[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 109 (Friday, July 26, 2013)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1147-E1148]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           OPPOSING H.R. 5, THE LETTING OUR STUDENTS DOWN ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. DANNY K. DAVIS

                              of illinois

                    in the house of representatives

                         Friday, July 26, 2013

  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I stridently oppose H.R. 5, the 
Letting our Students Down Act. This partisan proposal to reauthorize 
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act dismantles critical civil 
rights protections for our most vulnerable learners, dramatically 
undermines federal investment in education, directs taxpayer funds away 
from public schools to private entities, and restricts monies from the 
students who need it the most.
  The Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 is a landmark 
civil rights bill given its purpose to ensure each and every child a 
quality education by closing achievement gaps due to poverty and 
inequity. Since 1965, we have learned that to fulfill this mission, we 
must ensure that schools and states have the resources available to 
meet their academic needs. We also have learned that there remains an 
important role for the federal government to encourage thoughtful 
accountability systems to help identify schools and districts needing 
assistance in educating all students. Accountability systems with clear 
performance targets serve as an essential tool for ensuring that all 
students, regardless of race, ethnicity, language status, national 
origin, income, ZIP code or disability are taught at high levels. 
Unfortunately, the 2002 reauthorization also included overly 
prescriptive penalties and interventions that decreased standards, 
overburdened schools, and pushed classroom instruction to ``teaching to 
the test.'' Thus, the challenge facing policymakers during 
reauthorization is balancing federal oversight and decision making at 
the state level without abdicating federal responsibility for 
safeguarding equal educational opportunity regardless of race, 
ethnicity, language, country of origin, income or ability.
  H.R. 5 undermines critical federal investment in education and 
eschews the federal responsibility to encourage states to improve the 
education of all children under the guise of state flexibility. Rather 
than investing in education, the Republican plan exacerbates school 
funding shortfalls by locking in draconian spending cuts, removing over 
a billion dollars from our classrooms and students. To further ensure 
the dismantling of the federal investment in education, H.R. 5 
prohibits Congress from appropriating any money above the excessively-
low spending levels set and even bans increasing federal investment 
with inflation. In addition to enacting harsh reductions in spending at 
the federal level, H.R. 5 eviscerates education investment by removing 
the federal maintenance of effort provisions, thereby licensing states 
to reduce state education funding and redirect these funds to non-
education activities.
  Further, H.R. 5 undercuts federal accountability and taxpayer 
investment by eliminating requirements that schools or districts take 
action when failing to improve academic achievement or graduation 
rates. Specifically, the 2002 law required states and districts to 
examine and address the performance of vulnerable students, including 
at-risk, migrant, racial/ethnic minority, English Language Learner, and 
low-income students as well as students with disabilities. H.R. 5 
removes the requirement for intervention, relinquishing the federal 
responsibility to ensure that states provide equal educational 
opportunity for our youngest citizens. The bill removes other 
safeguards for vulnerable students as well. For example, it removes the 
one percent cap on the use of alternative assessment scores for 
accountability purposes for students with significant cognitive 
disabilities, permitting schools to provide less rigorous curricula and 
assessments to an unlimited number of students with disabilities. This 
change is unnecessary, promotes lesser standards and assessments for 
students with disabilities, and incentivizes the over-identification of 
students with disabilities. Another illustration of weakened 
protections for vulnerable students is the lessening of funding and 
protections for homeless students. H.R. 5 reduces the McKinney-Vento 
authorization despite a 57 percent increase in homeless children since 
2009. It strikes provisions improving access to educational services 
for homeless students championed by former Illinois Congresswoman Judy 
Biggert and included in prior Republican versions of this bill. H.R. 5 
also eliminates critical supports for afterschool programs, STEM 
enrichment, physical education, the arts, music, as well as social and 
emotional programs that support positive behaviors.
  Teachers, the dedicated stewards of our education system, are harmed 
by eliminating requirements for quality professional development, a 
critical component of advancing teacher content and pedagogical 
knowledge. Under this bill, proposed teacher evaluation systems are 
punitive, used to hire and fire rather than to encourage professional 
growth and improvement. H.R. 5 removes protections for

[[Page E1148]]

collective bargaining and shamefully shifts funding away for teacher 
supports from the highest need schools and students.
  One of the most important responsibilities of a nation is the 
education of her public. Federal oversight to ensure that each student 
is college and career ready upon high school graduation is a 
commonsense policy to strengthen the well-being of our citizens and the 
competitiveness of our country in a global economy. It is our moral 
imperative to ensure that each child has equal protections under the 
law. The Republicans bill reflects a disconnect with the realities 
facing our nation's schools and students, a disconnect underscored by 
the numerous organizations from all sectors of society that have 
publicly opposed the bill. In uncommon agreement, diverse groups such 
as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Business Round Table, the National 
Center for Learning Disabilities, the Leadership Conference on Civil 
Rights, Easter Seals, and the American Federation of Teachers expressed 
concerns that underfunding schools without accountability fosters 
systemic inequities that have devastating economic consequences for all 
students and our country.
  H.R. 5, the Letting Students Down Act is a false promise to 
reauthorize this critical law enacted to fight the ``war on poverty'' 
by ensuring equal access to a free and public education. We cannot let 
our students down; we must lift them up. The Democratic substitute 
offered by Representative Miller empowers states and school districts 
to set realistic achievement targets for improving student growth, 
achievement, and graduation rates while granting flexibility in 
determining appropriate interventions. I join with dozens of 
stakeholders in supporting the Miller Substitute and opposing H.R. 5.

                          ____________________