Page images
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

TESTIMONY OF MRS. PHILIP FRIEDER ON S. 1669, REVENUE SHARING
ACT OF 1971, BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION OF THE
COMMITTEE ON LABOR AND PUBLIC WELFARE, U. S. SENATE
November 3, 1971

I am Mrs. Philip Frieder of Denver, Colorado, National Board Member of the National Council of Jewish Women, and Chairman of its Education Task Force. Since 1959 I have also served as a member of the Colorado State Board of Education. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before this committee on behalf of the 100,000 members of the National Council of Jewish Women to express our concerns with S. 1669, "The Education Revenue Sharing Act of 1971".

The National Council of Jewish Women, founded in 1893, has Sections throughout the United States and in their local communities Councilwomen work with the public schools in a variety of ways. Sections sponsor tutoring programs, provide special assistance to handicapped children, finance and service special enrichment programs, and serve as volunteers in a variety of settings from the pre-school up to, and including, adult education. Our traditionally strong support for public education is rooted in our belief that, and here I quote from our Resolutions, "American Democracy depends on a strong system of public education to develop the highest potential of the individual". To that end our members have pledged themselves to promote expanded educational opportunities for all children and "to work for a

higher level of financial support for public education

[blocks in formation]

C.

by urging reappraisal of the basis of financing public education

d.

by protecting public funds from being diverted to private elementary and secondary education."

-2

We view S. 1669 as an attempt to deal with two basic problems:

1.

the desperate financial plight of public education and the needs for additional financial support

especially from the federal level, and

2. the proliferation of federal legislative titles, programs and grants dealing with education, the numbers of which are not only very confusing but also are sometimes self-defeating.

Both of these are laudable objectives. The National Council of Jewish Women certainly concurs with the need for more efficient, more responsible, and more responsive institutions and government, at every level; and we have a consistent record of working for the adoption of legislation designed to provide additional financial support for public education. However, as we have examined the proposed legislation, we fail to see a clear expression of intent to increase significantly the total amount of federal assistance to public education. What we do see is some consolidation of existing programs, the granting of additional flexibility to the states to allocate moneys presently appropriated, and, because additional discretionary powers will be given to the states without any additional funds, we see the very real possibility that certain beneficial education programs could be cut at the state level, and eventually even eliminated.

Members of our organization are fully in accord with the proposition that governmental programs should not be allowed to proliferate needlessly and endlessly, and that once a particular problem has been resolved or a need met, the relevant program ought not be continued. We do, however, feel strongly that there are certain areas of national concern which require the special focus and attention that only a categorical program can provide. We hope the Congress will weigh carefully the necessity for ensuring that the needs of children, as pinpointed by certain categorical programs, will continue to be met.

So although the purpose of the bill is "to strengthen education by providing

a share of the revenues of the United States to the States and to local educational

-3

a crisis

agencies for the purpose of assisting them in carrying out education programs reflecting areas of national concern" we feel that it falls short of its stated goal: (1) It fails to recognize the current financial crisis in public education which reflects the inadequacy and the inequity of the present method and level of support for public education. The importance of public education to the well-being of the nation cannot be over-emphasized. Public education is a national concern;

it should be a national priority, and as such, in our opinion, deserves a far greater degree of federal financial support. As we all know, most of the federal programs are not and have not been funded even in the less than adequate amounts authorized, so that schools now receive for each authorized program only a fraction of the amount specified in the original bill. In the legislation before us the schools will be asked, in effect, to divide up the presently grossly inadequate appropriation, and to spread it even thinner. We sincerely hope that the committee will consider this aspect of the bill, and move to authorize sufficient funds to meet the stated legislative objective of strengthening education.

(2) S. 1669 also proposes to consolidate some 33 legislative titles and grants into 5 broad areas of legislative support, but does so, in our estimation, without adequate safeguards to ensure that needed programs are not under-implemented or phased out. Accountability is a key word these days in the education community. Citizens, parents are demanding that schools and government must be accountable to the public. This is as it should be. Unfortunately, in this bill, standards of quality appear to have been considerably relaxed, and provisions for accountability in many of the programs are so vague as to be practically nonexistent, since only mandated "flow through" funds would be subject to federal review. Here again, we would urge that the committee carefully examine the proposal.

(3) But our primary objection to this bill is based on our strong commitment to protect the principle of separation of church and state, which is basic to our system of public education. It is our firm conviction that separation of church and state

-4

Accord

is essential to the continued political and social health of this country. ingly, we oppose all proposals which would allow public funds to be used for private schools. Last April, in his Message on Special Revenue for Education, President

Nixon stated:

"Non-public schools bear a significant share of the cost and effort of providing education for our children today. Federal aid to education should take this fully into account. This proposal would do that by considerably broadening the authority for extending aid to students in non-public schools. Non-public school students would be counted in the reckoning of population for purposes of allocation, and all forms of educational services would be available to them." It is apparent that S. 1669 could well provide substantial support to nonpublic schools a development which we deplore. Once the concept of federal revenue-sharing is extended to include church schools we will have made a major departure from our basic doctrine of separation of church and state, and we may then expect to see further weakening of the wall of separation. To us the constitutional and historical safeguards of separation of church and state represent, not sterile legal doctrine, but important public policy - a policy which must not be diluted or otherwise weakened.

with better

There is no doubt that public education needs strengthening planning, greater accountability, and greater financial support. This is true in every state and in every school district in the country. However, the bill before us falls far short of meeting those needs, and, in our opinion, it carries within it the potential for great harm both to education and to our society as a whole.

We hope the Committee will reject this proposal.

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you to voice our concerns.

Senator PELL. Our next and final witness is Mr. Edward D'Alessio of the U.S. Catholic Conference. Would you introduce your colleagues, please?

STATEMENT OF EDWARD R. D'ALESSIO, PH. D., DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, U.S. CATHOLIC CONFERENCE, ACCOMPANIED BY: REV. FRANK H. BREDEWEG, C.S.B., DIRECTOR OF SPECIAL PROJECTS, NATIONAL CATHOLIC EDUCATIONAL ASSOCIATION; AND FRANK J. MONAHAN, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF GOVERNMENTAL PROGRAMS, DIVISION OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY EDUCATION, U.S. CATHOLIC CONFERENCE

Mr. D'ALESSIO. Yes; on my right is Father Frank Bredeweg, director of special projects, National Catholic Educational Association and on my left is Frank Monahan, assistant director of governmental programs, Division of Elementary and Secondary Education, U.S. Catholic Conference.

Senator PELL. Have you a prepared statement?

Mr. D'ALESSIO. Yes; we do.

Senator PELL. If you would like to abbreviate it, the whole text will appear in the record or you may read the whole thing. (The prepared statement of Mr. D'Alessio follows:)

« PreviousContinue »