[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 154 (2008), Part 9]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 13186]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




ON THE INTRODUCTION OF THE PUBLIC CHARTER SCHOOLS HOME RULE ACT OF 2008

                                 ______
                                 

                       HON. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON

                      of the district of columbia

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, June 19, 2008

  Ms. NORTON. Madam Speaker, today, I am introducing the Public Charter 
Schools Home Rule Act of 2008, to give the District of Columbia local 
government full jurisdiction and complete oversight over the District 
of Columbia Charter School Board. I had hoped this normally routine 
local control would be possible when I was in the minority and worked 
with House Speaker Newt Gingrich and former Representative Steve 
Gunderson on the bill that created the District's major charter school 
board. While the charter board bill itself was created on a home rule 
basis, the structure was not, and reflects a period before the recovery 
of the DC government from financial and managerial distress.
  The DC Charter School Board is composed of members selected by the 
mayor, but only from a list of individuals presented by the Secretary 
of the Department of Education. Unlike similar boards in the District, 
the charter school board members need not be residents of the District 
of Columbia. Because the mayor is not permitted to select members of 
the board other than those submitted by the Secretary, the Federal 
Government inserts itself into critical decisionmaking about an 
important local education matter. This is an anti-home rule anomaly in 
a bill which had strong home rule support and is justifiably resented 
by DC public officials and residents.
  Ironically, the charter school bill itself was drawn with an 
abundance of home rule officials and resident participation. The DC 
Charter School Board was established by Congress during a time when the 
District was in the midst of a serious financial crisis. The city's 
local charter board, working under the DC Board of Education, had 
largely failed in its mandate to charter schools. Yet, it was clear 
that the District's children needed an alternative to the local school 
system. I am grateful that my Republican congressional colleagues, who 
controlled Congress at the time, agreed that alternatives to DCPS could 
be created without going to private school vouchers, which DC residents 
and elected officials strongly opposed. Instead, a task force, created 
by Speaker Gingrich and led by former Representative Steve Gunderson, 
worked with officials, residents and me, on a home rule basis, to 
develop the bill. The task force held many sessions that members of the 
City Council, the School Board, DC education advocates, and residents 
who had a special interest in education attended. H.R. 3610 became the 
first Federal charter school bill. Shortly thereafter, a nationwide 
charter school bill that includes grant funding was enacted with broad 
bipartisan support.
  I do not believe any of us could have anticipated the phenomenal 
growth and success of the DC Charter School Board or the level of 
innovations, diversity and excellence of many of the schools that has 
made it a model, and my bill is not intended as a criticism of the 
Charter School Board or its work. DC residents have created huge 
demand. The exponential growth of charter schools up to the largest 
number in the U.S. and their long waiting lists are a solid indication 
of the success of our charter schools in meeting the needs of thousands 
of students. The city would almost surely have lost many more residents 
than it has without the large growth of charters schools.
  Mayor Adrian Fenty is restructuring and reforming the DC public 
school system and has dissolved the local charter school board, leaving 
the federally created charter school board as the only standing 
authority. However, a federally chartered board structure is at odds 
with these reforms. Only a structure developed by local, officials is 
appropriate, particularly for local education matters. This bill, 
therefore, does not create a structure or indicate the appointing 
authority. In our country that is a matter for local officials alone. I 
have insisted that this bill do no more than repeal all existing 
Federal jurisdiction and transfer that jurisdiction to the District of 
Columbia to write its own bill.
  Only DC officials should appoint members to its local education 
board. The board cannot be appropriately accountable if its members are 
chosen from outside the accountable jurisdiction. I urge my colleagues 
to pass this important measure as soon as possible.

                          ____________________