Labor-H Veto Override Fails

“The question is, will the House, on reconsideration, pass the bill, the objections of the President to the contrary notwithstanding?” This was the question that led off a debate last night on whether to overturn President Bush’s veto of the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill (which funds NCLB, among other areas of education, health, etc.). However, the House failed to reach the two-thirds majority needed to override the veto, falling 2 votes short, with a final count of 277-141. In terms of party breakdown, all Democrats that were present voted for the override, along with 51 Republicans; all 141 who voted against it were Republicans. The vote was near the end of a 14-and-a-half hour marathon session held yesterday, the last day before the House’s Thanksgiving break began; the House is now adjourned until Dec. 4th (the Senate will break this afternoon until Dec. 3rd).

Rep. Obey (D-Wisc.), Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, among others in the Democratic leadership, have said that they will likely attempt to “split the difference” for overall appropriations with the President, cutting half of the $22B which they are over his budget to $11B. However, Obey has issued a statement that outlines some of the cuts that he says will have to be made to the Labor-H bill in order to do this. His main comment regarding NCLB in the statement was the following: “This bill provides $400 million above the President to serve nearly 120,000 more low-income kids with Title I grants, but 60,000 of those kids are out of luck if we meet him halfway.” We will be carefully watching the potential cuts though, and the possible effects they may have on the latest STEM education funding levels (recently summarized here).

Here are a few brief but informative statements from the floor debate last night that give a sense of what each side was saying about the attempted veto override:

-Rep. James Walsh (R-NY): “I would like to thank Chairman Obey and to thank his staff for the good, solid work product that they have delivered. I have enjoyed our work together this year, and as I said before, this bill, the people's bill, is a thoughtful piece of legislation. If Congress does not override the President's veto, I will look forward to working with the chairman to negotiate a good bill that can be enacted. If the veto is sustained, I would hope that all parties, the White House and both houses of Congress, will come together quickly and work in good faith to complete the appropriations process in a timely manner… If the proposal is to split the difference, to reduce the amount of spending above the President's request by $11 billion, I would advise the President to take ``yes'' for an answer.”

-Rep. Lewis (R-Calif.), Ranking Member of the House Appropriations Committee: “The primary difference between the parties on this bill is that Republicans believe we must balance the benefits of these worthwhile programs with the fact that the American taxpayer must pay for them. The vetoed bill that we are being asked to consider today is nearly $10 billion over the President's budget request and $6 billion over the fiscal year 2007 enacted level. It represents roughly half of the $22 billion the majority party in this Congress wants to spend over what the president requested.”

-Rep. Obey (D-Wisc.), Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee: “The gentleman from New York [Rep. Walsh] mentioned the need for compromise on this bill. We have already had incredible compromise. We have had compromise on virtually every item in this bill, on every issue ranging from family planning to special education, and the minority has been involved every step of the way. When the bill was reported out of subcommittee, every single member of the subcommittee signed the committee report, and yet today we face a Presidential veto. Madam Speaker, I want to make one thing clear. We have said from the beginning to the White House we would like to compromise. We have asked the White House, I have asked Mr. Nussle, I know our leadership has asked the President personally, to sit down and work out our differences. We have been told as recently as last Saturday by the press secretary speaking for the White House that the White House had no intention of compromising, and that all the Congress had to do to meet the President's standards was to submit a bill which was fully identical with his budget. I'm sorry, this is an independent branch of government, and we have an obligation to do better than that.”

Head Start Passed With Ehlers’ Science, Math Requirements

Yesterday both houses passed HR 1429, the “Improving Head Start for School Readiness Act of 2007,” with over 75 percent voting for it in each chamber. Head Start is an early education, pre-K program for disadvantaged children that has been in existence for over 40 years. The passage is worth quickly noting for us because Rep. Ehlers (R-Mich.) authored language promoting the inclusion of math and science in the bill: “The measures I fought to include in this bill will help prepare students with math and science skills so that they are ready for kindergarten and first grade learning in those subjects,” said Ehlers. The first of his provisions added math and science as two of the overall aspects of "school readiness" which children must demonstrate. The second provision requires that Head Start teachers and staff be provided professional development in math and science, along with a number of other areas of school readiness. Similarly, language was added to further require that each Head Start classroom have at least one teacher with “demonstrated competency” with skills needed to improve “understanding of early math and early science” among children.

The conferees added the following explanation to their joint statement on the final bill: “Children participating in Head Start programs should, at a minimum, develop and demonstrate knowledge and skills that include number concepts such as counting and seriation; number operations; geometric and spatial concepts; classification; and time and measurement concepts. Children participating in Head Start programs should have access to educational experiences which include observing with senses, predicting, inferring, defining and controlling variables, working in teams, and communicating discoveries.” Rep. Ehlers’ statement on the bill is available here, and Rep. Miller, Chairman of the education committee that worked on the bill, has a statement available here.

Miller Verifies, NCLB Will Indeed be Put Off Until Next Year

Today, Rep. George Miller (D-Calif.), Chairman of the House education committee, verified that NCLB reauthorization will indeed be put off until next year, according to CongressNow. Sen. Kennedy (D-Mass.), Miller’s counterpart in the Senate, already had stated that it would not come to the Senate floor this year. Joking about the time left for NCLB reauthorization, Miller told CongressNow, “What, you don’t think we can get it done in the 10 legislative days we have left?”

Rep. Miller and the House Education and Labor Committee were working on another significant piece of legislation yesterday and today, a five-year reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, titled the College Opportunity and Affordability Act of 2007 (H.R. 4137). The Committee approved the legislation by a vote of 45-0, sending the bill to the House floor. According to the Committee’s website, the bill will “address the soaring price of college and remove other obstacles that make it harder for qualified students to go to college.” Also, an overview released by the Committee stated that the bill is to do the following two things for STEM education:

-“Create programs to bolster students’ interest in science, technology and critical foreign languages through collaborations with businesses and other stakeholders;” and
-“Improve teacher training and development programs and focuses on recruiting teachers into high demand science and technology fields.”

We will be reviewing the bill and supply another update shortly.

In other news, the House is set to attempt an override of the President’s veto of the Labor-H bill today; they would need a two-thirds majority to do so. If they do not, the measure will die and not go on to the Senate, and the possibility of an omnibus bill, incorporating the various areas of spending yet unfunded, will be increasingly likely.

Bush Vetoes Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations

This morning, President Bush delivered a long-expected veto of the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill, which contains funding for No Child Left Behind (NCLB), along with other areas of education. More details on the STEM education-related funding within the bill, along with the actions that led up to today’s veto, can be found here and here. A two-thirds vote in each house would be needed to override the President’s veto, and will likely be attempted mid-week, starting in the House; if the House fails to do so, the bill will die without going to the Senate. The White House has not yet released a statement, however Sen. Kennedy (D-Mass.) provided some remarks when announcing the veto on the Senate floor this morning. As he described the different areas that the spending bill would have funded, he asked the following question, highlighting the contentious nature of the debate, along with the central role that NCLB plays within it: “How can President Bush say he will leave no child behind when he vetoes the bill that does just that?” “We will not give up,” he went on to say, “we will chart a new course…the battle is not over, it has just begun.” This Washington Post article from last week offers a helpful context for these comments, as it explores Kennedy’s relationship with the President, as it relates to NCLB. The Democratic leadership released this statement on Saturday regarding the Labor bill, stating that “Congress welcomes dialogue with the Bush Administration on addressing the priorities of the American people, but…the President must be willing to find common ground.” As we noted last week, the President's most recent statement on the bill is available here.

The President did sign into law the defense appropriations bill this morning, which also includes a second continuing resolution (CR) to provide funding for government operations through Dec. 14th. On a related note, as we stated previously, the CJS appropriations bill has been sent to conference, and updates may be available this week.

Update: The White House released a statement this afternoon, holding that "Health care, education, job training, and other goals can be achieved without this excessive spending if the Congress sets priorities...I urge the Congress to send me a fiscally responsible bill that sets priorities. Americans sent us to Washington to achieve results and be good stewards of their hard-earned tax dollars. Because the legislation violates that commitment, I must veto this bill."

Labor-HHS Heads to the President; CJS to Conference

Though the appropriations process has been stalled for months, Congress has started to move on some spending bills—two are on their way to the President; two others have been sent to Conference Committee. That’s 4 of 12, though the more important question will be what Congress does after most of these are halted by Presidential vetoes. The Defense spending bill is one of the two on its way to the President, and includes a second CR, previously discussed here, to provide funding for government operations through Dec. 14th (the CR that is currently providing funding expires next Friday, Nov. 16th).

In terms of the spending bills which are more relevant for STEM education, Labor-HHS, now separated from Veterans’ Affairs, is on its way to the President, and Commerce-Justice-Science (CJS) is headed for Conference Committee. After the Democrats’ attempt to attach the Veterans’ spending bill to Labor-HHS failed, it was sent back to the House, passed with a vote of 274-141, and is now on its way to the President. The President continues to reiterate his veto threat of the bill, as evidenced in this statement of recent: “Even though proposed discretionary spending would grow at a rate of 6.9 percent under the President’s Budget, lawmakers are on a path to spend $22 billion more than the President proposed, and almost $10 billion of that increase is a result of the Labor, Health and Human Services and Education provisions…Despite the Administration’s clear communication of its objections, Congress has refused to set priorities within this topline.” Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) on the other hand, in attempting to keep the Labor and Veterans’ bills together Wed., issued a call to Senators that he will likely reiterate if he has to attempt to overturn a Labor-HHS veto: “Why do you think increases were made in the Labor-HHS bill? To help the American people as we see it. Why in the world would Senators who voted 75 in number now suddenly vote against the bill for which they voted? That is what they are doing…Don't kowtow to the President. We did what we thought was right, and it is unfair for him now to tell us how we should legislate.”

As a quick note on the CJS spending bill, which funds NSF and NASA, among others, the bill was sent to conference committee last night where differences will be worked out between the $53.5B House version and the $56.6B Senate version. Updates on spending, and a comparative chart like that provided in yesterday's Labor-HHS update, will be made available as soon as possible after the bill comes out of conference. The Senate conferees for the CJS bill are listed at the bottom of this post, and those for the House are Representatives: Mollohan, Kennedy, Fattah, Ruppersberger, Schiff, Honda, DeLauro, Price (of North Carolina), Obey, Frelinghuysen, Culberson, Rogers (of Kentucky), Latham, Aderholt and Lewis (of California). A chronological list of CJS coverage can be found here, and for Labor-HHS here.

The Uncertain Fate of Education Funding

There have been some important changes to the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations bill this week, our summary of which is broken into two sections below. The first section describes the logistics of getting the bill to the President, and the second discusses the funding status of STEM education in the bill, and is accompanied by a chart of relevant funding levels.

Will the Labor-HHS-Education spending bill get to the President?

Two of the 12 spending bills—Labor-HHS-Education and Veterans’ Affairs—were combined in Conference Committee last week, but the combined bill has now fallen victim to an ethics rule that was put into place this summer. The law, PL 110-81, includes a rule that allows an objection or “point of order” to be raised when new provisions are added to a bill in conference—in the case of this bill, the “new provision” was the addition of the Veterans’ Affairs spending bill to Labor-HHS. While the final legislation (also known as a "conference report") for the combined bill was being debated on the Senate floor yesterday, Sen. Hutchinson (R-TX) invoked the new law, raising a point of order. Sen. Harkin (D-IA) then called for the point of order to be overturned, however did not garner the 60 votes needed to do so, with only 47 votes for and 46 against. Thus the Veterans’ Affairs bill was separated from Labor-HHS, and the Labor-HHS conference report, on its own, was put to a vote in the Senate. Though the measure passed, it did not reach the veto-proof threshold needed to overturn Bush’s threatened veto, passing only 56-37. Though the report already passed the House this Tuesday in its combined format, now that it has been stripped of the Veterans’ Affairs bill, it will return to the House for another vote before being sent to the President.

The latest on Math Science Partnerships, Math Now, and other STEM-ed funding in Labor-HHS

Despite all of this, there are still some funding changes that are worth noting from the conference report, as they may be the final marks for FY08 funding for these programs. Math Science Partnerships (MSP), Math Now and other education programs were given these marks in the conference report, which we have been discussing, that was first released this week (available here in final form, and here as a PDF with handwritten Congressional changes). A chart comparing funding for relevant programs is included below.

MSP unfortunately received a $183M mark, which was not only lower than the House’s $197.8M, but was also $1M less than the $184M in the Senate bill. This lower mark was given despite a letter written to conferees by two long-time supporters of MSP, Rep.Vernon Ehlers (R-MI) and Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ), co-signed by 24 others, asking for the higher, $197.8M mark. Math Now is not mentioned at all within the conference report, so it will almost certainly remain at the zero funding level recommended by both chambers. Advanced placement funds were placed at $46M, between House and Senate requests, some of which go towards an interesting program known as “The Advanced Placement Incentive Program,” which seeks to increase participation of low-income students in pre-AP and AP classes. The conference report also included a note requesting that the Dept. of Education give priority for this program to science, math and foreign language AP study.

The next three updates to briefly note were all amendments added to the spending bill during debate on the Senate floor a few weeks ago:

-To start with the good news, the bachelor’s and master’s degree programs authorized in the America COMPETES Act, were included in the report; however, they received only $3M and $2M, respectively, half of what was initially requested for each in the Senate, and not even 2% of the $276.2M authorized for both programs in the COMPETES Act. More details on these two programs can be found here.

-Another amendment that was included, although not funding-related, emphasizes that the NAEP 2009 Science assessment must “include extensive and explicit attention to inquiry.” More details on this amendment, SA 3337, were discussed here.

-The “American Competitiveness Scholarship Act” was another COMPETES-authorized amendment that was added by the Senate, though it unfortunately was not included in the conference report. The amendment would have used H-1B visa fees to provide, among other things, scholarships for “associate, undergraduate, or graduate level degrees in mathematics, engineering, health care, or computer science.” It is discussed in greater detail about halfway down in this news item.

Otherwise, the biggest of NCLB’s programs, Title I, was placed at $14.8B. For perspectives from the opposing sides in the debate on the overall funding levels, and for an idea of the labor and health-related funding in the bill, see these available statements on the bill: the President; the House Appropriations Committee chair; and the House Education and Labor Committee chair.

The chart below shows the most relevant funding levels for the Dept. of Education in the Labor-HHS spending bill:

*Click on chart to enlarge

Senate NCLB Draft: Two Noteworthy COMPETES Programs Appear Repealed; Sections on MSP and Math Now Included

The Senate’s partial NCLB draft that recently became available is another sign that Congress would like to get some work done on NCLB reauthorization this year, however there is a lot of uncertainty in the air still (see this Education Week article for an overview). The Senate's draft legislation for Title I is available here, and Title II here (PDFs). The draft does not include a number of sections on the more controversial areas of teacher pay and accountability. The role of science in AYP, therefore, is also left unaddressed for the moment. We urge readers to consider contacting Congress to express their opinion regarding the place of science in AYP. For our part, we support its inclusion as a mandatory part of AYP calculations, and added our name to a recent Roll Call ad to that end (pictured to the left, and available here). The John Glenn Academies, another important STEM education program in the House draft, has not yet been included in the Senate draft either. However, the Senate draft does include Math Science Partnerships and the Math Now/Math Skills programs—the latter of which appears to include the repeal of a few noteworthy programs from the America COMPETES Act. An overview comparison of the House and Senate versions of each program can be found below.

Math Science Partnerships

Logistically speaking, the traditional “Mathematics and Science Partnerships” title is maintained in the Senate version, returned to its original location in Title II, Part B. The authorization amount for Math Science Partnerships (MSP) has been left blank in the Senate draft, as it was in the House (please note that authorization amounts, while worth noting, do not allocate funding, as appropriations bills do; for the latest on MSP funding, see our recent news on Labor-HHS appropriations). Most other language for MSP in the Senate draft is the same as the House, however there were two notable differences at this point.

The Senate draft maintains a pair of “authorized activities” which were left out of the House draft, but were both in the original NCLB bill. The first would allow funds to be used to recruit math, science and engineering majors into teaching (signing and performance incentives, stipends for teacher certification, scholarships for advanced degrees, etc.). The second would allow funds to be used for “developing or redesigning more rigorous mathematics and science curricula” that align with State and postsecondary study standards.

Math Now, Math Skills Programs

As a refresher, both Math Now and Math Skills provide grants through SEAs to “high-need” LEAs to improve math performance in K-12 schools. Both programs were also authorized in the recently passed America COMPETES Act.

The Senate draft has the same format for these as America COMPETES does, targeting K-9th grade students with Math Now, and secondary school students with Math Skills. In the Senate draft, the two programs are placed in separate sections under the heading of “Student Math Skills Improvement Grants,” in Title I, Part I. However, as we previously explained, the House draft combined these two programs into “Math Success for All,” in part D of Title II, a completely different title than that of the Senate draft. The fact that the programs are not only combined in the House draft, but also authorized under a single amount, is a significant difference, as the Senate version would authorize separate amounts for each program. In fact, the Senate follows the lead of the America COMPETES authorization again here, authorizing each of the programs at $95M for 2008. The House draft does not yet state an authorization amount (although in both houses Math Now has received zero appropriations funding so far this year, notwithstanding the President’s requested total of $250M).

As mentioned above, the section including Math Now and Math Skills within the Senate draft actually repeals a number of America COMPETES programs. A few appear to be non-consequential, as they are accounted for with similar authorization language in the Senate draft (e.g., sections 6201 and 6203 of COMPETES on Math Now and Math Skills are repealed, but included in the Senate draft). However, two other COMPETES programs that appear to be repealed, sections 6131 and 6202, are more significant. The first, 6131, was authorized at $1.2M, and would have established an “expert panel” to provide information on “promising practices” to strengthen K-12 STEM education. The second, 6202, did not yet have an authorization amount, and was to provide for “Summer Term Education Programs.” The programs would provide funding for 25-30 days of “summer learning” in math, technology, problem-solving and engineering to mainly low-income, K-8th grade students. Neither of these sections appear to have been moved from the COMPETES authorization into the Senate draft.

As the reauthorization process continues, we will be watching these programs and others to provide ongoing updates. On a related note, summaries and full text versions of the House’s NCLB draft, which were recently removed from the main House Education and Labor Committee site, are available here, on the Republicans’ version of the Committee site.

Continuing with the Continuing Resolutions

This morning on the Senate floor, majority leader Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) discussed the Congressional schedule for the next few weeks, stating that a vote on another CR would be likely. Given that the current CR only lasts for the next two weeks, until Nov. 16, this is not surprising, but it does emphasize the fact that the spending measures that we have been discussing here will not likely be resolved before then. Further, it may be challenging to get the spending bills resolved before the end of 2007, as Reid also noted that, starting on Nov.19, the Senate will take two weeks off for Thanksgiving, followed by only three weeks more in session, if the Senators return. In terms of continuing resolutions, last year’s Congress was in a similar situation a year ago this time, passing the second of four CRs in mid-November of 2006 (the fourth of which extended through all of FY07 until the 1st of last month, when the current CR began). They also shared the current problem of getting appropriations bills passed, only sending Defense and Homeland Security bills to the President.

Regarding the combined Labor-HHS and veterans’ bill that made it out of conference yesterday, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-Tex.), who attempted to keep the bills separate, has also threatened to raise a point of order against the bill when it reaches the Senate floor. This would be difficult to garner the 60 votes needed to override, and may force a separation of the now-combined bill. The bill is to reach the floor of both chambers next week.

Conference Committee Passes Combined Labor-HHS and Military Construction-Veterans’ Affairs Spending Bill

Since the House and Senate each have passed appropriations bills for both Labor-HHS-Education and Military Construction-Veterans’ Affairs, these bills were sent to a Conference Committee today for any differences to be worked out. The Conference Committee met and agreed to a package that combined the two spending bills (the Defense spending bill was originally to be part of the package as well, but the House Appropriations chairman, Rep. Obey, pulled it this morning, citing Republican objections). Together, discretionary spending for the two bills totals $215.4B, $13.8B above the President’s request. Labor-HHS makes up the largest portion of the bill, totaling $150.7B; of that, $60.7B goes towards education spending ($4.5B above the President’s request). The President has previously stated that he would pass the veterans’ bill, if sent to him separately, but has threatened to veto combination spending bills. This made today’s proceedings highly contentious, and almost stopped the two-bill package from passing. Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchinson (R-Tex.), chairwoman of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Military Construction and Veterans’ Affairs, offered a motion to keep the bills separate, only failing by a 9-8 vote along party lines. A statement by Sen. Byrd, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, is available here, and a statement from a number of Republican Senators on the measure, here. The bill will now proceed to a vote on the House and Senate floors. As details become available, we will provide updates and more specifics on the final numbers for education spending priorities.