[Congressional Record Volume 151, Number 3 (Thursday, January 20, 2005)]
[Senate]
[Pages S86-S95]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   THE NOMINATION OF MARGARET SPELLINGS TO BE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION

  The legislative clerk read the nomination of Margaret Spellings, of 
Texas, to be Secretary of Education.
  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I rise today to bring before the Senate the 
nomination of Margaret Spellings to be the Secretary of Education.
  On January 6, the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions 
held a hearing to review the qualifications of Ms. Spellings for the 
position. As chairman of the committee, I am pleased to note that the 
committee members found her qualifications to be exemplary and well 
suited to the Cabinet level position. She has been enthusiastic and 
well informed.
  As the President's domestic policy adviser, Ms. Spellings was 
instrumental in developing the No Child Left Behind Act, and other 
important legislative initiatives.
  Today I stand with Senator Kennedy, the ranking member and the former 
chairman of the HELP Committee, in bipartisan support of her 
nomination. I thank Senator Kennedy and his staff for helping us bring 
this nomination to the floor in a very timely manner.
  In addition, I am joined by Senator Alexander, who will be the chair 
of the HELP Committee's Subcommittee on Education and Early Childhood 
Development.
  We look forward to working with Ms. Spellings in her new position.
  I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I congratulate my friend and colleague, 
Senator Enzi, on his appointment as the chairman of our committee. He 
is my favorite chairman to the year 2007. I thank him very much.
  I am glad to withhold if the Senator desires. As always, he is very 
gracious, but I am glad to wait until he has completed his remarks. 
Then I intend to talk about education.
  Mr. ENZI. I concluded my initial statement, and I will see if another 
is necessary.
  I yield to the ranking member if he so desires.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I sincerely look forward to working with 
my friend from Wyoming. We had a great tribute the other evening from 
various education groups. Senator Enzi met with more than 95 different 
groups, and in his typical fashion said he was willing to sit down and 
listen to each and every group. It was a bold action on his part. It is 
a clear indication he is going to be an active leader in the field of 
education as he has been in so many other areas of our committee.
  I join with him in the strong support of Margaret Spellings to serve 
as the Secretary of Education.
  There is no more important position in a President's cabinet. And I 
believe that Margaret Spellings has the knowledge, commitment, and 
leadership to improve the quality of education across our land.
  The strength of America depends on the strength of our public 
schools.
  Education is the key to opportunity and a strong economy. Our schools 
and teachers prepare young Americans to compete and succeed in a an 
ever-changing economy.
  Education is key to our national security. We cannot protect America 
and maintain our progress in the world without skilled and well-trained 
citizens.
  Edcuation is the key to good citizenship. Good schools can shape the 
character of our citizens and train Americans to participate in our 
democracy, to serve our country and our communities.
  In short, our schools are key to the American dream.
  From our earliest days as a Nation, our country's founders understood 
this. John Adams, in drafting the Massachusetts constitution in 1780, 
affirmed that education of the people was ``necessary for the 
preservation of their rights and

[[Page S87]]

liberties.'' And many other States since have included similar 
commitments in their founding documents.
  With every new age and each new challenge, part of the genius of 
America is that we have adapted. We have risen to the challenge. As 
Thomas Jefferson reminds us, ``Every generation needs a new 
revolution.'' I believe that the revolution for this generation at this 
time is to master our own destiny and guide the currents of 
globalization for our own purposes.
  No nation is guaranteed a position of lasting prosperity and 
security. We have to work for it. We have to fight for it. We have to 
sacrifice for it. And above all else, we must equip our citizens to use 
their God-given talents to compete in the global economy, not by 
lowering their wages but by raising their skills.
  The price of failure is enormous. Already, millions of Americans have 
seen their good jobs shipped overseas. Last year, the new jobs created 
here at home paid 41 percent less than the jobs lost. And American 
families are finding it harder and harder to make ends meet--harder and 
harder to live the American dream.
  To restore that dream in a global economy, we must remove every 
obstacle to our vision and look beyond the horizons of today. Of 
course, we must strengthen our economy so that it works for everyone. 
And we must invest in new growth industries that will create the well-
paying jobs of the future.
  Most of all, we must stand with all Americans to ensure that they 
have the skills and the opportunities they need for the future. We must 
encourage the study of math and science, and once again create a 
culture of innovation and progress in America.
  That's the mission of the Department of Education in these times.
  It is why I welcome President Bush's nomination of Margaret Spellings 
to be the next Secretary of Education.
  Ms. Spellings has an impressive record on domestic policy. During her 
4 years in the White House, she has worked on a range of issues for 
President Bush, including transportation, housing, health, and labor.
  Most impressive is her work on education. Ms. Spellings has been a 
consistent champion for improving and strengthening public education, 
from her days as an advisor to Texas Governor Bush to her later role as 
the President's principal advisor on the No Child Left Behind Act. Over 
the years, she has worn many different hats in public education--
advocate, parent, and policymaker. Her steadfast commitment to children 
and to the institutions that serve them has never wavered.
  I look forward to working with her in the years ahead to strengthen 
our schools and universities, and forge a national commitment in 
education.
  More than a basic value or a founding belief, education has been a 
force to move America forward. It has been the engine of the American 
dream.
  During the industrial revolution, we made a national commitment to 
expand access to high schools and propel America forward.
  In the 1940's, the GI Bill opened the doors of college to a great 
generation and launched a renewal of our economy.
  After Sputnik's launch, we passed the National Education Defense Act 
to ensure our global competitiveness and national security by providing 
low-interest college loans for students studying math, science and 
foreign languages.
  Again today, we face national and international challenges to 
achieving the American dream--some new and others familiar.
  The destructive forces of poverty and inequality continue to prove 
obstacles to opportunity and progress. International challenges, such 
as outsourcing of jobs and the rising investment of other nations in 
mathematics and science, mark a new global standard to drive the 
world's economy.
  In the face of these changes, we need a national education strategy 
to assure that America can advance--not retreat--in the days ahead. As 
President Bush challenged the nation in his Inaugural Address today, we 
must ``bring the highest standards to our schools.''
  To meet this goal, we must do more to see that No Child Left Behind 
truly means no child.
  It's not just a slogan. For us, it's a moral commitment. It's a 
solemn oath to our children, to parents, and to communities that we 
will fight for them every single day.
  It's a promise that they will see qualified teachers, afterschool 
interventions, and supplemental services. It's a promise that they will 
see high academic standards, research-based instruction, and targeted 
help when they need it.
  It's also a promise that every child counts--Black or White, Hispanic 
or Asian, rich or poor. Our promise to leave no child behind means that 
children with disabilities receive access to a highly-qualified teacher 
and to the individualized support that they need to succeed in school 
and in life. It means that schools are held accountable for their 
progress, too.
  No Child Left Behind is an expression of our basic values that we're 
willing to make the tough choice and the hard sacrifices to invest in 
and improve our public schools, because they are the ever widening 
gateways to opportunity and success for every one of our children.
  Our commitment cannot stop there. We must do more to help students 
prepare for college, afford college, enter college, and complete 
college.
  I point out briefly what has been happening when we look at the costs 
of college tuition that are effectively out of control. From 2001 to 
2004 or 2005, the increase of public college education for 4 years has 
increased 35 percent.
  There has been an effort to recognize everyone has some role in 
making college affordable. The individual has a role. Some have 
resources, others do not. If they do not have the resources but have 
the academic skill, we at the Federal level ought to be able to put 
together the kind of package so they are able to attend college. We did 
that in the 1980s.
  Twenty years ago in Higher Education Aid, we had almost 60 percent of 
the assistance in grants and 40 percent in loans; now that has 
reversed. Now we find 58 percent and 41 percent in grants. As a result 
of this development and phenomena, there are hundreds of thousands of 
children in this country who do well and are admitted to the finest 
schools and colleges and universities of this country who will not 
attend because they do not have the resources. That is wrong. We have 
to address this.
  A college education means more today than it ever has. Today's demand 
for highly skilled workers has moved beyond the 1950s, when only 15 
percent of jobs required advanced skills. In 2005, more than 60 percent 
of all jobs require some post-secondary education. Of the fastest 
growing jobs, half require a college degree and the other half require 
strong information technology skills.
  Despite growing demand, in the future, it is estimated that the 
number of college degrees earned will slow to one-third of its current 
rate.
  Yet, last year, 400,000 college-ready students didn't attend a 4-year 
college on a full-time basis because they couldn't afford to do so.
  In America, surely we can agree that cost should never be a barrier 
to a college education.
  There is another area I want to mention. I know my colleagues are 
here and want to speak. I will not take more than my share of the time. 
One other very important feature I hope we can work with the 
administration on is early education. I touched briefly on college. I 
think we have to do a great deal more in the areas of math and science. 
When you look at what our competition is doing in China, in India, in 
terms of math and science and engineering and research, we cannot take 
for granted our own prosperity and our own national security.
  The best dollar invested in children is in early education. This 
chart shows results from the High Scope Perry Preschool Study, in 
Ypsilanti Michigan, which has been peer reviewed, the Beethoven Early 
Childhood Program Study, and the Chicago Child/Parent Centers Study in 
Chicago. They all reached the same conclusions: with early education a 
young person is more likely to complete school, more likely to get a 
skilled job, less likely to be held back a grade, and less likely to 
need special education. The results are dramatic. The results are even 
more dramatic that they are more likely to complete high school on 
time.
  The wonderful book Jack Shonkoff wrote, ``From Neurons to 
Neighborhoods,'' brings together three National

[[Page S88]]

Academy of Sciences Studies. All of them reach the same conclusion, 
that the opportunity to make progress with children in the earliest of 
months, virtually since the time they are born--even prior to the time 
they go to Head Start or a preschool program--is immense, and we have 
the proof.
  This is an area Mrs. Bush is interested in. I am very hopeful we can 
find common ground and work on this area.
  I believe that every child in America, upon reaching eighth grade, 
should be offered a contract. Let students sign it, along with their 
parents and Uncle Sam. The contract will state that if you work hard, 
if you finish high school and are admitted to college, we will 
guarantee you the cost of earning a degree. Surely, we have reached a 
stage in America where we can say it and mean it--cost must never again 
be a bar to college education.
  We must also inspire a renaissance of math and science in our schools 
and colleges. Over the last 30 years, America has fallen from 3rd to 
15th in producing scientists and engineers. In a major study released 
last month, we ranked 29th among 40 industrialized nations in math.
  This revival begins in our elementary and high school classrooms.
  Last week, President Bush called for increased investments in the 
training of math and science teachers in our middle schools and high 
schools. This is an important first step.
  In addition, the courses that students take--as well as the quality 
of teaching--matter greatly. We know that the higher the level of math 
courses that students take in high school, the more likely they are to 
earn a bachelor's degree.
  National standards in math and science have existed for more than a 
decade. We ensure that those standards are competitive with 
international norms, and align them with the skills that students need 
to be successful in college and in the workforce. We should offer 
incentives and supports for schools to develop and implement rigorous 
standards and courses. High standards and high-quality curriculum are 
the pillars of reform in our schools.
  We must strengthen the pipeline of math and science into higher 
education. In the 1950s, after the launch of Sputnik, the National 
Defense Education Act resulted in a doubling of the federal expenditure 
in education, and helped secure the advancement and later dominance of 
the United States in the arms race and in the global economy.
  But today, out of 15 million college students, less than 400,000 
graduate with a bachelor's degree in math, science, engineering, or 
technology. Only 75,000 go on to obtain Master's degrees in those 
fields. We need a new National Defense Education Act.
  We can double the number of future American scientists by 2010 if we 
pursue three key strategies.
  First, we need more and better math and science teachers in grade 
schools. We should make college free--no loans whatsoever--for any 
student, regardless of their family income, training to become a math 
or science grade school teacher.
  Second, even for those not going into teaching, we should make 
college and graduate school tuition free for middle class and low-
income math and science students. These fields are critical to 
America's future and we should dedicate resources toward strengthening 
them in particular.
  Third, we should expand the capacity of colleges and universities to 
educate future scientists and engineers by growing the Tech Talent 
program at the National Science Foundation. Tech Talent enables 
colleges to hire additional math and science faculty, develop 
additional math and science courses, make sure that math and science 
classes are small and accompanied by up to date lab facilities, and 
supports paid summer internships for math and science college students.
  Finally, we can't expect to maintain a competitive standing in the 
global economy without paying attention to education in the early 
years. Learning begins at birth, and research has proven that what we 
do for our children's early education and development does more to 
ensure their success later in school and later in life than any other 
investment.
  Today, two-thirds of fourth graders are not proficient readers. Less 
than a third of American students are proficient in math and science. 
And one-third of students who begin high school fail to earn a diploma.
  Early education can change all of that. Students who participate in 
high-quality, comprehensive early childhood programs are less likely to 
be held back a grade, and less likely to need special education. Later 
on, they are more likely to complete high school on time. Later in 
life, they are more likely to hold a skilled job or a college degree.
  It's time that we made early childhood education a priority in 
America. We need to ensure that every child has access to a high 
quality early education program.
  We need to coordinate the wide variety of programs and services 
currently available for children. And we must also ensure that all 
those caring for children have the skills and qualifications necessary. 
If we are to expect quality care for our children in these settings, 
then they need quality teachers, who are supported, trained, and 
adequately compensated to do the job.
  America has always dedicated itself to expanding opportunity and 
embracing the future. These are our highest values, and we must draw 
upon them to approach the challenges that lie ahead with strength, 
skill, and confidence.
  In short, we must stand ready to embrace the American dream by 
improving the quality of education in America.
  Mr. President, I urge our colleagues and friends to give overwhelming 
support for this nominee. Margaret Spellings does not always say no. 
She is not always going to say yes, but she is not always going to say 
no. We on this side of the aisle are looking forward to working with 
our chairman to try to make a real difference in enhancing the quality 
of education for children all over this country.
  I thank the Chair.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Who yields time?
  The Senator from Wyoming.
  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I yield such time to the Senator from 
Tennessee as he might consume.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, while the chairman and Senator Kennedy 
and Senator Dodd are here, I want to say that I appreciate Senator 
Kennedy's remarks and strong support for Margaret Spellings. I 
appreciate the work he and Mike Enzi and Senator Dodd have done in 
education and early childhood education, and I hope that is a signal 
that over the next couple of years we can do more together.
  Senator Kennedy and I worked on legislation that affects American 
history, and we have another pending bill on that. Senator Dodd and I 
have worked together on legislation that affects premature birth. We 
have some differences of opinion, and we will make those differences of 
opinion, but I am confident at least the chairman and I, and I believe 
Senator Kennedy and Senator Dodd, will work together on Education 
Committee issues to do our very best to make sure we put children first 
and our country's competitive position first. I relish the opportunity 
to work with them. I know of no three more effective Senators than the 
chairman, Senator Kennedy, and Senator Dodd. I wanted to say that while 
they were all here.
  I once held the same job President George W. Bush hopes Margaret 
Spellings will hold. I was appointed Secretary of Education by the 
first President Bush. As I said at the hearing for Ms. Spellings, at my 
first Cabinet meeting I learned that not everyone in Washington thinks 
it is the most important job in Washington, because I learned at my 
first Cabinet meeting that the Secretary of Education sits at the end 
of the Cabinet table and is the last to be evacuated in the case of a 
crisis. In fact, I used to tell my friends, if they woke up in the 
morning when I was in the Cabinet and saw me assuring them that 
everything was all right, they should know that everything was not all 
right because that would mean they had worked all the way down to rest 
of the Government before they got to me.
  But I agree with what the Senator from Massachusetts said a little 
earlier. I do not think there is any more important job in Washington 
than that of Secretary of Education, who does not manage education. 
Education is in the homes and communities and

[[Page S89]]

schools, and it is paid for, 93, 94 percent, outside of Washington. But 
the Education Secretary can help our President put a priority on 
education.
  A lot of improving education is simply valuing education. I used to 
say down in Tennessee, when I was Governor, trying to get our State to 
value it more than that, the reason the Minnesota schools are better 
than the Tennessee schools is that in Minnesota they value education 
more, that we were valuing fast cars and football games and they were 
valuing high scores in math and science, and we were getting the 
fastest cars and they were getting the highest scores in math and 
science.
  So having the President and respective Members of the Senate put this 
upfront and having a competition for who can have the best ``better 
schools'' program and the best new initiative, that is the way we 
should be doing it. I look forward to that.
  I believe Margaret Spellings can help President Bush complete 8 years 
as a genuine education President. Because she knows him. She worked 
with him in Texas. She helped him introduce one of the strongest 
accountability programs any State has. She was able to work with the 
Congress, helping him work in a bipartisan way with the No Child Left 
Behind bill, in a very strong example of bipartisanship, not just a 
passive one. But to continue to support it, she worked for the school 
board association there.
  So she knows the President. She knows the subject. She knows 
politics. She knows the Congress. She knows the White House. And she 
ought to be good. So I am delighted the President has chosen her. I 
look forward to working with her.
  Now, Senator Kennedy and Senator Enzi made some mention of a few 
subjects they believe are important, especially important right now, 
that they hope the President and his new Secretary will put a focus on. 
I would like to do the same, in brief.
  No. 1, I would like to see this new Secretary and this President 
establish a point person within the administration for higher 
education. One of my great regrets, as I left the Secretary of 
Education's office in 1992--other than I had to leave it because we 
lost the election--one of my great regrets was I did not go to the 
first President Bush and say: Let me be the point person for all the 
Federal Government does on higher education. And why is that? It is 
because the National Academy of Sciences estimates that one-half of our 
new jobs since World War II have come from advances in science and 
technology; in other words, from our brainpower. That is where it has 
come from. And much of that advance in science and technology has come 
from about 50 great research universities and the national laboratories 
we have that are run by the Department of Energy.
  No other country in the world has anything that compares with those 
research universities and those national laboratories. And just as they 
were for the last 50 years, they will be for the next 5, 10, 50 years 
the key to our ability to keep our standard of living. We need to 
remember that we are only 5 to 6 percent of the population in the 
world, and we may have a third of all the dollars. Now the rest of the 
world is going to be catching up, and they are already doing that.
  India and China are busy keeping their brightest people home. They 
are busy working on building greater universities. While we may be 
taking for granted this superior system of higher education we have 
today, Senator Kennedy pointed out the rising tuition. I will tell you 
why the tuition is rising. It is not because the Federal Government is 
not putting more money in. It is because the State governments are 
putting in less.
  In Tennessee, when I left the Governor's office in 1987, 51 cents out 
of every State tax dollar was being spent on education, and 14 cents on 
health care. Today, it is 40 cents on education, and 26 cents on health 
care; and health care is going up. That same story is true in virtually 
every State in the country, and the money that was being spent on 
education and now being spent on health care is coming, for the large 
part, out of higher education. So if we shortchange higher education, 
we are shortchanging our ability to keep good jobs in the United 
States.
  We have a number of other issues that have to do with higher 
education that we need to focus on. Visas for foreign students: The 
Senator from Minnesota has been as active, perhaps more active, than 
any other Senator in pointing out there is a dramatic drop in the 
number of foreign students at our universities. People might say, so 
what? They do not speak English very well, anyway, when they teach 
courses in graduate school.
  Here is so what. They are among the smartest people in the rest of 
the world, and they come here, go to our universities, and they create 
ideas and jobs for us. They help make our universities the best. 
France, Germany, India and China are trying to keep them home, and we 
are making it hard for them to get here. We are going to pay the price 
for that.
  The President has made some comments about year-round Pell grants. We 
have held a hearing about that. Senator Kennedy talked about the 
adequacy of Pell grants. We need to look at that. I believe our 
universities are strong because, first, we recognize their autonomy.
  In other words, we don't tell them what to do. We encourage autonomy, 
and then we give the money to students and let the money follow the 
students to the academic institution of their choice. We don't say you 
can't go to Notre Dame or you can't go to Yeshiva or you can't go to 
Howard. Sixty percent of American college students have a grant or a 
loan from the Federal Government that follows them to the school of 
their choice. We ought to continue to respect that autonomy and not 
restrict it.
  Colleges of education, distance learning, community colleges, 
increased spending for the physical sciences that support our research 
efforts, political correctness in colleges and universities, the 
relationship of research universities and the National Laboratories, 
having an administration-wide inventory of all the Federal Government 
does in support of higher education would help us put a focus on higher 
education, and the fact that better schools, colleges, and universities 
mean better jobs.
  There are two or three other areas I hope the President and the new 
Secretary will pay attention to, such as finding more ways to involve 
parents in the education of their children by giving them more choices 
of educational opportunities. I believe the genius behind our superior 
system of colleges and universities is because we don't try to run them 
from here. We respect the autonomy of the universities and we allow 
students money and allow them to choose the schools. If it helped 
create the best colleges, I don't know why we don't use more of that to 
help create the best schools.
  A third area is to make sure we are spending Federal dollars for 
children age 0 to 5 as well as possible. This is an area the Senator 
from Massachusetts mentioned. It is one in which the Senator from 
Connecticut is interested. The Federal Government spends $18 to $21 
billion a year through 69 different programs that dedicate part of 
their budget toward early education and care programs that serve 
children under the age of 5. That is in addition to all the money that 
goes to children because of the Medicaid Program. The Department of 
Education administers 34 of those 69 programs. We ought to take a look 
at the spending of the $18 to $21 billion and find out how well it is 
being spent.
  Head Start is just about a third of it. Head Start is not all we do 
for early children. We ought to see where the gaps are. We ought to 
understand what the States are doing, what the cities are doing, and 
then see what else the Federal Government might need to do additionally 
or what we might change to do better.
  Next, make sure No Child Left Behind is funded, flexible, and 
working. The President has asked us to expand it to high school, or has 
indicated his intention to do so. We ought to take a look at what we 
are already doing first and see if there are some lessons that we need 
to learn from how No Child Left Behind was implemented in the first 3 
years so that we can avoid any mistakes we made when we consider going 
on into high school.
  I am a convert to No Child Left Behind. I am a convert primarily 
because we have a third of our eighth graders who score below basic on 
reading and

[[Page S90]]

math, which is disgraceful. At least we need to know that and need to 
know who is falling behind. But this is a huge program, and there is a 
lot to look at: Achievement in State standards, what constitutes highly 
qualified teachers, the choice in supplemental service provisions, how 
No Child Left Behind affects rural areas as compared to urban, the very 
important U.S. history subject and learning English subject. And we 
need to look at funding.

  Last time I checked, the President does not appropriate a penny. The 
Congress might as well give itself some credit for this. Federal 
funding for K-12 is up 36 percent. That is a lot. It is as much as 
Senator Kennedy said tuition was up in the last 4 years. State funding, 
at least in my State, is up about 11 percent. So Federal funding for 
kindergarten through the 12th grade is up three times as much in the 
last 4 years as State funding for kindergarten through the 12th grade. 
But still we need to take an honest look to see.
  We put some new requirements, through No Child Left Behind, on State 
and local governments. Did we properly fund that? That is an 
appropriate question. We should ask that question.
  Finally, I would like to see more work done on the subject that 
Senator Kennedy and I and the new Democratic leader, Senator Reid, have 
worked on. That is restoring the civic mission of our public schools. 
The President talked about that today in his inaugural address: What 
does it mean to be an American? He gave the kind of speech I hoped he 
would give: What are the values in our country? What is important to 
us? We can get all the programs later. He did that beautifully.
  The late Albert Shanker, President of the American Federation of 
Teachers, once said the reason we have public schools is to teach the 
three Rs to the immigrant children and teach them what it means to be 
an American with the hope that they will go home and teach their 
parents. We should be embarrassed that the lowest score that high 
school seniors make on the national assessment for educational progress 
test is in U.S. history, our own history. If we don't know our own 
history, we don't know why we are in Iraq. We don't know why we say 
anything is possible. We don't know why we say no child is left behind. 
We don't know why we debate illegal immigration. We could have no 
discussion in the Senate Chamber that made any sense at all unless we 
had some understanding of U.S. history.
  Senator Reid and I cosponsored legislation that passed last year to 
help create summer academies, presidential academies for the teachers 
of American history, and congressional academies for students of 
American history. Senator Kennedy and I will introduce again this year 
legislation that will add State-by-State tests and NEAP tests in U.S. 
history, giving States that option so they can compare their scores. We 
are looking for many different ways to restore the civic mission of our 
public schools.
  There is a lot to do. I believe there are three great challenges 
facing our country: One is terrorism; one is preserving our common 
culture; and one is keeping our jobs in a competitive world 
marketplace. And the key to that is brainpower and education. Better 
schools, colleges, and universities will mean better jobs. And with the 
experience that we have in this Chamber and the high level of interest 
we have in education and the history we have had recently of bipartisan 
cooperation, we ought to be able to make some significant progress.
  I look forward to being a part of that, working with Chairman Enzi 
and Ranking Member Kennedy.
  I thank the Chair.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Wyoming.
  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Tennessee for his 
total enthusiasm on this issue. We are so fortunate to have him as the 
chair of the Subcommittee on Education and Early Childhood. You have 
just seen a demonstration of the passion that he puts into education. 
Of course, he has covered it from the perspective of being Governor, of 
being a college president. Probably more important, he has covered it 
from the perspective of being the Secretary of Education of the United 
States. Now as a Senator, he is going to make a difference in policy by 
pursuing that committee vigorously, as we can tell from his comments.
  I also appreciate the earlier comments of Senator Kennedy and the 
tremendous cooperation that we have had not only on the hearings that 
we have had but also on the personal discussions on the workload that 
we have by September 5, when 28 reauthorizations expire. We have to get 
those done.
  I thank the Chair and yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I am glad our colleague from Tennessee has 
remained. People may assume I am fulfilling some collegial courtesy to 
extend comments about the experiences of the members of the committee, 
but as Senator Enzi has just said, we are very fortunate to have Lamar 
Alexander as a Member of this body and as a member of the Committee on 
Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. The Senator from Wyoming 
touched on the experiences that Senator Alexander has had, except one, 
and that was as a Presidential candidate. He spoke eloquently, 
throughout those months in which he sought the highest office in the 
land, about the importance of education. So, we are fortunate to have 
him on our Committee.
  I can't tell the Chairman of the Committee how much I look forward to 
working with him as well. I am optimistic about the work we can do on 
the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee.
  I will support the nomination of Margaret Spellings as Secretary of 
Education. The mission of the Department of Education is ``to ensure 
equal access to education and to promote educational excellence for all 
Americans.'' If we succeed in making our education system as good as it 
can be, there is no national priority that will not benefit. If we do 
not succeed, we leave things to chance. So I believe that the Secretary 
of Education is one of the most, if not the most, important positions 
in the President's Cabinet.
  Ms. Spellings comes to the Department of Education with strong 
credentials as a policymaker in the area of education. She currently 
serves as the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy. In that 
role, she is responsible for the development and implementation of 
White House policy on education, health, labor and other elements of 
the President's domestic agenda. Prior to her White House appointment, 
she worked for 6 years as one of Governor Bush's senior advisers, a 
role in which she had responsibility for the development and 
implementation of his education agenda. Many of the initiatives she 
worked on were incorporated into the No Child Left Behind Act, NCLBA. 
In fact, Ms. Spellings was one of the administration's primary 
architects of the No Child Left Behind Act, working with Members of 
this body, and others, to craft this law.
  As Ms. spellings said at her hearing, there is no more important 
obligation each of us has to the American people than to educate our 
citizens. Like her, I believe that a high-quality education must be 
available to each and every American regardless of where they live, 
their economic status, whether they attend urban, rural or suburban 
schools, and whether they are a first or fifth generation American. I 
was impressed at her nomination hearing by the breadth of her knowledge 
and her ability to respond to a wide range of questions on so many 
aspects of education policy. Her intimate knowledge of No Child Left 
Behind will be the key to successful future implementation of this law, 
and I am hopeful that she is up to the task of working with this body 
to ensure that a greater degree of reasonableness is taken into account 
in implementing it.
  I do not in the least question this nominee's qualifications or 
commitment. She is in these respects truly impressive. I do, however, 
question the policies of the administration she is duty-bound to 
represent.
  I had high hopes when this administration came to office. I supported 
what is widely touted as this administration's landmark education 
initiative, the No Child Left Behind Act.
  I supported No Child Left Behind because I care about improving the 
quality of education in America for all of our children. I believed 
that this law would help to achieve this goal by establishing more 
rigorous standards for measuring student achievement, by helping 
teachers do a better job of instructing students, and by providing

[[Page S91]]

the resources desperately needed by our schools for even the most basic 
necessities to help put the reforms we passed into place. Regrettably, 
the high hopes that I and others had for No Child Left Behind have not 
been realized. The law is being implemented by the administration in a 
manner that is inflexible, unreasonable, and unhelpful to students.
  Worse still, the administration's promise of sufficient resources to 
implement No Child Left Behind's much-needed reforms is a promise that 
has yet to be kept. Currently, the law is underfunded by $9.8 billion. 
As a result of the failures of the administration to fulfill its 
commitment to our Nation's schoolchildren under the Law, children and 
their teachers are shouldering new and noteworthy hardships. Students, 
teachers, administrators, parents, and communities, are struggling to 
work with requirements that are often confusing, inflexible, and 
unrealistic. And they are struggling to do so without the additional 
resources they were promised to put them into place.
  As I have said on numerous occasions in the past, resources without 
reforms are a waste of money. By the same token, reforms without 
resources are a false promise--a false promise that has left students, 
their teachers, and taxpayers, grappling with new burdens and little 
help to bear them.
  Just last week, the President announced a new education initiative 
that would expand No Child Left Behind testing at the high school 
level. New testing, combined with new requirements already scheduled 
over the next 2 years--including the deadline for teachers to be highly 
qualified--will require a great infusion of resources. And yet, we have 
recently been told that one-third of the States will see a decline in 
No Child Left behind funds this coming year.
  No Child Left Behind is not the only law which remains underfunded. 
Today, the Individuals with Disabilities in Education Act, IDEA is 
funded at less than half of the 40 percent we committed to provide when 
we passed the law 30 years ago. This means that States continue to bear 
more than their fair share of responsibility for meeting disabled 
students' needs. States that, mind you, are facing astronomical 
deficits as a whole. States that often have no choice but to pass these 
costs on to municipalities which then pass them on to everyday, average 
American taxpayers through their local property taxes.
  Just as disheartening is this administration's lack of support for 
student financial aid. Since coming into office, it has done little to 
help the average American taxpayer send their children to college. The 
maximum Pell Grant award remains frozen at $4,050 for the fourth 
consecutive year, enough to pay just 34 percent of the average annual 
cost of attending college. In the meantime, public college tuition has 
gone up 35 percent over the last 4 years.
  A college graduate earns close to double the amount of an individual 
who has only graduated from high school. Without additional financial 
aid in the form of loans--and more importantly, grants--many American 
students may not be able to afford a college education. Prohibitive 
costs may be keeping some of our best minds from fulfilling their 
dreams of a higher education. And yet, this administration has done 
virtually nothing to make college more financial accessible. Qualified 
students with the will to achieve should be given the change to do so. 
Until recent announcements of expanding the Pell Grant program, this 
administration has done little if anything to give these students that 
chance. And while I am happy to hear that higher education is receiving 
long over due attention, I am concerned by indications that the 
administration may pay for new initiatives simply by cutting others.
  Outside of funding, I am concerned about President Bush's proposal to 
move Head Start from the Department of Health and Human Services to the 
Department of Education and to change the program's focus to reading. I 
do not object to exploring innovative ways to help children read. 
However, it is the comprehensive nature of Head Start that makes a 
difference for poor children. Head Start is just as much about ensuring 
that children have proper health care, dental care, vision and hearing 
screening, as well as screening for developmental delays. Head Start is 
about the social, emotional, physical, and cognitive development of 
children. To focus only on cognitive development would ignore the other 
pillars of school readiness. We need to be cautious about changing a 
program that does so much good for so many children and families. Our 
focus need to remain in the development of the ``whole'' child.
  I sill support Margaret Spellings' nomination because she is well-
qualified for the position and has demonstrated seriousness of purpose. 
However, my concerns about the nominee are not her personal 
qualifications but the policies of the administration she represents. I 
pledge my best effort to work with her and others to find common 
ground. But, by the same token, I will respectfully dissent where this 
administration pursues policies that I believe are harmful to our 
Nation's children.
  Again, even though I am supportive of this nomination, it does not 
mean that Ms. Spellings is going to agree with the Senator from 
Connecticut on everything. I suspect she will not. But I know when I 
make a call to her, I have somebody on the line who will listen and 
will consider sound arguments about why or why not we ought to do 
certain things. I very much look forward to working with her and this 
committee in the coming months.
  I have often quoted Thomas Jefferson who made the comment just over 
200 years ago that any nation that ever expects to be ignorant and free 
expects what never was and what never possibly could be. That was his 
statement at the beginning of the 19th century. It is just as true 
today. That is why the nomination before us is of the utmost 
importance.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Chafee). The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I do not want to turn this into a bouquet-
tossing process, but I also want to commend our friend from Wyoming. I 
think he is going to do an excellent job in his new position. At the 
end of last year, we got a little bit more flexibility in terms of the 
interpretation of Leave No Child Behind Act because of the efforts with 
respect to hiring of rural teachers, and I thank him for his work on 
that, and certainly the bipartisan firm of Senators Kennedy, Dodd, 
Enzi, and Alexander is a force to contend with, and I am looking 
forward very much to working with them.
  The confirmation of the Secretary of Education by the Senate, 
important as it is, is not the only important development in American 
education this week. I am sure many of our colleagues have heard about 
the remarks made by Harvard President Larry Summers this week, remarks 
that in effect said women may be underrepresented in math and sciences 
because of innate differences between men and women.
  I spoke with Dr. Summers this morning. He made it clear to me that he 
is acutely aware that remarks he intended to be thought-provoking 
crossed the line. He knows that as president of one of America's most 
distinguished institutions, his views are heard worldwide. I expect he 
will continue to express his contrition to the Harvard community and 
educators around the country.
  I have devoted a lot of time to this issue myself. In 2002, when I 
became chairman of the Subcommittee on Science, I pursued this issue on 
a bipartisan basis, particularly with Senator Allen of Virginia. Today 
I ask my colleagues the question of what ought to be on the table at 
this point, and that is what is going to be done now, what is going to 
be done immediately, to create more opportunities for girls and women 
to advance in science, math, engineering, and related fields?
  It is very seldom, when a problem such as this comes up, that there 
is literally a tool right at our fingertips to solve the problem, but 
in studying this issue, in holding hearings on this issue, I became 
convinced that title IX of the Education Act can be the key to ensuring 
gender equity in critical academic fields for women.
  Here is how title IX reads: No person in the United States shall, on 
the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the 
benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any educational 
program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

[[Page S92]]

  It means any institution receiving Federal funds must make sure that 
women are treated equitably.
  In the Senate, and certainly around the country, there is a common 
misconception that title IX is about sports. I think very few people 
are aware that primarily, at its roots, it is an academic statute. 
Athletics are certainly where we have seen the most progress under 
title IX. Before title IX, 1 in 17 girls in school played sports. Now 
it is 1 in 2.5, or 40 percent.
  So I ask my colleagues, imagine if those same changes could be seen 
in math, science, and engineering, from the 20 percent of science 
undergraduates who are women today, to 40 percent or 50 percent; from 
the 6 percent of engineering professors who are women today to 40 
percent.
  The potential of title IX is enormous. Enforcing it in academic 
fields could revolutionize the study and application of math and 
science in our country.
  Educators of good conscience should not wait for a Federal reprimand 
to comply with a Federal law that benefits all of us. Title IX ought to 
be a guiding principle in hiring, tenure, scholarships, and lab space 
for all scholars on all the academic campuses around our country. Title 
IX can finally give women studying science a fair shake where they have 
not gotten one before. It does not sound like a tall order, but it is 
not happening. Unfortunately, the Federal Government is not taking the 
lead in terms of tackling the issue.
  For example, I asked the General Accounting Office to examine whether 
the Federal Government is following the law and enforcing title IX. 
What the General Accounting Office found was disappointing at best. 
They looked at the Department of Education, NASA, the Department of 
Energy, and the National Science Foundation, and they found that little 
or no efforts were being made to ensure compliance with title IX 
requirements for grantees getting Federal dollars. Of all the agencies 
reviewed, the Department of Education was the only Federal agency that 
conducted any title IX compliance reviews. But they have not conducted 
a single review--not one--since 1995.

  The Federal Government is not doing its part to ensure that title IX 
is being enforced for women and girls with the ability and the desire 
to work in math and science. I have asked Secretary of Education Paige 
and the President that title IX be enforced as intended. But today, 
colleagues, I formally call on the individual who will shortly be 
confirmed as the Secretary of Education, Margaret Spellings, to work to 
ensure that girls and women in our federally funded schools do not 
suffer discrimination in math and the sciences. I will tell you, it is 
an issue of economics, and it is also an issue of national security. A 
report from the Hart-Rudman Commission on National Security to 2025 
warned that America's failure to invest in science and to reform math 
and science education was the second biggest threat to our national 
security. It warned that only the threat of a weapon of mass 
destruction in an American city was a greater danger. In fact, the 
Commission unanimously concluded that the danger from underinvesting in 
math and science and failing to reform math and science education was 
greater than the danger from any conceivable conventional war.
  I do not see how America can meet its national security needs if it 
is not giving women a fair shake as it relates to opportunity in math 
and science. So on this Inauguration Day, I call on the new Education 
Secretary, the individual we will shortly confirm, to take this message 
of economic fairness and national security to heart.
  The remarks that Dr. Summers has made, which have triggered such 
debate, have generated a new and important discussion about this issue. 
As the Senate confirms a new Education Secretary, I believe there is no 
better time to return our attention to the issue of how this body can 
advance opportunities for women in math and science, not by writing any 
new laws but by enforcing the laws on the books.
  Colleagues, I would say--our new chair is here--it is one thing if 
Chairman Enzi has to get together with Senator Kennedy and Senator 
Alexander and Senator Dodd and write a whole new law. Here we have a 
law on the books, but the conception is that it is just for sports, and 
it has been a good sports statute. What I am saying is we can 
revolutionize opportunities for women in math and science if we use the 
law as it was originally intended.
  Go talk to our former colleague, Senator Birch Bayh. Senator Bayh, 
who testified before my subcommittee, said this was primarily an 
academic statute, and he would very much like to see it used for 
opportunities for women.
  The conversation I had with Dr. Summers this morning certainly was 
not over when we hung up the phones. What began as a controversy this 
week I hope is going to end with a bipartisan effort, like the one that 
Senator Allen and I launched several years ago, to make sure there are 
more opportunities for women and girls to enter the math and science 
fields. That is what I intend to pursue. I intend to do it on a 
bipartisan basis, working with our new chair and colleagues whom I know 
share this interest.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, how much time do I have remaining?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 26 minutes and 56 seconds.
  Mr. ENZI. I have been requested by the Senator from Tennessee to 
yield 3 minutes to discuss the issue that has just been brought up.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I am glad I was here to hear the 
Senator from Oregon. I want to think about what he said and make two 
comments. It is a noble and good effort for us to think about how can 
we make certain young girls as well as young boys have the opportunity 
to learn more about science and math and to make careers of science and 
math should they choose to do that. I would like to urge some caution 
in the application of title IX to cause that. We may want to be more 
selective in our approach.
  I watched the good title IX can do. I was president of a university 
which saw a fantastic women's sports program, as an example, develop 
because of that--at the University of Tennessee. At least it encouraged 
that. But it might have some unintended consequences because, in many 
cases, girls are doing better than boys. Almost every liberal arts 
college in America today is having a hard time recruiting males, not 
females. In many of the graduate professional schools across the 
country we are finding growing numbers of women, which is a wonderful 
development, and they are in the majority. Were we to begin to apply 
too strict an application of title IX, we might find it restricting 
money spent for females because they are doing better than the males.
  One of the greatest problems affecting our country is why African-
American males are not doing as well in high schools, so I would like 
to discuss that some more. I appreciate his bringing it up. I am glad I 
was here to hear it.
  Second, I have read the comments about Dr. Summers and his comments. 
He may wish he said what he said in a little different way, but I am 
also a little concerned about the controversy. I understand what he 
said is he raised the question: Is it possible that there is an innate 
difference between men and women that might contribute to the smaller 
number of women who study math and science and make careers of it?
  If he were a politician on the Senate floor, he might think twice 
about saying that because he might be misinterpreted. But if you are on 
the campus of a university, you are supposed to be able to ask 
questions, even questions that are a little offbeat, even questions 
that are incorrect. I can guarantee you, having been temporarily on the 
faculty there at Harvard with an appointment, there are many more 
bizarre ideas than that that are regularly asked and regularly 
expressed. So he may be wrong; the answer to the question is no, there 
are no innate differences between men and women that contribute to the 
reason why fewer women follow math and science, but I think certainly a 
faculty member of Harvard or the president of Harvard ought to be free 
at least to discuss the question without being roundly condemned across 
the country.
  I thank the Senator from Oregon for his thoughtful comments. I would 
love to talk with him more about whether the application of title IX 
would actually have some unintended consequences, consequences he might 
not

[[Page S93]]

intend. I hope on all of our campuses and universities, even presidents 
are free to ask questions and have a free inquiry. I believe that is 
why we have those institutions.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Oregon.
  Mr. WYDEN. Mr. President, I will not belabor this. I do believe I 
have to make a couple of responses with respect to the remarks made by 
the distinguished Senator from Tennessee.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Wyoming yield time?
  Mr. ENZI. I yield 2 minutes for a quick response. This is a very 
important topic. Everybody has a common interest in making sure there 
is a quality in education all the way through. I would appreciate the 
comments of the Senator from Oregon, briefly.
  Mr. WYDEN. I want to say first of all, I am talking about enforcing a 
law that is on the books. All I am talking about is the original intent 
of a law that is on the books, which is applied primarily to the 
academic field--not sports.

  I want it understood that I am not talking about anything new. I am 
talking about enforcing the law that is on the books.
  Second, making sure that I am specific with respect to what the 
Senator from Tennessee has said, all I am talking about is that women 
would get an equal shot at all of the slots in math and science. We 
know there can be different results based upon the qualifications of an 
individual. And universities don't need to have the exact same number 
of men and women for every position on their faculties. But what I want 
us to do--and what title IX is all about--is make sure that women have 
an equal shot at all of the slots that are available. It seems to me, 
if we don't do that, we are not complying with the law that is on the 
books.
  I will tell you that we are not going to be able to meet the economic 
and national security needs of our country.
  The Senator from Tennessee is always very gracious. I am anxious to 
work with him in these areas. I want to make sure and emphasize that I 
am talking about equal opportunity--an equal shot. That is the call 
that I am making today on the floor of the Senate.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. CONRAD. Mr. President, earlier this month, the Senate Health, 
Education, Labor and Pension Committee reported to the Senate the 
nomination of Margaret Spellings for confirmation as Secretary of 
Education. I am very pleased that the nomination was unanimously 
reported and I intend to vote in support of her confirmation for this 
important post.
  Over the past 4 years since passage of the No Child Left Behind, 
NCLB, Act, there have been--and continue to be--many questions 
regarding funding and implementation of the Act. During this period, 
promises were made to Congress, the education community and parents 
that adequate funding would be provided to ensure that the various 
requirements relating to teacher quality and accountability could be 
implemented without creating an additional financial burden for States 
and local communities. Additionally, States were assured that 
sufficient flexibility would be provided to States for the development 
and implementation of State plans to meet the requirements under NCLB. 
Regrettably, these two key goals have not been met.
  The nomination of Margate Spellings is an encouraging development 
regarding our national education policy. Margaret Spellings brings to 
this office very significant credentials, including her service as the 
principal education advisor to President Bush during his term as 
Governor of Texas. She is recognized for her expertise on education 
reform and has distinguished herself as Assistant to the President for 
Domestic Policy. Additionally, Margaret Spellings played a key role in 
development of the No Child Left Behind Act.
  Most importantly, Margaret Spellings nomination represents a 
wonderful opportunity for the Department of Education to work more 
closely with Congress, States and the education community in a 
realistic implementation of NCLB. Congress supports the goals of 
improving teacher quality and ensuring that students are fully prepared 
upon graduation to meet the challenges of the 21st century. It's 
absolutely essential, however, that the Department of Education be a 
strong and realistic partner in the implementation of the Act. State 
and local officials and educators must also be assured that they will 
not be saddled with extraordinary unfunded mandates or regulations to 
comply with the act.
  I commend Margaret Spellings for her commitment to education and am 
pleased to vote in support of her confirmation as Secretary of 
Education. I look forward to working with her on critical education 
issues on a national level and to addressing the very real concerns of 
educators and school officials in North Dakota on teacher quality, 
especially the issue of highly qualified teachers and education 
funding. The No Child Left Behind Act must be an initiative of 
cooperation and partnership among all parties in the education 
community and the Federal Government if it is to succeed in improving 
education for our children.
  Ms. CANTWELL. Mr. President, today the Senate will consider and vote 
on the nomination of Margaret Spellings as the new Secretary of 
Education. I will support her nomination. Ms. Spellings is a capable 
leader, having been principally involved in shaping education policy on 
both State and Federal levels for over a decade. Her commitment to 
working on both sides of the political aisle and alongside our teachers 
and educators illustrates her dedication to strengthening our schools.
  In today's global marketplace, ensuring access to high-quality 
education--from a continuum that starts in early childhood to grade 
school, moving on to college and beyond--is central in maintaining 
America's competitive edge. To meet this goal, adequate funding of our 
public schools and post-secondary institutions is necessary to keep our 
students on the path toward achievement. I am confident that Ms. 
Spellings will uphold this responsibility as the head of the 
Department.
  Meeting the needs of learners at all ages and targeting approaches 
that prepare them to be successful is a priority. By investing in 
education, we are empowering our economy. I am eager to work with Ms. 
Spellings on strengthening our education system, making sure that every 
student reach his or her full potential and improving the quality of 
life for all families.
  Mr. DOMENICI. Mr. President, I rise today in strong support of the 
confirmation of Margaret Spellings to be Secretary of Education. 
Margaret Spellings has devoted her career to working to improve 
education for children in Texas and across the Nation. Her experience 
and dedication make her eminently qualified to serve as Secretary of 
Education.
  Margaret Spellings is the ideal person to work with States and 
Governors of both parties to achieve the goal of raising student 
achievement for all students in all schools. As the Assistant to the 
President for Domestic Policy, Ms. Spellings has been responsible for 
the development and implementation of White House policy on education, 
healthcare, labor, housing and many other elements of President Bush's 
domestic agenda. She has also served with distinction as the senior 
advisor to then-Governor George W. Bush in Texas with responsibility 
for State education policy, and as associate executive director of the 
Texas Association of School Boards.
  Throughout her professional career, Margaret Spellings has had in-
depth discussions with teachers, administrators and school board 
members. She understands about school reform and the Federal role in 
education. In Texas, she was responsible for developing and 
implementing the State's strong school accountability system, and she 
was also instrumental in the State's strong reading and charter school 
efforts. As a top domestic advisor to the President, she was integral 
to the development of the No Child Left Behind Act, which is producing 
solid improvements in reading and math for America's students and is 
helping students by transforming our public education system.
  The fact that President Bush has chosen one of his closest and most 
trusted advisors to become Education Secretary is a clear sign that 
education will continue to be a top domestic priority for this 
administration during the next 4 years. I look forward to working with 
Margaret Spellings in her new role as Education Secretary to help make 
public schools great for every child.

[[Page S94]]

  Mr. FRIST. Mr. President, it is my great pleasure and honor to 
support the nomination of Margaret Spellings to lead the Department of 
Education.
  Ms. Spellings has been a close and trusted adviser to the President 
for over a decade. She will bring to the post both local and national 
experience. In Texas, Ms. Spellings led the Texas Association of School 
Boards and advised two Governors on education policy, including then-
Governor Bush. In Washington, she has served as the top domestic policy 
advisor to the President and was one of the key architects of the 
historic No Child Left Behind Act.
  Ms. Spellings has earned a solid reputation as one of the sharpest 
minds in education policy. She is passionate about America's schools, 
and more importantly, passionate about America's school children. Like 
all of us in this chamber, she believes that every child has the right 
to learn. Education is the path to achieving the American dream. As a 
result of her work on the No Child Left Behind Act, students of every 
background are making strides.
  As the Secretary of Education, Ms. Spellings pledge to improve the No 
Child Left reforms and extend them to the high school level. She is 
also committed to enhancing college aid to assist older and 
disadvantaged students. As she told the HELP committee, reforms to No 
Child Left Behind need to be sensible and workable.
  Ms. Spellings' nomination comes to the Senate floor with strong 
bipartisan support. She was unanimously voted out of committee. Both 
sides of the aisle recognize and honor her leadership and experience. 
In Ms. Spellings, America's education system will have a thoughtful, 
flexible, and effective leader.
  Karl Rove once said that Margaret Spellings is the most powerful 
woman in Washington, whom no one knows. As a key Cabinet Secretary, she 
will be one of Washington's most luminous stars.
  I am pleased to support her nomination. I expect a swift and 
overwhelmingly bipartisan vote to make Ms. Spellings America's eighth 
Secretary of Education.
  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I yield myself such time as I need to 
conclude this debate.
  We have had a wonderful afternoon talking about some of the basic 
education policies that we need to be on top of for the kids of this 
country. I am excited about the bipartisanship that has been shown in 
this discussion this afternoon.
  We have had a pretty good covering of a lot of the different issues 
that will be coming before the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions 
Committee. But, of course, the real purpose of this discussion was to 
have a very brief discussion on the approval of the nomination of Mrs. 
Spellings to be our Secretary of Education. I am pleased there were no 
adverse comments during the entire time that we allowed, and there were 
none at the hearing we had for her.
  During that hearing, we discussed the President's education agenda 
and the future of the educational system. We asked Mrs. Spellings a lot 
of questions about her views on these issues and about her plans to 
continue to improve our schools. We were all impressed with her 
answers.
  It was evident from the comments of the Members there that Mrs. 
Spellings enjoys strong bipartisan support. I think that has been shown 
here today, too.
  As her record clearly shows, Mrs. Spellings is no stranger to the 
issues of education that will affect every child and every schoolroom 
throughout the United States.
  As the President's domestic policy adviser, Mrs. Spellings was the 
key part of the effort to emphasize the accountability and the 
importance of getting results in the classroom as part of the No Child 
Left Behind Act.
  Thanks to that important legislation, our Nation's classrooms are 
more effective. They are more efficient. They are places of learning, 
and our children are benefiting from that.
  Mrs. Spellings believes, as I do, that every school can be a good 
one, and every student can be a star student.
  It is no secret that good skills lead to good jobs. Maintaining those 
skills through a lifetime of learning will lead to a good career.
  That has been my experience as a father of three college graduates, 
and also the husband of a wife who got a college graduate degree on 
line from the University of Wyoming while we were here in Washington. 
There is a little time difference between here and Wyoming. A lot of 
her classes started pretty late at night. But she stuck with it and got 
a graduate degree. All of us are proud of her for that.
  I am proud of all three of my kids who have their degrees. One of 
them is a teacher. She has gotten a couple of degrees since she became 
a teacher. One of those got her a certification to be a principal.
  I get comments from that lobby very strongly. I am so pleased with 
the comments I get.
  I would also be remiss if I did not mention my sister, who is a 
business major for the Sheridan School District, which is one of the 
big school districts in Wyoming. She is actually the smartest of us two 
children. She is also an accountant and does an outstanding job of 
keeping track of every dime of education money and informs me of ways 
we messed up the law when we were doing that. I get a lot of good 
advice from there.
  But it is also my hope as a grandfather of a little boy who looks at 
me with trusting eyes certain that his grandpa has it under control--
and just looking at him, I can tell that he is counting on his grandpa 
and the other parents and grandparents of this body to ensure that he 
receives the kind of education he will need to find a good job, and the 
constant training and upgrading of skills to ensure that he will be 
able to keep it.

  I was just reading a book called ``The Jobs Revolution.'' A child 
starting school today probably will not be able to do like his parents 
or grandparents did, starting one job and continuing that for 30 years 
and then retiring. The average child starting school today will have 14 
different careers. Here is the key part: Ten of those haven't even been 
invented yet, which means the level of education that we have now has 
to have the flexibility to teach them to get the continuing education 
to get the new jobs so that the best jobs are maintained in the United 
States.
  Someday my grandson will take his place in the workplace, and we must 
make available to him, and to every worker who will give our workforce 
an advantage, a lifetime of learning to ensure that the United States 
retains its competitive edge in the global market.
  Mrs. Spellings understands this--the fact that the workplace isn't 
what it used to be.
  In this global, technology-driven economy, school can never be out. 
Today's workplace demands an ever-changing workforce that can adapt to 
the requirements and skills of the new high-tech jobs that are in such 
high demand.
  Keeping workers' abilities current will be vital if they are to 
continue to find every job they will need to support their families and 
maintain consistently higher standards of living.
  As chairman of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and 
Pensions, I am looking forward to working with Mrs. Spellings on these 
issues and many more--such as the importance of using advanced 
technology to improve our rural schools.
  As we work to address this and the other challenges of rural school 
systems, we must continue to be flexible in our approach.
  That is the only way we can ensure every child has access to a 
quality education and that our school systems are run in a manner that 
makes more sense for the population they serve.
  Having spoken with Mrs. Spellings, I am certain she shares my concern 
about rural education and that she will work together with this 
Congress to continue to make the changes that will be needed to keep 
our educational system and the lifetime of learning it must provide 
moving forward.
  As committee chairman, I am honored to be able to join the 
distinguished ranking member of the committee, Senator Kennedy, in 
supporting the confirmation of Mrs. Margaret Spellings to be the next 
Secretary of Education.
  I am extremely pleased that we worked in a bipartisan manner in order 
to have Mrs. Spellings confirmed by the date of the President's second 
inauguration.

[[Page S95]]

  Today, this body has the opportunity to confirm an excellent nominee 
with the skills, with the experience, and the character to help bring 
our students of all ages and backgrounds along the pathway to fulfill 
their own version of the American dream. I am confident we can do so, 
and provide our children and students of all ages with an effective 
advocate at the Department of Education.
  Thank you, Mr. President. I think all Members who wish to speak on 
this have spoken.
  I ask unanimous consent that all time remaining on both sides be 
yielded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? Without objection, it is 
so ordered.
  Mr. ENZI. I ask the Senate to proceed to the vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Will the Senate advise and 
consent to the nomination of Margaret Spellings, of Texas, to be 
Secretary of Education?
  The nomination was confirmed.
  Mr. ENZI. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. DURBIN. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The President will be immediately notified of 
the Senate's action.

                          ____________________