Let's talk about replacing GWBush in 2004.

Its silly to attempt to regain the past in order to maintain the status quo; humankind moves on. The choice is simple; get with the flow and embrace the future, or try to hold on to what was, get washed away by the tide. The times they are achangin'.

In Kabul the US backs the Karzai government; in the countryside the US has failed to forcefully challenge warlords like Fahim and their gross abuses of human rights, their heroin smuggling, their defiance of the central government, their desire to maintain their fiefdoms, and their resistance to democracy. The US continues to provide money for aid projects and for building a new army and police force; but it has not been using its power as effectively as it should to bring the country closer to democratic self-government.

One in seven Republican primary voters cast ballots for candidates other than Bush, holding the president to just 85 percent of the 62,927 ballots cast. In some parts of the state, such as southwest New Hampshire's Monadnock Region, a historic bastion of moderate Republicanism, Bush did even worse. In Swanzey, for instance, 37 percent of GOP primary voters rejected Bush. In nearby Surry, almost 29 percent of the people who took Republican ballots voted against the Republican president, while a number of other towns across the region saw anti-Bush votes of more than 20 percent in the GOP primary.

Few of the anti-Bush votes went to the 13 unknown Republicans whose names appeared on GOP ballots along with the president's. Instead, top Democratic contenders reaped write-in votes.

* * *

In all, 8,279 primary voters wrote in the names of Democratic challengers to Bush on their Republican ballots.

That's a significant number. In the 2000 general election, Bush beat Democrat Al Gore in New Hampshire by just 7,212 votes. Had Gore won New Hampshire, he would have become president, regardless of how the disputed Florida recount was resolved.

Committee on Education and the Workforce
Education & Workforce Accomplishments of the 107th Congress

House Education & the Workforce Committee

John Boehner, Chairman
2181 Rayburn HOB · (202) 225-4527
FACT SHEET


Bush Budget Provides Larger Increase for Education Than National Defense - Even in Wartime

Democrat Leaders, Lobbyists Distort Facts About Education Funding

October 10, 2002

Despite having no budget or plan of their own this year for education, Democrat leaders and Washington education lobbyists are attacking President Bush on the issue of education funding. Democrat leaders are charging Republicans with providing "less funding than promised" for the President's education reform legislation, the No Child Left Behind Act (H.R. 1)

Research and opinion polls show Americans believe the most important factor in improving America's schools is not just funding, but high standards and accountability for results. Republicans in Congress, under the leadership of President Bush, have provided both the resources and the reforms Americans want in education.

Here are the facts Democrat leaders and Washington education lobbyists are leaving out of their election-year political attacks.

House & Senate Democrats Have No Budget - for Education, or Anything Else.

Ø In the House, Democrats voted against the President's budget, but didn't offer an alternative.

Ø In the Senate, Democrats failed to even pass a budget resolution at all -- the first time since 1974 that the Senate has failed to pass one.

Ø Respected columnist David Broder had these harsh words for Democrats on their failure to offer a budget. "When the House was debating its budget resolution, the Democrats proposed no alternative of their own. . .Rather than fake it, the House Democrats punted. . .[The] budget resolution. . .is designed to be the clearest statement of a party's policy priorities. As long as they are silent, the Democrats cannot be part of serious political debate." (Broder, "The Democrats Punt," Washington Post, April 7, 2002)

Democrat leaders owe the American people an explanation: How do we pay for a larger increase in education spending at the same time we're fighting a war on terror? Which tax would they raise? Which programs would they cut?

President Bush's Education Budget Keeps the Promise of Education Reform - Even in War.

Despite the twin challenges of war and economic recovery, the President's budget this year maintains or expands funding for virtually all of our nation's education priorities. President Bush's budget this year proposes far more for education than the last budgets proposed and signed by President Clinton.

Under Republican leadership in the House, federal funding for education has more than doubled over the past six years. Discretionary appropriations for the Department of Education have climbed from $23 billion in FY 1996 to $49 billion this year - an increase of 113 percent.

A quick overview of major education funding items in the FY2003 Budget Resolution passed by House Republicans, which closely follows the President's budget:

Ø SPECIAL EDUCATION. For special education, the Republican budget provides a $1 billion increase for special education grants to states, and calls for full funding of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act within 10 years.

Ø TITLE I AID FOR DISADVANTAGED SCHOOLS & STUDENTS. For disadvantaged students and schools, the Republican budget provides a $1 billion increase in Title I grants - on top of last year's $1.6 billion increase - focusing resources on the highest-poverty school districts. As a result of President Bush's FY2003 Budget, under the first two years of President Bush's presidency, we will have seen greater increases in Title I funding than in the previous seven years combined. To see a breakdown of Title I funding increases by state this year as a result of No Child Left Behind, go to http://edworkforce.house.gov/issues/107th/education/nclb/statebystate.pdf

Ø TEACHER QUALITY. For teachers, who are carrying out the challenge of education reform, the Republican budget provides $2.85 billion, matching the historic increase President Bush signed this year. This is a 38 percent increase over the last Clinton budget.

Ø HEAD START. The FY2003 Budget Resolution adopted earlier this year by the House, which closely follows the President's FY2003 Budget, increases Head Start by $130 million to increase children's preparedness for learning when they enter school. In the past six years, Congress has increased Head Start funding by 83 percent - from $3.6 billion in FY1996 to $6.5 billion in FY2002. President Bush has supported Head Start and proposed a series of reforms to emphasize results in early childhood learning.

Ø PELL GRANTS. President Bush maintains the maximum Pell Grant at an historic high of $4,000. Republicans in Congress, later working with President Bush, increased the maximum Pell Grant award by 62 percent - from $2,470 in FY 96 to $4,000 in FY 02.

If Democrats have a better plan for America's schools. . .why don't they offer it?

GOP and President Bush: Fulfilling the Commitment to Education Reform

Even amid war and concern about homeland security, President Bush's commitment to education has not wavered. Unprecedented new education resources are flowing from Washington to schools across America. It's time to insist on results for the next generation of students. Accountability, not just funding, is the key to ensuring no child in our nation is left behind.

More facts about education funding you won't hear from Democrat leaders:

Ø Every single penny of federal funding appropriated by Congress as a result of the No Child Left Behind Act (H.R. 1) is being provided this year, and the President has proposed spending significantly more for education next year. No "cuts" have been made by the Bush Administration in funding for implementation of No Child Left Behind; in fact, the President's FY2003 Budget proposal significantly increases education funding, even in a time of war and economic uncertainty.

Ø President Bush's FY2003 Budget honors spending limits agreed to by Democrats and Republicans alike. Recognizing that funding alone will not close the achievement gap between disadvantaged students and their peers, the No Child Left Behind Act includes specific caps on federal Elementary and Secondary education spending over the next six years. These caps (authorization levels) are spending limits agreed to by Democrats and Republicans alike. The President's FY2003 Budget honors those limits while providing or maintaining major increases for every major education priority - including Title I, special education, teacher quality, bilingual education, and Reading First. Democrats, by contrast, have offered no budget this year for America's schools and students; the Democrat-controlled Senate failed to even pass a budget resolution this year, the first time since 1974 the Senate has failed to do so.

Ø President Clinton & Democrat Congress did exactly the same thing Democrat leaders are criticizing President Bush for doing. Democrat leaders are charging that proposed appropriations levels for the Elementary & Secondary Education Act (ESEA) provide less funding than "authorized." But when they were in control of the White House and Congress, Democrats did exactly the same thing. Democrats used the same approach to education funding in 1994, the last time the Elementary & Secondary Education Act (ESEA) was reauthorized - yet not a single Democrat leader accused President Clinton or then-Majority Leader Gephardt of providing "less than promised" for education. Prior to passage of No Child Left Behind, the last reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) occurred in 1994 - under a Democrat-controlled Congress and White House. The total authorization level for the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994 (IASA) for FY1995 was $13 billion. However, IASA activities were appropriated at $10.3 billion for FY1995 - a discrepancy of $2.7 billion.

Ø President Bush's FY2003 Budget provides a much larger increase for education over the next five years than for defense and federal law enforcement. An independent analysis by National Journal (Cannon, Baumann, Zeller; "Winners & Losers," 2/9/02) shows Democrat leaders' attacks are false. According to National Journal's independent analysis, funding for Elementary, Secondary, & Vocational education is increased by 41 percent over the next five years under President Bush's budget - the third largest growth category in the President's budget, second only to Medicare and federal correctional activities. This 41 percent increase for Elementary, Secondary and Vocational education is significantly larger than increases being provided for national defense (27 percent) and federal law enforcement (29 percent). The 41 percent figure does NOT include federal funding for higher education programs, which are also increased by the President's budget.

For additional facts about education reform efforts by President Bush and Republicans, please contact the House Committee on Education & the Workforce majority staff communications office at 202-225-4527 or e-mail Heather Valentine at [email protected].

News from the
Committee on Education and the Workforce
John Boehner, Chairman

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 7, 2004
CONTACTS: Josh Holly or
Dave Schnittger
Telephone: (202) 225-4527

Statement by U.S. Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) on Second Anniversary of President Bush's No Child Left Behind Education Reform Law

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- U.S. Rep. John Boehner (R-OH), chairman of the House Committee on Education & the Workforce, today issued the following statement regarding the two-year anniversary of President Bush's signing of the No Child Left Behind education reform law (NCLB). NCLB was signed into law by the President on January 8, 2002 at Hamilton High School in Hamilton, Ohio.

"The simple fact is that as a result of No Child Left Behind, the public education system is focusing on disadvantaged children like never before.

"Across America, teachers and principals and superintendents today are working with unprecedented determination to show they don't subscribe to the view that some children should be written off. Some are outspoken in their support, like the many African-American and Latino educators who have written to leaders of both parties to reiterate their support for the accountability provisions of the law. Others are confirming No Child Left Behind's principles simply through their actions, giving special attention to children who would once have been viewed as a drain on the system.

"A great deal of confusion over No Child Left Behind seems derived from one common misconception - specifically, the erroneous notion that the law seeks to 'punish' schools identified by states as needing improvement.

"In reality, No Child Left Behind calls for extra help for such schools - not penalties. Under the law, when a school is identified by its state as needing improvement, both the school and the parents of children attending that school qualify immediately for extra help. For the school, this extra help can take the form of everything from additional federal funding to technical assistance - whatever the state and district deem most needed to turn the school around. For parents, this extra help can mean the ability to get private tutoring for their children or to transfer them to a new school, including a charter school.

"The leaders of the Democrat party have demonstrated incredible hypocrisy through false attacks on President Bush suggesting, incredibly, that the No Child Left Behind Act -- which has resulted in a massive increase in federal education spending during a time of war -- is somehow inadequately funded. Every penny promised by President Bush and congressional Republicans has been delivered, and then some. When they controlled Congress and the White House, Democrats routinely appropriated less money for education programs than they authorized, yet not a single Democrat accused President Clinton of 'underfunding' education.

"Some states have also erected roadblocks that have hindered implementation, attempting to make No Child Left Behind the scapegoat for virtually every challenge they face. State officials in at least three states -- West Virginia, Tennessee, and Missouri -- have criticized President Bush for allegedly 'under-funding' No Child Left Behind, only to recently admit they've been sitting on millions in unspent federal education funds for as long as three years. The truth is, the federal government has been increasing education spending more quickly than states can spend it. The United States already spends more money for education than any other nation on Earth, yet student scores continue to lag behind those of other countries.

"Overall, the law is working very much as envisioned. There has been predictable grumbling by the education establishment as it has gradually realized the Bush administration has no intention of watering down the law through regulatory waivers, as the Clinton administration did with its own education plan. But virtually no one has suggested we should return to the days in which achievement gaps were subsidized and hidden from public view. And most important of all, disadvantaged children are finally getting the attention they're due. This is a bipartisan achievement we should build on as a nation in 2004 and beyond."

By June, though, both the State Department's intelligence branch and senior analysts within the Defense Intelligence Agency had privately challenged the view that the trailers were meant to produce biological weapons, saying that their more likely purpose was to manufacture hydrogen for use in military weather balloons, military and Bush administration officials said later last summer. In a review that the administration has not made public, only one of 15 intelligence analysts assembled from three agencies to discuss the issue in June endorsed the white paper conclusion, a former senior intelligence official said in an interview this week.

Bush administration officials had indications for months that the new Medicare prescription drug law might cost considerably more than the $400 billion advertised by the White House and Congress, according to internal documents and sources familiar with the issue.

The president's top health advisers gathered such evidence and shared it with select lawmakers, congressional and other sources said, long before the White House disclosed Thursday that it believes the program will cost $534 billion over the next decade -- one-third more than the estimate widely used when Congress enacted the measure in November.

The higher forecast, coming less than two months after President Bush signed the landmark bill into law, has fueled conservative criticism of White House spending policies and prompted accusations that the administration deliberately withheld financial information as it pushed the bill through a divided Congress.

With conservatives in his own party angry over what they see as excessive overall spending by the Bush administration, and those frustrations exacerbated by a large uptick in the estimated cost of a new Medicare overhaul, Bush spent most of his brief remarks to the lawmakers on fiscal restraint. He even singled out health care costs as an area in need of discipline.