OnTheIssuesLogo

Steve Lynch on Education

Democratic Representative (MA-9)

 


For STEM training across all educational levels

In support of the continued development of our STEM workforce and in order to ensure that we are able to fill critical skills gaps, we must employ data-driven policy approaches and bolster academic and career development in all STEM areas. I will advocate for STEM training and career development across all educational levels to ensure that regardless of their educational background, our young people have a pathway to a successful STEM career.
Source: ScienceDebate.org on 2020 MA-8 House race , Oct 9, 2020

Improve education through increased funding

On Beacon Hill

He fought for funding for early literacy programs, and for expanding full-day kindergarten. He voted to fund recruiting the best teachers and to reduce class size.

On Capitol Hill

He will mandate background checks for bus drivers, after-school workers, and day care staff. He will continue to provide parents with alternatives in their children’s education. He will seek to expand college scholarship programs.
Source: Candidate Website , Sep 8, 2001

Supports small classes, charter schools, better facilities

Lynch has won funding for early literacy programs, voted to lower class sizes, and founded a public charter school in a low performing public school district.

Lynch has made a pledge to work on expanding federal grants for building schools and replacing older school buildings. Another major priority is investment in technology advancements. He will work to expand federal grants and push for mandatory background checks on bus drivers, after-school workers, and daycare staff.

Source: Walpole Times, Walpole MA , Aug 2, 2001

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

Voted YES on allowing Courts to decide on "God" in Pledge of Allegiance.

Amendment to preserve the authority of the US Supreme Court to decide any question pertaining to the Pledge of Allegiance. The bill underlying this amendment would disallow any federal courts from hearing cases concerning the Pledge of Allegiance. This amendment would make an exception for the Supreme Court.

Proponents support voting YES because:

I believe that our Pledge of Allegiance with its use of the phrase "under God" is entirely consistent with our Nation's cultural and historic traditions. I also believe that the Court holding that use of this phrase is unconstitutional is wrong. But this court-stripping bill is not necessary. This legislation would bar a Federal court, including the Supreme Court, from reviewing any claim that challenges the recitation of the Pledge on first amendment grounds.

If we are a Nation of laws, we must be committed to allowing courts to decide what the law is. This bill is unnecessary and probably unconstitutional. It would contradict the principle of Marbury v. Madison, intrude on the principles of separation of powers, and degrade our independent Federal judiciary.

Opponents support voting NO because:

I was disappointed 4 years ago when two judges of the Ninth US Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that our Pledge, our statement of shared national values, was somehow unconstitutional. I do not take legislation that removes an issue from the jurisdiction of this court system lightly. This legislation is appropriate, however, because of the egregious conduct of the courts in dealing with the Pledge of Allegiance.

By striking "under God" from the Pledge, the Court has shown contempt for the Congress which approved the language, and, more importantly, shows a complete disregard for the millions of Americans who proudly recite the Pledge as a statement of our shared national values and aspirations. No one is required to recite the Pledge if they disagree with its message.

Reference: Watt amendment to Pledge Protection Act; Bill H R 2389 ; vote number 2006-384 on Jul 19, 2006

Voted YES on $84 million in grants for Black and Hispanic colleges.

This vote is on a substitute bill (which means an amendment which replaces the entire text of the original bill). Voting YES means support for the key differences from the original bill: lowering student loan interest rates; $59 million for a new Predominantly Black Serving Institution program; $25 million for a new graduate Hispanic Serving Institution program; provide for year- round Pell grants; and repeal the Single Lender rule. The substitute's proponents say:
  • The original bill has some critical shortcomings. First and foremost, this substitute will cut the new Pell Grant fixed interest rate in half from 6.8% to 3.4%, to reduce college costs to those students most in need.
  • It would also establish a new predominantly black-serving institutions programs to boost college participation rates for low-income black students, and a new graduate Hispanic-serving institution program.
  • As we saw from 1995 to 2000, the questions employers were asking was not your race, not your ethnicity, not your religion, they wanted to know if you had the skills and talents to do the job. Most often today, those skills and that talent requires a higher education. A college education is going to have to become as common as a high school education.
    Reference: Reverse the Raid on Student Aid Act; Bill HR 609 Amendment 772 ; vote number 2006-080 on Mar 30, 2006

    Voted YES on allowing school prayer during the War on Terror.

    Children's Prayers Resolution: Expressing the sense of Congress that schools should allow children time to pray for, or silently reflect upon, the country during the war against terrorism.
    Reference: Bill sponsored by Isakson, R-GA; Bill H.Con.Res.239 ; vote number 2001-445 on Nov 15, 2001

    Rated 100% by the NEA, indicating pro-public education votes.

    Lynch scores 100% by the NEA on public education issues

    The National Education Association has a long, proud history as the nation's leading organization committed to advancing the cause of public education. Founded in 1857 "to elevate the character and advance the interests of the profession of teaching and to promote the cause of popular education in the United States," the NEA has remained constant in its commitment to its original mission as evidenced by the current mission statement:

    To fulfill the promise of a democratic society, the National Education Association shall promote the cause of quality public education and advance the profession of education; expand the rights and further the interest of educational employees; and advocate human, civil, and economic rights for all.
    In pursuing its mission, the NEA has determined that it will focus the energy and resources of its 2.7 million members toward the "promotion of public confidence in public education." The ratings are based on the votes the organization considered most important; the numbers reflect the percentage of time the representative voted the organization's preferred position.
    Source: NEA website 03n-NEA on Dec 31, 2003

    Sponsored 10/10 Loan Forgiveness: cancel college loans after 10 years.

    Lynch co-sponsored Student Loan Fairness Act

    Congressional Summary:Student Loan Fairness Act:

    Opponent's argument against bill: (Blog post on voices.yahoo.com, "Why I'm Against the Student Loan Fairness Act"): The two key points to this bill are:

    1. The 10-10 plan: Where an individual would be required to make ten years of payments at 10% of their discretionary income, after which their remaining federal student loan debt would be forgiven.
    2. Cap federal interest rates at 3.4% and allowing existing borrowers whose educational loan debt exceeds their income to convert their private loan debt into federal Direct Loans.
        Sounds enticing enough. They make a convincing argument that convinced over 200,000 people to sign their petition, many of whom shared their personal stories of student debt and how this act would change their lives. I disagree with all of them.
      • First, there is already student loan forgiveness act that erases your loans after 20 years. It is called Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act.
      • Many people who signed the petition argued that the government bailed out the banks, so why not us? The main difference [with TARP is that] most banks paid back the loans from TARP [while student loan forgiveness will make] $1 trillion magically disappear.
      • If the average college graduate is 22 years old, then we are talking about being debt free by 32. That is a risk I see many young college students willing to take.
      Source: H.R.1330 13-H1330 on Mar 21, 2013

      Sponsored extending subsidized federal student loan rates until 2015.

      Lynch co-sponsored Student Loan Affordability Act

      Congressional Summary:Amends title IV (Student Assistance) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 to extend the 3.4% interest rate on Federal Direct Stafford loans to loans first disbursed to undergraduate students between July 1, 2011, and July 1, 2015. Replaces the [termination date of] 2013 with 2015.

      Proponent's argument for bill:(US PIRG press release): The Student Loan Affordability Act keeps interest rates affordable for students over the next two years. If Congress fails to act by July 1, interest rates on federal Subsidized Stafford Loans will double from 3.4% to 6.8%. That would hike the cost of college by $1,000 per student, per loan, for over 7 million students across the country. The bill pays for extending the current interest rates through 2015 by closing three non-education tax loopholes.

      Opponent's argument against bill:(Rep. Tom Cotton, R-AR): Unfortunately, too many students today struggle for years to repay their loans because Washington politicians dictate student-loan rates and end up hurting students and taxpayers alike. It's causing tuition costs to skyrocket, leaving students buried in debt, often without jobs, and forced to delay buying a home and starting a family. As students struggle to repay their loans--regardless of the interest rate--taxpayers are on the hook for a $100 billion bailout--a burden hard-working Arkansans shouldn't have to bear. A better path is to let Arkansas's hometown banks work with students and families to finance higher education, just as they do with homes, farms, businesses, and other loans. I'm committed to bringing affordable higher education to every Arkansan and ending the federal-government monopoly on the student-lending business.

      Source: S.707 / H.R.1433 13-H1433 on Apr 11, 2013

      No-strings-attached block grant will kill transparency.

      Lynch 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: Congressional vote 15-H0005 on Jul 8, 2015

      Oppose private and religious school voucher programs.

      Lynch 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: Congressional vote 15-H0010 on Oct 21, 2015

      2021-22 Governor, House and Senate candidates on Education: Steve Lynch on other issues:
      MA Gubernatorial:
      Ben Downing
      Bill Weld
      Bob Massie
      Charlie Baker
      Dan Wolf
      Danielle Allen
      Deval Patrick
      Don Berwick
      Geoff Diehl
      Jay Gonzalez
      Jesse Gordon
      Karyn Polito
      Lawrence Lessig
      Martha Coakley
      Marty Walsh
      Richard Tisei
      Seth Moulton
      Setti Warren
      Shiva Ayyadurai
      Sonia Chang-Diaz
      Steve Grossman
      Tom Menino
      Warren Tolman
      MA Senatorial:
      Beth Lindstrom
      Ed Markey
      Elizabeth Warren
      Geoff Diehl
      Heidi Wellman
      Joe Kennedy III
      John Kingston
      Kevin O`Connor
      Shannon Liss-Riordan
      Shiva Ayyadurai
      Republican Freshman class of 2021:
      AL-1: Jerry Carl(R)
      AL-2: Barry Moore(R)
      CA-8: Jay Obernolte(R)
      CA-50: Darrell Issa(R)
      CO-3: Lauren Boebert(R)
      FL-3: Kat Cammack(R)
      FL-15: Scott Franklin(R)
      FL-19: Byron Donalds(R)
      GA-9: Andrew Clyde(R)
      GA-14: Marjorie Taylor Greene(R)
      IA-2: Mariannette Miller-Meeks(R)
      IA-4: Randy Feenstra(R)
      IL-15: Mary Miller(R)
      IN-5: Victoria Spartz(R)
      KS-1: Tracey Mann(R)
      KS-2: Jake LaTurner(R)
      LA-5: Luke Letlow(R)
      MI-3: Peter Meijer(R)
      MI-10: Lisa McClain(R)
      MT-0: Matt Rosendale(R)
      NC-11: Madison Cawthorn(R)
      NM-3: Teresa Leger Fernandez(D)
      NY-2: Andrew Garbarino(R)
      NY-22: Claudia Tenney(R)
      OR-2: Cliff Bentz(R)
      PR-0: Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon(R)
      TN-1: Diana Harshbarger(R)
      TX-4: Pat Fallon(R)
      TX-11: August Pfluger(R)
      TX-13: Ronny Jackson(R)
      TX-17: Pete Sessions(R)
      TX-22: Troy Nehls(R)
      TX-23: Tony Gonzales(R)
      TX-24: Beth Van Duyne(R)
      UT-1: Blake Moore(R)
      VA-5: Bob Good(R)
      WI-5: Scott Fitzgerald(R)
      Incoming Democratic Freshman class of 2021:
      CA-53: Sara Jacobs(D)
      GA-5: Nikema Williams(D)
      GA-7: Carolyn Bourdeaux(D)
      HI-2: Kai Kahele(D)
      IL-3: Marie Newman(D)
      IN-1: Frank Mrvan(D)
      MA-4: Jake Auchincloss(D)
      MO-1: Cori Bush(D)
      NC-2: Deborah Ross(D)
      NC-6: Kathy Manning(D)
      NY-15: Ritchie Torres(D)
      NY-16: Jamaal Bowman(D)
      NY-17: Mondaire Jones(D)
      WA-10: Marilyn Strickland(D)

      Republican takeovers as of 2021:
      CA-21: David Valadao(R) defeated T.J. Cox(D)
      CA-39: Young Kim(R) defeated Gil Cisneros(D)
      CA-48: Michelle Steel(R) defeated Harley Rouda(D)
      FL-26: Carlos Gimenez(R) defeated Debbie Mucarsel-Powell(D)
      FL-27: Maria Elvira Salazar(R) defeated Donna Shalala(D)
      IA-1: Ashley Hinson(R) defeated Abby Finkenauer(D)
      MN-7: Michelle Fischbach(R) defeated Collin Peterson(D)
      NM-2: Yvette Herrell(R) defeated Xochitl Small(D)
      NY-11: Nicole Malliotakis(R) defeated Max Rose(D)
      OK-5: Stephanie Bice(R) defeated Kendra Horn(D)
      SC-1: Nancy Mace(R) defeated Joe Cunningham(D)
      UT-4: Burgess Owens(R) defeated Ben McAdams(D)

      Special Elections 2021-2022:
      CA-22: replacing Devin Nunes (R, SPEL summer 2022)
      FL-20: replacing Alcee Hastings (D, SPEL Jan. 2022)
      LA-2: Troy Carter (R, April 2021)
      LA-5: Julia Letlow (R, March 2021)
      NM-1: Melanie Stansbury (D, June 2021)
      OH-11: Shontel Brown (D, Nov. 2021)
      OH-15: Mike Carey (R, Nov. 2021)
      TX-6: Jake Ellzey (R, July 2021)
      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
      MA politicians

      Contact info:
      Email for constituents only
      Mailing Address:
      Cannon HOB 221, Washington, DC 20515
      Phone number:
      (202) 225-8273





      Page last updated: Feb 15, 2022