1998 Ron Paul 101:1
Mr. PAUL.
Madam Chairman, I appreciate
the opportunity to express my reservations
about H.R. 3248, the Dollars to the Classroom
Act. I take a back seat to no one in my opposition
to Federal control of education. Unlike
some of this bills most vocal supporters, I
have consistently voted against all appropriations
for the Department of Education. In fact,
when I was serving in the House in 1979, I
opposed the creation of the Education Department. I applaud the work Mr. Pitts and others
have done to force Congress to debate the
best means of returning power over education
to the states, local communities and primarily
parents. However, although H.R. 3248 takes a
step toward shrinking the Federal bureaucracy
by repealing several education programs, its
long-term effect will likely be to strengthen the
Federal Government’s control over education
by increasing Federal spending. Therefore,
Congress should reject this bill.
1998 Ron Paul 101:2
If H.R. 3248 did not increase Federal expenditures,
my support would be
unenthusiastic at best as the system of block
grants established by this bill continue the unconstitutional
practice of taking money from
taxpayers and redistributing it to other states. The Federal Government lacks constitutional
authority to carry out this type of redistribution
between states and taxpayers, regardless of
whether the monies are redistributed through
Federal programs or through grants. There is
no “block grant exception” to the principles of
federalism embodied in the United States
Constitution.
1998 Ron Paul 101:3
The requirement that the states certify that
95% of Federal monies are spent “in the
classroom,” (a term not defined in the act) and
report to the Congress how they are using
those monies to improve student performance
imposes an unacceptable level of Federal
management on the states. States are sovereign
entities, not administrative units of the
Federal Government, and should not have to
account to the Federal Government for their
management of educational programs.
1998 Ron Paul 101:4
For all its flaws, the original version of
H.R. 3248 at least restored some measure of
state control of education because it placed no
restrictions on a state’s use of funds. It was,
thus, a pure block grant. However, this bill
does not even give states that level of discretion
as H.R. 3248 has been amended to restrict
the uses to which a state can apply its
block grants.
1998 Ron Paul 101:5
Under the revised version of H.R. 3248,
states can only spend their block grant money
on one or more of the programs supposedly
repealed by the Federal Government! In fact,
this bill is merely one more example of “mandate
federalism” where states are given flexibility
to determine how best to fulfill goals set
by Congress. Granting states the authority to
select a particular form of federal management
of education may be an improvement over the
current system, but it is hardly a restoration of
state and local control over education!
1998 Ron Paul 101:6
The federal government’s power to treat
state governments as their administrative subordinates
stems from an abuse of Congress’
taxing-and-spending power. Submitting to federal
control is the only way state and local officials
can recapture any part of the monies the
federal government has illegitimately taken
from a state’s citizens. Of course, this is also
the only way state officials can tax citizens of
other states to support their education programs. It is the rare official who can afford not
to bow to federal dictates in exchange for federal
funding!
1998 Ron Paul 101:7
As long as the federal government controls
education dollars, states and local schools will
obey federal mandates; the core problem is
not that federal monies are given with the inevitable
strings attached, the real problem is
the existence of federal taxation and funding.
1998 Ron Paul 101:8
Since federal spending is the root of federal
control, by increasing federal spending this bill
lays the groundwork for future Congresses to
fasten more and more mandates on the
states. Because state and even local officials,
not federal bureaucrats, will be carrying out
these mandates, this system could complete
the transformation of the state governments
into mere agents of the federal government.
1998 Ron Paul 101:9
Madam Chairman, those who doubt the likelihood
of the above scenario should remember
that the Education Committee could not even
pass the initial block grant without “giving in”
to the temptation to limit state autonomy in the
use of education funds because
“Congress
cannot trust the states to do the right thing!”
Given that this Congress cannot pass a clean
block grant, who can doubt that some future
Congress will decide that the States need federal
“leadership” to ensure they use their
block grants in the correct manner, or that
states should be forced to use at least a certain
percentage of their block grant funds on
a few “vital” programs.
1998 Ron Paul 101:10
I would also ask those of my colleagues
who claim that block grant will lead to future
reductions in expenditures how likely is this
will occur when Congress had to increase expenditures
in order to originally implement the
block grant programs?
1998 Ron Paul 101:11
Furthermore, by increasing the flow of federal
money to state and local educrats, rather
than directly increasing parental control over
education through education tax credits and
tax cuts, the effect will be to make state and
local officials even less responsive to parents. I wish to remind my colleagues that many
state and local education officials support the
same programs as the federal educrats. The
officials responsible for the genital exams of
junior high school girls in Pennsylvania should
not be rewarded with more federal taxpayers’
dollars to spend as they wish.
1998 Ron Paul 101:12
It will be claimed that this bill does not increase
spending, it merely funds education
spending at the current level by adding an adjustment
to inflation to the monies appropriated
for education programs in Fiscal Year
1999. However, predicting the rate of inflation
is a tricky business. If, as is very likely, inflation
is less than the amount dictated by this
bill, the result will be an increase in education
spending in real dollar terms. Still, that is beside
the point, any spending increase, whether
real or nominal, ought to be opposed. CBO reports
that H.R. 3248 provides “additional authorization
of “9.5B.”
Madam Chairman, while I applaud the attempt
by the drafters of this bill to attempt to
reduce the federal education bureaucracy, the
fact is the Dollars to the Classroom Act represents
the latest attempt of this Congress to
avoid addressing philosophical and constitutional
questions of the role of the Federal and
State Governments by means of adjustments
in management in the name of devolution. Devolution is said to be a return to state’s
rights since it decentralized the management
of federal program; this is a new 1990’s definition
of the original concept of federalism and
is a poor substitute for the original, constitutional
definition of federalism.
1998 Ron Paul 101:13
Rather than shifting responsibility for the
management of federal funds, Congress
should defund all unconstitutional programs
and dramatically cut taxes imposed upon the
American people, thus enabling American
families to devote more of their resources to
education. I have introduced a bill, the Family
Education Freedom Act (H.R. 1816) to provide
parents with a $3,000 per child tax credit for
education expenses. This bill directly empowers
parents, not bureaucrats or state officials,
to control education and is the most important
education reform idea introduced in this Congress.
1998 Ron Paul 101:14
In conclusion, the Dollars to the Classroom
Act may repeal some unconstitutional education
programs but it continues the federal
government’s equally unconstitutional taking of
funds from the America people for the purpose
of returning them in the form of monies for
education only if a state obeys federal mandates. While this may be closer to the constitutional
systems, it also lays the groundwork
for future federal power grabs by increasing
federal spending. Rather than continue to increase
spending while pretending to restore
federalism, Congress should take action to restore
parents to the rightful place as the
“bosses” of America’s education system.
1998 Ron Paul Chapter 101
The text of this chapter was inserted in CongressionalRecord as an extension of remarks, and was not spoken on the House floor.
1998 Ron Paul 101:1 Unlike some of this bills most vocal supporters probably should be possessive:
Unlike some of this bill’s most vocal supporters.
1998 Ron Paul 101:10 I would also ask those of my colleagues who claim that block grant will lead to future reductions in expenditures how likely is this will occur when Congress had to increase expenditures in order to originally implement the block grant programs?
is ungrammatical and perhaps should read, I would also ask those of my colleagues who claim that block grants will lead to future reductions in expenditures how likely is itthat this will occur when Congress had to increase expenditures in order to originally implement the block grant programs?
1998 Ron Paul 101:13 Devolution is said to be a return to state’s rights since it decentralized the management of federal program
probably should read: Devolution is said to be a return to state’s rights since it decentralizes the management of federal programs.
1998 Ron Paul 101:15 the America people probably should be the American people. Ron Paul often uses the words
America and American in reference to the United States of America and not to all of the Americas.
