Waiving Points of Order Against Conference Report on S. 250, Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act of 2006

WAIVING POINTS OF ORDER AGAINST CONFERENCE REPORT ON S. 250, CARL D. PERKINS CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2006 -- (House of Representatives - July 27, 2006)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Utah (Mr. Bishop) for yielding me the customary 30 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, today this House is considering the conference report for the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act. This is a good bill, a worthy bill. This bill addresses the needs of America's changing workforce and hopefully it will help close the gaps that threaten our long-term ability to compete in the global economy.

I want to express my appreciation and my respect for the leadership and hard work invested over the past 15 months by House Education and Workforce Committee Chairman Buck McKeon and ranking member George Miller in moving these vital issues forward and that resulted in this strong, bipartisan supported bill.

Mr. Speaker, the conference report successfully improves several aspects of the programs authorized under the Perkins Act. It provides for more effective accountability for these programs. It establishes stronger links to businesses and stronger partnerships between high schools, colleges and businesses, including small businesses. It

creates better links and sequences of courses from high school to college and it promotes a much stronger academic focus, consistent with other Federal K-12 educational programs.

Mr. Speaker, I am a very strong supporter of vocational, career and technical education, and I am not alone in Central Massachusetts in believing in the importance of vocational and technical education.

Let me share with my colleagues an important milestone that took place just last month in Worcester, Massachusetts. On June 8, the last class to occupy the old Worcester Vocational High School graduated, ending an era that began in 1910 when the Boys Trade School opened its doors to 29 ironworkers and 23 woodworkers.

That evening, 204 graduating seniors who attended classes in that 1910 building received their high school diplomas in subjects as diverse as telecommunications, cosmetology and hotel management. These students represent a well-educated workforce.

In the past 5 years, in Worcester alone, the number of vocational technical graduates attending college has nearly tripled, from 24 percent in 2001 to 68 percent this year. It is not surprising, therefore, to know that the scores of these students on the Massachusetts mandatory State test, which has formidable high standards, have risen significantly, a testament to the hard work of students, faculty, school administrators and parents.

This coming September, a new era will begin for Worcester's vocational and technical students when they start classes in a new state-of-the-art school, the Worcester Technical High School. I have had the opportunity to tour this new school, the first vocational high school in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to be built in the last 30 years. I can assure my colleagues that the goals and programs outlined in today's reauthorization bill will find fertile ground and flourish at Worcester Technical High School.

But, Mr. Speaker, it takes more than just a good framework like the one provided by this conference report to ensure a quality education. It takes resources. It takes money. And, quite frankly, Mr. Speaker, that worries me.

I worry whether this House has the same bipartisan dedication and commitment that so successfully negotiated this conference agreement to make sure that these same programs are adequately funded in the future. Every year President Bush recommends the elimination of the Perkins vocational education programs in his budget. Every year, Mr. Speaker, every year he does this.

Will the Republican leadership of this House pledge to organize a bipartisan effort and convince the President that he must include full funding for the Perkins Act in his budget?

Each year when the President has eliminated the Perkins vocational and technical programs, the Republican majority of this House passes a budget resolution that matches the President's request, which means it also eliminates the funding for the Perkins Act programs.

Where does that leave us, Mr. Speaker? It leaves us with an appropriations allocation for education that is so low it is impossible to adequately fund our Federal education programs. In order to restore $1.3 billion to the Perkins program, we are forced to steal money from other critical K-12 and higher education programs.

This year is no exception. In the FY 2007 Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations Act, which has been waiting in the wings for 6 weeks since June 13 for a chance to come to the House floor, we once again see damaging cuts in education funding. For the second year in a row, funding for the Department of Education has been cut, this time $404 million below FY 2006 levels and $1 billion below FY 2005 levels. While the appropriations bill provides $1.3 billion for vocational education programs, this is the same level as last year. This means vocational education grants will have lost $83 million in real purchasing power since FY 2005.

Mr. Speaker, nearly half of all high school students and about one-third of all college students take vocational education courses to be ready for today's world of work. We cannot keep freezing the funding for these programs. The result is a de facto cut in resources at exactly the time when this authorization increases standards and accountability for vocational and technical schools.

So I hope that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will finally commit themselves not just to authorizing these critical programs, but to working in a bipartisan, all-out effort to make sure that they are adequately funded. Otherwise, nothing we do here today matters.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I have to admit I am a little bit confused. Only July 12, this House voted 260-159 in favor of a motion to instruct the conferees appointed to negotiate on this conference report to state clearly that when this authorizing bill describes as its purpose to prepare students for high wage jobs, that those jobs should, in no case, pay less than $7.25 an hour. 260-159, Mr. Speaker. That is an overwhelming vote. Sixty-four Republicans joined every single Democrat and Independent in this House in support of this language. But somehow, Mr. Speaker, it does not appear in the conference report.

High skilled jobs are important, Mr. Speaker. High wage jobs matter. And so does raising the minimum wage. The minimum wage was established 63 years ago to alleviate poverty. Today, the minimum wage condemns workers and their families to a life of poverty. That is more than 6.5 million hardworking American workers. I thought that was why 260 members of this House voted 2 weeks ago to demand that the conferees include in this bill that the phrase ``high wage'' means no less than $7.25 an hour.

Did the House conferees not take the Members of this House seriously? Did they fight during negotiations to include these words in the final conference report? Because, if so, then why isn't it there?

Mr. Speaker, I have worked in this House for a while now, 10 years as a Member of Congress and 13 years before that as a Congressional aid. I remember when motions to instruct conferees were taken seriously by Members appointed to the conference committee.

The Republican leadership will not allow this House to act on the FY 2007 Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations Act because it contains an increase in the minimum wage. Every Health, Education and Labor Department program is being held hostage to the Republican majority's determination to keep 6.5 million hardworking Americans in poverty.

Now they will not allow a handful of words, supported so strongly by Members of this House, to be included in this conference report. What are they so afraid of?

As we take up the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act conference report, we can all be proud of our support of vocational, technical and career education. But with all due respect, Mr. Speaker, what we do today is meaningless. It is worthless if we fail to ensure adequate appropriations for these programs and if we continue to let the minimum wage stagnate and willingly and deliberately condemn more and more American workers to lives of poverty.

In closing, I will support this bill because it does authorize a number of good programs. But let me repeat so my colleagues on the other side of the aisle can hear this loud and clear: It is not enough to authorize programs. We need to fund them. And this President has consistently tried to eliminate funding for important vocational educational programs and this Congress passes budgets that also eliminate funding for these programs. And, quite frankly, the funding that we do provide is inadequate.

Finally, let me repeat to all Members of this House, that it is a disgrace that we are about to recess for our August vacation without increasing the Federal minimum wage. It has been stuck at $5.15 an hour for nearly 9 years. During that same period of time, Members of this House have increased their pay eight different times, totaling about $35,000.

If this Republican leadership does not want to allow Members of this House a clean, straight, up-or-down vote on the minimum wage, then they should at least have the decency to bring to the floor a resolution to repeal this pay raise. It is wrong to increase our pay and, at the same time, refuse to do anything about the millions of American workers who are stuck in poverty.

If you work in this country, you should get paid enough so you don't have to live in poverty.

Again, vocational education is important, but we need to fund these programs. That is something that this Republican Congress has failed to do.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

http://thomas.loc.gov/