Debate 1988, President, Democrats; Isea Democratic Debate; Dick Gephardt, Bruce Babbit, Paul Simon, Michael Dukakis, Jesse Jackson, Al Gore

A major funding for this program was provided by friends of Iowa Public Television. The future of this country is said to be rooted in the education of our children. Tonight the nation's educational priorities are the focus of a Democratic presidential candidates debate live from Iowa Public Television's Maytag auditorium. The debate is sponsored by the Iowa State Education Association and the Iowa Association of School Boards. Good evening and welcome to another discussion of the major issues by the candidates for the Democratic Party's nomination for president of the United States. I'm Gene Borg and I'll moderate this discussion which tonight focuses on major issues in education in kindergarten through the 12th grade. The idea for this debate came from the Political Action Committee of the Iowa State Education Association. Those teacher members believing this event could reach more public education

staff members and citizens interested in education than their traditional candidate interviews. The method they've used since 1972 the Iowa Association of School Boards joined us a co-sponsor then and other education groups represented on our panel tonight which I'll be introducing in just a few minutes on the questioner's panel also joined in to cooperate in sponsoring the debate. Our program tonight will be divided into three segments. First each panelist will ask a question to be answered by all of the candidates in the second segment. Each candidate will then get a chance to ask any other candidate a question on our topic which is education and grades can garden through the 12th grade in the final segment will give each candidate a time to summarize in answer to a broad general question which I'll submit for consideration. The order of the candidate response tonight in each segment was determined by a random drawing which we have previously conducted. Now to introduce the candidates for the Democratic presidential

nomination participating in tonight's debate Representative Dick Gephardt of Missouri. Arizona Governor Bruce Babbitt. Senator Paul Simon of Illinois. Massachusetts governor Mike to caucus. The Reverend Jesse Jackson and Tennessee senator Al Gore. Our panelists are the president of the Iowa State Education Association Ken till the President of the Iowa Association of School Boards. Boyd bulgy the superintendent of the Des Moines diocese Catholic schools sister Jude Fitzpatrick. She is representing the private schools advisory committee to the State Board of Education in Iowa. Other panelists are the coordinator of the Iowa Home School Association. Rod Boyd and Sandra Lawrence who's president of the school administrators of Iowa and a principal in the Iowa City schools. Before we began just a word about the time allotments. I know the questions will be stimulating more thoughts by the candidates and can

possibly be squeezed into the time allotted for responses. So I think you'll be pleased to know that I'll be helping you stay within those time limits and our auditorium audience can help too by refraining from applause. In our first segment our panel will be posing the questions the first will come from Mr. tilt. Governor Babbitt will be the first to respond and then all of the candidates respond to that same question within a two minute time limit. MR. Thank you Dean. Gentleman please describe your vision of teachers and teaching in the year 2000. Again I think teaching is about people and good teaching is about good people. When I think about the year 2000 I think back to the best teacher that I ever had in my freshman year in high school and I had been hospitalized for nearly a semester as a result of a serious accident and it looked like I was going to simply drop out of my class and be a year behind. The teacher I remember

as Miss McNerney she came up to the hospital and she said Bruce you don't have to drop out. I'm going to be here. I'm going to help you will do correspondence courses and together we'll keep you up with your class. And she came up there and she kept after me she was a strong stern woman. And the last thing in the world I wanted to be doing was conjugating Latin verbs and doing algebra problems that she kept after it. And I was out for a whole semester but I stayed with my class. And I've often thought she didn't have to do that it wasn't part of her job description she was a kind of teacher who saw not just classes but individuals. That's the kind of teacher that I'd like to see in every school in every classroom in this country in the year 2000. I think a president can do just a few basic things to make that happen. First we need to recruit the very best students to be teachers. We've got to give the profession of teaching a sense of respect and honor and importance in society. And if we're going to recruit the best students we have to pay them. I think it's

absurd to think that we can get good teachers when in the present system they effectively take a vow of poverty as they leave school to become teachers. We have to correct that. Then we need to liberate teachers to teach. We've got to get rid of all the extraneous administrative duties to free them of the bureaucracy and to allow them to conduct a classroom that's full of excitement and creativity. That's my program recruit the very best by example. Pay them adequately and liberate them to teach our children. I'll repeat the question again and then we'll go down the way. The question is describe your vision of teachers and teaching in the year 2000. Senator Gore. My goal for teachers in the year 2000 is the same as my goal for this entire country in the year 2000 and that is to have the best system of education in the entire world with the best teachers and the best conditions for successful teaching. I want to be an education president in order to achieve that goal. I'll

start on election night by sending a telegram to Secretary William Bennett and telling him to start cleaning out his desk and then I'll appoint a secretary of education who understands why education is so important to the future of our nation. I want a future in which the federal government is a full partner in the process with local and state governments a system in which parents are full partners in the process as well in which the entire community is part of the learning process. I'd like to see a better system for discipline a lower dropout rate approaching Japan's level of only one or two percent. And I want to reach that goal by by making our schools so good that the students will want to stay in them. I'd like to start by focusing our attention on early education because if we are going to have the best schools in the year 2000 we should recognise that those who are entering the first grade now are kindergarten our the class of 2000. We need to understand that most learning takes place before

kids ever go into kindergarten. We have to get them off to a good start. We ought to build on successes like the Head Start program. We should lower the student teacher ratio so that teachers have more time to devote to each student. We should recruit the best young graduates from college to enter the teaching profession. We should shift responsibility for success and accountability for success to the teachers themselves. We should also expand access to college and set a goal of 100 percent literacy by the year 2000. With leadership and commitment we can create the best schools in the entire world by the year 2000 Governor Dukakis. You asked about teachers and teaching and I have to say to you that I am very very concerned about the future of teaching in this country. As you know better than anybody. Half of the public school teachers in the United States of America are going to retire in the next five to ten years. I go to college campuses these

days I go to high schools and I ask these young people how many of you are seriously interested in a career in public school teaching I did that at Ames Iowa State University when I spoke on public education several weeks ago 13 hands went up. Out of three hundred fifty in high schools these days a 5 hands out of 500 go up you're lucky. We today have 35000 teaching vacancies in the United States of America. We have 7000 high schools that don't even offer a basic course in physics because they can't find anybody to teach it. One out of every two public school teachers will be retiring from teaching. In Japan they have 40 applicants for every day can see 40 applicants for every vacancy. And my concern in addition to sharing the goals and values that Bruce and Alan everybody here I think genuinely share is whether or not we're going to have teachers in the classroom in the year 2000. Now we all know that the federal treasury is not brimming over with money in fact it's loaded with

red ink. So there are going to be billions and billions of dollars to throw around in the first year or two or three of a new presidency. And if I'm elected president United States my first and most important priority will be good teaching and good teachers. Making teaching a valued and honored profession again and allocating a quarter of a billion dollars less than one tenth of Star Wars to a fund for Teacher Excellence to do three things. First provide scholarships for young people willing to make a commitment to teaching after they graduate. Secondly to revive the national teacher corps which I think could be a tremendous recruiting tool for youngsters who don't know exactly what they want to do when I get out of college but might like try a stab at teaching the teaching internship or assistantship. And finally creating a network of feel centers of teaching learning where our present teachers can take a sabbatical can refresh revive do research do curriculum development and come back to teaching with new enthusiasm and new spirit. Thank you that it seems to me has to be the top priority the next pres in the United States.

Reverend Jackson your view of education in the year 2000. Thank you very much. We must get from 1987 to year 2000. Clinton today education is more technical more computerized and more automated. You'll be even more technical in year 2000. But we must look at the trend being established in 1987 and they the eight move into what year 2000. Today's paper the moron register had on the front page of the lawmaking set of facts aid that 600000 American youth this year attempt to commit suicide. 6000 nearly 6000 almost succeeded. It means that having more computers and more technocrats will not be a substitute for a parent teacher relationship and a focus on character education as well as on technical education. Teachers cannot bear the burden of teaching our children by themselves. Parents even this day must assume more responsibility to be the cool part of teachers today. Yes even

year 2000 teachers give homework. Parents must have the child home to do the work. It really does not matter that those of opportunities open your values have character failures if they in fact cannot wont to those DAWs sober and sane. Nineteen eighty five a look at some data that went something like this. That. By age 15 Our children watch 17000 hours of television. They listen to more radio than that compared to 11000 hours of school assuming no strike some time to read that assumption. Less than 3000 hours of church religious training a cracked education clearly. In year 2000 we must match. Parent involvement. We must match the role the role of parent and teacher and minister and mass media because our children will be inspired by. Parents and mass media. They must be helped by teachers

teachers need support to teach our children. Senator Simon back a few years ago. Speaker Tip O'Neill. The point when President Reagan was talking a great deal about merit pay for teachers appointed task force made up of four members of Congress. Very few trailhead of the NEA Al Shanker head of the FTC the head of the School Board Association and some others. Ask me to chair that task force. And very quickly we got off of merit pay because except for a few wealthy school districts it's just not is not a practical thing for most school districts even though it's theoretically desirable thing. But there were some things that were very clear as we look to the future. One is we're going to have to elevate the profession of teaching. And as Mike and others have suggested we're going have to pay teachers more. We're going to have to have sabbatical leaves for teachers. We're also going to have to demand more of teachers demand more in the way of

qualifications for those coming into the profession. A few years ago I was asked to speak at the commencement of the schole college and podiatry and one of those things you agreed to six months in advance and all of a sudden I was there and I've never been to a foot doctor in my life. And I started reading up and one of the interesting things was that in the state of Illinois and my guess is this is true of every state. We are much more careful of the standards we demand of those who take care of our feet than the standards that we demand for those who take care of our children. Obviously that has to change. We are going to have to have smaller classes. We're going to have some different structures more team teaching in many cases. And finally we're going to have to stimulate people to want to get into the field of teaching. I talked to a group of 500 teachers and ask how many of them want their sons and daughters to become teachers and they'll be 15 hands raised that says something. We're going to have to make a

priority out of education in this nation. And as we have not up to this point your vision of teachers and teaching in the year 2000 and Representative Gephardt when you select a candidate for president one of the things that you have to ask is What is that person's priorities. I have said almost in every speech that I've given in this campaign that my top priority is by the year 2000 to have the best educated people in the world. I've set that priority because I believe the great challenge to America in the next 20 years is to compete in a world market place and hold our standard of living. The question we have to answer is how can we pay our workers 12 and 15 and 20 dollars an hour when they compete against people who are earning two and three dollars an hour. The only way they can do it is if they have the capacity to do it. And by capacity in the future it's primarily going to mean mental capacity and skill. To

do that I know what I want to do and in the area of teaching and teachers what I want to do is to take the ideas that have been that have been pulled together by a lot of people who know a lot about this subject more than I do and put into a report called the Carnegie report. It was published about a year ago and I think it's the best thought that's been put together in the United States in a long long time about what we need to do about teachers and teaching. It talks about the professionalization of teaching. It talks about setting standards and a private board has already been set up to reach those standards. And it talks about linking paid to performance something that's hard to do complex PTD complex to do but can be done. The last thing I'd say is this. Teachers in teaching are the most critical part of education. I had a teacher at Southwest High School in St. Louis who stayed after school and helped me fill out the farms to go to a junior high school

Institute at Northwestern University. It's one of the reasons that I got to go to college. So that relationship between student and teacher is the most important thing. So when we set the goal of having the best educated people we'd better have the best teachers moving out of the second question. And again Governor Babbitt would be the first to respond. The question will come from the school board representative on our panel. Mr. Boyd thank you. States and their political subdivisions of had the principal responsibility. For educating children because our national constitution does not speak to the issue of education. Specifically what role do you think the federal government should play in the government's funding and operation of our nation's schools. Bolger I don't think the problem is the Constitution. I think the problem is that this administration has simply neglected and abdicated its responsibility to lead in education. There's a public service commercial on television now which many of you may have seen that I

think speaks to their view of education it shows William Bennett in a school hallway. He's kind of swaggering down the aisle like Kojak slamming the locker doors and incredibly enough he's blaming teachers for the drug problem in the United States. Now you know it's enough to make me want to take William Bennett and make him write on the blackboard 100 times. I will not blame teachers for my failure as secretary of education. Now I have a different view of the role of the federal government. I believe the federal government should lead. And my priorities are these first and most urgently early childhood first graders a little too late. We must have a nationally subsidized daycare voucher system to support working parents daycare isn't just custody it's the beginning of the education process. We must have universal headstart for four year olds in this country. We need

federal support. We must have federal support for elementary and secondary education. I wouldn't advocate a lot of seed catalogs full of grants they're the last to come the first to go. I advocate a much more radical approach. I believe the federal government should swap. That it should assume the responsibility for the indigent health care programs in this country and then say to the states you must use every dime of the windfall savings to support public education teacher salaries and all of the things that we know need to be done. Now that's the easy part. But this is all going to be window shopping unless we get to the hard part and that is how do we pay for it. And I think it's incumbent upon all of us to talk about these programs to answer what I think every viewer is sitting out there asking how are we going to pay for it. How are we going to set this as a priority by making cuts in other programs by raising revenues by recognizing that we must balance the budget and that we must persuade ourselves and the American people that we're serious

that this isn't just an exercise in talk. Senator Simon The question is the role of the federal government and education K through 12. Yes. Back some years ago the National Education Association came out with a one third federal one third state one third local government formula that I still think is basically a pretty good formula but we can't get from here to there overnight but we can move and part of it is setting priorities and partial response to my friend Bruce. One missile cost ninety eight million dollars this fiscal year the federal government will spend on high school sophomores. Ninety three million dollars will spend on a high school junior programs. Fifty two million dollars will spend for high school seniors. Thirty four million dollars. You know we really can shift our priorities. And there are things where we have clear

obligations. The law for handicapped young people which I helped to create called 94 142 says right now the federal funding level should be 40 percent. You know what it is 9 percent preschool education. We know we ought to be moving massively. I agree with Bruce and my colleagues on that. Dropout rates. I was in New Orleans along with all of my colleagues we've been seeing a lot of each other lately from the drop out rate in Louisiana. Forty six point eight percent dropout rate in Japan two percent. We know that a good preschool education program really can make a difference. We have national deficiencies in adult education adult illiteracy. We ought to be massively moving on. Well I've been able to get a few million dollars here in a few million dollars there. But if everything I have done and I've done more than any other member of Congress on

this reaches 1 percent that's probably a high figure. And the whole area of foreign languages for example we're the only nation on the face of the earth we can go to grade school high school college get a Ph.D. never have one year of a foreign language. These things have to change and it will take federal leadership to change them. Reverend Jackson. Federal role in education. In part the federal government must assure. Access to education an even playing field. I've seen the federal government for example in 1957 just 30 years ago on the good presidential leadership. To assure democracy you have to use federal troops to take children to school in Little Rock Arkansas and now earn a green one of those Little Rock Nine. As assistant secretary of labor and is now an investment banker on Wall Street and the grain would not have had access to first class education without the federal role in education. Australian Hunter-Gault had to go to University

of Georgia. Supported by the troops and now correspondent for McNeil lives and if she had not gone to the universe of Georgia with the troops then they would not have gotten the troops out to take her walker there so he can in fact give the school millions of dollars. The fact of the matter airs the federal role must be to assure equal access. It also must mean it will accept the role to even the playing field. Some children need daycare. And he had starred all those neat nutritional programs and Mr. Reagan said that the made a catch up constituted a vegetable. Either he was dieting napping on the radio. Children need balanced meals because if you leave a cold home you cannot get a hot meal. You cannot sustain your attention span long enough to get a good solid education. I submit in closing that if Allah plays this role it will appreciate the fact that

education is never spending. It's always investment. You get the highest possible return for the investment. Whether we educate our children and pay teachers in September and October in the face of welfare and prisons in June and July. Senator Gore the role of the federal government. Well the question involves not only funding but governance and operation as well and traditionally governance and operation of schools remains and will remain at the state and local level. But the federal government has an increasingly important role to play. Let's talk about funding for a moment. It used to be at 10 percent the federal share used to be at 10 percent. Under the Reagan administration that has fallen to six percent. When I said in my in response to the opening question that I believe the federal government must become a full partner in the process. Part of what I meant was that the federal government's role should be increased back toward that 10 percent level. Now the federal government does have other special roles

to play. Yes ensuring equal opportunity and equal access to a quality education system also devoting special attention to the disadvantaged and those who are disabled as well as those who are gifted. But the federal government can play another role as well. Reverend Jackson talked about 957 and Little Rock. It was a an important event. There was another event that took place that same year the Russians launched Sputnik into orbit and all of a sudden conservatives as well as liberals agreed that we had a national interest in greatly increasing our commitment to education. We perceived a sudden threat to the nation. Ironically we have a threat facing us now that is at least as serious as the one presented by Sputnik. We can see it in the trade deficit and in the crash of the stock market and in the declining competitiveness of American industry overseas. We must once again have inspirational leadership catalyzing a national commitment to

upgrade our educational system. The White House can be used in Theodore Roosevelt's phrase as a bully pulpit to create in this nation a commitment not just at the federal level but at the local and state level as well to rally the resources and attention and commitment of our people to create the best education system in the entire world. Representative Gephardt. As was just said the most important thing a president can do is to set a goal for a country. 1960 in response to Sputnik Jack Kennedy said that we'd put a person on the moon in 10 years. We did it nine in 1988 in my inaugural address I want to say by the year 2000 We'll have the best educated people in the world as individuals and as a nation we need to have goals we need to know the most important thing we have to do. And in my view education is that for America. But we've got to put our money where our mouth is. As has been said here the federal government has traditionally had a role

in equity and access. We tried to make sure that everybody has an equal chance college loans and grants Head Start other programs vocational education have done that. But they've all been cut. The Reagan administration. I met a girl the other day in Ames Iowa who had a three six average at the university. She had her parents made $14000 a year and she had just lost her student loan. That's how bad the Reagan cuts have been. Those cuts need to be restored. But we also need excellence and we need programs for excellence. I've given a number of specific speeches setting out what I think we need to do at the federal level for excellence. One of them is to give grants to schools local schools and state school boards who produce better outcomes I think that's one of the things that we can do. The final thing I'd say is that we do have to say how we're going to pay for it. I've set out a specific budget to both lower the deficit and to make room for things like education I've called for an oil import fee because I think it's good budget energy

policy I've called for the Harkin Gephardt save the family farm act. We spent 11 billion dollars a year today in corn subsidies we spent 10 billion dollars for education that can be turned around if farmers can get more of their price from the marketplace. And I'm for freezing defense spending. So that's those are my specifics on how to pay for it. We need to set the goal and get it done. Concluding this round of answers governor to caucus. Well boy the central fact of the matter is a number of us of already said that this nation is teeter tottering under a fiscal house of cards and we know that and we've been experiencing that for the past three or four weeks and there's no sense in getting the American people the next present United States is going to walk into a very very serious fiscal and economic situation. So the question is will the next president be somebody who knows how to balance budgets how to cut deficits how to get this nation's economy moving again how to go out there and collect billions in uncollected revenue every year that are being collected by the IRS and at the same time

get those interest rates down which will also make a major contribution to deficit reduction so that we're going to have the resources to do what we all want to do when it comes to educating our youngsters and providing good skills to our workers. That's why I said in my answer to the first question that at least for the first year or two the next pres the United States is going to have to pick its priorities from for me that's teaching. Because of the serious an impending crisis we're going to have in teaching if we don't do that. And I've suggested a quarter of a billion dollars in a fund for Teacher Excellence a fraction of what we're spending in Star Wars less than what Secretary Shultz asked for Contra aid a few weeks ago to provide the resources to recruit young people to get them interested in teaching to provide some scholarships for them to revive that National Teacher Corps and also to provide some incentives for staying in teaching and some support for the kinds of sabbaticals and in service training that Paul was talking about. One of the thing has been happening over the course of the past few years and you know that well in Iowa and that is that there's been an explosion of interest in commitment at the state level. You've done it here

we've done it in my state. There's been almost a revolution in the state role and the next president the United States I hope will be somebody who can work with state legislatures and the educational community at the state and local level to build on that. What better person than a sitting governor. I can't think of anybody who might build that partnership better. Thank you. Our next round of questioning brings the perspective of the private schools sister Jude Fitzpatrick thank you. Recognizing the contribution of religious schools to American society and the responsibility of parents to provide the most appropriate education for their children. How would you assure a dual system of education. Which would guarantee parents a choice and the economic freedom to exercise the choice of the best possible education for their children. Governor Babbitt. And my first again I'm starting to doubt the the quality of the drawing here but Sister I was

educated by the nuns in Flagstaff Arizona and I must confess that I learned early on that you normally tried to give the teacher the answer they wanted. But in this case I have to tell you that I can't because I'm opposed to tuition tax credits to the sorts of direct aid to private education that has so often been advocated. And I think that the discussion we've been having right here proves my point. Our Surely our first responsibility is to make the public education system work. That's the core of the American education tradition. And we're hearing here tonight how great the need is and how urgent it is that we devote the resources to get it done. Now we're not talking honestly about where we find those resources and I think that illustrates the difficulty of the problem Senator Simon says well one M-x missile. Ninety eight million dollars. It's a nice anecdote but that's not how we're going to pay the bill.

Al Gore says I'd like to up education spending back from 8 to 10 percent of the federal budget. Where does the money come from. Dick Gephardt says oil import fee is not a good answer. When you pay an oil import fee 50 percent of the money goes to subsidize oil companies and it's nowhere near enough money. I think what we need to do is to talk realistically about a systematic approach to budget cuts and revenues that are broadly based. Now in conclusion let me say I think I can offer you one piece of good news. My youngest son attends a parochial school. It's a good one. But it doesn't have access to all of the facilities of a public school and I've seen how it is he has access for special education for enrichment for other needs to the public school system. And I can tell you this I'd be a firm advocate of saying everybody out there in private education you can have access to any piece of that public school system when you need the enrichment of special education in the services.

It just so happens Governor Babbitt you referred to Representative Gephardt and he's next in turn. While I want every parent in this country to be confident and happy to send their child to the public school I don't think that's always the case today. And as long as it isn't We've got to marshal our resources spend our efforts do all of the things that we've talked about tonight and then some to make sure that our public schools reach the goal of giving us the best educated people in the world. So that's one reason that I would not be for sending money to the private school systems from the public treasury. I think there's a second reason that we have to look at as well and that is that we've always had a wall of separation between the church and state in our country and that also has to be maintained. There have been times in the past too and public monies have been

used for private education some of our loan and grant programs to college students obviously wind up in private schools so there have been instances where it can be done. But to go further than we've gone I think would be unacceptable from both viewpoints. Now let me just respond for a moment to what Bruce said about the oil import fee and paying for what we want to do now. I've been specific about what I want to do on the budget. I've set out specific proposals. They aren't popular in Iowa New Hampshire and other places nobody wants to hear about an oil import fee. But it's a good thing for our country. It will make us less dependent on other countries that will ensure our energy future. It fits in to good agriculture policy because if you have an oil import fee you can get banks to loan you money to build ethanol plants. And it brings in some money to pay for programs and education and help balance the budget. So I think we need to be specific. We have great needs in public education.

It's one of the reasons we don't have funds available for private education. But we've got to be straight about how we're going to fund our public education system. Center Simon I repeat the question which has to do with the dual system of education. How would you as president of the United States assure a dual system of education that would guarantee parents a choice the question are asked and also the economic freedom to exercise the choice. There is no question that the non public schools contribute a great deal. Three of my high school years were at a at a Lutheran High School. But I join my colleagues in believing that fundamental changes in the structure just are not going to happen in a large measure because we're not doing the job we ought to be doing for public schools right now. Now there are areas where help is being provided and I see nothing wrong with continuing those areas. We do have school lunch programs for example under Chapter 1. Helping

young people where they are economically and culturally disadvantage that help is available available to both public schools and public schools. And I think should continue. I happen to favor can an extending Chapter 1 also to high schools not simply elementary schools. And again would favor doing it for public and public schools but that would help only a very small number of public schools who are in very poor areas of our our country. At the college and university level. There we have a different situation there we have a traditional role of the federal government assisting. If you are a student you can get help whether you're going to marry crest college or Luther College or Brandeis University. And that has worked out reasonably well. One other area where I think some assistance can be provided. But it is very limited

and that is seminars for teachers. There I think we can say if you're going to go to a seminar for foreign language teachers for example teachers from wherever they are whatever their background should be eligible for that. But fundamentally the focus ought to be on bracing and buttressing the public school system of our nation. Governor to caucus. Will I to sister have to give you an answer which I'm not sure you would like to hear and that is that I opposed to it in tax credits and those kinds of devices for supporting private parochial schools. Not because I'm against choice I think that's a very important thing and while I am a product of the public schools myself I want families and parents and youngsters to have as broad a range of choice as possible. But because we simply don't have the resources at this point to provide the kind of support we need for public schools and beyond that that wall of separation between church and state that Dick Clark talked about is very important. I think there are real dangers

in government involvement in financing a private parochial schools because you know there's an old saying Who pays the piper calls the tune and I think as we get government if we do get government more and more into the financing of private parochial schools the government will be begin prescribing curriculum and textbooks teacher qualifications and all of the things that I think would be very dangerous to the private parochial system. There has been talk here tonight as there always is in these debates about how we're going to pay for all of this. Dick wants to impose an oil import tax on this country a 50 billion dollar economic burden when you count it up. Bruce has advocated a national sales tax for the life of me I don't understand why we don't go at what is the most obvious source of revenue uncollected taxes in this country tax compliance has dropped 81 percent the United States of America. That represents one hundred ten billion dollars in uncollected taxes we have responsible studies one done by a bipartisan commission on a respected congressman indicates conservatively that we could collect one hundred five billion dollars

over five years and thirty five billion dollars thereafter annually. As somebody who has to balance budgets and has to go out and collect the revenue to pay for increased teacher salaries and increase state support for my schools my teachers in my communities that's where you go first. That doesn't mean that we may not need additional taxes at some point we don't know at this point. But to permit 110 billion dollars to go uncollected in this country every year is not only dumb fiscal policy it's very unfair to the vast majority of American taxpayers who pay their taxes and pay them on time and pay them in full. Thank you Governor. Reverend Jackson Sr. if it's packed Rick asked how would you assure if you were elected president a dual system of energy education and the economic choice to make that decision. Sister I have good news we're going to keep church and state separate. It's important for all of us. The fact of the matter is that. Democracy does not guarantee success. It guarantees opportunity religious education is. It. Is a freedom it's an option. It's not an

obligation. One concern of course is not just religious education which is proving to be so good across the years but race education. And sex education. Bob Jones University for example. They get federal money is on the other hand and I want to obey federal laws and not want to respect the rights of the common people and so often the the schools in many instances became private not just of a better education but by. A race education separate education and therefore our federal money must go for the common good average spec good private schools. All three of our five children have gone to private schools but those are our private options and those are private obligations and saw support the idea that we ought to protect the right of private education. We ought to be funded by private sources. As I've looked at the whole question of how to fall on the process when the Reagan forces came

in power you know over the 750 billion dollar tax break on the one hand doubled military budget in peacetime on the other. How can we offset that tremendous negative impact upon our economy. If we freeze the present income tax rate at 38 percent. Those make into one of the laws a year above. That's twenty two billion dollars that Jim Wright talks about the corporate rate is frozen at what was in 1980 that's another 20 plus billion dollars in state tax the wealthy pay their share and us another 6 billion dollars. The money has to come from people who are making it not from unemployment compensation not from from the pharmas and the if you look at just their craft task force is just two more of them. The young the 13 we already have is another for that billion dollars and so we must have a commitment to educate all of our children and to make our public schools so good. Those will not go in the private schools will be inspired to give public education a chance

because it then becomes for them a real choice. Senator Gore. Well I think both public and private schools have an important role to play in our system. Two of my children are in public schools. One is in private school in a private school. The fourth is not yet old enough to go to school. I think that our primary focus has to be as a country on improving our public school system. But of course there should be freedom of choice. But where funding is concerned I agree with many of the sentiments already expressed. Those who wish to send their children to private schools must of course have the opportunity to do so. But in my view they do not have a right to ask for money from the Treasury either directly or indirectly by way of a tuition tax credit. Now I often hear the question from parents with children who go to private schools.

Why should I have to pay taxes to support the public schools when my children are not in the public schools. They're in private schools instead. And how can I bear that Bert. Well. The answer is that even those citizens who have no children at all get a tremendous benefit from living in a country that has a system of universal public education a system devoted to excellence and achievement. And so I think our priorities must be on the public school system and while guaranteeing freedom of choice make sure that the resources are devoted to the public schools and do not allow money to be taken from the Treasury for use in private schools. In our next round of questions Sen. Simon will be responding first you'll be glad Governor Babbit that you get a rest this time at least for a little bit. And another

perspective other than the parochial schools is home education. And that perspective in a question comes from Rod Boyd. Gentleman is estimated that about 1 million children are now being educated at home in another six million are attending private or church related schools and every academic category and home school and church school sectors student achievements are showing some very positive results. Thus there is a need to look at home instruction as a viable alternative to public education. How would you as president encourage this momentum. I don't think there is a rule for the president in that area. I think that is that decision that state governments have to make. I would add however I have some concerns in this area as one who has been spending a lot of time working in the field of education. There are things besides reading writing arithmetic and other academic courses that you should get from education and in the audience or my daughter Sheila and

my son Martin. When I went to public school in Carbondale Illinois they went to school with black and white with someone who has a son or daughter of someone who's unemployed as well as people who are more fortunate. I think that socializing factor that is there for people who go to school is very important in pulling our nation together. And so I think we have to be careful that we that we don't go too far in the area of home education though again that's a decision for state governments rather than federal government. There is a second concern that I have. One of the things we need is much stronger support for public education. You're a good example of someone who has the potential to provide that kind of support if we let too many people educate their children at home. I think we're

going to lose some of that is central support. That really could make a difference in seeing to it that our public schools moved ahead to become finer public schools. I think the main focus ought to be what is the interest of our society as a whole. How do we make our public schools the very finest possible. Governor Babbitt the question is. Would you encourage home instruction as a K through 12 option and how would you if you would encourage it. Rod I wouldn't encourage it I discourage it. I recognize that it's primarily a state issue but let me tell you my experience in Arizona in the midst of some very intensive efforts at education reform. The Home Education people came to the legislature. To get legislation allowing home education. They just about had it put together when they decided they ought to say what I would do with the bill and I told him in no uncertain

terms I said I'm going to veto it because I'm personally opposed to the concept. They made a powerful emotional case about their rights as parents and I listened very carefully and I was moved by the sincerity of their pitch as much as I disagreed with it. And I finally agreed to sign a bill on two conditions that the law require that any parent who want to do home education go to the county school superintendent and pass a basic skills test. And secondly that that child each year take the Iowa chief test it is taken by every other kid in Arizona schools and go back into the public school system. Upon failing. That's the way we resolve the dilemma but I've got to tell you. I don't think that that's the future of education. We're not going to get anywhere by taking kids out of schools. We got to keep them in schools and bring the parents into the schools as well. If there's one thing we could do to really get public education moving it would be to bring parents back into that schoolhouse.

If I could revolutionize education I had issue an edict from on high saying that in this world under penalty of death every parent will read to his or her child 15 minutes a night three nights a week or else I have another idea. What do you think it would be like to have a president of the United States seen on television not riding a horse but reading a book to a child. Reverend Jackson the question relates to home education. Would you encourage it. And if so hollow. I believe in home education. I believe in public education. And both have their place. Children must be taught to cope. Not just to count. Children cannot really be taught to cope at home in the real world a nation so diverse a world so so complex in this hemisphere alone we are one third as a nation. Two thirds of the people in this hemisphere

Latin Americans speak Spanish and Portuguese in the main altruism must be exposed to people of different races and cultures and religions and learn how to relate to them at various levels that is something inherently good and sound about a multicultural educational experience America. We are a superpower. That's why education must have supervision it MUST SEE. You must relate to the continents of the world. It must be able to relate to people who were African Asian. In the end a male the female a Christian the Moslem a Jew. And that's one of the great values of a public education. I would try to convince parents who believe in home education to do home education if the teacher gives homework. Have the child home to do the work. Good home education teach that child the right that religion and cultural and character values its good home education meet that child's

teacher four times a year to talk about their report card. Turn the TV off and radio off at least two hours every night. A good combination of home and public education a sound education saws from bit roam the classroom not the classroom. So a good combination of home education personal and private religious values plus public education is the best form of educating our children. Governor to caucus. Mr Boyd said that there's a momentum for home instruction. He asks if you would continue that momentum and how. Well I'm not sure I see that momentum. I see a tremendous momentum for improved quality in our public schools for better salaries for teachers for standards for our students and I think that's terrific. But as I think all of us have said here tonight parents have a major role to play in the education of youngsters. I don't think I'd impose the penalty of death on parents didn't read to their children but I think everybody knows that the best preschool education of all is a parent reading to his or her child.

Being involved in staying involved in that youngsters education on the other hand I find it difficult to see how an individual parent can provide the quality of education that we expect of our public schools and that as Dick has pointed out a nation that serious about being competitive and providing its youngsters with good skills and good schooling can possibly provide. I wasn't bad at math 35 years ago but I couldn't teach math today if my life depended on it what about foreign language what. But what about sciences. How does an individual parent teach those kinds of things. It seems to me it's the collaboration of parents and the school that makes the difference and one of the things that I believe we've got to do and this has already been said here is to do those things which will encourage parents not only be involved the education the youngsters but to get involved in the in the work of that school. We've done one thing in my state which over the past two years has produced a tremendous amount of amount of parental involvement. We now have school improvement councils. In every single public school in the

state made up of teachers and administrators and parents and state funds provide a very modest sum of money but important some money for that school improvement Council. Those school improvement councils have had more to do with getting parents deeply involved in those schools again bringing parents and teachers and administrators together around their common concern for those youngsters and anything we've done and is present the United States. I will encourage those school improvement Council encourage states to move in that direction because I think it's a wonderful way of involving parents actively and constructively in the education of the youngsters in our public schools. Representative Gephardt. From a legal viewpoint this obviously is not an issue for the federal government and I don't think the president of the United States should be the superintendent of a National School Board. But having said that I want to give you my personal feelings about it. I agree with Governor Babbitt. I think if home education is to be allowed it should only be allowed by certified teachers people who are certified to be competent teachers. And there

should be a testing of students to find out if the actual education is going on. The reason for that is simple the whole society has an interest in everybody having a basic education because youngsters who don't get educated are going to wind up in prisons wind up in unemployment lines wind up in welfare lines. So to simply turn this responsibility back to parents without knowing that the education is occurring is something that I don't think states and local government should do. Now let me talk for a moment about the parent is first teacher program in Missouri because you know I think rather than worrying about home education what we've really got to concentrate on is how we get parents who aren't enough involved in their children's education to be involved in it. We've had a program in the in Missouri that really has worked. It has really taught teachers how to teach parents how to be teachers. It's gotten parents involved in their schools it's reinvigorated the parent teacher

association in the schools. It's set up homework hotline so that parents who needed help to help their children could call other parents to get that help. I think that's the kind of thing we need to be talking about because clearly the parent is a very important teacher in the environment in that home as we've all said is critical. So rather than worrying about the problem of home teaching I think we've got to worry about how to get parents to be better teachers and to become involved with the public education program. Senator Gore will conclude the responses to this question which relates to instruction in the home. A few years ago as chairman of a group called the Congressional clearing house on the future I chaired a day long examination of new trends in education. It was the first time that I became aware of home schooling. The idea struck me as unusual and frankly undesirable. But as I listened I learned some new facts that I was not aware of before. And I became

convinced that for some families this option ought to be available so that those parents who would like to choose home schooling should have a right to do so. I frankly do not believe the federal government has a role in promoting home schooling. I agree with others that this is a state option and states should set the rules and write the laws that govern in this area. But while I would not choose it for my own children I do respect those parents who have made a case that for their children they genuinely and deeply believe that that is the correct option. Now what should we as a nation do and what should the federal government do. We shouldn't be promoting or encouraging home schooling in my view simply because our mission should be to make our public school system a system that is so good that it will tilt the choice for parents who are considering that option and there are somewhere between a hundred thousand to a million in the nation who are

now interested in home schooling and involved in it so that we can present them with a better choice if they wish to send their children to public schools and well as well. Instead now I believe also that parents do have a much more important role to play inside the school system. Others have made this point but the studies that have been coming out over the last several years make the point crystal clear that the single most important change in a student's performance in school is whether or not that student's parents are deeply involved in homework and in every school activity. So that's the kind of home schooling that I think we ought to be encouraging the most. QUESTION OFF-MIKE School Principal Sandra Lowrance. Gentleman using the traditional report card concept. How would you grade each of the following and please explain your rationale. A The quality of classroom teaching. Be.

The quality of instructional leadership being provided by school administrators. See. The quality of education being provided in our public school system. And. The quality of support being provided by parents and other taxpayers. Senator Simon Your first in response here and I'll just take those off really quickly again as I haven't jotted down the quality of your grade on the quality of classroom teaching. The quality of instructional leadership provided by school administrators the quality of education our public school system and the quality of support provided by parents and taxpayers are very difficult to make general observations when we have a school system that is so divided and I don't think I really can answer your question specifically. When I was in grade school we also had another little thing on the report card called effort. On effort I would give us a c. We have to

do much better and if we get the effort up then you're going to see inevitably. That our score goes up. On the other items and if I may give an analogy when we pass the aid for the handicap bill at the federal level which for the first time required all public schools to provide education for the handicapped. I remember the argument that was used against it. We don't have enough qualified quality teachers right now in helping children with disabilities. If you pass this law you'll see that standard go down appreciably. Well we passed the law and you know what's happened. The standard has gone up. We have improved the quality of education for handicapped youngsters in this nation. And I think the same thing will happen if we move in this area really putting some effort in back of our public

schools. One other area I'd like to give a score to ourselves on that card and that's adult illiteracy here. We have to say the nation gets an F 23 million functionally illiterate Americans adult Americans. People can read a stop sign can't address and can't help their children or their schoolwork. The thing we were just talking about before we ought to be massively moving on this problem and yet we're pretending right now it doesn't exist. Governor Babbit you've been asked to assign some grades. My answer is say say say it and see where the day for Secretary Bennett. I give him an F. But I'm afraid it come back and want to repeat the course.