I feel that is very irresponsible. In fact, I considered offering an amendment which would address the underlying question you are raising which is the much more fundamental question of the issue of unfunded mandates. This is not the core issue of what is and is not an unfunded mandate. I think we are confusing it in the debates right now. What this gets to is the fine issue. There is this other core issue, and I hope it is going to be taken up at some point in this Congress because I know there are a lot of bills floating around on the issue, and some have significant sponsorship. But that is not the issue that is being adjudicated by this amendment.
Sen. Judd Gregg: “I feel that is very irresponsible. In fact, I considered offering an amendment which would address the underlying…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the issue of unfunded mandates during a congressional debate.
Share
More from Sen. Judd Gregg
The Federal Government should not shift the costs of administering Federal programs to the States and local governments. I really do not think anything could be clearer as a statement of intent. It is a very appropriate statement of intent…
If funds are available and there is a contractual obligation, it seems to me the fine is assessed.
I would presume--and we are getting into some hypotheticals, which I think is worth getting into, and I think the answers so far have reflected the fact this is a legitimate amendment that is not going to destroy the bill, but is just…
It is very specific. It says quality, availability of curriculum instruction, materials and technology. That is not designing math courses. That is saying whether or not you are going to teach Euclidean geometry or some other type of…





