Maintained for Historical Purposes

This resource is being maintained for historical purposes only and is not currently applicable.

FISCAL YEAR 1996 DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION BUDGET Impact of House and Senate Appropriations Action

PublicationDate: 11/1/95
Impact of House and Senate Appropriations Action
Author: CSB - SFA Customer Support Branch

Updates on Legislation, Budget, and Activities

Impact of House and Senate Appropriations Action

Comparison with 1995 Revised Appropriation

Overall Department Budget: The House version of the appropriations bill
would reduce 1996 total discretionary funding for Department of Education
programs by $3.7 billion or 15 percent -- from a 1995 post-rescission level
of $24.5 billion to $20.8 billion in 1996. The Senate bill would
provide $22.3 billion, a cut of $2.2 billion, or 9 percent, below the 1995
level. Either bill would constitute the largest single-year cut in history
for Federal education programs. Reductions of this magnitude can
only be seen as the first step toward the elimination of effective Federal
support for education, and as an attack on programs that will improve
academic achievement, create safer school environments, improve the
quality of our teachers, promote parental involvement, and provide
innovative technology in our classrooms. By contrast, the President has
requested $26.1billion for education in 1996, an increase of $1.6 billion or
6.5 percent over the 1995 level.

Goals 2000 (-$372 million in House bill, -$62 million in Senate bill): The
House bill would eliminate all Goals 2000 funding -- a cut of $372 million
from 1995 and $750 million less than the President's 1996 budget request --
severely undermining State and local efforts to reform elementary and
secondary education and achieve the National Education Goals. This would
terminate funding just at the point when communities and States have
completed their planning and begun to implement comprehensive reforms
based on their own high academic standards. An estimated 17,000 schools
would be denied funding designed to help them better use their resources
to improve teaching and learning. The House also would eliminate funding for
the new Parental Assistance Centers -- 28 new centers designed to
strengthen the involvement of parents in the education of their children.
These Centers received their first year of planned four-year awards
this summer.

Title I Grants for Disadvantaged Students (-$1.1 billion in House bill,
-$679 million in Senate bill): The House would slash support for helping poor
children reach the same challenging academic standards as other
students by over $1.1 billion or 17 percent from 1995. This cut would
deny assistance to more than 1.1 million educationally disadvantaged students.

In addition, this cut includes a $113 million or 17 percent reduction in
Concentration Grants from 1995 while providing no funds for the Targeted
Grants included in the President's 1996 budget request. While the
President has requested increased funding and greater targeting of those
funds on communities with the highest concentrations of poor children,
the House bill would both cut funding and reject greater targeting.

Safe and Drug-Free Schools (-$266 million in both bills): Both bills would
cut Federal support for drug-free schools and communities programs by $266
million, or nearly 60 percent, sharply reducing drug abuse and violence
prevention activities currently serving about 39 million students in 97
percent of the Nation's school districts. Further, the House and Senate would
eliminate all support for national dissemination, demonstration, and
innovation efforts -- which have produced educational and informational
materials that are extremely popular with educators and parents -- as well as
all funding for prevention efforts at colleges and universities.

School-to-Work Opportunities (-$27.5 million in House bill, level funding in
Senate bill): The House would cut funds to States ready to implement
school-to-work systems by $20.6 million or 18 percent from the 1995 level,
and by $90 million or nearly half from the President's 1996 budget.
These systems are already starting to help smooth the transition for youth
from schools to rewarding careers and further education and training. Under
the President's budget, with combined funds from ED and DOL, 27 States
would be entering their second or third years of 5-year Federal commitments,
and 15 additional States would begin their 5-year grants.

Technology for Education (+$2.5 million in both bills, but $58 million below
the President's 1996 budget request): The Senate would provide only $15
million of the $50 million requested for the K-12 Technology Learning
Challenge, denying at least 14 communities the opportunity to form
partnerships with business and higher education to develop new and
effective applications of technology in schools. Neither the House nor
the Senate bill funds the $20 million Adult Technology Learning
Challenge, which would support innovative approaches to using
technology for adult education. In addition, the House bill eliminates
the $25 million Star Schools distance education program; the $7
million Ready to Learn program, which helps fund television
programming designed to enhance the development of young
children; and the $1.1 million Telecommunications Demonstration
Project for Mathematics, which supports professional development
for teachers.

Eisenhower Professional Development State Grants (-$201 million in House
bill, +$24 million in Senate bill): The House bill includes an 80 percent
reduction in Federal support for State and local efforts to prepare
educators to teach to high standards in the core academic subjects.
Funding would fall from $251 million in 1995 to just $50 million in 1996.
States would lose an average of $3.9 million, compared to an average gain of
$9.3 million under the President's $735 million request.

Bilingual Education (-$104 million in House bill, -$34 million in Senate
bill): The House would cut Federal support for the education of limited
English proficient students by nearly $104 million or 66 percent from the
1995 level, and $147 million or 74 percent from the President's 1996
budget. This clear attempt to eventually eliminate this program -- as called
for in the House Budget Resolution passed earlier this year -- would deny
services to almost 240,000 children and eliminate support for bilingual
teacher training and research.

Special Education Special Purpose Funds (-$162 million in House bill, -$8.6
million in Senate bill): The House reduction would eliminate funding for over
1,000 research, demonstration, technical assistance, and training projects
that support State and local efforts to provide early intervention and
special education services to children with disabilities. These projects
include training programs for 23,000 new special education teachers
and other personnel who work with children with disabilities.

Vocational Education Basic State Grants (-$173 million in House bill, -$83
million in Senate bill): The House would cut Basic State Grant funding by
$173 million or 18 percent, denying assistance needed by communities and
States to prepare youth and adults to pursue productive careers in a changing

Adult Education (-$20 million in House bill, -$7.7 million in Senate bill):
The House would consolidate most Adult Education funding under the Basic
State Grant -- as proposed by the Administration -- but would reduce overall
funding from the 1995 level by $20 million or 7 percent, eliminating services
to 78,000 adults.

Pell Grants (-$450 million in House bill, -$747 million in Senate bill): The
House would raise the Pell Grant maximum award by $100 to $2,440, but
also raise the minimum grant to $600, with a net impact of eliminating
awards for over 228,000 low-income postsecondary students. The
Senate is counting on the availability of surplus funds from prior years to
avoid raising the minimum award.

Perkins Loans (-$158 million in House bill, -$58 million in Senate bill): The
House would terminate new Perkins Loan Federal Capital Contributions -- a
$158 million reduction that would eliminate loans to approximately 150,000
needy college students.

State Student Incentive Grants (-$63 million in House bill, -$32 million in
Senate bill): The House abruptly eliminates this $63 million State-matched,
need-based postsecondary grant program, denying awards to 212,000 needy
college students.

Direct Student Loan Administration (-$230 million from permanent
appropriation in House bill, -$172 million in Senate bill): Both House and
Senate bills would make arbitrary cuts in funds needed to support general
student aid administration and oversight -- increasing the risk of waste
and abuse -- while making it difficult to implement the Direct Student Loan
program. Funding provided under this account for administration of
guaranteed student loans also would be severely reduced.

Byrd Honors Scholarships (-$29 million in House bill, level funding in Senate
bill) : The House would terminate this program, denying $1,500 merit-based
scholarships to over 19,400 students.

Department Discretionary Programs: The House would implement a new
overall policy of eliminating or consolidating discretionary grant programs
that support research, demonstration, training, technical assistance, and
evaluation activities that help States, communities, and higher education
institutions improve education at all levels. The bill would eliminate $300
million to $400 million for such activities, while providing merely a small
$20 million increase in Education Research that might be used for
similar projects. This new approach essentially ends one of the oldest,
most efficient, and cost-effective Federal roles in education: supporting
State and local development and dissemination of effective educational
practices throughout the Nation.

Budget Service
November 1, 1995

Last Modified: 08/16/1999