. . . the source for instructional leadership
. . . translating information into daily practice
Education Bills as of 2/25/17
Iowa ASCD has summarized all educational bills at the National level as of 2/25/17. You may access additional information on each bill, including author of the bill, history of progress, text of the bill, as well as steps you can take (e.g., get alers, call Congress, tweet, or share on facebook.
H.R. 610: To distribute Federal funds for elementary and secondary education in the form of vouchers for eligible students and to repeal a certain rule relating to nutrition standards in schools.
Sponsor: Rep. Steve King [R-IA4]
Introduced: Jan 23, 2017
Referred to Committee: Jan 23, 2017
This bill was assigned to a congressional committee on January 23, 2017, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole. Prognosis:1% chance of being enacted according to PredictGov (details)
The summary below was written by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress, and was published on Jan 23, 2017.
Choices in Education Act of 2017
This bill repeals the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and limits the authority of the Department of Education (ED) such that ED is authorized only to award block grants to qualified states.
The bill establishes an education voucher program, through which eachstate shall distribute block grant funds among local educational agencies (LEAs) based on the number of eligible children withineach LEA's geographical area. From these amounts, each LEA shall: (1)distribute a portion of funds toparents who elect toenroll their childin a private school or to home-school their child, and (2) do so in a manner that ensures that such payments will be used for appropriate educational expenses.
To be eligible to receive a block grant, a state must: (1)comply with education voucher program requirements, and (2) make it lawful for parents of an eligible child to elect to enroll their child in any public or private elementary or secondary school in the state or to home-school their child.
H.J.Res. 57: Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Education relating to accountability and State plans under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.
Sponsor: Rep. Todd Rokita [R-IN4]
Introduced: Feb 1, 2017
Passed House: Feb 7, 2017
Summary: This joint resolution nullifies the rulefinalized by the Department of Education on November 29, 2016, relating to accountability and state plans under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965.
It has passed the House and as a joint resolution will be addressed by the Senate. A joint resolution is often used in the same manner as a bill. If passed by both the House and Senate in identical form and signed by the President, it becomes a law. Joint resolutions are also used to propose amendments to the Constitution.
H.J.Res. 58: Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Department of Education relating to teacher preparation issues.
Sponsor: Rep. Brett Guthrie [R-KY2]
Introduced: Feb 1, 2017
Passed House: Feb 7, 2017
Summary: This resolution passed in the House on February 7, 2017 and goes to the Senate next for consideration.
H.R. 483: No Funding for Sanctuary Campuses Act
Sponsor: Rep. Duncan Hunter [R-CA50]
Introduced: Jan 12, 2017
Referred to Committee: Jan 12, 2017
Summary: The goal of this bill is to amend title IV of the Higher Education Act of 1965 to prohibit the provision of funds under such title to institutions of higher education that violate the immigration laws, and for other purposes. This bill was assigned to a congressional committee on January 12, 2017, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole. Prognosis: 1% chance of being enacted according to PredictGov (details)
S. 167: National Memorial to Fallen Educators Act
Sponsor: Sen. Jerry Moran [R-KS]
Introduced: Jan 17, 2017
Referred to Committee: Jan 17, 2017
Summary: This bill was assigned to a congressional committee on January 17, 2017, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole. The Prognosis Indicator submits a 1% chance of it going forward.
H.Con.Res. 29: Expressing the sense of the Congress regarding the need for increased diversity and inclusion in the tech sector, and increased access to opportunity in science, technology, engineering, arts, and mathematics (STEAM) education.
Sponsor: Rep. Barbara Lee [D-CA13]
Introduced: Feb 16, 2017
Referred to Committee: Feb 16, 2017
Summary: This resolution was assigned to a congressional committee on February 16, 2017, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole. A concurrent resolution is often used for matters that affect the rules of Congress or to express the sentiment of Congress. It must be agreed to by both the House and Senate in identical form but is not signed by the President and does not carry the force of law.
H.R. 949: Children of Fallen Heroes Scholarship Act
Sponsor: Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick [R-PA8]
Introduced: Feb 7, 2017
Referred to Committee: Feb 7, 2017
Summary: The goal of this bill is to increase Federal Pell Grants for the children of fallen public safety officers, and for other purposes. This bill was assigned to a congressional committee on February 7, 2017, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole. Prognosis by PredictGov is a 2% chance of being enacted
S. 351: Comprehensive Student Achievement Information Act of 2017
Sponsor: Sen. Orrin Hatch [R-UT]
Introduced: Feb 13, 2017
Referred to Committee: Feb 13, 2017
Summary: This is a bill to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to provide for comprehensive student achievement information. This bill was assigned to a congressional committee on February 13, 2017, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole. Predict.Gov provides a prognosis of 1% chance of being enacted.
H.R. 899: To terminate the Department of Education.
Sponsor: Rep. Thomas Massie [R-KY4]
Introduced: Feb 7, 2017
Referred to Committee: Feb 7, 2017
Summary: Among all the Cabinet-level agencies, perhaps none inspires more Republican ire than the Department of Education. President Trump as a candidate expressed opennessto eliminating the department, writing in his campaign book, “A lot of people believe the Department of Education should just be eliminated. Get rid of it. If we don’t eliminate it completely, we certainly need to cut its power and reach.”
A new bill in Congress would do just that.
What the billdoes
Some bills can be hundreds of pages long.H.R. 899, introduced by Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY4), is a single sentence: “The Department of Education shall terminate on December 31, 2018.”
What would it mean if the Education Department ended?The move would save taxpayers about$68.3 billion, the appropriated budget for the department this fiscal year. That represents about2.1 percent of the total federal budget, though it’sone of the lowest-spendingCabinet-level agencies. Nevertheless critics note how the department’s budget has increased above its$41.5 billion inflation-adjusted budgetwhen it began operating in 1980.
4,400 department employeeswould also be laid off. Critics also note that the government’s own classification during the shutdown a few years agolabeled 94 percent of Education Department employees as nonessential.
From a policy perspective, the move would revert more control over education to both states and municipalities like cities and town. However, many point out that states and already control most education aspects in the U.S., as states and localities make up92 percentof education funding, determining such aspects as curricula and testing requirements.
From a funding perspective, Dept of Education directs substantial federal funds to schools and individual students such as Pell Grants and the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) program for college loans, which for millions of people represent their most direct involvement with the Education Department. It’s unclear what would happen to these channels of support.
Who supportsit
Supporters argue the Education Department is an expensive bureaucracy that takes power out of states and local communities.
“Neither Congress nor the President, through his appointees, has the constitutional authority to dictate how and what our children must learn,” House lead sponsor Massiesaid in a statement. “Unelected bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. should not be in charge of our children’s intellectual and moral development. States and local communities are best positioned to shape curricula that meet the needs of their students.”
Who opposesit
Opponents argue that the Education Department serves necessary functions to ensure that children in this country have equality of educational opportunity. Needless to say, essentially no Democrats support the department’s abolishment.
A more surprising apparent opponent is House Education and the Workforce Committee Chair Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC5). When asked byInside Higher Edwhether she could envision Congress eliminating the Education Department, Foxx replied that she’d rather she the department cut back and curtailed without being abolished. “I definitely see the opportunity to see the department scaled back. We need to talk about those things,”Foxx said. “But we need to look at the functions of the Education Department and see are there things that can be done at the state and local level that are now being done at the federal level.”
Odds ofpassage
The bill has attractedseven cosponsors, all Republicans. For comparison, another House bill to eliminate the GOP bête noire Environmental Protection Agency only has three cosponsors. The Education Department bill awaits a vote in the House Education and the Workforce Committee.
Although Trump has said he’d prefer to eliminate the Education Department, a widely-circulated conservative idea was for Trump to simplynot appoint a new secretary or director for any department or agency he wished to eliminate. That didn’t happen, as Trump nominated billionaire philanthropist and former Michigan Republican Party chair Betsy DeVos as Education Secretary. (She was confirmed after a 50–50 Senate tie that was broken by Vice President Mike Pence.) This might indicate that while Trump might still cut back the agency’s funding or responsibilities, he might not actually eliminate the department as previously claimed.
Previous attempts to eliminate the Education Department
Although some form of federal oversight of education has been around for most of U.S. history, the Education Department was established as a Cabinet-level agency in 1979 under Democratic President Jimmy Carter. From the outset the department was always controversial, for much the same reasons the GOP doesn’t like it now. A few months later when Republican President Ronald Reagan took office, he pledged to eliminate it along with the Department of Energy. After several years of failing to do either,Reagan reversed his pledge in 1985, saying that while he still privately supported such a move, he acknowledged that the plan couldn’t garner enough support in Congress.
The next two Republican presidents, George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush, did not call for the Education Department’s abolition. In fact, the latter Bush significantly increased federal involvement in education with the No Child Left Behind Act.
There is precedent for eliminating Cabinet departments.The Post Office was a Cabinet Department for 98 years until the Postal Reorganization Act of 1970 under President Richard Nixon. Somewhat similarly, the Navy and Air Force used to both have their own Cabinet-level departments until they were subsumed into the new Department of Defense in 1949, while the CIA and Office of Drug Control Policy both still exist but are no longer classified as Cabinet-level agencies as they once were.
H.R. 416: Raising Accountability to Improve School Excellence Act
Sponsor: Rep. Brenda Lawrence [D-MI14]
Introduced: Jan 10, 2017
Referred to Committee: Jan 10, 2017
Summary: The purpose of this bill is to amend the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to strengthen accountability of authorized public chartering agencies and reduce charter school authorizing misconduct. This bill was assigned to a congressional committee on January 10, 2017, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole. Prognosis: 1% chance of being enacted according to PredictGov (details)
H.R. 1060: Young Farmer Success Act
Sponsor: Rep. Joe Courtney [D-CT2]
Introduced: Feb 15, 2017
Referred to Committee: Feb 15, 2017
Summary: To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to include certain individuals who work on farms or ranches as individuals who are employed in public service jobs for purposes of eligibility for loan forgiveness under the Federal Direct Loan program. This bill was assigned to a congressional committee on February 15, 2017, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole. PredictGov indicates a 1% chance of being enacted.
H.R. 926: ASPIRE Act
Sponsor: Rep. Darren Soto [D-FL9]
Introduced: Feb 7, 2017
Referred to Committee: Feb 7, 2017
Summary: To amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to reduce the principal amount on loans made to STEM majors. This bill was assigned to a congressional committee on February 7, 2017, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole. PredictGov gives it a 1% chance of moving forward.
H.R. 813: All-Year ACCESS Act
Sponsor: Rep. Linda Sánchez [D-CA38]
Introduced: Feb 1, 2017
Referred to Committee: Feb 1, 2017
Summary: The purpose of this bill is to restore access to year-round Federal Pell Grants. This bill was assigned to a congressional committee on February 1, 2017, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole. Prognosis: 1% chance of being enacted according to PredictGov (details)
H.R. 414: Encourage our Educators Act
Sponsor: Rep. Brenda Lawrence [D-MI14]
Introduced: Jan 10, 2017
Referred to Committee: Jan 10, 2017
Summary: The purpose of this bill is to amend the Higher Education Act of 1965 to allow an individual to qualify for both teacher loan forgiveness and public service loan forgiveness, and for other purposes. This bill was assigned to a congressional committee on January 10, 2017, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole. Prognosis: 1% chance of being enacted according to PredictGov (details)