|
|
Barbara Lee on EducationDemocratic Representative (CA-9) |
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.
Award competitive grants to provide adolescents with comprehensive sex education to:
Opponent`s argument against bill: (Nick Wing on Huffington Post) An abstinence-only effort, introduced the same day, the Abstinence Education Reallocation Act, stands as an effective counter to the Democratic-backed Real Education for Healthy Youth Act.
According to the text of the abstinence-only bill, sex education programs would need to be `medically accurate` and teach the `skills and benefits of sexual abstinence as the optimal sexual health behavior for youth` in order to qualify for grant money. The bill also calls for applicable programs to focus on the `holistic health, economic, and societal benefits that can be gained by refraining from non-marital sexual activity,` as well as to provide an `understanding of how drugs, alcohol, and the irresponsible use of social media can influence sexual decision-making and can contribute to risky and often aggressive sexual behavior.`
Congressional Summary:Student Loan Fairness Act:
Opponent`s argument against bill: (Blog post on voices.yahoo.com, `Why I`m Against the Student Loan Fairness Act`): The two key points to this bill are:
Congressional Summary:Amends title IV (Student Assistance) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 to extend the 3.4% interest rate on Federal Direct Stafford loans to loans first disbursed to undergraduate students between July 1, 2011, and July 1, 2015. Replaces the [termination date of] 2013 with 2015.
Proponent`s argument for bill:(US PIRG press release): The Student Loan Affordability Act keeps interest rates affordable for students over the next two years. If Congress fails to act by July 1, interest rates on federal Subsidized Stafford Loans will double from 3.4% to 6.8%. That would hike the cost of college by $1,000 per student, per loan, for over 7 million students across the country. The bill pays for extending the current interest rates through 2015 by closing three non-education tax loopholes.
Opponent`s argument against bill:(Rep. Tom Cotton, R-AR): Unfortunately, too many students today struggle for years to repay their loans because Washington politicians dictate student-loan rates and end up hurting students and taxpayers alike. It`s causing tuition costs to skyrocket, leaving students buried in debt, often without jobs, and forced to delay buying a home and starting a family. As students struggle to repay their loans--regardless of the interest rate--taxpayers are on the hook for a $100 billion bailout--a burden hard-working Arkansans shouldn`t have to bear. A better path is to let Arkansas`s hometown banks work with students and families to finance higher education, just as they do with homes, farms, businesses, and other loans. I`m committed to bringing affordable higher education to every Arkansan and ending the federal-government monopoly on the student-lending business.
Heritage Action Summary: An amendment offered by Rep. Mark Walker (R-NC) and Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) to the Student Success Act (H.R. 5). The amendment, known as A-PLUS (Academic Partnerships Lead Us to Success), would give the states the ability to consolidate their federal education funds and use them for any lawful education purpose they deem beneficial.
Heritage Foundation recommendation to vote YES: (7/8/2015): A-PLUS lets states escape No Child Left Behind`s prescriptive programmatic requirements. At its core, A-PLUS delivers on the promise of `restoring state and local control over the 10% of education funding financed by the federal government,` moving dollars out of the hands of federal bureaucrats and political appointees and into the hands of those closer to the students. Now is the time for Congress to restore federalism in education, empower parents and students instead of bureaucrats and unions, and remove archaic obstacles that have prevented true opportunity for all.
US News and World Report recommendation to vote NO: (4/7/2015): A-PLUS [is intended as] a no-strings-attached block grant. There isn`t all that much the federal government can do well in education, but it`s because of federally-required transparency that charter schools and voucher schools can demonstrate that they work. For example, New York City`s Success Academy scores in the top 1% of all the state`s public schools in math and in the top 3% in English. When Success Academy came under fire from teachers` union-backed Mayor Bill de Blasio, it was able to fight back with numbers to prove it. If a strong-union state were to receive a no-strings-attached block grant, transparency would be the first thing to go. A no-strings-attached block grant is an overreaction to federal overreach.
Legislative outcome: Failed House 195 to 235 (no Senate vote)
Heritage Action Summary: The House will vote to reauthorize the Scholarships for Opportunity and Results (SOAR) Act (H.R. 10). The bill would continue funding through Fiscal Year 2021 and allow eligible students in Washington, D.C. to enroll in a participating private school.Analysis by Heritage Action:
ACLU recommendation to vote NO: (Letter to U.S.House, 3/29/2011): The ACLU urges Congress to oppose the SOAR Act, legislation to restart and expand Washington DC`s failed private and religious school voucher pilot program. Originally started as a five-year pilot program in 2004, the DC voucher program is the nation`s first and only federally-funded private and religious school voucher program. Under the federal voucher pilot program, funds were provided to schools even though they infuse their curricular materials with specific religious content and even though they are not covered by many of the nation`s civil rights statutes that would otherwise protect students against discrimination. Additionally, each of the congressionally-mandated studies to explore the pilot program concluded that the voucher program had no significant effect on the academic achievement.
Cato Institute recommendation to vote YES: (4/28/2016): The Obama administration has repeatedly worked to undermine or eliminate the DC school choice program, even though it has the support of local Democratic politicians such as the DC Mayor and a majority of the DC City Council. Low-income students shouldn`t be condemned to low-quality schools just because their parents cannot afford a home in a wealthy neighborhood. The DC program was an important step toward breaking the link between home prices and school quality.
Legislative outcome: Passed by the House 240-191-3; never came to a vote in the Senate.
Excerpts from press release from Tammy Baldwin, Senate sponsor: The America`s College Promise Act makes two years of community college free by:
Opposing argument: (Cato Institute, `College Courtesy of the Taxpayer? No Thanks,` Jan. 9, 2015): One look at either community college outcomes or labor market outlooks reveals free college to be educational folly. Community college completion rates are atrocious: a mere 19.5% of community college students complete their programs. Meanwhile, the for-profit sector has an almost 63% completion rate. And [about 70%] of the new job categories in coming years will require a high school diploma or less.
Opposing argument: (Heritage Foundation, `Free Community College Is a Bad Deal`, July 15, 2016): Free college proposals would subject community colleges to the same types of subsidies-induced inflation endemic at four-year institutions. And low-income students already have access to federal Pell Grants, which can cover the bulk of community college tuition. By contrast, a more open market of alternative schooling models, such as online or vocational education programs, could better tailor degrees at a lower cost.
Legislative Summary:This bill authorizes private civil causes of action for discrimination on the ground of race, color, or national origin, including anti-Semitism) in programs receiving federal financial assistance.
Trump`s Statement of Administration Policy (against): The Administration strongly opposes passage of H.R. 2574. This bill fails to advance equality in education, while expanding bureaucracy, encouraging burdensome litigation, and imposing costs on recipients of Federal financial assistance. H.R. 2574 seeks to validate and expand the divisive regulatory agenda of the previous administration--advancing an ideological mission and enriching favored special interests like trial lawyers at the expense of students, educators, and taxpayers. The bill would require each recipient of Federal financial assistance to appoint a compliance coordinator, which would impose additional administrative burdens. H.R. 2574 would redirect vital resources that are needed to serve students in the pursuit of an ideological agenda.
Rep. Elaine Luria in support: H.R. 2574 would allow private individuals to file lawsuits under the Civil Rights Act`s Title VI authority, allowing students and parents to remedy discrimination in education. `Every student has the right to access public education, free from discriminatory practices, said Congresswoman Luria. `By focusing on equity and inclusion, we move towards a public education system that is more just and will benefit every student, regardless of sex, ethnicity, ability, or their zip code.`
Legislative outcome:Passed House 232-188-10, roll no. 192 on Sept 16, 2020; died in Senate without a vote.