[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 5]
[Senate]
[Pages 7163-7165]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



             BETTER EDUCATION FOR STUDENTS AND TEACHERS ACT

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate will resume consideration of S. 1.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 1) to extend programs and activities under the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.

  The Senate resumed consideration of the bill.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Idaho.


                 Amendment No. 372 to Amendment No. 358

  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.

[[Page 7164]]

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Idaho (Mr. Craig) proposes an amendment 
     numbered 372.

  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the 
amendment be dispensed with.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Without objection, it is so 
ordered.
  The amendment reads as follows:

 (Purpose: To tie funding under the Elementary and Secondary Education 
              Act of 1965 to improved student performance)

       On page 29, between lines 14 and 15, insert the following:

     ``SEC. 16. FUNDING RULE.

       ``(a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
       ``(1) Adjusted for inflation, the amount of money Federal, 
     State, and local governments spend per public school student 
     has nearly doubled over the past 30 years.
       ``(2) This doubling of real, per-pupil spending has had no 
     effect on test scores.
       ``(3) In 1965, the Federal Government enacted title I of 
     the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to 
     eradicate the achievement gap between economically 
     disadvantaged students and their more advantaged peers.
       ``(4) In 2001 that achievement gap persists, unaffected by 
     the $120,000,000,000 the Federal Government has spent on such 
     title I.
       ``(5) In 1996 the Department of Education reported that 
     `The progress of [part A of title I] participants on 
     standardized tests and on criterion-referenced tests was no 
     better than that of nonparticipants with similar backgrounds 
     and prior achievement'.
       ``(b) Funding Rule.--Notwithstanding any other provision of 
     this Act, a State shall be eligible for an increase in the 
     amount of funds made available under this Act from one fiscal 
     year to the next fiscal year (after adjusting for increases 
     in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers as 
     published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics) when the State 
     meets the requirements for adequate yearly progress for the 
     State under section 1111(b)(2) for the school year preceding 
     the fiscal year for which the determination is made, except 
     that nothing in this subsection shall be construed to provide 
     funds to a State under this Act for any fiscal year in an 
     amount that is less than the amount of funds provided to the 
     State under this Act for fiscal year 2001.''.

  Mr. CRAIG. Mr. President, I come to the floor this morning to address 
the very issue my colleague has just talked about, the issue of 
spending and education. We have offered an amendment to curb the 
Federal Government's appetite to spend tax dollars. It will ensure that 
we no longer throw good money after bad programs. It will focus our 
Nation's educational bureaucracy on what should be its sole purpose: 
helping students learn.
  Over the course of the last several days, we have been debating 
reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, or ESEA, 
and in that process we are adding by authorization a phenomenal amount 
of new money for the purpose of education.
  We have heard a great deal in this Chamber about how much we need to 
spend to improve education for our young people. Every Senator clearly 
wants to improve the educational system to which we entrust our 
children's futures. Unlike the past, we are offering some very real 
reforms this time. But in a continuation of past practices, we also are 
offering a tremendous amount of new money.
  Let me say very clearly that we have spent an awful lot of money on 
education in the past, and the record is very clear that money alone 
does not solve that problem. In fact, the additional money we have 
added to our educational system over the last 30 years has done nothing 
to improve education.
  Over the past 30 years, the amount of money we have spent to educate 
our children has doubled; that is even after inflation. In other words, 
it is real money we're talking about here and a lot of it. It will cost 
taxpayers twice as much to educate my grandchildren in public schools 
as it did to educate my children in public schools.
  We doubled the amount we spend on each student in the timespan of 30 
years. Yet this huge increase in spending has brought us, as I just 
mentioned, nothing.
  This is a chart that demonstrates that clearly. In spite of the fact 
that per-student spending has doubled and continues to climb, student 
achievement has stagnated. This is a line that demonstrates that major 
increase in spending over the timeframe I have mentioned through the 
seventies, the eighties, and the nineties. Look at the reading scores 
of the national assessment of 17-year-olds, 13-year-olds, and 9-year-
olds. Somehow it does not seem to parallel the amount of money we have 
spent.
  We doubled the resources, and yet somehow the system did not improve, 
and our children were shortchanged. Today's schoolchildren are entering 
an educational system that is no better than that in which their 
parents were educated. In fact, there are measurements to indicate it 
is worse.
  This next chart shows that not only have reading scores stagnated 
over that 30-year period, but doubling education spending likewise has 
brought us no improvement in math and no improvement in science. Yet 
our young people, in a very integrated world where demand for math and 
science skills is higher than ever, must compete with students from 
around the world for jobs that in their very character are 
international. Yet our educational system, despite all the money we've 
poured into it, has produced stagnation in math and science achievement 
for the last 30 years.
  The law we concern ourselves with today was passed in 1965. Its 
primary purpose is to close the achievement gap between poor students 
and nonpoor students. Since 1965, we have devoted some $120 billion to 
this goal. Yet as this chart demonstrates, $120 billion later, poor 
kids still lag behind in reading. In other words, poor kids are no 
better off today than they were 30 years ago. We have achieved nothing 
for them. Most important, we have allowed them not to achieve, and the 
taxpayers of this country have spent $120 billion in a failed attempt 
to close that gap.
  Five years ago, the Department of Education conducted a review of 
this program for disadvantaged students known as title I and found:

       The progress of [title I, part A] participants on 
     standardized tests and on criterion-referenced tests was no 
     better than that of nonparticipants with similar backgrounds 
     and prior achievement.

  When tested, no difference could be found between those inside title 
I and those outside title I. I want to repeat that. The progress of the 
participants was no better inside the program than outside the program. 
In other words, we spent a lot of money on a program that did nothing 
to improve the situation of these poor children. One hundred twenty 
billion dollars and nothing to show for it.
  How did we reward the system's failure? Of course, with more money. 
We allowed the establishment to design the system, and we fed the 
system money hoping that young people would improve, hoping that their 
scores in reading, math, and science would improve, and it did not 
happen.
  Yes, children have been left behind for a good number of years. We 
have struggled mightily. Certainly the chairman and the Presiding 
Officer have struggled mightily to try to reform the primary and 
secondary education systems of our country. The establishment has 
fought them openly and aggressively.
  Today we have some reform, but we are also putting in a phenomenal 
amount of new money through authorization with that reform. The 
question is, What will it yield?
  It has been said that the definition of insanity is doing the same 
thing over and over and just hoping there will be a different result. 
That is exactly what we have been doing for 30 years.
  This is a prescription for mediocrity.
  The amendment I offer today will change the way the Federal 
Government deals with schools that fail to improve. It is a moderate 
amendment and, I believe, a compassionate amendment.
  Decade after decade, as I have demonstrated, at least for the last 
three decades, schools have failed to improve, and decade after decade, 
with a wink and a smile, we tell the system: Don't worry about how many 
children you have left behind, we are still going to give you more 
money.

[[Page 7165]]

  The amendment I offer today will stop handing out rewards for leaving 
children behind. Under this amendment, in order to receive a funding 
increase under this act, States would be required to make adequate 
yearly progress in boosting student achievement, as defined in the 
bipartisan agreement reached between my colleagues from Vermont and 
Massachusetts, the chairman of the committee and the ranking member.
  This is a moderate measure. It will not cut educational spending. It 
guarantees that a State's funding level cannot fall below its current 
level but that a State that does not improve their children's 
achievement would forgo any reward from the Federal Government until 
they do.
  This amendment even allows the act to adjust for inflation because if 
we did not, that would be a real cut.
  What we have to say to the educational establishment of this country 
is: If you do not create a system that allows our children to achieve 
at ever improving rates, then we cannot reward you with more of the 
taxpayers' money.
  Public education is critically important, and a strong public 
education system in our country has been the foundation of our Republic 
and, without question, the strength of our Republic.
  This is a moderate and compassionate measure, and I believe it is 
necessary. We cannot reauthorize this act and say that without 
improvement, the taxpayers of this country will continue to reward the 
system.
  Taxpayers historically have been very generous when it comes to 
education. Funding at the local and State level over the last several 
years across the country has rapidly increased. But it is also time to 
say, as we do with this amendment and with the reauthorization of ESEA, 
improvement is now a must; it must be measured, and if you do improve, 
we will reward you. But if you do not, we will no longer use taxpayers' 
hard earned dollars to buy mediocrity for the young people of America.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from North Dakota.

                          ____________________