With Congress working to complete reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), a hearing on Title VI of the ESEA was held on February 9 by the House Education and the Workforce Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Youth and Families (see The Source, 2/4/00).
Title VI is a formula-based block grant that allows flexibility in spending. States and districts often use Title VI to try innovative programs, purchase computers, bolster library content, provide new training for teachers, and offer special opportunities for gifted and talented students.
The FY2000 omnibus spending bill (P.L. 106-113) required the President to select all federal programs subject to a mandatory .38 percent spending rescission. Title VI spending was reduced by the maximum rescission possible for any one program, with a $14.25 million cut from its $380 million appropriation. The President did not propose any spending for Title VI in the FY2001 budget plan he offered on February 7.
Opening the hearing, Subcommittee Chair Mike Castle (R-DE) said that much of the ESEA is targeted at assisting disadvantaged and low-income students, but under Title VI recipients can “use its funds to benefit any and all student populations in any and all schools.” He noted “broad support for this program,” adding: “The administration zero-funds the Title VI program because they believe ‘the program is not well designed to support the kinds of state and local efforts most likely to result in real improvements in teaching and learning.'”
Dr. Earin Martin of the Title VI National Steering Committee described a 1998 survey of Title VI administrators from 44 states, which indicated that Title VI is effective in meeting its goals—improving student achievement and increasing flexibility for educators. According to the survey results, she said, “the absence of Title VI funds would severely impact the ability of schools…to initiate or complete reform initiatives that impact student performance.”
Several other witnesses spoke in favor of Title VI. Valerie Woodruff of the Delaware Department of Education described Title VI funds as “glue money,” adding: “It fills gaps and enables the expansion of initiatives supported by other federal and state resources.” No testimony was delivered on behalf of the Clinton administration.
Members of the subcommittee, including Reps. Marge Roukema (R-NJ), Lynn Woolsey (D-CA), and Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY), voiced support for Title VI. Rep. McCarthy said, “I’m sorry to see the President wants to eliminate Title VI, but I think there are enough of us who support it to keep that from happening.”
