[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 13]
[House]
[Pages 17342-17362]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2211, READY TO TEACH ACT OF 2003

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Simpson). Pursuant to clause 8 of rule 
XX, the pending business is the question of agreeing to the resolution, 
House Resolution 310, on which the yeas and nays are ordered.
  The Clerk read the title of the resolution.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the resolution.
  This will be a 5-minute vote.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 252, 
nays 170, not voting 12, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 338]

                               YEAS--252

     Abercrombie
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Bachus
     Baker
     Ballenger
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Bell
     Bereuter
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burns
     Burr
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Carter
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Clay
     Coble
     Cole
     Collins
     Cox
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cunningham
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Doolittle
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Emerson
     English
     Eshoo
     Everett
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Flake
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Fossella
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Gutknecht
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hobson
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Honda
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Isakson
     Issa
     Istook
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     LaHood
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lucas (OK)
     Manzullo
     Marshall
     Matheson
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McKeon
     Meeks (NY)
     Mica
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller, Gary
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nethercutt
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Oxley
     Paul
     Pearce
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Ramstad
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reynolds
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Royce
     Rush
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Saxton
     Schrock
     Scott (GA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stearns
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauzin
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Toomey
     Turner (OH)
     Upton
     Vitter
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Weldon (FL)
     Weller
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                               NAYS--170

     Ackerman
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Baird
     Baldwin
     Ballance
     Becerra
     Berkley
     Berman
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blumenauer
     Boswell
     Brady (PA)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown, Corrine
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Case
     Clyburn
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Crowley
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     Deutsch
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley (CA)
     Doyle
     Emanuel
     Engel
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Farr
     Fattah
     Filner
     Ford
     Frank (MA)
     Frost
     Gonzalez
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hoeffel
     Holt
     Hooley (OR)
     Hoyer
     Inslee
     Israel
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     John
     Johnson, E. B.
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     Kleczka
     Kucinich
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (GA)
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lynch
     Majette
     Maloney
     Markey
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McIntyre
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Menendez
     Michaud
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (VA)
     Murtha
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Pallone
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pelosi
     Rahall
     Rangel
     Reyes
     Rodriguez
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Ruppersberger
     Ryan (OH)
     Sabo
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Scott (VA)
     Serrano
     Sherman
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Stark
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Tauscher
     Taylor (MS)
     Thompson (MS)
     Tierney
     Towns
     Turner (TX)
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (PA)
     Wexler
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn

                             NOT VOTING--12

     Cramer
     Dreier
     Edwards
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Goss
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Janklow
     Millender-McDonald
     Owens
     Pascrell


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood) (during the vote). Members are 
advised there are 2 minutes to vote.

                              {time}  1211

  So the resolution was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 310 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 2211.

                              {time}  1212


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 2211) to reauthorize title II of the Higher Education Act of 
1965, with Mr. Simpson in the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as having 
been read the first time.
  Under the rule, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner) and the 
gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) each will control 30 
minutes.

                              {time}  1215

  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner).
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  H.R. 2211, the Ready to Teach Act of 2003, which was reported by the 
Committee on Education and the Workforce on June 10 by a bipartisan 
voice vote, complements the No Child Left Behind Act and will help 
improve the quality and accountability of our Nation's teacher 
preparation programs.
  No Child Left Behind set a lofty, but achievable, goal of placing a 
highly qualified teacher in every public school classroom by the 2005-
2006 school year. We can all agree that a highly qualified teacher 
plays a pivotal role in the successful education of our Nation's 
children, and those children deserve nothing less. Congress has kept 
our word to increase funding to help ensure teachers can become highly 
qualified. In fact, we increased funding for teacher quality grants by 
35 percent in the first year of No Child Left Behind alone, and the 
increases are continuing. We are providing the resources, and this bill 
will build on that effort by supporting our teachers with real reforms.
  There is a serious problem when the programs charged with training 
the teachers of tomorrow are not meeting that goal, and that is exactly 
what we are facing today. Everyone here will agree that highly 
qualified teachers prepared to meet the challenges of the classroom and 
fulfill the needs of our students are essential if we are going to 
succeed with education reform in America. Yet the Nation's teacher-
training programs suffer from serious lack of accountability, and this 
time it is the teachers who are being left behind.

[[Page 17343]]

  The bill before us today takes important steps to ensure that 
teacher-training programs are in fact giving perspective teachers the 
skills and knowledge they need to meet the highly qualified standard in 
No Child Left Behind. Let us be clear on this point: this bill is about 
supporting our teachers. We are expecting a lot from them, and they 
deserve to have access to high quality training programs that ensure 
that when they step into the classroom they are truly ready to teach.
  This legislation makes several improvements to title II of the Higher 
Education Act to ensure that teacher-training programs are providing 
perspective teachers with the skills they need to be highly qualified 
and ready to teach when they enter the classroom. This bill is about 
helping teachers, pure and simple, giving them the tools and training 
they need to meet the needs of our Nation's students.
  H.R. 2211 authorizes competitively awarded grants under the Higher 
Education Act to increase the quality of our teaching force by 
improving the preparation of perspective teachers and enhancing teacher 
professional development activities. We want to hold teacher-
preparation programs accountable for preparing highly qualified 
teachers and recruit highly qualified individuals, including minorities 
and individuals from other occupations, into the teaching force.
  The Ready to Teach Act ensures that program effectiveness can 
accurately be measured and places a renewed emphasis on the skills 
needed to meet the ``highly qualified'' standard found in No Child Left 
Behind, such as the use of advanced technology in the classroom, 
vigorous academic content knowledge, scientifically based research and 
challenging State student academic standards.
  Under this legislation, funds can also be used to recruit 
individuals, and specifically minorities, into the teaching profession. 
The committee adopted a bipartisan amendment offered by the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Burns), the gentleman from New York (Mr. Owens), and 
the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) to authorize grants for the 
creation of Centers of Excellence at high quality, minority-serving 
institutions.
  In general, those Centers of Excellence will help increase teacher 
recruitment and make institutional improvements to teacher-preparation 
programs at minority-serving institutions. Grants under this program 
will be competitively awarded to high quality teacher preparation 
programs at eligible institutions, which include historically black 
colleges and universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, tribally 
controlled colleges or universities, Alaska native-serving 
institutions, or native Hawaiian-serving institutions.
  Mr. Chairman, as we work to place highly qualified teachers in 
classrooms across the Nation, I am particularly pleased that the Ready 
to Teach Act allows for innovative programs that provide alternative 
options to traditional teacher-training programs. Proposals outlined in 
this bill, such as charter colleges of education, provide a much-needed 
alternative route to training highly qualified and effective teachers.
  H.R. 2211 authorizes States to use funds to set up charter colleges 
of education that function in a manner similar to elementary and 
secondary charter schools, except that they would prepare highly 
qualified teachers in a higher-education setting. Charter colleges of 
education would exchange flexibility in meeting State requirements for 
institutional commitments to produce results-based outcomes for 
teacher-education graduates, measured based on increased student 
academic achievement.
  This bill takes the important step of recognizing that individuals 
seeking to enter the teaching profession often have varied backgrounds; 
and by creating a more flexible approach that steps outside the box, 
these individuals can become highly qualified teachers through training 
programs as unique as their own individual experiences.
  H.R. 2211 will also hold teacher-preparation programs accountable for 
preparing highly qualified teachers. While current higher-education law 
contains annual reporting requirements, these reporting measures have 
often proven ineffective in measuring the true quality of teacher-
preparation programs. In fact, the current requirements have often been 
manipulated, leaving data skewed and often irrelevant. The Ready to 
Teach Act includes accountability provisions that will strengthen the 
reporting measures and hold teacher-preparation programs accountable 
for providing accurate and useful information.
  I would like to thank a new member of our committee, the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), the author of this bill, for his work on 
the Ready to Teach Act. I would also like to commend my colleague, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the ranking member; the 
gentleman from California (Chairman McKeon) of the subcommittee; and 
his ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), for their 
bipartisan effort on this bill. They have put together a bipartisan 
bill that makes commonsense changes to title II of the Higher Education 
Act to help improve the quality of our Nation's teachers.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the underlying bill.
  The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) ask 
unanimous consent to control the time of the gentleman from California 
(Mr. George Miller)?
  Mr. KILDEE. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
  The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the gentleman from Michigan is 
recognized.
  There was no objection.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 2211, the Ready to Teach Act 
of 2003, with the hope that certain amendments that were made in order 
will be adopted.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), the author 
of this bill, and the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon), the 
chairman of the subcommittee. He and I have worked together for a 
number of years now on higher-education matters. It was a very 
enjoyable task in this. I would also like to thank the chairman of the 
full committee, the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Boehner), for his 
work in the committee.
  Mr. Chairman, this legislation reauthorizes title II's teacher-
quality programs and makes much-needed improvements to its 
accountability system. Teacher quality is a critical element to ensure 
our children succeed academically. This bill makes great strides to 
improve teacher-preparation programs that create our supply of highly 
qualified teachers.
  Chief of these improvements is a bipartisan amendment accepted at the 
subcommittee markup creating the Minority Centers of Excellence 
program. This new program will allow high-quality Historically Black 
Colleges, Hispanic-serving institutions and Tribal colleges to improve 
teacher preparation and to work with disadvantaged school districts. 
This program will tap the vast knowledge and skill housed in these 
institutions to improve teacher preparation, especially for minority 
teachers.
  In addition, the bill's provisions to expand teacher retention and 
preparation of early childhood teachers are very critical improvements. 
With added resources for retention, school districts will be more able 
to keep highly qualified teachers in their districts. With new 
resources to ensure that we have early childhood teachers, our Nation's 
youngest children will receive the head start they really need to 
succeed.
  While this legislation represents a good first step, we are missing 
an opportunity to address some of the most pressing issues facing 
education. Whether it is the No Child Left Behind Act, IDEA or Pell 
Grants, the Bush administration and Republican leadership have failed 
to meet their education funding commitments.
  President Bush and the House and Senate appropriations committees 
have proposed funding, for example, title I at $12.35 billion. That is 
over $6 billion short of the $18.5 billion which the President signed 
into law for this year when he signed No Child Left Behind.

[[Page 17344]]

  The Republican budget resolution promised $2.2 billion in new IDEA 
funding. The House and Senate appropriations committees have proposed 
less than half that amount.
  In addition, the Pell Grants have been frozen by the House and Senate 
appropriation committees, despite increasing college costs.
  While I really want to reiterate that I will support this 
legislation, the administration and the Republican Congress are missing 
an opportunity to meet our education funding commitments.
  Basically, and Members have heard me say this before, this is an 
authorization bill; and it is a good authorization bill. We worked hard 
on it. But I have always said an authorization bill is like a get-well 
card, Mr. Chairman. If I have a friend who is ill, I will send my 
friend a get-well card, which expresses my attitude, how I value my 
friend, and that is very important. But what my friend really needs is 
a Blue Cross card to pay the bills.
  I think we have to work closer together to make sure there is not 
such a wide disparity between the levels that are in the authorization 
bills, the get-well card, and what is in the appropriations bill, the 
Blue Cross card.
  But having said that, I want to say that the authorizing committee 
did work well together; and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the 
chairman, was very, very fair to us, and we adopted Democratic 
amendments in that committee. I think the authorizers have done a good 
job.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, let me again congratulate my friend from Michigan. This 
is a bipartisan bill that has been worked on with Members on both sides 
of the aisle to try to address the serious needs that we have in our 
teacher preparation programs as outlined in title II of the Higher 
Education Act. But as a side note, I need to respond to my colleague 
from Michigan when it comes to the issue of funding the Federal 
Government's role in education.
  We can look at this as a glass half empty, or we can look at it as a 
glass half full. Federal education spending over the last 3 fiscal 
years has gone from $28 billion for elementary and secondary programs 
to $35.7 billion for these same programs, including almost $400 million 
to pay for the development and implementation of the testing 
requirements under No Child Left Behind.
  We can look at title I. It has been increased almost 200 percent over 
the last 6 years. We can look at the last 6 years of special education 
funding having risen 300 percent.
  So when Members come to the floor of the House and suggest that we 
are not meeting our commitments, I have no choice but to stand up and 
say, let us be honest. We are doing our share. Could we do more? Of 
course, we could do more.
  But as I told my colleagues one day, I was elected to come to 
Congress and make decisions; I was not elected to be Santa Claus, and 
today is not Christmas. As we get through the appropriations process, 
we are going to continue to work at the appropriate funding levels for 
these education programs. But, today, we have a bipartisan bill that 
will help improve the quality of our Nation's teachers and those who 
seek to be teachers, and we have to continue to work together to meet 
this important goal.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman 
from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), the author of this bill, who spent an awful 
lot of time as a school board member, a State legislator, and now as a 
Member of Congress, developing teacher-training programs to help meet 
the needs of our Nation's teachers.

                              {time}  1230

  Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman of the Committee on 
Education and the Workforce, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), for 
yielding me this time. I would like to thank the chairman of the 
subcommittee, the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon), as well as 
the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) and the gentleman 
from Michigan (Mr. Kildee). We have worked very closely, very good 
together, as the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) pointed out, in a 
very bipartisan fashion. And, as the chairman just mentioned, it is not 
all about funding; it is certainly also about accountability. That is 
what we are trying to do in the reauthorization of the Title II part of 
the Higher Education Act: We want to bring additional accountability so 
that we make sure that no child is left behind by assuring that a 
qualified teacher is, indeed, in every classroom.
  H.R. 2211, the Ready to Teach Act of 2003, is a bill that I 
introduced to help ensure that teacher training programs are producing 
well-prepared teachers to meet the needs of American students. H.R. 
2211 updates the teacher provisions of the Higher Education Act. 
Specifically, this legislation amends Part A, Teacher Quality 
Enhancement Grants for States and Partnerships, and also Part B, 
Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology of Title II of the 
Higher Education Act. In addition, H.R. 2211 authorizes teacher 
preparation Centers of Excellence for minority-serving institutions.
  The purposes of the Ready to Teach Act are to increase student 
academic achievement, elevate the quality of the current and future 
teaching force by improving the preparation of prospective teachers and 
enhancing professional development activities; hold teacher preparation 
programs accountable for preparing highly qualified teachers; and to 
recruit highly qualified individuals, including minorities and 
individuals from other occupations, into the teaching force.
  As in current law, H.R. 2211 authorizes three types of competitive 
grant programs: State grants, partnership grants, and teacher 
recruitment grants.
  State grant funds must be used to reform teacher preparation 
requirements, coordinate with activities under Title II of No Child 
Left Behind Act, and ensure that current and future teachers are highly 
qualified. Programs administered through State grants will focus on 
effective teacher preparation, placing a renewed emphasis on the skills 
needed to meet the ``highly qualified'' standard.
  The partnership grants allow effective partners to join together, 
combining their strengths and resources to train highly qualified 
teachers and achieve success in the classroom. The eligible 
partnerships must include four partners: a high-quality teacher 
preparation program at an institution of higher education; a college of 
arts and sciences, presumably at that same institution; a high-need, 
local educational agency; and a public or private educational 
organization. It can include additional partners, but it must include 
those four. These partnerships will require the faculty of the teacher 
preparation programs to serve with a highly qualified teacher in the 
classroom, allowing effective in-class experience to ensure that 
teachers are truly prepared to teach. Among other things, partnership 
activities will help to ensure that teachers are able to use advanced 
technology effectively in the classroom, address the needs of students 
with different learning styles, including students with disabilities, 
and receive training in methods of improving student behavior in the 
classroom.
  As America holds teacher preparation programs accountable for 
preparing teachers who will ensure that no child is left behind, the 
need to recruit individuals into the teaching profession will only 
expand. Teacher recruitment grants will help bring high-quality 
individuals into teacher programs and ultimately put more highly 
qualified teachers into the classrooms. H.R. 2211 recognizes the need 
to ensure that high-need, local educational agencies are able to 
effectively recruit highly qualified teachers, and will help answer 
that need by increasing the number of teachers being trained.
  H.R. 2211 also includes a new program which is based on provisions 
submitted to the committee by the United Negro College Fund and the 
Hispanic Education Coalition to authorize teacher

[[Page 17345]]

preparation Centers of Excellence at minority-serving institutions. In 
general, the purpose of this program and this amendment brought to us 
by my colleague and good friend, the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. 
Burns), are to increase teacher recruitment and to make institutional 
improvements to teacher preparation programs at minority-serving 
institutions.
  While current higher education law contains annual reporting and 
accountability requirements for institutions of higher education, these 
measures, as the chairman indicated, have proven ineffective in 
determining the true quality of teacher preparation programs. H.R. 2211 
in this reauthorization adds accountability provisions to the Higher 
Education Act that will strengthen these current law provisions and 
hold teacher preparation programs accountable for providing accurate 
and useful information about the quality of their programs.
  Mr. Chairman, in summary, H.R. 2211 is specifically designed to align 
teacher preparation programs with the high standards of accountability 
and results provided for in the No Child Left Behind Act. This Ready to 
Teach Act will help to ensure that program effectiveness can accurately 
be measured and places a strong focus on the quality of teacher 
preparation and a renewed emphasis on the skills needed to meet the 
``highly qualified'' standard found in the No Child Left Behind Act.
  In conclusion, I want to thank my colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle for their assistance in moving this bill through the process. It 
is a bipartisan product, Mr. Chairman, of which we can all be proud. I 
urge each and every one of my colleagues to support H.R. 2211, the 
Ready to Teach Act of 2003.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Price).
  Mr. PRICE of North Carolina. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to rise in 
support of H.R. 2211, the Ready to Teach Act, and to highlight the new 
provisions for recruiting and training teachers that it contains.
  Our Nation faces the unprecedented challenge of recruiting and 
retaining an additional 2.5 million teachers over the next 10 years. 
This is necessary to keep pace with anticipated retirements and a 
growing student population. It is also a critical aspect of education 
reform. The No Child Left Behind Act requires that every teacher be 
``highly qualified'' by the 2005-06 school year. In fact, there is 
hardly an aspect of educational reform that does not depend on a well-
trained and highly motivated teaching force.
  That is why I introduced the Teaching Fellows Act, H.R. 1805, modeled 
on a program established in 1986 by the North Carolina General Assembly 
that has brought some 4,000 young people into our State's teaching 
force and that offers, I believe, a model for national emulation. I am 
grateful to the gentleman from North Carolina (Mr. Ballenger), a 
cosponsor of H.R. 1805, and to the gentleman from California (Chairman 
McKeon), and to the ranking member, the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. 
Kildee) and to many other subcommittee and full committee members for 
their cooperation in writing major elements of the Teaching Fellows Act 
into the bill that is before us today.
  Much as we envisioned in the Teaching Fellows Act, H.R. 2211, as 
amended in committee, would establish State scholarship programs for 
prospective teachers and give them the preparation and support they 
need to make a long-term commitment to the field. Scholarships could be 
offered to high school students embarking on a 4-year program or to 
students farther along in college when they might be better prepared to 
make a career choice.
  The bill also contains a second recruitment initiative: Through 
partnerships between community colleges and 4-year schools, H.R. 2211 
would offer fellowships to 2-year students, particularly those in 
training as teaching assistants, to go on for their bachelor's degree 
and full teaching certification. This community college component of 
the program is especially promising for rural and small town areas. Too 
often our beginning teachers are lured away by schools in the big 
cities and the affluent suburbs, leaving rural and inner-city schools 
behind. But community colleges typically contain people more deeply 
rooted in these underserved areas, and enabling them to complete a 4-
year degree would be a promising strategy for identifying and training 
a cadre of ``home-grown'' teachers.
  The program we envision would not merely throw money at individual 
students, but would seek, through rich, extracurricular programs, to 
promote espirit de corps and collaborative learning, to strengthen 
professional identity, and to provide a support system as students 
first enter the classroom as teachers. Students would participate in 
various community and school-based internships and experiences that go 
well beyond normal teacher preparation. In North Carolina, these 
enrichment programs have featured orientations to school systems, 
communities, and educational issues, as well as experiences like 
Outward Bound and international travel.
  In exchange, scholarship recipients would be required to teach in a 
public school for a minimum of 1 year plus a period of time equivalent 
to the length of their scholarships. In this the program would resemble 
the National Health Service Corps, which helps finance students' 
medical and dental education in exchange for service in underserved 
areas, and early National Service proposals, which envisioned young 
people being given scholarships as compensation for community service. 
The ideas of reciprocal obligation and community service would thus be 
enlisted in the service of teaching, which is surely one of the best 
ways one can imagine of giving back to the community and to the next 
generation.
  Finally, the legislation assumes that the route to success is not 
through regimented, top-down administration, but through a 
decentralized structure that engages and empowers local leaders and 
participants. States would be given the option of running their 
programs through nonprofit organizations separate from their department 
of education, an arrangement that has fostered innovation and 
flexibility in North Carolina.
  Mr. Chairman, H.R. 2211 does not include all of the elements of the 
Teaching Fellows Act, and it leaves future funding levels 
indeterminate. It will require us to work with the Department of 
Education to get an energetic program up and running, and to push in 
this body for adequate annual appropriations. But I am enthused at the 
opportunity this bill affords to initiate and expand State scholarship 
programs for prospective teachers. I want to commend and thank those 
colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have contributed to this 
effort.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to control the time 
of the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner).
  The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from 
California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I want to thank 
the gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Boehner) and my colleague, the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), a new member of the committee who 
has shown great leadership in bringing forth this bill. I want to thank 
him for his work on this important piece of legislation.
  I rise in strong support of H.R. 2211, the Ready to Teach Act of 
2003, a bipartisan bill that seeks to meet the call of the No Child 
Left Behind Act to place a highly qualified teacher in every classroom. 
It makes improvements to Title II of the Higher Education Act to help 
ensure teacher training programs are producing well-prepared teachers 
to meet the needs of America's students.
  There is widespread awareness that the subject matter, knowledge, and 
teaching skills of teachers play a central role in the success of 
elementary and secondary education reform. More than half of the 2.2 
million teachers that America's schools will need to hire over the next 
10 years will be first-time teachers, and they will need to be well 
prepared for the challenges of today's classrooms. For these reasons,

[[Page 17346]]

the Nation's attention has increasingly focused on the role that 
institutions of higher education and States play in ensuring that new 
teachers have the content knowledge and teaching skills they need to 
ensure that all students are held to higher standards.
  Accordingly, building on current law, the Ready to Teach Act 
authorizes three types of teacher training grants, and each play a 
unique, yet crucial, role in the education of tomorrow's teachers. 
State grant funds must be used to reform teacher preparation 
requirements and ensure that current and future teachers are highly 
qualified. Partnership grants allow effective partners to join 
together, combining strengths and resources to train highly qualified 
teachers and achieve success where it matters most: in the classroom. 
Teacher recruitment grants help bring high-quality individuals into 
teacher programs, and ultimately put more highly qualified teachers 
into classrooms.
  H.R. 2211 includes a new program to authorize grants for the creation 
of teacher preparation programs at minority-serving institutions around 
the country. These institutions provide equal opportunity and strong 
academic programs for minority and disadvantaged students to help 
achieve greater financial stability for the institutions that serve 
these students.
  In general, the Ready to Teach Act focuses on three key objectives, 
accountability, flexibility, and effectiveness, to improve the quality 
of teacher preparation.
  While current higher education law contains some annual reporting 
requirements, these reporting measures have proven ineffective in 
measuring the true quality of teacher preparation programs. In fact, 
the current requirements have often been manipulated, leaving data 
skewed and often irrelevant. H.R. 2211 includes accountability 
provisions that will strengthen reporting requirements and hold teacher 
preparation programs accountable for providing accurate and useful 
information.
  This legislation recognizes that flexibility should exist in methods 
used for training highly qualified teachers and, for that reason, would 
allow funds to be used for innovative methods in teacher preparation 
programs such as chartered colleges of education, which can provide an 
adequate gateway for teachers to become highly qualified. Pioneering 
programs such as charter colleges of education would also implement 
systems to gauge a true measure of teacher effectiveness: the academic 
achievement of students.
  In addition to increasing accountability measures, the Ready to Teach 
Act increases the effectiveness and quality in teacher training by 
including provisions to focus training on the skills and knowledge 
needed to prepare highly qualified teachers.

                              {time}  1245

  The bill places a renewed emphasis on a broad range of skills 
required for effective teaching, such as the use of advanced technology 
in the classroom, rigorous academic content knowledge, scientifically 
based research and challenging State student academic content 
standards.
  Teacher-preparation programs have a great deal of responsibility 
contributing to the preparation of our Nation's teachers, and this bill 
will make sure they are meeting their responsibilities. Once again, I 
want to commend the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) for 
introducing the Ready to Teach Act, and I appreciate the bipartisan 
efforts of the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) and the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) on this bill.
  I believe the Ready to Teach Act will help to ensure that the best 
and brightest teachers are teaching our children. I urge our colleagues 
to support this legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Maryland (Mr. Van Hollen).
  Mr. VAN HOLLEN. Mr. Chairman, I want to begin by commending the 
committee leadership on both sides of the aisle for their efforts on 
this bipartisan bill, the chairman of the committee, the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Boehner); the ranking member, the gentleman from California 
(Mr. George Miller); the subcommittee leadership, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. McKeon); and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee); 
and the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) for all his work on this 
piece of legislation.
  It is critical that we improve teacher training in this country to 
make sure that the children in our classrooms get the best possible 
results. I want to thank the committee for adopting an amendment that I 
submitted along with the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) to 
make it clear that these teacher-training funds could be used to train 
the teachers who train our youngest children because we all understand 
the importance of early, early education.
  I must say, however, I am very concerned about the growing gap 
between what we say we want to do as an authorizing committee and what 
we are willing to pay for as a Congress. We can talk all day long about 
the good things we are going to do; but at the end of the day, if we 
are not going to pay for them, all we have is talk. And I think this 
gap, this credibility gap, cannot be made more clear between what we 
are going to do here today and what we will do tomorrow when we take up 
the education appropriations bill.
  Today we will pass an authorizing bill, Ready to Teach, calling for a 
$300 million authorization to do the things we are talking about on 
this floor. Tomorrow we will have a Republican appropriations bill that 
has less than one-third of that money, $300 million authorized, $90 
million appropriated. Today we are talking about how important it is to 
teach teachers, but tomorrow we will take up an education 
appropriations bill that underfunds No Child Left Behind by $8 billion. 
It is great to have trained teachers; but if we do not provide the 
schools with the money to hire them, our kids will not get the benefit 
of those teachers, and that is $8 billion short.
  Today we are talking about training special education teachers so 
they can provide a good education to the children in this country who 
have disabilities. But tomorrow we will take up an education 
appropriations bill that provides less than 50 percent of what this 
committee, the Committee on Education and the Workforce, said we should 
be providing.
  Now, the chairman said we can look at that as a cup half full or half 
empty. The fact of the matter is we promised a full cup; and we, as a 
Congress, are not delivering. I think the chairman of the committee is 
absolutely right, we came here to make decisions to establish 
priorities. Let us do it. The reason we are falling short tomorrow in 
the appropriations bill and not meeting the commitments that we are 
making today in this authorizing bill is because the priority of the 
majority party here was to provide huge tax cuts that 
disproportionately benefit the very wealthiest Americans. Let us get 
our priorities straight and truly pass not only an authorizing bill but 
an appropriations bill that leaves no child behind.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from the 
great State of Nebraska (Mr. Osborne), a member of the committee and a 
good friend of mine.
  Mr. OSBORNE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman and also the 
gentleman from Ohio (Chairman Boehner), the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. 
Gingrey), and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) for their work 
on this bill.
  I would like to remind the gentleman who just spoke that frequently 
what is authorized and what is appropriated is not the same. I 
certainly share many of his sentiments, but I do believe that H.R. 2211 
is an important bill because I spent 5 years teaching in a teachers 
college, 3 years when I was a young man in my twenties, and 2 years 
more recently at an unspecified age. And I was often struck by the 
disconnect between the theory of teaching presented

[[Page 17347]]

in the teachers college and the practical aspects of teaching in the 
classroom. As a result, because of this disconnect, we find a lot of 
young teachers going into the classroom unprepared and they leave 
early, and this is very expensive to the whole system.
  So H.R. 2211 requires teachers colleges to work together with school 
districts so education theory and actual classroom teaching experience 
are aligned. I think this is critical because so often what happens is 
the teachers college kind of drifts off into a never-never-land of 
theory and they are really not rooted in actual experience. So I think 
this is a critical change. And I think this will encourage higher 
retention rates.
  In addition, as has been pointed out previously, H.R. 2211 ensures 
that teacher preparation is thorough and that teachers have sufficient 
knowledge and skills to truly meet the highly qualified standards set 
forth in No Child Left Behind. Again, my experience has been that too 
often teachers have not adequately been assessed in terms of their 
knowledge, their skill; and mediocrity has often been the norm, and 
that is tragic in a profession as important as this. So H.R. 2211 
raises the bar for teacher preparation. I think it is a good bill, and 
I urge its support; and I thank those who have worked so hard to bring 
it to fruition.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Wisconsin (Mr. Kind).
  Mr. KIND. Mr. Chairman, as a member of the Committee on Education and 
the Workforce, I too want to commend the leadership of the committee 
for putting together this bipartisan piece of legislation.
  This is an important piece of the overall higher-education bill that 
we have to reauthorize during the rest of this session. It recognizes 
the importance of teacher quality in the classroom. It recognizes the 
fact that because of attrition and the aging population, retirement, we 
will have to replace 2.2 million teachers over the next decade. It also 
recognizes that the quality of a teacher is the second most important 
determinant of how well students perform in the classroom, right behind 
the active involvement of loving and caring parents in their own 
child's education. But it also recognizes the new mandates that are 
being placed on schools and school districts throughout the entire 
country under No Child Left Behind that mandates that every classroom 
have a qualified, certified teacher by 2005 and 2006 under the No Child 
Left Behind legislation. And in part, this bill is meant to address 
these growing challenges as a Nation.
  But like my friend from Maryland indicated, there is a growing gap 
between the rhetoric for support for education in this country and what 
is actually being appropriated and the resources and funds that are 
going to achieve the success that we are demanding of our school 
districts.
  I am particularly pleased that under this legislation it is 
reauthorizing the Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology 
program. This is a program that has been highly successful in preparing 
prospective teachers to use technology to help students reach their 
highest potential. Unfortunately, in the education appropriations bill 
that will start later today and tomorrow, the Republican majority has 
zeroed out funding for that technology program, even though we have 
this powerful new learning tool and yet there exists a gap between the 
integration of that technology in classroom curriculum. We need more 
resources and more training for teachers on how to use this technology 
rather than zeroing it out.
  I am also disappointed that under the labor-HHS and education 
appropriations bill that we are $8 billion short in fully funding the 
No Child Left Behind legislation. We are setting up these school 
districts for failure unless we provide them the tools and resources 
they need to meet the new Federal mandates that are passed under this 
legislation. The President ran as an education President. He got passed 
the No Child Left Behind, which establishes these new Federal mandates. 
And I think it is outrageous that he is not funding this now, as the 
promise was just a short year and a half ago that he would.
  Let me say in conclusion that I am very proud and I think every 
Member in this House is very proud of the military force that we have 
protecting our country. We have a lot of well-motivated, well-trained 
individuals that comprise our Armed Forces; but it does not just happen 
by accident. We invest a lot of money in our military to make sure they 
have the proper training and the proper equipment so they can be an 
effective military force around the globe as they carry out our orders 
as policymakers. But we have another national security threat that I am 
afraid is going neglected, and that is the investment in the future of 
our Nation, in our children, and in these education programs which will 
also make our country strong. We need to do a better job of backing up 
the rhetoric around here with the resources. This bill is a start if 
the funding follows, and I would encourage bipartisan support for it.
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
North Carolina (Mr. Ballenger), a senior member of the Committee on 
Education and the Workforce.
  Mr. BALLENGER. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for yielding me 
time. First, I would like to begin by thanking the chairman and the 
ranking member for working with me and my colleague from North Carolina 
(Mr. Price) to include aspects of the gentleman's Teaching Fellows Act 
in today's bill.
  The Ready to Teach Act authorizes competitive grants to encourage 
development of teacher-training programs and to create highly qualified 
teachers. I believe that one of the most important additions that we 
made to this legislation is that it allows a partnership grant to be 
used to coordinate with community colleges to strengthen teacher-
training programs.
  It is estimated that North Carolina will need 80,000 new teachers 
over the next decade. To address this problem in my area, Appalachian 
State Teachers' College, it used to be, it is now Appalachian State 
University, which is a branch of the university and recognized as one 
of the best teaching colleges in the United States, Caldwell Community 
College and the local public schools initiated a proposal to leverage 
technology and integrate their resources to develop a model teacher-
training program. Area residents who typically would not have had 
access to the teacher prep program would have the opportunity to become 
highly qualified teachers through the use of distance technology. It is 
this kind of innovative thinking that the Ready to Teach Act aims to 
encourage, and I strongly encourage my colleagues to support this 
bipartisan legislation.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois (Mr. Davis).
  Mr. DAVIS of Illinois. Mr. Chairman, I want to thank the gentleman 
for yielding me time.
  ``Unfunded mandate'' is a term and a phrase that we often hear in 
education. Time and time again we attempt to solve problems by 
demanding change while refusing to provide funds necessary for schools 
to make that desirable change. Loan forgiveness attracts college 
graduates into the field of education and encourages current teachers 
to continue their education. However, this does not fully address the 
problems of teacher quality and higher education affordability; 
especially we need to help title I schools.
  However, the labor-HHS-education appropriations bill falls $334 
million short of the promised $1 billion in title I funds under the No 
Child Left Behind Act.
  Mr. Chairman, over one-fifth of our secondary school students have 
taken at least one class from a teacher who neither majored nor minored 
in that subject in college. Today our schools lack many greatly needed 
and highly qualified teachers; therefore, we must improve teacher 
training and education. H.R. 2211 attempts to promote teacher training 
and development by making up for some of the funding shortfalls in 
education. In the labor-HHS-education appropriations bill, we

[[Page 17348]]

were promised $3.2 billion for States to improve teacher quality; and 
yet, like the promise to fund title I schools, the appropriations bill 
falls $244 million short. As a result, 54,000 fewer teachers will 
receive federally supported professional development.
  H.R. 2211 attempts to make up for some of the unfunded mandates under 
the No Child Left Behind Act. Indeed, there are some encouraging 
aspects to this bill which I am in great support of. However, it still 
lacks greater funding, which is needed for true improvement in 
education that will maximize the potential of teachers and the 
potential of students so that, indeed, no child is left behind.
  Mr. Chairman, I support this legislation, but I sure hope that before 
it is over we will have the money that is needed to fund the thoughts 
and ideas.
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Georgia (Mr. Burns), a former college professor.
  Mr. BURNS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman, the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Boehner), and the ranking member, the gentleman from 
California (Mr. George Miller), and the author, my good friend, the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), for their leadership in bringing 
this bill to the floor today.
  Paine College and Savanna State University are two Historically Black 
Colleges and Universities in the 12th district of Georgia. Both of 
these institutions do a wonderful job of preparing young professionals 
for lives in the working world. With these two institutions and the 
many minority-serving institutions across this country, it is 
imperative that we increase opportunities for Americans of all 
educational, ethnic, and geographic backgrounds to become highly 
qualified teachers.

                              {time}  1300

  I was proud to sponsor an amendment that will allow grants to be 
competitively awarded to highly qualified teacher-training programs for 
eligible institutions. These institutions can include Historically 
Black Colleges and Universities, Hispanic-serving institutions, 
Tribally controlled colleges and universities, Alaska Native-serving 
institutions and Native Hawaiian-serving institutions.
  I would like to especially thank my good colleague, the gentleman 
from New York (Mr. Owens), and the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa) 
for their cosponsorship of this amendment in committee and then 
ultimately its successful adoption and strong bipartisan support we 
have received. I would also like to thank the United Negro College Fund 
and the Hispanic Education Coalition for the help they provided and the 
inspiration for this amendment that strengthened this bill.
  The purposes of this provision are to increase our teacher 
recruitment at minority-serving institutions and to make institutional 
improvements to teacher-preparation programs at minority-serving 
institutions. Specifically, we are looking for funds here that will 
allow these universities and colleges to be awarded grants to produce 
highly qualified minority teachers. We need more strong, high-quality 
teachers from all backgrounds, both current and future.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Ready to Teach Act. H.R. 2211 
will result in more highly qualified teachers, and this will increase 
the academic achievement of America's students.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Holt).
  Mr. HOLT. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me the 
time, and I commend him and the chairman and the other senior members 
of this subcommittee for this bipartisan legislation, which will not 
only help recruit and retain highly qualified teachers but also provide 
professional development. I certainly hope, as others have said, that 
the majority and the appropriators will see fit to fund this program 
fully, unlike the labor and education bill which, as it now stands, 
underfunds the No Child Left Behind by $8 billion.
  I am pleased that the committee has accepted two of my amendments in 
this bill. The first amendment would ensure that teacher-recruitment 
programs could assist people who want to make the transition into 
teaching from a career outside of the field of education.
  The second amendment will allow school districts to form partnerships 
with universities and businesses. This will allow opportunities for 
teachers to get clinical experience and training in areas related to 
science, mathematics and technology, including opportunities in 
laboratories and businesses. I think teachers with real-world 
experience are more able to show applications of science to the 
student, which is a more inspiring way to teach.
  Investing in improved math and science education in this country is 
directly linked to the strength of our national security. I believe if 
we, as a Nation, fail to make a new national commitment to science and 
math education, we are facilitating the gradual erosion of America's 
physical and economic security, and do not just take my word for it.
  The United States Commission on National Security in the 21st Century 
headed by former Senators Gary Hart and Warren Rudman said, ``The 
inadequacies of our systems of research and education pose a greater 
threat to the U.S. national security over the next quarter century than 
any potential conventional war that we might imagine. If we do not 
invest heavily and wisely in rebuilding these two core strengths, 
America will be incapable of maintaining its global position long into 
the 21st century.''
  Mr. Chairman, I thank the chairman for working with me on these 
amendments, and I ask my colleagues to support this bill.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Quinn). The Chair would inform the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) that he has 10 minutes remaining. 
The gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner) has 4 minutes remaining.
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to yield 2 minutes to the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Hoekstra), the chairman of the 
Subcommittee on Select Education.
  Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Chairman, I thank my chairman for yielding me the 
time and congratulate him and the gentleman from California (Mr. George 
Miller) on the success in passing an education agenda beginning more 
than a year ago and passing the President's agenda for No Child Left 
Behind, at least beginning that process, and now filling in the many 
different pieces that are necessary to make sure that every one of our 
children has the opportunity to leave school well qualified and well 
prepared to go for higher education for a professional career.
  The part of the bill that I think is most interesting here was what 
my colleague from Georgia just talked about. This authorizes grants for 
the creation of centers of excellence at highly qualified, minority-
serving institutions, such as Historically Black Colleges and 
Universities and Hispanic-serving institutions.
  Over the last number of years, this Congress has taken an increasing 
interest in making sure that Historically Black Colleges and Hispanic-
serving institutions get the resources they need so that they can more 
effectively serve those populations that have a tremendous amount of 
potential and that they have done such a good job at. We are reaching 
out to Historically Black Colleges and Universities and to Hispanic-
serving institutions specifically in this bill to provide the 
resources, additional resources and grants, for them to build more 
effective teaching programs because we recognize that if we are going 
to address the vision that we have in mind of making sure that we leave 
no child left behind, that we have to develop more effective training-
teacher programs specifically to reach into inner city schools; and 
that is what we are looking at here.
  We have talked with Historically Black Colleges and Universities to 
try to partner with them to develop programs to reach into the inner 
city, to use their unique resources. This fulfills the promise. This, 
along with the next bill, really gets us moving in the right direction.

[[Page 17349]]


  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Texas (Mr. Green).
  Mr. GREEN of Texas. Mr. Chairman, I thank my colleague from Michigan 
for yielding me the time, and also the chairman of the committee.
  Both the Ready to Teach Act and the Teacher Recruitment and Retention 
Act try to improve teacher training and quality and retention. I 
congratulate the Committee on Education and the Workforce on these two 
bills, but both these bills fall short in one important area. They fail 
to correct the problem of the government pension offset, or what is 
called the GPO. The Committee on Education and the Workforce cannot 
address this major reason people are leaving the teaching profession 
because they do not have the jurisdiction.
  In my home State of Texas, teachers are leaving the profession in 
droves because of the unfair GPO. This provision reduces spousal 
benefits by two-thirds and, in some cases, eliminates benefits 
altogether.
  The GPO is a problem for many public servants, but especially bad for 
women. Eighty percent of the Texas school teachers and retirees are 
women. Sixty percent of that group are married. Almost all of them are 
eligible for Medicare through their husbands, and none of them are 
eligible for their spousal Social Security benefit because of the 
government pension offset.
  After a lifetime of being underpaid as teachers, they depend on their 
Social Security widow's benefit to make up for it in their retirement; 
but the GPO, the government pension offset, takes away that widow's 
benefit.
  The only way some teachers can escape this unfair mentality is by 
working their last day in a job covered by Social Security and their 
retirement system. This last-day exemption is the only way teachers can 
get a fair retirement benefit; but this House is trying to take that 
away, and we debated this issue a few months back when the House voted 
narrowly on H.R. 743, the so-called Social Security Protection Act.
  That language would eliminate the last-day exemption and cause many 
of my Texas teachers to lose their widow's benefits. Teachers in Texas 
are retiring by the busload so that they can get their benefits before 
the Senate acts to take them away.
  This is a serious problem in Texas and other States that do not have 
Social Security as part of their teacher retirement system, and it is 
causing a serious retention problem. Debating these bills today is 
good, but we really need to look at why teachers are leaving the 
profession instead of getting into it.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Andrews).
  Mr. ANDREWS. Mr. Chairman, I thank my friend from Michigan for 
yielding me the time.
  Students in this era take laptops and hand-held computers to class, 
but they are very often being taught by teachers who started teaching 
when cable television was an innovation or even when color television 
was an innovation.
  This is a very promising bill that the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. 
Gingrey) has written, that the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the 
gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Kildee), the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon), and 
the others have brought to the floor. I am happy to support it and 
commend all those responsible for it.
  My concern is that the promise of this bill may well turn out to be 
another unfulfilled promise when it comes to helping teachers catch up 
to the new realities of the world in which they are teaching. School 
districts across this country already understand that reality. When 
they look at the requirements under the No Child Left Behind Act, they 
understand that by the 2005-2006 school year, every classroom must have 
a highly qualified teacher in that classroom. The gap between getting 
to that point and where we are now is a very expensive one; and if we 
look at the education funding bill that the House will be considering 
tomorrow, there is an $8 billion difference between what is needed by 
school districts around our country and what is provided by the 
majority in its bill to meet that need.
  It does not make sense to raise standards and raise expectations and 
then fail to provide the funding and the money and the resources to 
meet those expectations. It is obvious that many of the teachers that 
are presently teaching around our country today are going to need 
sabbaticals, are going to need extra education, are going to need extra 
training in order to meet the new standards of being a highly qualified 
teacher.
  I support raising those standards, but I do not support falsely 
raising expectations about what we are going to do for public education 
and then failing to meet those expectations. How are we in this 
predicament?
  The budget forecast a few years ago said that this year for every 
$100 we are going to spend to run our government, we would have $125 
worth of revenue coming in. Did not happen. Certainly the terrorist 
attack of 9/11 had a role in this. The recession has had a major role 
in this, but the two huge tax cuts enacted by the majority have also 
had a role in this. So, today, instead of having $125 of revenue for 
every $100 that we need to spend, we have about $80 of revenue for 
every $100 that we need to spend.
  What gets cut? Environmental protection, health care, education. This 
is one more example of a choice the majority has made between the long-
term fiscal health of the country by improving education and the short-
term political gratification of enacting tax cuts.
  This is the right bill. It makes a great promise, but the majority 
will fail to fulfill that promise because it continues to worship at 
the altar of irresponsible fiscal practices.
  I urge support of the bill.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Ohio (Mr. Kucinich).
  Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Chairman, H.R. 2211 is a good bill. As its name 
suggests, the Ready to Teach Act works to ensure that our children, our 
future, are taught by well-prepared and qualified teachers. It also 
supports our schools so that they are able to recruit and retain the 
teachers who give so much of themselves for the children of others.
  We will pass this bill today; and in doing so, we all agree that the 
country needs the Federal Government to spend $300 million on teacher 
preparation and retention; but in fact, we will not spend that much on 
teacher preparation and retention. The President has asked that we 
spend only $90 million or 30 percent of what we today all agree is 
necessary. Why?
  Yesterday we passed the defense spending bill that spends $8.9 
billion on a missile system which does not work; and today we will pass 
an education bill that, if fully funded, would work, but we will not 
fully fund it.
  There is money for education. We could reallocate the $8.9 billion 
for missile defense and put it into education. We would have money to 
hire and train thousands more qualified teachers. We would have money 
to buy 9 million more computers for our children and schools. We would 
have money to fully fund and expand the Head Start program, IDEA, and 
the No Child Left Behind Act.
  Instead, we are spending too much, $8.9 billion, for a missile 
program that will not work, and we are underfunding the education 
account.
  Mr. Chairman, as we walk in each day to vote, we walk under the 
canopy of the House, and there is a pediment that is supported by the 
pillars, and the pediment is called the ``Apotheosis of Democracy,'' 
and in the middle of it right at the apex there is a woman whose arm is 
outextended, and her arm is protecting a child who is sitting 
blissfully atop a pile of books. That sculpture, which is right at the 
center of our experience as we come in to vote every day, is entitled 
``Peace Protecting Genius.''

                              {time}  1315

  And the child genius is protected not with nuclear arms, but with the 
arms of eternal love and sitting atop a pile of books which represents 
knowledge.

[[Page 17350]]

  We have to realize that our protection in this country and our 
security depends on education, and that it is peace which protects 
genius, and that it is peace which will lead us on a path towards 
sparing the tremendous amount of monies that are to be wasted by the 
Pentagon, and freeing it up so that we can put that money back into 
education to truly protect the future of this Nation and to enable the 
children of this Nation to be able to have lives that are rich, that 
are endowed with great education, and that lead to a world of peace.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  This is a bipartisan bill, and we do our best especially in the field 
of education when we work in a bipartisan way, and we did that in 
committee. There was not only civility in committee, but a great deal 
of enjoyment in writing this bill. This is a good start for the 
authorization of the remaining titles of the Higher Education Act.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, let me thank the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee), 
the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), and Members on both 
sides of the aisle for their work. I especially want to thank the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey), a new member of our committee and 
new Member of Congress, for his authorship of the underlying bill.
  We all know that one of the real keys to ensuring every child in 
America gets a chance at a good education is to ensure that every child 
has a highly qualified teacher in their classroom. There has been much 
effort around the country at improving the quality of teacher 
preparation programs. What we try to do in the bill we have before us 
today is to strengthen those programs and to bring greater 
accountability for those programs that need a little more oversight 
than they are getting today.
  The goal here is to take young people and others outside of the 
profession and put them through rigorous programs that will benefit 
them and their students when they are in the classroom. There are just 
too many programs today around the country that are doing not as well 
as they could in terms of preparing teachers for tomorrow.
  There has been a lot of discussion here about funding, because later 
on today the House is expected to take up the Labor-HHS appropriation 
bill, which includes the funding for education. As I said earlier, 2 to 
3 years ago we were spending $28 billion a year on elementary and 
secondary education programs. Today we are spending $35.7 billion per 
year. Most of the money to fund primary and secondary education comes 
from State governments, local governments, and property taxes. The 
Federal Government's role is focused on helping needier students have a 
better chance at the same kind of education than our children received.
  We are doing our share. Could we be doing more? Absolutely, we could 
be doing more. But we are here, as I said before, to make decisions, 
and I do think that we are meeting our commitments under No Child Left 
Behind. I do again suggest to all of our Members that this is a good 
underlying bipartisan bill, so let us support it.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Chairman, and other distinguished 
members, I rise today in order to speak about House Resolution 2211, a 
bill that shall reauthorize Title II of the Higher Education Act of 
1965.
  For our country to progress, we as representatives of the people, 
must adhere to the provisions of the Higher Education Act, especially 
in regards to the activities addressed in Title II of that document. 
Activities such as the disbursement of teacher quality enhancement 
grants for our States and grants preparing the teachers of tomorrow 
with the newest technology of today benefit society as a whole.
  Besides maintaining the grant-given ability so crucial to the future 
of the United States, House Resolution 2211 would also create a new 
grant program for higher educational institutions that have 
historically served minority populations. Schools that largely cater to 
Native-American, African-American, and Hispanic-American student bodies 
will receive the funding needed to compete with our Nation's premiere 
universities by developing teachers that will improve the high academic 
standards of the United States.
  In fact, I attempted to submit an amendment that would require the 
Secretary of Education to collect all grant repayments and redirect the 
funds to low-income and historically low-achieving school districts. I 
offered this amendment for the purpose of balancing the benefits 
conferred to low-income and needy schools when exceptional students who 
complete teacher education programs opt to repay the amount of the 
scholarship awarded to assist them in completing education programs.
  Additionally, teacher preparation programs will flourish under House 
Resolution 2211. Current law neglects to provide funding for the 
enhancement of institutionally based teacher preparation programs; this 
bill allows State and partnership grantees to use funds to strengthen 
and improve teacher preparation programs and will reauthorize 
institutions to strengthen technology instruction for teacher 
candidates.
  We believe that the future of our youth is the future of our country; 
an investment in our children is an investment for America. Teachers 
are responsible for the development of the United States through their 
impact in our classrooms. It is greatly appreciated when teachers begin 
the process of intellectual development for our children, but there is 
an even greater appreciation when teachers continue working with those 
children throughout the years. Teachers are quite often the role models 
of the children who eventually go on to serve the United States through 
avenues of public service. House Resolution 2211 requires teachers who 
are part of the grant program to stay a minimum of two years, thus 
having a longer and more influential role in our country's future.
  How will we know and how will we be able to gauge the improvement of 
our children, so that ``not child is truly left behind?'' House 
Resolution 2211 addresses such a topic. Under the bill, a State will 
require the grantees to report information regarding the extent to 
which substantial progress is made with the allocated funds and will 
also track the number of highly qualified teachers produced due to the 
grant program. With a statistical system able to verify the definite 
success, all Americans will see just how important this bill is for us.
  House Resolution 2211, if passed, will last until fiscal year 2008. I 
am certain that the United States will see an improvement in the 
quality of our teachers, but more importantly, an increase in the 
quality of our Nation's future, the children, during that time.
  This bill is a key component in a series of bills to reauthorize the 
Higher Education Act as we seek to meet the call of the No Child Left 
Behind Act, an act striving to place a highly-qualified teacher in 
every classroom in the United States.
  Mr. Chairman and members, the United States is a great country. To 
continue on a path that America has been on for over two hundred years, 
the passage of House Resolution 2211 must be passed. When no child is 
left behind, as a country we can say that Congress has done its part in 
the development of each individual child. This is what the parents of 
America are asking for, and I believe we should comply with their 
demands.
  I strongly urge my colleagues to support House Resolution 2211.
  Mr. EMANUEL. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the Ready to Teach 
Act. This bill takes important steps toward one of the most important 
goals for our Nation--filling our schools with committed, talented 
teachers.
  The shortage of qualified teachers in our country has reached 
critical levels, and it has a direct impact on the quality of 
education, especially in underserved areas. In urban districts, close 
to 50 percent of newcomers leave the profession during their first five 
years of teaching. This bill recognizes the importance of not only 
filling our schools with teachers, but providing these teachers with 
the resources and training that allow them to be successful and to make 
their students successful as well.
  I want to call your attention to a school in my district, The Chicago 
Academy, as an example of the type of positive change that can be 
brought about by quality teacher preparation programs. The Chicago 
Academy is a joint program of Chicago Public Schools and a nonprofit 
organization. Academy for Urban School Leadership, which is taking 
groundbreaking steps to address the teacher shortage in underserved 
Chicago schools. The President of the Carnegie Corporation called this 
institution ``a model for our Nation.''
  The Chicago Academy creates a ``farm team'' of teachers for Chicago's 
underserved public schools, through a teacher residency program which 
involves an entire year of in

[[Page 17351]]

classroom training, instead of the typical twelve-week student teacher 
segment of graduate programs in education. Each classroom of 24 
students is shared by one experienced mentor teacher and two resident 
teachers, providing an unmatched student-teacher ratio for public 
schools.
  In-classroom training is coupled with graduate work with faculty from 
National-Louis University. Residents are provided with a stipend for 
their participation in the program, and receive a Masters of Arts in 
Teaching at the completion of the year. In return, they commit to five 
years of service in underperforming Chicago schools.
  In the Academy's first year of operation, 82 percent of students 
performed at or above national norms in reading--better than any other 
school in the neighborhood This school is proof of the way that a 
quality school changes a community. Families are moving out of the 
suburbs and into Chicago in order to send their children to the 
Academy. And this effect can extend to the underserved schools that 
will be supplied with these committed teachers.
  The first class of 30 resident teachers graduated last month. Next 
year, a second Academy will open, and the current school will expand to 
include the eighth grade. As these new teachers transition into 
underserved Chicago schools, the number of students served by this 
program increases exponentially.
  The values embodied by the Chicago Academy are those reflected in 
this important legislation. I commend Mr. Gingrey, Chairman Boehner, 
and Ranking Member Miller for their bipartisan work to bring this 
reauthorization to the floor.
  Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 2211, the Ready 
to Teach Act, which will strengthen teacher training programs to ensure 
teachers are highly-qualified and ready to teach when they enter the 
classroom.
  Eighteen months ago the President signed the No Child Left Behind Act 
into law and ever since, States and school districts across the country 
have been answering the call. The Ready to Teach Act follows the 
momentum of No Child Left Behind and meets its requirement to place a 
highly qualified teacher in every classroom--a requirement of great 
import, as the value of a qualified teacher on a student's ability to 
learn has been proven, over and over again. H.R. 2211 achieves this by 
making improvements to the Higher Education Act to help ensure teacher 
training programs are producing highly qualified teachers to meet the 
needs of America's students.
  All States and nearly all teacher education programs in the country 
are affected by general accountability provisions in this legislation. 
Schools receiving Federal funds must report annually on the quality of 
teacher preparation, including information on the pass rates of their 
graduates on initial certification assessments. Higher educational 
institutions enrolling federally-aided students in their teacher 
preparation programs must report annually, detailing, among other 
things, the certification pass rates of graduates.
  Unfortunately, this data has proven ineffective in measuring the true 
quality of teacher preparation programs. Current requirements have 
often been manipulated, leaving data skewed and often irrelevant. For 
example, if a student fails to pass the State certification exam, upon 
completion of the institution's program, the school will award them a 
degree in another field rather than in education. A school will only 
award students an education degree if that student has passed the state 
exam. That way, the school will always have a 100 percent pass rate. 
H.R. 2211 sets forth more useful information. This includes requiring a 
school to report on all students who have completed 50 percent of the 
program and requiring an average score of students rather than the pass 
rates.
  As in current law, H.R. 2211 will continue to award State, 
partnership and teacher recruitment grants. In doing so, H.R. 2211 has 
evolved with the teaching profession and places updated requirements on 
these grants.
  State grants will be used to increase the advancement technology in 
the classroom and increase the focus on rigorous academic content 
knowledge and scientifically based research. States will be given 
flexibility in identifying innovative methods for teacher preparation 
programs, such as charter colleges of education to provide an 
alternative gateway for teachers to become highly qualified.
  Partnership grants allow effective partners to join together, 
combining strengths and resources to train highly qualified teachers 
and achieve success in the classroom. Among other things, partnership 
activities will help to ensure that teachers are able to address the 
needs of students with different learning styles, and receive training 
in methods of improving student behavior in the classroom.
  Finally, teacher recruitment grants will help bring high quality 
individuals into teacher programs, and ultimately put more highly 
qualified teachers into classrooms. The Ready to Teach Act places a 
priority on applicants that will emphasize measures to recruit 
minorities into the teaching profession, providing a teaching workforce 
that is both highly qualified and diverse.
  We are fortunate in the State of Delaware to have the University of 
Delaware's Elementary Teacher Education program. In many ways the 
University of Delaware has already begun to address the need to have a 
highly qualified teacher in our classrooms. They have been innovative 
and forward thinking always recognizing the importance of providing 
their students with a strong academic base as well as a practical 
experience.
  In their freshman year at the University of Delaware, students 
participate in field experiences in the school setting. Freshmen have 
the opportunity to observe, tutor, and offer general assistance in the 
classroom. As sophomores and juniors, the experiences include planning, 
implementing, and assessing limited instructional units with small 
groups or an entire class. As seniors, students become engaged in an 
extended student teaching experience.
  Technology is integrated throughout the curriculum and all students 
will graduate with the skills necessary to utilize technology in their 
instructional planning. The Elementary Teacher Education program's goal 
is to prepare teachers who are reflective practitioners serving a 
diverse community of learners as scholars, problem solvers and 
partners.
  I am committed to ensuring No Child Left Behind is a success for 
America's children. The Committee and this Congress have been working 
since passage to ensure other laws in the education arena are aligned 
with No Child Left Behind. We have accomplished this with IDEA, Head 
Start and hopefully today with the Ready to Teach Act. I encourage my 
colleagues to support H.R. 2211.
  Mr. HINOJOSA. Mr. Chairman, I believe that H.R. 221 is a step in the 
right direction. It builds on the improvements made to teacher 
preparation programs in the 1998 amendments to the Higher Education Act 
and provides a much needed focus on preparing a diverse teacher corps 
so that America's teachers reflect the students in America's 
classrooms.
  To improve student achievement, schools of education must graduate 
teacher candidates that are prepared to teach our Nation's increasingly 
diverse K-12 student population. About 42 percent of all public schools 
in the United States have no minority teachers even though minority 
students make up more than a third of enrollment in U.S. public 
schools.
  Minority teachers make up just 13.5 percent of all teachers. By the 
early 21st century, the percentage of minority teachers is expected to 
shrink to an all-time low or 5 percent. While 41 percent of American 
students will be minorities. Furthermore, some 2.4 million teachers 
will be needed in the next 11 years because of teacher attrition and 
retirement as well as increased student enrollment.
  Improving minority teacher recruitment will help our Nation meet the 
challenge of addressing this severe nationwide teacher shortage.
  Minority-serving institutions are uniquely equipped to help us 
address these shortages.
  The Centers of Excellence established in this legislation could 
provide much needed assistance so that these institutions can increase 
the number of highly qualified teachers they produce. However, this can 
only happen if the resources are made available.
  Unfortunately the majority and the Administration have elected to 
allocate our resources elsewhere--mainly to tax breaks for the elite--
the wealthiest individuals in our nation. It is my sincere hope that we 
will provide the funding for all of these programs that we say are 
critical to the education of our children.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation and to make a stand 
for the necessary investment in education.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Quinn). All time for general debate has 
expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the committee amendment in the nature of a 
substitute printed in the bill shall be considered as an original bill 
for the purpose of amendment under the 5-minute rule, and shall be 
considered read.
  The text of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is 
as follows:

                               H.R. 2211

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

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Ready to Teach Act of 
     2003''.

[[Page 17352]]



     SEC. 2. TEACHER QUALITY ENHANCEMENT GRANTS.

       Part A of title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 
     U.S.C. 1021 et seq.) is amended to read as follows:

      ``PART A--TEACHER QUALITY ENHANCEMENT GRANTS FOR STATES AND 
                              PARTNERSHIPS

     ``SEC. 201. PURPOSES; DEFINITIONS.

       ``(a) Purposes.--The purposes of this part are to--
       ``(1) improve student academic achievement;
       ``(2) improve the quality of the current and future 
     teaching force by improving the preparation of prospective 
     teachers and enhancing professional development activities;
       ``(3) hold institutions of higher education accountable for 
     preparing highly qualified teachers; and
       ``(4) recruit qualified individuals, including minorities 
     and individuals from other occupations, into the teaching 
     force.
       ``(b) Definitions.--In this part:
       ``(1) Arts and sciences.--The term `arts and sciences' 
     means--
       ``(A) when referring to an organizational unit of an 
     institution of higher education, any academic unit that 
     offers 1 or more academic majors in disciplines or content 
     areas corresponding to the academic subject matter areas in 
     which teachers provide instruction; and
       ``(B) when referring to a specific academic subject matter 
     area, the disciplines or content areas in which academic 
     majors are offered by the arts and science organizational 
     unit.
       ``(2) Exemplary teacher.--The term `exemplary teacher' has 
     the meaning given such term in section 9101 of the Elementary 
     and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
       ``(3) Highly qualified.--The term `highly qualified' has 
     the meaning given such term in section 9101 of the Elementary 
     and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
       ``(4) High-need local educational agency.--The term `high-
     need local educational agency' means a local educational 
     agency--
       ``(A)(i)(I) that serves not fewer than 10,000 children from 
     families with incomes below the poverty line; or
       ``(II) for which not less than 25 percent of the children 
     served by the agency are from families with incomes below the 
     poverty line;
       ``(ii) that is among those serving the highest number or 
     percentage of children from families with incomes below the 
     poverty line in the State, but this clause applies only in a 
     State that has no local educational agency meeting the 
     requirements of clause (i); or
       ``(iii) with a total of less than 600 students in average 
     daily attendance at the schools that are served by the agency 
     and all of whose schools are designated with a school locale 
     code of 7, as determined by the Secretary; and
       ``(B)(i) for which there is a high percentage of teachers 
     not teaching in the academic subjects or grade levels that 
     the teachers were trained to teach; or
       ``(ii) for which there is a high percentage of teachers 
     with emergency, provisional, or temporary certification or 
     licensing.
       ``(5) Poverty line.--The term `poverty line' means the 
     poverty line (as defined by the Office of Management and 
     Budget, and revised annually in accordance with section 
     673(2) of the Community Services Block Grant Act (42 U.S.C. 
     9902(2))) applicable to a family of the size involved.
       ``(6) Professional development.--The term `professional 
     development' has the meaning given such term in section 9101 
     of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 
     U.S.C. 7801).
       ``(7) Scientifically based reading research.--The term 
     `scientifically based reading research' has the meaning given 
     such term in section 1208 of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6368).
       ``(8) Scientifically based research.--The term 
     `scientifically based research' has the meaning given such 
     term in section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
       ``(9) Teaching skills.--The term `teaching skills' means 
     skills that--
       ``(A) are based on scientifically based research;
       ``(B) enable teachers to effectively convey and explain 
     subject matter content;
       ``(C) lead to increased student academic achievement; and
       ``(D) use strategies that--
       ``(i) are specific to subject matter;
       ``(ii) include ongoing assessment of student learning;
       ``(iii) focus on identification and tailoring of academic 
     instruction to students's specific learning needs; and
       ``(iv) focus on classroom management.

     ``SEC. 202. STATE GRANTS.

       ``(a) In General.--From amounts made available under 
     section 210(1) for a fiscal year, the Secretary is authorized 
     to award grants under this section, on a competitive basis, 
     to eligible States to enable the eligible States to carry out 
     the activities described in subsection (d).
       ``(b) Eligible State.--
       ``(1) Definition.--In this part, the term `eligible State' 
     means--
       ``(A) the Governor of a State; or
       ``(B) in the case of a State for which the constitution or 
     law of such State designates another individual, entity, or 
     agency in the State to be responsible for teacher 
     certification and preparation activity, such individual, 
     entity, or agency.
       ``(2) Consultation.--The Governor or the individual, 
     entity, or agency designated under paragraph (1) shall 
     consult with the Governor, State board of education, State 
     educational agency, or State agency for higher education, as 
     appropriate, with respect to the activities assisted under 
     this section.
       ``(3) Construction.--Nothing in this subsection shall be 
     construed to negate or supersede the legal authority under 
     State law of any State agency, State entity, or State public 
     official over programs that are under the jurisdiction of the 
     agency, entity, or official.
       ``(c) Application.--To be eligible to receive a grant under 
     this section, an eligible State shall, at the time of the 
     initial grant application, submit an application to the 
     Secretary that--
       ``(1) meets the requirement of this section;
       ``(2) demonstrates that the State is in full compliance 
     with sections 207 and 208;
       ``(3) includes a description of how the eligible State 
     intends to use funds provided under this section;
       ``(4) includes measurable objectives for the use of the 
     funds provided under the grant;
       ``(5) demonstrates the State has submitted and is actively 
     implementing a plan that meets the requirements of sections 
     1111(h)(1)(C)(viii) and 1119 of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311(h)(1)(C)(viii) and 
     6319); and
       ``(6) contains such other information and assurances as the 
     Secretary may require.
       ``(d) Uses of Funds.--An eligible State that receives a 
     grant under this section shall use the grant funds to reform 
     teacher preparation requirements, to coordinate with State 
     activities under section 2113(c) of the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6613(c)), and to 
     ensure that current and future teachers are highly qualified, 
     by carrying out one or more of the following activities:
       ``(1) Reforms.--Ensuring that all teacher preparation 
     programs in the State are preparing teachers who are highly 
     qualified, and are able to use advanced technology 
     effectively in the classroom, including use of instructional 
     techniques to improve student academic achievement, by 
     assisting such programs--
       ``(A) to retrain faculty; and
       ``(B) to design (or redesign) teacher preparation programs 
     so they--
       ``(i) are based on rigorous academic content, 
     scientifically based research (including scientifically based 
     reading research), and challenging State student academic 
     content standards; and
       ``(ii) promote strong teaching skills.
       ``(2) Certification or licensure requirements.--Reforming 
     teacher certification (including recertification) or 
     licensing requirements to ensure that--
       ``(A) teachers have the subject matter knowledge and 
     teaching skills in the academic subjects that the teachers 
     teach necessary to help students meet challenging State 
     student academic achievement standards; and
       ``(B) such requirements are aligned with challenging State 
     academic content standards.
       ``(3) Alternatives to traditional teacher preparation and 
     state certification.--Providing prospective teachers with 
     alternative routes to State certification and traditional 
     preparation to become highly qualified teachers through--
       ``(A) innovative approaches that reduce unnecessary 
     barriers to State certification while producing highly 
     qualified teachers;
       ``(B) programs that provide support to teachers during 
     their initial years in the profession; and
       ``(C) alternative routes to State certification of teachers 
     for qualified individuals, including mid-career professionals 
     from other occupations, former military personnel, and recent 
     college graduates with records of academic distinction.
       ``(4) Innovative programs.--Planning and implementing 
     innovative and experimental programs to enhance the ability 
     of institutions of higher education to prepare highly 
     qualified teachers, such as charter colleges of education or 
     university and local educational agency partnership schools, 
     that--
       ``(A) permit flexibility in meeting State requirements as 
     long as graduates, during their initial years in the 
     profession, increase student academic achievement;
       ``(B) provide long-term data gathered from teachers' 
     performance over multiple years in the classroom on the 
     ability to increase student academic achievement;
       ``(C) ensure high-quality preparation of teachers from 
     underrepresented groups; and
       ``(D) create performance measures that can be used to 
     document the effectiveness of innovative methods for 
     preparing highly qualified teachers.
       ``(5) Merit pay.--Developing, or assisting local 
     educational agencies in developing--
       ``(A) merit-based performance systems that reward teachers 
     who increase student academic achievement; and
       ``(B) strategies that provide differential and bonus pay in 
     high-need local educational agencies to retain--
       ``(i) principals;
       ``(ii) highly qualified teachers who teach in high-need 
     academic subjects, such as reading, mathematics, and science;
       ``(iii) highly qualified teachers who teach in schools 
     identified for school improvement under section 1116(b) of 
     the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     6316(b));
       ``(iv) special education teachers;
       ``(v) teachers specializing in teaching limited English 
     proficient children; and
       ``(vi) highly qualified teachers in urban and rural schools 
     or districts.
       ``(6) Teacher advancement.--Developing, or assisting local 
     educational agencies in developing, teacher advancement and 
     retention initiatives that promote professional growth and

[[Page 17353]]

     emphasize multiple career paths (such as paths to becoming a 
     highly qualified mentor teacher or exemplary teacher) and pay 
     differentiation.
       ``(7) Teacher removal.--Developing and implementing 
     effective mechanisms to ensure that local educational 
     agencies and schools are able to remove expeditiously 
     incompetent or unqualified teachers consistent with 
     procedures to ensure due process for the teachers.
       ``(8) Technical assistance.--Providing technical assistance 
     to low-performing teacher preparation programs within 
     institutions of higher education identified under section 
     208(a).
       ``(9) Teacher effectiveness.--Developing--
       ``(A) systems to measure the effectiveness of teacher 
     preparation programs and professional development programs; 
     and
       ``(B) strategies to document gains in student academic 
     achievement or increases in teacher mastery of the academic 
     subjects the teachers teach as a result of such programs.
       ``(10) Teacher recruitment and retention.--Undertaking 
     activities that--
       ``(A) develop and implement effective mechanisms to ensure 
     that local educational agencies and schools are able 
     effectively to recruit and retain highly qualified teachers; 
     or
       ``(B) are described in section 204(d).
       ``(11) Preschool teachers.--Developing strategies--
       ``(A) to improve the qualifications of preschool teachers, 
     which may include State certification for such teachers; and
       ``(B) to improve and expand preschool teacher preparation 
     programs.
       ``(e) Evaluation.--
       ``(1) Evaluation system.--An eligible State that receives a 
     grant under this section shall develop and utilize a system 
     to evaluate annually the effectiveness of teacher preparation 
     programs and professional development activities within the 
     State in producing gains in--
       ``(A) the teacher's annual contribution to improving 
     student academic achievement, as measured by State academic 
     assessments required under section 1111(b)(3) of the 
     Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     6311(b)(3)); and
       ``(B) teacher mastery of the academic subjects they teach, 
     as measured by pre- and post-participation tests of teacher 
     knowledge, as appropriate.
       ``(2) Use of evaluation system.--Such evaluation system 
     shall be used by the State to evaluate--
       ``(A) activities carried out using funds provided under 
     this section; and
       ``(B) the quality of its teacher education programs.
       ``(3) Public reporting.--The State shall make the 
     information described in paragraph (1) widely available 
     through public means, such as posting on the Internet, 
     distribution to the media, and distribution through public 
     agencies.

     ``SEC. 203. PARTNERSHIP GRANTS.

       ``(a) Grants.--From amounts made available under section 
     210(2) for a fiscal year, the Secretary is authorized to 
     award grants under this section, on a competitive basis, to 
     eligible partnerships to enable the eligible partnerships to 
     carry out the activities described in subsections (d) and 
     (e).
       ``(b) Definitions.--
       ``(1) Eligible partnerships.--In this part, the term 
     `eligible partnership' means an entity that--
       ``(A) shall include--
       ``(i) a partner institution;
       ``(ii) a school of arts and sciences;
       ``(iii) a high-need local educational agency; and
       ``(iv) a public or private educational organization; and
       ``(B) may include a Governor, State educational agency, the 
     State board of education, the State agency for higher 
     education, an institution of higher education not described 
     in subparagraph (A), a public charter school, a public or 
     private elementary school or secondary school, a public or 
     private educational organization, a business, a science-, 
     mathematics-, or technology-oriented entity, a faith-based or 
     community organization, a prekindergarten program, a teacher 
     organization, an education service agency, a consortia of 
     local educational agencies, or a nonprofit telecommunications 
     entity.
       ``(2) Partner institution.--In this section, the term 
     `partner institution' means an institution of higher 
     education, the teacher training program of which demonstrates 
     that--
       ``(A) graduates from the teacher training program exhibit 
     strong performance on State-determined qualifying assessments 
     for new teachers through--
       ``(i) demonstrating that the graduates of the program who 
     intend to enter the field of teaching have passed all of the 
     applicable State qualification assessments for new teachers, 
     which shall include an assessment of each prospective 
     teacher's subject matter knowledge in the content area or 
     areas in which the teacher intends to teach; or
       ``(ii) being ranked among the highest-performing teacher 
     preparation programs in the State as determined by the 
     State--

       ``(I) using criteria consistent with the requirements for 
     the State report card under section 207(a); and
       ``(II) using the State report card on teacher preparation 
     required under section 207(a); or

       ``(B) the teacher training program requires all the 
     students of the program to participate in intensive clinical 
     experience, to meet high academic standards, and--
       ``(i) in the case of secondary school candidates, to 
     successfully complete an academic major in the subject area 
     in which the candidate intends to teach or to demonstrate 
     competence through a high level of performance in relevant 
     content areas; and
       ``(ii) in the case of elementary school candidates, to 
     successfully complete an academic major in the arts and 
     sciences or to demonstrate competence through a high level of 
     performance in core academic subject areas.
       ``(c) Application.--Each eligible partnership desiring a 
     grant under this section shall submit an application to the 
     Secretary at such time, in such manner, and accompanied by 
     such information as the Secretary may require. Each such 
     application shall--
       ``(1) contain a needs assessment of all the partners with 
     respect to teaching and learning and a description of how the 
     partnership will coordinate with other teacher training or 
     professional development programs, and how the activities of 
     the partnership will be consistent with State, local, and 
     other education reform activities that promote student 
     academic achievement;
       ``(2) contain a resource assessment that describes the 
     resources available to the partnership, the intended use of 
     the grant funds, including a description of how the grant 
     funds will be fairly distributed in accordance with 
     subsection (f), and the commitment of the resources of the 
     partnership to the activities assisted under this part, 
     including financial support, faculty participation, time 
     commitments, and continuation of the activities when the 
     grant ends; and
       ``(3) contain a description of--
       ``(A) how the partnership will meet the purposes of this 
     part;
       ``(B) how the partnership will carry out the activities 
     required under subsection (d) and any permissible activities 
     under subsection (e);
       ``(C) the partnership's evaluation plan pursuant to section 
     206(b);
       ``(D) how faculty of the teacher preparation program at the 
     partner institution will serve, over the term of the grant, 
     with highly qualified teachers in the classrooms of the high-
     need local educational agency included in the partnership; 
     and
       ``(E) how the partnership will ensure that teachers in 
     private elementary and secondary schools located in the 
     geographic areas served by an eligible partnership under this 
     section will participate equitably in accordance with section 
     9501 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 
     (20 U.S.C. 7881).
       ``(d) Required Uses of Funds.--An eligible partnership that 
     receives a grant under this section shall use the grant funds 
     to reform teacher preparation requirements, to coordinate 
     with State activities under section 2113(c) of the Elementary 
     and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6613(c)), and 
     to ensure that current and future teachers are highly 
     qualified, by carrying out one or more of the following 
     activities:
       ``(1) Reforms.--Implementing reforms within teacher 
     preparation programs to ensure that such programs are 
     preparing teachers who are highly qualified, and are able to 
     use advanced technology effectively in the classroom, 
     including use for instructional techniques to improve student 
     academic achievement, by--
       ``(A) retraining faculty; and
       ``(B) designing (or redesigning) teacher preparation 
     programs so they--
       ``(i) are based on rigorous academic content, 
     scientifically based research (including scientifically based 
     reading research), and challenging State student academic 
     content standards; and
       ``(ii) promote strong teaching skills.
       ``(2) Clinical experience and interaction.--Providing 
     sustained and high-quality preservice and in-service clinical 
     experience, including the mentoring of prospective teachers 
     by exemplary teachers, substantially increasing interaction 
     between faculty at institutions of higher education and new 
     and experienced teachers, principals, and other 
     administrators at elementary schools or secondary schools, 
     and providing support for teachers, including preparation 
     time and release time, for such interaction.
       ``(3) Professional development.--Creating opportunities for 
     enhanced and ongoing professional development that improves 
     the academic content knowledge of teachers in the subject 
     areas in which the teachers are certified to teach or in 
     which the teachers are working toward certification to teach, 
     and that promotes strong teaching skills.
       ``(4) Teacher preparation.--Developing, or assisting local 
     educational agencies in developing, professional development 
     activities that--
       ``(A) provide training in how to teach and address the 
     needs of students with different learning styles, 
     particularly students with disabilities, limited English 
     proficient students, and students with special learning 
     needs; and
       ``(B) provide training in methods of--
       ``(i) improving student behavior in the classroom; and
       ``(ii) identifying early and appropriate interventions to 
     help students described in subparagraph (A) learn.
       ``(e) Allowable Uses of Funds.--An eligible partnership 
     that receives a grant under this section may use such funds 
     to carry out the following activities:
       ``(1) Alternatives to traditional teacher preparation and 
     state certification.--Providing prospective teachers with 
     alternative routes to State certification and traditional 
     preparation to become highly qualified teachers through--
       ``(A) innovative approaches that reduce unnecessary 
     barriers to teacher preparation while producing highly 
     qualified teachers;
       ``(B) programs that provide support during a teacher's 
     initial years in the profession; and

[[Page 17354]]

       ``(C) alternative routes to State certification of teachers 
     for qualified individuals, including mid-career professionals 
     from other occupations, former military personnel, and recent 
     college graduates with records of academic distinction.
       ``(2) Dissemination and coordination.--Broadly 
     disseminating information on effective practices used by the 
     partnership, and coordinating with the activities of the 
     Governor, State board of education, State higher education 
     agency, and State educational agency, as appropriate.
       ``(3) Managerial and leadership skills.--Developing and 
     implementing professional development programs for principals 
     and superintendents that enable them to be effective school 
     leaders and prepare all students to meet challenging State 
     academic content and student academic achievement standards.
       ``(4) Teacher recruitment.--Activities--
       ``(A) to encourage students to become highly qualified 
     teachers, such as extracurricular enrichment activities; and
       ``(B) activities described in section 204(d).
       ``(5) Clinical experience in science, mathematics, and 
     technology.--Creating opportunities for clinical experience 
     and training, by participation in the business, research, and 
     work environments with professionals, in areas relating to 
     science, mathematics, and technology for teachers and 
     prospective teachers, including opportunities for use of 
     laboratory equipment, in order for the teacher to return to 
     the classroom for at least 2 years and provide instruction 
     that will raise student academic achievement.
       ``(6) Coordination with community colleges.--Coordinating 
     with community colleges to implement teacher preparation 
     programs, including through distance learning, for the 
     purposes of allowing prospective teachers--
       ``(A) to attain a bachelor's degree and State certification 
     or licensure; and
       ``(B) to become highly qualified teachers.
       ``(f) Special Rule.--At least 50 percent of the funds made 
     available to an eligible partnership under this section shall 
     be used directly to benefit the high-need local educational 
     agency included in the partnership. Any entity described in 
     subsection (b)(1)(A) may be the fiscal agent under this 
     section.
       ``(g) Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to prohibit an eligible partnership from using 
     grant funds to coordinate with the activities of more than 
     one Governor, State board of education, State educational 
     agency, local educational agency, or State agency for higher 
     education.

     ``SEC. 204. TEACHER RECRUITMENT GRANTS.

       ``(a) Program Authorized.--From amounts made available 
     under section 210(3) for a fiscal year, the Secretary is 
     authorized to award grants, on a competitive basis, to 
     eligible applicants to enable the eligible applicants to 
     carry out activities described in subsection (d).
       ``(b) Eligible Applicant Defined.--In this part, the term 
     `eligible applicant' means--
       ``(1) an eligible State described in section 202(b); or
       ``(2) an eligible partnership described in section 203(b).
       ``(c) Application.--Any eligible applicant desiring to 
     receive a grant under this section shall submit an 
     application to the Secretary at such time, in such form, and 
     containing such information as the Secretary may require, 
     including--
       ``(1) a description of the assessment that the eligible 
     applicant, and the other entities with whom the eligible 
     applicant will carry out the grant activities, have 
     undertaken to determine the most critical needs of the 
     participating high-need local educational agencies;
       ``(2) a description of the activities the eligible 
     applicant will carry out with the grant, including the extent 
     to which the applicant will use funds to recruit minority 
     students to become highly qualified teachers; and
       ``(3) a description of the eligible applicant's plan for 
     continuing the activities carried out with the grant, once 
     Federal funding ceases.
       ``(d) Uses of Funds.--Each eligible applicant receiving a 
     grant under this section shall use the grant funds--
       ``(1)(A) to award scholarships to help students, such as 
     individuals who have been accepted for their first year, or 
     who are enrolled in their first or second year, of a program 
     of undergraduate education at an institution of higher 
     education, pay the costs of tuition, room, board, and other 
     expenses of completing a teacher preparation program;
       ``(B) to provide support services, if needed to enable 
     scholarship recipients--
       ``(i) to complete postsecondary education programs; or
       ``(ii) to transition from a career outside of the field of 
     education into a teaching career; and
       ``(C) for followup services provided to former scholarship 
     recipients during the recipients first 3 years of teaching; 
     or
       ``(2) to develop and implement effective mechanisms to 
     ensure that high-need local educational agencies and schools 
     are able effectively to recruit highly qualified teachers.
       ``(e) Additional Discretionary Uses of Funds.--In addition 
     to the uses described in subsection (d), each eligible 
     applicant receiving a grant under this section may use the 
     grant funds to develop and implement effective mechanisms to 
     recruit into the teaching profession employees from--
       ``(1) high-demand industries, including technology 
     industries; and
       ``(2) the fields of science, mathematics, and engineering.
       ``(f) Service Requirements.--
       ``(1) In general.--The Secretary shall establish such 
     requirements as the Secretary determines necessary to ensure 
     that recipients of scholarships under this section who 
     complete teacher education programs--
       ``(A) subsequently teach in a high-need local educational 
     agency for a period of time equivalent to--
       ``(i) one year; increased by
       ``(ii) the period for which the recipient received 
     scholarship assistance; or
       ``(B) repay the amount of the scholarship.
       ``(2) Use of repayments.--The Secretary shall use any such 
     repayments to carry out additional activities under this 
     section.
       ``(g) Priority.--The Secretary shall give priority under 
     this section to eligible applicants who provide an assurance 
     that they will recruit a high percentage of minority students 
     to become highly qualified teachers.

     ``SEC. 205. ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS.

       ``(a) Duration; One-Time Awards; Payments.--
       ``(1) Duration.--
       ``(A) Eligible states and eligible applicants.--Grants 
     awarded to eligible States and eligible applicants under this 
     part shall be awarded for a period not to exceed 3 years.
       ``(B) Eligible partnerships.--Grants awarded to eligible 
     partnerships under this part shall be awarded for a period of 
     5 years.
       ``(2) One-time award.--An eligible partnership may receive 
     a grant under each of sections 203 and 204, as amended by the 
     Ready to Teach Act of 2003, only once.
       ``(3) Payments.--The Secretary shall make annual payments 
     of grant funds awarded under this part.
       ``(b) Peer Review.--
       ``(1) Panel.--The Secretary shall provide the applications 
     submitted under this part to a peer review panel for 
     evaluation. With respect to each application, the peer review 
     panel shall initially recommend the application for funding 
     or for disapproval.
       ``(2) Priority.--In recommending applications to the 
     Secretary for funding under this part, the panel shall--
       ``(A) with respect to grants under section 202, give 
     priority to eligible States serving States that--
       ``(i) have initiatives to reform State teacher 
     certification requirements that are based on rigorous 
     academic content, scientifically based research, including 
     scientifically based reading research, and challenging State 
     student academic content standards;
       ``(ii) include innovative reforms to hold institutions of 
     higher education with teacher preparation programs 
     accountable for preparing teachers who are highly qualified 
     and have strong teaching skills; or
       ``(iii) involve the development of innovative efforts aimed 
     at reducing the shortage of highly qualified teachers in high 
     poverty urban and rural areas; and
       ``(B) with respect to grants under section 203--
       ``(i) give priority to applications from broad-based 
     eligible partnerships that involve businesses and community 
     organizations; and
       ``(ii) take into consideration--

       ``(I) providing an equitable geographic distribution of the 
     grants throughout the United States; and
       ``(II) the potential of the proposed activities for 
     creating improvement and positive change.

       ``(3) Secretarial selection.--The Secretary shall 
     determine, based on the peer review process, which 
     application shall receive funding and the amounts of the 
     grants. In determining grant amounts, the Secretary shall 
     take into account the total amount of funds available for all 
     grants under this part and the types of activities proposed 
     to be carried out.
       ``(c) Matching Requirements.--
       ``(1) State grants.--Each eligible State receiving a grant 
     under section 202 or 204 shall provide, from non-Federal 
     sources, an amount equal to 50 percent of the amount of the 
     grant (in cash or in kind) to carry out the activities 
     supported by the grant.
       ``(2) Partnership grants.--Each eligible partnership 
     receiving a grant under section 203 or 204 shall provide, 
     from non-Federal sources (in cash or in kind), an amount 
     equal to 25 percent of the grant for the first year of the 
     grant, 35 percent of the grant for the second year of the 
     grant, and 50 percent of the grant for each succeeding year 
     of the grant.
       ``(d) Limitation on Administrative Expenses.--An eligible 
     State or eligible partnership that receives a grant under 
     this part may not use more than 2 percent of the grant funds 
     for purposes of administering the grant.

     ``SEC. 206. ACCOUNTABILITY AND EVALUATION.

       ``(a) State Grant Accountability Report.--An eligible State 
     that receives a grant under section 202 shall submit an 
     annual accountability report to the Secretary, the Committee 
     on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions of the Senate, and 
     the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the House of 
     Representatives. Such report shall include a description of 
     the degree to which the eligible State, in using funds 
     provided under such section, has made substantial progress in 
     meeting the following goals:
       ``(1) Percentage of highly qualified teachers.--Increasing 
     the percentage of highly qualified teachers in the State as 
     required by section 1119 of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6319).
       ``(2) Student academic achievement.--Increasing student 
     academic achievement for all students as defined by the 
     eligible State.

[[Page 17355]]

       ``(3) Raising standards.--Raising the State academic 
     standards required to enter the teaching profession as a 
     highly qualified teacher.
       ``(4) Initial certification or licensure.--Increasing 
     success in the pass rate for initial State teacher 
     certification or licensure, or increasing the numbers of 
     qualified individuals being certified or licensed as teachers 
     through alternative programs.
       ``(5) Decreasing teacher shortages.--Decreasing shortages 
     of highly qualified teachers in poor urban and rural areas.
       ``(6) Increasing opportunities for professional 
     development.--Increasing opportunities for enhanced and 
     ongoing professional development that--
       ``(A) improves the academic content knowledge of teachers 
     in the subject areas in which the teachers are certified or 
     licensed to teach or in which the teachers are working toward 
     certification or licensure to teach; and
       ``(B) promotes strong teaching skills.
       ``(7) Technology integration.--Increasing the number of 
     teachers prepared effectively to integrate technology into 
     curricula and instruction and who use technology to collect, 
     manage, and analyze data to improve teaching, learning, and 
     decisionmaking for the purpose of increasing student academic 
     achievement.
       ``(b) Eligible Partnership Evaluation.--Each eligible 
     partnership receiving a grant under section 203 shall 
     establish, and include in the application submitted under 
     section 203(c), an evaluation plan that includes strong 
     performance objectives. The plan shall include objectives and 
     measures for--
       ``(1) increased student achievement for all students as 
     measured by the partnership;
       ``(2) increased teacher retention in the first 3 years of a 
     teacher's career;
       ``(3) increased success in the pass rate for initial State 
     certification or licensure of teachers;
       ``(4) increased percentage of highly qualified teachers; 
     and
       ``(5) increasing the number of teachers trained effectively 
     to integrate technology into curricula and instruction and 
     who use technology to collect, manage, and analyze data to 
     improve teaching, learning, and decisionmaking for the 
     purpose of improving student academic achievement.
       ``(c) Revocation of Grant.--
       ``(1) Report.--Each eligible State or eligible partnership 
     receiving a grant under section 202 or 203 shall report 
     annually on the progress of the eligible State or eligible 
     partnership toward meeting the purposes of this part and the 
     goals, objectives, and measures described in subsections (a) 
     and (b).
       ``(2) Revocation.--
       ``(A) Eligible states and eligible applicants.--If the 
     Secretary determines that an eligible State or eligible 
     applicant is not making substantial progress in meeting the 
     purposes, goals, objectives, and measures, as appropriate, by 
     the end of the second year of a grant under this part, then 
     the grant payment shall not be made for the third year of the 
     grant.
       ``(B) Eligible partnerships.--If the Secretary determines 
     that an eligible partnership is not making substantial 
     progress in meeting the purposes, goals, objectives, and 
     measures, as appropriate, by the end of the third year of a 
     grant under this part, then the grant payments shall not be 
     made for any succeeding year of the grant.
       ``(d) Evaluation and Dissemination.--The Secretary shall 
     evaluate the activities funded under this part and report 
     annually the Secretary's findings regarding the activities 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. The Secretary shall broadly 
     disseminate successful practices developed by eligible States 
     and eligible partnerships under this part, and shall broadly 
     disseminate information regarding such practices that were 
     found to be ineffective.

     ``SEC. 207. ACCOUNTABILITY FOR PROGRAMS THAT PREPARE 
                   TEACHERS.

       ``(a) State Report Card on the Quality of Teacher 
     Preparation.--Each State that receives funds under this Act 
     shall provide to the Secretary annually, in a uniform and 
     comprehensible manner that conforms with the definitions and 
     methods established by the Secretary, a State report card on 
     the quality of teacher preparation in the State, both for 
     traditional certification or licensure programs and for 
     alternative certification or licensure programs, which shall 
     include at least the following:
       ``(1) A description of the teacher certification and 
     licensure assessments, and any other certification and 
     licensure requirements, used by the State.
       ``(2) The standards and criteria that prospective teachers 
     must meet in order to attain initial teacher certification or 
     licensure and to be certified or licensed to teach particular 
     subjects or in particular grades within the State.
       ``(3) A description of the extent to which the assessments 
     and requirements described in paragraph (1) are aligned with 
     the State's standards and assessments for students.
       ``(4) The percentage of students who have completed at 
     least 50 percent of the requirements for a teacher 
     preparation program at an institution of higher education or 
     alternative certification program and who have taken and 
     passed each of the assessments used by the State for teacher 
     certification and licensure, and the passing score on each 
     assessment that determines whether a candidate has passed 
     that assessment.
       ``(5) The percentage of students who have completed at 
     least 50 percent of the requirements for a teacher 
     preparation program at an institution of higher education or 
     alternative certification program and who have taken and 
     passed each of the assessments used by the State for teacher 
     certification and licensure, disaggregated and ranked, by the 
     teacher preparation program in that State from which the 
     teacher candidate received the candidate's most recent 
     degree, which shall be made available widely and publicly.
       ``(6) A description of each State's alternative routes to 
     teacher certification, if any, and the number and percentage 
     of teachers certified through each alternative certification 
     route who pass State teacher certification or licensure 
     assessments.
       ``(7) For each State, a description of proposed criteria 
     for assessing the performance of teacher preparation programs 
     in the State, including indicators of teacher candidate 
     skills and academic content knowledge and evidence of gains 
     in student academic achievement.
       ``(8) For each teacher preparation program in the State, 
     the number of students in the program, the average number of 
     hours of supervised practice teaching required for those in 
     the program, and the number of full-time equivalent faculty 
     and students in supervised practice teaching.
       ``(b) Report of the Secretary on the Quality of Teacher 
     Preparation.--
       ``(1) Report card.--The Secretary shall provide to 
     Congress, and publish and make widely available, a report 
     card on teacher qualifications and preparation in the United 
     States, including all the information reported in paragraphs 
     (1) through (8) of subsection (a). Such report shall identify 
     States for which eligible States and eligible partnerships 
     received a grant under this part. Such report shall be so 
     provided, published and made available annually.
       ``(2) Report to congress.--The Secretary shall report to 
     Congress--
       ``(A) a comparison of States' efforts to improve teaching 
     quality; and
       ``(B) regarding the national mean and median scores on any 
     standardized test that is used in more than 1 State for 
     teacher certification or licensure.
       ``(3) Special rule.--In the case of programs with fewer 
     than 10 students who have completed at least 50 percent of 
     the requirements for a teacher preparation program taking any 
     single initial teacher certification or licensure assessment 
     during an academic year, the Secretary shall collect and 
     publish information with respect to an average pass rate on 
     State certification or licensure assessments taken over a 3-
     year period.
       ``(c) Coordination.--The Secretary, to the extent 
     practicable, shall coordinate the information collected and 
     published under this part among States for individuals who 
     took State teacher certification or licensure assessments in 
     a State other than the State in which the individual received 
     the individual's most recent degree.
       ``(d) Institution and Program Report Cards on Quality of 
     Teacher Preparation.--
       ``(1) Report card.--Each institution of higher education or 
     alternative certification program that conducts a teacher 
     preparation program that enrolls students receiving Federal 
     assistance under this Act shall report annually to the State 
     and the general public, in a uniform and comprehensible 
     manner that conforms with the definitions and methods 
     established by the Secretary, both for traditional 
     certification or licensure programs and for alternative 
     certification or licensure programs, the following 
     information:
       ``(A) Pass rate.--(i) For the most recent year for which 
     the information is available, the pass rate of each student 
     who has completed at least 50 percent of the requirements for 
     the teacher preparation program on the teacher certification 
     or licensure assessments of the State in which the 
     institution is located, but only for those students who took 
     those assessments within 3 years of receiving a degree from 
     the institution or completing the program.
       ``(ii) A comparison of the institution or program's pass 
     rate for students who have completed at least 50 percent of 
     the requirements for the teacher preparation program with the 
     average pass rate for institutions and programs in the State.
       ``(iii) A comparison of the institution or program's 
     average raw score for students who have completed at least 50 
     percent of the requirements for the teacher preparation 
     program with the average raw scores for institutions and 
     programs in the State.
       ``(iv) In the case of programs with fewer than 10 students 
     who have completed at least 50 percent of the requirements 
     for a teacher preparation program taking any single initial 
     teacher certification or licensure assessment during an 
     academic year, the institution shall collect and publish 
     information with respect to an average pass rate on State 
     certification or licensure assessments taken over a 3-year 
     period.
       ``(B) Program information.--The number of students in the 
     program, the average number of hours of supervised practice 
     teaching required for those in the program, and the number of 
     full-time equivalent faculty and students in supervised 
     practice teaching.
       ``(C) Statement.--In States that require approval or 
     accreditation of teacher education programs, a statement of 
     whether the institution's program is so approved or 
     accredited, and by whom.
       ``(D) Designation as low-performing.--Whether the program 
     has been designated as

[[Page 17356]]

     low-performing by the State under section 208(a).
       ``(2) Requirement.--The information described in paragraph 
     (1) shall be reported through publications such as school 
     catalogs and promotional materials sent to potential 
     applicants, secondary school guidance counselors, and 
     prospective employers of the institution's program graduates, 
     including materials sent by electronic means.
       ``(3) Fines.--In addition to the actions authorized in 
     section 487(c), the Secretary may impose a fine not to exceed 
     $25,000 on an institution of higher education for failure to 
     provide the information described in this subsection in a 
     timely or accurate manner.
       ``(e) Data Quality.--Either--
       ``(1) the Governor of the State; or
       ``(2) in the case of a State for which the constitution or 
     law of such State designates another individual, entity, or 
     agency in the State to be responsible for teacher 
     certification and preparation activity, such individual, 
     entity, or agency;

     shall attest annually, in writing, as to the reliability, 
     validity, integrity, and accuracy of the data submitted 
     pursuant to this section.

     ``SEC. 208. STATE FUNCTIONS.

       ``(a) State Assessment.--In order to receive funds under 
     this Act, a State shall have in place a procedure to identify 
     and assist, through the provision of technical assistance, 
     low-performing programs of teacher preparation within 
     institutions of higher education. Such State shall provide 
     the Secretary an annual list of such low-performing 
     institutions that includes an identification of those 
     institutions at risk of being placed on such list. Such 
     levels of performance shall be determined solely by the State 
     and may include criteria based upon information collected 
     pursuant to this part. Such assessment shall be described in 
     the report under section 207(a).
       ``(b) Termination of Eligibility.--Any institution of 
     higher education that offers a program of teacher preparation 
     in which the State has withdrawn the State's approval or 
     terminated the State's financial support due to the low 
     performance of the institution's teacher preparation program 
     based upon the State assessment described in subsection (a)--
       ``(1) shall be ineligible for any funding for professional 
     development activities awarded by the Department of 
     Education; and
       ``(2) shall not be permitted to accept or enroll any 
     student who receives aid under title IV of this Act in the 
     institution's teacher preparation program.

     ``SEC. 209. GENERAL PROVISIONS.

       ``(a) Methods.--In complying with sections 207 and 208, the 
     Secretary shall ensure that States and institutions of higher 
     education use fair and equitable methods in reporting and 
     that the reporting methods do not allow identification of 
     individuals.
       ``(b) Special Rule.--For each State in which there are no 
     State certification or licensure assessments, or for States 
     that do not set minimum performance levels on those 
     assessments--
       ``(1) the Secretary shall, to the extent practicable, 
     collect data comparable to the data required under this part 
     from States, local educational agencies, institutions of 
     higher education, or other entities that administer such 
     assessments to teachers or prospective teachers; and
       ``(2) notwithstanding any other provision of this part, the 
     Secretary shall use such data to carry out requirements of 
     this part related to assessments or pass rates.
       ``(c) Limitations.--
       ``(1) Federal control prohibited.--Nothing in this part 
     shall be construed to permit, allow, encourage, or authorize 
     any Federal control over any aspect of any private, 
     religious, or home school, whether or not a home school is 
     treated as a private school or home school under State law. 
     This section shall not be construed to prohibit private, 
     religious, or home schools from participation in programs or 
     services under this part.
       ``(2) No change in state control encouraged or required.--
     Nothing in this part shall be construed to encourage or 
     require any change in a State's treatment of any private, 
     religious, or home school, whether or not a home school is 
     treated as a private school or home school under State law.
       ``(3) National system of teacher certification 
     prohibited.--Nothing in this part shall be construed to 
     permit, allow, encourage, or authorize the Secretary to 
     establish or support any national system of teacher 
     certification.

     ``SEC. 210. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     part $300,000,000 for fiscal year 2004 and such sums as may 
     be necessary for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal years, of 
     which--
       ``(1) 45 percent shall be available for each fiscal year to 
     award grants under section 202;
       ``(2) 45 percent shall be available for each fiscal year to 
     award grants under section 203; and
       ``(3) 10 percent shall be available for each fiscal year to 
     award grants under section 204.''.

     SEC. 3. PREPARING TOMORROW'S TEACHERS TO USE TECHNOLOGY.

       (a) Eligibility.--Section 222(a)(3)(D) of the Higher 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1042(a)(3)(D)) is amended by 
     inserting ``nonprofit telecommunications entity,'' after 
     ``community-based organization,''.
       (b) Permissible Uses of Funds.--Section 223(b)(1)(E) of the 
     Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1043(b)(1)(E)) is 
     amended to read as follows:
       ``(E) To use technology to collect, manage, and analyze 
     data to improve teaching, learning, and decisionmaking for 
     the purpose of increasing student academic achievement.''.
       (c) Authorization of Appropriations.--Section 224 of the 
     Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1044) is amended by 
     striking ``each of fiscal years 2002 and 2003.'' and 
     inserting ``fiscal year 2004 and each of the 4 succeeding 
     fiscal years.''.

     SEC. 4. CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE.

       Title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
     1021 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following:

                    ``PART C--CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE

     ``SEC. 231. PURPOSES; DEFINITIONS.

       ``(a) Purposes.--The purposes of this part are--
       ``(1) to help recruit and prepare teachers, including 
     minority teachers, to meet the national demand for a highly 
     qualified teacher in every classroom; and
       ``(2) to increase opportunities for Americans of all 
     educational, ethnic, class, and geographic backgrounds to 
     become highly qualified teachers.
       ``(b) Definitions.--As used in this part:
       ``(1) Eligible institution.--The term `eligible 
     institution' means--
       ``(A) an institution of higher education that has a teacher 
     preparation program that meets the requirements of section 
     203(b)(2) and that is--
       ``(i) a part B institution (as defined in section 322);
       ``(ii) a Hispanic-serving institution (as defined in 
     section 502);
       ``(iii) a Tribal College or University (as defined in 
     section 316);
       ``(iv) an Alaska Native-serving institution (as defined in 
     section 317(b)); or
       ``(v) a Native Hawaiian-serving institution (as defined in 
     section 317(b));
       ``(B) a consortium of institutions described in 
     subparagraph (A); or
       ``(C) an institution described in subparagraph (A), or a 
     consortium described in subparagraph (B), in partnership with 
     any other institution of higher education, but only if the 
     center of excellence established under section 232 is located 
     at an institution described in subparagraph (A).
       ``(2) Highly qualified.--The term `highly qualified' has 
     the meaning given such term in section 9101 of the Elementary 
     and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).
       ``(3) Scientifically based reading research.--The term 
     `scientifically based reading research' has the meaning given 
     such term in section 1208 of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6368).
       ``(4) Scientifically based research.--The term 
     `scientifically based research' has the meaning given such 
     term in section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801).

     ``SEC. 232. CENTERS OF EXCELLENCE.

       ``(a) Program Authorized.--From the amounts appropriated to 
     carry out this part, the Secretary is authorized to award 
     competitive grants to eligible institutions to establish 
     centers of excellence.
       ``(b) Use of Funds.--Grants provided by the Secretary under 
     this part shall be used to ensure that current and future 
     teachers are highly qualified, by carrying out one or more of 
     the following activities:
       ``(1) Implementing reforms within teacher preparation 
     programs to ensure that such programs are preparing teachers 
     who are highly qualified and are able to use advanced 
     technology effectively in the classroom, including use for 
     instructional techniques to improve student academic 
     achievement, by--
       ``(A) retraining faculty; and
       ``(B) designing (or redesigning) teacher preparation 
     programs that--
       ``(i) prepare teachers to close student achievement gaps, 
     are based on rigorous academic content, scientifically based 
     research (including scientifically based reading research), 
     and challenging State student academic content standards; and
       ``(ii) promote strong teaching skills.
       ``(2) Providing sustained and high-quality preservice 
     clinical experience, including the mentoring of prospective 
     teachers by exemplary teachers, substantially increasing 
     interaction between faculty at institutions of higher 
     education and new and experienced teachers, principals, and 
     other administrators at elementary schools or secondary 
     schools, and providing support, including preparation time, 
     for such interaction.
       ``(3) Developing and implementing initiatives to promote 
     retention of highly qualified teachers and principals, 
     including minority teachers and principals, including 
     programs that provide--
       ``(A) teacher mentoring from exemplary teachers or 
     principals; or
       ``(B) induction and support for teachers and principals 
     during their first 3 years of employment as teachers or 
     principals, respectively.
       ``(4) Awarding scholarships based on financial need to help 
     students pay the costs of tuition, room, board, and other 
     expenses of completing a teacher preparation program.
       ``(5) Disseminating information on effective practices for 
     teacher preparation and successful teacher certification test 
     preparation strategies.
       ``(6) Activities authorized under sections 202, 203, and 
     204.
       ``(c) Application.--Any eligible institution desiring a 
     grant under this section shall submit an application to the 
     Secretary at such a time, in such a manner, and accompanied 
     by such information the Secretary may require.
       ``(d) Minimum Grant Amount.--The minimum amount of each 
     grant under this part shall be $500,000.

[[Page 17357]]

       ``(e) Limitation on Administrative Expenses.--An eligible 
     institution that receives a grant under this part may not use 
     more than 2 percent of the grant funds for purposes of 
     administering the grant.
       ``(f) Regulations.--The Secretary shall prescribe such 
     regulations as may be necessary to carry out this part.

     ``SEC. 233. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

       ``There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this 
     part $10,000,000 for fiscal year 2004 and such sums as may be 
     necessary for each of the 4 succeeding fiscal years.''.

     SEC. 5. TRANSITION.

       The Secretary of Education shall take such actions as the 
     Secretary determines to be appropriate to provide for the 
     orderly implementation of this Act.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. No amendment to the committee amendment is 
in order except those printed in House Report 108-190. Each amendment 
may be offered only in the order printed in the report, by a Member 
designated in the report, shall be considered read, shall be debatable 
for the time specified in the report, equally divided and controlled by 
the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and 
shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 printed in House 
Report 108-190.


                 Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Gingrey

  Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, pursuant to the rule, I offer amendment 
No. 1.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 1 offered by Mr. Gingrey:
       Page 6, line 25, strike ``(1)'' and insert ``(1)(B)''.
       Page 7, beginning on line 11, strike ``shall, at the time 
     of the initial grant application, submit'' and insert ``shall 
     submit''.
       Page 8, line 15, after ``qualified,'' insert ``are able to 
     understand scientifically based research and its 
     applicability,''.
       Page 9, line 10, after ``teach'' insert ``that are''.
       Page 10, line 7, strike ``and experimental''.
       Page 18, line 4, strike ``fairly distributed'' and insert 
     ``used''.
       Page 18, line 9, strike ``and''.
       Page 18, line 25, strike ``teachers'' and insert 
     ``teachers, principals, and superintendents''.
       Page 19, line 5, strike the period at the end and insert 
     ``; and''.
       Page 19, after line 5, insert the following:
       ``(4) contain a certification from the high-need local 
     educational agency included in the partnership that it has 
     reviewed the application and determined that the grant 
     proposed will comply with subsection (f).
       Page 19, line 17, after ``qualified,'' insert ``are able to 
     understand scientifically based research and its 
     applicability,''.
       Page 24, after line 2, insert the following:
       ``(h) Supplement, Not Supplant.--Funds made available under 
     this section shall be used to supplement, and not supplant, 
     other Federal, State, and local funds that would otherwise be 
     expended to carry out the purposes of this section.
       Page 28, beginning on line 19, strike ``serving States''.
       Page 29, line 3, strike ``include'' and insert ``have''.
       Page 29, line 8, strike ``involve the development of'' and 
     insert ``have''.
       Page 32, line 22, strike ``receiving'' and insert 
     ``applying for''.
       Page 33, beginning on line 3, insert ``,'' after 
     ``students''.
       Page 36, strike lines 10 through 20 and insert the 
     following:
       ``(5) For students who have completed at least 50 percent 
     of the requirements for a teacher preparation program at an 
     institution of higher education or alternative certification 
     program, and who have taken and passed each of the 
     assessments used by the State for teacher certification and 
     licensure, each such institution's and each such program's 
     average raw score, ranked by teacher preparation program, 
     which shall be made available widely and publicly.
       Page 48, line 19, strike ``qualified'' and insert 
     ``qualified, are able to understand scientifically based 
     research,''.
       Page 49, line 21, after ``teacher'' insert ``or 
     principal''.
       Page 50, line 7, strike ``test'' and insert ``and licensure 
     assessment''.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 310, the 
gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).
  Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  The manager's amendment to H.R. 2211, the Ready to Teach Act of 2003, 
makes refinements to the bill as reported by the Committee on Education 
and the Workforce on June 10, 2003. This has been a bipartisan bill 
every step of the way, and I believe it will enjoy broad support among 
my colleagues in the House. I will not take a great deal of time to 
describe the amendment in detail since it was drafted in consultation 
with our Democratic Member, and it contains mostly technical and 
clarifying changes as recommended by the Department of Education.
  However, Mr. Chairman, I would like to take a moment to point out a 
few of the changes of this proposed amendment. As currently drafted, 
H.R. 2211 authorizes grants to design or redesign teacher preparation 
programs that are based on rigorous academic content, scientifically 
based research, and challenging State student academic content 
standards. This amendment adds language to ensure that teachers in 
these programs are able to understand the scientifically based research 
and how to apply that in their classrooms.
  Under H.R. 2211, each partnership that applies for a grant must 
include at least a high-quality teacher preparation program at an 
institution of higher education; second, a school of arts and sciences; 
third, a high-need local education agency; and, finally, a public or 
private educational organization. In addition, this legislation 
requires that at least 50 percent of partnership grant funds be used to 
``directly benefit'' partner local education agencies. This provision 
in the amendment is designed to ensure that each partner local 
education agency has the ability to influence grant activities, and 
guarantees that partnership activities focus on the needs of teachers 
and students in the classroom.
  My amendment adds a provision to the bill to require that partnership 
grant applications contain a certification from the partner local 
educational agencies stating that they will ``directly benefit'' from 
the proposed grant activities. This amendment ensures that the 
partnership grant funds are used only to supplement, not to supplant, 
other Federal, State, and local funds that would otherwise be used for 
teacher preparation activities.
  Finally, Mr. Chairman, my amendment ensures that teacher preparation 
program average raw score data that is reported to the State is also 
included in the State report card on quality of teacher preparation.
  This amendment makes common-sense, noncontroversial changes to the 
legislation, and I ask for my colleagues' support. Support it because 
it improves the quality of the programs authorized under Title II of 
the Higher Education Act.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition, although I am not in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from Michigan?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I do not intend to oppose this amendment. 
This amendment makes, indeed, important technical and clarifying 
changes to the bill, and I urge its support.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey).
  The question was taken; and the Chairman pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.
  Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote, and, pending 
that, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. 
Gingrey) will be postponed.
  The point of no quorum is considered withdrawn.
  It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 printed in House 
Report 108-190.


                 Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mr. Kildee

  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Millender-McDonald), I offer an amendment.

[[Page 17358]]

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 2 offered by Mr. Kildee:
       Page 18, strike line 23.
       Page 19, line 5, strike the period at the end and insert a 
     semicolon.
       Page 19, after line 5, insert the following:
       ``(F) how the partnership will design and implement a 
     clinical program component that includes close supervision of 
     student teachers by faculty of the teacher preparation 
     program at the partner institution and mentor teachers;
       ``(G) how the partnership will design and implement an 
     induction program to support all new teachers through the 
     first 3 years of teaching that includes mentors who are 
     trained and compensated by the partnership for their work 
     with new teachers; and
       ``(H) how the partnership will collect, analyze, and use 
     data on the retention of all teachers in schools located in 
     the geographic areas served by the partnership to evaluate 
     the effectiveness of its teacher support system.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 310, the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  This amendment would expand the bill to allow clinical and mentoring 
programs as part of the teacher preparation. I believe this amendment 
is a good addition to the bill, and I would urge its passage.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, although I do not oppose the amendment, I 
ask unanimous consent to claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, we have worked with the minority on this amendment, we 
support it, and I ask that the membership also support the amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment 
No. 3 printed in House Report 108-190.


                  Amendment No. 3 Offered by Mr. Honda

  Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 3 offered by Mr. Honda:
       Page 23, insert after line 15 the following:
       ``(7) Teacher mentoring.--Establishing or implementing a 
     teacher mentoring program that--
       ``(A) includes minimum qualifications for mentors;
       ``(B) provides training and stipends for mentors;
       ``(C) provides mentoring programs for teachers in their 
     first 3 years of teaching;
       ``(D) provides regular and ongoing opportunities for 
     mentors and mentees to observe each other's teaching methods 
     in classroom settings during the school day;
       ``(E) establishes an evaluation and accountability plan for 
     activities conducted under this paragraph that includes 
     rigorous objectives to measure the impact of such activities; 
     and
       ``(F) provides for a report to the Secretary on an annual 
     basis regarding the partnership's progress in meeting the 
     objectives described in subparagraph (E).

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 310, the 
gentleman from California (Mr. Honda) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda).
  Mr. HONDA. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to begin by thanking the chairman of the 
committee, the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), and the ranking 
member, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller), for their 
leadership in crafting this legislation and the support for this 
noncontroversial bipartisan amendment.
  I would also like to give a special thanks to the gentleman from 
Michigan (Mr. Ehlers) for working with us on this amendment.
  This amendment, based on legislation I introduced earlier this year, 
the Teacher Mentoring Act, would permit the use of grant funds to be 
used for teacher mentoring programs and is supported by the American 
Federation of Teachers.
  As a former teacher and principal, I can attest to the critical role 
teacher mentoring programs play in preparing and retaining teachers for 
the many challenges they will face. Teacher retention rates remain a 
critical problem for our Nation's schools.
  According to the National Commission on Teaching and America's 
Future, nearly a quarter of new teachers quit by the end of their 
second year, and almost half leave within 5 years. This revolving-door 
phenomenon is particularly problematic in high-poverty schools, where 
the turnover rate is almost one-third higher than the national average. 
Teachers who leave the profession often point to support programs for 
beginning teachers as a key to increasing retention rates.
  One critical source of support can be found through teacher mentoring 
programs that will pair new teachers with experienced educators serving 
as mentors. A large majority of school districts today have enacted 
teacher mentoring programs that have proven successful in retaining 
teachers. In fact, teachers without mentoring programs have been shown 
to leave the profession at a rate almost 70 percent higher than those 
with mentoring programs.
  My amendment, Mr. Chairman, will help provide the necessary resources 
for these essential programs, and I urge all Members to support this 
bipartisan amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, although I do not oppose the amendment, I 
ask unanimous consent at this time to claim the time in opposition.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  This amendment, Mr. Chairman, was drafted in consultation with the 
Committee on Education and the Workforce, and we support it. It does 
include minimum qualifications for mentors, provides training and 
stipends for mentors, provides mentoring programs for teachers in their 
first 3 years of teaching, and provides regular and ongoing 
opportunities for mentors and mentees to observe each other's teaching 
methods in classroom settings during the school day.
  I served for 9 years on a school board before I came here, and we had 
a mentoring program there which was very beneficial. I think this is a 
strong amendment to the bill, improves the bill, and I would ask the 
support of our colleagues for this amendment.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from California (Mr. Honda).
  The amendment was agreed to.

                              {time}  1330

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Quinn). It is now in order to consider 
amendment No. 4 printed in House Report 108-190.


                 Amendment No. 4 Offered by Mr. Kildee

  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, as the designee of the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Baca), I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 4 offered by Mr. Kildee:
       Page 23, after line 15, insert the following:
       ``(7) Computer software for multilingual education.--
     Training teachers to use computer software for multilingual 
     education to address the needs of limited English proficient 
     students.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 310, the 
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee)

[[Page 17359]]

and a Member opposed each will control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment will expand the bill to allow teachers 
to retrain using computer software for bilingual education. I believe 
this amendment is a good addition to the bill and urge its passage.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition, although I do not oppose the amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment was also written with the committee, has 
the support of the committee, and I believe will be very beneficial to 
those multilingual children who need this special help; and I urge 
support for the amendment.
  Mr. BACA. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the amendment that will 
help address a growing problem in our Nation today. My amendment asks 
for more funding for teachers so that they can be trained to address 
the needs of students who are of limited English, or speak English as a 
second language.
  In our school systems, the faces that fill our classrooms are 
diverse. No longer are our students simply Anglo, English-speaking, 
American born children. Rather, they are children from many different 
races and cultural backgrounds, speaking many different languages. But 
sadly, our teachers are not given the proper tools or training they 
need to address this growing diversity.
  Our teachers are left to their own devices to try to communicate with 
a classroom of children who do not speak the same language as the 
instructor. Because we do not give teachers the resources to teach 
students with limited English skills, many students are being left 
behind all across this nation. Students with limited English skills are 
more likely to drop out of school.
  We need to build their self-esteem and confidence; otherwise they are 
more likely to get involved with drugs and alcohol. They are more 
likely to commit crimes. We need trained teachers who are able to reach 
out to students with limited English skills and stop them from dropping 
out of school. Every child deserves an education! Every child deserves 
to be taught! Every child deserves the access to opportunity!
  Education opens the door for opportunity, but for many children with 
limited English, the doors will always remain shut if they do not learn 
to read, speak, and write in English!
  The need for qualified teachers who can teach students with limited 
English skills exists not only in states with large immigrant 
populations like California, Florida, and Texas, but it exists all 
across the United States! That is why funding to train teachers 
properly is so crucial!
  Georgia, North Carolina, Indiana, Oregon, New Hampshire, and Missouri 
all reported an increase of over 40 percent in students with limited 
English! This is not merely a problem in California; it is a problem 
all over this country! And we cannot ignore it any longer!
  Hispanics represent over 14 percent of the total population. It isn't 
fair to the teachers and it isn't fair to the students if we don't 
train them! That is why, even here in the Capital, many Congressional 
members are taking Spanish classes to learn the language and the 
ability to communicate to their new diverse constituents. School 
districts are suffering due to a lack of teachers properly trained in 
teaching English as a Second Language!
  In North Carolina there are only 900 qualified teachers for 53,000 
students with limited English! In Wisconsin, schools districts that may 
have had only 8 students with limited English now have as many as 65 
today. In Idaho, almost 18,000 limited English students are enrolled in 
their public school system but research indicates that nearly 40 
percent will drop out by the 10th grade!
  The fact is that immigrants exist, they are increasingly settling in 
rural communities not accustomed to immigrants, and are sending their 
kids to schools that do not know how to educate these children. Our 
country is a nation of new faces who need and deserve an education.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment and help 
the countless school districts throughout our nation who need our help.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Kildee).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. It is now in order to consider amendment 
No. 5 printed in House Report 108-190.


            Amendment No. 5 Offered by Mr. Meeks of New York

  Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Amendment No. 5 offered by Mr. Meeks of New York:
       Page 26, strike lines 8 through 17 and insert the 
     following:
       ``(e) Additional Discretionary Uses of Funds.--In addition 
     to the uses described in subsection (d), each eligible 
     applicant receiving a grant under this section may use the 
     grant funds--
       ``(1) to develop and implement effective mechanisms to 
     recruit into the teaching profession employees from--
       ``(A) high-demand industries, including technology 
     industries; and
       ``(B) the fields of science, mathematics, and engineering; 
     and
       ``(2) to conduct outreach and coordinate with inner city 
     and rural secondary schools to encourage students to pursue 
     teaching as a career.

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 310, the 
gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks).
  Mr. MEEKS of New York. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I 
may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, I come before this body to offer an amendment to 
today's Ready to Teach Act. As we here in Congress continue to discuss 
year in and year out the education of our children, this Nation's 
future, I am pleased to offer an amendment that I feel will have a 
large impact not only on the diversity of schools today but also on the 
future academic achievement of our students.
  My amendment proposes to encourage partnerships between educational 
entities and inner city and rural secondary schools. This partnership 
will be funded by allowable uses of funds, which will fund outreach and 
coordinate efforts that encourage inner city and rural youth to pursue 
teaching as a career.
  The need for such collaboration is evident to both educational 
researchers and anyone who simply walks into nearly any public school 
in the Nation. Research shows that our educational system must increase 
its efforts to encourage a higher proportion of students of color and 
males into the postsecondary pipeline. Too often, students leak out of 
the college pipeline between their 9th and 12th grade years because 
they do not consider themselves college material.
  My amendment helps prevent that from occurring. By forming 
partnerships between educational entities and secondary schools, an 
opportunity is created to identify those secondary students who find 
teaching attractive and encourage them to remain focused on their 
studies.
  Not only does my amendment encourage teaching as a career, but it 
also encourages diversity. Obviously, a teacher's effectiveness 
depends, first and foremost, on his or her skills and high 
expectations; yet we also know that students benefit in important ways 
by having some teachers who look differently or some who look like 
them, who share similar cultural experiences, who come from similar 
neighborhoods, and who serve as role models demonstrating that 
education and achievement are things to be respected. It is important 
to expose children to a diverse teaching staff and to diverse role 
models within each of our schools. Where we have a rural or inner city 
school with teachers unlike the students, we are giving students a 
stunted educational experience.
  Mr. Chairman, as schools are redoubling their commitment to raising 
standards and closing achievement

[[Page 17360]]

gaps, we need to seize every opportunity to boost the achievement of 
inner city and rural students.
  This amendment provides us with an opportunity not only to change the 
demographics of the teacher workforce, but also to encourage students 
to continue their pursuit of an education and to reveal to them the 
nature of the work of teaching.
  Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank the chairman and ranking member 
of the Committee on Education and the Workforce for their cooperation 
in allowing me to offer this amendment, and I request the support of 
all my colleagues as we seek to provide more educational opportunities 
to all our children.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the time 
in opposition to this amendment, although I do not oppose the 
amendment.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentleman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mr. McKEON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, this amendment was also drafted in consultation with 
the Committee on Education and the Workforce. We feel it makes the bill 
stronger. We strongly support it, and I urge my colleagues to support 
it.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The question is on the amendment offered by 
the gentleman from New York (Mr. Meeks).
  The amendment was agreed to.


                 Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Gingrey

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The pending business is the demand for a 
recorded vote on amendment No. 1 printed in House Report 108-190 
offered by the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Gingrey) on which further 
proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice 
vote.
  The Clerk will redesignate the amendment.
  The Clerk redesignated the amendment.


                             Recorded Vote

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. A recorded vote has been demanded.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 416, 
noes 4, not voting 14, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 339]

                               AYES--416

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Ballance
     Ballenger
     Barrett (SC)
     Bartlett (MD)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Becerra
     Bell
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Bishop (UT)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burns
     Burr
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Carter
     Case
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cole
     Collins
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Cox
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley (CA)
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Franks (AZ)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gilchrest
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Gutknecht
     Hall
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hefley
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley (OR)
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (NC)
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (IA)
     King (NY)
     Kingston
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Lynch
     Majette
     Maloney
     Manzullo
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy
     Murtha
     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Nethercutt
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Ose
     Otter
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pickering
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Rohrabacher
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tancredo
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Taylor (NC)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Toomey
     Towns
     Turner (OH)
     Turner (TX)
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--4

     Flake
     Frank (MA)
     Paul
     Sabo

                             NOT VOTING--14

     Cramer
     Cunningham
     Edwards
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Goss
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Janklow
     Millender-McDonald
     Moran (VA)
     Owens
     Oxley
     Scott (GA)


                Announcement by the Chairman Pro Tempore

  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Quinn) (during the vote). Members are 
advised there are 2 minutes remaining in this vote.

                              {time}  1358

  Mr. SABO changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  Mrs. CUBIN changed her vote from ``no'' to ``aye.''
  So the amendment was agreed to.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  Stated for:
  Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Chairman, on rollcall No. 339, the Gingrey 
amendment to H.R. 2211, I am not recorded. Had I been present, I would 
have voted ``aye.''
  (Mr. ABERCROMBIE asked and was given permission to speak out of order 
for 1 minute.)


                            Casting of Votes

  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, I know it is the intention of the 
Chairman and leadership to expedite the casting of votes. I have risen 
on the floor in the past speaking on behalf of those, particularly in 
the Longworth Building, to request that we make some attempt either by 
way of signage, blinking lights sufficient to be able to attract 
attention. I am not sure of the precise manner, but it is virtually 
impossible during these months when we are being visited with the 
number of people that are in the buildings, particularly in Longworth, 
to make use of

[[Page 17361]]

those elevators to get here in a timely fashion.
  No Member wants to try to tell members of the public to get off 
elevators or not to come in. They make inquiries and so on, as they 
should. It is simply unfair to them. We have got to figure out a way to 
make at least one elevator eligible for exclusive use by the Members 
during the time in which a vote is taking place.

                              {time}  1400

  Simply to ring the bells and then expect people to know what that 
means, let alone to be able to follow up on it during the 15- or 16- or 
17-minute period, is impossible.
  I guarantee you, you are going to have people, as has happened 
recently and almost happened again today, that are going to miss votes 
and be upset about it, unless we are able to figure out some way to 
figure out the logistics associated with that.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. I yield to the gentleman from California.
  Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Chairman, I think if you look at the historical 
context in which Members were allowed to vote, if you go back to the 
earliest House building, the Cannon Building, you will find that they 
went to the extreme position of having two sets of buttons, one with 
which the elevators operate exclusively when Members are to vote.
  Clearly, in today's kind of relationship with people who visit, we do 
not want to impose our desire to move around the Capitol at our 
pleasure. But during the vote period, it seems to me that either we 
have people on the elevators, or we use modern technology to allow us 
to utilize those elevators.
  Historically, they had people on them and separate buttons. You are 
just asking for a fair shot to get to the floor to cast your vote. I do 
not think that is unreasonable at all.
  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the 
gentleman, most especially because I like to be supportive of him as 
much as possible.
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore (Mr. Quinn). The gentleman from Alaska 
controls the time, or Hawaii.
  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. It is a common mistake, Mr. Chairman.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. The gentleman from Hawaii, who looks like 
he is from Alaska.
  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. Mr. Chairman, both the gentleman from Alaska and 
myself are shy and retiring types, and so it is often the case that we 
are mistaken for one another.
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. ABERCROMBIE. I yield to the gentleman, who has been working very 
hard to resolve this issue and for whom I have great respect as a 
result.
  Mr. NEY. Mr. Chairman, I want to point out just a couple of things. 
One, we have worked on this situation before. People are touchy 
politically I know about having someone on the elevators. In fact, 
there was a vote on this floor a few years ago where somebody thought 
it would save their election by trying to throw these people off. The 
bottom line is you need people on there to help. We have had some 
shortages. Let us not have a vote to do that kind of thing again.
  The second thing is that the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Larson) 
and I have been looking at this, and also the elevator repair, because 
people were stuck on elevators. We never again want that mixture of 
Members on the elevators.
  Finally, let me just say that there is an appropriation in 2004. If 
we can get that moved up a little bit, we can get that sped up. The 
gentlemen are both correct.
  In closing, I promise the gentleman, I will bring the plan personally 
to him and visit him in Anchorage.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. There being no other amendments, the 
question is on the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, 
as amended.
  The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, as amended, 
was agreed to.
  The CHAIRMAN pro tempore. Under the rule, the Committee rises.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
LaHood) having assumed the chair, Mr. Quinn, Chairman pro tempore of 
the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, reported 
that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 
2211) to reauthorize title II of the Higher Education Act of 1965, 
pursuant to House Resolution 310, he reported the bill back to the 
House with an amendment adopted by the Committee of the Whole.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the rule, the previous question is 
ordered.
  Is a separate vote demanded on any amendment to the committee 
amendment in the nature of a substitute adopted by the Committee of the 
Whole? If not, the question is on the amendment.
  The amendment was agreed to.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on engrossment and third 
reading of the bill.
  The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was 
read the third time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.
  The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that 
the ayes appeared to have it.


                             Recorded Vote

  Mr. BOEHNER. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
  A recorded vote was ordered.
  The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 404, 
noes 17, not voting 13, as follows:

                             [Roll No. 340]

                               AYES--404

     Abercrombie
     Ackerman
     Aderholt
     Akin
     Alexander
     Allen
     Andrews
     Baca
     Bachus
     Baird
     Baker
     Baldwin
     Ballance
     Ballenger
     Barrett (SC)
     Barton (TX)
     Bass
     Beauprez
     Becerra
     Bell
     Bereuter
     Berkley
     Berman
     Berry
     Biggert
     Bilirakis
     Bishop (GA)
     Bishop (NY)
     Blackburn
     Blumenauer
     Blunt
     Boehlert
     Boehner
     Bonilla
     Bonner
     Bono
     Boozman
     Boswell
     Boucher
     Boyd
     Bradley (NH)
     Brady (PA)
     Brady (TX)
     Brown (OH)
     Brown (SC)
     Brown, Corrine
     Brown-Waite, Ginny
     Burgess
     Burns
     Burr
     Burton (IN)
     Buyer
     Calvert
     Camp
     Cannon
     Cantor
     Capito
     Capps
     Capuano
     Cardin
     Cardoza
     Carson (IN)
     Carson (OK)
     Carter
     Case
     Castle
     Chabot
     Chocola
     Clay
     Clyburn
     Coble
     Cole
     Collins
     Conyers
     Cooper
     Costello
     Cox
     Crane
     Crenshaw
     Crowley
     Cubin
     Culberson
     Cummings
     Cunningham
     Davis (AL)
     Davis (CA)
     Davis (FL)
     Davis (IL)
     Davis (TN)
     Davis, Jo Ann
     Davis, Tom
     Deal (GA)
     DeFazio
     DeGette
     Delahunt
     DeLauro
     DeLay
     DeMint
     Deutsch
     Diaz-Balart, L.
     Diaz-Balart, M.
     Dicks
     Dingell
     Doggett
     Dooley (CA)
     Doolittle
     Doyle
     Dreier
     Duncan
     Dunn
     Ehlers
     Emanuel
     Emerson
     Engel
     English
     Eshoo
     Etheridge
     Evans
     Everett
     Farr
     Fattah
     Feeney
     Ferguson
     Filner
     Fletcher
     Foley
     Forbes
     Ford
     Fossella
     Frank (MA)
     Frelinghuysen
     Frost
     Gallegly
     Garrett (NJ)
     Gerlach
     Gillmor
     Gingrey
     Gonzalez
     Goode
     Goodlatte
     Gordon
     Granger
     Graves
     Green (TX)
     Green (WI)
     Greenwood
     Grijalva
     Gutierrez
     Hall
     Harris
     Hart
     Hastings (WA)
     Hayes
     Hayworth
     Hensarling
     Herger
     Hill
     Hinchey
     Hinojosa
     Hobson
     Hoeffel
     Hoekstra
     Holden
     Holt
     Honda
     Hooley (OR)
     Hostettler
     Houghton
     Hoyer
     Hulshof
     Hunter
     Hyde
     Inslee
     Isakson
     Israel
     Issa
     Istook
     Jackson (IL)
     Jackson-Lee (TX)
     Jefferson
     Jenkins
     John
     Johnson (CT)
     Johnson (IL)
     Johnson, E. B.
     Johnson, Sam
     Jones (OH)
     Kanjorski
     Kaptur
     Keller
     Kelly
     Kennedy (MN)
     Kennedy (RI)
     Kildee
     Kilpatrick
     Kind
     King (NY)
     Kirk
     Kleczka
     Kline
     Knollenberg
     Kolbe
     Kucinich
     LaHood
     Lampson
     Langevin
     Lantos
     Larsen (WA)
     Larson (CT)
     Latham
     LaTourette
     Leach
     Lee
     Levin
     Lewis (CA)
     Lewis (GA)
     Lewis (KY)
     Linder
     Lipinski
     LoBiondo
     Lofgren
     Lowey
     Lucas (KY)
     Lucas (OK)
     Lynch
     Majette
     Maloney
     Markey
     Marshall
     Matheson
     Matsui
     McCarthy (MO)
     McCarthy (NY)
     McCollum
     McCotter
     McCrery
     McDermott
     McGovern
     McHugh
     McInnis
     McIntyre
     McKeon
     McNulty
     Meehan
     Meek (FL)
     Meeks (NY)
     Menendez
     Mica
     Michaud
     Miller (FL)
     Miller (MI)
     Miller (NC)
     Miller, Gary
     Miller, George
     Mollohan
     Moore
     Moran (KS)
     Murphy
     Murtha

[[Page 17362]]


     Musgrave
     Myrick
     Nadler
     Napolitano
     Neal (MA)
     Nethercutt
     Neugebauer
     Ney
     Northup
     Norwood
     Nunes
     Nussle
     Oberstar
     Obey
     Olver
     Ortiz
     Osborne
     Ose
     Oxley
     Pallone
     Pascrell
     Pastor
     Payne
     Pearce
     Pelosi
     Pence
     Peterson (MN)
     Peterson (PA)
     Petri
     Pitts
     Platts
     Pombo
     Pomeroy
     Porter
     Portman
     Price (NC)
     Pryce (OH)
     Putnam
     Quinn
     Radanovich
     Rahall
     Ramstad
     Rangel
     Regula
     Rehberg
     Renzi
     Reyes
     Reynolds
     Rodriguez
     Rogers (AL)
     Rogers (KY)
     Rogers (MI)
     Ros-Lehtinen
     Ross
     Rothman
     Roybal-Allard
     Royce
     Ruppersberger
     Rush
     Ryan (OH)
     Ryan (WI)
     Ryun (KS)
     Sabo
     Sanchez, Linda T.
     Sanchez, Loretta
     Sanders
     Sandlin
     Saxton
     Schakowsky
     Schiff
     Schrock
     Scott (GA)
     Scott (VA)
     Sensenbrenner
     Serrano
     Sessions
     Shadegg
     Shaw
     Shays
     Sherman
     Sherwood
     Shimkus
     Shuster
     Simmons
     Simpson
     Skelton
     Slaughter
     Smith (MI)
     Smith (NJ)
     Smith (TX)
     Smith (WA)
     Snyder
     Solis
     Souder
     Spratt
     Stark
     Stearns
     Stenholm
     Strickland
     Stupak
     Sullivan
     Sweeney
     Tanner
     Tauscher
     Tauzin
     Taylor (MS)
     Terry
     Thomas
     Thompson (CA)
     Thompson (MS)
     Thornberry
     Tiahrt
     Tiberi
     Tierney
     Turner (OH)
     Turner (TX)
     Udall (CO)
     Udall (NM)
     Upton
     Van Hollen
     Velazquez
     Visclosky
     Vitter
     Walden (OR)
     Walsh
     Wamp
     Waters
     Watson
     Watt
     Waxman
     Weiner
     Weldon (FL)
     Weldon (PA)
     Weller
     Wexler
     Whitfield
     Wicker
     Wilson (NM)
     Wilson (SC)
     Wolf
     Woolsey
     Wu
     Wynn
     Young (AK)
     Young (FL)

                                NOES--17

     Bartlett (MD)
     Bishop (UT)
     Flake
     Franks (AZ)
     Gilchrest
     Gutknecht
     Hefley
     Jones (NC)
     King (IA)
     Kingston
     Manzullo
     Otter
     Paul
     Rohrabacher
     Tancredo
     Taylor (NC)
     Toomey

                             NOT VOTING--13

     Cramer
     Edwards
     Gephardt
     Gibbons
     Goss
     Harman
     Hastings (FL)
     Janklow
     Millender-McDonald
     Moran (VA)
     Owens
     Pickering
     Towns


                Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood) (during the vote). Two minutes 
remain to vote.

                              {time}  1424

  Mr. ROHRABACHER changed his vote from ``aye'' to ``no.''
  So the bill was passed.
  The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________