[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 106 (Thursday, July 9, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4931-S4934]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        EVERY CHILD ACHIEVES ACT

  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, I rise to speak on an amendment that has 
great significance for our country. It is about early learning. I will 
give you the formal name of the amendment so we have it for the record: 
Casey amendment No. 2152, the strong start for America's children 
amendment, which is an amendment to the Every Child Achieves Act that 
will establish a Federal-State partnership to provide access to high-
quality and public prekindergarten education for low- and moderate-
income families.
  We have had a debate, especially over the last couple of days, about 
our commitment to basic education, so-called elementary and secondary 
education. As part of that, I think it is the time to finally, at long 
last, have a debate about early learning on the floor of the U.S. 
Senate. It has been a long time since that has happened.
  I thank the folks who have made it possible for us to get to this 
point to consider an amendment like this and to have this debate about 
the larger legislation but also about this amendment, in particular. 
Senator Alexander and Senator Murray were leading the effort to 
consider the Every Child Achieves Act, but also, in particular, I again 
salute Senator Murray for her many years, as you might call it, 
laboring in the vineyards of early learning, as she has done on so many 
other issues--since the first stage, she has been in the Senate working 
on early learning. I thank Senator Hirono for her work on this issue as 
well, in proposing legislation which has come together now after a lot 
of years of work by a number of us in the Senate. We are grateful for 
their contribution.
  I also ask unanimous consent to add Senator Booker as a cosponsor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. CASEY. Mr. President, what this comes down to is something very 
fundamental. The basic link between learning and earning--if children 
learn more now or learn more when they are very young, they are going 
to earn a lot more down the road. They are going to do better in 
school. They are going to succeed in progressing in school in a way we 
would hope, no matter where they live and no matter what their 
circumstances, if we make the commitment to those children. Because of 
that success and progress and learning, they will learn more down the 
road. We know a more developed education leads to great success in 
school and also leads to a better job down the road.
  This isn't simply a commitment to a child. It certainly is that first 
and foremost, but it is also a commitment to our long-term economic 
future. If you want higher wages and you want better jobs and you want 
a growing economy and you want America not only to compete in a world 
economy but outcompete and have the best workforce, the best workers in 
the world, we have to make sure we have the best education system. That 
starts long before a child gets to first or second grade and even 
starts before they get to kindergarten. That is why I refer to this as 
pre-K or prekindergarten education. If they learn more now, they will 
earn more later. We have to make sure we bear that in mind.
  As we debate the appropriate role of the Federal Government to ensure 
that all students in the Nation graduate from high school prepared for 
college and career, we cannot forget about this basic piece of the 
puzzle that begins before that child enters kindergarten.
  In the short term, students enter kindergarten more prepared and 
ready for elementary school if we pass legislation like the amendment I 
am proposing. Some studies have even shown high-quality early learning 
can help double a child's cognitive development. High quality and early 
learning can double a child's cognitive development.
  In the long term, high-quality early learning--we want to emphasize 
``high quality.'' I didn't say just any program or any kind of 
curriculum. We will talk more about that later. High-quality early 
learning contributes to, among other things, No. 1, a reduction in the 
need for special education; No. 2, lower juvenile justice rates; No. 3, 
improved health outcomes; No. 4, increased high school graduation and 
college matriculation rates; and, No. 5, increased self-sufficiency in 
productivity among families. These aren't just assertions. These are 
the results of many years of study.
  I will turn to the first chart for today. No. 1, high-quality early 
learning means children can earn as much as 25 percent more as adults. 
This is where early learning has a direct and substantial correlation 
to higher wages down the road. No. 2, early learning leads to healthier 
and more productive lives. There is no question about that. Some of the 
best research on this has been done lately and should be part of the 
discussion. No. 3, high-quality early learning also leads to children 
who are less likely to commit a crime. All the data shows that over 
many years now. No. 4, high-quality early learning means children are 
more likely to graduate from high school.
  We need to get that number up across the country. We hope that will 
lead to more young people finishing high school and getting higher 
education, but that doesn't always mean a 4-year degree. It might mean 
a 2-year degree. It might mean a community college. It might mean a 
technical school. They can't get to a community or technical school or 
any kind of higher education unless they graduate from high school. We 
want to make sure we have programs that do that. Kids learn more now 
and earn more later. That is the first reason to do this. It has a 
positive impact on that child and a substantially positive impact on 
the economy.
  The other way to look at this is what would happen in the absence of 
this kind of commitment, which we don't have right now as a nation. I 
think it is a strategic imperative that we have a commitment to early 
learning. But what happens if we don't? We can spend upward of $40,000 
per inmate on incarceration, thousands of dollars on drug treatment and 
special education. Whatever the challenge is, those problems become 
worse the longer we don't make this commitment. That is one option.
  The other option is to spend a fraction of that $40,000 on high-
quality preschool and give children the good and smart start they need 
in life. It is that old adage: An ounce of prevention is worth a pound 
of cure.
  We often have the best testimony from folks in our home State. I want 
to read one of those pieces of testimony. This is a letter I received. 
I will not read the whole letter. I want to refer to

[[Page S4932]]

a couple of individuals from Pennsylvania. Heather is from Southwestern 
Pennsylvania, and she wrote to us talking about her child. She is 
talking about the fact that her daughter is enrolled in a high-quality 
pre-K program. These are positive testimonials about the impact on the 
child and on the family. Heather, from southwestern Pennsylvania, wrote 
to us and told us that her daughter is enrolled in a high-quality pre-K 
program. These letters are positive testimonials that describe the 
impact this program has on a child and family.

  Heather says in pertinent part:

       My daughter has blossomed since starting the PA Pre-K 
     Counts program . . . she loves it!! She sings us songs she 
     learns daily and has made lots of friends daily she tells us 
     how much she loves her school and her teachers!

  It goes on from there.
  Another letter from Dorie D., also from the southwestern corner of 
our State, out near Pittsburgh, says:

       Our daughter has blossomed since starting the PA Pre-K 
     Counts program. Having this program available to us has 
     helped us see how our child learns best.

  She goes on to say:

       She is just so much more animated and open to learning now.

  We get letters like these all the time about the positive impact of 
early learning. This is testimony from people who are directly affected 
by it.
  One way to look at this is from the testimony of families. Another 
way to look at it is from the data. One of the best authorities is Dr. 
James Heckman, the Nobel Prize-winning economist who estimates that the 
return on high-quality early learning is as high as $10 for every $1 we 
invest. Another study of the Perry Preschool Project in Michigan showed 
a return of $17 for every $1 spent. So when you spend a buck on early 
learning, you get 17 bucks in return. This study has been on the record 
for many years, and unfortunately some elected officials haven't taken 
it to heart.
  The data of return on investment is overwhelming and indisputable. So 
if we want to measure this in terms of dollars, there is all of the 
evidence in the world. I think the evidence and the testimony from 
parents is even more persuasive, but if we want to do a dollar 
comparison, there it is--17 bucks returned on 1 buck of investment in 
early learning.
  The same research found that children who participated in high-
quality early learning earned approximately 25 percent more per year 
than those who did not.
  So study after study looking at full-day learning programs across the 
country have found a positive impact on the future earnings of 
participants, and in some cases the benefit just from increased wages 
could be as high as 3.5 percent per year. So this does have a direct 
correlation to wages. My strong start amendment would help more than 3 
million American children have that opportunity for high-quality early 
learning, and it would give them access to those kinds of programs.
  My home State of Pennsylvania has made strides in this direction at 
the State level. That is the good news. The bad news is that they have 
not made anywhere near the strides we need to make. We are nowhere near 
50 percent of our children in these kinds of programs. So because of 
that, because of that void or that deficit, the number for Pennsylvania 
in terms of benefits is high. It is estimated that 93,930 children in 
the State of Pennsylvania could benefit from this amendment being 
enacted into law.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the document entitled 
``Five-Year Estimates of Federal Allotments and the Number of Children 
Served By Casey Strong Start Amendment'' be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

  FIVE-YEAR ESTIMATES OF FEDERAL ALLOTMENTS AND THE NUMBER OF CHILDREN
                 SERVED BY CASEY STRONG START AMENDMENT
                          (funding in dollars)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Estimated
            State               Federal Allotment $     Children Served
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama-....................              429,922,966             51,804
Alaska-.....................              130,998,000             15,643
Arizona-....................              656,508,117             80,170
Arkansas-...................              315,518,722             34,630
California-.................            3,139,171,848            356,816
Colorado-...................              366,496,715             43,250
Connecticut-................              199,660,755             21,673
Delaware-...................              130,998,000             15,789
District of Columbia-.......              130,998,000             12,666
Florida-....................            1,440,455,110            161,553
Georgia-....................              917,616,106            101,756
Hawaii-.....................              130,998,000             16,099
Idaho-......................              153,654,734             18,800
Illinois-...................              961,484,302            108,064
Indiana-....................              530,095,397             65,147
Iowa-.......................              241,549,933             26,707
Kansas-.....................              259,275,568             30,942
Kentucky-...................              411,598,742             47,475
Louisiana-..................              455,185,965             52,223
Maine-......................              130,998,000             15,427
Maryland-...................              361,451,446             40,378
Massachusetts-..............              268,510,976             30,552
Michigan-...................              704,261,046             82,020
Minnesota-..................              344,519,863             41,581
Mississippi-................              341,868,957             42,015
Missouri-...................              448,967,945             54,565
Montana-....................              130,998,000             16,099
Nebraska-...................              147,742,118             17,666
Nevada-.....................              252,190,201             30,808
New Hampshire-..............              130,998,000             16,099
New Jersey-.................              448,992,376             42,744
New Mexico-.................              227,159,310             27,175
New York-...................            1,234,026,608            137,136
North Carolina-.............              872,086,515            101,598
North Dakota-...............              130,998,000             16,099
Ohio-.......................              976,595,679            118,760
Oklahoma-...................              323,544,733             34,739
Oregon-.....................              292,466,846             33,472
Pennsylvania-...............              817,003,895             93,930
Puerto Rico-................              453,536,785             55,738
Rhode Island-...............              130,998,000             16,035
South Carolina-.............              514,947,370             61,478
South Dakota-...............              130,998,000             16,099
Tennessee-..................              585,849,905             68,313
Texas-......................            2,670,071,687            299,902
Utah-.......................              283,952,191             34,897
Vermont-....................              130,998,000             15,224
Virginia-...................              461,782,685             53,967
Washington-.................              511,392,470             60,180
West Virginia-..............              150,649,562             15,676
Wisconsin-..................              455,857,852             50,212
Wyoming-....................              130,998,000             16,099
------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Total-..................           26,199,600,001          3,017,891
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Table prepared by the Congressional Research Service. Estimates
  were developed using assumptions and some may not be subject to
  change. Estimates of children served assume the cost of serving each
  child would be $9,000 per child in every state.

  Mr. CASEY. That is a list of the dollar amounts that States would 
receive under this. They have to choose to participate, but if they 
did, they would have not just the dollars for it but the children 
served. So my amendment would benefit 3 million children across the 
country and almost 94,000 children in Pennsylvania. In Ohio, 118,760 
children would benefit from this program. Even a very large State that 
might not have the investment we would hope, a State such as Texas, has 
299,902 children--let's just round it off and call it 300,000--who 
would benefit.
  This chart shows the number of children who would benefit, and I 
believe it is long overdue that we made this commitment to our 
children.
  The State would have to match, and that is why I mentioned it at the 
beginning. This is a Federal and State partnership. And we know if that 
happens, the full-day preschool would be available for 4-year-olds--
that is the age category we are focused on--from families earning 200 
percent below the Federal poverty level. So if it is a family of four, 
200 percent is a little less than $49,000 of family income.
  Earlier, I mentioned quality. We don't want to just have programs set 
up around the country--a Federal and State partnership and have a 
program. That would be nice, but it won't advance the goal of the best 
possible learning. We want high-quality programs. So we insist that the 
programs be ones that have teachers with high qualifications who are 
paid comparably to K-through-12 teachers. We would also insist that 
there be rigorous health and safety standards for these programs, such 
as small class sizes and low child-to-staff ratios, and instruction 
that is evidence-based and developmentally appropriate. We don't want 
to have just any curriculum; we want to have the best curriculum that 
is based on evidence that it works and also evidence-based 
comprehensive services for children.
  This amendment acknowledges that high-quality pre-K programs should 
be inclusive of services for children with disabilities as well and 
recognizes the need for increased funding to specifically serve these 
children in early childhood.
  There are other aspects of the program I do not have time to discuss 
right now, but I wanted to address an issue some people have brought to 
my attention. This program is a new commitment by the United States of 
America, and even folks who say this is a really good idea ask: How do 
you pay for it?
  Well, we have a pay-for. There is a change to the Tax Code, which I 
think a lot of folks would support because of what we have seen over 
the last couple of years. To pay for this, we would put limits on the 
ability of American companies to invert and move their tax domicile 
overseas to reduce their tax liability. That is a long way of saying we 
would make it more difficult for companies to engage in this so-called 
inversion strategy which allows them, through a loophole, to pay less 
taxes because they move operations into a smaller company that is 
foreign owned.

[[Page S4933]]

I believe we should make it more difficult for companies to do that. If 
they want to do that--I don't like when they do that, and not many 
people like it--we should at least make it a little more difficult. If 
we make it more difficult for companies to do what we hope they 
wouldn't, that will actually lead to a savings in revenue.
  It would make a lot of sense for American companies that believe they 
should move overseas to help us pay for early learning. I think that 
makes all the sense in the world if we are committed to early learning 
and if we are committed to making sure we can pay for the program. The 
amendment itself is paid for by dealing with this loophole or dealing 
with part of an advantage companies have.
  This amendment is supported by nearly 40 national organizations, from 
unions, to parent education and early learning groups, disability 
advocacy groups, and civil rights groups.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have the full list of 
endorsing organizations printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

 List of Organizations Endorsing Casey Amendment #2152 to S. 1177--The 
             Strong Start for America's Children Amendment

       1. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal 
     Employees
       2. American Federation of Teachers
       3. American Federation of School Administrators
       4. Bazelon Center
       5. Child Care Aware America
       6. Center for American Progress Action Fund
       7. Center for the Collaborative Classrom
       8. Children's Defense Fund
       9. Center for Law and Social Policy
       10. Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional 
     Learning
       11. Common Sense Kids Action
       12. Easter Seals
       13. Education Law Center
       14. First Five Year's Fund
       15. First Focus Campaign for Children
       16. Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
       17. Learning Disabilities Association of America
       18. National Association for the Advancement of Colored 
     People
       19. National Association for the Education of Young 
     Children
       20. National Association of Councils on Developmental 
     Disabilities
       21. National Association of Elementary School Principals
       22. National Association of School Psychologists
       23. National Association of State Directors of Special 
     Education
       24. National Black Child Development Institute
       25. National Center for Families Learning
       26. National Council of La Raza
       27. National Urban League
       28. National Women's Law Center
       29. National Education Association
       30. Nemours Children's Health System
       31. Parents as Teachers
       32. School Social Work Association of America
       33. Service Employee International Union
       34. Teach For America
       35. Teaching Strategies
       36. The Committee for Children
       37. The National Down Syndrome Congress
       38. Tourette Association of America
       39. Zero to Three
  Mr. CASEY. Just a couple of more points, and I will move on.
  Even with these recent gains, according to one of the national groups 
that track this data, the National Institute of Early Education and 
Research, NIEER, shows that only 4 in 10 American 4-year-olds are 
enrolled in public pre-K and fewer than 2 in 10 3-year-olds. Let's just 
focus on the 4-year-olds. Four in ten 4-year-olds are in these kinds of 
programs.
  I don't know how we can compete and have the best workforce in the 
world and develop the highest skill level in the world for our future 
if we don't make a commitment to early learning. I don't know how else 
we can get there over time if we are going to continue to talk a good 
game about early learning. And to listen to the testimony of parents, 
CEOs, and business owners who come to us year after year, in addition 
to talking to us about taxation and other issues--they say: Please, 
please make an investment in early learning. Some of the biggest 
companies in Pennsylvania and some of the biggest companies in the 
world have come to us and said that. Whether it is a CEO or a parent or 
an educator, they all believe we have to finally, at long last, make a 
commitment to early learning as a nation because it is a strategic 
economic imperative.
  Even in Pennsylvania, where I mentioned before that we made some 
strides over basically the last decade or 15 years, we rank 10th in the 
amount of State resources invested. That is kind of good news but not 
enough. Pennsylvania is still only able to serve less than 10 percent 
of all 3- and 4-year-olds in State funding for early learning.
  I think that at the same time we can make the academic arguments--the 
arguments by parents and educators and CEOs--we also know that the 
national data and polling show it is something the American people 
support as well. The American people understand the vital importance of 
increasing investment in early learning.
  A national poll conducted last year by the bipartisan team at Public 
Opinion Strategies and Hart Research showed that 64 percent of 
Americans believe we should be doing more to ensure that children start 
kindergarten ready to do their best.
  Here is another way to summarize it. This chart shows voters who say 
we should be doing more to ensure that children start kindergarten 
ready to do their best, and virtually no one else says we should do 
less. Those who say we should do more to ensure our children start 
kindergarten ready to learn and ready to do their best--64 percent. 
Twenty-seven percent say we should do enough. We have to persuade some 
of those folks in green. Only 4 percent say we should do less. I don't 
know who those folks are. I hope I can meet them and talk to them. But 
the overwhelming majority of Americans say we need to do more to give 
children the opportunity to be prepared to learn and therefore to have 
a strong start in their education and down the road to literally earn 
more when they are working.
  This support runs across all parties--55 percent of Republicans, 63 
percent of Independents, and 73 percent of Democrats.
  When asked about a similar proposal to the one in my amendment, 7 in 
10 Americans, including 67 percent of Republicans, support it. So it 
has overwhelming support.
  I will end with the words of the folks who know the benefit of these 
programs already--some of the parents who wrote to us. There are two 
more letters I will cite.
  The next testimonial is from Beth. She is from Washington County, PA. 
She expresses gratitude for the Pennsylvania pre-K program. She says:

       My daughter has learned so much. Before the start of PA 
     Pre-K Counts, she couldn't write any of her letters or even 
     recognize them. She has improved so much since the first day 
     of class. It has given her socialization with other kids her 
     age.

  She goes on to tell how much that means to her family and how much 
that means to her daughter.
  Finally, Megan, who is from the other end of the State, southeastern 
Pennsylvania in Montgomery County, says in part that her son ``came 
into this program shy and with very little verbal communication. He now 
talks nonstop and loves learning!''
  I have only read brief excerpts from letters we have received.
  Here is the point: If a child enters a program and by the end of that 
is curious about learning, that is a huge success. If a child enters a 
program not knowing her letters and by the end of that she is learning 
and achieving, that is something we can all be positive about.
  The first letter I read talked about the way one mother's child was 
singing songs that she learns daily. Whatever it is, whether it is 
singing or learning letters or reading, these children are learning 
because of a good program. It didn't just happen by accident. It 
happened because they are in a high-quality program. It happened 
because in some communities they made the decision to invest in the 
future of that child and the future of our economy.
  So let's take a step with this amendment to allow children to learn 
more now so they can earn more later and help us move into the future 
in a very positive direction for our children, for our families, and 
for our economy.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin.
  Ms. BALDWIN. Mr. President, I rise to speak in strong support of an 
amendment to this underlying bill that addresses resource equity in our 
Nation's schools. I am proud to have

[[Page S4934]]

worked across party lines to join my colleagues in supporting this 
bipartisan amendment, particularly to have worked with Senators Kirk, 
Reed of Rhode Island, and Brown on this measure. It is an improvement 
to the long-overdue reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act that we have been debating over the course of this week.

  The Every Child Achieves Act importantly focuses on ensuring that 
those students most in need have access to a high-quality education. It 
continues to ensure that title I funds flow to school districts where 
Federal support can make the greatest impact and the most difference. 
It requires States to report key information that will help us identify 
disparities such as per-pupil expenditures, school discipline, and 
teacher and educator quality. But I believe we must further strengthen 
those reporting requirements in order to fully ensure that the range of 
critical school resources--from quality teachers, to rigorous course 
work, to well-conditioned and equipped school facilities--is being 
equitably distributed among school districts in a given State. And we 
must require States to demonstrate how they will act to address 
disparities among schools.
  Despite the advances we have seen since President Johnson signed the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act into law 50 years ago, 
significant gaps in achievement and opportunity still exist. The U.S. 
Department of Education's Office of Civil Rights recently published 
data from a comprehensive survey of schools across the Nation that 
illustrated the magnitude of the problem. For example, the report 
describes how Black, Latino, American Indian, and Native Alaskan 
students and English learners attend schools with higher concentrations 
of inexperienced teachers.
  Furthermore, nationwide, one in five high schools lacks a school 
counselor, and between 10 and 25 percent of high schools across the 
Nation do not offer more than one of the core courses in the typical 
sequence of high school math and science.
  In my home State of Wisconsin, higher poverty and higher minority 
school districts remain more likely to have inexperienced teachers. The 
Department of Education has data that shows that, for example, in 
Milwaukee, where there are the most high-poverty and high-minority 
schools in our State, 8 percent of teachers are in their first year of 
teaching and 19 percent of teachers lack State certification. The State 
average is 5.6 percent for first-year teachers and 0.3 percent for 
those who lack certification.
  As with the Nation, achievement gaps follow these disparities. 
According to data from the National Center for Education Statistics, 
there are startling differences in student proficiency and graduation 
rates both in Wisconsin and nationally. For example, the average math 
proficiency in low-performing schools in my home State is 12 percent. 
The average in all other schools in the State is 51 percent. That is a 
huge gap; it is a 40-percent gap. There is also a 37-percent gap for 
reading and language arts proficiency and a 31-percent gap in 
graduation rates.
  We cannot close those achievement gaps if we do not provide all 
students with equal access to core educational resources. That is why I 
am pleased to join Senators Kirk, Reed, and Brown in offering this 
opportunity dashboard of core resources amendment. This amendment 
requires each State to report what key educational resources are 
currently available in districts with the highest concentrations of 
minority students and students in poverty. Then it requires them to 
develop a plan to address the disparities that are shown to exist. It 
gives States flexibility to develop those plans and lay out a timetable 
with annual benchmarks for taking action, and it protects a parent's 
right to know about the critical educational resources that are 
available to his or her child.
  As we work to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
in its 50th year, we have yet to see its promise of equal access to 
educational opportunity fulfilled for all of America's students. As we 
look to the next half-century of supporting public education, it is 
critical that we take steps to ensure that all children have access to 
the educational resources that will help them succeed, regardless of 
race, ethnicity, or family income.
  I understand there may be a vote on this amendment early next week. I 
certainly hope so. I urge my colleagues to support this very important 
bipartisan effort.
  Thank you, Mr. President.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________