Dana Rohrabacher: “I rise in opposition to the conference report on S. 2000, the Head Start Act Amendments of 1994. I would like to note…”

“I rise in opposition to the conference report on S. 2000, the Head Start Act Amendments of 1994. I would like to note that I have always supported the Head Start. Head Start has been successful because it is a specially targeted program which prepares disadvantaged children for their first years of school. It provides these children with the tools they will need to help them achieve educational success. Many immigrant families depend on Head Start to give their children a chance to learn English. The Head Start Program currently meets the needs of non-English speaking children through bilingual programs. This is questionable enough. I don't need to state the importance of ensuring that these children become fluent in English in order to assimilate successfully in our society. This particular bill, however, goes beyond the current scope of the Head Start Program. Currently, Head Start must provide special services for 'non-English language children.' This bill strikes this particular language and replaces it with 'non-English language background children and their families.' Under this bill, children who already speak English will also receive instruction in their families' native languages. Mr. Speaker, it is absurd to think that we are going to use the Head Start Program to provide foreign language instruction to children who already speak English!”