John Kline

Mr. KLINE

Mr. KLINE. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KLINE. Madam Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. KLINE. Madam Chair, I feel like I have to compliment the minority for writing a bill in 2 days that is a ream and a half of paper--that is quite an accomplishment--that adds more programs, costs more money, and doubles down on what are failed policies. The Democrat substitute, frankly, is going in exactly the wrong direction. I urge my colleagues to oppose that substitute, support the underlying bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KLINE. Madam Chair, I am pleased to yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oklahoma (Mr. Russell), a new member of the committee whose leadership has been very impressive, and his passion on this is unmatched.

Mr. KLINE. Madam Chair, I rise in opposition to the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. KLINE. Madam Chair, we have now had a few days to look at the 851-page amendment that the Democrats brought forward. It was a little bit surprising during the markup to have it brought up to us. I think one of my colleagues said something about not legislating by the pound, but if we had been legislating by the pound, there are a lot of pounds there, so I appreciate the time we have had to look at this. It seems to me that the Democrats' substitute amendment just doubles down on the policy that we have now. The gentleman from Virginia--my friend, the ranking member--talked about areas of concentrated poverty, and we need to spend money there. That is what we do. We spend money there now. We spend a lot more money per student in high-poverty areas; yet, in those areas, we have less than half the kids graduating. He talked about progress that has been made, but right now in America, one in five students will drop out of high school. Only 26 percent of high school seniors are proficient in math, and only 38 percent of high school seniors--just over a third, Madam Chair--are proficient in reading. The current system is not working. As I have said again and again in this debate, Republicans and Democrats agree that No Child Left Behind is fundamentally flawed and needs to be replaced. We have different ideas about how we want to go about doing that. We believe that the much greater flexibility that the Student Success Act affords to superintendents and to local leaders to put the money where they think it can get the best results is a better way to do it than by adding program after program as we have seen in amendments during this debate. We have a fundamentally different idea about how best to achieve what we all want to achieve, which is an excellent education for every child at every school. I think the underlying bill is a much better way to do it, and I would encourage my colleagues to oppose the Democrats' substitute amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KLINE. Madam Chair, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Rokita), chair of the K-12 subcommittee on the Education and the Workforce Committee.

Mr. KLINE. Madam Chair, can I inquire as to how much time is remaining on each side?

Mr. KLINE. Madam Chair, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from Georgia (Mr. Allen).

Mr. KLINE. Madam Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KLINE. I am.

Mr. KLINE

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Chairman, again, I appreciate the gentleman's interest in this issue. His amendment creates a new program. Under the underlying bill, there is an allowable use. If the school wants to spend money on STEM education, they certainly may, and I think that is the right way to approach this. Again, I oppose the gentleman's amendment and support the underlying bill. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Chairman, I understand the gentleman's concerns, but I must oppose the amendment. I believe it is important to ensure our strong prohibitions and limited Federal role are put in law and maintained for years into the future, rather than for the length of a pilot project. Our school boards and superintendents and educators need to have some consistency and not be worried about things that are going to change in a year or two or three. These prohibitions in the bill are important to correct the course of the Federal Government, ensure the U.S. Secretary of Education cannot exercise any control over State and local education decisions, and that cannot be a short-term fix. For that reason, I oppose the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. KLINE. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KLINE. I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for this amendment. Foster children are a vulnerable population of students that face many disruptions in their lives. Unfortunately, it sometimes also disrupts their education. This amendment will allow States and schools to see how their foster children are doing, in addition to other subgroups of students, and then better address their unique needs to improve their education. Again, I thank the gentlewoman for the amendment. I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. KLINE

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that it may be in order at any time on Tuesday, March 3, 2015, for the Speaker to declare a recess, subject to the call of the Chair, for the purpose of receiving in Joint Meeting His Excellency Binyamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel.

Mr. KLINE

Mr. KLINE. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. KLINE. I will be happy to work with you.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Chairman, I seek time in opposition to the gentleman's amendment, although I do not oppose it.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Chairman, I move that the Committee do now rise.

Mr. KLINE

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Chairman, I claim the time in opposition to the gentleman's amendment.

Mr. KLINE. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the gentleman's interest and passion in looking at this issue. I oppose the amendment because it is yet another example of expanding the Federal role in education into areas that are best left to States or local school districts. There are debates about start times for schools. There are studies that are out there. The gentleman mentioned some of those. There are a lot of opinions on the topic, but I don't believe that the Federal Government conducting yet another study--a national study--will be helpful. Each State and local school district needs to figure out what works best for their students as they contemplate decisions about running their schools, whether it is start times or end times or anything in between. It is not the role of the Federal Government. I oppose this amendment and ask my colleagues to oppose the amendment. I reserve the balance of my time.