Page images
PDF
EPUB

may include health, recreational, and social services, and the establishment of model preschool programs.

III. HIGHER EDUCATION

A. Public Law 89-329, Higher Education Act of 1965 (H.R. 9567) The Higher Education Act of 1965, H.R. 3220, a bill to strengthen the educational resources of our colleges and universities and to provide financial assistance for students in postsecondary and higher education, was introduced by Chairman Adam C. Powell.

An identical bill, H.R. 3221 was introduced by Representative Edith Green, of Oregon. The bill, H.R. 3220, was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor on January 19, 1965. H.R. 9567, the Higher Education Act of 1965, was introduced by Representative Green on June 30, 1965. It was reported from the full committee on July 14, 1965 (Rept. No. 621).

During the early months of 1965, 15 days of hearings were held to identify and provide for filling some of the remaining needs and gaps in the field of higher education. The bill was later expanded to encompass the President's proposals for a National Teacher Corps and a program of fellowships for teachers. These teacher programs were aimed at providing able and spirited teaching help in the most depressed rural and urban slum schools, thereby improving the educational opportunities of economically handicapped children.

The bill passed the House on August 26, 1965. On September 2, 1965, the Senate passed the bill with amendments and asked for a conference. On September 15, 1965, the House agreed to the conference. The conference report was filed on October 19, 1965 (Rept. No. 1178). Both Houses agreed to the conference report on October 20, 1965.

The Higher Education Act of 1965 will provide more than $2.2 billion over 3 years for a wide range of programs-Federal scholarships of up to $1,000 a year for exceptionally needy college students, community services and continuing education, purchase of library materials, aid for developing colleges, expansion of college work study, expansion of grant authorization for undergraduate and graduate educational facilities, a National Teacher Corps, fellowships for teachers, guaranteed reduced-interest loans for undergraduate and graduate students, and grants to colleges to buy laboratory and other special equipment such as closed circuit television equipment. Titles I, III, and IV-A are breakthrough provisions.

Title I-Community service and continuing education programs: For the first time, under this provision, grants are authorized to aid colleges and universities in strengthening community service programs and in assisting the people of the United States in the solution. of community problems such as housing, poverty, government, recreation, employment, youth opportunities, transportation, health, and land use.

The program under title I will put the President's words into action by encouraging innovation and helping institutions of higher education to respond to the demands of the communities they serve. The committee placed special emphasis on the solution of community problems in urban and suburban areas. In drafting this significant legislation, the committee realized that technological developments

and radical change in population distribution in and around the urban centers of America has resulted in community problems so massive as to render ineffective purely local efforts at solving them. Now, however, local officials, private citizens, and organizations will have the tremendous resources of the Nation's institutions of higher education at their sides in their struggle with these problems.

Title III Strengthening, developing institutions: Title III represents an important step toward improving the academic quality of the smaller American colleges which are currently beset with grave problems, both financial and of other sorts. This title provides for a program of grants to institutions of higher education to support cooperative arrangements aimed at strengthening developing institutions. Title III also authorizes the establishment of a program of national teaching fellowships to be awarded to high qualified graduate students and junior faculty members of stronger institutions to encourage them to teach at developing institutions.

Title IV Student assistance: In framing this title, the committee agreed upon a diversified program of financial aid to assist academically qualified students. The package features reduced-interest loans, expanded work-study opportunities, an improved NDEA loan program, and, for the first time in the history of the Nation, a program of nationally financed scholarship educational opportunity grantsavailable to exceptionally needy high school graduates. In this legislation, the committee reemphasized the importance of making full educational opportunity a reality for all young Americans, regardless of economic status.

B. Public Law 89-36, National Technical Institute for the Deaf Act (H.R. 7031)

This act provides for the establishment and operation of a postsecondary residential facility at which technical training and education will be provided for deaf persons.

There are authorized to be appropriated for each fiscal year such sums as may be necessary for this purpose.

This bill is evidence of the committee's special concern for the higher education needs of the deaf. To bridge the widening gap in the technical training and educational opportunities for the deaf on the postsecondary level, H.R. 7031 was introduced on April 1, 1965, by Representative Hugh L. Carey, of New York. It was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor and was reported out on May 6, 1965 (Rept. No. 307). It passed the House under suspension of the rules on May 17, 1965, and the Senate on May 26. The bill was approved on June 8, 1965, and became Public Law 89-36.

The major purpose of the bill is to allow the deaf young adult to fulfill his intellectual potential by enabling him to obtain individualized training in an educational environment tailored to his needs. This objective will be met through an agreement between the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare and an institution of higher education in a large metropolitan industrial area to establish, construct, equip, and operate a National Technical Institute for the Deaf.

Tentatively, this training facility will be geared to accommodate at least 600 students. It should be equipped and staffed so as to be able to counsel, educate, train, and place in jobs at least 200 trainees a year. The Institute will provide a flexible curriculum to meet the

A special section of the Higher Education Act of 1965 prohibits & student from deriving loan benefits under both of these acts in any single year. An Advisory Council on Insured Loans to Vocational Students will oversee the policy issues involved in administering this act.

VI. INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES

The problems involved in providing full educational opportunity in urban public schools were investigated by two special subcommittees. The first, a special subcommittee to investigate de facto racial segregation in the public schools of Chicago, held hearings on July 27 and 28, 1965, in Washington. The hearings were conducted by Chairman Adam C. Powell and attended by nine other members of the full committee. The main witness was Benjamin C. Willis, the superintendent of the public schools of Chicago. Various other persons concerned with the crisis of a school system whose elementary students attend schools that are 82 percent segregated (from 90 to 100 percent of the student body belongs to one race) testified, including a representative of a parental organization opposed to integration as well as spokesmen for various local civil rights groups. The hearings highlighted the growing conflict in northern cities between educational systems based on neighborhood schools and integrated, quality education.

The second special subcommittee, the task force to investigate the District of Columbia poverty program and the school system, was chaired by Representative Roman C. Pucinski, of Illinois. It held hearings on October 7, 8, 12, 26, and 27, 1965. School Superintendent Carl Hansen, United Planning Organization Executive Director James Banks, and the District of Columbia Commissioners were among the 43 witnesses heard by the task force. The hearings focused on the relationship between the kind of education offered District citizens and the impoverished conditions of life suffered by one-third of them.

SPECIAL PROGRAM SUPPORT

An intensive effort was made by the committee to provide significant assistance to disabled persons, older Americans, and delinquents, and to establish a positive Federal program of support for cultural activities, the arts, and the humanities.

I. THE DISABLED

A. Public Law 89-333, the Vocational Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1965 (H.R. 8310). The passage of H.R. 8310 resulted from 4 years of vigorous committee study and work to develop and promote legislation which would help thousands of persons with problems of disability.

Introduced on May 20, 1965, by Representative Dominick V. Daniels, of New Jersey, H.R. 8310 was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor, and reported out on May 28, 1965 (H. Rept. No. 432). H.R. 8310 passed the House on July 29, 1965, and passed the Senate, amended, on October 1. The bill then was committed to conference, and a conference report was filed on October 21, 1965 (Rept. No. 1204). The Senate agreed to the conference report that

same day; the House agreed on October 22. The act was approved by the President on November 8, 1965, and became Public Law

89-333.

The Vocational Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1965 substantially improve the old act, as amended. The major change made in the existing methods of financing State rehabilitation services and facilities consists in the increased size of the Federal share for basic support and project grants.

The Federal share of the basic support grants under section 21 which assists the States in meeting the costs of their vocational rehabilitation services, is a flat rate of 75 percent beginning with fiscal year 1967. Specific ceilings of $300, $350, and $400 million were set on the authorizations for fiscal years 1966, 1967, and 1968, respectively.

The Federal share of grants to the States for improving their services through innovation projects was changed to 90 percent for the first 3 years of their duration and 75 percent for the last 2 years (fiscal year 1966, $5 million; fiscal year 1967, $7 million; and fiscal year 1968, $9 million).

New sections in the 1965 amendments were added to encourage the construction and improvement of workshops and similar rehabilitation facilities. Federal grants to the States following the HillBurton formula-encourage the construction and initial staffing of facilities, particularly of a vocational rather than purely medical nature. Grants for workshop improvement projects at the Federal share of 90 percent-allow longer periods of training in occupational skills. (The training services grants under this act are intended to be comparable to the Federal assistance given to the training of nondisabled persons under the Manpower Development and Training Act.)

In connection with workshops, other new features are provided by this legislation. Grant funds may be used not only for new construction and for initial staffing, but also for acquisition of existing buildings and land. An experimental provision permits the use of grant funds for construction of residential accommodations for the mentally retarded, as well as other disabled groups, as designated by the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare. Constant self-scrutiny is encouraged in the workshops as a result of standards set by a newly established National Policy and Performance Council.

Two features of the new legislation are aimed especially at this country's efforts to improve the national rehabilitation record. The old requirement to show economic need has now been deleted from the Federal law in order to encourage States to make people eligible for rehabilitation services on the basis of their handicap rather than of their poverty. And persons heretofore proclaimed unsuitable for rehabilitation will now be given a trial period of up to 6 months of services (or up to 18 months for mentally retarded persons) to determine their rehabilitation potential.

In general, the committee provided legislative authority for support through financing, rehabilitation facilities, and trained manpower on a far higher level than ever before. The number of disabled persons rehabilitated under the program in 1965 was almost 135,000. This, new legislation, hopefully, will make it possible to rehabilitate as many as 200,000 disabled persons in the next year, and four or five times this year's achievement in the next decade.

A special section of the Higher Education Act of 1965 prohibits a student from deriving loan benefits under both of these acts in any single year. An Advisory Council on Insured Loans to Vocational Students will oversee the policy issues involved in administering this

act.

VI. INVESTIGATIVE ACTIVITIES

The problems involved in providing full educational opportunity in urban public schools were investigated by two special subcommittees. The first, a special subcommittee to investigate de facto racial segregation in the public schools of Chicago, held hearings on July 27 and 28, 1965, in Washington. The hearings were conducted by Chairman Adam C. Powell and attended by nine other members of the full committee. The main witness was Benjamin C. Willis, the superintendent of the public schools of Chicago. Various other persons concerned with the crisis of a school system whose elementary students attend schools that are 82 percent segregated (from 90 to 100 percent of the student body belongs to one race) testified, including a representative of a parental organization opposed to integration as well as spokesmen for various local civil rights groups. The hearings highlighted the growing conflict in northern cities between educational systems based on neighborhood schools and integrated, quality education.

The second special subcommittee, the task force to investigate the District of Columbia poverty program and the school system, was chaired by Representative Roman C. Pucinski, of Illinois. It held hearings on October 7, 8, 12, 26, and 27, 1965. School Superintendent Carl Hansen, United Planning Organization Executive Director James Banks, and the District of Columbia Commissioners were among the 43 witnesses heard by the task force. The hearings focused on the relationship between the kind of education offered District citizens and the impoverished conditions of life suffered by one-third of them.

SPECIAL PROGRAM SUPPORT

An intensive effort was made by the committee to provide significant assistance to disabled persons, older Americans, and delinquents, and to establish a positive Federal program of support for cultural activities, the arts, and the humanities.

I. THE DISABLED

A. Public Law 89-333, the Vocational Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1965 (H.R. 8310). The passage of H.R. 8310 resulted from 4 years of vigorous committee study and work to develop and promote legislation which would help thousands of persons with problems of disability.

Introduced on May 20, 1965, by Representative Dominick V. Daniels, of New Jersey, H.R. 8310 was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor, and reported out on May 28, 1965 (H. Rept. No. 432). H.R. 8310 passed the House on July 29, 1965, and passed the Senate, amended, on October 1. The bill then was committed to conference, and a conference report was filed on October 21, 1965 (Rept. No. 1204). The Senate agreed to the conference report that

« PreviousContinue »