[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 130 (Monday, September 22, 2003)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11754-S11757]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATEMENTS ON INTRODUCED BILLS AND JOINT RESOLUTIONS
By Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself and Mr. Cochran):
S. 1638. A bill to amend title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965
to increase teacher familiarity with the educational needs of gifted
and talented students, and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, today I am introducing a bill to help
prepare new teachers to recognize and meet the needs of gifted and
talented students. As many of my colleagues are aware, I have been
working for some time to advance a comprehensive approach aimed at
improving access to gifted and talented educational services in every
State. My proposal has been introduced in this Congress as S. 501.
While I will continue to work to enact this needed legislation, the
bill I am introducing today addresses the different but related need to
raise awareness among all teachers about the unique educational needs
of gifted and talented students.
Unfortunately, many misconceptions persist about the needs of gifted
children in both the educational community and in public policy
circles. There is often a tendency to think of gifted kids as those
kids who will succeed with or without help. This is simply not the case
and reflects a misunderstanding of giftedness. What makes a child
gifted and talented is not how well the child does in school, but how
he or she learns. A student may get straight A's and not be a gifted
learner, while a gifted and talented student might do poorly on his or
her schoolwork. Gifted and talented children actually have a different
way of looking at the world. They tend to have distinct approaches to
learning and interacting socially, and they frequently learn at a
different pace, and to different depths, than others their age. The
bottom line is that gifted and talented children have unique learning
needs that need to be met in order for them to succeed in school.
Earlier this year, when I re-introduced my bill to expand the
availability of gifted education services, I told the Senate about a
third grade student from Iowa City names Jose. I would like to remind
the Senate about Jose's experience because I think it illustrates some
important points about gifted students and their needs. Jose wasn't
completing his assignments and his grades were suffering. He had
trouble paying attention and would act up in class. He got along with
his classmates, but didn't have much social interaction with others.
Jose's teacher tried to get him to pay attention and do his work like
the other kids, but was left frustrated. Still, Jose's parents
recognized in him a real hunger for learning and had his IQ tested over
the summer. It turns out that, while Jose's teacher saw him as a
problem student, the problems she noticed were really symptoms of a
gifted student who was bored because he was not being properly
challenged. Jose now leaves his regular classroom a couple of times a
week for what Iowa City schools call the ``extended learning program.''
As a result of the added stimulation he now receives, Jose enjoys
school more, has made friends
[[Page S11755]]
with his gifted peers, and is doing great with his regular school work.
Jose's experience is more than just a success story showing how
quality gifted education services can make a real difference for a
child. It also illustrates that gifted students have real needs that
can all too easily go unrecognized and unmet. Moreover, Jose'
experience highlights the need for teachers to understand the
characteristics of gifted kids. In Jose's case, he had parents who were
able to recognize his gifts and have him assessed privately. Jose's
parents were then able to take these findings to the gifted education
teacher at Jose's school and have him identified to receive gifted
education services. Had his former teacher been able to recognize the
indications of giftedness, she could have referred him for services
earlier and she would have been better able to help him succeed in the
regular classroom.
I would like to cite another real-life example; this time of a 12-
year-old girl from Shenandoah, IA named Leah. Leah has two parents with
a high school education who work hard to provide for her, but they
don't have much discretionary income. Her parents want her to be
successful, but they rely on the public school system to meet her
educational needs. Leah came to school able to read, but was a very
quiet child so no one noticed anything exceptional about her. A year
later, the first grade teacher caught Leah reading in the coat closet
and realized that she could read exceptionally well. Leah's teacher
referred her to the gifted and talented teacher and she has thrived in
the gifted and talented program ever since. Leah's experiences have
been limited by her circumstances. She lives in a small town in rural
south-west Iowa and has not traveled farther than Des Moines or Omaha.
Leah hasn't grown up with every advantage, yet she is lucky to have had
an astute classroom teacher who recognized her abilities. Leah now has
access to a quality gifted education program of services that includes
a specially trained teacher available to help Leah develop her gifts.
While Leah is another success story, it is easy to see the important
role that teachers played in her experience. It is important to
remember that gifted and talented students come from all backgrounds
and can be found in any community. A gifted student could be the child
of a single mom working three jobs, the child of recent immigrants, or
a foster child. I've even heard stories of a gifted child in Iowa who
missed school because her parents had her begging for money on the
streets. Not all gifted children have parents who are equipped to
recognize their child's gifts or have the resources and ability to see
that their child gets the services he or she needs to be successful.
That is why it is so important that classroom teachers have some
understanding of how to identify gifted kids and how to meet their
needs while they are in the regular classroom. It is impossible to know
how many gifted students are overlooked because their teachers do not
know how to recognize the signs of giftedness or are unprepared to deal
with the unique needs that gifted kids have. While Iowa requires school
districts to provide gifted and talented services, a great many school
districts in many States have little or no programs for gifted kids.
Moreover, according to the federally funded National Research Center on
the Gifted and Talented, the large majority of gifted and talented
students spend at least 80 percent of their time in a regular education
classroom. As a result, it is vital that all teachers have at least
basic knowledge and skills to address gifted students' learning needs.
However, a national survey of third and fourth grade teachers by the
National Research Center on the Gifted and Talented found that 61
percent had no training whatsoever in teaching highly able students.
Ultimately, all teachers should have at least some exposure to the
characteristics of gifted and talented students and strategies to
address their needs. Yet, only one State currently requires regular
classroom teachers to have coursework in gifted education. Some of the
techniques used in classrooms to accommodate gifted kids include
differentiated curriculum, cluster grouping, and accelerated learning.
The time to make sure teachers have the necessary knowledge is when
prospective teachers are in their pre-service training programs. If
teachers aren't exposed to information about the needs of gifted
students in their pre-service training, they may never acquire the
necessary knowledge. Title II of the Higher Education Act already
contains grants designed to enhance the quality of teacher preparation
programs. My bill would simply add allowable uses to these existing
grants to provide an incentive for States and teacher training programs
to incorporate the needs of gifted and talented students into teacher
preparation and licensure requirements.
Under current law, Title II State grants are awarded directly to
States and are to be used to reform State teacher preparation
requirements. The law lists seven potential reforms under the allowable
uses for grant funds. The first three allowable uses include:
strengthening State requirements for teacher preparation programs to
ensure teachers are highly competent in their respective academic
content areas, reforming certification and licensure requirements with
respect to competency in content areas, and providing alternatives to
traditional teacher preparation programs. My legislation would add
another allowable use, referencing these three reforms, to encourage
States to incorporate a focus on the learning needs of gifted ant
talented students into reforms of State requirements for teacher
preparation programs, reforms of State certification and licensure
requirements, or new alternative teacher preparation programs. In
addition, my bill would add a new allowable use so that States could
use grant funds to create or expand new-teacher mentoring programs on
the needs of gifted and talented students. This way, new teachers could
learn from veteran teachers about how to identify classroom indicators
of giftedness and provide appropriate instruction to gifted students.
My bill would also add language to the Partnership Grants, which
provide funds to partnerships among teacher preparation institutions,
school of arts and sciences, and high-need school districts to
strengthen new teacher education. These grants come with three required
uses, including reforming teacher preparation programs to ensure
teachers are highly competent in academic content areas, providing pre-
service clinical experience, and creating opportunities for enhanced
and ongoing professional development. One allowable use for which a
partnership may use funds is preparing teachers to work with diverse
populations, including individuals with disabilities and limited
English proficient individuals. To this section, my legislation would
add gifted and talented students. Recognizing that every teacher will
have gifted students in his or her classroom, my bill would also add a
new allowable use so that teacher preparation programs could use the
funds to infuse teacher coursework with units on the characteristics of
high-ability learners. In other words, the idea is not to require
additional courses, but rather to discuss how to accommodate for the
needs of gifted students throughout the teacher preparation curriculum
when new teachers are learning how to present lessons.
My bill does not create a new grant program or require new funds. It
simply provides an incentive through existing grant programs that will
encourage States and teacher preparation programs to improve the
knowledge of new teachers about the unique needs of gifted and talented
students. New teachers will encounter gifted and talented students. It
is important they know how to recognize them and how to help them
succeed. As we have seen with Jose and Leah, having a teacher that
understands a child's needs can make a huge difference. In fact, it can
mean the difference between a child hating school and a child loving
school; a child falling behind, and a child succeeding beyond all
expectations. When a gifted child is left behind, the loss of human
potential is tragic. We may not know what we are missing, but it is
more than we can afford to lose. The legislation I have proposed today
is a relatively modest step that could have a tremendous impact. I urge
my colleagues to join me in this effort.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
[[Page S11756]]
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 1638
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO TITLE II OF THE HIGHER EDUCATION ACT
OF 1965.
(a) State Grants.--Section 202(d) of the Higher Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1022(d)) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(8) Gifted and talented students.--Incorporating the
learning needs of gifted and talented students into the
activity described in paragraph (1), (2), or (3) in order to
ensure that new teachers possess basic knowledge and skills
necessary to meet the educational needs of gifted and
talented students.
``(9) New-teacher mentoring on the needs of gifted and
talented students.--Establishing or expanding new-teacher
mentoring and assessment programs (including induction and
evaluation programs) that are a part of the licensure process
that includes the development of a portfolio produced by the
new teacher, under the supervision and guidance of a veteran
teacher mentor, which is designed to demonstrate that the new
teacher possesses basic knowledge of the classroom indicators
of giftedness, is able to identify student learning
differences among gifted students, and is able to provide
instruction to accommodate such differences.''.
(b) Partnership Grants.--Section 203(e) of the Higher
Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1023(e)) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and limited English
proficient individuals'' and inserting ``, limited English
proficient individuals, and gifted and talented students'';
and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(5) Gifted and talented students.--Increasing the
knowledge and skills of preservice teachers participating in
activities under subsection (d) in the educational and
related needs of gifted and talented students by, among other
strategies, infusing teacher coursework with units on the
characteristics of high-ability learners, using assessments
to identify preexisting knowledge and skills among students,
and developing teaching strategies that are driven by the
learner's progress.''.
______
By Mr. REID (for himself, Mr. Burns, and Mr. Ensign):
S. 1639. A bill to amend the Petroleum Marketing Practices Act to
extend certain protections to franchised refiners or distributors of
lubricating oil; to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.
Mr. REID. Mr. President, during the 103rd Congress in 1994, the
Petroleum Marketing Practices Act, PMPA, was amended to protect
independent petroleum wholesalers and retailers from arbitrary and
unfair termination or non-renewal of their franchise relationships with
major oil companies.
However, this protection was provided only to motor and diesel fuel
franchisees.
Franchisees of other petroleum products sold by the major oil
companies lack similar protection.
Today, I rise with Senators Burns and Ensign to introduce a bill that
extends the same protections enjoyed by the motor fuel industry to the
lubricant industry.
I have heard from a constituent in Nevada that his franchise
agreement to sell lubricating oils to car dealers in Las Vegas was
arbitrarily canceled with 30 days notice.
In essence, he had thirty days to convert all of his customers to a
new brand.
This seems grossly unfair and, in fact, if the product sold by my
constituent were gasoline or diesel fuel rather than lubricating oil,
it would have been illegal.
I have been made aware of similar terminations or non-renewals in
other States.
Without equal protection under the law, lubricant franchisees are
vulnerable to predatory cancellation by their suppliers. This situation
is exacerbated by recent mergers and acquisitions in the petroleum
industry.
The merger of oil giants Chevron and Texaco and Shell Oil's recent
acquisition of Penzoil-Quaker State will undoubtedly result in the
termination of many independent lubricant franchisees.
In New Mexico, there was a lubricant franchisee who had been
promoting and distributing a branded lubricant to his customers for
over 30 years, only to be canceled with 30 days notice following a
merger of refiners.
This unfair practice stifles competition in the marketplace and
invariably results in raising the price of the product, which hurts
American consumers and small businesses.
This is especially troublesome in rural areas.
Given the increasingly anti-competitive nature of the petroleum
industry, the time has come to extend protections under current law for
motor fuel marketers to include lubricant franchisees.
There are approximately 3,500 independent distributors and nearly
25,000 commercial retail lube oil outlets that could be impacted by the
increasing frequency of lubricant franchise cancellations.
Refiners have not suffered by complying with PMPA in motor fuels.
Consequently, it is hard to believe it would be much of an imposition
to include the much smaller segment of lubricant franchisees.
I introduce this bill today because it protects small businesses,
benefits consumers and ensures fair competition in the marketplace.
In short, this bill is the right thing to do and I hope my colleagues
will support it.
I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the
Record.
There being no objection, the bill was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
S. 1639
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PROTECTION OF FRANCHISED DISTRIBUTORS OF
LUBRICATING OIL.
(a) Definitions.--Section 101 of the Petroleum Marketing
Practices Act (15 U.S.C. 2801) is amended--
(1) in paragraph (1)(B)--
(A) in clause (ii)(II), by striking ``and'' at the end;
(B) by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (iv); and
(C) by inserting after clause (ii) the following:
``(iii) any contract under which a refiner authorizes or
permits a distributor to use, in connection with the sale,
consignment, or distribution of lubricating oil, a trademark
that is owned or controlled by the refiner; and'';
(2) in paragraphs (2), (5), and (6), by inserting ``or
lubricating oil'' after ``motor fuel'' each place it appears;
(3) by striking paragraphs (3) and (4) and inserting the
following:
``(3) Franchisee.--The term `franchisee' means--
``(A) a retailer or distributor that is authorized or
permitted, under a franchise, to use a trademark in
connection with the sale, consignment, or distribution of
motor fuel; or
``(B) a distributor that is authorized or permitted, under
a franchise, to use a trademark in connection with the sale,
consignment, or distribution of lubricating oil.
``(4) Franchisor.--The term `franchisor' means--
``(A) a refiner or distributor that authorizes or permits,
under a franchise, a retailer or distributor to use a
trademark in connection with the sale, consignment, or
distribution of motor fuel; or
``(B) a refiner that authorizes or permits, under a
franchise, a distributor to use a trademark in connection
with the sale, consignment, or distribution of motor fuel.'';
and
(4) by adding at the end the following:
``(20) Lubricating oil.--The term `lubricating oil' means
any grade of paraffinic or naphthenic lubricating oil stock
that is refined from crude oil or synthetic lubricants.''.
(b) Protection of Franchised Distributors of Lubricating
Oil.--Section 102(b)(2) of the Petroleum Marketing Practices
Act (15 U.S.C. 2802(b)(2)) is amended by inserting after
subparagraph (E) the following:
``(F) Franchised distributors of lubricating oil.--In the
case of a franchise between a refiner or a distributor for
the sale, distribution, or consignment of trademarked
lubricating oil, a determination made by the franchisor in
good faith and in the normal course of business to withdraw
from the marketing of the lubricating oil in the relevant
geographic market in which the franchised lubricating oil is
distributed, if--
``(i) the determination is made--
``(I) after the date on which the franchise is entered into
or renewed; and
``(II) on the basis of a change in relevant facts or
circumstances relating to the franchise that occurs after the
date specified in subclause (I); and
``(ii) the termination or nonrenewal is not for the purpose
of converting any accounts subject to the franchise to the
account of the franchisor.''.
______
By Mr. INHOFE (for himself, Mr. Jeffords, Mr. Bond, Mr. Warner,
Mr. Voinovich, Mr. Crapo, Mr. Chafee, Mr. Cornyn, Ms.
Murkowski, Mr. Thomas, and Mr. Allard):
S. 1640. A bill to provide an extension of highway programs funded
out of the Highway Trust Fund pending enactment of a law reauthorizing
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century; to the Committee on
Environment and Public Works.
[[Page S11757]]
Mr. INHOFE. Mr. President. I am introducing today the Transportation
Extension Act of 2003 which will extend the expiring Transportation
Equity Act for the 21st Century an additional 5 months. Senators,
Jeffords, Bond, Warner, Voinovich, Crapo, Chafee, Cornyn, Murkowski,
Thomas, and Allard join me as original cosponsors on this short-term
extension.
As my colleagues may be aware, we are now 7 days from the expiration
of TEA-21. Despite the best efforts of Senator Bond and myself, we have
been unable to secure the necessary floor time for consideration of a
comprehensive 6-year bill.
This bill provide 5 months worth of the $35.5 billion allowed under
the Budget Resolution and a corresponding amount of obligation
limitation. This is a significant, 7-percent increase in highway
funding over 2003, which will translate into over 100,000 new jobs.
Of course, the best thing we can do to create economic opportunity is
enact a comprehensive, 6-year reauthorization. As we all know, highway
bills are jobs bills. A highway bill drafted at $255 billion over 6
years as proposed by the Environment and Public Works Committee will
create about two million new American jobs. This combined with the tax
cuts signed by President Bush is the best stimulus the economy can
receive.
Let me be very clear that my preference is that we would be
completing a 6-year comprehensive bill, not working on a five-month
extension, but reality is that the funding needed to do a comprehensive
6-year bill at $255 billion has not yet been identified. Because of
that, I believe the best outcome for the long term program is to do a
5-month extension and continue to work on a comprehensive 6-year bill.
Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I wish to make some brief remarks about
the extension of the Transportation Equity Act, often referred to as
TEA-21.
Chairman Inhofe and I, along with subcommittee Chairman Bond and
ranking member Harry Reid, have been working together on drafting a
comprehensive, bipartisan 6-year transportation reauthorization bill.
Unfortunately, that reauthorization effort will not be completed before
TEA-21 expires on September 30.
Thus, as with the previous reauthorization of ISTEA by TEA-21, we
will need to do a short extension of TEA-21. In the interest of time,
and to avoid any concerns about potential disruptions, we have used
major portions of the same short-extension language used for ISTEA in
1997 for this extension.
It is important that I clarify some aspects of this short extension
with the chairman of the committee, Senator Inhofe.
The purpose of this short extension is to continue the Federal
surface transportation programs and transportation investment patterns.
For that reason, we have provided considerable short-term spending
flexibility to the States.
However, in a longer term extension, if any were needed, we should be
consistent with Congressional goals set forth in TEA-21. Thus, I want
to ensure that if there is a need for another extension we more closely
adhere to the flexibility provisions set forth in TEA-21. This would
require, for example, changes to the text used in this short-term
extension regarding section 133(d).
In a short-term extension there is little risk that investment
patterns would be altered in a manner inconsistent with TEA-21 and thus
the proposed language is acceptable for the short term.
Senator Inhofe do you agree with my understanding that the bipartisan
extension we have proposed works well in the short term but would
require some modification to its flexibility provisions if it were to
apply for a longer period of time? In addition, will you agree to work
with me to make changes to the language if we have to do another
extension to address the concerns I have raised?
Mr. INHOFE. Yes, I will work with the Senator on his concerns if we
have to do a longer term extension.
____________________