Congressional Record, Volume 161 Issue 33 (Thursday, February 26, 2015)

[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 33 (Thursday, February 26, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H1266-H1285]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

STUDENT SUCCESS ACT

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 125 and rule
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House
on the state of the Union for the further consideration of the bill,
H.R. 5.
Will the gentleman from Idaho (Mr. Simpson) kindly take the chair.

{time} 1848

In the Committee of the Whole

Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the
Whole House on the state of the Union for the further consideration of
the bill (H.R. 5) to support State and local accountability for public
education, protect State and local authority, inform parents of the
performance of their children's schools, and for other purposes, with
Mr. Simpson (Acting Chair) in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Acting CHAIR. When the Committee of the Whole rose earlier today,
amendment No. 14 printed in part B of House Report 114-29 offered by
the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. McKinley) had been disposed of.

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, proceedings
will now resume on those amendments printed in part B of House Report
114-29 on which further proceedings were postponed, in the following
order:
Amendment No. 1 by Mr. Kennedy of Massachusetts.
Amendment No. 2 by Mr. Grothman of Wisconsin.
Amendment No. 6 by Mr. Castro of Texas.
Amendment No. 9 by Mr. Quigley of Illinois.
Amendment No. 13 by Ms. Moore of Wisconsin.
The Chair will reduce to 2 minutes the minimum time for any
electronic vote after the first vote in this series.

Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Kennedy

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from
Massachusetts (Mr. Kennedy), on which further proceedings were
postponed and on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 204,
noes 217, not voting 11, as follows:

[Roll No. 95]

AYES--204

Adams
Aguilar
Ashford
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello (PA)
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Curbelo (FL)
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Dent
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Gibson
Graham
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Guinta
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanna
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson, E. B.
Jolly
Kaptur
Katko
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Knight
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meng
Moore
Moulton
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Norcross
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reichert
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Rigell
Ros-Lehtinen
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schock
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sherman
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Stefanik
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Upton
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
Young (AK)

NOES--217

[[Page H1267]]

Latta
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
MacArthur
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Paulsen
Perry
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Russell
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Trott
Turner
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke

NOT VOTING--11

Clay
Hinojosa
Hurt (VA)
Johnson (GA)
Lee
Long
Meeks
Roe (TN)
Sewell (AL)
Speier
Waters, Maxine

{time} 1910

Messrs. SCHWEIKERT, DENHAM, DUNCAN of South Carolina, and SMITH of
Nebraska changed their vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Messrs. COSTELLO of Pennsylvania, RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois, DIAZ-
BALART, DOLD, CURBELO of Florida, UPTON, Ms. TSONGAS, Messrs. CLYBURN,
AL GREEN of Texas, ROYCE, Ms. STEFANIK, and Ms. HERRERA BEUTLER changed
their vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Grothman

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Wisconsin
(Mr. Grothman) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This is a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 114,
noes 311, not voting 7, as follows:

[Roll No. 96]

AYES--114

Amash
Ashford
Barr
Bera
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blum
Bonamici
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brownley (CA)
Buck
Burgess
Capuano
Castro (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clawson (FL)
Collins (GA)
Cooper
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Doggett
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Engel
Fincher
Fleming
Flores
Fortenberry
Franks (AZ)
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Harris
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Himes
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huffman
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Jackson Lee
Jenkins (KS)
Jolly
Jones
Jordan
Kelly (PA)
Labrador
Lance
Loudermilk
Love
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Massie
McClintock
McHenry
Meadows
Messer
Mica
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Nadler
Neugebauer
Nolan
Olson
Palmer
Pascrell
Perry
Peters
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Ribble
Rohrabacher
Rooney (FL)
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott (VA)
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Smith (NE)
Stewart
Stutzman
Weber (TX)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Wittman
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (IA)

NOES--311

Abraham
Adams
Aderholt
Aguilar
Allen
Amodei
Babin
Barletta
Barton
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Benishek
Beyer
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (MI)
Black
Blumenauer
Bost
Boustany
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brooks (IN)
Brown (FL)
Buchanan
Bucshon
Bustos
Butterfield
Byrne
Calvert
Capps
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coffman
Cohen
Cole
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Connolly
Conyers
Cook
Costa
Costello (PA)
Courtney
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Curbelo (FL)
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
Denham
Dent
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Dold
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Eshoo
Esty
Farenthold
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Forbes
Foster
Foxx
Frankel (FL)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Goodlatte
Graham
Granger
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Hartzler
Hastings
Heck (NV)
Heck (WA)
Hensarling
Higgins
Honda
Hoyer
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Israel
Issa
Jeffries
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Joyce
Kaptur
Katko
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kline
Knight
Kuster
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latta
Lawrence
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lummis
Lynch
MacArthur
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Marchant
Marino
Matsui
McCarthy
McCaul
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
McSally
Meehan
Meeks
Meng
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Moore
Moulton
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Napolitano
Neal
Newhouse
Noem
Norcross
Nugent
Nunes
O'Rourke
Palazzo
Pallone
Paulsen
Payne
Pearce
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peterson
Pingree
Pittenger
Pitts
Pocan
Poliquin
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Rice (NY)
Rice (SC)
Richmond
Rigell
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rokita
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Russell
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schock
Schrader
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (MO)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Stefanik
Stivers
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Trott
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Watson Coleman
Webster (FL)
Welch
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (FL)
Wilson (SC)
Womack
Yarmuth
Young (AK)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke

NOT VOTING--7

Hinojosa
Hurt (VA)
Lee
Long
Roe (TN)
Speier
Waters, Maxine

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 1916

Mr. PAYNE changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
Mr. BARR changed his vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
(By unanimous consent, Mr. McCarthy was allowed to speak out of
order.)

Legislative Program

Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, Members are advised that the House is
expected to complete its work for the week by tomorrow evening.
Information on the legislation that will be considered and more
detailed floor timing for tomorrow will be announced after the
conclusion of the Rules Committee hearing tonight.
Mr. HOYER. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. McCARTHY. I yield to the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. HOYER. What can we expect to be on the floor tomorrow, Mr.
Leader?
Mr. McCARTHY. Well, Mr. Whip, I expect that we will deal with the
current schedule that we have before us, plus dealing with DHS.
Mr. HOYER. Can the majority leader tell us, in light of fact that is
less than 24 hours from now, what we might be considering with respect
to keeping the

[[Page H1268]]

Department of Homeland Security operating on a permanent basis through
September 30?
Mr. McCARTHY. As the gentleman knows, we dealt with this weeks ago
and sent it over to the Senate. And as I just listed before, we will
provide that information after the Rules Committee hearing tonight.
Mr. HOYER. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. McCARTHY. Gladly.
Mr. HOYER. The Rules Committee is going to meet tonight at 9:30
tonight, is that the--8:00. Somebody said 8 o'clock over here--a member
of the Rules Committee. Was it at 8:00 or at 9:30?
Mr. McCARTHY. I think it was--where is our Rules Committee chair?
Eight o'clock.
Mr. HOYER. Eight o'clock. Will the gentleman yield again?
Mr. McCARTHY. Gladly.
Mr. HOYER. Mr. Leader, we have been now--you are correct--6 weeks
leaving the Department of Homeland Security twisting in the wind. We
have done that as the gentleman knows----
Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I have been very clear
about the schedule for tomorrow. We will end our work by tomorrow
evening. This House has taken action to make sure that DHS is fully
funded. We did our part.
I yield back.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman yields back.

Amendment No. 6 Offered by Mr. Castro of Texas

The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, 2-minute voting will continue.
There was no objection.
The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas (Mr.
Castro) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the
noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

The Acting CHAIR. A recorded vote has been demanded.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The Acting CHAIR. This will be a 2-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 182,
noes 243, not voting 7, as follows:

[Roll No. 97]

AYES--182

Adams
Aguilar
Ashford
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Graham
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Moulton
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Norcross
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Reichert
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth
Yoho

NOES--243

Abraham
Aderholt
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Babin
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Bost
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Bustos
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Cook
Cooper
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Garrett
Gibbs
Gibson
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Katko
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Knight
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
Levin
LoBiondo
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
MacArthur
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Polis
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Russell
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schock
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Trott
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke

NOT VOTING--7

Hinojosa
Hurt (VA)
Lee
Long
Roe (TN)
Speier
Waters, Maxine

Announcement by the Acting Chair

The Acting CHAIR (during the vote). There is 1 minute remaining.

{time} 1924

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 9 Offered by Mr. Quigley

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Illinois
(Mr. Quigley) on which further proceedings were postponed and on which
the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 98]

AYES--218

Adams
Aguilar
Ashford
Barletta
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Bost
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello (PA)
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Curbelo (FL)
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
Davis, Rodney
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene

[[Page H1269]]

Denham
Dent
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Diaz-Balart
Dingell
Doggett
Dold
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Fitzpatrick
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Gibson
Graham
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hanna
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Herrera Beutler
Higgins
Himes
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Jolly
Kaptur
Katko
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kinzinger (IL)
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McKinley
McNerney
Meehan
Meeks
Mooney (WV)
Moore
Moulton
Murphy (FL)
Murphy (PA)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Norcross
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Ros-Lehtinen
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schock
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Simpson
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (NJ)
Smith (WA)
Stefanik
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Upton
Valadao
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Watson Coleman
Welch
Whitfield
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

NOES--201

Abraham
Aderholt
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Babin
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Cook
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Garrett
Gibbs
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Granger
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kline
Knight
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
MacArthur
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mulvaney
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Russell
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Smith (MO)
Smith (TX)
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Trott
Turner
Wagner
Walberg
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Westmoreland
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke

NOT VOTING--13

Blum
Hinojosa
Hurt (VA)
Lee
Long
Meng
Mullin
Palmer
Poliquin
Roe (TN)
Smith (NE)
Speier
Waters, Maxine

{time} 1928

So the amendment was agreed to.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 13 Offered by Ms. Moore

The Acting CHAIR. The unfinished business is the demand for a
recorded vote on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from
Wisconsin (Ms. Moore) on which further proceedings were postponed and
on which the noes prevailed by voice vote.
The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
The Clerk redesignated the amendment.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 99]

AYES--185

Adams
Aguilar
Ashford
Bass
Beatty
Becerra
Bera
Beyer
Bishop (GA)
Blumenauer
Bonamici
Boyle, Brendan F.
Brady (PA)
Brown (FL)
Brownley (CA)
Bustos
Butterfield
Capps
Capuano
Cardenas
Carney
Carson (IN)
Cartwright
Castor (FL)
Castro (TX)
Chu, Judy
Cicilline
Clark (MA)
Clarke (NY)
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Cohen
Connolly
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Courtney
Crowley
Cuellar
Cummings
Davis (CA)
Davis, Danny
DeFazio
DeGette
Delaney
DeLauro
DelBene
DeSaulnier
Deutch
Dingell
Doggett
Doyle, Michael F.
Duckworth
Edwards
Ellison
Engel
Eshoo
Esty
Farr
Fattah
Foster
Frankel (FL)
Fudge
Gabbard
Gallego
Garamendi
Gibson
Graham
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Gutierrez
Hahn
Hastings
Heck (WA)
Higgins
Himes
Honda
Hoyer
Huffman
Israel
Jackson Lee
Jeffries
Johnson (GA)
Johnson, E. B.
Kaptur
Katko
Keating
Kelly (IL)
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilmer
Kind
Kirkpatrick
Kuster
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lawrence
Levin
Lewis
Lieu, Ted
Lipinski
Loebsack
Lofgren
Lowenthal
Lowey
Lujan Grisham (NM)
Lujan, Ben Ray (NM)
Lynch
Maloney, Carolyn
Maloney, Sean
Matsui
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McNerney
Meeks
Meng
Moore
Moulton
Murphy (FL)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Nolan
Norcross
O'Rourke
Pallone
Pascrell
Payne
Pelosi
Perlmutter
Peters
Peterson
Pingree
Pocan
Polis
Price (NC)
Quigley
Rangel
Rice (NY)
Richmond
Roybal-Allard
Ruiz
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Schakowsky
Schiff
Schrader
Scott (VA)
Scott, David
Serrano
Sewell (AL)
Sherman
Sinema
Sires
Slaughter
Smith (WA)
Swalwell (CA)
Takai
Takano
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Titus
Tonko
Torres
Tsongas
Van Hollen
Vargas
Veasey
Vela
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walz
Wasserman Schultz
Watson Coleman
Welch
Wilson (FL)
Yarmuth

NOES--239

Abraham
Aderholt
Allen
Amash
Amodei
Babin
Barletta
Barr
Barton
Benishek
Bilirakis
Bishop (MI)
Bishop (UT)
Black
Blackburn
Blum
Bost
Boustany
Brady (TX)
Brat
Bridenstine
Brooks (AL)
Brooks (IN)
Buchanan
Buck
Bucshon
Burgess
Byrne
Calvert
Carter (GA)
Carter (TX)
Chabot
Chaffetz
Clawson (FL)
Coffman
Cole
Collins (GA)
Collins (NY)
Comstock
Conaway
Cook
Costello (PA)
Cramer
Crawford
Crenshaw
Culberson
Curbelo (FL)
Davis, Rodney
Denham
Dent
DeSantis
DesJarlais
Diaz-Balart
Dold
Duffy
Duncan (SC)
Duncan (TN)
Ellmers (NC)
Emmer (MN)
Farenthold
Fincher
Fitzpatrick
Fleischmann
Fleming
Flores
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foxx
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Garrett
Gibbs
Gohmert
Goodlatte
Gosar
Gowdy
Graves (GA)
Graves (LA)
Graves (MO)
Grayson
Griffith
Grothman
Guinta
Guthrie
Hanna
Hardy
Harper
Harris
Hartzler
Heck (NV)
Hensarling
Herrera Beutler
Hice, Jody B.
Hill
Holding
Hudson
Huelskamp
Huizenga (MI)
Hultgren
Hunter
Hurd (TX)
Issa
Jenkins (KS)
Jenkins (WV)
Johnson (OH)
Johnson, Sam
Jolly
Jones
Jordan
Joyce
Kelly (PA)
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kinzinger (IL)
Kline
Knight
Labrador
LaMalfa
Lamborn
Lance
Latta
LoBiondo
Loudermilk
Love
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lummis
MacArthur
Marchant
Marino
Massie
McCarthy
McCaul
McClintock
McHenry
McKinley
McMorris Rodgers
McSally
Meadows
Meehan
Messer
Mica
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Moolenaar
Mooney (WV)
Mullin
Mulvaney
Murphy (PA)
Neugebauer
Newhouse
Noem
Nugent
Nunes
Olson
Palazzo
Palmer
Paulsen
Pearce
Perry
Pittenger
Pitts
Poe (TX)
Poliquin
Pompeo
Posey
Price, Tom
Ratcliffe
Reed
Reichert
Renacci
Ribble
Rice (SC)
Rigell
Roby
Rogers (AL)

[[Page H1270]]

Rogers (KY)
Rohrabacher
Rokita
Rooney (FL)
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothfus
Rouzer
Royce
Russell
Ryan (WI)
Salmon
Sanford
Scalise
Schock
Schweikert
Scott, Austin
Sensenbrenner
Sessions
Shimkus
Shuster
Simpson
Smith (MO)
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Stefanik
Stewart
Stivers
Stutzman
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiberi
Tipton
Trott
Turner
Upton
Valadao
Wagner
Walberg
Walden
Walker
Walorski
Walters, Mimi
Weber (TX)
Webster (FL)
Wenstrup
Westerman
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Williams
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Womack
Woodall
Yoder
Yoho
Young (AK)
Young (IA)
Young (IN)
Zeldin
Zinke

NOT VOTING--8

Granger
Hinojosa
Hurt (VA)
Lee
Long
Roe (TN)
Speier
Waters, Maxine

{time} 1933

So the amendment was rejected.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

Amendment No. 15 Offered by Mr. Delaney

The Acting CHAIR (Ms. Ros-Lehtinen). It is now in order to consider
amendment No. 15 printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Mr. DELANEY. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 235, line 4, strike ``and'' at the end.
Page 235, line 9, strike the period at the end and insert
``; and''.
Page 235, after line 9, insert the following:
``(F) Support State or local pay for success initiatives
that meet the purposes of this part.''.
Page 241, line 4, strike ``or'' at the end.
Page 241, line 7, strike the period at the end and insert
``; or''.
Page 241, after line 7, insert the following:
``(10) carrying out activities related to pay for success
initiatives that meet the purposes of this part.''.
Page 250, after line 20, insert the following:
``(ix) Supporting State or local pay for success
initiatives that meet the purposes of this part.''.
Page 257, line 25, strike ``and'' at the end.
Page 258, line 3, strike the period at the end and insert
``; and''.
Page 258, after line 3, insert the following:
``(I) carrying out activities related to pay for success
initiatives that meet the purposes of this part.''.
Page 508, after line 17, insert the following (and
redesignate the succeeding provisions accordingly):
``(34) Pay for success initiatives.--The term `pay for
success initiatives' means initiatives--
``(A) that produce a measurable, clearly defined outcome
that results in social benefit and direct cost savings to the
local, State, or Federal Government;
``(B) except as provided in subparagraph (D)(i), that make
payments only when agreed-upon outcomes are achieved;
``(C) for which a feasibility study is conducted on the
initiative describing how the proposed intervention is based
on strong or moderate evidence of effectiveness and how the
initiative will meet the requirements of subparagraph (A);
and
``(D) for which--
``(i) an evaluation, which may be paid for out of funding
for the pay for success initiative without respect to a
successful outcome, is included that uses experimental
designs using random assignment or other research
methodologies that allow for the strongest possible causal
inferences when random assignment is not feasible by an
independent evaluator to determine whether the initiative has
met the outcomes described in subparagraph (A); and
``(ii) the State or local educational agency produces an
annual, publicly available report on the progress of the
initiative in meeting the requirements of subparagraph (A),
as appropriate.''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentleman
from Maryland (Mr. Delaney) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Maryland.
Mr. DELANEY. Madam Chair, I yield myself 3 minutes.
I want to start by thanking Congressman Young, Congressman Polis,
Chairman Kline, and Ranking Member Scott for their support of this
bipartisan amendment. I know my colleagues join me, Madam Chair, in the
view that whenever the government, the private sector, and the not-for-
profit community work well together, we get better outcomes for all of
our citizens, which is exactly what the Pay for Success framework is
designed to do. It allows local governments to innovate and address
best practices and be fiscally responsible with respect to the
provision of government services.
This amendment, Madam Chair, is designed specifically to allow the
funds that are allocated in the underlying bill for teacher training
and retention to utilize Pay for Success frameworks against those
programs.
Teacher turnover is a big issue in the United States. It is estimated
to cost our educational system $1- to $2 billion. In my own State of
Maryland, it is estimated to cost up to $45 million. It is very
important that we make a difference against this problem. We want to
make sure that educational agencies have as many tools available at
their disposal as possible to work against this problem, including Pay
for Success approaches and frameworks.
Madam Chair, I want to thank my colleagues for their support of this
amendment, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Indiana. Madam Chair, I claim time in opposition,
although I am supportive of the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for
5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. YOUNG of Indiana. Madam Chair, I want to thank the gentleman from
Maryland for his hard work on this important amendment and for his
leadership. Currently, teacher attrition costs the United States over
$1 billion each year. Many teachers leave within the first 5 years
because of a lack of effective mentoring, training, and support.
Providing these teachers with effective, evidence-based training
through a Pay for Success model will not only save the government
money, it will also help to retain top talent in the classroom.
Madam Chair, this amendment would do just that. It would give States
and local school districts the ability to participate in this
innovative new financing model in order to retain our best teachers.
Now, Pay for Success projects, also known as social impact bonds or
social impact partnerships, are public-private partnerships that
harness philanthropic and other private sector investments to scale up
scientifically proven social and educational programs. Because these
projects are focused on results, government money is only paid out to
private sector investors when desired outcomes are met and only in
accordance with the value assigned to those successful outcomes. This
social impact financing model has the potential to fundamentally
transform our Nation's education programs, shifting the focus of such
programs from inputs to outcomes.
I want to thank the gentleman from Maryland, the gentleman from
Colorado, and others for their leadership on this issue. I also want to
thank my fellow colleague from Indiana for his overall leadership on
this educational bill. I look forward to our continued cooperation on
these efforts. I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DELANEY. Madam Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from
Colorado (Mr. Polis), my friend.
Mr. POLIS. Madam Chairman, I want to thank my colleagues from
Maryland and from Indiana for bringing this amendment forth. I am
honored to be a cosponsor of this amendment.
Social impact bonds essentially allow a way in which we can leverage
philanthropic dollars to meet a socially desirable outcome. It is only
paid back if that outcome is reached. What this can apply to teacher
development and teacher training is a type of market discipline--to
fund what works, to leverage our limited resources through a Pay for
Success mechanism to ensure that we are getting what we paid for.
This is important to educators who deserve the very best in
professional development. It is important for students to make sure
that they benefit from the limited professional development dollars
that we have. It is also important for the philanthropic community and
for government investment because we want to make sure our dollars are
deployed as positively as possible.
Some of these metrics can include: Does the professional development
lead the recipient to help improve student achievement? That is one of
the ultimate benchmarks of whether professional development and teacher
training work. By tying and aligning our limited resources for outcomes
for supporting teachers through a Pay for

[[Page H1271]]

Success initiative, we can make sure that our limited investment has a
maximum positive benefit.
Madam Chairman, I strongly urge my colleagues to adopt this strong
amendment.
Mr. DELANEY. Madam Chair, I want to thank the gentleman from Colorado
for his support of the amendment.
I yield 1 minute to my colleague from Virginia (Mr. Scott), the
ranking member.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman for
yielding.
This amendment will make evidence-based prevention approaches a
reality. We all know that many evidence-based approaches save more
money than they cost. This will allow the private sector to make those
investments and prove that we are right. So I want to thank the
gentleman from Maryland for introducing the amendment and thank him and
the gentleman from Indiana for their leadership.
This is a great amendment, Madam Chair. I trust it will be adopted,
and we will be able to make great progress in education and other
social services.
Mr. DELANEY. Madam Chair, again, I urge my colleagues to support the
amendment. I thank my colleagues for supporting it here on the floor.
As I said in the beginning, whenever the government, the private
sector, and the nonprofit community work together, we get better
outcomes for our citizens.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. YOUNG of Indiana. Madam Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentlewoman from the State of Washington (Mrs. McMorris Rodgers), my
hardworking colleague.
Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. Madam Chair, I rise in support of the
amendment, and I rise to support strong, conservative legislation that
provides equal opportunity and education for everyone in this country,
no matter their walk of life, how much money they may have, or what
challenges they face. The Student Success Act improves, strengthens,
and modernizes our classrooms to give all of our students the
opportunity to reach their full potential.
As the mom of a 7-year-old son, Cole, who has special needs, I know
firsthand that everyone has different needs in the classroom. Every
student's path to learning is both unique and equally important. So I
am proud to advance legislation that recognizes that.
It all starts by innovating and empowering America's students. That
is why I have championed the 21st Century Classroom Innovation Act,
included in today's legislation, and together we will ensure that that
technology will be fully incorporated into our classrooms to enhance
personalized learning for our students. By blending traditional
learning programs with high tech tools, we will take our classrooms and
our students to the 21st century.
But the foundation of real, educational reform goes beyond
technological advancements and begins with an unequivocal recognition
that our students may have different needs, but they should all have an
equal opportunity--an equal opportunity to learn, an equal opportunity
to graduate, and an equal opportunity for a diploma.

{time} 1945

That is why I have championed several important provisions in the
Student Success Act that address these needs.
First, when a State establishes guidelines for individualized
alternative testing, they will do so on a subject-by-subject basis.
Parents must be clearly informed when they move their children in
alternative testing, so they will fully understand the implications of
making those decisions for their kids.
Right now, far too many parents with children with disabilities
aren't told when their kids are moved into alternative testing. This
legislation changes that.
The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
Mr. YOUNG of Indiana. I yield an additional 1 minute to the
gentlewoman.
Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. It ensures that students with disabilities who
have taken alternative assessments cannot be prevented from receiving a
regular diploma.
These provisions will enhance data transparency, improve
communication between parents and teachers, and give everyone an equal
opportunity to receive a diploma. It ensures that when my son Cole and
millions like him walk into a classroom, they will be defined by their
abilities, not their disabilities.
At its very core, this legislation changes the way we think about and
educate those with disabilities. That is how we achieve real 21st
century education reform.
Mr. YOUNG of Indiana. Madam Chair, I yield the balance of my time to
the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Rokita), my colleague.
Mr. ROKITA. Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman from Indiana, my good
friend, for his leadership on this issue and the gentleman on the other
side of the aisle. I appreciate it very much.
I rise in strong support of this amendment. I think it is a great
example of the kind of use that we intended with this language to begin
with.
The Federal Government spends tens of billions of dollars on
education annually. If you ask the average Hoosier or any American,
they think Washington does a pretty poor job of spending those dollars
efficiently, as was just demonstrated.
Instead of business as usual, we should look for new and innovative
ways to achieve results, which is exactly the concept behind the
gentleman's Pay for Success initiatives. These initiatives provide
flexibility for the public and private sectors to partner together
around common goals. This model ensures value for taxpayer dollars.
As a cosponsor of the underlying bill, along with Chairman Kline and
certain members of the Education and the Workforce Committee, we would
urge all our colleagues, both Republican and Democrat, to support this
amendment.
Mr. YOUNG of Indiana. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my
time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Delaney).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 16 Offered by Mr. Jeffries

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 16
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Mr. JEFFRIES. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 240, line 14, strike ``technology,'' and insert
``technology (including education about the harms of
copyright piracy),''.
Page 338, line 5, strike ``technology,'' and insert
``technology (including education about the harms of
copyright piracy),''.
Page 355, line 4, strike ``technology,'' and insert
``technology (including education about the harms of
copyright piracy),''.
Page 511, line 6, strike ``technology,'' and insert
``technology (including education about the harms of
copyright piracy),''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Jeffries) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
Mr. JEFFRIES. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Chair, I rise today in support of a modest change to H.R. 5
that would amend relevant portions of the Student Success Act related
to technology to include education about the harms of copyright piracy.
This amendment is designed to encourage local educational agencies,
teachers, educational staff, and parents to discuss the harms of
copyright piracy, as well as the use of technology in a responsible
fashion.
In the absence of classroom instruction about the importance of
intellectual property, as well as the harms of copyright piracy at the
elementary and secondary school level, young people are often unaware
of the boundaries established in law to prevent the illegal
infringement of copyrighted content.
Research suggests that in order to uphold the societal value of
respect for intellectual property, individuals must learn or be
introduced to this principle at an early age. This mission, of course,
is anchored in the United States constitutional charge to Congress to
protect intellectual property.
Article I, section 8, clause 8 of the United States Constitution
says:

[[Page H1272]]

The Congress shall have power to promote the progress of
science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to
authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective
writings and discoveries.

We have an article I responsibility as Members of Congress to insure
that creators and innovators are not robbed of the fruits of their
labor. Technology, of course, is a wonderful thing, and it is the way
of the future.
It is an important tool, and we must ensure that our students are
using it in a safe and responsible fashion or, certainly, at least,
provide our local educational stakeholders the opportunity to
disseminate information in a manner that they see fit.
In the classroom, children are currently taught that plagiarism is an
ethical violation of academic honesty. This amendment will hopefully
facilitate the extension of this discussion into the digital era.
To that end, we must help our local schools and parents be given the
tools necessary to proactively educate, to the extent that they see
fit, information about the unforeseen impact on copyright piracy, the
importance of intellectual property, and its connection, of course, to
the American economy.
A variety of bipartisan stakeholders support this amendment,
including the educational organizations such as CreativeFuture, as well
as the Copyright Alliance, the Recording Industry Association of
America, the National Music Publishers' Association, the Songwriters
Guild of America, the Authors Guild, The Association of American
Publishers, as well as The Recording Academy.
Intellectual property protection is a foundation of the American
economy. Our continued prosperity, at least in part, depends on
protecting the innovation and the creative output of artists,
musicians, scientists, and engineers and insuring that the next
generation of creators could flourish as well.
Thus, it is important to recognize the vital role that education can
play in helping the future leaders of America understand the value of
the American creative community and protect the significant sector for
future generations.
For these reasons, I urge my colleagues to support this modest
amendment.
Madam Chair, I yield 30 seconds to the distinguished gentleman from
Virginia (Mr. Scott).
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Madam Chair, I thank the gentleman for
yielding.
Madam Chair, copyright law is a complicated field, and any guidance
we can give teachers and parents in how to avoid copyright infringement
and refrain from unintentional or intentional piracy would be
worthwhile.
I support the gentleman's amendment.
Mr. JEFFRIES. Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. POLIS. Madam Chair, I claim the time in opposition, even though I
am not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Colorado is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. POLIS. Madam Chair, I don't intend to use the whole time.
I just wanted to add my praise to Mr. Jeffries' work. I think it also
represents a good starting point. I certainly support this amendment.
There are a number of issues around technology that are important to
incorporate in professional development. Some of them have to do with
the legal framework, like copyright. I would add to that illegal
hacking or accessing of sites. I would add to that trademark piracy, in
addition to copyright piracy.
Some of them have to do with potential dangers to students, like
cyber bullying, privacy, and knowledge about how students don't put
their personal information online or how it could make them subject to
a crime.
Along with, of course, copyright piracy, particularly in the academic
context, it is important that teachers, parents, and educational
professionals receive education on the fair use in the academic
context, a very important piece of when you are researching document
citations where the line is between plagiarism and a proper citation,
where the line is between fair use in a noncommercial academic context
and illegal commercial or personal use of a copyrighted product.
I think this represents a good starting point. I look forward to
working with the gentleman from New York on this issue as it moves
forward, and I support the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Jeffries).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 17 Offered by Ms. Clark of Massachusetts

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 17
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Ms. CLARK of Massachusetts. Madam Chair, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 240, line 15, strike ``or'' at the end.
Page 240, insert the following after line 20:
``(I) professional development for teachers, principals and
other school administrators in early elementary grades that
includes specialized knowledge about child development and
learning, developmentally-appropriate curricula and teaching
practices, meaningful family engagement and collaboration
with early care and education programs;
``(J) professional development, including through joint
professional development opportunities, for early childhood
educators, teachers, principals, specialized instructional
support personnel, and other school leaders; or
``(K) training on child development, improving instruction,
and closing achievement gaps;''

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentlewoman
from Massachusetts (Ms. Clark) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Massachusetts.
Ms. CLARK of Massachusetts. Madam Chair, I yield myself 3 minutes.
Madam Chair, in addition to achieving outstanding results for
individual children, high-quality early childhood education and care is
as close to a silver bullet as we are going to find to solve our
economic challenges.
Young children's brains develop at an astonishing pace. Children's
first learning experiences during these years are critical to their
visual, language, and social emotional development. Skills developed at
this stage are the foundation of language and reading proficiency, the
key indicators for academic and economic success later in life.
America's early childhood teachers will provide our children their
first informative experiences and are, therefore, a critical influence
on our Nation's future economy. An important stepping stone to the
middle class is not just access to early learning, but access to high-
quality learning.
Parents should be able to go to work and have confidence that their
kids are receiving high-quality learning experiences. This confidence,
in turn, enhances parents' ability to work and reach their own economic
potential.
For this reason, I am offering a commonsense amendment. This
amendment simply clarifies that professional development for early
grade teachers is an acceptable use of funding under this bill.
Local school systems should have the flexibility to use title II
funds, the existing funds that are already targeted to support
teachers, principals, and school leaders on professional development
that directly benefits our youngest learners. It is important to note
that this amendment does not require them to do so; rather, it simply
allows them.
This no-cost amendment is supported by a range of early childhood
advocates, including the Center for Law and Social Policy and Zero to
Three. High-quality early childhood education for our youngest learners
is a goal that cuts across party lines and enjoys broad support from
the American public.
It is a win-win. I hope my colleagues in both parties will support
this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I
am not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Hultgren). Without objection, the gentleman
from Indiana is recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for this amendment.
Early childhood care and education, as we all can appreciate, is
critical to both children and working parents.

[[Page H1273]]

This amendment would allow schools and Head Start centers, if they so
choose, Mr. Chairman, as the gentlewoman described, would allow them,
if they so choose, to coordinate and provide important services to low-
income children.
It will also ensure parents have a clear understanding of the
services being offered. I think this amendment is a step forward for
the existing partnerships between the Head Start program and local
education agencies.
Like the amendment that was discussed before, I think this amendment
is deserving of our support on both sides of the aisle.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.

{time} 2000

Ms. CLARK of Massachusetts. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).
Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Representative
Clark for yielding and for offering this important amendment.
High-quality early childhood education sets up students for success
throughout their lives and is a critical component of any education
system. We should be doing all we can to support early childhood
educators, to help engage families in early education, and to take
steps to close the achievement gap before it opens.
This amendment is an important step to building a strong foundation
for our country's students. I urge my colleagues to support
Representative Clark's amendment.
Ms. CLARK of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of
my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Massachusetts (Ms. Clark).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 18 Offered by Mr. Cohen

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 18
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chair, I offer amendment 18.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 240, line 15, strike ``or'' at the end.
Page 240, line 20, add ``or'' at the end.
Page 240, insert the following after line 20:
``(I) professional development on restorative justice and
conflict resolution;''

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentleman
from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Tennessee.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to offer an amendment to H.R.
5, the Student Success Act, to add a section on restorative justice and
conflict resolution, allowing States to award grants for professional
development in those areas.
This amendment allows more flexibility to States by expanding the
types of training that can be paid by title II funds, which would be
used to make sure teachers and administrators have sufficient training
opportunities. The amendment doesn't add any cost to the bill.
Numerous studies have shown that once students enter the juvenile
justice system, they are more likely to be arrested as adults. Rather
than feeding the school-to-prison pipeline, this amendment offers a
means to train teachers and administrators on how to address
disciplinary problems by means other than simply suspending or
expelling students. When students are away from the classroom because
of suspensions or expulsions, they are more likely to get in trouble
with law enforcement.
Many LEAs have moved away from zero tolerance policies because
students were being suspended or expelled from the classroom for
relatively minor behavior. An example was a student who used his hand
to simulate a gun and was suspended and another situation where a child
brought a Nerf-style gun to school and was reported to the police.
These types of incidents hurt the students, cost society more money in
the long run, and cost us human beings.
This amendment would help by providing a means to fund the training
necessary to establish disciplinary policies and procedures that don't
treat each infraction the same, often with excessive punishment.
Restorative justice and conflict resolution programs work to address
the cause of disciplinary problems and repair any harm that has been
done. Evidence suggests those restorative justice programs work, and
they save money in the long run because incarcerating youth is
expensive. A report released by the Justice Policy Institute in 2014
showed incarcerating a child can exceed $400 a day--or nearly $150,000
a year.
Many of our Nation's most vulnerable youth are swept into the justice
system as a result of the current overreliance on policing in our
schools. This needs to stop. From Pennsylvania to California, schools
have been seeing reductions in disciplinary infractions and suspensions
because of the program's usage, and it has been used in many
communities around the country but needs to be used in more.
There are many organizations that support, in this country,
restorative justice and this amendment. The NEA, the AFT, the Peace
Alliance, National Association of Community and Restorative Justice,
Dignity in Schools, and the Kansas Institute for Peace and Conflict
Resolution have all written in support of this amendment.
If this amendment becomes law, teachers and school administrators
have the opportunity and resources to address disciplinary problems in
ways other than suspension, expulsion, or involving law enforcement.
More flexibility will go to LEAs and save money in the long term. CBO
has said the amendment does not add cost.
I appreciate the opportunity to present this amendment, which will
help numerous students stay on the path to graduation and a crime-free
life. I ask my fellow Members to support it.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, although I am
not opposed.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Indiana is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend, the gentleman from
Tennessee, for this amendment.
This amendment will allow teachers and other school professionals, if
they so choose, at the State and local level--and that is the key here
throughout our bill--to receive training and to better address problems
that may arise at their schools. I agree, conflict resolution is an
important tool to help keep students and faculty safe and focused on
education rather than the problems.
This is a good amendment, as it improves the underlying bill, and I
thank the gentleman again for offering it. I urge my colleagues to
support it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. COHEN. I want to thank my friend from the Hoosier State for
working with me on this.
I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis) to
address his support.
Mr. POLIS. I thank the gentleman from Tennessee.
Mr. Chairman, I am very proud that my home county of Boulder County
is one of four judicial districts in the State of Colorado to have a
pilot program for restorative justice. Boulder, Weld, Pueblo, and
Alamosa Counties are recipients of the pilot program, and it really is
a tremendous opportunity to use restorative justice in the juvenile
delinquency context.
As you know, the goal of restorative justice is for the young people
to figure out how they can make up for their crimes directly to the
people affected rather than just have a fine that is placed on them.
Our district attorney, Stan Garnett, believes that 60 to 70 percent of
juvenile crime will be able to be dealt with through restorative
justice in Boulder County.
What this amendment would allow for Mr. Cohen is a more meaningful
partnership with the school district to this effect. The current funds
for the pilot program come through the justice system. If funds are
available to train educators with regard to restorative justice, a more
meaningful and integrated partnership with the school district and the
DA's office and the sheriff's department can be reached to make
restorative justice even more successful, both in Boulder County,
Colorado, as well as the rest of the country.

[[Page H1274]]

I strongly support the amendment.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chairman, in the process of thanking Chairman Kline
and Ranking Member Scott and the Committee on Education and the
Workforce and Chairman Sessions and Ranking Member Slaughter and the
rest of the Committee on Rules, I yield the balance of my time to the
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott), the ranking member.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from
Tennessee for this great amendment. I know, working with him on the
Committee on the Judiciary for many years, that he is a strong
supporter of crime prevention initiatives; and restorative justice and
conflict resolution programs have been shown to reduce crime time and
time again, and so these concepts are appropriate in our schools. They
will help create safe learning environments. I am delighted to support
it.
Mr. COHEN. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Tennessee (Mr. Cohen).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 19 Offered by Ms. Wilson of Florida

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 19
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Ms. WILSON of Florida. Mr. Chair, as the designee of Mr. Duffy, I
have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 268, line 9, before the period insert ``any
assessments mandated by the State educational agency or local
educational agency for the student for that school year, and
any local educational agency policy regarding student
participation in such assessments''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentlewoman
from Florida (Ms. Wilson) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.
Ms. WILSON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, this amendment requires school
districts to be transparent in providing information to parents at the
beginning of the school year on mandated assessments the students will
have to take during the school year and any school district policy on
assessment participation.
As a former teacher and elementary school principal, I have seen
firsthand the damage caused by the pervasive overuse of high-stakes
standardized testing. For the sake of our students and our education
system, we need to move towards a more balanced form of assessment that
effectively measures diverse kinds of success in teaching and student
learning. Unfortunately, H.R. 5 fails to address schools' excessive
dependence on deeply problematic standardized tests.
As someone who has dedicated decades of my career and my life to my
students and their success, I can tell you that teachers do not join
the profession to teach to the test; yet more and more educators are
forced to spend time preparing students for tests, administering tests,
and reviewing the results of those tests. By some estimates, almost
one-third of a teacher's time is spent preparing students to take
standardized tests. This is unacceptable. That is why this amendment is
so important.
By providing parents with information about the standardized tests
their students will be taking and providing them with the policies
regarding student participation, we begin to hold the system
accountable for the dramatic overuse of these tests.
It is time to end this practice of toxic overtesting. That is why I
support this amendment and ask all of my colleagues to vote in favor of
this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition, although I do
not oppose the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Indiana is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. ROKITA. I thank my colleagues, Ms. Wilson and Mr. Duffy, for this
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, it looks like this amendment promotes transparency for
parents and students, and that is a great thing, and that is one of the
chief purposes of our bill. We have all heard the concerns about
testing from our constituents, neighbors, and colleagues alike. One way
to address that is to ensure parents are aware of what tests their
children will have to take. This narrowly tailored amendment ensures
parents have that ability to request this information from their
children's school.
This is a good amendment, as it improves the underlying bill, and I
urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wilson).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 20 Offered by Mr. Polis

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 20
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment as the designee of Mr.
Messer and a cosponsor.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 270, line 6, amend the section header for section 3101
so that it reads ``sense of congress; purpose''.
Page 270, after line 6, insert the following:
``(a) Sense of Congress.--
``(1) Findings.--The Congress finds the following:
``(A) The number of public charter schools has dramatically
increased in recent years. Between the 2008-2009 school year
and the 2013-2014 school year, there was a 77 percent
increase in the number of students attending public charter
schools and a 39 percent increase in the number of schools.
``(B) Charter schools serve a very diverse population of
students. Nationally, 57 percent of students enrolled in
charter schools are minority students, while only 39 percent
of students in non-charter public schools are minority
students.
``(C) For the 2014-2015 school year, there are more than
6700 public charter schools serving about 2.9 million
students. This represents a 4 percent growth in the number of
open charter schools, and a 14 percent increase in student
enrollment from the 2013-2014 school year.
``(D) There are more than one million student names on
charter school waiting lists.
``(E) Charter schools are open in areas where students need
better education options, including areas that serve
economically disadvantaged kids. Almost 50 percent of the
students attending charter schools qualify for free or
reduced priced lunch, a slightly larger percentage than non-
charter public schools.
``(F) Charter schools serve students in all areas, from
urban cities to rural towns through traditional brick and
mortar schools, blended learning models, and online programs,
giving parents across the Nation options to find the best
learning environment for their children.
``(G) Charter schools give parents the opportunity to find
the right place for their child to learn. Whether they are
looking for digital learning, Montessori, or a more
structured environment, charter schools provide a variety of
education options for families.
``(H) Charter schools have strong accountability to parents
and the community because they have to meet the same State
academic accountability requirements as all other public
schools, satisfy the terms of their charter with their
authorizing authority, and satisfy parents who have selected
the school for their children.
``(2) Sense of congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that charter schools are a critical part of our education
system in this Nation and the Congress believes we must
support opening more quality charter schools to help students
succeed in their future.
Page 270, line 7, strike ``It'' and insert the following:
``(b) Purpose.--It

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentleman
from Colorado (Mr. Polis) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, over 40 States now allow for public charter
schools, Washington State being the newest. Like other kinds of public
schools, we find across the country high-quality public charter schools
as well as poorly performing public charter schools.
Charter schools are not an answer; they are not a problem. They are
an opportunity; they are a way that there can be more flexibility at
the site level. Some have extended schooldays; some have a
differentiated curriculum than the district; some partner very closely
with community nonprofits to provide wraparound services.

[[Page H1275]]

Before I came to Congress, Mr. Chairman, I had the opportunity to
found two charter schools, and I served as superintendent of one. The
New America School, which now has five campuses in New Mexico and
Colorado, works with new immigrants and English language learners to
help them gain proficiency in reading and writing English and getting a
high school-level diploma.
Many of the students that we recruited to attend our school were not
in school before; they worked odd jobs. We had a flexible schedule day
or night. We had to provide day care because just under half of our
young women who attend that school have children themselves.
I also had the opportunity to be a cofounder of the Academy of Urban
Learning, which works with homeless youth and youth in transitional
housing in Denver, Colorado.
What this sense of Congress does is it simply supports the public
charter school movement, which has long had near universal bipartisan
support, and it calls upon and supports more quality public charter
schools. I want to separate this from, of course, some of the issues
that my colleagues perhaps on both sides of the aisle have with
particular low-quality schools, whether they are charter schools or
neighborhood schools or something in between, like innovation schools,
which Colorado allows.
If the school is poor quality, hopefully it is a school that not only
the Member of Congress who represents that district has a problem with,
but hopefully the school board and the superintendent also want to take
the steps necessary to improve the quality of that public school.

{time} 2015

To the extent that we have methodologies and models for successful
public charter schools, we need more of them just as we need more high-
quality neighborhood schools and just as we need more high-quality
magnet schools. I hope that this can be incorporated as a sense of
Congress.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, but I do
not oppose the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Indiana is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. ROKITA. I thank my colleagues Mr. Polis and Mr. Messer for
continuing to raise this issue. I am in complete agreement with it as
are certain Members and a good deal of the committee--really, of this
Chamber as a whole.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment highlights the important role charter
schools play in our education system. Parents are clamoring for more
options for their children, and charter schools help fit that need.
I visit charter schools all over Indiana and more and more throughout
the Nation. It is clear that, while charter schools might not be the
answer for everyone--that is, some parents love their traditional
public schools, some want to have their children homeschooled, and
others believe a private school is the right choice--the key here is
choice.
Many parents would not have an option at all without charter schools,
as the gentleman describes. Charter schools are a great thing, and I
appreciate this amendment's adding a sense of Congress on the
importance of charter schools.
Again, I thank the gentleman for offering this amendment. I think it
is a great amendment, and I encourage my colleagues to support it and
the underlying bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, to address the issue of accountability
within charter schools, charter schools are subject to the same
accountability laws as other public schools, both at the Federal level
through No Child Left Behind and, indeed, in the successor bill.
All of the same accountability and metrics are applied to public
charter schools as they are to magnet schools, to neighborhood schools,
and to other district schools of choice.
In addition, charter schools have a strong accountability to parents
in the community because, in addition to meeting those State and
Federal academic requirements, they have to earn the enrollment of
their students.
Unlike a neighborhood school, they start with zero students, and
without the confidence of the community and without the confidence of
the parents who choose to entrust that particular public school with
the education of their kids, they will not succeed.
I am glad that our Congress can come together around important
innovation and public education, and I strongly encourage my colleagues
to adopt this amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 21 Offered by Mr. Polis

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 21
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 284, line 8, strike ``and''.
Page 284, line 14, insert ``and'' after the semicolon.
Page 284, after line 14, insert the following:
``(iii) is working to develop or strengthen a cohesive
strategy to encourage collaboration between charter schools
and local educational agencies on the sharing of best
practices;''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentleman
from Colorado (Mr. Polis) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to offer an amendment today
that would amend the Charter Schools Program in title III for the
underlying bill and make a positive improvement.
As you know, the Charter Schools Program not only is a lifeline for
growing and replicating public charter schools, but we want to see the
benefit of that innovation spread across other public schools. I am
very grateful to both the underlying bill and the Democratic
substitute, which both have very strong language--in fact, nearly
identical--about helping quality public charter schools grow and
expand.
As many of my colleagues are quick to point out, traditional public
schools are also doing innovative things and are showing growth every
day. For the foreseeable future, the vast majority of students in the
country will continue to attend district public schools.
District public schools are innovating to provide meaningful programs
for students and are helping to narrow the achievement gap in our
country every day.
As my colleagues know, I am quick to point out the benefit of
innovation that public charter schools allow, including the two that I
founded in Colorado and New Mexico.
My amendment, which I am offering with Mr. Rokita, would encourage
charter schools and traditional public schools to collaborate and share
best practices. They need not operate in their own separate silos. Both
can learn from one another. Both kinds of school governance bring ideas
to the table that can improve the quality of education for all
students.
This amendment would simply encourage public schools with traditional
governance through a school district and public charter schools to work
together so that both parties can learn from the others' success.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I
do not oppose the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Indiana is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. ROKITA. I want to thank my friend and colleague for this
amendment, and I appreciate being able to join with him on it and on
continuing our work on the charter school initiatives.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment supports the sharing of best practices
between charter schools and traditional public schools. Again, I think
that is a good thing. We have seen the successful charter school-
traditional public school collaborations, like in Ohio between
breakthrough schools and the Cleveland Metropolitan School District,
and we know that working together helps each of them excel.

[[Page H1276]]

It is the old adage of iron sharpening iron, and that is reflected
here in this good amendment. Put simply, Mr. Chairman, many of us
believe other charter schools and traditional public schools can
benefit from these partnerships as well.
This is a great amendment, and it improves the underlying bill. I
thank the gentleman for offering it, and I urge my colleagues to
support it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from
Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).
Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you, Representative Polis, for yielding.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank Representatives Polis and Rokita for
offering this amendment.
High-quality charter schools are laboratories for innovation. In
exchange for offering families, students, and educators the autonomy to
experiment with new educational models, we expect that successful
approaches to teaching and learning will be widely shared so that the
roughly millions of students--in fact, the vast majority of students--
in traditional public schools can benefit from the lessons learned.
Last Congress, an amendment I authored was included in the bipartisan
Success and Opportunity through Quality Charter Schools Act. That
provision, which is now included in H.R. 5, asks States to track and
report on the sharing of best practices emerging from charter schools.
I am pleased that the Polis-Rokita amendment encourages the
collaboration between charter schools and school districts to improve
the dissemination of promising practices, and I urge my colleagues to
join me in supporting this amendment.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I hope that this amendment, in our small
way, helps Congress change the culture, which all too often is too
competitive between charter schools and school districts.
I have talked to district administrators and to heads of literacy for
districts who hadn't been to and didn't know about innovative literacy
programs going on in charter schools in their own districts.
Again, there is plenty of blame to go around. I have talked to
charter schools that aren't aware of their own district's initiatives
for professional development or for STEM education in the lower grades.
By working together, even at times when it takes swallowing one's
pride, I am confident that both public charter schools and district-run
schools will benefit in the long run, most importantly, benefiting the
students that they serve. I call upon my colleagues to support this
amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 22 Offered by Ms. Kelly of Illinois

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 22
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Ms. KELLY of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 336, after line 20, insert the following:
``(7) An assurance that the applicant will conduct training
programs in the community to improve adult literacy,
including financial literacy.''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentlewoman
from Illinois (Ms. Kelly) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Illinois.
Ms. KELLY of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I offer a commonsense amendment
to H.R. 5, the Student Success Act.
My amendment makes a minor modification to the underlying bill and
does not have an impact on direct spending; still, the simple fix
stands to make a tremendous difference for countless students and
families on the education front.
My amendment would provide an assurance from statewide family
engagement center grantees, under the ``family engagement in education
programs'' portion of the bill, that they will conduct adult and
financial literacy training programs in their communities as part of
their efforts to engage families and improve academic outcomes for
students.
So often, the national debate around education focuses on children in
school, but estimates suggest there are 30 million adults in the United
States who have trouble with basic literacy. This means, not only do
they struggle in their own lives when reading a menu or paying the
bills, but they are also unable to help their children with the most
basic homework exercises. Parents who struggle to read are often
incapable of comprehending report cards and academic progress reports,
and their struggle with literacy can have multigenerational
consequences as these parents are unable to provide early academic
guidance at home that is critical to early learning success.
Like reading literacy, financial literacy is a critical component to
comprehensive education, and communities stand to gain from the
existence of more local programs devoted to teaching money management
skills to parents and kids.
Many teachers cite a lack of time, a lack of State curriculum
requirements, and a lack of demand as the top challenges to teaching
financial literacy. American students today often find themselves in
situations in which they are making more spending decisions and
accumulating more debt at a time when debt pressures are impacting
student performance and resulting in students dropping out of school.
As the family engagement centers supported by this bill aim to
improve educational outcomes for families across the spectrum, they
must realize that bolstering reading and financial literacy is a
critical comprehensive family engagement in education strategy.
Our national security, economic prosperity, and global standing
depend on America's ability to secure its educational and financial
future. When schools succeed, America succeeds, and when communities
and families are invested in education, students thrive.
I ask for bipartisan support of this commonsense amendment, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition, although I do
not oppose the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Indiana is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. ROKITA. I thank the gentlewoman for this amendment.
Mr. Chairman, family engagement centers are available to help parents
understand and engage in their children's education. As a part of that
mission, the centers help parents learn basic skills, like literacy. In
today's world, financial literacy is an important issue for parents to
be able to understand and support their children's education.
I want to be clear that this language is part of a grant application
and requirement. In that regard, it is not part of a testing standard
or a teacher training standard. With that, I urge my colleagues to
support this amendment and the underlying bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Illinois (Ms. Kelly).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 23 Offered by Ms. Bonamici

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 23
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Beginning on page 342, strike line 13 through page 343,
line 24, and insert the following:
``(3) State activities and state administration.--A State
educational agency may reserve not more than 17 percent of
the amount allotted to the State under subsection (b) for
each fiscal year for the following:
``(A) Not more than 5 percent of such amount for each
fiscal year for--
``(i) the administrative costs of carrying out its
responsibilities under this part;
``(ii) monitoring and evaluation of programs and activities
assisted under this part;
``(iii) providing training and technical assistance under
this part;
``(iv) statewide academic focused programs; or

[[Page H1277]]

``(v) sharing evidence-based and other effective strategies
with eligible entities.
``(B) To do one or more of the following:
``(i) To pay the costs of developing the State assessments
and standards required under section 1111(b), which may
include the costs of working, at the sole discretion of the
State, in voluntary partnerships with other States to develop
such assessments and standards.
``(ii) If the State has developed the assessments and
standards required under section 1111(b), to administer those
assessments or carry out other activities related to ensuring
that the State's schools and local educational agencies are
helping students meet the State's academic standards under
such section.
``(iii) To conduct an audit of State assessments and
report, in a publicly available format, the findings of such
audit, which may include assessment purposes, costs, schedule
of administration and dissemination of results, description
of alignment with the State's academic standards, and
description of policies for inclusion of all students.
``(iv) To develop and implement a plan to improve the State
assessment system, which may include efforts, if appropriate
as determined by the State--

``(I) to reduce the number of assessments administered;
``(II) to provide professional development on assessment
and data literacy;
``(III) to ensure the quality, validity, and reliability of
assessments; or
``(IV) to improve the use of assessments by decreasing the
time between administering assessments and releasing
assessment data.

``(C) Not more than 5 percent of such amount for each
fiscal year for awarding blended learning projects under
paragraph (4).''.
Page 355, after line 15, insert the following (and
redesignate succeeding provisions accordingly):
``(2) Streamlining assessment systems.--An eligible entity
that receives an award under this part may use such funds--
``(A) to conduct an audit of the local assessments
administered by the local educational agency and report, in a
publicly available format, the findings of such audit, which
may include such findings as described under section
3202(c)(3)(B)(iii); and
``(B) to develop and implement a plan, in collaboration
with local stakeholders, which may include efforts, if
appropriate as determined by the eligible entity, as
described under section 3202(c)(3)(B)(iv).''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentlewoman
from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Oregon.
Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank Chairman Kline and
Ranking Member Scott for their leadership on the committee and on this
important legislation. I know that we will need to continue to work
together to identify opportunities for bipartisan collaboration if we
are going to successfully replace No Child Left Behind, and I have
confidence we can do that.
I also thank Representative Costello for his work on this amendment
and for his partnership on the SMART Act. Mr. Costello's dedication to
public education is commendable, and I look forward to continuing to
work with him.
Mr. Chairman, the Bonamici-Costello amendment is an example of
finding common ground on a way to support teaching and learning in our
Nation's classrooms. We have all heard about the overuse and misuse of
standardized tests. Too much time is lost in preparing for and in
administering assessments, and too few of these assessments provide
timely information that meaningfully supports the learning that is
taking place in our schools, but the purposeful use of high-quality
assessments can support teaching and learning. Good assessments used
appropriately can serve as one tool for monitoring students' progress
and in helping parents, teachers, and school leaders see how students
are performing across the State.
This amendment will help to reduce the testing burden and build high-
quality assessment systems that support teachers and students.
Importantly, the amendment recognizes that a one-size-fits-all policy
to address excessive testing won't work. There is evidence that time
spent testing fluctuates significantly among districts, with some
districts dedicating three times as many hours to testing as other
districts.

{time} 2030

This variety in the use of tests is why our amendment lets the States
and local districts design their own plans to improve the use of
assessments.
Our amendment reserves a portion of local academic flexible grant
funds for States and school districts to improve the use of
assessments. The amendment allows States and school districts to use
those funds to audit their assessment systems and report to the public
the results, which might include the amount of time students spend
taking tests, whether those tests are high quality, and whether the
tests provide prompt feedback to support teaching.
The amendment allows States and school districts to use the funds to
develop and implement a plan to make assessments work better for their
teachers, families, and students. States and school districts can
eliminate low-quality or redundant tests, provide professional
development on assessment literacy, or speed the delivery of assessment
results to student and educators.
Once again, I thank Representative Costello for his partnership, and
Chairman Kline, Representative Rokita, and Representative Scott for
their willingness to work with us to make sure States and school
districts have the ability to eliminate unneeded assessments and get
the most out of high-quality assessments.
I urge my colleagues to support the Bonamici-Costello amendment, and
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. COSTELLO of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in
opposition, but I do not intend to oppose the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman is recognized for
5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. COSTELLO of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time
as I may consume.
Mr. Chairman, public education is overly burdened by standardized
tests. Frustrated teachers and parents, not to mention students, are
all saying the same thing: We need to do something about excessive
testing in our public schools.
Make no mistake, regular assessments in English and math are
essential objective tools to measure achievement, but their impact has
been worn down through an unnecessary maze of blue books and Scantron
sheets that waste classroom time and prevent our teachers from doing
their jobs.
Let me illustrate the point at my alma mater, Owen J. Roberts High
School. Prior to 1992, high school students would have a midterm and
final test for some of their courses, and teachers would spend a day or
two reviewing for these tests and a class period giving the tests. This
would be approximately 5 hours per subject of instructional time for
reviewing for and administering these exams.
Currently, a member of the class of 2017 who is proficient already on
Pennsylvania assessment tests will spend approximately 43 hours
preparing for and taking three Keystone exams and the other high school
assessment to prepare for college.
A member of the class of 2017 who is not proficient on these tests
during the first attempt could spend, minimally, 163 hours preparing
for and taking three Keystone exams twice, completing three online PBA
assessments, attending three classes of remediation, and completing the
other high school assessments to prepare for college.
The bottom line: it is too much. It is stifling. It is not conducive
to fostering the intellectual growth we want to see in our students.
This bipartisan amendment is a solution to many of the redundant,
low-quality, and unnecessary testing that takes place. It will empower
teachers and parents by giving existing Federal funding to State and
local education agencies to develop curriculum plans to make the use of
tests for the student.
It also means quicker delivery of assessment data to educators and
parents and a more qualitative analysis of how to shape curriculum for
that student from the local district and parents, not the Federal
Government.
We need to stop teaching to the test and get back to empowering our
children to think and succeed at the local level.
I thank Chairman Kline for the opportunity to address this important
issue, and I appreciate the efforts of Congresswoman Bonamici and her
unwavering dedication to this issue of improving public education. She
has been a delight to work with.
I encourage my colleagues to join in favor of this amendment to be
included

[[Page H1278]]

in H.R. 5, and I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. BONAMICI. May I inquire about the balance of my time?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Oregon has 2\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chairman, at this time I yield 1 minute to my
colleague from Colorado (Mr. Polis).
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chair, I want to thank Ms. Bonamici for bringing
forward this important amendment. Hardly a day goes by where I don't
hear from my constituents that there is too much testing.
Now, they don't often make the effort to distinguish between district
testing, State testing, Federal testing and classroom testing, but
clearly the Federal piece is the part that we are dealing with here
today in Washington.
What this amendment ensures is that we can focus on the quality of
testing. We recently had a school district, Poudre School District, in
and around Fort Collins, that did a review of all the different levels
of testing that they have. What drives the most frustration among
educators and among families and among students is testing for which
they either don't understand the purpose or it doesn't have a purpose.
We need to make clear not only what the purpose of testing is in
public education but also have the most efficient and best route to get
from here to there with regard to the quality of the tests.
There are too many unnecessary and low-quality tests in public
education. And at the same time we maintain our commitment to
accountability and transparency, we must ensure that we take the
quickest possible line from point A to point B through the highest-
quality tests and the minimum amount of testing necessary to fulfill
the very important public policy goals of accountability and
transparency.
Mr. COSTELLO of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Florida (Mr. Curbelo), a true champion of public
education.
Mr. CURBELO of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the
amendment offered by my distinguished colleagues, Mr. Costello and Ms.
Bonamici.
As a member of the Miami-Dade County Public School Board, I am all
too familiar with all of the challenges that our families and students
face as it relates to testing.
Now, don't get me wrong. Testing is a critical part, an element of
the accountability system. If we can't ask the question, ``Are our
children learning?'' then we have already failed in delivering an
education system that serves this great Nation and our families.
However, excessive and redundant testing has undermined accountability
systems and has made it harder for our young people to learn.
That is why I commend my distinguished colleagues for working
together in a bipartisan way to offer this solution that will help
millions and millions of children, teachers, and families all over our
country. I know that the children of Miami-Dade County Public Schools
and Monroe County Public Schools will appreciate this amendment. I know
that the teachers back home will appreciate this amendment, and I
commend my colleagues for their courage to work together in favor of
such a smart solution.
I also want to take the opportunity to commend Chairman Kline and
Chairman Rokita for all of their hard work on the underlying bill,
which I support.
Ms. BONAMICI. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank, again, my cosponsor of
this amendment and those who spoke in favor. Good, quality assessments
can inform instruction. Duplicative assessments need to be eliminated.
This amendment gives districts and States the flexibility to do that. I
urge my colleagues to support it.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. COSTELLO of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield 30 seconds to the
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Rokita).
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chair, I thank Mr. Costello for yielding. I want to
congratulate him on already being an effective Member of Congress. I
also want to thank Representative Bonamici for her continued work on
this amendment and seeing it through; also, Representative Carlos
Curbelo, a member of our committee, for his effectiveness to date. It
has been a great partnership all the way around.
I want to associate myself with Mr. Curbelo's remarks and also simply
add that this amendment helps States examine all of the assessments
given to students, helps improve how student assessments are used, and
possibly limits how many are given.
This is a commonsense amendment, and I am happy to support it and
urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to do so as well.
Mr. COSTELLO of Pennsylvania. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance
of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 24 Offered by Mr. Polis

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 24
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 343, after line 24, insert the following new
subparagraph:
``(H) Awarding grants for the creation and distribution of
open access textbooks and open educational resources.''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentleman
from Colorado (Mr. Polis) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Colorado.
Mr. POLIS. In education, Mr. Chairman, oftentimes textbooks cost
hundreds of dollars for each student. Now, sometimes that money has to
come from the families. Sometimes the school or the district might have
some old dog-eared textbooks, outdated and of different versions.
I have been to a number of classrooms where the teacher has to say,
For your assignment, if you have this version, read pages 33 through
35. If you have this version, it is 36 through 38. If you don't have
any version, here's a few copies in front that we'll give to you.
That gets in the way of a quality education, both from an access
standpoint, from a reinforcing economic disparity standpoint, as well
as preventing our students from having access to the most up-to-date
textbooks and available information.
In an effort to address this issue, what my amendment would do is
create an allowable use of funds for awarding grants for the creation
and distribution of open source textbooks and open educational
resources.
The open source movement, in general, is sweeping the country with
regard to available education and other areas. My amendment allows
funds to be used for the creation and distribution of open source
educational resources and textbooks at the K-12 level to bring cost
savings to school districts, cost savings to families, and quality
enhancements and educational enhancements to those districts, schools,
and States that embrace this utilization of the funds.
Many States and districts are already beginning to embrace this
concept to save costs and improve the quality of their educational
content in tight budget times. My amendment would simply allow them to
use existing Federal funds to boost these cost savings even more in
innovative districts and States that have chosen to embrace the open
source textbook movement.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition, although I am
not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Indiana is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. ROKITA. Again, I thank Mr. Polis for this amendment. The
amendment simply clarifies that States may use, again, at their
choosing, their funds under the local academic flexible grant to create
or distribute open source education resources. This is a good thing.
This grant is designed to be used to support the activities the State
and local school districts believe are important to their students. If
open source material is what is best for them, they should be able to
use the funding to support that activity. This is in line with the
spirit and themes

[[Page H1279]]

found throughout the Student Success Act.
Again, I thank the gentleman for his leadership in offering it. I
urge my colleagues to support it, and the underlying bill.
With that, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. POLIS. Mr. Chairman, by supporting my amendment, Congress can
voice its support for the growing academic open source community and
for encouraging cost-reducing, quality-enhancing innovation in the
content that is available for students across the country.
I encourage my colleagues to support my amendment, the open education
resources amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 25 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 25
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 354, line 19, strike ``two'' and insert ``three''.
Page 355, after line 15, insert the following:
``(iii) Accountability-based programs and activities that
are designed to enhance school safety, which may include
research-based bullying prevention, cyberbullying prevention,
disruption of recruitment activity by groups or individuals
involved in violent extremism, and gang prevention programs,
as well as intervention programs regarding bullying.''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentlewoman
from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, let me thank the gentleman from
Indiana for his kindness this evening as I have listened to the debate.
I want to thank the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Scott,
and Mr. Kline, who have worked diligently. We could not have come to
the point of having Members' amendments without the very hard work of
Mr. Scott's staff, and certainly Mr. Kline. So I thank both of them
because of our great concern on this issue.
Mr. Chairman and colleagues, this is a face that I am trying to help
with my amendment. This is the face of children being bullied in
America.
My amendment supports accountability-based programs and activities
that are designed to enhance school safety, including research-based
bullying prevention, cyber bullying prevention, disruption of
recruitment activity by groups or individuals involved in violent
extremism, and gang prevention programs.
I will note, Mr. Chairman, that this amendment wants to support
accountability-based programs and to acknowledge that every day in
schools across America children of all kinds are bullied. One in seven
students in grades K-12 is either a bully or a victim of bullying, and
282,000 students are physically attacked in secondary schools each
month.
The Jackson Lee amendment also addresses growing concerns regarding
violent extremism and the misuse of social media by militant extremist
groups to recruit students and young persons.
It really is about giving tools to schools to be prepared for the
new, if you will, ills that are facing our children, which include
cyber bullying, bullying based on discrimination, and peer advocacy.

{time} 2045

It is noted that when bystanders intervene, bullying stops within 10
seconds, 57 percent of the time; and bullied youths were most likely to
report that actions that accessed support from others made a positive
difference.
I ask my colleagues to support this amendment and to realize that we
can provide the skills and the tools for school districts to help in
these very unfortunate circumstances for our children.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition, although I am
not opposed to the amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Indiana is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for offering this
amendment. This adds an allowable use of funds for what we are calling
the local academic flexible grant to support projects that focus on
school and student safety.
The local academic flexible grant, again, is the product of us
eliminating over 65 programs in current law and delivering the funds
that supported those programs back to the States and, with the States'
blessing, even further back to local school districts and so forth.
We know all too well that bad things can happen in schools. This
amendment will clarify that school districts can use this funding--
again, not being mandated by the Federal Government--but through this
grant can use the funding to support programs aimed at making schools
safer. This is in all our interests.
I thank the gentlewoman for offering this amendment and urge my
colleagues to support it and the underlying bill.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Texas has 3 minutes remaining.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Let me, first of all, thank the gentleman from
Indiana, again, for the clarity of this instruction to our school
districts across America; and if I might, again, acknowledge Mr. Scott
and the chairman of the full committee.
If I might continue to say that cyber bullying, it is estimated that
2.2 million children experienced cyber bullying in 2011.
This is a teaching tool. This is a Marvel comic book that says
Internet superheroes meet the Internet villains, many different tools
that school districts can use to be able to educate our children.
Sixty-four percent of students enrolled in weight loss programs
reported experiencing weight-based victimization.
As I indicated, peer advocacy, 70.6 percent of young people say they
have seen bullying in their school. We know that this is a problem, but
we know that intervention helps. My amendment, again, emphasizes the
intervention and the accountability.
I ask my colleagues to support this amendment, I thank them for their
support in advance, and I leave you simply by acknowledging that this
face should be a smile. When every child goes to school, they should
have a smile on their face.
Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk. It is listed in the
report as Jackson Lee Amendment No. 25.
As the founder and co-chair of the Congressional Children's Caucus, I
have long advocated for the health, dignity and well-being of our
nation's children.
One of the fundamental things that children need to succeed in life
is a good education.
I thank the Rules Committee for making in order Jackson Lee Amendment
No. 25.
Mr. Chair, Jackson Lee Amendment No. 25 supports accountability-based
programs and activities that are designed to enhance school safety,
which may include research-based bullying prevention, cyberbullying
prevention, disruption of recruitment activity by groups or individuals
involved in violent extremism, and gang prevention programs.
Statistics on bullying:
Mr. Chair, the daily reality for too many of our children is that
they are threatened, bullied, and assaulted but reluctant to tell
adults about their pain or shame:
1. 1 in 7 students in grades K-12 is either a bully or a victim of
bullying.
2. 282,000 students are physically attacked in secondary schools each
month.
3. 90% of 4th to 8th grade students report being victims of bullying
of some type.
4. 71% of students report incidents of bullying as a problem at their
school.
5. 15% of all students who don't show up for school report it to
being out of fear of being bullied while at school.
Consequences of bullying:
1. 15% of all school absenteeism is directly related to fears of
being bullied at school.
2. According to bullying statistics, 10 percent of school dropouts do
so because of repeated bullying.
3. Bullying is a leading cause of adolescent suicide.

[[Page H1280]]

The Jackson Lee Amendment also addresses growing concerns regarding
violent extremism and the misuse of social media by militant extremist
groups to recruit students and young people.
Mr. Chair, as we all know, our world changed on September 11, 2001.
Groups like ISIS/ISIL are attempting to reach children and young
people through social media.
This activity is being addressed by law enforcement, intelligence,
and Homeland Security.
It is important that we provide schools and school districts an
opportunity to include in their education programs around school
violence material for parents and their children on the issue of
radical extremism.
As the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on
Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, as well as a
senior member of the Homeland Security Committee I believe that we must
address emerging threats where they are as early as possible.
I ask my colleagues to support Jackson Lee Amendment No. 25 to help
protect our school age children from bullying and radical extremism.

CYBERBULLYING AND SUICIDE STATISTICS

Cyberbullying: Estimated that 2.2 million students experienced
cyberbullying in 2011.
Of the 9% of students that reported being cyber-bullied in the
National Crime Victimization Survey compared to 6.2% in 2009 (NCES,
2013): 71.9% reported being cyber-bullied once or twice in the school
year, 19.6% reported once or twice a month, 5.3% reported once or twice
a week, and 3.1% reported almost every day.
Bullying based on discrimination: 64% of students enrolled in weight-
loss programs reported experiencing weight-based victimization.
Of 7,000 LGBT aged 13-21 revealed that because of their sexual
orientation: 8 of 10 students had been verbally harassed at school, 4
of 10 had been physically harassed at school, 6 of 10 felt unsafe at
school, and 1 of 5 had been the victim of a physical assault at school.
Children with disabilities were two to three times more likely to be
bullied than their nondisabled peers.
Peer advocacy: 70.6% of young people say they have seen bullying in
their schools (U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2014). When
bystanders intervene, bullying stops within 10 seconds 57% of the lime
(U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2014).
Bullying intervention: Bullied youth were most likely to report that
actions that accessed support from others made a positive difference
(Davis and Nixon, 2010).
Last thing, I would like to reference the following: Super Heroes
Meet the Internet Villains Marvel, sponsored by Microsoft.

How One Government Is Taking Drastic Measures To Save Kids From Islamic
Extremist Brainwashing

(By Kara Pendleton)

ISIS has been busy recruiting children, even publishing a
booklet for mothers called the Sister's Role in Jihad that
instructs them to begin indoctrinating their children as
infants, because waiting until they're older may ``be too
late.''
The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) reports
that ``children are central to ISIS,'' being both a
propaganda tool and future fighters.
Due to a surge in Islamic extremism occurring in the U.K.,
the government is taking steps to help combat the grooming
and indoctrination of youngsters:
A new bill proposed in the U.K. would enlist school
teachers as agents of the state in the fight.
How would it work?
The Daily Mail cites a Home Office (the U.K. counterpart to
the U.S. State Department) spokesman, who explained:
``We are not expecting teachers and nursery workers to
carry out unnecessary intrusion into family life but we do
expect them to take action when they observe behaviour of
concern.
For schools, including nurseries and other childcare
providers, we would expect staff to have the training they
need to identify children at risk of radicalisation and know
where and how to refer them for further help if necessary.''
However, some argue this latest move is a step too far.
The policy director of the human rights body Liberty,
Isabella Sanky, believes the focus should be on supporting
those children who are at risk:
``Instead they are playing straight into terrorists' hands
by rushing through a Bill that undermines our democratic
principles and turns us into a nation of suspects.''
People remain split over whether it is acceptable for the
state to take children away from their parents. With ISIS and
radical Islam on the rise, it's clearly difficult to find the
line between freedom and state control and identify a
solution that both respects individual rights and protects
the populous.

I ask for support of the Jackson Lee amendment and yield back the
balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 26 Offered by Ms. Wilson of Florida

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 26
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Ms. WILSON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 354, line 19, strike ``two categories'' and insert
``four categories''.
Page 355, after line 15, insert the following:
``(iii) Establishing, expanding, or maintaining intensive
care reading laboratories to assist elementary school
students who are reading at below grade level.
``(iv) Enabling elementary schools to provide instruction
in language arts, mathematics, and science in grades 1
through 3 through teachers who are specialized in language
arts, mathematics, or science, respectively.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentlewoman
from Florida (Ms. Wilson) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Florida.
Ms. WILSON of Florida. Mr. Chairman, this amendment provides for
elementary students reading below grade level to utilize intensive care
reading labs to improve their reading efficiency.
I am well aware of the shortcomings of H.R. 5 and its failure to make
the improvements necessary to bring our educational system into the
21st century. The bill falls short of providing quality education for
many of our young students and has, in fact, left many of our students
behind.
Students need enriching learning environments, individualized
instruction, well-trained teachers, and positive reinforcement to
support their educational development.
Mr. Chairman, this amendment I have before you today provides for
just that approach to helping students improve their reading
proficiency.
First, it provides for individualized reading instruction through
intensive care reading labs, in addition to their normal reading
instruction in schools, helping improve students' literacy early in
their education.
In these labs, students will be taught by highly trained teachers who
work with students in small numbers to improve their literacy and
reading comprehension. If children can read on grade level by grade
three, they will graduate high school.
Teachers in first, second, and third grade should specialize in
teaching language arts, then another subgroup should specialize in math
and science. They should be trained by the school district.
By using this specialized approach, schools will be able to better
prepare teachers and ensure students are being taught by teachers
dedicated to their specific fields. In high schools, English teachers
teach English, math teachers teach math. It should be the same in K-3
grades.
That is why I support this amendment and why I urge all of my
colleagues to vote for this amendment as well.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to this
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Indiana is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. ROKITA. Mr. Chair, I appreciate the gentlewoman's concern and the
purpose of this amendment; however, it must be opposed.
Comprehensive literacy and reading programs and their connection to
college and career success are obviously vitally important.
Since State and local educational officials understand the importance
of reading proficiency, including the benefits of teaching
comprehension, vocabulary, and other skills, I am confident that these
officials will see the benefits of programs like this and choose to use
their local academic flexible grant under this bill to fund programs
like this.
The block grant is designed to be flexible, thereby allowing local
education officials to use the funds in a

[[Page H1281]]

way that most benefits their students. We do not want to start
rebuilding the silos that we have just knocked down with this bill
language.
I believe this amendment, unfortunately, would do that very thing by
requiring this instruction instead of letting State and local school
districts, teachers, parents, local taxpayers, and school officials
decide what is best for their students.
I agree, again, with the importance of this issue, but oppose the
amendment as the underlying bill already provides States and school
districts funding flexibility to set their own priorities, not letting
Washington do it.
I encourage my colleagues, on that basis then, to oppose this
amendment but still support the underlying bill.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wilson).
The amendment was rejected.

Amendment No. 27 Offered by Mr. Courtney

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 27
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 366, line 5, strike ``and''.
Page 366, after line 5, insert the following:
(2) in paragraph (1)(E)--
(A) by striking ``(E)'' and inserting ``(E)(i)'';
(B) by striking the semicolon and inserting ``; or''; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
``(ii) resided on Federal property under lease under
subchapter IV of chapter 169 of title 10, United States
Code;''; and
Page 366, line 6, strike ``(2)'' and insert ``(3)''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentleman
from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney) and a Member opposed each will control
5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Connecticut.
Mr. COURTNEY. Mr. Chairman, nearly two decades ago, Congress created
the Military Housing Privatization Initiative to improve military
family housing that, in many cases, was decrepit by allowing private
developers to upgrade, maintain, and operate housing communities.
In the years since, public-private ventures created under this
program have infused millions in private capital to improve the living
conditions of military families at installations all across the country
and has made a tremendous difference for our military families across
the Nation.
As of 2011, 193,000 units of housing have been converted under this
program. Under the program, priority for housing goes first to military
personnel, then to Federal employees and retirees. However, if
occupancy rates drop below certain levels for a period of time, the
housing can be made available to the general public.
Allowing nonmilitary families with children access to this housing is
an important part of ensuring the financial viability of these
ventures, but it also presents unanticipated challenges to the host
communities where they are located, since these properties are property
tax exempt.
For example, today, there are 130 civilian nonmilitary children
residing at the public-private housing at Naval Submarine Base New
London in Groton, Connecticut.
These children attend Groton public schools alongside military
children residing in the same community; yet Groton receives no Impact
Aid support for the cost of their education. Since their housing is
property tax exempt, the host community has to absorb the entire per
pupil cost for their education.
While I was made aware of this problem because of the growing
challenge in Groton, it is clear from discussions with Navy officials
and the Groton developer that the same problem will face communities
across the country that have privatized military housing, as the size
and composition of our military changes in the years ahead.
Under current law, local schools are eligible to receive only 5
percent of the support payments for children residing on Federal
property with a parent who is not affiliated, but only if the number of
children being educated equals or exceeds 1,000 or equals or exceeds 10
percent of the total numbers of students in average daily attendance.
My amendment is simple. It would ensure that the number of civilian
children living in property tax exempt military housing can be more
adequately factored into a community's support for educating these
children under Impact Aid.
Since my amendment was made in order last night, I have heard
recognition of the problem that I am seeking to address, but also
concerns at how it would have wider-ranging impacts to this program,
particularly in light of the ongoing funding challenges in Impact Aid.
Throughout the day, my staff and I have had productive and thoughtful
discussions with the National Association of Federally Impacted Schools
and the Military Impacted Schools Association about how to address this
issue that my communities and others are facing.
I would note that the chairman of the committee, Mr. Kline, who also
serves on the House Armed Services Committee with me, has pledged to
work with my office to try and address this issue which, again, at the
end of the day, is about fairness for host communities that step up and
make sure that our military families have safe and good schools.
Mr. KLINE. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. COURTNEY. I yield to the gentleman from Minnesota.
Mr. KLINE. I will be happy to work with you.
Mr. COURTNEY. I appreciate that, Mr. Kline. These organizations have
pledged to work with me to find ways to constructively address these
issues in the days moving ahead.
Mr. Chair, I withdraw my amendment.

Amendment No. 28 Offered by Mr. Nolan

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 28
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Mr. NOLAN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 391, line 19, add at the end after the period the
following: ``It is further the policy of the United States to
ensure that Indian children do not attend school in buildings
that are dilapidated or deteriorating, which may negatively
affect the academic success of such children.''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentleman
from Minnesota (Mr. Nolan) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Minnesota.
Mr. NOLAN. Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin by thanking Chairman
Kline for his work on this important legislation; of course, Ranking
Member Bobby Scott as well; and the members of the committee and the
Rules Committee for allowing us to offer this amendment here this
evening.
Mr. Chairman, in short, my amendment ensures that Indian children
will not be expected to attend school in buildings that are dilapidated
and dangerous.
Under title V of House Resolution 5, the Federal Government has an
obligation to fund and to maintain these schools. It is time to honor
that obligation and send the message to our students in Indian Country
that their education and their success in life are important to all of
us, and expecting them to go to school in facilities in utter disrepair
simply does not send that message.
According to the Department of the Interior, there are 63 schools
funded by the Bureau of Indian Education that are listed in poor
condition.
For example, the Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School on the Leech Lake
Reservation in my district is housed in an old pole building--cold and
drafty in the winter, hot in the summer, unfit for children or teachers
in any season.
I operated my sawmill and pallet factory in a pole building. I think
we all agree that we want something better for our children when they
go to school.
Look around us right now, Mr. Chairman. We have a magnificent Capitol
here to symbolize the importance of the work and the purpose of what we
do here.
Sure, as a practical matter, we can conduct our Nation's business in
a pole

[[Page H1282]]

building, but we don't and for good reason.

{time} 2100

Architecture needs to carry with it not only a sense of function but
a sense of importance and a sense of purpose. The simple truth is
architecturally distinctive schools deliver a message to students that
their education is valued, that it is important.
The Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School I mentioned, like so many others, has an
incredibly long list of serious problems. Students endure rodent and
bat infestations, roof leaks and holes, mold and fungus, a faulty air
system, uneven floors, poor lighting, sewer problems, and dangerous
electrical configurations with wires just crisscrossing all the
hallways and the rooms in a dangerous way. This building is literally
at risk of collapse. It has earned the nickname ``Killer Hall'' from
the local emergency responders.
Students and faculty throughout the 63 schools in Indian Country face
similar serious health and safety risks every day at schools like this,
thus perpetuating lower graduation rates and difficulties retaining
qualified teachers. In fact, Chairman Kline, himself, called for action
on tribal school construction in a letter to the Bureau of Indian
Education just last week, and I want to applaud him for that.
Regarding the Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig School, the chairman said: ``This
appalling situation not only adversely affects the quality of education
these students receive, but also their health and safety.'' The
chairman is right. Our children deserve better, regardless of where
they live.
I want to particularly thank the gentlewoman from Minnesota,
Congresswoman Betty McCollum, for her continued support on this issue,
as well as Congresswoman Ann Kirkpatrick of Arizona, Congressman Ben
Ray Lujan of New Mexico, and Congressman Raul Ruiz of California for
cosponsoring this amendment.
I am pleased the administration requested more money for the Bureau
of Indian Education construction funding in its most recent budget, but
we can do better. We can do more.
Minnesota's MinnPost reporter Devin Henry recently wrote a story
entitled, ``Where Republicans and Democrats Agree the Government Needs
to Spend More,'' and that item is funding for Indian education and
construction. I will include that article in the Record.

[From MINNPOST, Feb. 9, 2015]

Where Republicans and Democrats Agree the Government Needs to Spend
More

(By Devin Henry)

Washington.--From budget limits to the national debt, much
of the debate Washington today focuses on cutting spending.
But on at least one line item in President Obama's budget,
lawmakers on both sides of the aisle agree that the
government needs to spend more.
Minnesota Rep. Betty McCollum, a Democrat on the budget-
writing Appropriations Committee, said she and a group of
members, including Republicans, are looking for ways to boost
funding for school construction on tribal lands around the
country, even after Obama proposed pumping millions in new
money into it.
Tribal school construction has been neglected for some
time, so even though Obama proposed more than doubling its
modest budget next year, it's not nearly enough to confront
the problem of broken down schools around the country. In
Minnesota, the Leech Lake Reservation's Bug-O-Nay-Ge-Shig
School, typifies this--it's housed in a used pole barn and
students have taken to wearing winter coats while in the
school. When winds reach 40 miles per hour, teachers move
children to other buildings.
The administration sees Obama's proposal as a first step of
a multi-year effort to improve the system, but Indian
education advocates are looking for more money right now to
kick-start new school construction down the road.
Still, officials are heartened that the issue is at least
on the radar--the Bug School, for example, isn't funded in
Obama's plan, but tribal chairwoman Carri Jones issued a
statement saying the tribe is ``extremely pleased and
grateful'' that the president included new funds in his
budget.
On Capitol Hill, funding for Indian education, especially
school construction, is an area of relative bipartisanship:
last year, for example, both parties agreed on a large
spending increase for replacement school construction around
the country, above what even Obama proposed. McCollum credits
this to trust and treaty obligations the United States
government has to tribes across America--the U.S. has a
responsibility to support tribes, and it's one Congress takes
seriously.
There are still a lot of questions about what McCollum and
others are trying to do, like how much money they're looking
for, and where it will come from. For now, she's not getting
into details, except to say that she thinks more money could
be on its way.
``This is not enough money and we need to come up with a
plan that would have tribal nations, American children who
are members of tribal nations, going to safe schools, 21st
century schools,'' she said.

Obama's plan wins bipartisan support

Obama has proposed a $1 billion budget for the Bureau of
Indian Education in 2016--a $150 million increase over
current levels. That includes $45 million for new school
construction. The budget represents a big increase over what
Obama has looked for in the past--new school construction saw
a big influx of funding in the stimulus act in 2009, but his
$3.5 million request last year was his first since 2011.
Even so, the problem is much bigger than what's in Obama's
budget. His proposal would go toward building the last two
buildings on a 2004 list of replaceable schools, but that
would still leave behind a $1.3 billion backlog of
dilapidated schools nationwide.
Members on both sides of the aisle greeted the request as a
welcome change of pace after what McCollum described as a
``time out'' for BIE construction funding. Republican Rep.
Tom Cole, an Oklahoman on the Appropriations Committee with
whom McCollum has worked on Indian issues, said the proposal
``is an area where we can cooperate and hopefully make a lot
of progress on.''
Minnesota Rep. John Kline, who chairs the House Education
Committee, said in a statement that he's ``pleased'' by the
proposal and vowed to ``look more closely at this issue and
demand better for these students.''
All that said, everyone recognizes the plan only accounts
for two schools-worth of funding. When Interior Secretary
Sally Jewell introduced Obama's plan to reporters last month,
she acknowledged that $45 million isn't enough to made major
inroads in the school construction backlog. She called it
``just step one in a multi-year approach'' to fixing the
backlog, and said it ``was as far as we could reasonably go''
to fit funding into the overall budget and get lawmakers'
approval.

Happy with the plan, but looking for more

Congress has a history of going above and beyond what the
Obama administration requests on BIE issues. Last year, for
example, Obama requested $3.5 million to plan construction of
a new BIE school in Maine. Congress appropriated $20.1
million to straight-up build the school instead.
Since Obama's 2016 budget covers the money needed to
rebuild the schools still on the government's list, any money
above that could go toward planning the schools that might be
included on a new replacement list, McCollum said. ``When we
see the list and we have a dollar figure off the list, then
we need to have the big idea, the big plan on a way forward
so we can get these schools reconstructed so they can be
repaired, and rebuilt where they need to be taken down,'' she
said.
To that end, she and other budget writers are scouring the
budget--from the Interior Department and beyond--trying to
find funding to pump up BIE construction even further. It's a
bipartisan effort: McCollum said she, Cole and a group of
other Republicans began discussing additional funding schemes
while they toured Indian Country in Arizona last month.
``We were literally at dinner like, `what if we try this,
what if we try that, well we're going to talk to Treasury,
we're going to talk to OMB, let's talk to the White House,'
'' she said.
There is danger here, of course, that partisan budget
fights could delay or derail the whole process. The Interior
budget is relatively small, which McCollum said makes it
difficult to shift funding toward a bipartisan priority like
Indian schools when there are other areas--clean air and
water, wildfire prevention--that need funding. It's easier to
find money for Defense Department schools (the only other
school system the federal government runs) because the DOD
budget is so big.
But that's what negotiations are for. McCollum and
Oklahoma's Cole both said they expect to eventually find a
path forward on this.
``The trick is always finding the money, because the
president is proposing this having disregarded the budget
caps,'' Cole said. ``But it wouldn't be the first time, on
Interior Approps, we've been able to rob Peter to pay Paul.
And the Democrats might not like the Peter, but we all agree
on the Paul that needs help, in this case Indian Education.''

Bug School could get on new list

The Leech Lake Reservation's Bug School has gained some
notoriety in the Indian education community. Jewell visited
it last summer and in announcing Obama's funding request,
mentioned it as the type of school that needs to be replaced.
Lawmakers did the same in a budget bill Congress passed in
December.
When officials made their list of replacement schools in
2004, they left off the Bug School. The Interior Department
has now assembled a team of experts from the Department of
Defense' school system and the Interior Department to write a
new list and come up with criteria meant to more accurately
identify replaceable schools.
For example, McCollum said, the last list considered the
condition of all the schools in an individual district, and
because Leech

[[Page H1283]]

Lake's elementary schools are in comparably acceptable
condition, the Bug School was less likely to make the cut.
Its inclusion in a budget bill, and the attention Jewell has
given it, indicates its inclusion on a new list, which is
expected this spring.
``We are extremely pleased and grateful that the
President's budget includes substantially more funding for
BIE school construction and rehabilitation than in years past
and that it begins to recognize the significant need in
Indian Country for a safe learning environment for our
students,'' Jones, the Leech Lake tribal chairwoman, said in
a statement to MinnPost. ``We are fighting to give our
community a new high school facility because our children
deserve the best educational opportunities.''

Mr. NOLAN. Mr. Chairman, the choice today is simple. No child should
be expected to endure deteriorating school rooms to get an education. I
urge my colleagues to adopt the amendment.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KLINE. Mr. Chairman, I seek time in opposition to the gentleman's
amendment, although I do not oppose it.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Minnesota is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. KLINE. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague from the cold
north of Minnesota for his very excellent amendment. We know in
Minnesota, as we know across the country, that the state of many of
these Indian schools are just absolutely deplorable. He described that
very well. It is appalling that sometimes it has taken us 10 years to
identify a problem, and we can't do anything about it.
We are compromising the education of vulnerable children; we are
compromising their health and safety, as my friend from Minnesota (Mr.
Nolan) said; and we are certainly compromising their education and
their hopes for a better future. That is why we have got to look more
closely at this issue. That is why I did write the letter to the
Director of the BIE to begin a dialogue. That is why we will hold, in
the coming weeks, a hearing to dig into this.
We are badly organized, shall I say, in the government sometimes and
in the Congress. So one committee is looking at one thing, and then
nobody is looking at another, and nobody is paying attention to
something else, and we have let this deplorable situation develop. We
have got to do better.
The gentleman's amendment will help in this regard. I very much
appreciate that he did it. I am very, very supportive of this amendment
because it makes this bill a better bill.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Minnesota (Mr. Nolan).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 29 Offered by Mrs. Davis of California

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 29
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the
desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 514, line 9, strike ``of the school'' and
insert ``in the school building''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentlewoman
from California (Mrs. Davis) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, this bipartisan amendment
that I bring forward with my colleagues, Mr. Dold of Illinois and Mr.
Polis of Colorado, would clarify the definition of ``school leader''
currently contained in section 6101 of H.R. 5.
Mr. Chairman, the current definition of ``school leader'' contained
in this bill is problematic. As currently drafted, the definition fails
to make clear to State and local school districts that a school leader
is an individual who runs the operations and instructional programs
within a school, as opposed to a district administrator who oversees
individual schools' programs.
As a result, States and local school districts might interpret this
definition to apply to an assistant superintendent of curriculum or a
subject matter content specialist who oversees instructional practices
within an LEA but is not in a school building on a daily basis, such as
a principal.
This amendment removes this ambiguity by making it clear that the
definition of ``school leader'' should apply as it was originally
intended--directly and solely to a school principal. If left unchanged,
it is possible that district administrators could become eligible for
title II professional development funds currently aimed at improving
the quality of our Nation's school principals.
I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, which ensures that
title II funds go to the school leader, the person who is most
responsible for student achievement.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DOLD. Mr. Chairman, I claim time in opposition to the amendment,
even though I am not opposed to it.
The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentleman from Illinois is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. DOLD. Mr. Chairman, I certainly want to thank my good friend from
California for her leadership on this, and also my friend from
Colorado.
Really what this is doing, Mr. Chairman, is this is talking about a
technical correction. As my friend from California pointed out, what we
are really looking to try to do is to make sure that the dollars
allocated in this bill for continuing education and other things are
actually going to a school leader, which is mentioned throughout this
bill, but ``school leader'' is left largely undefined.
We want to make sure that we put a little bit more definition for our
local school districts so that they have a better understanding that a
school leader is actually someone that resides within the school. We
think that is absolutely critical in terms of continuing education,
some of the other programs, to make sure that it is not ambiguous. We
want to make sure that we are focusing on the task at hand.
We hope that this is something, again, that has bipartisan support.
We hope that we will be able to go through the process fairly quickly.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague
from Illinois and reiterate that this is merely a clarifying amendment,
but one with real impact as it will return the term ``school leader''
to its originally intended use.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis).
The amendment was agreed to.

Amendment No. 30 Offered by Mr. Zeldin

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 30
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 563, after line 15, insert the following:

``SEC. 6532. STATE CONTROL OVER STANDARDS.

``(a) In General.--Nothing in this Act shall be construed
to prohibit a State from withdrawing from the Common Core
State Standards or any other specific standards.
``(b) Prohibition.--No officer or employee of the Federal
Government shall, directly or indirectly, through grants,
contracts or other cooperative agreements, through waiver
granted under section 6401 or through any other authority,
take any action against a State that exercises its rights
under subsection (a).''.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentleman
from New York (Mr. Zeldin) and a Member opposed each will control 5
minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Chairman, I rise this evening in support of my
amendment that sends a very clear message to States that if they choose
to withdraw from Common Core, there will be no penalty whatsoever from
the Federal Government.
As a New York State Senator, I introduced legislation with New York
State Assemblymen Al Graf and Ed Ra that would stop Common Core in New
York.
In New York, we have these Common Core standards set nationally,
tests created by the State, curriculum set by the local school
districts, and no one is talking to each other; teachers not only
teaching to the test, but they are

[[Page H1284]]

teaching to the wrong test because they are not given the tools they
need to know what the test is even going to look like.
And for any government Kool Aid-drinking bureaucrat who is listening
to this and disagreeing with what I have to say, you are not listening
to those parents and educators and students who are pleading with
passion exactly what I am saying, begging for a positive change that
will improve the quality of education in America's classrooms.
The most common argument I received in opposition to my bill was that
if New York State withdrew from Common Core, that somehow the Federal
Government was going to punish New York State with hundreds of millions
of dollars lost--some even said billions of dollars. This amendment is
the most important action that this Congress can take to diffuse those
claims and allow States to withdraw without punishment.
As for my strong personal opinion, I believe in higher standards, but
I don't believe that Common Core is the answer. This goes way beyond
the complaints of killing morale in the teaching profession. Much more
importantly, this is about killing the morale for that student who is
intelligent, pays attention in class, goes home and does their
homework. They are going to grow up to be a doctor or a lawyer or a
successful businessman. They are being told that they are not
proficient in reading--not because they are not proficient in reading,
but because the rollout of Common Core has been a disaster.
We have 10-year-old special education students taking fifth grade
tests even if they are reading at a first grade reading level. Or you
can go on the EngageNY Web site and read about how first graders, the
domain for English language arts, early world civilizations, they are
learning about ancient world Mesopotamia and the strategic advantage of
the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers with regard to the development of the
city of Babylon--6-year-olds, first graders.
As a father of twin third grade girls, I believe in higher standards.
I believe in challenging our students to excel and to aim as high as
possible. But when it comes to all of America's children, there just
shouldn't be a one-size-fits-all approach.
While some States embrace Common Core, not all States' needs are the
same. My amendment would allow States currently using Common Core to
opt out without punishment. Parents need to be in charge of their
children's education, not unelected, faceless bureaucrats making
unilateral decisions for the entire Nation.
A one-size-fits-all solution to education reform intensifies the
problem, and it doesn't address our underlying issues. We want to
provide the best possible opportunities for our children, and the
people best positioned to make those decisions are our parents and our
local educators.
I ask my colleagues to support my amendment, hear the concerns of our
parents and educators, and heed the call to rescue our schoolchildren.
It is like when they fall into the deep end of a pool, they don't have
a lifejacket, they don't yet know how to swim. That is what it feels
like for many of them.
This is a vote for residents in your district who aren't even old
enough to vote. Fight for them and pass this amendment.
I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, this amendment is not necessary
because there is no prohibition against people withdrawing from Common
Core.
I think we need to say a few things about Common Core.
It is not a national or a Federal initiative. It is State led. States
develop the Common Core standards through the Council of Chief State
School Officers and the National Governors Association. The U.S.
Department of Education did not participate in that. The administration
does not coerce States into adopting Common Core. In fact, States have
received waivers under NCLB and have not adopted Common Core, like my
home State of Virginia.
In Virginia, our State system of higher education certified that when
a child is proficient under our standards of learning, they could enter
public universities without the needed remediation. Those standards
were okay, not the Common Core.
Frankly, we need those kinds of standards, college and career-ready,
because you want people, when they graduate from high school, to be
able to go to college without remediation. That is not a high bar, and
we want to make sure that whatever happens to this amendment, we are
not exempting States from meaningful standards.
I reserve the balance of my time.

{time} 2115

Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Chairman, I will continue to reserve the balance of
my time.

=========================== NOTE ===========================

February 26, 2015, on page H1284, the following appeared: I
reserve the balance of my time. Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Chairman, I will

The online version should be corrected to read: I reserve the
balance of my time. (2115) Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Chairman, I will

========================= END NOTE =========================

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the
gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Polis).
Mr. POLIS. I thank the gentleman from Virginia.
Mr. Chairman, there is an enormous amount of misperception about what
the Common Core standards are. Frankly, those of us who serve in this
body are elected leaders. I urge my colleagues to take the time to
educate themselves about this collaborative effort between a number of
States that have developed college- and career-ready standards before
they decry it based on misperceptions that, unfortunately, exist among
the American public.
A number of States chose to work collaboratively on college- and
career-ready standards. What we at the Federal level want to see is
that States have college- and career-ready standards. We want to make
sure that a diploma is meaningful. If a Federal investment is made, we
want to make sure that States don't define success downward, disguising
achievement gaps and making it look like every child achieves
expectations by lowering expectations.
How they do that is entirely up to them. Let me repeat myself. How
they do that is entirely up to them. Many States choose to work
together. Some States choose to create their own standards. A project
of the National Governors Association had Governors and State education
commissioners working together to develop college- and career-ready
standards. Other States have chosen to develop their own college- and
career-ready standards.
That really is an appropriate discussion to have at the State level,
but not in the halls of Washington. You won't hear people pushing
Common Core standards here in Washington because I don't think any of
us feel it is an appropriate discussion. But for some reason people
have a particular agenda against what some of their own States are
doing here in Washington. Well, I suggest they don't run for Congress.
I suggest they run for Governor if that is their beef. This is simply
the wrong place to have a discussion about curriculum and standards.
Mr. Chairman, the Federal Government does not set standards; the
Federal Government does not set curriculum. It is also important to
note that curriculum standards are different. Curriculum is developed
from the standards, and depending on what standards the States have
adopted, the curriculum is an entirely different matter.
So, again, I hope that we can use this opportunity as a learning
moment so my colleagues can engage in a more meaningful debate about
what standards are and who sets them.
Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Chairman, I think this would be a very good learning
moment because States were receiving hundreds of millions, into the
billions of dollars, from the Federal Government. They had to sign up
for Common Core in order to get the money.
Mr. POLIS. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ZELDIN. No. Let me----
Mr. POLIS. You do not need to sign up for Common Core to receive the
funding.
Mr. KLINE. Regular order, Mr. Chairman.
The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Dold). The gentleman from New York controls the
time.
Mr. ZELDIN. There were applications that were sent from New York
State, for example, to the Federal Government signed by the New York
State congressional delegation asking for a waiver from the Federal
Government,

[[Page H1285]]

asking for money from the Federal Government to New York State that
went to over 700 school districts to sign up for Common Core and all
sorts of other things that came from the Federal Government. So I
appreciate this as a learning moment.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time to Mr. Scott.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, how much time do I have
remaining?
The Acting CHAIR. The gentleman from Virginia has 1\1/2\ minutes
remaining.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I just want to reiterate that
the Commonwealth of Virginia had received a waiver without accepting,
without being involved in Common Core. We need to make sure that we
have meaningful, high standards so that when someone graduates from
high school, they are college- or career-ready without remediation.
Whatever happens to this amendment, we want to make sure that States
are not trying to exempt themselves out of reasonable standards.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from New York (Mr. Zeldin).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. ZELDIN. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from New York
will be postponed.

Amendment No. 31 Offered by Mr. Hurd of Texas

The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 31
printed in part B of House Report 114-29.
Mr. HURD of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
The text of the amendment is as follows:

Page 574, after line 17, insert the following:

``SEC. 6552. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON PROTECTING STUDENT PRIVACY.

``(a) Findings.--The Congress finds as follows:
``(1) Students' personally identifiable information is
important to protect.
``(2) Students' information should not be shared with
individuals other than school officials in charge of
educating those students without clear notice to parents.
``(3) With the use of more technology, and more research
about student learning, the responsibility to protect
students' personally identifiable information is more
important than ever.
``(4) Regulations allowing more access to students'
personal information could allow that information to be
shared or sold by individuals who do not have the best
interest of the students in mind.
``(5) The Secretary has the responsibility to ensure every
entity that receives funding under this Act holds any
personally identifiable information in strict confidence.
``(b) Sense of Congress.--It is the sense of the Congress
that the Secretary should review all regulations addressing
issues of student privacy, including those under this Act,
and ensure that students' personally identifiable information
is protected.

The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 125, the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Hurd) and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. HURD of Texas. Mr. Chairman, our children are our most precious
resource, so protecting their personally identifiable information is
incredibly important. As a former undercover officer in the CIA, I have
seen the damage that can be done when personal data falls into the
wrong hands. Bad actors can not only use this information for their own
gain, they can also use it to target America's children. It is up to us
to protect our children and ensure their information is secure.
Students' personal information should never be shared with anyone who
is not authorized to view it or use it, period.
I support the final passage of H.R. 5 and hope this amendment will
spur Congress to help protect the personally identifiable information
of our Nation's students.
Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition,
although I am not opposed.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the gentleman is
recognized for 5 minutes.
There was no objection.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Texas has
raised some good points about data privacy with this amendment. The
Subcommittee on Elementary and Secondary Education held a hearing on
data privacy in the digital age earlier this month, and I think we are
going to be looking at ways that we can improve FERPA for the 21st
century during this Congress.
Mr. Chairman, that bill was written 40 years ago when data in the
classroom was all in a teacher's grade book and technology was not
employed anywhere close to where it is today. Parents need to be able
to trust that their children's personal information is secure and will
not be used for marketing or noneducational purposes. Teachers need to
be given resources to understand how they can best protect the
students' data. As policymakers, we need to safeguard student privacy
while supporting technological innovation happening in American
schools.
We must help researchers and educators diagnose and address
achievement gaps and enable all students to achieve their greatest
potential. So I support the gentleman's amendment, and yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. HURD of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hurd).
The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes
appeared to have it.
Mr. HURD of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.
The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas will
be postponed.
Mr. KLINE. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr.
Stivers) having assumed the chair, Mr. Dold, Acting Chair of the
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 5) to
support State and local accountability for public education, protect
State and local authority, inform parents of the performance of their
children's schools, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution
thereon.

____________________