Copyright 1999 Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.
Federal Document Clearing House Congressional Testimony
February 11, 1999, Thursday
SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 857 words
HEADLINE:
TESTIMONY February 11, 1999 BILL GOODLING REPRESENTATIVE HOUSE
EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE FISCAL 2000 EDUCATION BUDGET
BODY:
OPENING STATEMENT OF REP. BILL GOODLING
(R-PA), CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE HEARING ON "THE
ADMINISTRATION'S EDUCATION PROPOSALS AND PRIORITIES FOR FY2000" THURSDAY,
FEBRUARY 11, 1999 9:30 AM 2175 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING Good morning. It is
a pleasure to be here for our third education hearing this year. I want to take
this opportunity to welcome Secretary Riley and thank him for coming this
morning. One of our Committee's major responsibilities this year is to review
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. In light of that, it is important
that we hear from you to better understand what the Administration's proposals
and priorities are for this year. For many years I have tried to focus our
attention on the quality of elementary and secondary education programs. Are
taxpayers receiving their money's worth? Are children learning better? Are we
emphasizing quality or quantity? More often than not, the Federal government's
focus over the past 30 years has been on quantity, not quality. We have added
one layer of programs on top of another. But what have the hundreds of education
programs our Oversight Subcommittee has found spread across 39 agencies gotten
us? How are children better off? For many of these programs, we know little or
nothing about their quality. Is that an efficient way to manage Federal
resources? I don't think so. The President has even admitted as much. He said we
must change the way we invest the $15 billion that goes into public education
and start supporting what works and stop supporting what does not work. And I
think that is something you would agree with as well, Secretary Riley. We're
also finding out we haven't been getting significant results. This week we heard
the results of the latest reading report card--the National Assessment of
Educational Progress. It showed that no significant improvement in the percent
of 4' graders scoring below "Basic" in reading-38% cannot read. And the most
recent National Education Goals Report shows our high school graduation rate has
been stagnant over time (steady at 86%) and that we have lost ground in 12th
grade reading achievement. What all of us in this room can agree on is that we
want all children to have a quality education. But more programs, more money,
more paperwork, more requirements-that is not the way to get there. A school
district can fill out federal forms perfectly, but fail to adequately teach
their children to read. We want schools and teachers to be able to focus on
helping children perform - not on complying with federal requirements and
mandates and jumping through bureaucratic hoops. And I think states want the
freedom to have the flexibility to achieve these results now. Why should they
have to wait for the completion of ESEA legislation, which will
likely not be in effect until 2001. And last time I checked Ed-Flex is not even
currently a part of ESEA. If states are willing to show
results, why not pass Ed-Flex legislation now so that all states can have the
freedom to implement their reform plans. Why put schools on our timetable? We
all know this reauthorization process is going to take some time. We don't even
have the Administration's proposal yet. Why should Delaware wait any longer to
be able to fully implement a reform plan like Texas? Under Ed-Flex Texas has
seen disadvantaged and minority test scores in schools affected by Ed- Flex
waivers outpace those same groups statewide. So Mr. Secretary, I hope that today
you will Join with us and not put process before performance. In addition to
quality and flexibility, we'll focus on the following: - making sure dollars get
to the classroom; - increasing flexibility in Federal programs: - improving the
quality of teaching, - encouraging parents to save for the education of their
children; - increasing funding for the unfunded mandate of special education; -
supporting drug free schools; and - encouraging increased parental involvement
in the education of children. Mr. Secretary, I again thank-you for coming this
morning and look forward to hearing your testimony. However, I want to say up
front that I hope that you have brought to us the final IDEA regulations that
were due in December. As you know, we passed this legislation two years ago and
the final regulations are still not complete. If you don't have them with you
today, when will you wrestle them free from OMB? Maybe we should stage a "Free
IDEA" rally down at the Old Executive Office Building. I hope, as well, that you
will explain why the Administration's budget request has added so little to
IDEA, while creating new programs that duplicate and overlap current programs.
If we could fulfill our promise to pay the 40 percent excess cost to educate a
child with a disability, then local school districts would have
the funds to hire new teachers and repair their schools and the Federal
government would not have to create new Federal programs for these purposes. In
just a few minutes we will proceed, but before we do that I'd like to yield to
the ranking member for any opening statement he may have.
LOAD-DATE: February 22, 1999