[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 8]
[House]
[Pages 10324-10325]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                    MORE COMPARABLE EDUCATION SYSTEM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 3, 2001, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Fattah) is 
recognized during morning hour debates for 5 minutes.
  Mr. FATTAH. Mr. Speaker, I take the floor today to, on one hand, 
compliment the other body which for over 2 days now has debated the 
legislation that I offered here in the House to create a more 
comparable education system within our various States.
  I want to thank in particular the Senator from the great State of 
Connecticut, Senator Dodd, and Senator Biden from Delaware, Senator 
Reed from Rhode Island. I would like to also thank Senator Boxer and a 
host of other members, Senator Corzine, and then the colleague who I 
served on the Web-based Education Commission with, Senator Enzi, who is 
a Republican Member of the Senate from the State of Wyoming.
  I would expect that when the matter is brought for a vote after some 
more debate this week, there will be a lot of the other Members from 
the other body that I would want to thank.
  But I also have some concern that this legislation, unfortunately, 
did not get a full hearing here in this House. The Committee on Rules 
decided that, when we debated the education bill, that for some reason 
we were in a rush and that we could not offer amendments to title I as 
part of the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education 
Act.
  So even though the House Committee on Education and the Workforce 
under the leadership of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), my great 
friend, the majority chairman, gave me the opportunity to testify 
before the committee and to raise this concern, it was not afforded the 
opportunity rightfully to be debated and voted on here on the floor of 
the House.
  But let me move to the substance of this matter because I think that 
we perpetrate a fraud on the Nation to talk about education reform and 
some discussion about the inequities that exist within our States 
between poor, rural and urban school districts and their wealthier 
suburban counterparts, for in almost every State in the Union, there 
has been and continues to be litigation brought by small, rural and 
impoverished school districts and large urban districts seeking from 
their State a fuller share of educational funding, an adequate share.
  When we talk about education reform, we talk about testing every 
child every year in every school as if every child every year and in 
every school is afforded the same education opportunity. Well, we know 
that is not the case.

                              {time}  1245

  We know that, for instance, in poorer school districts most of the 
children are being taught by teachers who are not certified in the 
subject that they are teaching; that, in fact, in math, in science, in 
the critical disciplines, that the teachers who are teaching the 
majority of the students in urban and rural school districts did not 
major nor minor in the subjects that they are teaching. So we have 
physical education teachers teaching science, and then we want to come 
along and test kids and compare them to others.
  Now, I see my colleague, the newest of Members from the great State 
of California, where there has been plenty of litigation on this issue. 
Look at the example of Beverly Hills High, in which young people have 
the opportunity to have 23 advanced placement courses offered to them, 
but at Compton High not one advanced placement course is available to 
them. How can we create a situation where we are going to look at young 
people and say they are not performing as well as their counterparts 
when they are not given the same opportunity?
  In Maryland, right next door, we have wide disparities on what is 
being spent in one district versus another. We have in the city of 
Baltimore 123 young people who had the opportunity to take AP courses; 
but in Montgomery County, the wealthiest suburb, 5,000 students had the 
opportunity to take AP courses.
  In Philadelphia, my home, in the great Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, 
the 45 contiguous school districts to

[[Page 10325]]

the city of Philadelphia spent, on average, $70,000 more per year per 
classroom than the city district. Now, how can we have a circumstance 
in which these young people are going to be able to compete when in the 
suburban districts class sizes are at 18 and 19 and in the city it is 
above 30? How can we have a situation where in the Council Rock School 
District, right near my home outside of Philadelphia, they can spend 
$90,000 a year on a teacher and inside the city they can only afford to 
pay $30,000 a year for a teacher. How are they going to attract and 
retain quality teachers?
  Then let us talk about curriculum, because the Federal Government has 
no role in curriculum; States have that responsibility. Our Department 
of Education says in a study on this matter that only 15 percent of 
low-income students ever get the opportunity to take algebra, geometry, 
and the higher-order math. And so, Mr. Speaker, I come today to 
compliment the other body, to issue a concern about our work here on 
education reform, and hope we too will have an opportunity in 
conference to add our voice on this matter.

                          ____________________