OnTheIssuesLogo

Adam Putnam on Education

Republican Representative (FL-12)

 


More emphasis on technical training, not college

"Two-thirds of our people do not have a university degree. That's OK, as long as we are exposing our young people to the opportunities to earn as welders, heavy equipment operators, nurses, IT tech, regional sales, farmers, manufacturers, the construction trades, all jobs that are paying more than the barista at the coffee shop with the sociology degree who has a $60,000 student loan. Lets bring back career technical education to the schools."
Source: FloridaPolitics.com on 2018 Florida gubernatorial race , Aug 9, 2017

Parental control of education, not state or federal

As parents, Adam and Melissa understand that no two children are the same. Parents know what is best for their children, not Washington or Tallahassee. Supports policies that allow parents to choose the education that best fits their child's needs. Wants Florida to have stronger career training programs that lead to long-term, well-paying careers.
Source: 2018 Florida Gubernatorial campaign website AdamPutnam.com , Jul 12, 2017

Urges veto of school choice bill

Putnam bashed a major conservative education bill and said Gov. Rick Scott should "take a hard look at vetoing" the school-choice bill, putting the Republican more in line with Democratic-leaning teacher unions and public school boosters. Unwilling to detail any criticisms with the substance of the bill, Putnam focused on process.

"I have concerns about the way that that bill, along with much of the budget, was fashioned completely in the dark and behind closed doors to the point that not only the public but many of the members who were asked to vote on it were unaware of all the different things that were taped together at the last second and then shoved into the pipeline," Putnam said.

Source: Politico.com on 2018 Florida gubernatorial race , May 24, 2017

Voted NO on $40B for green public schools.

Congressional Summary:Make grants to states for the modernization, renovation, or repair of public schools, including early learning facilities and charter schools, to make them safe, healthy, high-performing, and technologically up-to-date.

Proponent's argument to vote Yes: Rep. BETSY MARKEY (D, CO-4): This legislation will improve the learning environment for our children, reduce energy costs and create new jobs across the country. Green schools not only save school districts money but also teach the importance of sustainable living to children at a young age.

Opponent's argument to vote No: Rep. GLENN THOMPSON (R, PA-5): We all know our Nation is drowning in a sea of red ink. The bill we're debating today would add an estimated $40 billion in new spending. And despite the majority's hollow promises of fiscal responsibility, there's nothing in the legislation to offset this hefty price tag with spending reductions elsewhere. This is just more of the same borrow and spend, spend and borrow policy that we've seen under this majority and this administration.

Reference: 21st Century Green Schools Act; Bill H.R.2187 ; vote number 2009-H259 on May 14, 2009

Voted NO on additional $10.2B for federal education & HHS projects.

Veto override on the bill, the American Competitiveness Scholarship Act, the omnibus appropriations bill for the Departments of Departments of Education, Health & Human Services, and Labor. Original bill passed & was then vetoed by the President.

Proponents support voting YES because:

Rep. OBEY: This bill, more than any other, determines how willing we are to make the investment necessary to assure the future strength of this country and its working families. The President has chosen to cut the investments in this bill by more than $7.5 billion in real terms. This bill rejects most of those cuts.

Opponents recommend voting NO because:

Rep. LEWIS: This bill reflects a fundamental difference in opinion on the level of funding necessary to support the Federal Government's role in education, health and workforce programs. The bill is $10.2 billion over the President's budget request. While many of these programs are popular on both sides of the aisle, this bill contains what can rightly be considered lower priority & duplicative programs. For example, this legislation continues three different programs that deal with violence prevention. An omnibus bill is absolutely the wrong and fiscally reckless approach to completing this year's work. It would negate any semblance of fiscal discipline demonstrated by this body in recent years.

Veto message from President Bush:

This bill spends too much. It exceeds [by $10.2 billion] the reasonable and responsible levels for discretionary spending that I proposed to balance the budget by 2012. This bill continues to fund 56 programs that I proposed to terminate because they are duplicative, narrowly focused, or not producing results. This bill does not sufficiently fund programs that are delivering positive outcomes. This bill has too many earmarks--more than 2,200 earmarks totaling nearly $1 billion. I urge the Congress to send me a fiscally responsible bill that sets priorities.

Reference: American Competitiveness Scholarship Act; Bill Veto override on H.R. 3043 ; vote number 2007-1122 on Nov 15, 2007

Voted NO on allowing Courts to decide on "God" in Pledge of Allegiance.

Amendment to preserve the authority of the US Supreme Court to decide any question pertaining to the Pledge of Allegiance. The bill underlying this amendment would disallow any federal courts from hearing cases concerning the Pledge of Allegiance. This amendment would make an exception for the Supreme Court.

Proponents support voting YES because:

I believe that our Pledge of Allegiance with its use of the phrase "under God" is entirely consistent with our Nation's cultural and historic traditions. I also believe that the Court holding that use of this phrase is unconstitutional is wrong. But this court-stripping bill is not necessary. This legislation would bar a Federal court, including the Supreme Court, from reviewing any claim that challenges the recitation of the Pledge on first amendment grounds.

If we are a Nation of laws, we must be committed to allowing courts to decide what the law is. This bill is unnecessary and probably unconstitutional. It would contradict the principle of Marbury v. Madison, intrude on the principles of separation of powers, and degrade our independent Federal judiciary.

Opponents support voting NO because:

I was disappointed 4 years ago when two judges of the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that our Pledge, our statement of shared national values, was somehow unconstitutional. I do not take legislation that removes an issue from the jurisdiction of this court system lightly. This legislation is appropriate, however, because of the egregious conduct of the courts in dealing with the Pledge of Allegiance.

By striking "under God" from the Pledge, the Court has shown contempt for the Congress which approved the language, and, more importantly, shows a complete disregard for the millions of Americans who proudly recite the Pledge as a statement of our shared national values and aspirations. No one is required to recite the Pledge if they disagree with its message.

Reference: Watt amendment to Pledge Protection Act; Bill H R 2389 ; vote number 2006-384 on Jul 19, 2006

Voted NO on $84 million in grants for Black and Hispanic colleges.

This vote is on a substitute bill (which means an amendment which replaces the entire text of the original bill). Voting YES means support for the key differences from the original bill: lowering student loan interest rates; $59 million for a new Predominantly Black Serving Institution program; $25 million for a new graduate Hispanic Serving Institution program; provide for year- round Pell grants; and repeal the Single Lender rule. The substitute's proponents say:
  • The original bill has some critical shortcomings. First and foremost, this substitute will cut the new Pell Grant fixed interest rate in half from 6.8% to 3.4%, to reduce college costs to those students most in need.
  • It would also establish a new predominantly black-serving institutions programs to boost college participation rates for low-income black students, and a new graduate Hispanic-serving institution program.
  • As we saw from 1995 to 2000, the questions employers were asking was not your race, not your ethnicity, not your religion, they wanted to know if you had the skills and talents to do the job. Most often today, those skills and that talent requires a higher education. A college education is going to have to become as common as a high school education.
    Reference: Reverse the Raid on Student Aid Act; Bill HR 609 Amendment 772 ; vote number 2006-080 on Mar 30, 2006

    Voted YES on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror.

    Children's Prayers Resolution: Expressing the sense of Congress that schools should allow children time to pray for, or silently reflect upon, the country during the war against terrorism.
    Reference: Bill sponsored by Isakson, R-GA; Bill H.Con.Res.239 ; vote number 2001-445 on Nov 15, 2001

    Voted YES on requiring states to test students.

    No Child Left Behind Act of 2001: Vote to pass a bill that would authorize $22.8 billion in education funding, a 29 percent increase from fiscal 2001. The bill would require states to test students to track progress.
    Reference: Bill sponsored by Boehner R-OH; Bill HR 1 ; vote number 2001-145 on May 23, 2001

    Supports requiring schools to allow prayer.

    Putnam co-sponsored a bill requiring schools to allow voluntary prayer:

    H.R.1, S.73:

    No DOE funds shall be available to any educational agency which prevents participation in constitutionally protected prayer in public schools by individuals on a voluntary basis. No educational agency shall require any person to participate in prayer or influence the form or content of any constitutionally protected prayer in such public schools.
    H.Con.Res.199 (Nov 19, 1999, Bonilla et. al.)
    Expressing the sense of the Congress that prayers and invocations at public school sporting events contribute to the moral foundation of our Nation and urging the Supreme Court to uphold their constitutionality.
    H.J.RES. 54
    Recognizing the authority of public schools to allow students to exercise their constitutional rights by establishing a period of time for silent prayer or meditation or reflection, encouraging the recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance, and refusing to discriminate against individuals or groups on account of their religious character or speech.
    Source: H.R.1 01-HR1 on Jan 31, 2001

    Rated 17% by the NEA, indicating anti-public education votes.

    Putnam scores 17% by the NEA on public education issues

    The National Education Association has a long, proud history as the nation's leading organization committed to advancing the cause of public education. Founded in 1857 "to elevate the character and advance the interests of the profession of teaching and to promote the cause of popular education in the United States," the NEA has remained constant in its commitment to its original mission as evidenced by the current mission statement:

    To fulfill the promise of a democratic society, the National Education Association shall promote the cause of quality public education and advance the profession of education; expand the rights and further the interest of educational employees; and advocate human, civil, and economic rights for all.
    In pursuing its mission, the NEA has determined that it will focus the energy and resources of its 2.7 million members toward the "promotion of public confidence in public education." The ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.
    Source: NEA website 03n-NEA on Dec 31, 2003

    Other governors on Education: Adam Putnam on other issues:
    FL Gubernatorial:
    Alexander Snitker
    Andrew Gillum
    Charlie Crist
    Gwen Graham
    Philip Levine
    Rick Scott
    Ron DeSantis
    FL Senatorial:
    Alan Grayson
    Bill Nelson
    Carlos Lopez-Cantera
    Charlie Crist
    David Jolly
    Edward Janowski
    Marco Rubio
    Pam Keith
    Patrick Murphy
    Rick Scott
    Ron DeSantis

    Gubernatorial Debates 2018:
    AK: Walker(i) vs.Chenault(R) vs.Huggins(R) vs.Begich(D) vs.Treadwell(D)
    AL: Kay Ivey(R) vs.Countryman(D) vs.Tommy Battle (R) vs.Walt Maddox (R) vs.George(R) vs.Carrington(R)
    AR: Hutchinson(R) vs.Henderson(D) vs.West(L)
    AZ: Ducey(R) vs.David Garcia (D) vs.Farley(D)
    CA: Newsom(D) vs.Chiang(D) vs.Villaraigosa(D) vs.Delaine Eastin (D) vs.David Hadley (R) vs.John Cox (R) vs.Zoltan Istvan (I) vs.Allen(R) vs.La Riva(P)
    CO: Johnston(D) vs.Mitchell(R) vs.Cary Kennedy (D) vs.Doug Robinson (R) vs.Barlock(R) vs.Lynne(R) vs.Polis(D) vs.Coffman(R) vs.George Brauchler(R,A.G.) vs.Stapleton(R)
    CT: Malloy(D) vs.Lamont(D) vs.Srinivasan(R) vs.David Walker (R) vs.Lumaj(R) vs.Visconti(R) vs.Lauretti(R) vs.Drew(D)
    FL: Gillum(D) vs.Graham(D) vs.Putnam(R)
    GA: Kemp(R) vs.Cagle(R) vs.Hill(R) vs.Abrams(D) vs.Levine(D)
    HI: Ige(D) vs.Hanabusa(D) vs.Carroll(R)
    IA: Kim_Reynolds(R) vs.Leopold(D) vs.Boulton(D) vs.McGuire(D) vs.Glasson(D) vs.Hubbell(D)
    ID: Little(R) vs.Fulcher(R) vs.Labrador(R) vs.Ahlquist(R) vs.Minton(D) vs.Jordan(D)
    IL: Rauner(R) vs.Kennedy(D) vs.Pawar(D) vs.Daniel Biss (D) vs.Pritzker(D) vs.Ives(R)
    KS: Brewer(D) vs.Wink Hartman (R) vs.Colyer(C) vs.Kobach(R) vs.Orman(O)
    MA: Baker(R) vs.Gonzalez(D) vs.Setti Warren (D) vs.Bob Massie (R)
    MD: Hogan(R) vs.Alec Ross (D) vs.Cummings(D) vs.Madaleno(D) vs.Jealous(D)
    ME: Mayhew(R) vs.Mills(D) vs.Boyle(D) vs.Thibodeau(R) vs.Moody(D)
    MI: Whitmer(R) vs.El-Sayed(D) vs.Tim Walz (D) vs.Schuette(R) vs.Calley(R)
    MN: vs.Smith(D) vs.Coleman(D) vs.Murphy(D) vs.Otto(D) vs.Tina Liebling (DFL) vs.Tim Walz (DFL) vs.Matt Dean (R) vs.Pawlenty(R) vs.Johnson(R)
    NE: Ricketts(R) vs.Krist(D)
    NH: Sununu(R) vs.Schwartz(R) vs.Steve Marchand (D)
    NM: Lujan-Grisham(D) vs.Pearce(R) vs.Cervantes(D) vs.Apodaca (D)
    NV: Fisher (R) vs.Sisolak(D) vs.Laxalt(R) vs.Schwartz(R)
    NY: Cuomo(D) vs.Nixon(D) vs.Hawkins(G) vs.Molinaro(R)
    OH: DeWine(R) vs.Husted(R,Lt.Gov.) vs.Kucinich(D) vs.Sutton(D,Lt.Gov) vs.Taylor(R) vs.Jim Renacci (R) vs.Connie Pillich (D) vs.Schiavoni(D) vs.Whaley(D) vs.Cordray(D)
    OK: Stitt(R) vs.Cornett(R) vs.Edmondson(D) vs.Richardson(R) vs.Johnson(D)
    OR: Brown(D) vs.Scott Inman(D) vs.Buehler(R)
    PA: Wolf(D) vs.Wagner(R) vs.Barletta(R)
    RI: Raimondo(D) vs.Fung(R) vs.Morgan(R)
    SC: McMaster(R) vs.McGill(R) vs.Pope(R) vs.Templeton(R) vs.Smith(D)
    SD: Noem(R) vs.Jackley(R) vs.Sutton(D)
    TN: Green(R) vs.Dean(D) vs.Black(R)
    TX: Abbott(R) vs.Glass(L) vs.White(D) vs.Valdez(D)
    VT: Scott(R) vs.Stern(D)
    WI: Walker(R) vs.Harlow(D) vs.Vinehout(D) vs.Evers(D) vs.Roys(D)
    WY: Throne(D) vs.Dahlin(R) vs.Gordon(R) vs.Rammell(R)
    Newly-elected governors (first seated in Jan. 2017):
    DE-D: Carney
    IN-R: Holcomb
    MO-R: Greitens
    NH-R: Sununu
    NC-D: Cooper
    ND-R: Burgum
    VT-R: Scott
    WV-D: Justice

    Retiring 2017-18:
    AL-R: Robert Bentley(R)
    (term-limited 2018)
    CA-D: Jerry Brown
    (term-limited 2018)
    CO-D: John Hickenlooper
    (term-limited 2018)
    FL-R: Rick Scott
    (term-limited 2018)
    GA-R: Nathan Deal
    (term-limited 2018)
    IA-R: Terry Branstad
    (appointed ambassador, 2017)
    ID-R: Butch Otter
    (retiring 2018)
    KS-R: Sam Brownback
    (term-limited 2018)
    ME-R: Paul LePage
    (term-limited 2018)
    MI-R: Rick Snyder
    (term-limited 2018)
    MN-D: Mark Dayton
    (retiring 2018)
    NM-R: Susana Martinez
    (term-limited 2018)
    OH-R: John Kasich
    (term-limited 2018)
    OK-R: Mary Fallin
    (term-limited 2018)
    SC-R: Nikki Haley
    (appointed ambassador, 2017)
    SD-R: Dennis Daugaard
    (term-limited 2018)
    TN-R: Bill Haslam
    (term-limited 2018)
    WY-R: Matt Mead
    (term-limited 2018)
    Abortion
    Budget/Economy
    Civil Rights
    Corporations
    Crime
    Drugs
    Education
    Energy/Oil
    Environment
    Families/Children
    Foreign Policy
    Free Trade
    Govt. Reform
    Gun Control
    Health Care
    Homeland Security
    Immigration
    Infrastructure/Technology
    Jobs
    Local Issues
    Principles/Values
    Social Security
    Tax Reform
    War/Iraq/Mideast
    Welfare/Poverty


    Contact info:
    Email
    Fax Number:
    202-225-0585
    Mailing Address:
    Cannon HOB 442, Washington, DC 20515
    Official Website
    Search for...





    Page last updated: Aug 17, 2018