I chair the positive education caucus in the Congress of the United States. This positive education caucus believes that it is easy to be critical but much more difficult to find solutions. That positive caucus is called the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the United States House of Representatives. So I am pleased to join several of my colleagues in reviewing two things with the American people and with all who are watching: first, the seven key Republican principles on education; and second, the key education accomplishments we have made over the last 5 years. Since we became a majority party in November of 1994, I have fought to include seven key principles in all education legislation that is passed through the Committee on Education and Workforce and the House. Now, why did we do that? Why did we come up with these seven principles? Well, I sat here for 20 years in the minority where I was told over and over again, and I watched it happen, that all we need to do is come up with one more program or another billion dollars or cover another 100,000 or half million children and we will solve all those problems. And for 20 years I watched one more program, one more billion dollars. Nothing happened positively in relationship to closing the achievement gap between those who are fortunate enough to have someone at home who is their first and most important teacher and those that are not.
Editor's note · Context
Discussing education principles and accomplishments in the House of Representatives.
Share
More from William F. Goodling
There is no question it kills the bill. Title VII at the present time exempts churches and religious organizations from employment discrimination laws. So, obviously, the church is not going to give up that title VII exemption or the…
For 22 years, I tried to get 40 percent of excess spending back to the local districts as far as special ed is concerned. If the majority had done that for all these years, Los Angeles, for instance, would have been getting an extra 100…
Right. Secondly, only the partnership gets the money. The church itself cannot get the money. The partnership that the church is working with gets the money, not the church itself.
First of all, the church cannot be a fiscal agent. They cannot, in our legislation, be a fiscal agent.





