[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 8]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 11547]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



              INTRODUCTION OF THE TEACHER EMPOWERMENT ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                        HON. WILLIAM F. GOODLING

                            of pennsylvania

                    in the house of representatives

                         Thursday, May 27, 1999

  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, today I am joining with the distinguished 
Chairman of the Subcommittee on Postsecondary Education, Training and 
Life-long Learning, Mr. McKeon, Mr. Castle, the Speaker of the House, 
the Majority Leader, Mr. Watts, Mr. Blunt, Ms. Pryce, and other 
distinguished Members of the House to introduce the Teacher Empowerment 
Act. As someone who has spent a lifetime in education as a parent, a 
teacher, a school administrator, and a Member of Congress, I know that 
after parents, the most important factor in whether a child succeeds in 
school is the quality of the teachers in the classroom. An 
inspirational, knowledgeable, and qualified teacher is worth more than 
anything else we could give a student to ensure academic achievement.
  The Teacher Empowerment Act will go a long way toward helping local 
schools improve the quality of their teachers, or to hire additional 
qualified teachers, and to do this in the way that best meets their 
needs. The Teacher Empowerment Act will provide $2 billion per year 
over 5 years to States and local school districts to help pay for the 
costs of high quality teacher training and for the hiring of new 
teachers. We do this by consolidating the following programs: 
Eisenhower Professional Development, Goals 2000, and ``100,000 New 
Teachers.''
  We have tried to develop legislation that will have bipartisan 
support, and we will continue to do so as the bill moves along. 
However, our approach differs significantly from the Administration's. 
The Administration's legislative proposal is prescriptive and centered 
on Washington. We lift restrictions and encourage local innovation.
  The Administration's proposal is so focused on reducing class size 
that it loses sight of the bigger quality issue. We try to find the 
right balance between reducing class size, retaining, and retraining 
quality teachers. And in our bill, class size is a local issue, not a 
Washington issue.
  In math and science, the Administration increases set-asides and 
makes no provision for local school districts that do not have 
significant needs in those areas. Our approach is different because we 
maintain the focus on math and science, but also provide additional 
flexibility for schools that have met their needs in those subject 
areas.
  The Administration takes dollars from the classroom by allowing the 
Secretary of Education to maintain half of all funds for discretionary 
grants and to expand funding for national projects. Our bill reduces 
funding for national projects and sends 95 percent of the funds to 
local school districts.
  The Administration wants to put 100,000 new teachers into classrooms, 
but requiring this would force States and local school districts to put 
many unqualified teachers in the classroom. We allow schools to decide 
whether they should use the funds to reduce class size, or improve the 
quality of their existing teachers, or hire additional special 
education teachers.
  Finally, one point that I would like to make is that improving the 
quality of our teachers does not mean that we need national 
certification. In fact, our bill prohibits it. Again, it's a question 
of who controls our schools: bureaucracies in Washington, or people at 
the State and local level who know the needs of their communities.
  The Teacher Empowerment Act is good legislation. It provides a needed 
balance between the quality and quantity of our teaching force. I hope 
that we can work together on this legislation, in a bipartisan manner, 
so that we see enactment of this legislation, along with our other 
reforms in ESEA, in this Congress.

                          ____________________