Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
323154157
label
Signing of Higher Education Amendment 7/23/92 [OA 7577] [2]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
323154157
contentType
document
title
Signing of Higher Education Amendment 7/23/92 [OA 7577] [2]
citationUrl
identifierLocal
13822-010
collections
Records of the White House Office of Speechwriting (George H. W. Bush Administration)
Speech Backup Chronological Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
323154157
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
0b633811f1ef0a83
ocrText
Originally Processed With FOIA(s):
FOIA Number:
S
S
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the George Bush Presidential
Library Staff.
Record Group/Collection:
George H.W. Bush Presidential Records
Collection/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File Backup Files
Subseries:
Chron File, 1989-1993
OA/ID Number:
13822
Folder ID Number:
13822-010
Folder Title:
Signing of Higher Education Amendment 7/23/92 [OA 7577] [2]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
G
26
22
6
5
A
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
01. Memo
Charles E. M. Kolb to Clayton Yeutter and Roger B. Porter,
06/19/92
P.S
re: Reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. (3 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Open on Expiration of PRA
Office:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
(Document Follows)
Series:
Speech File, Backup
By SN (NLGB) on 4/5/2005
Subseries:
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Signing of the Higher Education Amendment 7/23/92 [2]
Date Closed:
12/2/2004
OA/ID Number:
07577
FOIA/SYS Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2004-2265-S
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
MR Case #:
Appeal Case #:
MR Disposition:
Appeal Disposition:
Disposition Date:
Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advise between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 19, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR CLAYTON YEUTTER
ROGER B. PORTER
FROM:
CHARLES E.M. KOLB came
SUBJECT:
Reauthorization of the Higher Education Act
On Tuesday, the Conference Committee concluded its work on
reauthorizing the Higher Education Act, the legislation that
establishes the popular multi-billion dollar Stafford Student
Loan and Pell Grant programs. Some months ago, the
Administration issued veto threats should the final bill include
either a Pell Grant entitlement (currently it's not an
entitlement) or a direct loan program that would replace or alter
the existing Stafford Loan construct.
While Pell entitlements were dropped weeks ago, to the surprise
of many, not only did direct loans make it through Conference but
they did so in a vastly expanded version. As presently drafted,
the direct loan demonstration program authorized by the bill
would extend to some 500 institutions (including proprietary
schools) and involve potentially some $1 billion in Federal funds
-- roughly 18 percent of the entire Federal appropriation.
As Roger knows, I have long advocated direct loans as a way to
reform and streamline the existing loan program which has grown
too cumbersome, complex, and inefficient. Needless to say, I am
personally delighted that the Congress appears poised to adopt
what is essentially the idea I brought to Secretary Cavazos more
than two years ago and in which he concurred. Publicly, of
course, I have adhered consistently to the Administration's
official position opposing direct loans.
Assuming both chambers pass the Conference Report, we can expect
to have this major bill on the President's desk later this
summer, probably in late June or July. The issue then becomes
the obvious: with Pell no longer an entitlement, will we indeed
veto this popular bill merely because of direct loans? On
Tuesday, at the close of the Conference, the Education Department
-- I suspect at the prompting of OMB, whose leader has
consistently opposed the idea -- issued a statement from Lamar
indicating that because of direct loans he would recommend the
President veto this bill.
-
- 2 -
Let me offer seven reasons why I believe such a course would be
folly.
First, direct loans make sense. They save several billion
dollars over five years and vastly simplify and streamline this
program. As the party of reform, restructuring, and change, we
should welcome direct loans, not oppose them.
Second, the President will not be able to sustain the veto in the
House and doing SO in the Senate is questionable. Only Thad
Cochran expressed heartfelt opposition to direct loans. Senators
Simon and Durenberger are ardent supporters. Other than Cochran,
and perhaps Senator Kassebaum, it's unclear who'd lead our veto
charge in the Senate.
Third, the President's veto will be portrayed as pitting him
against providing loans and grants to low- and middle-income
students -- a position that's an embarrassment, potentially, in
this election year. Imagine the headline: "Bush Vetoes College
Financial Assistance." The rationale for doing SO -- based on a
pilot demonstration program -- will be a difficult one to sell.
Few people will care, and Clinton would have a field day.
Fourth, the bill also includes long-awaited support for
alternative certification, a small concept admittedly in the
grander scheme but nonetheless a key plank in our education-
reform agenda. I'd hate to see this go down the tubes.
Fifth, vetoing this bill opens up the President to the charge
that he did so to protect the interest and special allowance
payments that the government now pays to "fat cat" bankers.
(Student loans are the third most profitable activity of banks,
falling just behind credit cards and commercial/industrial
lending.) A direct loan program eliminates the middlemen and, in
so doing, not only reduces the complexity in this behemoth but
saves substantial sums that will not have to be paid to
middlemen. Of course the bankers hate this, but this is a
student loan program, not indirect relief or a subsidy for the
nation's consumer banks.
Sixth, we may well find ourselves vetoing the K-12 reform bill
later this summer or fall, just on the eve of the election. This
is precisely the Democrats' strategy: force the President to
veto an education bill a month before election day. That's why
the Democrats have delayed action on that bill and moved up the
higher education measure. Signing this bill permits the
President to take credit for a constructive, reform-oriented
postsecondary education bill and, in my view, heightens his
credibility as the "education president" should he then need to
veto a status-quo K-12 bill which is more than likely going to be
God-awful.
-
- 3 -
Seventh, the bill already represents a significant win for the
Administration in terms of how any savings would be used.
Originally, many congressional supporters of direct loans wanted
any savings to be ploughed back into other education programs.
As currently structured, these savings -- which are expected to
be significant -- will go for deficit reduction, something which
I presume we would favor. The House Budget Committee, for
example, already counted such savings ($6.6 billion over five
years) in its May 26, 1992, package of "Balanced Budget Amendment
Options" submitted by Chairman Panetta.
Bear in mind one salient fact: people really care about
financing postsecondary education. Whether we like it or not, K-
12 education is perceived by many as a non-issue, in part because
it's mostly a public good paid for through people's taxes.
Parents who send their children to private secondary schools feel
differently, of course, because they not only pay taxes but also
have to write out tuition checks.
When it comes to postsecondary education, millions of families
really worry about how they'll find the money to send their
children to college. They feel this personally because many of
them have to pay for tuition or fill out the forms for Federal
loans and grants. In my view, vetoing this bill will send a
negative message to millions of real people with real worries --
a far more salient message than the one conveyed by vetoing a K-
12 bill.
Dick Darman hates direct loans and has so colored the perspective
of the Education Department. (Darman has three reasons for his
opposition: (1) direct loans will increase the national debt
(not the deficit) by a few billion dollars (an ironic point,
indeed); (2) the program needs more risk-sharing with States to
insulate the Federal Treasury from defaults (the insulation now
is only de minimis, and this argument is a non-starter for
already strapped State treasuries); and (3) the Department of
Education is ill-equipped to manage direct loans (an argument
that actually supports the more simplified direct loan program
given the massive complexity of the current program)) So be it.
But I can assure you there are lots of "closet" supporters of
direct loans in the White House and the Department, and at least
one governor at the Federal Reserve Board and a senior member of
the Bush-Quayle Campaign have supported direct loans in the past.
In my judgment, the President will not be well-served by a
recommendation to veto this bill once passed by the Congress.
It's a good, reform-oriented bill, and he should sign it.
CC: Cam Findlay
Chris Sheehan
In April, the Drug-Free Zones program expanded to entire
neighborhoods. "When kids see that the whole community is
involved, not just one person, we work as a team to find safety
and give support within our group SO we can stay drug free, = said
Janet Greer, faculty sponsor of the drug-free program at John
Patti Elementary (6/30).
For more information, call (202) 479-6500.
===== HIGHER EDUCATION
=====
*5 HIGHER EDUCATION ACT: CONGRESS COMPROMISES
Congress moved closer to reauthorizing the Higher Education
Act last night when House and Senate conferees reached a
compromise with the White House on direct student loans (multi
cites). A "stumbling block to the bill's passage,' the direct
student loan provision would bypass commercial banks and allow
schools to loan money directly to students (Elizabeth Neuffer,
BOSTON GLOBE). Under the compromise, the DoEd will oversee a
five-year trial direct loan program at a cost of $500M for the
first year. Caps on time and money made the compromise
"palatable" to the Administration (Carol Innerst, WASHINGTON
TIMES).
Ed Sec Lamar Alexander had "urged Pres. Bush to veto
legislation that included the direct-loan experiment because the
elimination of private banks would create 'billions of dollars of
new unlimited government debt. " (Mary Jordan, WASHINGTON POST)
But Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA), a supporter of the
controversial provision said, "Direct loans will be significantly
less expensive for the federal government to administer and much
simpler for students to obtain."
Senator Paul Simon (D-IL), commenting on an "all-out
lobbying campaign" by guarantee agencies and lenders said, "
...
this is not a bankers' assistance bill or a Sallie Mae assistance
bill, it's a student assistance bill, and we should do all we can
to help students get a higher education, whether it makes a
profit for Sallie Mae or not." (Simon press release)
Among other things, the higher ed bill would "broaden access
to Federal loans for middle-class students" and increase funds
for low-income students (Adam Clymer, NY TIMES, all cites, 7/1).
*6 FLORIDA'S PREPAID TUITION: THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY
Despite its financial and enrollment successes, FL's prepaid
college tuition plan is wreaking havoc for "some politicians and
educators [who] worry that the state has underestimated the
political and financial repercussions from the program." (Goldie
Blumenstyk, CHRONICLE OF HIGHER ED). The CHRONICLE adds: "State
auditors have also questioned whether the program is really the
best way for families of modest means to save for college."
FL's prepaid tuition program is the largest in the country,
according to the CHRONICLE. The five-year-old plan lets families
prepay future college expenses at prices near current costs.
More than 123,000 participants have enrolled in the plan, which
has a $26 surplus. It also yields approximately $3M a year in
5
-09-1992 16:09 FROM
TO
94561605
P.03
unnecessary, burdensome requirements that
institutions often manipulate in order to delay the
hearing process;
--authorizing the Secretary to require third-party
financial guarantees from institutions that do not
meet specific statutory standards of financial
responsibility, and, in some cases, to hold
individuals who exercise substantial control over an
institution personally liable for financial losses;
and
--the permanent elimination of the statute of
limitations for the collection of defaulted loans.
other positive features:
The increase of annual Stafford Loan limits for
undergraduate students beyond their first year, with the
pro-ration of annual limits according to program length.
The increases in the annual and aggregate limits for
Supplemental Loans for Students.
The reduction in the number of categorical deferments for
the GSL programs from 11 to 3.
The inclusion of a 6.5% combined origination/insurance
fee to offset a substantial portion of the cost to the
Government for the new "unsubsidized" student loan
entitlement.
The new requirements for annual independent compliance
audits of lenders, guaranty agencies, secondary markets, and
third party servicers.
The inclusion of a requirement that each new institution
develop and implement for two years a default management
plan approved by the Secretary.
The authority for the Secretary to provisionally certify,
for a limited period, an institution that is applying for
initial certification, experiencing a change in ownership,
or that is of marginal financial responsibility or
administrative capability.
The requirement that lenders offer graduated or income-
sensitive repayment schedules to borrowers.
The elimination of provisions that would have immunized
lenders from borrower defenses based on failings of the
2
-09-1992 16:09 FROM
TO
94561605
P.04
school attended by the borrower.
The creation of a single Federal aid application form for
the Title IV programs, which would clearly ensure that
students are not charged fees for applying for Federal
student aid and simplify the process for aid applicants. In
addition, the GSL application form and promissory note would
be standardized, which would facilitate student aid delivery
and data collection efforts.
The inclusion of most of the Administration's Alternative
Certification proposal and some of the features of its
Teacher and School Leader Academies proposal.
3
09-1992 16:08 FROM
TO
94561605
P.02
TALKING POINTS
ON THE POSITIVE FEATURES OF S. 1150,
THE "HIGHER EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1992"
Major items:
Less than half-time eligibility for Pell Grants-one key
component of the President's Lifelong Learning Act.
An increase in the maximum Pell Grant to $3700, although the
Administration had preferred more narrowly targeted award
rules in order to focus limited student aid funds on the
neediest students.
The inclusion, for the first time, of an academic
achievement component in need-based student aid programs.
The academic criteria for determining student eligibility
for follows: the Presidential Access Scholarships program are as
1) coursework; completion of specified minimum college preparatory
2) 2.5 GPA or higher in final two years of high
school; and
3) a) top 10% of high school graduating class; or
b) early intervention program participation
(subject to waiver if no such programs
available in student's area, or if the programs
have no available space).
A more comprehensive approach to and an increased State role
in "gatekeeping," to help ensure only schools of
sufficiently high quality participate in the student
assistance programs.
The imposition of new standards that, in order to be
recognized by the Secretary, accrediting agencies must
establish, as appropriate, regarding institutions' course
completion, State licensing examinations, and job placement
rates, student loan default rates, and compliance with Title
IV program responsibilities.
A number of valuable program integrity and default
prevention provisions, including:
--enhanced Secretarial oversight of guaranty agencies;
the reduction of the default trigger for the
elimination of high default schools from 30 percent
to 25 percent for determinations made in FY 1994 and
subsequent years;
--the elimination of "on the record" hearings in
enforcement proceedings, which would eliminate
09-1992 16:09 FROM
TO
94561605
P.03
unnecessary, burdensome requirements that
institutions often manipulate in order to delay the
hearing process;
--authorizing the Secretary to require third-party
financial guarantees from institutions that do not
meet specific statutory standards of financial
responsibility, and, in some cases, to hold
individuals who exercise substantial control over an
institution personally liable for financial losses;
and
--the permanent elimination of the statute of
limitations for the collection of defaulted loans.
Other positive features:
The increase of annual Stafford Loan limits for
undergraduate students beyond their first year, with the
pro-ration of annual limits according to program length.
The increases in the annual and aggregate limits for
Supplemental Loans for Students.
The reduction in the number of categorical deferments for
the GSL programs from 11 to 3.
The inclusion of a 6.5% combined origination/insurance
fee to offset a substantial portion of the cost to the
Government for the new "unsubsidized" student loan
entitlement.
The new requirements for annual independent compliance
audits of lenders, guaranty agencies, secondary markets, and
third party servicers.
The inclusion of a requirement that each new institution
develop and implement for two years a default management
plan approved by the Secretary.
The authority for the Secretary to provisionally certify,
for a limited period, an institution that is applying for
initial certification, experiencing a change in ownership,
or that is of marginal financial responsibility or
administrative capability.
The requirement that lenders offer graduated or income-
sensitive repayment schedules to borrowers.
The elimination of provisions that would have immunized
lenders from borrower defenses based on failings of the
2
TO
94561605
P.04
school attended by the borrower.
The creation of a single Federal aid application form for
the Title IV programs, which would clearly ensure that
students are not charged fees for applying for Federal
student aid and simplify the process for aid applicants. In
addition, the GSL application form and promissory note would
be standardized, which would facilitate student aid delivery
and data collection efforts
The inclusion of most of the Administration's Alternative
Certification proposal and some of the features of its
Teacher and School Leader Academies proposal.
3
P.04
MELISSI BLECIC
126 PARKWAY DRIVE
TRUSSVILLE, ALABAMA 35173
(205) 655-2804
FEB IS 5 07 PH i92
generary 14, 1992
Lamar Alexander
Education
Department of Education
400 Maryland Avenue South West
Washington, D.C. 20202
Dear Mr. Alexander:
I am a junior at Samford University in Birmingham, Alabama. I am
pursuing a Bachelor Degree of Science in Paralegal Studies, and
from there I plan to complete my law degree.
I wanted to take a moment to thank the United States Department of
Education, as well as the United States Government, for the Pell
Grant which I received for the 1991-92 school year. You will never
know how much I appreciate the assistance that you have given to me
for the pursuit of my dream.
Again, thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Melisos Bucic
Melissi Blecic
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
July 16, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR KATHY SUPER
FROM:
DANIEL CASSE Dac
SUBJECT:
Higher Education Bill Signing Ceremony
I have spoken with Dr. Ernst, President of the Northern Virginia
Community College, Annandale Campus. He would be "delighted" at
the prospect of having the President sign the higher education
bill at his campus. Their Community Cultural Center has an
auditorium that seats 500. Mrs. Bush spoke there two years ago.
The college has a full summer session -- there would be no
problem inviting students for the event. The campus is located
in Fairfax, just off the Beltway.
I have told Dr. Ernst that an advance representative would be in
touch with him and that he should not assume that the event has
been set until he meets with the advance team.
The Advance Office should contact Dr. Ernst directly at (703)
323-3101.
CC: Cece Kremer
Lisa Jaeger
Jane Barnett
(Hinchliffe/Gershowitz)
July 17, 1992 4 p.m.
HIGHER Draft One
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: SIGNING OF HIGHER EDUCATION Act
NORTHERN VIRGINIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE
THURSDAY, JULY 23, 1992
[ACKNOWLEDGMENTS]
I want to tell you about a woman I admire. She's not
someone you'll read about in the papers, or see on t.v. She is
someone who might be your neighbor, or the mother of one of your
kids' friends. [ANECDOTE ABOUT WOMAN WHO WILL GET FUNDING FOR
EDUCATION THROUGH THIS Act] Well, I met [NAME] a little while
ago, at the roundtable discussion we just had. I listened to her
story -- saw her determination -- and I was proud -- proud of
her; and proud that this Administration is giving her, and the
thousands of men and women like her, the chance to get that
education they so deeply desire and deserve.
We're giving them that chance through this Higher Education
Act of 1992. I proposed/higher educati Key on initiatives because I
the Bill
was determined that all Americans should get their shot at post-
secondary education -- and that's what this act does.
Most importantly -- it opens up the chance for a college
education for middle-income students -- the ones who've been
squeezed out. Look around you at all the good, hard-working kids
you know who qualify for college -- who want to go to college --
o
but who can't because they can't afford to pay the skyrocketing
costs unaided; and their families make just too much to qualify
?
for the basic grants and loans. This act helps them.
It finally (x bails out middle-class families -- the ones who
2
are the heart of this country -- the ones who've worked hard all
their lives to help their kids grab hold of their piece of the
American dream. Too often in the past, the funding cracks have
been big enough that these solid, decent families have slipped
through, and their kids' dreams have slipped away. Well, no
longer. It's a matter of fairness. It's a matter of our future.
And so, this act expands access to the middle class by
increasing the maximum grants; by lifting limits on how much
parents can borrow; and -- most essentially -- by letting almost
all students borrow their education money, regardless of income.
This act does something else remarkable -- a big victory in
funding that I'm really proud of. It addresses another big need
for the middle-class -- for older students who are trying to grab
hold of the education dream the only way they can -- by taking a
course or two each semester while working. Well, for the first
time in history, this act provides federal aid to them.
break the old preconceptions about educ.
You see -- we have to realize that education is not
something we get only in a steady, unbroken stream from
America 2000, I STET
kindergarten to the end of college. In my national education
AND IN AMER 2000,
om: that's what it takes
goals, I stressed lifelong learning -- because the exciting
I
voyage that is education need never end. An educator named
Robert Maynard Hutchins once said: "The object of education is
to prepare the young to educate themselves throughout their
lives." Let me repeat that -- "throughout their lives."
[NAME] knows about how a dream deferred can be the most
meaningful dream of all -- because of this Higher Education Act
3
now he'll be able to return at age [] to get his college degree.
He'll be able to do it the only way he can -- after work and on
weekends -- one course at a time. If he has the courage and
determination to make time in his life for education -- then I
say his government has the duty to help him meet his goal.
Here at NOVA, you understand the exciting implications of
all of this. After all, you're here -- and your government is so
strongly dedicated to ensuring that higher education is available
to all -- because of one very simply fact. Education is the
absolutely essential key to our future. Look at where we are.
We're about to enter the 21st century -- a time of extraordinary
challenge -- and of unparalleled competition in the high-tech
global marketplace. In order to survive -- we have to be better
prepared than ever before in America's history. Our future --
yours, mine, our kids, and our nation's -- depends on it.
Think of how much richer our future will be because of this
Act I'm signing today. 1.4 million more students will become
eligible for loans. 1.1 million students who currently receive
partial loans can receive larger ones. 1 million more students
from families with higher incomes will become eligible for assis-
tance. And 3 million families will be able to borrow more money
-- therefore have to ransom less of their personal security in
order to pass on the American legacy of education to their kids.
While opening up federal education funding to middle-class
and non-traditional students is obviously the centerpiece of this
act, there are many other exciting elements -- and I'd like to
4
draw your attention to a few.
First, the act sets tough standards for program integrity
and default prevention -- to rid the Federal aid programs of
fraud and abuse both by sham schools and by students trying to
default on their loans. We mest have
Second, for the first time, academic achievement will be a
consideration in some need-based student aid programs.
And third, it includes segments of my AMERICA 2000 program,
academin for
particularly: an alternative certification program and school
teachers and leaders academies These three key points
V
underscore a major underpinning both of this act and of our
entire approach to education: fundamental accountability.
This act reaffirms my administration's absolute commitment
to education. It's another piece of the mosaic of education-
related activities we've produced -- from our education goals to
the far-reaching challenges of my AMERICA 2000 initiative. On
behalf of [NAME] and the legions of students at NOVA and across
this country who will benefit --- it is with a great deal of pride
and hope that I sign this Higher Education Act of 1992.
#
#
#
CV BY:Xerox Telecopier 7020 ; 7- 8-92 ; 4:55PM
2028638774-
12024561647;# 2
SOCIAL POLICY
EDUCATION
would not have been able to get finan-
cial aid for the coming school year.
As Bush Drops Loan Objections,
Without the reauthorization, the pro-
grama would expire Sept. 30.
Student Aid Nears Enactment
Sen. Paul Simon, D-III., an advocate
of direct loans, called Bush's retreat
sensible: "It was becoming increasingly
evident that he wasn't going to be sup-
I n an abrupt about-face after lobby-
ported by the Republicans."
ing from Republican House mem-
Robert E. Andrews, D-N.J., who
bers, President Bush dropped his
pushed direct loans in the House, pre-
threat to veto a $100 billion student
dicted that they would lead to the de-
financial aid bill, and the Senate
mise of the guaranteed student loan
passed the conference report and sent
program run by the banks.
it to the House.
The bill (S 1150) would reautho-
"If this is a fair test, the savings
are going to be obvious, and the bank-
rize the Higher Education Act of 1965.
ing industry and their friends are go-
which governs loans and grants for
ing to be overwhelmed in the next re-
students to attend college and trade
authorization," Andrews said.
schools. It would allow all students,
According to the General Account-
regardless of income, to borrow money
ing Office, the federal government
to pay for their education.
could save about $4.5 billion over five
Bush's advisers had recommended
R. MICHAEL JENKINS
years by switching to direct loans and
that he veto the bill because it in-
BOXSCORE
eliminating all subsidies to banks.
cluded a demonstration program to
test the idea of having the government
Wide-Ranging Rewrite
make loans directly to students, cut-
Bill: S 1150 - Higher Education
ting out the middleman role of banks.
The overall bill is a wide-ranging
Act reauthorization.
The banks, which receive federal sub-
one, encompassing student financial
sidies for issuing student loans, stren-
Latest action: Senate passage of
assistance, aid to historically black
uously objected to the plan.
conference report by voice vote
colleges and universities, grants to ac-
The Senate approved the confer-
June 30.
ademic libraries, and programs to re-
cruit and train teachers for elemen-
ence report to the bill by voice vote
Next likely action: House vote to
tary and secondary schools.
June 30. The House is expected to
clear bill the week of July 6.
Currently, 6 million students receive
follow suit the week of July 6.
The conference report called for
Background: The Higher
a total of $21.5 billion in federal, state
500 schools to participate in the direct
Education Act of 1965 governs
and private student aid, in the form of
loan project, with 35 percent of the
federal financial aid for
both guaranteed loans and Pell grants,
institutions allowing students to repay
postsecondary students
named for Sen. Claiborne Pell, D-R.I.,
their loans according to how much
historically black colleges and
chairman of the Education, Arts and
money they earn after graduation.
universities, academic libraries
Humanities Subcommittee. The federal
Other students would pay a fixed
and pre-college teacher training,
guaranteed loan program pays the in-
Reference: Weekly Report, p.
terest while students are in school and
amount each month, regardless of how
much money they earn.
1799; provisions, p. 1099; House
then guarantees loan repayment if stu-
dents default.
Education Secretary Lamar Al-
passage, p. 804; Senate
exander said the program "destroyed"
passage, p. 406.
Lawmakers opened the aid pro-
the bill and would create billions of
grams to more middle-class students by
dollars of new government debt.
removing a family's home or farm eq-
But Republican lawmakers who
uity from calculations of how much aid
Committee Chairman William D. Ford,
helped write the bill went to the
a student needs to attend school. And
D-Mich., asking for a compromise.
White House June 25 and talked to
they created a new unsubsidized loan
According to the lawmakers' aides,
Bush for about 20 minutes.
program for all students, regardless of
Moore suggested that Ford and Sen-
"We told him frankly that we
how much money their families earn.
ate Labor Committee Chairman Ed-
thought we had fought the fight and
Those students would be required to
ward M. Kennedy, D-Mass., drop the
the bill was overwhelmingly good,"
begin paying the interest on their loans
provision specifying that 500 schools
said Rep. Tom Coleman of Missouri,
as soon as they received them.
be included and change it to schools
the ranking Republican on the Sub-
Loan limits on the regular guaran-
with a combined loan volume of $500
committee on Postsecondary Educa-
teed student loan program - known as
million - as in the original House bill,
tion. "We told him it would be hard to
Robert T. Stafford loans - would be
which the administration had previ-
explain why he was vetoing this bill
raised under the bill from $2,625 to
ously opposed. With 500 schools, the
that helps middle-income families."
$3,500 for full-time second-year stu-
government would have had to pro-
After the meeting, W. Henson
dents; from $4,000 to $5,500 for full-
vide about $700 million to $1 billion in
Moore, Bush's deputy chief of staff,
time undergraduate students who have
loans.
called House Education and Labor
finished two years; and from $7,500 to
Ford said that if the bill had been
$8,500 for full-time graduate students.
vetoed, he would not have written a
By Jill Zuckman
The bill would keep the $2,625 loan
new one. As a result, he said, students
limit for first-year students.
CO
JULY 4, 1992 - 1967
By ADAM CLYMER
Special to The New York Times
WASHINGTON, July 8 - Trumpet-
not see many votes in. This year they
ing its allegiance to middle-class
see votes in bills to help the middle
Americans, the House today passed
class, not the poor.
and sent to President Bush legislation
The argument some Democrats of-
to help them get more college loans.
fer privately for the increased theoreti-
The higher education bill, which Mr.
cal limit is that if Mr. Bush is defeated,
Bush supports, also promised more col-
the next President might support an
lege help for the poor. But it offered
effort to divert money from cuts in
them much larger direct grants than
military spending and apply it to do-
the Government has the money to de-
mestic programs. Then, they say, hav-
liver.
ing the higher limits in the underlying
Most House members devoted their
law would set the stage for bigger
appropriations. President Bush has
speechmaking to congratulating one
said he would veto shifting money from
another as well as the Administration
defense to domestic programs.
for agreeing to expand several student
The real cut in the maximum Pell
loan programs to provide "tremendous
grant to $2,300 would take effect in the
opportunities for middle-class fam-
academic year that begins this sum-
ilies," as Representative Tom Cole-
mer. The theoretical increase from
man, Republican of Missouri, put it.
$3,100 to $3,700 takes effect in the fol-
lowing year.
Grants Subject to Limits
The Administration had threatened
But almost no one directly addressed
to veto the bill from time to time, most
the disparity between the increases
recently over the direct loans, which
supporters say can save millions of
Congress authorized in Pell grants, the
dollars that now goes to banks to pro-
principal Federal program of student
aid to the poor, and the lack of Federal
cess them. But Republican House
money to pay for them. These direct
members met with Mr. Bush recently
grants, unlike the loans, count against
and persuaded him to drop his opposi-
tion.
the spending limits set by the 1990
budget act.
More Students Eligible
The bill, a product of a House-Senate
Mr. Ford contended the bill would
conference, was passed 419 to 7. It
make 1.4 million more college and
would change two major programs of
trade school students eligible. for Fed-
check
federally guaranteed loans by lifting
eral loans and 1.1 million current stu-
limits on how much most parents can
dents could borrow more than before.
He said 3 million families could borrow
borrow and by letting all students, re-
more and million more students
gardless of income, borrow through the
from families with higher incomes
other loan program. It would also
would become eligible for Pell grants.
periment with having the Government
Pell grants go to more than 3 million
bypass banks and lend money directly
students a year.
to students.
The loan programs reach more stu-
But when Representative William D.
dents, nearly 5 million, and under the
Ford. a Michigan Democrat who is
bill still more students would be eligi-
chairman of the Education and Labor
ble.
Committee, said the "maxiumum Pell
The bill's biggest innovation is a
grant award will be increased from
demonstration project in which stu-
Direct
$2,400 to $3,700 for the 1993-94 school
dents at some institutions would re-
year," he was being optimistic about
ceive loans directly from the Federal
the principal Federal program of aid to
Government, without going through
banks.
students from poor families.
The Education Department would
Real Grant May Be Cut
select the institutions where direct
The bill would indeed raise the maxi-
loans would be offered. At 35 percent of
those selected, students would be of-
mum theoretical amount of a Pell
fered repayment terms that would de-
Grant, to $3,700 by that school year,
pend on how much they earned after
from the current theoretical maximum
college.
of $3,100.
Loan Limits to Rise
But the real top grant for the aca-
demic year that beings this summer
Loan limits for all programs would
family income exceeded $70,000 would
would be cut from $2,400 to $2,300 under
rise. Maximum loans under the biggest
become eligible for Stafford loans, but
of the programs, the Stafford guaran-
separate legislation approved last
unlike other recipients of guaranteed
teed loans, would go to $3,500 from
week by a House Appropriations sub-
loans, they would not have all or part of
$2,625 for second-year students, to
committee. The real money that goes
$5,500 from $4,000 for third- and fourth-
to students comes under that commit-
year students, and to $8,500 from $7,500
the interest paid by the Government
while they are in school. The students
tee's jurisdiction, and its subcommit-
for full-time graduate students.
from higher-income families would
tee voted for the cut behind closed
In two other programs, the PLUS
and SLS loans, repayment of principal
also pay a 6.5 percent origination and
doors as it tried to stay within the
insurance fee.
is required to begin while the student is
spending limits set by the 1990 budget
still in school and Those loans are
In addition, the bill would remove
act.
available regardless of income. The
parents' equity in houses or farms
Representative William H. Natcher,
Stafford loans do not require repay-
from the calculations used to assess a
the Kentucky Democrat who is chair-
ment of principal while the student is
family's financial need and determine
man of the subcommittee, said in an
still in school.
eligibility for loans or grants.
interview today that he hoped that af-
The loans available to parents under
ter a House-Senate conference, enough
the PLUS program would no longer
money might be found to keep the
have a limit of $4,000 per student if the
grants at $2,400.
borrower had no adverse credit histo-
The disparity was mentioned by only
ry. That would mean that some parents
one speaker in the debate, Representa-
tive Tom Roemer, Democrat of Indi-
could borrow the entire cost of college.
Under the SLS program full-time col-
ana, who said, "I hope the appropria-
lege juniors and seniors, now eligible to
tors will come up with the money."
borrow $7,500 per year, will be able to
Limits and Reality Clash
borrow $8,500 per-year. The limit for
In most years the actual maximum
full-time graduate students will go to
grant has fallen below the theoretical
$10,000 from $4,000 per year.
limit. as is often the case with domestici
Another major change would allow
family values
-anecdote/examples
JANE BARNETT
call Lisa Jaeger, Cab. Affairs, 2800
-need an ancedote (Round Table?)
--anyone at Education drafting
--* middle class access to higher ed (expanded access)
--* small piece but big victory, people can take one course at a
time, adult learners, etc.
must report campus crimes (Cleary Bill -- Greg Fitch)
alternative certification (Lamar hates)
default
will be the news event of the day (therefore, family values)
Lisa Jaeger (2800)
--2:15 -- will get stuff from education, get back to me this
afternoon;
--3 -- Education is writing draft, will send to her late
Monday morning, she'll bring to me (with all her other material)
NY Times:
-middle-class Americans
-expand several federally guaranteed student loan programs by
lifting limits on how much parents can borrow; and letting almost
all students borrow, regardless of income; increases masximum of
grants;
Pell grants
finesse direct loan aspect? (demonstration project)
will make 1.4 m. more students eleigible for loans; and 1.1
current ones could borrow more; 3 m. families can borrow more; 1
m. more students from families with higher incomes become
eligible;
Memo from Lamar (6/30) :
bill reaffirms Federal Government's policy and contribution to
postsecondary education
--this legislation is another piece of the mosaic of education-
related activity of President and his Administraiton
--GB taking a constructive role in legislative process (as
opposed to veto)
--provides help for famlies paying college costs
--nearly 50% of all full-time students receive some type of
Federal grant or loan
--also: tougher standards on loan defeaults;
qualifies working students taking one course as a time;
must make academic progress as condition
academies for teachers and school leaders (as called for
in America 2000 strategy)
CQ:
requahorize Highe Ed Act of 65 which governs loans and grants
for students, allo all students, regarldes of cincome, to borrow
money to pay for their eduction (also historically blakc colleges
and universities; academic libraries; and re-college teacher
training)
-helps middle-income families
-created new unsubsidized loan program for all, regardless of
how much money family earns
TPs:
less than half-time eligibility for PEll grants -- one key
components of the PResident's LIfelong Learning Act
"gatekeeping"
NOVA:
-Community Culturual Center seats 500; BB spoke there two years
ago;
full summer session
JUL-09-1992 15:06 FROM
TO
94561605
P.02
STATEMENT OF EDUCATION
File OPE
Highe
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Road try it
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
THE SECRETARY
June 30, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR HENSON MOORE
FROM:
LAMAR ALEXANDER Lawan
SUBJECT:
Schedule Proposal: Higher Education
Reauthorization Signing Ceremony
Proposal: That the President host a meeting with members of
Congress, representatives of the higher education community and
selected guests* at which he will sign the "Higher Education
Amendments of 1992" -- the bill which reaffirms the Federal
Government's policy and contribution to postsecondary education.
Time Period: Within ten days after likely House passage at the
end of next week (July 10).
Reasons for Proposal:
-- The President has placed an emphasis on education as both a
domestic accomplishment and the reason he should be
re-elected. This legislation is but another piece of the
mosaic of education-related activity in which his
Administration has been fully engaged.
-- The Administration and many Congressional Republicans have
devoted a great deal of time and energy to enacting a
responsible and responsive bill. We didn't get everything
we wanted, and had to swallow more than we'd like, but the
President should take due credit for the positive Republican
contributions that were made to this legislation.
-- Shows the President taking a constructive role in the
legislative process (as contrasted with a veto strategy).
He is seen running the country and leading the Congress.
* Guests might include grateful recipients such as Melissi
of thanks (see attached).
Blecic of Trussville, Alabama who wrote the Secretary a letter
400 MARYLAND AVE.. S.W. WASHINGTON D.C. 20202-0100
9-1992 15:07 FROM
TO
94561605 P.03
-2-
Points to Be Made at the signing:
1) Provides increasing: help for families paying college costs by
-- the maximum Pell Grant to $3,700;
-- the Guaranteed Student Loan limits for almost all
undergraduate and graduate students.
Nearly 50% of all full-time students receive some type of
Federal grant or loan.
2) Tougher standards on loan defaults.
3) Working students taking one course at a time can qualify for
financial aid.
4) Provides that students make academic progress as a condition
for receiving additional financial aid.
5) Academies for teachers and school leaders. As called for in
AMERICA 2000 strategy.
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
(George Bush Library)
Document No.
Subject/Title of Document
Date
Restriction
Class.
and Type
02. Letter
Melissi Blecic to Lamar Alexander, re: Federal student loans;
02/14/92
P-6, (b)(6)
personal information redacted. (1 pp.)
Collection:
Record Group:
Bush Presidential Records
Office:
Speechwriting, White House Office of
Series:
Speech File, Backup
Subseries:
WHORM Cat.:
File Location:
Signing of the Higher Education Amendment 7/23/92 [2]
Date Closed:
12/2/2004
OA/ID Number:
07577
FOIA/SYS Case #:
Re-review Case #:
2004-2265-S
P-2/P-5 Review Case #:
MR Case #:
Appeal Case #:
MR Disposition:
Appeal Disposition:
Disposition Date:
Disposition Date:
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P-1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
(b)(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P-2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
(b)(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of an
P-3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P-4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
(b)(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
(b)(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P-5 Release would disclose confidential advise between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
(b)(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P-6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
(b)(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed of
(b)(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
(b)(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
MELISSI BLECIC
P6,
(6)(6)
February 14, 1992
FEB 19 5 07 FH '92
Mr. Lamar Alexander
Secretary of Education
United States Department of Education
400 Maryland Avenue South West
Washington, D.C. 20202
Dear Mr. Alexander:
I am a junior at Samford University in Birmingham, Alabama. I am
pursuing a Bachelor Degree of Science in Paralegal Studies, and
from there I plan to complete my law degree.
I wanted to take a moment to thank the United States Department of
Education, as well as the United States Government, for the Pell
Grant which I received for the 1991-92 school year. You will never
know how much I appreciate the assistance that you have given to me
for the pursuit of my dream.
Again, thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Melissi Bucic
Melissi Blecic
94561605
P.02
File OPE
PEDICATION OF STATES ATION
Highe-sel Highe sd
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Road try t
UNITED STATES of PAMPIRA
THE SECRETARY
June 30, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR HENSON MOORE
FROM:
LAMAR ALEXANDER Lawan
SUBJECT:
Schedule Proposal: Higher Education
Reauthorization Signing Ceremony
Proposal: That the President host a meeting with members of
Congress, representatives of the higher education community and
selected guests* at which he will sign the "Higher Education
Amendments of 1992" -- the bill which reaffirms the Federal
Government's policy and contribution to postsecondary education.
Time Period: Within ten days after likely House passage at the
end of next week (July 10).
Reasons for Proposal:
-- The President has placed an emphasis on education as both a
domestic accomplishment and the reason he should be
re-elected. This legislation is but another piece of the
mosaic of education-related activity in which his
Administration has been fully engaged.
The Administration and many Congressional Republicans have
devoted a great deal of time and energy to enacting a
responsible and responsive bill. We didn't get everything
we wanted, and had to swallow more than we'd like, but the
President should take due credit for the positive Republican
contributions that were made to this legislation.
Shows the President taking a constructive role in the
legislative process (as contrasted with a veto strategy).
He is seen running the country and leading the Congress.
*
Guests might include grateful recipients such as Melissi
Blecic of Trussville, Alabama who wrote the Secretary a letter
of thanks (see attached).
400 MARYLAND AVE.. S.W. WASHINGTON. D.C. 20202-0100
-2-
Points to Be Made at the signing:
1) Provides increasing: help for families paying college costs by
-- the maximum Pell Grant to $3,700;
-- the Guaranteed Student Loan limits for almost all
undergraduate and graduate students.
Federal grant or loan.
Nearly 50% of all full-time students receive some type of
2) Tougher standards on loan defaults.
3) Working students taking one course at a time can qualify for
financial aid.
4) Provides that students make academic progress as a condition
for receiving additional financial aid.
5) Academies for teachers and school leaders. As called for in
AMERICA 2000 strategy.
:0-14-87 1CAM
P02/**
LiSA FYI
Jane UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
Griffith
OF
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
THE SECRETARY
July 17, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR SAM SKINNER
FROM:
LAMAR ALEXANDER
Lawas
SUBJECT: JULY 22 SIGNING CEREMONY FOR THE HIGHER EDUCATION
REAUTHORIZATION BILL
Now that a date is within sight for a signing ceremony, here are
my thoughts on time, place, invitees, and message for the
occasion.
CONTEXT
This bill funds most of the major Federal Government programs for
higher education including Pell Grants and Student Loans. The
bill includes many initiatives proposed by the President and is
one of the most far-reaching pieces of domestic legislation that
has been agreed to by the President and the Congress this
session.
LOCATION
We strongly agree with your idea that the ceremony be held at a
local college or university, preferably a community college, to
give us a backdrop against which to highlight those elements of
the bill which the President proposed such as: promoting lifelong
learning by providing Federal aid to students who take as little
as one course at a time; increasing the maximum Pell Grant to
provide access to a college education for more middle- and lower-
income students; providing numerous proposals to rid the Federal
aid programs of fraud and abuse; and, for the first time, making
academic achievement a consideration in some need-based student
aid programs.
CONGRESSIONAL INVITEES
I recommend that the following Members of Congress be invited to
the ceremony:
O
Members of the House Education and Labor Subcommittee on
Postsecondary Education (Chairman Bill Ford D-MI) ;
Members of the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee
(Chairman Ted Kennedy D-MA) ;
400 MARYLAND AVE., S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20202-0100
10-14-87 09:10AM
P03
Congressmen Bob Michel (R-IL) and Newt Gingrich (R-GA) and
Senators Bob Dole (R-KS), and Al Simpson (R-WY) from the
Senate, representing the Republican Congressional
Leadership;
Representative Bart Gordon (D-TN) and Senators Bill Roth (R-
DE) and Sam Nunn (D-GA), were instrumental in working on
Administration-backed amendments;
And, key staff including:
SENATE
HOUSE
Terry Hartle (Kennedy)
Rose DiNapoli (Coleman)
Nick Littlefield (Kennedy)
Jay Eagan (Ford)
Kris Iverson (Hatch)
Andy Hartman (Goodling)
Susan Hattan (Kassebaum)
Jo Marie St. Martin (Goodling)
David Evans (Pell)
Tom Wolanin (Ford)
Sarah Flanagan (Pell)
Maureen Long (Ford)
Corine Larson (Hatch)
Diane Stark (Ford)
Jason Hendler (Pell)
Pat Rissler (Ford)
Suzanne Ramos (Kennedy)
Lisa Ross (Kassebaum)
Doris Dixon (Cochran)
In addition to Congressional invitees, I suggest that we invite
leaders from the Higher Education Community to the ceremony and I
will forward this list to the White House under separate cover.
MEETING WITH REPUBLICANS
Either before or after the meeting, I suggest that the President
hoppening
meet for approximately 15 minutes with the Committee Republicans
and Members of the elected Leadership to discuss strategy on H.R.
4323 and S.2, the Democratic alternatives to the President's
AMERICA 2000 legislation. They worked with him on the Higher
Education bill and now he's asking them to stand fast for his
priorities on elementary and secondary education. We are at a
crucial point in the House, as the bill is likely to be
considered before the August Congressional recess. These
Republicans need to hear directly from the President that he will
not accept a "business-as-usual" bill. The meeting should be
held before House Republicans have to cast their votes on the
bill. (See my points, attachment #1.)
STATEMENT FOR THE PRESIDENT
Attachment #2 is a suggested statement for the President to use
at the signing ceremony.
10-14-87 09:11AM
DRAFT TALKING POINTS FOR MEETING happening WITH REPUBLICANS
not
Thank Bill Goodling for his years of support for the
Administration's education initiatives.
Those Democrats who think that they can renege on agreements
with Committee Republicans and that they can force the
Education President to sign a bill just because the word
education appears in its title, are dead wrong.
The Ford "business-as-usual" bill is simply unacceptable and
will be vetoed.
I urge all Committee Republicans to vote for the Goodling
substitute, which includes the Administration's key
initiatives: helping States create world-class standards
and a voluntary national examination system; helping
communities create thousands of "break-the-mold" New
American Schools; giving middle- and low-income families
more choices of all schools; and, giving teachers more
flexibility in the spending of Federal money.
Committee Republicans need to know that AMERICA 2000 is
crucial to the President's domestic legislative agenda.
The bill was introduced almost 1 1/2 years ago, and the
Administration has made numerous attempts to work with
Congress on a compromise bill. In fact, a compromise was
even worked out by Bill Goodling along with Congressman Dale
Kildee earlier this year, only to have it pulled back by
House Education and Labor Committee Chairman Bill Ford.
The Democrats think they have boxed us into a corner by
crafting a bill that pays lip service to some of our AMERICA
2000 ideas by: including the words New American Schools in
their bill; incorporating a flexibility provision that fails
to include even one-half of one-percent of our nation's
schools; and, including a muddled Standards and Testing
provision. A few words from AMERICA 2000 in the Democrat's
bill isn't enough. We need a reform bill that includes all
four of our transforming ideas. That's why I support the
Goodling substitute and oppose the Ford "business-as-usual"
bill.
10-14-87 09:12AM
PRESIDENT'S STATEMENT
ON SIGNING THE HIGHER EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1992
Today, I have signed into law S. 1150, the "Higher Education
Amendments of 1992." It reauthorizes the many programs in the
Higher Education Act of 1965. It is great in scope and
significance, encompassing Pell Grants and Student Loans. I hope
that many middle- and low-income families saving to pay for their
sons' and daughters' college educations will find that this bill
eases the burden on their budgets, and makes sending their
children to college more manageable. The Administration worked
closely with Congress to produce a bill that we can all be proud
of, and my thanks to the many members on both sides of the aisle
who made it possible.
Educator Robert Maynard Hutchins once said, "The object of
education is to prepare the young to educate themselves
throughout their lives." I think the key phrase here is,
"throughout their lives." We hope to make it easier for all
Americans to pursue postsecondary education and training
throughout their lifetime--whether they're just out of high
school or returning to school later in life. The world has
changed, and to live, work, and compete in today's competitive
global economy we must be prepared. More importantly, to
function as responsible citizens in our American democracy we
must be informed.
In reauthorizing the Higher Education Act of 1965, the
Administration was guided by two major principles: improving
access to postsecondary education, and enhancing accountability
of all who play a role in its programs--students, institutions,
lenders, guaranty agencies, accrediting bodies, the States, and
the Federal Government itself. This legislation isn't perfect,
but it is faithful to these principles. As the saying goes, "The
only thing more expensive than education is ignorance," but that
doesn't mean we shouldn't try to keep costs down. This bill
contains a number of valuable program integrity and default
prevention provisions. It will crack down on sham schools that
have defrauded students and the system in the past. It will also
help to prevent student loan defaults.
I am particularly gratified that segments of my AMERICA 2000
strategy are part of the legislation, particularly: an
alternative certification program by which states will develop
new routes to teacher certification; and authorization of School
Teacher and Leader Academies to provide in-service training in
academic and other educational areas.
I'm also pleased about two other provisions: For the first time,
academic achievement will be considered in need-based student aid
programs. Second, eligibility for Pell Grants has been extended
to students studying less than half-time. This second provision
was originally part of my "Lifelong Learning Act. " Providing
grants to individuals taking as little as one course at a time
offers American men and women the flexibility they need to
improve their employment skills while recognizing their
commitment to jobs and families. This allows a working mother in
a low-wage job to receive financial assistance for courses that
would qualify her for a better paying, high-skilled job.
To change our country we must change our schools. We now have
the best system of colleges and universities in the world. As a
next step, I would like to see the same excellence at the
elementary and secondary school level, The revolution has
started and is spreading. There are 1,500 communities and 44
States committed to the AMERICA 2000 strategy. Congress can and
should help that revolution. My AMERICA 2000 legislation calls
for four revolutions: A new generation of break-the-mold New
American Schools; world class standards and voluntary national
exams; broad flexibility for teachers and principals; and
parental choice of schools. We cannot afford to accept business-
as-usual here in Washington while the country cries for change
and improvement.
Tomorrow Senator Danforth and Congressman Gradison will be
introducing my proposal "State and Local GI Bills for Children."
It would give middle- and low-income families consumer power--
dollars to spend at any lawfully-operating school of their
choice--public, private, or religious. Just as the original GI
Bill and the Pell Grants transformed higher education, the GI
Bills education. for Children could transform elementary and secondary
I am pleased to sign this legislation, the "Higher Education
Amendments of 1992. I look forward to signing the GI Bills for
Children in the near future.
###
JUL-09-1992 16:08 FROM
TO
94561605
P.02
LAM
FUT
Jane
TALKING POINTS
ON THE POSITIVE FEATURES OF S. 1150,
THE "HIGHER EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1992"
Major items:
Less than half-time eligibility for Pell Grants-one key
component of the President's Lifelong Learning Act.
An increase in the maximum Pell Grant to $3700, although the
Administration had preferred more narrowly targeted award
rules in order to focus limited student aid funds on the
neediest students.
The inclusion, for the first time, of an academic
achievement component in need-based student aid programs.
The academic criteria for determining student eligibility
follows: for the Presidential Access Scholarships program are as
1) coursework; completion of specified minimum college preparatory
2) 2.5 GPA or higher in final two years of high
school; and
3) a) top 10% of high school graduating class; or
b) early intervention program participation
(subject to waiver if no such programs
available in student's area, or if the programs
have no available space).
A more comprehensive approach to and an increased State role
in "gatekeeping, to help ensure only schools of
sufficiently high quality participate in the student
assistance programs.
The imposition of new standards that, in order to be
recognized by the Secretary, accrediting agencies must
establish, as appropriate, regarding institutions' course
completion, State licensing examinations, and job placement
rates, student loan default rates, and compliance with Title
IV program responsibilities.
A number of valuable program integrity and default
prevention provisions, including:
--enhanced Secretarial oversight of guaranty agencies;
--the reduction of the default trigger for the
elimination of high default schools from 30 percent
to 25 percent for determinations made in FY 1994 and
subsequent years;
--the elimination of "on the record" hearings in
enforcement proceedings, which would eliminate
Beth
10-14-87 09:10AM
P02/**
FYI
X
Griffith
STATE OF
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
THE SECRETARY
July 17, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR SAM SKINNER
FROM:
LAMAR ALEXANDER Lawas
SUBJECT: JULY 22 SIGNING CEREMONY FOR THE HIGHER EDUCATION
REAUTHORIZATION BILL
Now that a date is within sight for a signing ceremony, here are
my thoughts on time, place, invitees, and message for the
occasion.
CONTEXT
This bill funds most of the major Federal Government programs for
higher education including Pell Grants and Student Loans. The
bill includes many initiatives proposed by the President and is
one of the most far-reaching pieces of domestic legislation that
has been agreed to by the President and the Congress this
session.
LOCATION
We strongly agree with your idea that the ceremony be held at a
local college or university, preferably a community college, to
give us a backdrop against which to highlight those elements of
the bill which the President proposed such as: promoting lifelong
learning by providing Federal aid to students who take as little
as one course at a time; increasing the maximum Pell Grant to
provide access to a college education for more middle- and lower-
income students; providing numerous proposals to rid the Federal
aid programs of fraud and abuse; and, for the first time, making
academic achievement a consideration in some need-based student
aid programs.
CONGRESSIONAL INVITEES
I recommend that the following Members of Congress be invited to
the ceremony:
O
Members of the House Education and Labor Subcommittee on
Postsecondary Education (Chairman Bill Ford D-MI) ;
O
Members of the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee
(Chairman Ted Kennedy D-MA) ;
400 MARYLAND AVE., S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20202-0100
10-14-87 09:10AM
POB
Congressmen Bob Michel (R-IL) and Newt Gingrich (R-GA) and
Senators Bob Dole (R-KS), and Al Simpson (R-WY) from the
Senate, representing the Republican Congressional
Leadership;
Representative Bart Gordon (D-TN) and Senators Bill Roth (R-
DE) and Sam Nunn (D-GA), were instrumental in working on
Administration-backed amendments;
And, key staff including:
SENATE
HOUSE
Terry Hartle (Kennedy)
Rose DiNapoli (Coleman)
Nick Littlefield (Kennedy)
Jay Eagan (Ford)
Kris Iverson (Hatch)
Andy Hartman (Goodling)
Susan Hattan (Kassebaum)
Jo Marie St. Martin (Goodling)
David Evans (Pell)
Tom Wolanin (Ford)
Sarah Flanagan (Pell)
Maureen Long (Ford)
Corine Larson (Hatch)
Diane Stark (Ford)
Jason Hendler (Pell)
Pat Rissler (Ford)
Suzanne Ramos (Kennedy)
Lisa Ross (Kassebaum)
Doris Dixon (Cochran)
In addition to Congressional invitees, I suggest that we invite
leaders from the Higher Education Community to the ceremony and I
will forward this list to the White House under separate cover.
MEETING WITH REPUBLICANS
Either before or after the meeting, I suggest that the President
meet for approximately 15 minutes with the Committee Republicans
and Members of the elected Leadership to discuss strategy on H.R.
4323 and S.2, the Democratic alternatives to the President's
AMERICA 2000 legislation. They worked with him on the Higher
Education bill and now he's asking them to stand fast for his
priorities on elementary and secondary education. We are at a
crucial point in the House, as the bill is likely to be
considered before the August Congressional recess. These
Republicans need to hear directly from the President that he will
not accept a "business-as-usual" bill. The meeting should be
held before House Republicans have to cast their votes on the
bill. (See my points, attachment #1.)
STATEMENT FOR THE PRESIDENT
Attachment #2 is a suggested statement for the President to use
at the signing ceremony.
10-14-87 09:11AM
DRAFT TALKING POINTS FOR MEETING WITH REPUBLICANS
Thank Bill Goodling for his years of support for the
Administration's education initiatives.
Those Democrats who think that they can renege on agreements
with Committee Republicans and that they can force the
Education President to sign a bill just because the word
education appears in its title, are dead wrong.
The Ford "business-as-usual" bill is simply unacceptable and
will be vetoed.
I urge all Committee Republicans to vote for the Goodling
substitute, which includes the Administration's key
initiatives: helping States create world-class standards
and a voluntary national examination system; helping
communities create thousands of "break-the-mold" New
American Schools; giving middle- and low-income families
more choices of all schools; and, giving teachers more
flexibility in the spending of Federal money.
Committee Republicans need to know that AMERICA 2000 is
crucial to the President's domestic legislative agenda.
The bill was introduced almost 1 1/2 years ago, and the
Administration has made numerous attempts to work with
Congress on a compromise bill. In fact, a compromise was
even worked out by Bill Goodling along with Congressman Dale
Kildee earlier this year, only to have it pulled back by
House Education and Labor Committee Chairman Bill Ford.
The Democrats think they have boxed us into a corner by
crafting a bill that pays lip service to some of our AMERICA
2000 ideas by: including the words New American Schools in
their bill; incorporating a flexibility provision that fails
to include even one-half of one-percent of our nation's
schools; and, including a muddled Standards and Testing
provision. A few words from AMERICA 2000 in the Democrat's
bill isn't enough. We need a reform bill that includes all
four of our transforming ideas. That's why I support the
Goodling substitute and oppose the Ford "business-as-usual"
bill.
10-14-87 09:12AM
P O 5
PRESIDENT'S STATEMENT
ON SIGNING THE HIGHER EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1992
Today, I have signed into law S. 1150, the "Higher Education
Amendments of 1992." It reauthorizes the many programs in the
Higher Education Act of 1965. It is great in scope and
significance, encompassing Pell Grants and Student Loans. I hope
that many middle- and low-income families saving to pay for their
sons' and daughters' college educations will find that this bill
eases the burden on their budgets, and makes sending their
children to college more manageable. The Administration worked
closely with Congress to produce a bill that we can all be proud
of, and my thanks to the many members on both sides of the aisle
who made it possible.
Educator Robert Maynard Hutchins once said, "The object of
education is to prepare the young to educate themselves
throughout their lives." I think the key phrase here is,
"throughout their lives." We hope to make it easier for all
Americans to pursue postsecondary education and training
throughout their lifetime--whether they're just out of high
school or returning to school later in life. The world has
changed, and to live, work, and compete in today's competitive
global economy we must be prepared. More importantly, to
function as responsible citizens in our American democracy we
must be informed.
In reauthorizing the Higher Education Act of 1965, the
Administration was guided by two major principles: improving
access to postsecondary education, and enhancing accountability
of all who play a role in its programs--students, institutions,
lenders, guaranty agencies, accrediting bodies, the States, and
the Federal Government itself. This legislation isn't perfect,
but it is faithful to these principles. As the saying goes, "The
only thing more expensive than education is ignorance," but that
doesn't mean we shouldn't try to keep costs down. This bill
contains a number of valuable program integrity and default
prevention provisions. It will crack down on sham schools that
have defrauded students and the system in the past. It will also
help to prevent student loan defaults.
I am particularly gratified that segments of my AMERICA 2000
strategy are part of the legislation, particularly: an
alternative certification program by which states will develop
new routes to teacher certification; and authorization of School
Teacher and Leader Academies to provide in-service training in
academic and other educational areas.
I'm also pleased about two other provisions: For the first time,
academic achievement will be considered in need-based student aid
programs. Second, eligibility for Pell Grants has been extended
to students studying less than half-time. This second provision
A Message from the Secretary
The national education goals
adopted by President Bush and
the governors in 1990 are
ambitious-but worthy of a great
nation. The AMERICA 2000
Education Strategy described in
the pages that follow is a bold,
complex, and long-range plan to
move every community in America
toward those goals.
The AMERICA 2000 Education
Strategy has a language of its own.
One good way to begin reading
this booklet is to turn first to the
Glossary of Key Terms. In time,
these terms will become familiar to
the millions of people who are
needed to make America all that it
should be.
Lamar Alexander
Secretary of Education
April 18, 1991
AMERICA 2000: An Education Strategy
Overview
AMERICA 2000 is a long-term strategy to help make this land all
that it should be-a nine-year crusade to move us toward the six
ambitious national education goals that the president and the
governors adopted in 1990 to close our skills-and-knowledge gap.
The strategy anticipates major change in our 110,000 public and
private schools, change in every American community, change in
every American home, change in our attitude about learning.
This strategy is bold, complex and long-range. It will start
quickly-but results won't come quickly. It will occupy us at least
for the rest of this decade.
We already know the direc-
tion in which we must go; the
AMERICA 2000 strategy will
help us get there.
It will spur far-reaching changes in weary practices, outmoded
assumptions and long-assumed constraints on education. It will
require us to make some lifestyle changes, too. Yet few elements of
this strategy are unprecedented. Today's best ideas, dedicated
education reformers, impressive innovations and ambitious
experiments already point the way. We already know the direction
in which we must go; the AMERICA 2000 strategy will help us get
there.
AMERICA 2000 is a national strategy, not a federal program. It
honors local control, relies on local initiative, affirms states and
localities as the senior partners in paying for education and the
private sector as a vital partner, too. It recognizes that real educa-
tion reform happens community by community and school by
AMERICA 2000-1
school and only when people come to understand what they must
do for themselves and their children and set about to do it.
The federal government's role in this strategy is limited as-
wisely- its part in education always has been. But that role will be
played vigorously. Washington can help by setting standards,
highlighting examples, contributing some funds, providing
flexibility in exchange for accountability, and pushing and
prodding-then pushing and prodding some more.
The AMERICA 2000 strategy has four parts that will be pursued
simultaneously. They can be visualized as four giant trains-big
enough for everyone to find a place on board-departing at the
same time on parallel tracks on the long journey to educational
excellence. All four must move swiftly and determinedly if the
nation is to reach its destination:
1. For today's students, we must radically improve today's
schools, all 110,000 of them-make them better and
more accountable for results.
2. For tomorrow's students, we must invent new schools
to meet the demands of a new century-a New Genera-
tion of American Schools, bringing at least 535 of them
into existence by 1996, and thousands by decade's end.
3. For those of us already out of school and in the work
force, we must keep learning if we are to live and work
successfully in today's world. A "Nation at Risk" must
become a "Nation of Students."
4. For schools to succeed, we must look beyond their
classrooms to our communities and families. Schools will
never be much better than the commitment of their
communities. Each of our communities must become a
place where learning can happen.
AMERICA 2000-2
when people come to understand what they must
Four big trains, moving simultaneously down four parallel
S and their children and set about to do it.
tracks: Better and more accountable schools; a New Genera-
tion of American Schools; a Nation of Students continuing to
nment's role in this strategy is limited as-
learn throughout our lives; and communities where learning
in education always has been. But that role will be
can happen.
'. Washington can help by setting standards,
aples, contributing some funds, providing
ange for accountability, and pushing and
ushing and prodding some more.
000 strategy has four parts that will be pursued
hey can be visualized as four giant trains-big
ne to find a place on board-departing at the
llel tracks on the long journey to educational
ir must move swiftly and determinedly if the
ts destination:
y's students, we must radically improve today's
ill 110,000 of them-make them better and
ountable for results.
orrow's students, we must invent new schools
e demands of a new century-a New Genera-
merican Schools, bringing at least 535 of them
ence by 1996, and thousands by decade's end.
è of us already out of school and in the work
must keep learning if we are to live and work
lly in today's world. A "Nation at Risk" must
"Nation of Students."
is to succeed, we must look beyond their
S to our communities and families. Schools will
nuch better than the commitment of their
ies. Each of our communities must become a
re learning can happen.
AMERICA 2000-3
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
July 17, 1992
MEMORANDUM FOR WRITERS/RESEARCHERS
FROM:
DAN MC GROARTY Dmor
SUBJECT: NEW ASSIGNMENTS FOR NEXT WEEK
Please note several new assignments for next week:
7/23: HIGHER ED. BILL SIGNING (ANNANDALE, VA)
BETH HINCHLIFFE
7/24: BROOKVILLE (OH) PICNIC -- BRIEF REMARKS
JANICE CROUSE
7/23 (FOR BROADCAST 7/25): RADIO ADDRESS
JENNIFER GROSSMAN
**FYI: JEANNIE BUNTON IS PRE-ADVANCING THE OHIO AND NORTH
CAROLINA TRIPS.
# # #
(Hinchliffe/Gershowitz)
July 21, 1992 7 p.m.
HIGH Draft Two
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: SIGNING OF HIGHER EDUCATION AMENDMENTS
NORTHERN VIRGINIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE
THURSDAY, JULY 23, 1992 1:45 P.M.
Thank you. It's a pleasure to be here in Virginia
in
the cradle of American education
...
to help move our schools
into the 21st century.
We gather at a momentous moment in history. Over the past
four years
the world has witnessed changes of almost Biblical
proportions. The Cold War is over. In the international Super
Bowl of ideas and lifestyle
we won. The competition was
lopsided
...
like a flag football team taking on the Redskins.
What does that mean for you and your families? Well
when children go to bed tonight
they'll be safer from the
specter of nuclear war. Safer than they were a decade ago.
Safer than they were a year ago. Safer than even just a month
ago. I believe that is very good news!
This new world poses big challenges
and big
opportunities. From Poland to Peru
other nations are trying
to copy our system of free enterprise. A system more productive
than any other
...
a system that can make cars, computers
even that incredible 21st century marvel of imagination
the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.
Here's the question: How do we win
when more of the
world's nations are playing our game?
The opportunity is huge. When we win
...
the economists say
we will "all share in a larger proportion of increasing
2
global prosperity." What does that mean in English? It means
good, steady jobs
...
for you and all your families.
How do we win those jobs? I believe we cannot renew America
...
without renewing our schools.
Consider this: While the mean income for workers without a
college education has [#], the income for college-educated
workers has [#]. The way to pull yourself up by your bootstraps,
the way to carve out your own piece of America, is through
education. That's why one of my major goals as President is
putting college education and career training within the grasp of
every American, equally and fairly, whether they're the child of
a doctor, a steelworker, or someone on welfare. Education is
America's greatest equalizer -- and our greatest opportunity.
I want to tell you about a woman I admire. She's not
someone you'll read about in the papers, or see on t.v. She is
someone who might be your neighbor, or the mother of one of your
kids' friends. She has two severely disabled children, and a
life that's had more bad breaks than good. But she also has a
dream she won't let go of -- to be a nurse. And finally, she's
getting the educational financial aid she needs. She can take
her courses here at NOVA -- and some day her kids will sit in the
audience while their Mom receives her nursing degree. Frances
McIntyre -- stand up -- you and let us all wish you well.
When I heard Frances' story -- saw her determination -- I
was proud. Proud of Frances; and proud that this Administration
is giving thousands of men and women like her -- a better chance
3
to get that education they so deeply desire and deserve.
Frances represents Americans I've met all across this land -
- good, hard-working men and women ready to blossom if we just
give them a chance. The Higher Education Amendments of 1992 do
just that. This Act gives a hand up to our poorest kids, who
need help the most. But it also reaches out to middle-income
families -- the ones who are the heart of this country -- the
ones who've worked hard all their lives to help their kids grab
hold of their piece of the American dream. Too often, the
funding cracks have been big enough that these solid, decent
families have slipped through, and their kids' dreams have been
in danger of slipping away. Well, no longer. It's a matter of
fairness. It's a matter of our future.
This Act reaches out to middle-income families -- raising
limits on how much students and parents can borrow; and letting
almost all students get loans, regardless of income.
This act does something else: a big victory I'm really proud
of. It addresses another major need -- of older students who are
trying to grab hold of the education dream the only way they can
-- by taking a course or two at a time toward their degree while
still working during the day. Well, this act opens the federal
aid door to them.
You see, we have to break the old preconceptions. An educa-
tor named Robert Maynard Hutchins said: "The object of education
is to prepare the young to educate themselves throughout their
lives. Education's not something we get only in a steady,
4
unbroken stream from kindergarten to the end of college. In my
education goals and in AMERICA 2000, I stress lifelong learning:
that's what it takes to get ahead as individuals and as a nation.
Frances knows how a dream deferred can be the most meaningful
dream of all. Now, at her age, she'll be able to get her degree
-- and provide for her family.
How much richer our future will be because of this Act I'm
signing today. Each year, millions of families will be able to
get more Federal assistance -- and will be able to pass on to
their kids the American legacy of education.
This Act does more than open up federal funding to middle-
income and non-traditional students. Through a new Federal/State
partnership, it also sets tough standards, to rid Federal aid
programs of fraud and abuse both by sham schools and by students
who default on their loans. We must demand accountability.
In addition, this act takes a first step toward rewards for
academic achievement in some need-based student aid. And it
includes parts of AMERICA 2000, like academies for teachers and
school leaders and an alternative certification program.
That's a program near and dear to my heart, so let me take a
minute here. When I lived in West Texas, I tried to volunteer to
teach night courses, but my Phi Beta Kappa economics degree
wasn't good enough, because I didn't have the required education
courses. That's the kind of thinking that keeps us back. In too
many states, our most successful business leaders, our brightest
college professors, even Albert Einstein, couldn't teach in our
5
public schools. Well, in my first months in office, I proposed
legislation to allow our best and brightest to teach. After 3
years and 3 tries, Congress finally agrees. Now, we have a real
resource and peace dividend in the armed services: men and women
who entered combat for us and shone brilliantly -- let's allow
them to enter the classrooms and shine for future generations.
This act reaffirms my absolute commitment to education. It's
another piece of the mosaic of education-related activities we've
produced, from our national education goals to the far-reaching
challenges of AMERICA 2000 -- all based in the belief that to
renew our country we must renew our schools.
Our system of higher education is the best in the world --
because it's rooted in American ideals that make it excellent,
accessible and accountable. AMERICA 2000 is the revolution that
believes those ideals must be transferred to our elementary and
secondary schools. 1,500 communities and 44 states have already
joined up. I'm calling for break-the-mold New American Schools;
for world class standards and exams; for flexibility for
teachers; for allowing parents to choose the schools they want
their kids to attend.
And yesterday Senator Danforth and Congressman Gradison
introduced my "State and Local GI Acts for Children,' which will
transform education by giving consumer power to middle- and low-
income families. Higher education thrives on competition and
choice: we must bring those incentives to elementary and
secondary schools. It's time we let parents, not the government,
6
choose their kids' schools -- public, private or religious.
Together, these reforms will empower all Americans to get
the education we need to face -- and forge -- our future.
And now, on behalf of Frances and the legions of students at
NOVA and across this country who will benefit -- it is with a
great deal of pride and hope that I sign this Higher Education
Act of 1992.
#
#
#
(Hinchliffe/Gershowitz)
July 17, 1992 4 p.m.
HIGHER Draft One
PRESIDENTIAL REMARKS: SIGNING OF HIGHER EDUCATION ACT
NORTHERN VIRGINIA COMMUNITY COLLEGE
WEDNESDAY, JULY 22, 1992
[ACKNOWLEDGMENTS]
I want to tell you about a woman I admire. She's not
someone you'll read about in the papers, or see on t.v. She is
someone who might be your neighbor, or the mother of one of your
kids' friends. [ANECDOTE ABOUT WOMAN WHO GETS FUNDING THROUGH
THIS ACT] Well, I met [NAME] a little while ago, at the
roundtable discussion we just had. I listened to her story --
saw her determination -- and I was proud. Proud of her -- and
proud that this Administration is giving her, and the thousands
of men and women like her, the chance to get that education they
so deeply desire and deserve.
We're giving them that chance through this Higher Education
Act of 1992. I proposed key initiatives in the Bill because I
was determined that all Americans should get their shot at post-
secondary education -- and that's what this act does.
Most importantly -- it opens up the chance for a college
education for middle-income students -- the ones who've been
squeezed out. Look around you at all the good, hard-working kids
you know who qualify for college -- who want to go to college --
but can't because they can't afford to pay the skyrocketing
costs unaided; and their families' incomes don't qualify for the
basic grants and loans. This act helps them.
It gives a hand up to middle-class families -- the ones who
2
are the heart of this country -- the ones who've worked hard all
their lives to help their kids grab hold of their piece of the
American dream. Too often in the past, the funding cracks have
been big enough that these solid, decent families have slipped
through, and their kids' dreams have slipped away. Well, no
longer. It's a matter of fairness. It's a matter of our future.
And so, this act expands access to the middle class by
increasing the maximum grants; by lifting limits on how much
parents can borrow; and -- most essentially -- by letting almost
all students borrow their education money, regardless of income.
This act does something else remarkable -- a big victory in
funding that I'm really proud of. It addresses another major
need for the middle-class -- for older students who are trying to
grab hold of the education dream the only way they can -- by
taking a course or two at a time while working. Well, for the
first time in history, this act provides federal aid to them.
You see -- we have to break the old preconceptions about
education. It's not something we get only in a steady, unbroken
stream from kindergarten to the end of college. In my national
education goals, and in AMERICA 2000, I stressed lifelong
learning -- because that's what it takes to get ahead as
individuals and as a nation. An educator named Robert Maynard
Hutchins once said: "The object of education is to prepare the
young to educate themselves throughout their lives." Let me
repeat that -- "throughout their lives."
[NAME] knows about how a dream deferred can be the most
3
meaningful dream of all. Now, because of this Higher Education
Act, she'll be able to return at age X to get her college degree.
She'll be able to do it the only way she can -- after work and on
weekends, one course at a time -- improving her skills and her
future while still providing for her family. If she has the
courage and determination to make time in her life for education,
then I say her government has the duty to help her meet her goal.
Here at NOVA, you understand the exciting implications of
all of this. After all, you're here -- and your government is so
strongly dedicated to ensuring that higher education is available
to all -- because of one very simply fact. Education is the
absolutely essential key to our future. Look at where we are.
We're about to enter the 21st century -- a time of extraordinary
challenge -- and of unparalleled competition in the high-tech
global marketplace. In order to survive -- we have to be better
prepared than ever before in America's history. Our future --
yours, mine, our kids, and our nation's -- depends on it.
Think of how much richer our future will be because of this
Act I'm signing today. 1.4 million more students will become
eligible for loans. 1.1 million students who currently receive
partial loans can receive larger ones. 1 million more students
from families with higher incomes will become eligible for assis-
tance. And 3 million families will be able to borrow more money
-- therefore have to ransom less of their personal security in
order to pass on the American legacy of education to their kids.
While opening up federal education funding to middle-class
4
and non-traditional students is obviously the centerpiece of this
act, there are other elements. I'd like to draw your attention to
a few. First, the act sets tough standards for program integrity
and default prevention: to rid the Federal aid programs of fraud
and abuse both by sham schools and by students trying to default
on their loans. We must demand fundamental accountability.
Second, for the first time, academic achievement will be a
consideration in some need-based student aid programs.
And third, it includes segments of my AMERICA 2000 program,
particularly: an alternative certification program for teachers;
and academies for school teachers and leaders, which will provide
in-service training in academic and other educational areas.
This act reaffirms my administration's absolute commitment
to education. It's another piece of the mosaic of education-
related activities we've produced -- from our national education
goals -- to the far-reaching challenges of AMERICA 2000, which
states: To change our country we must change our schools.
And let me tell you: the revolution has begun. 1,500 commu-
nities and 44 states have joined AMERICA 2000. And today Senator
Danforth and Congressman Gradison are introducing my "State and
Local GI Bills for Children" --- which will transform education by
giving consumer power to middle- and low-income families.
Together, these reforms will empower all Americans to get the
education we need to face -- and forge -- our future.
And now, on behalf of [NAME] and the legions of students at
NOVA and across this country who will benefit -- it is with a
5
great deal of pride and hope that I sign this Higher Education
Act of 1992.
#
# #
BUSH QUAYLE '92 PRESS ID:202-336-7330
JUL 15'92
7:39 No.001 P.01
BUSH
QUAYLE
92
Via Telecopy
July 15, 1992
TO:
Steve Provost
FROM:
Fred Malck
Here are a few lines that may be helpful in your speech preparation.
factures made SC cberry loyo face HG
loyer ya
- (cagart t west production elder
1030 15th SL NW, Washington, DC 20005
Paid for by Bush-Quayle '92 Primary Committee. Inc.
Printed on Recycled Paper
BUSH QUAYLE '92 PRESS ID:202-336-7330
JUL 15'92
7:39 No 001 P.02
Possible Lines for POTUS for July/August :30s
These lines envision GB in interview format, living room setting,
leaning forward toward interviewer, speaking with passion.
America is still the greatest nation on earth, but we face
some big problems. I know we can solve those problems by
returning to the values that made us great. Promoting the
family as the basic unit of society. Teaching respect for
law and order and enforcing the law with speed and certainty.
Promoting thrift among our citizens. and making the government
live within its means. That's what I believe.
I believe in three basic principles and I will use them to
lead this nation. Number one, we won't have a healthy,
growing economy until we balance the federal budget. Number
two, (government policies) should encourage family values and
provide incentives for families to come together and stay
together. And number three, we are a nation of laws.
Every citizen must respect the law and the President must
enforce it. That's what I'll do, if the American people
support these principles.
Government can't solve all our problems. You can trace this
country's problems to the fact that some people have lost
sight of their basic morality. There are absolute standards
of right and wrong that we know and recognize in this country.
Our children must be taught the difference in right and wrong
and our adults must be held accountable if they don't respect
the difference in right and wrong. I'm going to speak out
for the basic moral code that unites us, whether certain
cultural elites like it or not.
When I say I believe in family values I don't just mean
that candidates should travel with their children. I
mean that children should have the right to pray in their
public school. That parents should have the right to
choose what school their children attend. That government
policy should discourage single mothers from having more
children, not encourage it. And, yes, that parents have
a right to know if their teenaged daughter decides to have
an abortion.
Let's face the facts. You and I both know, and the American
people know, that this recession and all our economic problems
are caused by the federal government spending too much money
and running a deficit. We will have a healthy, growing
economy over a long period again only when the federal
government balances its budget. I'd like to have Congress'
BUSH QUAYLE '92 PRESS ID:202-336-7330
JUL 15'92
7:40 No. 001 P.03
-4-
help in balancing the budget. But, I will cut federal spending.
I will reduce this deficit. With or without their help.
I have said from the very beginning that we will only have a
growing economy when the federal government stops spending
more than it takes in. Congress disagrees. I've compromised
with them--at great political cost to myself--I've cajoled
them and I've confronted them. But, the spending keeps right
on growing. No more. I'm using my veto to cut federal
spending and to do it right now. That's what I believe in
and that's what I'm going to do.
You know, you can trace a lot of our social problems directly
to the viscious cycle of welfare dependency we have created
in this country, I have strong views about changing that
system and we're doing it right now. My welfare plan is
based on family values. We will give families the incentive
to stay together. Fathers will be financially responsible
for their children. I will cut welfare benefits for single
mothers who have more children. Everyone on welfare will
receive mandatory job training, then we'll get them a mandatory
job. From now on, welfare is a temporary helping hand. Not
a permanent way of life.
You watched the riots in Los Angeles with the same horror that
I did. Who was responsible? The individual criminals who did
the killing and burning. A generation in our cities has grown
up without being taught respect for law and order, the difference
in right and wrong. Well, now we're going to teach them.
The Civilian Training Corps will teach them the difference,
teach them to respect the law, and give them the discipline
and work ethic needed to succeed in life. That's my program,
based on my basic belief in traditional American values.
Editorials
from years of being in the design doldrums, while some Jap-
anese design has taken on a bland sameness.
FINDING THE RIGHT
So: far, SO: good. for Detroit. But this time, U.S. auto
makers must not blow their new advantage. If they are to
MIX OF R&D
maintain their momentum, they must conquer their instincts
for self-immolation: In previous recoveries, they forgot the
here's a simple cure for the sad decline of many U.S.
recession's hard lessons once the going got better. The ur-
T
industries: Invent better products, and consumers will
gency of their cost-cutting efforts disappeared. Profits were
beat a path to your door. So, how can companies attain
frittered away on stock repurchases, fat salaries, and ill-ad-
technological leadership? Part of the answer is to invest
vised diversifications outside the car business. In their last
heavily in research and development. But not just any kind
brush. with prosperity, GM shelled out $8.5 billion for comput-
of R&D. For too long, those corporate research labs that con-
er-services giant EDS and defense contractor Hughes Aero-
centrated on the "R" churned out important discoveries
space, Chrysler paid $642 million for Gulfstream, and Ford
without turning them into products. In the more recent
funneled its cash into buying savings and loan associations.
past, companies have responded to the recession by focusing
With attention. focused on their performance, Detroit's
too much on the "D." That can boost competitiveness in
new managements aren't likely to repeat their past mistakes.
the short term, but it will leave companies unable to come
But the Big Three must realize that their window of oppor-
up with the big innovations needed for long-term survival.
tunity to take back ground from Japan may not stay open
The good news is that some U.S. companies seem to be
for long. Consumers' "buy American" mood may not last, and
learning from these mistakes. Not only are they raising
Japan seems sure to compete more vigorously once election-
R&D spending in these difficult times (page 104), they are
year threats of U.S. retaliation subside.
finding ways to do both R and D-and to speed up the
There's more riding on a revived Detroit than auto-in-
process. If the trend continues, these companies will be
dustry jobs or stockholder and investor interest-though
producing more innovative products for the same R&D buck.
the market has doubled its valuation of the equities of
At the same time, it's also clear that Washington can do
the Big Three in seven short months. It is still true that
more to help. After all, Uncle Sam spends $74 billion a
when Detroit sneezes, the economy catches cold. And a ro-
year on R&D. Yet the vast majority of this money goes for
bust Big Three means just the opposite: good economic
defense and space, areas that no longer spin off many new
news for the nation.
technologies to the private sector. That's why Washington
needs to redirect some of this money to key areas, such as
automation, advanced manufacturing, and robotics, that will
leverage industry's own R&D. It could also build a technolog-
INVESTING IN
ical infrastructure-test facilities and computer networks-
companies could use. And it needs to do more in educating
THE CHILDREN
industry about the latest science and technology advances
around the world. Couple these steps with the improve-
A
ny politician knows that the family taps our deepest
ments in companies' own R&D, and you have a good start to-
emotions as a haven of intimacy, safety, and comfort.
ward a national competitiveness policy.
Yet like much in modern society, the U.S. family is
changing: About half of all American marriages end in di-
vorce, and out-of-wedlock births have rocketed. The tradi-
tional two-parent family is becoming less common. The per-
STEP ON IT,
centage of children raised by one parent grew from 9.1% in
1960 to 24.7% in 1990. Most children born today may spend
DETROIT
at least some time in a single-parent household (page 90).
These are not easy problems to solve. But some policy im-
A
S car sales improve in tandem with the U.S. econo-
plications are obvious. First, government should reform
my, Detroit is starting to score against its Japanese
those welfare policies that actually encourage family disin-
competition (page 82). In the first five months of
tegration and dependency. Second, talking about family val-
1992, U.S. carmakers have grabbed 72.4% of the car and
ues, however necessary, will not do much to help the real
light-truck market, up 1.6 points from a year earlier.
victims of family break-up: the children. That will cost mon-
Japanese rivals, meanwhile, have lost 1.4 points, to 24%.
ey. Policymakers should focus on helping out parents who
Today, Ford and Chrysler are among the world's low-
work in low-wage jobs, especially single mothers. Low-in-
cost producers, many experts contend, and GM finally seems
come-parents could get access to better health care and tax
determined to control its expenses. At the same time, costs
credits for child care and housing. The current disincen-
are rising for the Japanese. Partly in response, Japanese car-
tives against full-time work by welfare recipients should
makers have hiked sticker prices an average of 5% this
be scrapped. It may be worth investigating ways to automat-
spring, and they plan to lengthen the interval between
ically deduct child support from the wages of absent fathers.
some new models from their current four years. The Big
Compassion and decency are not the only reasons why
Three lead the Japanese in fuel economy and safety features,
policymakers should invest in these children. Good education
both of which are important to U.S. consumers. Detroit is
and adequate health care for all young Americans are the
speeding up introductions of new models and is rebounding
best ways to ensure economic growth.
134 BUSINESS WEEK/JUNE 29, 1992
DEMOGRAPHICS
Valuing the Family
Working mothers and
merica has to sit for a new family
absent fathers have
A
presidential nomination, talks of "provid-
portrait. The 1950s snapshot with
ing tax fairness to working families, end-
dad as the breadwinner and mom
ing welfare as we know it, providing fami-
altered the traditional
a full-time homemaker tending a
ly leave and cracking down on deadbeat
bunch of kids no longer tells the real
parents." But Clinton has also acknowl-
portrait of the
story.
edged living arrangements that don't fit
Nostalgia notwithstanding, many ex-
the idealized 1950s norm; he spoke to the
American family.
perts regard the suburban scenario of the
concerns of gay men and lesbians before
postwar period as a historical aberration,
Increasing concern for
an audience of gays in May, and in a June
a brief transition between the multigener-
appearance on the MTV cable television
children is driving a
ational extended families of earlier years
network, he supported the role of women
and today's changing patterns of rearing
in the workplace in a very personal way:
search for policies to
children and making ends meet.
"I don't see why my wife should check
Depicting the American family of the
confront the new
her lifetime of work and experience and
21st century probably calls for a video
intelligence and passion and compassion
realities of the family.
recorder, not a box camera. The advent
at the front door just so I can get elected
of the two-wage-earner household means
President."
that both dad and mom will be kept on
The family experiences of the Quayles
the move; increasingly, however, one or
and the Clintons are fairly representative
BY ROCHELLE L.
both may work, at least part
of the time, at home. There
STANFIELD
still will be lots of single-par-
ent households-headed by
either mom or dad-but
absentee parents, who will
be under increased pressure
to pitch in financial support,
may be more likely to keep
in touch with their offspring.
Concern that changes in
the structure of the Ameri-
can family may mirror an
erosion of the nation's moral
values has become a popular
political theme in this presi-
dential election year.
Embracing the concept of
the traditional nuclear fami-
ly, Vice President Dan
Quayle, in a recent address
to members of the Southern
Baptist Convention, lashed
out at "cultural elites" who,
he said, "seem to think [that]
the family is an arbitrary
arrangement of people who
live under the same roof,
that fathers are dispensable
and that parents need not be
married or even of opposite
sexes."
John Eisele
Bill Clinton, who has
Family Research Council's William R. Mattox Jr.
clinched the Democratic
He traces family woes to "careerism and selfishness."
1562 NATIONAL JOURNAL 7/4/92
of other well-educated baby boomers in
Bureau, a Washington-based
their mid-40s. Marilyn Quayle, a lawyer,
think tank. In the process.
was a working mom in Huntington, Ind.,
she noted, "more women are
until her husband Dan won a congress-
having and raising children
ional seat; she then shifted-on an
on their own."
unpaid basis-to the equally professional
Indeed, the demographic
job of helping to manage his political
bombshell of the 1980s was
career. Hillary Clinton, also a lawyer,
the rise in out-of-wedlock
stayed in the paid work force, juggling
births. Thirty-one per cent of
motherhood, her career in law and her
the nation's one-parent fami-
own responsibilities as wife of the gover-
lies are now headed by
nor of Arkansas.
never-married women, up
The domestic arrangements of those
from 6.5 per cent in 1970.
who lead-and aspire to lead-the nation
Conservative study groups,
in fact provide larger-than-life examples
such as the Washington-
of the changing American family portrait.
based Family Research
As a remarried divorcé, former Presi-
Council, believe that stricter
dent Reagan, now 81, may have been
divorce laws and increased
somewhat atypical of his age group, but
tax relief for families of
not of his ex-peers in Hollywood or, for
young children would help to
that matter, a growing share of the gener-
shore up faltering families.
al population. He and his wife Nancy
But council spokesman
headed a very loosely knit family of step-
William R. Mattox Jr. con-
siblings.
ceded that governmental
George and Barbara Bush (both in
solutions are limited. Many
their late 60s and from wealthy families)
family problems, he said,
are products of the generation that gave
"primarily result from value-
rise to the idealized family-model of the
oriented or cultural issues
1950s. The President has always been the
that policy makers do not
breadwinner; his wife, the consummate
have a great deal of control
John Eisele
homemaker who left college to get mar-
over, such as materialism,
ried. A few years younger and from mid-
careerism and the selfishness
Census Bureau demographer Suzanne M. Bianchi
dle-class backgrounds, Ross Perot and his
of the Me Generation."
Two-parent families aren't "the whole answer."
wife, Margot, present a similar pattern.
Some liberals believe that
She was a schoolteacher who left the job
view
of
conservatives take too narrow
A
also a reflection of troubling statistics
market early in their marriage to raise
the single-parent problem.
they're
documenting the plight of many of
their five children.
thinking that there's one family value
and
today's children.
This year's presidential also-rans nearly
that family value is the husb hat's
One child in five lives in poverty, for
round out the menu of modern family
their bottom line," Sandra I.. Hollerth,
example, and the poverty rate among sin-
options. Patrick J. Buchanan, 53, is mar-
who researches child care issuess at the
gle-parent families with childremunder 5
ried but has no children. Sen. Robert
Urban Institute, said.
years old is 57 per cent. "That's a crush-
Kerrey, D-Neb., 48, has remained unmar-
Those who see a more positive , Ne for
ing item of data," said Rep. Thomas C.
ried since his 1978 divorce. And Edmund
government generally urge purlus, policies
Sawyer, D-Ohio, chairman of the House
G. (Jerry) Brown Jr., 54, has stayed sin-
that provide a financial and back-
Post Office and Civil Service Subcommit-
gle.
stop for children. For children par-
tee on Census and Population. "And it is
At the heart of the current debate over
ents divorce, they advocate mea-
not a life-style of choice."
family values are the challenges present-
sures to track down fathers 2518 pollect
Since 1950, the percentage of Ameri-
ed by the trends toward working mothers
child support. For children of
can families headed by women has nearly
and absent fathers. The wholesale
families, they call for generone. perental
doubled; it now stands at 17 per cent.
entrance of women into the labor market
leave policies and high-quality compre-
Within those families, however, are a dis-
in recent years has provided women an
hensive day care services.
proportionate share of the nation's chil-
unprecedented financial alternative to
"The only way we're going
100%
the
dren. According to 1991 Census Bureau
marrying-or staying married. Divorce
system that we need for our children is if
figures, 29 per cent of the nation's fami-
rates, which soared in the 1970s, have sta-
we all have to pay for it," will Raith
lies with children are classified as one-
bilized, but experts say that a staggering
Wohl, a human resources director at E.I.
parent households. These family units.
50 per cent of all new marriages are des-
duPont de Nemours & Co.. Bran with
nearly all of which are headed by single
tined to end in a breakup if current
extensive family-support policies
mothers, are predominantly poor. On
trends continue.
average, one-parent families have less
Marriages may be faltering, but fertility
than half (42 per cent) the income of two-
isn't. By 1976, the number of children
PLIGHT OF THE CHILDREN
parent families.
born to the average American woman
In the family portrait of the 350 Many the
Such gloomy statistics probably
had dipped to 1.7, but since then, the
central focus is on the children
account for the popularity of nostalgic
U.S. fertility rate has crept back up and
scholars see this as a shift in monasis
references to the 1950s as an era that was
leveled off at 2.1. "That says to me there
from the preoccupation during 1970s
a child-raising paradise. (Such recollec-
is a demographic universal that women
sin-
and '80s with adult life-styles
tions of middle-class bliss, however.
want two children," said Martha
gles scene. In part, the change
the
ignore the fact that more children lived in
Farnsworth Riche, director of policy
aging of the baby boom
generation-
poverty then-27 per cent in 1959-than
studies for the Population Reference
which now includes many
do so now-about 19 per cent in 1990.)
NATIONAL JOURNAL 7/4/92 1563
with dads] who don't have more than a
high school education," said Suzanne M.
TAKING THE FAMILY'S MEASURE
Bianchi, a Census Bureau demographer
who studies family trends. "While getting
kids back in two-parent families would
F
ederal statistical agencies take snapshots of families when they should be
certainly take care of a chunk of child
recording them with video cameras and wide-angle lenses.
poverty, it's not the whole answer."
That's the complaint of demographers and other family researchers who say
Some demographers predicted during
that contemporary living arrangements aren't being accurately measured. Of
the 1980s that because of economic
most concern is the very definition of what constitutes a family. "The Census
changes, women would put off marriage
Bureau-and by default everybody else-defines family as people 'related by
and childbearing until their 30s. Now they
blood or marriage living in the same household' and household is defined by
understand that isn't happening. "Despite
separate entrance and cooking facilities," explained Mary Grace Kovar, a statis-
what everybody thinks, most babies [are
tician with the National Center for Health Statistics. "So you could have chil-
born] to women in their 20s," Martin
dren living with unmarried parents but [the statistics] don't pick it up appropri-
O'Connell, chief of the Census Bureau's
ately. Or a woman lives next door to her kids and sees them all the time, but we.
Fertility Statistics Branch, said.
interview that woman and say she is living alone."
Young families of all stripes find them-
Most data are based on periodic cross sections of the population rather than
selves in an economic ditch, according to
on studies that follow people over time. "We tend to measure this sort of thing
a recent study by the Children's Defense
in a decennial snapshot at a time when everything is changing very, very rapidly,
Fund and Northeastern University's Cen-
especially for individual households," said Rep. Thomas C. Sawyer, D-Ohio,
ter for Labor Market Studies. From 1973-
chairman of the House Post Office and Civil Service Subcommittee on Census
90, inflation-adjusted median income for
and Population. He said that he's been urging the Census Bureau to incorporate
families without children rose 11 per
new kinds of data in its surveys.
cent, but for young families (heads of
Agencies that provide services to children and families, on the other hand,
household under 30 years old) with chil-
tend to collect and use data in different ways. Sen. Herbert H. Kohl, D-Wis.,
dren, it dropped 32 per cent. During
chairman of the Senate Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Government
those years, the percentage of young fam-
Information and Regulation, has been trying for a year to secure foundation
ilies living in poverty more than doubled.
sponsorship for a series of interagency roundtables to coordinate federal data-
To make ends meet, many young
gathering.
mothers had no choice but to look for
Why doesn't the government do it? "In this [tight] budget era, it's very diffi-
jobs. A 1991 Bureau of Labor Statistics
cult to convince the Appropriations Committees to provide money to have agen-
survey found that 58 per cent of mothers
cies talk to one another. There's the sense that they ought to be doing that any-
with children under 6 years old were in
way," said David McMillan, a Kohl aide.
the labor force, 37 per cent of them work-
The American Statistical Association is planning a conference in January to
ing full-time. Ten years earlier, only 49
discuss new ways to gather and compile data about families and children. Orga-
per cent of such mothers worked.
nizer Martha Farnsworth Riche, director of policy studies at the Washington-
As a result, more preschoolers spend
based Population Reference Bureau, said, "If you really want to understand
time in day care centers. The federally
what's happening in the family, you've got to stop looking at who lives with
financed 1990 National Child Care Sur-
whom and look well beyond that."
vey found that 68 per cent of employed
mothers with children under 3 depended
on some form of day care, as did 79 per
By most measures, the 1950s were an
ing something so extreme, we created
cent of mothers with 3-4-year-old chil-
unusual time. "It's a strange baseline for
something that was brittle," she said. "By
dren. But day care-and early education,
data," Sara McLanahan, a professor of
dividing the sexes by task and tempera-
as popularized by the federal Head Start
sociology and public affairs at Princeton
ment, we lost a sense that what really
program-is also proving increasingly
University, said. "Never did so many
works in marriage is common interest."
attractive to nonworking moms (27 per
women marry. Never did so many have
She attributed the rise in single living
cent of mothers with children under 3 use
children. Never was the standard of living
that is being seen today to the view incul-
day care services, as do 42 per cent of
so high. And it really was the last gasp
cated in the 1950s that-marriage is a bur-
those with kids 3-4).
before women entered the labor force."
den for both men and women.
Academic researchers and family advo-
A few scholars depict the essentially
Whether or not the 1950s represented
cates argue among themselves over the
all-white world of Ozzie and Harriett,
heaven, the twin hells for those trying to
effect on youngsters of being in the care
Beaver Cleaver and Dick, Jane, Sally and
rear children in the 1990s are less money
of someone other than their parents:
Spot as more than statistically aberrant.
and less family time, whether the home
whether all mothers are the best care-
"I see the 1950s as, in fact, pernicious,"
has one parent or two. Economic restruc-
givers or whether children, especially 3-4-
Frances K. Goldscheider, a Brown Uni-
turing has as much if not more to do with
year-olds, do better with trained profes-
versity sociology professor, said.
this situation as life-styles, many scholars
sionals.
Goldscheider believes that the new
believe.
The one clear finding is that babies in
suburbs of the 1950s led to a breakdown
The shift toward a knowledge-based
the first year of life probably do better
of the support system of the extended
economy requires longer and far more
with their parents than with an outsider,
family. Couples no longer lived in close
expensive preparation for a well-paying
even if it's a relative. But Jay Belsky, a
proximity to relatives and became sepa-
career and leaves those with only a high
professor of human development at
rated in time and in function, with hus-
school education out in the occupational
Pennsylvania State University, cautioned
bands away from the home for long hours
cold.
against reading too much into such find-
(because of lengthy commutes to work)
Even in families where the parents stay
ings. His studies of very young children
and wives made solely responsible for
together, "the likelihood of poverty has
identify problems among those in day
housework and child-rearing. "By creat-
increased for kids,
in particular [those
care, but they don't necessarily show that
1564 NATIONAL JOURNAL 7/4/92
day care is the cause. "We're not talking
consistent and significant and something
about devastating psychopathology here,"
dren, Mott doesn't see much gain to
we should be concerned about, but not
black children from their fathers' visits.
he cautioned. "Let's not catastrophize
huge when we look at various kinds of
White girls do better if their natural
what we're saying."
behaviors," Frank Furstenberg, a sociolo-
fathers keep in touch; Mott found, "but
Day care may also affect parents, per-
gy professor at the University of Pennsyl-
having a new man in the home appears to
haps helping to equalize the division of
vania, said. "I'm not minimizing the
be quite detrimental."
household responsibilities. Bianchi, who
effects of divorce. I'm just saying the pic-
Perhaps Mott's most surprising finding
was at home during most of May caring
ture becomes more complicated as you
relates to black boys. In recent years,
for her three sick children and unable to
study divorce as a process."
many of the problems of inner-city black
do her normal Census Bureau research,
Andrew J. Cherlin, a Johns Hopkins
youths have been attributed to the lack of
recalled that she "did a little informal sur-
University sociology professor, added:
a father figure. For example, Mattox of
vey" of the child care center across the
"Most kids adapt successfully to divorce
the Family Research Council, said:
street from her home. "A lot of fathers
after a period of initial upset. Research
"When you're looking at crime, for exam-
dropped the kids off in the morning and
doesn't convincingly show that divorce is
ple, when you really scratch the surface,
the mothers picked them up in the after-
a terrible, long-lasting problem for kids."
the most significant variable at work is
noon," she said. "I'd love to study that, to
Remarriage has been touted as a good
family structure."
see if that's how families are managing,
solution to the divorce problem, particu-
But Mott, who is looking at youngsters
moving their schedules. We don't mea-
larly for the poor. "Marriage is the single
under age 7, not teenagers, has found
sure that very well."
greatest escape route from poverty for
that "for black boys, more often than not
welfare recipients-more than work,
the form of the family doesn't make a
TRAUMA OF DIVORCE
more than transfer payments," the Family
whole lot of difference."
Research Council's Mattox said.
Many family sociologists conclude that
Experts heatedly disagree over how
But remarriage often isn't the best
disruptions in a family's structure have
the nation's rising divorce rate affects
solution for the children involved.
the most impact on middle-class children
children. The National Center for Health
McLanahan has been investigating the
living otherwise pleasant lives. For inner-
Statistics counts about 1.2 million
effects of remarriage on children, "and I
city kids, McLanahan said, "so many
divorces each year, about half of them
have been quite surprised to find that
[bad] things are going on that family
between couples with at least one child.
there are very consistent negative effects
structure is just one small piece of the
Among children 18 and under, the likeli-
that really show up for kids in remarried
puzzle."
hood of having divorced parents soared
households," she said.
from 6.3 per 1,000 in 1950 to 16.4 in 1988.
That is also one of several counterintu-
Most sociologists and psychologists
itive findings reported by Ohio State Uni-
A NEW FAMILY MODEL?
who study divorce agree that children suf-
versity research scientist Frank L. Mott,
That the family is in transition is
fer to some extent when their parents
who has analyzed results of the National
broadly acknowledged. But there is fierce
split up, a view that is getting more atten-
Longitudinal Survey of Youth, a massive
disagreement over the direction of
tion today than it did two decades ago,
survey of youngsters from all types of
change and what can-or should-be
when restrictions against divorce were
family situations that has fol-
being eased in many states. "When I got
lowed the same respondents
divorced in the early '70s, I said to my
since 1979.
parents: 'Happy mothers make happy chi-
Mott has found, for example,
dren. What's good for me will be good for
that young black fathers-who
them,' McLanahan recalled. "There
in most cases were never mar-
were a lot of books making that case
ried to their children's moth-
then. I think they went too far. Parents
ers-frequently live within a
need the information that if they decide
mile of their children and visit
to divorce, their children are at greater
them frequently. Young white
risk."
fathers, who are more likely to
The financial consequences of divorce
have been divorced, are less
on children are severe. A 1991 Census
likely to visit. However, young
Bureau report found that the household
white mothers are more likely to
income of the custodial parent plunged
have acquired a new husband or
by 37 per cent within four months of a
live-in boyfriend.
separation. Only 58 per cent of women
Mott is not convinced that the
with children under age 21 had been
conventional assumptions about
awarded child-support payments, and of
the negative impact on children
them only about half said they received
of divorce or being reared in
the full amount due.
single-parent households will be
Studies show that children of divorce
upheld by his analysis. "More
are more likely to get ill or injured, do
often than not, I don't find
less well in school or drop out entirely
effects," Mott said. Acknowl-
and have greater trouble in their own
edging that his findings "would
marriages. But it's not clear whether
be quite controversial," he said,
these misfortunes are the result of the
"I'm still working on it slowly
divorce itself, the problems in the family
and have not tried to publish
that caused the divorce, the decline in
yet."
Richard A. Bloom
income that almost inevitably follows
Contrary to common wisdom,
divorce or a combination of factors.
which advocates involvement of
Population expert Martha Farnsworth Riche
"The over-all effect of the divorce is
absent fathers with their chil-
Children get support from outside the living unit.
NATIONAL JOURNAL 7/4/92 1565
homes, the fathers are actually
by golly, three years later, they had not
present but go unrecorded to
created a pregnancy."
avoid the loss of welfare benefits.
To make life easier for young parents,
In other cases, fathers live close by
many researchers advocate paid parental
and have frequent contact with
leave, high-quality day care and family-
their children. Financial support
centered work options. Paid parental
received from absentee fathers
leave for six months or a year after the
also is sometimes underreported.
birth of a baby is probably the farthest
(For more on the adequacy of avail-
off, given the White House's current
able statistics, see box, p. 1564.)
opposition to mandating even unpaid
"As long as you define the fami-
leave-something that many large firms
ly in terms of the living unit, things
already provide voluntarily. But paid
look weird," the Population Refer-
parental leave is a fact of life in several
ence Bureau's Riche said. But she
European countries, including France
added that in studies that take a
and Germany.
broader look at family-support
Improvements in the quality of day
relationships, "we don't see that
care services may be on the way. Legisla-
much change."
tion enacted in 1990 expanded federal tax
credits for parents who must pay for child
care and provided for grants to states to
TOUGH CHOICES
improve day care programs and expand
In her book New Families, No
Head Start classes for disadvantaged
Families? (University of California
preschoolers.
A. Bloom
Press, 1991); co-authored with
As the Urban Institute's Hofferth
Linda J. Waite, Goldscheider por-
noted, the widespread availability of day
trays the American family as being
care ("there's always one more person
at a critical juncture. Both men
out there willing to take a child in") has
and women, she writes, face a
somewhat ironically aggravated the prob-
Urban Institute researcher Sandra L. Hofferth
tough choice: Either fashion egali-
lem of uneven quality.
Competition has led to lower-quality day care.
tarian "new families" where out-
Because of stiff competition, day care
side work, housework and decision
providers have kept costs low (adjusted
done about it, particularly by govern-
making is shared or face "no families,"
for inflation, the cost of day care has not
ment.
increased single living and mother-only
gone up in 15 years). To do that, they
The Family Research Council's conser-
families.
lowered salaries and thus quality. Hof-
vative theorists want to return, as far as is
Students of the family who agree with
ferth and others are pressing for subsidies
possible, to the traditional two-parent
Goldscheider believe that the federal and
of some sort to improve day care services
family with a stay-at-home mom. They
state governments must play a direct role
and to provide information to parents to
advocate a minimal role for government,
in easing the way toward the new family
help them choose high-quality care.
but would like state governments to do
of increasingly shared responsibilities.
Some state governments and many
away with no-fault divorce laws that they
Some steps are already on the books.
large firms such as duPont already have
believe have helped pave the way toward
Legislation is in place, for example, to
implemented family-centered work
more broken families.
make it more difficult for absentee
options. Flextime, compressed work
The council also backs federal and
fathers to evade their child-support obli-
weeks (three days on, two days off) and
state reforms designed to encourage mar-
gations. States are now required to track
work at home are some of the alterna-
riage among mothers receiving welfare.
down deadbeat dads and, in some cases,
tives. This is a relatively new develop-
But it doesn't back pending legislation
train them or help them find jobs so they
ment. DuPont's Wohl remembers it was
that would require employers to grant
will be able to pay.
less than three years ago when a young
unpaid parental leave. President Bush,
A side benefit expected from financial
woman employee asked to take a com-
who opposes the bill's mandatory lan-
involvement of dads is their emotional
puter with her on maternity leave so she
guage, is likely to veto the measure for
involvement in their kids. "Fathers who
could work at home after the birth of her
the second time if Congress sends it to
pay child support tend to visit children
child. "It was a big issue then," Wohl
him again. Instead, the council supports
more and be more involved in their
said. "Now it's practically a done deal for
employment preferences, similar to those
lives," said Freya Lund Sonenstein, a
anyone who asks."
for veterans, for mothers who seek to
senior research associate at the Urban
It's not only women employees who
return to the labor force after staying
Institute, one of a few researchers who
are seeking these options. "Over the last
home with children for as long as seven
studies fathers. But she quickly acknowl-
five years we've seen a 50 per cent in-
years.
edged that research doesn't show
crease in the number and percentage of
Other students of the family assign
whether that will be the case when child-
men who favor flexible work options as a
equal urgency to finding ways to assure
support payments are withheld from
way to help them manage work and fami-
children the stability and nurture of two
fathers' wages.
ly responsibilities," she said. Young
loving parents, but they are less nostalgic
In fact, Sonenstein's research has indi-
fathers in the company tell her "our lives
about the family of the 1950s and are
cated that peer-group values are likely to
have changed as much as young
looking instead for 1990s alternatives.
have more of an effect on prospective
women's."
Some alternative arrangements may
teen fathers than the threat of having to
In this respect, the search for a new
already be working well but remain
pay child support. Citing a study of young
family model may take the country all the
undocumented because of inexact or out-
men that she conducted, she said, "If
way back to the early days on the farm
dated research methods. In some cases,
they thought their family and friends
when the livelihood was earned at home
in households reported as single-parent
would be upset if they got a girl pregnant,
and everyone pitched in with chores.
1566 NATIONAL JOURNAL 7/4/92
Nexis (Lib)
Jonie At Nex's:
curnt (File)
X3431
/. Latch w/l Key; type focus Type w/20
deliquen! or problem or (FiM!
2. (parent or family) W/5 (work or Job)
W/25 (family or unit or Hid or child!) w/5
(Break date or deteriorate or problem deliquent)
andiAFt 792
MINNIAPOLIS Star
BusiNess wr 6/29
Tribune
National JOURNal
July 4, '92
7/12 Chacago
Ruthie KONiCK 649-4404
Nexs Strategy search
Family w/ig values and Job w/20 Jobs or
work W/20 financial or finances W/20 children
and family w/10 Latch Vey kids W/2 w/zo Neglect
and PATENTS of or Parentaliquidance
w/20 recreation on vacation w/o Family Psycholog. W/20
or studies od dated
- Nexis tratespy Search
Family w/10 values w/20 church W/20 Jobs or
Work w/zo fiNaNcial or finances w/20 children
w/20 Nurturing w/zo Latch Z Key
kids w/10 Parental Hprez guidance W/20 Z
delinquent or delinquency w/20 recreation or
Vacation w/20 psychological or Sociological w/o₂ 10
Studies or data.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
DATE: 7-22
TO: Gary
FROM: LISA M. JAEGER
Associate Director
Office of Cabinet Liaison
Room 239, OEOB, x2800
Voile! / also ache
attached is & list of
& copy X Beth -
Gigresshen /Scrator ulo
may attend - The sorry
is
delay - -
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
July 21, 1992
SIGNING CEREMONY FOR THE HIGHER EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1992
DATE:
July 23, 1992
LOCATION:
Community Cultural Center
Northern Virginia Community College
TIME:
1:45 p.m.
THROUGH:
EDE HOLIDA
DAVID DEMAREST
FROM:
JANE E. BARNETT
LISA JAEGER
gB
I. PURPOSE
To sign the "Higher Education Amendments of 1992. "
II. BACKGROUND
The bill you will sign, "Higher Education Amendments of
1992, " reauthorizes the Higher Education Act of 1965. It
continues funding for the major federal higher education
programs, including Pell Grants and student loans. At the
same time this legislation includes some of the key
education reform proposals you have supported, such as
alternative teacher certification and merit scholarships
for Pell recipients. The bill also reforms the existing
programs by making aid more accessible to a wider range of
people as well as deterring fraud and student loan
defaults.
On the dais behind you will be 25 people, many of whom
will directly benefit from this legislation. One is a
single mother who will be able to attend school because
the bill allows financial aid for students who are only
able to take a few credits at a time. Another is a father
of a young child who is able to attend school because of
federal aid. Frances McIntire, whom you will mention in
your speech, is a mother of two handicapped children who
could not attend school without financial aid.
Also on the dais will be Delia Stafford, who earlier this
year sent you an honorary alternative teacher certificate
from the state of Texas. Harry King, Sallie Mae Chairman,
will be on the dais as well.
In the audience will be members of Congress and
approximately 250 college students, higher education
officials, and key members of higher education groups.
-2-
III. PARTICIPANTS
The President
Secretary Alexander
Dr. Ernst, Northern Virginia Community College President
Senators and Congressmen (see attached list)
Approximately 250 students, members of education groups,
and higher education officials
IV. PRESS PLAN
Open.
V. SEQUENCE OF EVENTS
Please see Advance Office scenario.
VI. REMARKS
To be provided by speechwriters.
SIGNING CEREMONY FOR THE HIGHER EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1992
MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN ATTENDANCE
Senator Dan Coats (R-IN) - pending
Senator Chris Dodd (D-CT)
Senator Nancy Kassebaum (R-KS)
Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA)
Senator Claiborne Pell (D-RI)
Senator Paul Simon (D-IL) - pending
Senator John Warner (R-VA)
Congressman Bob Andrews (D-NJ)
Congressman John Boehner (R-OH)
Congressman Tom Coleman (R-MO) - pending
Congressman Bill Ford (D-MI)
Congressman Bill Goodling (R-PA)
Congressman William Jefferson (D-LA)
Congressman Scott Klug (R-WI)
Congresswoman Nita Lowey (D-NY)
Congresswoman Susan Molinari (R-NY)
Congressman Bill Orton (D-UT)
Congressman Tim Petri (R-WI)
Congressman Jim Ramstad (R-MN)
Congressman John Reed (R-RI)
Congresswoman Marge Roukema (R-NJ)
Congressman Tom Sawyer (D-OH) - pending
Congressman Pat Williams (D-MT)
Longfellow
5¹¹
1
Alike were they free from
14 But the great Master said, "I see
Fear, that reigns with the tyrant, and envy,
No best in kind, but in degree;
the vice of republics.
I gave a various gift to each,
Ib. pt. I, sec. I
To charm, to strengthen, and to teach."
Ib. st. 6
2 When she had passed, it seemed like the ceas-
ing of exquisite music.
Ib.
15 All your strength is in your union.
All your danger is in discord;
3 Silently one by one, in the infinite meadows
Therefore be at peace henceforward,
of heaven
And as brothers live together.
Blossomed the lovely stars, the forget-me-
The Song of Hiawatha [1855], pt. I
nots of the angels.
Ib. 3
16 By the shores of Gitche Gumee,
4 Talk not of wasted affection! affection never
By the shining Big-Sea-Water,
was wasted;
Stood the wigwam of Nokomis,
If it enrich not the heart of another, its wa-
Daughter of the Moon, Nokomis.
ters, returning
Ib. III
Back to their springs, like the rain, shall fill
17 From the waterfall he named her,
them full of refreshment:
That which the fountain sends forth returns
Minnehaha, Laughing Water.
Ib. IV
again to the fountain.
Ib. II, I
18 As unto the bow the cord is,
Give what you have. To someone, it may be
So unto the man is woman,
5
better than you dare to think.
Though she bends him, she obeys him,
Kavanagh [1849]
Though she draws him, yet she follows,
Useless each without the other!
Ib. X
6 Build me straight, O worthy Master!
19
If we could read the secret history of our
Staunch and strong, a goodly vessel.
The Building of the Ship [1849], l. I
enemies, we should find in each man's life
sorrow and suffering enough to disarm all
7 And see! she stirs!
hostility.
Driftwood [1857]
She starts-she moves-she seems to feel
20 IfI am not worth the wooing, I surely am not
The thrill of life along her keel.
Ib. l. 349
worth the winning.
The Courtship of Miles Standish
Sail on, O Ship of State!
[1858], pt. III
8
Sail on, O Union, strong and great!
21 "Why don't you speak for yourself, John?"¹
Humanity with all its fears,
Ib.
With all the hopes of future years,
Is hanging breathless on thy fate!
22 Saint Augustine! well hast thou said,
Ib. l. 378
That of our vices we can frame
A ladder, if we will but tread
9 Our hearts, our hopes, our prayers, our tears,
Beneath our feet each deed of shame.²
Our faith triumphant o'er our fears,
The Ladder of St. Augustine
Are all with thee-are all with thee!
[1858], st. I
Ib. l. 397
23 The heights by great men reached and kept
10 There is no fireside, howsoe'er defended,
Were not attained by sudden flight,
But has one vacant chair!
But they, while their companions slept,
Resignation [1849], st. I
Were toiling upward in the night.
Ib. st. IO
11 There is no Death! What seems so is transi-
tion;
24 The long mysterious Exodus of death.
This life of mortal breath
The Jewish Cemetery at Newport
Is but a suburb of the life elysian,
[1858], st. I
Whose portal we call Death.
Ib. st. 5
25
A boy's will is the wind's will,
12 Nothing useless is, or low.
And the thoughts of youth are long, long
The Builders [1849], st. 2
thoughts.
13 God sent his Singers upon earth
My Lost Youth [1858], refrain
With songs of sadness and of mirth.
¹See Shakespeare, 209:9.
The Singers [1849], st. I
2See St. Augustine, 129:10, and Tennyson, 531:19.
07/23/92
10:33
202 401 3036
OPBE
1
002
NOTE TO GARY GERSCHWITZ
Per our conversation following is a statement regarding earnings
for use in the President's speech.
A similar trend can be seen for more recent high school and
college graduates. For example, men between the ages of 25 and
34 earned $6,000 more in 1980 if they completed college compared
to high school graduates. This difference had increased to
$10,000 by 1990.
The methodology used to produce these numbers differs slightly
from that used in generating the 25 & older numbers already in
the speech. Our data are from the Current Population Report P-60
Series, "Money Income of Households, Families, and Persons in the
United States, 1980 and 1990" while the other are from special
census tabulations which are not available to the public. In
addition, I used the general CPI-U to convert 1980 to 1990
dollars while the other used the CPI-UX1 which I could not find
on such short notice. These differences will not be significant
especially since everything is rounded off to the nearest $1,000.
If you have any questions regarding this information, please
contract me at 401-0182.
Dan Goldenberg
Using median income data adjusted by CPI-U-X1 for individuals 25
years of age and older:
o In 1980, a man with a college education made 43 percent more
income per year than a man with only a high school education.
By 1990, that spread had increased to 74 percent.
In 1980, a man with a college education made $11,000 more
income per year--in terms of $1990--than a man with only a
high school education. By 1990, that spread had increased to
more than $16,000.
In 1980, a woman with a college education made 87 percent more
income per year than a woman with only a high school
education. By 1990, that spread had increased to 111 percent-
-that is, a woman with a college education made more than
twice the income per year of a woman with only a high school
degree.
In 1980, a woman with a college education made about $8,000
more income per year--in terms of $1990--than a woman with
only a high school education. By 1990, that spread had
increased to nearly $12,000.
Such incentives from higher education do not go unrecognized.
The percentage of men with a college education rose from 21.3
percent in 1980 to 24.6 percent in 1990--a 15 percent
increase. For women, the percentage with a college education
rose from 14.2 percent in 1980 to 19.6 percent in 1990--a 38
percent increase.
It'S the John Kitchen: x466
395
The 15 percent increased represents the increasin
SHARE
the precutage of was ME N with a college degree. The
absolute increase is 3.3 percentage points.
3.3 pet. pt.s
21.3 pet
= %
Similafor the 38 % increases for wome with college
degre.
The percent ^ increase are not for the number of men or
women with collegedeguis.
07/23/92 10:32
C202 401 3036
OPBE
$
001
)
FAX COVER SHEET
TO
:
Gary Gerschwitz
FROM :
Dan Goldenberg
Department of Education
Name and Telephone Number of
Sender: 401-0182
Number of Pages, including cover sheet:
2
Our Fax Number is: (202) 401-3036
Your Fax Number is: 456-6218
07-22-92 03:08PM
P01
THE
Housing and
Class
Household Economic
Statistics Division
DATE: 7/22/92
NUMBER OF PAGES:
3
(plus cover)
FAX TO: Gary Gershowitz
FAX NUMBER:
202 456 6218
ORGANIZATION:
PHONE NUMBER:
speech writing
202 456 7750
White House
Charge 0 $
FROM: Lydia Scoon-Rogen
FAX NUMBER: (301)763-8412
Income Statistics Branch
PHONE NUMBER: (301)763-9576
FAX TRANSMISSION RECORD
TITLE OF DOCUMENT:
AS REQUESTED
_FOR CLEARANCE
_PER CONVERSATION
_FOR COMMENTS
_PER MEMORANDUM
_FOR YOUR INFORMATION
MESSAGE:
To convert current dollars to constant 1990 dollars,
muthply current dollar mean estimates on table
by "1990 dollars factor" on page titled "Consumer
Price Index." After you convert to constant dollars,
you will have adjusted for inflation.
MAILING ADDRESS:
STREET ADDRESS:
Bureau of the Census
HHES Division
HHES Division
3737 Branch Avenue
Room 307-1, Iverson Mail
Room 307
Washington, DC 20233-3300
Temple Hills, Maryland 20748
4/14/92
P02
Educational Attainment--Number and Mean Earnings for Year-Round, Full-Time Morkers 18 Years and Over between 1980 and 1990
No
Total
College
College
NUMBER
1990
80,773
41,490
39,284
1987
76,832
41,018
35,814
1986
74,275
39,571
34,705
1985
72,279
38,907
33,373
1983
66,657
36,699
29,960
1981
65,027
37,567
27,461
1980
64,663
37,955
26,708
MEAN
IN CURRENT DOLLARS
1990
28,903
22,136
36,050
1987
25,604
20,312
31,665
1986
24,633
19,374
30,630
1985
23,493
18,719
29,058
1983
21,042
17,041
25,942
1981
18,957
15,767
23,320
1980
17,541
14,696
21,584
SOURCE:
Current Population Reports, Series p-60
Income Statistics Branch
U.S. Bureau of the Census
U.S. Department of Commerce
Washington, D.C. 20233
07-22-92 03:08PM
(301) 763 8576
07-22-92 03:08PM
P03
CONSUMER PRICE INDEX
CPI-U-X1
1990
1982-84=
Dollars
Year
100.0
Factor
1947
24.2°
5.400826.
1948
26.2.
4.988550.
1949
25.9*
5.046332*
1950
26.24
4.988550-
1951
28.3
4.618375
1952
28.8
4,538194
1953
29.0°
4.506897.
1954
29.2*
4.476027*
1955
29.1'
4.491409*
1956
29.6*
4.415541-
1957
30.5*
4.285246*
1958
31.4°
4.162420*
1959
31.6.
4.136076*
1960
32.2°
4.059006.
1961
32.5.
4.021538'
1962
32.8°
3.984756*
1963
33.34
3.924925*
1964
33.7*
3.878338*
1965
34.2
3.821637'
1966
35.2
3.713068*
1967
36.3°
3.600551*
1968
37.7-
3.466844'
1969
39.4*
3.317259'
1970
41.3"
3.164649.
1971
43.1°
3.032483*
1972
44.4*
2.943694*
1973
47.2*
2.769068*
1974
51.9°
2.518304*
1975
56.2°
2.325623.
1976
59.4
2.200337*
1977
63.2.
2.068038*
1978
67.5°
1.936296*
1979
74,0*
1.766216*
1980
82.3'
1.588092'
1981
90.1.
1.450610°
1982
95.6*
1.367155'
1983
99.6'
1.312249'
1984
103.9*
1.257940*
1985
107.6.
1.214684*
1986
109.6.
1.192518*
1987
113.6.
1.150528*
1988
118.3"
1.104818'
1989
124,0'
1.054032*
1990
130.7*
1.000000
Factors prior to 1967 are extrapolated.
/ 377-2000 COMM. / 70855664 Public AFFNTS/
214-1659 (Vance Grant) DOE: Education iNfo Branck
Edward We/NiAX: Buraclor CeNcus: 301-763-8576
(for income level Question
MONEY iNCOMP of
Shirley smith
HOUSEROIDS, families A
persons
B.Davidgon chriss JOhnYoN
708.5547/OFFICOF
A
Assof
Careifort.
Evans
DOE/studiFina AssistaNce
G Diso 708-8391
Bruce Murrie 708-9366
Educational Attain Ment, Mean EAININGS
Mary OFFICE of Assistance Sec for
Post sec. Education
-Call to confirm stats iN Ed speech-
John Haynes (Act. Dept Assistant sec for stud.
(STOM PESHA: Director
Assistance: 708-745-9448
708-4764
Dee Goldsmith
THE WHITE house
WASHINGTON
Higher Ed
Speech
2 problems
from DOE:
I
"1980 has w/ college idention
hade 43 of hore
11
By 1990, that number
there stats hey be
incorrect - DOE statisticians
Say they're not accurate- -
you can call
maureen McCaughlin
401-1958
OR Allan Ginsberg
(both are statistician)
on 401.0182
OVER
401-2182 (Dan Goldenberg)-
2
At end of speech:
"State & Local G Acts"
should read
state of Locel
GI Bills
Thanks -
Sorry to have to change
things-
Lun
To
Gary
Date
Time 2:00
WHILE YOU WERE OUT
M
45a Yeager
of
Phone
X2800
Area Code
Number
Extension
TELEPHONED
X
PLEASE CALL
X
CALLED TO SEE YOU
WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU
URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
Message
CK
Operator
AMPAD
EFFICIENCY®
23-023 CARBONLESS
STATE
3 shst
ACE
12 000 ans
THE
STATE
To Cary
Date 7/23
Time 10.15
WHILE YOU WERE OUT
M Dan Goldenberg
of
Phone
401-0182
Area Code
Number
Extension
TELEPHONED
PLEASE CALL
CALLED TO SEE YOU
WILL CALL AGAIN
WANTS TO SEE YOU
URGENT
RETURNED YOUR CALL
Message
Operator
AMPAD
EFFICIENCY@
23-023 CARBONLESS
Riz
Hutter
254-8169
Julyettertal
SAIIY Ruvion
Ma 1/17/1991
FLOTUS
Spokeat
N.U.C.C
confirmed