-
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/files/original/7450a49698e86df5e2c29c887498cf04.pdf
3d989916deff0d44ec7ecf29fc43d063
PDF Text
Text
FOIA Number:
2006-0469-F
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting
Series/Staff Member:
Michael Waldman
Subseries:
14423
OA/ID Number:
FolderlD:
Folder Title:
[State of the Union 1999] Elderly: Policy Memos/Language
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
92
3
1
3
�THE PRESIDENT HAS SEEN
3. Health Care - Medicare Commission: As the Medicare Commission nears its
March 1 deadline, members are intensifying their efforts to come up with reform proposals
and the press is paying greater attention to their progress. Most of the attention at last
week's meeting focused on a "premium support" approach that Senator Breaux is pushing,
but that most other Democrats on the Commission are now reluctant to embrace. "Premiu m
support" is a term coined by Reischauer and Aaron to refer to models that have both a
defined contribution and defined benefits. These models essentially guarantee a set of
benefits, but limit government payment for those benefits in some way. The Commission's
discussion of the premium support approach left many critical issues unresolved, and neither
HCFA nor the CBO has yet scored these proposals. (HCFA hopes to complete its estimates
within two weeks, while the CBO has declined to do any work for the Commission.) We
took no position on the premium support ideas coming out of the meeting, noting that "the
devil is in the details" and that we will be analyzing the ideas closely as the Commission
gives them greater content. On a related issue, most Commission members now appear to
agree that Medicare should include a prescription drug benefit, but have reached no
consensus on its scope, design, management, or financing. (As you know, one critical
question is whether all beneficiaries or only those in managed care should receive this
benefit.) Finally, virtually all members now privately acknowledge (and Bruce Vladeck said
publicly last week) that significant new revenues will be needed to extend the life of the
Trust Fund.
4. Education - Education Week Report: In its annual "Quality Counts" report,
released last week, Education Week focused on how states are (or aren't) holding schools,
educators, and students accountable for results — and in so doing, provided strong support for
our ESEA proposals. The report demonstrates that although states are beginning to adopt
-accountability measures^relatiyely few_are using the full set of measures needed to ensure
high-quality performancer~A^rdingto~the report, 36 states issue report cardslbr eaclT
| school, but only 26 place them on the internet and only 13 send them directly to~pare"nfsr
Perhaps even worse, only 19 states publicly identify and provide assistance to low performing"
Wjiools; nf these, 1R have the ultimate power to take over, reconstitute, or close dowTTfaitin^
/public schools, but only three (New York, Oklahoma and Texas) actually have applied this
sanction (to a total of 55 schools). Only 19 states provide rewards to successful schools, with
only fourteen giving such schools additional money. And only five states have what the report
considers a comprehensive system for holding sqhools accountable for results — school report
cards and ratings, monetary rewards for success, and graduated sanctions for failure, up to and
including reconstitution or closure. Significantly, other studies have shown that two of these
five states - North Carolina and Texas ~ can boast the largest overall gains in student
achievement and the greatest success in closing the achievement gap between minority and
majority students. As you know, our ESEA proposal essentially would require states to adopt
and carry out this set of accountability measures, as well as a number of others focusing on
ending social promotion and ensuring teacher quality.
�^
"
"
Paul D. Glastris
01/02/99 03:10:12 PM
Record Type:
To:
Record
Joshua S. Gottheimer/WHO/EOP
cc:
Subject: here's the memo that went to mw
December 30, 1998
MEMORANDUM TO MIKE WALDMAN
FROM: PAUL GLASTRIS
RE:
SOTU-ADDITIONS TO FIRST DRAFT OF EDUCATION SECTION
Mike,
Below are some of the missing facts are statistics for the speech. In addition, here are
a few suggestions that occur to me after looking over the draft I gave you and talking further
with Mike Cohen and others.
I suggest restructuring the argument begining in graf 4. After the sentence "We have
begun to organize an army of tutors to help elementary school children learn to read and
middle and high school students prepare for college"..! suggest restructing the rest of the
section so that it goes:
1- we're already seeing results in terms of improved student performance
2- but that improvement isn't good enough, and so we need to...
3- modernize our schools for the 21st Century
4- create more accountability in the system
So, the next graf would read something like...
All these efforts and more have begun to bear fruit. SAT scores have climbed every
year since 1993, and average math scores for have risen nation wide. This is good news. We
are making progress. But the we not making progress fast enough. While our fourth graders
outperform their peers in other developed countries in math and science achievement, our
eighth graders score only in the fiftieth percentile and our twelfh graders rank at the bottom.
Clearly, American students start out smart, but the system fails them. We must do better.
Next, I suggest a graf or two that lumps together all the policies that will appeal to
�middle-class voters, under the heading of giving Americans modern schools for the 21st
Century. That includes.
-"We are making progress towards connecting every school and classroom in America to the
Internet by the year 2000, but we are not there yet. Eighty-five percent of public schools and
58 percent of classrooms are now wired, but over a million classrooms remain cut off from the
technology that all children will need in the 21st Century,
-downpayment on 100,000 teachers
-5000 modernized schools-use these factoids:
- The average public school building in the U.S. is 42 years old.
After 40 years, a school building begins rapid deterioration, and
after 60 years most schools are abandoned,
-big riff on after school programs and workplace schools that are structured for the way we
work and live now
Then, finish up with the accountability stuff, which Mike Cohe notes is more relevant
and beneficial to the lower-middle and workin-poor than the soccer moms.
Real people
Here are the bare bones of two real life end-social-promotion success stories. I got
them from the kids' principal, so the information is pretty solid. To get more human detail I'll
have to speak with the kids' parents and/or the kids themselves; the principal will hook me up
after January 4th.
On September 25, 1998, President Clinton visited the Jenner elementary school,
located in Chicago's Cabrini-Green housing complex. Among the many Jenner children he
met was Darneisha Rogers. Darneisha had received a letter the previous spring, after taking
the Iowa tests-as all third, sixth, and eight-graders in Chicago must do-saying she had failed
to score high enough to be promoted to seventh grade and would have to repeat sixth grade,
unless she went to summer school and brought her test scores up. That letter, and the prospect
of not being able to stay with her classmates, roused Darneisha from inattentiveness, says her
principal. She buckled down, and in only six weeks-the length of the summer
session-boosted her reading level by eight months and her math by a year and five months.
When the POTUS met her, she was back with her classmates, having been promoted to
seventh grade.
Another student was fourth-grader Niandra Taylor. He story was much the same:
Poor scores on the Iowa in third grade, followed by summer school, by the end of which she
had raised her reading level one year and four months, her math nine months.
The size of the social promotion problem
We need to confirm some of this with Dept of Ed statistical people and fill some TKs,
but for now you can plug in the following sentences:
�Every year, one in five public school students advances to the next grade without
having learned the material he or she was supposed to learn in their current grade. That's
nearly 10-million students whom the system has failed to educate; 10-million students destined
to fall further and further behind every year because they failed to receive the educational
foundations they needed. The results can be tragic: every year, tk-thousand students graduate
high school with reading and math skills insufficient to balance a checkbook or fill out a job
application.
�PUD a tS
a - l Sr
G i
•• '
Record Type:
To:
12/30/98 05:39:37 PM
Record
Joshua S. Gottheimer/WHO/EOP
cc:
Subject: waldman memo
December 30, 1998
MEMORANDUM TO MIKE WALDMAN
FROM: PAUL GLASTRIS
RE:
SOTU-ADDITIONS TO FIRST DRAFT OF EDUCATION SECTION
Mike,
Below are some of the missing facts are statistics for the speech. In addition, here are
a few suggestions that occur to me after looking over the draft I gave you and talking further
with Mike Cohen and others.
I suggest restructuring the argument begining in graf 4. After the sentence "We have
begun to organize an army of tutors to help elementary school children learn to read and
middle and high school students prepare for college"..! suggest restructing the rest ofthe
section so that it goes:
1- we're already seeing results in terms of improved student performance
2- but that improvement isn't good enough, and so we need to...
3- modernize our schools for the 21st Century
4- create more accountability in the system
So, the next graf would read something like...
All these efforts and more have begun to bear fruit. SAT scores have climbed every
year since 1993, and average math scores for have risen nation wide. This is good news. We
are making progress. But the we not making progress fast enough. While our fourth graders
outperform their peers in other developed countries in math and science achievement, our
eighth graders score only in the fiftieth percentile and our twelfh graders rank at the bottom.
Clearly, American students start out smart, but the system fails them. We must do better.
Next, I suggest a graf or two that lumps together all the policies that will appeal to
�middle-class voters, under the heading of giving Americans modern schools for the 21st
Century. That includes.
-"We are making progress towards connecting every school and classroom in America to the
Internet by the year 2000, but we are not there yet. Eighty-five percent of public schools and
58 percent of classrooms are now wired, but over a million classrooms remain cut off from the
technology that all children will need in the 21st Cenmry.
-downpayment on 100,000 teachers
-5000 modernized schools-use these factoids:
-- The average public school building in the U.S. is 42 years old.
After 40 years, a school building begins rapid deterioration, and
after 60 years most schools are abandoned,
-big riff on after school programs and workplace schools that are structured for the way we
work and live now
Then, finish up with the accountability stuff, which Mike Cohe notes is more relevant
and beneficial to the lower-middle and workin-poor than the soccer moms.
Real people
Here are the bare bones of two real life end-social-promotion success stories. I got
them from the kids' principal, so the information is pretty solid. To get more human detail I'll
have to speak with the kids' parents and/or the kids themselves; the principal will hook me up
after January 4th.
On September 25, 1998, President Clinton visited the Jenner elementary school,
located in Chicago's Cabrini-Green housing complex. Among the many Jenner children he
met was Darneisha Rogers. Darneisha had received a letter the previous spring, after taking
the Iowa tests-as all third, sixth, and eight-graders in Chicago must do-saying she had failed
to score high enough to be promoted to seventh grade and would have to repeat sixth grade,
unless she went to summer school and brought her test scores up. That letter, and the prospect
of not being able to stay with her classmates, roused Darneisha from inattentiveness, says her
principal. She buckled down, and in only six weeks-the length of the summer
session-boosted her reading level by eight months and her math by a year and five months.
When the POTUS met her, she was back with her classmates, having been promoted to
seventh grade.
Another student was fourth-grader Niandra Taylor. He story was much the same:
Poor scores on the Iowa in third grade, followed by summer school, by the end of which she
had raised her reading level one year and four months, her math nine months.
The size of the social promotion problem
We need to confirm some of this with Dept of Ed statistical people and fill some TKs,
but for now you can plug in the following sentences:
�Every year, one infivepublic school students advances to the next grade without
having learned the material he or she was supposed to learn in their current grade. That's
nearly 10-million students whom the system has failed to educate; 10-million students destined
to fall further and further behind every year because they failed to receive the educational
foundations they needed. The results can be tragic: every year, tk-thousand students graduate
high school with reading and math skills insufficient to balance a checkbook or fill out a job
application.
�December 30, 1998
MEMORANDUM TO MIKE WALDMAN
FROM: PAUL GLASTRIS
RE:
SOTU-ADDITIONS TO FIRST DRAFT OF EDUCATION SECTION
Mike,
Below are some of the missing facts are statistics for the speech. In addition, here are a
few suggestions that occur to me after looking over the draft I gave you and talking further with
Mike Cohen and others.
I suggest restructuring the argument begining in graf 4. After the sentence "We have
begun to organize an army of tutors to help elementary school children leam to read and middle
and high school students prepare for college"..! suggest restructing the rest of the section so that
it goes:
1- we're already seeing results in terms of improved student performance
2- but that improvement isn't good enough, and so we need to...
3- modemize our schools for the 21st Century
4- create more accountability in the system
So, the next graf would read something like...
All these efforts and more have begun to bear fruit. SAT scores have climbed every year
since 1993, and average math scores for have risen nation wide. This is good news. We are
making progress. But the we not making progress fast enough. While our fourth graders
outperform their peers in other developed countries in math and science achievement, our eighth
graders score only in the fiftieth percentile and our twelfh graders rank at the bottom. Clearly,
American students start out smart, but the system fails them. We must do better.
Next, I suggest a graf or two that lumps together all the policies that will appeal to
middle-class voters, under the heading of giving Americans modem schools for the 21st Century.
That includes.
-"We are making progress towards connecting every school and classroom in America to the
Internet by the year 2000, but we are not there yet. Eighty-five percent of public schools and 58
percent of classrooms are now wired, but over a million classrooms remain cut off from the
technology that all children will need in the 21st Century,
-downpayment on 100,000 teachers
-5000 modernized schools-use these factoids:
- The average public school building in the U.S. is 42 years old.
After 40 years, a school building begins rapid deterioration, and
after 60 years most schools are abandoned,
-big riff on after school programs and workplace schools that are structured for the way we work
�and live now
Then, finish up with the accountability stuff, which Mike Cohe notes is more relevant and
beneficial to the lower-middle and workin-poor than the soccer moms.
Real people
Here are the bare bones of two real life end-social-promotion success stories. I got them
from the kids' principal, so the information is pretty solid. To get more human detail I'll have to
speak with the kids' parents and/or the kids themselves; the principal will hook me up after
January 4th.
On September 25, 1998, President Clinton visited the Jenner elementary school, located
in Chicago's Cabrini-Green housing complex. Among the many Jenner children he met was
Darneisha Rogers. Darneisha had received a letter the previous spring, after taking the Iowa
tests-as all third, sixth, and eight-graders in Chicago must do-saying she had failed to score
high enough to be promoted to seventh grade and would have to repeat sixth grade, unless she
went to summer school and brought her test scores up. That letter, and the prospect of not being
able to stay with her classmates, roused Darneisha from inattentiveness, says her principal. She
buckled down, and in only six weeks—the length of the summer session—boosted her reading
level by eight months and her math by a year and five months. When the POTUS met her, she
was back with her classmates, having been promoted to seventh grade.
Another student was fourth-grader Niandra Taylor. He story was much the same: Poor
scores on the Iowa in third grade, followed by summer school, by the end of which she had
raised her reading level one year and four months, her math nine months.
The size of the social promotion problem
We need to confirm some of this with Dept of Ed statistical people and fill some TKs, but
for now you can plug in the following sentences:
Every year, one in five public school students advances to the next grade without having
learned the material he or she was supposed to leam in their current grade. That's nearly 10million students whom the system has failed to educate; 10-million students destined to fall
further and further behind every year because they failed to receive the educational foundations
they needed. The results can be tragic: every year, tk-thousand students graduate high school
with reading and math skills insufficient to balance a checkbook or fill out a job application.
�December 26, 1998
MEMORANDUM FOR MICHAEL WALDMAN
^
FROM: PAUL GLASTRIS
RE: DRAFT OF "STRONG CHILDREN" SECTION OF SOTU
M
The Founding Fathers believed that American democracy could survive only if its
citizens were well-educated. In 1787 they declared that all new territories set aside land for
public schools. With that far-sighted action, our Founders established a principle that public
education, though a state and local responsibility, is a national priority. That principle has been
reaffirmed many times since. In 1867, President Abraham Lincoln created the land grant college
system. In 1917, President Woodrow Wilson won federal aid for vocational training in high
schools. In 1944 Franklin Delano Roosevelt signed the GI bill and gave millions of returning
veterans tickets to the middle class. In 1958 President Dwight Eisenhower responded to the
Soviet's launch of Sputnik with federal funds to improve science and math instruction
in our public schools. In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson further expanded federal support for
education so that minorities long shut out of the classroom could be brought inside.
At each of these turning points in history, our leaders strengthened public education in
ways that matched the challenges of their times. When I became President in 1992, the challenge
of our time was an emerging global economy in which, more than ever before, what you eam
depends on what you leam. To help our people compete in this new economy, I knew we had to
improve the quality of public schools and open the doors of college wider.
I am pleased to say that over the last six years we have succeeded in making college more
affordable for all Americans. With bipartisan support we have expanded Pell grants for the
neediest college students. We have created $1500 HOPE Scholarships, education IRAs,
education grants for those serving in AmeriCorps, student loans payable as a percentage of future
income; and made the interest on student loans tax-deductible. Today we can honestly say what
we could not say six years ago: That every high school graduate in America, regardless
of income, can afford to go to college.
We have also made some progress towards improving k-through-12 education. Fortyeight of 50 states have now adopted the tougher academic curricula we laid out in our Goals
2000 program. Thousands of schools have cracked down on drugs, gangs, and indiscipline, and
students who were once literally killing each other over jackets and sneakers are now wearing
school uniforms. We have found common-sense ways to allow more religious expression in
public schools without violating the Constitution-or amending it. We have begun to organize
an army of tutors to help elementary school children leam to read and middle and high school
students prepare for college. We are making progress towards connecting every school and
library in America to the Internet by the year 2000. Thanks to the previous Congress, we have
placed a down payment on 100,000 new, highly-trained teachers to reduce class sizes in the early
grades. I trust that the new Congress will keep up those payments, just as I trust you will work
�with me to build or modernize 5000 of our oldest school buildings.
Most heartening of all, we have learned that public schools can be dramatically
improved if all those involved-students, teachers, principles, and political leaders-are
held accountable for results. Three years ago Chicago Mayor Richard Daley took personal
responsibility for improving his city's schools. He ended the practice of social promotion, in
which students proceed to the next grade level regardless of whether they have mastered the
material in their current grade level. Students who fail tests the end of 3rd, 6th, and 8th grades
are placed in academically-enhanced summer school and after school programs and drilled until
they do pass. Schools with chronically low scores that fail to improve are taken over, with new
principals, new curricula, and new or retrained teachers.
It is tough medicine, but it works. Citywide math and reading scores have gone up three
years in a row, with the biggest gains coming from some of the most disadvantaged schools.
Last fall, I visited Jenner Elementary school, located in Chicago's Cabrini Green public housing
complex. Test scores at Jenner have doubled on a percentage basis in just one year. One Jenner
student, tk, is with us today. STORY OF HOW TK WAS HELD BACK BUT JUMPED 2
GRADE LEVELS DURING SUMMER SCHOOL AND MOM SAYS SHE'S APPLYING
HERSELF LIKE NEVER BEFORE AND WANTS TO BECOME AN ASTRONAUT OR
SOME SUCH THING.
Unfortunately, success stories like TK's are the exception in America's public schools.
We must make them the rule, and I believe we can. Each year the federal government invests
over $13 billion in our public schools. I believe we can get a better return on that investment by
demanding real accountability. Tonight, I propose that every dime the federal government
invests in public schools come with four conditions attached.
First, to receive federal investment, schools must end social promotion. Advancing
students who have not mastered the basics does great harm to those students and sends the
message to all students that performance and effort don't matter. But it would be wrong to mark
students as failures when it is the educational system that has failed them. If we are going to
hold students to high academic standards, we must give them the help they need to meet those
standards. That is why my new balanced budget contains an additional $400 million for
academically-enriched summer school and after school programs. After school programs will
not just help students academically, but keep them constructively engaged and off the street in
the hours after regular school lets out, when juvenile crime soars and working parents are
frantically strugging to get home.
Second, states and school districts must take responsibility for their worst-performing
schools. If that means bringing in new principals, fresh resources, and better-trained teachers, so
be it. Under our federalist system, responsiblity for public education rests primarily with states
and local school districts. As a former governor, I am deeply committed to that system. But I
also believe that states and school districts that refuse to live up to their responsibilities should
not expect federal resources. It is that simple.
�Third, states and school districts must be more accountable for the teachers they put into
the classroom. Research shows that nothing is more important to childrens' learning than the
quality of their teachers. Yet nearly a quarter of secondary school teachers do not have college
majors-or even minors-in the subjects they teach, and the situation is worse in inner city
schools. Our schools have many superb teachers, but many others who are burned out and
otherwise ineffective. States and school districts should require tests of competency for
incoming teachers, periodic reviews of all current teachers, and swift but fair procedures for
removing those who cannot do the job.
Public school teachers perform one of the noblest jobs in America, and one of the
toughest. Our nation will not progress in the 21st Century if we cannot convince more of our
ablest young people to chose careers in teaching. The first step is to make public schools work,
so that idealistic young people will know that their efforts won't be wasted. TK STUFF ON
TEACHER RECRUITMENT IF WE HAVE IT.
Fourth, parents must be empowered with more and better information about their local
schools. Schools issue report cards on students. Why can't every school district issue report
cards on individual schools, like this one from TK school [POTUS holds up report card]? It
contains easy-to-read information on the academic achievment ofthe students, the qualifications
of the teachers, the average size of classes, and the school's safety record. Choosing a school is
perhaps the most important decision a parent can make for a child. Yet it is usually easier to get
information on the quality of local restaurants than the quality of local public schools. We can
and must do better.
We must also give parents more choice within the public school system. I am pleased
that the number of charter schools has risen from tk when I took office to tk today, with tk more
predicted to open by the year 2000. This year, I will propose new public school choices tailored
to the way families work and live today. Imagine dropping your child off every morning at a
public school 100 yards from your office? Imagine being able to walk over to that school in
minutes to sooth a skinned knee or speak with the teacher? Imagine getting homework done on
the commute home at night? Hundreds of parents have that ability because their employers have
built schools at their work sites run by the public schools. I believe we should encourage more
such workplace schools, to give working parents the tools they need be more successful on the
job and as parents.
In addition to providing our children with stronger educations, we must also do more to
protect them from the dangers of tobacco. Tobacco is a fiercely addictive drug, especially to the
young, tk-thousand of whom get hooked every year. Tonight I am asking Congress, as I did last
year, to help me save these young people's lives by affirming the Food and Drug
Administration's authority to regulate tobacco products. I am also opening up a second front in
the war against tobacco's damaging effects. Tonight I am directing the Department of Justice to
begin preparing a suit against tobacco companies for hiding from Americans the truth about the
addictive nature of their products. We cannot undue the damage tobacco has done to the lives
and health of millions of Americans and their families. But we can seek reimbursement for the
$tk billion in costs to Medicare attributable to tobacco. And we can pledge tonight that any
�money reimbursed from such a suit will be set aside to help fund the cost of providing
prescription drugs to Medicare recipients.
###
�/fi
Paul D. Glastris
12/29/98 10:24:08 A M
Record Type:
To:
Record
Joshua S. Gottheimer/WHO/EOP
cc:
Subject: SOTU Outline
Forwarded by Paul D. Glastris/WHO/EOP on 12/29/98 10:24 AM
1'";' yfi
^
r
r
Paul D. Glastris
1 2 / 2 8 / 9 8 0 8 : 4 3 : 3 5 PM
Record Type:
To:
Record
Michael Waldman/WHO/EOP
cc:
Subject: SOTU Outline
In the 20th Century, we built a system of public schools that gave all Americans a basic
education and lifted millions offamilies into the middle class. Now we must transform all our
public schools to give all Americans a better-quality education to meet the challenges ofthe
21st Century.
In the 20th Century, the American family underwent tremendous stress as it adapted to
new ways, but survived and was transformed. Now, we must strengthen the new American
family for the challenges ofthe 21st Century.
(Note-lead withwork and home before goin into medical stuff)
In the 20th Century, we created and then rolled back massive industrial pollution and
saved the great, remote wilderness areas of our country. Now, we must preserve and enhance
the green spaces closer to home.
In the 20th Century, we saw criminals nearly take over our cities, but then rolled them
back. Now, to keep crime going down, we must break the cycle of crime.
In 20th Century, we overcame many boundaries of race and class to
build the most diverse and democratic society the world has ever known. In the
�21st Century, we must find ways to reaffirm and reawaken the American values
we all share.
�December 23, 1998
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
Bruce Reed
Mike Cohen
SUBJECT:
ESEA Reauthorization Proposal
We have been working with the First Lady's office, OMB, the Vice President's office and
the Education Department to develop the strongest possible proposal to reauthorize the
Elementary and Secondary Education Act, with the objective of transmitting it to Congress by
March 1. While there is still much to be done to shape and finalize this proposal, we have made
progress in addressing some of the most significant issues. (Although Secretary Riley has not
reviewed our suggestions in detail. Deputy Secretary Smith has been very closely involved in the
process.) This memo looks at how the 1994 reforms are working, where they are falling short,
and what improvements we are considering. We are planning to meet with you in early January.
I. Progress Report on the 1994 Reauthorization and Goals 2000
Our reauthorization proposal will build on the framework for federal aid to elementary
and secondary education established in Goals 2000 and the Improving America's Schools Act,
the 1994 reauthorization of ESEA. In principle, both of these Acts overhauled federal
elementary and secondary education programs by:
•
Insisting that every state set challenging academic students that all students are expected
to reach. Goals 2000 required states to set academic standards for all students and
develop assessments aligned to those standards. Title 1 of ESEA built on this requirement
by mandating that states use these standards for disadvantaged students, thus ending the
practice of setting lower expectations for low-income students.
•
Providing schools, school districts, and states with the flexibility to determine how best to
educate students to meet high standards. Goals 2000 provided states and districts with
tremendous flexibility in how funds could be used, and for the first time allowed the
Secretary of Education to waive federal requirements if they impeded state or local
reform efforts. ESEA reduced regulations, paperwork, and reporting requirements;
launched your initiative to establish 3,000 charter schools; and permitted high-poverty
schools (with 50% or more students eligible for Title 1) to combine funds from separate
streams and use them to improve the whole school.
•
Holding schools accountable for the results they achieve, rather than for compliance with
�rules and regulations. Title 1 now requires states to set annual goals for each school and
district relating to the number of students who must reach academic standards; to report
progress annually for each school (disaggregating data by demographic subgroups); and
to intervene in schools that fail to make adequate progress.
These reforms have sparked considerable state and local education reform activity. There
is, however, still much more to be done to achieve significant improvement in elementary and
secondary education, especially in high-poverty schools. The key lessons from the
implementation of Goals 2000, ESEA, and related state and local reforms include:
•
Standards-based education reform works. A recent Rand study of education reform in
North Carolina and Texas ~ the two states with the best track record of improving
achievement generally and closing achievement gaps between minority and white
students ~ shows that a sustained, statewide approach of raising academic standards,
providing schools with the flexibility and tools they need, targeting resources for extra
help to low-performing students and schools, and holding schools accountable for results
produces results, particularly for disadvantaged students. Other studies also have shown
that states and school districts — including urban school districts like Philadelphia,
Boston, San Francisco, and Chicago -- that have adopted similar approaches have shown
significant gains in reading and math. This data indicate that our overall strategy is
sound. If we maintain the recent direction of federal education policy while intensifying
our efforts, we can improve elementary and secondary education across the nation.
•
States have adopted policies effecting standards-based education reform, but these
policies do not go far enough. Forty-eight states have set new, more challenging
academic standards, and most states are working to develop or adopt new assessments
aligned with these standards. Fewer states, however, have adopted accountability
systems along with the standards. Only 25 states provide for intervention in lowperforming schools, as required by Title 1. In addition, only 17 states provide extra help,
such as summer school or tutoring, for students who do not meet the standards, and only
five states require students to demonstrate they have met the standards as a condition for
promotion.
•
Implementation of state policies providing for standards, assessments, and accountability
leaves room for improvement. Title 1 includes a series of deadlines for implementing
state policies on standards, assessments, and accountability. Although not all ofthe
implementation deadlines have been reached, it is already clear that many states are not
on track to meet them. In addition, some states are failing to implement these policies as
envisioned. For example, some states have evaded the full extent of their responsibility
to set goals for "adequate yearly progress" for students and schools. And although half
the states have policies that provide for some kind of intervention in low-performing
schools, many have shown themselves unable or unwilling to take the actions necessary
to turn around these schools so they provide an acceptable education.
�•
Improvements in the quality of teachers and teaching are urgently needed. Governor
Hunt's National Commission on Teaching and America's Future has underscored the
difficulty of recruiting and retaining talented and well-prepared teachers, especially in
schools with the most disadvantaged students. About 50,000 teachers each year enter the
profession with emergency or substandard licenses. Nearly one quarter of secondary
school teachers lack even a minor in their main teaching field, and in schools with the
highest minority enrollment, students have less than a 50% chance of having a math or
science teacher with a license and degree in the field. On average, 22% of new teachers
leave the field within three years, and in urban areas 30-50% leave within five years.
Paraprofessionals are widely and increasingly used to provide instruction to lowachieving students in Title 1 schools, with as many as 20% of Title 1 instructional aides
providing instruction without a teacher's supervision. By one estimate, instructional aides
account for roughly half (67,000) of the entire Title 1 instructional workforce, and Title 1
aides are being hired at twice the rate of Title 1 certified teachers.
The Eisenhower professional development program, the main federal program to improve
teacher quality (Goals 2000 and Title 1 also provide some funds for this purpose), has
failed to improve the situation in any significant way. Recent evaluation data suggest that
in many districts, the Eisenhower program funds activities of limited effectiveness. And
even where the activities are effective, the program often fails to fund them at an
adequate level. The Higher Education Act you signed last year includes a new program
to provide scholarships to highly qualified individuals who commit to teaching in highpoverty schools, but the current appropriation is sufficient for only about 1,400 of these
scholarships.
II. Major Changes to ESEA
Our budget contains a number of initiatives to expand educational opportunity in the
elementary and secondary grades: school modernization, class size reduction, after-school
funding connected to social promotions policy, and an increase in Title 1 funding for the specific
purpose of intervening in low-performing schools. Our ESEA reauthorization can build on these
initiatives by insisting on what the studies suggest we most need: accountability ~ for students,
teachers, and low-performing schools. With this Congress, we may not be able to enact every
ESEA reform we want, but we can put forward a bold vision of the future of school reform.
We recommend a new set of accountability requirements as a condition for any state or
district to receive any ESEA funds (not just Title 1). States and school districts would be
required to produce annual school report cards, end social promotions, intervene in the lowest
performing schools, and end the use of unqualified teachers. Taken together, these new
requirements represent a fundamental change in federal aid to elementary and secondary
education. For the first time, the federal government would link investment in state and local
education systems with their commitment to take the steps necessary to enable all students,
�teachers, and schools to meet high standards. In effect, we are saying that, from now on, the best
way for the federal government to help students is to insist that states and local school districts
live up to their responsibilities, rather than simply attempting to compensate for their failure to
do so.
Along with the investments in your budget, this approach is intended to help close the
opportunity gap by lifting achievement in low-performing schools and making sure that
disadvantaged students are not left behind. We hope the approach would be compelling enough
to unite Congressional Democrats, the education community and the public, as well as to counter
an expected Republican push for vouchers and block grants.
A. Annual School Report Cards. Our proposal would require annual report cards,
easily understood by and widely distributed to parents and the public, for each school, school
district, and state. The report cards would include information on student achievement, teacher
quality, school safety, and class size. Where appropriate, the data collected and published —
especially on student achievement ~ would be broken down by demographic subgroups, to allow
a greater focus on the gaps between minority and majority, low-income and more advantaged
students.
B. Ending Social Promotions. Our proposal would require states and districts
participating in ESEA to adopt policies that (1) require students to meet academic performance
standards at key transition points in elementary and middle school and for high school
graduation; (2) use objective measures ~ Le., tests valid for these purposes — to make an initial
determination if a student has met the standards; and (3) permit (or conceivably, require) other,
non-objective factors, including teacher judgment, to enter into a final determination as to
whether the student has met the standards. States and school districts would have to show how
they will help students meet promotion standards by (1) strengthening learning opportunities in
the classroom with steps such as clear grade-by-grade standards, small classes with well prepared
teachers, high quality professional development, and the use of proven instructional practices; (2)
identifying students who need help at the earliest possible moment; (3) providing extended
learning time, including after-school and summer school, for students who need extra help; and
(4) providing an effective remedial plan for students who do not meet the standards on time, so
that they do not repeat the same unsuccessful experiences. The proposal would phase in this
requirement over five years; design the requirement to fit state governance systems (allowing
"local control" states to delegate responsibilities to the local school district); and base the
requirement on state or local rather than national standards. The Secretary would review and
approve each state's plan, with continued funding conditional on adequate annual progress ii
implementing the plan.
To reinforce this requirement and encourage local school systems to address it even
before the enactment of ESEA, your FY2000 budget contains a $400 million increase in funding
for the 21 Century Learning Center program, half of which will be reserved for after-school and
summer school programs in school districts implementing policies to end social promotions.
s,
�C. Accountability for Teachers. Our proposal would require states and local school
districts participating in ESEA to phase out the use of unqualified teachers over five years. In
particular, states and school districts would have to end the use of (1) teachers with emergency
rather than full certification; (2) secondary school teachers teaching "out of field" ~ Le^ teaching
subjects for which they lack an academic major or minor; and (3) instructional aides serving as
lead instructors. Ending these practices is particularly important for high-poverty schools, where
the practices are most prevalent. States also would have to adopt teacher competency tests for
new teachers, including tests of subject-matter expertise for secondary school teachers. States
and school districts would be able to use funds from a number of ESEA programs, including
Title 1, bilingual education, and a new grant program focused in part on teacher quality, to help
meet these requirements.
In addition, we are working with the Education Department to fashion a requirement for
states and school districts to deal with low-performing teachers. We are exploring a number of
approaches, including (1) requiring periodic recertification of teachers, and (2) requiring school
districts to adopt procedures to identify low-performing teachers, provide them with needed help,
and remove them fairly and quickly if they do not improve. We will work closely with the NEA
and AFT over the coming weeks to try and fashion a provision that will meet our objectives
while addressing their concerns.
D. Accountability Fund for Title 1 Schools. We recommend significantly
strengthening accountability requirements in Title 1 so as to require and adequately fund
immediate and significant state and local intervention in the lowest performing schools.
Because the schools of greatest concern are invariably Title 1 schools and because Title 1 already
contains certain accountability provisions, we believe we should incorporate these provisions
into Title 1, rather than imposing a broader ESEA requirement.
Our proposal would retain current provisions for states to adopt performance standards
and assessments by 2001. In addition, it would strengthen the current provisions in Title 1
relating to low-performing schools by: (1) requiring the immediate public identification ofand
intervention in the lowest performing schools in each state ~ i ^ , schools with very low levels of
achievement that have made little or no improvement over the previous three years; (2) setting
aside 2.5% of Title 1 funds to support aggressive intervention in these schools, including an
external assessment of each school's needs and the implementation of needed improvements
(such as addressing school safety and security needs, providing better teacher training, acquiring
up-to-date textbooks, technology, and curriculum materials, and extending learning time to help
students catch up academically); and (3) requiring states to provide recognition or rewards to
Title 1 schools showing the greatest improvements.
To increase the appeal of this approach, your FY2000 budget contains a significant
increase in Title 1 funding, of which $200 million is specifically dedicated to this initiative.
�III.
Other Changes in ESEA
A. Charter Schools and Public School Choice. Earlier this fall you signed the Charter
Schools Expansion Act of 1998, which strengthened incentives for states to (1) increase the
number of high-quality charter schools, (2) strengthen accountability for charter schools, (3)
maximize flexibility for charter schools, and (4) provide charter schools with their proper share
of federal program funds. We believe, along with most in Congress, that no further changes
relating to charter schools are needed in the ESEA reauthorization process.
We do recommend, however, proposing new authority in ESEA to enable the Education
Department to support other, new approaches to expanding public school choice. At present, the
Department has authority only to support specific approaches to choice, such as intra-district
magnet schools in the context of desegregation efforts, and (as of last year) high schools on
community college campuses. We will propose a new competitive grants program that will give
the Education Department the ability to support a much wider range of choice approaches,
including district-wide public school choice systems, interdistrict magnet schools and other
interdistrict approaches, work-site schools, schools-within-schools, and post-secondary
enrollment options.
As a first step in this direction, your FY2000 budget proposal will contain funds and
necessary authorizing language for three specific choice initiatives: $10 million in grants to
school districts to establish work-site schools; $10 million to support interdistrict magnet
schools; and (as already authorized) $10 million to establish high schools on community college
campuses.
B. Bilingual Education. We recommend changes to the Title VII Bilingual Education
program and to Title 1 (which serves more than 1.1 million LEP students) consistent with
statements you and Secretary Riley made in opposing California's Unz Initiative. These
statements called for (1) expanding the flexibility given to local communities to select the
programs they believe will best educate LEP students; (2) making sure teachers are well trained
to teach LEP students; and (3) strengthening accountability for programs serving LEP students
by including a goal that all LEP students reach English proficiency within three years.
To expand local flexibility and parental choice, we would remove the Title VII provision
in current law that limits expenditures on English-language (rather than bilingual) programs to
25% of the funds available. We also would require parental approval for participation in any
program funded under Title VII. To improve teacher quality, we would phase in a requirement
that schools receiving Title 1 funds provide LEP students with appropriately trained teachers.
We also would strengthen the teacher training provisions in Title VII by giving funding priority
to school districts and institutions of higher education that have implemented proven programs to
hire, train, and support new ESL and bilingual teachers.
In Title 1, we would require that LEP students be included in the assessment and
�accountability requirements for each school. Assessments would be in their language of
instruction and, after three years of schooling in the United States, in English. We would require
schools to disaggregate data, so that they would report ~ and be accountable for — both the
academic achievement and the English language proficiency of LEP students. We also would
require schools receiving Title 1 funds to provide altemative instructional strategies for LEP
students who do not make adequate progress in English proficiency after three years. Finally,
we would cut off Title VII funding to a program after three years if it could not show that
students made significant gains in both English and academic subjects.
C. Safe and Drug Free Schools Program. As you announced at the White House
Conference on School Safety, we would significantly overhaul the Safe and Drug Free Schools
Program to improve its effectiveness at promoting drug-free, safe, and disciplined learning
environments. Our proposal would accomplish this by (1) requiring states to allocate funds to
local school districts on a competitive basis, with funds going to the districts with the greatest
need and highest quality proposals; (2) requiring local school districts receiving program funds to
develop and implement a rigorous, comprehensive approach to drug and violence prevention
based on proven practices; (3) requiring every school district receiving funds to have a full-time
program coordinator; and (4) requiring all schools to issue report cards that include data on
crime, disorder, and substance abuse.
D. Class Size Reduction. We would include authorization for our Class Size Reduction
initiative in our ESEA package, since the provisions in last year's Omnibus Appropriations Act
provide funding and authority for only one year. Although we do not expect Congress to enact
the ESEA reauthorization this year, we believe that transmitting authorization legislation will
strengthen our ability to fight for additional funds for class size reduction in the FY2000
appropriations bill. Unlike the provision enacted last year, our original proposal required local
school districts to provide matching funds (an average of 20%, with a sliding scale based on
poverty levels). We intend to include the matching requirement in our ESEA authorizing
proposal, so that we can reach our goal of providing 100,000 teachers within 7 years. In all other
respects, our proposal would reflect the agreement reached with Republicans last year, which
itself was fully consistent with our original proposal.
E. School Modernization. We also intend to include our school modernization
proposal, with only minor changes from the one introduced last year, in our ESEA package.
F. Ed-Flex. Our proposal to expand Ed-Flex (which gives states the authority to waive
many statutory and regulatory requirements in ESEA) to all 50 states died last year, caught
between Democrats who opposed granting greater flexibility and conservative Republicans who
insisted on a more sweeping block grant proposal. Governors ofboth parties aggressively
promoted Ed-Flex until the very end of the session, and Governor Carper has indicated that the
NGA will take up the cause again next year. Although we believe we should continue to support
some version of Ed-Flex, we will need to think carefully about the scope of the proposal. We
think it would be a mistake to allow states to waive the social promotion, teacher quality, and
�accountability provisions described above or the requirement for using class size funds to reduce
class size to 18 in the early grades.
G. Preschool Education. Our ESEA proposal would retain provisions in current law
allowing the use of Title 1 funds for pre-school, and would expand the Even Start Family
Literacy program to reach greater numbers of children and adults. We also would strengthen the
quality of pre-school programs and enhance school readiness by providing funds to local school
districts, on a competitive basis, to (1) work with Head Start and other pre-school programs to
identify the basic language and literacy skills that children need when they enter school and to
design a curriculum to help students acquire these skills; and (2) provide professional
development for child care providers and other providers of early childhood services to help
children build these basic language and literacy skills.
IV. The future of Goals 2000 and continuing support for standards-based reform.
Goals 2000 has been the flagship Administration initiative promoting standards-based
reform, and recent studies show that it has been successful. We do not believe we should let the
program expire simply because of the political opposition it faces in Congress. At the same time,
we do not believe it is wise — either for substantive or for political reasons ~ to submit a
proposal that simply extends the current program. We are instead looking for a way to advance
standards-based reform in a somewhat different form ~ a kind of second-generation proposal that
will reflect the current state of the standards movement.
Most educators agree that while states have made significant gains in developing
standards, they still face great challenges in actually putting those standards into place in the
classroom. To meet these challenges, schools must have talented and well-prepared teachers,
who themselves have the tools — curriculum materials, instructional approaches, technology,
and the like — to engage all students in learning to higher standards.
Several currently existing formula grant programs — Goals 2000, the Eisenhower
Professional Development program, and the Title VI Block Grant - could contribute to this
objective. We are considering a number of approaches involving these programs, including
proposals to consolidate some or all of them into a larger program, which would be designed to
help move standards into the classroom and would have a strong focus on improving teacher
quality. Such a proposal effectively would create a "responsible block grant," with clear
purposes and accountability. Some Congressional Democrats - including Senator Kennedy are also looking at this approach, in part because it would respond to the Republican push for
block grants and in part because it would create a large funding stream to address issues of
teacher quality. We still have much work to do on this issue, and we will outline more concrete
options in a subsequent memo.
�November 6, 1998
ACTION
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
NEAL LANE
SUBJECT:
Themes and Initiatives for the January 1999 State of the Union Address
Purpose
st
This memorandum makes recommendations for themes that underscore your vision for the 21
century and related initiatives to include in the 1999 State of the Union Address. The emphasis is
on science, technology, and education.
Background
The 1999 State of the Union address provides an opportunity to amplify two themes that are
integral to your commitment to strengthen our nation for the 21 century: education and
exploration. You have been consistent and eloquent about your commitment to investing in
America's future, including your recent statement that "we have to make the investments and
decisions that we know will produce growth over the long run for the American economy.
Whether it's in education, or science and technology, we have to do the things that send the
signal that we understand how the world economy works and we intend to do well in it."
Continued American leadership in the world and a better quality of life for all Americans depend
on our enduring commitment to science, to technology, to learning, and to research.
st
RECOMMENDATION
That you approve the following themes and initiatives for use in the 1999 State of the Union
Address:
1.
Theme: Education
Amplify the bold agenda announced in your 1998 address. Commit to:
A.
An expanded Education Research Initiative that will provide all citizens the math and
science skills they need for full participation in an increasingly "knowledge-based" social and
economic system. The National Science Foundation, the Department of Education, the National
Institute of Child Health and Human Development, and the Domestic Policy Council are
supportive of this initiative, which will fund an enhanced research effort to help determine the
DRAFT
�-2-
most effective methods for teaching and learning based on the current state of knowledge and
technological development.
B.
An Information Technology (IT) Workforce Initiative to address the shortage of IT
industry workers. Leaders in industry, academia, and government currently decry their inability
to recruit qualified workers needed to undertake highly-skilled jobs from the assembly line to
high-powered computations required to design new drugs. This initiative will establish
partnerships among school boards, community colleges, universities, and corporate America to
ensure this problem does not constrain the economic productivity growth we can expect as
information technology pervades the economy.
C.
A Math and Science Teachers Initiative to address the impending shortage of math and
science teachers. Qualified teachers are increasingly hard to fmd as we move toward a
requirement of 2,000,000 K-12 teachers. This initiative will emphasize enhanced teacher
training and partnerships between school boards and local industries to ensure sufficient numbers
of teachers trained (and retained) in math and science teaching.
2.
Theme: Exploration
st
Amplify on the "gift to the millennium" you made in your 1998 address ~ the 21 Century
Research Fund for pathbreaking scientific inquiry. Commit to:
A.
A "Millennium Research Fund" that ensures substantial, stable support for a balanced
portfolio of civilian and university-based research, including DOD 6.1 and 6.2. Budgetary
initiatives in a variety of areas, e.g., biomedical research, food safety, genome research, critical
infrastructure protection, bioterrorism, biodiversity, clean water, clean energy, and climate
change research could be used to amplify the exploration theme.
B.
An Information Technology Research Initiative that includes a substantial increase in
the budget for information technology, as recommended by your Information Technology
Advisory Committee. This includes research to produce the next generation of information
technology and computer scientists and engineers. It also includes the use of world-class
information technology to advance research in all fields of science and engineering. IT is key to
good jobs and a strong economy (it generated one-third of all economic growth between 1995
and 1997), key to good health (including telemedicine), key to security (to counter-terrorism and
weapons systems), and key to environmental quality (for monitoring to modeling).
C.
Remaining resolute in our work with our intemational partners (including Russia) to
make a success of the International Space Station. John Glenn's mission has reinvigorated
Americans' interest in space exploration, and we should capitalize on their enthusiasm to build
Congressional support.
Approve
Disapprove
Approve as Amended
DRAFT
No Action
�November 5, 1998
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
Bruce Reed
Gene Sperling
Elena Kagan
Sally Katzen
SUBJECT:
State of the Union/Budget Ideas
This memorandum provides a brief description of new ideas we are considering for the State of the
Union. Some work has been done on fleshing them out, but many need additional work and further
vetting through the interagency process. Most of these ideas involve increased spending, and you
will have to make choices among them and/or scale them back as you consider the FY 2000 budget.
Although our offices have worked together on many, if not most, of the ideas in this memo, we have
noted, where possible, which of our offices has the lead role with respect to each proposal. Options
relating to Social Security are not included in this memo.
EDUCATION AND TRAINING (DPC/NEC as specified)
1. Ending Social Promotion.. Last year's budget proposal included $200 million for Education
Opportunity Zones in districts that agreed to remove bad teachers, turn around failing schools, and
t
end social promotions. The proposal required authorization, which Congress will never give us. For
Ofy
next year, we recommend a simpler approach that uses existing authority and focuses entirely on
^
f ending social promotion. We would like to expand our after-school program from $200 million to
* V V $^00 million and give a disproportionate share of this money to districts that end social promotion.
^
These school districts could use the money (as Chicago does) to provide extra help after school and
\ mandatory summer school for students who need it. (Cost: $300 million above FY99 budget.)
(DPC)
2. Teacher Quality and Recruitment. Now that we're on track to begin hiring 100,000 new
teachers to reduce class size, we have an even greater responsibility to help communities attract
talented new teachers to the profession. We envision a five-part strategy on teacher quality and
recruitment: (1) a $100 million increase in the teacher recruitment scholarships we enacted this year
in the Higher Education Act, which would put us on course to attract 60,000 new teachers at highneed schools over the next five years; (2) a $60 million initiative ~ modeled after the successful
Troops-to-Teachers program ~ that would help states expand altemative certification routes and
attract talented people from other professions, such as military personnel and employees in firms
being downsized; (3) a nationwide crackdown on teacher education schools, including new
regulations authorized by the Higher Education Act to require report cards for education schools;
�(4) a $50 million increase in the Eisenhower program to send secondary school teachers who teach
outside their field back to college to take additional courses in the subjects they're teaching, coupled
with a new requirement that new secondary teachers pass competency tests in a subject before they
can teach it; and (5) a high-profile effort to help states make the most of the 15 percent set-aside for
teacher quality in the recently passed class size legislation. (Cost: about $210 million above FY99
budget). We are also exploring a politically interesting counter to private school choice: vouchers
for private school teachers ~ Le^ an incentive program to encourage private school teachers to teach
in public schools. (DPC)
3. Work-Site Schools. One of the most promising new education ideas sprouting up around the
country is the creation of public schools at work sites, designed primarily to serve employees'
children. School districts provide the teachers and curriculum; companies provide facilities and
upkeep. These schools-at-work serve a host of objectives at once, by (1) providing new facilities
at no cost to the district; (2) increasing parental involvement in the schools and parental satisfaction
in the workplace; (3) reducing employee turnover and absenteeism; and (4) increasing school
diversity, because work sites are more diverse than residential neighborhoods. We propose a $ 100
million increase in an existing discretionary program to provide grants to 100 communities to launch
work-site schools. We also could seek a stand-alone bill (like the charter school law) to advance this
idea. In addition, we are working with Treasury to develop a tax credit for businesses that start onsite schools, similar to the Kohl business tax credit for on-site child care that is already in our budget.
(Cost: $100 million for start-up grants. No estimate yet for tax credit, but it will be very small.)
(DPC/NEC)
4. Public School Choice. As support grows for private school vouchers, we must continue our
efforts to expand choices within the public schools. Charter schools are one answer, and we
recommend a $20 million increase, to $120 million, to keep us on track to 3,000 charter schools by
2002. Work-site schools are another. We also recommend increased funding for (1) an existing
grant program that helps urban and suburban school districts reduce racial isolation by forming
interdistrict magnet programs; and (2) magnet schools on university campuses, especially in urban
areas. (Cost: $25 million for interdistrict magnet programs; $15 million for 10 university-based
schools.) (DPC)
5. School Leadership Academies. Research has shown that an effective principal is the single
most important indicator of school success, yet little has been done at the national or state level to
improve the management skills of principals. We propose a small initiative to create school
leadership academies that would provide training in management, teacher evaluation, school
discipline, and other areas to elementary school principals in high-poverty districts. (Cost: $50
million) (DPC)
6. Class size. To stay on course to reach 100,000 new teachers in seven years, we will ask for $ 1.3
billion in the FY2000 budget. We are planning an ambitious rollout of the class size initiative over
the next year, as we awardfirst-yearfunding, issue guidance to local districts on how the program
works, and so on. We also will press Congress to restore the local matching requirement and
�strengthen the provisions to require competency testing of new teachers. (DPC)
7. Partnership for a Literate America. According to the National Adult Literacy Survey, 44
million adults struggle with a job application, cannot read to their children, or are left on the welfare
rolls because they lack basic skills. We are considering: (1) Workplace: a new tax credit and/or
Federal grants to encourage employers to provide adult basic education classes at the worksite, and
setting aside funds for work-based literacy projects within Welfare-to-Work competitive grants (se
welfare section of this memo); (2) Communitv: expanding the infrastructure and funding for adult
basic education through the Adult Education program, encouraging the development of programs
focused on easing the transition to the U.S. for new immigrants (through ESL and civics classes),
subsidizing the provision of child care on college campuses and other adult education sites, and
launching a national information campaign to make people aware of the problem of functional
illiteracy and of available services; and (3) Home: using the new Learning Anytime Anywhere
Partnerships to create software for adult basic education using $200 computers (e.g., WebTV, game
players) and subsidizing public housing projects that create computer literacy programs. (NEC)
8. National Campaign to Open Doors of College. Notwithstanding enormous strides we have
made in reducing the financial barriers to college, too many families assume college is more
expensive than it really is and are not aware of the aid that is available (Even among low-income
youth with high test scores, one-fourth say they have not been able to get much information about
financial aid for college). We are planning: (1) launching a major national public information
campaign about college costs andfinancialaid (e.g. naming a national chairman such as Bill Cosby,
having a national college visit day, etc.), (2) building on the authority in the new GEAR UP
program, providing every middle school (e.g. 7th grade counselor) with the ability to give students
a "21st Century Scholar Certificate," indicating the financial aid that they are eligible for, and (3)
seeking to provide every high-poverty middle school with a college partner. This does not require
any new investment, just some focus and creativity. (NEC)
4
9. Improving the College Success Rate. Getting people in the doors of college is not enough to
close the racial and income opportunity gaps. For example, only 21% of African-American and
18% of Hispanic students who begin college complete a bachelor's degree within 5 years compared
to 30% of WTiite students. We are considering a package of policies to increase degree attainment
among low-income and minority students, including: (1) a super-Pell grant for the lowest income
families and/or to encourage a full-time focus on school in the first year of college (this would be
expensive); (2) expanding successful mentoring and other support services in colleges (including
those aimed at graduate school preparation); (3) promoting college course-taking while in high
school; (4) improving articulation between two-year and four-year colleges; (5) encouraging
partnerships between predominately minority-serving and predominately majority-serving
institutions of higher education (particularly to promote graduate study); and (6) establishing a
bridge fellowship program for graduate study in science and technology fields for minorities and
women. (NEC)
10. School Modernization. The current assumption is that we will repeat this year's proposal for
�tax credits to build and renovate schools covering the interest on nearly $22 billion in bonds. We
are however, critically comparing our current proposal against other possible mechanisms to ensure
we have the most effective approach. (NEC)
11. Further Expanding Junior ROTC. In response to the Los Angeles riots, Colin Powell
proposed and Congress approved in 1992 an expansion of the high school-based JROTC. Since
then, 1,000 units have been added primarily in urban areas, bringing the total to nearly 2,600 units
with 400,000 participants. The budget increased over that period from $76 million to $166 million.
There is a waiting list of more than 450 schools that would like to have a JROTC unit. Because
DOD does not plan any further expansion, these 450 schools on the waiting list will not likely be
added. We could propose adding another 900 units over the next few years, to reach the authorized
maximum of 3,500. Cost: about $235 million. (NEC)
12. Training American Workers for Current and Future Skills Gaps. We should
challenge the private sector to make specific commitments to train more American workers, which
they pledged to do during the debate on Hl-B visas. They could provide more college scholarships
for women and minorities, partner with community colleges to develop cutting-edge curricula, and
encourage their employees to serve as telementors for middle school students to get them excited
about math and science. In addition, we are working on: (1) a program to foster partnerships
("Regional Skills Alliances") between industry and training providers to train both employed and
unemployed workers; (2) competitive grants to encourage companies to develop programs in which
they subsidize the training of individuals who they then commit to hire; (3) extensions and/or
expansions of some of the current training tax provisions (such as the lifelong learning tax credit and
Section 127); (4) a major informational/media campaign by the Departments of Education and Labor
to inform all Americans about available training opportunities, financial aid, and job search
assistance to allow them to develop the skills required for employment opportunities around the
country; (5) the adult literacy initiative described above; and (6) the "Improving the College Success
Rate" initiative described above. (NEC)
i I
^ ii
^ &\
^ \l
y
13. Making Job Training Universal. We are considering an initiative to make job training more
universal. The first component of this initiative would be to seek a significant increase in dislocated
worker funding — about $ 190 million — so that we are on path to provide training to every dislocated
worker who wants or needs it within five years. The second component would be to ensure that job
search assistance is available for every unemployed person. The final component would be to take
the steps necessary to ensure that every worker, regardless of where they live, would be able to have
access to a One-Stop Career Center (where they can leam about job training, employment service
activities, unemployment insurance, vocational rehabilitation, adult education, and other assistance.)
y£ ( E )
NC
School safety -- see CRIME section
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Michael Waldman
Description
An account of the resource
<p>Michael Waldman was Assistant to the President and Director of Speechwriting from 1995-1999. His responsibilities were writing and editing nearly 2,000 speeches, which included four State of the Union speeches and two Inaugural Addresses. From 1993 -1995 he served as Special Assistant to the President for Policy Coordination.</p>
<p>The collection generally consists of copies of speeches and speech drafts, talking points, memoranda, background material, correspondence, reports, handwritten notes, articles, clippings, and presidential schedules. A large volume of this collection was for the State of the Union speeches. Many of the speech drafts are heavily annotated with additions or deletions. There are a lot of articles and clippings in this collection.</p>
<p>Due to the size of this collection it has been divided into two segments. Use links below for access to the individual segments:<br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=43&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=2006-0469-F+Segment+1">Segment One</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=43&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=2006-0469-F+Segment+2">Segment Two</a></p>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Michael Waldman
Office of Speechwriting
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1993-1999
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0469-F
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
Segment One contains 1071 folders in 72 boxes.
Segment Two contains 868 folders in 66 boxes.
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
William J. Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Still Image
A static visual representation. Examples include paintings, drawings, graphic designs, plans and maps. Recommended best practice is to assign the type Text to images of textual materials.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
[State of the Union 1999] Elderly: Policy Memos/Language
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Office of Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Box 51
<a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/36403"> Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7763296">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0469-F Segment 1
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
William J. Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Preservation-Reproduction-Reference
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
6/3/2015
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
7763296
42-t-7763296-20060469F-Seg1-051-013-2015