As a mother, a first-generation college graduate, and a former educator, I understand the need for conservative education solutions that empower parents and students, not the federal government. That is why I led the charge against President Obama’s nationalized “free” community college proposal, why I authored legislation to simplify the education tax code, and why, yesterday I voted for the Student Success Act –a measure to restrict the Obama Administration’s reach into our local schools and replace the flawed No Child Left Behind law. This bill passed the House with near-unanimous Republican support in the last Congress but unfortunately there has been some misinformation about the bill this year ahead of the vote. I appreciated hearing from those of you who called and wrote my office to share your thoughts on this legislation and, today, I want to share with you about what the Student Success Act is and is not.
This measure is not a blanket extension of No Child Left Behind as some have falsely claimed. As National Review explains, it is a “conservative alternative” to the current law that will reduce the federal footprint on education and restore local control to our schools. That is why Members of Congress like Michele Bachmann, Trey Gowdy, and Scott DesJarlais joined me in supporting the measure when it first passed the House in 2013.
It is also why left-leaning groups like the AFL-CIO and the national teachers’ union oppose the bill and why President Obama has issued a callous veto threat of the measure. The President knows as well as I do that, if passed, this legislation will significantly limit his Administration’s ability to influence curricula and testing standards in our local schools.
The Student Success Act was not perfect. For example, I was disappointed to see the House reject an amendment to the bill that I supported which would have block-granted education funding to the states – allowing them to use these dollars for any lawful education purpose they wished. However, this legislation still offered many conservative gains.
For example, the Student Success Act repeals the so-called “adequate yearly progress” accountability metric under No Child Left Behind that resulted in federal interventions and restructurings of local schools. The Heritage Foundation called this testing scheme “the cornerstone of No Child Left Behind.” Under our bill, this flawed standard would be erased for good
The legislation also includes language authored by Rep. Matt Salmon allowing parents to opt their child out of mandatory testing without the schools being punished for lack of participation. It additionally bans the federal government from requiring states to participate in one-size-fits-all standards like Common Core in order to receive federal grants and waivers.
Further, the Student Success Act eliminates 69 duplicative government programs that are authorized under existing law, instead offering one streamlined grant that school districts can use to fund tutoring, before or after school activities, and other academic support. The bill will also allow for responsible spending cuts – setting authorization levels at more than $1 billion below what is currently in law. I have long said that it is time to stop measuring success in education by how much money we spend and instead focus on how many students we graduate that are career and college ready – this bill marks an important step in that direction.
My own academic journey taught me that education works best when it is kept closest to the parent, the teacher, and the child. That is the spirit of the Student Success Act and that is why I proudly voted in support of this legislation.
Sincerely,
Diane Black
Member of Congress
PS – This week the House voted on another major item of legislation known as the 21st Century Cures Act. While I wholeheartedly supported the policies behind this measure, I voted against the bill because of this disingenuous way that it was funded. This legislation would have violated bipartisan spending agreements by calling for nearly $11 billion in new mandatory spending. I wanted you to hear straight from me why I opposed this measure, so I explained my vote in greater detail here.
