[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 1989-2012]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



              AFFORDABLE EDUCATION ACT OF 1999--Continued

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Kerry 
amendment be set aside so the Senator from California, Mrs. Boxer, can 
offer her amendment at this time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am happy to do this in 5 minutes or 
maybe, at the most, 6.
  I thank my friend from Georgia, my friend from Nevada, and my friend 
from Louisiana, who graciously agreed I could go ahead of her.


                           Amendment No. 2880

  (Purpose: To require schools that receive Federal funding to notify 
      parents of certain pesticide applications on school grounds)

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk and ask 
for its immediate consideration.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from California [Mrs. Boxer] proposes an 
     amendment numbered 2880.

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:
       At the end, add the following:

     SEC. ___. PESTICIDE APPLICATION IN SCHOOLS.

       (a) In General.--Each school that receives Federal funding 
     shall--
       (1) take steps to reduce the exposure of children to 
     pesticides on school grounds, both indoors and outdoors; and
       (2) provide parents and guardians of children that attend 
     the school with advance notification of certain pesticide 
     applications on school grounds in accordance with subsections 
     (b) and (c).
       (b) EPA List of Toxic Pesticides.--
       (1) In general.--The Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall distribute to each school that 
     receives Federal funding the current manual of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency that guides schools in the 
     establishment of a least toxic pesticide policy.
       (2) List.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall provide each school that receives 
     Federal funding with a list of pesticides that contain a 
     substance that the Administrator has identified as a known or 
     probable carcinogen, a developmental or reproductive toxin, 
     or a category I or II acute nerve toxin.
       (c) Parental Notification of Toxic Pesticide Applications 
     in Schools.--
       (1) In general.--On or after the date that is 18 months 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, any school that 
     receives Federal funding shall not apply any pesticide 
     described in paragraph (b)(2) on school grounds, either 
     indoors or outdoors, unless an administrative official of the 
     school provides notice of the planned application to parents 
     and guardians of children that attend the school not later 
     than 48 hours before the application of the pesticide.
       (2) Notice.--The notice described in paragraph (1)--
       (A) shall include--
       (i) a description of the intended area of application; and
       (ii) the name of each pesticide to be applied; and
       (B) shall indicate whether the pesticide is a known or 
     probable carcinogen, a developmental or reproductive toxin, 
     or a category I or II acute nerve toxin.
       (3) Incorporation of notice.--The notice described in 
     paragraph (1) may be incorporated in any notice that is being 
     sent to parents and guardians at the time at which the 
     pesticide notice is required to be sent.

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I am very hopeful that this amendment, 
unlike the other one that I have pending, will get the support of my 
friends on the other side of the aisle.
  For a long time I have been talking about the need for a children's 
environmental protection act. It is very important we understand that 
our children are not little adults; they are quite different from 
adults. They are growing; they are changing; and certain exposures are 
much more harmful to them than they would be for us.
  My amendment does two things. It gives parents notification before 
toxic pesticides are applied in their children's schools. It also 
requires the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to 
distribute to schools its guide on the establishment of a least-toxic-
pesticide policy. In other words, we have already got the work done. 
Here it is. It talks about how we can lessen the bad impact on our 
children by using the kinds of products that will harm them the least. 
Right now, the EPA does send this out, but it is a spotty situation; 
they don't send it to all of the schools.
  What we are asking for is a 48-hour notice so parents know that these 
substances are being sprayed, if they are, in fact, toxic, and if they 
are, in fact, a product that could harm the children.
  Of course, what we really want to do is lower the use of toxic 
pesticides. That would be the very best thing we could do. That is our 
ultimate hope. That is why we are encouraging the Environmental 
Protection Agency to work with our schools. But, unfortunately, we have 
very toxic products being sprayed on our schools today.
  Why is it important that parents know this is occurring? Because 
pesticides, by definition, are meant to kill living things. Exposure to 
pesticides has been linked to cancer, neurological disorders, and 
learning disabilities. A common insecticide schools currently spray on 
baseboards and floors to kill cockroaches and ants--it has an active 
ingredient called chlorpyrifos--is classified by the EPA as a nerve 
toxin.

[[Page 1990]]

Since we know some of these common pesticides contain a nerve toxin, we 
have to ask what are the effects of our children's exposure to nerve 
toxin.
  The acute effects of this type of toxin include headaches, dizziness, 
mental confusion, and vomiting. We know potential effects include 
decreased neurological performance. We know that because there have 
been some studies about which I will discuss.
  These risks are much more prevalent in children than adults because, 
again, children are not little adults; they are different. A 1993 
National Academy of Sciences report, Pesticides in the Diets of Infants 
and Children, documented what has long been known by children's health 
professionals: Children are at greater risk to experience the harmful 
effects of pesticide exposure than adults. The National Academy 
explained that children face greater exposure to pesticides because, 
pound for pound of body weight, they eat more food and drink more water 
and breathe more air than adults. In other words, they are smaller and 
therefore their intake is greater as a proportion of their body weight.
  Children are rapidly growing, and their developing systems are more 
vulnerable to harmful effects of pesticides. I referred to a study. A 
study conducted in Mexico had children exposed to these very harmful 
pesticides make a drawing of a stick figure. I have that in the 
cloakroom, if anyone is interested in looking. The children who were 
exposed to the pesticides could not put together a stick figure. The 
ones who had no exposure were able to do it as a normal child would. 
That study certainly helps demonstrate why we should encourage schools 
to adopt the least toxic pesticide program.
  I will close with this: My amendment is not some new idea, because 
many schools in my home State go beyond what is provided for in this 
amendment. For example, in the San Francisco, Los Angeles, Mendocino, 
and Arcata school districts in California, they have all adopted 
policies to prohibit the use of these toxic pesticides. I am not even 
going that far. My amendment merely requires, if we are going to use 
them, let the families know in advance.
  We should try to help schools get off of these products. My amendment 
takes the first step toward reducing the use of toxic pesticides in 
schools nationwide by encouraging schools to adopt similar policies to 
those I have cited in my home State.
  I think it is important, since we look to parents to protect their 
children, that those parents have the information and can decide how to 
proceed. Maybe if they find out there is toxic spraying going on, they 
will get together and try to come forward with a different brand of 
pesticide. All in all, I think we are giving parents more tools to be 
able to control the lives of their children and what their children are 
exposed to.
  I am very hopeful that the Republican side of the aisle will reach 
across the aisle and accept this amendment. If they do so, I will not 
require a recorded vote; a voice vote will do just fine.
  I ask my friend from Georgia does he have any information as to 
whether this amendment will be able to be accepted and disposed of by a 
voice vote at this time?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.
  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, if I might respond to the Senator from 
California, I am not 100 percent certain. As I told her when she came 
to the floor, it appears that that will be acceptable; in which case, 
we will do a voice vote. But I am not totally certain yet. I am sure I 
will be by the time we start voting.
  Mrs. BOXER. I thank my friend very much because I think we could all 
be proud of this amendment. It is quite simple. Again, we are giving 
parents information they should have, and we are essentially telling 
the Environmental Protection Agency to do a better job of getting this 
booklet out to all the school districts.
  I thank my friends for their indulgence and yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Boxer 
amendment be set aside and Senator Landrieu be allowed to speak for 30 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Louisiana.


                           Amendment No. 2867

  (Purpose: To promote teacher and principal quality and professional 
                              development)

  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on 
behalf of myself, Senator Lieberman, and Senator Bayh.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Louisiana [Ms. Landrieu], for herself, Mr. 
     Lieberman, and Mr. Bayh, proposes an amendment numbered 2867.

  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (The text of the amendment is printed in today's Record under 
``Amendments Submitted.'')
  Ms. LANDRIEU. Mr. President, I offer this amendment on behalf of 
Senator Lieberman, Senator Bayh, and myself. Others may be joining.
  The amendment has to do with improving the quality of teaching in our 
public schools, to provide resources to our States and our local 
communities to help teachers gain additional professional skills to 
help them do a better job in the classroom.
  The amendment will provide an additional $1 billion to States and 
local governments. It will encourage States to design their own 
initiatives. Many States are well on their way in this regard and are 
seeing great progress. Other States and other communities have a long 
way to go.
  I am not going to spend my time right now relaying all the statistics 
in this regard, only to say that a large percentage--by some estimates, 
40 percent; in some communities, 50 percent--of the teachers teaching 
in public elementary and high schools are not certified and, by the 
standards set by their own local communities and States, not qualified 
to teach a particular subject matter.
  In particular, we have had a shortage of teachers in the math and 
science areas. Although we have made great progress in that particular 
area in the last couple of years, we have a way to go.
  On the general issue of education, I thank my colleague from Georgia 
for his handling of this issue. I say to both of the leaders and to my 
colleagues, I hope we will stay on the issue of education. It is the 
most important issue to the American public. Whether our children are 
in public school or not, as taxpayers, as parents, as grandparents, as 
young people, this issue is weighing heavily on the American people 
today. They want the proper and appropriate response from Washington. 
They want us to discuss it, but, more importantly, they want us to act.
  Whether we agree to pass this bill or not, one thing is clear in our 
minds: We all agree that elementary and secondary education in America 
is in need of reform. We must accelerate the progress and the reforms 
that are underway.
  It is simply taking too long. We are not making enough progress in 
the areas where we need to, satisfied with the status quo. It is not 
because public schools aren't working, it is that they are just not 
working well enough for the children and families who need them the 
most and depend on them the most. And we have reams and reams and reams 
of material to back up this statement. We all agree that the current 
rate of student achievement is simply not satisfactory for a large 
number of our students.
  Again, there are many public schools that are working well. There are 
many classrooms--hundreds and thousands--that are functioning 
beautifully. Yet, under the status quo, many students are being left 
behind, many districts left out, many States not meeting the goals.
  We must begin in this year, the year 2000, to consider new ways to 
help increase the quality of learning for our

[[Page 1991]]

youth. We are not alone in this sentiment in the Senate or in the 
House. Pick up any newspaper or magazine daily and you will see 
articles on the need for reform and the need for new testing results 
and smaller class size. School construction has been in the daily 
headlines for months--in fact, years. Speak to any parent and they will 
tell us about the need for change. Talk with teachers who are in the 
classrooms.
  Of the eight goals set by the National Goals Panel in 1992, which 
many of us and many Governors and grassroots leaders worked on, not one 
has been satisfactorily accomplished to date.
  Admittedly, some of the goals were quite lofty--if you will, reaching 
for the stars. Nonetheless, in the 6 years after a tremendous amount of 
work, a tremendous amount of money, we are not making significant 
progress. Up to 28 categories were chosen to monitor these 8 goals in 
the United States as a whole, and we have improved in only 12 of those 
categories. We have made no progress in 11, and we have actually 
declined in 5.
  Here is the National Education Goals Report which contains all of 
these details. They are discouraging, in my opinion. I am happy to see 
that we have made significant progress in increasing our math and 
science scores. But we have gone down in some very important areas--in 
teacher certification; reading scores at the 4th grade, 8th grade, and 
12th grade levels have not appreciably improved. According to the 
National Commission on Teaching in America, fewer than 75 percent of 
all teachers have been licensed specifically in their area.
  This is not the kind of reform--or at least the pace of reform--we 
should accept, or we need to accept, or we need to embrace. We need to 
say, yes, while we are doing some things very well, we have to 
accelerate the pace of reform and make some fundamental changes.
  My husband and I are building a house here on Capitol Hill, and it 
has been a wonderful experience--if we can get through this without 
fighting too much and all of the things that go along with building a 
house. It sort of reminds me of this debate. We spend a lot of time in 
the Senate and House floor giving speeches about specific areas. We 
talk about school construction, early childhood education, teacher 
quality, or new reading programs, which are all good. It is like 
talking about redesigning a window or redesigning a kitchen or redoing 
a living room. I am talking about something many of us feel strongly 
about--a new foundation.
  We need to build a ``bigger house'' so that all the children can find 
a place in this house. We need to build a much better house. You can't 
do it by arguing about the size of windows, or the color of the carpet, 
or the decor of the living room, which is how we are spending a lot of 
our time here. We need to talk about fundamental, foundational change 
in the way the Federal Government helps to reform and accelerate the 
pace of reform in America today.
  Let me outline a few principles that I think are very important.
  No. 1, in my opinion, we can't do this in the piecemeal manner in 
which we have been approaching it--whether it is a great idea for a new 
tax gimmick or scheme, or a good tax policy, depending on how you look 
at what we have debated, whether it is about a specific amendment, or 
school construction, or a new bond issue that will give us interest-
free loans for our local governments or even extend the debt.
  We need to accept the fact that comprehensive reform is necessary. We 
have that opportunity in this Congress. As we go to the reauthorization 
of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, which is now in 
committee and being debated in our Education Committee, it is my great 
hope that out of that committee and to this floor will come not a 
piecemeal approach, but a fundamental, foundational approach that would 
have a couple of components: One, that we would trust our local 
government and our Governors and our mayors and our legislators, and 
that it would be a bipartisan trust, and say that many Governors--not 
all--have been making considerable headway in their States with new 
accountability standards, new innovation, pressing hard to make sure 
the resources get to the classroom.
  One of the great changes we need to make in a comprehensive way is 
saying that we don't have all the answers, and we don't want to 
micromanage, that we want to trust our local government officials and 
give them the flexibility they need toward this accelerated reform 
about which I am speaking. We need to reward them for their 
performance, reward them for being successful. Stop rewarding failure. 
Stop giving more money to the schools that have poor results, and start 
encouraging our local officials through the way we fund elementary and 
secondary education, and base our funding on the rate of improvement so 
each school area competes against its own standards; and when a school 
fails, encourage the local system, when there is a failing, to take 
real measures. Don't leave the children in a school that is not 
working. They have already been punished enough.
  Let us create a comprehensive system of reform that rewards 
innovation, that expects excellence, and that stops being satisfied 
with failure, and trust our local officials to do that.
  I feel very strongly about the word ``accountability,'' but we toss 
it around so much. I am not sure we all agree on what it means. I don't 
want them accounting for the number of pencils purchased or the numbers 
of textbooks. I don't want them accounting for the number of computers. 
I want to have the locals account for the improvement of test scores of 
their students. How are the teachers improving? Is there greater 
parental involvement? These are the measures of accountability on 
whether a school is working or not. And I will also go so far as to say 
it is not only test scores, although that is clearly important, and we 
need to have national standards set perhaps at local levels, but 
national measurements of achievement. But also the morale of the 
school, the enthusiasm of parents, and the spirit of the teachers and 
the principals all should be considered in terms of the way we fund 
schools and what we expect.
  I can walk into a school--and I have walked into hundreds of them, as 
you have, Mr. President, and as many of our colleagues have--and tell 
from the minute I walk in the door whether the school is working or 
not, and whether there is learning going on. It doesn't matter if the 
place is shiny and painted, although that helps and lifts your spirit. 
But it is also about the brightness in the eyes of the students, and 
the brightness in the eyes of the teachers and the principals, that 
they are a team, that they are working together and accomplishing great 
things.
  Some of the schools I have visited in very poor areas with very poor 
children are doing a beautiful job. In some places, it seems everything 
should be going well because on the outside it all looks good, but 
there is not a lively spirit.
  It is hard to legislate along these lines. But I think it is a real 
goal we should strive for to determine our funding in a way that 
encourages that kind of light and commitment at the local level and to 
join with our Governors and with our legislators and not against them 
in this effort.
  It is my great hope we will continue this debate. I know we are going 
to vote on this particular bill tonight. But, again, this is like 
discussing a particular window dressing. It might help the overall look 
of the house and actually make the house be part of a great looking 
building, but we need to be talking about the great foundation. I hope 
this Congress will stay on education week after week this year, and 
next year if necessary, until we get the new foundation laid for the 
way the Federal Government should work with our local governments so 
that we can have accelerated, positive reform in public schools.
  I know people are frustrated. The answer is not to abandon the public 
school system. It is not to walk away through vouchers or other 
systems. It is to stand steady and redo the foundation in a 
comprehensive reform at the national level, which is only 7 to 9 
percent of the budget, but an important 7

[[Page 1992]]

to 9 percent of the total education budget, and stand steady and 
produce comprehensive Federal legislative reform from this level to 
ensure every school is working in every community for every child. I 
believe we most certainly can meet that test.
  One of my colleagues, Senator Herb Kohl from Wisconsin, is also 
supportive of this amendment and wanted to associate himself with the 
statement. I certainly appreciate his help and his support.
  Let me close by saying, again, I thank the leaders who have been 
helping us with this particular debate and thank all of my colleagues 
who have spent their time coming down to the floor and talking about 
very important and significant issues. But, again, I believe the time 
is now, since this report was issued in 1999, to recognize that while 
some good things are happening, they are not happening fast enough. We 
cannot be satisfied with the status quo. We cannot continue to be 
piecemeal in our efforts. A comprehensive overhaul of the way the 
Federal Government funds education, trusting our local officials, 
granting flexibility, focusing on accountability, and, yes, increasing 
resources.
  I am one of the Members of this body who has agreed on a tax cut that 
can be reasonable and responsible. I also agree it is a great time to 
make some strategic investments. I, for one, would be willing to make a 
huge investment in education but not unless structural reform is in 
place. We cannot continue to throw more money at an old problem and be 
satisfied with a rate of result which is not good enough and is leaving 
too many of our students behind.
  I believe the budget is at least poised to make some significant 
investment in education. Let us do it with comprehensive reform and a 
new direction of Federal support that will result in greater 
performance of our schools at the local level. I think we are up to the 
task. I know we can do it in a bipartisan way.
  I thank the Senators who have joined me in this particular amendment. 
I may or may not ask for a vote on this particular amendment before we 
finish this debate.
  But I also wanted to mention Senators Lincoln and Breaux. I mentioned 
Senator Bayh. Senator Lieberman is supportive of this particular 
amendment. We may or may not ask for a specific vote on it, but, again, 
I want to reiterate how important comprehensive reform us and to take 
the time this year to get it done.
  I yield the remainder of my time.
  Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise today in support of both the pending 
amendment and the underlying Education Savings Account bill. Education 
Savings Accounts will clearly help some families save money for their 
children's education, but they are only part of the solution to 
improving education in our country.
  The amendment proposed by the Senator from Louisiana is another part. 
It represents the work of several Senators who are trying to take a 
realistic, effective approach to improving public education. I urge my 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle to take a serious look at our 
bill, the Public Education Reinvestment, Reinvention, and 
Responsibility Act--better known as ``Three R's''.
  We have made great strides in the past six years toward improving 
public education. Nearly all States now have academic standards in 
place. More students are taking more challenging courses. Test scores 
have risen slightly. Dropout rates have decreased. But there are still 
significant improvements to be made. A recent study of students from 41 
different countries found that American students still score far behind 
those in other countries.
  Addressing this sort of fundamental failure is going to take more 
than cosmetic reform. We are going to have to take a fresh look at the 
structure of Federal education programs. We need to let go of the tired 
partisan fighting over more spending versus block grants and take a 
middle ground approach that will truly help our States, school 
districts--and most importantly, our students.
  Our ``Three R's'' bill does just that. It makes raising student 
achievement for all students--and eliminating the achievement gap 
between low-income and more affluent students--our top priorities. To 
accomplish this, our bill centers around three principles.
  First, we believe that we must continue to invest in education, and 
invest wisely, targeting funds where they are needed the most. Second, 
we believe that States and local school districts are in the best 
position to know what their educational needs are. They should be given 
more flexibility to determine how they will use Federal dollars to meet 
those needs. And third, and most importantly, in exchange for increased 
flexibility, public schools must be accountable for results. These 
principles are a pyramid, with accountability being the base that 
supports the federal government's grant of flexibility and funds.
  For too long, we have seen a steady stream of Federal dollars flow to 
States and school districts--regardless of how well they educate their 
students. This has to stop. We need to reward schools that do a good 
job. We need to provide assistance and support to schools that are 
struggling to do a better job. And we need to stop subsidizing failure.
  The amendment before us now is the Teacher Quality and Professional 
Development section of the ``Three R's'' bill. It would increase 
funding for teacher quality and professional development to $2 billion, 
and target those funds to the neediest school districts. It gives 
States and school districts more flexibility to design teacher 
recruitment, mentoring, and professional development programs. And it 
requires States and school districts to ensure that every student will 
be taught by a fully qualified teacher--and holds them accountable for 
making sure that happens.
  Mr. President, the amendment before us today is just one part of the 
``Three R's'' bill. It focuses on one of the most important parts of 
improving education--improving teaching. It is an example of how, by 
using the concepts of increased funding, targeting, flexibility--and 
most importantly, accountability--we can work with our State and local 
partners to make sure every child is taught by a qualified teacher. I 
look forward to continuing to work on these issues when the Senate 
considers ESEA.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the amendment 
of the Senator from Louisiana be set aside, and the Senator from New 
York be recognized for 10 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from New York.
  Mr. SCHUMER. Thank you, Mr. President.


                           Amendment No. 2868

(Purpose: To put teachers first by providing grants for master teacher 
                               programs)

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from New York [Mr. Schumer] for himself, and 
     Ms. Landrieu, proposes an amendment numbered 2868.

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of 
the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:
       At the appropriate place, insert the following:
             TITLE __--21ST CENTURY MASTER TEACHER PROGRAMS

     SEC. __01. MASTER TEACHER PROGRAMS.

       Title II of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 6601 et seq.) is amended--
       (1) by redesignating part E as part F; and
       (2) by inserting after part D the following new part:

                   ``PART E--MASTER TEACHER PROGRAMS

     ``SEC. 2351. MASTER TEACHER PROGRAMS.

       ``(a) Definitions.--In this part:
       ``(1) Board certified.--The term `board certified' means 
     successful completion of all requirements to be certified by 
     the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards.
       ``(2) Master teacher.--The term `master teacher' means a 
     teacher who is certified by

[[Page 1993]]

     the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards and 
     has been teaching for not less than 3 years.
       ``(3) Novice teacher.--The term `novice teacher' means a 
     teacher who has been teaching for not more than 3 years at a 
     public elementary school or secondary school.
       ``(b) Program Authorized.--
       ``(1) Authority.--
       ``(A) In general.--The Secretary is authorized to award 
     grants on a competitive basis to local educational agencies 
     to establish master teacher programs as described in 
     paragraph (4).
       ``(B) Distribution.--To the maximum extent practicable, the 
     Secretary shall award grants under subparagraph (A) so that 
     such grants are distributed among the school districts with 
     the highest concentration of teachers who are not certified 
     or licensed or are provisionally certified or licensed.
       ``(2) Duration.--A grant under paragraph (1) shall be 
     awarded for a period of 5 years.
       ``(3) Amount.--The amount of a grant awarded under 
     paragraph (1) shall be determined based on--
       ``(A) the total amount appropriated for a fiscal year under 
     subsection (h); and
       ``(B) the extent of the concentration of teachers who are 
     not certified or licensed or are provisionally certified or 
     licensed in the school district involved.
       ``(4) Authorized activities.--The master teacher programs 
     described in paragraph (1) shall provide funding assistance 
     to teachers to become board certified, including the 
     provision of the board certification fee.
       ``(c) Applications.--
       ``(1) In general.--A local educational agency desiring a 
     grant under subsection (b) shall submit an application to the 
     Secretary at such time, in such manner, and accompanied by 
     such information as the Secretary may reasonably require.
       ``(2) Approval of application.--The Secretary shall make a 
     determination regarding an application submitted under 
     paragraph (1) based on a recommendation of a peer review 
     panel, as established by the Secretary, and any other 
     criteria that the Secretary determines to be appropriate.
       ``(d) Payments.--
       ``(1) In general.--Grant payments shall be made under this 
     section on an annual basis.
       ``(2) Administrative costs.--Each local educational agency 
     that receives a grant under subsection (b) shall use not more 
     than 2 percent of the amount awarded under the grant for 
     administrative costs.
       ``(3) Denial of grant.--If the Secretary determines that a 
     local educational agency has failed to make substantial 
     progress during a fiscal year in increasing the percentage of 
     teachers who are board certified, or in improving student 
     achievement, such an agency shall not be eligible for a grant 
     payment under this section in the next succeeding year.
       ``(e) Reports.--Not later than March 31, 2004, the 
     Secretary shall prepare and submit to the Committee on 
     Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate and the 
     Committee on Education and the Workforce of the House of 
     Representatives a report of program activities funded under 
     this section.
       ``(f) Matching Requirement.--The Secretary may not award a 
     grant to a local educational agency under subsection (b) 
     unless the local educational agency agrees that, with respect 
     to costs to be incurred by the agency in carrying out 
     activities for which the grant was awarded, the agency shall 
     provide (directly or through donations from public or private 
     entities) non-Federal contributions in an amount equal to 25 
     percent of the amount of the grant awarded to the agency.
       ``(g) Repayment of Funds.--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of any program under this 
     section in which assistance is provided to a teacher to pay 
     the National Board for Professional Teaching Standard board 
     certification fee to become board certified, assistance may 
     only be provided if the teacher makes agreements as follows:
       ``(A) The teacher will enter and complete the National 
     Board for Professional Teaching Standards board certification 
     program to become board certified.
       ``(B) Upon becoming board certified, the teacher will teach 
     in the public school system for a period of not less than 2 
     years.
       ``(2) Breach of agreements.--A teacher receiving assistance 
     described in paragraph (1) is liable to the local educational 
     agency that provides such assistance for the amount of the 
     certification fee described in paragraph (1) if such 
     teacher--
       ``(A) voluntarily withdraws or terminates the certification 
     program before taking the examination for board 
     certification; or
       ``(B) is dismissed from the certification program before 
     becoming board certified.
       ``(h) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized 
     to be appropriated to carry out this section, $50,000,000 for 
     each of the fiscal years 2001 through 2005.''.

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I rise to offer my amendment, the 
Teachers First Act, to the education bill we are currently considering.
  If you had listened to the debate over the last 2 days on this bill 
as I have, there is not a single Senator who is satisfied with the 
quality of education in our public schools. We have different 
prescriptions, but we are unanimous in our belief that U.S. schools 
must do better in this globally competitive and idea-based world.
  In my own State, at the end of the last fiscal year, New Yorkers were 
shocked to learn that half of the State's fourth grade students could 
barely handle written and oral work. Over the past 8 years, the number 
of New York schools cited for poor performance has more than doubled. 
This is simply unacceptable.
  I am concerned, of course, as a Senator from New York, but I am even 
more concerned as a parent because my two daughters attend public 
schools in New York City.
  For me, if we could accomplish only one thing, if we could make only 
one change to our schools to raise the quality of education for all 
kids, it must be to improve the quality of our teachers and make the 
teaching profession more attractive to young people.
  In the past, America was able to attract high-quality young people to 
teach--top-quality women who were locked out of other professional 
fields, talented men because of the promise of stable employment, or as 
an alternative to the Vietnam war draft. Today, very unfortunately for 
our country, to choose to teach is to choose financial sacrifice. And 
quality has become less important than filling vacant teacher slots. 
This has to change for a whole bunch of reasons.
  First, today's economy depends more on the quality of the minds we 
provide in our schools than the minerals we dig in the soil or the 
wealth of the fields.
  Two, we have an enormous teacher shortage on the horizon.
  Three, studies tell us that teacher qualifications account for more 
than 90 percent of the differences of students' reading and math 
scores.
  Let me repeat that because it is an astounding fact.
  Studies tell us that teacher qualifications account for more than 90 
percent of the differences in students' reading and math scores. So 
quality and training count.
  The bad news is that more than 12 percent of all newly hired teachers 
enter the workforce with no training at all, and 37 percent of all new 
teachers nationwide lack full certification.
  I was at a reception of the North Carolina Community Bankers. I had 
not had lunch and I wanted to smell the crab cakes. I told them about 
the amendment I was submitting because much of the idea of this 
amendment came from the work of Gov. Jim Hunt of North Carolina. One of 
the bankers said: Why should we have any teachers who are not 
certified? I said: We shouldn't. He said: Why do we let them teach?
  The answer is very simple. We do not have enough qualified teachers 
applying for the jobs at existing salary levels. Given the working 
conditions of a teacher, given that the starting salary of a teacher in 
America is $24,000 a year, schools--particularly in rural and inner-
city areas, but now in other places, too--are facing a Hobson's choice: 
no teacher or an unqualified teacher, an uncertified teacher.
  There is no other choice. The number of people who are certified 
doesn't fill the need for the number of teachers.
  I think it should be a given in this great democracy of ours that 
every American child deserves to be taught by a highly qualified and 
motivated teacher. Scarce Federal dollars should be used to support and 
help replicate successful programs to recruit and retain high-quality 
teachers. And we should have standards in accountability to ensure that 
we are doing right by our children.
  I am proud to have worked with Senator Kennedy, and I compliment 
Senator Kennedy's tremendous leadership on his qualified-teacher-in-
every-classroom amendment. This effort, unfortunately, failed this 
afternoon. It would have included mentoring and professional 
development programs, provided resources and ongoing support to 
teachers, particularly in the subject areas of math and science where 
they are desperately needed. The number of teachers, by the way, in 
math and science who are qualified and certified overall is very low 
for the simple reason those individuals can make virtually double in 
the private sector with a background in math and science.

[[Page 1994]]

  Second, that accountability measures for States and local districts 
to improve teacher quality be real.
  Third, that recruitment efforts to attract the best and brightest 
continue.
  As a complement to the fine work of Senators Kennedy, Bingaman, 
Wellstone, Murray, Reed, and others, I am introducing an amendment that 
will provide funding for teachers to complete a 1-year intensive 
program to become board certified. The National Board for Professional 
Teaching Standards is the gold seal of certification. We want doctors, 
accountants, and architects to obtain board certification. We must have 
the same for teachers.
  I am one who believes strongly in standards and accountability in the 
educational system. I do not believe we should be lowering the bar for 
teachers or for students. To lower the bar is the end of a great 
American tradition of meritocracy; that is, no matter who you are or 
where you come from, if you meet certain standards, you get the job.
  On the other hand, if we are not going to lower the bar--and we 
certainly shouldn't, and I support many of my colleagues in that 
viewpoint on both sides of the aisle--we then have to make sure people 
can get over the bar.
  If there are too few teachers right now who meet certification, we 
can have uncertified teachers in the classroom or we can help more 
teachers become certified. That is the nub of this program.
  Board certification requires teachers to undergo a rigorous regime of 
testing and assessments based on actual classroom teaching, lesson 
plans, and student work samples. This is not some abstract test that 
one takes. This is real on-the-job training. Teachers seeking board 
certification are also required to pass written exams designed to test 
subject matter knowledge, curriculum design, and student assessment 
techniques. The process takes nearly a year and costs $2,000.
  My proposal provides $50 million a year in grants for 5 years to 
cover 75 percent of the costs of certification in those districts with 
the highest concentration of teachers who are not certified or 
licensed. The local district would match the remaining 25 percent and 
teachers would agree to remain within the school district as master 
teachers for at least 2 years after certification.
  Why don't we just simply allow localities to do this on their own? 
Because they don't. They are strapped for funds, they have day-to-day 
needs and concerns, and they will take an uncertified teacher and put 
them in the classroom because they are faced with the choice of no 
teacher.
  This is just the type of program the Federal Government should 
initiate. We shouldn't mandate a program on the school districts. No 
school district has to participate in this. Rather, we ought to focus 
on the pressure points and pinpoint where a little financial incentive 
will encourage school districts to do things that we think we need.
  As my colleague, Senator Dodd, said in a private conversation the 
other day, we do have national values. To give money to local school 
districts and say, do whatever you want with it, ensures the same old 
situation with which we are not happy. If we agree that we should raise 
the bar for who should be teachers, what better method than to give 
dollars to local school districts that wish to help certify more 
teachers? Not all dollars; they have to match it 25 percent so it means 
something to them, but it gives them help.
  The bottom line is that we have to make teaching an exalted 
profession in the 21st century as the professions of law and medicine 
have been in the 20th century. My amendment is a step in the right 
direction.
  Today, only nine States have over 90 percent of their teachers who 
are nationally board certified. My own State has 61 board certified 
teachers; 61 out of 205,000 teachers in New York State. That ratio is 
abysmal. It is time to make a change. I urge my colleagues to join me 
in supporting this amendment.
  I yield back the remainder of my time.
  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that at 6:45 
the votes commence, with the first vote limited to 15 minutes and all 
successive votes be limited to 10 minutes. There will be 2 minutes for 
explanations prior to each vote. I also ask any amendment agreed to by 
the Senate be modified to conform to the earlier-passed Roth amendment.
  Let me announce the sequence of the votes: Coverdell, Boxer, 
Bingaman, Wellstone, Feinstein-Sessions, Durbin, Kerry, Boxer, Schumer, 
and final passage.
  The leader has advised both managers that the time limits on the 
votes will be strictly adhered to. We had a lot of trouble earlier this 
afternoon. He is insistent that we follow this schedule. Some of these 
votes may be by voice vote. We are still working on that.
  This is the general outline of where we are going in the next 15 
minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent it be added to the 
agreement that Senators Torricelli and Lieberman have the remaining 
time until 6:45 to speak. Senator Lieberman wants to speak to the 
Landrieu amendment and Senator Torricelli wants to speak on the bill 
itself.
  Mrs. BOXER. Reserving the right to object, I didn't hear the rest of 
it. We had an arrangement to speak for 5 minutes.
  Mr. COVERDELL. At 6:45.
  Mrs. BOXER. I should be here at 6:45.
  Mr. COVERDELL. Yes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Connecticut.
  Mr. LIEBERMAN. I thank the Chair.
  I rise to speak both in favor of the underlying proposal offered by 
the Senator from Georgia and the Senator from New Jersey, which I am 
pleased to be a cosponsor of, but also to speak on behalf of an 
amendment that has been introduced by the Senator from Louisiana, Ms. 
Landrieu, on behalf of herself, Senator Bayh, and myself.
  Let me say briefly, on the underlying proposal, it is a modest but 
important proposal which encourages parents and enables parents through 
the tax benefits provided to set aside some money for their children's 
future, and to use it for a variety of educational purposes that have 
been well outlined here. This proposal, as has been said over and over 
again, is no different than existing legislation for use at the college 
level. I support it enthusiastically and think it is a step forward. It 
will be of particular help to struggling middle-class families who want 
the best for their children's education and often find it hard to pay 
the way. This will help them just a little bit.
  Second, speaking about the amendment offered by Senator Landrieu and 
Senator Bayh and myself, as I have followed the debate on the 
Coverdell-Torricelli proposal, I have been troubled, again, to see the 
Senate divided largely along partisan lines. The lines are familiar, 
the arguments have been heard before, but they do not get us anywhere, 
and they particularly do not respond to the message that I get clearly 
when I go home and speak to people in Connecticut and that I guess my 
colleagues here get when they go to their respective States. It is that 
there is nothing that matters more to the people of America today than 
to improve our system of education, particularly public education, but 
all education, private, faith-based as well.
  If we respond to that clear plea, that priority of our constituents, 
with partisanship and posturing that produces nothing but a 
continuation of the status quo, then shame on us. So in hopes of 
reaching a realistic consensus in the weeks ahead, this debate in some 
ways has been a warm-up. But it is an important one that has substance 
attached to it for the broader debate on the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act.
  The amendment Senator Landrieu has put forward is a piece of a 
broader proposal that she and I and Senator Bayh, Senator Lincoln, and 
others are developing as a total reform of the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act. It is building on good news in a number of our States 
which are moving in the direction, not of a fixation with rules and 
regulations or bureaucracies but

[[Page 1995]]

concentrating instead on results: How can we improve the educational 
performance of our children?
  In the States that are succeeding, they are doing three things. 
First, they are infusing new resources into their public education 
systems. We are going to have to invest more. Second, they are giving 
local districts more flexibility in how they meet those higher 
standards as they determine the needs of their children and local 
school systems. Third, they are demanding new measures and mechanisms 
of accountability to increase the chance that these investments will 
yield the intended return, which is higher academic achievement by all 
of our students. Those are the goals of the bill that Senators 
Landrieu, Bayh, Lincoln, I and several others are drafting.
  It calls for revamping the framework of our Federal education 
programs and engaging the States in a new performance-based 
partnership, where we would significantly increase Federal funding to 
help our schools meet these new expectations, to target these new 
dollars to the communities and children who are disadvantaged, who need 
them most, and to provide State and local officials with broad latitude 
in allocating these resources to meet their specific priorities. We 
then hold the States responsible for showing progress in meeting those 
goals, to reward those who do and, yes, to punish those who do not 
better educate our children.
  In this approach, we believe and hope, are the seeds of a bipartisan 
solution. It brings together what is best on both sides of the favored 
educational reform. For those who call for more resources and more 
targeting to poor urban and rural districts, we are proposing 
increasing our investment in ESEA by $25 billion over the next 5 years, 
80 percent of which would be put into title I.
  For those who call for more flexibility of local control, we propose 
consolidating the mass of Federal categorical grant programs, a kind of 
Washington-knows-best attitude, into five performance-based partnership 
grants, all of which are tied to the overarching goal of raising our 
children's academic achievement. And for everyone, the parent in 
particular, who is concerned about the bottom line--and the bottom line 
here is how well are my children being educated--we propose making 
accountability our new education linchpin by rewarding States that 
exceed their own performance goals and punishing those who routinely 
fail to show such progress.
  We plan to introduce this bill next week and hope to have it 
considered on the floor during the ESEA debate. In the meantime, I 
appeal to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to take a hard look 
at that proposal and the ideas behind it.
  I recognize nothing we do at the Federal level can, by itself, solve 
the problems of education in our country. But we can create incentives 
for change and innovation. We can identify the way and build the will 
to get there, which is our goal, as is, may I say, the goal of the 
underlying bill before the Senate today.
  I support the Landrieu amendment. I am proud also to state my support 
for the Coverdell-Torricelli bill.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I think by previous accord, not 
necessarily by unanimous consent, Senator Torricelli will have the time 
remaining until the voting occurs.
  Mr. TORRICELLI. Mr. President, I first express my admiration and, 
indeed, thanks to Senator Coverdell who, through these many days and 
many years, has both written this measure and brought it to this moment 
of judgment. I have been proud to be his partner in this process, 
though admittedly he has shouldered far more than half of this load, 
bringing us to this moment of judgment. I am genuinely grateful and 
proud to have worked with him.
  Mr. COVERDELL. I think the Senator knows the compliments are mutually 
shared.
  Mr. TORRICELLI. I thank my colleague.
  At this point I think every argument has been made and almost 
everybody has made them. This Senate has now looked at the question of 
education savings accounts from every possible perspective. I know 
these arguments, both for and against the legislation, have been 
sincerely made. But, indeed, I fear that what is the beginning of a 
long and detailed analysis of the problems of American education has 
been plagued by a perennial senatorial problem, and that is making the 
perfect the enemy of the good.
  Neither Senator Coverdell nor I have ever argued that offering these 
private savings accounts would solve every education problem in 
America. They will not. No Senator could come to this floor with any 
proposal solving every problem. But they are the opening shot in a 
revolution in American education, a revolution that, if we are wise 
enough, will at some point include the construction of new schools, the 
raising of teacher salaries, the increasing of accountability, and new 
standards. But on this day, if we succeed, it changes the battle lines 
in American education by bringing private resources and the private 
community into the process of education.
  Throughout the history of our country, we have allowed American 
education to be simply a question of what local governments, sometimes 
with Federal resources, can do through the instruments of Government to 
educate children. That formula will always dominate American education. 
We seek to change it if only in this marginal degree. By the use of 
these private savings accounts, we estimate that $12 billion of family 
resources will be used to help educate children from kindergarten 
through high school. That is not a substitute for public resources. It 
does not divert public resources. Indeed, not a dollar of public money 
is diverted from the public schools to any other institution. It does 
allow the community, a family at the birth of a child, to establish 
these savings accounts and then call upon grandparents, parents, 
cousins, churches, synagogues, labor unions, and corporations to 
contribute moneys into these funds.
  That cannot be bad. Mr. President, $12 billion will be spent on 
education tomorrow that is not spent today. We may divide on other 
issues of education, but no one can sincerely argue in this Chamber 
those resources are not needed or that it is not a good thing parents 
or churches or grandparents have a vehicle to participate in that 
child's education.
  I know my colleagues, particularly my Democratic colleagues, are 
sincere when they express concern, but this legislation will not help 
every child. I cannot argue that point. There are some families so 
wealthy they may not qualify, and there are some families so poor they 
may not be able to contribute or find sponsors who will. For them, 
there are other days, other legislation, and other proposals which this 
Senate has an obligation to consider. But on this day, on this vote, 
for millions of American families, working-class families, people who 
work hard every day, middle-income families who can save $50, $100, 
$1,000 for their child, this is a vehicle.
  Under what possible reason would the Federal Government be taxing the 
interest of an account where a family saves for the education of their 
child? Not only should we not be taxing it, we should be doing 
everything possible to encourage that family to save that money. It 
will help most families.
  Yet many of my colleagues still argue: But the money will be diverted 
from public schools. No, I say to my colleagues, not a dollar. Indeed, 
the CBO has estimated that 70 percent of this money will actually be 
spent by public school students.
  The other day, in this Chamber, my friend and my colleague, whom I 
admire greatly, Senator Dodd, said: But the public schools are free. 
No, I say to my colleagues, public schools are not free. Afterschool 
activities cost money, tutors cost money, transportation costs money, 
books cost money, computers cost money.
  Some of the greatest champions in the Senate of public schools in 
America have argued against this legislation in the belief they are 
defending public schools. Most of this $12 billion will go to the 
public schools so middle-class

[[Page 1996]]

families and working families will be able to use these funds to help 
pay for public school activities. Yet some of this money will also go 
to help pay the tuition of private school students, and that is a good 
thing, too.
  I say to my colleagues, this has been a good debate. This is a sound 
proposal. I hope and I trust on a bipartisan basis we will send a 
signal that this Congress is finally serious about genuine education 
reform; that we will return on another day to deal with the problem of 
teacher salaries, construction, and standards, but that on this day, we 
will marshal private resources to deal with the public and private 
school problems of America.
  This is good, and it is sound legislation. It passed the House of 
Representatives on an overwhelming bipartisan basis. Almost every 
Member of this Senate voted for the identical proposal to fund higher 
education. Now we offer the same bill with the identical language to 
deal with K through 12. Senator Coverdell, I believe, has made a great 
contribution by this legislation. I am very proud to join with him in 
offering it and very proud that it has become a genuinely bipartisan 
proposal.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The hour of 6:45 p.m. having arrived, under 
the previous order, the Senate will proceed to vote.
  The Senator from Georgia.
  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from New Jersey 
for his dedication and courage.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.


                     Amendment No. 2867, Withdrawn

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Landrieu 
amendment be withdrawn.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I further ask for the yeas and nays on the 
Durbin amendment and on the Boxer amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it shall be in order to 
order the yeas and nays.
  Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.


                    Amendment No. 2880, As Modified

  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the Boxer 
amendment No. 2880 on pesticides be modified with the changes that are 
at the desk and that we proceed to a voice vote. Under the procedures 
of voting, the Senator will have 1 minute of explanation, and then we 
will proceed to a voice vote.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is so modified.
  The amendment, as modified, is as follows:

       At the end, add the following:

     SEC. ___. PESTICIDE APPLICATION IN SCHOOLS.

       (a) In General.--Each school that receives Federal funding 
     shall--
       (1) take steps to reduce the exposure of children to 
     pesticides on school grounds, both indoors and outdoors; and
       (2) provide parents and guardians of children that attend 
     the school with advance notification of certain pesticide 
     applications on school grounds in accordance with subsections 
     (b) and (c).
       (b) EPA List of Toxic Pesticides.--
       (1) In general.--The Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall distribute to each school that 
     receives Federal funding the current manual of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency that guides schools in the 
     establishment of a least toxic pesticide policy.
       (2) List.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall provide each school that receives 
     Federal funding with a list of pesticides that contain a 
     substance that the Administrator has identified as a known 
     carcinogen, a developmental or reproductive toxin, or a 
     category I or II acute nerve toxin.
       (c) Parental Notification of Toxic Pesticide Applications 
     in Schools.--
       (1) In general.--On or after the date that is 18 months 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, any school that 
     receives Federal funding shall not apply any pesticide 
     described in paragraph (b)(2) on school grounds, either 
     indoors or outdoors, unless an administrative official of the 
     school provides notice of the planned application to parents 
     and guardians of children that attend the school not later 
     than 48 hours before the application of the pesticide.
       (2) Notice.--The notice described in paragraph (1)--
       (A) shall include--
       (i) a description of the intended area of application; and
       (ii) the name of each pesticide to be applied; and
       (B) shall indicate whether the pesticide is a known 
     carcinogen, a developmental or reproductive toxin, or a 
     category I or II acute nerve toxin.
       (3) Incorporation of notice.--The notice described in 
     paragraph (1) may be incorporated in any notice that is being 
     sent to parents and guardians at the time at which the 
     pesticide notice is required to be sent.

  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I understand the Senator from Nevada would 
like to speak for 1 minute, in addition to my 5 minutes; is that all 
right? Are we discussing the pesticide amendment or the gun amendment?
  Mr. COVERDELL. Pesticide.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is the Chair's understanding the Senator 
from California had 1 minute.
  Mr. COVERDELL. That is correct.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, that is fine with the Senator from 
California. I thank my friend from Georgia. We made a small change in 
my amendment. Essentially, what we are telling parents now is that if 
the schools their kids go to are going to be sprayed with dangerous 
pesticides that are known carcinogens, that could cause nerve damage, 
they will be notified 48 hours in advance of the spraying that will be 
taking place.
  In addition, what we do is we instruct the Environmental Protection 
Agency to take the booklet they have already produced on how to get 
away from using these very strong and toxic pesticides and send it to 
every school district in America.
  I am very pleased this is being done. I have a larger bill, the 
Children's Environmental Protection Act, on which I invite everyone to 
join me. Children are not little adults. I am a little adult, but 
children are growing and changing. Their bodies are changing, their 
hormones are changing, and they are absolutely more adversely impacted 
by these toxins.
  I thank my colleague very much. I hope we can have a voice vote.
  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I yield back the 1 minute. I thank the 
Senator from California for her cooperation. I call for a voice vote on 
her amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
2880, as modified.
  The amendment (No. 2880), as modified, was agreed to.
  Mrs. BOXER. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. REID. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 2881

 (Purpose: To provide for a Manager's amendment to the bill as amended 
                    by Senate Amendment number 2869)

  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I have a manager's amendment. It has 
been cleared on both sides. I send the amendment to the desk.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Georgia [Mr. Coverdell], for Mr. Roth, 
     proposes an amendment numbered 2881.

  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is printed in today's Record under ``Amendments 
Submitted.''
  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I call for the adoption of the 
amendment.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, I have been told by staff that this has been 
cleared by the minority on the Finance Committee.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is agreed to.
  The amendment (No. 2881) was agreed to.
  Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, I rise to address one provision in the 
managers' amendment that has been adopted.
  The provision to which I am referring deals with the authority of the 
Federal

[[Page 1997]]

Housing Finance Board to allocate authority to Federal Home Loan Banks 
to guarantee school construction bonds. The provision contemplates 
legislation that ``expressly'' authorizes the Federal Housing Finance 
Board to allocate such authority to the Federal Home Loan Banks. No 
inference should be drawn from this provision with respect to the 
Federal Housing Finance Board's current authority.
  I note that the general counsel of the Board has issued a legal 
opinion arguing that the Board has the implicit legal authority to 
allocate authority to Federal Home Loan Banks to guarantee school 
construction bonds.
  I ask unanimous consent that a copy of a letter from Deborah 
Silberman, General Counsel, Federal Housing Finance Board, dated March 
3, 1999, be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                Federal Housing Finance Board,

                                    Washington, DC, March 3, 1999.
     Mr. Paul S. Friend,
     Vice President and General Counsel, Federal Home Loan Bank of 
         New York, New York, NY.

     Regulatory Interpretation: FHLBank of New York Request for 
         Regulatory Interpretation Regarding FHLBank Authority to 
         Issue Standby Letters of Credit In Conjunction With Tax-
         Exempt Bonds or Notes, Including School Construction 
         Bonds (99-RI-7).

       Dear Mr. Friend: This is in response to your February 10, 
     1999 letter on behalf of the Federal Home Loan Bank of New 
     York (FHLBank), as supplemented by a February 18, 1999 
     letter, requesting a Federal Housing Finance Board (Finance 
     Board) Regulatory Interpretation regarding the FHLBank's 
     authority, under recently promulgated Finance Board 
     regulations, to issue standby letters of credit (SLOCs) in 
     conjunction with tax-exempt bonds or notes.
       Specifically, the FHLBank has requested confirmation that 
     under the recently adopted Finance Board Regulation on SLOCs, 
     the FHLBank would have authority to issue SLOCs in 
     conjunction with tax-exempt bonds or notes ``when the issues 
     are designed to promote housing or the financing of 
     commercial and economic development activities that benefit 
     low- and moderate-income families, or that are located in 
     low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.'' In addition, the 
     FHLBank requests confirmation that the FHLBank could issue a 
     ``confirming'' letter of credit on behalf of a member that 
     provides a letter of credit for the benefit of bondholders in 
     conjunction with a tax-exempt school construction bond 
     issuance. Your February 18, 1999 letter indicates that the 
     FHLBank's issuance of the confirming letter of credit would 
     enable bond rating agencies to issue a triple ``A'' rating on 
     the bond, as well as provide an additional guarantee of 
     payment to the bondholders.
       The Finance Board's former Interim Policy Guidelines For 
     FHLBank Standby Letters Of Credit (SLOC Guidelines), Finance 
     Board Resolution No. 93-63 (July 28, 1993), provided that the 
     FHLBanks could issue or confirm SLOCs, on behalf of member 
     institutions, ``in conjunction with tax-exempt bonds or 
     notes, only when the issues are designed to promote housing 
     or the financing of commercial and economic development 
     activities that benefit low- and moderate-income families, or 
     that are located in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.'' 
     That is, the purpose of the tax-exempt bonds or notes had to 
     be the financing of housing or commercial and economic 
     development activities eligible for funding under the Bank's 
     Community Investment Program (CIP), see 12 U.S.C. 
     Sec. 1430(i).
       On November 23, 1998, the Finance Board adopted a final 
     regulation (SLOC Regulation), which codified and amended the 
     SLOC Guidelines to allow for broader use of SLOCs by members 
     and eligible nonmember mortgagees and eliminated or modified 
     some of the restrictions that had been imposed on the SLOC's 
     issued or confirmed by the FHLBanks. See 68 Fed. Reg. 65693 
     (Nov. 30, 1998). The SLOC Guidelines were rescinded by the 
     Finance Board after the SLOC Regulation was adopted. See 
     Finance Board Resolution No. 98-50 (Nov. 23, 1998).
       Section 938.2(a) of the SLOC Regulation provides that:
       Each [FHL]Bank is authorized to issue or confirm on behalf 
     of members standby letters of credit that comply with the 
     requirements of this part, for any of the following purposes:
       (1) To assist members in facilitating residential housing 
     finance;
       (2) To assist members in facilitating community lending 
     that is eligible for any of the [FHL]Banks' CICA programs 
     under part 970 of this chapter;
       (3) To assist members with asset/liability management; or
       (4) To provide members with liquidity or other funding.
     See 63 Fed. Reg. 65693, 65699-65700 (to be codified at 12 
     C.F.R. Sec. 938.2(a)).
       Where a member issues an SLOC to support a tax-exempt bond 
     or note issuance, a FHLBank's issuance on behalf of the 
     member of a confirming SLOC enables the transaction to 
     receive a triple ``A'' rating from the bond rating agencies, 
     lowering the interest rate paid on the bonds or notes and 
     reducing the cost of the bond issuance. Therefore, the 
     FHLBank's issuance of a confirming SLOC assists the member in 
     facilitating the financing purpose for which the bond or note 
     was issued. Moreover, the Preamble to the SLOC Regulation 
     states that ``a [FHLBank] SLOC may be issued to support the 
     issuance of bonds.'' See id. at 65696. Accordingly, under 
     section 938.2(a)(1) and (2), a FHLBank may issue a confirming 
     SLOC on behalf of members in conjunction with tax-exempt 
     bonds or notes, provided the bonds or notes are issued for 
     the purpose of ``residential housing finance'' or ``community 
     lending.''
       The Community Investment Cash Advance Programs Regulation 
     (CICA Regulation) provides the FHLBanks with an array of 
     specific standards for projects, targeted beneficiaries, and 
     targeted income levels that the Finance Board has determined 
     support ``community lending'' under all CICA programs, 
     including the CIP. See 63 Fed. Reg. 65536 (Nov. 27, 1998). 
     Specifically, section 970.3 of the CICA Regulation defines 
     ``community lending'' to mean ``providing financing for 
     economic development projects for targeted beneficiaries.'' 
     See id. at 65546. ``Economic development projects'' are 
     defined in section 970.3 as:
       (1) Commercial, industrial, manufacturing, social service, 
     and public facility projects and activities; and
       (2) Public or private infrastructure projects, such as 
     roads, utilities, and sewers.
     See id. ``Targeted beneficiaries'' are defined in section 
     970.3 as beneficiaries determined by the geographical area in 
     which a project is located, by the individuals who benefit 
     from a project as employees or service recipients, or by the 
     nature of the project itself, as further set forth in the 
     CICA Regulations, See id. at 65547.
       Thus, economic development activities that are financed by 
     tax-exempt bonds or notes and that benefit low- or moderate-
     income families would have to be one of the types of eligible 
     ``targeted beneficiaries'' set forth in section 970.3 of the 
     CICA Regulation in order to qualify as ``community lending'' 
     for the purposes of the SLOC Regulation. Economic development 
     activities located in low- and moderate-income neighborhoods 
     (i.e., neighborhoods with an area median income of 80 percent 
     or less) would be targeted beneficiaries for purposes of the 
     CICA Regulation.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
     \1\ Under section 970.3 of the CICA Regulation, a ``targeted 
     beneficiary'' includes projects ``located in a neighborhood 
     with a median income at or below the targeted income level,'' 
     and ``targeted income level'' is defined to include 
     neighborhoods with an area median income of 80 percent or 
     less. See id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
       School construction would qualify as an ``economic 
     development project'' under section 970.3 of the CICA 
     Regulations since it is a public facility project. Therefore, 
     if the school construction project being financed by the tax-
     exempt bond qualifies as a ``targeted beneficiary'' for 
     purposes of the CICA Regulation as discussed above, it would 
     qualify as ``community lending'' for purpose of the SLOC 
     Regulation. Accordingly, the FHLBank would have the 
     authority, under the Finance Board's regulations, to issue, 
     on behalf of a member, a confirming SLOC in conjunction with 
     a tax-exempt bond financing such school construction.
       Finally, please be advised that the Finance Board recently 
     has adopted Procedures governing requests by the FHLBanks for 
     regulatory interpretations. See Procedures for Requests and 
     Applications, Resolution No. 98-51 (October 28, 1998). All 
     future requests from the FHLBank for regulatory 
     interpretations shall be required to conform to the 
     requirements set forth in the Procedures.
       If you have any further questions, please call the 
     undersigned at (202) 408-2570.
           Sincerely,
                                             Deborah F. Silberman,
                                                  General Counsel.
       This is a Finance Board regulatory interpretation within 
     the meaning of the Procedures for Requests and Applications 
     adopted by the Board of Directors of the Finance Board 
     pursuant to Resolution No. 98-51 (October 28, 1998). The 
     regulatory guidance set forth herein may be relied upon by 
     the recipient subject to modification or rescission by action 
     of the Board of Directors of the Finance Board.
                                    I concur: William W. Ginsberg,
                                                 Managing Director

  Mr. ROTH. Mr. President, in supporting this amendment, Senators do 
not necessarily agree or disagree with this legal opinion. What the 
Senate is stating is that if a bond issuer is to receive both the 
benefit of tax-exempt interest and a Federal Home Loan Bank guarantee, 
it can happen only if there is an express subsequent authorization 
enacted.


                    Amendment No. 2874, As Modified

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the next amendment 
is the Coverdell amendment.
  Mr. COVERDELL. I ask for the yeas and nays.

[[Page 1998]]

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. COVERDELL. I will speak for 5 minutes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.
  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, earlier in the day, the Senator from 
California sent an amendment to the desk dealing with, I will say in 
shorthand, guns, but more particularly the shooting that occurred 
earlier this week in Michigan for which we are all deeply grievous.
  I have offered a substitute that I think embraces the spirit of the 
amendment of the Senator from California. Earlier in the day she 
indicated she might vote for this one as well. I guess we will see.
  The main differences are three. It is a little broader in scope. It 
acknowledges the problem of weapons in schools. It deals with drugs and 
culture, as well. It does not point the finger at the Congress or 
impugn in any way what the motives are of various people who have 
strong beliefs with regard to issues relating to guns.
  It does not set an artificial deadline which is in the amendment that 
was offered by the Senator from California. The spirit of the amendment 
is very similar. I think it will receive very broad support. As I said, 
the amendment does not set an arbitrary date. It does not point the 
finger at anybody's motives. Also, it is broader.
  It is an amendment that appreciates what is happening here. It 
involves many aspects of our lives. Witness the situation in Michigan, 
where we are now reading about the environment in which this child 
lived who is alleged to have perpetrated the crime that occurred. As 
Senator Kerry of Massachusetts said a little earlier, it is kind of 
hard to believe how that child was living.
  That is the scope of the Coverdell amendment.
  Mr. President, if there is any time remaining of my 5 minutes, I 
yield it back.
  Mrs. BOXER addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
  Mrs. BOXER. I wonder, since the Senator yielded back his time, if we 
can have an extra 2 minutes for Senator Reid on my side?
  Mr. COVERDELL. How much time do I have?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 3 minutes remaining.
  Mr. COVERDELL. I yield 2 minutes to the Senator from Nevada.
  Mr. LOTT. Reserving the right to object, Mr. President--and I do not 
intend to object--I just want to determine how much time is left on 
this amendment.
  Mrs. BOXER. Five minutes for me.
  Mr. COVERDELL. Plus the 2 minutes I gave to Senator Reid.
  Mr. LOTT. Under my reservation, let me emphasize this, if I could. I 
believe after that we will be prepared to start voting. I know Senator 
Reid has been working aggressively to try to reduce the number of 
amendments. I know the same is true with Senator Coverdell. But as I 
now understand it, we still have eight amendments that could require 
votes. Hopefully, that can be reduced with some voice votes. Then there 
is final passage. So we could have as many as nine votes.
  I emphasize to Senators, and to their staffs who are here or who are 
listening, we have already gotten an agreement that the first vote will 
be 15 minutes, and then there will be 2 minutes, a minute on each side, 
before each vote after that so people will have time to know what is in 
the amendments, and those will each be 10-minute votes. I am going to 
stay on the floor to enforce the time. We will end the first vote after 
15 minutes, and we will end each vote after that after 10 minutes.
  So staffs should notify Members to start coming to the floor and to 
be prepared to stay on the floor; don't go get something to eat. We can 
save as much as an hour of time if Members will cooperate. So I am 
going to enforce the voting time. I think Senator Daschle will support 
that and the sponsors, too.
  With that, I do not object.
  Mr. REID addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nevada.


                    Amendment No. 2874, As Modified

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, Senator Coverdell has offered an amendment 
that expresses the sense of the Senate that the Safe and Drug Free 
Schools Program should target the elimination of illegal drugs and 
violence in our schools.
  Those on this side of the aisle agree with his sentiment and, 
accordingly, I expect this amendment will receive nearly unanimous 
support.
  What we want to make clear, however, is that we do not agree with his 
one-sided attack in this resolution about the administration's gun 
prosecutions record.
  What this amendment fails to recognize is that, in fact, firearms 
convictions are up dramatically. In 1996, 22 percent more criminals 
were incarcerated for either State or Federal weapons offenses than in 
1992. I am sure we could go forward with the statistics--that we do not 
have--for 1997, 1998, and 1999 that would show it would be up even 
more.
  The proof is in the pudding. The Nation's rate of violent crimes 
committed with guns has dropped by 35 percent since 1993. Something 
this administration is doing must be working. For instance, it could be 
the passage of the Brady bill, which has stopped more than 400,000 
felons and fugitives from receiving firearms, preventing untold crimes 
and violence.
  Finally, let's be serious. It will be a lot easier to prosecute gun 
crimes once we close the loopholes that riddle our code. So while 
Democrats support Senator Coverdell's conclusion, we cannot and do not 
support these one-sided findings in the amendment.
  Mrs. BOXER addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.
  Mrs. BOXER. I thank my friend from Nevada.
  I tell the Senator from Georgia, I have no problem voting on his 
amendment that deals with getting drugs out of the schools. But let's 
be clear, friends; this Coverdell amendment has nothing to do with the 
Boxer amendment. So don't think, if you vote for Coverdell, it somehow 
is a version of the Boxer amendment. They are two different things. The 
Boxer amendment calls on the Senate to act responsibly to pass 
reasonable, sensible gun laws.
  We call on the Congress to do so not on an arbitrary date but on the 
anniversary of the Columbine tragedy. The Boxer amendment is not about 
the incident in Michigan. It references it in a string of incidents of 
school violence.
  This Senate should be commended for acting 8 months ago to pass five 
very reasonable, very responsible gun control amendments. But this 
Senate should be chastised for not doing anything about it at all since 
that time. What we do in this very simple sense of the Senate is call 
on the Congress to bring those amendments back here so we can send a 
bill to the President for his signature.
  I want to tell you we are dealing with a harsh reality in America.
  I am going to show you just two charts. The first one shows you how 
many of our men and women tragically perished in 11 years of the 
Vietnam war: 58,168 tragic losses for our Nation, and those families 
have been hurting and suffering ever since. No matter on what side of 
this conflict you find yourselves this is the tragic reality of 
Vietnam.
  In the last 11 years, the same amount of time as the Vietnam war, we 
have seen over 396,000 deaths on our streets, in our schools. This is 
just handgun violence.
  That is the tragic reality we are talking about in the Boxer 
amendment.
  Here is another tragic reality: How about this for an ad in a gun 
magazine. It says: ``Start 'Em Young! There's no time like the 
present.'' Here is a young teenager with a handgun in his hand: ``Start 
`Em Young!'' We know about starting them young. All you have to do is 
look at what happened in Michigan. How young do they want them to 
start?
  I could not understand why we could not walk, hand in hand, down the 
Senate aisle and vote for the Boxer amendment.

[[Page 1999]]

  But when I got back to my office, I found out why because there 
waiting for me was a letter from the Gun Owners of America attacking my 
amendment, saying, essentially, that I was taking political advantage 
of a horrible tragedy in Michigan, when, in fact, my resolution isn't 
about that. It is about the tragic realities we face in this Nation and 
calling on the Congress to act.
  The Gun Owners of America has every right to take this position. They 
have every right to do it. We should look at what their logo says: 
``Gun Owners of America, 25 Years of No Compromise.'' That is their 
slogan. That is their logo: ``25 Years of No Compromise.''
  My friends, when we voted out those sensible gun control amendments 8 
months ago, we did compromise. We compromised between the right of law-
abiding citizens to have guns versus the right of children to have 
guns, mentally disturbed people, people with criminal records; and we 
found a balance there. We did it in a bipartisan way.
  All this Boxer amendment is saying is it is time to bring those 
sensible gun control measures--those compromises that withstood the 
division in this body and passed this body--back for a vote.
  We have a very harsh reality in this Nation. Fifty percent of 
children ages 9 through 17 are worried about dying young; 31 percent of 
children ages 12 through 17 know someone their age who carries a gun. I 
do not understand why on earth there would be opposition to simply 
saying, we are proud of what we did 8 months ago. Let's bring those 
sensible gun laws back here. Let's act before the Columbine tragedy 
anniversary is upon us. Let's do the right thing.
  I support this amendment. I hope my colleagues will as well.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time has expired. The question is on 
agreeing to amendment No. 2874, as modified. The yeas and nays have 
been ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain) is 
necessarily absent.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Inouye) and 
the Senator from Maryland (Ms. Mikulski) are necessarily absent.
  The result was announced--yeas 96, nays 1, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 26 Leg.]

                                YEAS--96

     Abraham
     Akaka
     Allard
     Ashcroft
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bryan
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee, L.
     Cleland
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Coverdell
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Gorton
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McConnell
     Moynihan
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nickles
     Reed
     Reid
     Robb
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thurmond
     Torricelli
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                                NAYS--1

       
     Thompson
       

                             NOT VOTING--3

     Inouye
     McCain
     Mikulski
  The amendment (No. 2874), as modified, was agreed to.


                       vote on amendment no. 2873

  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Voinovich). The question is on agreeing to 
amendment No. 2873. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will 
call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain) is 
necessarily absent.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Inouye) is 
necessarily absent.
  The result was announced--yeas 49, nays 48, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 27 Leg.]

                                YEAS--49

     Abraham
     Akaka
     Ashcroft
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Bryan
     Byrd
     Chafee, L.
     Cleland
     Conrad
     Daschle
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Graham
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Mikulski
     Moynihan
     Murray
     Reed
     Reid
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Torricelli
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                                NAYS--49

     Allard
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Campbell
     Cochran
     Collins
     Coverdell
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Domenici
     Enzi
     Frist
     Gorton
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Jeffords
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Voinovich
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Inouye
     McCain
       
  The amendment (No. 2873) was announced as agreed to.
  Mrs. BOXER. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 2875

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are 2 minutes of debate on the Bingaman 
amendment, equally divided.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I desire to speak for 1 minute on the 
Bingaman-Kennedy amendment.
  This amendment Senator Bingaman and I offer is a very simple 
amendment. It basically takes the amount that is being appropriated, 
identified here under the Coverdell amendment, and rather than using it 
in creating the Coverdell approach on the education, it uses it to help 
and assist the Pell grants. It effectively increases the Pell grant by 
some $250. The Pell grants, then, would be available to those who are 
eligible under the Pell Grant Program.
  It seems to me that program is targeted toward well-qualified, needy 
students attempting to continue their education. I think that is a 
preferable way of allocating the resources that are included in the 
Coverdell amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I would like to clarify the results of the 
last vote so there will be no misunderstanding. I have the impression 
that the vote was defeated.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair announced that the amendment was 
agreed to.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I believe that announcement may have been 
incorrect.
  Mr. DASCHLE. We already voted to reconsider and to lay it on the 
table.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, what would be the rule when an incorrect 
count was announced by the Chair?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. I say to the distinguished majority leader, we 
will consult with the Parliamentarian.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader has the floor.
  Mr. LOTT. I didn't get a clarification on the rule. I believe a 
simple clerical error--perhaps there is no precedent for that. If that 
is the case, then I think it would be appropriate to correct that or 
reconsider the vote.
  Mr. DASCHLE addressed the chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader has the floor.
  Mr. LOTT. I yield to the distinguished minority leader.
  Mr. DASCHLE. This appears to be an understandable clerical error, and 
I don't think we ought to challenge the calculation or the ultimate 
outcome of

[[Page 2000]]

that particular vote, but under the rules, I think the author of the 
amendment might have been entitled to another vote under consideration, 
and I suggest that as a way to resolve the matter.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, we have been pushing to try to get the votes 
completed in 10 minutes, and it does put additional pressure on the 
staff to tabulate the results. I think that contributed to the clerical 
error. I, therefore, move that the previous vote be reconsidered.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, to make things more orderly, will Senators 
sit in their seats. We have a series of votes. It is impossible for the 
staff to do its job. People are up there talking to them, asking them 
to repeat votes. Could we ask that everyone sit in their seats as they 
are supposed to do and vote from their seats.
  Mr. LOTT. That is an important point, Mr. President.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Presiding Officer is advised by the 
Parliamentarian that under the precedent of the Senate, when a clerical 
error has occurred, it is the duty of the Chair to announce the correct 
vote.
  The correct vote having been presented to the Chair, it is now 
announced there are 49 yeas, 49 nays, and the amendment is not agreed 
to.
  Mrs. BOXER. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I ask consent the motion to reconsider be 
deemed to have been tabled and the vote now occur on the Boxer 
amendment, which would be the same vote that occurred earlier. That 
way, we will have a definite clarification of what the vote was and is.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                       Vote On Amendment No. 2873

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
2873. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. Nickles. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain) is 
necessarily absent.
  Mr. Reid. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Inouye) is 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
who desire to vote?
  The result was announced, yeas 49, nays 49, as follows:
  The result was announced--yeas 49, nays 49, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 28 Leg.]

                                YEAS--49

     Abraham
     Akaka
     Ashcroft
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Bryan
     Byrd
     Chafee, L.
     Cleland
     Conrad
     Daschle
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Graham
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Mikulski
     Moynihan
     Murray
     Reed
     Reid
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Torricelli
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                                NAYS--49

     Allard
     Bennett
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Campbell
     Cochran
     Collins
     Coverdell
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Domenici
     Enzi
     Frist
     Gorton
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Jeffords
     Kyl
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Voinovich
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Inouye
     McCain
       
  The amendment (No. 2873) was rejected.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. COVERDELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.


                           Amendment No. 2875

  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I believe we are on Bingaman amendment 
No. 2875. He has already used his minute. Senator Kennedy did.
  I reiterate that earlier today, I had a chart showing what the 
Republican majority has done for Pell grants, and it is straight up.
  The second thing I want to point out is this is the fifth time the 
other side of the aisle has tried to make moot the underlying premise 
of this bill we have been debating now for 2 weeks, the education 
savings account. It blows away 14 million families, it blows away 20 
million children, and it blows away $12 billion that would be 
volunteered to help education in every quadrant, from kindergarten to 
college. As with all these other amendments, its objective is to 
destroy the education savings account for millions of American 
families. I rise in opposition to the amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator's time has expired.
  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, the pending amendment No. 2875 offered 
by the Senator from New Mexico and, I believe, the Senator from 
Massachusetts increases mandatory spending by $1.2 billion. If adopted, 
it will cause the underlying bill to exceed the committee's section 
302(a) allocation. Therefore, I raise a point of order against the 
amendment pursuant to section 302(f) of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. President, I move to waive the relevant section of 
the Budget Act and ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The question is on agreeing to the motion to waive the Budget Act in 
relation to amendment No. 2875. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain), 
is necesarily absent.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Inouye), is 
necesarily absent.
  The yeas and nays resulted--yeas 41, nays 57, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 29 Leg.]

                                YEAS--41

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Bryan
     Chafee, L.
     Cleland
     Collins
     Conrad
     Daschle
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Graham
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lincoln
     Mikulski
     Moynihan
     Murray
     Reed
     Reid
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                                NAYS--57

     Abraham
     Allard
     Ashcroft
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bond
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Cochran
     Coverdell
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Domenici
     Enzi
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Gorton
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Jeffords
     Kyl
     Lieberman
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Torricelli
     Voinovich
     Warner

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Inouye
     McCain
       
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Ashcroft). On this vote, the yeas are 41, 
the nays are 57. Three-fifths of the Senators duly chosen and sworn not 
having voted in the affirmative, the motion is rejected. The point of 
order is sustained and the amendment falls.


                           Amendment No. 2878

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are now 2 minutes, equally divided, on 
the Wellstone amendment.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, the Sessions-Feinstein amendment says 
even if States decide, given the evidence, that retention and holding 
kids

[[Page 2001]]

back does not work, States would have to do that. The Federal 
Government tells the States what to do and will cut off funds if they 
don't do it.
  My amendment makes a difference. It says at least let's make sure 
every child has an opportunity to do well and to achieve on these 
tests, that there are certified teachers, that there is English as a 
second language, that there is high-quality educational materials, and 
that we provide support for kids.
  If we do not do this, in the name of being tough, the only thing we 
are doing is punishing kids. Let's at least make the commitment that 
every child has the same opportunity to do well.
  I am going to send to each colleague an NAACP Legal Defense and 
Educational Fund letter which brings together all the evidence and 
makes this compelling argument.
  I hope my colleagues will vote for this equal opportunity to learn 
amendment.
  Mr. SESSIONS addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Alabama is recognized.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. President, the time has come to end social 
promotion. The Feinstein-Sessions amendment does that. It does it in a 
way that allows the States to set the standards they believe are 
appropriate for each level of achievement.
  We are pouring more and more money every year into education. If we 
care about those children, if we really are concerned about children, 
we will find out if they are meeting at least minimum academic 
standards. If they are not, we will be intervening, in a failing 
system, and will force the system to deal with them and help them 
through the process. It gives the States complete freedom to set these 
standards.
  President Clinton supported this in the State of the Union message. 
The people of this country overwhelmingly support it. Over 10 States 
have already gone to it. My State of Alabama is in the process of going 
to it. The Republican Party has favored it. Senators Feinstein, 
Lieberman and Byrd are cosponsors of this amendment. It is time for us 
to pass it.
  But we must not pass the Wellstone amendment. It will eliminate the 
ability to make this system work effectively.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
2878. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the 
roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain) is 
necessarily absent.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Inouye) is 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 29, nays 69, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 30 Leg.]

                                YEAS--29

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Conrad
     Daschle
     Dorgan
     Feingold
     Graham
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Mikulski
     Moynihan
     Murray
     Reed
     Reid
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Torricelli
     Wellstone

                                NAYS--69

     Abraham
     Allard
     Ashcroft
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Bond
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bryan
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee, L.
     Cleland
     Cochran
     Collins
     Coverdell
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Enzi
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Gorton
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Jeffords
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Roth
     Santorum
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Voinovich
     Warner
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Inouye
     McCain
       
  The amendment (No. 2878) was rejected.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote and to lay 
that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 2876

  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, are we ready for debate time on the next 
amendment?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. I believe we are. There is now 1 minute to a 
side on Senator Feinstein's amendment.
  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, I think it has been pretty clear, at 
least to me and certainly to the State of California, the city of 
Chicago, the city of Los Angeles, the city of San Diego, and other 
cities around this country, that either an implicit or explicit policy 
or practice of promoting children when they are failing or when they 
don't even show up in school is probably the leading cause for many of 
us for the decline of quality public education across this great 
country.
  It isn't politically correct to say we will no longer permit social 
promotion, but it can make a huge difference in where this Nation goes. 
This amendment is very carefully crafted to say that Federal education 
dollars will not be available to a jurisdiction if the State does not 
have a policy to prohibit the practice of social promotion. If we leave 
the details to the State and local communities, it does not tell them 
how, when, or where to do it. It simply says that Federal moneys are 
contingent upon the abolition of that practice. The fact is that the 
States are moving in this direction. The fact is that there is still no 
accountable standards.
  I wish to stress that it does allow for remedial education; it does 
allow for Federal dollars to be used for remedial education.
  I thank the Chair.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, if colleagues will listen for a second, 
I have two points. First of all, the evidence is overwhelming. I went 
over evidence this afternoon. There was no rebuttal. Holding kids back 
doesn't work. That is not the real point. If your State decides that it 
doesn't want to hold kids back, this amendment says it doesn't make any 
difference; the Federal Government is going to cut off Federal funding. 
We are telling States what to do, to hold kids back no matter what you 
decide or we will cut Federal funding.
  That is wrong. I hope there will be an overwhelming vote against this 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment 
of the Senator from California.
  The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain), 
is necessarily absent.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Inouye), is 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 30, nays 68, as follows:--

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 31 Leg.]

                                YEAS--30

     Baucus
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Bryan
     Byrd
     Cleland
     Coverdell
     Daschle
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Hagel
     Hutchinson
     Kohl
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     McConnell
     Moynihan
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Torricelli
     Warner
     Wyden

                                NAYS--68

     Abraham
     Akaka
     Allard
     Ashcroft
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Campbell
     Chafee, L.
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Domenici
     Edwards
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Gorton
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hollings
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Mack
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Nickles
     Reed
     Reid
     Roberts
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter

[[Page 2002]]


     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Voinovich
     Wellstone

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Inouye
     McCain
       
  The amendment (No. 2876) was rejected.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. COVERDELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. REID. Mr. President, we have remaining four votes counting final 
passage. Senator Kerry and Senator Schumer have requested, through me, 
to ask unanimous consent they be allowed to speak for their amendments 
for up to 1 minute at the present time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Massachusetts is recognized.


                      Amendment No. 2866 Withdrawn

  Mr. KERRY. Mr. President, the amendment I have offered is a serious 
effort to try to attract qualified teachers in an era when the private 
sector is making it nearly impossible to draw people out of college and 
teaching because of the salaries. We really need a special incentive.
  We have already created an incentive. We have a $5,000 paydown on 
loans. It is not enough to attract people.
  I have offered an amendment that would raise the incentive and 
provide, in essence, a GI bill for teachers. I think it is worthwhile. 
I will not ask my colleagues to vote on it tonight because we are on 
automatic pilot. I think it is an idea that deserves better 
consideration than it will receive under that kind of approach. I don't 
want it prejudiced in the future by a vote that is on automatic pilot.
  I ask unanimous consent to withdraw the amendment with hopes we get 
the ESEA on the floor and we will have an opportunity to consider this 
in a better, bipartisan, and perhaps more thoughtful mode.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment (No. 2866) was withdrawn.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York is recognized.


                      Amendment No. 2868 Withdrawn

  Mr. SCHUMER. Mr. President, I am going to withdraw this amendment in 
the interest of time. It is a very simple amendment. We have a real 
shortage in America of certified teachers. I was visiting with the 
Community Bankers of North Carolina looking for a few crabcakes. One of 
the fellows came over and asked why we would have a teacher who was not 
certified. The answer is very simple. Because many school districts--
particularly poor, inner-city districts and rural districts--have a 
choice: Uncertified teacher or no teacher, because there are not enough 
qualified teachers, given salary levels, working conditions, et cetera, 
who will go into the classroom.
  This amendment helps certify teachers. We would pay 75 percent of the 
cost of training them. It is $50 million a year. It is a very good 
amendment to help raise the quality of teachers. I have always believed 
we should not lower the bar but help people get over it. That is what 
this amendment does. I hope my colleagues will support it at some 
point.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the amendment is withdrawn.
  The amendment (No. 2868) was withdrawn.


                           Amendment No. 2879

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are now 2 minutes to be equally divided 
on the Durbin amendment.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, the headlines in the morning paper tell 
the story: America is facing a national gun crisis. Firearms are easy 
to come by for 6-year-olds and psychotics.
  The violence is not confined to just the main streets. It is in our 
homes, our fast-food restaurants, and in our schools.
  This amendment gives to school districts across America an 
opportunity to apply for help from the Department of Education for 
grants so they can educate the children in the school, and their 
parents, about how dangerous guns can be and how they should be stored 
safely.
  It provides money for public service announcements so we can try to 
reduce the gun violence we read about, sadly, every single day. We 
know, as sure as we are here this evening, there will be another story 
in the newspaper in the not-too-distant future of more gun violence in 
schools. With the Durbin amendment, we at least start to move forward 
toward reducing that violence by helping schools.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia.
  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, the Senator from Illinois and I have 
been discussing this amendment during the course of the day. We would 
have voiced it, but the Senator from Illinois, as is his right, asked 
for a rollcall.
  My intention is to support the amendment. I do not think it is 
inconsistent with beliefs on my side of the aisle.
  I yield back whatever time remains.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
2879. The yeas and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the 
roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain) is 
necessarily absent.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Inouye) is 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 91, nays 7, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 32 Leg.]

                                YEAS--91

     Abraham
     Akaka
     Allard
     Ashcroft
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bingaman
     Bond
     Boxer
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bryan
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Chafee, L.
     Cleland
     Cochran
     Collins
     Conrad
     Coverdell
     Craig
     Crapo
     Daschle
     DeWine
     Dodd
     Domenici
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Enzi
     Feingold
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Gorton
     Graham
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Hagel
     Harkin
     Hatch
     Hollings
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerrey
     Kerry
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lieberman
     Lincoln
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McConnell
     Mikulski
     Moynihan
     Murkowski
     Murray
     Reed
     Reid
     Robb
     Roberts
     Rockefeller
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thurmond
     Torricelli
     Warner
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                                NAYS--7

     Gregg
     Helms
     Inhofe
     Nickles
     Smith (NH)
     Thompson
     Voinovich

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Inouye
     McCain
       
  The amendment (No. 2879) was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading and was read 
the third time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. There are 2 minutes equally divided. May we 
have order in the Chamber. There are 2 minutes equally divided.
  The majority leader is recognized.
  Mr. LOTT. Has the motion to reconsider been tabled?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. No.
  Mr. LOTT. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. COVERDELL. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  Mr. ASHCROFT. Mr. President, I strongly support and urge Congress to 
pass and President Clinton to sign the Affordable Education Act now 
pending before the Senate. I am pleased to be a cosponsor of this 
legislation.
  Children presently are 25 percent of our population and 100 percent 
of the future. It is my fundamental belief that Congress should invest 
in the future by improving educational opportunities for students. This 
bill is part of a comprehensive strategy to give parents and local 
schools the resources needed to make the 21st century, the

[[Page 2003]]

era in which educational excellence for all students is achieved.
  For the past three years, Congress has passed legislation that 
provides tax incentives to help parents pay for the education of their 
children. But President Clinton has twice vetoed legislation that 
provided these incentives. Parents across America hope and trust that 
this time these tax incentives will be enacted into law.
  A major feature of this bill is that it creates Educational Savings 
Accounts for K through 12 expenses. These ESAs allow parents to 
contribute up to $2,000 annually to an Educational Savings Account. The 
build-up of earnings within the account is tax-free if used for 
educational expenses, such as tuition, fees, tutoring, special needs 
services, books, computers, etc. The premise behind ESAs is that 
parents should have greater control over the education of their 
children. After all, who is in a better position to know what each 
child needs--a bureaucratic Washington government or the parents and 
teachers who see that child every day?
  This bill does more than just create Educational Savings Accounts. 
Included in this bill are other provisions that I have either supported 
or co-sponsored that:
  Provide tax incentives to help pay for college tuition;
  Provide tax exclusions for education assistance programs provided by 
employers;
  Revise the tax treatment of qualified state tuition programs to 
exclude from gross income any distributions used for higher education 
expenses;
  Allow a tax deduction of up to $2,500 per year of interest on 
education loans;
  Allow a limited tax credit for the donation of computers to schools, 
and extends from two to three years the age of computers that may be 
donated to schools; and
  Reduce the complexity of the arbitrage rules that currently govern 
the issuance of school bonds.
  This bill provides more than $4.3 billion of education tax incentives 
for the next five years, and it gives more educational control to 
parents. Parents will be able to save more for the future education of 
their children.
  This bill is just one part of an overall strategy to increase 
educational resources. Over the past five years Congress has increased 
overall educational spending by 40 percent, and Congress last year 
approved a budget that projects yet another 36 percent increase over 
the next four years. In the next few weeks Congress will take up 
legislation to reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. 
I will be offering amendments to that bill that will:
  Channel federal aid in failing school districts to teaching the 
academic basics in order to raise student achievement levels;
  Provide funds for failing school districts to use in attracting and 
retaining highly qualified teachers; and
  Double the amount of federal aid for college costs for high achieving 
students in failing school districts.
  For now, however, Congress should take the first step in expressing 
its commitment to improving education by passing the pending Affordable 
Education Act. I urge Senators to support this legislation.
  Mr. L. CHAFEE. Mr. President, this week the Senate has debated 
legislation which is designed, in part, to encourage families to invest 
in tax exempt savings accounts. Funds from these ``education savings 
accounts'' could be used for a variety of activities related to the 
education of children, including for tuition and fees at private and 
religious schools. I opposed this bill because I do not believe that 
the federal government should divert funds, in this case more than 2 
billion dollars, to private and parochial education.
  Such a move would be a fundamental change in the federal role in 
education, a change I believe is misguided. Ninety percent of American 
children attend public schools. Rather than divert federal dollars to 
private and parochial schools, I believe the federal government has a 
responsibility to assist states and local school districts work to 
improve education for all children, especially children in poverty and 
children with disabilities.
  During this debate, a variety of amendments were offered. Senator 
Dodd proposed an amendment that would eliminate the proposed 
``education saving accounts'' and target its funds to increasing 
federal funding for special education. I commend my Republican 
colleagues for increasing IDEA--Individuals with Disabilities Education 
Act--funding in fiscal year 2000 by 25 percent over fiscal year 1998 
and 13 percent over fiscal year 1999. Nevertheless, the federal 
commitment to special education falls far short of what local districts 
need.
  Senator Robb offered an amendment that would have made the funds 
available for school construction bonds. I agree wholeheartedly with 
Senator Robb about the need to assist states and local school districts 
as they attempt to repair, modernize, and construct school facilities. 
However, I believe that there is a far better way to accomplish this 
goal. At the end of the last session, Senator Snowe introduced S.1992, 
the Building, Renovating, and Constructing Kids' Schools, BRICKS, Act. 
BRICKS would provide states with low interest loans to help defray the 
enormous costs associated with modernizing school facilities. I urge my 
colleagues to look closely at Senator Snowe's excellent proposal.
  Finally, there have been a number of worthwhile amendments designed 
to improve public education. Ironically, as the Senate has been 
debating the Affordable Education Act, the Health, Education, Labor, 
and Pensions Committee has been attempting to mark-up legislation to 
reauthorize the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.
  I voted against many of these amendments simply because I believe 
they should be considered in the context of the ESEA rather than in a 
piecemeal fashion on a bill the President is certain to veto.
  Improving and supporting education is the issue of greatest interest 
to most Americans. I look forward to working with Chairman Jeffords on 
a strong ESEA reauthorization bill.
  Mr. LEVIN. Mr. President, I will vote against the so-called 
Affordable Education Act, S. 1134, because it is not a wise use of 
Federal dollars. It does not address our national education priorities. 
And, it will not help those who are most in need.
  I would like to take a moment to talk about exactly who will benefit 
from this IRA expansion for elementary and secondary education 
expenses. According to the U.S. Department of the Treasury, 70 percent 
of the proposed IRA tax benefit would go to the top 20 percent of all 
taxpayers. These higher income families, many of whom already send 
their children to private schools, would gain most of the benefits. 
Families unable to save, including most families earning less than 
$55,000 a year, would receive very little, if any benefit at all.
  Additionally, this IRA tax benefit would be minimal. According to the 
Joint Committee on Taxation, the average annual benefit for families 
with children attending private schools would be limited to 
approximately $37; and for families with children in public schools, 
the average annual benefit would be $7.
  Mr. President, 90 percent of the children in America attend public 
schools. Instead of investing in proven initiatives to raise academic 
standards for all children, the bill before the Senate emphasizes the 
wrong priority. It fails to reduce class size, enhance teacher training 
in technology, modernize school buildings, expand after-school programs 
or improve special education.
  According to the National Council on Education Statistics, nearly 53 
million children are currently enrolled in public schools and the 
number is expected to increase to 54.3 million by 2008. It is estimated 
that approximately 2,400 new school facilities will be needed to 
accommodate this increase. As is well documented, the condition of 
school facilities and the student-teacher ratio are linked to student 
achievement. Therefore, it is clear where our federal education 
resources should be directed.
  We must not lose sight of the fact that school modernization is a 
critical component to the success of our school

[[Page 2004]]

children. It simply must be one of our national educational priorities. 
Local school communities cannot shoulder all of the costs associated 
with school building modernization and technology infrastructure 
improvements.
  Young people today are in the midst of a technology explosion that 
has opened up limitless possibilities in the classroom. In order for 
students to tap into this potential and be prepared for the 21st 
century, they must learn how to use new technologies. But all too 
often, teachers are expected to incorporate technology into their 
instruction without being given the training to do so.
  Too often students are left to teach teachers in the rapidly 
expanding area of technology. It is not enough for a teacher to be able 
to email, they must use this education technology to advance their 
curriculum and guide their students along the information highway. Just 
two years ago, it was reported that a mere 10 percent of new teachers 
reported that they felt prepared to use technology in their classrooms, 
while only 13 percent of all public schools reported that technology-
related training for teachers was mandated by the school, district, or 
teacher certification agencies. Currently, only 18 states require pre-
service technology training. I am disappointed that the legislation 
before us does not adequately address the large-scale needs of our 
teachers in the use of technology in the classroom.
  In my own state of Michigan I often talk with teachers when I visit 
schools and I find them straight-forward about what they don't know and 
eager to develop new technology skills. In fact, the only reason that 
we are not further behind in this area is that teachers have used their 
own time and often their own money to learn the technology skills to 
better teach their courses.
  Almost 2 years ago, I brought together about 400 leaders in 
education, business, philanthropy and government for a Michigan summit 
meeting focusing on the need for a greater commitment to professional 
development in technology. My message at that gathering and my message 
now is that we've got to match our teacher's commitment to our children 
with our own commitment to their professional development in the use of 
technology in classroom instruction. I am currently involved with 
several initiatives that are an attempt to accomplish this.
  Mr. President, for all these reasons, I cannot support this 
legislation.
  Mr. ABRAHAM. Mr. President, today I voted for both the Coverdell and 
Boxer sense of the Senate amendments relating to school safety. I voted 
for both amendments because I believe that Congress can and should 
enact legislation to provide for safer schools and a secure learning 
environment. The language of Senator Boxer's Sense of the Senate stated 
that ``Congress shall make schools safe for learning by implementing 
policies that will reduce the threat of gun violence in schools''; I 
rise now to briefly explain a few of the wholly-attainable measures 
that I believe would truly make a difference.
  During the Juvenile Justice debate I offered a commonsense amendment 
that would allow local school districts to access existing funds 
available under the Safe and Drug Free Schools Act to conduct locker 
searches for guns, explosives, other weapons, or drugs. Mr. President, 
no one involved opposes cleansing our schools of these elements, other 
than those criminals who possess them; and to those few, I have no 
sympathy for any inconvenience these searches may cause. I am pleased 
that my colleagues supported my amendment, which was accepted by voice 
vote.
  I also suggest that Congress should build upon a current tax 
deduction and reward businesses that donate school safety devices to K-
12 schools. Qualified security equipment and technologies should 
include metal detectors, electronic locks and surveillance cameras.
  Along with these security improvements, I believe it is important to 
provide training for school personnel and parents on how to recognize a 
troubled young person before tragedy strikes. And in the event of an 
attack, our school officials, security personnel, parents and 
communities must be trained for emergency preparedness and crisis 
response.
  In that vein, I argue to my colleagues that we should allow ESEA 
funding available under the Safe & Drug Free Schools and Communities 
program and the Innovative Education Program to be used for innovative 
approaches to reducing violence in schools and improving the classroom 
environment. Among other uses of such funding could be the testing of 
students for illegal drug use, at the request or consent of a parent or 
legal guardian; comprehensive school security assessments; purchase of 
school security equipment and technologies; implementation of a school 
uniform policy; and collaborative efforts with groups demonstrating 
expertise in providing research-based violence prevention and 
intervention programs.
  But the most important quality of these initiatives is that they 
would be initiated at the local level by those with the most knowledge 
of the community, not by some nameless Washington bureaucrat wielding a 
``one-size-fits-all'' solution.
  Finally, I was pleased to have the opportunity to vote for Senator 
Durbin's amendment, which harkens back to a day when this country 
discussed issues of responsibility and society in a constructive 
manner, not in one based in fear or fantasy. Without question, we 
should educate our young people on right and wrong, and we must 
encourage constructive adult involvement in the lives of our young 
people, not only by parents and teachers, but also by community-based 
organizations, faith-based organizations, and local law enforcement 
personnel. Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  Mr. LOTT. Briefly, for the information of all Senators with regard to 
the schedule for the balance of the week and the first of next week, in 
just a moment we will have the final 2 minutes, equally divided, to 
make comments before final passage. That will be it for the night and 
for the week. I commend Senator Reid, Senator Coverdell, and others for 
the good work they have done in getting us to this point.
  Because we have been able to finish all the amendments and go to 
final passage, we will not be in session tomorrow. We will be in 
session on Monday and Tuesday, but the next recorded vote will not 
occur until approximately 5 o'clock Tuesday afternoon because of the 13 
primaries that are occurring across the country between the two 
parties. We will be in session Tuesday. We will be in session on 
Wednesday and Thursday with votes likely into the night, and we may 
have votes on Friday. So do not be scheduling departure on Thursday 
night. We have to finish a couple of very important issues next week 
and have some votes on the Executive Calendar.
  I thank my colleagues, and I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Georgia is recognized.
  Mr. COVERDELL. I ask for the yeas and nays on final passage.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, everybody has heard just about 
everything they need to on this measure. I thank my colleagues for 
their courtesy and comity. It has been somewhat of a long journey, and 
I am glad we have finally arrived at final passage. The legislation 
does represent substance in education reform. I thank my comanager, 
Senator Reid of Nevada. I yield back whatever time remains.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Connecticut is recognized.
  Mr. DODD. Mr. President, I commend those involved in this bill. Those 
of us who oppose this bill think the first order of business is 
education, and yet we have done nothing about the quality of public 
education with this legislation. Fifty percent of the benefits of this 
bill go to private schools, yet 90 percent of the children in America 
go to a public school.
  This bill does nothing about class size, nothing about the quantities 
of

[[Page 2005]]

teachers in our schools, nothing about trying to improve the safety of 
our schools in this country. We believe we need to do a far better job 
on improving the quality of public education. Unfortunately, this 
education bill does nothing to address those issues. For those reasons, 
we will oppose this legislation.
  Mr. President, I yield back the remainder of my time.
  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, I commend the able Senator from Georgia 
for the fine job in handling this bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is, Shall the bill pass? The yeas 
and nays have been ordered. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. NICKLES. I announce that the Senator from Arizona (Mr. McCain) is 
necessarily absent.
  Mr. REID. I announce that the Senator from Hawaii (Mr. Inouye) is 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 61, nays 37, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 33 Leg.]

                                YEAS--61

     Abraham
     Allard
     Ashcroft
     Bennett
     Biden
     Bond
     Breaux
     Brownback
     Bunning
     Burns
     Byrd
     Campbell
     Cleland
     Cochran
     Collins
     Coverdell
     Craig
     Crapo
     DeWine
     Domenici
     Enzi
     Feinstein
     Fitzgerald
     Frist
     Gorton
     Gramm
     Grams
     Grassley
     Gregg
     Hagel
     Hatch
     Helms
     Hutchinson
     Hutchison
     Inhofe
     Kerrey
     Kohl
     Kyl
     Lieberman
     Lott
     Lugar
     Mack
     McConnell
     Murkowski
     Nickles
     Roberts
     Roth
     Santorum
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Smith (NH)
     Smith (OR)
     Snowe
     Specter
     Stevens
     Thomas
     Thompson
     Thurmond
     Torricelli
     Voinovich
     Warner

                                NAYS--37

     Akaka
     Baucus
     Bayh
     Bingaman
     Boxer
     Bryan
     Chafee, L.
     Conrad
     Daschle
     Dodd
     Dorgan
     Durbin
     Edwards
     Feingold
     Graham
     Harkin
     Hollings
     Jeffords
     Johnson
     Kennedy
     Kerry
     Landrieu
     Lautenberg
     Leahy
     Levin
     Lincoln
     Mikulski
     Moynihan
     Murray
     Reed
     Reid
     Robb
     Rockefeller
     Sarbanes
     Schumer
     Wellstone
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--2

     Inouye
     McCain
       
  The bill (S. 1134), as amended, was passed, as follows:

                                S. 1134

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; AMENDMENT OF 1986 CODE; TABLE OF 
                   CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Affordable 
     Education Act of 2000''.
       (b) Amendment of 1986 Code.--Except as otherwise expressly 
     provided, whenever in this Act an amendment or repeal is 
     expressed in terms of an amendment to, or repeal of, a 
     section or other provision, the reference shall be considered 
     to be made to a section or other provision of the Internal 
     Revenue Code of 1986.
       (c) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; amendment of 1986 Code; table of contents.

                 TITLE I--EDUCATION SAVINGS INCENTIVES

Sec. 101. Modifications to education individual retirement accounts.
Sec. 102. Modifications to qualified tuition programs.

                    TITLE II--EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE

Sec. 201. Permanent extension of exclusion for employer-provided 
              educational assistance.
Sec. 202. Elimination of 60-month limit on student loan interest 
              deduction.
Sec. 203. Exclusion of certain amounts received under the National 
              Health Service Corps Scholarship Program and the F. 
              Edward Hebert Armed Forces Health Professions Scholarship 
              and Financial Assistance Program.
Sec. 204. 2-percent floor on miscellaneous itemized deductions not to 
              apply to qualified professional development expenses of 
              elementary and secondary school teachers.
Sec. 205. Credit to elementary and secondary school teachers who 
              provide classroom materials.
Sec. 206. Exclusion of national service educational awards.
Sec. 207. Elimination of marriage penalty in phaseout of education loan 
              interest deduction.

  TITLE III--LIBERALIZATION OF TAX-EXEMPT FINANCING RULES FOR PUBLIC 
                          SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION

Sec. 301. Additional increase in arbitrage rebate exception for 
              governmental bonds used to finance educational 
              facilities.
Sec. 302. Treatment of qualified public educational facility bonds as 
              exempt facility bonds.
Sec. 303. Federal guarantee of school construction bonds by Federal 
              Housing Finance Board.
Sec. 304. Disclosure of fire safety standards and measures with respect 
              to campus buildings.

                    TITLE IV--TRANSITION TO TEACHING

Sec. 401. Short title.
Sec. 402. Findings.
Sec. 403. Purpose.
Sec. 404. Program authorized.
Sec. 405. Application.
Sec. 406. Uses of funds and period of service.
Sec. 407. Equitable distribution.
Sec. 408. Definitions.

                   TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

Sec. 501. Expansion of deduction for computer donations to schools.
Sec. 502. Credit for computer donations to schools and senior centers.
Sec. 503. Report to Congress regarding extent and severity of child 
              poverty.
Sec. 504. Careers to classrooms.
Sec. 505. Pesticide application in schools.
Sec. 506. Sense of the Senate regarding a safe learning environment.
Sec. 507. Reduction in school violence.

                 TITLE I--EDUCATION SAVINGS INCENTIVES

     SEC. 101. MODIFICATIONS TO EDUCATION INDIVIDUAL RETIREMENT 
                   ACCOUNTS.

       (a) Maximum Annual Contributions.--
       (1) In general.--Section 530(b)(1)(A)(iii) (defining 
     education individual retirement account) is amended by 
     striking ``$500'' and inserting ``$2,000''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--Section 4973(e)(1)(A) is amended 
     by striking ``$500'' and inserting ``$2,000''.
       (3) Elimination of the marriage penalty in the reduction in 
     permitted contributions.--Section 530(c)(1) (relating to 
     reduction in permitted contributions based on adjusted gross 
     income) is amended--
       (A) by striking ``$150,000'' in subparagraph (A)(ii) and 
     inserting ``$190,000'', and
       (B) by striking ``$10,000'' in subparagraph (B) and 
     inserting ``$30,000''.
       (b) Tax-Free Expenditures for Elementary and Secondary 
     School Expenses.--
       (1) In general.--Section 530(b)(2) (defining qualified 
     higher education expenses) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(2) Qualified education expenses.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified education expenses' 
     means--
       ``(i) qualified higher education expenses (as defined in 
     section 529(e)(3)), and
       ``(ii) qualified elementary and secondary education 
     expenses (as defined in paragraph (4)).
       ``(B) Qualified state tuition programs.--Such term shall 
     include any contribution to a qualified State tuition program 
     (as defined in section 529(b)) on behalf of the designated 
     beneficiary (as defined in section 529(e)(1)); but there 
     shall be no increase in the investment in the contract for 
     purposes of applying section 72 by reason of any portion of 
     such contribution which is not includible in gross income by 
     reason of subsection (d)(2).''.
       (2) Qualified elementary and secondary education 
     expenses.--Section 530(b) (relating to definitions and 
     special rules) is amended by adding at the end the following 
     new paragraph:
       ``(4) Qualified elementary and secondary education 
     expenses.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified elementary and 
     secondary education expenses' means--
       ``(i) expenses for tuition, fees, academic tutoring, 
     special needs services, books, supplies, computer equipment 
     (including related software and services), and other 
     equipment which are incurred in connection with the 
     enrollment or attendance of the designated beneficiary of the 
     trust as an elementary or secondary school student at a 
     public, private, or religious school, and
       ``(ii) expenses for room and board, uniforms, 
     transportation, and supplementary items and services 
     (including extended day programs) which are required or 
     provided by a public, private, or religious school in 
     connection with such enrollment or attendance.
       ``(B) Special rule for homeschooling.--Such term shall 
     include expenses described in subparagraph (A)(i) in 
     connection with education provided by homeschooling if the 
     homeschool operates as a private school or a homeschool under 
     State law.
       ``(C) School.--The term `school' means any school which 
     provides elementary education or secondary education 
     (kindergarten through grade 12), as determined under State 
     law.''.
       (3) Conforming amendments.--Section 530 is amended--

[[Page 2006]]

       (A) by striking ``higher'' each place it appears in 
     subsections (b)(1) and (d)(2), and
       (B) by striking ``higher'' in the heading for subsection 
     (d)(2).
       (c) Waiver of Age Limitations for Children With Special 
     Needs.--Section 530(b)(1) (defining education individual 
     retirement account) is amended by adding at the end the 
     following flush sentence:

     ``The age limitations in subparagraphs (A)(ii) and (E) and 
     paragraphs (5) and (6) of subsection (d) shall not apply to 
     any designated beneficiary with special needs (as determined 
     under regulations prescribed by the Secretary).''.
       (d) Entities Permitted To Contribute to Accounts.--Section 
     530(c)(1) (relating to reduction in permitted contributions 
     based on adjusted gross income) is amended by striking ``The 
     maximum amount which a contributor'' and inserting ``In the 
     case of a contributor who is an individual, the maximum 
     amount the contributor''.
       (e) Time When Contributions Deemed Made.--
       (1) In general.--Section 530(b) (relating to definitions 
     and special rules), as amended by subsection (b)(2), is 
     amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(5) Time when contributions deemed made.--An individual 
     shall be deemed to have made a contribution to an education 
     individual retirement account on the last day of the 
     preceding taxable year if the contribution is made on account 
     of such taxable year and is made not later than the time 
     prescribed by law for filing the return for such taxable year 
     (not including extensions thereof).''.
       (2) Extension of time to return excess contributions.--
     Subparagraph (C) of section 530(d)(4) (relating to additional 
     tax for distributions not used for educational expenses) is 
     amended--
       (A) by striking clause (i) and inserting the following new 
     clause:
       ``(i) such distribution is made before the 1st day of the 
     6th month of the taxable year following the taxable year, 
     and'', and
       (B) by striking ``due date of return'' in the heading and 
     inserting ``certain date''.
       (f) Coordination With Hope and Lifetime Learning Credits 
     and Qualified Tuition Programs.--
       (1) In general.--Section 530(d)(2)(C) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(C) Coordination with hope and lifetime learning credits 
     and qualified tuition programs.--For purposes of subparagraph 
     (A).
       ``(i) Credit coordination.--The total amount of qualified 
     higher education expenses with respect to an individual for 
     the taxable year shall be reduced--

       ``(I) as provided in section 25A(g)(2), and
       ``(II) by the amount of such expenses which were taken into 
     account in determining the credit allowed to the taxpayer or 
     any other person under section 25A.

       ``(ii) Coordination with qualified tuition programs.--If, 
     with respect to an individual for any taxable year--

       ``(I) the aggregate distributions during such year to which 
     subparagraph (A) and section 529(c)(3)(B) apply, exceed
       ``(II) the total amount of qualified higher education 
     expenses (after the application of clause (i)) for such year,

     the taxpayer shall allocate such expenses among such 
     distributions for purposes of determining the amount of the 
     exclusion under subparagraph (A) and section 529(c)(3)(B).''.
       (2) Conforming amendments.--
       (A) Subsection (e) of section 25A is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(e) Election Not To Have Section Apply.--A taxpayer may 
     elect not to have this section apply with respect to the 
     qualified tuition and related expenses of an individual for 
     any taxable year.''.
       (B) Section 135(d)(2)(A) is amended by striking 
     ``allowable'' and inserting ``allowed''.
       (C) Section 530(d)(2)(D) is amended--
       (i) by striking ``or credit'', and
       (ii) by striking ``credit or'' in the heading.
       (D) Section 4973(e)(1) is amended by adding ``and'' at the 
     end of subparagraph (A), by striking subparagraph (B), and by 
     redesignating subparagraph (C) as subparagraph (B).
       (g) Renaming Education Individual Retirement Accounts as 
     Education Savings Accounts.--
       (1) In general.--
       (A) Section 530 (as amended by the preceding provisions of 
     this section) is amended by striking ``education individual 
     retirement account'' each place it appears and inserting 
     ``education savings account''.
       (B) The heading for paragraph (1) of section 530(b) is 
     amended by striking ``Education individual retirement 
     account'' and inserting ``Education savings account''.
       (C) The heading for section 530 is amended to read as 
     follows:

     ``SEC. 530. EDUCATION SAVINGS ACCOUNTS.''.

       (D) The item in the table of contents for part VII of 
     subchapter F of chapter 1 relating to section 530 is amended 
     to read as follows:

``Sec. 530. Education savings accounts.''.

       (2) Conforming amendments.--
       (A) The following provisions are each amended by striking 
     ``education individual retirement'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``education savings'':
       (i) Section 25A(e)(2).
       (ii) Section 26(b)(2)(E).
       (iii) Section 72(e)(9).
       (iv) Section 135(c)(2)(C).
       (v) Subsections (a) and (e) of section 4973.
       (vi) Subsections (c) and (e) of section 4975.
       (vii) Section 6693(a)(2)(D).
       (B) The headings for each of the following provisions are 
     amended by striking ``education individual retirement 
     accounts'' each place it appears and inserting ``education 
     savings accounts''.
       (i) Section 72(e)(9).
       (ii) Section 135(c)(2)(C).
       (iii) Section 4973(e).
       (iv) Section 4975(c)(5).
       (h) Effective Dates.--
       (1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), the 
     amendments made by this section shall apply to taxable years 
     beginning after December 31, 2000.
       (2) Subsection (g).--The amendments made by subsection (g) 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 102. MODIFICATIONS TO QUALIFIED TUITION PROGRAMS.

       (a) Eligible Educational Institutions Permitted To Maintain 
     Qualified Tuition Programs.--
       (1) In general.--Section 529(b)(1) (defining qualified 
     State tuition program) is amended by inserting ``or by 1 or 
     more eligible educational institutions'' after ``maintained 
     by a State or agency or instrumentality thereof''.
       (2) Private qualified tuition programs limited to benefit 
     plans.--Clause (ii) of section 529(b)(1)(A) is amended by 
     inserting ``in the case of a program established and 
     maintained by a State or agency or instrumentality thereof,'' 
     before ``may make''.
       (3) Conforming amendments.--
       (A) Sections 72(e)(9), 135(c)(2)(C), 135(d)(1)(D), 529, 
     530(b)(2)(B), 4973(e), and 6693(a)(2)(C) are each amended by 
     striking ``qualified State tuition'' each place it appears 
     and inserting ``qualified tuition''.
       (B) The headings for sections 72(e)(9) and 135(c)(2)(C) are 
     each amended by striking ``qualified state tuition'' and 
     inserting ``qualified tuition''.
       (C) The headings for sections 529(b) and 530(b)(2)(B) are 
     each amended by striking ``Qualified state tuition'' and 
     inserting ``Qualified tuition''.
       (D) The heading for section 529 is amended by striking 
     ``state''.
       (E) The item relating to section 529 in the table of 
     sections for part VIII of subchapter F of chapter 1 is 
     amended by striking ``State''.
       (b) Exclusion From Gross Income of Education Distributions 
     From Qualified Tuition Programs.--
       (1) In general.--Section 529(c)(3)(B) (relating to 
     distributions) is amended to read as follows:
       ``(B) Distributions for qualified higher education 
     expenses.--For purposes of this paragraph--
       ``(i) In-kind distributions.--No amount shall be includible 
     in gross income under subparagraph (A) by reason of a 
     distribution which consists of providing a benefit to the 
     distributee which, if paid for by the distributee, would 
     constitute payment of a qualified higher education expense.
       ``(ii) Cash distributions.--In the case of distributions 
     not described in clause (i), if--

       ``(I) such distributions do not exceed the qualified higher 
     education expenses (reduced by expenses described in clause 
     (i)), no amount shall be includible in gross income, and
       ``(II) in any other case, the amount otherwise includible 
     in gross income shall be reduced by an amount which bears the 
     same ratio to such amount as such expenses bear to such 
     distributions.

       ``(iii) Exception for institutional programs.--In the case 
     of any taxable year beginning before January 1, 2004, clauses 
     (i) and (ii) shall not apply with respect to any distribution 
     during such taxable year under a qualified tuition program 
     established and maintained by 1 or more eligible educational 
     institutions.
       ``(iv) Treatment as distributions.--Any benefit furnished 
     to a designated beneficiary under a qualified tuition program 
     shall be treated as a distribution to the beneficiary for 
     purposes of this paragraph.
       ``(v) Coordination with hope and lifetime learning 
     credits.--The total amount of qualified higher education 
     expenses with respect to an individual for the taxable year 
     shall be reduced--

       ``(I) as provided in section 25A(g)(2), and
       ``(II) by the amount of such expenses which were taken into 
     account in determining the credit allowed to the taxpayer or 
     any other person under section 25A.

       ``(vi) Coordination with education savings accounts.--If, 
     with respect to an individual for any taxable year--

       ``(I) the aggregate distributions to which clauses (i) and 
     (ii) and section 530(d)(2)(A) apply, exceed
       ``(II) the total amount of qualified higher education 
     expenses otherwise taken into account under clauses (i) and 
     (ii) (after the application of clause (iv)) for such year,

     the taxpayer shall allocate such expenses among such 
     distributions for purposes of determining the amount of the 
     exclusion under clauses (i) and (ii) and section 
     530(d)(2)(A).''.
       (2) Conforming amendments.--

[[Page 2007]]

       (A) Section 135(d)(2)(B) is amended by striking ``section 
     530(d)(2)'' and inserting ``sections 529(c)(3)(B)(i) and 
     530(d)(2)''.
       (B) Section 221(e)(2)(A) is amended by inserting ``529,'' 
     after ``135,''.
       (c) Rollover to Different Program for Benefit of Same 
     Designated Beneficiary.--Section 529(c)(3)(C) (relating to 
     change in beneficiaries) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``transferred to the credit'' in clause (i) 
     and inserting ``transferred--

       ``(I) to another qualified tuition program for the benefit 
     of the designated beneficiary, or
       ``(II) to the credit'',

       (2) by adding at the end the following new clause:
       ``(iii) Limitation on certain rollovers.--Clause (i)(I) 
     shall only apply to the first 3 transfers with respect to a 
     designated beneficiary.'', and
       (3) by inserting ``or programs'' after ``beneficiaries'' in 
     the heading.
       (d) Member of Family Includes First Cousin.--Section 
     529(e)(2) (defining member of family) is amended by striking 
     ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (B), by striking the 
     period at the end of subparagraph (C) and by inserting ``; 
     and'', and by adding at the end the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(D) any first cousin of such beneficiary.''.
       (e) Definition of Qualified Higher Education Expenses.--
     Subparagraph (A) of section 529(e)(3) (relating to definition 
     of qualified higher education expenses) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified higher education 
     expenses' means--
       ``(i) tuition and fees required for the enrollment or 
     attendance of a designated beneficiary at an eligible 
     educational institution for courses of instruction of such 
     beneficiary at such institution, and
       ``(ii) expenses for books, supplies, and equipment which 
     are incurred in connection with such enrollment or 
     attendance, but not to exceed the allowance for books and 
     supplies included in the cost of attendance (as defined in 
     section 472 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     1087ll), as in effect on the date of the enactment of the 
     Affordable Education Act of 2000) as determined by the 
     eligible educational institution.''.
       (f) Effective Dates.--
       (1) In general.--The amendments made by this section shall 
     apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2000.
       (2) Qualified higher education expenses.--The amendments 
     made by subsection (e) shall apply to amounts paid for 
     courses beginning after December 31, 2000.

                    TITLE II--EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE

     SEC. 201. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF EXCLUSION FOR EMPLOYER-
                   PROVIDED EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE.

       (a) In General.--Section 127 (relating to exclusion for 
     educational assistance programs) is amended by striking 
     subsection (d).
       (b) Repeal of Limitation on Graduate Education.--
       (1) In general.--The last sentence of section 127(c)(1) is 
     amended by striking ``, and such term also does not include 
     any payment for, or the provision of any benefits with 
     respect to, any graduate level course of a kind normally 
     taken by an individual pursuing a program leading to a law, 
     business, medical, or other advanced academic or professional 
     degree''.
       (2) Effective date.--The amendment made by paragraph (1) 
     shall apply with respect to expenses relating to courses 
     beginning after December 31, 2000.

     SEC. 202. ELIMINATION OF 60-MONTH LIMIT ON STUDENT LOAN 
                   INTEREST DEDUCTION.

       (a) In General.--Section 221 (relating to interest on 
     education loans) is amended by striking subsection (d) and by 
     redesignating subsections (e), (f), and (g) as subsections 
     (d), (e), and (f), respectively.
       (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 6050S(e) is amended by 
     striking ``section 221(e)(1)'' and inserting ``section 
     221(d)(1)''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply with respect to any loan interest paid after 
     December 31, 2000.

     SEC. 203. EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN AMOUNTS RECEIVED UNDER THE 
                   NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE CORPS SCHOLARSHIP 
                   PROGRAM AND THE F. EDWARD HEBERT ARMED FORCES 
                   HEALTH PROFESSIONS SCHOLARSHIP AND FINANCIAL 
                   ASSISTANCE PROGRAM.

       (a) In General.--Section 117(c) (relating to the exclusion 
     from gross income amounts received as a qualified 
     scholarship) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Subsections (a)'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (2), 
     subsections (a)'', and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(2) Exceptions.--Paragraph (1) shall not apply to any 
     amount received by an individual under--
       ``(A) the National Health Service Corps Scholarship Program 
     under section 338A(g)(1)(A) of the Public Health Service Act, 
     or
       ``(B) the Armed Forces Health Professions Scholarship and 
     Financial Assistance program under subchapter I of chapter 
     105 of title 10, United States Code.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to amounts received in taxable years beginning 
     after December 31, 1993.

     SEC. 204. 2-PERCENT FLOOR ON MISCELLANEOUS ITEMIZED 
                   DEDUCTIONS NOT TO APPLY TO QUALIFIED 
                   PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT EXPENSES OF ELEMENTARY 
                   AND SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS.

       (a) In General.--Section 67(b) (defining miscellaneous 
     itemized deductions) is amended by striking ``and'' at the 
     end of paragraph (11), by striking the period at the end of 
     paragraph (12) and inserting ``, and'', and by adding at the 
     end the following new paragraph:
       ``(13) any deduction allowable for the qualified 
     professional development expenses paid or incurred by an 
     eligible teacher.''.
       (b) Definitions.--Section 67 (relating to 2-percent floor 
     on miscellaneous itemized deductions) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new subsection:
       ``(g) Qualified Professional Development Expenses of 
     Eligible Teachers.--For purposes of subsection (b)(13)--
       ``(1) Qualified professional development expenses.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified professional 
     development expenses' means expenses--
       ``(i) for tuition, fees, books, supplies, equipment, and 
     transportation required for the enrollment or attendance of 
     an individual in a qualified course of instruction, and
       ``(ii) with respect to which a deduction is allowable under 
     section 162 (determined without regard to this section).
       ``(B) Qualified course of instruction.--The term `qualified 
     course of instruction' means a course of instruction which--
       ``(i) is--

       ``(I) directly related to the curriculum and academic 
     subjects in which an eligible teacher provides instruction, 
     or
       ``(II) designed to enhance the ability of an eligible 
     teacher to understand and use State standards for the 
     academic subjects in which such teacher provides instruction,

       ``(ii) may--

       ``(I) provide instruction in how to teach children with 
     different learning styles, particularly children with 
     disabilities and children with special learning needs 
     (including children who are gifted and talented), or
       ``(II) provide instruction in how best to discipline 
     children in the classroom and identify early and appropriate 
     interventions to help children described in subclause (I) to 
     learn,

       ``(iii) is tied to challenging State or local content 
     standards and student performance standards,
       ``(iv) is tied to strategies and programs that demonstrate 
     effectiveness in increasing student academic achievement and 
     student performance, or substantially increasing the 
     knowledge and teaching skills of an eligible teacher,
       ``(v) is of sufficient intensity and duration to have a 
     positive and lasting impact on the performance of an eligible 
     teacher in the classroom (which shall not include 1-day or 
     short-term workshops and conferences), except that this 
     clause shall not apply to an activity if such activity is 1 
     component described in a long-term comprehensive professional 
     development plan established by an eligible teacher and the 
     teacher's supervisor based upon an assessment of the needs of 
     the teacher, the students of the teacher, and the local 
     educational agency involved, and
       ``(vi) is part of a program of professional development 
     which is approved and certified by the appropriate local 
     educational agency as furthering the goals of the preceding 
     clauses.
       ``(C) Local educational agency.--The term `local 
     educational agency' has the meaning given such term by 
     section 14101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act 
     of 1965, as in effect on the date of the enactment of this 
     subsection.
       ``(2) Eligible teacher.--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `eligible teacher' means an 
     individual who is a kindergarten through grade 12 classroom 
     teacher in an elementary or secondary school.
       ``(B) Elementary or secondary school.--The terms 
     `elementary school' and `secondary school' have the meanings 
     given such terms by section 14101 of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8801), as so in 
     effect.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2000.

     SEC. 205. CREDIT TO ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS 
                   WHO PROVIDE CLASSROOM MATERIALS.

       (a) In General.--Subpart B of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     section:

     ``SEC. 30B. CREDIT TO ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOL 
                   TEACHERS WHO PROVIDE CLASSROOM MATERIALS.

       ``(a) Allowance of Credit.--In the case of an eligible 
     teacher, there shall be allowed as a credit against the tax 
     imposed by this chapter for such taxable year an amount equal 
     to the qualified elementary and secondary education expenses 
     which are paid or incurred by the taxpayer during such 
     taxable year.
       ``(b) Maximum Credit.--The credit allowed by subsection (a) 
     for any taxable year shall not exceed $100.

[[Page 2008]]

       ``(c) Definitions.--
       ``(1) Eligible teacher.--The term `eligible teacher' means 
     an individual who is a kindergarten through grade 12 
     classroom teacher, instructor, counselor, aide, or principal 
     in an elementary or secondary school on a full-time basis for 
     an academic year ending during a taxable year.
       ``(2) Qualified elementary and secondary education 
     expenses.--The term `qualified elementary and secondary 
     education expenses' means expenses for books, supplies (other 
     than nonathletic supplies for courses of instruction in 
     health or physical education), computer equipment (including 
     related software and services) and other equipment, and 
     supplementary materials used by an eligible teacher in the 
     classroom.
       ``(3) Elementary or secondary school.--The term `elementary 
     or secondary school' means any school which provides 
     elementary education or secondary education (through grade 
     12), as determined under State law.
       ``(d) Special Rules.--
       ``(1) Denial of double benefit.--No deduction shall be 
     allowed under this chapter for any expense for which credit 
     is allowed under this section.
       ``(2) Application with other credits.--The credit allowable 
     under subsection (a) for any taxable year shall not exceed 
     the excess (if any) of--
       ``(A) the regular tax for the taxable year, reduced by the 
     sum of the credits allowable under subpart A and the 
     preceding sections of this subpart, over
       ``(B) the tentative minimum tax for the taxable year.
       ``(e) Election To Have Credit Not Apply.--A taxpayer may 
     elect to have this section not apply for any taxable year.''.
       (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart 
     B of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by 
     adding at the end the following new item:

``Sec. 30B. Credit to elementary and secondary school teachers who 
              provide classroom materials.''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2000.

     SEC. 206. EXCLUSION OF NATIONAL SERVICE EDUCATIONAL AWARDS.

       (a) In General.--Section 117 (relating to qualified 
     scholarships) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Qualified National Service Educational Awards.--
       ``(1) In general.--Gross income for any taxable year shall 
     not include any qualified national service educational award.
       ``(2) Qualified national service educational award.--For 
     purposes of this subsection--
       ``(A) In general.--The term `qualified national service 
     educational award' means any amount received by an individual 
     in a taxable year as a national service educational award or 
     other amount under section 148 of the National and Community 
     Service Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12604) to the extent such 
     amount does not exceed the qualified tuition and related 
     expenses (as defined in subsection (b)(2)) of the individual 
     for such taxable year.
       ``(B) Limitation.--The total amount of the qualified 
     tuition and related expenses (as so defined) which may be 
     taken into account under subparagraph (A) with respect to an 
     individual for the taxable year shall be reduced (after the 
     application of the reduction provided in section 25A(g)(2)) 
     by the amount of such expenses which were taken into account 
     in determining the credit allowed to the taxpayer or any 
     other person under section 25A with respect to such 
     expenses.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section 
     shall apply to amounts received in taxable years beginning 
     after December 31, 1999.

     SEC. 207. ELIMINATION OF MARRIAGE PENALTY IN PHASEOUT OF 
                   EDUCATION LOAN INTEREST DEDUCTION.

       (a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 221(b)(2) 
     (relating to limitation based on modified adjusted gross 
     income) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``$60,000'' in clause (i)(II) and inserting 
     ``$80,000'', and
       (2) by inserting ``($30,000 in the case of a joint 
     return)'' after ``$15,000'' in clause (ii).
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 
     2000.

  TITLE III--LIBERALIZATION OF TAX-EXEMPT FINANCING RULES FOR PUBLIC 
                          SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION

     SEC. 301. ADDITIONAL INCREASE IN ARBITRAGE REBATE EXCEPTION 
                   FOR GOVERNMENTAL BONDS USED TO FINANCE 
                   EDUCATIONAL FACILITIES.

       (a) In General.--Section 148(f)(4)(D)(vii) (relating to 
     increase in exception for bonds financing public school 
     capital expenditures) is amended by striking ``$5,000,000'' 
     the second place it appears and inserting ``$10,000,000''.
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) 
     shall apply to obligations issued in calendar years beginning 
     after December 31, 2000.

     SEC. 302. TREATMENT OF QUALIFIED PUBLIC EDUCATIONAL FACILITY 
                   BONDS AS EXEMPT FACILITY BONDS.

       (a) Treatment as Exempt Facility Bond.--Subsection (a) of 
     section 142 (relating to exempt facility bond) is amended by 
     striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (11), by striking the 
     period at the end of paragraph (12) and inserting ``, or'', 
     and by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(13) qualified public educational facilities.''.
       (b) Qualified Public Educational Facilities.--Section 142 
     (relating to exempt facility bond) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new subsection:
       ``(k) Qualified Public Educational Facilities.--
       ``(1) In general.--For purposes of subsection (a)(13), the 
     term `qualified public educational facility' means any school 
     facility which is--
       ``(A) part of a public elementary school or a public 
     secondary school, and
       ``(B) owned by a private, for-profit corporation pursuant 
     to a public-private partnership agreement with a State or 
     local educational agency described in paragraph (2).
       ``(2) Public-private partnership agreement described.--A 
     public-private partnership agreement is described in this 
     paragraph if it is an agreement--
       ``(A) under which the corporation agrees--
       ``(i) to do 1 or more of the following: construct, 
     rehabilitate, refurbish, or equip a school facility, and
       ``(ii) at the end of the term of the agreement, to transfer 
     the school facility to such agency for no additional 
     consideration, and
       ``(B) the term of which does not exceed the term of the 
     issue to be used to provide the school facility.
       ``(3) School facility.--For purposes of this subsection, 
     the term `school facility' means--
       ``(A) school buildings,
       ``(B) functionally related and subordinate facilities and 
     land with respect to such buildings, including any stadium or 
     other facility primarily used for school events, and
       ``(C) any property, to which section 168 applies (or would 
     apply but for section 179), for use in the facility.
       ``(4) Public schools.--For purposes of this subsection, the 
     terms `elementary school' and `secondary school' have the 
     meanings given such terms by section 14101 of the Elementary 
     and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8801), as in 
     effect on the date of the enactment of this subsection.
       ``(5) Annual aggregate face amount of tax-exempt 
     financing.--
       ``(A) In general.--An issue shall not be treated as an 
     issue described in subsection (a)(13) if the aggregate face 
     amount of bonds issued by the State pursuant thereto (when 
     added to the aggregate face amount of bonds previously so 
     issued during the calendar year) exceeds an amount equal to 
     the greater of--
       ``(i) $10 multiplied by the State population, or
       ``(ii) $5,000,000.
       ``(B) Allocation rules.--
       ``(i) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this 
     subparagraph, the State may allocate the amount described in 
     subparagraph (A) for any calendar year in such manner as the 
     State determines appropriate.
       ``(ii) Rules for carryforward of unused limitation.--A 
     State may elect to carry forward an unused limitation for any 
     calendar year for 3 calendar years following the calendar 
     year in which the unused limitation arose under rules similar 
     to the rules of section 146(f), except that the only purpose 
     for which the carryforward may be elected is the issuance of 
     exempt facility bonds described in subsection (a)(13).''.
       (c) Exemption From General State Volume Caps.--Paragraph 
     (3) of section 146(g) (relating to exception for certain 
     bonds) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or (12)'' and inserting ``(12), or 
     (13)'', and
       (2) by striking ``and environmental enhancements of 
     hydroelectric generating facilities'' and inserting 
     ``environmental enhancements of hydroelectric generating 
     facilities, and qualified public educational facilities''.
       (d) Exemption From Limitation on Use for Land 
     Acquisition.--Section 147(h) (relating to certain rules not 
     to apply to mortgage revenue bonds, qualified student loan 
     bonds, and qualified 501(c)(3) bonds) is amended by adding at 
     the end the following new paragraph:
       ``(3) Exempt facility bonds for qualified public-private 
     schools.--Subsection (c) shall not apply to any exempt 
     facility bond issued as part of an issue described in section 
     142(a)(13) (relating to qualified public educational 
     facilities).''.
       (e) Conforming Amendment.--The heading for section 147(h) 
     is amended by striking ``Mortgage Revenue Bonds, Qualified 
     Student Loan Bonds, and Qualified 501(c)(3) Bonds'' and 
     inserting ``Certain Bonds''.
       (f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to bonds issued after December 31, 2000.

     SEC. 303. FEDERAL GUARANTEE OF SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION BONDS BY 
                   FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE BOARD.

       (a) In General.--Section 149(b)(3) (relating to exceptions) 
     is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     subparagraph:
       ``(E) Certain guaranteed school construction bonds.--Any 
     bond issued as part of an issue 95 percent or more of the net 
     proceeds of which are used for public school construction 
     shall not be treated as federally

[[Page 2009]]

     guaranteed for any calendar year by reason of any guarantee 
     by the Federal Housing Finance Board (through any Federal 
     Home Loan Bank) under the Federal Home Loan Bank Act (12 
     U.S.C. 1421 et seq.), as in effect on the date of the 
     enactment of this subparagraph, to the extent the face amount 
     of such bond, when added to the aggregate face amount of such 
     bonds previously so guaranteed for such year, does not exceed 
     $500,000,000.''.
       (b) Effective Date.--Subparagraph (E) of section 149(b)(3) 
     of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as added by the 
     amendment made by subsection (a), shall take effect upon the 
     enactment, after the date of the enactment of this Act, of 
     legislation expressly authorizing the Federal Housing Finance 
     Board to allocate authority to Federal Home Loan Banks to 
     guarantee any bond described in such subparagraph, but only 
     if such legislation makes specific reference to such 
     subparagraph.

     SEC. 304. DISCLOSURE OF FIRE SAFETY STANDARDS AND MEASURES 
                   WITH RESPECT TO CAMPUS BUILDINGS.

       (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``Campus 
     Fire Safety Right to Know Act''.
       (b) Amendment.--Section 485 of the Higher Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 1092) is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a)(1)--
       (A) by striking ``and'' at the end of subparagraph (N);
       (B) by striking the period at the end of subparagraph (O) 
     and inserting ``; and''; and
       (C) by adding at the end the following new subparagraph:
       ``(P) the fire safety report prepared by the institution 
     pursuant to subsection (h).''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following new subsection:
       ``(h) Disclosure of Fire Safety Standards and Measures.--
       ``(1) Fire safety reports required.--Each eligible 
     institution participating in any program under this title 
     shall, beginning in academic year 2001-2002, and each year 
     thereafter, prepare, publish, and distribute, through 
     appropriate publications or mailings, to all current students 
     and employees, and to any applicant for enrollment or 
     employment upon request, an annual fire safety report 
     containing at least the following information with respect to 
     the campus fire safety practices and standards of that 
     institution:
       ``(A) A statement that identifies each student housing 
     facility of the institution, and whether or not each such 
     facility is equipped with a fire sprinkler system or another 
     equally protective fire safety system.
       ``(B) Statistics concerning the occurrence on campus, 
     during the 2 preceding calendar years for which data are 
     available, of fires and false fire alarms.
       ``(C) For each such occurrence, a statement of the human 
     injuries or deaths and the structural damage caused by the 
     occurrence.
       ``(D) Information regarding fire alarms, smoke alarms, the 
     presence of adequate fire escape planning or protocols (as 
     defined in local fire codes), rules on portable electrical 
     appliances, smoking and open flames (such as candles), 
     regular mandatory supervised fire drills, and planned and 
     future improvement in fire safety.
       ``(2) Rule of construction.--Nothing in this subsection 
     shall be construed to authorize the Secretary to require 
     particular policies, procedures, or practices by institutions 
     of higher education with respect to fire safety.
       ``(3) Reports.--Each institution participating in any 
     program under this title shall make periodic reports to the 
     campus community on fires and false fire alarms that are 
     reported to local fire departments in a manner that will aid 
     in the prevention of similar occurrences.
       ``(4) Reports to secretary.--On an annual basis, each 
     institution participating in any program under this title 
     shall submit to the Secretary a copy of the statistics 
     required to be made available under paragraph (1)(B). The 
     Secretary shall--
       ``(A) review such statistics;
       ``(B) make copies of the statistics submitted to the 
     Secretary available to the public; and
       ``(C) in coordination with representatives of institutions 
     of higher education, identify exemplary fire safety policies, 
     procedures, and practices and disseminate information 
     concerning those policies, procedures, and practices that 
     have proven effective in the reduction of campus fires.
       ``(5) Definition of campus.--In this subsection the term 
     `campus' has the meaning provided in subsection (f)(6).''.
       (c) Report to Congress by Secretary of Education.--Not 
     later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, 
     the Secretary of Education shall prepare and submit to the 
     Congress a report containing--
       (1) an analysis of the current status of fire safety 
     systems in college and university facilities, including 
     sprinkler systems;
       (2) an analysis of the appropriate fire safety standards to 
     apply to these facilities, which the Secretary shall prepare 
     after consultation with such fire safety experts, 
     representatives of institutions of higher education, and 
     other Federal agencies as the Secretary, in the Secretary's 
     discretion, considers appropriate;
       (3) an estimate of the cost of bringing all nonconforming 
     dormitories and other campus buildings up to current new 
     building codes; and
       (4) recommendations from the Secretary concerning the best 
     means of meeting fire safety standards in all college and 
     university facilities, including recommendations for methods 
     to fund such cost.

                    TITLE IV--TRANSITION TO TEACHING

     SEC. 401. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Transition to Teaching 
     Act''.

     SEC. 402. FINDINGS.

       The Congress finds as follows:
       (1) School districts will need to hire more than 2,000,000 
     teachers in the next decade. The need for teachers in the 
     areas of mathematics, science, foreign languages, special 
     education, and bilingual education, and for those able to 
     teach in high-poverty school districts will be particularly 
     high. To meet this need, talented Americans of all ages 
     should be recruited to become successful, qualified teachers.
       (2) Nearly 28 percent of teachers of academic subjects have 
     neither an undergraduate major nor minor in their main 
     assignment fields. This problem is more acute in high-poverty 
     schools, where the out-of-field percentage is 39 percent.
       (3) The Third International Math and Science Study (TIMSS) 
     ranked United States high school seniors last among 16 
     countries in physics and next to last in mathematics. It is 
     also evident, mainly from the TIMSS data, that based on 
     academic scores, a stronger emphasis needs to be placed on 
     the academic preparation of our children in mathematics and 
     science.
       (4) One-fourth of high-poverty schools find it very 
     difficult to fill bilingual teaching positions, and nearly 
     half of public school teachers have students in their 
     classrooms for whom English is a second language.
       (5) Many career-changing professionals with strong content-
     area skills are interested in a teaching career, but need 
     assistance in getting the appropriate pedagogical training 
     and classroom experience.
       (6) The Troops to Teachers model has been highly successful 
     in linking high-quality teachers to teach in high-poverty 
     districts.

     SEC. 403. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this title is to address the need of high-
     poverty school districts for highly qualified teachers in 
     particular subject areas, such as mathematics, science, 
     foreign languages, bilingual education, and special 
     education, needed by those school districts, by recruiting, 
     preparing, placing, and supporting career-changing 
     professionals who have knowledge and experience that will 
     help them become such teachers.

     SEC. 404. PROGRAM AUTHORIZED.

       (a) Authority.--The Secretary is authorized to use funds 
     appropriated under subsection (b) for each fiscal year to 
     award grants, contracts, or cooperative agreements to 
     institutions of higher education and public and private 
     nonprofit agencies or organizations to carry out programs 
     authorized by this title.
       (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--For the purpose of 
     carrying out this title, there are authorized to be 
     appropriated $25,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2001 
     through 2006.

     SEC. 405. APPLICATION.

       Each applicant that desires an award under section 404(a) 
     shall submit an application to the Secretary containing such 
     information as the Secretary requires, including--
       (1) a description of the target group of career-changing 
     professionals upon which the applicant will focus in carrying 
     out its program under this title, including a description of 
     the characteristics of that target group that shows how the 
     knowledge and experience of its members are relevant to 
     meeting the purpose of this title;
       (2) a description of how the applicant will identify and 
     recruit program participants;
       (3) a description of the training that program participants 
     will receive and how that training will relate to their 
     certification as teachers;
       (4) a description of how the applicant will ensure that 
     program participants are placed and teach in high-poverty 
     local educational agencies;
       (5) a description of the teacher induction services (which 
     may be provided through existing induction programs) the 
     program participants will receive throughout at least their 
     first year of teaching;
       (6) a description of how the applicant will collaborate, as 
     needed, with other institutions, agencies, or organizations 
     to recruit, train, place, and support program participants 
     under this title, including evidence of the commitment of 
     those institutions, agencies, or organizations to the 
     applicant's program;
       (7) a description of how the applicant will evaluate the 
     progress and effectiveness of its program, including--
       (A) the program's goals and objectives;
       (B) the performance indicators the applicant will use to 
     measure the program's progress; and
       (C) the outcome measures that will be used to determine the 
     program's effectiveness; and

[[Page 2010]]

       (8) an assurance that the applicant will provide to the 
     Secretary such information as the Secretary determines 
     necessary to determine the overall effectiveness of programs 
     under this title.

     SEC. 406. USES OF FUNDS AND PERIOD OF SERVICE.

       (a) Authorized Activities.--Funds under this title may be 
     used for--
       (1) recruiting program participants, including informing 
     them of opportunities under the program and putting them in 
     contact with other institutions, agencies, or organizations 
     that would train, place, and support them;
       (2) training stipends and other financial incentives for 
     program participants, not to exceed $5,000 per participant;
       (3) assisting institutions of higher education or other 
     providers of teacher training to tailor their training to 
     meet the particular needs of professionals who are changing 
     their careers to teaching;
       (4) placement activities, including identifying high-
     poverty local educational agencies with a need for the 
     particular skills and characteristics of the newly trained 
     program participants and assisting those participants to 
     obtain employment in those local educational agencies; and
       (5) post-placement induction or support activities for 
     program participants.
       (b) Period of Service.--A program participant in a program 
     under this title who completes his or her training shall 
     serve in a high-poverty local educational agency for at least 
     3 years.
       (c) Repayment.--The Secretary shall establish such 
     requirements as the Secretary determines appropriate to 
     ensure that program participants who receive a training 
     stipend or other financial incentive under subsection (a)(2), 
     but fail to complete their service obligation under 
     subsection (b), repay all or a portion of such stipend or 
     other incentive.

     SEC. 407. EQUITABLE DISTRIBUTION.

       To the extent practicable, the Secretary shall make awards 
     under this title that support programs in different 
     geographic regions of the Nation.

     SEC. 408. DEFINITIONS.

       In this title:
       (1) High-poverty local educational agency.--The term 
     ``high-poverty local educational agency'' means a local 
     educational agency in which the percentage of children, ages 
     5 through 17, from families below the poverty level is 20 
     percent or greater, or the number of such children exceeds 
     10,000.
       (2) Program participants.--The term ``program 
     participants'' means career-changing professionals who--
       (A) hold at least a baccalaureate degree;
       (B) demonstrate interest in, and commitment to, becoming a 
     teacher; and
       (C) have knowledge and experience that are relevant to 
     teaching a high-need subject area in a high-need local 
     educational agency.

                   TITLE V--MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS

     SEC. 501. EXPANSION OF DEDUCTION FOR COMPUTER DONATIONS TO 
                   SCHOOLS.

       (a) Extension of Age of Eligible Computers.--Section 
     170(e)(6)(B)(ii) (defining qualified elementary or secondary 
     educational contribution) is amended by striking ``2 years'' 
     and inserting ``3 years''.
       (b) Reacquired Computers Eligible for Donation.--Section 
     170(e)(6)(B)(iii) (defining qualified elementary or secondary 
     educational contribution) is amended by inserting ``, the 
     person from whom the donor reacquires the property,'' after 
     ``the donor''.
       (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to contributions made in taxable years ending 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 502. CREDIT FOR COMPUTER DONATIONS TO SCHOOLS AND SENIOR 
                   CENTERS.

       (a) In General.--Subpart D of part IV of subchapter A of 
     chapter 1 (relating to business related credits) is amended 
     by adding at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 45D. CREDIT FOR COMPUTER DONATIONS TO SCHOOLS AND 
                   SENIOR CENTERS.

       ``(a) General Rule.--For purposes of section 38, the 
     computer donation credit determined under this section is an 
     amount equal to 30 percent of the qualified computer 
     contributions made by the taxpayer during the taxable year as 
     determined after the application of section 170(e)(6)(A).
       ``(b) Qualified Computer Contribution.--For purposes of 
     this section, the term `qualified computer contribution' has 
     the meaning given the term `qualified elementary or secondary 
     educational contribution' by section 170(e)(6)(B), except 
     that--
       ``(1) such term shall include the contribution of a 
     computer (as defined in section 168(i)(2)(B)(ii)) only if 
     computer software (as defined in section 197(e)(3)(B)) that 
     serves as a computer operating system has been lawfully 
     installed in such computer, and
       ``(2) notwithstanding clauses (i) and (iv) of section 
     170(e)(6)(B), such term shall include the contribution of 
     computer technology or equipment to multipurpose senior 
     centers (as defined in section 102(35) of the Older Americans 
     Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3002(35)) described in section 
     501(c)(3) and exempt from tax under section 501(a) to be used 
     by individuals who have attained 60 years of age to improve 
     job skills in computers.
       ``(c) Increased Percentage for Contributions to Entities in 
     Empowerment Zones, Enterprise Communities, and Indian 
     Reservations.--In the case of a qualified computer 
     contribution to an entity located in an empowerment zone or 
     enterprise community designated under section 1391 or an 
     Indian reservation (as defined in section 168(j)(6)), 
     subsection (a) shall be applied by substituting `50 percent' 
     for `30 percent'.
       ``(d) Certain Rules Made Applicable.--For purposes of this 
     section, rules similar to the rules of paragraphs (1) and (2) 
     of section 41(f) shall apply.
       ``(e) Termination.--This section shall not apply to taxable 
     years beginning on or after the date which is 3 years after 
     the date of the enactment of the New Millennium Classrooms 
     Act.''.
       (b) Current Year Business Credit Calculation.--Section 
     38(b) (relating to current year business credit) is amended 
     by striking ``plus'' at the end of paragraph (11), by 
     striking the period at the end of paragraph (12) and 
     inserting ``, plus'', and by adding at the end the following:
       ``(13) the computer donation credit determined under 
     section 45D(a).''.
       (c) Disallowance of Deduction by Amount of Credit.--Section 
     280C (relating to certain expenses for which credits are 
     allowable) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) Credit for Computer Donations.--No deduction shall be 
     allowed for that portion of the qualified computer 
     contributions (as defined in section 45D(b)) made during the 
     taxable year that is equal to the amount of credit determined 
     for the taxable year under section 45D(a). In the case of a 
     corporation which is a member of a controlled group of 
     corporations (within the meaning of section 52(a)) or a trade 
     or business which is treated as being under common control 
     with other trades or businesses (within the meaning of 
     section 52(b)), this subsection shall be applied under rules 
     prescribed by the Secretary similar to the rules applicable 
     under subsections (a) and (b) of section 52.''.
       (d) Limitation on Carryback.--Subsection (d) of section 39 
     (relating to carryback and carryforward of unused credits) is 
     amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(9) No carryback of computer donation credit before 
     effective date.--No amount of unused business credit 
     available under section 45D may be carried back to a taxable 
     year beginning on or before the date of the enactment of this 
     paragraph.''.
       (e) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for subpart 
     D of part IV of subchapter A of chapter 1 is amended by 
     inserting after the item relating to section 45C the 
     following:

``Sec. 45D. Credit for computer donations to schools and senior 
              centers.''.
       (f) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall apply to contributions made in taxable years beginning 
     after the date of the enactment of this Act.

     SEC. 503. REPORT TO CONGRESS REGARDING EXTENT AND SEVERITY OF 
                   CHILD POVERTY.

       (a) In General.--Not later than June 1, 2001 and prior to 
     any reauthorization of the temporary assistance to needy 
     families program under part A of title IV of the Social 
     Security Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.) for any fiscal year 
     after fiscal year 2002, the Secretary of Health and Human 
     Services (in this section referred to as the ``Secretary'') 
     shall report to Congress on the extent and severity of child 
     poverty in the United States. Such report shall, at a 
     minimum--
       (1) determine for the period since the enactment of the 
     Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation 
     Act of 1996 (Public Law 104-193; 110 Stat. 2105)--
       (A) whether the rate of child poverty in the United States 
     has increased;
       (B) whether the children who live in poverty in the United 
     States have gotten poorer; and
       (C) how changes in the availability of cash and non-cash 
     benefits to poor families have affected child poverty in the 
     United States;
       (2) identify alternative methods for defining child poverty 
     that are based on consideration of factors other than family 
     income and resources, including consideration of a family's 
     work-related expenses; and
       (3) contain multiple measures of child poverty in the 
     United States that may include the child poverty gap and the 
     extreme poverty rate.
       (b) Legislative Proposal.--If the Secretary determines that 
     during the period since the enactment of the Personal 
     Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 
     1996 (Public Law 104-193; 110 Stat. 2105) the extent or 
     severity of child poverty in the United States has increased 
     to any extent, the Secretary shall include with the report to 
     Congress required under subsection (a) a legislative proposal 
     addressing the factors that led to such increase.

     SEC. 504. CAREERS TO CLASSROOMS.

       (a) Definitions.--In this section:
       (1) In general.--The terms ``elementary school'', ``local 
     educational agency'', ``secondary school'', and ``Secretary'' 
     have the meanings given the terms in section 14101 of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     8801).
       (2) Alternative certification or licensure requirements.--
     The term ``alternative certification or licensure 
     requirements''

[[Page 2011]]

     means State or local teacher certification or licensure 
     requirements that permit a demonstrated competence in 
     appropriate subject areas gained in careers outside of 
     education to be substituted for traditional teacher training 
     course work.
       (3) Eligible individual.--The term ``eligible individual'' 
     means an individual who has received--
       (A) in the case of an individual applying for assistance 
     for placement as an elementary school or secondary school 
     teacher, a baccalaureate or advanced degree from an 
     institution of higher education; or
       (B) in the case of an individual applying for assistance 
     for placement as a teacher's aide in an elementary school or 
     secondary school, an associate, baccalaureate, or advanced 
     degree from an institution of higher education.
       (4) Institution of higher education.--The term 
     ``institution of higher education'' has the meaning given the 
     term in section 101 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
     U.S.C. 1001)
       (5) State.--The term ``State'' means each of the several 
     States of the United States, the District of Columbia, 
     American Samoa, the Federated States of Micronesia, Guam, the 
     Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Commonwealth of the 
     Northern Mariana Islands, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, 
     the Republic of Palau, and the United States Virgin Islands.
       (b) Placement Program.--The Secretary may establish a 
     program of awarding grants to States--
       (1) to enable the States to assist eligible individuals to 
     obtain--
       (A) certification or licensure as elementary school or 
     secondary school teachers; or
       (B) the credentials necessary to serve as teachers' aides; 
     and
       (2) to facilitate the employment of the eligible 
     individuals by local educational agencies identified under 
     subsection (c)(2) as experiencing a shortage of teachers or 
     teachers' aides.
       (c) States With Alternative Certification Requirements and 
     Teacher and Teacher's Aide Shortages.--Upon the establishment 
     of the placement program authorized by subsection (b), the 
     Secretary shall--
       (1) conduct a survey of States to identify those States 
     that have alternative certification or licensure requirements 
     for teachers;
       (2) periodically request information from States identified 
     under paragraph (1) to identify in these States those local 
     educational agencies that--
       (A) are receiving grants under part A of title I of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     6311 et seq.) as a result of having within their 
     jurisdictions concentrations of children from low-income 
     families; and
       (B) are also experiencing a shortage of qualified teachers, 
     in particular a shortage of science, mathematics, computer 
     science, or engineering teachers; and
       (3) periodically request information from all States to 
     identify local educational agencies that--
       (A) are receiving grants under part A of title I of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     6311 et seq.) as a result of having within their 
     jurisdictions concentrations of children from low-income 
     families; and
       (B) are experiencing a shortage of teachers' aides.
       (d) Selection of Eligible Individuals.--
       (1) In general.--Selection of eligible individuals to 
     participate in the placement program authorized by subsection 
     (b) shall be made on the basis of applications submitted to a 
     State. An application shall be in such form and contain such 
     information as the State may require.
       (2) Priority.--In selecting eligible individuals to receive 
     assistance for placement as elementary school or secondary 
     school teachers, the State shall give priority to eligible 
     individuals who--
       (A) have substantial, demonstrated career experience in 
     science, mathematics, computer science, or engineering and 
     agree to seek employment as science, mathematics, computer 
     science, or engineering teachers in elementary schools or 
     secondary schools; or
       (B) have substantial, demonstrated career experience in 
     another subject area identified by the State as important for 
     national educational objectives and agree to seek employment 
     in that subject area in elementary schools or secondary 
     schools.
       (e) Agreement.--An eligible individual selected to 
     participate in the placement program authorized by subsection 
     (b) shall be required to enter into an agreement with the 
     State, in which the eligible individual agrees--
       (1) to obtain, within such time as the State may require, 
     certification or licensure as an elementary school or 
     secondary school teacher or the necessary credentials to 
     serve as a teacher's aide in an elementary school or 
     secondary school; and
       (2) to accept--
       (A) in the case of an eligible individual selected for 
     assistance for placement as a teacher, an offer of full-time 
     employment as an elementary school or secondary school 
     teacher for not less than two school years with a local 
     educational agency identified under subsection (c)(2), to 
     begin the school year after obtaining that certification or 
     licensure; or
       (B) in the case of an eligible individual selected for 
     assistance for placement as a teacher's aide, an offer of 
     full-time employment as a teacher's aide in an elementary 
     school or secondary school for not less than 2 school years 
     with a local educational agency identified under subsection 
     (c)(3), to begin the school year after obtaining the 
     necessary credentials.
       (f) Stipend for Participants.--
       (1) In general.--The State shall pay to an eligible 
     individual participating in the placement program a stipend 
     in an amount equal to the lesser of--
       (A) $5,000; or
       (B) the total costs of the type described in paragraphs 
     (1), (2), (3), (8), and (9) of section 472 of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087ll) incurred by the 
     eligible individual while obtaining teacher certification or 
     licensure or the necessary credentials to serve as a 
     teacher's aide and employment as an elementary school or 
     secondary school teacher or teacher aide.
       (2) Relation to other assistance.--A stipend paid under 
     paragraph (1) shall be taken into account in determining the 
     eligibility of the eligible individual for Federal student 
     financial assistance provided under title IV of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1070 et seq.).
       (g) Grants To Facilitate Placement.--
       (1) Teachers.--In the case of an eligible individual in the 
     placement program obtaining teacher certification or 
     licensure, the State may offer to enter into an agreement 
     under this subsection with the first local educational agency 
     identified under subsection (b)(2) that employs the eligible 
     individual as a full-time elementary school or secondary 
     school teacher after the eligible individual obtains teacher 
     certification or licensure.
       (2) Teacher's aides.--In the case of an eligible individual 
     in the program obtaining credentials to serve as a teacher's 
     aide, the State may offer to enter into an agreement under 
     this subsection with the first local educational agency 
     identified under subsection (b)(3) that employs the 
     participant as a full-time teacher's aide.
       (3) Agreements contracts.--Under an agreement referred to 
     in paragraph (1) or (2)--
       (A) the local educational agency shall agree to employ the 
     eligible individual full time for not less than 2 consecutive 
     school years (at a basic salary to be certified to the State) 
     in a school of the local educational agency that--
       (i) serves a concentration of children from low-income 
     families; and
       (ii) has an exceptional need for eligible individuals; and
       (B) the State shall agree to pay to the local educational 
     agency for each eligible individual, from amounts provided 
     under this section, $5,000 per year for a maximum of 2 years.
       (h) Reimbursement Under Certain Circumstances.--
       (1) In general.--If an eligible individual in the placement 
     program fails to obtain teacher certification or licensure, 
     employment as an elementary school or secondary school 
     teacher, or employment as a teacher's aide as required under 
     the agreement or voluntarily leaves, or is terminated for 
     cause, from the employment during the 2 years of required 
     service, the eligible individual shall be required to 
     reimburse the State for any stipend paid to the eligible 
     individual under subsection (f)(1) in an amount that bears 
     the same ratio to the amount of the stipend as the unserved 
     portion of required service bears to the 2 years of required 
     service. A State shall forward the proceeds of any 
     reimbursement received under this paragraph to the Secretary.
       (2) Obligation to reimburse.--The obligation to reimburse 
     the State under this subsection is, for all purposes, a debt 
     owing the United States. A discharge in bankruptcy under 
     title 11 shall not release a participant from the obligation 
     to reimburse the State. Any amount owed by an eligible 
     individual under paragraph (1) shall bear interest at the 
     rate equal to the highest rate being paid by the United 
     States on the day on which the reimbursement is determined to 
     be due for securities having maturities of 90 days or less 
     and shall accrue from the day on which the eligible 
     individual is first notified of the amount due.
       (i) Exceptions to Reimbursement Provisions.--
       (1) In general.--An eligible individual in the placement 
     program shall not be considered to be in violation of an 
     agreement entered into under subsection (e) during any period 
     in which the participant--
       (A) is pursuing a full-time course of study related to the 
     field of teaching at an institution of higher education;
       (B) is serving on active duty as a member of the Armed 
     Forces;
       (C) is temporarily totally disabled for a period of time 
     not to exceed 3 years as established by sworn affidavit of a 
     qualified physician;
       (D) is unable to secure employment for a period not to 
     exceed 12 months by reason of the care required by a spouse 
     who is disabled;
       (E) is seeking and unable to find full-time employment as a 
     teacher or teacher's aide in

[[Page 2012]]

     an elementary school or secondary school for a single period 
     not to exceed 27 months; or
       (F) satisfies the provisions of additional reimbursement 
     exceptions that may be prescribed by the Secretary.
       (2) Forgiveness.--An eligible individual shall be excused 
     from reimbursement under subsection (h) if the eligible 
     individual becomes permanently totally disabled as 
     established by sworn affidavit of a qualified physician. The 
     Secretary may also waive reimbursement in cases of extreme 
     hardship to the participant, as determined by the Secretary.

     SEC. 505. PESTICIDE APPLICATION IN SCHOOLS.

       (a) In General.--Each school that receives Federal funding 
     shall--
       (1) take steps to reduce the exposure of children to 
     pesticides on school grounds, both indoors and outdoors; and
       (2) provide parents and guardians of children that attend 
     the school with advance notification of certain pesticide 
     applications on school grounds in accordance with subsections 
     (b) and (c).
       (b) EPA List of Toxic Pesticides.--
       (1) In general.--The Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall distribute to each school that 
     receives Federal funding the current manual of the 
     Environmental Protection Agency that guides schools in the 
     establishment of a least toxic pesticide policy.
       (2) List.--Not later than 1 year after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the Environmental 
     Protection Agency shall provide each school that receives 
     Federal funding with a list of pesticides that contain a 
     substance that the Administrator has identified as a known 
     carcinogen, a developmental or reproductive toxin, or a 
     category I or II acute nerve toxin.
       (c) Parental Notification of Toxic Pesticide Applications 
     in Schools.--
       (1) In general.--On or after the date that is 18 months 
     after the date of enactment of this Act, any school that 
     receives Federal funding shall not apply any pesticide 
     described in paragraph (b)(2) on school grounds, either 
     indoors or outdoors, unless an administrative official of the 
     school provides notice of the planned application to parents 
     and guardians of children that attend the school not later 
     than 48 hours before the application of the pesticide.
       (2) Notice.--The notice described in paragraph (1)--
       (A) shall include--
       (i) a description of the intended area of application; and
       (ii) the name of each pesticide to be applied; and
       (B) shall indicate whether the pesticide is a known 
     carcinogen, a developmental or reproductive toxin, or a 
     category I or II acute nerve toxin.
       (3) Incorporation of notice.--The notice described in 
     paragraph (1) may be incorporated in any notice that is being 
     sent to parents and guardians at the time at which the 
     pesticide notice is required to be sent.

     SEC. 506. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING A SAFE LEARNING 
                   ENVIRONMENT.

       (a) Findings.--Congress finds that:
       (1) Every school child in America should have a safe 
     learning environment free from violence and illegal drugs.
       (2) Violence and illegal drugs in the schools undermine a 
     safe and secure learning environment.
       (3) Any instance of violence or illegal drugs in schools is 
     unacceptable and undermines the efforts of Congress, State 
     and local governments and school boards, and parents to 
     provide American children with the best education possible.
       (4) In the last 12 months, there have been at least 50 
     people killed or injured in school shootings in America.
       (5) From 1992 through 1998, the number of referrals made by 
     the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms to the Federal 
     Bureau of Investigation for Federal firearms prosecutions 
     fell 44 percent, which resulted in a 40-percent drop in 
     prosecutions and a 31-percent decline in convictions, 
     allowing criminals to remain on the streets preying on our 
     most vulnerable citizens, including our children.
       (6) From 1996 to 1998, the Justice Department only 
     prosecuted an average of seven persons per year for illegally 
     transferring a handgun to a juvenile.
       (7) Since 1992, the percentage of 8th grade students using 
     marijuana, cocaine, and heroin in the past 30 days has 
     increased 162 percent, 86 percent, and 50 percent, 
     respectively, according to the respected Monitoring the 
     Future survey.
       (8) The February 29, 2000, shooting at Buell Elementary 
     School in Mount Morris Township, Michigan, is evidence that 
     gun violence in American schools continues, that the drug 
     culture contributes to youth violence, and that the breakdown 
     of the American family has contributed to the increase in 
     violence among American children.
       (b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate 
     that the reauthorization of the Safe and Drug-Free Schools 
     program that Congress soon will be considering should target 
     the elimination of illegal drugs and violence in our schools 
     and should encourage local schools to insist on zero-
     tolerance policies towards violence and illegal drug use.

     SEC. 507. REDUCTION IN SCHOOL VIOLENCE.

       (a) Short Title.--This section may be cited as the ``School 
     Violence Reduction Act''.
       (b) Findings.--Congress finds that:
       (1) Every school child in America has a right to a safe 
     learning environment free from guns and violence.
       (2) The United States Department of Education report on the 
     Implementation of the Gun-Free Schools Act found that 3,930 
     children were expelled for bringing guns to school during the 
     1997-98 school year.
       (3) Nationwide, 57 percent of the expulsions were high 
     school students, 33 percent were in junior high and 10 
     percent were in elementary school.
       (c) Grants.--The Secretary of Education shall award grants 
     to elementary and secondary schools (as such terms are 
     defined in section 14101 of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 8801)) to enable such 
     schools to--
       (1) develop and disseminate model programs to reduce 
     violence in schools,
       (2) educate students about the dangers associated with 
     guns, and
       (3) provide violence prevention information (including 
     information about safe gun storage) to children and their 
     parents.
       (d) Application.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
     subsection (b), an elementary or secondary school shall 
     prepare and submit to the Secretary of Education an 
     application at such time, in such manner, and containing such 
     information as the Secretary may require.
       (e) Public Service Announcements.--The Secretary of 
     Education shall provide for the development and dissemination 
     of public service announcements and other information on ways 
     to reduce violence in our Nation's schools, including safe 
     gun storage and other measures.
       (f) Authorization of Appropriations.--For the purpose of 
     carrying out this section, there are authorized to be 
     appropriated funds of up to $7,000,000 for fiscal year 2001 
     and such sums as may be necessary for each of the four 
     succeeding fiscal years.

  Mr. COVERDELL. I move to reconsider the vote and move to lay that 
motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.


              Technical Corrections To Amendment No. 2869

  Mr. COVERDELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the clerk 
be authorized to make technical conforming corrections to Roth 
amendment No. 2869.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________