[Congressional Record Volume 148, Number 110 (Wednesday, September 4, 2002)]
[Senate]
[Pages S8150-S8152]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND

  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, for families across this country who have 
school-age children, they have been involved over the period of these 
recent days and weeks preparing their children to attend, by and large, 
the public schools of our country. Over 90 percent of the children in 
this country go to the public schools. A little less than 10 percent go 
to private schools.
  Over these last several months, we have had, with President Bush, a 
bipartisan effort which resulted in what was called the ``No Child Left 
Behind Act.'' That legislation recognized that what is really needed 
for the neediest children in this country is school reform. But we also 
need investment, school reform and increased resources.
  For a long time, the Title I program was criticized because it 
provided resources without really providing the kind of accountability 
that is so important. So there was a bipartisan effort to provide for 
that kind of accountability.
  Now as parents are seeing their children going back to school and 
they are asking whether the Congress and this administration are 
meeting their responsibility. Because in that legislation, we are 
holding accountable the children that were going through school. We are 
holding accountable the schools. We are holding accountable teachers.
  I was asked over the recent month of August as I went around 
Massachusetts, is: What is going to be the administration's response to 
the children being left behind with the budget that the administration 
recommended to the Congress for funding of No Child Left Behind? Will 
politicians be accountable? There are 10.3 million children who fall 
into what we call the Title I category. Over 6 million of those 
children are going to be left behind under the administration's budget. 
We do not expect that money in and

[[Page S8151]]

of itself to be the answer to all of the problems, but it is a pretty 
good indication of the priorities of a nation and the priorities of an 
administration. And this chart is a pretty clear indication of the 
recent history of increased funding for education. We are talking her 
about the total education budget. In 1997, a 16 percent increase; 12 
percent in 1998; 12 percent in 1999; 6 percent in the year 2000; 19 
percent in 2001; and 16 percent in 2002. However, it is only 2.8 
percent under this administration's budget, the lowest we have seen 
over the last 7 years.
  Again, money is not everything, but we did make a commitment to the 
parents, to the families, to the schools. There is tough criteria for 
all of those groups.
  We have seen, in the efforts made by Senator Harkin in the 
Appropriations Committee, the recommendation that it will be higher 
than this program. It will be some $4.2 billion, and it will raise this 
percentage up to about 6 percent. 2.8 percent is the recommendation 
that is being made by our Republican friends in the House of 
Representatives. By and large, the best judgment we have is that this 
will be the figure coming from the House, and we will be somewhat 
above, and the conference will come out lower, certainly, than what we 
have seen in recent years.
  What has resulted from this--from the fact that we have not seen 
adequate funding of the program? We recognize in the No Child Left 
Behind Act that one of the most important necessities is a well-
qualified teacher in every classroom in the country. There is virtually 
no increase in funding for teacher training. So the 18,000 teachers 
that would have been trained if there had been a cost of living 
increase will not receive the training.
  Mr. President, 20,000 students will be cut from the college Work-
Study Program; 25,000 limited-English-proficient children cut from the 
Federal bilingual program; 33,000 children cut from afterschool 
programs; there is virtually no increase in the Pell grants; and there 
is no increase in student loans.
  What has the administration requested of the Congress? Why do I take 
a few moments of the Senate time today? I want to point out what is 
happening in this debate regarding funding of education because 
tomorrow in the House of Representatives, they will mark up a 
recommendation by this administration for $4 billion in new funding for 
private school vouchers. We understand, this is for private schools, 10 
percent of the education, $4 billion. Yet just 2.8 percent increase for 
the public schools, where 90 percent of the children go.
  There are a number of reasons we should be concerned. I think most of 
us believe that we should not be taking scarce funds from the public 
school children and putting them into private schools. That is in 
effect what this is doing. If we had the $4 billion, we would be able 
to increase the total number of poor children to be covered under the 
Title I program to about two-thirds of those that are being left behind 
this year. However, the administration said no; we will have $4 billion 
over a 5-year period to be used for the private schools, for just 10 
percent of the children.

  The reason we raise this issue is in case we have these resources 
again, we will have an opportunity, hopefully, to debate this, and it 
ought to be directed toward the public school system.
  But beyond that, some of the things that concern us is that with the 
$4 billion, there is virtually no requirement that we have 
accountability. The administration made a great deal about 
accountability, to make sure that we know where the money is invested, 
what the results will be on the standardized systems to be able to tell 
if children are progressing. In my own State of Massachusetts, we have 
seen important progress where we have had accountability and support, 
including the recent announcement of the MCAS results in the past week, 
in which we have seen continued progress in math and continued progress 
made in English. Not all the problems are resolved, and there are still 
painful problems in terms of disparity, but we have seen progress made 
because of accountability.
  The administration has talked about accountability. But for their $4 
billion, there is no accountability to any schools to ensure that they 
do what all the public schools do, and that is, to have the 
examinations.
  There is no accountability to ensure that private schools accept all 
the children. In the public school system there has to be acceptance of 
all of the children, but the private schools do not have to do that.
  In private schools, there is no accountability to ensure teachers 
will be highly qualified teachers. We wrote in that legislation that in 
a 4-year period there will be highly qualified teachers in the 
classrooms. We fund a variety of programs regarding recruitment, 
training, and retention, and we give maximum flexibility to local 
communities to be able to do that. But there is no requirement with 
that $4 billion that they use those funds for highly qualified teachers 
in the classrooms. And there is no requirement to give the parents the 
critical information they need and which we have insured under this 
legislation.
  So we are puzzled. We heard both the President and our good friends 
on the other side saying accountability was the key element. We agree 
that was enormously important--we are going to have accountability and 
resources. However, now we have the administration coming back with $4 
billion more. Instead of allocating that to the 90 percent of the 
schools that will train the children of America, the public school 
systems which returned to school this past week--no, they will use that 
money, the $4 billion, in the private schools for vouchers. They have 
basically retreated on each and every one of these principles. It seems 
a very important mistake and one which we will have the opportunity, 
hopefully, to debate.
  With those resources, if the Bush budget took that $4 billion in new 
funding for private schools over 5 years along with the cut in public 
schools, had that $4 billion been available for public schools, it 
would mean the upgrading of the skills of 1 million teachers across 
this country. It would upgrade the skills of 1 million teachers. You 
could provide 5.2 million more children with afterschool learning 
opportunities.

  I just point out about the after-school programs, because of all of 
the Federal programs that are out there that go through the process and 
are considered to be quality programs, when they get in line for the 
funding, the afterschool programs are No. 1. Do we understand that? 
There is a greater need, in terms of limited resources for these 
programs, than for any other Federal program. People understand that if 
you are going to provide afterschool programs and supplementary 
services for the children who need them, this is the way to try to do 
it. We are seeing the results of success academically as well as in 
terms of the social progress the children have made.
  This is what you would be able to do. You could provide 5.2 million 
more children with afterschool learning opportunities. You could 
provide a Pell Grant to 500,000 more college students--those students 
who are able, gifted, talented, motivated young people whose parents 
have limited resources and income. They will not go on to college 
because they are not eligible for the Pell grants. With these 
resources, 5,000,000 more children would receive increased college aid.
  As we continue this debate and discussion about funding education, it 
is enormously important that the American people understand whose side 
we are on. We on this side of the aisle believe very strongly that with 
scarce resources in our budget, these resources ought to be used to 
provide more highly qualified teachers in every classroom, smaller 
class sizes, afterschool programs, supplementary services, and 
information to parents so they know what is happening in those 
schools--all of those for the children in this country. We believe that 
is where the needs are. That is what we ought to be doing with scarce 
resources, not siphoning off $4 billion for the 10 percent of children 
who are attending private schools.
  We will have an opportunity, when this comes before the Senate, to 
debate it further. But we want the parents of children going to public 
schools, who are facing increasing pressure--as we have seen all across 
this country as States have cut back in support and help to local 
communities, increasing the size of their classes, reducing the 
afterschool programs, cutting out a

[[Page S8152]]

number of subjects such as music programs, and cutting back on the 
number of teachers' aides and teachers' assistants--to know that we 
understand this is not a time to abandon our public schools. This is a 
time to invest in our future.
  One final point. We have had a great deal of discussion and debate 
about national security and national defense. I would like to make the 
point that ensuring that we are going to have well-qualified children 
in schools that are going to meet standards is an essential aspect of 
our national security and national defense. And we should not 
shortchange that investment any more than we do our Defense Department.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Idaho.
  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, for the last few moments I had the 
opportunity to listen to the Senator from Massachusetts. Of course, he 
is well known for his dedication to public education in this country. I 
applaud him for that.
  I also want to recognize a President who has seen public education in 
its current condition to be an issue on which to speak out and on which 
to lead. And while the private school and the voucher may be 
criticized, we are creating a dynamic, now, in the marketplace of 
education, that means the public schools are going to have to compete a 
little more. In that competition, they will dramatically improve.
  The condition for educating young people, in my opinion--and I think 
it is a growing opinion in America--will rapidly increase.

                          ____________________