charter schools. i'm also pleased that the committee made in order two amendment i offered to improve this flawed bill. the first amendment further improves the charter school program. i enjoyed working with chairman kleine and ranking member miller program and he both the underbill and democratic substitute contains strong language around helping charter schools grow and expand to meet the demands of the more than one million kids who remain on charter school waiting lists across our country, unable to attend the school of their choice. recent study found that those who are -- those schools that are strong and successful in the beginning remain strong and successful schools as they grow and expand. my amendment would allow charter schools to receive funding to -- to use grant funding for startup costs like teacher training and materials.

i know this additional flexibility provided under our proposed amendment would help get quality charter school office the ground. the amendment also allows for revenue to be more portable across school districts to provide states with the ability o move toward more models. or competency based education if they so desire. it ensures that charter schools are doing outreach to low income and other schools. many charter schools are already leading in this regard d helping our most at-risk families to achieve success. we want to ensure they continue to lead the way and provide access to choice for more families. i'm also pleased that my amendment i offered with brooks regarding computer science is made in order. my amendment with representative brooks would clarify that federal funds can be used for computer science education. it's particularly important because it relates to funding for teacher preparation based on the bipartisan computer

science education act which representative brooks and i introduced earlier this year. based 's knowledge economy, we need high quality teachers to have access to training in all relevant fields including computer science education. i also worked with mr. petri on another amendment regarding charter schools which i withdrew and i want to talk about some additional changes that are included in our all-star act that i look forward to working with chairman kline and ranking member miller to make changes on the charter school programs that were in my amendment with mr. petri. the amendment with mr. petri would provide a way to grow and replicate charter schools that are demonstrating outstanding results across the country. there are six million charter schools yet there are over a million student on charter school waiting lists.

my amendment would have increased overall authorization for this high impact, low cost program to $330 million so that with our limbed federal resources we have a maximum impact on increasing choice and learning opportunities for families. my amendment would also have afloird continuation of the charter schools programs grants for the replication and expansion of high quality schools program. a very successful program that helps more families access the highest performing charter schools. in this time of austerity and constrained public resources we need to maximize the impact of every dollar spent by making sure we only invest in what works, fostering innovative new approaches for results and cost savings to achieve even greater gains in student achievement that means investing in those public charter schools that are getting great results as well as allowing charter school operators with a strong evidence base of student achievement, particularly with our most at-risk kids and families and robust management capacity to replicate and expand so they can serve more students. i look forward to continuing to work with chairman kline and

ranking member miller to include those priorities in he re-authorization and further legislation. with that, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman reserves. the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. i now would like to yield three minutes to my distinguished colleague from the education committee and the great state of wisconsin mr. petri. mr. petri: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. -- the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for three minutes. mr. petri: thank you. i would like to rise in support this bill, one of the concern is hear most is that federal money comes to local schools and districts in a variety of funding streams each with its own restrictions and reporting requirements. i'm constantly asked if there's a way to consolidate some of these funding pots so schools can better apply the funds to those areas where they will have the most effect f --

effect. these feelings are strongest in smaller or more rural schools where funding tends to be the most limited. h.r. 5 would give them that much-needed local flexibility. wisconsin schools are doing a lot of innovative things to prepare their students for success in the 21st century economy. they know that the nature of work is changing, jobs in manufacturing where wisconsin is the leader, require critical thinking and the ability to be innovative and work with people of varying skill levels and the ability to communicate effectively. these skills were favorably noted in a 2012 national research council report and a recent gallup poll that found that those who have those skills are twice as lick lie to have higher work quality than those who don't. wisconsin is a member of the partnership for 21st century skills a coalition of states, education groups, and employers that is working to ensure that students have these critical skills.

i hear from educators that these innovative programs help to bring to life the subjects that students are studying at school often renewing their focus on core academics. but again i also hear that schools and districts are ham strung by their inability to put federal funds to use in these innovative ways. so i'm pleased that the students -- student success act through its local academic flexibility grant and in other ways gives educate dwhrorse flexibility to pursue these innovative initiatives at the local level. i'd also like to mention the subject of geography which is a core academic subject under no child left behind that has never received the same level of support as other core academic subjects. the "national geographic" society has invested millions of its own dollars to help invest in the future of geographic education, a critical investment given the importance of geography to our national and international well being.

it's crit ka -- critical that geography be on a level playing field with other core academic subjects and this bill accomplishes that fund by give allowing funds to enhance the educational development of teachers on this subject. i want to emphasize my support for the rule and underlying bill and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. does the gentlelady from north carolina rere-serve in ms. foxx: yes, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. polis: i'd like to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from florida a former member of the rules committee, ms. castor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. ms. castor: i thank the gentleman for yielding and for his unceasing efforts to improve public education in america. mr. speaker, i rise today in strong opposition to this rule on house resolution 5 because the republican bill fails america's students. mr. speaker, america's public

schools are the envoif the world. we are fortunate -- envy of the world. we are fortunate to live in a country that believes that every child should be educated and given the opportunities to succeed in life. our public schools are one of the best examples of american values, no matter where a child comes from, no matter what challenges a student faces -- faces in life a disability, utism, poverty, that student can receive a good education. our local public schools are largely community based and locally run but the if federal government provides important support especially for working class communities for students with disabilities and learning chams. and we have important work to do to continue to improve publicls and e-- and recruit good teachers. but under this bill, republicans want to go in the other direction, the republican bill before the house today proposes a harsh prescription for students and families who seek better schools and talented teachers.

h.r. 5 got education funding -- guts education funding for students and teachers by other $1 billion below last year's levels at a time when we want high quality curriculum and states and local school districts have been challenged financially. back home in my tampa bay area district in florida, i have over 00 title one schools like -- 200 title one schools. these are students from working class families, and over 90% of these students qualify for free and reduced lunch. it is a long time compact between the federal government and our local schools that ensures support to these students that do not come from wealthy families. the students who attend these schools range from the ones with special needs that require title 1 help to work with exceptional education teachers, english language learns that -- learners that need help from translators and students with severe emotional behavior disorders. the republican bill retreats

from these students and the responsibility to education. no child left behind has been riddled with problems from the start and its one size fits all policy hasn't worked. but this republican bill is not the answer. it's a step backwards. i urge my threes to oppose the rule and the underlying bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: i would like to yield two minutes to our distinguished colleague from tennessee, congresswoman blackburn. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for two minutes. mrs. blackburn: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to thank the gentlelady from north carolina for her excellent work on this measure. all of the work she has done in committee, dr. foxx is such a skilled educator, we're pleased to have her in our conference and i know that chairman kline, who has really put a lot of effort into this bill, is so pleased to have her. i do rise to support h.r. 5, it's commonsense, it helps

parents, teachers, students, it will help prepare our children to compete in the global work force. it helps to right the wrongs of our broken education system by bringing back flexibility to the system and encouraging more effective teaching and learning in our schools. i have to tell you as a mother and grandmother, as a classroom volunteer and a home room mother for many years, i know how important it is for our children and the reason that we are bringing this bill forward is because of concern and preparing every child to compete. i'm troubled by a recent report that says the u.s. ranked 18th out of 23 industrialized countries in the quality and quantity of high school diplomas. these are all items that need our attention and the feedback we have gotten through the years from no child left behind

ne size fits all does not work. people do not work these decisions being made in washington, and the student success act would fix this by repealing the federal accountability system and restoring much-needed local control. it would also stop the administration's act of coercing states through race to the top funds and into adopting specific national academic standards otherwise known as common core. it would put an to end that. h.r. 5 would reverse the federal footprint in our education system by repealing the k to 12 waiver schemes the pet programs that have been put in place. this is the right step that we should take for our students, for their success, for their educational opportunities, and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired.

the -- does the gentlelady from north carolina reserve in ms. foxx: yes, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado. . polis: the gentlelady said the u.s. ranks 14th in quality and quantity of education. this will make this worse both with regard to quality and quantity. i'm hop nored to yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from california, ms. chu. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady is recognized for two minutes. s. chu: i rise in strong opposition to the rule and to h.r. 5. this bill radically reduces the role of the federal government in education at a time when we need to revitalize our education system. it slashes over $1 billion in funding to teach our kids. it eliminates accountability in

our education system that ep sures students graduate from high school and those with special needs don't get left behind. i am particularly concerned about the impact this bill will have on community services that benefit the students struggling the most. studies show that when we don't address students' social and economic disadvantages at school well, undo the work that's aghiveed having good schools and teachers with adequate resources. an astounding 2/3 of the achievement gap is due to factors outside of school. children are more likely to succeed in schools when they're -- when their comprehensive needs, nutrition, health, and a safe and stable home, are met. these support systems sometimes called wraparound services are particularly important for low-performing and low income schools that greatly benefit from these services. but instead of supporting programs that are scientifically proven to help

close the achievement gap, h.r. 5 takes away the designated funding for them and lets states do with the money as they please. it completely cuts funding for after school programs. it eliminates social and emotional programs that help keep our students safe, healthy, and ready to learn. and with the money that's left, there's no guarantee that it will be used to provide these services to students who need them the most. we shouldn't leave to chance whether a school will care about students beyond their test scores. but this bill sets a dangerous precedent by exempting the federal government from responsibility to ensure hools a adequately support students and families who face channels outside of school. instead of improving no child left behind, this bill takes us

even further backwards. i urge my colleagues to vote no on this rule and the underlying bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. does the gentleman from colorado reserve in mr. polis: yes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: i now would like to yield four minutes to my distinguished colleague from eorgia, mr. collins. mr. collins: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in strong support of the rule as well as the underlying bill, h.r. 5, the student success act, and i want to thank also, as others also, the gentlewoman from north carolina for her leadership on this important issue and the gentleman from colorado on his interest on this legislation as well, although we differ on what this legislation would do, i believe it's a conversation we need to have. you see, i have the privilege to be married to a public school teacher for 25 years. i also have three children who are the product of public school education, one of which is a special needs child who

has spinal biff da. i -- spinal bifida. when it gets down to it, this gets to the kids and this country and how they're educated and what role this body is to play in that. i believe that's an honest conversation. education, as i speak today, this is near and dear to my heart because i believe our democracy was founded on the principle that every child should have the opportunity to learn and i believe the goal of our educational system should instill a love of learning that will carry with them throughout their entire life. there is nothing better than walk in a room and see my child reading a book. a 14-year-old, a 17-year-old reading a book or learning. that is what we cry for as parents. whenever i'm home in georgia, i encounter numerous folks who tell me their concerns about the expansion of our federal government, not just the size but the scope and power.

parties and teachers i heard from lately and also live with, i am concerned about the topdown approach that this administration in washington seems to be taking on education. probably the best known example is the common core standard which has been mentioned already and washington wants to use as a national litmus test for states seeking funding. again, it's the carrot and stick approach. when we look at this, is that what we want us to be in the business of doing? as you will hear further from my colleagues, there are plenty of concern about the content of the so-called common core, and i could speak a lot about that but i choose to focus on one thing and that is i can't wrap myself around the fact there are so many wish who see washington's role in education expanded and beyond the level it should be. when that role should not exist on the level that it does. in fact, my friend from colorado, he made the statement, he said that the federal government needs to be an honest referee. and i appreciate that. however, i disagree in the fact

that using an honest referee to use a carrot and stick approach with money and standards is not the way it should work. i'm an old schooler, as i said before. i believe the referee on the football field should not be seen. this goes very much against that and the referee should be there but not be the center of attention in which washington has become in education. make no mistake, i believe our education system should be a global leader, and in order for our students to be competitive schools ld face, our need high standards. we've seen firsthand in this country what occurs when our students fall behind in stem education. that cannot continue to happen. we must raise the bar and demand excellence in our schools. however, education standards should be developed at the state and local level, by those intimately familiar with the needs of our children and the educational policy, not from inside the beltway. the beauty of public education is that every child, regardless of race, gender, religion, geography,e op hrtunity

to learn. our nation is great because our people are great, and if we as a nation fall, our -- fail in our most basic responsibility, educating our children, then we will not be a shining light in a dark world. i'm proud to be a member of a party that says that the best educational opportunities exist when the teachers are allowed to teach children how to learn, not how to bubble an examine. i'm tired of having to watch my wife worry more about having to fill out a form than doing her lessons plan the next -- lesson plans the next day because she's inundated. i'm proud we can teach and promote that on a federal -- not a federal level but a state and local level. current federal law prohibits certification of academic standards to ensure state and local control over the classroom. apparently and unfortunately this law just doesn't seem to matter up here. they decided that they know better than parents and teachers. as parents and husband of a

school teacher, that thinking doesn't fly with me. our education has its roots in the state and local government for a good reason. no one has a stronger interest in the child's success than his or her parents. no one knows what really works in the classrooms like our teachers. the communities surrounding the child understands the students' needs and do what it takes to ensure his or her success. i support the student success act because it places education decisions where it belongs, in the hands of parents and teachers. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. ms. foxx: i yield the gentleman 30 more seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for 30 seconds. mr. collins: mr. speaker, there's a lot in this country -- there's a lot this country can do to empower our kids to take the challenges of the 21st century but those changes must be considered and debated and adopted by parents whose children will live the with the consequences of those choices. it belongs not in washington and this n street bill helps this.

i strongly support h.r. 5 and support this rule and will yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from north carolina wish to reserve? ms. foxx: yes, mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. polis: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield two minutes to the gentleman from texas, mr. doggett. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. doggett: thank you. mr. speaker, think of the excitement next month as so many young americans return to school and what this legislation does, it would greet them with a big cut in funds to our most disadvantaged schools. i can tell you that in texas governor perry and his cohorts will redirect these funds from disadvantaged students faster than you can say oops. and you will find other governors across america with a similar tepid support for public education, the same kind of people who have come to this floor and called the government -- called them government schools instead of public schools, you'll find them

seeing cuts to disadvantaged students as the easiest way to plug a state budget gap. while no child left behind is flawed, removing support for economically disadvantaged students is not the way to fix it. at one middle school in san antonio, in one of our poorest neighborhoods, title 1 funding has helped principal mary ollison and her team make real progress. a 30% improvement in math, reading and science scores. now the district's second best record in attendance and disciplinary actions have been reduced 75%. those educators are out there struggling. now is not the time to remove the support they need to do their very difficult job. cutting this support would turn back the clock on the progress there and across america. title 1 funding has already been cut for the next school year. this really is a leave more

students behind act that will lock in those cuts and allow state diversion of much-needed funds. and really this bill turns a blind eye to the achievement gap, to the racial disparities in our classrooms and it particularly ignores the need of students who want to learn english by cutting the english language learners program which helps many of our latino neighbors in texas. with the damage that has already been inflicted in my home state to public schools, now is not the time to reduce federal aid to our schools that are the most disadvantaged. mr. speaker, this bill needs to be sent to detention, it needs to be given an f, it needs to be rejected. it is not the way to strengthen education. i believe in our public schools as a way to bind our communities together. we need to be investing more, not doing less. i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. does the gentleman from colorado reserve? mr. polis: yes. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, over the last four decades, the federal government's role in elementary and secondary education has increased dramatically. the department of education currently runs more than 80 k-12 education programs. many of which are duplicative or ineffective. as a school board member, i saw how the vast reporting requirements for these federal programs tie the hands of state and local leaders who want to make the best education available to their students. since 1965, federal education funding has tripled, yet student achievement remains flat. more money is clearly not going to solve the challenges we face in education. our children deserve better. it's time to acknowledge more taxpayer dollars and more

federal intrusion cannot address the challenges facing schools. h.r. 5, the student success act, will streamline the nation's education system by eliminating more than 70 duplicative and ineffective federal education programs, cutting through the bureaucratic red tape that's stifling innovation in the classroom, granting states and school districts the authority to use federal education funds to meet the unique needs of their students. the bill also requires the secretary of education to identify the bureaucrats in washington who run the programs to be consolidated or eliminated in h.r. 5 and eliminate those positions to ensure that the bureaucracy shrinks with the programs. additionally, this legislation will take definitive steps to limit the secretary's authority y prohibited him or her from coercing states from adopting

academic standards, like the common core. it also halts the executive overreach in the waiver process by prohibiting the secretary from imposing extraneous conditions on states and local districts in exchange for a waiver. he student success act protects state and local autonomy by removing the secretary's authority to add new requirements to federal programs. mr. speaker, federal policy should not tie the hands of local educators to make the best decisions for their students and communities. h.r. 5 is a step in that direction, and i urge my colleagues to support the rule and the underlying bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman reserves the balance of her time. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. 8 1/2 minutes left on your side. mr. polis: mr. speaker, i yield one minute to the gentleman from new jersey, the ranking member of the education and work force subcommittee on health, employment, labor and

pensions, mr. andrews. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for one minute. mr. andrews: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. andrews: if a school said that african-american children could not take advanced math it would be wrong and illegal. i think most of us agree if a school said that jewish children could not enroll in a certain program that would be wrong and it is illegal. in most states in this country, though, if a school says a child who is gay or lesbian or bisexual or transgender or perceived to be, there is no legal protection for that child. this is not simply a theoretical problem. lgbt children have been bullied and harassed and mistreated across this country. the stories are heartbreaking. they often end in family tragedy like suicide. there is a curious proposal that would remedy this injustice that is sponsored by members of the house of representatives and there was an attempt to make that in order for debate and a vote.

it should have been and it was not. this is a serious issue. majority s than a agrees. no child should be left behind. certainly not left behind because of their race, their religion, their ethnicity. that should include sexual orientation as well. for that and many other reasons i oppose the bill. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. you have 15 1/2 minutes remaining. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, republicans do agree that schools should be safe places for all students to learn. however, as my friends and colleagues know, the amendment to which they have been referring had several parliamentary problems when it

was introduced. to begin with, it was not germane to the underlying bill. additionally, it violated cut-go provisions and house rules. my understanding is that although the cut-go issues were ultimately resolved, the amendment was not redrafted to fix the germaneness problem. for these reasons, the in dment was not made order. no, not until i'm finished. however, i appreciate his strong feelings on the issue and respect his desire to protect students. mr. speaker, i'm proud of this bill and i'm proud of the open and transparent process by what -- which it has been brought up for consideration, and i eserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. polis: i was going to say to the gentlelady that the

ut-go policy was addressed and it could have been addressed as many others are before it was brought to the floor. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman is recognized for ne and a half minutes. ms. lee: i think we need to address this, but this bill is not the answer. it guts education, it violates the civil rights of students and does not support educators. it leaves state of the unions with disables, low income students, state of the unions of color, english language learners, migrant students and lgbt students out in the cold. the so-called student support act which is really the letting students down act, that's what it really is it guts education, it guts it by $1 billion below locking l 2012 levels,

in these already detrimental sequester cuts. it would fail to support meaningful improvements at the lowest performing schools. this bill does not support students, it does not protect students and in no way does it guarantee access to equal quality public education. finally, mr. speaker, let me just say, the rule fails to make in order the student nondiscrimination amendment which would protect lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender students across the country from harassment and bullying. every child deserves these protections. so we should go back to the drawing board on this bill. we should call it for what it is. and that's letting students down. that's what this bill does. and we should really look at how we invest in our future through education rather than making it more difficult to improve student achievement. once again, this bill begins to

erode our system of public education, it violates our student civil rights, it does not support our teachers and our educators, and finally, let me just say, it also fails to prioritize stem education. that would eliminate the math and science partnership program which really is the only program at the department of education focused solely on teacher professional development in stem subjects. so i hope that we vote against this rule, excuse me, and also the underlying bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. does the gentleman from colorado reserve? the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so ordered. ms. foxx: our colleagues have said that h.r. 5 guts education funding. that is not accurate. h.r. 5 authorizes funding for all programs under the act as

the final appropriated amount for sembings; -- esca programs in 2013. those amounts are level funded for the six-year life of the bill. while authorizing spending for the act is the tissue at the final f.y. 2013 level, it prioritizes federal spend big protecting core programs. title 1 aid for the disadvantaged as well as targeted population programs, migrant education, neglected and delinquent english language acquisition, indian education and rural education are authorized at f.y. 2012 levels. adecisionally, because the bill consolidates many existing programs, funds currently spent on those lower priority programs have been used to increase the authorization for these core programs. as a result, our bill would thoffers more spending, i'll emphasize, more spending for these core programs in f.y. 2014 than the president's own

f.y. 2014 budget proposal. with that, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. polis: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield one and a half minutes to the gentleman from rhode island, mr. cicilline. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one and a half minutes. mr. cicilline: i rise in opposition to the rule and underlying bill this education bill fails students in so many ways it's difficult to know where to begin. in addition to putting forth a proposal that will cause so ch harm, the majority denied many opportunities for amendments and improvements to the legislation that we are considering today. among those amendments that was denied consideration was one offered by the gentleman from colorado, mr. polis. to prohibit discrimination in public schools based on actual or perceived sexual orientation or gender identity. the student nondiscrimination act is an important piece of legislation that will protect

lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered students across the country from harassment and bullying and would hold schools accountable for failing to protect the nation's children. the federal government has a responsibility, mr. speaker, to do all we can do to ensure the safest and best possible environment in which students can learn. when students are bullied or harassed because of who they are, they're denied the opportunity to achieve their full potential. refusing to include provisions of the student nondiscrimination act means we're failing our duty to protect all of our nation's children and to guarantee them a safe and nurturing environment in which to learn. i thank the gentleman and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from colorado reserves. the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. h.r. 5 continues the charter school, magnet school and tutoring programs to provide parents with more choices in

educating their children. along with parental involvement, encouraging and supporting effective teachers in the classroom is critical to student success and quality education. most americans can regail you with stories -- regale you with stories of their favorite teachers who made a lasting impact on their lives. h.r. 5 also supports the development and implementation of teacher evaluation systems deintinde states and school districts with input from parents, teachers, school leaders and other stake holders. in addition to evaluation systems, the student success ct reduces confusion and duplication by consolidating teacher quality programs into a single flexible grant program to be used by states and school districts to support creative approaches to recruit and retain effective educators. the recurring theme throughout this legislation is empowering the people closest to students,

to make decisions for their communities and ensuring that the law is flexible to meet the needs of diverse states, regions, and student populations. mr. speaker, with that, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady reserves. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. polis: i yield one and a half minutes to the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for one and a half minutes. mr. blumenauer: i appreciate the gentleman's courtesy. h.r. 5 takes a u-turn for educational policy. it is interesting, our dear friends on the republican side of the aisle in a farm bill a couple of weeks ago managed to unite environmentalists, farm groups, taxpayers advocates in unanimous opposition to their proposal and they've done it again. they've brought together business, education, civil rights groups, a broad cross section of organizations that don't agree with each other

very often to oppose this provision. in part it's what happens when you simply refuse to work in a bipartisan and cooperative fashion as the committee used to do. i had a very viffed example of the impact of the shortsighted approach. i represent grant high school in portland, oregon, they won the national competition for the u.s. constitution contest that project, through we the people, has been zeroed out by congress and programs like this are not going to come back if we approve this approach. it not only cuts -- continues to undercut programs for education, the overall spending for education is in fact dramatically reduced. it keeps the sequestration cuts. we're going to lose over $10 million in oregon, for instance, and worse, it locks in the post-sequestration funding level through 2019.

well, in addition it takes away protections that have -- for key priority programs, dismantling provisions to ensure equity. this legislation undermines the federal partnership with the state and local communities to try to support education. opposed by a wide away -- array of groups and why this house should reject it as well. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. it's puzzling why our colleagues continue to misrepresent what h.r. 5 does when the public can read the bill and know the truth. for example, our colleagues have said that h.r. 5 eliminates protections for students with disabilities, low income students, and students from major racial and ethnic

groups. this charge is simply false. the student success act maintains annual testing requirements in reading, math, and science. it also maintains the laws -- the law's requirements that schools and districts dising a ate and prereport subgroup performance. this provides that special needs students and other groups are transparent and parents have the information they need to evaluate schools properly. critics in this approach believe in the widely discredited premise captured in no child left behind that the federal government can and should devise an accountability system appropriate for all of the nearly 100,000 public schools in the country. frankly, mr. speaker, that's one of the most widespread criticisms of what we have known as no child left behind which was really a re-authorization of this bill

several years ago. so it's puzztology me that they continue to criticize what's bad about what exists and yet say they want to do it again. doesn't make any sense. mr. polis: will the gentlelady yield. ms. foxx: no i won't. thank you very much. h. reform 5 -- h.r. 5 is based on a different premise that true education reform -- reform comes not from the top down but the bottom up. acknowledging that washington can't fix schools doesn't dp mean we're backing away from the belief that schools should have standards to which they are accountable and those standards should be equally aplanned parenthood across all school groups. it means we must empower and trust states and communities, those closest to the classroom, to develop an accountability and school improvement system that best meets the educational needs of their students. all of the wisdom of the world is not in washington, d.c., mr.

speaker. it is out there in the country. it's out there with the local people, with the american people, who are very bright and know how to do things for themselves. with that, i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina reserves. the gentleman from colorado is recognized. mr. polis: i would like to inquire of the gentlelady if she has additional speakers ms. foxx: we do not. mr. polis: i'd like to inquire how much time remains. the speaker pro tempore: 13 minutes. mr. polis: i yield myself the remainder of the time. in response to the allegation that members on our side of the aisle have not -- have misrepresented the bill, that's completely false. the bill does in fact remove the 1% cap for students with disabilities. a school district could look and say we're not looking at whether students with

disabilities are making progress at all. perhaps we're excluding every child with an i.e.p., we're excluding every child that receives federal funding for taxpayer money that we are custodians for. in addition, it allowings states define success downward, rather than having meaningful college and career-ready standards, a state could say, we're going to write our standards to make students look brilliant then we'll pat ourselveses on the back and say, job well done. those kids may not be ready for college or for careers. we as a nation state cannot afford to do -- not to do bet we are regard to serving our public. this bill slashes education funding. i don't know how you call moving $.6 billion worth of program into a $2 billion block grant anything less than slashing education funding. what's being eliminated? school improvement grants, turning around some of our lowest performing schools and giving them the opportunity to succeed. race to the top which is

encouraged reforms at the state level including my home state of colorado, which replaced teacher tenure with evaluation system with bipartisan support. investments in innovation, replacing important tangible programs that are some of the highest leverage dollars that the federal government spends with just a block granting money to states, sending more money into the quote-unquote system, without any reforms or any accountability required. as elected officials we're concerned about our nation's welfare and as providers of 10% of education funding we in the federal government have an obligation to provide transparency and accountability and yes to be a referee in the k through 12 education system. we have an obligation to ensure that cools cannot fail kids year after year. we cannot retreat from the goals of no child left behind. while it was flawed, it shined light on achievement gaps for minorities and low-income

students and has unleashed state and local base red form we are just beginning and continue to benefit from. we need to use what we've learned from our experiences under no child left behind to build on what reform-minded states and districts are doing. we need to encourage flexibility, improving -- improve and streamline the federal role, invest in what works and change what dun work. i look forward to working together across the isle to provide more accountability, ensure funding equity in our nation's schools. h.r. 5 would bring us back to a time where adults have every incentive to hide poor student performance and students are left to attend failing schools for generations without choice and without recourse. mr. speaker, i urge my colleagues to vote no and defeat this partisan bill. i urge a no vote on this restrictive rule on the bill. i urge my colleagues to move forward with improving the public education system and i yield back the balance of my

time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlelady from north carolina is recognized. you have nine minutes remaining. ms. foxx: thank you, mr. speaker. many of my republican colleagues and i feel that the federal government should be out of education altogether. but that is not what we are recommending here. rather, h.r. 5 is a reasonable first step in empowering the people closest to the students to make decisions for those students. that being said, as long as taxpayer money is being used for the federal government to fund education, congress must ensure that funding recipients are being held accountable for how they use that hardworking taxpayer money. washington must live within its means just as families all across this country do, and limited resources require wise stewardship. again, those closest to the

student, parents, teachers, principals, local school boards and local school leaders and states know what works best for their diverse student populations. the student success act recognizes this by allowing states to develop their own accountability systems that incorporate three broad parameters. an annual measure of the academic achievement of all public school students against state academic standards. annual evaluation and identification of the academic performance of each public school in the state based on student academic achievement. a school improvement plan to be implemented by school districts when schools don't meet the state standard. these broad accountability measures not only serve to steward taxpayer money carefully but ensure parents have the information needed to make the best decisions about their school's education. let's give control back to the people who know the needs of their students and communities

best and pass this rule and underlying bill. we tried it the other way, mr. speaker, and it hasn't worked. control from washington has not brought us improvement in our educational programs. mr. speaker, my background as an educator, school board member, mother and grandmother reinforces my belief that students are best served when people at the local level are in control of education decisions. i also believe that education is the most important tool americans at any age can have. i was the first person in my family to graduate from high school and went to school where i worked full time and attended school part time. it took me seven years to earn my bachelor's degree, and i continued to work my way through my masters and doctorial degrees. from my own experience, i am convinced this is the greatest country in the world for many

reasons not the least of which is that a person like me who grew up extremely poor in a house with no electricity and no running water with parents with very little formal education and no prestige at all could work hard and be elected to the united states house of representatives. no legislation is perfect, and that is why i look forward to working with my colleagues to address their concerns and improve the student success act through the amendment process. however, i've never been one to let the perfect be the enemy of the good and while h.r. 5 isn't perfect, it's a step in the right direction of reducing the federal role in education, empowering parents, teachers and local school districts in increasing local control. that's why i'm a proud co-sponsor of this legislation and urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this rule and the underlying bill. i yield back the balance of my time and i move the previous question on the resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the

gentlewoman yields back the balance of her time. the question is on ordering the previous question on the resolution. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the ayes have it. ms. foxx: on that i request the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from north carolina has requested the yeas and nays. all those in favor of taking this vote by the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. members will record their votes y electronic device. pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule 20, this 15-minute vote on ordering the previous question will be followed by five-minute votes on adoption of the house resolution number 303, if ordered, and approval of the journal. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 232. the nays are 192 and the previous question is ordered. the question is on adoption of the resolution. as many as are in favor will signify by saying aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the gentleman from colorado. mr. polis: on that i request a recorded vote. the speaker pro tempore: a recorded vote is requested. those in favor of a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 230. the nays are 190. the resolution is adopted. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid on the table. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20, the unthe unfinished business is the -- the unfinished business is the question on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal which the yeas and nays were ordered. the question is on agreeing to the speaker's approval of the journal. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 278. the nays are 143, with one answering present. the journal stands approved.

for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to remove my name from h.r. 580. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota rise? >> mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent that all members may have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on h.r. 5. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. pursuant to house resolution 303 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole on the state of the union for the consideration of h.r. 5. the chair appoints the gentleman from washington, mr. hastings, to preside over the committee of the whole. the chair: the committee -- the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for consideration of h.r.

5, which the clerk will report by title. the clerk: a bill to support state and local accountability for public education, protect state and local authority, inform parents of performance of their children's schools, and purpose. the chair: pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered as read the first time. the gentleman from minnesota, mr. kline, and the gentleman from california, mr. miller, will each control 30 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise today in strong support of h.r. 5, the student success act. and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for as much time as he may consume. the gentleman will suspend. the committee will be in order. i ask members to take their conversations off the floor. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized.

mr. kline: thank you, again, mr. chairman. the student success act will take a critical step toward real reform. real reform of our education system. this legislation will restore local control, empower parents, eliminate unnecessary washington red tape, and intrusion in schools, and support innovation and excellence in the classroom. as chairman of the house education and work force committee, i have heard countless stories of the amazing progress being made in schools across the country. this success isn't due to heavy-handed dictates from washington. rather it reflects the work of dedicated parents, teachers, principles, superintendents, and state officials who decide the status quo is just not good enough for our kids. in dozens of committee hearings over the last few years, my colleagues and i have had the honor of speaking with many of these reformers. we learned about the groundbreaking programs and initiatives they have implemented to serve students more effectively. we listened to the ways they are working to hold schools more

accountable not just to the government but their local communities and families. we heard impassioned stories how much more these dedicated reformers would do for our children if not for the slew of onerous washington mandates and outdated regulations standing in the way. our children deserve better. but instead of working with congress to fix the problems in current k-12 education law, the obama administration chose to go rogue, granting temporary waivers in exchange for implementing the president's preferred reforms. 39 states and the district of columbia are now beholden to new federal standards crafted without congressional consent, representing an unprecedented expansion of federal control over our nation's classrooms. it's time for a new way forward, mr. chairman, that starts with passage of the student success act. this commonsense legislation reflects what we have learned from parents, teachers, and education leaders nationwide and embodies four principals vital to a stronger education system in which all students have the

opportunity to succeed. first, the bill before us today will reduce the federal footprint in our classrooms. for too long federal overreach has tied the hands of american educators. the student success act will put an end to the administration's convoluted conditional waiver scheme and take concrete steps to rein in the secretary of education's authority. the legislation also will eliminate more than 70 perfectly programs in the rigid federal accountability metrics and overly prescriptive school improvement requirements and grant states the freedom, the freedom to develop their own plans to raise the bar. all of which will help ensure more focused, streamlined, and transparent federal role in the nation's education system. second, the legislation will restore local control by providing states and school districts the flexibility they need to spend federal funds where they are needed. school leaders know best which programs will have the greatest benefit for their students' achievement.

we must support policies that encourage more local decisionmaking and allow these knowledgible school leaders and administrators to do what they do best, ed america's children. third, the student success act recognizes a better education system cannot come without better educators. the legislation will eliminate federal requirements that value credentials over a teacher's ability to educate students. instead, states and school district should develop their own evaluation systems based in part on student achievement, ensuring teachers can be judged fairly, on their effectiveness in the classroom. finally, the student success act will empower parents. no one has a better understanding of a child's strengths and challenges that his or her parents. and no one, no one is more invested in making sure their child achieves his or her full potential. h.r. 5 provides parents more freedom and choice by re-authorizing and strengthening the charter school program and improving tutoring and public school choice initiatives.

we have an opportunity before us today for the first time in more than a decade to approve new k-12 education legislation in the house of representatives. we have an opportunity to lend our support to legislation that will tear down barriers to progress and grant states and districts more freedom to think bigger, innovate, and take whatever steps are necessary to put more children on a path to a brighter future. i urge my colleagues to join me in taking this critical step toward real reform and ask you to vote yes on the student success act. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i thank the chair. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. miller: mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to h.r. 5, the letting students down act. h.r. 5 is supposed to be the re-authorization of the elementary and secondary education act, and a rewrite of no child left behind. the elementary-connectedary 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. advocates the federal government's responsibility to ensure every child has an equal opportunity to 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 the 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 re-authorize and to update the elementary, secondary education act. we all recognize that a good education is a great equalizer, no matter where you come from, it is necessary for a strong economy and a vibrant democracy. each re-authorization of the elementary-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 grafting the no child left behind act more than a decade ago. we agreed there was a soft bigotry of he low expectations in our education system. we agreed that schools were hiding low achievement by some by using the averages of performance in their 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 students. 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 pros and cons, i recognize that we now need to modernize with some -- education laws, no child left behind with fundamental changes. no child left behind is very much in the education reform of the past. it is inflexible and encourages some to lower their standards, to reduce their standards, to dumb down their standards. this nation cannot tolerate. that's why it's time to rewrite this law. to embrace the principle that all students can learn if given an opportunity, to encourage high standards that meet the needs of the 21 stth 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 not -- by not guaranteeing all

students have access to world class, well-rounded educational students 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 to states and districts adequately fund their schools. it now lets -- it lets down students with disabilities by allowing schools to lower their standards for educating these children. it lets our students down by not building on a broad consensus 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 disability says that this bill would dramatically alter the academic landscape for students with disability, jeopardizing their ability to graduate from high school, to go on to college, or to obtain employment. the national conference and

civil rights believes that the merits 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, native american students to be reallocated for other purposes. the business community owe poses this bill, the u.s. chamber of commerce is disappointed 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 the basics of read and math. . i i agree with these concerns. this bill is a huge step outside the mainstream consensus that an even bigger step backward for our nation's students. we should be embracing the drive toward high standards across this country to ensuring that all of our children and all of the states benefit from this improved education system. i yield myself an additional 30 seconds. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. miller: i hope my colleagues on the other side of the aisle will agree that will a bipartisan elementary secondary

education authorization in the right process when we should move forward. this is about every child in our country getting an education they deserve regardless of poverty, disability, or other challenges. to walk away from that commitment means letting our students down. it means letting the parents down. it means letting down the taxpayers who demand accountability. it means letting down teachers who deserve support while struggling for the toughest job around. it means letting down businesses who are counting on our school system to produce college and career ready students. 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. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: thank you, mr. chairman. i now yield four minutes to the chairman of the subcommittee on early childhood, elementary and secondary education in the committee, mr. rokita. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for four minutes. mr. rokita: mr. speaker, i stand in support of parents,

teachers and our communities. i stand in support of local government versus federal government and most importantly i stand in support of our children and urge my colleagues and all of them to pass the student access act. i want to thank the distinguished gentleman from minnesota for his leadership and the members of the committee on education and work force in efforts of writing this legislation. the student success act is a huge step forward that empowers parents and teachers to make the decisions regarding education of our children while maintaining high expectations teacher ring effectiveness. they have done little to improve education in our system. and now they want what really amounts to a national curriculum but is there any doubt that a one-size-fits-all approach have left far too many of our children behind? we wrote this legislation because we believe that parents and teachers care for our hildren more than career

bureaucrats at the department of education. we trust parents. we trust ourselves. we trust the states and our communities to determine what success is and how best to chieve it. what i saw in the students is young people reaching and even exceeding their potential. what that visit also showed, and i have read it in letters i received and saw it again as recently as this week at the two river school in washington, d.c., was that when given a choice, mr. chairman, parents will put their kids in the schools their education needs and not the bureaucrats. choice works and it shouldn't be tied to cookie cutter washington standards. it should be about what works and what doesn't work. it is one more example that the best ideas don't come from the top down, don't come from congress or even the executive branch.

they come from those who care the most about our children. and that's parents and communities. it's time to step back and truly ask what's best for our children and families. you know, i came to washington as part of a new crew who came here to change how washington does business and the student success act is certainly different by washington standards. as we've just heard. those on the other side of the aisle always advocate education policy that tells us as parents washington ers that knows best and it can be solved by bigger bureaucracy. this is nothing sure of arrogant and pessimistic. it's pessimistic because it says when given the opportunities in the best interest of children, parents will fail and washington is smarter. i'm an optimist and i'm also a realist. and we are optimistic that parents know what is best for their children. they need us to cut the washington red tape blocking

their way. and for our optimism we are likely to be the subject of demagoguery in this debate. critics will say we want to harm children by cutting bureaucracy in washington. we just heard some of that. of course they ignore the track record of a bureaucracy that treats our children as nothing more than nameless, faceless statistics. bureaucracy that demands we continue throwing good money after bad because these false arguments have been around for far too long. if we are to truly be a society that prioritizes education and the success of our children we must no longer throw money away. we must trust to know what's best for students, not the president and not the secretary of education. this bill does that. the student success act empowers teachers and students maintain high standards, reduce the enormous footprint of the education bureaucracy and finally gives parents, teachers and states the flexibility they need?

-- they need -- i thank the gentleman. i won't need it. it gives the flexibility they need, mr. chairman, in setting curriculum and educating our children. i urge, again, all of my colleagues to support this bill. with that i yield. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i yield 1 1/2 minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. andrews, a member of the committee. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey is rked for 1 -- recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. andrews: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the chair: without objection, so ordered. mr. andrews: after brown vs. the board of education, the 1965, congress passed a law that said we should have federal resources for the children that were achieving least in america's most difficult schools. many of whom were children of color. for 35 years after that, the essential strategy of the elementary-secondary education act was to send federal money to that's schools and hope they tried their best. it didn't work.

didn't work. 2001, a truly bipartisan effort, led by chairman miller at the time, speaker boehner, who was chairman of the committee at the time, the late senator kennedy and president bush and others got together and said, listen, we'll keep the resources going but measure whether children can read and calculate and we're going to see what happens. the first five years after that law passed, there were more gains that had been made in the previous 15 years for african-american and latino children. now, we hit a wall in about 2005, and rather than think about why that wall was hit and how we could work together to fix it, this bill goes in a whole different direction backwards to 1965. this bill essentially says no strings attached, here's billions of dollars to local schools. we trust and hope you'll do your best. i think most of them will. i think most of them will. but history shows that some of

them won't, and when they leave behind african-american children, leave behind latino children, leave behind children with disability, that's not good enough for them and that's not good enough for our country. we should oppose this bill. i yield back. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: mr. chairman, i now yield two minutes to the gentlelady from florida, ms. ros-lehtinen. the chair: the gentlelady from florida is recognized for two minutes. ms. ros-lehtinen: well, i thank the chairman and i thank the chairman for yielding. like many of my colleagues, i support h.r. 5, the student success act. i believe that states and school districts should be empowered to set their own priorities when educating our nation's children. i also believe in supporting florida's parents and their teachers and administrators to make sure they have the resources necessary to give our children a world-class education including in civics. civics education, mr. chairman,

the study of the right and duties of citizenship under our government, is an essential component to sustaining our constitutional democracy. there is no more important task than the development of an informed, effective and responsible citizenry. according to the 2010 national assessment for educational progress, that's our nation's report card, only 24% of high school seniors scored proficient in civics. that means they had problems with the u.s. constitution, with civil rights, with our social system and our court system. only 22% of eighth graders scored proficient, meaning they could not recognize the role performed by the supreme court or identify the purpose of the bill of rights. civics education programs, like close-up, aim to improve the dismal results by allowing students and their teachers to participate in activities here in our nation's capital to

increase civic responsibility and a true understanding of the federal government. are engagement activities essential. they're important for underserved populations like in my congressional district, and i support programs that allow elementary school and secondary school students to improve academic achievement through civics education. so i'm glad that the student success act empowers states and school districts to determine their own priorities and i urge support for specific programs like civic education and i thank the gentleman for the time and i yield him back the balance of my time. the chair: the time of the gentlelady has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i yield one minute to the gentleman from texas, mr. hinojosa, a member of the committee. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. hinojosa: i rise in strong opposition to h.r. 5, it denies children to high-quality education and a chance to lead successful and prosperous lives. mr. speaker, i chose not to offer any amendments today

because i believe this republican bill is beyond exacerbate ould existing things in public education causing irreparable harm to disadvantaged students. h.r. 5 slashes education by over $1 billion next year by locking in the sequester funding levels at a time when our nation's schools are becoming increasingly diverse. now more than ever, our nation's public schools need increased federal funding to prepare all students for college careers and to equip them with a well-rounded education. to make matters worse, the republican bill removes the maintenance of effort requirement in current law that ensures that states maintain education funding. simply put, this is no time to gut critical education funding for america's children. this republican bill abandons the federal government's historic commitment to educating disadvantaged populations. h.r. 5 blocks grants, vital programs targeted for english

language learners, migrant workers, indian education and allows states and districts to siphon away these federal funds and use them for other purposes. this republican bill has no expectation that all students graduate from high school and are prepared for college and careers. more to the point, h.r. 5 does not require states to set college and career ready standards and eliminates performance targets for all students. mr. miller: i yield the gentleman 30 additional seconds. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hinojosa: i am concerned that this republican bill walks away from english language learners by removing measurable performance targets for content, mastery and second language acquisition. furthermore, it's failing to require native language assessment. in a gleblely competitive world, all -- globally competitive world, all students need the equipment they need in school and in life.

i encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to join me in opposition to h.r. 5, and i yield back. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: mr. chairman, now i yield two minutes to a member of the committee, the gentleman from south carolina, mr. wilson. the chair: the gentleman from south carolina is recognized for two minutes. mr. wilson: i would like to thank the chairman for yielding. i'm very grateful for chairman john kline and subcommittee chairman todd rokita. big government creates big problems. our education system needs limited government reform. having access to the highest quality education paves the path for tremendous opportunities, success and fulfillment. locally elected school boards, hardworking teachers, school administrators and active parents know what's best for our children's education needs, not washington bureaucrats. the passage of today's bill, the student success act, will promote our education system by eliminating washington's

influence so that our leaders on the local level and classroom teachers have the power to make decisions to help america's children succeed. south carolina's second district has a wide range of diverse school districts. we have children from all backgrounds of life, wealthy, poor, rural and urban communities. as an appreciative husband to a retired school teacher, i've seen firsthand what we need to do to help our children succeed. the best way to adequately prepare our children for the future is to empower local school boards who wants input from teachers and students. what works in one area may not work in another. we must change course. it is time for a different commonsense approach. we must reform our education system in order to provide a brighter future for our children and grandchildren.

i urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this piece of legislation. by putting faith in our educators, school board members, parents and administrators, we can give a child quality education to fulfill their dreams. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i yield to the gentleman from rhode island, mr. langevin, for one minute. the chair: the gentleman from rhode island is recognized for ne minute. mr. langevin: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, so order. mr. langevin: i thank the gentleman for yielding this ill fails to enact real reform and fails to invest in a good work force. it does not invest in quality teacher education development programs. of additional concern is that . reform 5 reverses decades of

protections for state of the unions with disabilities. ky not support a bill that undoes so much of what we have fought for and accomplished over the last 30 years. instead, i'll support the substitute offered by ranking member miller which addresses many of the concerns that i have and with whm i was proud to work on a provision that includes comprehensive career counseling as an allowable use of local funds. as co-chair of the caucus, i ow that cool councils play a critical role in helping the next ove into step to further their career. i think the ranking -- i think the ranking member's decision is the way to go and i thank the ranking member. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from -- the chair: the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: i yield two minutes to the chame of the subcommittee on health, employment, labor, dr. row.

the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. roe: i rise in strong support today of the student success act h.r. 5. the goal of increasing accountability under no child left behind was a worthy one. but the reality of the law is that there is too much federal control, too many mandates put on our states, our local school administrators, an our featurers. our bill today makes needed reforms to move us closer to our shared goal of ensuring every american child receives a quality education. under the student success act, we're giving states and school administrators the flexibility to meet this unique need and understand they understand far better than washington bureaucrats. i've listened carefully to concerns of teachers in tennessee's first district and if there's one thing i've learned it's that the current accountability mechanisms undermine parent's confidence in their schools without provide anything useful information. by the way, my next door neighbor is an elementary school principal,, and i speak

to him regularly about these things. today we have an unworkable accountability metric, repealing the highly qualified teacher requirement if if -- in favor of a state and local teacher effectiveness. the effectiveness of a teacher should be based on how well a student learns not how many diplomas hang on the wall. we need to epstep back and ask a simple question, are these programs meeting the needs of students? that's why we create the local academic flexibility grant that replaces 70 of these overlapping and ineffective programs with one fleblingsable grant to states. with these grants, states and school districts can help ensure local challenges are met. because we have too many kids trapped in failing schools this bill strengthens charter schools which have become a viable educational option for thousands of hardworking students without other options.

finally, in recent years, the administration has been able to coerce states into adopt regular formsudesing what is known as the common core standards initiative by offering waivers from current law. many are concerned common core could become the foundation for a national curriculum. this bill will prevent states from required to department common core and ensures states will be able to choose which reforms they will enact. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentleman has expired. mr. row: i yield back the balance of my time. -- mr. roe: i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i yield to the gentlewoman from california. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. mrs. davis: a group of civic leaders and others agree that h.r. 5 is not the right answer. h.r. 5 fails on all measures to promote educational equity,

provide a well-rounded education, and help struggling schools succeed. it creates evaluation systems without providing professional development. it fails to make the right investments by block granting critical programs an locking in across the board cuts. what kind of message does this bill send to our future leaders, to our scientists, our teachers, and innovators? investing in education, well, it's not just good for our economy. our economy and our competitiveness. it is key, it is key to our national security as generals and admirals have expressed to me through my work as ranking member of the armed services personnel committee system of now more than ever, we can't afford to let our kids down and i urge my colleagues to say no to h.r. 5. the speaker pro tempore: the time of the gentlelady has

expire. the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: i yield two minutes to the chairman of the work force protection subcommittee, the gentleman from michigan, mr. walberg. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman -- the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. walberg: our children are being held back by an jut dated, cumbersome and overbearing federal system. it's clearly not working. statistics she that only 34% -- show that only 34% of our eighth graders are proficient in reading and nearly one in four high school students fail to graduate on time. for the last 40 years we have not seen any significant improvement in students' math, english, and science scores. these results are especially frightening at a time when we're spending three times more on education than we did in 1970. since then, the federal government's arm has extended even further into local school districts leaving teachers and parents restricted by a growing

number of rules an costly requirements. one of the worst examples of this, the department of ducation has chosen to grant states waivers from a failing policy but only those state december sided to adopt standards deemed necessary by washington bureaucrats and not by congress, let alone their educators. students and paraphernalias need real solutions with freedom an choice -- students and parents need reel solutions with freedom and choice. we neat to -- need to get the federal government out of the way and work with teachers, parents, and state leaders who are workingrd to raise the stan car of our schools in michigan and throughout the nation the student success act emphasis on increased state and local control by people closest to our kids will help put more than students on a course for a successful future. as a parent and grandparent, i encourage my colleagues to support the student success act and i yield back.

the chair: the time of the gentleman has expire. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i yield one minute to the gentlewoman from florida, ms. debbie wasserman schultz. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for one minute. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise in opposition to the underlying bill on behalf of an entire generation of south florida's children. the stakes could not be higher. our k through 12 public education system is essential -- essential to prepare the next generation of americans to succeed in life. it's why access to quality public education has been a priority for me throughout my career. yet faced with this national priority, the bill before us is a step backwards, not forward. it locks in $1.3 billion in irresponsible sequester cuts including tens of millions of dollars that will come straight out of the class roops of brow ward and miami-dade counties that i represent. for a teacher i know it means

fewer resources for her second graders, less extra help and fewer opportunities for professional development. we cannot allow this to happen. this congress could be working to make it possible to have an excellent teach for the every classroom, engage parents and give schools the resources they need to ensure every child has success. sadly we are doing the opposite. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: i yield one minute to a member of the committee, the gentleman from arizona, mr. salmon. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. salmon: i rise in strong support of h.r. 5, the student success act. s the first real glimmer of sanity an commonsense on federal education policy probably in the last 20 or 30 years. i congratulate the chairman. as one of the speakers said before me, in the last 30 years, our international standing on stem classes and

math and science has gone from first place, i believe we're in the -- somewhere between 10th and 15th place in the international test scores. i used to listen to an adage from my father, he said if you keep doing what you're doing, we're going -- you're going to keep getting what you're getting. we've had this encroachment of the federal government into schools and it doesn't work. this gives the decisions back to local governments, teachers, parents, class roops, local school boards. one size does in the fit all and washington is not the font of -- fount of all knowledge. we can do better and will do better and this will do much better. i have two letters from people in my local community education leaders that have come out in strong support of this bill and they're hard to please so i ask for unanimous consent to enter it into the record. the chair: that will have to be done under general leave and the time of the gentleman has expired.

the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i yield one and a half minutes to to the mr. kourtney. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one and a half minutes. mr. courtney: as the poison of sequestration is creeping through america's economy, society, national defense, there's a lot of folks in this city who are saying they oppose sequestration. but i think if you look closely at this legislation, it bakes in sequestration funding levels for education, not just for next year but for the next six years. mr. speaker, i supported the defense authorization bill along with the chairman of my committee a few weeks ago which actually used presequestration levels for our national defense yet here today we are voting on a bill which tells america's children, sorry, you're stuck with se rest -- sequestration. you have to allow basically this chainsaw which is going through federal programs to continue for the next six years. at exactly the time when we should, as a national priority, be investing more in education.

we heard from the prior speaker about the need for stem. absolutely. there's nothing in this bill that prioritizes or focuses on the need for this country to step up stem education, stem curriculum in this country. this bill is the wrong direction for people who care about upgrading america's competitiveness. again if you think about it is china going to sequester its education funding over the next six years? is any of our other large economic competitors doing that? of course not. this is a retreat a surrender to sequestration, not for ourselves but for our children. it is shameful. i urge a no vote on h.r. 5. i yield back. chip the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: i yield one minute to a member of the committee, the gentleman from kentucky, mr. guthrie. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. guthrie: i thank the jelled for yielding. i rise in support of the student success act. as a father of three children i know the importance of good education that ensures students graduate high school prepared

for post-secondary education and the work force. for years, states and school districts have been burdened by federal overreach and red tape that has failed to improve the academic performance of our students. we can and must do better. our state and local leaders have the best understanding of their own school districts and student populations. so we must get washington out of our student's classrooms and equip them with the tools necessary to put our state of the unions on the path to academic excellence. h.r. 5 has got about four key principles to do just that reducing the federal footprint, empowering parent, supporting effective teachers and restoring local control. my colleagues and i share the belief that young people need to think big and dream bigger. i urge my colleagues to support this bill and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i yield one and a half minutes to the gentlelady from oregon, ms. bonamici.

the chair: the gentlelady is recognized. ms. bone meecha -- ms. bonamici: it's clear we need long-term thinking and real chains to improve elementary and secondary education act and give our students the schools worthy of their potential. h.r. 5 does some things right but too many things wrong. it underfunds title 1, cutting funding to the schools most in need of our support. it allows students with disabilities to be taught at lower standards letting those who need more attention fall through the cracks. it eliminate pross visions that assist homeless student, puts too much emphasis on the failed strategy of basing teacher evaluations on student test scores and it perpetuates inequality. this bill is a missed opportunity. we could and should be working on legislation that includes more support for stem education. a bill that has provisions to ensure that every student receives a well-rounded educationers that includes civics and art and music.

we should be focusing on the whole child, ensuring that every student is healthy, safe, engaged, supported and challenged. this bill doesn't address these important issues. ky not support it and i encourage my colleagues to oppose it as well. i yield back. thank you, mr. speaker. the chair: the time of the gentlelady has expire. the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: i yield one minute to a member of the committee the gentleman from indiana, dr. bucshon. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. bucshon: i rise in support of h.r. 245erk student sess act because our students deserve better in the classroom. the one size fitses all approach is not effective serving our students. the student sess act -- success act correct this is problem by allowing states the freedom and flex to believe the provide a betterings to all their students, an education tailored o their student's these. this restores control over state and local communities where education decisions

should be made. we ensure that parents and school teachers are able to make decisions about what is best for their students. mr. speaker, as the father of four, it is very important to me that we provide the best educational opportunities for all children regardless of where they live or their socioeconomic status. the student success act accomplishes this goal. thank you and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i yield one minute to the gentleman from rhode island, mr. cicilline. the chair: the gentleman from rhode island is recognized for one minute. mr. cicilline: i thank the gentleman for yielding. i rise in strong opposition to this bill. america's young people must be given every opportunity to obtain a world-class education in the best possible environment. the future of our country and our ability to complete -- compete in a global economy depends on the education of our children. h.r. 5 would cut education unding by over $5 billion --

$1 billion next year. the bill also eliminates funding for critical after-school programs which work to improve learning opportunities for students outside the classroom by cult vating strong -- cultivating strong community partnerships. this fails students in so many ways and would do so much harm to public education in this country. rather than putting forth this extreme proposal destined to fail in the senate, we should be working together to ensure that a re-authorized elementary and secondary education act improves student achievement, supports teachers and principals and provides a quality education for all students. this bill does not do that, and i urge my colleagues to vote no. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: mr. chairman, i yield 1 1/2 minutes to many of the committee, the gentleman from nevada, dr. heck. the chair: the gentleman from nevada is recognized for 1 1/2 minutes. mr. heck: mr. chairman, i rise in strong support of h.r. 5, the student success act, because it will improve

education in america and help our students succeed. my district in southern nevada is home to and my three children are products of the clark county school district, the fifth largest in the nation. while there are remarkable out of these me schools, i hear all the time from teachers and parents that federal requirements are getting in the way of what is best for their students. while only a small portion of a school's budget come from washington, they don't have the ability to shift the funds to where they're needed most and they are forced to use scarce resources to check the federal boxes to receive those funds. this one-size-fits-all approach to education is washington bureaucracy at its worse and it does not take into account the specific conditions in our local classrooms. it strikes me as arrogant to imply, as my colleagues on the other side do, that only the federal government cares about student success. no one understands the conditions or has more of an interest in improving education of our children than the people who work in our schools and

interact with students every day. it's time we return control over education policy to those who are invested in the success students. the student success act will do just that. i applaud chairman kline and members of the committee for this bill, urge a yes vote and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i yield one minute to the gentlewoman from nevada, ms. titus. the chair: the gentlelady from nevada is recognized for one minute. ms. titus: thank you. i rise in strong opposition to h.r. 5. my colleague from nevada must be talking to different teachers and parents than i am. this bill would hurt students and teachers and undermine the long-standing federal mandate to guarantee educational opportunity for all students. i'm particularly concerned about the impact this bill would have on english language learners, especially at a time hen nevada schools have seen a significant increase in e.l.l. students. these students enrich our

schools with new cultural perspectives that they need resources and quality instruction to help them succeed academically. h.r. 5 would reduce such resources just when schools and students need the most. this bill would also be devastating for students in special ed. most students with learning disabilities can meet high standards if they're given the appropriate tools. h.r. 5, however, denies them the chance to learn and thrive. education is the best investment we can make for the future of our nation, yet, h.r. 5 starves our schools, reduces standards and diminishes our national commitment to equal access to learning. let's call it what it is, the letting our students down act, and let's vote it down. the chair: the time of the gentlelady has expired. the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: mr. chairman, may i inquire as to how much time remains on each side? the chair: the gentleman from minnesota has 9 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from california has 13 minutes remaining. mr. kline: thank you, mr.

chairman. i now like to yield two minutes to a member of the committee, the gentleman from indiana, mr. messer. the chair: the gentleman from indiana is recognized for two minutes. mr. messer: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise in support of the student success act and want to commend chairman kline and my hoosier colleague, mr. rokita, for their good work on this important bill. few laws have been used as a political punching bag by members of both sides of the aisle quite as much as the no child left behind law. much of that criticism is deserved. the student success act moves us past no child left behind, improves on this law's important progress and provides relief from the law's most onerous and harmful mandates. it restores local control of our public schools, empowers teachers, parents and students and gets washington out of the way. this bill eliminates 70 duplicative programs and

prohibits the d.o.e. from implementing a national common core curriculum. most importantly, it puts parents and students first. as a longtime proponent of school choice, i'm pleased this bill expands charter school opportunities. we hear a lot of excuses about why students shouldn't have more educational choices. but the truth is that no child should be forced to attend a school where they have no chance to succeed. the student success act recognizes the truth that when parents have a choice, kids have an opportunity. more can and should be done, but this bill eliminates the worst of no child left behind. it restores local control of our public schools and it empowers teachers and parents. our support. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired.

the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i yield one minute to the gentleman from washington, mr. heck. the chair: the gentleman from washington is recognized for one minute. mr. heck: thank you, mr. chairman. h.r. 5 continues the sequestration cuts to impact and if you represent a military installation, you know what it is because that's where impact aid goes. i have the honor to represent the third largest military installation in america and this is not good for the children of the men and good or any other military base around america. we owe them more. but my bigger reason springs from my perspective as a businessman. if i learned anything in the private sector, including serving on the board of a learning and trading company, to compete in a 21st century economy, you have to build a 21st century education system. h.r. 5 does not do that. h.r. 5 does the opposite of that. so if you want, as i do, to grow this economy faster and create jobs, good-paying jobs,

you're going to vote no on this measure. thank you, mr. chairman. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: thank you, mr. chairman. an effort to balance the time here, i'll reserve. the chair: the gentleman from minnesota reserves his time. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i yield one minute to the gentleman from minnesota, mr. kildee. the chair: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for one minute. mr. kildee: thank you, mr. chairman. thank you to the ranking member for his leadership on this issue. this legislation is an attack on teachers and takes away the tools they need to succeed in the classroom. i'm exhausted by the continual scapegoating of america's school teachers. teachers like my three sisters spend countless hours both in and out of the classroom preparing curricula, mentoring our youth in after-school programs. we should help every educator grow and develop professionally and not standardize and reduce their performance to a one-size-fits-all approach. automatic' weary of elected

officials who -- i'm weary of elected officials who give lip service. mr. chairman, actions speak louder than words. i ask my colleagues to vote no on this bill. the majority continues to bargain with their local communts on conditions that are best for their local ommunities and i strong in opposition to this bad bill. i yield back. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: mr. chairman, i'll reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. the gentleman from california. mr. kline: i have more speakers. i was advised you have several more. the chair: the gentleman from california reserves, i think. the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. kline: thank you, mr.

chair. i knew we could sort that out. i'd like to yield one minute to the gentleman from illinois, mr. schock. the chair: the gentleman from illinois is recognized for one inute. mr. schock: i thank the chairman and, mr. speaker, the 10th amendment of the constitution says a free and public education is vested with the states. recently the federal government has been running head wrong into establishing federal standards through a common corset of principles at state levels. h.r. 5 is an important step in reaffirming the fact that states' rights and states' responsibility to determine what those students should learn within their states and more importantly reasserts the fact that local elected school boards should be the sole determineans of what should be taught and learned at local school districts. as a former school board member myself, i know the importance of local control. h.r. 5 re-establishes that and makes certain that the secretary of education does not have the power to force in a

ck at that torial way -- dictatorial way. for these reasons the bill should be passed and i yield back. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i yield myself one minute. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. miller: i thank the chairman for understanding we are in the middle of the caucus and i think members are trying to get here to speak. many of my colleagues have expressed concern over the fact that h.r. 5 takes the level of funding to the sequestration level, and i think we ought to understand what this means in terms of ongoing improvement in the education program, the jaxal opportunity for those -- for -- educational opportunity for those young people who are poor and minority and who go to some of the poorest schools in some of the poorest districts in our country. this is going to really grind down their ability to respond,

those schools, those districts, those teachers, those administrators to the needs of those young people. and what it means is they will not have access to the kinds of support services that are necessary so that they will truly have an opportunity at a full educational opportunity. we know that in many instances in many of these schools these students and these teachers require additional resources, require additional support systems for these students, and i yield myself an additional 30 seconds, and we know when they're given those support systems, when they're given those resources those very same children are able to thrive. we see that demonstrated all across this country all the of the time. of the most me difficult schools in the state of california in the most difficult areas in the state of california where children navigate very dangerous streets to get to school and come back and yet we see students who were given that opportunity to

have a first-class education are now attending brown university and the university of nebraska and ucla and other such institutions so the fact is these children can learn. the question is whether we'll supply the resources so they'll have the opportunity to do so and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: thank you, mr. chairman. i now yield two minutes to a member of the committee, the gentlelady from alabama, mrs. roby. the chair: the gentlelady from alabama is recognized for two minutes. mrs. roby: mr. speaker, i rise today in support of h.r. 5, the student success act, and i thank my chairman for yielding. it's a privilege to serve on this committee and be part of the debate here today. we need excellent teachers in ery classroom and inspired administrators in every school. they can be hamstrung by overreaching regulations and red tape. federal mandates in education

have grown at an alarming rate. politicians and bureaucrats, they keep trying to fix their schools with a washington knows best approach. but ask any teacher or principal or parent and they'll let you know that one size does not fit all when it comes to education. that's why i'm pleased that the student success act reduces the federal footprint in education, returning the decisionmaking authority to states and local districts where it belongs. and this bill expressly prohibits the department of education from making funding grants and regulation waivers contingent on whether a state adopts certain curriculum or assessment standards. i believe we should have the highest standards for our schools. as a mother of a child in public school, i'm glad my state of alabama has made recent efforts to increase its standards, but the problem is that the obama administration has improperly inserted itself into the process. we need to empower all states to set their own education policy free from federal

ntrusion. setting and revising standards can be a good thing, however, the unwelcome intrusion of the federal government into the process invariably comes with the political agenda of the white house. the executive branch has exceeded its appropriate reach when state education policy is concerned and it is absolutely time that we rein it in i'm proud to support h.r. 5 and i encourage my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this legislation that finally puts state and local leaders back in control of their classrooms. thank you, mr. speaker, i yield back. the chair: the time of the gentlelady has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i have no further speakers. the chair: the gentleman from california reserves. the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: thank you, mr. chairman. i now yield one and a half minutes to the gentleman from kansas, mr. yoder. the chair: the gentleman is

recognized for one and a half minutes. mr. yoder: thank you, mr. chairman. like many of my colleagues here today, i think the future of our nation lies in the quality of education that our young americans received. -- receive. americans expect and deserve the very best from our public schools and our schools across the nation so their children have the tools to hantle -- handle the channels of the 21st century. for far too long in this country, we've tried to a one size fits all, top-down federal approach to educating our bright learners. yet intuition tells us and experience shows us local communities are better suited to make the right decisions when it comes to local public schools. that's why i'm proud to support the student success act, to return and restore local -- local control back to our public schools. i know that teachers, parents, neighbor, and families are better suited to make decisions regarding their children's education than bureaucrats and government officials in washington, d.c. mr. chairman, let's put our communities back in charge of

our future. let's eliminate the top down mandate the strings acoach -- attached approach that washington uses to educate our kids and put teachers back in charge of the classroom and families and neighborhoods back in charge of our schools. i yield back. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. 24 jefrelt -- the gentleman from california. mr. miller: the gentleman has the right to close, correct? mr. kline: my last speaker just spoke, i'm ready to close. mr. miller: i thank the gentleman. i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for such time as he may consume, up to 9 1/2 minutes. mr. miller: you don't really want me to do that, do you? you didn't say that with conviction. this is a fundamental debate we'll be having as we enter the amendment process for this legislation. this is about whether we go backwards or forwards as a nation. every member of this congress,

i believe i would be correct in se, both in the house and senate, have told their constituents how important it is that we have a world class education system. and how we're falling behind other nations. and yet we see here the consideration of this legislation by this chamber that in fact moves us to the past. it restricts the resources available, it reduces the accountability in the system, it fails to support teachers and principals, those people that almost every speaker today has said are the most important people in our education system, teacher provides for evaluation which i support, it really only provides it for the purposes of hiring and firing the teacher. not to provide the kind of support, not to provide the collaboration, young teachers, new teachers to the system so they can improve their profession. the kinds of opportunities

teachers want and the reasons teachers are organizing independently among themselves both on the internet and in localities so they can share their skills and talents to prove their ability to improve education. that support is not here. you say it's block grants, they can do it if they want. not under sequestration. they'll be lucky to provide survival for the student this is legislation is directed at, the poorest children in this country. minority children, english learners, children on an indian reservation, children who need special attention to succeed. if they get it they can succeed this legislation doesn't do that this legislation doesn't need -- doesn't address the priority every member of the body has spoken about, the priority that needs to be put on stem. you can do it if you want to do it. i've listened for so many years to the federal government, it's only 6% of the money, and it's

also -- always so burdensome. then don't take it. i know the manager's amendment says that. if everything else is going so well how is this 5% of the money have such bad resulters in districts? because the fact of the matter is for whatever reasons, they're failing the students they're supposeed to be teaching. this is an effort to give them flexibility to make those decisions if but if you send it in the form of h.r. 5 they won't have the supports to do it they won't have the resources to do it. they're not going to have the trained teachers to do it. they're not going to have principals to do it. that's what we should not be doing. we should be embowdening our schools with those resources

and talents and skills. we should make sure every teacher has the capability, as the subject matter competency and a poor school today, you're learning arithmetic in the fourth grade, mathematics in the eighth grade, you're learning algebra, your chances having a teacher that understands those subjects is one in seven. shouldn't it be for those children one in one? shouldn't it be that every classroom has a teacher that has subject matter competency, we all know that's not what happens in many of these schools. we know an art teacher is asked to go into a mathematics class. we know history teachers, part time, can you help us out in a science class. that's not how you maintain this country being number one in the nation.

that's not the education system that will do it. we can poke along, we can lament, we can worry about china and india and countries that are making a commitment to their education system to the research facilities but unless we make that commitment, we won't be running that race in the next generation. we will have settled in. to some other place than number one. and i don't think that's acceptable to the people of this country. we have been told by every business leader that comes here, whether they come from silicon valley or come from manufacturers areas of the country in the midwest, they've told us they want a stronger k through 12 system. that's why the chamber of commerce and the business round table has serious problems and opposition to h.r. 5 because it doesn't meet their needs, that they say they need in terms of a future educated population. to get those skilled workers to get that talent base, to get

that future innovation. that's their decision not my decision. of the lso the decision civil rights groups. that's also the decision of the parents of childrens with disability, it's also the decision of the educators in these systems. this system is not up to the standards of america. it doesn't meet america's future needs. it doesn't meet the standards of excellence and doesn't meet the commit. of resources that this nation should be making on behalf of the schoolchildren of this nation. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields bag. the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: i yield myself the remainder of our time. the chair: the remainder of your time which is four minutes. mr. kline: i wouldn't need the nine and a half anyway, so thank you, mr. chairman. years n 12 years, 12

since anybody in either body, house or senate, has had a chance to come to the floor in either chamber and vote on ducation policy. elementary and secondary education act is overdue for re-authorization. since 2007. neither party when our colleagues on the other side of the aisle were in the majority or since we've been in the majority has been able to bring legislation to the floor in either body. our children deserve better. we've been in a situation for years now where the congress of the united states house an senate have abdicated completely their responsibility for establishing public policy o this administration. this administration has been

issuing conditional temporary waivers to suit their idea of what education policy ought to be, not what the legislative body, not what the people we represent say it ought to be. our children deserve real reform. of the nation's education system. we can't allow these conditional waivers. or temporary fixes. and political infighting. and an impasse here whether democrats or republicans are in charge. can't allow that. to keep us from our fundamental responsibility to improve what is now i believe universally recognized to be a flawed law. by passing the student success act today, we can help ensure teachers, principals, superintendents, state and local officials have more opportunities to build a more responsive and effective education system that better meets the unique needs of every student and in fact, yes, of businesses. a vote for this bill demob strait ours heartfelt

commitment to reform, proving mr. milies nationwide, chairman, that the house of representatives will not stand by and allow the administration to micromanage our classrooms or defend the failed status quo. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on h.r. 5 and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from minnesota yields back the balance of his time. all time for general debate has expyred. pursuant to the -- expired. pursuant to the rule the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five minute rule. in life of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the committee on education and the work force printed in the bill, it hall be in order to consider as an original bill under the five-minute rule an amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the thevks rules committee print 113-180. that amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be considered as read. no amendment to that amendment in the nashe of -- nature of a subs institute -- substitute

shall be in order except those printed in house report 113-158. each such amendment may only be offered in the order prinned in the report by a member designated in the report, shall be considered read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by a proponent and an opponent, may be withdrawn by a proponent any time before action thereon, shall not be subject to amendment and shall not be subject to demand for division of the question. it is now in order to consider amendment number 1 printed in house report 113-158. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? mr. kline: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number one printed in house report 113-158 offered by mr. kline of minnesota. the chair: pursuant to house resolution po 3, the gentleman from minnesota, mr. kline, and a member opposed will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from minnesota. mr. kline: i rise in support of the manager's amendment for

h.r. 5, the student success act and i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for such time as he may consume. mr. kline: for the first time in more than a decade we're considering legislation to re-authorize the elementary and secondary education act in congress. this law is woefully overdue for a rewrite. while some seem content to leave our students and schools tied to an outdated law, my republican colleagues and i know better this will better prepare our children for a successful future. it will sport unique student populations, protect our nation's most vulnerable children and help states continue to narrow achievement gaps. most important thrirk student success act resthorse balance between the federal government's limited role and the responsibilities of state and local governments to deliver an excellent education to all students. i'd like to highlight a few technical changes including the manager's amendment that will improve the underlying education and strengthen og -- strengthen our efforts to

ensure all students have access to a quality education. to encourage more he call control, the amendment specifies state assessments must measure individual student growth at the sole disdelofingse state this ensures states have maximum flexibility in developing their own accountability systems. the port effective teach amendment clarifies school districts may use funds for professional development programs for civic education, or to operate a civic education program if they so choose. to promote parental choice and engagement, the amendment makes additional improvements to the charter school program ensuring equal funding for credit enhancement and allowing schools to use that funding for predevelopment. the amendment clarifies states may opt out of funding under the elementary and secondary education act entirely, freeing them from any requirements that would otherwise tie to those educational resources. mr. chairman, nothing is more important to the future of this nation than the success of our

hildren, and right now federal education law isn't helping students gain the skills and knowledge they need. our children deserve better. with the passage of this legislation today, we can take a critical step forward in the fight for real education reform. i strongly urge my colleagues to support the manager's amendment and the student success act and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the entleman from california rise? mr. miller: mr. chairman, i yield myself one minute. the chair: does the gentleman rise in opposition to the amendment? mr. miller: yeah, that's it. the chair: how long does the gentleman yield himself? mr. miller: one minute. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. miller: thank you, mr. chairman. for the most part, this manager's amendment are technical changes to the underlying bill for the same reasons that i oppose the underlying bill, i oppose the manager's amendment and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: does the gentleman yield back the whole balance of

his time or the one minute? mr. miller: the whole balance. the chair: the gentleman from minnesota is recognized. mr. kline: mr. chairman, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from minnesota. so many as in favor, say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 2 principled printed report 113- -- 158.ouse report 113- the clerk will report the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 2 printed in house report 113-158 offered by mr. young of alaska. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 303, the gentleman from alaska, mr. young, and a member opposed, will each

control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: one successful programs, this has worked very uccessfully and doing so destroying a program that works. this is a different program than any areas have but is an area that should be left in this bill. as i talked to the chairman, why take out some successful program and try to take and change it when there are problems with leave no child behind? so i ask my colleagues to vote for this amendment which puts it back in, it restores title 7 moneys. it does retain a working program that we should lead. now, i say this because alaskan natives and hawaiian natives are not under the b.i.e. funding program. and it would be impossible for them to see moneys under the grant program. i want to keep them on the improving their

lives, being better educated, achieving the goals and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota rise? mr. kline: mr. chairman, i claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman claims time in opposition, he's recognized. mr. kline: thank you, mr. chairman. while i understand and appreciate the gentleman's concerns, and we've talked about this at some length over the years, the amendment reduces funding for title 1 programs. that's aid to the disadvantaged, migrant students, neglected and delinquent students, rural education and english language acquisition to pay for the restoration and expansion of the alaskan native and native hawaiian programs. this reduces funding to states and school districts, about $64 million a year, who need title 1 funds to increase student academic achievement, especially with today's budgetary challenges. the underlying bill upholds the federal government's trust responsibility to the indian people. it re-authorizes and maintains

a separate funding stream for the indian education program, as in current law, and increases funding for indian education over the f.y. 2013 level and over president obama's f.y. 2014 budget. the manager's amendment adds alaskan native organizations as eligible entities to the program as well. so reluctantly, i urge my colleagues to oppose the amendment and support the student success act and i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: does the gentleman yield back or reserve his time? mr. kline: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: at this time i'd recognize the congresswoman hanabusa one minute. the chair: the gentlelady from hawaii is recognized for one minute. ms. hanabusa: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you to the gentleman from alaska. mr. speaker, this amendment, which i've introduced with my colleague, ensures all native students are supported in their education efforts.

h.r. 5 as reported eliminates and reduces title 7 and combines them with the broad title 1 program which is unjust to the title program. what this amendment does is upholds the federal trust responsibility to tribes, native organizations by ensuring that native americans, native alaskans and native hawaiians who have been historically disadvantaged are able to succeed. this amendment also ensures flexibility among the states as to how these programs would be administered, and most importantly, the c.b.o. has found that our amendment has no impact on direct spending and complies with the cut-go requirements. the primary issue here is that congress must ensure that we maintain this important precedent in law, precedent in law that we have trust responsibility to the native children and we must ensure that continues. es that why i encourage -- that

is why i encourage my colleagues to vote in favor of this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the time of the gentlelady has expired. the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: i'd like to at this time, mr. chairman, yield one minute to congresswoman gabbard. the chair: the gentlelady from hawaii is recognized for one minute. ms. gabbard: thank you. i'm rising to support this amendment. i want to thank mr. young for his steadfast support and championing the issues and concerns of native communities throughout our country. this amendment does a simple thing. it ensures that native students across the country have the access to support which meets the unique cultural and language needs of this community. the support has been there now for decades, and it's important crucial we continue it. for my own state of hawaii, the native hawaiian education program, which the amendment re-authorizes and does not exist in the underlying measure is a vital resource for our native hawaiian community. i ask unanimous consent to insert into the record numerous

letters of support that i've received from my constituents explaining in a very personal way the importance and success stories of the native hawaiian education program over the years. last district period when i was home over the fourth of july had the opportunity to travel to a few different islands where i met with teachers, parents, students and other stakeholders and learned firsthand about the many accomplishments of this program. by passing this amendment, we're empowering and educating the next generation in communities that have largely been underserved at the same time preserving rich and unique cultural language and values to our native people. i yield back. the chair: the time of the gentlelady has expired and the unanimous consent request has to be made under general leave. the gentleman from alaska. mr. young: mr. chairman, at this time i yield one minute to congressman denham from california. the chair: the gentleman from california is recognized for one minute. thank you. i appreciate chairman kline and

the committee's work on this important re-authorization consolidating programs and replacing them with flexible ants is the right way to ensure that states and school districts are able to respond to the specific needs of their communities. however, the federal government has a unique and important trust obligation to the native american population in this country. this trust obligation means that support for indian education programs should be handled separately from the traditional grant programs that support disadvantaged students. only by maintaining a separate title can we ensure that there is a dedicated funding stream that meets the needs of native children. thank you, mr. young, for offering this important and revenue-neutral amendment. i urge my colleagues to support both the underlying legislation as well as this amendment. i yield back. the chair: the time of the gentleman has expired. mr. young: how much time do i have left? the chair: one minute remaining. mr. young: again, i thank the

speakers and i'm urging the chairman to support this amendment. this amendment takes no money away from anyone except the natives themselves. this program has worked. it's worked so well that i'm asking my colleagues to keep it in the existing bill that's coming before us. i'm not going to argue about leave no child behind or the new bill, h.r. 5, but if a program's working, for god sake's is neutral, let's leave it in there. why take it out? everybody says, have a chance b.i.e. t when we have funding in alaska. it doesn't from any other programs. i ask very respectfully, my colleagues, to vote for this legislation, to promote american indian, hawaiian indian and alaskan natives educational program. it's the right thing to do and let's do what's right today. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. all time has expired. the question is on the amendment offered by the

gentleman from alaska. all those in favor. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the noes have it. mr. young: what? the chair: the amendment is not agreed to. >> i request a recorded vote. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from alaska will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 3 printed in 1158. report 113- for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> thank you, mr. chair. i ask unanimous consent -- the chair: does the gentleman have an amendment at the desk? the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 3 158 ted in house report 113-

offered by mr. cardenas of california. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 303, the gentleman from california, mr. cardenas, and a member opposed, auto each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from california. mr. cardenas: thank you, mr. chairman. my amendment increases authorized funding for english learners. services to this growing but completely underserved population are important to me and families throughout my district and throughout this country. but it should be important to all of us. la teenas as a percent of the labor force will grow 40% in the next 10 years. i want to show numbers showing neglect of these students. only 70% in the fourth grade and 3% of those in the eighth grade were at or above proficient in english. they saw five times as many fourth graders and 11 times as many eighth graders at or above

proficient in english. all those should reach those levels and greater. mr. chairman, english language learners is the fastest growing segment of the school population. many are native born u.s. citizens. half are second or third .enerational citizens this could prevent 25% of english language learners from dropping out, ensuring a fair shot at their participation in this economy of ours. instead, our system has failed these students. second and third generation american citizens in our public schools are not proficient in english. this is absolutely unacceptable. my amendment provides the funding stream specifically for services for english language learners but the provisions in h.r. 5 do not ensure these funds will be used to support these children. h.r. 5 does not do what needs to be provided for the students. it strips the english language lerner title and allows funds to be -- learner title and allows funds to be redone.

this opens the doors -- opening the door to redirecting funds makes the problem worse. if we can't measure whether something works or not, what is the point of funding it, ladies and gentlemen? give our poor record of -- given our poor record of educating americans, why is the federal government retreating from having these outcomes measured? these children can be doctors, lawyers, business owners, educators and community leaders if we provide them with the proper education when they're youngsters. we must allow them to realize their potential by investing in them. that is why next week i'll be introducing my own bill on educating english language lerners. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle give -- learners. my colleagues on the other side of the aisle lip service. h.r. 5 would have been a great opportunity to serve that should they meant what they said. at this time i'd like to yield as much time as she may consume

to my friend from illinois, ongresswoman duckworth. the chair: the gentlelady is recognized for such time as she wishes to consume. ms. duckworth: thank you to my friend from california, for yielding and for your leadership on this issue. earlier this year, i held an education round table with school district administrators on the importance of averting the sequester and reforming our education system. since then, i have heard continuously from educators, parents, throughout my district on the importance of english language learner programs for our young men and women. as a child, english was not my first language and i understand intimately the importance of programs that help children learn the language of our nation. it maybes them more competitive when they become adults and enter the work force and make

ours nation more competitive to have truly bilingual members of the work force. that's why i support proper fund og they have english language program and i rise in opposition to this this bill that simply put lets students down. h.r. 5 ignores the needs of a growing student population, it ignores them along with migratory children and children with disabilities. it removes accountability pr visions we all know our student december serve. i want the children in my district to receive complenlt education and this partisan extreme bill will fail to provide that i yield back to the gentleman from california. mr. cardenas: how much time do i have, mr. chairman. the chair: the gentleman has one minute. mr. cardenas: my amendment while ruled in order does not go as far as we should, mr. mirl's substitute provides more

opportunity, his bill would replace h.r. 5, therefore i ask my colleagues to support mr. miller's substitute language, vote against the current language and at this time i withdraw my amendment. the chair: the gentleman is withdrawn. mr. cardenas: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. it is now in order to consider amendment number four printed in house report 113-158. for what purpose does the gentleman from missouri seek recognition? mr. luetkemeyer: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate. the clerk: amendment number four printed in house report 113-158 offered by mr. luetkemeyer of missouri. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 303, the gentleman from missouri, mr. luetkemeyer and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from missouri. mr. luetkemeyer: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise today in support of my amendment that expresses the sense of congress that states

and local education agencies should maintain the rights and responsibilities for curriculum assess. s for their students. he call control is the basis of education in america. as many parents and teachers will tell you, the people closest to the child are the ones best suited to deliver the highest quality education. no washington bureaucrat through top down mandates and regulations should determine what is best for each of our nation's more than 100,000 schools and the nearly 50 million students. unfortunately, in recent year, the federal government has vastly expanded its influence over local education decisions. through efforts to push common core state standards, the department of education has incentivized and pressured state into cooperating common national standards favored by the department. though initially billed as a simple framework, these standards and assessments will ultimately influence curricula and materials used in classrooms across the nation. as federal bureaucrats attach

more strings to what schools are able to do, they lessen the ability to have parents, teachers, and school board members to determine the most appropriate ways to help students learn. in addition to producing bad practice, increased federal influence over our classrooms threatens to run afoul of numerous laws. the education policy act, the department of education act, the and no child left behind all include statutory language prohibiting the direction, control, and supervision of curricula and instructional materials by the federal government. every school is different, every classroom is different, every student is unique. the quicker we recognize and derstand this tie namic, the more able we'll be able to help our children succeed. maintaining the right of states and local school boards to set curricula allows for competitive excellence and innovation in our school educational system. respecting the historic role of local communities while

adhering to high standards will produce superior outcomes we all desire. it is imperative that we give states and local agencies the right to reclaim their education decision making authority. if included in the underlying legislation, this will help roll back the department's common core by reaffirming that teachers, parents and local school districts shall maintain the authority to maintain what their children are taught. i thank chairman kline for aze efforts, i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and support h.r. 5. with that, i reserve the balance of my timened i think i have -- the gentleman is not here. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> i rise to claim time np opposition to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. unanimous ask

consent to revise and extend my remarks. i oppose this amendment, we oppose this amendment because we believe it is redundant and ideological. it truly is a solution in search of a problem. mr. andrews: not one word of existing federal law and not one ward of the underlying bill authorizes the federal department of education to create curriculum or any sort of curriculum for states and for local school districts. as a matter of fact i would offer the author of the amendment just this one thought. i know he's proceeding in a good faith intent to make sure the day never comes when there's a national curriculum. i think in some ways this amendment is contrary to that goal because it implies the amendment is necessary. that the amendment is unnecessary if as is the case there is no present authority for a national curriculum in federal law and there is no

existing authority under the proposed bill for a national curriculum. adding this may actually raise the ambiguity that there's in existing federal law or in the bill that would authorize a national curriculum. so i think that this is simply a statement to try to solve a exist in t does not present law or in this bill and i would respectfully urge a no vote on the amendment and reserve the plans of our time. the chair: the gentleman eserves. mr. andrews: i yield one minute to the gentleman from michigan, mr. kildee. the chair: the gentleman from michigan is recognized for one minute. mr. kildee: thank you, mr. chairman, thank you for yielding. i'm speaking on the previous amendment on the young amendment, i ran out of time, as currently written this bill does not provide a clear funding source for indian education programs which

violates an important trust responsibility between the federal government and our sovereign indian nations. we have a moral obligation as a society to provide quality education for all children, including native american youth. i believe it is a huge mistake to eliminate title 7 and that this amendment, the previous amendment is not adopted in roll call it will have a negative impact on native american communities. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. andrews: i yield to the gentleman, mr. polis. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. polis: this chamber this body at the federal level is the wrong venue, the wrong place to be discussing this issue of common core standards. if the gentleman or others are interested in making sure their states or districts don't adopt them, they need to run for a state house, for governor, for state board, state superintendent. this body here, the federal government has nothing to do

with core common standards, nor should we have a role in trying to prevent states from working together which symbolically this amendment does. i think it's great that my state and a number of others have taken advantage of economy and scale to prepare good standards, i think it's good that states outside of the working group of governors has come up with their own core standards for college and career ready that are different but also high standards. there's different ways to to get there and again, if any folks in this chamber feel passionately about that, they ought to run for a different office. it's not this body that decides on standards, i think it's the wrong reason to come here and try to force any particular standard down any state's throat. very clearly, i think it's great some states are working together, my state among them. it's important that we don't have a race to the bottom with regard to standard. -- standards. one of the dangers of this

underlying bill sit encurms that, it encourages states to define mediocrity as success by lowering their standards and showing all studentries chiefing when achievement means nothing and the meaning of the word is diluted. we have an interest in make ugh sure kids from alaska, from minnesota, from texas, from colorado are ready for college, ready for career and if some states want to work together to develop those standards that can save money, save time, be convenient for families that move between those states, if other states want to take it upon themselves to engage in that, but certainly with this amendment -- what this amendment inis sin wait that states are being coerced to do a certain thing, contrary to secretary duncan's testimony before our committee and anybody who disagrees needs to run for a different office to advocate for or against a different set of standards. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from new jersey has one minute remaining. mr. andrews: it's my

understanding the majority side yielded its time, and we have how much time yeft? -- left? the chair: the majority has yielded back, you have one minute remaining. mr. andrews: i yield myself one min. chip the gentleman is recognized. mr. an truce: the problem is not that the bill tries to impose a national curriculum but that it ignores a national interest. national interest is articulating high standards for every student in our country and leaving to the creative energies of local educators and families the best way to reach those high standards. the failure of the underlying bill to reach that objective is the reason that business groups such as the chamber of commerce, education, civil rights group, disabled advocates have yined, an unusual coalition, frankly, to oppose the legislation. we think the underlying bill is flawed, we think this amendment flaws that flaw and would respectfully ask for a no vote

on the underlying amendment. we yield back the balance of our time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from missouri, those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair the noes visit. mr. luetkemeyer: i request a recorded vote, the yeas and nays please. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentleman from missouri will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number five printed in house report 113-158. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? ms. jackson lee: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate. the clerk: amendment number five printed in house report 113-158 offered by ms. jackson lee of texas. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 303, the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee,

and a member opposed, will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee, for five minutes. ms. jackson lee: i thank the chairman very much. i'm reminded in my amendment of the high calling of chairman miller and president bush some ny years ago with the name leave no child behind. my amendment could be called throw no child away or no child is a throwaway. that's the necessity of where we are today with the underlying bill. we must restore and help those children who are considered throughout america as at-risk children. research shows that a disproportionate number of schools with predominantly low income african-american and hispanic state of the unions have low housing stability and such students -- students are more likely than others to switch schools in the middle of the year, high student mobility has consequences for students, teachers, and schools and can result in lower achievement levels, slower academic pacing

and lower teaching satisfaction. my amendment expands that concept and it indicates that states with insufficient funding should find a way to target funds to schools serving neglected, delinquent, migrant students, at-risk students and native americans to increase academic achievement of such students, all with the idea that there are no throwaway children. children, education, are one and the same. that is the work of children. when children are at work and are fully educated, when i say that, at their work, a combination of education and play, what you create -- create is a greater american. poor families move 50% to 100 more often than nonpoor families. migrant children move from community to commurnt. foster children often change schools each time they're removed from a home. right now as we speak, we in houston are trying to establish one of those homes for age-out children who are in high school but aged out of foster care.

those children are typically at risk we feel can't shortchange them as the underlying legislation does. student mobility has consequences for students and teachers and therefore we need to help build higher achievement levels because there is a possibility of lower achievement levels, slower academic pacing and lower teaching satisfaction. take the school district they represent, h.i.s.d., 200,000 students, 80% of which are eligible for free and reduced price lumpling. children cannot learn if they're hungry. hisd has a dworse population but 100 largest districts represent less than 1% of the school dribblingts in the tion yet it enrolls 20% of students by census. but the real point is that in addition to these large school districts, this amendment respects the rule community -- the rural communities of america and deals with at-risk

children in those areas, deals with migrant students in those areas, and indicates the state should not shortchange those vims get their grant money is in fact short changed, don't shortchange the children. again there are no throwaways. so i think my amendment balances great needs in the underlying legislation by saying to my colleagues that the understanding of education is that it should be equal to all. and the quality should be equal to all. and therefore, whether you are a student that moves frequently or a migrant student or an english learner student, you should not be denied an excellent education. i'd like to reserve my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves her time. for what purpose does the gentleman from indiana seek recognition? >> marm, i rise to claim time -- r. chairman, i rise to claim time in opposition although i do not intend to oppose. the chair: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for

five minutes. >> i thank the chair. as one of the authors of the underlying legislation, i'll be the first to admit that going through the process that we have laid out in this house has the potential to only make the legislation better and in that vein, this amendment, as i understand the gentlelady to propose it, supports the tutoring and public school choice options in the direct student services program. mr. rokita: tutoring services and public school choice are key programs to ensure students have he opportunity to access critical educational help or to find a school that better fits their needs. we know through study after study, through letter after letter, through parent interview after parent interview that students who have access to tutoring service does better in school. those who are in a school that fits their learning style better. this is a minor amendment to the important program that i think

already exists in the underlying law and, you know, it says that if there is not enough funding in the state to support all of the applications for direct student services, that it should prioritize the vulnerable populations rather than look at supporting the lowest performing school. so, either way, the important thing is to help students have access to high-quality tutoring and school choice. for that reason, i'll reserve the balance of my time and -- unless the gentlelady -- i think she has some time to close. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentlelady from texas has 1 1/2 minutes remaining. ms. jackson lee: i thank the gentleman for his expression. i thank him for his egs special on this particular -- expression on this particular ealed -- amendment. let me frame it as i close. thanking my colleagues and expressing my commitment to the concept that no child should be thrown away. with form lass changing, block grants being promoted, the idea of a state being shortchanged in its awards means that there

needs to be focus and refocus and that is, and from my perspective, to look at those children, whether they are rural or urban communities, who need to be educated who could be considered neglected, delinquent, migrant students. english learners, at-risk students, native american youth. and to determine again, to find a way to focus those dollars in a way that will lift all educational votes. sometimes that will be an this s challenge as formula has evidenced and i'd like to see that no matter what happens, that we have these children protected, many of whom are in the school districts that i represent, including the north forest independent school district that could have benefited from those resources, having given to them a number of rural school districts in texas that could have benefited from targeted dollars, to be able to keep them as existing, viable school districts, teaching their

children, not closed school districts. so i hope that as we proceed, that the message that comes ultimately from members of congress is that premote education first and the children at risk will never be lost in the debate, but we'll always support them. with that i ask my colleagues to support the jackson lee amendment. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from indiana. mr. rokita: i'd like to ask the chair how much time i have remaining. the chair: the gentleman has 3 1/2 minutes remaining. the chair: the -- mr. rokita: i thank the chair. in closing, i'd like to urge my colleagues as well to support this amendment and the student success act in its entirety. and in response to the debate we've seen here on the floor this afternoon, mr. chairman, so far i'd like to say that there are many organizations in support of the student success act, including the american association of school administrators, the national school boards association, the council of chief state school

officers, the council for american private education, the association of christian schools international, concerned women for america, national association of independent schools, national alliance for public charter schools and many more. with that, mr. chairman, i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from texas, ms. jackson lee. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it's now in order to consider amendment number 6 printed in house report 113-158. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? mr. bentvolio: mr. chairman, i introduce my amendment

to h.r. 5. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 6 printed in house report 113-158 offered by mr. bentivolio of michigan. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 303, the gentleman from michigan and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan for five minutes. mr. bentvolio: mr. chairman, i have taught in both private and public schools. my children graduated from both private and public schools. i am certified as both a vocational and general education teacher. and i also have a master's degree -- masters degree in education. our students deserve not just a quality education, but an education that prepares them for the jobs of tomorrow, instilling them with passion, confidence and skills needed to be successful in the 21st century's global economy. in my state we have some of the

best schools and universities. but what i hear from our employers is that our students don't have the skills necessary to fill many of the jobs they are offering. this is especially true for companies in the stem and manufacturing sectors. this amendment brings employers, entrepreneurs, teachers and parents together to ensure that academic standards adequately prepare students to obtain employment, enter college or start their own business after graduating from high school. regardless of their circumstances in life. as a former teacher, i know firsthand how poor circumstances can negatively impact a child's ability to learn. broken homes, poverty and mental health concerns are things that put children in a challenging position. having a disadvantage, however,

does not mean that they do not have the potential to live successful and happy lives, just ask any educator. teachers see talent and potential in all of their students. children need someone to tell them they are capable and talented. they also need to know what opportunities exist and what skills they need to obtain those jobs. too often we simply assume that they know. by allowing employers to be part of the conversation in education, we can help brod broaden the economic horizons for all of our students. that should be the purpose of our education system. there are many paths to success in the united states, that is what makes our country so special and so unique. we need to ensure our schools are not just producing workers but also developing job creators and small business owners. we need the leaders of today to pass on their knowledge for tomorrow. regardless of what side of the aisle they sit on, i think most

of my fellow members of congress believe that our students need to be prepared for jobs if we want our education system to focus on college and career readiness, including creating jobs, then we need to have the private sector at the discussion table. this amendment does just that. i ask for your support. mr. chair, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. who seeks recognition? the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i yield myself two minutes in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. miller: mr. speaker, members of the house, i oppose this amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan because i think this amendment continues the ideological approach here that we have in taking away federal dollars under h.r. 5 from the poorer schools in our systems, serving some of the poorest children in our country, at a time when this legislation locks in the postsequestration

funding for the schools now as h.r. 5 does, mandates that those scarce dollars go to the private sector, now we're mandating that the schools now get involved with the private sector. i don't know, maybe it's different in your states, but in my states, when local school districts put together their budgets and local school districts consider engaging in developing new programs and new curriculums, they invite the community to come in and participate in those discussions across the board. nobody has to mandate them to do that. they do that because those are community schools. those are trying to serve the community. whether it's at the elementary level, the high school level or it's a community college level. this is what they do in developing those curriculums and developing those assessments that are taking place. and so i don't understand in building the rails against federal mandates, we're now under our second mandate on this

legislation, why are we creating these mandates for these local districts that know better, that know how to do it best according to all of the statements here, why are we then mandating them from the federal government to do it this particular way? in my community, i would say they already do it this way. but i don't think they need to be mandated to do that. for those reasons i oppose this amendment, because i think it continues the ideological bent that somehow while mandates are bad for schools when they come from the federal government, apparently when they come from the congress they're good. so we'll try to sort this out in the meantime, but in the meantime i'll oppose this amendment. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan has two minutes remaining. mr. bentvolio: sadly, too much of our federal education policy is based on where children are instead of where we want them to be. we need our children, but especially those we label as

disadvantaged, to know that they can be anything they set their mind to. when we continue to tell children they are victims instead of empowering them so seize the talents god has blessed them with, we as a congress and as a society fail. many of my colleagues believe it takes a village to raise a child. well, entrepreneurs, small business owners and employers are part of that community. it is the business owner who hires the entrepreneur, who creates opportunity. this is exactly why they should be involved in the education policy. it is time we stop merely labeling children as disadvantaged and instead let's empower our states and teachers to implement the potential they see every day in the classroom, by working with representatives from the private sector and the entrepreneurs. thank you. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california has three minutes remaining. mr. miller: i yield back.

the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to. it is now in order to consider amendment number 7 printed in house report 113-158. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from washington seek recognition? mrs. mcmorris rodgers: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 7 printed in house report 113-158 offered by mrs. mcmorris rodgers of washington. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 303, the gentlewoman from washington, mrs. mcmorris rodgers, and a member opposed

will each control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from washington. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: mr. chairman, no one in this chamber would argue the fact that a strong -- strong education system is important to keeping our nation competitive and a leader in the 21st century and beyond. and no one in this chamber will argue that a strong, quality education for our children is foundational for their growth, their development and their success, for whatever path they choose. yet for a segment of the student population, access to quality education can be a strug. i appreciate chairman kline's leadership as chairman of the committee and there are things thabt legislation that are positive. the bill maintains requirements that states test all students in read, math, science and report that data, dising a ated by subgroup so -- disaggregated by subgroup so we can focus on performance. i thank the chairman for working with me to include language in the manager's amount around universal design

for learning to improve the accessibility of assess. . i remain concerned that the protections in this bill for students with disabilities are inadequate. i know firsthand the importance having standards for these students are important. my son cole is learning well, even though he has a 21st chromosome, otherwise known as down syndrome this bill limits the percentage of students to whom schools can administer an alternate assessment aligned to alternate standards. without this cap, i believe students will abuse their authority and students will suffer. i believe we can return greater

flexibility to the states and still maintain key protections for students like cole. flexibility for states is not mutually exclusive of accountability. at this point i'd like to yield to the gentleman from mississippi, mr. harper. mr. harper -- the chair: the gentleman from mississippi is recognized. mr. harper: i rise in support of the amendment by the gentlewoman from washington. like her i'm the parent of a child with special needs. son issue my 24-year-old livingston has fragile x syndrome and we know what we have done to push our children into mainstream america. we cannot give kids with developmental disables the tools they need to become employed and less dependent on government services without the most appropriate education possible and we cannot provide an appropriate education to developmentally disabled children based on tain kuwaited

assumptions of what our kids cannot do we have to push our special kids and the schools if they are to have a chance to meet their full potential. there's a lot of good in this bill and i commend and chang chairman kline for his efforts and will vote for it but i do so only because i'm confident our concerns for special needs children will be addressed in conference. thank you and i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman from washington is recognized. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: for this reason i would like to ask the chair of the committee to work with me, mr. harper and others, and would the chair engage in a colloquy with me? there are things about this bill that are positive and i thank you for your thoughtful approach that to the this rethoffersation. however i'm concerned about what i believe to be a lack of sufficient protections for students with disabilities. these students are often our most vulnerable and as we work to reform our education laws we

should work to maintain the strong support these students need to thrive. would you be willing to work with me as the re-authorization process continues to ensure that all students including students with disabilities have access to a high quality education and i would yield to the gentleman. mr. kline: i thank the gentlewoman for yielding and let me thank my colleague for her leadership on this issue. i understand the passion and knowledge he brings to this topic. throughout this re-authorization process we have sought to recalibrate the role of the federal government, undoing excesses of the past while maintaining the law to ensure parents and communities have the information they need to evaluate their schools' performance. we do maintain requirements for disaggregated achievement data so achievement for disabled students won't be masked. we do maintain current requirements that narrowly define those students eligible

to take an alternate assessment. we think this will limit the abusing y of schools this i yield back to the gentlewoman. the chair: the gentlewoman's time has expired. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i claim time in opposition though i'm not opposed to the amendment. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. miller: i thank the chair and i thank the gentlewoman for introducing this amendment. i strongly support this amendment for all the reasons that she laid out in her remarks in support of her amendment. i believe that in its current form h.r. 5 would undo decades of progress and relegate students with disabilities to second class education and that's why the disabilities community stands united in firm opposition to this bill. it astounds me that this body is considering enactment of

such draconian policies. i thought by 2013, bipartisan consensus on natural ability and potential of all children would be common place but i was wrong. one of the biggest victories we had under no child left behind was the attention to students with disabilities with the assumption that this population of students can and will achieve and students with disabilities have thrived under these high expects as -- expectations. h.r. 5 returns us to the era of soft bigotry, with low expectations for those with disabilities this republican bill removes people with disables from the accountability system, green lighting states and systems to hold those with disabilities to lower standards regardless of the severe thoif disable. this would return us to a time where students with disabilities are hidden and not given access to quality education.

that was situation when i came to congress and i'm no more proud of any act i've ever authored than the children with handicaps act now known as idea, individuals with disables. we cannot undermine that legislation and the progress those children have made and the achievements they have achieve and that their families with them have and to see their successes and now to suggest that they will not be in an accountability system so we hold schools accountable for the achievement and successes of those children is unacceptable. i strongly support the mcmorris amendment and i yield my remaining time to the gentleman from colorado. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. polis: i thank the ranking member for his time and staunch advocate -- advocacy on this i thank the gentlewoman for bringing forth this important amendment. this underlying bill has an accountability hole so huge a school bus of children will fall through it.

essentially, absent this amendment, there's no accountability assured for those kids. in fact, a disproportionate share of the federal investment is for kids with idea. we've never met the 40% promise we've made, idea and of course free and reduced lunch are two of our larger funding screams. -- streams. if anything, we as custodians for the taxpayers, should be interested in more accountability, not less accountability for students with moral dis-- -- for students with disabilities. we should ensure that the learning needs of all children will be met. absent this amendment, the underlying bill has a perversen sentiv for school districts to do what they used to do, sweep problems under the rug. define success down and effectively awe lou schools to have some students that they don't have to account for success for in any way this

amendment is absolutely critical to restore meaning to an accountability system that otherwise allows for gamesmanship and exclusion of the families that need it most. i yield become to the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i yield to the gentlewoman from washington. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: without objection, i'd like to enter letters from people about this. the chair: general leave. mrs. mcmorris rodgers: i'd like to withdraw this amendment, given the gentleman from minnesota's pledge to work with me as authorization moves forward, i withdraw the amendment, support the underlying bill and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the amendment is withdrawn. all time has expired. it is now in order to consider amendment number eight pribted in house report 113-158.

for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. reed: i have an amendment at the desk. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number eight printed in house report 113-158 offered by mr. reed of new york. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 303, the gentleman from new york, mr. reed, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from new york for fife minutes. mr. reed: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise today in support of this amendment. i would like to thank the chairman for his support as well as my colleague from new york, mr. owens and the gentleman from west virginia, mr. mckinley, for their work on this issue. i am proud to support the underlying legislation that student success act that removes the one size fits all federal annual mandates that are strangling local school districts and forcing teachers to teach to the test. while testing is an important part of a school's assessment,

we can agree that other measures such graduation rates, involvement in advanced classes or extracurricular activities are also an important indicator of where a school district stands in their effort to to educate our children. this amendment would allow state and local education agencies to use multiple measures when it comes to these assessments. state and local legislators should be encouraged to base academic achievement systems on these measures. no child left behind is showing that schools are being labeled and punished based on testing scores alone and that's not fair this amendment gives states further flexibility to include program turnovers their choosing in their accountability systems to better measure school success. together, we can better care for our children and encourage their success in school. i am pleased to be offering this amendment with bipartisan support and urge my colleagues to vote in favor of this

amendment. i would also like to thank the chairman, the national education association, the american federation of teachers and the school superintendents association for their support on this effort. with that, mr. chairman, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. miller: i rise in opposition to this amendment because it weakens accountability to ensure our nation is achieving at high levels. this seems like a good thing allowing them to measure in things other than reading and math but it's so vague that it will allow almost any standard to be used. this does not fix the problem to help students. too often we have seen throughout the course of the last many years we have seen when adults tri-to make themselves look good by hiding and masking how well their students are doing academically, by trying to seek other systems of measure that will make the school look better even though the students

inside that school are not performing at top level and for those reasons i oppose the amendment and i'd like now to yield to mr. takano. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. takano: i rise to engage the ranking member of the committee, mr. miller new york a colloquy. as a teach for more than 20 years i have seen firsthand the consequences and the state's poor decisions in the implementation of them that they've had on america's students and teachers alike. i'm concerned that high stakes, low quality testing has caused a negative shift in our education system from teaching to testing. and our education system is no better off than it was before. mr. miller, you've spent considerable time on this issue and have been a leader in the congress on education. will you work with me to address the issues regarding our testing in our nation's schools?

mr. miller: if the gentleman would yield, mr. takano, i agree with you that the testing proig haves included in no child left behind as well as the implementation of these provisions is imperfect and outdad. unfortunately the authorization is five years overdue and the majority has no interest in working with us to develop a bill that can pass the house and senate. ll gladly work with you to ensure that we continue to ensure that students are achieving at grade level we also use assessments to improve teaching and learning. mr. takano: thank you, i look forward to working with you. i have submitted an amendment that would return annual testing to preno child left behind levels however, h. reform 5 is so bad of a bill that even this amendment if it were to pass i could not support the bill. that is why i've decided to withdraw my support for the amendment. i thank the gentleman, i thank

mr. miller for his leadership on this issue and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i yield back. the chair: the gentleman from new york. mr. reed: i'd like to yield to my friend west virginia, mr. mckinley. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for a minute and a half. mr. mckinley: i rise in support of this amendment. whenever i speak with teachers, principals, and parents back in west virginia, a common theme that emerges from those conversations is that they acknowledge one size doesn't fit all, they want control restored to the state and local levels. the underlying bill makes great strides in returning that control to the people who know best how toad cate our children and our grandchildren -- to educate our children and our grandchildren. not bureaucrats in washington. we have offered an amendment to go even further in giving states that frecksability they seek -- flexibility they seek. the amendment will allow states and local governments to take multiple measures into

consideration. currently no child left behind uses a narrow federal mandate on testing to measure results. testing may be just part of the solution. but states should be allowed to look at the ability of other benchmarks like graduation rates and the percentage of students taking advanced courses. this amendment has bipartisan support and is a commonsense way to improve the underlying bill. local government and flexibility should trump washington mandates. i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from new york. mr. reed: i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman from new york is recognized. >> mr. chairman, at this point in time i ask that my colleagues join me in this commonsense amendment that allows the local communities and local school districts flexibility to consider multiple measures in determining whether or not a school or student is succeeding

or failing in our nation's school system. mr. reed: with that, mr. chairman, i would ask my colleagues to support this amendment and with that i yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from new york. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is adopted. the chair: it is now in order to consider amendment number 9 printed in 113-158. for what purpose does the gentleman from michigan seek recognition? mr. benishek: i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment number 9 printed in house report 113-158 offered by mr. benishek of michigan. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 303, the gentleman from michigan, mr. benishek, and a member opposed each will

control five minutes. the house or the chair recognizes the gentleman from michigan. mr. benishek: thank you, mr. chairman. i rise today to urge support for this amendment number 9, which encourages states to include the number of students attaining . reer and technical education this information is already required to be collected by current law. it would simply streamline access to information for the public. to preserve the american dream, we must ensure that our children and grandchildren have the skills needed to land a good-paying job that provides for families to be able to pay their bills. these jobs require knowledge in science, technology, engineering and math. along with industry-recognized credentials through career and technical education. or c.t.e.

a 2012 talent shortage survey indicated that one in three job providers find it hard to fill vacancies because job applicants with the right skills are not easily attainable. currently u.s. employees have difficulty filling positions such as skilled trade workers, i.t. staff, mechanics, machinists and machine operators. whether a student wants to pursue a college degree or enter the work force immediately after high school, they have to work to ensure they have the necessary training, education skills to have a successful career in the path of their choosing. just this weekend, i spoke with a manufacturing company in my district that told me about their need for job applicants with certain skills. they told me there were jobs waiting to be filled, they just need to have anth individuals with the right training -- need to have the individuals with the right training. moms and dads in north michigan

also told me thernt weren't -- they weren't aware of programs being offered at local high schools. one of my goals is to make sure parents and students are aware of these programs and the long-term benefit they can provide to young adults. through the outstanding work of our teachers, school administration officials and partnerships with universities and industry, numerous vocational ed initiatives are already under way in my district. for example, a delta trade craft i.s.d. has an outstanding partnership with vanair, a manufacturing company. throughout high school students can take career and technical education courses that are aligned with job requirements at vanair. for participating in those courses, numerous students have been offering jobs at vanair immediately upon graduation. my amendment would make career in technical education data more visible for parents and students who are choosing where to enroll and which programs to

participate in. as well as for teachers and administraters to understand the impact career readiness has on student performance, graduation and success in postsecondary ventures. i urge my colleagues to support this amendment and the passage of the underlying bill and i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: i claim time in opposition to the amendment although i will not be in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. miller: mr. speaker, i rise to express appreciation to mr. benishek for this amendment. the gentleman from michigan has an admiral goal which is to improve career and technical education. mens of the congress are well aware of the needs in all of our local communities, as new systems of manufacturing are brought online, as new innovations take place, we want to know how well our students are doing and how well our schools are doing in helping to prepare students for job opportunities that are presented in these many craft areas. and i would urge members to support this amendment and yield back the balance of my time.

the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. benishek: i thank the gentleman for his support and i'll yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from michigan. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to.

the chair: it is now in order to

consider amendment number 10 printed in house report 113-158. for what purpose does the gentleman from nevada seek recognition? mr. heck: mr. chairman, i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment number 10 printed in house report 113-158 offered by mr. heck of nevada. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 303, the gentleman from nevada, mr. heck, and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from nevada. for five minutes. mr. heck: thank you, mr. chairman. the amendment i'm offering today focuses on helping children that far too often go unnoticed or get left behind by our education system. neglected, delinquent and other at-risk youth.

as a co-sponsor of the student success act, i am pleased that the underlying bill continues to provide for important programs that offer educational opportunities for youth in or returning from correctional institutions as well as other at-risk populations. additionally under the bill, school districts also make coordinated health and social services, operate for prevention programs for at-risk children and youth, provide counseling or offer other mentoring services. to help ensure that neglected, delinquent and at-risk youth are given the care and attention they need, my amendment provides local educational agencies with the option of partnering with organizations that have critical experience and existing resources that would enhance the services provided by school districts to our most vulnerable youth. mr. chairman, there are a number of hardworking organizations that are dedicated to providing a wide range of services and care to vulnerable children that need it most. and partnering with them would help these children. for example, in my home state of nevada, boys town has worked for

more than two decades to provide an integrated continuum of care that assists more than 20,000 children and families in nevada each year. these are children who have been abused, neglected or abandoned, children with serious behavioral, academic, social or emotional problems. their stories are heartbreaking. but their personal development into independent, productive citizens with help from boys town is simpling astounding. boys town operates had in a number of states throughout the country and there are many other nonprofit organizations that offer similar services. they have done the groundwork, they have proven their effectiveness, and they are a vital part of our communities and would be valuable partners. additionally, given our current fiscal climate, it is more important than ever to ensure that we are using all available resources effectively. by allowing local educational agencies and these organizations more flexibility to work together and share expertise, vulnerable youth will benefit from the attention and care they need both at school and at home.

coordinating these efforts provides critical stability that these children deserve. children belong in the education system, not the juvenile justice system. i urge my colleagues to support this important amendment and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. miller: i urge support of the heck amendment and yield back the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from nevada. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. he amendment is agreed to.

the chair: it is now in order to consider amendment number 11 printed in rouse report 113-158. for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. meehan: mr. speaker, i rise to speak on behalf of the schock-meehan amendment and to ask permission to revise and extend my remarks. the chair: does the gentleman offer an amendment? mr. meehan: yes. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 11 printed in house report 113-158 offered by mr. meehan of pennsylvania. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 303, the gentleman from pennsylvania, mr. meehan,

and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentleman from pennsylvania. mr. meehan: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, i rise in strong support of the schock-meehan amendment. in recent years the federal government has taken more and more control over deciding what goals and curriculum best fit our kids' needs. however, as all americans know, education policy should be set by those that know the community best. parents, teachers and local school board members. that's exactly what this amendment does. our amendment has three main objectives. it restores flexibility in crafting curriculum education for our children. the department of education will be restricted in promulgating any rules and regulations that contradict or create costly burdens on local school districts without an act of congress. second, it strengthens the process for input by parents, and lastly it requires the

department of education provide an annual report to congress on how any policies affect local school districts. this enables local school boards to have the ability to craft policies in coordination with the communities they serve. this amendment is vitally important to our communities. from pennsylvania to illinois and beyond, the parents, the students and the school board members that they elect are truly the experts in education, not washington bureaucrats. i urge my colleagues to support the schock-meehan amendment and, mr. speaker, i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman reserves the balance of his time. the gentleman from california. mr. miller: mr. speaker, i claim time in opposition. the chair: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. miller: mr. speaker, i rise in opposition to the schock-meehan amendment because it really is a political exercise. it fails to fix the problems of h.r. 5, letting students down