[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 5]
[House]
[Pages 7038-7039]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                   CONGRESSIONAL CAUCUS CONSTITUTION

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Garrett) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I come to the floor tonight

[[Page 7039]]

and I begin by commending the gentleman from Utah for his efforts every 
week as we take part in the process of bringing back to the American 
people the importance of the U.S. Constitution as part of the 
Constitution Caucus.
  At this point I would like to yield to the gentleman from Texas to 
make a point with regard to his very important legislation that he was 
referring to, H.R. 3499.
  Mr. CULBERSON. Mr. Speaker, I rise only to make the point, because I 
ran out of time earlier, that the legislation that we have coauthored 
together would give the decision to the locally elected State 
representatives to enter a contract with Federal elected 
representatives so that the only control the Federal Government would 
have over State public education would be the control that the State 
locally elected officials agree to. It would be a contract between the 
State legislature and the Federal legislature; and other than what they 
agree to, there is no Federal control over public education, as the 
Founders intended.
  Mr. Jefferson always said if you apply core Republican principles, 
the knot will always untie itself. That is true here, and it would 
continue to be true if we would just remember it.
  Mr. GARRETT of New Jersey. Mr. Speaker, I will try to remember that 
expression of Mr. Jefferson. Mr. Jefferson addressed the issue of 
education. One of the points of the Constitutional Caucus is to take a 
look at what does the Constitution actually say as to what the role of 
the Federal Government is.
  As we discuss education, we should ask: Is the role of the Federal 
Government in the area of education? I would hazard a guess it is not. 
Thomas Jefferson was asked that question as a Founding Father of this 
country. He was asked the question: Why is it the Federal Government is 
not involved in education?
  His response to that question was: as soon as the Constitution is 
amended to include language giving us that power, we will be involved 
in education. Of course, the Constitution has never been amended to 
allow the Federal Government to involve itself in education. Neither 
the word ``education'' nor ``school'' is anywhere in the U.S. 
Constitution.
  With that being said, no one here, not the gentleman from Utah, the 
gentleman from Texas, nor the gentlewoman from North Carolina would 
ever make the statement that education is not important. We all agree 
about the importance of quality education in all 50 States. We just 
believe there is a better way, and that is return control of education 
to the local authorities, local school boards, and to the parents.
  One of the problems when we look at the issues out there, people put 
a test of importance on the issue. Just because an issue is important, 
does that mean that the Federal Government should become involved? 
Again, I would look back to what the Founders said. There was never a 
test of importance by the Founding Fathers as far as the Constitution 
is concerned. They did not say if something is important, therefore the 
Federal Government should become involved. Rather, is it 
constitutional?
  Each night here, when we pull out our card to vote, we should ask 
ourselves: Is it in the Constitution? Is it constitutional?
  In the area of education, it is not. We have lost control of 
education from the State level to the Federal level. Lest anyone think 
that we are doing a better job of this, I refer them back to the 1960s 
when the ESEA, Elementary Secondary Education Act, was first put into 
place, when education standards in this country were some of the 
highest. Since that time, the Federal Government's role has increased 
dramatically, and we have seen where that has brought us. The level of 
education in this country, unfortunately, has gone down.
  That is why I am a proud supporter of H.R. 3499. It will return 
control to the people who are in the best position to exercise that 
authority: parents, local school boards, localities, and the States. I 
know also when you talk to those people who are on the front line, they 
will tell us of all of their frustration they have dealing with Federal 
mandates and with all of the Federal strings and controls.
  In New Jersey, I asked exactly how much money are you getting from 
the Federal Government. In our State, I don't know how it is in other 
States, we get around three cents on the dollar from the Federal 
Government. In return for those three pennies, the Federal Government 
is basically exercising all of this control, all of this regulation 
that the local school board must comply with or else. And that is why 
H.R. 3499 is so important. H.R. 3499 will return that authority back to 
the local school board.
  They will be in the position to say do we have to comply with these 
Federal regulations or not. I would hazard to guess in many instances 
local school boards will tell their legislators, we do not want to have 
to comply with all these Federal regulations. We do not want the 
legislation to go in that direction.
  I conclude by reminding this House and the Federal Government that we 
should look to the U.S. Constitution for direction, is it 
constitutional in the area of education, and leave it to the 
appropriate parties. I again commend the gentleman from Texas for his 
excellent work in moving in that direction.

                          ____________________