[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 19]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 26910-26912]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                      STUDENT RESULTS ACT OF 1999

                                 ______
                                 

                               speech of

                           HON. PATSY T. MINK

                               of hawaii

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, October 20, 1999

       The House in Committee of the Whole House on the State of 
     the Union had under consideration the bill (H.R. 2) to send 
     more dollars to the classroom and for certain other purposes:


[[Page 26911]]

  Mrs. MINK. Madam Chairman, I believe strongly that all children 
deserve the opportunity to receive the best education possible. Title I 
was enacted with this credo in mind.
  Our federal education dollars have always focused on specific areas 
of need within our education system. Since we provide roughly only 7% 
of the total elementary and secondary education funding spent in this 
country, we have always sought to concentrate these limited federal 
dollars in areas where they can make a real difference.
  Title I is arguably the most important program of our federal 
education funds; it certainly is the largest. It provides nearly $8 
billion annually to address inequities in education for our poorest 
students. This program is critical to helping communities provide high 
quality instruction and educational services to disadvantaged children.
  And Title I is working. Earlier this year, the U.S. Department of 
Education issued ``Promising Results, Continuing Challenges: The Final 
Report of the National Assessment of Title I.'' This in-depth analysis 
of Title I concluded that the initial results of Title I's systemic 
accountability system have proven successful. Out of the six States 
reporting data, five showed improvement in math achievement and four in 
reading. Out of the 13 urban school districts reporting, 9 showed 
substantial increases in either math or reading achievement. Most 
importantly, the National Assessment told us that, when fully 
implemented, systemic reform will very likely close the achievement gap 
between disadvantaged students and their non-disadvantaged peers.
  I do have serious concerns about certain provisions, or lack thereof, 
in H.R. 2.
  In particular, I am concerned about the changes in the schoolwide 
poverty requirements, the exclusion of the Women's Educational Equity 
Act, and the repeal of the Native Hawaiian Education Programs from the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
  H.R. 2, as reported, lowers the poverty eligibility threshold for 
schoolwide programs from 50% to 40%. Presently, schools with over 50% 
of their student population from low-income families can operate a 
schoolwide program. When this provision was first passed, schools had 
to have 75% poverty to be eligible.
  Although schoolwide programs have been shown to be very effective for 
disadvantaged students, they are only considered advantageous if there 
are a significant number of children in poverty. By lowering the 
poverty threshold to 40, the Majority is diluting the program's focus 
on poor children. 40% poverty means that 60%--the majority of the 
school--is not poverty-stricken. It is imperative that these Title I 
funds remain with the kids who need it the most.
  During Committee consideration of H.R. 2, the Committee, passed an 
amendment by Representative Payne, by a vote of 24-21, to retain the 
schoolwide threshold at 50%. Later in the markup, the Majority 
inexplicably reversed itself and passed an amendment to move the 
threshold back to 40%. For the life of me I cannot understand why after 
approving an amendment to raise the schoolwide threshold, the Committee 
took a step backwards and reversed itself.
  I also strongly oppose the elimination of the gender equity 
provisions in current law and the Women's Educational Equity Act 
(WEEA).
  By eliminating a current, long-standing program that ensures fairness 
and equal opportunities in schools, the Majority is ignoring the 
different educational needs of girls and boys. WEEA represents the 
federal commitment to ensure that all students' futures are determined 
not by their gender, but by their own interests, aspirations, and 
abilities.
  Since 1974, WEEA has funded the development and dissemination of 
curricular materials; training programs; guidance activities; and other 
projects to combat inequitable educational practices. WEEA provides a 
resource for teachers, administrators, and parents and provides the 
materials and tools to help schools comply with Title IX, the federal 
law prohibiting sex discrimination in federally funded education 
institutions. Through an 800 number, e-mail, and a web site, the WEEP 
Publishing Center makes these materials and models widely available to 
teachers, administrators, and parents.
  WEEA has funded over 700 programs since its inception, and the 
requests for assistance and information are growing. From February to 
August of this year, the WEEA Resource Center received over 750 
requests for technical assistance. Past and current WEEA-funded 
projects include making math and science opportunities more accessible 
to girls, and programs such as ``Expanding Your Horizons'' expose girls 
to women to non-traditional careers.
  The Majority cited the results of a 1994 GAO study as its reason for 
eliminating this very important program. It argued that the Womens' 
Educational Equity Center lacked the staff to implement this program. 
The majority also argued that a small percentage of the grants made its 
way to the state and local levels.
  It is no wonder. During the 1980s, WEEA fought a constant battle with 
funding and authorization. It has only been since the GAO report was 
printed and a Democratic president was elected, that the Womens' 
Educational Equity Center has been able to grow and improve. The 
Majority must not rely on a dated report that is no longer relevant to 
justify the elimination of this program.
  The Majority also argues this program is not needed. Girls are doing 
better than boys in school in reading and writing. Although there has 
been much improvement in girls accomplishments, this does not justify 
the elimination of the program that added to these gains. Girls are 
achieving now because of the federal government's focus and attention 
on these inequities.
  Moreover, although there has been gains, girls are still lagging 
behind boys in many important subjects, such as math, science, and 
technology.
  WEEA helps girls acquire the skills and self-confidence they will 
need to support themselves and help support their families. Efforts to 
improve education will fail unless we address the different needs of 
different students. Excellence and equity go hand in hand. The repeal 
of this critical program undermines this country's commitment to equity 
in the classroom.
  And last, I am appalled that this bill repeals the Native Hawaiian 
Education Programs from the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
(ESEA).
  The Native Hawaiian Education Program has been in effect since 1988, 
when it was first included in Title IX of ESEA together with funding 
for Native American and Native Alaskan education programs. Native 
Hawaiians are Native Americans, and like Native American Indians, they 
have suffered greatly at the hand of the U.S. Government, most 
significantly due to the illegal overthrow of the Hawaiian Monarchy by 
military force in 1893. As a result, Native Hawaiians were 
disenfranchised from their land, their culture, and their ability to 
self govern. Eliminating this program negates the steady progress that 
has been made in recent years to make amends for the terrible travesty 
of the overthrow.
  From 1826 until 1893, the United States recognized the Kingdom of 
Hawaii as a sovereign, independent nation and accorded her full and 
complete diplomatic recognition. During this time, treaties and trade 
agreements were entered into between these two nations. However, in 
1893, a powerful group of American businessmen engineered the overthrow 
with the use of U.S. Naval forces. Queen Liliuokalani was imprisoned 
and over 1.8 million acres of land belonging to the Crown, referred to 
as Crown lands or ceded lands, were confiscated without compensation or 
due process.
  This takeover was illegal. There was no treaty of annexation. There 
was no referendum of consent by the Native Hawaiian people. Recently, 
the National Archives disclosed amongst its treasures a 556 page 
petition dated 1897-1898 protesting the annexation of Hawaii by the 
U.S. It was signed by 21,259 Native Hawaiian people. A second petition 
had more than 17,000 signatures. Historians advise that this number of 
signatories constitutes nearly 100% of the adult Native Hawaiian 
population at that time.
  Today, out of a total of 211,033 acres of land occupied by the 
military, the ownership of 112,137 acres can be traced to the royal 
family. No compensation was ever paid for these lands.
  In 1920, Congress answered the cries of injustice by decreeing that 
200,000 acres of land confiscated by the federal government be returned 
to the Native Hawaiians as an act of contrition. Unfortunately, these 
lands were in places where no one lived or wanted to live. They were in 
the most remote places--isolated without any infrastructure or access 
to jobs. Today, Native Hawaiians live in segregated reservations much 
like the Indian tribes. Their current despair is due to this forced 
isolation.
  The Native Hawaiian Education Act was established out of our moral 
and legal responsibility for the destruction that occurred to this 
community. The $20 million that funds this program to help educate 
Native Hawaiian children can't begin to make up for the loss of a 
nation, of an identity, a culture, and a heritage, but it can help 
fulfill our moral and legal obligations.
  Justice requires that we fulfill our trust obligations to the Native 
Hawaiian community. This modest program has helped these children, who 
suffer the lowest reading and math

[[Page 26912]]

scores, whose families suffer the highest percentage of poverty, and 
whose health statistics and mortality rates are alarming by all 
measures. We do this for the Native American and Native Alaskan 
communities. The Majority would never dream of eliminating the funding 
for these equally important programs. We must not repeal this important 
program for the Native Hawaiian population.
  I want to support this bill. Some good reforms and improvements were 
incorporated in this legislation. But unless the three areas that I 
have addressed are fixed, H.R. 2 will be a travesty on girls and women, 
on Native Hawaiians and on the poor children who need all the help this 
nation can muster.

                          ____________________