On July 12, 1996, the House adopted the 
bill with the Republicans voting 209-22 in favor of passage. 
Incidentally, I will not read it into the record at this point but my 
submitted remarks will cite all of the rollcalls, dates and pages if 
anyone wants to check them. The bill cut education by $54 million below 
the levels agreed to for fiscal 1996 and $2.8 billion below the 
President's request. During the debate on that bill, Republicans also 
voted 227-2 to kill an amendment specifically aimed at restoring $1.2 
billion in education funding.
  As the fall and election of 1996 began to approach, the Republican 
commitment to cut education began to be overshadowed by their desire to 
adjourn Congress and go home to campaign. As a result, the President 
and Democrats in Congress forced them to accept an education package 
that was more than $3.6 billion above House-passed levels.
  1997 brought a 1-year respite from Republican efforts to squeeze 
education. For 1 year a welcomed bipartisan approach was followed and 
the appropriation that passed the House and the final conference 
agreement were extremely close to the amounts requested by the 
President and the Department of Education.
  Conflict between the two parties over education funding erupted again 
in 1998 when the President requested $31.2 billion for the Department 
for fiscal 1999. In July, the House Appropriations Committee reported 
on a party line vote a Labor-Health-Education bill that cut the 
President's education budget by more than $600 million; but the bill 
remained in legislative limbo after the beginning of the next fiscal 
year. Then on October 2, 1998, the Republicans voted with only six 
dissenting votes to bring the bill to the floor. The leadership then 
reversed itself on its desire to call up the bill and refused to bring 
it to the floor. The House Republican leadership finally grudgingly 
agreed to negotiate higher levels for education so they could return 
home and campaign. The White House and the Democrats in Congress had 
been able to force them to accept a funding level for education that 
was $2.6 billion above their original House bill.

  Last year, in 1999, the House Republican leaders again directed their 
appropriators to report a Labor-Health-Education appropriation bill 
that cut education spending below the President's request and below the 
level of the prior year. The fiscal 2000 bill reported to the Committee 
on Appropriations on a straight party line vote funded education 
programs at nearly $200 million below the 1999 level. The bill was 
almost $1.4 billion below the President's request.
  Included in the cuts below requested levels were reductions in title 
I grants to local school districts for education of disadvantaged 
students, $264 million below; after-school programs were taken $300 
million below the President's request; education reform and 
accountability efforts, $491 million below; and improvement of 
education technology resources, $301 million below. Because inadequate 
funding threatened their ability to pass the bill, House Republican 
leaders never brought it to the House floor. After weeks of pressure 
from House Democrats, they ordered a separate bill that had been agreed 
to with Senate Republican leaders to be brought to the House floor. 
That bill contained significantly more education funding than

[[Page H8608]]

the original House bill but still cut the President's request for class 
size reduction by $200 million, after-school programs cut by $300 
million, title I by almost $200 million, and teacher quality programs 
by $35 million.
  The bill was opposed by the Committee for Education Funding which 
represents 97 national organizations interested in education, including 
parent and teacher groups, school boards and school administrators. It 
was adopted by a vote of 218-211 with House Republicans voting 214-7 in 
favor. After further negotiations, they agreed on November 18 to add 
nearly $700 million more, which we were requesting, to those education 
programs.
  Now, this year. This year the President proposed a $4.5 billion 
increase for education programs in the fiscal 2001 budget. The bill 
reported by House Republicans cut the President's request by $2.9 
billion. Cuts below the budget request included $400 million cut from 
title I, $400 million from after-school programs, $1 billion for 
improving teacher quality and $1.3 billion for repair of dilapidated 
school buildings. It was adopted by a vote of 217-214 with House 
Republicans voting 213-7 in favor. When the fiscal 2001 Labor, Health 
and Education bill was sent to conference, a motion to instruct the 
conferees to go to the higher Senate levels for education and other 
programs was offered. It also instructed conferees to permit language 
ensuring that funds provided for reduced class size and repairing 
school buildings was used for those purposes. It was defeated 207-212 
with Republicans voting 208-4 in opposition.
  In summary, and I will supply tables for the record, the record 
clearly shows that over the past 6 years, House Republicans set the 
elimination of the Department of Education as the primary goal. Failing 
that, they attempted to reduce education funding to the maximum extent 
possible. Failing that, they attempted to reduce education funding to 
the maximum extent possible. In every year since they have had control 
of the House, they have attempted to cut the President's request for 
education funding.
  Appropriation bills passed by House Republicans would have cut a 
total of $14.6 billion from presidential requests for education 
funding. I repeat. Appropriation bills passed by House Republicans 
would have cut a total of $14.6 billion from presidential requests for 
education funding. In 3 of the 6 years that they have controlled the 
House, they have actually attempted to cut education funding below 
prior year levels despite steady increases in school enrollment, in the 
annual increase in cost to local school districts of providing quality 
classroom instruction.
  Now, these education budget cuts have not been directed at Washington 
bureaucrats as some Republicans have tried to argue but mainly at 
programs that send money directly to local school districts to hire 
teachers and improve curriculum. Programs such as title I, after-
school, safe and drug-free schools, class size reduction, educational 
technology assistance, all send well over 95 percent of their funds 
directly to local school districts. While zealots in the Republican 
conference drove much of this agenda, it is clear that they could not 
have succeeded without the repeated assistance from dozens of 
Republican moderates who attempt now to portray themselves as friends 
of education. They may have been in their hearts, but they were not 
when the votes came.

  The one redeeming aspect of the Republican record on education over 
the last 6 years is that in most of those years, they failed to achieve 
the cuts that they spent most of the year fighting to impose. When a 
coalition between Democrats in Congress and in some cases members of 
the Republican Party in the Senate and Democrats in the Senate, when a 
coalition between them and the Democrats in this House and the 
President made it clear that the bills containing those cuts would be 
vetoed and that House Republicans by themselves could not override the 
vetoes, legislation that was far more favorable to education was 
finally adopted. For Republican Members now to attempt to take credit 
for that fact is in effect bragging about their own political 
ineptitude.
  The question that concerned Americans must ask is this: What will 
happen if the Republicans find a future opportunity to deliver on their 
6-year agenda for education? They may eventually become more skillful 
in their efforts to cut education. They may at some point have a larger 
majority in one or both houses, or they may serve under a President who 
will be more amenable to their education agenda. All of those prospects 
should be very troubling to those who feel that local school districts 
cannot do the job that the country needs without greater assistance 
from the Federal Government.
  Now, this is not an issue of local versus Federal control. Almost 93 
percent of the money spent for elementary and secondary education at 
the local level is spent in accordance with the wishes of State and 
local governments. But there are national implications to failing 
schools in any part of the country. The Federal Government has an 
obligation to try to help disseminate information about what does and 
does not work in educating children, and it has an obligation to 
respond to critical needs by defining and focusing on national 
priorities. That is what the other 7 percent of educational funding in 
this country does. Education is indeed primarily a local 
responsibility, but it must be a top priority at all levels, Federal, 
State and local; or we will not get the job done.
  In summary, as the tables will show in the remarks that I am making 
tonight, the House Republican candidates now shout loudly that they can 
be trusted to support education, but their record over the last 6 years 
speaks louder than their words.

                              {time}  2130

  The records show that in 3 of the last 6 years, House Republicans 
tried to cut education $5.5 billion below previous levels and $13 
billion below Presidential requests, $14.5 billion if you count their 
first rescission effort in 1995. It shows that more than $15.6 billion 
that has been restored came only after Democrats in the Congress and in 
the White House demanded restoration.
  That is the record that must be understood by those concerned about 
education's future, and that is the record that will be demonstrated by 
the three charts that I am inserting in the Record at this point.

   The History of House Republican Efforts to Attack Education--1994 
                              Through 2000

       Across the nation Republican Congressional Candidates are 
     giving speeches and running ads pretending to be friends of 
     education. Those speeches and ads fly in the face of the 
     historical record of the past six years. That record 
     demonstrates that education has been one of the central 
     targets of House Republican efforts to cut federal 
     investments in programs essential for building America's 
     future in order to provide large tax cuts they have been 
     promising their constituents.
       Six years ago in their drive to take control of the House 
     of Representatives, the Republican Leaders led by Newt 
     Gingrich produced a so-called ``Contract with America'' which 
     they claimed would balance the budget while at the same time 
     making room for huge tax cuts. They indicated that one of the 
     ways they would do so was by abolishing four departments of 
     the federal government. Eliminating the U.S. Department of 
     Education was their number one goal. They also wanted they 
     said to eliminate the Departments of Energy, Commerce and 
     HUD.
       Immediately upon taking over the Congress in 1995 they 
     proposed cuts below existing appropriations in a rescission 
     bill, HR 1158. That bill passed the House on March 16, 1995 
     reducing federal expenditures by nearly $12 billion. 
     Education programs accounted for $1.7 billion of the total. 
     While the budget of the Department of Education totaled only 
     1.6% of federal expenditures in fiscal 1995, it contributed 
     14% to the spending reductions in the House Republican 
     package. The package was adopted with all but six House 
     Republicans voting in favor. (See Roll Call #251 for the 
     104th Congress, 1st session--Congressional Record, March 16, 
     1995, page H3302)
       Next, legislation (HR 1883) was introduced which called for 
     ``eliminating the Department of Education and redefining the 
     federal role in education.'' The legislation was cosponsored 
     by more than half of all House Republicans including as 
     original cosponsors, current Speaker Dennis Hastert, Majority 
     Leader Dick Armey, and Majority Whip Tom Delay. (See 
     Attachment A)
       The desire to eliminate the Department of Education was 
     stated explicitly in both the Report that accompanied the 
     Republican Budget Resolution passed by the House and in the 
     Conference Report on the Budget that accompanied the final 
     product agreed to by both House and Senate Republicans. The 
     Conference Report for H. Con. Res. 76 (the FY 1996 Budget 
     Resolution) states flatly, ``In the area of education, the 
     House assumes the termination of the Department of 
     Education.''
       That FY96 Budget Resolution not only proposed the adoption 
     of legislation to terminate the Department organizationally, 
     but

[[Page H8609]]

     put in place a spending plan to eliminate funding for a 
     major portion of the Department's activities and programs 
     in hopes of partially achieving the goal of elimination 
     even if the President refused to sign a formal termination 
     for the Department. The Conference Agreement adopted on 
     June 29, 1995 proposed cuts in funding for Function 500, 
     the area of the budget containing all federal education 
     programs or $17.6 billion or 34% below the amount needed 
     to keep even with inflation over the six-year period 
     starting in Fiscal 1996. The House passed Resolution had 
     proposed even larger cuts. Every House Republican except 
     one voted for both the House Resolution and the Conference 
     Report. (See Roll Calls #345 and 458 for the 104th 
     Congress, 1st session--Congressional Record, May 18, 1995, 
     page H5309 and June 29, 1995, page H6594)
       That Budget Resolution established a framework for passage 
     of the 13 appropriation bills. The Labor-HHS-Education 
     appropriations bill, which contains the vast majority of 
     funds that go to local school districts, was the hardest hit 
     by that resolution. The Fiscal 1996 appropriations bill for 
     labor, health, and education was adopted by the House on 
     August 4th 1995. It slashed funding from the $25 billion 
     level that had been originally approved for the Department in 
     fiscal 1995 to $20.8 billion for the coming year. This $4.2 
     billion or 17% cut below prior year levels was even larger 
     when inflation was considered and was passed in the face of 
     information indicating that total school enrollment in the 
     United States was increasing by about three quarters of a 
     million students a year. The programs affected by these cuts 
     included Title I for disadvantaged children (reduced by $1.1 
     billion below the prior year,) teacher training, (reduced by 
     $251 million,) vocational education (reduced by $273 
     million,) Safe and Drug Free Schools (reduced by $241,) and 
     Goals 2000 to raise student performance (reduced by $361 
     million). Republicans voted in favor of the bill, 213 to 18. 
     (See Roll Call #626 for the 104th Congress, 1st session--
     Congressional Record, August 4, 1995, page H8420) The bill 
     was opposed by virtually every national organization 
     representing parents, teachers, school administrators, and 
     local school boards.
       The Republican Leadership of the House was so determined to 
     force the President to sign that legislation and other 
     similar appropriations that they were willing to see the 
     government shut down twice to, in the words of one Republican 
     Leader, ``force the President to his knees.'' Speaker 
     Gingrich said, ``On October 1, if we don't appropriate, there 
     is no money. . . You can veto whatever you want to. But as of 
     October 1, there is no government. . . We're going to go over 
     the liberal Democratic part of the government and then say to 
     them: `We could last 60 days, 90 days, 120 days, five years, 
     a century.' There's a lot of stuff we don't care if it's ever 
     funded.'' (Rocky Mountain News, June 3, 1995) It is clear 
     that the Labor-HHS-Education bill, and education funding in 
     particular, was at the heart of the controversy that resulted 
     in those government shutdowns. Cutting education was an issue 
     that Republicans felt so strongly about that they literally 
     were willing to see the government shut down in an attempt to 
     achieve this goal. Speaker Gingrich said, ``I don't care what 
     the price is. I don't care if we have no executive offices, 
     and no bonds for 60 days--not this time.'' (Washington Post, 
     September 22, 1995) House Republican Whip Tom DeLay said, 
     ``We are going to fund only those programs we want to fund. . 
     . We're in charge. We don't have to negotiate with the 
     Senate; we don't have to negotiate with the Democrats.'' 
     (Baltimore Sun, January 8, 1996)
       When the government shut down, the public reacted strongly 
     against Republican House Leadership hard-headedness and that 
     led to the eventual signing of the Conference Agreement on 
     Labor-HHS-Education funding as part of an omnibus 
     appropriations package on April 26 of 1996, more than halfway 
     through the fiscal year. That action came after 9 
     continuing resolutions and those two government shutdowns. 
     That agreement restored about half of the cuts below prior 
     year funding that had been pushed through by the 
     Republican Majority, raising the original House Republican 
     figure of $20.8 billion for education to $22.8 billion.
       Later in 1996 the Republican House Caucus organized another 
     attempt to cut education funding below prior year levels in 
     the fiscal 1997 Labor-HHS-Education bill. On July 12, 1996 
     the House adopted the bill with Republicans voting 209 to 22 
     in favor or passage (See Roll Call #313, Congressional 
     Record, July 11, 1996, page H7373.) The bill cut Education by 
     $54 million below the levels agreed to for fiscal 1996 and 
     $2.8 billion below the President's request. During the debate 
     on that bill Republicans also voted (227-2) to kill an 
     amendment specifically aimed at restoring $1.2 billion in 
     education funding (See Roll Call #303, Congessional Record, 
     July 11, 1996, page H7330).
       As the fall and election of 1996 began to approach, the 
     Republican commitment to cut education began to be 
     overshadowed by their desire to adjourn Congress and go home 
     to campaign. As a result, the President and Democrats in 
     Congress forced them to accept an education package that was 
     more than $3.6 billion above House passed levels.
       1997 brought a one-year respite from Republican efforts to 
     squeeze education. For one year, a welcome bipartisan 
     approach was followed and the appropriation that passed the 
     House and the final conference agreement were extremely close 
     to the amounts requested by the President and the Department 
     of Education.
       Conflict between the two parties over education funding 
     erupted again in 1998 when the President requested $31.2 
     billion for the Department for fiscal 1999. In July, the 
     House Appropriations Committee reported on a party line vote 
     a Labor-HHS-Education bill that cut the President's education 
     budget by more than $660 million. But the bill remained in 
     legislative limbo until after the beginning of the next 
     fiscal year. Then on October 2, 1998 Republicans voted with 
     only six dissenting votes to bring the bill to the floor. 
     (See Roll Call #476, Congressional Record,  October 2, 1998, 
     page H9314). The leadership then reversed itself on its 
     desire to call up the bill and refused to bring it to the 
     floor. The House Republican Leadership finally grudgingly 
     agreed to negotiate higher levels for education so they could 
     return home and campaign. The White House and Democrats in 
     Congress were able to force them to accept a funding level 
     for education that was $2.6 billion above the House bill.
       Last year, in 1999, House Republican Leaders again directed 
     their Appropriators to report a Labor-HHS-Education 
     Appropriation bill that cut education spending below the 
     President's request and below the level of the prior year. 
     The FY2000 bill reported by the Appropriations Committee on a 
     straight party line vote funded education programs at nearly 
     $200 million below the FY 1999 level. The bill was almost 
     $1.4 billion below the President's request. Included in the 
     cuts below requested levels were reductions in Title I grants 
     to local school districts for education of disadvantaged 
     students ($264 million,) after school programs ($300 
     million,) education reform and accountability efforts ($491 
     million) and improvement of educational technology resources 
     ($301 million.) Because inadequate funding threatened their 
     ability to pass the bill, House Republican Leaders never 
     brought it to the House floor. After weeks of pressure from 
     House Democrats they ordered a separate bill that had 
     been agreed to with Senate Republican Leaders to be 
     brought to the House floor. The bill contained 
     significantly more education funding than the original 
     House bill but still cut the President's request for class 
     size reduction by $200 million, after-school programs by 
     $300 million, title I by almost $200 million and teacher 
     quality programs by $35 million. The bill was opposed by 
     the Committee for Education Funding which represents 97 
     national organizations interested in education including 
     parent and teacher groups, school boards, and school 
     administrators. It was adopted by a vote of 218 to 211 
     with House Republicans voting 214 to 7 in favor. (See Roll 
     Call 549, Congressional Record, October 28, 1999, page 
     H11120) It was also promptly vetoed by the President. 
     After further negotiations, they agreed on November 18th 
     to add nearly $700 million more, which we were requesting 
     to educational programs.
       This year the President proposed a $4.5 billion increase 
     for education programs in the FY2001 budget. The bill 
     reported by House Republicans cut the President's request by 
     $2.9 billion. Cuts below the request included $400 million 
     from Title I, $400 million from after school programs, $1 
     billion for improving teacher quality and $1.3 billion for 
     repair of dilapidated school buildings. It was adopted by a 
     vote of 217-214 with House Republicans voting 213 to 7 in 
     favor. (See Roll Call #273, Congressional Record, June 14, 
     2000, page H4436)
       When the FY2001 Labor-HHS-Education bill was sent to 
     conference a motion to instruct Conferees to go to the higher 
     Senate levels for education and other programs was offered. 
     It also instructed conferees to permit language insuring that 
     funds provided or reducing class size and repairing school 
     buildings was used for those purposes. It was defeated 207 to 
     212 with Republicans voting 208 to 4 in opposition. (See Roll 
     Call 415, Congressional Record, July 19, 2000, page H6563)
       In summary, the record clearly shows that over the past six 
     years House Republicans set the elimination of the Department 
     of Education as a primary goal. Failing that, they attempted 
     to reduce education funding to the maximum extent possible. 
     In every year since they have had control of the House of 
     Representatives they have attempted to cut the President's 
     request for education funding. Appropriations bills passed by 
     House Republicans would have cut a total of $14.6 million 
     from presidential request for education funding. In three of 
     the six years that they have controlled the House, they have 
     actually attempted to cut education funding below prior year 
     levels despite steady increases in school enrollment and the 
     annual increase in costs to local school districts of proving 
     quality class room instruction.
       The education budget cuts have not been directed at 
     Washington bureaucrats as some Republicans have tried to 
     argue but mainly at programs that send money directly to 
     local school districts to hire teachers and improve 
     curriculum. Programs such as Title I, After School, Safe and 
     Drug Free Schools, Class Size Reduction, and Educational 
     Technology Assistance all send well over 95% of their funds 
     directly to local school districts. While zealots in the 
     Republican Conference drove much of this agenda it is clear 
     that they could not have succeeded without the repeated 
     assistance from dozens of Republicans moderates who attempt 
     to portray themselves as friends of education.
       The one redeeming aspect of the Republican record on 
     education over the last six

[[Page H8610]]

     years is that in most years they failed to achieve the cuts 
     that they spent most of each year fighting to impose. When a 
     coalition between the Democrats in Congress and the President 
     made it clear that the bills containing these cuts would be 
     vetoed and that the Republicans by themselves could not 
     override the vetoes, legislation that was far more 
     favorable to education was finally adopted. For Republican 
     members to attempt to take credit for that fact is in 
     effect bragging on their own political ineptitude. The 
     question concerned Americans must ask is: What will happen 
     if the Republican find a future opportunity to deliver on 
     their six-year agenda? They may eventually become more 
     skillful in their efforts. They may at some point have a 
     larger majority in one or both Houses or they may serve 
     under a President that will be more amenable to their 
     agenda. All of these prospects should be very troubling to 
     those who feel that local school districts can not do the 
     job that the country needs without great assistance from 
     the federal government.
       This is not an issue of local versus federal control. 
     Almost 93% of the money spent for elementary and secondary 
     education at the local level is spent in accordance with the 
     wishes of state and local governments. But there are national 
     implications to failing schools in any part of the country. 
     The federal government has an obligation to try to help 
     disseminate information about what does and does not work in 
     educating children, and it has an obligation to respond to 
     critical needs by defining and focusing on national 
     priorities. And that is what the other 7% of educational 
     funding in this country does. Education is indeed primarily a 
     local responsibility, but it must be a top priority at all 
     levels--federal, state, and local--or we will not get the job 
     done.
       The House Republican candidates now shout loudly that they 
     can be trusted to support education, but their record over 
     the six years speaks louder than their words. Their record 
     shows that in three of the last six years, House Republicans 
     tried to cut education $5.5 billion below previous levels and 
     $14.6 billion presidential requests. It shows that the more 
     than $15.6 billion that has been restored came only after 
     Democrats in Congress and in the White House demanded 
     restoration. That is the record that must be understood by 
     those concerned about education's future.

  DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION--GOP EDUCATION APPROPRIATION CUTS COMPARED TO
                              PREVIOUS YEAR
                          [Millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                              Prior     House     House
                                              year      level      cut
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 95 Rescission..........................    25,074    23,440    -1,635
FY 96 Labor-HHS-Education.................    25,074    20,797    -4,277
FY 97 Labor-HHS-Education.................    22,810    22,756       -54
FY 00 Labor-HHS-Education.................    33,520    33,321      -199
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Discretionary Funding, Minority Staff, House Appropriations Committee.


  DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION--GOP EDUCATION CUTS BELOW PRESIDENT'S REQUEST
                          [Millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             House               Percent
                                  Request    level   House cut     cut
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 96 Labor-HHS-Education......    25,804    20,797     -5,007       -19
FY 97 Labor-HHS-Education......    25,561    22,756     -2,805       -11
FY 98 Labor-HHS-Education......    29,522    29,331       -191        -1
FY 99 Labor-HHS-Education......    31,185    30,523       -662        -2
FY 00 Labor-HHS-Education......    34,712    33,321     -1,391        -4
FY 01 Labor-HHS-Education......    40,095    37,142     -2,953        -7
                                ----------------------------------------
     Total FY96 to FY01........   186,879   173,870    -13,009        -7
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Discretionary Funding, Minority Staff, House Appropriations Committee.


    DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION--EDUCATION FUNDING RESTORED BY DEMOCRATS
                          [Millions of dollars]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                House      Conf                  Percent
                                level   agreement  Restoration  increase
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 95 Rescission............    23,440     24,497      1,057           5
FY 96 Labor-HHS-Education...    20,797     22,810      2,013          10
FY 97 Labor-HHS-Education...    22,756     26,324      3,568          16
FY 98 Labor-HHS-Education...    29,331     29,741        410           1
FY 99 Labor-HHS-Education...    30,523     33,149      2,626           9
FY 00 Labor-HHS-Education...    33,321     35,703      2,382           7
FY 01 Labor-HHS-Education...    37,142     40,751      3,609          10
                             -------------------------------------------
    Total FY95 to FY01......   197,310    212,975     15,665           8
------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Discretionary Funding, Minority Staff, House Appropriations Committee.



                          ____________________