[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 3856-3857]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                     THE EDUCATION FLEXIBILITY BILL

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, if I could briefly comment on the process we 
just went through and where we are with regard to this bill, Ed-Flex, 
the education flexibility bill, that is the underlying bill. It has 
broad bipartisan support. The President is for it. He had suggested we 
should pass it last year. We did not get it done, but he went before 
the National Governors' Association and called again for this 
legislation and says that he supports it. The National Governors' 
Association--all 50 of the Governors--supported a resolution in support 
of this bill, education flexibility.
  Twelve States have this flexibility now. My State is not one of 
those. It has been working quite well, I understand, in Massachusetts 
and in Maryland and other States where they now have this option in 
those 12 States. The rest of us want it.
  I just came from Chester, PA, earlier today, and Pennsylvania does 
not have this education flexibility. They would like to have it. They 
desperately would like to have it. The Governor of that State said: 
Please, give me this option. Let's waive some of this paperwork and the 
regulatory requirements. Let's have this option so we can give schools 
the flexibility, at the local level, to make these decisions to where 
the funds can best be used but results based. We need to see the proof 
that it actually is working. And all of that is included in this 
legislation.
  But in spite of that broad bipartisan support that we wanted to 
continue to show with this legislation, we now see there is a raft of 
amendments developing that would undermine or stop or add to, explode 
this legislation. I have asked the Members on this side of the aisle to 
try to withhold a whole number of amendments.
  We started off the first week--last week or the week before last--
with a very broad bill in support of our military men and women. The 
Soldiers', Sailors', Airmen's and Marines' Bill of Rights passed 
overwhelmingly. I believe that if we can get to a direct vote on Ed-
Flex to waive this bureaucratic redtape that the vote would probably be 
98-2 or 100-0. But now we see, with all these amendments being offered, 
and with us having no option but to add amendments of our own, with 
support for the special education commitment being fulfilled that we 
have not done, that this legislation now is being bogged down.
  We see that the first bill of the year that has broad bipartisan 
support is now approaching gridlock. Let's don't do that. Free the Ed-
Flex bill. Let's let this bill go. There will be other opportunities 
for Democrats and Republicans to offer their ideas on education on 
other bills this year. We have the reauthorization of the Elementary 
and Secondary Education Act coming up. There will be plenty of 
opportunities to offer that. I would like for us to have another day or 
2 to discuss the underlying bill and then vote. Let's get it done. I 
think it is good that we are having an education debate even on those 
issues that we might not have agreement, but let's find a way to move 
this legislation through.
  I have encouraged the Members, the Senators that are involved with 
this, to come up with some recommendations of how maybe we could have a 
limited number of amendments and then go on to final passage. But 
again, I call on Senators to free this important legislation. Let's 
give these other States this opportunity. Let's see if we can't get 
more decisions made at the local level and give them the option to 
decide whether this money should go for teachers or to repair roofs or 
technology for computers--whatever it may be. But in one school, 
perhaps, they need a greater emphasis on excellence in reading; in 
another school maybe they don't have a single computer in the 
classrooms.
  Let's give them the option, the flexibility to use these Federal 
funds without Federal Government mandates that you must use it here, 
you must use it there. I think the American people would support that. 
I know the Governors do. We say we do. Let's find a way to get this 
legislation passed.
  I urge the leaders and the managers of the legislation to see if they 
can come up with some ways to get this bill completed in the next 2 
days. But for now we will have a cloture vote on Tuesday. We will have 
at least one cloture vote, I guess maybe two, on Wednesday. And maybe 
in the interim we can find a way to get an agreement to provide for 
final passage.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. KENNEDY addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Massachusetts.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I appreciate very much the statement of 
the majority leader on the issue that is before us, the Ed-Flex 
legislation. If you look back over the history, it was officially 
initiated by an amendment by the Senator from Oregon, Senator Hatfield, 
and myself. It was initially provided that six States were going to 
have the power of waiver, and then when we considered the Goals 2000 we 
added six more States.
  So many of us on this side are very familiar with the legislation, 
are very familiar with the record that has been made, and are in 
support of the kind of accountability that the majority leader has 
stated. We are eager to see this legislation move towards completion. 
But we want to point out too, as the majority leader knows, that the 
underlying legislation may very well be the major opportunity for 
debate on education this year. Because the Elementary/Secondary 
Education Act does not expire until next year, it may very well not be 
up at that time.
  We will have a chance to express a sense of the Senate on the budget 
items. We will look forward to debating appropriations. That is 
generally the last piece of legislation that comes here in October. But 
this may very well be the only serious debate on education for the 
whole year. That is why, given the fact that there is not an extensive 
or busy calendar, given the importance of the issue--education--to 
families all over the country, and given the timeliness of the 
particular issue--the Murray amendment in terms of giving assurances to 
local communities all across the country--it is imperative that we have 
an opportunity for the Senate to address this issue in a brief way. 
Senator Murray has indicated her willingness to enter into a reasonable 
time limit to move toward a disposition of that legislation and that 
particular amendment.
  I just finally remind our colleagues that our leader, Senator 
Daschle, had indicated that he would urge short time limits on as few 
as five or six amendments. I would think that Senator Daschle might 
even be able to get a reduction to maybe even four amendments, even 
though there are many Members here who have plans and believe they are 
important. We could dispose of all of this in the period of a day, if 
not a day and a half.
  It seems to me that it is not unreasonable to say that on this issue 
which is of central importance and significance to families all across 
this country--the issue over partnership, the Federal Government 
working with the States and local communities--that we address the 
issue of class size, and we also address the very important issue of 
the funding of the IDEA.
  I think we can find very, very broad support for making sure that 
local communities are going to have the funding for IDEA, but I also 
think if put to a vote we would have a strong majority of Republicans 
and Democrats in favor of giving the communities across this country 
some help and assistance in terms of class size. That is something that 
every parent understands. It is something every teacher understands and 
every student understands.

[[Page 3857]]

  No one makes that case better than the former school board member and 
former teacher herself, Senator Murray. I welcome the chance to hear 
her on this issue.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from the State of Washington.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Thank you, Mr. President.
  Let me thank the Senator from Massachusetts for his statement. He has 
been a strong supporter of education. He understands that on this issue 
of class size reduction, parents, families, community members, police, 
mayors, school board members have all stood behind us and said this 
will make a difference for young children's learning.
  I remain baffled by the majority leader not allowing us to simply 
offer the amendment with an up-or-down vote. We are more than willing 
to have a time agreement, a short time agreement, and move this bill 
along.
  We all know that Ed-Flex has been asked for by 50 Governors. Well, 
reducing class size has been asked for by thousands of parents. It has 
been bipartisan--maybe it is not anymore; it certainly was last fall--a 
bipartisan initiative to reduce class size. I still believe that is 
true. It is timely, again, as school boards are looking at those 
budgets. If we can come to an agreement that will allow us to have an 
up-or-down vote, I am happy to offer my amendment. I will stay tonight; 
I can be here tomorrow morning.
  Let me conclude by saying it is frustrating to be told no and no and 
no time and time again when we want to offer an amendment. I am 
beginning to feel like one of those kids in one of those large classes 
who has been told by the teacher time and again, ``You have to wait.'' 
When that happens, you get frustrated, you start to think of other 
things to do. You can become a discipline problem. I don't want to be, 
but I will tell my colleagues that we want to offer this amendment, we 
want an up-or-down vote, and as long as we are told we can't move ahead 
with it, we will think of other things to do.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, first, let me comment on the remarks of 
the Senator from Washington.
  First of all, this bill is a very simple bill to help the Governors 
have flexibility--the States to have flexibility to maximize the 
utilization of title I funds, in particular. I don't think anybody 
disagrees with it.
  What I have set out as a policy for me, working with the leader, is 
that this bill ought not to be encumbered by matters which are under 
the jurisdiction of the committee which should be considered separately 
and after due hearing and after all of the elements of the legislation 
are considered. The amendment of the Senator from Washington really 
shortcuts that.
  Now, I agree that is an existing piece of legislation which needs 
some improvement. However, it does not fall out from the jurisdiction 
of the committee. On the other hand, with an appropriate amendment, I 
will endorse it. So I don't understand the concern of my partners on 
the other side of the aisle.
  We have an offer which will be before the Senate, and this side can 
endorse her amendment with the modification that is in that amendment. 
What that modification does is say, all right, let's reach a compromise 
here. The compromise would be, very simply, let the local governments 
decide whether they want to use the money which was appropriated but 
not quite available; they should have the local option. If they want to 
spend it on more teachers, additional teachers, they should have that 
option. If they want to spend it on IDEA, which I think most of the 
communities would do, they would have that option.
  I don't see why you can say that we are placing ourselves in a 
position of preventing the amendment from going forward. I don't want 
to do that.
  Let's also take a look at the problems of this committee. This 
committee has huge jurisdiction. The Elementary and Secondary Education 
Act spends about $15 billion, and amendments that have been addressing 
this bill would bypass the committee's ability to review all of these 
programs, which we should do. We haven't done so for 5 years, and the 
education of this country is suffering badly from not being able to 
maximize the opportunities for our young people.
  We have already had several hearings. We will have more hearings on 
it, and in the orderly process we ought to take those amendments up and 
vote on them at that time, but not now when we are just starting the 
legislative session.
  We will have an opportunity for the Senate to vote on an excellent 
amendment to the amendment of the Senator from Washington and give this 
body an opportunity to express itself. It will be, apparently, 
filibustered. I don't understand why or how anybody could filibuster an 
option for the local communities to decide whether they want to use it 
for new teachers or for special education.

                          ____________________