[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 106 (Thursday, July 9, 2015)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4934-S4935]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
EXPERIMENTS IN POLICY
Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, when I return home to my State during our
district work periods--the time when the Senate is not in session--as I
get a chance to travel my State, as the Presiding Officer does in his,
I always feel as though I learn something, and I appreciate a little
bit more how different policies can have a different impact and produce
different results.
As the distinguished Senator from Wisconsin was speaking about the
importance of education, I couldn't help but think that we all agree
with that, but we have maybe some differences on which policies
actually produce a better result. I couldn't help but think a little
bit about that last week as I was visiting some of the ranchers and
folks in west Texas in the ag sector who were very interested in what
we were doing here in Washington on trade promotion authority, as we
have worked with the President on a bipartisan basis to pass this
structure by which the next big trade agreement--the Trans-Pacific
Partnership--will be considered and voted on.
I do have a bias. I think experiments in policy are best conducted at
the State level, not at the national level. We have seen, for example,
as the Presiding Officer knows, a huge experiment in health care reform
where, under the Affordable Care Act, one-sixth of our economy was
effectively commandeered by the Federal Government in a one-size-fits-
all approach. Of course, the results were much worse than even its most
ardent opponents predicted. Many of the basic promises that were made
in order to sell the Affordable Care Act simply aren't true. They
haven't come to pass.
So I think it is helpful to do just the opposite. Rather than
experiment at the national level with what kinds of policies actually
work, let's try these at the State level. Indeed, on the matter of
trade, I would say I come from a State that is the No. 1 exporting
State in the country, and that is one reason why our economy grew last
year--2014--at 5.2 percent. The economy across the United States grew
at 2.2 percent. There are a lot of reasons for that difference, but
don't we think it would make some people curious about whether there
were actually policies or practices at the State level that produced a
better result--a growing economy with rising wages and more jobs?
This isn't just me being proud of where I come from. I guess people
are accustomed to Texans being proud of their State and bragging about
it. That is just kind of who we are, and we accept that. But this is
more than that. This is talking about the policies that actually work,
that have been embraced and implemented here at the national level,
once tested at the State level--we could actually see a better outcome
for all of America.
For example, Texas farmers and ranchers know from our experience in
Texas that trade is a good thing. As we begin to explain and explore
the importance of trade promotion authority, the idea that we comprise
roughly 5 percent of the world's population--in other words, 95 percent
of the world's population is beyond our shores but we represent 20
percent of the world's purchasing power--why wouldn't we want to open
up our goods and services and the things we grow and make to these
markets abroad so that more people can buy the things we grow and raise
and what we make?
I wish to speak about another innovation or at least another practice
at the State level that has had an impact on the quality of education
at the State level. As we continue the discussion of the Every Child
Achieves Act--
[[Page S4935]]
legislation that will hopefully help improve the results for 50 million
children--I am glad we will be bringing another tried-and-true example
of what has happened at the State level to the national level.
I was happy to cosponsor with the senior Senator from Virginia an
amendment which takes into account the commonsense purpose of
encouraging the States to conduct efficiency reviews of school
districts and campuses to make sure Federal dollars delivered to each
classroom are spent as cost-effectively as possible. This amendment
builds on an incredibly successful program in Texas--one that brings
greater accountability to our schools and helps them discern how they
can make each dollar go just a little bit further. This program is
called the Financial Allocation Study for Texas, or FAST. It was
developed by the Texas comptroller, Susan Combs--the immediate past
comptroller of the State of Texas--to evaluate the operational
efficiency of the school districts and campuses across our State. To do
that, the comptroller uses data about school finances, school
demographics, and academic performance from each school and campus
around the State to help measure academic achievement relative to
spending.
There is a broadly held fallacy that the quality of educational
outputs is equal to how much money we put into it. In other words, if
we want a better product--education--all we have to do is spend more
money. I would say that is demonstrably false. There are many of our
parochial schools that do an outstanding job of educating their
students at a fraction of what our public schools do. So I think it is
a fallacy to say that if we want more or better education, all we have
to do is spend more money. There is a smarter, more efficient way to
deal with that, and that is what the financial allocation study is
designed to achieve--to measure academic achievement relative to
spending.
As the senior Senator from Virginia explained earlier, this
successful Texas model of a fiscally responsible education system
caught his eye when he was Governor of Virginia, and fortunately he
then implemented a similar program. In Virginia, the savings came from
commonsense recommendations--again, as we did in Texas--things such as
introducing software programs to improve bus routes, enhancing methods
of facilities management, and encouraging best practices in hiring and
personnel management.
While more States have adopted similar programs, these money-saving
opportunities should be available to all school districts
nationwide. So now, with the adoption of this amendment just yesterday
and with the eventual passage of the Every Child Achieves Act, we can
make sure school districts all across the country are using their
dollars for what they are really intended--classroom education--not
stuck in the back office bureaucracy.
As many of us have already mentioned, the underlying legislation, the
Every Child Achieves Act, is really about putting the responsibility
for our children's education back in the hands of parents, local school
districts, and teachers--the people who are actually closer to the
issue, closer to the problems, and the ones who perhaps know more than
any bureaucrat in Washington could ever hope to know about what
actually works at the local level. It is also about flexibility,
meaning it is up to individual States, not just the Federal Government,
to determine how to achieve the best outcome for all of our students.
Importantly, I should add, that flexibility translates into greater
options for schools across the country by giving States additional
freedom to create and replicate high-quality charter schools, for
example, and giving more parents more choices, as I said, for their
children's education.
I am very proud of the good progress we have made across a number of
issues this year so far--passing the anti-human trafficking laws and
finally cracking the code on how we pay physicians under Medicare
adequately rather than temporarily patching that problem, as we have
for so many years. We passed a budget for the first time since 2009
that balances in 10 years. And, yes, we worked with the President of
the United States on a bipartisan basis to pass trade promotion
authority. Next week, we will conclude this Every Child Achieves Act by
reforming our early and elementary childhood education system to get
more of the power, to get more of the authority out of Washington and
back to parents, teachers, and the States, where it really belongs.
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
Mr. FRANKEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up
to 20 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________