FOR 40% LESS CHILDREN. THIS IS -- THIS PROBLEM WE HAVE AT
           SILVERADO IS ALL THROUGH THE CLARKE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT.
           AND, MR. PRESIDENT, I'M SORRY TO REPORT, IT'S THIS WAY AROUND
           MANY PARTS OF THE COUNTRY. WE HAVE THE NEED FOR NEW SCHOOLS IN
           CLARKE COUNTY, WITH SOME RENOVATIONS, AS I'VE INDICATED. AROUND
           MANY PARTS OF THE COUNTRY, THERE IS JUST AS BAD A NEED FOR
           RENOVATING SCHOOLS AS THERE IS FOR BUILDING NEW ONES IN CLARKE
           COUNTY. IN CLARKE COUNTY, WE'RE STRUGGLING TO FIND QUALIFIED

           TEACHERS. LAST YEAR WE HAD TO HIRE ALMOST 2,000 NEW
           SCHOOLTEACHERS IN ONE YEAR. THAT'S A REAL JOB. OUR UNIVERSITY
           SYSTEM CAN'T PRODUCE NEARLY ENOUGH TEACHERS TO MEET THE
           DEMANDS. ALMOST 2,000 NEW TEACHERS IN ONE SCHOOL DISTRICT. WE
           NEED HELP IN RECRUITING AND TRAINING HIGHLY-QUALIFIED TEACHERS,
           HIGH-QUALITY TEACHERS. MR. PRESIDENT, NEVADA IS A STATE, I'M
           NOT HAPPY TO REPORT, NEVADA IS A STATE THAT HAS THE HIGHEST
           DROPOUT RATE OF ANY SCHOOL IN THE COUNTRY -- ANY STATE IN THE

           COUNTRY. NEVADA HAS THE HIGHEST DROPOUT RATE. BUT THERE IS NO
           STATE IN THE UNION THAT SHOULD FEEL SMUG ABOUT DROPOUT RATES.
           IN AMERICA TODAY, 3,000 CHILDREN DROP OUT OF SCHOOL EVERY DAY.
           THESE ARE CHILDREN WHO ARE GOING TO WIND UP BEING LESS THAN
           THEY COULD BE. THEY'RE GOING TO BE -- THEY CERTAINLY WON'T BE
           AS EDUCATED AS THEY SHOULD BE. THEY CERTAINLY WON'T BE AS
           PRODUCTIVE ECONOMICALLY AS THEY SHOULD BE. THEY WON'T BE ABLE

           TO PROVIDE FOR THEIR FAMILY THE WAY THAT THEY COULD. SO HIGH
           SCHOOL DROPOUTS IS A PROBLEM. ABOUT 500,000 CHILDREN DROP OUT
           OF SCHOOL IN AMERICA EVERY DAY. WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT
           THAT. THAT'S A MAJOR AND SERIOUS FLOOB WE NEED TO ADDRESS--
           --PROBLEM THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS. AND I WOULD THINK AND I
           WOULD HOPE THAT THIS AMENDMENT WOULD RELATE DIRECTLY TO THAT.
           TO PROVIDE SCHOOL DISTRICTS WITH MONEY FOR THOSE WITH SPECIAL
           NEEDS SO THAT THEY CAN USE THEIR MONEY FOR OTHER THINGS, LIKE

           RENOVATING SCHOOLS SCHOOLS, DOING SOMETHING AS IT RELATES TO
           MAKING SURE THAT THEY HAVE HIGH-QUALITY TEACHERS TEACHERS. IF
           WE COULD COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT WOULD KEEP SOME OF THOSE
           CHILDREN IN SCHOOL -- NOW, I'M SURE THAT THERE'S NOTHING THAT
           WE CAN DO TO KEEP ALL 500,000 OF THEM IN SCHOOL EVERY YEAR. BUT

           IF WE COULD REDUCE THE NUMBER OF DROPOUTS BY 100 A DAY DAY, 200
           A DAY, 500 A DAY SO AT THE END OF THE YEAR INSTEAD OF HAVING
           500,000 STUDENTS DROP OUT OF SCHOOL, WE WOULD HAVE 400,000 OR
           300,000. THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, WE'VE GOT TO DO SOMETHING
           ABOUT THAT. THE SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO, SENATOR BINGAMAN, AND
           I OFFERED AMENDMENTS IN THE PAST TWO CONGRESSES. THE YEAR
           BEFORE LAST WE OFFERED AN AMENDMENT THAT PASSED, PASSED THE

           SENATE AND WAS KILLED IN THE HOUSE. LAST YEAR I'M SORRY TO
           REPORT, ON STRICTLY A PARTISAN VOTE, OUR AMENDMENT DEALING WITH
           DROP DROPOUTS WAS DEFEATED. STRICTLY PARTY-LINE VOTE. WHAT
           WOULD OUR AMENDMENT HAVE DONE?
           IT WOULD HAVE CREATED WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION A
           DROPOUT CZAR, SOMEONE WHOSE JOB WOULD BE TO FOCUS ONLY ON HIGH
           SCHOOL DROPOUTS IN THIS COUNTRY. THERE ARE PROGRAMS AROUND THE
           COUNTRY THAT WORK QUITE WELL. MANY OF THEM ARE VERY SMALL. BUT

           WE NEED SOMEBODY TO HELP EACH SCHOOL DISTRICT, TO BE ABLE--
           --TO BE AVAILABLE, NOT TO FORCE THEIR WILL ON LOCAL SCHOOL
           DISTRICTS BUT TO BE AVAILABLE WITH RESOURCES TO SEE IF THEY CAN
           DO SOMETHING TO HELP KIDS STAY IN SCHOOL. IF A SCHOOL DISTRICT
           WANTED HELP, THEY COULD COME TO THE SO-CALLED DROPOUT CZAR IN
           THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND GET SOME HELP. I WOULD HOPE
           THAT WE CAN LOOK AT THAT DURING THIS DEBATE ON THIS ISSUE TO
           SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO KEEP KIDS IN SCHOOL. AND AS I SAID, THE
           AMENDMENT -- THE UNDERLYING AMENDMENT, THE AMENDMENT WE'RE NOW

           DEBATING, CERTAINLY WOULD ALLOW US TO TAKE SOME OF THAT MONEY
           THAT'S NOW BEING USED FORSPECIAL EDUCATION AND USE IT FOR
           PROGRAMS LIKE HIGH SCHOOL DROP DROPOUTS. THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
           HAS NO INTENTION OF TAKING AWAY THE ABILITY OF LOCAL SCHOOL
           DISTRICTS TO MAKE THEIR DECISIONS. BUT WHAT WE NEED TO BE IS A
           RESOURCE, TO BE A RESOURCE TO HELP PUBLIC EDUCATION IN AMERICA

           TODAY. SCHOOL DISTRICTS ALL OVER AMERICA ARE BEGGING FOR OUR
           HELP. THEY RECOGNIZE THAT THERE IS NO MOVEMENT IN WASHINGTON TO
           TAKE OVER LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS. IF THERE'S ONE THING THAT IS
           RECOGNIZED IT'S THAT SCHOOLS SHOULD BE CONTROLLED ON THE LOCAL
           LEVEL. BUT THAT BEING THE CASE, THERE STILL HAS TO BE RESOURCES
           PROVIDED BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. AND IN MY OPINION, FAR MORE
           RESOURCES THAN 2% OF THE FEDERAL BUDGET OF THE UNITED STATES.
           WHY?

           BECAUSE WE NEED -- WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE ARE SCHOOLS
           THAT ARE REALLY STRUGGLING. ALL OVER AMERICA, SCHOOLS ARE
           STRUGGLING. THEY'RE STRUGGLING BECAUSE THEY CAN'T MEET THE HIGH
           INTEREST PAYMENTS ON THE BONDS THEY'VE HAD TO LET TO BORROW
           MONEY TO BUILD THESE SCHOOLS. WE RECOGNIZE THAT AROUND THE
           COUNTRY, THAT THEY'RE HAVING TROUBLE PASSING BOND ISSUES TO
           PROVIDE NEW SCHOOLS, TO RENOVATE NEW SCHOOLS. WE KNOW THAT
           THERE'S A SHORTAGE OF TEACHERS. WE HAVE TO DO A BETTER JOB OF
           MAKING SURE THAT THE TEACHERS THAT ARE EDUCATED AND TEACHERS'

           COLLEGES AND OTHER UNIVERSITY SYSTEMS AROUND THE COUNTRY ARE
           WELL-QUALIFIED TEACHERS THAT MEET CERTAIN MINIMUM STANDARDS. WE
           HAVE TO FOCUS ON THIS AND MAKE SURE THAT WE DO HAVE
           HIGH-QUALITY TEACHERS AND GOOD ADMINISTRATORS. AND WE HAVE TO
           RECOGNIZE THAT SMALLER CLASSES ARE IMPORTANT. WE HAVE TO
           RECOGNIZE ON A FEDERAL LEVEL THAT WE HAVE A NATIONAL PROBLEM
           ACROSS THIS COUNTRY IN SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION AND THAT WE HAVE TO
           HAVE A NATIONAL PROGRAM TO HELP LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS.
           ACCOUNTABILITY IS SOMETHING THAT WE'VE RECOGNIZED FOR YEARS

           THAT SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE. GOALS 2000 WAS A STEP IN THAT
           DIRECTION, BUT NOW WE HAVE TO MOVE ON TO THAT. WE HAVE TO MAKE
           SURE THAT CHILDREN ARE ALLOWED TO GO TO SCHOOL IN SAFE SCHOOLS,
           SCHOOLS THAT THE ROOFS DON'T LEAK. WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT
           CHILDREN HAVE ACCESS TO COMPUTER EQUIPMENT. THIS IS AS STANDARD
           AS WHEN I WAS GOING TO SCHOOL, YOU HAD TO HAVE TEETER-TOTTERS
           AND SWINGS. NOW YOU NEED TO HAVE COMPUTER EQUIPMENT. EXPANDING
           ACCESS TO TECHNOLOGY IS VITALLY IMPORTANT. AND WE HAVE TO MAKE

           SURE THERE'S UNIVERSAL ACCESS TO HIGH-QUALITY PRESCHOOL
           PROGRAMS PROGRAMS. I SEE ON THE FLOOR TODAY IS MY FRIEND, THE
           SENIOR SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS, WHO MORE THAN ANY OTHER
           PERSON IN AMERICA HAS MADE SURE THAT WE HAVE A CONTINUING
           DIALOGUE ON PRESCHOOL PROGRAMS, HEAD START PROGRAMS AND OTHER
           PROGRAMS THAT ARE REALLY THE BRAINCHILD OF THE SENATOR FROM
           MASSACHUSETTS. WE HAVE TO CONTINUE MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE
           HIGH-QUALITY PRESCHOOL PROGRAMS. WHERE IT'S BEEN
           LONG-ESTABLISHED THAT THE BETTER PRESCHOOL PROGRAMS WE HAVE,

           THE BETTER STUDENTS WE HAVE COMING INTO SCHOOL. AND WITH THE
           WAY THE FAMILY SITUATION HAS DEVELOPED, WITH BOTH PARENTS
           WORKING ON MANY OCCASIONS BECAUSE OF THE NEED THAT THEY DO SO,
           IT'S MORE IMPORTANT THAN EVER THAT THERE BE GOOD, HIGH-QUALITY
           PRESCHOOL PROGRAMS. THE AMENDMENT THAT IS NOW BEFORE US WILL
           ALLOW THAT, BECAUSE IT WILL FREE UP -- IT WILL FREE UP MONEYS
           THAT -- THAT SIMPLY AREN'T AVAILABLE TO LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

           I WOULD HOPE THAT THIS AMENDMENT, WHICH HAS BEEN OFFERED IN THE
           PAST BY SENATOR DODD, IS AN AMENDMENT THAT WILL RECEIVE
           BIPARTISAN SUPPORT SUPPORT. THAT THE $1.2 MILLION -- BILLION
           SET FORTH IN THIS BILL WILL BE USED TO GO DIRECTLY TO SCHOOL
           DISTRICTS. DIRECTLY TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS. THAT'S WHAT THIS
           AMENDMENT DOES. AND I WOULD HOPE, AS I'VE INDICATED, THAT WE'LL

           RECEIVE BIPARTISAN SUPPORT. A SENATOR: MR. PRESIDENT?

           MR. COVERDELL: MR. PRESIDENT?
           
           

           THE PRESIDING OFFICER: THE ABLE SENATOR FROM GEORGIA.
           

           MR. COVERDELL: MR. PRESIDENT, I SEE SENATOR KENNEDY FROM
           MASSACHUSETTS. I WOULD LIKE TO RESPOND JUST A MOMENT OR TWO TO
           THE COMMENTS BY SENATOR REID AND THEN TO, I THINK IN THE COMITY
           OF EVENTS HERE, IT WOULD COME TO YOU. THE FIRST THING I WANT TO
           SAY, SENATOR REID'S STATEMENTS DEALT WITH A PANOPLY OF ISSUES
           RELATED TO EDUCATION BUT NOT NECESSARILY TO THE AMENDMENT HE
           JUST SUBMITTED FOR SENATOR DODD. IN A WORD, THE AMENDMENT

           THAT'S BEEN OFFERED BY SENATOR DODD WOULD MAKE THE ENTIRE
           LEGISLATION THAT WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING FOR THE LAST SEVERAL
           DAYS IN THE SENATE MOOT MOOT. IT BASICALLY REMOVES ALL SECTIONS
           OF THE -- OF THE BILL BILL, AS WELL. I TAKE IT BACK. IT REMOVES
           THE EDUCATION SAVINGS ACCOUNT PROVISION AND WOULD MAKE THAT

           MOOT. IT IS PREMISED ON THE STATEMENT WE'VE ALL HEARD MANY
           TIMES, THAT SPECIAL EDUCATION, WHICH WAS PASSED IN THE
           MID-1970'S, WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN FUNDED IN PART BY THE
           FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, PART BY THE STATE GOVERNMENTS, AND IN PART
           BY THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT. BUT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT NEVER
           FULFILLED ITS PROMISE. INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, THE DEMOCRATS WERE
           IN THE MAJORITY UNTIL FIVE YEARS AGO THE ENTIRE TIME. THEY WERE

           THERE WHEN IT BECAME THE LAW. THEY WERE THERE WHEN IT WAS THE
           AGREEMENT. AND THEY CONSISTENTLY IGNORED IT. NOW -- NOW, SINCE
           A REPUBLICAN MAJORITY HAS COME TO THE SENATE SENATE, UNDER THE
           LEADERSHIP OF A NUMBER OF MEMBERS ON OUR SIDE, BUT PARTICULARLY
           I'LL MENTION TODAY SENATOR GREGG OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, THERE HAS
           BEEN A CONSISTENT ATTEMPT ON OUR SIDE TO FUND THE SPECIAL
           EDUCATION FUNDING. I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. IN FISCAL YEAR

           1997, THE PRESIDENT -- THAT'S THEIR VIEW -- REQUESTED $2.6
           BILLION. FOR THIS NEED THAT THE SENATOR FROM NEVADA HAS JUST
           BEEN DESCRIBING. BUT WE INCREASED THAT TO $3.1 BILLION, OR
           ALMOST A NEW $1 BILLION TO PUT INTO SPECIAL EDUCATION. NEXT
           YEAR, THE PRESIDENT OFFERED A BUDGET OF $3.2 BILLION. BUT WE
           PASSED, AT THE PRODDING OF THE SENATOR FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE, $3.8

           BILLION, OR $700 MILLION MORE. FISCAL 1999, THE PRESIDENT ASKED
           FOR $3.8 BILLION, BUT WE ANSWERED WITH $4.3 BILLN, ANOTHER $500
           MILLION BEHIND SPECIAL EDUCATION. AND THEN IN THE FY 2000
           BUDGET, THE PRESIDENT ASKED FOR $4.3 BILLION, BUT WE MADE IT
           $4.9 BILLION. THE POINT IS, THAT ON OUR SIDE SIDE, WE HAVE
           CONSISTENTLY BEEN TRYING TO IMPROVE THIS ACCOUNT FOR SPECIAL
           EDUCATION THAT WAS IGNORED FOR ALMOST 35 YEARS ON THE OTHER

           SIDE. SO I -- I HAVE TO BE A LITTLE SUSPICIOUS OF AN AMENDMENT
           THAT SUDDENLY WRAPS ITSELF AROUND IN THE INTEREST OF SPECIAL
           EDUCATION WHEN THEY COULDN'T DO IT FOR SOME 35 YEARS PREVIOUSLY
           AND IT ACTUALLY TOOK A NEW MAJORITY TO START FULFILLING THIS
           PLEDGE FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION. AS I SAID, THE EFFECT OF THE
           AMENDMENT WOULD BE TO MAKE MOOT THE EDUCATION SAVINGS ACCOUNTS

           ACCOUNTS. NOW, THIS ISSUE CAME UP LAST WEEK IN A DISCUSSION
           BETWEEN MYSELF AND SENATOR WELLSTONE OF MINNESOTA. THIS $1.2
           BILLION OR $1.3 BILLION THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE INVESTED
           IN THE EDUCATION SAVINGS ACCOUNT WILL PRODUCE $12 BILLION IN
           SAVINGS AND INVESTMENTS IN EDUCATION. THAT'S A CLASSIC

           SITUATION HERE HERE. IF WE TAKE THE $1.3 BILLION AND CONVERT IT
           TO THAT WHICH IS RECOMMENDED BY SENATOR DODD DODD, IT WILL BE
           WORTH $1.3 BILLION. AND WE WILL FORFEIT THE VALUE OF THE
           SAVINGS BUILDUP THAT CAN GO TO DO ALL THE THINGS THAT THE
           SENATOR FROM NEVADA
           
           TALKED ABOUT: ALLOWS A FAMILY TO PURCHASE COMPUTERS, ALLOWS
           FAMILIES TO HIRE TUTORS, ALLOWS FAMILIES TO AID AND ABET AND
           ASSIST IF THEIR CHILDREN NEED OR HAVE SPECIAL EDUCATION

           REQUIREMENTS OR NEEDS NEEDS. AND THE EFFECT OF THIS AMENDMENT
           WOULD BE TO FORFEIT, GIVE UP THE ACCUMULATION OF $12 BILLION IN
           NEW RESOURCES AND NEW ASSETS. THAT SEEMS TO ME TO BE PRETTY
           SHORTSIGHTED. WHY WOULD WE FORFEIT ONE OF THE LARGEST INFUSIONS
           OF RESOURCES -- AND I MIGHT ADD ONE OF THE SMARTEST INFUSIONS
           IN RESOURCES -- COMING FROM THE FAMILIES THEMSELVES?

           WE'RE NOT HAVING TO RAISE TAXES TO DO IT. NO STATE, NO
           GOVERNOR, NO LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICT IS HAVING TO DO IT. PEOPLE
           ARE DOING IT ON THEIR OWN, AND THEY'RE PRODUCING VERY SMART AND
           INTELLIGENT DOLLARS BECAUSE THOSE DOLLARS WILL BE INVESTED
           PRECISELY ON
{END: 2000/02/29 TIME: 10-00 , Tue.  106TH SENATE, SECOND SESSION}