[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 16 (Tuesday, February 6, 2001)]
[Senate]
[Page S1028]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page S1028]]
                           EDUCATING CHILDREN

  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I had a chance to speak before the 
National School Board Association yesterday. Sometimes it is only when 
you speak that you realize how strong your conviction is on an issue. I 
have come to the floor of the Senate to make an appeal to all Senators, 
starting with Democrats.
  The President, in his inaugural speech, talked about leaving no child 
behind. And the President, in his education proposal, also spoke about 
leaving no child behind. I think that is a wonderful value and a 
wonderful vision for our country. That, by the way, is the mission of 
the wonderful organization called the Children's Defense Fund headed by 
Marian Wright Edelman.
  If we look at the arithmetic of the President's tax cut he is 
proposing this week for the country, and if we are to stay true to the 
theme of accountability--the President in his education proposal called 
for accountability--I would like to hold the administration accountable 
on the floor of the Senate, and with amendments and with debate, in 
what I think is going to be a historic debate.
  The non-social Security surplus--putting the Social Security trust 
fund aside--is $3.1 trillion. President Bush calls for $1.6 trillion in 
tax cuts. The argument is: There is $1.5 trillion left. What is the 
problem?
  The problem is, first of all, when you look at the $1.6 trillion and 
when you look at the $3.1 trillion surplus, it is not really that, 
because we all know the Medicare trust fund money will be kept 
separate, and now all of a sudden $3.1 trillion in surplus becomes $2.6 
trillion. When you add to that the tax extenders--the tax credits that 
we all know will be extended--and the payments that will go to farmers 
and other groups of citizens in our country, we are now down to $2 
trillion. And when you understand that there will be Social Security 
trust fund solvency issues, which, if we do not deal with those issues, 
will mean that either benefits are cut or the age eligibility goes up, 
it may be less than $2 trillion. That is $2 trillion.
  On the other side of the equation, the $1.6 trillion in tax cuts--
once you now understand that we will no longer be paying down part of 
the debt, and interest payments go up--becomes $2 trillion--$2 trillion 
and $2 trillion--$2 trillion in tax cuts, only really $2 trillion in 
surplus; and there will be no resources for our investment to leave no 
child behind. There will be no resources.
  So the only thing you have is a proposal, A, with vouchers, which I 
think is a nonstarter and I think ultimately will be discarded. Then 
what you have is telling States and school districts: You do tests 
every year, starting at age 8--third grade--all the way up to eighth 
grade. But we are setting the schools and the children and our teachers 
up for failure because we are not providing any of the resources to 
make sure that all of those children will not be left behind and will 
have an opportunity to achieve.
  Fanny Lou Hamer is a great civil rights leader from the State of 
Mississippi. She once uttered the immortal words: I'm sick and tired of 
being sick and tired.
  I am sick and tired of symbolic politics with children's lives. Where 
in this budget, where in the arithmetic of the tax cuts and the 
surplus, will there be the investment to make sure that no child is 
left behind?
  Two percent of all the children who could benefit from Early Head 
Start, 2 years of age and under, benefit today. That is all we have 
funded.
  With only 50 percent of Head Start, only 10 percent for good child 
care for low-income families, much less middle-income families, when 
are we going to fully fund the IDEA program, which we made a commitment 
to school districts and States to do? Not in this budget. Not in this 
budget.
  I say to Senators and, in particular, since the majority leader is on 
the floor, to Democrats, it is extremely important that we have a civil 
debate, but it should be a passionate debate. We ought not to believe 
that in the call for bipartisanship, we should not as Senators speak up 
for the values and the people we represent. On present course, the best 
we are going to get is a decade; if we fold and if we do not challenge 
the tax cut proposals and the plan of this administration, the best we 
will get is not one dollar for investment in children, in education, in 
health care, in prescription drug costs; and the worst we will get is 
deficits going up again.
  I would like to, as a Democratic Senator from Minnesota, make three 
suggestions:
  A, we should hold the President and this administration accountable 
for the words, ``leave no child behind.'' I take that seriously. I 
don't let anybody get away with saying my goal and my value and my 
vision is to leave no child behind, when I see only a pittance, if 
that, of investment in the health and skills and intellect and 
character of our children so we leave no child behind.
  B, Democrats ought to be able to present a set of tax cuts which do 
not provide the vast majority of the benefits to the top 1 or 5 percent 
of the population. A lot of what President Bush is unfolding this week 
doesn't add up. You have the waitress, the single parent, making 
$23,000 a year with two children. She is not helped, because the tax 
cuts are not refundable. These tax cuts overwhelmingly go to the most 
affluent and powerful citizens. We should be able to present a clear 
alternative.
  Finally, I would be willing to debate anybody, anywhere, anytime, 
anyplace over tax cuts that go to the very wealthy versus prescription 
drug costs for elderly people. You don't do that on the cheap. I would 
be willing to debate anybody on tax cuts that go to wealthy, high-
income citizens versus expanding health care coverage for the 44 
million people who have no health insurance at all. I would be willing 
to debate anybody over tax cuts going primarily to wealthy people 
versus doing more for children, so when they come to kindergarten they 
really are ready to learn.
  If we can't stand for these values and can't have this debate, then 
what in the world do we stand for? One more time, I summarize: The $3.1 
trillion becomes about $2.6, $2.7 trillion right away, because we are 
not going to touch the Medicare trust fund money, nor should we. Then 
we all know we are going to extend the tax credits. So all of a sudden 
it is about $2 trillion. And the $1.6 trillion in tax cuts 
automatically, once we understand we now have to pay the interest that 
we wouldn't have paid if we were paying down the debt, goes to $2 
trillion.
  Where is going to be the investment in the children? Where is going 
to be the investment in education? Where is going to be the investment 
so that we make sure no child is left behind? When are we going to do 
something about the fact that we have the highest percentage of poor 
children among all the western European and all the advanced economies 
in the world? When are we going to do something about the fact that 
single elderly women also are among the poorest citizens in our 
country? Where is going to be the investment

  You don't proclaim the goal of leaving no child behind and then 
expect to do this on a tin cup budget. That is all we are getting from 
this President and his priorities. It is time for debate on the floor 
of the Senate about the priorities of our country.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Crapo). The majority leader.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I believe the time is reserved for the next 
hour or 40 minutes or so for the Democratic leadership. Since there is 
no Democrat seeking recognition at this point, I yield myself time out 
of my leader time to make some brief remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________