Jim Sensenbrenner: “Mr. Speaker, I respectfully disagree with the assertions that have been made that the section in question is…”

“Mr. Speaker, I respectfully disagree with the assertions that have been made that the section in question is unconstitutional. The gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson) cites a 1971 U.S. Supreme Court case. There have been two more recent cases, Agostini v. Felton in 1997 and Mitchell v. Helms earlier this year that clarified the Lemon v. Kurtzman test. Basically, it said that a statute similar to what is being proposed here is constitutional if it does not result in religious indoctrination, it does not define its recipients by reference to religion and it does not create excessive entanglement between government and religion. In each of these three instances, the statute does not do so. There has been a Presidential award program that has been on the books since 1983 where each year the National Science Foundation recommends to the President 107 math teachers and 107 science teachers from around the country to receive an award which is a $7,500 grant to the school where the teacher teaches. That is open to both public schools and private schools.”