SENATOR. WHAT IS AMAZING TO ME ABOUT THIS EDUCATION SAVINGS
           ACCOUNT IS THAT IT TAKES SUCH A LITTLE INCENTIVE TO MAKE
           AMERICANS DO HUGE THINGS. THE TAX RELIEF TO THESE 14 MILLION
           FAMILIES OVER THE NEXT FIVE YEARS IS JUST A PITTANCE OVER $500

           MILLION. OVER FIVE YEARS. WHAT DO THE 14 MILLION FAMILIES DO
           BECAUSE OF THAT?
           THEY SAVE OVER $5 BILLION -- $ $5 BILLION -- $5 BILLION. THAT
           PUTS $5 BILLION VOLUNTEER DOLLARS -- THESE ARE NOT TAX DOLLARS,
           NO SCHOOL BOARD'S GOT TO LEVY A NEW PROPERTY TAX NO, STATE
           GOVERNMENT HAS TO RAISE THEIR INCOME TAX, THE FEDERAL
           GOVERNMENT DOESN'T HAVE TO RAISE TAXES -- THE PEOPLE ON THEIR

           OWN, BECAUSE OF THE NATURE OF THE SAVINGS ACCOUNT, SAVE $5
           BILLION. AND 70% OF THOSE FAMILIES WILL HAVE CHILDREN IN PUBLIC
           SCHOOLS AND 30% WILL HAVE CHILDREN IN PRIVATE SCHOOLS. AND
           ABOUT HALF THE MONEY WILL END UP HELPING CHILDREN IN PUBLIC
           SCHOOLS AND ABOUT HALF THE MONEY WILL HELP CHILDREN IN PRIVATE
           SCHOOLS. MR. PRESIDENT, EVERYBODY IS A WINNER HERE. THERE ARE
           NO LOSERS. A LOT OF TIMES WE DO THINGS IN WASHINGTON, SOMEBODY

           GAINS, SOMEBODY LOSES. BUT IN THIS CASE, EVERYBODY WINS. THE
           PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM WINS. THE PRIVATE SCHOOL SYSTEM WINS.
           PEOPLE WITH KIDS IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS CAN USE THE SAVINGS
           ACCOUNTS. PEOPLE WITH KIDS IN PRIVATE SCHOOLS CAN USE THE
           SAVINGS ACCOUNTS. AND, AS I SAID -- I SEE WE'VE JUST BEEN
           JOINED BY THE DISTINGUISHED SENATOR FROM INDIANA, AND SO I'M
           GOING TO YIELD TO HIM. BUT EVERYBODY WINS. THESE ARE NOT PUBLIC

           DOLLARS. THESE ARE VOLUNTEER DOLLARS TO HELP CHILDREN WHEREVER
           THEY'RE GOING TO SCHOOL. I YIELD FIVE MINUTES TO THE SENATOR
           FROM INDIANA.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM INDIANA. FOR FIVE
           MINUTES.
           

           MR. COATS: MR. PRESIDENT, I WANT TO RISE IN OPPOSITION TO THE
           AMENDMENT THAT'S CURRENTLY BEFORE US, ALTHOUGH SENATOR KENNEDY
           MAY BE USING THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT THE BROADER BILL. IT
           IS THE AMENDMENT THAT WE WILL HAVE TO VOTE ON UNLESS THAT
           AMENDMENT IS WITHDRAWN. I WANT TO JUST STATE REASONS WHY --
           BRIEFLY REASONS WHY I THINK MEMBERS SHOULD VOTE AGAINST THAT
           PARTICULAR AMENDMENT. THE PRIMARY REASON IS THAT IT'S

           UNNECESSARY. THE LABOR COMMITTEE ON WHICH BOTH THE SENATOR FROM
           MASSACHUSETTS AND I SERVE HAS AS PART OF THE HIGHER EDUCATION
           ACT JUST UNANIMOUSLY VOTED OUT OF THE COMMITTEE A LOAN
           FORGIVENESS PROGRAM FOR TEACHERS WHICH I BELIEVE IS FAR MORE
           EFFECTIVE THAN WHAT IS BEING OFFERED BY THE SENATOR FROM
           MASSACHUSETTS. THAT TEACHER FOIR GIVENESS -- LOAN FORGIVENESS
           PROGRAM PROVIDES LOAN FORGIVENESS TO TEACHERS WHO HAVE LOANS

           THAT ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THE INTEREST SUBSIDY, ENSURING THAT THOSE
           MOST QUALIFIED -- THOSE WHO QUALIFY WILL BE THE ONES MOST IN
           NEED OF HELP OF REPAYING THE LOANS. THE SECOND CONDITION IS
           THAT THE TEACHER BE EMPLOYED FOR THREE YEARS. THIRDLY, THAT
           THEY TEACH IN A PUBLIC OR PRIVATE SCHOOL WHOSE SCHOOL DISTRICT
           HAS 30% OR MORE OF ITS STUDENTS ELIGIBLE FOR TITLE 1
           ASSISTANCE, THAT THEY HAVE AN ACADEMIC MAJOR IN THE SUBJECT
           AREA IN WHICH THEY TEACH, IF THEY ARE A HIGH SCHOOL TEACHER,

           AND HAVE DEMONSTRATED KNOWLEDGE IN TEACHING SCHOOLS IN READING,
           WRITING, MATHEMATICS IF THEY'RE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLTEACHERS. THE
           REASON WHY THESE CONDITIONS WERE IMPOSED -- AND, BY THE WAY,
           AGAIN, UNANIMOUSLY ACCEPTED BY THE LABOR COMMITTEE -- IS
           BECAUSE WE WANTED TO TARGET LOAN FORGIVENESS TO THE MOST
           QUALIFIED TEACHERS. WE DIDN'T WANT A BROAD, ALL-ENCOMPASSING
           LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM, WHICH I BELIEVE IS THE SENATOR FROM
           MASSACHUSETTS' AMENDMENT COVERS ABOUT 90% OF THE TEACHERS IN

           THIS COUNTRY, ALL THOSE EMPLOYED WITHIN A TITLE 1 SCHOOL, WHICH
           EQUALS ABOUT 90%. THE ISSUE IS NOT JUST MORE TEACHERS. THE
           ISSUE IS BETTER QUALIFIED TEACHERS. STATISTICS SHOW AND STUDIES
           SHOW THAT THE REAL SHORTAGE IS NOT THE NUMBER OF TEACHERS. I
           COULD GO INTO SOME DETAIL ON THAT BUT I DON'T HAVE TIME TO DO
           IT. BUT THE ISSUE AND THE NEED IS FOR QUALIFIED TEACHERS. AND
           SO WE HAVE STRUCTURED THIS LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM TO SUPPORT

           AND EMPHASIZE PEOPLE WHO MEET -- TEACHERS WHO MEET THESE
           PARTICULAR QUALIFICATIONS. THE SECOND REASON WHY I BELIEVE
           MEMBERS SHOULD NOT SUPPORT THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT IS THAT --
           IS THAT THE AVERAGE DEBT FOR TEACHERS IS CONSIDERABLY MORE THAN
           WHAT THE SENATOR'S AMENDMENT OFFERS IN TERMS OF FORGIVENESS.

           OURS ALLOWS PROVISIONS FOR UP TO $10,000 IN LOAN FORGIVENESS
           FORGIVENESS, WHICH MORE CLOSELY MEETS THE DEBT PROBLEMS THAT
           TEACHERS CURRENTLY FACE RATHER THAN THE -- RATHER THAN THE
           $10,000 -- OR THE $8,000 WHICH THE SENATOR'S AMENDMENT
           PROVIDES. AND, FINALLY, THE AMENDMENT IS DIRECTED TOWARD
           SCHOOLS IN GENERAL, THE LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM, WHEREAS THE

           LABOR COMMITTEE AMENDMENT IS BASICALLY DIRECTED TOWARD THE
           POOREST SCHOOLS. THE TEACHERS THAT MEET THE QUALIFICATIONS AS
           OUTLINED IN THE LABOR COMMITTEE'S LANGUAGE IS DESIGNED
           SPECIFICALLY FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRYING TO ADDRESS THE MOST
           CRITICAL NEED IN THIS COUNTRY AND THAT IS GETTING QUALIFIED
           TEACHERS WHO HAVE THE CREDENTIALS TO TEACH -- AND ARE TEACHING
           IN THE NATION'S POOREST SCHOOLS. AND I OUTLINED THOSE CRITERIA

           EARLIER. BUT THAT WAS THE BASIS FOR THE LABOR COMMITTEE'S
           DRAFTING OF THE LANGUAGE TO ADDRESS THE MOST CRITICAL NEED. AND
           THAT'S WHERE WE OUGHT TO BE PUTTING OUR RESOURCES. IT'S NOT THE
           SCHOOLS IN SOME OF THE MORE AFFLUENT SUBURBS THAT ARE HAVING
           PROBLEMS ATTRACTING TEACHERS, AND PARTICULARLY QUALIFIED
           TEACHERS. IT'S THE SCHOOLS IN THE POOREST DISTRICTS, THE
           SCHOOLS IN THE LOW-INCOME DISTRICTS, THE SCOLS IN THE MINORITY
           DISTRICTS THAT ARE HAVING TROUBLE ATTRACTING QUALIFIED TEACHERS

           TO TEACH THEIR STUDENTS. ARE THE TEACHERS THAT WE WANT TO
           ENCOURAGE THROUGH THIS LOAN FORGIVENESS PROGRAM. SO FOR THOSE
           REASONS, I WOULD URGE OUR COLLEAGUES TO OPPOSE THE AMENDMENT
           BEING OFFERED BY THE SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS PRIMARILY
           BECAUSE IT'S NOT NEEDED, IT'S BEEN ADDRESSED, IT'S BEEN
           SUPPORTED UNANIMOUSLY BY THE LABOR COMMITTEE. IT IS DIRECTED
           TOWARD THE AREAS THAT NEED IT THE MOST. IT IS DIRECTED TOWARD
           SUPPORTING QUALIFIED TEACHERS. AND FOR THOSE REASONS, I URGE A
           "NO" VOTE.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: FIVE MINUTES HAS EXPIRED. WHO YIELDS
           TIME?
           
           

           MR. KENNEDY: MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD YIELD MYSELF A MINUTE JUST
           IN RESPONSE TO THE SENATOR FROM INDIANA. THIS IS A BASIC
           SUBSTITUTE TO THE COVERDELL AMENDMENT, MR. PRESIDENT. WE HAVE
           AN OPPORTUNITY TO SAY IT IS MORE BENEFICIAL TO THE CHILDREN
           THAT ARE GOING TO OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS TO SUPPORT OUR AMENDMENT
           THAT'S GOING TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF QUALIFIED TEACHERS THAN
           TO SUPPORT THE COVERDELL AMENDMENT WHICH IS PRIMARILY GOING TO
           BENEFIT THE PARENTS WHO ARE SENDING THEIR CHILDREN TO PRIVATE

           SCHOOLS. NUMBER ONE. SECONDLY, THE -- I WOULD HOPE THAT MY
           FRIEND AND COLLEAGUE WOULD READ THIS -- MY AMENDMENT MORE
           CAREFULLY, BECAUSE IT DOES TARGET THE -- THE TEACHERS INTO THE
           UNDER UNDERSERVED AREAS AND ALSO IT TARGETS TEACHERS INTO THE
           AREAS WHERE THE STATE FINDS THAT THERE ARE CRITICAL SHORTAGES
           IN TERMS OF THE TYPE OF SPECIALTY NEEDS, FOR EXAMPLE, IN
           SUBJECT MATTERS FOR EXAMPLE, IN MATH AND SCIENCE AND OTHERS,

           AND DOES IT I THINK MORE CREATIVELY THAN WE HAVE DONE IN THE
           HIGHER ED BILL. SO IT IS CLEARLY MEETING -- I'LL YIELD MYSELF
           ANOTHER MINUTE. IT IS CLEARLY RESPONDING TO WHAT OUR HUMAN
           RESOURCE COMMITTEE HAS HAD HOURS OF HEARINGS ON AND THAT IS THE
           IMPORTANCE OF HAVING HIGH-QUALITY TEACHERS FOR OUR EXPANDED
           SCHOOL-AGE POPULATION POPULATION. I'M A STRONG SUPPORTER OF
           WHAT WE'VE DONE IN THE HIGHER ED BILL, BUIT ISN'T GOING TO BE

           ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO MEET THE KIND OF NATION'S NEED. AND EVERY
           STUDY THAT WE HAVE DONE HAS POINTED OUT. IF YOU WANT TO TRY AND
           BENEFIT PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND TEACHERS, OUR BILL -- MY AMENDMENT
           IS THE WAY TO DO IT. IF YOU WANT TO ABANDON PUBLIC SCHOOLS,
           MOVE TOWARDS THE SUPPORT OF FAMILIES THAT ARE SENDING THEIR
           CHILDREN TO PRIVATE SCHOOLS THAN THE COVERDELL WAY. I'LL
           WITHHOLD THE BALANCE OF THE TIME.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: WHO SEEKS TIME?
           
           

           MR. COVERDELL: MR. PRESIDENT, I YIELD ONE MINUTE TO THE SENATOR
           FROM INDIANA.
           

           MR. COATS: WELL, MR. PRESIDENT, THE LABOR COMMITTEE, IN WHICH
           THE SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS IS RANKING MEMBER, THE SENATOR
           JOINED HIS COLLEAGUES ON THE DEMOCRAT SIDE AND JOINED ALL
           REPUBLICANS IN PASSING OUT THE LABOR LANGUAGE UNANIMOUSLY. I
           DIDN'T OFFER -- HE DIDN'T OFFER HIS AMENDMENT THERE, SO I JUST
           WONDER WHAT'S CHANGED. OBVIOUS WHAT'S CHANGED IS THE AMENDMENT
           IS DESIGNED TO GUT THE COVERDELL -- UNDERLYING COVERDELL BILL.
           SECONDLY, THE SENATOR'S LANGUAGE IS NOT TARGETED. IT SAYS

           "TITLE 1 ELIGIBILITY." TITLE 1 COVERS 96% OF ALL SCHOOLS.
           THAT'S NOT TARGETED. TARGETED IS DESIGNED TO ADDRESS A SPECIFIC
           PROBLEM, THE SPECIFIC PROBLEM ARE MINORITY STUDENTS, POOR
           STUDENTS, STUDENTS IN POOR DISTRICTS THAT AREN'T GETTING THE
           QUALIFIED TEACHERS AND THE EDUCATION THAT THEY NEED. THIS LABOR
           COMMITTEE PRODUCT TARGETS IT TOWARD THOSE TEACHERS. THE
           SENATOR'S LANGUAGE TARGET -- DOESN'T TARGET. IT SAYS -- IT
           SAYS, WHERE THERE'S A SHORTAGE OF QUALIFIED ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
           AND SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHERS UNDER THE TITLE 1 PROGRAM. THAT'S

           96%. I DON'T CALL THAT BEING TARGETED.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR'S TIME HAS EXPIRED.
           

           MR. COATS: I BELIEVE WE SHOULD OPPOSE THE AMENDMENT.
           

           MR. COVERDELL: MR. PRESIDENT, I MOVE TO TABLE THE PENDING
           AMENDMENT OF THE SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS AND ASK FOR THE
           YEAS AND NAYS ON THE MOTION.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE MOTION TO TABLE IS PREMATURE UNTIL
           THE TIME HAS EXPIRED. THE PROPONENTS HAVE 1 MINUTE AND 43
           SECONDS REMAINING.
           

           MR. KENNEDY: MR. PRESIDENT, I'D YIELD MYSELF ONE MINUTES. I'D
           ASK THE SENATOR TO REVIEW THE -- THE -- REREAD THE AMENDMENT.
           IF HE LOOKS AT THE LOAN FORGIVENESS FOR THE TEACHERS, UNDERLINE
           8, IT TAKES ABOUT THE TITLE 1 PROGRAMS WHICH ARE TARGETED TO
           THE POOREST SCHOOLS SCHOOLS, AND PARAGRAPH 2, LINE 12, WHO
           TEACHES MATH, SCIENCE, FOREIGN LANGUAGES, AND THAT THE STATE
           EDUCATIONAL AGENCY DETERMINES IT. MR. PRESIDENT, I DO REALIZE

           THAT WE HAVE SUPPORTED A GOOD PROGRAM THAT IS COMING OUT OF OUR
           HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE. BUT THE BUDGET COMMITTEE PUT
           HANDS-DOWN, THUMB'S DOWN ON A VERY SIMILAR PROGRAM THAT WAS
           ADVANCED BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. WE'VE GOT REAL
           MONEY HERE ON THE FLOOR OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE AND THIS IS
           AN OPPORTUNITY IF YOU WANT TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT INCREASING
           QUALIFIED TEACHERS, OUR AMENDMENT DOES IT. IF YOU DON'T WANT TO
           DO THAT AND YOU WANT TO BENEFIT PRIVATE SCHOOLS, YOU'LL VOTE

           AGAINST THIS. MR. PRESIDENT, I RESERVE THE BALANCE OF OUR TIME. MR. COVERDELL: MR. PRESIDENT?
           
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM GEORGIA.
           

           MR. COVERDELL: MR. PRESIDENT, IF I MIGHT ASK THE SENATOR FROM
           MASSACHUSETTS MASSACHUSETTS. IT WOULD BE MY INTEND TO ASK FOR
           UNANIMOUS CONSENT THAT THIS VOTE OCCUR TOMORROW AT THE TIME
           SELECTED BY THE MAJORITY AND MINORITY LEADER AND THAT TWO
           MINUTES BE AFFORDED EACH SIDE AT THE TIME OF THE VOTE. AND IF
           THAT'S AGREEABLE, THEN I'M GOING TO PROCEED WITH THE MOTION TO
           TABLE AND ASK FOR THE YEAS AND NAYS.
           

           MR. KENNEDY: AS DESCRIBED BY THE SENATOR.
           

           MR. COVERDELL: YES.
           

           MR. KENNEDY: WITH THAT UNDERSTANDING, I WOULD YIELD BACK TIME.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: ALL TIME HAS BEEN YIELDED. THE SENATOR
           MAY PROCEED.
           

           MR. COVERDELL: ALL RIGHT. MR. PRESIDENT, I ASK UNANIMOUS
           CONSENT THE VOTE, WHICH I WILL MAKE IN A MOMENT ON THE MOTION
           TO TABLE THIS AMENDMENT, OCCUR ONUESDAY AT A TIME TO BE
           DETERMINED BY THE MAJORITY LEADER AND MINORITY LEADER AND THAT
           THE TIME REMAINING ON BOTH SIDES BE RESERVED RESPECTIVELY.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: IS THERE OBJECTION?
           HEARING NONE, SO ORDERED.
           

           MR. COVERDELL: MR. PRESIDENT, I NOW MOVE TO TABLE THE PENDING
           AMENDMENT OF THE SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS AND ASK FOR THE
           YEAS AND NAYS ON THE MOTION.
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: IS THERE A SUFFICIENT SECOND?

           THERE APPEARS TO BE A SUFFICIENT SECOND. MR. DORGAN: MR.
           PRESIDENT?
           
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA.
           

           MR. DORGAN: MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD ASK THE MANAGER OF THE
           LEGISLATION, I'D ASK FOR CONSENT TO SET ASIDE THE PENDING
           AMENDMENT SO THAT I MIGHT SPEAK FOR 15 MINUTES ON THE
           LEGISLATION ITSELF.
           

           A SENATOR: I WOULD SAY TO THE DISTINGUISHED SENATOR FROM NORTH
           DAKOTA.
           

           MR. ROTH: WE WOULD HAVE NO OBJECTION TO YOUR TAKING 15 MINUTES
           BUT WE DO HOPE IT WILL BE THE UNDERSTANDING TOMORROW THAT WE
           WILL PROCEED FROM AMENDMENT TO AMENDMENT. BUT WITH THAT

           ADMONITION, WE AGREE TO YOUR REQUEST. MR. COVERDELL: MR.
           PRESIDENT?
           
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE SENATOR FROM GEORGIA.
           

           MR. COVERDELL: IF I MIGHT ADD JUST A POINT, THAT INSOFAR AS I'M
           ASSUMING THAT THE SENATOR WOULD NOT OBJECT IF ON THIS SIDE, IN
           KEEPING A BALANCE, THAT WE WOULD ASK UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO, EVEN
           THOUGH WE'RE ON A PENDING AMENDMENT, FOR 15 MINUTES TO PERHAPS
           RESPOND TO
{END: 1998/04/20 TIME: 16-00 , Mon.  105TH SENATE, SECOND SESSION}