Congressional Record, Volume 151 Issue 3 (Thursday, January 20, 2005)

[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.

____________________