[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 146 (2000), Part 4]
[House]
[Pages 4550-4556]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                EDUCATION IS TOP PRIORITY FOR AMERICANS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gary Miller of California). Under the 
Speaker's announced policy of January 6, 1999, the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Rodriguez) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the 
minority leader.
  Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, we are here today to talk about the 
tremendous progress that we have made in education over the past 7 
years. Even better, over the past 5 years, we have seen some measurable 
results. Fourth grade reading scores in high-poverty schools are up. 
Eighth grade math scores are up. The gender gap in math and science 
scores are shrinking. The number of advanced placement tests, the AP 
tests with scores meeting college requirements increased overall, and 
more importantly, also for minorities and women. More high school 
students are taking tougher classes and are including the AP classes 
which are the advanced placement classes. More women and Hispanics and 
minorities are going to college than ever before. These are all just 
over the last 5 years.
  Mr. Speaker, this is all good news, and the progress we have made has 
been largely due to the Clinton administration and the efforts they 
have made throughout the country with good, sound solutions for our 
Nation's children. Knowing that 90 percent of our school-age population 
attend public schools, many of us here have worked hard with the 
administration to ensure that States and school districts are working 
together to reform their systems where they are. Along with the reforms 
is the need to hold our students accountable and make sure that they 
are held to higher standards. Raising standards, which we have been 
doing and talking about for much of the past decade, means that all 
children are reading well by the end of the third grade, and making 
sure that our eighth graders are on the college track and are taking 
algebra and geometry.
  This is really a reform that has been working, and it is something 
that we as Democrats feel very strongly about and need to continue to 
make that commitment.
  At the heart of the Clinton administration and the Democrats' reform 
is the focus on literacy. In 1996, we worked with the administration to 
implement the America Reads program, which mobilized communities to 
work together to fight illiteracy. This has been effective, especially 
with our community colleges working with our local school districts. In 
addition to the America Reads program, we have made sure that landmark 
legislation to support local and State efforts to improve literacy 
through professional development, as well as family literacy programs 
and tutoring. Let me add that we have found also some startling 
results, that when we work with parents on literacy, we also find that 
those youngsters of those parents have a direct impact in making sure 
that they also stay in school, and a lot of them choose not to drop 
out.
  Reading scores in San Antonio have improved over the last 5 years and 
it is due to these investments that we have made, both in the Federal 
and some of the local level areas.
  Clearly, ensuring that our children are literate and that reading is 
a priority is not a new agenda item. The presidential candidates would 
like to think that it is new. Reading is not a new agenda and claiming 
credit for educational reform is unfounded.
  During a press conference on March 28, Governor George Bush claimed 
progress for reading scores in Texas. I would like to read an excerpt 
from the Department of Education press release in response to this 
claim. That particular claim indicated that educational reform in the 
State of Texas has happened largely as a solid foundation that was set 
back in the 1980s by Governor White, and also a particular commission 
that he had developed by Ross Perot. He was revolutionary at the time 
and implemented reform measures much like what we are advocating today, 
in which we are advocating smaller class sizes, which makes sense; a 
significant increase in funding for education; a focus on qualified 
teachers and making sure that we do have those qualified teachers.
  Mr. Speaker, these are the measurements we have been implementing in 
the last 20 years, items that 20 years ago that we have been 
contributing to making progress as we move forward.
  I would like to bring to the attention of my colleagues a cartoon 
that was in the Washington Post of April 1, 2000, and the young man, as 
we have here, and the older man who says, here is my plan to boost 
child literacy, by spending another $5 billion, and then the response 
is, how can you afford this and your tax cut? The response: Hey, this 
is my reading plan. Math comes later.
  We are going to hear a great deal of these kinds of talks. The bottom 
line is we need to do the math now. The reality is, and we know that 
for the last 2 years we have had a surplus. Our last surplus was about 
$170 billion, and it has estimated, and this is an estimation only, 
that for the next decade, we probably will have approximately $170 
billion to $200 billion for the next 10 years.
  The bottom line is that if we have a $2 trillion tax cut after we 
figure that out, and we can do the math as this young man here did the 
math, the result is that what revenues are we going to have for Social 
Security? What revenues are we going to have for Medicare? What 
revenues are we going to have for education? The answer has to be none 
if we go with this tax cut.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to talk about the fact 
that the Republican opposition has basically proposed two major 
propositions, and that is, one, vouchers, and the other, block grants. 
We recognize that in order to respond to these we have a variety of 
issues that we need to deal with, and the solutions are varied.
  I want to take this opportunity, because I know we have with us some 
Members that have joined with me this evening, and I want to 
acknowledge the fact that we have the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. 
Napolitano), and since she is here with me, I want to ask her, since 
she has done some great, tremendous work, and I want to ask her to 
comment. I thank the gentlewoman from California for joining me this 
evening, and I yield to her at this time.
  Mrs. NAPOLITANO. Mr. Speaker, it is really important for us to 
acknowledge that this administration and the congressional Democrats 
have been at the forefront on educational reform and improving our 
public schools and helping to ensure that our students have the basic 
skills to succeed in this upcoming global economy of ours.
  Some of the points that I needed to make sure that I brought out and 
hit upon is that we have been trying for a very lengthy time to keep 
Hispanic children in schools. We have made that a priority, to help 
Hispanic students stay in school. The Hispanic education action plan 
targeted more than $30 million to help transform schools with high 
dropout rates, especially districts that have populations that are 
largely migrant workers. I say to my colleagues, you do not understand, 
or if you lived in my area you would have a

[[Page 4551]]

good feel of how important this particular issue is.
  I have some schools that may have as high as a 70 percent dropout 
rate from high school of Hispanic children, and that does not make for 
a good economy anywhere in the United States.
  Now, if we are able to help keep these young people in school and be 
able to provide any assistance, whether it is tutoring or any of the 
kind of family assistance that these children may need to be able to 
succeed, then we are helping, we are helping communities be more viable 
and helping our economy, because these young people will eventually 
become leaders in our areas.
  We also have to help students finish college. We proposed a new 
college completion challenge grant to help reduce the college dropout 
rate with pre-freshman summer programs, support services and increased 
grant aid to students. This is a $35 million initiative to improve the 
chances of success for nearly 18,000 students. That may be a beginning, 
hopefully, because I know that more than 18,000 students not only are 
needy of being able to receive the assistance, but also are deserving 
of being able to get assistance from us. We need to turn around our 
failing schools.
  There are 11 million low-income students now benefiting from Title I 
aid to the disadvantaged students, and all our children are benefiting 
from this higher expectation and the challenging curriculum that 
accompanies it, which is geared to higher standards. Our 2000 budget 
provides an additional $134 million, account bit fund, to help turn 
around the worst performing schools and hold them accountable for 
results.
  Now, 30 percent of children served by Title I are Hispanic. That 
tells us that we are failing our young people. We are not providing 
them with the tools to be successful, and consequently, I think that 
this Congress has done a great service to be able to target and begin 
focusing on those issues.
  I can tell my colleagues just quickly that the more we provide high-
quality teachers, and the more we provide smaller class size, the 
better our students are going to be. I can point to a group of middle 
school students that are going to be coming to New York to perform at 
Carnegie hall. These are middle school students out of one of my 
schools, one of my district schools, that have not only performed in 
the Rose Parade in Pasadena, but are also performing a full 
orchestratic ensemble in New York City. It is because they had a 
teacher who was of high quality, who cared about these young people and 
taught them that they can achieve anything they set their mind to. I am 
very proud of them, and I certainly want to share that with everybody 
so that others may learn that our youngsters, ages seven, eight, and 
nine, can also reach those heights.
  We have increased the funding for Pell grants. We have increased 
educational funding for migrant families. There are many of these 
important things for the State that I represent that are becoming 
viable for our people, and I certainly want to congratulate my 
democratic colleagues and those that helped us put these measures 
through.
  Again, education is the key for our young people to succeed, and I am 
glad to be here to be part of the thrust to achieve that for them.
  I thank the gentleman for yielding to me.
  Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman for those 
kind words. I know you stressed the importance of some of the 
solutions, and one of the things that the gentlewoman mentioned is also 
in terms of early childhood. I know how critical that is. I know Head 
Start has done some tremendous work, and that early start is critical. 
Reaching out to those 3 year olds and 4 year olds is real important. 
The quicker we get those youngsters into our educational system, the 
quicker they will to be able to compete and be able to get that head 
start that they need.
  We also have with us another Californian who I have the opportunity 
of sharing a committee with, the Committee on Armed Services. I thank 
the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez) for joining me tonight in 
talking about education.
  Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for the time that he 
has yielded to me.
  I really am grateful that the gentleman is talking tonight about the 
state of education and I think there are a lot of things, with the 
gentleman's background, that he could tell us about in Texas, the Texas 
experience. In particular, we are looking at a presidential election 
coming up, and the gentleman's governor, the governor of the 
gentleman's State, is on the Republican side. I know what the 
Republicans have not done with respect to education here in the House 
of Representatives.

                              {time}  1830

  So I am interested, because I have heard so many things about what is 
coming out of Texas. I think the gentleman is a great person to talk 
about that tonight.
  There are certain things that we know. We know that the type of child 
that enters the school system, it is important that they are healthy. 
We know that it is important that they come to school and they are 
ready to learn; i.e., they are not thinking about being hungry; third, 
that when they come to kindergarten, they do best when they have 
already gone through a preschool program or a Head Start program.
  I would be very interested to find out from the gentleman what his 
feelings are with respect to the readiness of children who go in Texas 
under the gentleman's Governor.
  For example, I know that in California, one of the biggest things 
that we did in the last couple of years was to match the Federal funds 
in order to put in an insurance program for health for our children in 
California. Those were children of working parents.
  That is beginning to make a difference, because now we have children 
who have access to health care, so they are healthy when they are 
starting out in the program.
  Secondly, of course, we know a few years ago the Republicans in this 
House tried to eliminate the lunch program that we have in the schools. 
I just remember reading in the paper about Governor George Bush, and 
how he said that there were no hungry people in the State of Texas, 
when in fact his State is the number two State in the Nation with 
children who go to bed without food in their bellies.
  So I am interested to find out what has been going on in Texas, if 
the gentleman can tell us.
  Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the gentlewoman for 
her question.
  In Texas, we were the last State to go into the CHIPS programs, the 
insurance program for youngsters. These are individuals who are 
uninsured. I would remind Americans that in America we have both 
Medicare for our seniors, we have Medicaid for our indigent, but one of 
the things that we find is that we have a large number of people 
working, working Americans, who do not have access to insurance. Texas 
has the largest number of uninsured individuals.
  The Clinton administration, one of the things that they have done, as 
the gentlewoman well knows, is that we have pushed on assuring that 
these youngsters were insured. Texas was the last State to move into 
this program. In addition to that, the funding they provided only 
extended to 60 percent of them, which means that only five to six out 
of the 10 that actually qualify will be able to get service, which is 
unfortunate.
  The gentlewoman mentioned also in terms of not only health but also 
in terms of nutrition. Even those individuals that qualify for food 
stamps, we find that there is a study that out of 10 that qualify, less 
than four are actually receiving it because of the bureaucratic nature 
that is there. In fact, some of those particular complaints came from 
the grocery industry in Texas, and people say that there are less 
people participating. It is because they made it very bureaucratic in 
nature.
  I want to go back a little bit in terms of education. The gentlewoman 
also mentions the importance of early

[[Page 4552]]

childhood education and how important it is to start. In Texas, we 
still only fund half-day kindergarten, so we still have a long way from 
that perspective.
  We have made some strides, but it has been a combination of years, 
and a lot of credit has been given to Governor White in the 1980s, and 
also to the third-party candidate, Ross Perot, who was on the committee 
that basically helped to revolutionize a lot of the things that we have 
there. But we still have a long way to go in making sure that we 
provide sufficient resources.
  For our teachers, we rank almost 47th in terms of expenditures, 
salaries for teachers, and in some of those categories. So we are 
really not pleased with where we are at. I think we have a long way to 
go. That is why I am real pleased about some of the propositions that 
we have.
  One is construction. I know we have been proposing on the House floor 
the importance of making sure that we have money for construction. Most 
of our schools, if we look at the studies that have been done, came 
close to 60 years old. In Texas, some are even older. As the 
gentlewoman well knows, I live in a home that is 70 years old. That was 
prior to the microwave.
  We recognize the importance of making sure we have good wiring for 
the new technology, and we need to make sure that we get that burst of 
resources that is needed.
  Along with construction money, and everyone has said this, when I did 
hearings on school violence one of the things they said was that we 
need smaller classroom sizes, so there is an importance to add 
qualified teachers out there. The administration pushed to put 100,000 
new teachers out there, and that is really important, as the 
gentlewoman well knows; and qualified teachers. So that is key.
  Along with that comes the need to make sure that we have the 
classrooms. A lot of Americans out there, we need to recognize the fact 
that in the 1950s and 1960s we had a boom, the baby boomers. The 
generation then decided that we needed to come up to the plate and 
build new schools.
  Now we have, as the gentlewoman well knows, we have what we call the 
baby echo, the kids of those baby boomers, our children. So it becomes 
real important that we also come up to the plate and build those 
schools that are needed, where the demographics show that we do have a 
lot of youngsters out there.
  They are smart youngsters, individuals who are doing extremely well. 
They are a lot sharper than we ever were at that age. But at the same 
time, we need to make sure that they have the opportunity to learn and 
have the technology.
  Ms. SANCHEZ. Mr. Speaker, I am glad that my colleague brought up two 
of the issues that are most important and dearest to my heart.
  The gentleman started by talking about Head Start. As most people 
here in the Congress know, I got my start in 1965 in the first year 
that Head Start existed when I was a child in that program. So I am 
proud to be the Head Start child of Congress.
  I get very worried because I see an administration, the Clinton-Gore 
administration, that has proposed $1 billion of more, more funding for 
Head Start, getting our kids prepared so that when they start at the 
starting line of the competition, at kindergarten, they are all equal 
when they get there, so they are not behind the starting line.
  The President and the Vice President have proposed $1 billion worth 
of more Head Start. In my county, in Orange County, only about one-
third of the children who actually qualify for Head Start are funded, 
so I am really looking forward to that.
  Then I take a look at Governor Bush's proposal on funding for 
education, his Federal education proposal. I see that he has no funds 
for Head Start. I think, well, why is that? Then I look at his tax cut 
plan and I know why, because where he is cutting is essentially that 
program which I think made such an impact in my life and which has made 
an impact on so many children's lives.
  And then of course the whole issue of school construction. As the 
gentleman knows, since I have been here, I have been carrying a bill on 
school construction, trying to get more schools built, because in 
California we did for 2 or 3 years now, as our colleague who used to be 
in the House in California, the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. 
Napolitano) noted, we did lower the amount of kids per teacher in 
California down to 20 to one in the first, second, and third grade 
level in California.
  Everywhere I go, and I have visited probably 130 schools in my 
district alone, first grade teachers tell me that the biggest 
difference they have seen is the lower amount of kids. Kids in 
kindergarten and first grade are reading now at a third grade level in 
some of my schools, and they attribute it to being able to have a 
smaller amount of kids and be able to teach them one on one.
  And then they add, you know, we need more schools, school classes. We 
need more places. We have parents who come and volunteer, but we do not 
have a class where they can come in and work on the projects for the 
school, for the children.
  This whole issue of school construction becomes so important, not 
just from a technology and modernization standpoint but from a room 
perspective, a place to grow our children.
  Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I am glad the gentlewoman mentioned that, 
because I think we all recognize that the solutions to some of our 
problems are not one answer but a variety of responses.
  I think some of the responses need to go even beyond the teacher. We 
have a tendency also to blame the school for everything. It was 
interesting to see that one of the schools that was cited in Florida by 
Jeff Bush, by the way, as not doing very good, in fact doing very 
poorly, was a school district that had a large percentage of mobility. 
They had a housing project where a lot of the teachers that had those 
youngsters, they only had them for a few weeks sometimes and they would 
move on. So that, in some cases, what we need is a combination of 
programs that help out the community.
  I had mentioned earlier that programs that help adults become 
literate are some of the best programs that help younger kids, their 
kids, to stay in school, so that it is a combination.
  One of the things that I wanted to share with the gentlewoman was 
that I got a report by some of the school social workers in Texas that 
they were having problems with youngsters staying in school, and part 
of the problems that they identified were child care; that in Texas we 
have a waiting list of individuals, because the State has chosen not to 
fully participate on child care for individuals who are in need. The 
importance of child care for families as well as those individuals that 
receive the care is great. Other factors that are around the community 
have a direct impact on our communities.
  I know the gentlewoman mentioned the fact that if we want a $2 
trillion tax cut, then that is what we are going to get, but we are not 
going to get anything for social security, we cannot get anything for 
Medicare, and we cannot get anything for education. In fact, it 
presupposes that the economy will continue to have those surpluses of 
$170 to $200 billion each year. So we need to be frugal. We need to be 
responsible in making sure that we meet those needs.
  I know the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Sanchez) agrees with me 
in terms of also the importance of teacher quality and how key that is. 
Especially one of the things that I like to emphasize is the importance 
of bilingual education in our schools.
  When I started school, I did not know any English. I started, and the 
statistics show that for someone who does not know any English, that it 
requires 5 to 7 years for them to be able to pick up a second language. 
In this case, my second language was English, since I knew Spanish.
  So when I look in terms of my grades, and I spent 2 years back then, 
and it seemed like every Mexican-American, every Mexican spent 2 years 
in the first grade, and we had no bilingual education. So I really did 
not know what was happening until almost

[[Page 4553]]

the fifth grade. It took me almost 6 years to kind of catch on to what 
was going on; the importance of bilingual teachers that are well-
trained, well educated. I was real pleased to see the administration 
move on dual language instruction.
  Most people do not understand that dual language instruction means it 
is basically what we are doing now with some of our gifted youngsters, 
it is what we are doing now with some of the people that go to private 
schools, where we teach them not only one language, but two.
  We find that that is the best time to learn a second language is 
prior to puberty, because people do not realize that the accent, if a 
person has an accent, usually it is a result of the fact that they 
learn the second language after puberty.
  If we can begin to introduce in America the possibility, and I am 
real optimistic that we can do dual language instruction, and we can 
teach English-speaking youngsters, whether they are English-speaking 
only, another language, whether it be Spanish or German or other, 
French.
  Ms. SANCHEZ. Or any of the other 92 languages I have in Orange 
County, where children come from a home that speaks something other 
than English.
  I am glad the gentleman brought that up, because this whole idea of 
what we do about another language is very troubling for some people 
across the United States, especially those who have not been in a 
classroom recently and have not seen what is going on.
  I guess a lot of us do not have the historical perspective of why 
bilingual education became such an important part to those communities 
that came with a different language to school in large numbers.
  The California experience speaks for itself. Earlier in the history 
of California, before I got to school but not that much before, if you 
spoke Spanish and you got to the classroom, and you had 18 kids who 
spoke English and you had two who spoke Spanish, there was no 
accommodation for them.
  Therefore, if you were not at that grade level, the first time maybe 
you were held back, but the second time you were probably diagnosed as 
mentally retarded. People were actually labeled that. Then they were 
put in a class of mentally retarded people. So that is the historical 
perspective of how we began, and we fought for having a second language 
like Spanish used in the classroom to get our students up to level and 
to get them transitioned over to English.
  I think a lot of times the American public does not know historically 
what happened with that situation, but today there are so many people 
coming, so many students coming with different language backgrounds 
that this whole idea of immersion and learning the two is actually a 
great concept, and one that I have seen work over and over in the 
classroom.
  I will just end by saying that I look at education, sitting on the 
Committee on Education and the Workforce, quite a bit back in my 
district in California, which as Members know, is a bellwether State 
for supposedly what will be the future of the United States.

                              {time}  1845

  I am always interested to see what happens between the States and 
where a person's perspective is coming from. When we do the testing, 
for example, in California of our students, we do those also that have 
a hardship with the language. Our tests tend to be lower because of 
that.
  I have heard that, in Texas, while Governor Bush has been touting 
such great scores, that, in fact, it is because they eliminate a lot of 
these children and either classify them as special education and keep 
them out of the actual test scores that are reported.
  I wanted to get a comment from the gentleman from Texas on that since 
he is, in particular, from an area, San Antonio, where I have heard 
that, in just a year, there used to be 35 percent of students in a 
particular school who were special ed students, and, in the next year, 
because of these tests, almost 62 percent of them were now special ed 
and were kept out of this whole series of how one tests the children. 
Can the gentleman from Texas comment to that?
  Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, let me just comment a little bit. I think 
in some cases in Texas I think we might have gone overboard with the 
amount of testing. In fact, there was a survey that was done recently 
on, I think, third graders that took about 22 tests, different types of 
tests. There is a great deal of emphasis on tests to the point that a 
great number of our teachers are very concerned that most of the 
emphasis is basically teaching to the tests, which brings up the issue 
of the fact that we need to make sure that we prepare our youngsters to 
be able to think and be able to comprehend and be able to learn without 
having to teach to the test. Yes, there has been some criticism in some 
of the schools that that has been occurring and that some of that has 
been happening.
  But, again, some of the progress that we have seen has been a result 
of, not just what happened in the last 4 years. It is like me, I came 
in 3 years ago. The first month I came in, they balanced the budget. It 
is kind of like saying I came in in 30 days and took care of the budget 
for you. My colleagues know that that is not correct.
  I would say that that has been an effort that has been going on. Part 
of the credit belongs to Governor White in the 1980s. Part of the 
credit belongs to a lot of the people that have worked hard down there. 
We still have a long way to go. Part of the credit belongs to Ross 
Perot and the committee that he had in Texas and making some things 
happen.
  Joining us also tonight is the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Brown). 
I am going to ask her to say a few words. I know she is familiar with 
Jeb Bush there in Florida, and I know she wanted to make some comments 
as it deals with affirmative action policies that impact on education 
and various other comments.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Brown).
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from 
Texas for really holding this special order.
  It is interesting that George Bush, like his brother Jeb Bush in the 
State of Florida, has promised to improve the educational gap between 
minorities and white students by trying to do away with affirmative 
action. I was not at all surprised to learn from my Texas colleagues 
that under the governorship of George W. Bush in 1996 and 1997, Texas 
ranked 38 in the Nation for financial aid given to needy students, and 
that Governor Bush did not include any additional Head Start funds in 
his 1999 Federal education proposal, despite the fact that it is 
currently serving only two in five eligible children.
  Today I want to talk about the Bush brothers' attack on affirmative 
action and what has gone on in my State of Florida. In Florida, 
Governor Jeb Bush is attempting to ram an education plan through the 
State of Florida called ``One Florida.'' In reality, this plan should 
be called ``Florida School for the Elite.'' This plan does away with 
affirmative action in Florida's university admissions.
  I am here today as a Member of Congress because of a tool called the 
Voting Rights Act. It took Florida 127 years to send an African 
American to Congress, and that was just 8 years ago. So we really still 
have problems in Florida.
  Thurgood Marshall, who was the only Supreme Court Justice, in my 
opinion, African American, but he said a snake is a snake. It does not 
matter whether that snake is a black snake or a white snake. If he 
bites you, the result is the same.
  Now, Governor Bush, Jeb, has tried to mislead the people of Florida 
by telling them that the Clinton administration and the Department of 
Education support his initiative. That is not true. The policy of the 
Clinton administration on affirmative action is mend it; do not end it. 
Mend it; do not end it.
  Florida has never been a color-blind or gender-neutral State. In 
fact, race is a factor and is a factor that is very important. Recently 
upheld in the Supreme Court, a decision as recently as in 1995, is the 
Adarand decision.

[[Page 4554]]

  The law of the land still affirms that affirmative action is lawful 
in the United States of America. It is in the Government's interest to 
address this limited minority participation in the social and economic 
structure of this country.
  Now, I want my colleagues to know that my governor had a special 
session on how we are going to kill people in Florida, how we are going 
to execute them in Florida, but would not have one on how are we going 
to save our kids.
  Florida ranks 47th with the number of our graduates that attend 
higher education, ranks 47th. But yet we want to come up with a plan 
that would exclude another group from attending our universities.
  The real sad thing about it is the courses, he talks about the top 
20, half of the courses that they are talking about are not even 
offered in the public school system in Florida. Half of the courses are 
not even offered.
  So when we were discussing this matter, they say, do not worry about 
it, do not worry about it. We will put these classes on the Internet. 
What a joke. Have they not heard of the digital divide? The computers 
are not in the community. They are not in the schools.
  I have been a representative in Florida for over 18 years, and I know 
what happened as far as the funding of the educational system. The 
schools that I represent are the ones on the other side of the track, 
on the other side of the bridge, on the other side of the railroad 
track. They are the ones that have not been funded.
  So we have this A Plus plan and the F plan, and we are going to give 
money to the A plus schools. Those are the schools that have been given 
the money all along. The D-F schools, as opposed to try to improve 
those schools, well, we are going to give them a voucher. So what we 
are trying to do in Florida is destroy public education. Give them a 
piece of paper that does not cover the costs.
  In fact, 90 percent of the kids in Florida and in this country go to 
public schools. So rather than addressing the problem, what we are 
doing, we are coming up with gimmicks and slogans.
  People need to understand that it is not who comes to your barbecue, 
it is how they stand on the issues that is important to you. This has 
really been a wake-up call in Florida.
  Our late governor, Lawton Chiles, as recently as 1998, signed an 
agreement with the Federal Government to improve minority participation 
and female participation in higher education in Florida. Not only 
recruitment, but recruitment and retention because of the historical 
problems that we have experienced in Florida.
  Let me give my colleagues another statistic in Florida. In school 
districts that are 40 percent black and 60 percent white, 95 percent of 
the special education students are black boys. Special ed is not a way 
to go to college. We need to work on that. As I said before, Florida 
ranks 47th with the number of our graduates that go on to college. We 
in Florida need to be working to try to improve that program.
  I also said almost 50 percent of the African Americans in Florida go 
to schools that do not even offer the courses that they are requiring. 
They say, well, in the top 20 percent, what we will do is we will admit 
you to a school, a school; but we are not including the schools like 
the University of Florida, Florida State, or the University of Central 
Florida.
  Do not sit here and tell me tonight that the only students that 
should be able to go to University of Florida are our fine basketball 
players and football players. No, we want kids in law school and 
medical school. We want to have others. There is a provision to exclude 
basketball and football.
  But I have to be concerned today as I speak where we have one student 
graduating at the University of Texas and the University of California, 
one African American in law. They have the same number as the 
University of Mississippi.
  We are not going to let that happen in Florida. I am committed that 
our State will remain one of inclusion, that we will consider all of 
our kids.
  I can really thank the Bush boys, because this has really been a 
wake-up call for us in Florida. We have been kind of brain dead and not 
involved. But that is over. We are going to be involved in the 
education of our kids and the future of all of our kids.
  Lyndon Johnson says it is not enough to open the gates of 
opportunity. All of our citizens must have the ability to walk through 
those gates. Let us remember what President Clinton remarked in his 
latest visit to Selma. He said, ``We have come a long way, but our 
journey is not over.'' I mean, because of all of the great things that 
has gone on in this country, we have to make sure that all of our kids, 
black and white, get an opportunity to cross the bridge.
  Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I know the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. 
Brown) mentioned the issue in terms of the number in Texas. It is 
appalling to see that the law school at the UT, which is supposed to be 
a little more liberal than most, had accepted 500. Of those, I think 
they had about four African Americans. Then only one that actually went 
in.
  So I would agree with the gentlewoman from Florida that, if they 
outreach the way they do for athletics, they could definitely outreach 
to get some qualified African Americans to go to law school in Texas.
  I know that that is unfortunate that those situations exist. I know 
when the Hopwood case came up in Texas, we were extremely disappointed 
that this was not the law of the land. This was a case in the district, 
and it was not one that should have been.
  But as soon as that came out, they wanted to make sure they followed 
it without recognizing that there were still other cases out there that 
talked about the importance of doing the right thing.
  In most cases, even after the cases come about, we need to continue 
to ask people throughout the country to do the right thing. If one has 
500 applicants and one does not have a single African American, there 
is a problem there. There is a need for us to really kind of look at 
that. We would ask those institutions, they do not need a law to tell 
them they have got a problem. They should be able to see it.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. That is correct, Mr. Speaker. I want to tell my 
colleagues that one of the problems is that these proposals is top 
down, not bottom up.
  I talked with the deans, for example, from the school of nursing. 
What she indicated to me was that all of their applicants have over 3.0 
average. But it is important when they decide or develop the class, 
there should be some reflection as to the communities that they are 
going to be going back working in.
  There is a shortage of African Americans and Hispanics in the allied 
health. It is important that it includes it.
  One cannot come here and talk about affirmative action and not talk 
about the history of this country. That is part of the problem. We have 
had years of slavery, years of Jim Crow, and 35 years of half hearted 
trying to do the right thing or not even pretending to do the right 
thing.
  So now this is supposed to be some magical day and that it is over 
and we are not going to consider race. Race is a factor, and we must 
consider the historical fact.
  The gentlewoman from Florida (Mrs. Meek), when she was in Florida, 
bright, young lady, could not go to the institutions in Florida. She 
had to go out of State for education.
  Many, many of my colleagues, that was the situation. In certain 
programs, one could not go to our flagships. One could not go to the 
University of Florida. One could not go to Florida State. Now, when we 
are just beginning to make a difference, we are talking about, well, we 
are going to do away with all of these programs.
  Let me tell my colleagues about women, I mean, because that is an 
area where, even though we have been able to get women into various 
colleges, we have not gotten into certain programs, like engineering 
programs or the high-paying technical programs.
  So in that agreement that we signed with the Federal Government, we 
indicated that we would make sure that we

[[Page 4555]]

would recruit women, not only recruit them, but have programs there for 
the retention of women in higher education, in various fields.
  So we are not going to go back, as I said, not in Florida. We are 
going to move forward.
  Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentlewoman from 
Florida for her comments.
  Mr. Speaker, I also have with us the gentleman from Texas (Mr. 
Gonzalez) who is also joining me from San Antonio. He will be making 
some comments.
  The gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Brown), I know the comments she has 
made are serious. I know in Texas we have a long way to go, and I want 
to thank the gentlewoman for those comments. I know she mentioned also 
a little bit in terms of making sure that we provide for our 
youngsters. As we enter this new century, we have to make sure that one 
of those cornerstones is making sure that our classrooms are well 
wired, that our classrooms are well equipped to be able to handle the 
new technology.
  One of the things that, under this administration, I was real pleased 
to see that we have expanded, when Clinton started, we had only 3 
percent that were connected to the Internet. That has gone to 63 
percent. It is still not there. We still have a long way to go.
  Ms. BROWN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, can my colleagues imagine Florida 
saying, courses that one has to take, they are going to put them on the 
Internet? Even though they are wired, they are not hooked up. My 
colleagues can go to schools in my district, and half of the schools we 
do not have computers in the classrooms.
  My colleagues can go to another side of the track, and there are 
computers in all of the classrooms. There are refrigerators and air 
conditioners. No matter where a kid attends school in this great 
country, we should have ``A'' schools all over. We do not destroy our 
system by doing away with the schools. We work to bring all of the 
standards up.
  Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I am on the Committee on Armed Services, 
and I really feel that part of our national defense is going to be 
directly tied into the level of our education of our people, just like 
economics.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from San Antonio, Texas (Mr. 
Gonzalez), and ask him to join us in the comments.
  Mr. GONZALEZ. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Texas very much 
for this opportunity to join him tonight along with other colleagues 
that are discussing one of the most important issues facing our Nation, 
and that is the adequacy of our education system.
  They say that a picture is worth 1,000 words; and that is what I have 
here today. It is going to be a series of six pictures that I have 
blown up. I think as people view this, they will be able to relate to 
it because this is an experience, this is a situation that basically 
exists in everyone's home district.
  This first picture is a picture of one of those buildings that are 
more often called temporary but really are permanent. My colleagues 
know what I am talking about, those that went up sometimes as long as 
30 years ago.
  Now, safety is going to be an obvious consideration here. My 
colleagues can see that it is on blocks. There is an open area 
underneath there. The sign on the wall says that all visitors stop at 
the office.
  But we know in today's climate, and if one wants one's children in a 
safe environment, does one want the building out there that is easily 
accessible to anyone off of the streets? Of course not. This is the 
problem that we have.
  We will go to photo number 2. Now, this is going to be a picture that 
is kind of dear to my heart, and there is going to be a special reason 
for it. Back here, my colleagues see these temporary buildings. They 
see the old existing building. This is Mark Twain Middle School.
  This school is located six blocks from my home. Now, my brothers and 
sisters went to that school. My father also went to that school. My 
father will be 84 years old this May. He went to this school more than 
70 years ago. That is going to be part of our problem. That is the 
aging, deteriorating condition of our schools.
  In this school, the amazing thing is that kids from these temporary 
buildings have to go into the main building regardless of weather 
because that is where the student bathroom is located. They do not have 
any facilities even near this particular building. I am very familiar 
with that campus.
  We will go to number 3 now.

                              {time}  1900

  We all think of libraries as a place of learning. Look at this 
library. The paint is all peeling off the ceiling. We can see it. It 
actually flakes and falls off of the ceilings onto the teachers and 
students on a weekly basis.
  What is really startling here is that we see about 10 computers. 
Those 10 computers serve 900 students at Mark Twain Middle School in 
San Antonio, Texas.
  We will go to number 4. Thank God for counselors; right? Now we can 
see the counselors' office. Three counselors for 1,000 students; and 
this is where they are counseled. I will tell my colleagues that I have 
been in that room, and I am convinced that was once a utility closet. 
They did not tell me that, but I know they are utilizing other closets 
for other purposes such as offices.
  We will go to picture number 5. Now, do they need space? The good 
news was that recently the school district bought some additional 
chairs, and so they brought these boxes in. They just did not know 
where to put them while they moved out the old furniture. They do not 
have a square inch in that whole facility to even store anything, so 
these boxes of course were out there in the middle of the hallway for 
some time.
  We will go to the last picture, number 6. One of my favorites. This 
is another temporary building that somehow became permanent. The 
majority of these buildings now, where the students are housed and 
taught, are really in the temporary buildings. Everyone that sees this 
can relate to it.
  Now, we heard earlier on this floor where we had Members of Congress 
extolling the virtues and the wonderful performance of the Final Four 
in the basketball championship. I guarantee if those kids had started 
off in this middle school, they would never have honed or perfected 
their skills, their athletic abilities, because they could not.
  If my colleagues can see, back over here is the basketball goal, 
which is now located 3 feet from the temporary building. It is no 
longer a playground; it is no longer a basketball court. But that is 
what is happening in our schools.
  By way of background, in 1995, the GAO conducted a study, and this is 
what they discovered: forty percent of America's schools reported 
needing $36 billion to repair or replace building features such as a 
roof or plumbing. Something as basic as a roof or plumbing.
  Two-thirds of America's schools reported needing $11 billion over a 
3-year period for repairs and renovations dealing with accessibility 
and health and safety problems, such as the removal of asbestos, lead 
in water or in the paint, and materials in underground storage tanks.
  Fifty percent of America's schools reported unsatisfactory 
environmental conditions, such as poor ventilation, heating or lighting 
problems, or poor physical security, which should be uppermost in our 
minds.
  One-third of America's schools needed extensive repair and building 
replacements at a cost of $65 billion. These schools throughout the 
Nation house 14 million students.
  The demand for Internet in our schools is at an all-time high. This 
study showed, according to the National Center for Education 
Statistics, only 39 percent of classrooms in our poorest schools have 
Internet access. Not having Internet access today is like not having a 
library.
  My colleagues know what I am talking about. This is not what we wish 
for our children or any child in this great Nation of ours.
  In addition, the National Center for Education Statistics reported 
that in

[[Page 4556]]

1999 America's schools were wearing out. The average public school in 
America is 42 years old, and school buildings begin rapid deterioration 
after 40 years. We are well aware of that.
  That is the problem that faces us. So what do we do about it? Do we 
throw our hands up and say, oh, we cannot do anything about that; let 
us give in? Of course not. Our goal, though, is not all brick and 
mortar. Our goal is not to repair, renovate, and rebuild these schools 
solely to have a nice building. That is not it. It is part and parcel 
of a grand plan, and it is an essential component in this grand plan.
  What I am talking about is reducing class size. Every parent that 
goes to a school where they are going to enroll their child, the first 
question they ask is what is the size of the classes? What is the 
teacher-student ratio. That is the first question anyone would ask. But 
we do not even have the physical facility to accommodate smaller 
classes in most schools in my district, which is in San Antonio.
  What do we get out of reduced class size? We have safe and orderly 
places for learning, to begin with. We have improved performance of 
students and teachers. Every study reflects the smaller the class, the 
better an educational experience for the child. There is no doubt about 
that.
  Now, I am not here to say that only Democrats have these concerns, 
and I am not here to say that only Democrats have all the answers. That 
is not true. We have most of the answers. And a good example of a 
bipartisan bill was the Rangel-Johnson Better Classroom Act. And I am 
now just going to briefly go over it.
  This bipartisan bill would subsidize $24.8 billion in zero interest 
school modernization bonds. The Federal Government would provide tax 
credits for the interest normally paid on these bonds. Bonds that would 
have gone to pay bond interest would be freed for other educational 
needs. For each $1,000 of school bonds, States or local school 
districts would save as much as $500 in payments. Yes, out of $1,000, 
they could save $500 in interest service payments.
  So what was the Federal Government's role in this? What would be the 
burden on the Federal Government? What would happen to local control? 
States and eligible school districts would complete a review of 
construction and renovation needs. I repeat, the school districts and 
the States would conduct the studies. State plans would include 
processes for allocating funds to areas with the greatest needs. The 
Federal Government would provide a tax credit to the bond purchaser 
equal to the interest that would otherwise be paid on a school 
construction bond. No new Federal bureaucracy would be created.
  So my colleagues might say, that sounds like a great idea; what 
happened to it? It died in a Republican-controlled committee. They are 
in the majority, and they can do it if they want to; and they did it in 
this bipartisan bill. Not bipartisan enough as far as the number of 
Republicans that would come and join us in this wonderful plan and 
proposal. But this is the problem today.
  I started off my remarks by saying that a picture is worth a thousand 
words. I also will end it by saying that talk is cheap. Words are 
cheap. What we want to see is action. What we want to see are tangible 
results. So we may have individuals out there that are touting 
themselves as the education governor of Texas, but if Texas is such a 
great model, then I would ask all of my fellow Members in this House, 
434, those that are not from Texas, I would ask them to adopt Texas as 
the model; strive for Texas's great place in education, if that is the 
great progress that has been made in the past 5 years under Governor 
Bush.
  Talk is cheap. I ask Governor Bush and I ask Members on the other 
side of the aisle to join hands. Let us not give up on an educational 
system that provides an education to 90 percent of the children in this 
country, the public school system. It needs improvement. There is no 
doubt about that, and we all agree. And we can do it if we work 
together. But we cannot replace it by simply saying we have a voucher 
program or let us just privatize it. That will not work.
  Let us not lose faith in our public schools. If we lose faith in our 
public schools, we lose faith in the students. We lose faith in our 
children. We lose faith in our future.
  Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman for those 
great comments. I think he has brought this to light in terms of one of 
the issues. And I want to share with the gentleman the fact that when 
we did a hearing on violence, one of the key things that they found was 
classroom size and the importance of making sure we had construction 
money to rebuild our schools in this country.
  I think it is going to be important to make sure we upgrade our 
technology. We want to make sure that the digital divide does not occur 
and that cyber-segregation does not happen. I think it is important 
that every school have that opportunity to be able to provide for their 
youngsters what is needed.
  The gentleman mentioned libraries. I know libraries are having 
difficulty buying books and also buying the new technology.

                              {time}  1915

  Those resources are key. And I want to take this opportunity to thank 
my colleague for joining me tonight as we have talked about this 
particular issue which is very key, and that is meeting the needs of 
education in this country.
  As we move forward, we know that the solution is a variety of 
answers. Both classroom sizes, making sure we have new construction for 
our schools, making sure we meet those demographic needs that are out 
there, making sure that we have after-school programs, making sure that 
we reach out to those 3- and 4-year-old youngsters with Head Start and 
a variety of different types of programs, and also making sure we have 
qualified teachers that are out there providing that instruction that 
is needed.
  That requires a commitment, and we are here to let our colleagues 
know that we are going to make that commitment to make sure that we 
meet the challenge of the 21st century.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank our colleagues for allowing us to have 
this opportunity to be here tonight and dialoguing on the important 
issue of education, which, as my colleague recognizes, is very 
important and very key to all of us and one of the things that we need 
to all be responsive.

                          ____________________