Quayle Record: Interest In Training, Budget Cuts

Article Tools
  • PrintPrinter-Friendly
  • EmailEmail Article
  • ReprintReprints
  • CommentsComments

Senator Dan Quayle, the Republican Vice Presidential candidate, often cites his sponsorship of 1983 job-training legislation as one of his proudest accomplishments in the Senate.

Mr. Quayle's involvement in passing the Job Training Partnership Act generally earned him high marks from his colleagues, both Republican and Democrat.

On most other education-related issues during his eight years in the Senate, however, Mr. Quayle has been content, with only a few exceptions, to let others take the lead.

The most active education role taken by Mr. Quayle, who serves on the Labor and Human Resources Committee, has been as a loyal supporter of Reagan Administration proposals, particularly its efforts to cut spending.

The jtpa provides federal funds to train the unemployed poor for jobs in private industry.

While stressing that the measure was developed by a bipartisan group of Senators, Mr. Quayle usually neglects to mention that his chief co-sponsor on the bill was one of the chamber's most liberal members--Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts.

Another issue on which Mr. Quayle has been vocal is space and technology education. A campaign packet on his education views includes a paper in which Mr. Quayle calls for stepped-up U.S. efforts in science and technology education in order to meet the Soviet space challenge.

He cites his support for the reauthorization of mathematics- and science-education programs and calls for the federal government and private industry to "recruit, train, and provide financial support for at least 100,000 Americans, especially minorities, to be trained in the field over the next decade."

Mr. Quayle often has been the champion of the Administration's proposals for education programs, introducing for the Education Department legislation on bilingual education, library services and construction, adult education, and student-loan defaults.

He voted in favor of tuition-tax credits and co-sponsored a bill call4ing for educational vouchers under the federal Chapter 1 program.

This year, he pushed for a proposal to require states to review regularly the progress of students who receive compensatory aid under the Chapter 1 program.

Educators feared that the amendment would open the door for state takeovers of schools not showing adequate progress. The amendment was diluted in conference, however, to ensure that states were not given any authority that they did not already have.

In 1981, Mr. Quayle introduced a bill to dissolve the Education Department.

"A Cabinet-level Department of Education threatens to preempt the role of parents, localities, and the states in determining policy for education," Mr. Quayle said at the time.

Although he has voted in favor of most legislation authorizing major education programs, Mr. Quayle frequently has opposed efforts to increase education funding.

For example, in 1983 he voted to kill an amendment that would have added $559 million to the $13.5 billion appropriated for education. Also that year, he voted against adding $40 million for Chapter 1. He voted against adding $916 million to Chapter 1 in 1982.

In 1981, on five separate votes, he voted against increasing funding for child immunizations, school lunch and child nutrition, and student financial-assistance programs.

In 1982, he voted against adding $63 million for the Summer Youth Employment Program, and in 1985, he voted against a measure that would have increased funds for the summer program by $665 million.

Mr. Quayle's campaign staff has a ready response to questions about his stand on education-funding issues.

The response reads: "I believe that our current educational programs are doing a good job, and that they have been effective. However, I see a limited role for the federal government in education, as education is primarily the responsibility of the state and local government."

"States and localities have increased their spending on education because of the reform movement," it concludes, "and I applaud these state and local efforts."

Vol. 08, Issue 07

Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.
Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.

Back to Top Back to Top

Most Popular Stories