91ƬƵ

91ƬƵ Funding

Democrats Move to Slash ‘Reading First’

By David J. Hoff — June 08, 2007 6 min read
  • Save to favorites
  • Print
Email Copy URL

House Democrats want to put their own stamp on federal education spending by increasing and other programs they favor and slashing and other priorities set by President Bush.

In the $56 billion fiscal 2008 spending bill for the Department of 91ƬƵ unveiled by the Democrats, No Child Left Behind Act programs would receive a $2 billion increase, with the Title I program for disadvantaged students receiving $1.5 billion of that.

But the $1.03 billion Reading First program—which the Bush administration points to as one of its biggest accomplishments under the NCLB law—would take a cut of $630 million, or 61 percent. What’s more, the administration’s latest proposals for private school vouchers and new mathematics programs would not be funded at all.

“This [Reading First] cut will not be restored until we have a full appreciation of the shenanigans that have been going on,” said Rep. David R. Obey, D-Wis., the . Reports by the Department of 91ƬƵ’s inspector general and have outlined management and ethical questions involving the program.

Republicans voiced no objections to the Reading First cuts or other spending levels during the June 7 session of the appropriations panel’s Labor, Health and Human Services, 91ƬƵ, and Related Agencies Subcommittee. The subcommittee approved the Democratic plan in a unanimous voice vote.

“If I were chairman,” said Rep. James T. Walsh, R-N.Y., the subcommittee’s senior Republican, “I don’t know that I would have made the bill a whole lot different.”

With their victories in the 2006 midterm elections, the Democrats gained control of the House of Representatives for the first time in 12 years.

91ƬƵ Department spokeswoman Katherine McLane said via e-mail: “It’s amazing that Congress would cut a program that benefits so many poor and minority children in this country. Reading First is a proven game-changer for a lot of children, getting them the help they need to become stronger readers and succeed in school. Cutting Reading First funding means cutting a lot of kids’ prospects of success in school.”

Punishing the Department?

Some reading experts agreed that, despite the problems with Reading First outlined in since last fall, the program is worth saving.

The findings essentially supported complaints that federal officials appeared to favor the use of some commercial programs, and discouraged others, during the implementation of Reading First. The inspector general’s findings largely substantiated the allegations of conflict of interest and mismanagement in the program. A Senate education committee report last month also described alleged ethical breaches by reading experts who gained financially while assisting in the rollout of the 5-year-old program. (“Senate Report Cites ‘Reading First’ Conflicts,” May 16, 2007.)

“The move to eviscerate the program by drastically cutting it is the ultimate example of throwing the baby out with the bath water,” said Alan E. Farstrup, the executive director of the Newark, Del.-based International Reading Association.

Even critics of the implementation and oversight of Reading First have expressed support for the program, and particularly for the funding and other help it provides districts for professional development and instructional practices that have been deemed effective in scientific studies.

“This is not the way I had hoped it would go,” said Robert E. Slavin, the founder of the Baltimore-based Success for All Foundation and one of three vendors whose complaints to the inspector general’s office in 2005 led to a broad review of the program.

“The department has yet to give a full accounting of the problems,” Mr. Slavin added. “But unfortunately, punishing the 91ƬƵ Department [by reducing funding] means punishing the kids who can most benefit from Reading First.”

Separate evaluations of Reading First have found that participating schools spend more time on reading instruction, and that teachers in such schools are more knowledgeable about the reading process. to this point show that schools in the program are improving on some test measures, although it is not clear whether Reading First is driving the gains. (“State Data Show Gains in Reading,” April 25, 2007.)

Democratic Priorities

Reflecting the new House majority, the spending bill approved by the subcommittee has a distinctly Democratic theme. It would increase 91ƬƵ Department discretionary spending in the fiscal year that begins Oct. 1 from $57.4 billion to $61.7 billion, a 7.4 percent jump. Overall, it would appropriate $153.7 billion for programs in the Labor, Health and Human Services, and 91ƬƵ departments, as well as a handful of other federal agencies. That would be an $8.9 billion increase over fiscal 2007.

Programs under the NCLB law would receive almost half the 91ƬƵ Department’s overall increase, going from $23.6 billion to $25.6 billion, or an 8.4 percent hike.

Title I funding would rise from $12.8 billion to $14.4 billion, or by 12 percent, which would be the largest dollar increase in the program’s 42-year history, Rep. Obey said.

The NCLB law’s program for improving teacher quality would increase from $2.9 billion to $3.2 billion, a 10 percent jump, and spending for the 21st Century Community Learning Centers would go from $981 million to $1.1 million, a 13 percent increase.

The spending bill, meanwhile, would not make dramatic cuts that President Bush has proposed for some NCLB programs.

It would provide $272 million—the same amount as in the current fiscal year—for state technology grants, a program Mr. Bush proposed eliminating. For the Safe and Drug-Free Schools and Communities Program, the bill would appropriate $300 million. While that would be a $46.5 million cut from the fiscal 2007 level, the House subcommittee’s level is $200 million more than what the Bush administration proposed.

In higher education, the bill would add $2 billion to the Pell Grant student-aid program, providing enough to raise the maximum award from $4,310 to $4,700.

The bill also would reject key ingredients for President Bush’s plan to reauthorize the No Child Left Behind law.

It would decline to provide the $325 million the president proposed for private school choice to give such options to students who attend chronically low-performing public schools.

The bill also would not fund math programs for elementary schools and middle schools proposed by Mr. Bush. And it would give only level funding to the $31.9 million Striving Readers program for middle schoolers, far less than the Bush administration request of $100 million.

Rep. Obey said that the bill’s price tag has raised the prospect that President Bush would veto it. But the Appropriations Committee chairman, who also leads the Labor-HHS-91ƬƵ subcommittee, had significant support from Republicans on the subcommittee to finance the programs Congress sees as a priority.

“The House has the power of the purse, and we should not give it up,” Rep. Walsh said. “We certainly need to assert that prerogative.”

The full Appropriations Committee must approve the bill before the House votes on it. Appropriators hope to win House approval for all 13 of the fiscal 2008 spending bills by the end of July.

Related Tags:

Associate Editor Kathleen Kennedy Manzo contributed to this report.
A version of this article appeared in the June 13, 2007 edition of 91ƬƵ Week as Democrats Move to Slash ‘Reading First’

Events

Recruitment & Retention Webinar Keep Talented Teachers and Improve Student Outcomes
Keep talented teachers and unlock student success with strategic planning based on insights from Apple 91ƬƵ and educational leaders. 
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of 91ƬƵ Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Families & the Community Webinar
Family Engagement: The Foundation for a Strong School Year
Learn how family engagement promotes student success with insights from National PTA, AASA and leading districts and schools.  
This content is provided by our sponsor. It is not written by and does not necessarily reflect the views of 91ƬƵ Week's editorial staff.
Sponsor
Special 91ƬƵ Webinar
How Early Adopters of Remote Therapy are Improving IEPs
Learn how schools are using remote therapy to improve IEP compliance & scalability while delivering outcomes comparable to onsite providers.
Content provided by 

EdWeek Top School Jobs

Teacher Jobs
Search over ten thousand teaching jobs nationwide — elementary, middle, high school and more.
Principal Jobs
Find hundreds of jobs for principals, assistant principals, and other school leadership roles.
Administrator Jobs
Over a thousand district-level jobs: superintendents, directors, more.
Support Staff Jobs
Search thousands of jobs, from paraprofessionals to counselors and more.

Read Next

91ƬƵ Funding Explainer How One Grant Can Help Schools Recover From Shootings
Schools can leverage a little-known emergency grant to recover from violence or a natural disaster. Here’s how.
9 min read
Broken piggy bank with adhesive bandage on the table
iStock/Getty
91ƬƵ Funding A Funding Lifeline for Rural Schools Is at Risk, and Not for the First Time
Rural schools near national forests rely on dedicated federal funds. But so far, lawmakers haven't renewed them.
7 min read
School bus on rural route, Owens Valley, CA.
iStock/Getty
91ƬƵ Funding Project 2025 Would Dramatically Cut Federal Funds for Schools. Then What?
A key federal funding source for schools would disappear under the conservative policy agenda.
9 min read
Kristen Eichamer holds a Project 2025 fan in the group's tent at the Iowa State Fair, Aug. 14, 2023, in Des Moines, Iowa. A constellation of conservative organizations is preparing for a possible second White House term for Donald Trump. The Project 2025 effort is being led by the Heritage Foundation think tank.
Kristen Eichamer holds a Project 2025 fan in the group's tent at the Iowa State Fair on Aug. 14, 2023, in Des Moines, Iowa. Conservative organizations preparing for a possible second White House term for Donald Trump have assembled a policy agenda that would eliminate the U.S. Department of 91ƬƵ and phase out Title I funds for public schools.
Charlie Neibergall/AP
91ƬƵ Funding A State Considers a Future in Which Schools Can't Rely on Property Taxes
How would school districts fill the gap if a governor gets his wishes?
10 min read
A school building rests on vanishing columns of rolled hundred dollar bills. Vanishing property tax support for schools.
Vanessa Solis/91ƬƵ Week + Getty Images