Hearings before a Senate appropriations subcommittee on the Education Department鈥檚 proposed fiscal 1985 budget began last week with Secretary of Education Terrel H. Bell restating the Administration鈥檚 proposition that a significant increase in Chapter 2 education block grants is the best way to bolster the states鈥� education-reform efforts.
During the hearing before the Senate Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, Mr. Bell said the Administration鈥檚 proposed $250-million increase in the Chapter 2 program is 鈥渢he best way to provide the states with the flexible assistance they need to respond to the excellence push.鈥�
He also contended that 鈥渧arious members of the education community鈥� have told him the most useful infusion of federal education money would be through Chapter 2.
The Administration proposes to increase Chapter 2 funding by approximately 50 percent--from $479 million to $729 million. The increase is part of a proposed $15.5-billion budget package for the Education Department that would increase federal education spending by $100 million over current levels.
The Administration is urging school districts to use Chapter 2 grants in ways that 鈥渉armonize鈥� with the recommendations of the National Commission on Excellence in Education.
Mr. Bell said last week that the increased funds could be used, for example, to strengthen mathematics and science programs and to expose students to the educational and commercial purposes of computers.
Last month, the Administration indicated that school districts would be free to use funds from their Chapter 2 education grants to finance reforms such as merit-pay or master-teacher plans.
Some state officials who oversee Chapter 2 programs seem to disagree about whether such plans are allowable expenses under the statute. And in a recent informal survey, many of them questioned whether Chapter 2 increases will translate into local school improvement. (See 澳门跑狗论坛, Feb. 15, 1984.)
Senators attending last week鈥檚 hearings pressed for assurance that more money for Chapter 2 would result in school improvement.
鈥楨ffectiveness鈥� Questioned
Senator Lowell P. Weicker Jr., the Connecticut Republican who chairs the subcommittee, asked whether a study on the effectiveness of Chapter 2 is available.
Mr. Bell said such a study is under way but will not be ready for several months.
Senator Lawton Chiles, Democrat of Florida, said, 鈥淲e would want assurances, before making this increase, that the money would be used to promote quality--would you therefore be amenable to some directions from us about how the money should be used?鈥�
Mr. Bell said the department could 鈥渟tate emphasis鈥� without 鈥渧iolating the spirit of the block grant.鈥�
The Administration鈥檚 request for $50 million for a program to improve the quality of instruction in mathematics and science was also discussed during the hearing.
Senator Weicker said he agreed that there is a need for more funding for mathematics and science, but asked, 鈥淚f there is a need for categorical math and science funding, why isn鈥檛 there specific need in other categories?鈥�
Asbestos Removal
Mr. Weicker also mentioned the problem of school-asbestos removal. 鈥淏e assured we will not get away from this budget without money for that,鈥� he said.
The 1980 federal law requiring schools to inspect for friable--or easily crumbling--asbestos authorized a program of low-interest loans for school districts seeking to remove it. The Congress, however, has never appropriated funds for the program.
The Education Department has estimated the removal of all friable asbestos from all public and private schools in the country will cost $1.4 billion. According to Sally H. Christensen, a budget specialist in the department, the government鈥檚 share of the cleanup expense could reach as high as $700 million.
This estimate is based on a provision in the asbestos-detection law stating that federal-loan volume for asbestos cleanup efforts could not exceed 50 percent of the total national cost of removal.
