James M. Jeffords: “I am sorry that I must disagree with the words of my colleague and member of my committee. Ed-Flex, as it currently…”

“I am sorry that I must disagree with the words of my colleague and member of my committee. Ed-Flex, as it currently operates, demands accountability of participating States. It is important to keep in mind that accountability has been a part of Ed-Flex since its inception, and the manager's package builds upon those strong accountability provisions. The manager's package, adopted last week, adds the following accountability features: State Ed-Flex applications must be coordinated with the title I plan or with the State's comprehensive reform plan; emphasis on school and student performance; requires additional reporting by the Secretary regarding rationale for approving waiver authority. It is very important to keep in mind that the Department of Education, the Secretary, is the entity that determines whether or not a State qualifies as an Ed-Flex State. That is retained. The September 1998 GAO report stated: The recent flexibility initiatives increase the amount of information districts need, rather than simplifying or streamlining information on Federal requirements. Federal flexibility efforts neither reduce districts' financial obligations nor provide additional dollars. For those reasons, I ask my colleagues to oppose the Wellstone amendment.”