Date: 1998-09-17
Speaker: BOB SCHAFFER (republican)
Chamber: H
State: Colorado

A training levy. which would be 2 percent of the frontline employee salaries and wages within 2 years. is what they said. Now. here it says. "If they have not done so within that time. then he will expect." he being the President. "expect their support when he submits legislation requiring the training levy." So envision the conversation. The President sits down with a group of business executives. leading business executives and organization leaders. and says. "You know. fellas. I have had in the back of my mind the idea of imposing a 2 percent training levy on all employers across the country. But I will hold back on that if you will voluntarily increase your investment in frontline employee training. at a level that would approximate 2 percent of salaries and wages. and if you get to that point within 2 years." Now. this. in any other circle. is called blackmail. Or bribery. perhaps. It goes on here. It says. and I will pick up with a quote here. "If they have not done so within that time. then he will expect their support when he submits this legislation requiring the training levy." So he is going to get their support one way or another. according to the plan. "He could do the same thing with respect to slots for structured onthejob training." It goes on a little further and talks next about college loan and public service programs. Listen to this. This is an effort described here to try to get students across the country to become part of a federallymanaged credentialing program for general education. And those students who get credentialed under the general education credential. the Federal standard. this Federal credential. will be entitled to a free year of higher education. And that would be accomplished through a combination of Federal and State funds. and that will have a decided impact on the calculations of costs for college loan public service programs. So what we really have here is a blueprint for a German model of education that would be forced upon the people of America. and employers in this case. either through force. or the threat of force. and done so in a way to redistribute the public wealth. . the strength of the Federal budget. to those students who voluntarily submit themselves to the new Federal credentialing standard for K through 12 education. Now. again. I point this out. and I will submit it for the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. but the reason I used this example. and there are plenty more horrendous examples in the letter that I will spare the body for the moment. is that this really is a document that describes the mentality of the White House the day after the 1992 presidential election. And it shows how this country made a dramatic departure away from the tradition that the gentleman and I would like to get back to: That tradition that suggests local control. local authority. treating teachers like professionals and administrators at the local level like professional administrators. This blueprint departs from that model and. instead. moves the country toward a governmentmanaged. governmentowned centralized education system from kindergarten past college. actually. into the job training stage. And it really is the conflict in visions that defines the differences between Republicans and Democrats typically. This is an accurate description of precisely what is at stake and what was at stake not only in the 1992 election but in the 1996 election. and the election coming up within 7 weeks. the 1998 election. This huge difference of opinion about whether education authority ought to be consolidated. as the President would believe. in Washington. D.C.. or our vision. as a Republican majority. that says we should trust parents. we should trust teachers. we should trust local administrators. local school districts. local school boards and. above all. State legislators in all 50 States. That is the difference and that is the distinction. And I believe that our answer offers greater hope and greater promise for the children of the future. Greater hope and greater promise in allowing for a whole menu of education alternatives. education approaches. education philosophies throughout the country based on local values. based on local priorities. based on the local needs of children to match local job markets. whether it is agriculture. or maybe it is an urban setting in a large city over on the East Coast. But to take into account these different settings and objectives and values and priorities and local communities. that is the real answer. in my mind. to education success that will restore Americas greatness asthe preeminent country throughout the world for educating youngsters and turning them into future leaders. not only in the political realm but in the religious realm and also in the area of business and commerce.