For readers who support substantial funding for the new Education Department
Math and Science Partnerships to improve science education, there may
still be time to make your voice heard, but time is short. Conferees
are now working to complete the bill that funds this program and, according
to reports, may be considering only minimal funding for the Partnerships.
As previously reported in FYI, the education reform legislation working
its way through Congress (the Elementary and Secondary Education Act,
known as ESEA), would establish in the Education Department a Math and
Science Partnerships program intended to foster improvements in science
and math education. This program would, in effect, replace the Eisenhower
Professional Development program as the only effort within the Education
Department with funds specifically designated for science and math education.
As stated in FYI
#146, the ESEA bill would authorize $450 million for the Partnerships
in FY 2002. (NSF also has programs to improve science education, including
$160 million in FY 2002 for its own version of Math and Science Partnerships,
but in general its programs are not intended to have the broad, nationwide
reach of Education Department programs.)
While ESEA - an authorization bill - can provide guidance to appropriators
on funding levels, only an appropriations bill can provide the actual
money. All Education Department programs are funded through the Labor,
Health and Human Services and Education Appropriations bill. Members
of the Labor-HHS-Education conference committee have been meeting this
week to reconcile the House and Senate versions of their funding bill
(H.R. 3061), and recent reports indicate they are considering minimal
funding levels for the Math and Science Partnerships. (The appropriations
bill would still contain substantial funding, on the order of $3 billion,
for a broad range of activities to improve teaching and education under
the heading of Teacher Quality, but no program other than the Partnerships
specifically addresses science and math.)
The latest reports warn that the Labor-HHS-Education appropriations
conferees may provide significantly less than $450 million - possibly
in the range of $10-25 million - for the Partnership program, although
the outcome remains uncertain. For comparison, last year the Eisenhower
program received $485 million for teacher professional development activities,
with $250 million of that specifically directed toward professional
development in science and math.
Although the Labor-HHS-Education conferees are trying to wrap up their
bill as soon as possible, they are now expected to meet again at least
once early next week. Therefore, for readers who have an interest in
this issue, there may still be time to let your Members of Congress
know your views on H.R. 3061. Readers who are constituents of the Labor-HHS-Education
conferees are most likely to have an impact.
The Labor-HHS-Education conference committee members are listed below.
Their offices can be reached through the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121.
For Members' email addresses, see their Homepages, accessible through
the House and Senate Directories under "Communicating
with Congress" on AIP's Science Policy web page.
| HOUSE CONFEREES |
SENATE CONFEREES |
| Ralph Regula (R-OH) |
Tom Harkin (D-IA) |
| Bill Young (R-FL) |
Ernest Hollings (D-SC) |
| Ernest Istook, Jr (R-OK) |
Daniel Inouye (D-HI) |
| Dan Miller (R-FL) |
Harry Reid (D-NV) |
| Roger Wicker (R-MS) |
Herb Kohl (D-WI) |
| Anne Northup (R-KY) |
Patty Murray (D-WA) |
| Randy Cunningham (R-CA) |
Mary Landrieu (D-LA) |
| Kay Granger (R-TX) |
Robert Byrd (D-WV) |
| John Peterson (R-PA) |
Arlen Specter (R-PA) |
| Don Sherwood (R-PA) |
Thad Cochran (R-MS) |
| David Obey (D-WI) |
Judd Gregg (R-NH) |
| Steny Hoyer (D-MD) |
Larry Craig (R-ID) |
| Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) |
Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-TX) |
| Nita Lowey (D-NY) |
Ted Stevens (R-AK) |
| Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) |
Mike DeWine (R-OH) |
| Jesse Jackson, Jr (D-IL) |
|
| Patrick Kennedy (D-RI) |
|