Michael Castle

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Leach], chairman of the Committee on Banking and Financial Services. (Mr. LEACH asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I would like to start by standing in praise of our distinguished colleague, the ranking member of our subcommittee, the gentleman from New York [Mr. Flake]. We said goodbye to him on the floor about a week ago and here he is back again. But that shows us something about just how good he is.

Mr. CASTLE. I yield to the gentleman from New York.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Smith], in a sense of fairness and comity, because he is on the other side of this.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Roemer].

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, reclaiming my time, I thank the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. Smith]. Obviously, that kind of discussion is money that would be foregone, not spent. But it does not use the offset of the revenue that comes in from the jobs which are created, which produces the $24 billion net surplus to the Federal coffers as a result of the tax payments which are made. We have dealt with the issues of the distorting of free trade, does it do that. No, it does not. It is actually making trade more market driven than it otherwise would be. The so-called tied aid export promotion offered by foreign governments worldwide has declined 75 percent by 1991, a dramatic U.S. policy success. We have heard some mention of that. The gentleman from California [Mr. Dreier] is very concerned about that issue, and I am too. I think we have had some modicum of success in trying to deal with that issue and drive it down as well as some of the other things that we have done, and I think that is the way that we should go. We deal with Eximbank's policy on domestic content. The bank currently only finances products at no more than 15 percent foreign content. The bank will only finance the U.S. portion of the export. So we have paid attention to what happens in the United States of America. We are paying more attention to the environmental guidelines. Quite frankly, I think a lot of this is because of the pressure which has been applied by the Congress of the United States. We are concerned about labor laws. We are concerned about jobs. So we are concerned about environmental laws and regulations in this country. We are raising these issues. And this is one agency which has responded to it and which has come forward and said that we are going to make the changes, and they have started to make the changes and, in my judgment, is worthy of the support of each and every one of us in Congress. We do have, I believe, 7 amendments which will be coming up here shortly. I hope the Members will listen to the discussion of those 7 amendments, keeping in mind the mannerisms in which this bank has already worked and whether or not we should make substantial changes which could be harmful to it. And then at the end of it all, I hope we can have votes where we need to on the amendments and vote for full support of the reauthorization of the Eximbank for the next 4 years.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. I will also be brief. I have tried to point out throughout this discussion today that the Export-Import Bank has a very positive financial benefit, not just to members of board of directors or officers of corporations, but to many employees throughout the country, and even the revenues of the United States of America, due to the exports which we have. The amendment, if it is to be treated seriously, in my judgment may be misplaced. If we are going to have the members of the board of directors do community work, why do we not have the stockholders do community work? They are the true beneficiaries of whatever this particular program may be, or even the workers, it may be argued, if we are going to extend it to this group.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the distinguished gentleman from New York [Mr. Flake], the ranking member of the Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy.

Mr. CASTLE. Reclaiming my time, Mr. Chairman, extending it even more, we could talk about farmers who receive agricultural subsidies, Medicare recipients. There are a whole group of people who for various reasons we have elected in Congress to be able to help in some way or another, all of which programs are judged on their merits. For that reason, I would hope that this is an amendment which could be withdrawn. I think the gentleman does make a valid point. I would hope that the Eximbank is doing a better job of managing how its various loans are handled. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Brady].

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Maryland for yielding. I thank everybody who has had anything to do with putting all of this together. The problems of pfiesteria and algae, which we have seen this summer all the way from parts of New York all the way perhaps down to Florida, have been tremendous. In my judgment, the only way to really coordinate and to attack from the point of view of doing something about it, worrying about what it is doing to both fish and to human beings, is to do it on a national level. We simply had to shift some of the funding, and the subcommittee has been extremely cooperative in helping to put this together. Experts have testified on the Hill today. The various States are getting involved in trying to coordinate their efforts also. I think for all these reasons we are finally beginning to address the problems that may be from the point or nonpoint sources. We do not know. We are going to find it, and this is a tremendous start.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the fine work of an outstanding, dedicated, and caring group of Delawareans: The Delaware Volunteer Fireman's Association. For myself, and on behalf of the citizens of the First State, I would like to thank them for their tireless service. This weekend in Rehoboth Beach, firefighters from all across Delaware will gather and celebrate their 77 years of outstanding leadership and unselfish devotion to their communities and State. These dedicated men and women train in preventing and fighting fires and perform emergency medical services for our citizens. It is because of this training and commitment that Delaware's volunteer fire and emergency medical services are ranked as one of the best in the country. This type of commitment to public service is uncommon among individuals. I commend these volunteers for their exemplary record of public and community assistance. They are truly a model for all of us who serve in public life. Their commitment to the cause of volunteer firefighters will find a permanent place in the Delaware volunteer fire service history. As the Delaware Volunteer Fireman's Association and Ladies Auxiliary gather to celebrate its 77th anniversary of leadership and service, I hope they will realize how deeply their efforts are appreciated

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I rise to salute and pay tribute to an outstanding and caring volunteer association in the State of Delaware. The Ladies Auxiliary of the Delaware Volunteer Firemen's Association. This weekend, the ladies auxiliary will celebrate its 60th year of service to the citizens of the First State. Their history of volunteerism began on September 9, 1937, when the first president, Nan Laws Woods of the Five Points Fire Co. Ladies Auxiliary, struck the first gavel establishing the ladies' auxiliary of the Delaware Volunteer Firemen's Association. The auxiliary encompassed many of the fire companies in Delaware and pledged their combined efforts to help the firemen of Delaware as well as those whose homes had been damaged by fire. Organized efforts included contributions to burn centers, food, and clothing to burn victims as well as financial support. During the war years, the auxiliary assisted the Red Cross by sending Christmas packages to soldiers. The members also encouraged the purchase of war bonds. Returning to peacetime, the auxiliary focused on fund raising efforts to assist local fire companies. Throughout their years of service, tired firefighters have come to rely on the meals and beverages served by the auxiliary during fires and emergencies. When the gavel falls to open the 60th annual meeting in Rehoboth Beach, it is fitting that Mrs. Barbara Lewis, the current president will preside. President Lewis is also from the Five Points Fire Co., the home of the Mrs. Nan Woods. I offer my congratulations not only as a Member of the House of Representatives but as a former Governor who appreciates the leadership, teamwork and commitment of this association in their service to the people of Delaware. I wish them many more years of success in their endeavors as they continue to assist volunteer fire and emergency services throughout Delaware.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. Rogers] for yielding. I very much appreciate the Commerce, State, Justice appropriations bill. There are several things in there of special interest to me. One is $5 million for the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which is truly critical funding for the Nation's primary resource for child protection. Also, something else I was interested in is ``no frills'' prison language restricting Federal funds from being spent on prisoner amenities such as martial arts instruction, weight rooms, in-cell television, expensive electrical instruments. I also appreciate the NOAA funding as it pertains to the Chesapeake Bay Restoration Program, which I think is vitally important for that area and some of the troubled water areas we have on the East Coast at the present time. Finally, the manufacturing extension program, which is sort of a new program, but it is the program which has become I think a cost effective, Federal-State, public-private partnership that helps small and midsized American manufacturers to become modernized to compete in the demanding global marketplace. These are just four different measures which this committee listened to and which I think can improve life in America. And I am very thankful to all the members of the committee who helped put this together.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back the balance of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore [Mr. Pease]. The question is on the motion offered by the gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Castle] that the House suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 2414, as amended.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Leach], chairman of the Committee on Banking and Financial Services.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I have already spoken to the issue raised by the delegates who have been so eloquent in carrying their message here today. I think the historical perspective of what they say and what the District of Columbia says does make a great deal of sense. In fact, the more I hear, the more I like it, and we should go forward with that as soon as we can. I would like to close not necessarily by talking about the legislation, but talking about the distinguished gentleman from New York [Mr. Flake], the ranking member, with whom I have worked for some 3 years now in the position of chair and ranking member. I do not know of any working relationship in this Congress which has been stronger than ours. We have never had a disparaging word between us. We have been in sync on practically everything. One time when he got rolled on something, he told me, and I got rolled on it almost as rapidly, on something we were not sure we really wanted to do. He has been just an absolute pleasure to work with. I thought of presenting some sort of resolution having all 435 Members urging the distinguished gentleman from New York [Mr. Flake] to stay in Congress, but I thought his church might vote about 3,000 to nothing as opposed to 435 to nothing and perhaps be able to overwhelm us. We will miss him tremendously. I do not know if this will be his last piece of legislation or not. If we can conjure up some other trouble out there, we probably will, because we have had a habit of doing that, but in case it is, I just want to give public recognition to one of the fine public servants in America today who has been called to a higher calling, if you will, and I respect that, much as it troubles me to have to lose him on the committee and in the Congress of the United States. He has obviously been tremendously helpful in the preparation and presentation of this legislation, which, by the way, is not being heard here for the first time. We have been working on this for over 2 years together, and we have had many, many discussions with the Treasury and the mint working out and refining all of the details. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. I would like to just state that the delegate from the District of Columbia and I have had some very fruitful and meaningful discussions about this, and I am in agreement with her. We are going to cosponsor along, I am sure, with the delegates from the insular areas legislation that would hopefully be able to be added to this at some point in the future. I think there would be some historical and educational aspects of that that could be helpful to the young people of our country. We do have to go back to Treasury and do some clearance, but we will be glad to go to work on that right away. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the gentleman from Oklahoma [Mr. Lucas], another Member who has been just of tremendous help in dealing with the issues of coinage, monetary policy, and related issues of our subcommittee.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 2414) to provide for a 10-year circulating commemorative coin program to commemorate each of the 50 States, and for other purposes, as amended.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Washington [Mr. Metcalf]. Let me just say, in matters of monetary policy and currency and coins, I do not think there is anyone other than the next two speakers on our side who have shown as much interest on this subcommittee. We appreciate that work.

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to bring H.R. 2414 before the House today. H.R. 2414, which is known as the 50 States Commemorative Coin Program Act of 1997, would authorize the United States Mint to strike over a 10-year period a series of 50 quarters that would preserve the portrait of George Washington on the front or obverse side of the coin, and retain all the traditional mottoes and identifying marks the current quarter carries. On the back or reverse side of the quarter, there would be a series of designs honoring each of the 50 States. The coins would be issued at the rate of 5 each year, starting in 1999, first in the order of States' ratification of the Constitution, then in order of their admission to the Union. Such a program would reinvigorate our circulating coin program for both the public and collectors in a responsible, affordable way. In addition, it would be educational and fun, would promote pride among the States, and would be a winner financially for the Government. Mr. Speaker, my subcommittee, the Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy of the House Committee on Banking and Financial Services, has been studying the concept of a circulating commemorative coin since 1997. We have held public hearings, authorized an independent study conducted by Coopers & Lybrand, which is substantial, and have worked with the Treasury Department on all aspects of this issue. We are confident that all questions regarding the design process, production, and public acceptance of the new quarters have been fully addressed. As Members may recall, the quarter, save for a brief commemorative design on its reverse for the 1975-76 bicentennial, has been unchanged since 1932, the longest period for any coin in U.S. history. Interestingly, the current quarter itself was intended as a circulating commemorative, scheduled to circulate only one year to commemorate the 200th anniversary of Washington's birthday. This country has not had a circulating commemorative coin since the very popular Bicentennial quarter. While that coin commemorated the bicentennial of the country's birth and was not designed as a fundraising mechanism, it was very popular with both the general public and with coin collectors. Of the 1.67 billion quarters struck, only 20 percent are still in circulation, so approximately 330 million dollars' worth of coins were saved by people and taken out of circulation. The fact that people save the coins saves the Government money. It represented a cost avoidance, meaning the Treasury did not need to borrow that money to pay interest on the national debt. Although this was not the original intent of this project, it turns out, based on the study commissioned last year by the Treasury Department and conducted by the accounting firm of Coopers & Lybrand, that minting a circulating commemorative quarter offering the 50 States would be a pretty impressive moneymaker. Here is how the mint will earn an estimated $11 million annually, $110 million over the life of the program, from the sale of silver proof sets of the quarter. The Coopers & Lybrand study showed that, as with the Bicentennial quarter, the 50-State quarter will be very popular with the public. The study showed that while 51 percent of the 2,000 people surveyed said that they thought the program would be a good idea, 75 percent said they would collect some or all of the quarters. Because the study found that an overwhelming number of people would save the quarters, Coopers & Lybrand estimated that between 2.6 and 5.1 billion dollars' worth of quarters would be taken out of circulation, meaning this program could save taxpayers billions of dollars. Given that the survey excluded people under the age of 18, the entire universe of schoolchildren that might be expected to collect the coins, those figures seem very conservative. Estimates by the General Accounting Office and the Congressional Budget Office and the mint of the amount that would be collected are generally consistent with the Coopers & Lybrand study. It must be noted that these estimates are necessarily a little imprecise because nothing of this scope, on average, roughly 700 million quarters will be minted of each State's design, ever has been attempted in this country before. Our neighbor to the north, Canada, conducted a similar program in 1992 when that country issued a series of quarters commemorating the provinces. While the scale is much smaller, nearly all of these coins are said to have been removed from circulation by collectors so quickly that the supply of coins struck dried up in 3 months. Given this, the program will certainly be a financial benefit to the Government. The program will also draw the interest of all Americans. As my colleagues have seen in the news, there has been coverage of the 50- State coin proposal on news pages and feature pages and editorial pages in newspapers across the country. Residents of many States have already been speculating what symbols would best represent their State. In my home State of Delaware, the Wilmington News Journal conducted a contest in which Delawareans designed a number of creative suggestions, including an outline of the State, the old Cape Henlopen Lighthouse, the Delaware Blue Hen, and Caesar Rodney, who made a heroic ride to Philadelphia to vote in favor of American independence in 1776. The News Journal had well over 100 entries, and I am told that I should expect these designs in my office in coming days. As a matter of fact, they did a full feature in one of their sections in the paper on this subject. Even informal contests, like the one in Delaware, will encourage school children and all Americans to learn more about the history of their States and suggest designs for their State's quarter to the Treasury. The public will have a chance to discuss the symbols and history of the States, and this will produce an even greater interest in this coin program. It is important to point out that we have worked with the Department of Treasury to ensure that the design of the coins will be carefully managed to ensure that they maintain the high standards our coin designs have reflected over the years. Treasury Secretary Rubin and I are in agreement that all the new designs should be dignified. To that end, the legislation authorizing the new quarters stipulates that the Secretary, and I quote, ``shall not select any frivolous or inappropriate design.'' The bill also specifies that the Governors of the individual States, and I quote again, ``or such other State officials or group as the State may designate'' will consult with the Secretary of the Treasury, who will select the final designs. When each State's final decision choice is sent to Washington, it must be approved by both the Federal Commission of Fine Arts and the Citizens Commemorative Coin Advisory Commission, the latter chaired by the director of the mint, before going to the Treasury Secretary for final approval. In other words, the Secretary of the Treasury has complete authority to ensure that the designs are appropriate and reflect the goals of the program and the high standards of our Nation. Importantly, while the bill would have quarters struck in the order the States came into the Union, the quarters for the first year would represent Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, and Connecticut, there is provision for growth of the Union. The bill states that if any new State is admitted to the Union during the 10-year period when the commemorative quarters are being struck, the Secretary may, using the above guidelines, issue a circulating commemorative quarter for that State. Mr. Speaker, the 50 State Coin Program will promote State pride, reinvigorate interest in our circulating coinage, help educate our young people, and produce savings for the Treasury. It has been carefully developed and will be of real benefit to the Nation. I urge the immediate adoption of H.R. 2414. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time. MR. FLAKE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself as much time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleagues for the expedited scheduling of what I believe to be a truly exciting event in the history of United States coinage, the 50 States Commemorative Coin Program Act. This bill also marks the last time that I will have the opportunity to bring a bill to the floor as ranking member of the Subcommittee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy. Thus, it is both a proud and bittersweet occasion for me, particularly given the relationship that I have had with the gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Castle], chairman of this subcommittee. It has been a tremendous experience that we have shared. We have had a great opportunity to bring bills before the floor, particularly coin bills, and have been in agreement in terms of numbers and standards and those things which we feel are important for the American people. So I would like to thank the gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Castle] for the opportunity to serve as ranking member of this Committee on Domestic and International Monetary Policy. In introducing this bill last year, the committee suggested several reasons as to why now is the time to introduce a series of circulating commemorative coins. We noted that it is appropriate to honor and celebrate our 220th anniversary as a republic. In addition, it was brought to our attention that Congress has not modernized U.S. coinage for nearly 25 years. I am pleased to recognize and recommend this program to the House, not only because it will reinvigorate the circulating coin program for both the public and collectors, but also because of the obvious educational benefits that can be derived from it. Each of the 50 coins will bear an image capturing the unique character of each and every individual State. This will promote public awareness of the roots of the Federal system upon which our Nation is founded and increase knowledge of the individuality of each and every State in the Nation. Beyond the educational dividends, the gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Castle] and I crafted H.R. 2414 to benefit the Federal budget as well. Indirect savings from the program will result in an estimated $3.4 billion, plus interest, gain for the Treasury over the 10 years that this program is in effect. Beyond these issues, the circulating commemorative program for quarters makes management sense for the mint. Last year, the gentleman from Delaware [Mr. Castle], the chairman, and I produced a bill that would limit the number of noncirculating commemorative coins. As many here may know, there has been a glut on the commemorative coin market over the last few years, and the mint and numismatic community have urged Congress to reduce the number of commemoratives. At the same time, we have been urged to authorize a circulating program. The program proposed in H.R. 2414 will strike a balance between the mint's productivity capacity and the desire to create artistic collectible coinage. In what better way could we create excitement in U.S. coinage? This program, as one witness in committee hearings described it, would put pride back into the pockets of the American citizens. The American public will become more aware of the rich history of the U.S. coinage, which dates all the way back to the 1790's. To illustrate this fact, we need to look back no further than 1976, the year we commemorated our Nation's bicentennial on the quarter. The bicentennial coins honored the people, places, events, and ideals which were the foundation of our great Nation. I expect that the 50 States Commemorative Coin Program will reflect similar values which exist in each of our 50 States while also celebrating our Nation's diversity. Moreover, I believe the legislation will generate a collective pride among Americans about not only their home States, but also the United States in general. Mr. Speaker, I hope that our colleagues will join us in support of H.R. 2414. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana for yielding me this time. I cannot say enough about the work that he and the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. Cardin], did on this task force. They are tenacious, they are highly understanding of this process, and I think without their leadership, frankly, this would not have been done. I am a supporter of the product which came from this committee. I was the only one on it who has never served on the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, and, frankly, I hope never to serve on it, based on what I have seen. But, having said that, hopefully we have made it easier for those who will serve in the future. While there are some areas that are contentious, such as should outsiders be allowed to do this, I realized 15 minutes into the proceedings we are not going to please everybody, it is impossible to do that, so some hard decisions had to be made. In fact, every decision made was hard. There are many, many decisions, literally in the hundreds, that had to be made by the committee, and virtually in every case I think we improved the product, which is the rules and procedures for the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. We reduced the potential for partisanship, which has not been talked about too much, but the committee staff shall be nonpartisan, professional, and available to all as a resource. That is an important change. We have standards now for timely resolution of matters before the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct by setting time limits for determining whether a complaint is properly filed or should go to subcommittee. That did not exist before and that is a very significant change. We have dealt with providing safeguards as to providing adequate and timely information to Members who might be accused of standards violations so they have the ability to defend themselves against complaints filed against them. That is important. That has not been done in the past, and that is a significant change. I believe this package contains many more items like that, most done on a bipartisan basis. As far as the amendments are concerned, I hope Members, staff and the public in general looking at the amendments would consider them very, very substantially and cautiously before casting any votes, particularly in favor of them. They are in a position to be very disruptive to the process of what this committee has done, and I think that needs to be kept in mind. But the bill should be adopted.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman from Illinois for yielding me the time. I rise reluctantly to oppose the Hoekstra amendment, reluctantly because I think that the sponsor of the amendment has done a great job in the Committee on Education and the Workforce and sincerely has the best interests of children and education at heart. But I do not agree with the concepts of this particular amendment. I think we really need to review the role of what the Federal Government is doing in accountability. There are, I believe, 28 programs that are affected here, all the way from Goals 2000 to Safe and Drug-Free Schools, some parts which have worked, others perhaps not worked. But these programs have been specifically created at the Federal Government level, usually to fill a need which is not being served at the local level, and are aimed at that purpose. If we do block grant these funds, it essentially means that we turn all the money over to a local government, we remove almost all the accountability that we have now. And there may be too much paperwork, and I think those statements are correct that we should be looking at these things at the authorization level. The committee should be examining these particular areas. But the bottom line is that the money is turned over. We do not know how the money would be expended. And clearly all these programs, it would probably in some way or another result in a lot of them may be eliminated altogether. And yet, they would all seem to have some fairly good cause. We also do not know to whom we are always turning it over. We complain about the District of Columbia schools, and yet we would be turning the money over to that as well as to other areas. I support the goal of what is happening here. It is my judgment that we are putting the cart before the horse. It is my judgment that the Committee on Education and the Workforce should sit down and go over this with some care and make recommendations, and then it should go to an appropriation. This is not the way we should be doing business, by having it come up in the Senate and then all of a sudden, out of blue air, have an amendment be brought up in the House of Representatives. I think it is too much, too fast. I do not think it reflects Federal priorities, and I do not think it should be included in the appropriations process. As I said, there may be some merit to block granting these programs, but it should be through a deliberate reauthorization process. For all these reasons, I would hope we withhold and oppose the amendment at this time.

Mr. CASTLE

Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentleman for yielding me time. Mr. Chairman, I do rise in support of the Goodling amendment. As a member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce and someone who wants all children to achieve the highest standards of learning, I am reluctantly opposing the administration's current national testing proposal in its current format. The goals and intentions behind the proposal are excellent, to enable States, schools, and students on a voluntary basis to see how they are doing relative to other State schools and students. At its best, this can spur reform efforts and help target resources where they are most needed. The tests can also provide one indicator of how successful local reform efforts are. Unfortunately, this proposal has been poorly managed and executed, and consequently has not gained adequate support from families, educators, the States, or Congress. My home State of Delaware recently implemented world class education standards. These standards were not developed at the top level and presented to educators and parents as a done deal. These standards were the product of extensive discussion and feedback from all parties at the local and State level. Consequently, when the standards were complete, there was widespread, although not universal, support for them. I believe this serves as a model for how testing should be developed at the national level. Instead, the administration's national testing proposal was developed in a top-down manner at the Education Department without adequate input from Congress and State and local educators. National standards in testing are issues we should address in a cooperative and coordinated manner. The administration's proposal has gotten off on the wrong foot, and we should go back to square one. The Senate has developed a reasonable compromise, and I hope we in the House can work with the Senate in conference to provide some guidance to the administration about how to revise the testing proposal. Among other things, the Senate has done the following: Reaffirmed the voluntary nature of the national test; given the National Assessment Governing Board exclusive authority over all policies, direction and guidelines for establishing the tests; provided that the National Assessment Governing Board has authority and responsibility over any activities already begun by the Department of Education and has 90 days to review any contracts; directed the National Assessment Governing Board to ensure that the content and standards for the national tests shall be the same as those to the National Assessment for Educational Progress, which is widely respected, as we have heard on the floor tonight; changed the composition of the 25- member National Assessment Governing Board to ensure it is truly bipartisan and independent; and reasserts the independence of the National Assessment Governing Board from the Department of Education. Mr. Chairman, I believe this compromise has potential. As Governor of Delaware, I had the opportunity to serve on the National Assessment Governing Board, which is the organization of State officials, educators, and parents that work with the Department of Education on national policy to improve educational standards and assess the educational progress of our children. I am supportive of increasing the involvement of the National Assessment Governing Board as a good way to involve Governors, local elected officials, business and industry representatives, as well as educators and parents, in the development and oversight of the tests. So while I support the Goodling amendment, I reiterate my hope that the House will work with the Senate on its compromise, and I will work to create a compromise we can all support. Mr. Chairman, I am not opposed to a strong Federal role in education. The Federal Government should be a partner with local schools, parents, and our States in improving the education we provide to our children. However, the Federal Government cannot dictate policy. Standards and tests must have the input and support of everyone who cares about education, including parents, teachers, administrators, and State officials. The current administration proposal does not do this, and, thus, I support the Goodling amendment to prevent it from moving forward until it is revised.