Pete Hoekstra

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. We saw that in Arizona when we went to, I do not remember the name of the school but we went to one of the gentleman's charter schools, we have seen it in the public schools as we have gone around, in all the different kinds of schools, the schools that are doing well, you go into the school and you go into the classroom and you can feel an energy. Parents are there. They are at our hearings, they are asking questions, they are contributing, the teachers are there, the kids are pumped, the administrators, but the thing that they all have in common, they feel ownership of that school. They are proud of it.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. That is really what we have found as we have gone around the country, is that when you empower parents, you have parents defining quality. The other thing that happens, it is kind of interesting, it happens in the private sector as well. When customers are defining quality, the people that are manufacturing or producing the product pay more attention to the customer and involve the customer in the process. What we find is that when you empower parents, you empower them in a number of ways, to choose, but also what you find out is that it fosters an environment that empowers parents and teachers and administrators to come together and to get a more common vision for their school and identify the school's role, the teacher's role and the parent's role. You actually get a consensus of where you want to go. The empowerment of parents, I think we saw that in Phoenix when we were there, we have seen the same development in California with charter schools. We are seeing it in Michigan with more public school choice. The atmosphere I think raises all of the schools up, traditional public schools. I have got a great example of a public school that is performing, I have got a lot of them in my district but one is kind of personal to me. They did very well in the State Science Olympiad. Some of you may remember at one time I had more hair on my face than I did on my head but they did very well in the State Science Olympiad. It is a traditional public school. I met with them, we kind of celebrated their success at the State Science Olympiad and I told them that you are going to go to the National Science Olympiad, they were smarter than I was because they are competing against 6,000 schools on a nationwide basis, that if you win the National Science Olympiad, you can shave off my beard. Obviously, they won the National Science Olympiad and so we can have excellence in all different formats of schools. We are not saying charters. A lot of the stuff that we are seeing a lot of States experimenting, vouchers, charters, tax credits. There is not a silver bullet, one answer. There are lots of things that we can do and that is empowering parents, dollars in the classroom, basic academics. The more we move in that direction, the better off we are going to be.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Has the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Bob Schaffer, had more involvement in that test than the gentleman from Arizona, Mr. Shadegg, is talking about?

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Who do we want to have in education define excellence?

Mr. HOEKSTRA. For those companies, who defines excellence?

Mr. HOEKSTRA. He has got some great ideas on what to do on education, yielding back to our friend from Colorado.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. If the gentleman will yield for just a second, some people might call that radical, is that correct?

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, reclaiming my time, I want to reinforce a couple things. The gentleman has brought up the term 760. Where does 760 come from? What we did, as part of the crossroads hearings, we went around the country, and we also asked the question in Washington, as to how many education programs are there. We went to OMB. We went to a couple of different places in the executive branch, and they came back and said, there are roughly 760 programs. We said, that is interesting, that sounds like a lot. We asked for these programs typically to move the money from Washington back to the State, what kind of process does it have to go through. 487 steps. No wonder we lose 40 to 50 cents. No wonder 40 to 50 cents of every education dollar that comes from Colorado, for every dollar that comes, only 50 cents makes it back to Fort Collins. I do not think that is good enough for Colorado. I think the people in Colorado at the local level, those parents and those teachers know how to improve their schools better than somebody from Washington who has never been in Colorado.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. I am not sure the House wants to compromise. I think the Senate maybe wants to compromise. I think my friend from California has something to say on this issue.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Tell us about the math test. This is the kind of math test that I think, actually this is the kind of math test that bureaucrats would give to bureaucrats, is that not correct?

Mr. HOEKSTRA. I thank my colleague and, just for a moment, yield again to the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Shadegg] who has a great definition because, remember, if it is national testing from the Federal Government, you really will not have an option as to whether to take it or not. If there are independent testing organizations out there, which there are, schools can pick which one is the best for their schools, which they think is the most appropriate that actually tests knowledge. My colleague from Arizona has a wonderful example, I believe that is what you are holding up, is how the Federal Government in their new testing program or at least one of the people involved in this defines quality in the types of things we should test. I believe it is in math. Is that what you have there?

Mr. HOEKSTRA. When you are bringing that out, the testing or whatever it is and the 90 cents of the dollar, I think my colleague from California will agree, we want that 90 cents to go to a local school district, but we want to give them a lot of flexibility as to what they do with it. We do not want to give them 90 cents and then give them a three-ring binder and say, here is how you spend it. We want the parents and local school administrators and local teachers to say, we have got great facilities. We need more computers or we need to invest in books or educational training or whatever. I yield to the gentleman from Colorado, Mr. Bob Schaffer, who has a great passion for this issue, is on the committee with us, and has really been helpful in us getting some work done in this area.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. You bring up a couple of good points. The President has not involved parents, teachers, administrators, governors, as a matter of fact, the President has not even involved Congress. We are going to embark on national testing and it is going to be one branch of government, a few elitist bureaucrats who have developed a test for all of our kids. And we are not even a part of that process.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I ask the gentleman, how do some of our colleagues describe trying to consolidate programs, get rid of red tape, empower parents and local school boards, and get the money back to the local school?

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman would yield, and what are we trying to do with that dollar?

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, we would love to have the gentleman back.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Riggs has been in San Diego. We are going to go to Colorado. Number one, we are going to parents and teachers. We have had over 25 educational institutions and hearings that we have visited; 174 grassroots witnesses. They are testifying about their schools, their teachers, and their kids in their hometowns. So we are hearing and we are finding that we feed parental control, we need a focus on basic academics, and we need to get dollars in the classroom. Mr. Speaker, I will yield to the gentleman from California because I miss him on the committee. I do not know if he went on to bigger and better things, but he was a great colleague on the committee.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Phoenix? It is a very different approach. The Clinton administration has said: We know best and we want to take over education. Mr. Speaker, here is where Republicans have been. Here is where we have been on our Crossroads project. We have been to Milwaukee, New York, actually twice, Chicago twice, we have been to Napa, California. We have been to San Fernando, California; Phoenix; Wilmington, Delaware; Milledgeville, Georgia; the Bronx, Cincinnati; Louisville; Little Rock; Cleveland; Muskegon Heights, Michigan. We are going to Iowa. We are going to Texas.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. No, parents were not involved.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Were they involved?

Mr. HOEKSTRA

Mr. HOEKSTRA. I thank the gentleman for yielding. No, Mr. Speaker, what our hearings have shown, as we have talked with parents, teachers, and administrators, developing a test is a very personal and very important issue. In the State of Michigan, we have made progress in developing a test, but if this test is not embraced at the local level by the parents and by the teachers, the American people will not rise up and embrace this test that they have had no input in. Secretary Riley may be a bright person, but there is no way, without bringing that grass-roots support and involvement in at the beginning of the process, that we can expect that a bunch of bureaucrats here in Washington are going to write a test that is going to be embraced in Hawaii, Detroit, Holland, Phoenix, or in Florida. There is absolutely no way. This is not about patriotism, this is about what works. This is a test that has to be developed at the grass-roots level up. If we issue a national test and we then test our kids, and that test is not a well- developed test and is not supported by the parents, we will not have Americans embracing this, we will have American parents in an uproar, because we will have tested their kids and given them a grade or score on a test that they do not believe in, and a test that has not been validated. It is the greatest disservice we could do to our local school districts, to our kids, and to their parents.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. What we have found as we have gone across the country is schools, where they are working, where they have done a good job with the children, are those where there is local parental control, not where Washington is dictating the agenda. This is about where are education decisions for our children going to be made. Is the direction going to be at the local level, or is it going to be moved to Washington, DC? All we have to do is go around the country, take a look at the grass-roots level. We will be surprised at the wonderful things that are going on in all types of education, public, private, parochial, religious education efforts. But it is because of grass roots, not because of what we are doing here in Washington. Moving to national testing is moving more decision making to Washington away from the very people that are making a difference in our kids' lives today. We need to begin a process of moving power and money back to parents and the local school districts, not continuing on this trend of moving it to Washington. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for this special order.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. If the gentleman will continue to yield, the question we really ought to be asking is why is the administration rushing to write a test? Why are they not involving Congress, why are they not involving the appropriate committees, why are they not involving the Governors, why are they not involving teachers and parents and school administrators? Why are they rushing to get this thing done without any involvement? It is absolutely going to fail, and the question is why? Why do we need to rush through this, and why can we not involve different people in this process?

Mr. HOEKSTRA. What we talked about earlier, Mr. Speaker, what happens in this process is, No. 1, our kids go through all kinds of tests already. This is one more layer on top. It is not only the time that is spent on taking the test, but if a school district is going to be evaluated on a national basis, and every child in a classroom is going to be evaluated against every other child in the country, we can bet parents are going to expect and teachers are going to want to prepare their students for that test. They are going to spend a week or 2 weeks teaching to the test. That is not what we want. We do not want teachers teaching to tests. We want teachers teaching to basic academics, the basic skills we want our children to learn. Then there are other ways to measure how they are learning. There is not a need for the Federal Government to come in and put one more overlay on things that are already being done at the State and local level.

Mr. HOEKSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding. What we have found, as we have gone around the country, and again, in the 14 States that we have been to, and I think we have had multiple hearings in a couple of States, so we have probably been in 16 different cities, we have seen tremendous things in education, tremendous things in public education, private education. That is really the good thing of all these hearings. We have seen some wonderful things. There are some common ingredients. We go into these environments, we ask the teachers, we ask parents, we ask administrators, we ask the business community, what is working in your school district, or who is making a difference? Why are your schools improving? What is the catalyst? I have still yet to hear someone say, it is that new Federal program, or it is this Federal program. The schools that are doing well are typically where a group of parents, administrators, and teachers have taken back their school and said, we are going to focus on these kids, and we are not going to focus on the bureaucracy and the red tape that either comes from Sacramento or comes from Lansing; but we know the kids' names, we know what their needs are. We are going to focus on our kids. We are going to take our schools back. We are going to, and this is what they are trying to do in Michigan as well, and what we are trying to do here in Washington, DC, as well, we are going to debate it next week, we are going to focus on getting the dollars from the bureaucracy and getting them into the classroom. When we do national testing, what is going to happen? We are going to spend a dollar on a national test, and the first 20 or 30 cents is going to be spent on bureaucracy. Only 65 or 60 cents will actually be spent on giving a test that they really should not be taking anyway. We are going to get dollars into the classroom and focus on basic academics.