[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 13]
[House]
[Pages 19552-19557]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



         QUALITY TEACHER RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION ACT OF 2000

  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the 
bill (H.R. 5034) to expand loan forgiveness for teachers, and for other 
purposes.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                               H.R. 5034

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Quality Teacher Recruitment 
     and Retention Act of 2000''.

     SEC. 2. FINDINGS AND PURPOSE.

       (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       (1) Over the next 10 years, a large percentage of teachers 
     will retire, leaving American classrooms, particularly urban 
     and rural classrooms, facing a serious teacher shortage.
       (2) The Nation will need 2,000,000 new teachers over the 
     next 10 years. Unfortunately, in the past this need has been 
     met by admitting some unqualified teachers to the classroom.
       (3) There is also a chronic shortage of fully certified 
     special education teachers, averaging about 27,000 per year. 
     While the demand is ever present, institutes of higher 
     education are graduating fewer teachers qualified in special 
     education.
       (4) High quality teachers are the first vital step in 
     ensuring students receive a high quality education.

[[Page 19553]]

       (5) Potentially valuable teacher candidates are often lured 
     into different careers by higher compensation.
       (6) Moreover, the burdensome paperwork and legal 
     requirements are factors which lead special education 
     teachers to leave the profession. More special education 
     teachers move into the general education realm than vice 
     versa.
       (7) High-quality prospective teachers need to be identified 
     and recruited by presenting to them a career that is 
     respected by their peers, is financially and intellectually 
     rewarding, and contains sufficient opportunities for 
     advancement.
       (8) Teacher loan forgiveness gives high-poverty schools an 
     effective incentive for recruiting and retaining much-needed 
     high quality teachers.
       (9) Loan forgiveness for high-need teachers, including 
     special education teachers, can be a critical link in 
     increasing the supply of these essential educators.
       (b) Purpose.--The purpose of this Act is to encourage 
     individuals to enter and continue in the teaching profession 
     in order to ensure that high quality teachers are recruited 
     and retained in areas where they are most needed so students 
     attending school in such areas receive a quality education.

     SEC. 3. EXPANDED LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM FOR TEACHERS.

       (a) Program.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary of Education (in this 
     section referred to as the ``Secretary'') shall carry out a 
     program of assuming the obligation to repay, pursuant to 
     subsection (c), a loan made, insured, or guaranteed under 
     part B of title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 or 
     part D of such title (excluding loans made under sections 
     428B and 428C of such Act or comparable loans made under part 
     D of such title) for any borrower who--
       (A) is a new teacher;
       (B)(i) is employed, for 3 consecutive complete school 
     years, as a full-time teacher in a school that qualifies 
     under section 465(a)(2)(A) of the Higher Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087ee(a)(2)(A)) for loan cancellation for a 
     recipient of a loan under part E of title IV of such Act who 
     teaches in such schools; or
       (ii) is employed, for 3 consecutive complete school years, 
     as a full-time special education teacher, or as a full-time 
     teacher of special needs children;
       (C) satisfies the requirements of subsection (d); and
       (D) is not in default on a loan for which the borrower 
     seeks forgiveness.
       (2) Award basis; priority.--
       (A) Award basis.--Subject to subparagraph (B), loan 
     repayment under this section shall be on a first-come, first-
     serve basis and subject to the availability of 
     appropriations.
       (B) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority in 
     providing loan repayment under this section for a fiscal year 
     to student borrowers who received loan repayment under this 
     section for the preceding fiscal year.
       (3) Regulations.--The Secretary is authorized to prescribe 
     such regulations as may be necessary to carry out the 
     provisions of this section.
       (b) Loan Repayment.--
       (1) Eligible amount.--The amount the Secretary may repay on 
     behalf of any individual under this section shall not 
     exceed--
       (A) the sum of the principal amounts outstanding (not to 
     exceed $5,000) of the individual's qualifying loans at the 
     end of 3 consecutive complete school years of service 
     described in subsection (a)(1)(B);
       (B) an additional portion of such sum (not to exceed 
     $7,500) at the end of each of the next 2 consecutive complete 
     school years of such service; and
       (C) a total of not more than $20,000.
       (2) Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to authorize the refunding of any repayment of a 
     loan made under part B or D of title IV of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965.
       (3) Interest.--If a portion of a loan is repaid by the 
     Secretary under this section for any year, the proportionate 
     amount of interest on such loan which accrues for such year 
     shall be repaid by the Secretary.
       (c) Repayment to Eligible Lenders.--The Secretary shall pay 
     to each eligible lender or holder for each fiscal year an 
     amount equal to the aggregate amount of loans which are 
     subject to repayment pursuant to this section for such year.
       (d) Application for Repayment.--
       (1) In general.--Each eligible individual desiring loan 
     repayment under this section shall submit a complete and 
     accurate application to the Secretary at such time, in such 
     manner, and containing such information as the Secretary may 
     require.
       (2) Years of service.--An eligible individual may apply for 
     loan repayment under this section after completing the 
     required number of years of qualifying employment.
       (3) Fully qualified teachers in public elementary or 
     secondary schools.--An application for loan repayment under 
     this section shall include such information as is necessary 
     to demonstrate that the applicant--
       (A) if teaching in a public elementary, middle, or 
     secondary school (other than as a teacher in a public charter 
     school), has obtained State certification as a teacher 
     (including certification obtained through alternative routes 
     to certification) or passed the State teacher licensing exam 
     and holds a license to teach in such State; and
       (B) if teaching in--
       (i) a public elementary school, holds a bachelor's degree 
     and demonstrates knowledge and teaching skills in each of the 
     subject areas in which he or she provides instruction; or
       (ii) a public middle or secondary school, holds a 
     bachelor's degree and demonstrates a high level of competency 
     in all subject areas in which he or she teaches through--

       (I) a high level of performance on a rigorous State or 
     local academic subject areas test; or
       (II) completion of an academic major in each of the subject 
     areas in which he or she provides instruction.

       (4) Teachers in nonprofit private elementary or secondary 
     schools or charter schools.--In the case of an applicant who 
     is teaching in a nonprofit private elementary or secondary 
     school, or in a public charter school, an application for 
     loan repayment under this section shall include such 
     information as is necessary to demonstrate that the applicant 
     has knowledge and teaching skills in each of the subject 
     areas in which he or she provides instruction, as certified 
     by the chief administrative officer of the school.
       (e) Treatment of Consolidation Loans.--A loan amount for a 
     consolidation loan made under section 428C of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965, or a Federal Direct Consolidation Loan 
     made under part D of title IV of such Act, may be a qualified 
     loan amount for the purpose of this section only to the 
     extent that such loan amount was used by a borrower who 
     otherwise meets the requirements of this section to repay--
       (1) a loan made under section 428 or 428H of such Act; or
       (2) a Federal Direct Stafford Loan, or a Federal Direct 
     Unsubsidized Stafford Loan, made under part D of title IV of 
     such Act.
       (f) Additional Eligibility Provisions.--
       (1) Continued eligibility.--Any teacher who performs 
     service in a school that--
       (A) meets the requirements of subsection (a)(1)(B) in any 
     year during such service; and
       (B) in a subsequent year fails to meet the requirements of 
     such subsection,
     may continue to teach in such school and shall be eligible 
     for loan forgiveness pursuant to subsection (a).
       (2) Prevention of double benefits.--No borrower may, for 
     the same service, receive a benefit under both this section 
     and subtitle D of title I of the National and Community 
     Service Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12571 et seq.).
       (3) Definition of new teacher.--The term ``new teacher'' 
     means an individual who has not previously been employed as a 
     teacher in an elementary or secondary school prior to August 
     1, 2001, excluding employment while engaged in student 
     teaching service or comparable activity that is part of a 
     preservice education program.

     SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     Act such sums as may be necessary for fiscal year 2001 and 
     for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal years.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) and the gentlewoman from California (Ms. 
Sanchez) each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling).


                             General Leave

  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members 
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their 
remarks on H.R. 5034.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 5034, the Quality Teacher 
Recruitment and Retention Act of 2000, and I thank the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Graham), who has worked diligently on our committee 
for many years to try to ensure that we have quality teachers in every 
classroom throughout the United States.
  It has been well noted that schools will need to hire 2 million new 
teachers in the next decade in order to accommodate growing enrollments 
and to offset the projected increase in teacher retirements. But it is 
more than just hiring more teachers. At the same time schools are 
compelled to hire the best teachers. Parents, business leaders, and the 
general public are all demanding more from our Nation's schools.
  However, as we have heard through the course of many hearings held by 
the Committee on Education and the Workforce, finding and retaining 
quality teachers has become more and more difficult, especially in 
light of the

[[Page 19554]]

many other opportunities available to potential teachers in today's 
marketplace.
  A front page New York Times article on August 24 underscores the 
difficulty facing many schools: ``A growing number of States and school 
districts are short-circuiting the usual route to teacher certification 
with their own crash courses that put new teachers in the classroom 
after as little as three weeks. Officials say they are driven by a 
severe teacher shortage.''
  In response, many schools are implementing innovative solutions. Last 
week during a hearing on this issue in our committee, we had the 
opportunity to hear from Micheline J. Bendotti, executive director from 
the Arizona Teacher Advancement Program. This program is being 
implemented in several schools across Arizona and provides teachers 
with market-driven compensation, multiple career paths, and 
performance-based accountability, along with high quality ongoing 
applied professional development.
  For our part, Republicans in Congress are assisting States and local 
school districts to meet the challenges of a competitive marketplace. 
Through initiatives such as the House-passed Teacher Empowerment Act, 
we have expanded the flexibility of current education programs to allow 
more schools to have the Federal resources necessary to carry out these 
types of innovative programs.
  Additionally, we are providing assistance targeted directly to 
prospective teachers through student loan forgiveness. Specifically, 
under the Higher Education Amendments of 1998, we established a program 
for qualified teachers who commit to teaching in a low-income school 
for 5 years. The program is only available for new student loan 
borrowers, and the total amount of loan forgiveness is limited to 
$5,000 per student.
  The fact is teacher loan forgiveness can be a highly successful 
incentive for encouraging some of our best and brightest graduates to 
enter the teacher profession. Teacher loan forgiveness also enjoys wide 
public support, as evidenced by a 1998 Lou Harris poll, which found a 
majority of Americans favored providing such assistance to teachers. 
Business groups have also been outspoken on the need for teacher loan 
forgiveness.
  For example, the California Business for Education Excellence has as 
one of its top priorities to support expanding teacher loan forgiveness 
programs. Specifically, they believe the amount and rate of loan 
forgiveness should be accelerated in order to recruit and retain 
teachers for hard-to-fill openings.
  That is exactly what has been done under legislation passed by the 
Committee on Education and the Workforce earlier this year. 
Specifically, H.R. 4402, the Training and Education for American 
Workers Act of 2000, directs 25 percent of the fees collected through 
H-1B visa applications to be used for new student loan forgiveness 
programs to attract more math, science and reading teachers who agree 
to teach for 5 years. Benefits under this program are in addition to 
any benefits a student may receive under programs established as part 
of the Higher Education Act Amendments.
  H.R. 5034, the legislation we are considering today, builds upon both 
of the other teacher loan forgiveness programs. This important 
initiative also expands upon the current programs by not limiting 
forgiveness to just new borrowers.
  Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentleman from South Carolina for working 
so hard on this important legislation. He has been a leader and an 
advocate for quality teaching in the years he has served on the 
committee. I encourage all Members to support its passage.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to give management 
duties on this bill to my colleague, the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. 
Holt).
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from California?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Holt).
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and 
I thank my colleague from California and rise in support of H.R. 5034.
  As my friend and colleague from Pennsylvania mentioned, this bill of 
our colleague from South Carolina provides up to $20,000 in student 
loan forgiveness to fully qualified teachers teaching in high-need 
schools and districts. I certainly view loan forgiveness as one of a 
number of strategies to ensure that we have enough highly qualified 
teachers, especially in the critical areas of science and math.
  This bill expands upon a Democratic initiative included under Title 
IV of the Higher Education Act during the last reauthorization that 
guarantees $5,000 in student loan forgiveness to any teacher who 
teaches in a high-need school for a period of 5 years. Now, $20,000 is 
obviously a more powerful incentive than $5,000; and given the looming 
teacher shortage, high-needs schools and districts will need all the 
help they can get in recruiting and retaining qualified teachers, and I 
applaud the gentleman from South Carolina for his interest in improving 
and expanding the existing program.
  I would be remiss, however, if I failed to mention some of my 
concerns about this legislation. For although I am disappointed that 
Democratic offers to work with our friends on the other side of the 
aisle to improve this legislation before it came to the floor were 
rebuffed, it is still my hope that some of my concerns and some of the 
concerns of my colleagues can be remedied should this bill be taken up 
in the Senate.
  To begin with, the bill is written in such a way that it is really 
unclear as to the relationship between this loan forgiveness program 
and the existing loan forgiveness program. I worry this could be 
confusing for students and school officials. We need to simplify 
student aid, not make it more complicated.
  In addition, funding for this program does not kick in until 3 years 
after the date of enactment, meaning that teachers could not benefit 
from it, as I understand it, until 2004. We are losing teachers to more 
lucrative professions today, and will in 2001 and 2002 and 2003. If we 
want to keep these talented individuals in the classroom, it seems to 
me prudent to provide them with loan forgiveness today.
  And perhaps most important, funding for this program is discretionary 
rather than mandatory, as is Title IV of the Higher Education Act. So 
depending on the spirit and generosity of the appropriators 3 years 
from now, although I presume we will have generous appropriators 3 
years from now, but depending on that spirit of generosity, some 
teachers might benefit while others, though equally qualified, might 
not. In fact, should the appropriators decide not to fund the program 
at all, no one will benefit, and we will be no closer to addressing the 
teacher shortage than we are today.
  So I would like to work with my colleague to see if there is some way 
we can ensure that all eligible teachers can benefit from this valuable 
program. After all, his intention, I am sure, is to provide an 
incentive that will be meaningful to recruit and to encourage teachers.
  Finally, I feel I must make one last point. For although it is not 
directly related to this bill, I think it is an essential part of this 
debate. We will not be able truly to address the problem of poor 
teacher recruitment and retention rates, particularly in high-need 
urban and rural communities, until we improve conditions faced by 
teachers in the classroom. For no matter how tempting the monetary 
incentive, good teachers will be unlikely to remain in the classroom if 
they are overcrowded, lacking supplies, and have buildings falling down 
around them.
  However, despite all this, I believe that H.R. 5034 is a good first 
step, and I urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
South Carolina (Mr. Graham), author of the

[[Page 19555]]

legislation and a valuable member of the committee.

                              {time}  2145

  Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Speaker, before we start discussing the bill, I would 
like to offer a debt of gratitude to my colleagues on the other side 
for allowing this bill to go forward. And we can make it better, I am 
sure. But I have a few points that were mentioned.
  This bill is building on existing programs that our Committee on 
Education and the Workforce in a bipartisan fashion passed a couple 
years ago. There is a $5,000 student loan forgiveness program in 
existence today if they will go into teaching in a Title I school.
  What does that mean? A Title I school is a school where 30 percent of 
the students are at the poverty level or below. That is usually a rural 
poor school, an urban poor school, the places that is very hard to 
recruit.
  As the chairman said, there is going to be a two-million person 
teacher shortage facing this Nation. And how do we get the best and the 
brightest into the teaching profession and how do we get them into the 
hardest-to-recruit area, rural poor, urban poor? We give them a signing 
bonus.
  But the law that exists today has the same requirement as this bill. 
We just do not want to get bodies into the classroom. We want to have 
quality teachers in the classroom. Under the current program, they 
cannot get any loan forgiveness until they teach 3 years.
  That is exactly what this bill does. But what it does is it goes 
beyond $5,000. It will allow a person who will go into teaching in a 
Title I school, a hard-to-recruit area, if they will teach for 3 years 
in the area that they major in in college, math teachers teaching math, 
science teachers teaching science, if they will go into this school 
district and keep their certification up, in the fourth and fifth and 
sixth year of their career, we will forgive their student loan up to 
$17,750 in additional loan forgiveness.
  And it is a discretionary program. We worked hard to try to find the 
offset. But let me just assure my colleague this, that the projections 
are that we will recruit 35,000 new teachers a year if we pass this 
bill.
  I would argue that every Member of this body, Republicans and 
Democrats, appropriators, non-appropriators, will put money into this 
program if it is bringing in the best and the brightest in areas that 
are hard to recruit under today's standards.
  A Newsweek article called ``Teachers Wanted'' is a great expose of 
what communities are doing all over the country to try to get people in 
the teaching profession to fill these voids in the classroom. But we go 
one step further. We just do not want bodies. We want people committed 
to the teaching profession to keep their certifications up and have a 
commitment to these schools. And once that commitment is shown, we are 
going to meet them more than halfway.
  The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Miller), the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Holt) and 
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez), I really appreciate them 
joining with us to get this bill out of the House. And if we can make 
it better, we will.
  But the bottom line is that there are a lot of folks getting ready to 
decide what career to choose and they want to go into teaching, and one 
of the biggest problems they face as a college graduate is a big 
student loan. The average is almost $17,000 now.
  What we are saying, in a bipartisan fashion, is, if they will make a 
commitment to teaching and they will keep their certifications up and 
they will do a good job, we will take that debt away from them in a 
very quick period of time. I think people are going to respond in 
droves.
  The article called ``Teachers Wanted,'' I would just like to let the 
people of the United States know that we disagree a lot in this body 
and we have different views of what the Federal Government should do in 
education. But this is a good day. We are approaching the end of a 
contentious Congress, but we are coming together as Republicans and 
Democrats and we are putting into place a program that will help real 
people in a real way to put a new generation of teachers in classrooms 
where it is very hard to recruit. And this applies to anybody with a 
student loan that is willing to go into a Title I school.
  Let me mention one other facet about this bill. The special education 
teachers are included. I would like to thank my colleague the gentleman 
from South Carolina (Mr. DeMint). We all know how hard it is to get 
people to go into special ed. So if they are a special-ed teacher, 
regardless of the school district they go to, we will help forgive 
their student loan if they will stay in there and help the kids.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman for the leadership he has 
shown in allowing this bill to come to the floor and my colleagues on 
the Democratic side of the aisle in the Committee on Education and the 
Workforce. This is a good day for the committee. I think it is a good 
day for the Congress, and I urge support of this bill.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman 
from North Carolina (Mr. Burr).
  Mr. BURR of North Carolina. Mr. Speaker, I thank the chairman for 
yielding me the time.
  Mr. Speaker, I am honored to stand before this House today in support 
of my good friend the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Graham) and in 
support of his legislation that would expand the current loan 
forgiveness program for teachers in high poverty schools.
  As chief architect of the original program in 1998, the gentleman 
from South Carolina (Mr. Graham) is a tremendous advocate for teachers. 
I appreciate his work on this behalf.
  I am increasingly concerned about the state of our Nation's education 
system, more specifically with regard to the quality of teaching. Just 
today, there are newspaper reports about teacher turnover in North 
Carolina schools.
  Mr. Speaker, I can assure my colleagues that the news is not good and 
it is getting worse. According to the North Carolina Department of 
Instruction, last year's teacher turnover rate was 13.59 percent, up 
from 13.4 in 1999 and 12.3 percent in 1998. This means that over 12,000 
out of 89,000 teachers in North Carolina left their job for one reason 
or another.
  Perhaps a more startling figure is that about 30 percent of these 
teachers had tenure. While these numbers are unsettling, I must share 
with my colleagues that North Carolina is making improvements. We have 
the most National Board Certified teachers in the country. We are 
recognized as one of the top two States in improving teaching. North 
Carolina has made the most gains on SAT test scores, more than any 
other State in the last 10 years.
  And finally, the National Education Goals Panel said that North 
Carolina is one of the top States in business and community support for 
public education.
  Even with this outstanding recognition, I think that we can all agree 
that it just is not enough. If North Carolina is making such 
improvements and our numbers are this high, I shudder to look at the 
States who have higher turnover rates. We must try harder, we must work 
harder to give our children an education that will provide them with 
the tools necessary to make solid choices in their lives.
  Sadly, many of our students are not able to make these choices. I 
believe that we can change that. In North Carolina, teachers in 1,459 
elementary and secondary schools are eligible for loan forgiveness 
under the current program. Of this number, teachers in 178 schools in 
and around my district are eligible.
  An especially attractive piece of this package is that all special 
education teachers are eligible for loan cancellation under the Graham 
bill. I am pleased that my district's most at-risk schools have a 
program to help them attract quality teachers, and I think this loan 
forgiveness program is a good foundation for us to build upon.

[[Page 19556]]

  Mr. Speaker, our Nation's most precious resource is our children. I 
believe that this bill gives our children, especially our disadvantaged 
children, the chance to have a better education.
  When I spoke on the floor yesterday about the 25th anniversary of the 
IDEA bill, I reminded my colleagues that every student has a right to 
free public education. I believe that we have secured access to 
education. Loan forgiveness for qualified teachers brings us one step 
closer to improving quality in the classroom.
  To close, it seems that the latest trend in Washington is to see who 
can buy the most teachers or who can spend the most on education. I 
cannot stand by and watch Congress and the President poor billions into 
the Title I program and cross their fingers any longer and hope that 
education gets better and student achievement goes up. I think we can 
do better. We will do better.
  We need to give teachers a reason to go to Title I schools and invest 
their time, their energy and their talents. Support this bill, and we 
are well on the way.
  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2\3/4\ minutes to the gentleman 
from South Carolina (Mr. DeMint) another important new member on our 
committee.
  Mr. DeMINT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Quality Teacher 
Recruitment and Retention Act. I am a cosponsor of this legislation.
  I have had the good fortune to work with my good friend the gentleman 
from South Carolina (Mr. Graham) on it. I want to emphasize a specific 
part of the bill which has already been mentioned.
  This bill would allow the loan forgiveness program to all teachers 
who choose to go into the special education field regardless of 
teaching location.
  The field of special education faces special challenges. There is not 
only a shortage of special-ed teachers, but some teachers in the field 
are not qualified.
  Additionally, special education teachers are burdened by the need to 
comply with complex Federal laws and paperwork requirements in the 
Individuals With Disabilities Education Act.
  While the law is filled with good intentions, it is widely 
acknowledged to be a complicated process which leaves less time for 
teachers to go about the business of teaching. Teachers are discouraged 
by the paperwork requirements and spend hours working on checklists 
rather than lesson plans. They do this because they fear lawsuits if 
somehow they fall short of a dotting an ``I'' or crossing a ``T.''
  Local school districts must pay for this underfunded mandate for 
special education, which strains their budget. This bill does its part 
in a small way by giving local school districts an incentive to attract 
special-ed teachers.
  If teachers are qualified, they can receive loan forgiveness over 
time if they teach in the special-ed field. While the number of 
special-ed students is rising, the number of teachers qualified to 
teach special-ed kids is not keeping pace with demand. Each year there 
is a chronic shortage of fully certified special-ed teachers, averaging 
about 27,000 per year. While the demand is ever present, institutions 
of higher education are graduating fewer teachers qualified in special 
ed.
  Mr. Speaker, the Quality Teacher Recruitment and Retention Act is one 
step we can take to help local school districts by recruiting qualified 
teachers to enter and remain in the special education field.
  I thank my colleague for his willingness to craft this legislation in 
such a way that addresses the important need for special education 
teachers across the country.
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I would like to repeat that we support this bill. It 
does need some perfecting, but it gets at the heart of what we must 
address in education.
  Teachers are indeed the key. Teachers are the key for special 
education. Teachers are the key for languages. Teachers are the key for 
science and math.
  In fact, tomorrow the Glen Commission, the National Commission on the 
Teaching of Mathematics and Science, will be issuing our report; and 
that will also highlight the need to recruit good teachers, to provide 
them training before they go in, mentoring as they enter their field, 
and life-long professional development.
  Loan forgiveness is part of the number of steps that we must take in 
order to have the kind of teaching that we need to give our students 
the education they need for fulfilling lives in the 21st century.
  We must recruit teachers. Loan forgiveness will help with that. But 
we also must look at the environment where they will teach, the class 
sizes, the facilities, and we must make sure that the environment 
provides an atmosphere of continuous improvement and professional 
development. With that, we can find the teachers we need, train them, 
and give our students the education they deserve.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                              {time}  2200

  Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield the balance of my time to the 
gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Souder), a seasoned, important member of 
our committee.
  Mr. SOUDER. I thank the gentleman for yielding me this time.
  Mr. Speaker, I am a proud conservative cosponsor of the gentleman 
from South Carolina's bill to provide loan forgiveness to teachers in 
title I schools and special ed. Sometimes, just once in a while, our 
liberal friends accuse conservatives of not caring about improving 
education because we do not favor a Federal takeover in education. In 
fact, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), the gentleman 
from South Carolina (Mr. Graham), and I were leaders in the fight 
against national testing standards. We fought against the national 
curriculum and national teaching standards. But the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) has committed his entire career to trying 
to provide better quality with local control, and this bill is yet 
another example.
  We Republicans say everyone should compete. Yet we do not believe in 
guaranteeing absolute equality. Parents' education differs, their 
income differs, some kids are going to have computers at home, some 
kids are going to have parents who can teach. There is not just a whole 
lot we can do about that. But we do believe that there ought to be 
basic opportunities for all kids in America. And so we support title I 
and we support IDEA. The chairman has been a leader in Even Start, in 
Head Start. We have had many such bills.
  This bill combines many of the principles that we as conservatives 
believe are valuable in trying to help low-income students. It does it 
with incentives, not mandates. It does not tell people what they 
actually have to do; it forgives their loans and gives them the 
flexibility; and it requires them to serve first. Often we give money 
to somebody, and they may or may not serve. In this case if they serve 
the 3 years, then they get 3 years forgiven; 4 years, then they get 
more forgiven the fifth year. If we give the money up front, we find 
that many times in other programs where we have done this we may or may 
not get people to serve, and we may battle over that forgiveness. That 
is a conservative principle.
  We also say that when you give it to an individual student who then 
goes and teaches, it does not come with the Federal strings. It gives 
the teachers the flexibility to determine what they are going to do, 
special ed or a title I school; it gives the school the flexibility 
without the strings that come from many of this administration's 
proposals. When people ask what conservatives are doing to help those 
who are hurting, to those who are behind, those who potentially can be 
left behind, this is yet one more example of what this Congress has 
done. It is a small step, but it is an important step.
  My daughter is currently teaching at a title I school. It is a new 
job. She has found that as opposed to a suburban school she gets less 
money to help in the classroom. Fewer of the parents show up. It is 
hard even to get as many parents to participate in bringing 
refreshments for the kids because they

[[Page 19557]]

do not have the income. We need to do some special steps in America to 
make sure that those who are college graduated even though we support 
alternative certification, even though we support creative ways to fill 
those gaps, we need creative ways like the gentleman from South 
Carolina's bill to encourage our young people in college today to take 
at least part of their career, many of whom will then fall in love with 
these kids who so much need their help to work in our title I and 
special ed programs.
  I commend the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling); I commend 
the gentleman from South Carolina (Mr. Graham) for his great work and 
add my enthusiastic support to this bill.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of the Quality 
Teacher Recruitment and Retention Act.
  Just this week, Newsweek's cover story asks ``Who will teach our 
kids?'' Since one half of all teachers in America are slated to retire 
by 2010, this is a question on the minds of millions of families across 
this country.
  In my home State of California, we are already feeling the teacher 
crunch where as a result of the State's class size reduction program, 
there are 35,000 uncertified teachers in our classrooms.
  Over the past two years, the Subcommittee on Postsecondary Education, 
Training, and Life-long Learning (which I serve as Chairman and the 
bill's sponsor, Lindsay Graham, serves as vice chairman) has devoted 
substantial time and effort toward the issue of teacher quality and 
recruitment.
  We have held numerous hearings and have had an active hand in shaping 
legislative proposals aimed at getting teachers into our classrooms.
  Those proposals include:
  The teacher quality enhancement grants--established in the higher 
education amendments of 1998;
  Language in H.R. 2, the ``Education Options'' Act to boost the 
qualifications of the 180,000 teachers and paraprofessionals who teach 
in our Nation's poorest school districts;
  The Tech-for-Success Program in H.R. 4141 to help better prepare 
teachers in how best to use technology to improve student academic 
achievement;
  The Bipartisan Teacher Empowerment Act to enable schools to focus on 
a host of initiatives including bonus and merit pay, tenure reform, 
teacher mentoring programs, and professional development; and
  Increased flexibility in the ``100,000 New Teachers'' Program so that 
schools experiencing a high percentage of uncertified teachers can use 
funds to focus on boosting teacher training as opposed to hiring 
additional teachers.
  H.R. 5034 builds on these significant efforts by expanding another 
important provision in the higher education amendments--loan 
forgiveness for teachers.
  This legislation enhances loan forgiveness by increasing the number 
of those qualified for the program while retaining the current 
requirements so that we not only get qualified teachers into the 
classroom but keep them there.
  The bill also addresses the need across the country for special 
education teachers by granting them loan forgiveness no matter where 
they teach.
  To conclude, in order to combat the shortage of teachers, we must 
continue to look at innovative ways to motivate thousands to come into 
the teaching profession.
  The new loan forgiveness provided under H.R. 5034 is one such 
incentive and, as such, I urge all my colleagues to support this 
important legislation.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Shimkus). The question is on the motion 
offered by the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) that the 
House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 5034.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor 
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________