Search

Statements were presented by: Honorable Tom Harkin, Chairman, U.S. Senator from Iowa, Chairman, Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry; Honorable Robert B. Casey, Jr., U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania; Honorable Saxby Chambliss, U.S. Senator from Georgia; Honorable Richard G. Lugar; Honorable Ken Salazar, U.S. Senator from Colorado; Kelly Brownell, Founder and Director, Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut; Mary Lou Hennrich, Executive Director, Community Health Partnership, Portland, Oregon; Teresa Nece, Director, Food and Nutrition, Des Moines Public Schools, Des Moines, Iowa; Susan K. Neely, President and Chief Executive Officer, American Beverage Association, Washington, DC; and Janey Thornton, Child Nutrition Director, Hardin County School District, Elizabethtown, Kentucky. The following are appended: (1) Prepared Statements; and (2) Documents Submitted for the Record.

The purpose of this hearing was to examine the education system of New Orleans. Statements were presented by: Honorable Lamar Alexander, Chairman, Subcommittee on Education and Early Childhood Development; Honorable Mary L. Landrieu, U.S. Senator from Louisiana; Honorable Richard Burr, U.S. Senator from North Carolina; Linda Johnson, President, Louisiana Board of Elementary and Secondary Education; Sarah Ottinger, Parent, Audubon Charter School; Father William F. Maestri, Superintendent of Catholic Schools, Archdiocese of New Orleans; Carole Butler-Wallin, Deputy Superintendent, Louisiana Department of Education; Robin Jarvis, Ph.D., Acting Superintendent, Recovery School District; Greg Richmond, President, National Association of Charter School Authorizers; Brian Riedlinger, Ph.D., Chief Executive Officer, Algiers Charter Schools Association; Phyllis Landrieu, President, Orleans Parish School Board; Senator J. Chris Ullo, Chairman, Louisiana State Senate Education Committee. Additional material includes letter from Gordon Alexander Cole; prepared statement of Scott S. Cowen, and responses to questions of Senator Alexander and Senator Landrieu.

Career and technical education is a critical component of a number of Federal education and training initiatives that are designed to help support the development of a 21st Century workforce. Career and technical education is unique in that it fuses challenging academic curricula with relevant skill training in order to prepare secondary and postsecondary students for the workplace. The central goal of Federally supported career and technical education programs is to provide students with strong academic and technical preparation, so that students can successfully enter the workforce or pursue additional education. The purpose of S. 250, the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Improvement Act of 2005, is to reauthorize and improve the federally supported career and technical education programs last reauthorized by the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Amendments Act of 1998.

The purpose of this hearing was to review the implementation of Titles I through III of Public Law 106-393, "The Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act of 2000." Statements were presented by: Honorable Jeff Bingaman, U.S. Senator from New Mexico; Honorable Maria Cantwell, U.S. Senator from Washington; Honorable Larry E. Craig, U.S. Senator from Idaho; Dr. Timothy Creal, Superintendent, Custer School District, Custer, South Dakota; James B. French, Trinity County Superintendent of Schools, Weaverville, California; Reta Griffith, Commissioner, Pocahontas County, West Virginia; Honorable Tim Johnson, U.S. Senator from South Dakota; Sherry Krulitz, Commissioner, Shoshone County, Idaho on Behalf of the National Association of Counties and the Idaho Association of Counties; Tim Lillebo, Conservation Policy Advocate, Oregon Natural Resources Council, Bend, Oregon; Mark Rey, Under Secretary, Natural Resources and Environment, Department of Agriculture; Honorable Ken Salazar, U.S. Senator from Colorado; Ed Shepard, Assistant Director, Renewable Resources and Planning, Bureau of Land Management, Department of the Interior; Ed Wehrheim, Chairman, Catron County Commission, Catron County, New Mexico; Honorable Ron Wyden, U.S. Senator from Oregon.

The purpose of this countable was to discuss the requirements of No Child Left Behind that about 200,000 teachers--special education teachers who teach children in special education classes or who are severely disabled and who teach multiple subjects in middle school and in high school--be "highly qualified," and what exactly that means. In his opening statement, Honorable Lamar Alexander stated that one witness, himself a teacher, posed three questions that seemed to best represent the point of the hearing: (1) What exactly do I have to do by the end of the next school year to demonstrate that I am highly qualified using the House option? (2) Will I have sufficient time to meet the requirements? and (3) What will the consequences be to me if I do not prove myself to be highly qualified? This roundtable set out to determine whether Congress has created barriers for special education teachers and to learn what Congress can do to achieve the objectives set out in the No Child Left Behind and the IDEA legislation. Testimony was presented by: Lamar Alexander (R-TN); Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA); Jeff Sessions (R-AL); John H. Hagar, Assistant Secretary, Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, U.S. Department of Education; Accompanied by Carolyn Snowbarger, Director, Teacher-To-Teacher Initiative, and Special Assistant for Teacher Quality, Office of Elementary and Secondary Education, U.S. Department of Education; Rene Islas, Special Assistant to the Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education, U.S. Department of Education; Jeffrey Langham, Superintendent of Education, Elmore County School System, Wetumpka, Alabama; James McLeskey, Professor and Chair, Department of Special Education, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida; Carol Ann Baglin, Assistant State Superintendent, Division of Special Education/Early Intervention Services, Maryland State Department of Education, Baltimore, Maryland; William Connolly, Teacher, Quirk Middle School, Hartford, Connecticut; Lana C. Seivers, Commissioner of Education, Tennessee; and Mary Senne, Parent and Disability Community Advocate, Orlando, Florida.

In his opening statement, Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN), chairman, Subcommittee on Education and Early Childhood Development, stated that one responsibility of Congress is to ensure that taxpayer dollars are being spent for the purposes intended and for the children intended. Between January 2003 and the first months of this year, there were numerous accounts from communities across the country of serious financial abuses or irregularities by individuals or entities entrusted with Head Start dollars. That is why the House and Senate Education Committee leaders asked the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to look into allegations of financial abuse and irregularities by the local agencies or individuals entrusted with Head Start funds. The purpose of this hearing was to consider the findings of the GAO report as well as its recommendations for how the Department of Health and Human Services can do a better job of overseeing the spending of Head Start money. Among those testifying were witnesses, representatives of the writers of the GAO report and of the Federal managers of the Head Start money as well as representatives from the community agencies that actually administer and use the Head Start money. Testifying before the Subcommittee were: Lamar Alexander (R-TN), Chairman, Subcommittee on Education and Early Childhood Development; Michael B. Enzi, Chairman, Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions; Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA); Wade Horn, Assistant Secretary for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; Marnie S. Shaul, Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office; Christopher Dodd (D-CT); Jim Caccamo, Director, Metropolitan Council on Early Learning, Kansas City, MO; A.C. Wharton, Mayor, Shelby County, TN; Yvonne Gates, Director for Marketing and Community Relations, Center for Academic Enrichment and Outreach, Clark County, NV; Olivia A. Golden, Senior Fellow, Urban Institute; and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY). Additional material (statements, articles, publications, letters, etc.) were submitted by: Wade F. Horn (in response to questions of Senator Enzi); Wade F. Horn (in response to questions of Senator Ensign); Government Accountability Office (in response to questions of Senator Alexander); Mayor A.C. Wharton (in response to question of Senator Alexander); and Olivia A. Golden (in response to questions of Senator Enzi). (Contains 4 figures.)

The focus of this hearing was on funding for abstinence education. Following an opening statement by Subcommittee Chairman Senator Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, witness testimonies were heard from: Dr. Wade F. Horn, Ph.D., Assistant Secretary for Children and Families, Department of Health and Human Services, Washington, D.C.; Rev. Kenneth Page, Pastor, Great Island Presbyterian Church, Lock Haven, Pennsylvania; Dominique Urrutia, Program Coordinator, Abstinence is BEST Program, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania; Joe Fay, Executive Director, Pennsylvania Coalition to Prevent Teen Pregnancy; Kelly Lesh, Abstinence Education Special Initiative Coordinator, Heartbeat Community Service, Millerstown, Pennsylvania; Ronald Evans, Director, Bridge Youth Services, Pennsylvania; Tyler Barth, Performer, Abstinence Group Choice Initiative, Central Mountain High School, Mill Hall, Pennsylvania; Miranda Shipley, Volunteer, Peer Education, Reel Commitment Program, Fairfield, Pennsylvania; Nelly Torres, Peer Educator, Impact Group, Millersville University, Millersville, Pennsylvania; Sierra Leiphart, Volunteer, Human Life Services, York County, Pennsylvania; Jennifer Bruno, Board Member, Youth as Resources Program, Lehigh Valley High School, Bethlehem, Pennsylvania; and Jesse Walton, Staff Member, Boys to Men Program, Mercy Hospital, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

This hearing considers the budget request by the Department of Education for fiscal year 2004 for the 21st Century Community Learning Centers Program. The request by the Department is for $600 million, a sharp reduction of last year's appropriation, which was $993 million. This is a program that serves approximately 1,300,000 students in 1,400 communities throughout the United States. It provides a wide variety of educational experiences and has generally been regarded to be a highly effective program until the Department of Education this year has cited what they conclude to be "disappointing initial findings from a rigorous evaluation." In light of this conclusion, albeit preliminary, the subcommittee concluded that it would be important to have a hearing and go into this issue in some detail. Statements in this hearing are given by: Senator Arlen Specter; Hon. William D. Hansen; Senator Barbara Boxer; Arnold Schwarzenegger; Hon. John DeStefano, Jr.; Harvey Sprafka; Steven Kinlock; and Madison White. (Author/MA)

A Senate committee hearing received testimony on the implementation of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 in American Indian and Alaska Native tribal communities. The act provided authority for tribal governments to administer welfare programs formerly administered by the states but did not provide funds to develop the infrastructure to administer welfare programs. A panel of researchers from the General Accounting Office and elsewhere reported on an ongoing study of tribal welfare programs, focusing on economic conditions on Indian reservations; changes in the numbers of Indian welfare recipients since the law was enacted; how the law's flexibility has allowed recipients to engage in traditional subsistence activities and self-employment and pursue education and job training; and tribes' lack of administrative experience and necessary infrastructure, such as automated data systems. Written statements and testimony from Senators and representatives of various tribes, American Indian and Alaska Native organizations, and federal and state agencies discussed poverty and unemployment in Indian country, needs of tribal governments for administrator training and technical assistance, the need for financial assistance to develop small businesses, policy and governance problems in relationships between state and tribal programs, the need for "rural/frontier status" for isolated areas, inadequate funding to meet education and job training needs, needs for child care assistance, and descriptions of tribal welfare services. Many witnesses supported a proposed "American Indian Welfare Reform Act." (SV)

Noting the significant increase since 1990 in food-borne illnesses affecting school children, these hearings transcripts provide testimony on the safety of federal school lunches. Statements by Senator Richard Durbin and Representatives Stephen Horn, Janice Schakowsky, and Carolyn Maloney emphasized the array of federal agencies with various food safety responsibilities, food safety agencies' inability to mandate food recalls, and the need for better cooperation and communication between the Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Representative Rosa DeLauro discussed findings of unsanitary conditions and unsafe food handling practices in Chicago area schools, recordkeeping flaws preventing officials from tracing food contamination to its source, the need to consolidate and streamline the number of federal agencies/committees responsible for protecting food, and the need to give the USDA and FDA authority to conduct mandatory recalls. General Accounting Office testimony recommended making schools aware of federal inspection and compliance records of potential food suppliers and described USDA and FDA measures to protect the food supply from deliberate contamination. Officials from the FDA and USDA described their respective roles in ensuring food safety and procedures for responding to illness outbreaks. An official of the Center for Science in the Public Interest discussed gaps in the food safety system and urged passage of the Durbin-DeLauro Safe Food Act. Two parents from a food safety advocacy group testified about their childrens food-borne illnesses, urged trace-back capability and accountability, advocated a single food safety agency, and maintained that overemphasizing consumer education misdirects responsibility for food safety from producers to consumers. Counsel for the National Food Processors Association asserted that mandatory recall is unnecessary because of industry cooperation with federal recall requests and maintained that a single food safety agency is not likely to provide the kinds of benefits proposed. Questions for witnesses related to interagency cooperation and communication, bioterrorism possibilities, specific incidents of foodborne illnesses and the followup investigations, USDA guidance to districts regarding procurement procedures, and concerns about due process. Appended to the transcripts are prepared statements, letters, and charts illustrating the school lunch supply chain and food safety oversight responsibilities. (KB)

A Senate committe hearing received testimony on the proposed "Native American Commercial Driving Training and Technical Assistance Act" (Senate Bill 1344). The Act cites the high unemployment and economic distress among Native Americans, the federal government's obligation to assist Indian tribes with economic development, the high demand and expected increase in demand for commercial truck drivers, and the benefits of a career in commercial vehicle driving. Four grants to provide commercial driver training and certification would be awarded competitively, with the competition restricted to tribally controlled community colleges or universities. Two of these--Fort Peck Community College (Montana) and D-Q University (California)--currently offer commercial vehicle driving programs. Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell and speakers representing the American Trucking Association, an American Indian-owned trucking firm, and Fort Peck Community College offered comments and recommendations related to the Act's passage and implementation, and discussed the role of tribally controlled colleges and universities in Native American job training and economic development; the funding needs of tribally controlled colleges; descriptions of current commercial driving programs and certification requirements; and career benefits. (SV)

Senator Edward Kennedy, from the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, submitted this report in accompaniment to United States Senate Bill 2969 (S. 2969), which was introduced by Senator Kennedy and Senator Gregg on September 19, 2002. S. 2969 provides for an office within the Department of Education to conduct high quality research using a variety of scientifically valid methods, to evaluate Federal Education Programs as well as research conducted outside the Department, develop products, and to disseminate information that will improve the quality of education for all students. S. 2969 provides a new structure to that office, to be known as the U.S. Institute for Education Sciences. The Committee believes that the goal of providing every individual with a high quality education requires the continued pursuit of knowledge about education through research, development, data collection, synthesis, technical assistance and information dissemination. The contents of this report are as follows: (1) Introduction; (2) Purpose and Summary; (3) Background and Need for Legislation; (4) Legislative History and Committee Action; (5) Explanation of Bill and Committee Views; (6) Cost Estimate; (7) Regulatory Impact Statement; (8) Application of Law to the Legislative Branch; (9) Section-by-Section Analysis; and (10) Changes in Existing Law. (Contains 2 tables.)

This document presents witness testimonies addressing the growing problem of Ecstasy use among American youth. All accounts point to the fact that youth are increasingly experimenting with the drug and experiencing seizures and other adverse affects at an alarming rate. Opening statements from Senators Lieberman, Bunning, and Akaka related the problem of drugs in their states. Testimony was presented from two teenage residents of Phoenix House Drug Rehabilitation Center, who are recovering from Ecstasy addiction. Other witnesses include Dr. Donald R. Vereen, Jr., Deputy Director of National Drug Control Policy; Alan I. Leshner, Director of National Institute on Drug Abuse; John C. Varrone, Assistant Commissioner of Customs; Joseph D. Keefe, Chief of Operations for Drug Enforcement Administration; John M. Bailey, Connecticut Chief State's Attorney; and Roy Rutland, Narcotics Detective for Miami-Dade Police Department. The hearing attempted to determine if the government was doing enough to stop the continued spread of this drug. It was hoped that the hearing gave a better understanding of the problem and provided some insight into what must be done. The appendix contains the prepared statements of the witnesses. (JDM)

In this report of a congressional hearing, testimony includes statements and prepared statements of these four senators: John Breaux, Larry Craig, Debbie Stabenow, and Herbert Kohl. Panel I is presented by the Acting Assistant Attorney General, United States (U.S.) Department of Justice. Panel II consists of individuals representing the National Center on Elder Abuse, National Association of State Units on Aging; a victim of elder abuse; Director of Geriatrics, University of California, Irvine, California; Elder Abuse Prosecution Unit, San Diego, California; and the National Association of Adult Protective Services Administrators. Appendixes include a statement by the National Indian Council on Aging; testimony by the Social Services Block Grant Coalition; and a letter from the American Bar Association and its recommended guidelines for state courts handling cases involving elder abuse. (YLB)

This is the report of a congressional hearing on the new National Family Caregiver Support Program. First, it looks at this new program before it is fully implemented in the states and assesses how the states are setting up their programs. Second, it examines whether the States are receiving the clear and effective guidance they need from the Federal Administration on Aging regarding the program's implementation. Testimony includes statements and prepared statements of five senators and three panels. Panel I consists of the Acting Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Aging, Administration on Aging, United States Department of Health and Human Services. Panel II is composed of statements of a member of the board of directors of the Jim "Catfish" Hunter ALS Foundation in Hartford, North Carolina, and a family caregiver in Boise, Idaho. Panel III consists of statements of the president of the National Family Caregivers Association, Kensington, Maryland; executive director of Older Women's League, Washington, DC; and executive director of Cenla Area Agency on Aging, Inc., Alexandria, Louisiana. Appendixes include the statements of the National Association on State Units on Aging and of Generations United. (YLB)

A hearing was held on the role of prevention in the comprehensive drug control policy of the United States. The hearing demonstrated a strengthening of the commitment to reduce the demand for drugs. It also showed bi-partisan support to remain vigilant in defense of the borders and in punishing those who sell or manufacture drugs. It states that the time has come to increase resources towards prevention. Following opening statements from Senators Orrin G. Hatch, Patrick J. Leahy, Mike Dewine, Richard J. Durbin, Maria Cantwell, Russell D. Feingold, and Srom Thurmond, expert witnesses presented testimony about what works in drug prevention. The panelists included Dr. Robert DuPont, president of Institute for Behavior and Health, Inc.; Edyie Hewitt, former director of Vermont Federation of Families for Children's Mental Health; Alan I. Leshner, National Institute on Drug Abuse; Donnie R. Marshall, Drug Enforcement Administration; Carroll O'Connor, actor and advocate for prevention; Debra Walcott, recovering drug addicted youth; James A. Walton, Jr., commissioner for the Department of Public Safety in Vermont; and Paul M. Warner, United States Attorney for the district of Utah. Statements were also submitted for the record from Joseph A. Califano, Jr., President of National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse, Columbia University and Dr. Jan K. Carney, Commissioner of Health, State of Vermont. (JDM)

A U.S. Senate committee hearing received testimony on proposed amendments to the Education Amendments of 1978 and the Tribally Controlled Schools Act of 1988. The amendments deal with accreditation and academic standards for Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) schools, facilities standards for BIA school dormitories, geographical attendance area boundaries for BIA schools, instructions to the General Accounting Office to conduct a national survey of the physical condition of all BIA-funded school facilities, facilities construction priorities and funding, federal funding formulas for BIA schools, administrative cost grants, establishment of a Division of Budget Analysis within the BIA's Office of Indian Education Programs (OIEP), the system of uniform direct funding and support for BIA schools, policy for Indian control of Indian education, school board training, hiring and qualifications of Indian education personnel, discharge and conditions of employment of educators, compensation or salaries for teachers and counselors, early childhood development programs, tribal departments of education, grants to tribally controlled schools, and eligibility for such grants. Statements and testimony were received from U.S. senators, the director of OIEP, and representatives of national and tribal organizations concerned with Indian education. Additional materials include details of educational facilities needs, estimated construction costs, and photographs of facilities on the Tohono O'odham Nation. (SV)

These hearing transcripts recount testimony before Congress on proposals to work with recipient governments and communities to establish a preschool and school feeding program in developing countries. Of particular focus in the hearing was the infrastructure needed to implement the program effectively and the roles of government agencies, nongovernmental agencies, voluntary agencies, the agricultural community, and the private commercial sector. Oral or written testimony was offered by Ambassador George McGovern; Senators Lugar, Cochran, Harkin, Leahy, Durbin, Daschle, Johnson, and Dole; and Representative James McGovern, as well as by the executive director of the World Food Program, the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), and directors/chairs of private voluntary relief organizations. It was asserted that international lunch programs have the potential benefit of helping to achieve several foreign policy goals: reducing hunger, increasing and enhancing education in developing countries, increasing education for girls, reducing child labor, increasing opportunities for orphans of war or disease, decreasing population, and decreasing pressure on food resources and on the environment. Testimony by representatives of private voluntary organizations pointed out: (1) the need to involve private voluntary organizations in implementing a school feeding program; (2) the importance of improving educational quality to enhance the school feeding impact; (3) the need for a multifaceted, multiyear approach; (4) the need for involving the private commercial sector; and (5) concerns about the real impact of a school feeding program on childrens nutrition. Appended are prepared statements submitted by congressmen and a concept paper by Food for Education and Economic Development. (KB)

This Congressional report contains the testimony and documents presented for the record of a hearing to gather input regarding the Strengthening Working Families Act of 2001, which was drafted to provide the assistance needed by former welfare recipients and other poor working parents to remain employed and advance in the labor market. The following are among the agencies and organizations represented at the hearing: Goodwill of Acadiana (Opelousas, Louisiana); Center for Fathers, Families, and Workforce Development (Baltimore, Maryland); Welfare to Work Partnership (Washington, DC); Catholic Charities (Alexandria, Virginia); United Way of Southeastern Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania); Child Welfare League of America; M.A.R.C.H, Inc. (Mediation Achieving Results for Children); and Center for Law and Social Policy. The following are among the topics discussed by witnesses: changes in employment levels and poverty levels since passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunities Reconciliation Act; the need to make sure that working poor families are better off financially than before they started on welfare; the problems that former welfare recipients and other poor workers with families face with regard to affording housing, food, transportation, child care, and health care; the effectiveness of block grants; and the role of work supports and education in boosting job retention and worker advancement. (MN)

A Senate committee hearing received testimony on proposed amendments to the Indian provisions of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). The proposals include amendments to the ESEA amendments of 1978 related to Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) schools and amendments to the Tribally Controlled Schools Act of 1988. Both sets of proposals stress local tribal flexibility in developing education programs and continue the trend toward increasing tribal contracting of federal services and programs. Testimony from U.S. Senators and representatives of Native educational associations addressed the role of Native school boards, the backlog of nearly a billion dollars in construction needs at BIA schools, the need for investment accounts for every BIA school to cover the costs of capital improvements, funding mechanisms, tribal educational standards and accountability, and local training and technical assistance needs. The question of whether a BIA grant school could also receive state charter-school funds was discussed. The appendix contains the Navajo Nation's recommendations for specific language to be used in the amendments. (SV)

When the National Forest System was established in 1907, Congress required that 25 percent of revenues derived from National Forests be shared with the counties where they are situated. These proceeds partially refund the tax revenues lost by local governments and help fund rural schools, roads, and other services. In recent years, reduced timber sales have decreased these payments dramatically, seriously impacting educational programs, road maintenance, and other services in the affected counties. This report from the Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources presents and recommends passage of S. 1608, which would establish secure payments for states and counties containing federal lands and apply available forest revenues to meet these payments, with general treasury funds making up the difference. Of the payments made, 80-85 percent would go to the traditional schools and roads program; 15-20 percent would be given to the counties for federal-land management projects developed locally. The bill aims to provide secure funding for rural schools while improving cooperative relationships among the people that use and care for federal lands and federal management agencies. This report contains the text of the legislation; its purpose, background, and history; and explanations of each legislative section. A statement by James R. Lyons, Agriculture Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment, explains why the Clinton Administration opposed this bill, citing the need to sever completely the link between timber sales and educational funding. (SV)

This report focuses on the Educational Opportunities Act, S. 2, which was designed to reauthorize and improve programs under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 for the next 5 years. It describes the purposes of the Act's 11 titles, which focus on the following issues: helping disadvantaged children meet high standards; teacher quality; enrichment activities; safe and drug-free schools; educational opportunity initiatives; innovative education; Impact Aid; general provisions; and amendments to other acts. The report's 11 sections are: (1) "Purpose and Summary"; (2) "Background and Need for the Legislation"; (3) "History of the Legislation and Votes in Committee"; (4) "Explanation of the Bill and Committee Views"; (5) "Cost Estimate"; (6) "Regulatory Impact Statement"; (7) "Application of Law to the Legislative Branch"; (8) "Section-by-Section Analysis"; (9) "Additional Views"; (10) "Minority Views"; and (11) "Changes in Existing Law." (SM)

At a hearing in Honolulu (Hawaii), the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies of the U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations received testimony on health, education, and employment and training programs serving the Native people of Hawaii. In July 1999, a federal government brief filed in a U.S. Supreme Court case established the official legal position of the United States that Native Hawaiians have the same status as other Native people of the United States and that there is a federal trust responsibility for Native Hawaiians. Testimony from state-level administrators outlined the current status of health, housing, education, and job training for Native Hawaiians and proposed recommendations for pending federal legislation: the Native American Housing Assistance and Self-Determination Amendments of 1999, the Native Hawaiian Health Care Improvement Act, and the Native Hawaiian Education Act. Other testimony described Native Hawaiian health care systems, the Native Hawaiian heart health initiative, the Native Hawaiian Cancer Awareness Research and Training Center, the Hawaii high schools health study, the Native Hawaiian Health Scholarship Program, the practice of naturopathic medicine with Native Hawaiians, the Native Hawaiian Higher Education Program and its outcomes and impacts, programs focused on Hawaiian language and cultural maintenance, family-based early childhood education programs, the Native Hawaiian Center of Excellence (to improve the health of indigenous Hawaiians), comprehensive school-based services, and the Native Hawaiian Special Education Project. (SV)

When the national forests were withdrawn from the public domain a century ago, they were established with the assurances that proceeds from the sustainable management of their natural resources would be shared with local governments. These proceeds partially refund the tax revenues lost by local governments and go toward funding rural schools, roads, and other services. Since 1990, controversies over federal forest management policies and reduced timber sales have decreased these payments dramatically, leaving many rural schools in difficult circumstances. A Senate subcommittee held hearings on proposed legislation that would establish a set amount to be paid to affected local governments and apply available receipts to meet these payments, with general treasury funds making up the difference. Only 75 percent of the payments would go to the traditional schools and roads program; 25 percent would be given to the counties for federal-land management projects developed locally. The bill aims to provide secure funding for rural schools while giving people a new incentive to work together at the local level. Testimony from U.S. Senators; county commissioners; and representatives of organizations advocating school, environmental, community, and timber industry interests discussed details of funding mechanisms, the balance between economic and ecological concerns, the composition and duties of local advisory committees, the risk of catastrophic wildfires, and issues related to community survival. (SV)

This transcript records testimony concerning Senate Bill 2490 which would bar federal aid from being used at colleges that directly or indirectly discriminate against off-campus businesses. The bill responds to difficulties small businesses have in competing with college campus bookstores due to the ability of colleges to channel student financial aid to college businesses and college bookstores. Following opening statements by Senators Lauch Faircloth and Olympia J. Snowe, the transcript presents the full testimonies of the following individuals: Graham Gillette, on behalf of Campus Bookstores, Inc.; William D. Gray, president of Gray's College Bookstore and national chairman of the Campus Area Small Business Alliance; Rob Karr, representing the Illinois Retail Merchants Association, and Anthony Samu, president of the United States Student Association. Also included are comments for the record from: John-Paul de Bernardo, of Campus Area Small Business Alliance; Daniel Lieberman, of Dynamic Student Services; David Longanecker, of the Office of Postsecondary Education, U.S. Department of Education; and Richard C. Yount, Loupots Bookstores of Houston, Inc. (DB)

This document records the oral and written testimony from a 1999 Senate Committee hearing on "the forgotten half"--young people who do not continue their education past high school and, in many cases, do not finish high school. Witnesses testified that there is a great need for persons with technical skills to fill existing and projected jobs in the United States, but that young people with the appropriate skills cannot be found. In response to this need, some witnesses suggested that more attention should be paid to high schools when Congress re-authorizes the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. Current legislation directs only 8 percent of the funds authorized by the act to high schools, although 28 percent of students are in high school. The witnesses asked for more funding for programs to improve high school teaching in technical areas and for minority and disadvantaged students, and to create innovative programs. Several witnesses profiled the programs in which they are involved, which have been successful in helping low-achieving students to acquire basic and technical skills and to advance to postsecondary education and to higher-wage employment. (KC)

This hearing before the Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions on examining legislation authorizing funds for the Elementary Secondary Education Act, focusing on educational technology programs, contains statements by: James M Jeffords, Chairman, Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions; Barbara Means, Assistant Director, Center for Technology in Learning, SRI International, Menlo Park, California; Phil Hyjek, School Information Technology Specialist, Vermont Institute for Science, Math, and Technology, Waterbury Center; Patty Murray, Senator from Washington State; Jeff Bingaman, Senator from New Mexico; Ervin Duggan, President, Public Broadcasting Service (PBS), Alexandria, Virginia; Daniel Hogan, participant, PBS Mathline Program, Cincinnati, Ohio; Inabeth Miller, President, the Jason Foundation for Education, Waltham, Massachusetts, accompanied by Georgene Lytle, third grade teacher, Wooster, Ohio; Michael Pitroff, Project Director, Baltimore Learning Community, Baltimore, Maryland; and Carmen Gonzales, Director, Regional Educational Technology Assistance Project, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New Mexico. (MES)

The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions met to consider the largest program within the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Title I, Helping Disadvantaged Children Meet High Standards. At this hearing, how Title I funds are spent, who they serve, and whether student performance is improving were topics discussed. After introductory remarks by Senators James M. Jeffords (Vermont), Christopher J. Dodd (Connecticut), Patty Murray (Washington), and Susan M. Collins (Maine), a panel of experts testified about the funding and impact of Title I. Wayne Riddle of the Congressional Research Service gave an overview of Title I. David Baroudi, Vermont's Title I director, discussed the important role of Title I and the need to integrate it with other education programs. Lula Ford, the Title I director for the Chicago, Illinois, schools discussed the way Title I related to overall reform efforts. William Taylor of the Citizen's Commission on Civil Rights suggested needed changes for the upcoming reauthorization of Title I. The final witness, Terry Bergeson, chief state school officer of Washington, presented her perspective on Title 1 and its relationship to other state and federal education programs. Prepared statements of these witnesses follow their testimony. (SLD)

A joint report by members of two Congressional Committees examined the proposed bill to carry out the National Sea Grant College Program Act and recommended that the bill be passed. The Sea Grant College Program Act authorizes appropriations for the National Sea Grant Program, which provides grants to support university-based marine research, education, and advisory services, and repeals the Strategic Marine Research Program. The committees supported a 5-year reauthorization at levels that would permit the continuation of the existing network without reduction. The committees reviewed the legislative history of this reauthorization and authorized levels of funding for 5 years with cost estimates from the Congressional Budget Office. An examination of the regulatory impact of the bill found that as the bill reauthorizes an existing program, no additional regulatory, economic, paperwork, or personal privacy burdens would be imposed on individuals or businesses. However, because the Strategic Marine Research Program component of the National Sea Grant Program duplicated another program, it was repealed. The report analyzes the bill section by section and indicates changes and omissions from the original bill. (JB)

A Senate hearing considered five bills related to the national parks. Of interest to the education community is S. 2232, which would establish Little Rock Central High School National Historic Site in Arkansas as a unit of the National Park Service. In 1957 the school became a center of controversy over school desegregation when nine African American students attempted to enroll at Central High. Senator Dale Bumpers from Arkansas spoke of the importance of recognizing the site, already on the National Register of Historic Places as the location of the first real test of desegregation in the wake of the "Brown v. Board of Education" decision. Everett Tucker, III, President of the Central High Museum spoke in support of the measure, as did Ernest Green, one of the nine students who integrated the school with federal support. Both speakers noted that the nine students were an inspiration to America because of their poise in a crisis. Although the school would be designated as a National Parks site, it would continue to be a functioning school, administered by the Little Rock school district. The hearing report also contains testimony by witnesses related to the other bills and the prepared statements of all witnesses. (SLD)

This is a transcript from a Joint Hearing of the U.S. Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources and the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Education and the Workforce that addresses the U.S. Department of Education's development of regulations necessary to implement the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) Amendments of 1997. It includes opening statements from Senator James Jeffords (R-VT), Representative William Goodling (R-PA), Senator Edward Kennedy (D-MA), Senator Dan Coats (R-IN), Representative Matthew Martinez (D-CA), and Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA). Prepared statements are included from Senator Bill Frist (R-TN), Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), Representative Frank Riggs (R-CA), and Representative Charlie Norwood (R-GA). Presentations are then provided from Judith Heumann, Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitation Services, Martha Feland, the President of Cabot School Board in Arkansas, Frank Clark, a school district attorney from Hershey Pennsylvania, Brian McNulty, Colorado Assistant Commissioner of Education, and Patricia McGill Smith, from the National Parent Network on Disabilities. Questions from the members of Congress and answers from the panelists are included. Among issues addressed in the testimony are discipline, suspensions of students with disabilities, funding of IDEA, and alternative placements. (CR)

This document presents the transcript of a congressional hearing held before a Senate subcommittee concerning reporting requirements of the Student Right to Know and Campus Security Act of 1990. Among issues addressed is whether the definition of "campus" includes buildings used partially or completely for commercial purposes, sidewalks, and hospitals, and whether hate crimes should be included in reporting requirements. Emphasis is on a current case involving the University of Pennsylvania. Following an opening statement by Senator Arlen Specter, the report includes the texts of oral statements and prepared statements by the following individuals or organizations: Howard Clery, founder of Security on Campus, Inc.; Jacob McKee, a student; Barbara Prentice, a parent; Stanley Ikenberry, president of the American Council on Education; Michele Goldfarb, administrator at the University of Pennsylvania; Peter C. Erichsen, vice president and general counsel at the University of Pennsylvania; Dolores A. Stafford, director of the university police department at George Washington University (District of Columbia); the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators; David A. Longanecker, Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education, U.S. Department of Education; and Robert C. Torricelli, U.S. Senator. (DB)

This transcript reports on a Senate hearing concerning the reauthorization of the Education of the Deaf Act. As well as statements by committee members, the transcript presents statements by and answers to questions of the following: students at Gallaudet University (Washington, DC), students at the National Technical Institute for the Deaf (New York), Jordan I. King, president of Gallaudet University; Robert R. DaVila, vice president of National Technical Institute for the Deaf; Judith Heumann, Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, Department of Education; Carol Cichowski, Director, Special Education, Rehabilitation and Research Analysis Division, Department of Education; Ramone Rodriguez, Liaison Office for Special Institutions, Department of Education; Sarah E. Snyder, Alexander Graham Bell Association for the Deaf; and Nancy J. Bloch, President, National Association for the Deaf. Additional material includes a chart showing placements of Gallaudet graduates and responses to questions asked by Senators James Jeffords and Tom Harkin. (DB)

A hearing was held to consider the issues involved in funding the administration's proposals for certain educational testing. After opening remarks by Senators Kennedy (Massachusetts) , Specter (Pennsylvania), and Harkin (Iowa), the Secretary of Education, Richard W. Riley, spoke about the proposed tests. The Clinton Administration and Secretary Riley believe that a rigorous voluntary national testing system in fourth-grade reading and eighth-grade mathematics would determine how well students are achieving in basic skills. The proposed tests are an extension of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) and would use the NAEP framework to hold students to high standards. Secretary Riley emphasized that these tests are voluntary and not designed to be part of a move toward a national curriculum. Senator Specter raised the question of delaying establishing the tests until a better national consensus is reached, and Senator Kennedy also commented favorably on the testing proposal. Senator Faircloth (North Carolina) questioned the usefulness of a voluntary test, and Senator Gregg (New Hampshire) questioned the participation of the Department of Education in the creation of the tests. Additional remarks were made by Senator Jeffords and Representative Goodling (Chairman of the Committee on Education of the House of Representatives), who opposes the voluntary national test. (SLD)

In this report, the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs reports favorably on Senate Bill 569 to amend the Indian Child Welfare Act (ICWA) of 1978 and recommends its passage with an amendment. In enacting ICWA, Congress sought to: (1) protect the relationship between Indian children and their parents; (2) affirm the tribal right to participate meaningfully in placement decisions affecting Indian children; (3) preserve each Indian child's Indian heritage and, if possible, specific tribal affiliation; and (4) provide an orderly mechanism for resolving questions concerning state and tribal jurisdiction over Indian children. The purpose of Senate Bill 569 is to amend ICWA to provide additional procedures applicable to voluntary Indian child custody proceedings. These procedures will help ensure greater certainty, stability, and finality in child custody determinations without compromising the meaningful participation of tribes in Indian child placement decisions, a vital aspect of tribal sovereignty. Following the text of the bill, this report includes purposes of the bill, background on federal Indian child welfare policy in relation to ICWA's four objectives listed above, procedures applicable to ICWA, need for legislation, description of the substantive amendments (which place time restrictions on tribal and family intervention and provide for visitation agreements), summary of provisions, legislative history, section-by-section analysis, cost and budgetary considerations, executive communications, and changes in existing law. (SV)

This report recommends passage of the Workforce Investment Partnership Act of 1997. It describes this bill as one that streamlines the current federal job training system, making it more user-friendly, and consolidates the numerous federal job training programs, eliminating confusing and redundant mandates and creating integrated statewide work force development systems. Nine sections are included: (1) background and need for the legislation; (2) history of the legislation and votes in committee; (3) committee views; (4) cost estimate; (5) regulatory impact statement; (6) application of the law to the legislative branch; (7) section-by-section analysis; (8) additional views; and (9) changes in existing law. (YLB)

This congressional report contains testimony examining the vocational rehabilitation system and the Vocational Rehabilitation Act and exploring some of the issues, including linkage, faced by the vocational rehabilitation system in Ohio. Statements were provided by a U.S. senator (Mike DeWine, Ohio) and representatives of the following agencies and organizations: Ohio Rehabilitation Services Commission; The Ohio State University; Ohio Client Assistance Program; Ohio Department of Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities; Ohio Association for the Deaf; and Ohio Disabilities Planning Council. Special attention was paid to proposed changes in the Vocational Rehabilitation Act to streamline the program's bureaucracy and regulations and improve the quality and quantity of job placements for people with disabilities. Other topics discussed include the following: the vocational rehabilitation process at the direct-service level; the role of the private sector in vocational rehabilitation; the Individualized Written Rehabilitation Program; and the National Association of Protection and Advocacy Systems' nationwide Client Assistance Program. Appended are written statements by representatives of the Ohio Rehabilitation Services Commission and National Association of Protection and Advocacy Systems. (MN)

This congressional report contains testimony pertaining to reauthorization of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act, which was drafted to authorize funds for programs covered by the act and consolidate, coordinate, and improve employment, training, literacy, and vocational rehabilitation programs in the United States. Statements were provided by three U.S. senators (Mike DeWine, Ohio; Paul D. Wellstone, Minnesota; Tom Harkin, Iowa) and representatives of the following agencies and organizations: Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services of the U.S. Department of Education; Rehabilitation Services Administration; National Institution of Disability and Rehabilitation Research; Ohio Rehabilitation Services Commission; Vermont Association of Business, Industry, and Rehabilitation; National Council for Independent Living; Fairfax Opportunities Unlimited; Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities; Council for State Administrators of Vocational Rehabilitation; and Arkansas Rehabilitation Services. An appendix constituting approximately 50% of the document contains statements, articles, publications, and letters that were submitted by 18 individuals and representatives of the following agencies and organizations: Council of Organizational Representatives; National Rehabilitation Association; National Industries for the Blind; American Speech-Language-Hearing Association; and American Foundation for the Blind. (MN)

This hearing, the ninth in a series discussing issues related to the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, focuses on three programs: Aid for Institutional Development, or Title III; the National Early Intervention Scholarship and Partnership Program; and the TRIO programs, which provide support services and scholarships for students, as well as institutional aid to colleges and universities and are intended to assist low-income, first-generation college students. The following witnesses made statements: (1) Moses Griffin, Wilberforce University (Ohio), who suggested that common evaluation criteria are inadequate for judging program effectiveness at historically black colleges and universities; (2) R. Vic Morgan, Sul Ross State University (Texas); who discussed the role of Title III at Hispanic-serving institutions; (3) Linda Shiller, speaking on behalf of the National Early Intervention Scholarship and Partnership Program, who discussed the programs of the Vermont Student Assistance Program; and (4) Ann Coles, who spoke on behalf of the National Council of Educational Opportunity Associations, and noted that over 2 million TRIO program participants had graduated from colleges over the past 30 years. Additional materials from the Hispanic Association of Colleges and Universities are appended. (CH)

This congressional hearing examines vocational education, adult education, and job training initiatives in Vermont and the role of these programs in developing work force development legislation. Testimony includes statements from a U.S. Senator and individuals representing the following: Vermont Department of Employment and Training; Vermont State Colleges; Vermont Department of Social Welfare; Agency of Commercial and Community Development; Burlington Technical Center; Career and Lifelong Learning, Vermont Department of Education; Lyndon State College; Vermont Adult Education Board; Executive Team of Central Vermont Adult Basic Education; Welfare to Work Programs, Vermont Department of Social Welfare; Mahoney Hardware; Vermont Science and Education Center; Vermont Heating and Ventilating; Vermont Technical College; Champlain Initiative; Governor's Rehabilitation Advisory Council; School-to-Work, Randolph region; Rutland Economic Development Corporation, Rutland Regional Educational Alliance; School-to-Work, Upper Valley; River Bend Career and Technical Center; Bradford Area Workforce Investment Board; Northern New England Tradeswomen; and Northland Job Corps Center. Other statements are from students, apprentices, and instructors from the Northland Job Corps, Essex Technical Center, and Burlington Technical Center. (YLB)

The Senate Committee on Indian Affairs held a hearing to assess the success of Public Law 102-477, the Indian Employment, Training, and Related Services Demonstration Act of 1992. Specifically, the hearing looked at how well the Act is working in terms of enhancing program efficiency, reducing unemployment in Native communities, and improving availability of employment and other services to Native people. The intent of Congress in enacting the Act was to allow tribal authorities to consolidate federal formula-funded programs into a single program, and to achieve efficiencies in that consolidation. The Act allows consolidation of 11 programs of the Department of Labor, Department of Health and Human Services, and Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), and will be extended to include welfare reform in July 1997. At the time of the hearing, participants included 18 grantees representing 177 federally recognized tribes. Representatives of the BIA testified about the Act's success in reducing administrative burdens on the tribes, the BIA's reluctance to support inclusion of Johnson O'Malley funds in the program, and cash flow problems. Representatives of tribes and intertribal organizations described their programs and discussed program successes in terms of increased tribal involvement, job placements, and intertribal cooperation and decreased costs and paperwork; implications for tribal implementation of welfare reform; and repeated bureaucratic delays in dealing with the BIA. (SV)

This report of the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources favorably recommends the passage of amendments to the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act to reauthorize and improve the act. Specific recommended improvements include: (1) decreasing paperwork, (2) providing increased flexibility and lower costs in the delivery of services, (3) enhancing parental input in decision making, (4) making schools safer, and (5) consolidating and targeting discretionary programs. Individual sections of the report present the proposed legislation's purpose and summary, the background and need for this legislation, the history of the legislation and committee action, an explanation of the bill and committee views, the specific amendments to sections of the original act, and a section-by-section analysis. (DB)

This congressional report contains testimony examining the status of vocational assistance and its role in work force development and the Clinton Administration's views on reforming the federal investment in vocational education. Testimony was provided by two U.S. senators (James M. Jeffords, Vermont; Edward M. Kennedy, Massachusetts) and representatives of the following agencies and organizations: U.S. Department of Education; American Federation of Teachers; Vocational Education Task Force; National Center for Research in Vocational Education; Information Technology Association of America; New Urban High School Project; Clark-Theders Insurance Group; Center for Occupational Research and Development; and Office of Vocational and Technical Education of the Mississippi Department of Education. The following were among the topics discussed: the adequacy of vocational education policy and practices for the 21st century; the role of community and technical colleges in labor force development; career guidance and counseling services provided through the Perkins Act; proposed changes in the Perkins Act to streamline the vocational education system, improve it, and increase its flexibility and accountability; vocational education funding formulas and financing; school-to-work; national skill standards; business and industry views regrading the role of vocational education and skills needed for the work; work-based learning; and vocational education in urban settings. (MN)

Senate Bill 363 is designed to protect American children from the harm caused by viewing violence on television. The bill amends the Communications Act of 1934 to require that violent video programming be limited to broadcast after the hours when children are reasonably likely to comprise a substantial portion of the audience, unless it is specifically rated on the basis of its violent content so that it is blockable by electronic means specifically on the basis of that content. This report on the Bill provides background information on television violence and details the legislation. Section 1 of the report addresses background and needs for such legislation. Section 2 describes the historical Congressional concern over the amount of violence on television. Section 3 summarizes research on television violence and violent behavior, while section 4 addresses the growth of television violence. Section 5 presents anecdotal evidence of the effect of television violence. Section 6 provides a summary of the response by the television community, including: (1) public service announcement; (2) common television code; (3) warning labels; and (4) industry-proposed ratings system. Section 7 provides response to the industry's proposed ratings system. Section 8 provides summary information on actions taken in other countries. Section 9 discusses the issues of constitutional analysis. The final sections describe the legislative history of this bill. (Author/SD)

This hearing transcript presents testimony exploring how the well-being of abused and neglected children can be improved through an amendment clarifying the "reasonable efforts" requirement of the Adoption Assistance and Child Welfare Act (1980) to allow the child's health and safety to take precedence over parents' rights. Testimony begins with a statement from Ohio Senator DeWine, which notes the frequency with which abused or neglected children are returned to unsafe or unhealthy home environments, and the number of children in foster care for longer than 2 years. Additional testimony in support of the change is presented from: (1) the acting assistant secretary for Children and Families, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Olivia A. Golden; (2) the director of the University of Rhode Island's Family Violence Research Program, Richard J. Gelles; (3) director of Montgomery County (Ohio) Children Services Board, Helen Leonhart-Jones; and (4) director, Los Angeles County (California) Department of Children and Family Services, Peter Digre. Additional statements, articles, and correspondence--both anecdotal and research-based, are appended from Senator Jeffords, the speakers, and the Child Welfare League of America. (HTH)

Existing U.S. Federal law has not been sufficiently effective in preventing youth violence or in ensuring the punishment of juvenile offenders. Young people are the most violent segment of American society, and there is little reason to believe that a continuation of present Federal policy is likely to reduce youth crime. Bill S. 1952 seeks to make significant changes in the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act. The legislation: (1) makes changes designed to ensure that the Federal Government's policy toward youth violence is focused on those activities that the Federal Government can perform best, that are appropriately Federal, and that would be unlikely to be undertaken by state or local levels of government; (2) eliminates many bureaucratic and procedural requirements of current law; (3) reauthorizes the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act and Missing Children's Assistance Act; and (4) repeals authorizations for programs for which there is little or no evidence of success in preventing youth violence and reallocates those funds. The contents of this legislative report, submitted by Mr. Hatch from the Committee on the Judiciary, are: (1) Purpose; (2) Legislative history; (3) Discussion; (4) Vote of the Committee; (5) Section-by-section analysis; (6) Cost estimate; (7) Regulatory impact statement; (8) Additional views of Messrs. Kennedy and Feingold; (9) Additional views of Mr. Kohl; and (10) Changes in existing law. (JBJ)

This report of the Senate Committee on Labor and Human Resources unanimously supports the passage of a bill (Senate Bill 1578) which amends the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) and authorizes appropriations for fiscal years 1997 through 2002. The bill amends parts A through H of IDEA. Amendments are intended to reduce unnecessary administrative burdens and increase flexibility for state and local educational agencies, while continuing the national commitment to ensure that all children with disabilities have available a free appropriate public education. Title I of the proposed bill revises general provisions and grant application procedures. Title II reorganizes and simplifies eligibility, procedural guidelines and safeguards, and administrative requirements. Title III authorizes a competitive state systems-change grant program. Title IV provides for improving educational services through research, demonstrations, outreach, and personnel preparation activities to be coordinated with local and state efforts. It consolidates programs authorized in parts D and E in current law. Title V also consolidates programs and authorizes the continued funding of technical assistance, support, and dissemination projects (including Parent Training and Information Centers) and technology and media projects. Title VI contains minor amendments to Part H of the present law, which provides early intervention services for infants and toddlers with disabilities. Separate sections of the report present information on the historical background of and need for the legislation, cost estimates, the regulatory impact statement, a section-by-section analysis, views of individual senators, and the text of both the original law and the proposed amendments. (DB)

This document presents witness testimony and supplemental materials from a Congressional hearing focused on the role of technology in promoting distance learning in the United States. Distance learning programs make educational resources available to citizens, regardless of socioeconomic status or geographic location, and enable citizens to remain competitive with each other and with other countries. Issues of cost and funding for distance learning are discussed. The document features an opening statement by Senator Conrad Burns, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Science, Technology, and Space; and statements by Senator Ernest F. Hollings, Senator John D. Rockefeller IV, Senator J. James Exon, and Senator Larry Pressler. Testimony and prepared statements are included from the following witnesses: (1) Kimberly K. Obbink, director of Distance Learning and Instructional Telecommunications at Montana State University; (2) Janet K. Lewis, Ph.D., Dean of Continuing Education, University of South Dakota; (3) Henry Marockie, Ph.D., West Virginia State Superintendent of Schools; (4) Jessica Lambert, Distance Learning Student, Mount View High School, Welch, West Virginia; (5) Patrick Portway, founder and executive director, U.S. Distance Learning Association; (6) Linda G. Roberts, Ph.D., director, Office of Educational Technology, U.S. Department of Education; (7) Kenneth C. Elliott, assistant professor of psychology, Division of Social and Behavioral Sciences, University of Maine at Augusta; (8) Shelly Weinstein, president and CEO, National Education Telecommunications Organization; (9) Pat Wright, senior vice president of Education, ETC, with Telecommunications, Inc.; (10) David W. Jupin, general manager of Network Systems, COMSAT RSI; (11) Carl E. Swearingen, president, Georgia BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc.; and (12) Sally M. Johnston, Ph.D., director, Western Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications, Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education. (SWC)

This report from the Committee on Environment and Public Works describes S.1873, the National Environmental Education Amendments Act of 1996, which amends the National Environmental Education Act of 1990. The report begins with a general statement on the background of the Act, which established a comprehensive environmental education program at the Federal level to support State and local efforts. It also established an Office of Environmental Education within the Environmental Protection Agency. The general statement is followed by the current congressional legislation history and a summary of S.1873. The bill, a single title with nine sections, extends the authorization for programs authorized by the National Environmental Education Act until the year 2007. The bill includes a number of changes to make programs authorized under the Act operate more effectively and efficiently. For example, Section 2 ensures that the Office of Environmental Education's programs will be balanced and scientifically sound. The Act supports environmental education programs and materials that characterize environmental problems in a factual and objective manner. A section-by-section analysis describes these changes. The analysis is followed by a cost projection of the legislation and changes in the language of the existing law. (PVD)

This document contains proceedings of Senate hearings before a subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations on H.R. 2127, an act making appropriations for the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and other related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1996. The document contains testimonies, answers to committee questions, and prepared statements from: Robert Reich, Secretary of Labor; Donna Shalala, Secretary of Health and Human Services; Richard Riley, Secretary of Education; Harold Varmus, Director of the National Institutes of Health; and representatives from other federal agencies. Secretary Riley's testimony includes comments on proposed revisions from Department of Education Programs, the streamlining of Department services and functions, the features of the 1996 budget request, standards-based reform, and preparing students to work in the Information Age. A subject index and list of witnesses, communications, and prepared statements are included. (LMI)