[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1729-E1731]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

H.R. 2127 LABOR-HHS-EDUCATION APPROPRIATIONS

______

HON. MATTHEW G. MARTINEZ

of california

in the house of representatives

Wednesday, September 6, 1995
Mr. MARTINEZ. Mr. Speaker, I think we can all agree that the right to
an education is one of the most important rights we have in the United
States.
Long ago, we realized that all Americans must have access to
education if our Nation and our citizens are to prosper. However, the
new majority leadership is undermining education in this country.
They cut $4 billion from education, reducing the Federal Commitment
by 16 percent.
Do they assume that States and localities will pick up where the
Federal Government will leave off?
In my State or California, it took a lot of arm-twisting to allocate
another $1 billion for education, raising California's per pupil
expenditure rank from 42nd to 40th among the 50 States. Parents, school
board members, and school districts are pleading that Federal funds be
restored.
I submit some of these statements from school districts in my
district for the record.
Schools will not be able to continue to provide many services that
our most disadvantaged children rely upon. Mr. Speaker, this is
irrational and mean spirited.
Azusa Unified School District,

Azusa, CA, August 1, 1995.
Representative Matthew Martinez,
Rayburn House Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Representative Martinez: Azusa Unified School District
respectfully requests your support to express our opposition
to the $4 billion in cuts the House Appropriations Committee
is currently considering to elementary, secondary and higher
education programs previously recommended by an
appropriations subcommittee. These congressional cuts would
slash critical education and training initiatives in
California and would reduce education funding by 17 percent
while other discretionary programs have only been reduced by
two-five percent.
The following critical educational program areas affected
are the Safe & Drug Free Schools with a $282 million cut and
a $25 million funding loss to California. This cut comes at a
time when parents, educators and communities are seeking a
safer learning environment for California's students.
Vocational Education programs administered by the U.S. Dept.
of Education would be cut by $300 million. California would
lose approximately $30 million in vocational education
funding--a 3 percent cut for the state. Title I funding would
be cut by $1.1 billion. California would lose approximately
$130 million and the more than 236,000 needy California
pupils that benefit from this program will be impacted. Cuts
to Title I hit hardest those schools and students that are
most in need. Impact Aid would be cut by $83 million
nationwide. California would lose approximately $8 million
directly affecting California's more than 200 Impact Aid
districts. Bilingual Education would be drastically cut by
about 75 percent. California would lose approximately $37
million in bilingual funding and districts would be forced to
significantly cut back on the number of students served. More
than one-quarter of California's 5.3 million kindergarten
through 12th grade students have limited-English proficiency.
Providing the appropriate services is increasingly
challenging in California's schools, where nearly 100
different languages are spoken. Goals 2000 would be
completely eliminated. In California approximately 96 percent
of all school districts, including Azusa Unified, have
indicated to the California Dept. of Education that they
desire to utilize Goals 2000 funds. California would end up
losing $30 million from this program. These diverse programs
are developed at the local level to reexamine existing school
programs in order to better serve students.
Adequate state funding for education and crucial,
deserving, and equally needed programs will not be available
if these cuts are approved. School districts, such as Azusa
Unified, desperately need additional revenue to continue to
provide necessary programs to assist children within
California. It is our concern that the approval of this final
Appropriations bill will negatively affect our district's
educational programs.
Sincerely,
Inez Z. Gutierrez,
President, Board of Education.
____

Baldwin Park,

Unified School District,

Baldwin Park, CA, July 20, 1995.
Hon. Matthew Martinez,
U.S. House of Representatives, Rayburn Building, Washington,
DC.
Dear Representative Martinez: I have just learned of the
proposed cuts to numerous educational programs proposed by
the House Subcommittee on Labor/Health & Human Services/
Education Appropriations and am writing to express my outrage
and concern for the students and families who will
dramatically affected by the Committee's actions. By reducing
programs between 20% and 100%, the Committee is choosing to
deny students learning experiences that make a difference in
a child's life. The need for maintenance of educational
funding from the federal government is critical to the
success of schools. The educational system provides students
and families with numerous opportunities of success. Imagine
how many students learn for the first time to read a word or
write a sentence as well as work addition and multiplication
problems. The Committee's decision to slash numerous programs
will reduce the effectiveness of teachers resulting in poor
student performance and ultimately greater social strife.
The Committee's actions deny children a comprehensive,
appropriate education. The cutbacks slated for the identified
programs reflect this observation which have myriad social
implications. It is unconscionable that educational programs
would be targeted for reduction and include slashing Title I
by $1.1 billion; eliminating the Goals 2000 program;
splitting the Safe & Drug-Free Schools funds in half; cutting
Bilingual Education by 55 percent; reducing Vocational
Education by

[[Page E 1730]]
28 percent; and trimming Education Technology by 55 percent.
It makes no sense to cut programs which impact all
districts across this country in positive dimensions. As an
example, planned Title 1 funding reductions would eliminate
related activities by \1/5\ or one day out of five in our
nation's schools. All Title 1 students and parents would have
lessened Math and Reading activities because of the
Committee's decision to reduce educational funding.
What will be some resultants of the Committee's actions:
reduced direct teaching time, especially Math and Reading,
for students who need it the most; lessened assistance for
students, parents, and teachers in the arena of drug
prevention education; a significant increase in lessons
taught in a students non-understanding language which will
cause students to fall further behind in attaining their
education; an increase student drug use because of lack of
knowledge and appropriate decision making; expended school
violence and confrontation; greater numbers of parents who
are distraught over their child's performance and lack of
resources because of educational cutbacks; a drop in the
opportunity for students, parents, and teachers to partake in
technology based programs; and less prepared students to work
in vocational fields among other resultants.
California already suffers from one of the highest teacher
to student ratios in the United States. The actions of
Congress to eliminate Title 1 will force districts across the
state and country to layoff teaching assistants who provide a
worthwhile service to students. Greater student to teacher
ratios would be anticipated.
I ask you, where is the leadership to provide schools with
the basics so that they can provide a decent education to
children? If you think that schools are not performing well
currently, there will be an even greater backlash.
I am in favor of budget cutbacks. However, I would suggest
that the Congress look to numerous other programs like
agricultural subsidies and non-significant funded projects.
At the same time Congress could vote to reduce spending by a
given percentage, yet legislate that departments
determination the reduction.
Education is the foundation of our country from which all
industry and decision making flows. The educational system is
what makes our country great so I ask you not to partake in
dismantling our country's backbone.
Please demonstrate to the country and the State of
California the need for maintaining funding for education
from the federal government.
Sincerely,
Peter J. Knapik.
____

Alhambra School District,

Alhambra, CA, July 28, 1995.
Hon. Matthew Martinez,
U.S. House of Representatives, Rayburn Building, Washington,
DC.
Dear Congressman Martinez: Educators and Administrators in
the Alhambra, California School District regard the recent
vote of the House Subcommittee on Labor/Health & Human
Services/Education Appropriations to drastically reduce
funding for Title I services and to eliminate the Goals 2000
program as a direct assault on the school children of
California.
At a time when the State of California in general and Los
Angeles County in particular are facing severe budget
problems, now, more than ever, school districts need federal
support for special needs children and need money for
projects to improve America's schools. In fact, this is the
vital role envisioned for the federal government as a partner
in educating the nation's children.
Please don't balance the federal budget on the backs of the
neediest in our society--our school children. The focus
should be on stimulating their ideas and developing their
skills to lead the U.S. into the 21st century. Along with the
expert guidance of their teachers, we can all be winners in
the continuing struggle for quality education.
Sincerely yours,
Terry J. Larsen,
Coordinator, Special Projects K-12.
____

Garvey School District,

Rosemead, CA, July 31, 1995.
Hon. Matthew G. Martinez,
U.S. House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Congressman Martinez: The Garvey School District, as
you know, is an elementary school district serving 7,200
students attending kindergarten through grade 8. Of this
number of students, 3,300 are limited english proficient and
2,400 are non-english proficient. Twenty-four foreign
languages are spoken by our student population.
The space in this letter is not enough to describe the
numerous other challenges that we face as we endeavor to
respond to the fast-changing and sometimes difficult student
population service.
It is disheartening to learn of the proposal by House
Republicans to cut $36 billion from current education and
training investments, which would mean a cut of $4.3 billion
for California school districts, including ours.
We believe that federal financial assistance program
funding alone will not solve our educational challenges.
However, federal funds constitute a significant and critical
part of our total budget of $36 million.
California school districts have had limited options for
increasing their local revenues. The reduction in federal
funding for programs such as Head Start, Title 1, Goals 2000
and Safe and Drug-Free Schools proposed by House Republicans
would have a devastating impact on our local school children
over the long haul. At the time when California continues to
lag in revenue levels compared to that of other states, we as
a district, are in no position to absorb the kind of funding
cuts that are sure to be inflicted by the Republican
proposal.
As a school district administrator belonging to the every-
increasing group of people who are being asked to do more
with less, I strongly urge you to oppose these cuts as they
are harmful to children, to California and to the country.
Sincerely,
Rolland M. Boceta,
Director, Business Services.
____

Montebello Unified School District,

Montebello, CA, August 1, 1995.
Hon. Matthew G. Martinez,
U.S. House of Representatives, Rayburn Building, Washington,
DC.
Dear Congressman Martinez: Thank you for your continued
support of public education. It is sad to see that many of
your fellow representatives do not value educational
excellence for our country's children the way you do. If we
are going to ask our students to be competitive with the
students in other countries. We cannot cut another
educational dollar! The federal investment in education is
already only 2-3% of the federal tax dollar, yet it has been
cut an alarming 18% while other discretionary programs have
only been reduced on their growth slowed by 2-5%.
Leaving it to the states to make up the difference is
ignoring the fact that California has been forced to severely
cut back its education dollars during our recent devastating
recession. We are only now beginning to rebuild and it will
take years to get back to at least the average national per
pupil expenditure. We do not have the ability to replace the
proposed cuts in federal funds and will have to take
appropriate actions to balance our already fragile budget.
These funds truly do make a difference in Montebello
Unified School District. Title I dollars help our truly
disadvantaged students. Our ``richest'' school has a 45%
property rate--our poorest are located in one of the poorest
cities in the nation. These students now have access to
counseling, tutoring, and computers which reinforce their
reading, writing and math skills. We have an almost 50%
limited-English speaking population in our district. In one
city, students would never have to speak English if it were
not for the schools. Cutting bilingual dollars will not help
us in our quest to help them become fully proficient in the
English language. Our students are also under constant
pressure to join gangs and use drugs. Drug usage has once
again become a nationwide epidemic and our students are also
affected. This is not the time to decrease half of our
funding--we should be increasing it!
Finally, I would like to point out that the major corporate
employers and politicians have all said that our students are
not ready to be employed when they leave school. One proven
way to assist those students who have chosen not to go on to
higher education is through vocational education funding.
Major programs are being developed to assist the school-to-
work initiative Cutting back California 30% in vocational
education funding will only set us back in our effort to
assist those students seeking a viable career after they
graduate. My fear is we will see more dropouts instead of the
steadily decreasing dropout rate we currently have in our
district.
We sincerely appreciate all your effort to help not only
the students in our District, or in the State of California,
but to continue to fight for all our children throughout the
country. America will not continue to be the great county it
is if it continues to ignore the educational needs of its
children.
Very truly yours,
Barbara L. Chavira,
Vice-President.
____

Los Angeles Unified School District,

Los Angeles, CA, August 1, 1995.
Hon. Matthew Martinez,
U.S. House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Representative Martinez: The staff of the Los Angeles
Unified School District is opposed to the current Labor/HHS/
Education appropriations bill. This legislation would enact
billions of dollars in education spending reductions with a
potential of great harm to the children who are most in need
of educational services.
Federal involvement in public education at the local level
is an integral part of the public school system. It has
provided much-needed programs for the disadvantaged student
population. To change the commitment of our federal
government to the nation's neediest children is to cripple an
already stressed system. Our cities and their children do not
deserve to be hurt in such a manner.
Proposed cuts to Title 1, which improves basic skills for
disadvantaged children; Safe and Drug-Free Schools programs
that work to keep violence and drugs away from schools; job
training programs for low-income and dislocated workers; and
summer jobs programs for youth who most desperately need hope
and a way to be trained in work skills, as well as the
elimination of the School Dropout Prevention program from the
federal agenda, are ill-conceived.
Cutting one of these valuable programs would be harmful;
cutting all of these and

[[Page E 1731]]
many other is dangerous. No state or local government can replace these
federal funds to prevent the damage the current
appropriations bill would cause.
We strongly urge you to go on record as opposing the Labor/
HHS/Education appropriations bill. The role of the federal
government should not be to harm children by withdrawing
established and effective support.
Sincerely,
Ronald Prescott,
Associate Superintendent.

____________________