BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.

I rise today in strong opposition to H.R. 471.

Let me be very clear: Public funds should support public education. But this bill, which would authorize $300 million to support education in the District of Columbia, includes an authorization for the expenditure of $100 million over 5 years to enable a tiny fraction of D.C. students to attend private schools. We have been told that the purpose of this bill is to help D.C. children get a better education. But House Republicans passed legislation earlier this year that slashes billions of dollars from educational programs across the country. In H.R. 1, which passed the House in February, House Republicans cut $5.7 billion from the Pell Grant program, $1 billion from Head Start, $757 million from Federal Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants, $694 million from Title I-A grants, and $100 million from the 21st Century Community Learning Centers. Under these Republican cuts, nearly 44,000 students from the District of Columbia could see their Pell Grants reduced, 700 would lose their Head Start placements, 500 could face reduced or eliminated after-school placements, and 2,500 would lose supplemental educational services.

Remarkably now, after voting to leave so many behind, the Republican leadership wants to authorize $100 million in new spending just for private schools in the District as part of a $300 million authorization for education in that one district. And the majority does not even pay for any part of this $300 million bill. Let me be clear on this point: There is no offset for this bill. For that reason, H.R. 471 also appears to violate the legislative protocols issued by the majority with such fanfare at the beginning of this Congress. So all the rhetoric supposedly justifying massive cuts to education funding, all the talks about budget constraints, about tightening our belts, and about making sacrifices, all that goes out the window when the majority wants to give $100 million in taxpayer funds to private schools.

Also problematic is that the D.C. voucher program has not resulted in better student achievement. The Institute for Education Sciences evaluated this program and found that in 2010, there was no overall statistically significant impact on student achievement in reading or math. By comparison, reading and math test scores did improve among students enrolled in the District's public schools and its public charter schools from 2007 to 2010.

The bill is also a direct assault on D.C. home rule. The Speaker did not consult with the District's representative or its elected officials before introducing the bill. Our committee did not receive testimony from the mayor of the District before we marked up this bill. And the Republicans have not introduced a national voucher bill because using taxpayer dollars to fund private schools is highly unpopular and has failed in every referendum placed on State ballots.

Despite all of these arguments against the bill, to me, the most significant problem is that it diverts funds away from educational programs that help all of the District's 70,000 students. Instead, the bill would use a lottery system to award vouchers to send about 1.3 percent of District students to private schools. I know there are Members on the other side of the aisle who are truly concerned about the education of our Nation's children, and they have a sincere desire to help students of the District of Columbia. But we should help all of the students. We should provide a high-quality education for all of them, and we should support continued improvements that raise all student achievement.

I have said it over and over again: The greatest threat to our national security is the failure to properly educate every single one of our children, every one of them. We should not adopt a measure that spends $100 million so that about 1,000 students can go to private schools. And as a graduate of public schools and a longtime advocate of quality public education, as one who has sat on a charter school board, I agree with the President's statement of the administration's policy which opposes creating or expanding a voucher program and asserts that the ``Federal Government should focus its attention and available resources on improving the quality of public schools for all students.'' Because this bill does not do that, I urge my colleagues to reject H.R. 471 in its current form.

Mr. Speaker, later during this debate, my distinguished colleague Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, who represents the District of Columbia, will offer an amendment to redirect funding for private schools to improve public education for all of the District's students. This amendment is a thoughtful improvement, and I urge all Members to support it.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CUMMINGS. In regards to what was just stated by the gentleman, we care about all these children. And it would be helpful if $5.7 billion was not slashed from the Pell Grants when these kids get to college.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, it is not a false dichotomy when, through H.R. 1, $1.8 billion is being slashed from the Head Start budget, causing 218,220 Head Start students to not get a start.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, most respectfully to our Speaker, I know his intentions are very good and honorable, and I wanted to be clear on this side of the aisle, Mr. Speaker, that we care about every single child being educated and becoming all that God meant for them to be, too. That is why we oppose the $1.08 billion cut from Head Start in H.R. 1 and the $5.7 billion cut from the Federal Pell Grant program.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CUMMINGS. I yield myself such time as I may consume.

Let me say this, Mr. Speaker. The ranking member said that basically this is a gift to the District of Columbia, and you know, the chairman of the committee--and I would appreciate it if he would take into consideration--while handing the District of Columbia $20 million in vouchers, H.R. 1, which he voted for, would take from the District of Columbia now $2.39 million from the D.C.'s title I funding, $500,000 for the funding for the 21st Century Community Learning Centers. This is just from the District of Columbia; $23.5 million from Pell Grants so that when these kids get through the system like he just said, they would be able to have some money to go to school; but H.R. 1 takes away $845 per year. That's a lot of money for a college student. $5.7 million from Federal supplemental educational opportunity grants, $3.92 million from Head Start programs which would disallow 700 Head Start students from going to Head Start.

So when you talk about giving a gift, I mean, that's one thing; but just in Pell Grants alone you've taken away from the very people that you say you support.

And, you know, let's just be fair about this. Mr. Speaker, this is about every child. I've said it in committee, and I'll say it again. There is nobody on this side of the aisle who wants more for every child to have an education and have a good education than we do; and so hopefully this matter will be resolved, but this is not the way to do it.

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

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, let me say this: The last speaker said something that I found very offensive when he said it's about raw, gutter politics. I personally resent that, and the reason why I resent it is because it sends the wrong message on this floor.

We can have disagreements, but this is not about raw, gutter politics. This is about standing up for every child. I've said it over and over and over again. And I, as a product of public schools, and my children who have gone to charter schools and public schools, and I've sat on a charter school board, and living in an area in Baltimore where ``The Wire'' is filmed, I can tell you that this is not about raw, gutter politics. This is about the politics of lifting children up so that they can be the best that they can be. That's what this is all about.

And I've said it in committee and I'll say it over and over again: There is not one Member on this side who does not care about every single child. And when we talk about this program, this voucher program, one of the things that we need to consider is we're talking about right now about 1,012 kids. We're also talking about a charter school program with over 27,000 and counting. And it affects a lot more people. What we're trying to do is help as many kids as possible.

You talk about the graduation rates. The graduation rates for the charter schools are better than this voucher program graduation rates. And so what do we try to do?

We need to be trying to address things in the most effective and efficient manner. And so it's easy to talk about gutter politics. But what we're talking about is trying to help every child.

Now, you talked also about how we can take this money, children can take this money, when they get to college and go to various places, colleges; and you're right. But the fact is that you just voted in H.R. 1 to slash $845 per year. And I see students every year, the board I sit on, the college board in Baltimore where kids, for $845, that $845 would cause kids not to be able to attend college, period. So it's nice to lift them up.

First of all, we don't give them, we cut off money from the Head Start so they can't get the Head Start. We want children to even get to the point of being able to be in a position to go to high school. But then after they get out of high school--and it is not about gutter politics--after they get out of high school, we want to make sure that they're able to have the necessary funding to go forward. And so I don't consider what the other side is saying one bit.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Ms. NORTON. I am pleased to yield the gentleman another minute.

Mr. CUMMINGS. Let me be clear. I do not consider it gutter politics for the other side to argue what it's arguing. I believe there are philosophical differences, and that's okay. And we will differ. And I have never, not once, and I don't think anybody on this side has not once, said that we don't all want to lift our children up. That's what America's all about. That's how we became the great country that we are. For every child.

And again I say it: The worst thing, the greatest threat to our national security is our failure to properly educate every single one of our children. Leave no child behind.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, as I listened to our last speaker talk about teary-eyed parents, well, guess what: I see teary-eyed parents who want to put their kids in Head Start. I just saw them last week at a town hall meeting. H.R. 1 slashes over $1 billion from Head Start. They are in tears, too.

In my district, by the way, a total of 20,000 kids will not get Pell Grants or get $1,000 slashed per year from Pell Grants. They are in tears, too. Do you know why? Because they will drop out of school and many of them will never return to school because they don't have the money. They are in tears, too.

I believe with all my heart that the Speaker's intentions are good. You won't hear me say anything opposite of that. But, again, I am trying to figure out how do we take the dollars that we have and spend them in the most effective and efficient manner.

When we talk about the least of these, I really want to see kids get that head start that I am talking about; and, for the life of me, maybe I am missing something, I don't see how on the one hand we talk about these children that we love, how we want to embrace them and how we want to embrace their parents and bring joy to their hearts, but then take away the very money that would allow them to be able to get to where they have got to go.

So you are right that there was a time when people could not get in that schoolhouse door all over this country. My parents, they would be walking to school for 4 miles and other kids would come riding the bus spitting on them.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman has expired.

Ms. NORTON. I am pleased to yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. CUMMINGS. And they were unable to get an education.

Mr. Speaker, what I am saying is let's embrace all of our kids. I want for my colleagues' kids, Mr. Speaker, the same thing I would want for mine. This program affects about 1,000 kids. Well, just in charter schools, there are over 27,000 in the District.

So I would just support the gentlewoman's amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CUMMINGS. Mr. Speaker, the final amendment before us would accomplish two important goals: First, the amendment would cut the funding authorized by H.R. 471 in half, thereby reducing the Federal deficit over the next 5 years by $150 million below what was authorized for expenditure in the base text of H.R. 471.

We have heard a lot of rhetoric from the other side today, Mr. Speaker. But one thing is clear: Voting for this motion will save $150 million over 5 years.

So the question for my Republican colleagues is will you be true to your promises to address the deficit, or will you put these promises aside to support a pet project that advances a narrow ideological agenda?

Second, instead of spending money on a miniscule fraction of students who would receive a voucher, this amendment would target scarce Federal resources to areas where they would do the most good: D.C. public schools, charter schools, and special education/IDEA activities.

As we have discussed, students participating in the existing D.C. voucher program have shown no statistically significant improvement in reading or math skills. By contrast, students in the D.C. public schools and charter schools have shown significant gains over the last few years. This amendment would direct funds to support schools that have been proven to improve student achievement. This amendment would also provide funds to support special education and IDEA-related programs in the District.

IDEA funding goes toward critical services for children with disabilities, such as early intervention, support for special education teachers, and assistance to help students gain access to a suitable curriculum.

Since the enactment of IDEA, achievement among students served by this program has improved dramatically, but more progress must be made.

As Mayor Gray discussed Monday in his State of the District address, D.C. has been unable to serve all of its special needs kids in public facilities and is paying nearly $250 million to send students to nonpublic schools that can serve disabled students' unique educational needs. This amendment would help D.C. better serve students who need special education services in the public system.

Importantly, let it be clear that if you vote ``yes'' on this motion, the amendment it proposes will be voted on immediately following this debate. That vote will be followed by a vote on final passage of the bill. Adoption of this amendment will not delay consideration of this legislation; and, therefore, I urge my colleagues to vote for deficit reduction. I urge my colleagues to direct scarce Federal dollars where they will do the most good.

I urge a ``yes'' vote on this final amendment to the bill.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT