[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 3]
[House]
[Pages 3454-3455]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




            THE REPUBLICANS TAKE ACTION ON IMPROVING SCHOOLS

  (Mr. SOUDER asked and was given permission to address the House for 1 
minute and to revise and extend his remarks and include therein 
extraneous material.)
  Mr. SOUDER. Mr. Speaker, we have heard a lot today and we will hear a 
lot more in the future about who is saving social security, but there 
is a key fact we should keep in mind. That is, for 40 years the 
Democrats held control of this House. The number of times they worked 
to save social security was somewhere around zero.
  The important thing here is not whether we talk, but whether we do. 
Today in the Committee on Education and the Workforce we are 
considering a bill called Ed-Flex, to give local and State governments 
more flexibility, and allowing school boards more flexibility in 
education. Similar bills are being considered on the Senate floor. We 
are actually doing something about what other people talk about. It is 
a bipartisan effort. The gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Roemer), and others from both sides of the 
aisle are reaching forth.
  Will the Democratic Party join with us in trying to give flexibility? 
I will refer to two articles, which I will insert into the 
Congressional Record along with these remarks. One is from Steve 
Gordon, president of the East Allen County School Board, saying, States 
should fight Federal meddling in the schools. We don't need a national 
school board in Washington. We need to give more flexibility to local 
school boards and States.
  Another is a letter to the editor praising Concordia High School in 
my district, which is the largest Lutheran high school in the country, 
for their drug testing programs. At the local level people are doing 
things, not just talking.
  The letters referred to are as follows:

           [From the Ft. Wayne News Sentinel, Feb. 22, 1999]

             State Should Fight Federal Meddling in Schools

       With the start of the new legislative year, one issue that 
     always comes up is education. Of course, the president, 
     governor and every legislator have this issue near the top of 
     their agendas.
       The president used his State of the Union speech to address 
     aspects of education, and I would like to respond. He 
     recommends bringing public education more under the authority 
     of the federal government. He also makes some points that 
     should be common-sense to most Americans, but to him are more 
     of a revelation that only the federal government should 
     implement.
       His first point was to end social promotion. Children 
     should not graduate with a diploma they can't read. Who could 
     possibly oppose this? Already schools--at the local level--
     are endeavoring to ensure reading skills are mastered at the 
     earliest grade levels.
       His second point was to close low-performing schools. Will 
     the federal government decide this issue? By what standard? 
     Indiana already examines each public school's performance and 
     intervenes when necessary to help those schools to meet their 
     specific needs. We don't need the federal government to 
     transcend the state authority already in place.
       His third point suggested that teachers only teach subjects 
     they are trained in. This is another local issue--one 
     manipulated by contracts, state licensing rules and course 
     offerings requested by students. What we at the local level 
     need is greater flexibility in putting qualified teachers 
     into the classroom. Indiana should modify the licensing 
     procedure to allow people to teach who are qualified in the 
     material but do not necessarily have a major in education.
       An example is: Schools are in great need of vocational 
     program teachers. People who have vocational skills but may 
     not meet licensing requirements could pass their experience 
     on to students. For example, people just out of the military 
     or retirees could fill this need.
       His fourth point was to allow parents to choose which 
     public school to send their child to based on school ``report 
     cards.'' Indiana already requires each district to publish 
     information about schools' performance. Charter schools have 
     been a state issue and should remain so. One aspect of 
     charters that makes them unique is the avoidance of many 
     current state Department of Education regulations. I suggest 
     that if some schools can do this, all public schools should 
     be allowed to avoid these rules.
       His fifth point was to ``implement sensible discipline 
     policies.'' Not long ago, the president pushed through the 
     mandatory one-year expulsion for any student who comes to 
     school with a handgun. Every state had to make this into law. 
     Indiana already had a law forbidding handguns to be within 
     1,000 feet of a school. Why was it necessary to federalize 
     this issue?
       I would like to make some suggestions in contrast to the 
     president's agenda.
       First, give real tax relief to families. When families have 
     both parents working out of necessity, they have less time 
     for their children. A parent waiting for the child to arrive 
     at home is better than after-school programs. Families are 
     paying approximately 40 percent of their income to taxes. One 
     parent is effectively working just to pay the government. 
     Children need their parents--not another government program!
       Second, do not generalize when talking about education. 
     Every school has unique problems--and many have unique 
     successes. Create opportunities for all schools to succeed in 
     the areas that they want and need. Rather than add more 
     bureaucracy, remove what currently exists. Free the public 
     schools up so that they can compete equally with private 
     schools. It is tempting--and easy--for legislators to get 
     their hands into the means of education. Be more concerned 
     about the results and leave the means implementation to the 
     local school districts. They can better assess their specific 
     needs and respond to them directly.
       Third, let the local districts decide how to spend money. 
     The recent ``100,000 teachers'' legislation is a perfect 
     example. Considering the amount of money appropriated, it 
     will never meet the need to hire that amount of teachers. It 
     creates an obligation to the school districts to make up a 
     difference that they may not have.
       Finally, I would ask that education remain a local issue 
     and that the state resist any further federal intervention. 
     There are problems in public education, but they can be much 
     better resolved at the local and state level. Washington 
     doesn't need to involve itself any further.
       I realize I do not have the influence on law-makers that 
     the president or governor may have. But I am only a school 
     board member. I want to do what is in the best interests of 
     students in this district. I ask parents who support these 
     ideas to contact their representatives and tell them how they 
     feel.

[[Page 3455]]

     
                                  ____
           [From the Ft. Wayne Journal-Gazette, Mar. 2, 1999]

                    Praise School That Fights Drugs

       It has long been said that one picture is worth a thousand 
     words. Unfortunately those words do not have to be the truth 
     or accurate. Such is the case with the Feb. 26 editorial 
     cartoon. It infers several incorrect concepts. The first is 
     that education will take a secondary role to drug testing at 
     Concordia High School. One only has to look at ISTEP scores, 
     graduation rates, percent of graduates going to college and 
     SAT scores to refute that idea.
       The second is that the testing will occupy the entire 
     school day. Testing can be completed in a very short period 
     of time, being minimally disruptive to the school day. For a 
     non-drug user an inconvenience--to a drug user, surely no 
     more disruptive than days missed because of over indulgence.
       His third incorrect concept is the most damaging. His 
     attempt to ridicule the recently announced plan for random 
     drug testing at Concordia, by overstating his case, will give 
     those who have a misguided belief that drug testing is evil 
     and an invasion of privacy the belief that taking action to 
     help prevent good kids from making bad decisions is an 
     unworthy undertaking.
       Rather than swelling up with righteous indignation over the 
     alleged loss of privacy, I would suggest the editorial staff 
     consider looking at the educational success gained at a high 
     school where standards are set, expectations delineated and 
     students and faculty are held accountable for their actions. 
     This action to take care of a problem that occurs in every 
     high school in this area is the act of responsible 
     administrators and parents who are taking action rather than 
     burying their heads in the sand.
                                                Earnie Williamson,
     Fort Wayne.

                          ____________________