[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 112 (Friday, July 25, 2003)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1624]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      SCHOOL READINESS ACT OF 2003

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                           HON. NITA M. LOWEY

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, July 24, 2003

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2210) to 
     authorize the Head Start Act to improve the school readiness 
     of disadvantaged children, and for other purposes:

  Mrs. LOWEY. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to this misguided 
legislation.
  The father of Head Start, Dr. Edward Zigler, once said, ``Learning is 
not a purely cognitive enterprise--children learn better when they have 
good physical and mental health and have families whose own needs are 
met.'' I could not agree with him more.
  The Head Start program merges literacy activities with lessons in 
good nutrition, vision screenings, and proper hygiene. It also 
recognizes the need to bring parents into the developmental process by 
providing them with support services in and out of the home, such as 
access to comprehensive health care and social workers, peer 
counseling, and parenting programs.
  As a mother and grandmother, I know that it takes a lot more than 
basic reading skills to get our children prepared for learning. A kid's 
emotions, personality, and social surroundings are just as important as 
their I.Q. when first entering school.
  Under this bill, however, instead of providing comprehensive family 
support, eight states could divert the funding to reading and language 
development-only programs--leaving behind the parental involvement and 
health components that are key to Head Start.
  If the goal was to truly promote reading excellence, then we could 
expand and increase our investment in programs like Reading First, 
Literacy Through School Libraries, and Reading Is Fundamental.
  Unfortunately, that is not what this proposal is about. Rather, it is 
a subtle acknowledgement that the Republican Congress has not fulfilled 
its promise to supersize the federal government's education budget. By 
giving states the right to divert this funding into education programs, 
Head Start will be likely be used to makeup for the funding shortfalls 
for the No Child Left Behind Act's programs.
  My colleagues, our kids need balanced meals before, during, and after 
school. They need comfortable, clean clothing in order to learn. And 
they need safe, structured, and encouraging environments in which to 
study. Head Start teaches parents these lessons, while also providing 
our kids with the right tools and motivation to learn.
  What happened to the saying--``if it's not broken, don't fix it?!'' 
This program has a proven track record for effectiveness.
  While I strongly support the provisions in the bill that improve 
teacher quality, create accountability measures, and increase Head 
Start's focus on educational skills--we simply cannot make the drastic 
changes that will eliminate the very initiatives that keep Head Start 
strong. I urge my colleagues to join me in fighting to maintain the 
critical nutrition and health components of Head Start by voting 
against this bill.




                          ____________________