Mr. Chairman, actually the key here is mandatory funding because no matter what we authorize on this committee, no matter what we vote for today on H.R. 1350, whether it is 18 percent of the 40 percent Federal commitment, whether it is 21 percent of the 40 percent commitment, or if it is 25 percent of the 40 percent Federal commitment, the funding has to be spent. We can authorize it, but the Committee on Appropriations spends it. Unless we tell the Committee on Appropriations through changing the rules of H.R. 1350 and IDEA, unless we tell them that it is mandatory that they spend what we authorize, it will not get spent; and it is going to be the year 2035 before we even come close to reaching 40 percent. Later on today the gentleman from California (Mr. McKeon) and I have an amendment that will pass all new funding after the year 2003, pass any new funding that is appropriated directly to the school districts and to the schools. But if we do not get any new funding because indeed the appropriators do not choose to add funding, then we pass along nothing to school districts because 100 percent of nothing is still nothing. The Federal commitment to IDEA 30 years ago was 40 percent that Federal Government would match the mandate that the States educate all kids, which is absolutely the right thing to do, and provide them a free education and equally educate all children in the public school system.
Lynn C. Woolsey: “Mr. Chairman, actually the key here is mandatory funding because no matter what we authorize on this committee, no…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the importance of mandatory funding for education under H.R. 1350 and IDEA.
Share
More from Lynn C. Woolsey
I have an amendment at the desk. The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will report the amendment. The Clerk read as follows: At the end of the bill (before the short title) insert the following: Sec. __. The total amount of appropriations made…
I thank the gentleman for leading this Special Order. Mr. Speaker, yesterday we were debating work requirements under the TANF program. Well, after we've all listed the issues that the Republicans have refused to address in this Congress…
Again, Mr. Speaker, nothing in the proposed rule would have applied to children working on their parents' family farm, and I reserve the balance of my time.
I feel like you are giving us information that isn't based on politics. It is based on science and on observation.





