I welcome my colleague from Colorado here tonight as we talk about educating our children. The topic tonight came out of a process that for some of us began in 1995, where we began a process that was called Education at a Crossroads, where we took a look at the definition of education here in Washington, we took a look at what worked and what was wasted in the Federal programs, and also what worked and what was wasted at the state and at the local level, and really came to a decision to review some of the information and the documentation that we gathered since 1995 based on a press conference that the Secretary of Education gave last week. As many of our colleagues know, we are embarked on a plan this year for the second year in a row to try to make sure that we spend no Social Security dollars on general fund expenditures. It looks like we did that in 1999, or came very, very close, for the first time in 40 years, and what we want to do is duplicate that for 2000, so we have embarked on a plan that said we are going to look for a 1 percent savings. Last week the Secretary of Education came out and said, "If you try to find a 1 percent savings in my department, you cannot find it. It is not there, and any reduction in expenditures in education will come off the backs of our children."
Editor's note · Context
Discussing education funding and the impact of potential budget cuts on children.
Share
More from Pete Hoekstra
Next year, hopefully we can all take a toast of American bourbon legally in the province of Ontario," Hoekstra said. "And toast the friendship and the relationship between the United States and Canada."
I think it’s important that people realize this, okay? Because I hear it all the time. What does America have to do with this? We paid for the bridge. It’s our bridge. Just open it.
We have a bridge that has come in significantly over budget and has come in significantly later than originally forecast. That has changed the business model.
Compared to a provincial government and Canadian taxpayers running (political) ads in the United States of America? You’re equating those two? C’mon, that’s not even close!





