[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 8]
[Senate]
[Pages 11184-11195]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                    EVERY CHILD ACHIEVES ACT OF 2015

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, the Senate will 
resume consideration of S. 1177, which the clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       A bill (S. 1177) to reauthorize the Elementary and 
     Secondary Education Act of 1965 to ensure that every child 
     achieves.

  Pending:

       Alexander/Murray amendment No. 2089, in the nature of a 
     substitute.
       Alexander (for Fischer) amendment No. 2079 (to amendment 
     No. 2089), to ensure local governance of education.
       Murray (for Peters) amendment No. 2095 (to amendment No. 
     2089), to allow local educational agencies to use parent and 
     family engagement funds for financial literacy activities.
       Toomey amendment No. 2094 (to amendment No. 2089), to 
     protect our children from convicted pedophiles, child 
     molesters, and other sex offenders infiltrating our schools 
     and from schools ``passing the trash''--helping pedophiles 
     obtain jobs at other schools.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, the Democratic leader and the 
Republican leader have created an environment in which we can succeed 
on this bill, and I am grateful to them for that. I listened to their 
remarks this morning about some things that have gone on in the past in 
the Senate. My late friend Alex Haley, the author of ``Roots,'' used to 
say: Find the good and praise it. And so what I would like to do is 
thank the majority leader for putting the bill on the floor. Only he 
can do that and give us a chance to debate it. I thank the Democratic 
leader for creating an environment in which we can have a large number 
of amendments and succeed.
  I thank the Senator from Washington, Mrs. Patty Murray, who suggested 
the way we proceed today. We fell into some partisan differences in the 
last two Congresses that made that impossible, and she has, as much as 
anybody, helped solve that problem.
  We are making good progress. We have adopted a number of amendments. 
We voted on some others. Some have passed, and some have been defeated. 
People have had a chance to have their say. Senator Murray and I have 
received a large number of amendments--several dozen, actually, that 
Senators on both sides have offered--that we have agreed to recommend 
to the full Senate we adopt by consent.
  In addition to that, we adopted 29 amendments in the committee 
consideration, and many of those were amendments from Democratic 
Members of the Senate. So I think most Senators--in fact, I haven't 
heard a single one say that they haven't had a chance to have their say 
on No Child Left Behind.
  Yesterday, I put into the Record an op-ed from the Washington Post by 
the Virginia Secretary of Education Anne Holton, who made the argument 
that States, like Virginia, are well prepared to accept the 
responsibility for higher standards, better teaching, and real 
accountability. Over the last 15 years, that has happened in every 
State.
  It reminds us that this bill we are debating only provides 4 percent 
of the dollars that pay for our 100,000 public schools in the country. 
We have some other money that the Federal Government spends--4 percent 
or 5 percent more--for those schools, but this bill spends 4 percent. 
Most of the money, most of the responsibility, most of the opportunity 
for success is with parents, classroom teachers, and others who are 
close to the children.
  The consensus we have developed, the bipartisan consensus--again, 
with the bill Senator Murray and I put together and improved by our 
committee and now being improved on the floor--is that while we keep 
the important measures of the accountability, so we know what children 
in South Dakota and Tennessee and Washington State are learning and not 
learning, so we can tell if anyone is left behind, that we restore to 
States the responsibility for figuring out what to do about the tests. 
That has broad-scale support.
  Superintendents were in town yesterday from all over the country; 
they told us that. Governors are calling us; they tell us that. The 
major teachers organizations in the country tell us we do not need, in 
effect, a national school board. Those decisions need to be made by 
teachers who cherish the children in their classroom and the parents 
who put them there and school board members who care for them and 
Governors and legislators who are closer to home. So this bill isn't 
easy to do, but because of that consensus, we are making good progress.
  I will submit following my remarks an article from earlier this week 
from Newsweek entitled, ``The Education Law Everyone Wants to Fix.'' 
The House of Representatives said it wants to fix it last night. The 
progress we are making suggests the Senate wants to fix it. We know all 
across the country Governors, legislators, teachers, school 
superintendents, and parents want to end the confusion and anxiety in 
the 100,000 public schools.
  We will be having more votes, hopefully today just before lunch, and 
then we will continue with the bill.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that following my remarks, the 
article from Newsweek entitled ``The Education Law Everyone Wants to 
Fix'' be printed in the Record.
  On a different subject, which I will not elaborate on today, I wish 
to also include, following my remarks, an article I wrote for the Wall 
Street Journal yesterday about the cost of going to college. I think it 
is unfortunate that so many politicians and pundits say that Americans 
can't afford college when in fact most of them can. It is never easy, 
but it is important for them to know that for low-income Americans, for 
example, the first 2 years of college are free or nearly free at a 
community college; and there are many other ways colleges, 
universities, the Federal Government, and taxpayers try to make it easy 
for a larger number of Americans to go to college. That is a debate 
Senator Murray and I are already working on. We will bring the 
reauthorization of the higher education bill before the Senate 
hopefully later this year.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that my op-ed from the Wall 
Street Journal be printed in the Record following my remarks.
  Mr. President, there are a number of Senators who wish to come to the 
floor to speak today. I encourage any Senator who hasn't presented 
their amendment to go ahead and do that. I am hopeful that soon we will 
have an agreement to have a number of votes before lunch.
  I yield the floor.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                     [From Newsweek, July 3, 2015]

                The Education Law Everyone Wants to Fix

                            (By Emily Cadei)

       When it comes to setting standards for America's public 
     schools, there's a remarkable degree of consensus: The system 
     the federal government has in place--known as No Child Left 
     Behind--doesn't work. Fixing it, however, is about to set off 
     a new round of fierce political combat in Washington, D.C., 
     and draw in 2016 candidates as well.
       Both the House and Senate are set to debate the 2001 No 
     Child Left Behind law next week. Passed with bipartisan 
     support--including the unlikely pairing of President George 
     W. Bush and Massachusetts liberal Sen. Ted Kennedy--it sought 
     to set national

[[Page 11185]]

     standards for school and student achievement, and mandated 
     testing to make sure they were keeping up as well as funding 
     incentives to keep schools on track.
       But the goals that the 2001 law set turned out to be far 
     too ambitious and, the chorus of critics say, too rigid. 
     ``Teaching to the test'' is a refrain heard across the 
     country. Test results have become an end-all, be-all, 
     complain teachers and parents, Democrats and Republicans, 
     alike.
       No Child Left Behind ``simplified all of school 
     accountability to be a performance on a math test or a 
     reading test,'' says Mary Kusler, director of government 
     relations for the National Education Association, which 
     lobbies on behalf of teachers and other education 
     professionals. That, Kusler says, ``has corrupted the 
     education our children are receiving because it has reduced 
     our schools to this reduce and punish system.''
       The two parties have very different visions for overhauling 
     the law, however. Those in the middle, the House and Senate 
     leaders that have drafted the legislation, are now faced with 
     walking a tightrope between a measure that will win 
     sufficient Republican support in the House but still get a 
     signature from President Obama. That's no easy task--the law 
     has technically been expired since 2007, but Congress has not 
     been able to muster the political consensus to reauthorize it 
     since then. It's still being implemented, though, because 
     Congress continues to provide funding for the vast majority 
     of its programs.
       In the Senate, Tennessee Republican Lamar Alexander, a 
     former Secretary of Education, and Washington Democrat Patty 
     Murray have crafted a proposal that passed their Health, 
     Education, Labor and Pensions Committee unanimously in April. 
     Their legislation would maintain the testing regimen put in 
     place by No Child Left Behind but give states more 
     flexibility in how they use test results to measure 
     performance. That's earned the hearty endorsement of teachers 
     and groups like NBA, as well as business associations--which 
     are usually on opposite sides of the education policy debate. 
     In order to get Democrats on board, Alexander dropped one big 
     Republican priority from the bill--a provision that would 
     link federal funding for students from low-income areas to 
     the individual child, rather than the school district in 
     which they reside, which is how the system works now. 
     Republicans argue this ``portability'' measure gives children 
     and their families an opportunity to go to better schools but 
     Democrats say it will just weaken already struggling schools. 
     It's part of a broader fight over ``school choice'' and 
     whether students can use public funds to go to the school 
     they want--even private school--via things like vouchers. 
     That, says Kusler, defeats the whole purpose of the law, 
     which is aimed at improving low-performing schools and 
     ``serving historically underserved populations.''
       The House bill, sponsored by Minnesota Republican John 
     Kline, includes the portability provision Republicans favor. 
     That prompted a veto threat from the White House in February. 
     But even with that provision, Kline's bill has had trouble 
     winning conservative support. Republican leaders initially 
     planned to hold a vote on it in late February but changed 
     their minds at the last minute when it became apparent they 
     didn't have enough GOP support. Members aligned with the Tea 
     Party argue the overhaul still spends too much money and 
     leaves too much power in the hands of the federal government. 
     They're insisting on a vote on an amendment that would give 
     states the option of opting out of No Child Left Behind 
     requirements entirely, a proposal known in shorthand as A-
     PLUS.
       ``There's just no conceivable way they can bring the Kline 
     bill onto the floor without bringing up A-PLUS,'' says Dan 
     Holler, spokesman for Heritage Action for America, the 
     advocacy arm of the conservative Heritage Foundation. 
     Holler's group came out in strong opposition to the bill in 
     February and plans to continue to oppose it unless that 
     provision is included in the House bill. He argues that the 
     House needs to pass the most conservative bill possible, 
     given that they'll then have to negotiate a final text with 
     the Senate.
       Given how toxic No Child Left Behind has become, 2016 
     candidates on the campaign trail are going to be hard-pressed 
     to avoid the debate. There could be 100 amendments or more 
     filed in the Senate, which means the four Republican senators 
     running for president will have to weigh in on plenty of 
     thorny questions surrounding education policy as it relates 
     to race, inequality and states' rights.
       Even those candidates who won't be voting, however, are 
     bound to be questioned on the topic. Education policy has 
     become a litmus test on the Right, with conservatives 
     rallying against any attempts to nationalize what they 
     believe should be state or local decisions. They've mainly 
     focused on plans for a national curriculum, known as Common 
     Core, which is not part of the No Child Left Behind law. But 
     Common Core is indirectly linked, since states have adopted 
     it to meet the testing and accountability standards that No 
     Child Left Behind created.
       Many Republican governors that initially embraced the 
     Common Core standards, including 2016 long shots Chris 
     Christie of New Jersey and Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, have 
     backed away from them amidst the conservative backlash. 
     Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush is one of the few (along with 
     Gov. John Kasich of Ohio) who has stood by Common Core. He 
     also once offered the Obama administration support in its 
     efforts to reauthorize No Child Left Behind, according to an 
     email the website Buzzfeed published last month. Those 
     education stands are a big reason for conservatives' 
     simmering distrust of this son and brother of past 
     presidents.
       The teachers' unions, meanwhile, continue to hold 
     tremendous sway in the Democratic primary, and their 
     endorsements remain up for grabs in 2016. Dark horse 
     candidate Martin O'Malley, the former governor of Maryland, 
     is clearly eyeing that vote, and is scheduled to hold an 
     education event followed by a meeting with the NBA of New 
     Hampshire next week.
       The presidential race also offers a rationale to 
     conservative holdouts opposed to the No Child Left Behind 
     reauthorization, which would be effective for as long as five 
     years. With the possibility of a Republican sweeping into the 
     White House, some argue it's best to stick to the status quo 
     for now, and tackle a more ambitious overhaul once a more 
     conservative president is in office (they hope).
       But Kusler, for one, is hopeful that the pressure from all 
     sides to fix an unworkable law will ultimately force a 
     political compromise--opposed to kicking the can down the 
     road further. ``I am entirely optimistic that we will get 
     this done. We have never been so close,'' she says. ``We have 
     created a perfect storm here.''
                                  ____


              [From the Wall Street Journal, July 6, 2015]

                  College Too Expensive? That's a Myth

                          (By Lamar Alexander)

       Pell grants, state aid, modest loans and scholarships put a 
     four-year public institution within the reach of most.
       Paying for college never is easy, but it's easier than most 
     people think. Yet some politicians and pundits say students 
     can't afford a college education. That's wrong. Most of them 
     can.
       Public two-year colleges, for example, are free or nearly 
     free for low-income students. Nationally, community college 
     tuition and fees average $3,300 per year, according to the 
     College Board. The annual federal Pell grant for these 
     students--which does not have to be paid back--also averages 
     $3,300.
       At public four-year colleges, tuition and fees average 
     about $9,000. At the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 
     tuition and fees are $11,800. One third of its students have 
     a Pell grant (up to $5,775 depending on financial need), and 
     98% of instate freshmen have a state Hope Scholarship, 
     providing up to $3,500 annually for freshmen and sophomores 
     and up to $4,500 for juniors or seniors. States run a variety 
     of similar programs--$11.2 billion in financial aid in 2013, 
     85% in the form of scholarships, according to the National 
     Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs.
       The reality is that, for most students, a four-year public 
     institution is also within financial reach.
       What about really expensive private colleges? Across the 
     country 15% of students attend private universities where 
     tuition and fees average $31,000, according to the College 
     Board. Georgetown University costs even more: about $50,000 a 
     year. Its president, John DeGioia, told me how Georgetown--
     and many other so-called elite colleges--help make a degree 
     affordable.
       First, Georgetown determines what a family can afford to 
     pay. It asks the student to borrow $17,000 over four years 
     and work 10-15 hours a week under its work-study program. 
     Georgetown pays the remainder--at a total cost of about $100 
     million a year.
       Apart from grants, work and savings, there are federal 
     student loans. We hear a lot of questions about these loans. 
     Are taxpayers generous enough? Is borrowing for college a 
     good investment? Are students borrowing too much?
       An undergraduate today can get a federal loan of up to 
     $5,500 his first year. The annual loan limit rises to $7,500 
     his junior and senior years. The fixed interest rate for new 
     loans this year is, by law, 4.29%. A recent graduate may pay 
     back the loan using no more than 10% of his disposable 
     income. And if at that rate he doesn't pay it off in 20 
     years, taxpayers forgive the loan.
       Are students borrowing too much? The College Board reports 
     that a student who graduates from a four-year institution 
     carries, on average, a debt of about $27,000. This is about 
     the same amount of the average new car loan, according to the 
     information-services company Experian Automotive. The total 
     amount of outstanding student loans is $1.2 trillion. The 
     total amount of auto loans outstanding in the U.S. is $950 
     billion.
       But a student loan is a lot better investment. Cars 
     depreciate. College degrees appreciate. The College Board 
     estimates that a four-year degree will increase an 
     individual's lifetime earnings by $1 million, on average.
       What about the scary stories of students with $100,000 or 
     more in debt? These represent only 4% of all student loans, 
     and 90% of the borrowers are doctors, lawyers, business 
     school graduates and others who have earned graduate degrees.

[[Page 11186]]

       About seven million federal student loan borrowers are in 
     default, defined as failing to make a loan payment in at 
     least nine months. That's about one in 10 of all outstanding 
     federal student loans in default--although the Education 
     Department says most of those loans eventually get paid back.
       Here are five steps the federal government can take to make 
     it easier for students to finance their college education:
       Allow students to use Pell grants year-round, not only for 
     the traditional fall and spring academic terms, to complete 
     their degrees more rapidly.
       Simplify the confusing 108-question federal student-aid 
     application form and consolidate the nine loan repayment 
     programs to two: a standard repayment program and one based 
     on their income.
       Change the laws and regulations that discourage colleges 
     from counseling students against borrowing too much.
       Require colleges to share in the risk of lending to 
     students. This will ensure that they have some interest in 
     encouraging students to borrow wisely, graduate on time, and 
     be able to pay back what they owe.
       Clear out the federal red tape that soaks up state dollars 
     that could otherwise go to help reduce tuition. The Boston 
     Consulting Group found that in one year Vanderbilt University 
     spent a startling $150 million complying with federal rules 
     and regulations governing higher education, adding more than 
     $11,000 to the cost of each Vanderbilt student's $43,000 in 
     tuition. America's more than 6,000 colleges receive on 
     average one new rule, regulation or guidance letter each 
     workday from the Education Department.
       It is vital that more Americans earn their college degrees, 
     for their own benefit and that of the country. A report by 
     Georgetown University's Center on Education in the Workforce 
     tells us that if we don't, we'll fall short by five million 
     workers with postsecondary education in five years.

  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, making sure our Nation's students get a 
quality education is critical for our ability--our country's ability--
to lead the world in the years to come, and a good education can be a 
ticket to the middle class. It is also important for building an 
economy from the middle out, not just from the top down.
  Of course, yesterday the House of Representatives passed their 
partisan bill to reauthorize the Nation's K-12 education bill. While 
that is another important step in the process to finally fix the badly 
broken No Child Left Behind law, I am disappointed that House 
Republicans have chosen to take a partisan approach in their bill that 
is unacceptable to Democrats and will never become law.
  I appreciate the work that ranking member Bobby Scott put into the 
House Democratic substitute. I am looking forward to coming together 
with him as well as Chairman Kline in a conference. I truly hope House 
Republicans will be ready to join ranking member Bobby Scott and other 
House and Senate Democrats, Senate Republicans, and the administration 
as we work to get this done in a way that works for all students and 
families. I am looking forward to continuing that work here today in 
the Senate.
  Again, I truly want to thank my colleague, the senior Senator from 
Tennessee, for working with me on our bipartisan bill, and I appreciate 
Chairman Alexander's cooperation in working in a bipartisan way through 
this process. I join him this morning in encouraging our colleagues to 
file their amendments so we can continue making progress on this 
important piece of legislation.
  Our bipartisan bill, the Every Child Achieves Act, is a good step in 
the right direction to fix No Child Left Behind. It gives our States 
more flexibility, while also including Federal guardrails to make sure 
all students have access to a quality public education. We are not done 
yet. I want to work to continue to improve and strengthen the bill.
  One example, today we will talk about an amendment to help shine a 
light on inequalities in education that still exist in our country. I 
thank Senator Warren for offering her amendment. I look forward to that 
discussion. That amendment will help States, districts, and schools 
better analyze student achievement data so they can help their students 
achieve. So I hope our colleagues will pass that amendment.
  I am looking forward to getting started again today to work through 
this issue and a number of others we have, and I hope to continue to 
work in a bipartisan way to make sure all students have access to a 
quality education, again, regardless of where they live or how they 
learn or how much money they make.
  I look forward to today's discussion. Again, I thank our colleagues 
on the other side of the aisle for working with us to fix this badly 
broken bill.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I wish to acknowledge the comments of 
the Senator from Washington. Before she was here, I commented on her 
leadership and on how the Democratic leader as well as the Republican 
leader have created an environment in which we can succeed. We govern a 
complex country such as ours by consensus, and I think the way we are 
doing things is a pretty good example of the way we can do that.
  I am glad the House of Representatives acted. We have a process for 
this called conference. We haven't been doing conferences much lately. 
But she and I both talked with Chairman Kline and Representative Scott. 
If we should succeed next week, as I believe we will, why then we will 
have a conference with the House of Representatives, and we will 
develop a bill we hope the President will be comfortable signing. We 
are not here just to make a speech. We want to resolve this. As I said 
in the article I put in earlier, this is the education law everyone 
wants fixed. In our constitutional system of government, we don't fix 
it unless the House and Senate agree and the President signs it.
  So that is our goal, and we are continuing to make steps, thanks to 
the leadership of Senator Murray and others.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the time 
until 11:30 a.m. today be equally divided between the two managers or 
their designees and that it be in order to call up the following 
amendments: Daines amendment No. 2110, Warren amendment No. 2120, Brown 
amendment No. 2099, Portman amendment No. 2147, Manchin amendment No. 
2103, Kaine amendment No. 2096, Heller amendment No. 2121, Feinstein 
amendment No. 2087; that the Toomey amendment be modified with the 
changes at the desk; further, that at 11:30 a.m., the Senate vote in 
relation to the amendments in the order listed, with a vote in relation 
to the Toomey amendment, as modified, after disposition of the Brown 
amendment, with a 60-affirmative vote threshold for adoption of the 
Daines amendment, and with no second-degree amendments in order to any 
of the amendments prior to the votes; that there be 2 minutes equally 
divided prior to each vote, and that upon the disposition of the 
Feinstein amendment, the Senate vote in relation to the Fischer 
amendment No. 2079.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment (No. 2094), as modified, is as follows:

   (Purpose: To ensure that States have policies or procedures that 
  prohibit aiding or abetting of sexual abuse, and for other purposes)

       At the end of title IX, add the following:

     SEC. __. PROHIBITION ON AIDING AND ABETTING SEXUAL ABUSE.

       Subpart 2 of part F of title IX (20 U.S.C. 7901 et seq.), 
     as amended by sections 4001(3) and 9114, and redesignated by 
     section 9106(1), is further amended by adding at the end the 
     following:

[[Page 11187]]



     ``SEC. 9539. PROHIBITION ON AIDING AND ABETTING SEXUAL ABUSE.

       ``(a) In General.--A State, State educational agency, or 
     local educational agency in the case of a local educational 
     agency designated under State law, that receives Federal 
     funds under this Act shall have laws, regulations, or 
     policies that prohibit any person who is a school employee, 
     contractor, or agent, or any State educational agency or 
     local educational agency, from assisting a school employee, 
     contractor, or agent in obtaining a new job, apart from the 
     routine transmission of administrative and personnel files, 
     if the person or agency knows, or recklessly disregards 
     credible information indicating, that such school employee, 
     contractor, or agent engaged in sexual misconduct regarding a 
     minor in violation of the law.
       ``(b) Exception.--The requirements of subsection (a) shall 
     not apply if the credible information described in such 
     subsection--
       ``(1)(A) has been properly reported to a law enforcement 
     agency with jurisdiction over the alleged misconduct; and
       ``(B) has been properly reported to any other authorities 
     as required by Federal, State, or local law, including title 
     IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 (20 U.S.C. 1681 et 
     seq.) and the regulations implementing such title under part 
     106 of title 34, Code of Federal Regulations, or any 
     succeeding regulations; and
       ``(2)(A) the case has been officially closed or the 
     prosecutor with jurisdiction over the alleged misconduct has 
     investigated the allegations and notified school officials 
     that there is insufficient information to establish probable 
     cause that the school employee, contractor, or agent engaged 
     in sexual misconduct regarding a minor;
       ``(B) the school employee, contractor, or agent has been 
     charged with, and exonerated of, the alleged misconduct; or
       ``(C) the case remains open but there have been no charges 
     filed against, or indictment of, the school employee, 
     contractor, or agent within 4 years of the date on which the 
     information was reported to a law enforcement agency.
       ``(c) Prohibition.--The Secretary shall not have the 
     authority to mandate, direct, or control the specific 
     measures adopted by a State, State educational agency, or 
     local educational agency under this section.
       ``(d) Construction.--Nothing in this section shall be 
     construed to prevent a State from adopting, or to override a 
     State law, regulation, or policy that provides, greater or 
     additional protections to prohibit any person who is a school 
     employee, contractor, or agent, or any State educational 
     agency or local educational agency, from assisting a school 
     employee who engaged in sexual misconduct regarding a minor 
     in violation of the law in obtaining a new job.''.

  Mr. ALEXANDER. Mr. President, for the information of Senators, we 
expect the first four amendments in this series to require rollcall 
votes, with the rest of the amendments being adopted by a voice vote.
  I thank the Senator from Washington for working with us to create 
this agreement.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                    Amendment No. 2094, as Modified

  Mr. TOOMEY. Mr. President, I wish to speak about my amendment, which 
is part of the unanimous consent agreement that was just agreed to. I 
have a number of thank yous I need to go through.
  I will start by thanking the cosponsors of this amendment, starting 
with Senator Manchin, who has been with me in this battle for a very 
long time now. But I wish to thank the other cosponsors, including 
Senators McConnell, Alexander, Cotton, Capito, Gardner, Heller, Inhofe, 
Johnson, McCain, Roberts, and Vitter.
  I am on the floor of the Senate to explain to people what we have 
done and are going to vote on later today. I believe that this 
amendment is very constructive, and I am very optimistic and hopeful 
this will pass.
  This amendment is based on a bill that I introduced with Senator 
Manchin over a year and a half ago, which was called the Protecting 
Students from Sexual and Violent Predators Act. I have spoken about 
this a number of times because I feel very strongly about this. The 
fact is that while the overwhelming majority of our school employees 
across America are wonderful people and some of the great role models 
of our lives, it is also a fact that there are predators in our 
schools. That is a sad fact, but it is true. We know this for many 
reasons, not the least of which is that last year alone there were 459 
school employees arrested across America for sexual misconduct with the 
kids that they are supposed to be protecting.
  So far this year we are on a path of arresting people at a rate that 
exceeds that of last year. We know this is a huge problem.
  It came to my attention because of the absolutely horrific story of a 
young boy named Jeremy Bell. Sadly, that story began in Pennsylvania, 
where a teacher was molesting the students under his charge. He was 
molesting little boys. The school figured out what was going on and 
reported it to the authorities. But as much as they wanted to, the 
authorities were never able to assemble enough evidence to mount a 
prosecution. So the school did something despicable. What the school 
decided to do was to make this predator someone else's problem. So they 
wrote a letter of recommendation and said: You just leave, take this 
letter with you, and find employment elsewhere.
  Well, this is a pedophile. This is a predator they did this for, and 
of course he left and became someone else's problem. He was hired in 
West Virginia as a schoolteacher. Eventually, he became principal, and 
of course, he serially molested the children in that school, finally 
culminating in the rape and murder of a little boy named Jeremy Bell.
  The practice of sending a letter of recommendation on behalf of a 
known predator is so appalling that most of us can't imagine anyone 
would do it. But the sad truth is that it has happened so frequently 
that it even has a name. It is called passing the trash. In prosecution 
circles and in the circles of people who are advocates for children who 
are victims of these horrendous crimes, they know this all too well. 
Passing the trash is all too common a practice as a way for schools to 
make these predators someone else's problems.
  Well, the initial amendment that I filed this bill, mirroring the 
legislation that Senator Manchin and I introduced, attempted to deal 
with this problem in two ways. One, in the first place, was to 
establish a thorough Federal standard for background checks for school 
employees, and the second was to have a prohibition against passing the 
trash--to make it illegal for someone to knowingly recommend for hire a 
sexual predator.
  As for the first part, the background check part, we have had 
disagreements among ourselves as to how to do that and whether to do 
that. There have been deep disagreements, and despite many 
conversations with my colleagues, we have not been able to reach an 
agreement on how to proceed on that. I am disappointed that we have not 
reached an agreement, but I understand that we don't have the votes to 
pass that portion. So I have agreed to put that aside for now. I have 
not agreed to abandon this cause of establishing the most rigorous 
possible background checks, but we will have that fight another day and 
hopefully at a time when we have the votes to pass it.
  What is really terrific news is that we have reached an agreement on 
the other part of our legislation, the part that prohibits this 
despicable, horrendous practice of passing the trash--the very action 
that enabled the predator to get the job that enabled him, in turn, to 
rape and kill young Jeremy Bell. Having reached this agreement, I am 
confident that we will be able to pass this amendment later today. If 
we do, it will be the first time that the Senate has established that 
this despicable practice will no longer be tolerated anywhere in the 
country.
  This is a huge victory for America's children. It is as simple as 
that. When we pass this in the Senate, and when it eventually becomes 
law, which I am confident it will, the fact is our kids are going to be 
safer. There are a lot of States that already have some legislation 
that prohibits passing the trash within their State, but no State can 
force another State to forbid this practice from coming across the line 
and into their State. That is why this always needed a Federal 
response, and I am really thrilled that today I think we are going to 
have that Federal response.

[[Page 11188]]

  I need to thank a lot of folks. I see my colleague from West Virginia 
has joined us, and I will start with him. Senator Manchin has been a 
great partner in this effort since we started over a year and a half 
ago. I am sure he will have something to add about this entire process.
  I also wish to thank the chairman of the committee, Senator 
Alexander, and Ranking Member Murray for all of the help they have 
provided in getting us to this place. In particular, I have to thank 
Senator Alexander and his staff, together with my staff. I also have to 
mention Dimple Gupta, who has worked tirelessly on this issue.
  We had many long and often difficult conversations. We started in 
what seemed like irreconcilable differences about this topic. But 
because we persisted and everybody approached this in a cooperative 
fashion, despite the stiff opposition that there was at times, we were 
able to find common ground.
  I also need to acknowledge some outside groups that made it possible 
for us to find this common ground: the National Children's Alliance, 
the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, many child advocate groups 
across Pennsylvania and across the country, law enforcement groups, and 
prosecutors. Even the American Academy of Pediatricians has been 
helpful in getting us here.
  I will close with this: This is exactly the way the Senate is 
supposed to work. This is the way it is supposed to happen. As people 
who share a common vision, we all want to make sure our kids are in the 
safest possible environment when they go to school. We started with 
wildly different views about how to get there. When the Senate is 
working well, it works exactly as it is working now with regular order 
on the Senate floor, going through the committee process, and having a 
ranking member and a chairman who are willing to work with individual 
Members on their priorities. People came together to figure out where 
their common ground was, how to get this done, and how to put the 
interest of their constituents, the American people--and in this case 
our kids and grandkids--ahead of political considerations.
  I am really thrilled that I think we have reached that point on this 
really important amendment. So I urge all of my colleagues to support 
this amendment. I hope it will have very broad support. I want to say 
thanks to all of the colleagues who helped to make this happen.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. MANCHIN. Mr. President, first of all, let me say to my colleague, 
Senator Toomey from Pennsylvania, that I have enjoyed working with him 
on many ventures, if you will, but this is one that is particularly 
gratifying now that we have finally come to an agreement. I think it is 
bipartisan all the way. I think it will pass. It makes all the sense in 
the world. It was Jeremy Bell from my State of West Virginia who was 
the victim of this tragic crime that could have been prevented if we 
had just known. That is what this is all about. As Senator Toomey has 
said, we are not going to give up on making sure we can find out who 
these perpetrators are, if they have a record we can follow and trace 
and keep them out of the school system before they ever begin their 
careers. That is a situation on which we will continue to be very 
vigilant.
  Again, I thank Senator Toomey for his commitment and his hard work. 
His staff and our staff enjoyed working together. We will continue to 
work on many endeavors that will benefit most importantly the children 
of this great country of ours in our respective States.
  I thank Senator Alexander and Senator Murray for including my 
amendment--another amendment I will be speaking about--to promote 
volunteerism and community service. This is an issue about which I feel 
very strongly. I go all over the State of West Virginia and speak in 
different parts of the country, and I speak to young people and ask 
them if they feel as if they own the country.
  I say: Do you have ownership? Do you believe this is your country?
  They look at me very strangely. They really don't feel as though they 
have ownership.
  I ask them: In the Constitution and in the preamble where it says a 
government of the people, by the people, and for the people, whom are 
we speaking about? It is you. It is your government. You own it. What 
have you done to invest in it? Are you taking care of it? Are you doing 
preventive maintenance?
  I am often reminded of the five promises that were made, which were 
started by Colin Powell and his five promises committee. It is an idea 
that my wife and I, when I was Governor of West Virginia, endorsed. We 
have a five promise program that we still support in West Virginia.
  The five promises are simply these:
  Every child when they are born into this world should have a loving, 
caring adult in their life, somebody who unconditionally loves them. 
Sometimes, unfortunately, it is not always the biological parents or 
the biological family, but every child deserves to have unconditional 
love.
  Second, every child must have a safe place where harm can't enter 
their life, where they know they will be kept safe. Every child 
deserves that.
  Third, every child deserves a healthy start. We know that nutrition 
is important and basically the ability to provide good nutrition. 
Sometimes, because of economic conditions, the opportunity doesn't 
always exist. That is a responsibility we have as the greatest country 
on Earth, the superpower that we are. Every child should have a healthy 
start.
  Fourth, every child should grow to earn a skill, learn a skill, be 
able to obtain a skill that will carry them to be a successful adult in 
life.
  I will speak about the fifth promise in just a moment.
  Giving back to our communities, contributing our time and services to 
improve our world--this is something everybody can do. We can't use the 
excuse of ``I am sorry, my family is not wealthy enough for me to do 
something''--that is not an excuse--or ``I am sorry, I live in a rural 
area where I just don't have that available to me.'' There is a need 
everywhere in the world. In every part of this great country, there is 
a need for people to give something back and do something to 
contribute, to reach out and help somebody of lesser means, or maybe 
they don't have any assistance whatsoever in their life. There is an 
opportunity for every person to give.
  I learned from my grandparents. I watched them open up their home and 
make sure there was always a bed for a stranger, make sure there was 
always food, and make sure there were a few rules we had to live by. 
You couldn't swear when there were too many young children around, you 
couldn't drink, and you had to work and provide something. If that was 
the case, then my grandparents took care of you and they wanted to 
share with you. They are pretty simple rules to live by.
  Unfortunately, true public service is not there. We for some reason 
have thought it was somebody else's responsibility to take care of--
just offer a government program, a Federal or State program. What 
happened to reaching across the room, if you will, or reaching across 
your town or your community or your State to help people? Our world is 
different, but our commitment to our neighbors shouldn't be. That is 
one value that doesn't change. One person can still have a meaningful 
impact on another person's life. We know that.
  My amendment with Senator Shaheen basically aims to counter this 
trend by giving every school the flexibility to use their Federal 
funding on programs that promote volunteerism and community service. 
That is all. It is optional. It is not mandatory. But if one believes 
that is such an intricate part of our responsibility as an educator, to 
make sure these young people have a chance to get into a food bank or a 
food pantry or a homeless shelter or a senior citizen opportunity to 
help people in need, or a nursing home--given that chance, they can use 
some of those resources they will have

[[Page 11189]]

through this updated bill we are about to pass, which I think is 
historical and much needed--this amendment will allow them to do that. 
That is all we have asked for.
  I am very appreciative that both Chairman Alexander and Ranking 
Member Murray have accepted this.
  My amendment today is part of keeping General Powell's fifth promise. 
I spoke about the four promises. The fifth promise is this: Every child 
should grow to be a loving, caring adult and give something back. We 
can't teach that one. People have to earn that one. People have to 
learn that for themselves. Sometimes people are able to get it from 
where they live, the family they live with, the community around them. 
Sometimes people see it and they know it is the right thing to do. This 
is going to provide an opportunity in an educational setting to find 
one's lot in life, to be able to give something back, to be able to 
grow into a loving, caring adult. That is what this is all about.
  So I believe very strongly in this amendment. I believe very strongly 
that it is going to help the youth of America to be able to be 
Americans and what is expected of us as Americans--to help one another.
  I would say that an investment in community service pays off both for 
our students and our communities. In 2013, that 1 year, U.S. taxpayers 
invested $1.7 billion in our national service programs that we have to 
date. The total social return on this investment is estimated to be 
$6.5 billion--almost a 4-to-1 return in the value we receive back as a 
society. I don't think we can get a better return on an investment than 
having the youth of America being able to give something back and learn 
that fifth promise to be a caring, loving adult and be able to carry 
this tradition on.
  With that, I appreciate very much the chairman and the ranking member 
accepting this amendment. I think it will greatly help the school 
systems of America to be able to be involved in volunteerism, without 
social media but truly hands on. So I think this is something we need. 
I am appreciative, and I thank my colleagues.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. PORTMAN. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from West Virginia. 
He was just speaking about a need for us to support our young people. 
In essence, what he was saying is they can use their God-given 
abilities to be able to give back, and that is what the amendment I 
wish to speak to is all about.
  I appreciate the fact that the chairman and ranking member have 
agreed to take a look at this amendment. In fact, my understanding is 
that Senator Alexander is going to be offering this amendment later. 
This amendment has to do with substance abuse. It has to do with our 
young people. Unfortunately, we are seeing a younger and younger age of 
first use of drugs. We are seeing also, unfortunately, more and more 
young people who struggle with addiction.
  In the legislation and in the underlying law, there are provisions 
for prevention, and that is incredibly important. If we can get our 
young people not to go down this road, we can avoid some devastating 
consequences to them and to their future, to their families, and to 
their communities.
  If we look at the use today, in my home State of Ohio--I was just 
home the day before yesterday at a conference on this issue of heroin 
use and prescription drug use by our young people. It is growing. It is 
a huge problem. The No. 1 cause of death now in Ohio is overdose from 
these drugs. It is no longer car accidents, as it has been in the past. 
We must focus on this issue, and the most effective way, of course, is 
through prevention and education, which I strongly support, and it is 
in the underlying bill.
  What is not in the bill, though, is to provide support services for 
our young people should they be struggling with addiction. This is 
incredibly important. So the legislation I am offering along with 
Senator Whitehouse simply provides recovery and support services for 
our young people who fall victim to the dangers of drugs. We have a 
responsibility to do this, in my view, again not just to focus, as the 
underlying legislation does, on drug prevention and early intervention 
but also to focus on providing these important recovery services to 
students in schools and communities so they could overcome their 
addiction and achieve their God-given abilities and again be productive 
members of society, which the Senator from Pennsylvania and the Senator 
from West Virginia were speaking about. I encourage my colleagues to 
support this amendment.
  The second amendment I wish to speak about that I understand also may 
be offered later and included in a package--and I appreciate the 
chairman and ranking member taking a look at this--has to do with 
homeless youth. This is an amendment which basically enables us to 
streamline the current process, where it is very difficult to establish 
that somebody is homeless. In fact, under our current law, one has to 
go through quite a process with HUD, the Department of Housing and 
Urban Development. I am told there are sometimes up to maybe 10 or 12 
different documents one has to go through. This streamlines the process 
and allows the counselors who are already in the schools to be able to 
make the determination to help get services to these kids.
  Homeless youth in America is now at an alltime high. We are told that 
1 in 45 children is homeless each year. By the way, that is 1.6 million 
children. So I hope this amendment, which is amendment No. 2087, to 
help homeless youth will also be one we will be able to take up here on 
the floor. Senator Feinstein and I are offering it together. It is one 
that is bipartisan, and it is one that will help foster greater 
community collaboration between agencies and departments by 
streamlining the process and allowing these counselors who are already 
in the schools to get the training they need to be able to support 
these kids, to more quickly identify them and provide the services they 
need.
  I thank my colleague from Montana for allowing me to speak about 
these two very important amendments. I thank Senator Murray and Senator 
Alexander for giving this very serious consideration in the 
legislation. I hope these amendments can be adopted on a bipartisan 
basis.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.


                Amendment No. 2110 to Amendment No. 2089

  Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I ask to set aside the pending amendment 
in order to call up amendment No. 2110.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment is set aside.
  The clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Montana [Mr. Daines] proposes an amendment 
     numbered 2110 to amendment No. 2089.

  Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the reading 
of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

  (Purpose: To allow a State to submit a declaration of intent to the 
Secretary of Education to combine certain funds to improve the academic 
                        achievement of students)

       After part B of title X, insert the following:

                           PART C--A PLUS ACT

     SECTION 10301. SHORT TITLE; PURPOSE; DEFINITIONS.

       (a) Short Title.--This part may be cited as the ``Academic 
     Partnerships Lead Us to Success Act'' or the ``A PLUS Act''.
       (b) Purpose.--The purposes of this part are as follows:
       (1) To give States and local communities added flexibility 
     to determine how to improve academic achievement and 
     implement education reforms.
       (2) To reduce the administrative costs and compliance 
     burden of Federal education programs in order to focus 
     Federal resources on improving academic achievement.
       (3) To ensure that States and communities are accountable 
     to the public for advancing the academic achievement of all 
     students, especially disadvantaged children.
       (c) Definitions.--
       (1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided, the terms 
     used in this part have the meanings given the terms in 
     section 9101 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
     1965 (20 U.S.C. 7801 et seq.).

[[Page 11190]]

       (2) Other terms.--In this part:
       (A) Accountability.--The term ``accountability'' means that 
     public schools are answerable to parents and other taxpayers 
     for the use of public funds and shall report student progress 
     to parents and taxpayers regularly.
       (B) Declaration of intent.--The term ``declaration of 
     intent'' means a decision by a State, as determined by State 
     Authorizing Officials or by referendum, to assume full 
     management responsibility for the expenditure of Federal 
     funds for certain eligible programs for the purpose of 
     advancing, on a more comprehensive and effective basis, the 
     educational policy of such State.
       (C) State.--The term ``State'' has the meaning given such 
     term in section 1122(e) of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6332(e)).
       (D) State authorizing officials.--The term ``State 
     Authorizing Officials'' means the State officials who shall 
     authorize the submission of a declaration of intent, and any 
     amendments thereto, on behalf of the State. Such officials 
     shall include not less than 2 of the following:
       (i) The governor of the State.
       (ii) The highest elected education official of the State, 
     if any.
       (iii) The legislature of the State.
       (E) State designated officer.--The term ``State Designated 
     Officer'' means the person designated by the State 
     Authorizing Officials to submit to the Secretary, on behalf 
     of the State, a declaration of intent, and any amendments 
     thereto, and to function as the point-of-contact for the 
     State for the Secretary and others relating to any 
     responsibilities arising under this part.

     SEC. 10302. DECLARATION OF INTENT.

       (a) In General.--Each State is authorized to submit to the 
     Secretary a declaration of intent permitting the State to 
     receive Federal funds on a consolidated basis to manage the 
     expenditure of such funds to advance the educational policy 
     of the State.
       (b) Programs Eligible for Consolidation and Permissible Use 
     of Funds.--
       (1) Scope.--A State may choose to include within the scope 
     of the State's declaration of intent any program for which 
     Congress makes funds available to the State if the program is 
     for a purpose described in the Elementary and Education 
     Secondary Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301). A State may not 
     include any program funded pursuant to the Individuals with 
     Disabilities Education Act (20 U.S.C. 1400 et seq.).
       (2) Uses of funds.--Funds made available to a State 
     pursuant to a declaration of intent under this part shall be 
     used for any educational purpose permitted by State law of 
     the State submitting a declaration of intent.
       (3) Removal of fiscal and accounting barriers.--Each State 
     educational agency that operates under a declaration of 
     intent under this part shall modify or eliminate State fiscal 
     and accounting barriers that prevent local educational 
     agencies and schools from easily consolidating funds from 
     other Federal, State, and local sources in order to improve 
     educational opportunities and reduce unnecessary fiscal and 
     accounting requirements.
       (c) Contents of Declaration.--Each declaration of intent 
     shall contain--
       (1) a list of eligible programs that are subject to the 
     declaration of intent;
       (2) an assurance that the submission of the declaration of 
     intent has been authorized by the State Authorizing 
     Officials, specifying the identity of the State Designated 
     Officer;
       (3) the duration of the declaration of intent;
       (4) an assurance that the State will use fiscal control and 
     fund accounting procedures;
       (5) an assurance that the State will meet the requirements 
     of applicable Federal civil rights laws in carrying out the 
     declaration of intent and in consolidating and using the 
     funds under the declaration of intent;
       (6) an assurance that in implementing the declaration of 
     intent the State will seek to advance educational 
     opportunities for the disadvantaged;
       (7) a description of the plan for maintaining direct 
     accountability to parents and other citizens of the State; 
     and
       (8) an assurance that in implementing the declaration of 
     intent, the State will seek to use Federal funds to 
     supplement, rather than supplant, State education funding.
       (d) Duration.--The duration of the declaration of intent 
     shall not exceed 5 years.
       (e) Review and Recognition by the Secretary.--
       (1) In general.--The Secretary shall review the declaration 
     of intent received from the State Designated Officer not more 
     than 60 days after the date of receipt of such declaration, 
     and shall recognize such declaration of intent unless the 
     declaration of intent fails to meet the requirements under 
     subsection (c).
       (2) Recognition by operation of law.--If the Secretary 
     fails to take action within the time specified in paragraph 
     (1), the declaration of intent, as submitted, shall be deemed 
     to be approved.
       (f) Amendment to Declaration of Intent.--
       (1) In general.--The State Authorizing Officials may direct 
     the State Designated Officer to submit amendments to a 
     declaration of intent that is in effect. Such amendments 
     shall be submitted to the Secretary and considered by the 
     Secretary in accordance with subsection (e).
       (2) Amendments authorized.--A declaration of intent that is 
     in effect may be amended to--
       (A) expand the scope of such declaration of intent to 
     encompass additional eligible programs;
       (B) reduce the scope of such declaration of intent by 
     excluding coverage of a Federal program included in the 
     original declaration of intent;
       (C) modify the duration of such declaration of intent; or
       (D) achieve such other modifications as the State 
     Authorizing Officials deem appropriate.
       (3) Effective date.--The amendment shall specify an 
     effective date. Such effective date shall provide adequate 
     time to assure full compliance with Federal program 
     requirements relating to an eligible program that has been 
     removed from the coverage of the declaration of intent by the 
     proposed amendment.
       (4) Treatment of program funds withdrawn from declaration 
     of intent.--Beginning on the effective date of an amendment 
     executed under paragraph (2)(B), each program requirement of 
     each program removed from the declaration of intent shall 
     apply to the State's use of funds made available under the 
     program.

     SEC. 10303. TRANSPARENCY FOR RESULTS OF PUBLIC EDUCATION.

       (a) In General.--Each State operating under a declaration 
     of intent under this part shall inform parents and the 
     general public regarding the student achievement assessment 
     system, demonstrating student progress relative to the 
     State's determination of student proficiency, as described in 
     paragraph (2), for the purpose of public accountability to 
     parents and taxpayers.
       (b) Accountability System.--The State shall determine and 
     establish an accountability system to ensure accountability 
     under this part.
       (c) Report on Student Progress.--Not later than 1 year 
     after the effective date of the declaration of intent, and 
     annually thereafter, a State shall disseminate widely to 
     parents and the general public a report that describes 
     student progress. The report shall include--
       (1) student performance data disaggregated in the same 
     manner as data are disaggregated under section 1111(b)(3)(A) 
     of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 
     U.S.C. 6311(b)(3)(A)); and
       (2) a description of how the State has used Federal funds 
     to improve academic achievement, reduce achievement 
     disparities between various student groups, and improve 
     educational opportunities for the disadvantaged.

     SEC. 10304. ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.

       (a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), the 
     amount that a State with a declaration of intent may expend 
     for administrative expenses shall be limited to 1 percent of 
     the aggregate amount of Federal funds made available to the 
     State through the eligible programs included within the scope 
     of such declaration of intent.
       (b) States Not Consolidating Funds Under Part a of Title 
     I.--If the declaration of intent does not include within its 
     scope part A of title I of the Elementary and Secondary 
     Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.), the amount 
     spent by the State on administrative expenses shall be 
     limited to 3 percent of the aggregate amount of Federal funds 
     made available to the State pursuant to such declaration of 
     intent.

     SEC. 10305. EQUITABLE PARTICIPATION OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS.

       Each State consolidating and using funds pursuant to a 
     declaration of intent under this part shall provide for the 
     participation of private school children and teachers in the 
     activities assisted under the declaration of intent in the 
     same manner as participation is provided to private school 
     children and teachers under section 9501 of the Elementary 
     and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7881).

  Mr. DAINES. Mr. President, as a fifth-generation Montanan, a product 
of Montana public schools, a husband of an elementary school teacher, 
and the father of four children, including one of them who has a degree 
in elementary education, I understand how important a first-rate 
education is to our kids' future.
  As I meet with parents and educators across Montana, they frequently 
share concerns about the one-size-fits-all student performance and 
teacher qualification metrics that currently dictate Federal funding as 
part of No Child Left Behind. While well-intended, many of these 
metrics have proven difficult for schools in rural areas to achieve.
  As the Senate debates the Every Child Achieves Act to reform our 
Nation's education policies, one of my priorities will be fighting to 
increase local control over academic standards and

[[Page 11191]]

education policies and working to push back against burdensome Federal 
regulations that often place our schools in a straitjacket.
  For example, the U.S. Department of Education has incentivized States 
to adopt common core standards by offering exemptions from No Child 
Left Behind regulations and making extra Federal education funds 
accessible through programs such as Race to the Top to States that 
adopt common core. However, as are many Montanans, I am deeply 
concerned that the Federal Government's obvious efforts to back States 
into adopting such programs is an inappropriate interference in 
education policy decisions that should be made by the States, should be 
made by the parents, by the teachers, and local school boards.
  If we are serious about wanting to make future generations as 
fortunate as ours, it is critical that we prepare our children to excel 
in a globally competitive economy. Our children should receive a well-
rounded education that focuses on core subjects, including reading, 
writing, science, and math, as well as technical and vocational 
disciplines and training in the arts.
  It is clear that the Federal Government's one-size-fits-none approach 
isn't working. That is why I am introducing the academic partnerships 
lead us to success amendment, or A-PLUS for short. It is an amendment 
to the Every Child Achieves Act. I thank the chairman and the ranking 
member, Senator Alexander and Senator Murray, for allowing a vote on 
this amendment today.
  This measure will help expand local control of our schools and return 
Federal education dollars where they belong--closer to classrooms. With 
A-PLUS, the States should be freed and will be freed from Washington 
unworkable teacher standards. States would be free from Washington-
knows-best performance metrics. States would be free from Washington's 
failed test requirements. States would be held accountable by parents 
and teachers because a bright light would shine directly on the 
decisions made by State capitals and local school districts.
  With freedom from Federal mandates comes more responsibility, 
transparency, and accountability from the States. It would empower our 
States, our local schools, our teachers, and our parents to work 
together to develop solutions that best fit the unique needs of each 
child. The A-PLUS amendment goes a long way toward returning 
responsibility for our kids' education closer to home and reduces the 
influence of the Federal Government over our classrooms.
  I thank Senators Grassley, Cruz, Vitter, Johnson, Lee, Lankford, 
Blunt, Crapo, Rubio, and Gardner for sponsoring my A-PLUS amendment, 
and I ask my other Senate colleagues to join us in empowering our 
schools to serve our students, not DC bureaucrats, and support this 
important amendment.
  I see my colleague Senator Lee of Utah is here, and I yield my time 
for his comments on this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Utah.
  Mr. LEE. I thank the Senator.
  Mr. President, the work the Senate is engaged in this week is long 
overdue. The last time the Elementary and Secondary Education Act was 
updated was 14 years ago. Congress gave the country No Child Left 
Behind, a policy that by all accounts has been a failure. That is why 
in 2012 the Obama administration began offering waivers to States, 
allowing them to opt out of the coercive and ineffective requirements 
that No Child Left Behind imposed on America's school districts and 
classrooms. But State and local school boards quickly learned, just as 
parents and teachers did, these so-called waivers didn't solve the 
fundamental problems created by No Child Left Behind; they further 
entrenched that problem. These weren't waivers in any meaningful sense 
because they came with a new set of strings attached that only 
reinforced the authority of Washington, DC, to micromanage the policies 
and the curriculum of classrooms all around the country. They did not 
give State and local policymakers the freedom and flexibility to use 
education funding in a way that would best meet the needs of students 
and truly empower every child to succeed. No. Instead, they forced 
teachers, school boards, and State officials to choose between the 
lesser of two evils--either, on one hand, abide by the Federal mandates 
of No Child Left Behind or, on the other hand, accept the Federal 
mandates prescribed by common core and Race to the Top.
  The underlying bill we will vote on next week makes the same mistake, 
and unless it is amended, we can expect it in turn to have the same 
disappointing results. More kids will be trapped in failing schools, 
their opportunities in life predetermined by their parents' ZIP Code 
rather than their God-given talents and their own individual desire to 
learn and succeed. More teachers can be rewarded on the basis of the 
number of years they have been on the job rather than on the basis of 
the number of kids they have helped to graduate. And more parents will 
regrettably but understandably lose faith in the public education 
system, knowing it is designed to serve the ideological whims of 
Federal politicians and Federal bureaucrats instead of the educational 
needs of their children.
  That is why I am here this morning to offer my support and to 
encourage my colleagues to offer their support for an amendment to the 
proposed reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, 
an amendment that would help us avoid the serious mistakes of the past.
  The basic premise, the basic animating principle behind the bill 
before the Senate, as it now stands, and the basic premise, basic 
principle behind No Child Left Behind and common core is that when it 
comes to running the classroom, Washington bureaucrats and politicians 
know better than America's teachers, parents, and local school boards. 
The principle behind the A-PLUS amendment is essentially the opposite; 
that no one is in a better position to make decisions about a child's 
education than his or her parents, guardians, teachers, counselors, and 
principals. If you believe in this principle as I do--and as experience 
instructs all of us to do--then you must support the A-PLUS Act because 
it empowers every child's parents, guardians, teachers, counselors, and 
principals to make the greatest impact on their education and on their 
lives, and it would do so without eliminating any Federal mandates--
coercive and ineffective though they may be--and would simply give 
States the choice to opt out of them, no strings attached.
  Here is how the A-PLUS act works. If a State's legislators determine 
that the Federal Government's approach to education reform has not 
improved academic achievement in their State, they have an alternative. 
They can submit to the U.S. Department of Education a declaration of 
intent outlining their State-directed education reform initiatives. In 
States that choose to opt out, education officials will no longer have 
to spend all of their time complying with onerous one-size-fits-all 
Federal mandates. Instead, they will have the freedom and flexibility 
to listen and respond to the needs and recommendations of parents, 
teachers, principals, and school boards. They will be able to make 
their education funds go further by consolidating programs and funding 
sources, and they will be able to improve the educational opportunities 
to disadvantaged children by designing their State's policies to be 
more responsive and more targeted.
  This amendment isn't about States' rights so much as it is about 
children's rights, such as the right to a good education. It would 
secure those rights by empowering America's teachers and parents to 
pursue innovative policies, such as charter schools and school vouchers 
and pay-for-success initiatives that have proven to be successful in 
classrooms all around the country.
  The bill the Senate will vote on next week may be well-intentioned in 
its reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, but 
it misdiagnoses the problem of the status quo. Our education system 
needs to be reformed, not in spite of excessive Federal control but 
because of it. The A-

[[Page 11192]]

PLUS Act recognizes this fact, and it takes critical steps to rebuild 
our education policy around it.
  I urge my colleagues to support the A-PLUS amendment. The success of 
America's children depends upon it.
  I thank my friend and distinguished colleague from Montana and yield 
my time back to him.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Montana.
  Mr. DAINES. I thank the Senator from Utah for his remarks and his 
insights to empower schools, parents, and States to have more control 
over their children's future through education. This measure will help 
expand local control of our schools. It will return Federal education 
dollars to where they belong; that is, close to the classrooms.
  Just before I came down to the floor to speak, I was in my office 
with some high school students from Montana from communities like St. 
Regis, Hobson, Missoula, Clyde Park, Stevensville. They are the bright 
future of our State. As I chatted with them about this amendment, they, 
too, agreed that by shifting control back to the States, to the local 
school boards, to the parents, that individual and effective solutions 
can be created to address the multitude of unique challenges facing our 
schools and our students across the country. Through these laboratories 
of democracy, Americans can watch and learn how students can benefit 
when innovative reforms are implemented at the local level.
  I thank my colleagues, and I urge my Senate colleagues to join us in 
empowering our schools to serve their students, not DC bureaucrats, and 
support this important amendment.
  I yield back.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Fischer). The Senator from Tennessee.


          Amendments Nos. 2147 and 2121 to Amendment No. 2089

  Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, I ask to set aside the pending 
amendment to call up the following amendments en bloc: Portman 
amendment No. 2147 and Heller amendment No. 2121.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Tennessee [Mr. Alexander] proposes 
     amendments en bloc numbered 2147 and 2121 to amendment No. 
     2089.

  Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
reading of the amendments be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendments are as follows:

                           amendment no. 2147

      (Purpose: To promote recovery support services for students)

       On page 422, line 22, insert ``recovery support services,'' 
     after ``referral,''.
       On page 439, line 16, insert ``recovery support services,'' 
     after ``mentoring,''.


                           amendment no. 2121

 (Purpose: To ensure timely and meaningful consultation between State 
 educational agencies and Governors in the development of State plans 
                under titles I and II and section 9302)

       On page 800, between lines 17 and 18, insert the following:

     SEC. 9115A. CONSULTATION WITH THE GOVERNOR.

       Subpart 2 of part F of title IX (20 U.S.C. 7901 et seq.), 
     as amended by sections 4001(3), 9114, and 9115, and 
     redesignated by section 9106(1), is further amended by adding 
     at the end the following:

     ``SEC. 9540. CONSULTATION WITH THE GOVERNOR.

       ``(a) In General.--A State educational agency shall consult 
     in a timely and meaningful manner with the Governor, or 
     appropriate officials from the Governor's office, in the 
     development of State plans under titles I and II and section 
     9302.
       ``(b) Timing.--The consultation described in subsection (a) 
     shall include meetings of officials from the State 
     educational agency and the Governor's office and shall 
     occur--
       ``(1) during the development of such plan; and
       ``(2) prior to submission of the plan to the Secretary.
       ``(c) Joint Signature Authority.--A Governor shall have 30 
     days prior to the State educational agency submitting the 
     State plan under title I or II or section 9302 to the 
     Secretary to sign such plan. If the Governor has not signed 
     the plan within 30 days of delivery by the State educational 
     agency to the Governor, the State educational agency shall 
     submit the plan to the Secretary without such signature.''.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.


 Amendments Nos. 2120, 2099, 2103, 2096, and 2087 to Amendment No. 2089

  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I ask to set aside the pending 
amendment in order to call up the following amendments en bloc as 
provided for under the previous order and ask that they be reported by 
number: Warren No. 2120, Brown No. 2099, Manchin No. 2103, Kaine No. 
2096, and Feinstein No. 2087.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendments by 
number.
  The legislative clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Washington [Mrs. Murray] proposes 
     amendments en bloc numbered 2120, 2099, 2103, 2096, and 2087 
     to amendment No. 2089.

  The amendments are as follows:

                           amendment no. 2120

  (Purpose: To amend section 1111(d) of the Elementary and Secondary 
 Education Act of 1965 regarding the cross-tabulation of student data)

       On page 75, strike line 1 and all that follows through line 
     4 on page 76 and insert the following:
       ``(iii) Technical assistance.--Upon request by a State or 
     local educational agency, the Secretary shall provide 
     technical assistance to States and local educational agencies 
     in collecting, cross-tabulating, or disaggregating data in 
     order to meet the requirements of this paragraph.
       ``(C) Minimum requirements.--Each State report card 
     required under this subsection shall include the following 
     information:
       ``(i) A clear and concise description of the State's 
     accountability system under subsection (b)(3), including the 
     goals for all students and for each of the categories of 
     students, as defined in subsection (b)(3)(A), the indicators 
     used in the accountability system to evaluate school 
     performance described in subsection (b)(3)(B), and the 
     weights of the indicators used in the accountability system 
     to evaluate school performance.
       ``(ii) Information on student achievement on the academic 
     assessments described in subsection (b)(2) at each level of 
     achievement, as determined by the State under subsection 
     (b)(1), for all students and disaggregated and cross-
     tabulated in accordance with the following:

       ``(I) Such information shall be disaggregated by each 
     category of students described in subsection (b)(2)(B)(xi), 
     homeless status, and status as a child in foster care and, 
     within each category of students described in subsection 
     (b)(2)(B)(xi), cross-tabulated by--

       ``(aa) each major racial and ethnic group, gender, English 
     proficiency, and children with or without disabilities; and
       ``(bb) any other category of students that the State 
     chooses to include.

       ``(II) The disaggregation or cross-tabulation for a 
     category described in subclause (I) shall not be required in 
     a case in which the number of students in the category is 
     insufficient to yield statistically reliable information or 
     the results of such disaggregation or cross-tabulation would 
     reveal personally identifiable information about an 
     individual student.

       ``(iii) For all students and disaggregated by each category 
     of students described in subsection (b)(2)(B)(xi), the 
     percentage of students assessed and not assessed.
       ``(iv)(I) For all students, and disaggregated and cross-
     tabulated in accordance with subclauses (II) and (III)--

       ``(aa) information on the performance on the other academic 
     indicator under subsection (b)(3)(B)(ii)(II)(aa) used by the 
     State in the State accountability system; and
       ``(bb) high school graduation rates, including 4-year 
     adjusted cohort graduation rates and, at the State's 
     discretion, extended-year adjusted cohort graduation rates.

       ``(II) The information described in subclause (I) shall be 
     disaggregated by each of the categories of students, as 
     defined in subsection (b)(3)(A), and, within each such 
     disaggregation category, cross-tabulated by--

       ``(aa) each major racial and ethnic group, gender, English 
     proficiency, and children with or without disabilities; and
       ``(bb) any other category of students that the State 
     chooses to include.

       ``(III) The disaggregation or cross-tabulation for a 
     category described in subclause (II) shall not be required in 
     a case in which the number of students in the category is 
     insufficient to yield statistically reliable information or 
     the results of such disaggregation or cross-tabulation would 
     reveal personally identifiable information about an 
     individual student.

       On page 89, between lines 5 and 6, insert the following:
       ``(5) Cross-tabulation provisions.--
       ``(A) Cross-tabulation data not used for accountability.--
     Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to require 
     groups of students obtained by cross-tabulating data under 
     this subsection to be considered categories of students under 
     subsection (b)(3)(A) for purposes of the State accountability 
     system under subsection (b)(3) or section 1114.

[[Page 11193]]

       ``(B) Cross-tabulated data implementation.--Information 
     obtained by cross-tabulating data under this subsection shall 
     be widely accessible to the public in accordance with 
     paragraph (1)(B)(i)(III) and, upon request, by any additional 
     public means that the State determines.


                           amendment no. 2099

 (Purpose: To amend part A of title IV of the Elementary and Secondary 
  Education Act of 1965 to allow funds provided under such part to be 
                 used for a site resource coordinator)

       On page 447, between lines 16 and 17, insert the following:
       ``(X) designating a site resource coordinator at a school 
     or local educational agency to provide a variety of services, 
     such as--
       ``(i) establishing partnerships within the community to 
     provide resources and support for schools;
       ``(ii) ensuring all service and community partners are 
     aligned with the academic expectations of a community school 
     in order to improve student success; and
       ``(iii) strengthening relationships between schools and 
     communities; and


                           amendment no. 2103

(Purpose: To enable local educational agencies to use funds under part 
A of title IV of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 for 
    programs and activities that promote volunteerism and community 
                                service)

       On page 444, strike line 2 and insert the following:

     school; or
       ``(iii) promote volunteerism and community service;''.


                           amendment no. 2096

  (Purpose: To add career and technical education as a core academic 
                                subject)

       On page 759, line 3, insert ``career and technical 
     education,'' after ``music,''.


                           amendment no. 2087

   (Purpose: To provide for additional means of certifying children, 
               youth, parents, and families as homeless)

       On page 813, line 8, insert before the semicolon the 
     following: ``, and provide training on the definitions of 
     terms related to homelessness specified in sections 103, 401, 
     and 725 to the personnel (including personnel of preschool 
     and early childhood education programs provided through the 
     local educational agency) and the liaison''.
       On page 827, strike line 22 and insert the following:
     nator.
       ``(E) Certifying homeless status.--A local educational 
     agency liaison or member of the personnel of a local 
     educational agency who receives training described in 
     subsection (f)(6) may certify a child or youth who is 
     participating in a program provided by the local educational 
     agency, or a parent or family of such a child or youth, who 
     meets the eligibility requirements of this Act for a program 
     or service authorized under title IV, as eligible for the 
     program or service.''; and

  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Oregon.
  (The remarks of Mr. Wyden pertaining to the introduction of S. 1740 
are printed in today's Record under ``Statements on Introduced Bills 
and Joint Resolutions.'')
  Mr. WYDEN. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
order for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
order for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 2110

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 2 
minutes of debate prior to a vote in relation to amendment No. 2110, 
offered by the Senator from Montana, Mr. Daines, which is subject to a 
60-affirmative-vote threshold for adoption.
  The Senator from Montana.
  Mr. DAINES. Madam President, the academic partnerships lead us to 
success amendment--also called A-PLUS--gives States greater flexibility 
in allocating Federal education funding and ensuring academic 
achievement. Here is what it does. States would be allowed to obtain 
Federal education funding in the form of block grants. States would 
submit a declaration of intent to the Department of Education to 
consolidate Federal education programs and funding and redirect sources 
toward State-directed education reform initiatives. What this does is 
allow State and local leaders to exercise greater control over the use 
of Federal education funds to address the needs of local students and 
target scarce resources to areas of highest need.
  I ask my Senate colleagues to join me in empowering our schools to 
serve their students, not DC Democrats, and support this important 
amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, this amendment is well-intentioned, 
unnecessary, won't pass, and undermines the bipartisan agreement we 
reached to try to move in exactly the direction the Senator from 
Montana suggested. In addition, the House of Representatives rejected 
it last night.
  I recommend instead that my friends who want more local control of 
the schools vote for our bipartisan agreement, which ends the common 
core mandate, ends waivers in 42 States, reverses the trend of national 
school boards, and which, in my opinion, would be the biggest step 
toward restoring local control to public schools in the last 25 years.
  I urge a ``no'' vote on a well-intentioned, unnecessary idea which 
won't become law and which might help undermine the bipartisan proposal 
that has a very good chance of becoming law.
  Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the votes following the 
first vote in this series be 10 minutes in length.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The question is on agreeing to the amendment.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Florida (Mr. Rubio).
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Maine (Mr. King) is 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 44, nays 54, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 226 Leg.]

                                YEAS--44

     Ayotte
     Barrasso
     Blunt
     Boozman
     Burr
     Cassidy
     Coats
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Fischer
     Flake
     Gardner
     Graham
     Grassley
     Heller
     Hoeven
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Lankford
     Lee
     McCain
     McConnell
     Moran
     Paul
     Perdue
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rounds
     Sasse
     Scott
     Sessions
     Shelby
     Sullivan
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Vitter
     Wicker

                                NAYS--54

     Alexander
     Baldwin
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Booker
     Boxer
     Brown
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cochran
     Collins
     Coons
     Corker
     Donnelly
     Durbin
     Feinstein
     Franken
     Gillibrand
     Hatch
     Heinrich
     Heitkamp
     Hirono
     Kaine
     Kirk
     Klobuchar
     Leahy
     Manchin
     Markey
     McCaskill
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Nelson
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Reid
     Sanders
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Shaheen
     Stabenow
     Tester
     Udall
     Warner
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--2

     King
     Rubio
       
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order requiring 60 votes

[[Page 11194]]

for the adoption of this amendment, the amendment is rejected.
  The Senator from Tennessee.


                           Amendment No. 2120

  Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, if I could have the attention of 
Senators, I ask unanimous consent that the order relating to the Warren 
amendment be vitiated and the amendment remain pending while Senator 
Murray and I work with Senator Warren on the language in the bill.
  So we won't be voting on the Warren amendment today, but it will 
remain pending. That leaves votes on two amendments: Senator Brown's 
amendment and Senator Toomey's amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.


                           Amendment No. 2099

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 2 
minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote in relation to 
amendment No. 2099, offered by the Senator from Washington, Mrs. 
Murray, for Mr. Brown.
  The Senator from Washington.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I know Senator Brown is on his way. But 
I just want to let Senators know that too often our Nation's students 
show up to school hungry or lacking adequate school supplies. Many of 
our teachers, as we know, are really struggling to provide students 
with an education, while they are also dealing with the compounding 
problems brought on by poverty.
  Site resource coordinators, which this amendment addresses, operate 
through a community school model, are able to bolster the number of 
resources in schools, and increase the number of services offered to 
students and their families.
  So what this amendment does is that it would further that goal by 
allowing title IV funds to be used for site coordinators.
  I thank Senator Brown for offering this amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Tennessee.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, I remind Senators that this and the 
next vote are 10-minute votes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. ALEXANDER. I yield back the time.
  Mrs. MURRAY. I yield back the time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, all time is yielded back.
  The question occurs on agreeing to the amendment.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk called the roll.
  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Florida (Mr. Rubio).
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Maine (Mr. King) is 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 98, nays 0, as follows:

                      [Rollcall Vote No. 227 Leg.]

                                YEAS--98

     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Booker
     Boozman
     Boxer
     Brown
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Coats
     Cochran
     Collins
     Coons
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Donnelly
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Flake
     Franken
     Gardner
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Heinrich
     Heitkamp
     Heller
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Kaine
     Kirk
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Leahy
     Lee
     Manchin
     Markey
     McCain
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Nelson
     Paul
     Perdue
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Reid
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rounds
     Sanders
     Sasse
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sessions
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Udall
     Vitter
     Warner
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--2

     King
     Rubio
       
  The amendment (No. 2099) was agreed to.


                    Amendment No. 2094, as Modified

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 2 
minutes of debate equally divided prior to a vote in relation to 
amendment No. 2094, as modified, offered by the Senator from 
Pennsylvania, Mr. Toomey.
  The Senator from Pennsylvania.
  Mr. TOOMEY. Madam President, this amendment is really very simple. It 
is designed to protect children from sexual predators. We know we have 
a problem because every year we arrest hundreds of school employees 
across the country for the sexual abuse of children who are supposed to 
be in their care.
  This measure will help that problem by a very simple requirement that 
States pass legislation to prohibit knowingly recommending for hire a 
teacher who has abused children. This is common sense.
  I am very grateful to my colleagues for helping us get here, 
especially Senator Manchin. He has been a great partner in this effort 
for a long time now. I want to thank Senator Alexander and Senator 
Murray for their work in helping us find the common ground that could 
get to a great bipartisan solution for a real problem.
  I yield to the Senator from West Virginia.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from West Virginia.
  Mr. MANCHIN. Madam President, I appreciate the hard work Senator 
Toomey has put in. Our staffs have worked together. I wish to thank 
Chairman Alexander and Ranking Member Murray for their hard work on 
this. This young man from West Virginia, Jeremy Bell, was the victim of 
a crime that was preventable if we had known. We did not know. This 
person who basically was a predator was passed down to West Virginia 
without West Virginia having any knowledge at all. This will prevent 
this from happening anywhere in the country.
  I urge all of my colleagues to please support this piece of 
legislation. This amendment is most reasonable. It will protect your 
children.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, I ask for 30 seconds for Senator 
Murray and me to make a brief comment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. I want to thank the Senator from Pennsylvania and the 
Senator from West Virginia for working with Senator Murray and me and 
others to come to a conclusion on this. They feel passionately about 
it. They have worked hard on it. They deserve credit for that. I am 
glad to be a cosponsor of it, and I plan to vote for it.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I join with the chairman in thanking 
the Senators from Pennsylvania and West Virginia and for working with 
our staffs to create this new version. I think this amendment gets at a 
real problem by ensuring that suspected abusers do not transfer to 
other States and districts. It is a positive step. I urge its adoption.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment, 
as modified.
  Mr. MANCHIN. I ask for the yeas and nays.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There appears to be a sufficient second.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk called the roll.
  Mr. CORNYN. The following Senator is necessarily absent: the Senator 
from Florida (Mr. Rubio).
  Mr. DURBIN. I announce that the Senator from Maine (Mr. King) is 
necessarily absent.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Are there any other Senators in the Chamber 
desiring to vote?
  The result was announced--yeas 98, nays 0, as follows:

[[Page 11195]]



                      [Rollcall Vote No. 228 Leg.]

                                YEAS--98

     Alexander
     Ayotte
     Baldwin
     Barrasso
     Bennet
     Blumenthal
     Blunt
     Booker
     Boozman
     Boxer
     Brown
     Burr
     Cantwell
     Capito
     Cardin
     Carper
     Casey
     Cassidy
     Coats
     Cochran
     Collins
     Coons
     Corker
     Cornyn
     Cotton
     Crapo
     Cruz
     Daines
     Donnelly
     Durbin
     Enzi
     Ernst
     Feinstein
     Fischer
     Flake
     Franken
     Gardner
     Gillibrand
     Graham
     Grassley
     Hatch
     Heinrich
     Heitkamp
     Heller
     Hirono
     Hoeven
     Inhofe
     Isakson
     Johnson
     Kaine
     Kirk
     Klobuchar
     Lankford
     Leahy
     Lee
     Manchin
     Markey
     McCain
     McCaskill
     McConnell
     Menendez
     Merkley
     Mikulski
     Moran
     Murkowski
     Murphy
     Murray
     Nelson
     Paul
     Perdue
     Peters
     Portman
     Reed
     Reid
     Risch
     Roberts
     Rounds
     Sanders
     Sasse
     Schatz
     Schumer
     Scott
     Sessions
     Shaheen
     Shelby
     Stabenow
     Sullivan
     Tester
     Thune
     Tillis
     Toomey
     Udall
     Vitter
     Warner
     Warren
     Whitehouse
     Wicker
     Wyden

                             NOT VOTING--2

     King
     Rubio
       
  The amendment (No. 2094), as modified, was agreed to.


                           Amendment No. 2147

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Under the previous order, there will be 2 
minutes of debate, equally divided, prior to a vote in relation to 
amendment No. 2147, offered by the Senator from Tennessee, Mr. 
Alexander, for Mr. Portman.
  The Senator from Washington.
  Mrs. MURRAY. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
Senator from Virginia be given 1 minute and the Senator from California 
be given 1 minute to speak prior to the five voice votes.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The Senator from Virginia.


                           Amendment No. 2096

  Mr. KAINE. Madam President, I rise to speak on amendment No. 2096.
  CTE is a core academic subject. I grew up working in my dad's iron-
working and welding shop. I ran a school that taught kids to be 
carpenters and welders in Honduras many years ago, and what I learned 
is that high-quality technical education is an important part of the 
educational spectrum. We downgraded it for a number of years, but there 
is a renaissance now.
  What my amendment would do is it would go into the current Federal 
law and specify that career and technical education programs are core 
curricula. Originally, English, math, and science were. This bill 
broadens what is a core curriculum to include computer science and 
foreign languages. This amendment would make plain that high-quality 
career and technical education is a core academic subject.
  I wish to thank Senators Ayotte, Merkley, Scott, Baldwin, and Warner 
as cosponsor. I also thank the chairman and ranking member for bringing 
this bipartisan bill to the floor.
  This is commonsense and bipartisan. I hope it will pass.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from California.


                           Amendment No. 2087

  Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Madam President, I rise to speak on amendment No. 
2087. It is pretty simple what this amendment would do, and I present 
it on behalf of Senator Portman and myself. It assures that homeless 
children have access to HUD housing.
  Today, we have 1.3 million children homeless in this country. In my 
State, we have 310,000. The problem is getting a clear definition of an 
individual who is homeless. This bill would allow the appropriate 
authorities in a school to certify that a youngster is homeless, so we 
don't have a conflict between the HUD certification and the school 
certification. It is long overdue. I believe it will be helpful. I am 
very hopeful this amendment will pass with a very big vote.
  I thank the Chair, and I thank Senator Portman.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington.
  Mrs. MURRAY. I yield back our remaining debate time on the final 
amendments.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All Democratic debate time is yielded back.
  Mr. ALEXANDER. Madam President, I yield back all Republican time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is yielded back.


                       Vote on Amendment No. 2147

  The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 2147.
  The amendment (No. 2147) was agreed to.


                       Vote on Amendment No. 2103

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
2103.
  The amendment (No. 2103) was agreed to.


                       Vote on Amendment No. 2096

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
2096.
  The amendment (No. 2096) was agreed to.


                       Vote on Amendment No. 2121

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
2121.
  The amendment (No. 2121) was agreed to.


                       Vote on Amendment No. 2087

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
2087.
  The amendment (No. 2087) was agreed to.


                       Vote on Amendment No. 2079

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to amendment No. 
2079.
  The amendment (No. 2079) was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The majority leader.

                          ____________________