Nancy L. Johnson: “the current language reads that the Office of Civil Rights of the Department of Education must have updated policy…”

“the current language reads that the Office of Civil Rights of the Department of Education must have updated policy guidance, including objective criteria clarifying how colleges and universities can demonstrate, first, a history and continuing practice of program expansion; and, second, full and effective accommodation of the interests and abilities of the underrepresented sex. I believe the word ``objective'' can, ironically, be a subjective standard. It is my fear that parties who oppose title IX, or schools that simply do not wish to comply, could take the policy guidance developed, by OCR, to court over whether or not the criteria developed are truly objective. If such a court case was pending, Mr. Chairman, it is entirely possible that funding for OCR's enforcement of all civil rights laws would be in jeopardy. This is absolutely ludicrous and far from the gentleman's intent and far from anyone's intent in proposing the language in the bill. My concern is alleviated by the substitute amendment we offer today, which replaces objective criteria with specific criteria. This language still ensures OCR must provide more guidance to schools by December 31, 1995. However, it is hard to argue in court that criteria are not specific. Therefore, I do not believe the same threat of a loss of funds for civil rights enforcement due to court cases exists with this language.”