OnTheIssuesLogo

Jackie Speier on Education

Democrat

 


Stop punishing schools that are struggling

No Child Left Behind must be reformed. It is a program that has been detrimental to our education system over the past seven years. The reliance on standardized testing has resulted in too many teachers simply teaching to the test. I’ve witnessed the effects this policy has had on our children. We need to stop punishing schools that are struggling and start helping them by supporting educators in implementing programs that improve student learning and reward success.
Source: 2008 House campaign website, jackieforcongress.com, “Issues” , Apr 8, 2008

Voted NO on reauthorizing the DC opportunity scholarship program.

Congressional Summary:The SOAR Act award five-year grants on a competitive basis to nonprofit organizations to carry out an expanded school choice opportunities to students who are District of Columbia residents and who come from households:
  1. receiving assistance under the supplemental nutrition assistance program; or
  2. with incomes not exceeding 185% of the poverty line.
Provides funds to the Mayor of DC, if the Mayor agrees to specified requirements, for:
  1. the DC public schools to improve public education, and
  2. the DC public charter schools to improve and expand quality public charter schools.

Proponent's Argument for voting Yes:
[Rep. Bishop, R-UT]: In 1996, Congress insisted upon a charter school program in DC. You will hear from both sides of the aisle recognition of the great value that that program has, and justifiably so. There is a waiting list in DC for those charter schools. This bill increases the percentage of funding going to charter schools in the District. In 2003, an Opportunity Scholarship was instituted, at the insistence of Congress. Again, there was a waiting list of people wanting the opportunity; disadvantaged kids who wanted the opportunity that this scholarship afforded them. There were 216 kids at the time scheduled to enter the program who were not allowed; the bill remedies that.

Opponent's Argument for voting No:
[Rep. Hastings, D-FL]: In the last 41 years voters have rejected private school vouchers every time they have been proposed. In 1981, 89% of the people in a referendum in DC voted against vouchers. So how dare we come here to tell these people that we are going to thrust upon them something they don't want without a single public official in this community being consulted. Congress' oversight of the District is not an excuse for political pandering to the Republicans' special interest of the day du jour.

Reference: Scholarships for Opportunity and Results Act (SOAR); Bill HRes186 ; vote number 11-HV200 on Mar 30, 2011

Voted YES on $40B for green public schools.

Congressional Summary:Make grants to states for the modernization, renovation, or repair of public schools, including early learning facilities and charter schools, to make them safe, healthy, high-performing, and technologically up-to-date.

Proponent's argument to vote Yes: Rep. BETSY MARKEY (D, CO-4): This legislation will improve the learning environment for our children, reduce energy costs and create new jobs across the country. Green schools not only save school districts money but also teach the importance of sustainable living to children at a young age.

Opponent's argument to vote No: Rep. GLENN THOMPSON (R, PA-5): We all know our Nation is drowning in a sea of red ink. The bill we're debating today would add an estimated $40 billion in new spending. And despite the majority's hollow promises of fiscal responsibility, there's nothing in the legislation to offset this hefty price tag with spending reductions elsewhere. This is just more of the same borrow and spend, spend and borrow policy that we've seen under this majority and this administration.

Reference: 21st Century Green Schools Act; Bill H.R.2187 ; vote number 2009-H259 on May 14, 2009

Comprehensive sex ed for sexually-active adolescents.

Speier co-sponsored Real Education for Healthy Youth Act

Award competitive grants to provide adolescents with comprehensive sex education to:

  1. replicate evidence-based sex education programs,
  2. substantially incorporate elements of evidence-based sex education programs, or
  3. create a demonstration project based on generally accepted characteristics of effective sex education programs.
Prohibits federal funds provided under this Act from being used for health education programs that:
  1. deliberately withhold life-saving information about HIV;
  2. are medically inaccurate or have been scientifically shown to be ineffective;
  3. promote gender stereotypes;
  4. are insensitive and unresponsive to the needs of sexually active youth or lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender youth; or
  5. are inconsistent with the ethical imperatives of medicine and public health.

Opponent's argument against bill: (Nick Wing on Huffington Post) An abstinence-only effort, introduced the same day, the Abstinence Education Reallocation Act, stands as an effective counter to the Democratic-backed Real Education for Healthy Youth Act.

According to the text of the abstinence-only bill, sex education programs would need to be "medically accurate" and teach the "skills and benefits of sexual abstinence as the optimal sexual health behavior for youth" in order to qualify for grant money. The bill also calls for applicable programs to focus on the "holistic health, economic, and societal benefits that can be gained by refraining from non-marital sexual activity," as well as to provide an "understanding of how drugs, alcohol, and the irresponsible use of social media can influence sexual decision-making and can contribute to risky and often aggressive sexual behavior."

Source: H.R.725 / S.372 13-H0725 on Feb 14, 2013

Sponsored supporting the contributions of Catholic schools.

Speier co-sponsored House Resolution on parochial schools

    Now, therefore, be it RESOLVED, That the Ho
    Source: H.RES.46 13-HRes46 on Jan 23, 2013

    No-strings-attached block grant will kill transparency.

    Speier voted NAY A-PLUS Amendment To Student Success Act

    Heritage Action Summary: An amendment offered by Rep. Mark Walker (R-NC) and Rep. Ron DeSantis (R-FL) to the Student Success Act (H.R. 5). The amendment, known as A-PLUS (Academic Partnerships Lead Us to Success), would give the states the ability to consolidate their federal education funds and use them for any lawful education purpose they deem beneficial.

    Heritage Foundation recommendation to vote YES: (7/8/2015): A-PLUS lets states escape No Child Left Behind's prescriptive programmatic requirements. At its core, A-PLUS delivers on the promise of "restoring state and local control over the 10% of education funding financed by the federal government," moving dollars out of the hands of federal bureaucrats and political appointees and into the hands of those closer to the students. Now is the time for Congress to restore federalism in education, empower parents and students instead of bureaucrats and unions, and remove archaic obstacles that have prevented true opportunity for all.

    US News and World Report recommendation to vote NO: (4/7/2015): A-PLUS [is intended as] a no-strings-attached block grant. There isn't all that much the federal government can do well in education, but it's because of federally-required transparency that charter schools and voucher schools can demonstrate that they work. For example, New York City's Success Academy scores in the top 1% of all the state's public schools in math and in the top 3% in English. When Success Academy came under fire from teachers' union-backed Mayor Bill de Blasio, it was able to fight back with numbers to prove it. If a strong-union state were to receive a no-strings-attached block grant, transparency would be the first thing to go. A no-strings-attached block grant is an overreaction to federal overreach.

    Legislative outcome: Failed House 195 to 235 (no Senate vote)

    Source: Supreme Court case 15-H0005 argued on Jul 8, 2015

    Oppose private and religious school voucher programs.

    Speier voted NAY SOAR Act

    Heritage Action Summary: The House will vote to reauthorize the Scholarships for Opportunity and Results (SOAR) Act (H.R. 10). The bill would continue funding through Fiscal Year 2021 and allow eligible students in Washington, D.C. to enroll in a participating private school.Analysis by Heritage Action:

    ACLU recommendation to vote NO: (Letter to U.S.House, 3/29/2011): The ACLU urges Congress to oppose the SOAR Act, legislation to restart and expand Washington DC's failed private and religious school voucher pilot program. Originally started as a five-year pilot program in 2004, the DC voucher program is the nation's first and only federally-funded private and religious school voucher program. Under the federal voucher pilot program, funds were provided to schools even though they infuse their curricular materials with specific religious content and even though they are not covered by many of the nation's civil rights statutes that would otherwise protect students against discrimination. Additionally, each of the congressionally-mandated studies to explore the pilot program concluded that the voucher program had no significant effect on the academic achievement.

    Cato Institute recommendation to vote YES: (4/28/2016): The Obama administration has repeatedly worked to undermine or eliminate the DC school choice program, even though it has the support of local Democratic politicians such as the DC Mayor and a majority of the DC City Council. Low-income students shouldn't be condemned to low-quality schools just because their parents cannot afford a home in a wealthy neighborhood. The DC program was an important step toward breaking the link between home prices and school quality.

    Legislative outcome: Passed by the House 240-191-3; never came to a vote in the Senate.

    Source: Supreme Court case 15-H0010 argued on Oct 21, 2015

    Make two years of community college free.

    Speier signed making two years of community college free

    Excerpts from press release from Tammy Baldwin, Senate sponsor: The America's College Promise Act makes two years of community college free by:

    Community, technical, and tribal colleges enroll 40% of all college students today. Community colleges are uniquely positioned to partner with employers to create tailored training programs to meet economic needs within their communities such as nursing and advanced manufacturing.

    Opposing argument: (Cato Institute, "College Courtesy of the Taxpayer? No Thanks," Jan. 9, 2015): One look at either community college outcomes or labor market outlooks reveals free college to be educational folly. Community college completion rates are atrocious: a mere 19.5% of community college students complete their programs. Meanwhile, the for-profit sector has an almost 63% completion rate. And [about 70%] of the new job categories in coming years will require a high school diploma or less.

    Opposing argument: (Heritage Foundation, "Free Community College Is a Bad Deal", July 15, 2016): Free college proposals would subject community colleges to the same types of subsidies-induced inflation endemic at four-year institutions. And low-income students already have access to federal Pell Grants, which can cover the bulk of community college tuition. By contrast, a more open market of alternative schooling models, such as online or vocational education programs, could better tailor degrees at a lower cost.

    Source: S.1716 & H.R.2962 15-H2962 on Jul 8, 2015

    2017-18 Governor, House and Senate candidates on Education: Jackie Speier on other issues:
    CA Gubernatorial:
    Antonio Villaraigosa
    Carly Fiorina
    David Hadley
    Delaine Eastin
    Doug Ose
    Eric Garcetti
    Eric Swalwell
    Gavin Newsom
    Hilda Solis
    Jerry Brown
    Jerry Sanders
    John Chiang
    John Cox
    Kamala Harris
    Neel Kashkari
    Travis Allen
    CA Senatorial:
    Dianne Feinstein
    Duf Sundheim
    Greg Brannon
    Kamala Harris
    Kevin de Leon
    Loretta Sanchez
    Michael Eisen
    Rocky Chavez
    Tom Del Beccaro

    Freshman class of 2019:
    "Freshman class" means "not in Congress in January 2017", with exceptions:
    * Special election, so sworn in other than Jan. 2019
    ** Served in Congress in a previous term
    *** Lost recount or general election
    Freshman class of January 2019 (Republicans):
    AZ-8*:Lesko
    CA-39***:Kim
    FL-6:Waltz ; FL-15:Spano ; FL-17:Steube
    GA-7:Woodall
    ID-1**:Fulcher
    IN-4:Baird
    IN-6:Pence
    KS-2:Watkins
    MN-1:Hagedorn ; MN-8:Stauber
    MS-3:Guest
    MT-0*:Gianforte
    NC-9***:Harris
    ND-a:Armstrong
    NM-2***:Herrell
    OH-12*:Balderson ; OH-16:Gonzalez
    OK-1:Hern
    PA-9:Meuser ; PA-11**:Smucker ; PA-12*:Keller ; PA-13:Joyce ; PA-14:Reschenthaler
    SC-4:Timmons
    SD-0:Johnson
    TN-2:Burchett ; TN-6:Rose ; TN-7:Green
    TX-2:Crenshaw ; TX-3:Taylor ; TX-5:Gooden ; TX-6:Wright ; TX-21:Roy ; TX-27*:Cloud
    VA-5:Riggleman ; VA-6:Cline
    WI-1:Steil
    WV-3:Miller
    Freshman class of January 2019 (Democrats):
    AZ-2**:Kirkpatrick ; AZ-9:Stanton
    CA-49:Levin ; CA-10:Harder ; CA-21:Cox ; CA-25:Hill ; CA-39:Cisneros ; CA-45:Porter ; CA-48:Rouda
    CO-2:Neguse ; CO-6:Crow
    CT-5:Hayes
    FL-26:Mucarsel-Powell ; FL-27:Shalala
    GA-6:McBath
    HI-1**:Case
    IA-1:Finkenauer ; IA-3:Axne
    IL-4:Garcia ; IL-6:Casten ; IL-14:Underwood
    KS-3:Davids
    KY-6***:McGrath
    MA-3:Trahan ; MA-7:Pressley
    MD-6:Trone
    ME-2:Golden
    MI-8:Slotkin ; MI-9:Levin ; MI-13:Tlaib ; MI-13*:Jones ; MI-11:Stevens
    MN-2:Craig ; MN-3:Phillips ; MN-5:Omar
    NC-9***:McCready
    NH-1:Pappas
    NJ-2:Van Drew ; NJ-3:Kim ; NJ-7:Malinowski ; NJ-11:Sherrill
    NM-1:Haaland ; NM-2:Torres Small
    NV-3:Lee ; NV-4**:Horsford
    NY-14:Ocasio-Cortez ; NY-11:Rose ; NY-19:Delgado ; NY-22:Brindisi ; NY-25:Morelle
    OK-5:Horn
    PA-4:Dean ; PA-5:Scanlon ; PA-6:Houlahan ; PA-7:Wild ; PA-17*:Lamb
    SC-1:Cunningham
    TX-7:Fletcher ; TX-16:Escobar ; TX-29:Garcia ; TX-32:Allred
    UT-4:McAdams
    VA-2:Luria ; VA-7:Spanberger ; VA-10:Wexton
    WA-8:Schrier
    Abortion
    Budget/Economy
    Civil Rights
    Corporations
    Crime
    Drugs
    Education
    Energy/Oil
    Environment
    Families
    Foreign Policy
    Free Trade
    Govt. Reform
    Gun Control
    Health Care
    Homeland Security
    Immigration
    Jobs
    Principles
    Social Security
    Tax Reform
    Technology
    War/Peace
    Welfare/Poverty



    Candidate Information:
    Main Page
    Profile
    CA politicians

    Contact info:
    Email Contact Form
    Fax Number:
    202-226-4183
    Mailing Address:
    Cannon HOB 211, Washington, DC 20515
    Phone number:
    (202) 225-3531
    Search for...





    Page last updated: May 27, 2020