After a rough road through the House, the remaking of the
Head Start program is heading to the Senate, where leaders must decide whether
they, too, want to shift preschool power to some states.
The House put its mark on the landmark education program early Friday, voting
by a hair-thin 217-216 margin to give up to eight states control over Head Start
so they can coordinate it with other programs. The White House backs the idea.
Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., who chairs the Senate Education Committee, has
expressed interest in upgrading the states' role but has not committed to the
House plan. He also wants a bipartisan bill, and several Senate Democrats say
they won't back the legislation if it experiments with state control over the
long-standing federal program.
The House raised another issue that faces an uncertain fate in the Senate: a
move to let religious-oriented Head Start centers hire people based on their
faith, such as a Catholic center that only wants to hire Catholics.
As a sign of the Republicans' tenuous victory margin, Rep. John Sullivan,
R-Okla., who was in a car accident on Wednesday, appeared in a wheelchair
Thursday night to cast votes. He coordinated the plan with Rep. Tom DeLay,
R-Texas, and rested in the majority leader's office between votes.
Democrats accused Republicans of dismantling a program that has provided
nutritional, social, emotional and literacy help to more than 20 million needy
children since 1965.
"This Republican bill breaks Head Start's 35-year bipartisan tradition by
reducing the quality of Head Start services and the number of children who will
receive them," said Rep. George Miller, D-Calif. "Their bill remains
as unacceptable today as the day it was first unveiled."
Opposition also came from groups such as the Children's Defense Fund, the
National League of Cities, the American Federation of Teachers and the National
Women's Law Center. Bill sponsors pointed out that the state pilot project won
support from the Council of Chief State School Officers and the Brookings
Institution.
"Why shouldn't we see if it works?" said Rep. John Boehner, R-Ohio,
chairman of the House Education and the Workforce Committee. "Why
shouldn't we take the chance to help these children?"
Overall, much of the House bill went through without controversy. It raises
academic expectations for children and requires more teachers to hold a
bachelor's degree, for example.
The bill authorizes spending increases yearly, upping the program's budget to
$7.4 billion by 2008. But that won't even cover inflationary costs, some
observers warned.
"The question is, what exactly are you accomplishing by simply giving
states the money?" said Steve Barnett, director of the National Institute
for Early Education Research. "If nothing else, some additional money to
facilitate this would almost be a show of good faith that the federal
government is not looking to get out of this by shifting it to the
states."
House Republicans brought their bill to the floor after struggling for party
unity. GOP leaders said moderate and conservative members came together on a
deal to cap yearly spending increases and to ensure existing Head Start centers
won't lose money if they uphold standards.
The bill would guarantee that the states that take control of Head Start could
not cut the funds of any existing Head Start center for five years - the
duration of the legislation. Those centers, however, can see their money
disappear if they fail to meet the bill's standards.
Also, the GOP compromise would set specific money increases over five years,
not just the next year. That was to satisfy conservatives who thought the
spending language would allow bigger increases than they wanted.
Sponsors said the bill assures that states eligible for the pilot project could
not move Head Start money to other areas of government, cut services to
children or drop standards of care. But opponents said the bill doesn't back
those promises.
House Democrats tried to eliminate the state project. That amendment failed,
229-200. In a 231-199 vote, they also failed to remove language allowing
religiously oriented centers to hire people based on their faith.
Bill sponsors said that language would free organizations to choose workers who
share their religious mission and that civil rights law is on their side.
Critics say the provision is a permit to discriminate.