Congressional Budget for the United States Government for Fiscal Year 2005

CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET FOR THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005

AMENDMENT NO. 2719

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report.

The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

The Senator from Washington [Mrs. Murray], for herself, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. Lieberman, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Corzine, Mr. Levin, Mr. Dodd, Ms. Stabenow, Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Harkin, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Pryor, Mr. Reed, Mr. Dayton, Mr. Kohl, and Ms. Landrieu, proposes an amendment numbered 2719.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that reading of the amendment be dispensed with.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

The amendment is as follows:

On page 3, line 9, increase the amount by $516,000,000.
On page 3, line 10, increase the amount by $13,244,000,000.
On page 3, line 11, increase the amount by $2,924,000,000.
On page 3, line 12, increase the amount by $516,000,000.
On page 3, line 17, increase the amount by $516,000,000.
On page 3, line 18, increase the amount by $13,244,000,000.
On page 3, line 19, increase the amount by $2,924,000,000.
On page 3, line 20, increase the amount by $516,000,000.
On page 4, line 20, increase the amount by $516,000,000.
On page 4, line 21, increase the amount by $13,244,000,000.
On page 4, line 22, increase the amount by $2,924,000,000.
On page 4, line 23, increase the amount by $516,000,000.
On page 5, line 3, decrease the amount by $516,000,000.
On page 5, line 4, decrease the amount by $13,760,000,000.
On page 5, line 5, decrease the amount by $16,684,000,000.
On page 5, line 6, decrease the amount by $17,200,000,000.
On page 5, line 7, decrease the amount by $17,200,000,000.
On page 5, line 11, decrease the amount by $516,000,000.
On page 5, line 12, decrease the amount by $13,760,000,000.
On page 5, line 13, decrease the amount by $16,684,000,000.
On page 5, line 14, decrease the amount by $17,200,000,000.
On page 5, line 15, decrease the amount by $17,200,000,000.

At the end of Title III, insert the following:

SEC. . RESERVE FUND FOR NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND ACT EDUCATION PROGRAMS.

The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate shall revise the aggregates, functional totals, allocations to the Committee on Appropriations of the Senate, discretionary spending limits, and other appropriate levels and limits in this resolution by up to $8,600,000,000 in budget authority for fiscal year 2005, and by the amount of outlays flowing therefrom in 2005 and subsequent years, for a bill, joint resolution, motion, amendment, or conference report that provides additional fiscal year 2005 discretionary appropriations, in excess of levels provided in this resolution, for Department of Education programs in the No Child Left Behind Act (P.L. 107-110).

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the following Senators be added as cosponsors: Senators KENNEDY, LIEBERMAN, MIKULSKI, CORZINE, LEVIN, DODD, STABENOW, CLINTON, KERRY, HARKIN, SCHUMER, PRYOR, REED of Rhode Island, Kohl, Dayton, and LANDRIEU.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, parents, teachers, and students throughout Washington State and across our entire country are looking for our help today as they try to implement the No Child Left Behind Act.

Unfortunately, the budget before the Senate by the Republicans falls $8.6 billion short of what our schools and our students need this year. It is yet another broken promise to our schools, our students, and our families.

We can do better. That is why I am offering this amendment this morning. I have visited schools in every corner of my State and I know firsthand that our educators everywhere are working harder than ever to help their students to meet these new accountable requirements. They want to do a good job. They want to do what is right. I also know it is not fair for the Federal Government to leave our schools without the funding they need to meet these Federal mandates we place on them.

Today our State and local budgets everywhere are stretched thin. Our local communities cannot afford to make up the difference between what our schools were promised and what this budget actually provides. That is why I am offering this amendment today to fully fund the No Child Left Behind Act. My amendment tells students, teachers, and parents that the Federal Government will be a full partner with our local schools as they carry out the new law we passed.

I am not asking for some unheard of amount of funding. I am simply asking we provide the funding we promised our schools 2 years ago. As everyone knows, the No Child Left Behind Act increased accountability for schools so we can ensure that all of our children will receive a high-quality education. However, accountability is a two-way street. We cannot demand that schools follow all of these new mandates and look the other way when it is time to write a check. If we expect our schools to uphold their part of the bargain, then we have to do our part and fund these requirements.

Let's not forget, the funding levels in the No Child Left Behind Act were based on a bipartisan agreement on what it would take to implement this new law. It is hard to believe we are here 2 years later and the Federal Government is still not doing its part.

This is especially important today because States are now confronting the true cost of implementing this law. The only study that looked at the actual cost to the States of the No Child Left Behind Act was conducted in Ohio. That analysis estimates that the cost to Ohio of complying with the law will reach $1.447 billion annually by fiscal year 2010.

Again, the President's budget request and this Republican budget fail to live up to the promises we made in this Senate just 2 years ago when we passed No Child Left Behind. That is why we need to pass this amendment today. This amendment adds $8.6 billion to function 500 to fully fund the No Child Left Behind Act and to improve overall funding for educational programs.

I am sure we will hear those on the other side saying their budget increases funding for No Child Left Behind by $1.2 billion over last year. It does. But it is still $8.6 billion short of what our schools need. That shortfall is going to have real and painful effects on all of our students unless we fix this budget.

Mr. President, 4.6 million low-income children in this country will not get the help they need under title I unless we pass this amendment. In my home State alone, the difference between the President's request and the promise of No Child Left Behind means 28,000 low-income students will be left behind.

This budget will result in fewer students being served by a number of important programs. That is because the Republican budget freezes funding for programs but those freezes mean real cuts in service when you factor in that we have rising enrollment and costs to our schools. At the end of the day, the Republican budget will mean that fewer students will be served in impact aid, dropout prevention, school counseling, afterschool, teacher quality, migrant education, and rural education.

Let me give one example of what those cuts mean for our students. This budget will leave nearly 20,000 children in Washington State alone and 1.4 million children nationwide without a safe, adult-supervised environment after school. We can do better. My amendment shows how.

My amendment will live up to the commitments we made to our students when the No Child Left Behind Act was passed. It fully funds programs such as title I, English language acquisition, afterschool, and rural education. If this amendment passes, more than 2 million additional needy children will be served by title I, as we promised, when we passed No Child Left Behind.

My amendment will mean more than 38,000 children in Washington State and 1.4 million students nationwide will have access to safe, adult-supervised afterschool programs.

My amendment is also fiscally responsible because it also asks for $8.6 billion in deficit reduction, something many of our colleagues have talked about.

Our priority should be educating our students. This amendment reflects that priority because both the education increase and deficit funding reduction are taken by closing tax loopholes. During the debate on my amendment, I suspect we will hear a whole list of reasons why we cannot give our kids the funding we promised them. I want to debunk some of those plans right now.

We will hear some argue that we have already increased funding for education to a high enough level. I say to any one of my colleagues, go to your local schools in your communities and ask them if they agree with that. See what type of reaction you get. Let's remember, we have never fully funded the No Child Left Behind Act-never. How can we ask our schools today to comply with the law when we are not holding up our end of the bargain?

Let's not forget that the only reason we have reached this level of funding is because many in Congress pushed and pushed last year to do better than the President's budget. If we had accepted the President's funding request, there would be at least $10.7 billion less for education than was appropriated by Congress and $6.6 billion less for No Child Left Behind.

Another claim we will hear during this debate is that if my amendment is accepted, we will come back and ask for more funding next year. That is exactly what the law called for when we passed it. The requirements on our schools ratchet up throughout the lifetime of this bill, including requirements to increase test scores and to have an increased number of highly qualified teachers that we require under the law. That is why the funding in the bill was slated to increase annually as well and why we are now falling further and further behind as we fail to live up to that commitment. That is why we are hearing from our teachers in our schools today. As parts of this law become implemented, they have to live up to them.

If my amendment is accepted, the request for fiscal year 2006 will not have to play catchup again as we have done for the past 2 fiscal years.

Finally, we will hear opponents argue that States and schools do not really need all of this funding. I disagree. The bottom line is that our schools do not need more excuses from Washington, DC. They need the funding we promised and my amendment will provide it.

As I conclude, I want to be very clear what is at stake. This amendment will determine whether we keep the funding promises we all made when we voted for No Child Left Behind. Those who vote against this amendment will have to explain to parents and teachers and students and families and communities they represent why they refused to provide the funding we promised in the No Child Left Behind Act.

If any of my colleagues want to argue against fully funding No Child Left Behind, that of course is their right, but I will fight with everything I have to give our schools the funding we promised so this law can work. Our students deserve nothing less.

I urge my colleagues to stand up with all of us who are working hard to make that law work for all of our students. I urge my colleagues to vote for the Murray amendment.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. KENNEDY. First, I see my friend and colleague from Montana wants to address the Senate. I would like to comment after he concludes. But I first of all want to thank the good Senator from Washington for offering this amendment.

There is varied experience that is brought to the Senate by Members of this body. But we are listening to a voice who has been a teacher and also a school board member, and prior to entering the Senate probably spent more time in the area of education, particularly young children, certainly, than any other Member of this body.

When she speaks about education and what happens in the classrooms and to the teachers, she is talking on the basis of a lifetime experience. She makes a compelling case. I welcome the opportunity to join with her.

I want to take a moment of the Senate's time and ask whether the kind of situation we are facing in Massachusetts is typical of what she is finding in her State or if she has heard about it in other States.

In my own State of Massachusetts, we passed effectively a "no child left behind" bill 4 years prior to the time we passed it here in the Senate. As a result, over a 7-year period, we find Massachusetts is No. 1 in the country in the fourth grade and No. 1 in the eighth grade. We reduced the disparities with regard to race more than any other State. It is because of those accepted concepts which the Senator from Washington has talked about: smaller class size, well-trained teachers, supplementary services, parental involvement, evaluation of the children themselves, and support from the local communities.

These are the things for which she has fought. But when you fail to do that-I have here before me a copy of the Boston Globe newspaper of February 19, which talks about what is happening in the region: "Deep Cut in School Systems Taking a Toll on Educators." It lists school systems feeling the effects because of the cutbacks, because of the failure of us to provide for No Child Left Behind, plus what is happening in the State.

Boston has lost 396 teachers. They have closed six schools. They have cut the budgets on individual schools and eliminated programs.

For Braintree, they have lost 56 teachers and increased class sizes.

Bridgewater-Raynham Regional has lost 35 teachers, increased class sizes, added a $175 bus fee, $200 athletic fee, and a $50 extracurricular fee, being paid by parents.

Fitchburg lost 47 teachers, increased class sizes, added a $180 annual bus fee, and raised the athletic fees from $30 to $40.

Haverhill lost 143 teachers, closed 6 schools, increased class sizes, eliminated full-day kindergarten, added a $250 music fee, and raised athletic fees from $50 to $300. As we all know, in education, if the child works in music for 3 to 4 years, their average goes up 50 to 75 points in their test to go on to college.

The list goes on.

Lynn lost 85 teachers, closed 3 schools, eliminated full-day kindergarten and prekindergarten.

Pittsfield lost 51 teachers, increased class sizes, eliminated afterschool programs, added a $100 student activity fee.

Let me read this and ask whether this is something the Senator has seen. Here we have this extraordinary superintendent,

Thomas Giancristiano, who has been in education for 30 years.

Let me read from the story:

On good nights, the superintendent fretted. On the bad nights sleep vanished. Hours before dawn, thousands of dollars and cents reeled in his head. Thomas Giancristiano would lie in his bed in his Peabody home, eyes open and red, and make deals with the school finance devil.

How many custodians do we need, the Winthrop superintendent would ask. How many secretaries? If we keep the libraries closed, can we keep one more kindergarten teacher?

That is what is happening out in the schools. Men and women who have worked a lifetime trying to educate our children, this is what they are going through.

Going back to the article, he then saw the cutbacks that took place in his school district:

It was a hard moment to watch: A confident, likeable, optimist with 30 years of education experience was faced with
cutting 17 teaching jobs. He chose instead to cut himself.

Giancristiano's voice was steady, his pique never showing. Only his reddening eyes displayed his anger.

"Either you do not support me, or you do not support your children," he read from notes.

This is happening across the country. This is what this budget is all about. We have a chance to do something for these schools or we can provide the additional kinds of tax breaks for the wealthiest individuals.

The amendment of the Senator from Washington is responsible because it pays for itself and also helps reduce the deficit. I commend the Senator. I intend to speak longer, but I am just wondering, since I listened to the Senator speak and since she is back home every weekend talking to parents and schoolteachers and superintendents, whether the kind of stories I mentioned very briefly are happening in her State and are having a similar kind of impact on the men and women who have devoted their lives to provide greater educational opportunity to children in the State of Washington.

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Massachusetts for defining for all of us what I think we are seeing across our country in every school and every classroom where the morale among our educators who are responsible for caring for our children every day has declined dramatically.

The Senator will remember not that long ago when the Senate passed a bill to increase class sizes in kindergarten, first, and second grades. As I traveled around my State at that time, teachers were so enthusiastic. They were excited about being given the opportunity to help their young students learn to write and learn to do math so they could be successful in life.

That atmosphere has changed dramatically. Now you travel around to classrooms and they are begging and pleading for help. Every teacher says to me: I want to do the right thing. I want to be accountable. I want my students to be able to succeed. I want to make this work. But my class size is twice as large. I get less time with parents. I am paying more out of my own pocket for basic supplies. We don't have enough books for all of our students. And even more so, I am spending every single second teaching to this test because my students don't have art and music and other things that help them be well-rounded adults.

We can change this. We can make it better. We can do what we promised 2 years ago and fund this and really make a difference in our children's lives.

I thank the Senator from Massachusetts for his question. I yield 10 minutes to the Senator from Montana.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, the Senator from New Hampshire has strewn a number of arguments across the floor that need to be responded to. Every one of them has a very legitimate, responsible answer.

I used to teach preschool, and I am reminded of the kids who came in and threw all their toys on the floor and then trying to figure out which one to pick up first to try to make it look better. Frankly, there are so many arguments out here that I want to respond to-and I know the Senator from Louisiana wants to respond to-but every one of these arguments can legitimately and clearly be denied.

First, let me respond that this amendment does not raise taxes despite the rhetoric from the other side. This amendment closes loopholes, just as the Republican budget requires within itself in order to pay for this. That is legitimate. It is not raising taxes. It is closing loopholes. I think it is an argument all of us in the Chamber understand.

Senator Landrieu has been listening carefully to the Senator from New Hampshire on his argument about funding and funding increases, and she is going to respond to that. I will yield her time to do that.

But let me point out, when President Clinton came into office in 1993 and 1994-and the Republican chart that was up only talked about 1993 and 1994; it did not talk about the tremendous increases later-the President's No. 1 priority at that time was to balance the budget, which was extremely out of whack. President Bush, when he came into office-and that chart was showing us the numbers of increases at that time-his No. 1 priority was to cut taxes. That is the difference.

I remind my colleagues on the other side, the reason the budgets for education were increased is because Democrats demanded it. I know they have forgotten this, but Democrats were in control in the Senate from about June of 2001 until January of 2003, when much of those increases were in place, because we came to the floor and said it needed to be done.

I know my colleague, Senator Landrieu from Louisiana, is here. I yield to her such time as she needs to respond.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Minnesota and all of our Democratic colleagues who have spoken. When the Senator from Minnesota was speaking, I couldn't help but think of someone he remembers well. During the whole debate of No Child Left Behind, Senator Paul Wellstone, who was on the floor during that debate saying: We are giving a promise I don't believe we are going to keep. Everyone assured him: No, no, we will put this accountability in place. We will fund this.

The Senator from Minnesota speaks from his heart, as I know Senator Wellstone would have admired him for, in reminding all of us what is happening to our children and to our schools because we haven't kept the promise all of us said we would keep when the debate took place several years ago.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. MURRAY. Mr. President, I know we are going to have a vote in a few minutes. I will wrap up a few things. There has been a lot of stuff strewn across the floor about this. We need to remember what this amendment is all about. It is about keeping a commitment all of us made when we voted to pass No Child Left Behind.

We told our schools, essentially our children, our communities, our families across this Nation that we were going to put in place accountability; that we wanted our students to learn, we wanted them to achieve, and we wanted them to be able to go on and get the skills they needed to be out in the job market.

The Senator from Iowa talked about Microsoft and Boeing and making sure we can be competitive. The best thing for Microsoft and Boeing to be competitive is to have an educated workforce of young people who have the skills they need to come in and do the kinds of jobs to be competitive in an international marketplace.

When we passed the No Child Left Behind Act, we said we were going to put those standards out there, but that was a two-pronged promise, and the other promise was to fully fund No Child Left Behind.

I have been amazed, sitting on the floor all morning listening to the other side say: We never intended to fully fund No Child Left Behind. I am shocked. I thought during the debate we had an agreement that we would have accountability and that we would have funding. Now to come back 2 years later and say, We never intended to fully fund this act, what kind of promise is that to our children? We are going to make you take tests and meet standards, and every year we are going to increase those standards and we expect you to live up to it. But here in Congress we can get behind some kind of statement that we never intended to fully fund it? That doesn't fly in my home.

I think it is imperative that we face the American people and tell them that when we in the Senate make commitments, we mean it. When we make a promise to fund education, to make sure our students have the skills they need, and they can meet those accountability requirements, we keep it. That is what this amendment is about. It is as simple and as clear as that.

I heard those on the other side argue that this is not a real amendment. I heard them say that it just sets up language. The language that I use in this amendment is the exact language that the other side has in the budget to set up a reserve fund for transportation, to set up a reserve fund for Iraq and Afghanistan funding, to set up a reserve fund for fire suppression. Are those not real, either? If those are not real, then I accept the argument that mine is not real. But if they want to stand out here and say we are fighting for fire suppression, that their budget covers Iraq and Afghanistan, that their budget covers transportation, then this amendment covers the No Child Left Behind funding.

This amendment is real. It is exactly real. No one can hide behind the fact it is not real. It is real to every child in every classroom across this country.

There is a revolt going on in this country. Any Senator who has been home and been in a school knows it. Any Senator who has talked with legislators at their homes-and I know there have been discussions in Virginia, Utah, and many other States across the country-knows they do not want this mandate anymore and to take off the handcuffs because we have not funded it.

We have not lived up to our obligation to our children, to our communities, to our families, to our States, and to everyone else in this world who cares about education because we have not funded this bill.

My amendment is basic and simple. It says we will follow up on a promise we made 2 years ago to fully fund No Child Left Behind. I am more than at ease to go home and tell my constituents that I am fighting to make sure their children get a good education and we follow up on a promise. That is the decision every Senator is going to have to make when they vote on this amendment. Whose side are you on, on the side of making sure we keep our promises, making sure our children have the ability to learn and we do not just tell them they have to live up to standards, or on the side of hiding behind smoke and mirrors?

I intend to go home and tell my families in every community across the State that I am going to fight every single day I am here to make sure their children have quality teachers, their children have quality classrooms, their children have the ability to have good curriculum, their children are able to learn the skills they need from highly qualified teachers because that is what we promised them in this bill.

This amendment is about keeping promises. I urge my colleagues to vote for the Murray-Kennedy amendment. I ask for the yeas and nays.