[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 67 (Wednesday, April 25, 2007)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E853-E854]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         H.R. 362 AND H.R. 363

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. SCOTT GARRETT

                             of new jersey

                    in the house of representatives

                        Tuesday, April 24, 2007

  Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Madam Speaker, I am encouraged by the 
continued development of science, technology, engineering, and 
mathematics (STEM) education programs in the United States as we seek 
to stay competitive at the global level. While H.R. 362 and 363 attempt 
to boost these endeavors, we have to examine at what cost and whether

[[Page E854]]

that cost is commensurate with what they accomplish. H.R. 363 alone 
would cost $1.25 billion over 5 years and H.R. 362 represents an 
expenditure of $1.5 billion over 5 years.
  Oddly, these duplicative bills seek to establish programs that are 
already in existence and expand others that have yet to show a return 
on their original investment. As outlined by the Statement of 
Administrative Policy, ``the Academic Competitiveness Council has 
identified 105 existing STEM education programs spending over $3 
billion annually, including 45 programs that support training of STEM 
teachers, and found that very few of these programs demonstrated 
evidence-based effectiveness.''
  My colleagues on the other side of the aisle would like to pour more 
money into programs that are simply not working. I have continued to 
support successful legislation like loan forgiveness for science and 
math teachers to encourage development in this field. I also encourage 
individual states to look into programs like that in New Jersey's Core 
Curriculum Content standards, which I was proud to work on in the New 
Jersey Assembly. Under this program, students are taught the highest 
level of math and science while also providing development of pre-
engineering and design and equipping students with modern computer 
literacy.
  Out of a sense of responsibility to our Nation's next generation, I 
could not in good conscience support these expensive, bureaucracy-laden 
bills. I will continue to support measures that are proven to work 
while upholding states' Constitutional right to design STEM programs 
which work well for them and their students.

                          ____________________