I join my colleague from Massachusetts in urging everyone to vote for the Gorton amendment. However, I urge them to vote no on the Daschle amendment. The distinguished minority leader has offered objections to S. 2, and we agree that it is not perfect, but S. 2 does ensure that the Federal Government provides leadership and support in areas where there is a critical need for help. These areas include title I, education for the disadvantaged; safe and drug-free schools; bilingual education; and education technology, to name a few. S. 2 maintains and strengthens the title I reform process begun in 1994 with the enactment of the last ESEA reauthorization which required the establishment of high standards and the development and implementation of assessments designed to measure progress towards those standards. The deadline for adopting standards was 1998, and the deadline for adopting assessments is in the school year 2001-2002. A bipartisan group of educators, known as the Independent Review Panel, which was created under the 1994 law to review federally funded elementary and secondary education programs, said in their report, released last year, that standards driven reform should be given a chance to fully take hold while the Nation continues to assess progress in student performance.
James M. Jeffords: “I join my colleague from Massachusetts in urging everyone to vote for the Gorton amendment. However, I urge them to vote…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the Gorton and Daschle amendments related to education legislation.
Share
More from James M. Jeffords
last Thursday I submitted a statement expressing my concerns with the nomination of Judge Samuel Alito to the United States Supreme Court. I am here today to reiterate these concerns as we move toward a final vote on this nomination. There…
throughout my 30 years in the Congress, I have considered myself a free-trader. I believe that breaking down barriers to trade and opening access to markets in a fair and balanced way in the long run benefits all economies, both consumers…
I see that as a possibility and would, with the concurrence of the four bill managers, support reasonable modifications to be allowable.
I will be brief but concise. This is not a vote about reducing mercury by 90 percent by 2009 or even 70 percent by the year 2030. That is a red herring. This is not a vote about the opponents' wildly outdated claims on the potential cost…