S.Amdt. 2203

SA 2203. Mr. MERKLEY submitted an amendment intended to be proposed
to amendment SA 2089 submitted by Mr. Alexander (for himself and Mrs.
Murray) to the bill S. 1177, to reauthorize the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 to ensure that every child achieves;
which was ordered to lie on the table; as follows:

At the end of part B of title X, add the following:

SEC. 102__. FINDINGS AND SENSE OF THE SENATE.

(a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
(1) The Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services,
and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2016
(S. 1695, 114th Congress) (referred to in this section as

[[Page S4976]]

the ``proposed appropriations Act''), as reported out of the
Committee on Appropriations of the Senate on June 25, 2015,
reduces investments in critical middle-class priorities by
$3,575,000,000, compared to the appropriation levels enacted
for fiscal year 2015.
(2) The proposed appropriations Act reduces investments in
critical middle-class priorities by $13,231,000,000, compared
to the Democratic funding alternative that is consistent with
pre-sequester funding levels provided in the Budget Control
Act of 2011 (Public Law 112-25; 125 Stat. 240).
(3) These funding cuts would bring Federal investments in
programs under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 6301 et seq.) to their lowest levels since
fiscal year 2002.
(4) Of the lowest-achieving 5 percent of schools that
receive funds under part A of title I of such Act (20 U.S.C.
6311 et seq.), about two-thirds of students do not meet grade
level standards.
(5) The proposed appropriations Act cuts funding for part A
of title I of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of
1965 (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) by $850,000,000, compared to
the President's fiscal year 2016 budget request and the
Democratic funding alternative offered in the Committee on
Appropriations of the Senate.
(6) Research consistently shows that high-quality early
education is critical to the educational development of every
child.
(7) The proposed appropriations Act provides no funding for
preschool development grants, a cut of $750,000,000 compared
to the President's fiscal year 2016 budget request and the
Democratic funding alternative offered in Committee.
(8) The education funding cuts in the proposed
appropriations Act are largely the result of the artificial
and arbitrary spending caps triggered by the lack of a
bipartisan budget agreement as envisioned by the Budget
Control Act of 2011 (Public Law 112-25; 125 Stat. 240).
(9) Congress has previously provided relief from these cuts
in the form of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 (Public Law
113-67; 127 Stat. 1165), which provided relief from
sequestration equally for defense and nondefense investments
for fiscal years 2014 and 2015.
(b) Sense of the Senate.--It is the sense of the Senate
that--
(1) the fiscal and economic challenges of the United States
are a top priority for Congress, and the deep, automatic
budget cuts of sequestration remains an unreasonable and
inadequate budgeting tool either to address the deficits and
debt of the Nation or provide the resources needed to educate
our children and grow the economy;
(2) this Act was supported unanimously in Committee;
(3) fulfilling the promise of this Act will require
Congress to provide funding at levels above sequestration;
(4) Congress should immediately begin negotiations on a
successor to the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013 (Public Law
113-67; 127 Stat. 1165) that provides equal relief from
sequestration for defense and nondefense investments,
including education, for fiscal year 2016 and beyond; and
(5) for fiscal year 2016, Congress should provide
$18,554,875,000 for key programs under the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965 and other education programs,
as amended by this Act and consistent with the pre-sequester
funding levels called for by the bipartisan Budget Control
Act of 2011 (Public Law 112-25; 125 Stat. 240), including--
(A) programs under part A of title I of the Elementary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965;
(B) the striving readers comprehensive literacy program
under part E of title I of such Act, as such Act was in
effect on the day before the date of enactment of this Act,
or its successor;
(C) the 21st century community learning centers program
under part B of title IV of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act of 1965;
(D) English language acquisition grants under title III of
such Act;
(E) preschool development grants under title XIV of
division A of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 (Public Law 112-10); and
(F) investing in innovation grants under such title.
______