The penalties will be the same as they are in the original form of the bill; that is to say, if a State does not meet the commitments it made in getting into this 15-State Straight A's Program, it runs the risk, at the discretion of the Department of Education, of losing the ability to continue in that program. It would revert to the present system of categorical aid programs and the accountability provisions contained therein. What this does is add another mandatory requirement to what the State undertakes, a 10-percent reduction in this differential. So it makes it somewhat tougher for the State to be entitled to continue in Straight A's after its initial 5-year period.
T. Gorton: “The penalties will be the same as they are in the original form of the bill; that is to say, if a State does not meet…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing penalties for states in the 15-State Straight A's Program.
Share
More from T. Gorton
The Senator is correct. Section 156 states, ``nothing in this section shall be construed to expand the existing statutory authority of the Secretary.'' The interpretation suggested by our House colleagues would require additional statutory…
I expect that the $2.5 million grant program administered by NFWF will leverage at least $2.5 million overall in additional, nonfederal funds.
I agree with that view. It should be the U.S. Forest Service's priority to use the most effective, environmentally protective aerially applied fire retardants.
I would agree that maintaining dual suppliers of high performance, environmentally acceptable fire retardants is critical to the mission of the Service.





