Dale Kildee

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. The Pentagon is in the real world, I would hope. My two sons are lieutenants in the Army.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I have two sons in the military, so I would not want this to happen. But we would never say the President could transfer 10 percent of the funds from the Pentagon to some other program here, because the Pentagon has to plan also, and schools have to plan just like the Pentagon. We would never be able to successfully have an amendment here on the floor allowing the President of the United States to transfer 10 percent of some Pentagon funds to another agency. Why do we do this to schools?

Mr. KILDEE. Two things that bother me: First of all, schools have to plan. As my colleague knows, that is why we generally have education forward funded. The schools have to plan, and with the schools never knowing for sure whether the Governor may reach in and pull 10 percent of those funds out does not really make for good planning. Would the gentleman be willing to put it some language saying that the Governor must certify that all needs under the block have been met before any funds are transferred.

Mr. KILDEE. We will try to keep up.

Mr. KILDEE. It would be in order? In the engrossing of the bill, any technical corrections may be made by the motion we usually make at the end of the bill?

Mr. KILDEE. I did not have the manager's night amendments myself, however.

Mr. KILDEE. Well, no, my point is: We worked late last night preparing our amendments based upon the text of the bill that is before us. The manager's amendments have been offered and will probably be adopted. Our amendments may not be in the right exact line or section because of changes made by the manager's amendment. Will we be allowed to make those and have the Clerk make the necessary technical corrections to put those in a proper spot?

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to address a question which affects the manager's amendment and what we do the rest of the day. I have prepared some amendments based upon the text of the bill, not necessarily based upon the text of the bill as amended by the manager's amendment. Will I be protected technically when I offer my amendments, in case they are not in the exact line or section? Will I be protected and have the assurance from the chairman that we can have whatever technical corrections need to be made before the bill is transmitted?

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I would label this amendment the State- national partnership for education amendment. It could also be called the no-free-lunch amendment. Right now States must show that they are maintaining their fiscal commitment to programs that are receiving Federal funds. Why do we do this? Because it helps create a larger pool of funding and a shared commitment to achieving the goals of the program. My colleagues should know that the Senate job-training bill, which will be voted on next week, has the current law, the current maintenance-of-efforts language. This was never an issue over in the Senate. It was assumed by our colleagues in the other body that both partners in this endeavor would be required to invest. The Senate welfare bill also has a maintenance-of-effort provision. My good friend and chairman has on many occasions said that he is opposed to general revenue sharing, and that Federal funds should not replace State funds. Without my amendment, that is precisely what we will see. Finally, I want to read a quote from a report recently issued by the Consortium for Policy Research in Education in ``An Outlook for School Revenue in the Next 5 Years.'' The report states: ``The environment for increases in real school revenue per pupil in the rest of the 1990s will not be favorable. The most significant problem is likely to be reductions in Federal aid to States. States will respond to decreases in Federal aid for social and health programs by trimming increases in State education aid.'' Mr. Chairman, let us not hand States an open invitation to evade their responsibility. Let us keep this very healthy partnership alive. I recognize that in the manager's amendments, they put some half language in on supplement not supplant, but this does not address the core problem. I think we have to have in place a strong requirement that the States not supplant their dollars with the Federal dollars; that they fully maintain their efforts. We should reinstate the language that we have used for years, the same language as the Senate in its wisdom kept in the bill.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

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

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

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I am offering this amendment with my colleague, the gentleman from Montana [Mr. Williams]. This amendment would strike six lines in the bill which were added after the bill was reported from committee. That provision would allow transfer of 10 percent of funding from the youth block grant to the adult training block or vice versa. This provision would never have been approved in committee because it would completely undermine the ability of local communities to plan for the rational and effective use of limited education and work force preparation dollars. When we set up these block grants, Mr. Chairman, we engaged in a productive debate about how to design an integrated, high performance career preparation and education system. In the face of 20 percent cuts in the authorization level, and over $2 billion in job training and education funds, this represents a very real threat to the stability of the system. The greatest threat this poses is to local schools, your local schools. We all know that it is going to be next to impossible, Mr. Chairman, for States to meet the very stringent work requirements of the emerging welfare compromise. Now, for Governors who are trying to avoid the penalties of failure to meet those targets, this new provision, which was not discussed in committee, will provide an irresistible source of funds for Governors. Our schools will be left holding the bag as Governors pull that 10 percent, from the schools transfer the funds to the adult training block to meet those emerging work requirements in welfare. So our schools again will be left holding the bag and the uncomfortable choice of raising local property taxes or new school levies. Mr. Chairman, I would support this provision, if it contained the stipulation that the Governor certify that all needs under the title from which the funds are being transferred have been met. But that is not part of the provision. Otherwise this provision will seriously, I think, threaten the school-based part of vocational education by tempting the Governors to reach into the schools to pull more money toward those work requirements in the welfare bill. So, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today to discuss this legislation which seeks to consolidate a number of our current job training and education programs into an integrated system. I want to commend the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Goodling], my chairman, for his prodigious efforts on this bill. My colleagues, the direction in which this bill seeks to take us is the right one. For a number of years now, as the employment and training needs of America changed, we have tended to address those needs through specific separately funded and administered programs, and, unfortunately, by that method we have often wound up with overlapping and duplicative efforts which hinder the local community's ability to deliver the services needed. I want to particularly commend the gentleman from California, Buck McKeon, the subcommittee chairman, for recognizing the need for change in that area. Having said that, Mr. Chairman, I am still somewhat afraid that we are creating a system that will not be able to do what we expect it to do. Today, we will hear that although this bill authorizes funding at a level 20 percent below current levels, we are told that administrative savings and economies of scale will generate savings that can be driven into services for the young people and adults served under this bill. Mr. Chairman, that was done before the Committee on Appropriations determined that local communities will have $1.5 billion fewer to spend on job training programs next year. That very much frightens me, this lack of fusion between the authorization and the appropriations and the dynamics created by that. Mr. Chairman, many of my colleagues on the minority side of our committee would like to vote for this bill, and, hopefully, before the day is over we can and will, because we think it is definitely a step in the right direction. But we do have reservations. We want to see an agreement of the vocational rehabilitation title worked out, and I think we are still working on that. I think both sides recognize that that is an effort that should yield some fruit. We would also like to preserve the progress we have made in the School to Work Act, which Mr. Gunderson mentioned in his statement today. This is a very good act brought to us by the Business Roundtable and by many of the chambers of commerce. The gentleman from Montana [Mr. Williams] and I will be offering a number of amendments today which will seek to preserve the integrity of decisionmaking in schools. In particular, Mr. Williams and I will offer an amendment to strike the bill's provisions that would allow a governor to transfer 10 percent of funds between title II youth programs and to title III adult employment and training programs. Mr. Chairman, there will be a number of other amendments offered to improve this bill by Members on both sides. I want to thank our colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle for working with us. I think we still have work to do today right on this floor, and I think by the time this debate is concluded, if we have worked out the areas I have mentioned, we will have strong support on our side. We will still have some points to work out in conference committee, and I look forward to that, but as has been pointed out, there has been a certain degree of collegiality across the aisle in working this bill out. I hope that continues through the process of discussion today.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's comments. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman mentioned that this is a compromise with the Governors. It is a compromise with his side of the aisle, because the Governors never negotiated with us. We wrote this bill in committee in a very bipartisan spirit. The bill came out of committee, I think, with only four negative votes. Then the Governors came to that side of the aisle and worked out a compromise. I think they have jeopardized a bipartisan effort. if they want a compromise, we are still here, too, but they choose to compromise only with that side of the aisle.

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will continue to yield, I read the amendment. I know it could flow from title II to title III and vice versa. But in this environment which are we are in right now, while we are changing welfare as we know it, and we are putting increased pressure on getting into the work force, which I agree with, the pressure is going to be on pulling money from schools to the adult part. That is the way the money will flow in the next few years.

Mr. KILDEE. It could.

Mr. KILDEE. Well, I am just wondering why we always make schools have bake sales to make up the difference. We always let people raid school funds and not other areas of government.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to pay tribute to the Hispanic Independence Awards Ceremony that will be held on Saturday, September 16, 1995, at the General Motors Institute in my hometown of Flint, MI. September is National Hispanic Heritage Month and the Hispanic Independence Awards Ceremony kicks off a month-long celebration of Hispanic culture, ideas, and achievements in Genesee County. The Hispanic community will once again honor individuals who have selflessly committed themselves to making Fling and Genesee County a better place in which to live. Each award is named for a prominent deceased member of the Hispanic community who exemplified the ideas espoused by the award. The Pedro Mata Leadership Award is given to a person who has provided leadership, encouragement, and influence in the Hispanic community. This year's recipient is Mrs. Guadalupe ``Lupe'' Morgan. The Tano Resendez Award for community service is given to a person who has dedicated personal efforts to promoting civic and cultural activities. The award this year is being given to Mrs. Juanita Diaz. The Joe Benavidez Award for education is presented to a person who has supported educational issues relating to Hispanics of all ages, Mrs. Ana Maria Hufton is this year's recipient. The Labor Involvement Award is being given to Mr. Juan Diaz for his [[Page E 1788]] efforts to increase community awareness, improve the quality of life, and open doors for Hispanics. The Bruno Valdez Arts and Entertainment Award is presented to a Hispanic artist who has promoted Hispanic culture through professional and personal activity. The award this year is being given to Mr. Eddie Soto. The Veterans Award is given to a member of the Hispanic community who has honorably served in the U.S. Armed Forces. Mr. Tom Torres is being honored with the award this year. Mr. Armando J. Singer will be given the Maria DeLeary Award. This year the Hispanic community pays tribute to those individuals who are not of Hispanic dissent, but play a major role in improving life for Hispanics in Genese County. This year the recipients are Mrs. Sue Burnash Quintanilla, and Mrs. Lois Laughlin. The Migrant Farm Worker Award recipients, Mr. and Mrs. Dale Nelson, are being recognized for their selfless service to the migrant workers. To honor those of the Hispanic community just starting to pursue their life goals, the Pedro Mata, Jr. Scholarship Award will be given to Mr. Carlos Lambaria. The purpose of this award is to foster a commitment to community service and encourage continued education. Mr. Speaker, it is with great pride that I rise today and ask my colleagues in the House of Representatives to join me in congratulating the winners of these awards. The recipients are to be commended for their dedication, commitment, and leadership to the Hispanic community of Flint and Genesee County.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to honor the recipient of the 1995 Golden Door Award, Dr. Alexander Ibe. Dr. Ibe will receive the award at the annual dinner meeting of the International Institute of Flint on Tuesday, October 11. The International Institute of Flint presents this award annually to a foreign-born citizen who has substantially improved life in the Flint community. Dr. Ibe has worked tirelessly since his arrival in the United States in 1979 to help African immigrants and others. Dr. Ibe was born in Nigeria the son of Chief Alphonsus Ibe and Justina Ibe. He is the fourth of seven sons. After immigrating to the United States he helped bring three brothers to live permanently in this country. In addition to helping his family immigrate. Dr. Ibe has been tireless in his efforts to help African refugees realize their dreams of living in the United States free of persecution. The list of Dr. Ibe's accomplishments is long. As president of the African American Association of Greater Flint he raised money to aid Liberian refugees. He fought deportation of Africans and provided relief to those in financial need. He raised money for scholarships and even paid the college tuition for needy students out of his own pocket. He has devoted his time and expertise to developing African cultural presentations. School children throughout Genesee County have gained a greater knowledge of the contributions Africans have made to the world through these programs. He has volunteered for the past 6 years to organize the international institute's African festivities. In addition to his volunteer work for the international institute, Dr. Ibe serves as a minister of the Word at St. Michael's Catholic Church and is currently raising money for the Our Mother of Africa chapel at the National Shrine in Washington, DC. When he is not volunteering his time to various causes, Dr. Ibe is a medical research scientist. He recently completed a study of cystic fibrosis. With his wife Carolyn, he has two children, Alexander Merenini Ibe II and Crystal Ndidi Ibe. Mr. Speaker, I ask the Congress to rise with me today to honor this great American. My hometown of Flint has benefited innumerable times from the contributions of Dr. Alexander Ibe. We are a better world because of his compassion.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in very strong opposition to the Labor-HHS appropriations bill, because it will result in very real damage to very real students and teachers in real schools in communities throughout this country. Mr. Chairman, I say to my colleagues, the education policy in this bill is based on two somewhat conflicting assumptions. First, that because the national contribution to education funding is so small that it does not matter and will not be missed; second, that the national role in education is too large and too intrusive and needs to be scaled back. Mr. Chairman, these assumptions are both wrong. These assumptions dishonor decades of bipartisan cooperation over education policy as a shared priority. Mr. Chairman, this bill will seriously erode the long-standing role that we play on the national level to ensure that educational opportunities are available to those who have been denied them. Laws like the Individuals With Disabilities Education Act [IDEA] were enacted 20 years ago because over 1 million disabled children were excluded entirely from public schools. Those 1 million disabled children now have a chance to realize their full potential and contribute to American society because of what Congress did then. Mr. Chairman, ask the parents of Caitlin Cody, who live in my community. Caitlin is a bright 8-year-old with spina bifida who joins her classmates every day in her neighborhood public school to discover the joys of learning. They will tell you that in the absence of the Federal role in education, Caitlin's future would not be as promising as it is. Mr. Chairman, this bill cuts IDEA. It cuts funding which will severely curtail professional development, research, and outreach activities which are crucial for improving services to children with disabilities. This bill also cuts chapter 1 by $1.2 billion. With this cut, over 1 million disadvantaged children across this country will be denied a chance to succeed. In Flint, MI, which is struggling right now to regain its economic footing, over 2,800 students will lose vital academic help. These students will lose the guidance of 47 teachers and 109 teaching aids. Who are these children and who are their teachers? Mr. Chairman, let me tell my colleagues the story of one chapter 1 student. Shelly is a real person who lives right now in my district. She is not a composite; a real individual person. Shelly entered middle school in the seventh grade last fall. Shelly came to school every day, because there she could get a meal. Then her teachers discovered that Shelly lived with her mother and younger brother right in my neighborhood, wherever they could find a place to stay at night. They had been evicted from their apartment and stayed in a shelter or with friends. When Shelly moved to Michigan, she was identified as a chapter 1 student. Shelly's teacher recognized that she needed the stability of a regular classroom and instead of pulling her away from her peers, she provided Shelly with reading support services in her science and social studies classes. As the year progressed, because of this program, Shelly's life improved and her teacher made connections to mentors and helped find a place for her to live because this teacher believed in Shelly's potential. Shelly entered middle school as a homeless child. She finished the year as an honor student. Mr. Chairman, we should not take opportunities away from the Caitlin's and the Shelly's to finance a tax cut for the very, very rich. [[Page H 8335]] Vote ``no'' on this.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express some very grave concerns regarding the devastating effects that the Labor-HHS appropriations will have on public education in America, and that despite the great efforts of my good friend, Chairman John Porter. Since November of last year, we have been engaged in a robust and very healthy debate about the proper role of the Federal Government in the economic and social life of our country. In that debate, I continue to be guided by the words of one of this Nation's great humanitarians, the former Vice President of the United States, Hubert Humphrey, who said, ``The moral test of government is how it treats those who are in the dawn of life, the children, those who are in the twilight of life, the elderly, and those who are in the shadows of life, the sick, the needy and the handicapped.'' This bill, which we will take up this week, Mr. Speaker, I believe represents a monumental failure of this test. Over the next 7 years, it will cut education and training $36 billion. Now, my Republican friends are fond of saying that this is a plan that will reward future generations. But what about this generation, the children in Head Start, the children in title I, the children in the kindergartens and first grades of this country? What price will they pay, Mr. Speaker? And what price will we as a nation pay for this failure of vision? Mr. Speaker, I have served on this committee with responsibility for the children and workers of this country for 18 years, and during that time, particularly in the field of education, Republicans and Democrats have worked together on common ground to strengthen the basic fabric of this complex and diverse Nation. We have worked to provide opportunities for those willing to use the tools of education and work to achieve the rewards of American citizenship. Education has always risen above partisanship as a shared priority, and it is sad, Mr. Speaker, to say that I believe this bill breaks that covenant between Democrats and Republicans.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Speaker, it is truly an honor and a privilege to rise before you today to pay tribute to the late Andrew Jackson Transue, a selfless servant to the people of Michigan and a personal friend of mine. Mr. Transue passed away on June 28, 1995, at the age of 92, but his long tenure of dedicated service will never be forgotten by the thousands of individuals whose lives he enriched. Born and raised in Clarksville, MI, Mr. Transue graduated from Clarksville-Ionia County High School and received his Juris Doctorate from the Detroit College of Law. Never satisfied by past accomplishments, Mr. Transue's life was characterized by a continuous, unquenchable effort to better the lives of America's working people. The vigor with which Mr. Andrew Jackson Transue fought for the American working family was every bit the equal of that of his namesake. Transue began his long career of public service in 1933 when he was elected county prosecuting attorney, and he continued to represent the common man from 1937 to 1939 as a New Deal Democrat in the 75th Congress. Later, he would serve as President of the Flint Lions Club and as a devoted 55-year member of the Court Street United Methodist Church. What Transue was perhaps most proud of, however, was the case he argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1952. Not only did he win that case, but he also succeeded in redefining the legal principle of ``criminal intent'' and in setting a precedent that would subsequently be cited in over 500 judicial rulings. In light of these accomplishments, it is often difficult, even for those of us who knew him personally, to keep in mind that Mr. Transue should not be remembered primarily for his legal and electoral successes. Rather, we must remember him for his genuine concern for his fellow man and for the endearing legacy of compassion he has left behind. Never consumed by self-focused ambition, Mr. Transue was first and foremost a man dedicated to his community and to his late wife Vivian, and his children, Tamara and Andrea. His integrity, his wisdom, but most of all his passion, will never be forgotten by the many souls graced with his humanity.

Mr. KILDEE

Mr. KILDEE. Mr. Chairman, there is no one over here who questions the gentleman's intentions at all, we are just worried about the language. We know that. We are worried about the language, what the effect will be, not the gentleman's intentions at all, because his record is very good in that. What I worry about is one thing. It appears that food inflation costs will be down this year, less than in previous years, so that food inflation being down, it would appear, then, that we could feed more people. If we cap the number of people, we cannot take advantage of that low inflation for food costs. That is one of the problems I see with the gentleman's amendment.