Federal Legislative Update Archives
March 1999
[Return to Legislative Action Center]

March 26, 1999
March 19, 1999
March 12, 1999
March 5, 1999

3/26/99
[return to top]

News from Capitol Hill...

Social Security Offset - NEA Supports Legislative Relief

NEA Vice President Reg Weaver urged Congress this week to support legislation filed by Rep. William Jefferson of Louisiana (H.R. 1217) that would limit Social Security offset. The little understood offset provision of the Social Security Act imposes severe benefit losses upon education employees not covered by Social Security who survive their spouses. These widows and widowers can keep only a fraction of their Social Security survivor benefits. Weaver said, “More than a third of teachers and education employees are not covered by Social Security. It is unconscionable that those who survive their spouses should see their retirement incomes reduced by thousands of dollars just because they are public employees.” The Jefferson proposal guarantees the first $1200 of combined benefits, striking a blow for equity. Weaver urged Congress to enact the Jefferson proposal, and “to stop punishing people whose only transgression is a life spent serving the public.”

The Budget Resolution

Let the buyer beware! The House and Senate yesterday, on the eve of a two-week spring recess, approved FY 2000 budget resolutions, the annual blueprint that guides Congress in funding federal programs. The budget resolution, required by law, does not provide funding levels for individual programs. Rather, it establishes the ground rules for the funding decisions to come. The House and Senate action yesterday offers a blueprint of the political and funding battles ahead.

USA Today’s editorial (3/24) comments: “The $1.7 trillion spending and tax outlines muscled through the House and Senate this week are little more than the budgetary equivalent of The Emperor’s New Clothes… This budget puts Congress in favor of politically popular increases in spending for defense, education, medical research, veterans’ benefits, and other programs. But it doesn’t say which programs will have to be cut – and by how much – to pay for it.”

Paying for spending: There’s the rub. The 1997 balanced budget agreement capped all discretionary spending, that is, spending not mandated by law, including both defense and education. In order to stay within the tight spending caps, proposed increases in funding for one program must be balanced by decreases for other programs. The spending caps are a major issue shaping the budget debate.

The House and Senate budget resolutions differ and so they now move to conference committee to be reconciled. The law requires the budget resolution to be completed by April 15, but the deadline is routinely missed.

The budget resolution does not have the force of law and does not require the president’s signature. Once the blueprint is approved, the committees that actually appropriate the money go to work. Thirteen separate spending bills make up the final budget.

Next Steps: In mid-to-late April, the Appropriations Committees will divide the pool of funds among their thirteen subcommittees. Each sub-committee then writes the actual spending bills. The House Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education Subcommittee, chaired by Rep. John Porter of Illinois, is expected to complete its bill in mid-May.

Storm Clouds Ahead!

X - Class Size Reduction, Full Funding for IDEA, Modern Schools: The Senate passed a reasonable increase for elementary and secondary education, but at a cost to young children and families. Head Start loses. Summer youth jobs will be cut. Colleges receive no increase. Class size reduction and school modernization gain no funding. The House budget resolution poses even greater jeopardy for education programs, including likely cuts in Pell grants and college student aid.

The Senate declined to consider full funding for IDEA and class size reduction on a party line vote. The amendment to fully fund IDEA and class size reduction by reducing the proposed tax cuts, sponsored by Sen. Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts and Chris Dodd of Connecticut, was tabled by a vote of 54–45. All Democrats supported consideration and all Republicans opposed [Note: Sen. John McCain of Arizona was absent].

The House rejected by a vote of 173-250 a substitute budget resolution proposed by Rep. John Spratt of South Carolina that included increases for education and tax credits for school modernization bonds.

The House and Senate Leadership are determined to try to live under the spending caps. House Speaker Dennis Hastert of Illinois quickly acknowledged, however: “Let me say up front it is difficult to stay with the caps. The reality is…there are a lot of concerns out there.”

The “Proof of the Pudding”: With Election 2000 hovering in the wings, the FY 2000 budget resolution is as much a political blueprint for the campaign trail as it is a budget blueprint. Robert Reischauer, former Congressional Budget Office head, summed up the week, “They’re sort of passing the hot potato to the appropriations committees, saying, ‘You solve this.’”

NEA will provide state affiliates an analysis of the House and Senate plans and the projected funding.

Advocacy: Making a Difference!

E-Rate – The dollars are flowing and the numbers, growing! Schools and libraries are now receiving $1.66 billion in E-Rate (education rate) subsidies for first year applications. NEA, as a partner in the Ed-LiNC coalition, fought hard to pass the E-Rate for telecommunications services that is helping schools gain access to technology. NEA continued the fight this past year to protect the program from ongoing attacks. A record number of schools nationwide have now submitted second year applications. The 36,500 applications beat last year’s total by 250.

Readers Sought For New Grant Programs. A recent U.S. Department of Education announcement offers an opportunity to gain “hands on” experience with what NEA’s advocacy for resources that support new and better ways to teach and learn makes possible. The Department is seeking qualified educators and practitioners to serve as field readers for new grant programs. For information, go to http://www.ed.gov/offices/OPE/OHEP/solicit.html

3/19/99
[return to top]

News from Capitol Hill...

The Proof of the Pudding is in …
The Budget!

How serious is Congress’ commitment to funding education programs? The true test is the Fiscal Year (FY) 2000 budget.

Act II – The Budget Resolution
Senate Budget Committee increases, House Budget Committee decreases President’s proposal for elementary and secondary education.

[Act I in Review -The President’s Proposed Budget:
The President submitted his proposed FY 2000 budget to Congress in late January. NEA applauded the President’s vision for education, but challenged the proposed funding levels. “An overall increase of less than four percent just doesn’t go far enough to respond to public demand and growing pressures on our schools to improve,” NEA President Bob Chase said.]

Act II - The FY 2000 Budget Resolution:
House and Senate budget committees completed action this week on the FY 2000 budget resolution. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Pete Domenici of New Mexico proposed an increase of $3.3 billion next year and $28 billion over the next five years above the President’s proposed budget for elementary and secondary education. House Budget Committee Chairman, John Kasich of Ohio described the House committee proposal as an increase of $1.2 billion for the next year. An analysis of the figures, however, indicates that the House plan would actually generate fewer dollars than the President’s proposal. The committees’ proposals now go to the full House and Senate.

The Budget Resolution - First Mile; Long Road Ahead
An annual budget resolution, required by the 1974 budget law, is essentially a blueprint or a framework for the spending and tax laws to be written later by other congressional committees. The budget resolution does not have the force of law and does not require the president’s signature. The law requires the budget resolution to be completed by April 15, but that deadline is routinely missed. Once the blueprint is approved, the committees that actually appropriate the money go to work. Thirteen separate spending bills make up the final budget.

With Election 2000 hovering in the wings, the FY 2000 budget resolution will be as much a political blueprint for the campaign trail as a budget blueprint.

Education advocates can be encouraged by Senate Budget Committee Chairman Domenici’s support for investing in America’s public schools. Caution is in order, however.

1) NO to Class Size Reduction; NO to Fully Funding IDEA; NO to Modern Schools; YES to Block Grants

Both the House and Senate Budget Committees rejected class size reduction amendments on party line votes with all Democrats supporting the class size reduction amendments and all Republicans opposed. The House Budget Committee also rejected by party line votes a school modernization proposal and a proposal to fully fund IDEA. The House Committee further, again on a party line vote, stated support for combining funds from 31 current education programs in a block grant that would jeopardize these targeted programs. Block grants historically have reduced their funding.

2) The Caps

The 1997 balanced budget agreement capped all discretionary spending, that is, spending not mandated by law, including both defense and education. With the caps in place, proposed increases in funding for one program must be balanced by decreases for other programs. Further, in order to stay within the tight spending caps, current funding must be sharply cut. Maintaining the spending caps is the major issue shaping the debate.

“Will they or won’t they raise the caps?” The House and Senate Leadership are determined to try to live under the caps. House Speaker Dennis Hastert of Illinois quickly acknowledged, however: “Let me say up front it is difficult to stay within the caps. The reality is…there are a lot of concerns out there.”

The “Proof of the Pudding”: Is Congress willing to give real budget dollars to education programs? Look for signs in the final budget resolution.

Coming Attractions: The House and Senate FY 2000 budget resolutions go to the floor next week (the week of March 22). NEA will provide state affiliates an analysis of the House and Senate plans and the projected funding.

3/12/99
[return to top]

News from Capitol Hill...

House, Senate Pass Ed-Flex Bill

Senate Tables Murray Class-Size Reduction Amendment

After a week of parliamentary maneuvers, both the U.S. House and Senate failed to pass NEA-supported amendments to reduce class size by hiring 100,000 teachers in the Education Flexibility Partnership Act, H.R. 800 and S. 280. Additionally, the Senate approved an NEA-opposed amendment, authored by Senator Lott, that allows states to use last year’s $1.2 billion class-size funds for special education. This undermines the class-size initiative by forcing states and districts to choose between funding 100,000 new teachers or special education. NEA believes that both are important and that both should be fully funded, but not at the expense of each other.

In The Senate

Senators Murray (WA) and Kennedy (MA) pressed throughout the week for an amendment to the Senate Ed-Flex bill that would authorize a six-year program to reduce class size. NEA cyber-lobbyists sent more than 1,500 messages to the Hill urging support for the Murray amendment to help hire 100,000 new teachers nationwide. The Senate voted to table (kill) the amendment by a party-line vote of 55-44.

In The House

Representatives Clay (MO) and Wu (OR) introduced a companion amendment to reduce class size by hiring 100,000 teachers. Their amendment was ruled out-of-order in committee and blocked by House procedural rules on the floor.

Class-size reduction advocates, including Sen. Kennedy, said they will continue to press for a national commitment to reduce class size. Sen. Kennedy promised, "One way or another, this will come back!"

If you sent messages of support to your Senators and Representatives, thank you! Please help us keep Congress focused on the importance of reducing class size.

OUR MESSAGE TO SENATORS AND REPRESENTATIVES: Help increase student achievement by supporting legislation to reduce class size. Drop the Lott amendment, which pits class-size against special education, from the final Ed-Flex bill. Research demonstrates what teachers and parents know intuitively: students in smaller classes, particularly in the early elementary grades, perform better.

To send an e-mail message to your U.S. Senators and Representative using your personal e-mail account and your home computer, point your Web browser to NEA’s online Legislative Action Center at http://www.nea.org/lac and select “E-Mail Congress” under QUICK CLICKS on the left-hand margin. To phone your Representative and Senators, contact the Capitol switchboard at 202/224-3121.

Senate Adopts Lott Amendment to Weaken Class-Size Reduction Program

The Senate approved the amendment offered by Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott to the Education Flexibility Act. The amendment which passed by a vote of 60 to 39, with all Republican and five Democratic senators voting “aye," pits one group of students against others by linking class-size reduction and special education funding as “either/or” options. The Lott amendment allows the $1.2 billion already approved in the Fiscal Year (FY) 99 budget for class size reduction to be diverted to special education funding.

The Lott amendment jeopardizes the class-size reduction program already approved and creates a false and unnecessary choice. In fact, class-size reduction benefits not only children in the general education program, but also children with disabilities, the majority of whom are educated in the general education classroom. Further, class-size reduction dollars can be used to add special education teachers as well as general education teachers.

NEA on IDEA Funding: NEA supports full funding for the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), the nation’s special education law, with real dollars. NEA opposes shuffling dollars from one student to another. Full funding for IDEA would require an increase of over $13 billion per year – or $65-70 billion over five years. Yet the FY 2000 budget principles released last week by the House and Senate leadership did not mention increased funding for IDEA and did not propose any increase in education spending.

NEA Government Relations Director Mary Elizabeth Teasley told senators: “NEA urges bipartisan action on the appropriations and budget bills to allow for productive resolution of this issue. We urge bipartisan action for IDEA funding on the FY 99 supplemental appropriations bill. In addition, we urge that the FY 2000 Budget Resolution provide for full IDEA funding without cutting existing programs.”

Class Size Reduction for Your Community NOW

The U.S. Department of Education (DOE) is currently hosting workshops on the FY 1999 class size reduction program for the 1999-2000 school year. Workshop dates and locations, state-by-state information on the allocation of funds, and a guidance document on the program can be found at http://www.ed.gov/inits/FY99/.

Local school districts have considerable discretion in implementing the program. Waiver options should prove especially helpful to districts that already have a class-size reduction program in place.

The DOE guidance document emphasizes that states may not use any of the funds to administer the program. One hundred percent of the class-size reduction funds must go to localities.

An NEA Help Tool - NEA is providing state affiliates point by point information on how to maximize the opportunity offered by the class-size reduction program, and model state legislation that supports new teachers. (See the Wisconsin Education Association Council (WEAC) web site at http://www.weac.org/ for information on Wisconsin’s class-size reduction program, the Sage program.) Note: “Use it or lose it!” applies! The dollars allocated for states that do not apply are distributed among participating states.

3/5/99
[return to top]

News from Capitol Hill...

Class Size Reduction

Send a Message to the Senate Today!

Urge your senators – ASAP! - to support increased student achievement by supporting the class size reduction amendment. Sen. Patty Murray of Washington will offer her class size reduction proposal as an amendment to the bipartisan Ed-Flex bill, S. 280. The Ed-Flex bill is now on Senate floor, and so the amendment can come down at any time.

Keeping the Promise – The Murray Amendment

The Murray Amendment builds on the class size reduction program in the Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 budget ($1.2 billion for 30,000 additional teachers) by authorizing a six-year program to reduce class size through the hiring of 100,000 new qualified teachers. Messages can be sent to your senators directly from the NEA Legislative Action Center at www.nea.org/lac.

Bring Class-Size Reduction to Your Community NOW

The U.S. Department of Education is hosting workshops on FY 1999 class-size reduction grant program. The grants fund class-size reduction in the 1999-2000 school year, with funds flowing in time for school districts to plan and to recruit new teachers. Workshop dates and locations and state-by-state information on the allocation of funds can be found at www.ed.gov/inits/FY99. The workshops include detailed information on application procedures and a breakout session on teacher recruitment. DOE will also post a guidance document shortly on its web site. NEA is providing state affiliates point by point information on how to maximize the opportunity offered by the class-size reduction program, and model state legislation that supports new teachers. Note: “Use it or lose it!” applies! The dollars allocated for states that do not apply are distributed among participating states.

Ed-Flex

On the Fast Track
School Modernization

The bipartisan Ed-Flex bill, S. 280, is now on the Senate floor. Ed-allows states to waive federal regulations for key programs in the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) that includes Title I. The bill expands to all 50 states the pilot now underway in 12 states.

NEA supports the bill that has been strengthened with the addition of accountability provisions. Flexibility waivers that have increasing student achievement as their primary goal and that include accountability provisions can enhance the effectiveness of programs such as Title I. A similar proposal is moving in the U.S. House.

School Modernization: Other educational issues may be introduced during the Senate debate. A likely amendment by Sen. Tom Harkin of Iowa, Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey, and Charles Robb of Virginia, would put the Senate on record as supporting the enactment this year of $25 billion in school modernization bonds as well as one billion dollars over five years in direct grants for modernizing schools. Senators Harkin and Robb are co-sponsors of the Public School Modernization Act, S.223, introduced by Sen. Lautenberg. This “sense of the Senate” statement of support would be a first step towards passage of school modernization legislation. Look for a spirited exchange about education priorities.

Note:

Special Education

Supreme Court: Schools Must Provide Medical Aid
NEA Seeks “Legislative Fix”

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled this week that public schools must provide a wide array of medical care for disabled students. The nation’s special education law, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), requires schools to provide “related services.” The dispute centered on whether medical care constitutes a “related service.” The Court relied on a two-part standard established in a 1984 court decision. A service that is essential to the child’s ability to attend class and that can be provided in a school by a nurse or other qualified individual, but not a physician is a “related service” that the school must provide. Justice John Paul Stevens wrote for the Court “Congress intended to open the door of public education to all qualified children,” and emphasized that states are “to educate handicapped children with non-handicapped children whenever possible.”

NEA is actively lobbying the Congress for a “legislative fix.” Our medically fragile students’ needs must be met appropriately, not through education budgets.

The court ruling will surely fuel the growing dispute in Congress over special education funding. NEA opposes the President’s FY 2000 budget proposal to “level fund” special education. Representatives and Senators of both parties are pressing to increase funding. The Senate this week passed 100-0 support for full funding of IDEA as an amendment to the Ed-Flex bill now on the Senate floor.

Reading Matters - “Promising Results”
Title I Report –
NAEP Reading Report Card

Increased Title I Student Achievement. This week, U.S. Secretary of Education Richard Riley released a report showing increased Title I student achievement since the standards-based 1994 reauthorization. Although the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA ) includes more than 40 programs, Title I is the best known. An executive summary and “analysis and highlights” of the report, “Promising Results, Continuing Challenges: Findings from the National Assessment of Title I” are available at http://www.ed.gov/offices/OUS/eval/elem.html#TitleI. The full report will be available online later this month, with hard copy of the 200-page document available in 6-8 weeks.

NEA will work to reauthorize and improve ESEA as a priority for the 106th Congress. NEA believes reauthorization should build on the standards-based direction of 1994.

NAEP Reading Report Card – Impressive Progress: The Department of Education 1998 National Assessment of Education Progress (NAEP) Reading Report released this week revealed impressive progress and provides direction for effective programs. NEA President Bob Chase emphasized that a commitment to teacher quality is key to continued progress. Noting the large gains made by Connecticut, Chase said: “Connecticut is proof-positive that a solid, sustained commitment to high quality teaching produces results.”

Reading Excellence Grants Available: The U.S. Department of Education is now hosting workshops on application and award procedures for Reading Excellence Grants included in the FY 1999 budget. The grants will fund programs for the 1999- 2000 school year. The workshops will provide specific instructions on the application process and showcase effective practices based on research. Breakout Session topics include Professional Development and Family Literacy (http://www.ed.gov/inits/FY99). NEA is providing state affiliates with point by point information on how to maximize this opportunity, and model state legislation that supports making reading programs work for children.

[return to top]