2017: Schweikert Voted To Disapprove A Rule Implementing The ESSA's Implementation Of Statewide Accountability Systems. In February 2017, Schweikert voted for a resolution that, according to Congressional Quarterly, "disapproves of the rule issued by the Education Department on Nov. 29, 2016, known as the Accountability and State Plans Under ESEA Rule, which addresses the design and implementation by states of statewide accountability systems when receiving federal education funding under the Elementary and Secondary School Act (ESEA; PL 89-10). The measure provides that the rule will have no force or effect." Also according to Congressional Quarterly, "If a disapproval resolution is enacted, it prevents the rule from going into effect and the agency is prohibited from ever issuing any substantially similar rule unless Congress specifically authorizes it." The vote was on the resolution. The House adopted the resolution by a vote of 234 to 190. The president later signed the legislation into law. [House Vote 84, 2/7/17; Congressional Quarterly, 2/3/17; Congressional Actions, H. J. Res. 57]
The 2015 Re-Write Of No Child Left Behind Left Its Data-Gathering Requirement And The Idea That Federal Funds Should Provide "Greater Equity In Education Across A State" While Making The States Create The Standards. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Congress in late 2015 reauthorized the 1965 Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) by enacting the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA; PL 114-95) as a successor to the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB; PL 107-110), which most education professionals had considered to be too inflexible and punitive to low-performing schools. The 2015 reauthorization retained most of the NCLB's data-gathering requirements regarding student and school performance while adding additional demographic information to be collected. It also retained the overarching philosophy that states and local school districts receiving federal funding must demonstrate that federal funding helps provide greater equity in education across a state, with better educational outcomes for low-performing schools and students. However, it shifted much of the responsibility for determining and administering education standards to the state and local level; under the law, states are required to design and implement their own statewide accountability systems." [Congressional Quarterly, 2/3/17]
In 2016, The Education Department Issued The Rule Based Off Of The New Law. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The Education Department in late November 2016 issued final regulations to implement ESSA provisions regarding accountability and state plans. The department said the rule is intended to give states the flexibility to incorporate measures of school quality or student success that the state determines are most relevant while maintaining the expectation that states will continue to work to improve education for all students." [Congressional Quarterly, 2/3/17]
The 2016 Rule Required That States ID Low-Performing Schools Using A Variety Of Metrics; Graduation Rates And English Language Proficiency Were Required And The Information Had To Be Disaggregated By Subgroup. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Among its elements, the rule requires states to identify low-performing schools for comprehensive or targeted support and improvement, and it requires that each state's statewide plan use multiple indicators of student success that are the same for all public schools (including charter schools), with the indicators disaggregated by subgroup. It requires states to measure academic achievement; graduation rates and academic progress; progress in attaining English language proficiency; and at least one state-selected indicator of school quality or student success. Indicators must emphasize academic performance. States must set 'ambitious' goals and interim measurements of progress for academic outcomes and provide assurances that they will meet the law's requirements for academic standards." [Congressional Quarterly, 2/3/17]
Rule Opponents Claimed That The Rule Continued The "Label And Punish" Policies Of NCLB While Not Effectively Empowering Students, Parents, Teachers And State And Local Leaders. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Supporters of the resolution to disapprove the rule, primarily Republicans, argue that the rule effectively acts to continue the federal overreach and the 'label and punish' policies generated by the old No Child Left Behind law while ignoring the required movement toward empowering students, parents, teachers, and local and state leaders as mandated by the new Every Student Succeeds Act. Specifically, they say it would continue the use of statewide standardized testing as the main determinant of whether a school is meeting academic standards, thereby undermining the intent of the new law to provide state and local leaders with flexibility in identifying and responding to struggling schools." [Congressional Quarterly, 2/3/17]
Democrats Claim That By Removing The Rule, It Reneged On A Compromise And Leaves States Without The Necessary Guidance. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Democrats see Republican efforts to overturn the regulations as a violation of the compromise they made when they passed the law in 2015, and they worry that the lack of regulations will put states in a difficult position as they finish work on their education plans. 'Without this regulation they will not know what to do,' said Rep. Robert C. Scott. D-Va., during the Rules Committee hearing. '[It] leaves everybody in a total lurch. . . . It's just much better to go through the regulatory process.'" [Congressional Quarterly, 2/7/17]
2015: Schweikert Effectively Voted Against The Every Student Succeeds Act, A Rewrite Of No Child Left Behind; Every Student Succeeds Act Eliminated The Federal Accountability System. In December 2015, Schweikert effectively voted against the Every Student Succeeds Act. According to Congressional Quarterly, the conference report would have "reauthorize[d] the Elementary and Secondary Education Act through fiscal 2020, eliminate the federal school accountability system created by the No Child Left Behind law and instead require states to establish their own accountability systems, and maintain the requirement for regular student proficiency testing in math, reading and science." The vote was passage. The House passed the conference report by a vote of 359 to 64. The Senate later passed the measure and the president then signed it into law. [House Vote 665, 12/2/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/1/15; Congressional Actions, S. 1177]
Every Student Succeeds Act Replaced No Child Left Behind (NCLB), Which Increased Federal Oversight In Education, Including A National System That Judged Schools. According to the Washington Post, "The measure replaces No Child Left Behind, the 2002 law that amplified Washington's role in U.S. classrooms and launched a national system that judged schools based on math and reading test scores and required them to raise scores every year or face escalating penalties. No Child Left Behind was also created with strong bipartisan support, but over time its test-based accountability became widely seen as overly punitive and unrealistic." [Washington Post, 12/10/15]
Every Student Succeeds Act Eliminated The National School Accountability System And Required That State And Local School Districts Establish Their Own. According to Congressional Quarterly, "The agreement eliminates the current national school accountability system and goals created in 2001 by No Child Left Behind. States and local school districts must establish their own accountability system and goals, including how to use test scores to determine a school's performance and how to hold schools accountable and improve poorly performing schools." [Congressional Quarterly, 12/1/15]
States Would Need Education Department Approval For Accountability Plans. According to Congressional Quarterly, "States would need to submit their accountability plans to the Education Department for approval." [Congressional Quarterly, 12/9/15]
Every Student Succeeds Act Continued To Require Regular Testing As Mandated By NCLB, Required States To Develop Plans For The Lowest-Performing Schools And Prohibits The U.S. Education Department From Setting National Standards. According to Congressional Quarterly, the Every Student Succeeds Act, "maintains the requirement under NCLB for regular testing of students to assess their proficiency in math, reading and science, and that the results of those student assessments be disaggregated by race, income, English proficiency and other specified categories in order to determine whether any particular subgroup of students is lagging academically. The measure requires states to develop plans to help the lowest-performing 5% of all public schools that receive Title I funding, all public high schools that fail to graduate one-third or more of their students, as well as schools where any subgroup of students consistently underperforms. It prohibits the U.S. Education Department from setting national academic standards or otherwise imposing conditions on states and school districts in exchange for federal grants or waivers from ESEA requirements, and it requires the department to downsize to reflect the elimination of 49 federal education programs. [Congressional Quarterly, 12/1/15]
Every Student Succeeds Act Revoked Obama Administration Policy That Granted States Waivers If They Adopted Administration Policies. According to the Washington Post, "The new law also dismantles a second federal accountability system the Obama administration created, in which states were excused from the demands of No Child Left Behind if they adopted the administration's favored policies. Forty-three states and the District hold those waivers today; they will be moot by August." [Washington Post, 12/10/15]
Legislation Created A Completive Grant Program To Help States To Expand Pre-School For Low-Income Children. According to the Washington Post, "The bill would create a $250 million annual competitive grant program to help states plan, organize and expand preschool programs for low-income children. The grant program was a priority for Murray, a former preschool teacher, as well as the Obama administration." [Washington Post, 12/2/15]
National Education Association (NEA): "This New Law Is A Well-Deserved Victory For Our Nation Because The Every Student Succeeds Act Will Create Greater Opportunity For Every Student Regardless Of Zip Code." According to the National Education Association, "At a White House ceremony President Barack Obama today signed into law S. 1177, the Every Student Succeeds Act, a bipartisan and bicameral bill to reauthorize the federal education law known as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act. [...] '0This new law is a well-deserved victory for our nation because the Every Student Succeeds Act will create greater opportunity for every student regardless of ZIP Code,' said NEA President Lily Eskelsen García. 'Educators welcomed the end of No Child Left Behind and the beginning of a new era in public education in schools.' [...] Students and educators have lived with the unintended consequences of the failed No Child Left Behind (NCLB) for more than 14 years." [National Education Association, 12/10/15]
NEA Members Advocated For The Every Student Succeeds Act. According to the NEA "NEA members have waged an unprecedented mobilization and advocacy campaign on behalf of the nation's students in an effort to turn the page on the failed NCLB law and to bring in a new federal education law that provides more opportunity for all students. Throughout the reauthorization process, NEA's focus has been threefold: elevate the voices of educators in the policymaking process, decouple standardized testing from high stake decisions, and create an "opportunity dashboard" to help close opportunity gaps in needy schools. Based on these measures, ESSA has the potential to be a game-changer." [National Education Association, 12/10/15]
Legislation Was Backed By The U.S. Chamber Of Commerce And More Than 100 Civil Rights Groups. According to the Washington Post, "A broad range of national groups endorsed the bill, including the National Governors Association, the two major teachers unions, Teach for America, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, state education leaders, the National PTA and a coalition of more than 100 civil rights groups." [Washington Post, 12/2/15]
Every Student Succeeds Act Did Not Include Vouchers, Or Title 1 Portability, Which Would Allow Low Income Students To Use Federal Monies For Private Education. According to the Washington Post, "The deal leaves in place the complex funding formulas used to determine yearly Title 1 grants, the money the federal government provides to help educate students in high-poverty schools. It does not allow Title 1 funds to "follow the student" when a low-income student transfers to another school. The deal also does not allow federal dollars to be used as vouchers for private school tuition." [Washington Post, 12/2/15]
2015: Schweikert Voted For The Student Success Act, Which Reauthorized The Elementary And Secondary Education Act Of 1965 And Changed Title 1 To A Block Grant And Allows Title I Funding to Follow Individual Students. In June 2015, Schweikert voted for the Student Success Act which reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 and reformed the No Child Left Behind law. According to Congressional Quarterly, the bill would have, "allow[ed] Title I funding to follow individual students to other schools and eliminates more than 65 education programs and merges their funding, as well as the funding for targeted groups of students, into a new Title I block grant that gives states greater flexibility in how funds are used." The bill was known as the Student Success Act. The vote was on the passage of the bill. The House passed the bill 218 to 213. The bill died in the Senate, but a similar bill, the Every Child Succeeds Act, but that did not allow block grant Title I or allow portability, became law. [House Vote 423, 7/8/15; Congressional Quarterly, 7/13/15; Congressional Quarterly, 12/1/15; Congressional Actions, S. 1177; Washington Post, 7/8/15; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5]
Title 1 Funding "Is The Foundation Of The Federal Commitment To Closing The Achievement Gap Between Low-Income And Other Students." According to the National Association for the Education of Young Children, "Title I, formerly known as Chapter 1, is part of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, and is the foundation of the federal commitment to closing the achievement gap between low-income and other students. Nearly 14,000 of the 15,000 school districts in the nation conduct Title I programs. The original purpose of Title I was additional resources to states and localities for remedial education for children in poverty. The 1994 reauthorization of Title I shifted the program's emphasis from remedial education to helping all disadvantaged children reach rigorous state academic standards expected of all children. Title I funds can be used for instructional activities, counseling, parental involvement, and program improvement. In return, school districts and states must meet accountability requirements for raising student performance." [National Association for the Education of Young Children, Accessed 10/27/15]
Title 1 Portability Allows Federal Money To Follow Students; Could Reallocate Money From The Neediest To The Wealthiest School Districts. According to Washington Post, "Public schools now receive those federal funds according to a formula based on the number of disadvantaged students enrolled. Under the Republican plan, known as 'Title 1 portability,' the money would 'follow the child' --- if a poor student transferred from a high-poverty school to a wealthier one, the federal money would follow the student to the new school. Democrats argue that the bill would send dollars out of the neediest schools to more affluent ones. The Senate's bill does not include Title I portability." [Washington Post, 7/8/15]
Think Progress: History Shows Block Granting Results In Program Cuts. According to ThinkProgress, "Given the freedom that usually comes with block grants, [the states] could make many choices in implementing them. But ultimately the reform would mean a severe cut, if past experience is any guide. [...] Of the 11 major programs created with block grants in recent decades, eight have shrunk. Some of the declines are severe: Title 1 funding, or Education for the Disadvantaged, has fallen 115 percent since it was created, while the Social Services Block Grant has fallen 87 percent and the Community Development Block Grant, Home Investment Partnership Program, and the Training and Employment Services Block Grants have all seen declines around 60 percent." [ThinkProgress, 3/18/15]
Democrats Opposed The Bill Because It "Would Turn Back The Clock" And The White House Has Threatened To Veto. According to Congressional Quarterly, "Democrats, meanwhile, objected to the thrust of the bill, saying a lack of accountability to underserved students and struggling schools would 'turn back the clock' on educational progress. [...] The White House has threatened to Veto the measure." [Congressional Quarterly, 7/13/15]
2015: Schweikert Voted Against An Amendment That Would Have Delayed The Enactment Of The Student Success Act Until The Education Department Proved The Bill Would Not Reduce College And Career Readiness For Minority, Disabled, ESL, And Low-Income Students. In July 2015, Schweikert vote against an amendment that would prohibit the bill from being enacted until the Education Department determines that its enactment will not reduce the college and career readiness of certain populations. According to Congressional Quarterly, the amendment "would prohibit the bill from being enacted until the Education Department determines that its enactment will not reduce the college and career readiness of racial or ethnic minority students, students with disabilities, English learners and low-income students and the department provides written notification to Congress on such determination." The underlying measure was the Student Success Act, which reauthorized the Elementary and Secondary Education Act Overhaul. The vote was on the amendment. The House of Representatives rejected the amendment 189 to 241. [House Vote 418, 7/8/15; Congressional Quarterly, 7/8/15; Congressional Actions, H. Amdt. 65; Congressional Actions, H.R. 5]