[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 160 (2014), Part 2]
[House]
[Pages 2101-2102]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      NATIONAL SCHOOL CHOICE WEEK

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
California (Mr. George Miller) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, for the past 40 years, 
my work in this House has been guided by my firm belief that every 
child, regardless of his or her ZIP code, deserves access to a quality 
education that will prepare them for future success; and every parent 
deserves to know that their child's school is helping their son or 
daughter achieve his or her full potential.
  That is why, under No Child Left Behind, we demanded the 
accountability include transparency on school performance. We share the 
collective responsibility, at all levels of government, to make good on 
the promise of high-quality education for all students. Unfortunately, 
we all know that not every school is living up to that promise.
  When any school fails its students, it is our responsibility, not 
only to give those students a high-quality public school option, but to 
also improve the low-performing schools. It is simple: no child should 
be stuck in a failing school.
  This week is National School Choice Week. Many of my colleagues on 
the other side of the aisle and their strategists have embraced the so-
called ``school choice'' as a part of their rebranding effort to appear 
more caring.
  Politico reported just last week that the Republican strategists have 
been counseling the Republicans that talking about helping poor 
minority children softens the Republican image. Talking about it, not 
doing something about it.
  Conservative advocacy groups have declared in planning documents that 
it is an excellent media opportunity to focus on kids and the future. 
It is a media opportunity to focus on children, not to do something 
about it.
  This new effort even has a warm and fuzzy name, the Growth and 
Opportunity Project. This is political posturing at its worst, and it 
does nothing to provide actual choice for our Nation's students.
  The cornerstone of true school choice is the principle that every 
child has the right to attend a great school. Not only should the 
students have high-quality options, but we need to demand that low-
performing schools improve, and support that improvement.
  Without quality schools to pick from, families face an empty choice. 
Yet that is all the Republican majority has offered Americans so far.
  Neither school choice nor quality of schools was on their agenda when 
they voted for the Republican rewrite of the Elementary and Secondary 
Education Act. That bill abandoned our responsibility to ensure that 
every child has access to a high-quality education. It undercut Federal 
support for schools.
  The majority leader pledged that Republicans remain vigilant in 
protecting and promoting school choice; yet their bill removed the 
school choice mechanisms that were already in current law. And their 
bill failed to require that schools in districts improve when they are 
failing to effectively educate students.
  With the Republicans' Elementary and Secondary Education bill, along 
with sequestration, the majority turned its back on the Nation's most 
vulnerable students. They took money away from America's poorest 
schools, and they took money away from America's poorest students.
  The very people that the majority's school choice media opportunity 
pretends to support are the same ones that are hurt by the majority's 
actual votes in this Chamber. Not a media conversation, not the 
posturing to appear to soften the image, but the actual votes taken in 
this Chamber harm the very children that they now say they want to 
support with this media opportunity to soften their image.
  It was the Democratic Elementary and Secondary Education bill that 
held schools accountable for improvement and demanded that children be 
afforded new education opportunities when stuck in a failing school.
  School choice should not be an empty promise. It should not be a 
political tag line that frees my colleagues from taking responsibility 
for our Nation's education system.
  Mr. Speaker, if you want meaningful school choice, you must demand 
schools be held accountable for equitably serving all students, and you 
must provide the support that the schools need to provide that quality 
education.
  Without that accountability for school quality, what choices would 
parents really have when their schools are failing?
  An option between two low-performing schools? Not a good option.
  An option between low-performing neighborhood schools and figuring 
out how to get your child across town to a different school, providing 
the transportation, and still hold down the job, that is not a fair 
option.
  What we know, Mr. Speaker, is that if you ask parents all across 
America, they will tell you that their first choice in school choice is 
to have a neighborhood school that is high-performing; have a 
neighborhood school that meets the demands of that family and those 
children to get a first-class education; not to drive across town; not 
to spend time putting their kids in transit or putting their kids in 
harm's way trying to walk to that better school.
  Fix the neighborhood schools; and if you don't, then provide that 
child the alternative to go to another school, as we did in current 
law, not as we do in the media release.
  I challenge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to go beyond 
the rhetoric and posturing and sit down with me and others to make 
real, sustainable improvements in public education for all students.
  Poor and minority kids are not a media opportunity. These are real 
children who deserve an equal shot at a bright future.

[[Page 2102]]



                          ____________________