[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 3]
[Senate]
[Pages 4030-4031]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                               EDUCATION

  Ms. LANDRIEU. Madam President, the second amendment I wish to talk 
about for a moment and offer tomorrow for a vote is not about the 
military; it is about education. I was in the Chamber earlier today 
speaking about education. Let me recap.
  Senator Murray offered an amendment which I was pleased to vote for, 
proud to vote for. Although it only received 48 votes, I think it was 
one of the most important amendments we discussed all day. The reason I 
say that is because one of the major platforms of this administration 
when this President took office--I can remember the speeches. I sat in 
the great room of the House Chamber and listened to the State of the 
Union speeches. I will paraphrase, but I heard this.
  I heard the leader of our country say we are not doing enough in 
education; that our schools were not doing what they should do, and 
that he had a plan. If we would just stop throwing money at the system, 
if we would start expecting success, not funding failure, if we would 
embrace accountability, if we would make sure all of our teachers were 
certified, and if we would really work together across party lines and 
come up with a new plan for public education in our Nation, that is 
what we should do.
  I was convinced, committed, and worked very hard to see that bill 
pass, and it passed. That was the No Child Left Behind Act. It was not 
a big lift for me for a number of reasons.
  I am very proud of my State because before we entered into this 
agreement at the Federal level, the State of Louisiana was one of about 
five States in the Union that was pioneering this exact concept. It 
said for 150 years we have just thrown money at the system not really 
requiring or expecting good results and not really measuring our 
commitment of dollars based on the results we were getting, and that 
did not seem to make sense. So we switched our system, holding all 
schools accountable, not just for the averages for the subgroups of 
children--African Americans, rural children, poor children--but making 
sure we were not leaving anybody out.
  We were well on our way. Louisiana was doing great. Then this 
administration came in and said: Your plan, although you like it and 
the people of Louisiana like it and you are making progress, I do not 
think it is strong enough. He, the leadership, pushed this country into 
an even stricter plan. The leadership, the administration, said: If you 
go there, I will be there. I will help and provide the funding in the 
budget for No Child Left Behind.
  One of the reasons I am going to vote against this budget tomorrow is 
because that did not come true, because it is short $9 billion. For 
Louisiana, it means about $200 million.
  I have schools that have been rated as in need of improvement. They 
are trying so hard, and they are doing a beautiful job. But they need 
to hire a few more teachers. This administration said it would be there 
to help hire the teachers. The President said that, but it is not in 
his budget, and it is not in the budget in the chairman's mark to help 
them.
  Unfortunately, one of the small items that is in the budget which 
really pours salt on the wound is, while we do not have the $9 billion 
for No Child Left Behind, I want to share with everyone what is in the 
budget, which is very hard to read. What is in the budget is $50 
million to send kids from public schools to private schools, basically. 
It reserves $50 million for school choice initiatives that move 
children from public schools to private schools.
  Now we have the situation where we are not going to fund taking 
children from lower performing schools to move them into higher 
performing public schools, but we are going to specifically provide 
additional money to move them into private schools.
  For the record, in Chicago, under the President's plan, 125,000 
students were eligible for transfer, meaning that 125,000 students 
found themselves in schools that did not make the mark.
  They requested a transfer to a higher performing public school, which 
is one of the promises of No Child Left Behind, but only 3,000 were 
transferred. Why? Because there is no space. Why? Because they do not 
have the money to hire additional teachers. Why? Because the 
President's budget specifically prohibits money from being used for 
school construction, because the Republican leadership, led by 
President Bush, does not want money spent on school construction.
  I do not know how children are moved from a lower performing school 
to a higher performing school if the higher performing school is filled 
unless classrooms are added, expanded, or teachers are added. Because 
he flat-funded the teacher section and prohibits money from being used 
to build additional schools, I am not quite sure how our 
superintendents, Democrats or Republicans, are going to handle it, but 
they have a real challenge before them.
  In Los Angeles, we have 230,000 children who are eligible for 
transfer. I do not think anybody in the Chamber could guess how many 
actually were transferred. One hundred students. Two hundred thirty 
thousand children are eligible, and 100 were transferred.
  I learned today, and I am going to submit for the Record, if I can 
verify it--and if not, I will remove this from the Record--there has 
not been a new school built in L.A. in the last 20 years. That may not 
be correct, but I want to say it tonight. If it is not, I will remove 
it from the Record. L.A. is growing so fast, and these children have no 
place to go, and this budget does not help them get anywhere. It says 
instead of helping children go to new public schools, we are going to 
send them to private schools.
  Of course, there are no spaces in the private schools, either, so I 
am not sure where we are going to send them.
  In Baltimore, 30,000 children--that is this year--last year were 
eligible for transfer. Only 194 were transferred. In New Orleans, in my 
home city, 35,000 children were in failing schools. Only 400 were 
transferred. The rest were denied because of lack of space in higher 
performing schools.
  My amendment is going to remove the $50 million, and say no money can 
be spent in this budget sending children to private schools until we 
provide options for them to go to public schools. Many of these 
families would choose public schools, but according to this budget they 
cannot go because we will not help them add teachers, and they are 
strictly prohibited from using the money for school construction in 
this budget.
  Those are the two amendments: One to help spouses in the military. I 
think we can find a few million dollars to help them and I am hoping to 
take this out of the budget so we can keep our priorities straight, 
which is helping all schools with the best we can, but living up to our 
promises of No Child Left Behind first.
  When we have funded that effort, which is not just any other 
Government program--I know we do not fund every Government program at 
the authorized levels, but this is different. This was a special 
promise made. This was the foundation of a new beginning for our public 
schools. This was a promise that was made to the people of our country, 
and it is a promise that is not fulfilled in this budget, which is why, 
again, I will vote against it, and I will be pleased to offer these 
amendments in the morning.

[[Page 4031]]

  I yield back my time.

                          ____________________