[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 2]
[Senate]
[Pages 1768-1769]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                             SCHOOL CHOICE

  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that a copy of 
my remarks at the Brookings Institution earlier today be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                             School Choice

       I am delighted to be here, but I should warn you: Based on 
     my track record, I'm probably not your most reliable observer 
     on school choice.
       If I take you back to September 1992, I gave a speech at 
     Ashland University in Ohio, and I predicted that by the year 
     2000 ``school choice will not be an issue.''
       I suggested that an Ashland student writing a thesis in 
     2000 ought to make the subject parental choice of schools, 
     because by then, I said, ``It will be a matter of history.
       ``Your colleagues will wonder along with you as you examine 
     this strange era when we granted government monopolies 
     control of the most valuable and important enterprises in 
     town, and so many people fought furiously to keep doors to 
     many of the best schools closed to poor children.
       ``They will ask, how could this have ever happened in 
     America, at a time when the ideas of freedom, choice and 
     opportunity were sweeping the rest of the world?''
       My prediction might not have been right, but not because we 
     didn't try.
       In 1984, I gave a speech at the University of the South 
     outlining the ``deep ruts'' into which American K-12 
     education had fallen. One of those was the lack of school 
     choice for parents.
       In 1985, the National Governors Association (NGA) embarked 
     on a project called ``Time for Results.'' We divided into 
     seven task forces, each chaired by a governor, to ask seven 
     of the toughest questions you could ask about American 
     education. One of those questions was, ``Why not let parents 
     choose the schools their children attend?'' The task force 
     working on that question was chaired by the Democratic 
     governor of Colorado, Richard Lamm, who said then, ``You 
     know, it is interesting that America is a land of choices. We 
     have 100 breakfast cereals to choose from, 200 different 
     makes of cars. But in this one educational area . . . we have 
     not done a lot in choice.''
       Then in 1992, President Bush proposed his ``GI Bill for 
     Children,'' which was a plan to allow states and cities to 
     give $1,000 annual scholarships in new federal dollars to 
     each child of a middle- and low-income family in a 
     participating state or locality.
       Families could spend the scholarships at any lawfully 
     operated school--public, private or religious.
       And up to half of the scholarship could be spent on other 
     academic programs, like a Saturday math tutoring program or a 
     summer accelerated language course.
       That year, the Carnegie Foundation had reported that 28 
     percent of our nation's parents would like to send their 
     child to a different school.
       Today, that number is even higher--it is, in fact, more 
     than twice as high. A recent 2013 Luntz Global study found 
     that 64 percent of parents said that ``if given the financial 
     opportunity,'' they would send one or all of their children 
     to a different school.
       The last 23 years have seen some positive changes in the 
     ability of parents to choose their children's schools.

[[Page 1769]]

       Today all 50 states and Washington, D.C. offer to some 
     students alternatives to the school they would normally be 
     assigned based on their residence.
       Approximately 15 percent of school-age children attend a 
     school other than their school of residence through open-
     enrollment programs.
       Policies in 42 states allow some, or all, parents to send 
     their children to public schools outside their districts.
       Of those 42 states--15 states require districts to 
     participate, 23 allow them to participate, and three require 
     it specifically for low-income students and students in 
     failing schools.
       In 31 states, parents are allowed to choose among schools 
     within their district.
       Of those 31 states--16 states require districts to 
     participate, 10 allow them to participate, and 6 require it 
     for low-income students or students in failing schools 6 
     states.
       More than 2.5 million--or nearly five percent of all public 
     school children--are enrolled in more than 6,000 public 
     charter schools in 42 states and D.C. Typically parents 
     choose to enroll their children in these schools.
       In addition, today more than 300,000 children are served by 
     41 private school choice programs across 19 states, D.C., and 
     Douglas County, Colorado. These programs often give students 
     who meet certain criteria--usually based on income, special 
     needs, or academic performance--an opportunity for a voucher, 
     tax credit program, or education savings account to allow 
     them to attend private schools.
       Also, the option for homeschooling is available in all 
     states and parents of about three percent of school-age 
     children choose to homeschool.
       Allowing students to choose among schools is not a new idea 
     for the federal government.
       Allowing federal dollars to follow students has been a 
     successful strategy in American education for 70 years.
       In 1944, the G.I. Bill allowed veterans to choose among 
     colleges, public or private.
       Today, about $136 billion in federal grants and loans 
     continue to follow students to the college or university of 
     their choice.
       Just last year, Congress reauthorized the $2.4 billion 
     Child Care and Development Block Grant program, or CCDBG, 
     which, when combined with other federal and state funding, 
     helps approximately 900,000 families pay for child care of 
     their choice while they work or attend school, mostly through 
     vouchers.
       These are among the most successful and popular federal 
     programs--why is it so hard to apply the same sorts of 
     choices to elementary and secondary schools?
       What can the federal government do now to expand the 
     opportunity parents have to choose the most appropriate 
     school for their children?
       The first is Scholarships for Kids. This is a bill I 
     introduced that would use $24 billion of the federal dollars 
     we spend each year on K-12 education and allow states to 
     create $2,100 scholarships to follow 11 million low-income 
     children to any public or private school of their parents' 
     choice.
       Also, the discussion draft I've just released to fix No 
     Child Left Behind gives states the option of using $14.5 
     billion in Title I money to follow 11 million low income 
     children to the public school they attend.
       Most people agree that Title I money, which is supposed to 
     help low-income kids, gets diverted to different schools 
     because of a formula that targets money to districts based on 
     how much states spend per student. That is largely influenced 
     by teacher salaries.
       The simplest way to solve that problem is to let that money 
     follow the child to the school they attend. You could do that 
     to just public schools, which has been the tradition with 
     Title I money, or to private schools, which is what I would 
     prefer.
       The second is the CHOICE Act. This is a proposal by Senator 
     Tim Scott to allow about $11 billion the federal government 
     now spends for children with disabilities to follow those six 
     million children to the schools their parents believe provide 
     the best services.
       I think it's important to note that these bills do not 
     require states to do anything--instead they give them the 
     option to have money follow the child.
       The third is the DC Opportunity Scholarship Program. 
     Senator Scott's CHOICE Act would also expand the D.C. 
     Opportunity Scholarship Program that began in 2004 and has 
     provided about 6,000 low-income students in Washington, D.C. 
     with the opportunity to receive a scholarship to attend a 
     private school of their parents' choice. Today, far more 
     parents in the city have applied for the scholarships than 
     have received them.
       The fourth is expanding charter schools. In my final year 
     as education secretary under President George H. W. Bush, I 
     wrote every school superintendent in America asking them to 
     try this new idea from Minnesota called ``start-from-scratch 
     schools.'' At the time there were only twelve of them. They 
     were the first charter schools. Today there are more than 
     6,000.
       Charter schools have had strong bipartisan support--
     including from President Clinton and Secretary Duncan.
       We've got in our discussion draft provisions that would 
     streamline and update the existing Charter Schools Program 
     to:
       Provide grants to State entities to start new charter 
     schools and to replicate or expand high-quality charter 
     schools.
       Provide grants to entities to enhance credit methods to 
     finance charter school facilities.
       Provide grants to charter management organizations, like 
     KIPP or Rocketship in my home state of Tennessee, to 
     replicate or expand high-quality charter schools.
       Our goal is to grow the federal investment in expanding and 
     replicating high-quality charter schools with a demonstrated 
     record of success, and hold charter schools accountable for 
     their performance.
       Other senators also have some good proposals. Senators Paul 
     and Lee both have bills to allow federal dollars from Title I 
     of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act to follow low-
     income children to the public or private school of their 
     parents' choice. Senator Rubio has a bill that creates a new 
     federal tax credit for individual and corporate donations to 
     organizations that provide low-income students with private 
     school scholarships.
       As for the future, I think I've learned my lesson--I'm not 
     about to make a prediction.
       It looks like it will be a while before school choice will 
     be a matter of history.
       But the progress so many have made is impressive--there is 
     plenty of opportunity to do more.
       As Ross Perot told me in 1984, ``Changing the public 
     schools of Texas was the hardest, meanest, bloodiest thing 
     I've ever tried to do.''
       Since I'm not going to make a prediction then I'll end with 
     a question--the same one I asked in 1992: If we trust parents 
     to choose child care for their children, and we trust them to 
     help their children choose a college to attend--and both 
     those systems have been so successful--why do we not also 
     trust them to choose the best elementary or high school for 
     their children?

                          ____________________