Virginia Foxx: “The majority of the amendments are unobjectionable, though none of them address the underlying problems with the bill.…”

“The majority of the amendments are unobjectionable, though none of them address the underlying problems with the bill. However, I highlight two problematic amendments: The amendment offered by Representative Cooper would give school districts priority in this program if those districts had previously submitted an application under an Obama-era predecessor to the program in the underlying bill. This amendment is flawed for two reasons: An application filed 4 years ago, may or may not still be adequate. Automatically giving those districts priority would disadvantage school districts who might have new and better ideas to propose. Submitting an application 4 years ago is not the same as being funded 4 years ago. Applicants that never demonstrated their merit then should start on equal footing with new applicants now. Another amendment concealed within the en bloc is offered by Representative Green of Texas, which forces grantees' hands on a dilemma many are still considering for themselves. The amendment requires that participating school districts that utilize entrance exams and competitive application procedures must replace these processes with other methods. Republicans recognize that many school districts, as well as colleges and universities, are wrestling with the role entrance exams and other competitive application procedures have played in the admissions decisions and should play in the future.…”