« PreviousContinue »
STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN VOCATIONAL ASSOCIATION
I am Jerelyn B. Schultz, Vice President for Home Economics Education of the American Vocational Association. I appreciate this opportunity to oller written testimony on behalf of vocational home economics education. I will speak to the need for restoration of the $38.5 for Consumer and Homemaking Education, Title III-B, Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Act, P.L. 101-392.
re federal funds are to be used to help build a strong, competitive work force for America's future, then consumer and Homemaking programs must be funded. Today, hall of our population lives in urban areas and both parents work. Parents often do not have the time or the resources to teach their children about sound nutrition, individual and family health, parenting, and consumer education. At the same time, dropout rates, teenage pregnancy, and child abuse and neglect have reached epidemic proportions in this country. These problems weigh heavily on public budgets and will become heavier if we do not help young people stay in school, learn to prevent pregnancy, and become responsible and self-sufficient.
Consumer and homemaking educators across the country are experts
The work and Family Institute program began in
Another nationally disseminated program is GRADS, a
States have used federal dollars to provide leadership to consumer and homemaking education program. Michigan has focused its money on program improvement through an organized state-wide process to meet student needs. As a part of this process, they surveyed school administrators, parents, and students regarding the value of consumer and homemaking education. Almost 90% of the administrators indicated that all students benefit from these programs and 70% of parents indicated that the daily living skills provided were very important to young people. Other studies have provided evidence of the importance of consumer and homemaking programs to students. A 1989-90 follow-up study in North Carolina found that 40% of teenagers said the main reason they stayed in school was their home economics program.
Consumer and homemaking education is the only federally funded curriculum for youth and adults that focuses on developing the knowledge and skills for the work of the family. Work attitudes and values are formed in the home; worker productivity is strongly influenced by family stability that promotes the development of family members. Congress, in funding Consumer and Homemaking Education since the Smith Hughes Act of 1917, has recognized the relationship between a quality home and family life and a productive and satisfying work life. Consumer and homemaking programs help strengthen families and prevent problems related to family instability, child abuse, sexual abuse, inadequate nutrition, and resource management. These programs prepare youth and adults for both the work and family spheres of life and focus on the interrelationships between the two.
In order for consumer and homemaking to continue its important work of educating and assisting America's families and underserved populations, I encourage you to appropriate the $38.5 million authorized under title III-B, Carl D. Perkins Vocational Applied Technology Act, P.L. 101-392. Thank you for your consideration of this request.
STATEMENT OF SENATOR BROWN
Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify before the Subcomittee in support of a program that is vital to our nation; impact aid.
During these times of severe fiscal constraints, we must exercise the highest degree of prudence when making budgetary decisions. a result, it is critical that congress identify the programs that are of the highest priority to the nation. Mr. Chairman, I believe that impact aid is a high priority program that deserves full funding. The impact aid program deserves special attention because it is designed to ensure that a federal presence in a community does not interefere with the education of the young people of that community. P.L. 81-874 was enacted in 1950, and subsequently reauthorized in 1988 (P.L. 100-297) to ensure that the federal government reimburses school districts for revenues lost as a result of federal activities or acquisition of land. If Congress funded impact aid at its full authorization level, school districts throughout the nation would be entitled to a total of $885 million. However, the Administration has requested $620.1 million, which is a $160.6 million reduction from last year's appropriation.
This year, the Administration proposed no funding for "b" students. In Colorado, this would translate into a loss of $2.8 million. The skepticism surrounding the funding of "category b" is based on the claim that only some of the revenue sources for public education are affected. However, the law recognizes the difference in impact between "a" and "b" students by granting "b" students an entitlement of .25 cents for every $1.00 received by "a" students. Thus, the differences in impact are contemplated by the law. In addition, (ven though all six revenue sources may .ot be disrupted by "b" students, the financial structure supporting schools is thrown off balance, which results in the reduction of educational services to all children.
Another section of the impact aid program that deserves special attention is Section 2. As you know, Mr. Chairman, school districts are most severely burdened by the removal of land from their tax roles. For this reason, P.L. 81-874 provides that Section 2 be funded at 100% entitlement before any funds are allocated for Section 3 payments. However, the mandate of the law has not been followed over the past few years. In fact, since 1988, Section 2 payments have been made at only approximately 60-70% of entitlement.
For example, Adams County School District 14 in Colorado received only 45% of their 1989 entitlement. At 100% entitlement, Adams county 14 would have received $1.85 million. Their actual receipt was $843,687. How can we expect Adams County to meet the educational needs of the community with a loss of over $1 million?
The impact aid program represents Congress' responsibility to ensure that localities with a significant federal presence are not unfairly burdened, and that federally-connected children receive the educational opportunities to which they are entitled. Congress must fulfill its obligation to uphold the spirit and letter of P.L. 81-874 by funding Sections 2 and 3 at their full authorization levels. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Price and Patient Benefit Restoration Act (MADPA); Medi
and, our suggestion that an HHS Practicing Pharmacists Advisory
Council be established.
The author of MADPA and so many other proconsumer,
pro-small business measures,
Senator David Pryor, is in my
thoughts this morning.
since his heart attack two days ago in
the early morning hours of April 16, our prayers have been for
him and his family.
MADPA was indeed, as the national media has
cast it a David vs.
David, of course, is our friend
David Pryor. As a consequence of his singlemindedness; skill as
a legislator; the high regard for him in this body; and,
support of the nation's consumers,
MADPA is law.
Denying the best price for drugs to the outpatient poverty
program for the past 25 years made a mockery of common sense. David Pryor has, with his bipartisan support, and in spite of
the vicious, often racist, campaign against him, corrected this
We commend him and the many members of the
subcommittee that have long supported equal access to fair
prices and economic justice for independent pharmacists and many
indigent persons in the Medicaid program.
As a long time member of the Board of the Small Business
Legislative Council (SBLC), I was especially pleased that David
Pryor received the 1990 SBLC Small Business Advocate Award.
On May 15, 1990, your colleague, Senator Tom Daschle,
brought this recognition of Senator Pryor to your attention
through the following statement
on the Senate floor:
Mr. President, I noted with interest in the May
small business on a variety of issues in Washington,
and I ask that the attached article from the NARD
Journal be printed in the Congressional Record.
The article follows:
Senator David Pryor, Small Business Advocate
Small Business Support
Pryor has undertaken numerous activities on behalf of small business. Pryor is the chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, which is currently holding hearings on multitier pricing practices in the pharmaceutical industry and serves on several other Senate committees, including Agriculture, Finance and Government Affairs. He is also a member of the Pepper