George Miller

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield myself the balance of my time. Mr. Chairman, Members of the House, this substitute that I have introduced on behalf of the Democrats creates a fundamental choice for this body in our vote later today. It creates a fundamental choice of whether or not this Nation is going to go forward and provide a high- quality education to every student or whether this Nation is going to go back to a time when students are left out of this system, when resources weren't provided, when schools weren't keeping up. It's also a question of whether or not we're going to break a promise and go back on our constitutional responsibility to make sure that all students have access to that education--poor students, minority students, English-learning students, students with disabilities. Are we going to hold school districts and schools accountable for providing that educational opportunity for those students, and will those students have the same access to a high-quality education that in many instances is available across town, in the next neighborhood, but not in their neighborhood or isn't accessible because it's not friendly or welcoming to students with disabilities or students who are learning the English language? Will they have the same rights to that education? We know from this economy and this economic downturn that we need every one of those students to be able to be productive, successful, and achieving. But that's not what the Republican bill promises. It grinds down the funding available to these school districts for poor and minority children and for students with disabilities. It grinds it down because it marks it down to the sequestration label. So quietly and silently, school districts all over the Nation are going to be losing the resources for these poor children. We're stealing money from the poorest people in this country to achieve deficit reduction, but tax reform maybe next year, the year after, or the year after. Economic justice sometime later down the road. Today, this is about education justice and whether or not every student and every family is going to have access to a high-quality education that no longer depends on their Zip Code or the neighborhood or the town in which they live. You know, it's been said very often from the other side that somehow all we want is a Washington-knows-best solution and what they offer is something opposite of that. No, what we've put together in this substitute is different than Washington knows best. This is about parents who know best, parents who demand the accountability that is in the substitute and not in the Republican bill. Because they want to know if their child is learning in that school--their child who may be poor, their child who may have disabilities, their child who may have learning problems. They want to know if their child is learning. This is parents who want to know best, teachers who want to know best, who want the resources so they can teach those children; the business community that wants a well-trained workforce----

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. An educated workforce. That's why the Business Roundtable, that's why the Chamber of Commerce opposes their bill.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Educators who want a strong system, that's why they oppose their bill.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Parents who want it, that's why they oppose their bill.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. No. Who's running out of time?

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Children are running out of time in this Nation.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Children are running out of time in this Nation because they're grinding down and streaming their money.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. * * *

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. * * *

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. * * *

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. * * *

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chairman, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chair, I yield myself 5 minutes. Mr. Chair, I rise in opposition to H.R. 5, the Letting Students Down Act. H.R. 5 is supposed to be the reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act and a rewrite of No Child Left Behind. The Elementary and Secondary Education Act was born out of Brown v. Board of Education. It is our Nation's education law, but it is fundamentally a civil rights law. H.R. 5 runs our country in the opposite direction from those civil rights promises. This bill guts funding for public education. It abdicates the Federal Government's responsibility to ensure that every child has the right to an equal opportunity and a quality education. And it walks away from our duty to hold school systems accountable to students, parents and taxpayers. For decades, providing all children with a quality education has been considered such a critical national priority that we have always found a way to come together in a bipartisan fashion to reauthorize and to update the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. We all recognize that a good education is a great equalizer, no matter where you come from, and it is necessary for a strong economy and a vibrant democracy. Each reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, in its own way, has moved our national education system forward. That's why now-Speaker John Boehner and I worked with then-Senator Ted Kennedy and President George W. Bush in crafting the No Child Left Behind Act more than a decade ago. We agreed that there was a soft bigotry of low expectations in our education system. We agreed that schools were hiding low achievement by some students by using the averages of performance in the schools, and it was wrong. Parents wanted to know how their child was doing, not how the average child in the school was doing. No Child Left Behind turned the lights on inside our Nation's schools. For the first time, parents could see whether or not their schools were actually teaching all students. Were they serving their student? And in the decade since the law has been in effect, the evidence is irrefutable that all kids can learn, given the opportunity to succeed, regardless of their background, just given a chance. However, as someone who has listened to experts in communities across the Nation and its pros and cons, I recognize that we now need to modernize the education law, No Child Left Behind, with fundamental changes. No Child Left Behind is very much the education reform of the past. It is inflexible, and encouraged some to lower their standards, to reduce their standards, to dumb down their standards, which this Nation cannot tolerate. That's why it's time to rewrite this law, to embrace the principle that all students can learn if they're given an opportunity, and to encourage high standards that meet the needs of the 21st century global economy. Unfortunately, H.R. 5 moves our education system in the wrong direction for students and schools already struggling under a broken system, and lets American kids down at a critical time. H.R. 5 lets our students down by not guaranteeing all students have access to world-class, well-rounded educational opportunities needed to compete in a global economy. It lets our students down by locking sequestration cuts into education funding. It allows funds to be moved away from schools with the most poverty, and removes the requirements of States and districts to adequately fund their schools. It lets down students with disabilities by allowing schools to lower their standards for educating these children. And it lets our students down by not building on a broad consensus that we should continue to demand high standards of all students. An extraordinary cross section of business, labor, civil rights, disabilities and education groups are opposing this bill because it lets our Nation's children down. It lets our economy down. The National Center for Learning Disabilities says that this bill would dramatically alter the academic landscape for students with disabilities, jeopardizing their ability to graduate from high school or to go to college or to obtain employment. The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights believes that the merit of an education bill is determined by its treatment of the most disadvantaged among us. Yet H.R. 5 permits Federal funds targeted for this vulnerable group of students, such as English language learners and Native American students, to be reallocated for other purposes. The business community opposes this bill. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is disappointed that the bill ``does not demand targeted support and real improvement for students stuck in low-performing schools or for students whose schools are not teaching them the basics in reading and math.'' I agree with these concerns. This bill is a huge step outside the mainstream consensus and an even bigger step backward for our Nation's students. We should be embracing the drive towards high standards across this country and ensuring that all of our children in all States benefit from this improved education system.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield myself an additional 30 seconds. I hope that my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will agree that a bipartisan Elementary and Secondary Education Act authorization is the right process we should move forward. This is about every child in our country getting the education they deserve, regardless of poverty, disability, or other challenges. To walk away from that commitment means letting our students down, letting the parents down, and letting down taxpayers who demand accountability. It means letting down teachers who deserve support. It means letting down businesses who are counting on our school system to produce college- and career-ready graduates. It means letting down our future. We can do better than this. We can do it way better than this. I urge a ``no'' vote on H.R. 5, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Andrews), a member of the committee. (Mr. ANDREWS asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chair, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Hinojosa).

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield the gentleman an additional 30 seconds.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Langevin). (Mr. LANGEVIN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his remarks.)

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis).

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz).

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from Connecticut (Mr. Courtney), a member of the committee.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentlewoman from Oregon (Ms. Bonamici), a member of the committee.

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Cicilline).

Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California. I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. Titus).