69传媒

It鈥檚 really a matter of simple math.

President Bush wants to fashion several new education programs this year, including pricey items central to his oft-touted high school agenda. But he also is proposing for the first time since he entered the White House to cut the overall budget of the U.S. Department of Education.

So, if Mr. Bush is serious about reining in the agency鈥檚 spending, something鈥檚 got to give.

And he鈥檚 asking Congress to give up a lot鈥�48 line items, to be exact. That鈥檚 how many of the department鈥檚 programs the president wants to put out of business to make room for his priorities. This is not the first time Mr. Bush has sought to abolish a raft of education programs; he鈥檚 tried repeatedly, but lawmakers from both parties have largely foiled those efforts.

Among the items on the chopping block this time are funds for education technology, vocational and technical education, arts education, and state grants under the Safe and Drug-Free 69传媒 and Communities program.

Overall, the president鈥檚 fiscal 2006 budget request would reduce the Education Department鈥檚 discretionary budget by $530 million, or about 1 percent, to $56 billion. The last time the agency鈥檚 budget actually shrank was a decade ago, during President Clinton鈥檚 administration.

Some lawmakers, including key Republicans, have made clear they鈥檙e not interested in Mr. Bush鈥檚 idea of shifting $1.3 billion in vocational and technical education aid to his high school agenda.

鈥淚 would hate to see the high school program sort of built on the funding back of vocational education,鈥� Rep. Michael N. Castle, the Delaware Republican who chairs the House Education Reform Subcommittee, said last week. 鈥淎nd I don鈥檛 think I鈥檓 alone in this.鈥�

He predicted that federal lawmakers鈥攁s they have before鈥攚ere likely to substantially rearrange the figures in Mr. Bush鈥檚 request before it finally reaches his desk. Indeed, Mr. Castle expressed skepticism last week that the cornerstone of President Bush鈥檚 second-term education agenda, expanding high school testing and accountability, would become law this year.

A 鈥楧isciplined Budget鈥�

The Education Department was one of numerous federal agencies whose budgets were slated for cuts in the budget request that President Bush forwarded to Capitol Hill on Feb. 7. The White House has emphasized that the $2.5 trillion budget package comes in tight fiscal times, as the war in Iraq, homeland security issues, and the president鈥檚 stated intention to gradually decrease budget deficits make trade-offs necessary.

鈥淚 would call it a disciplined budget,鈥� Mr. Bush said during a Detroit speech a day after announcing his budget plan for fiscal 2006, which begins Oct. 1. 鈥淢y budget reduces spending鈥攔educes spending鈥攐n nonsecurity discretionary programs by 1 percent, the most disciplined proposal since Ronald Reagan was in office.鈥�

The budget, Mr. Bush鈥檚 fifth, represents the first time he鈥檚 sought to cut the Education Department鈥檚 overall discretionary spending, which has grown steadily鈥攁nd in some years rapidly鈥攕ince the mid-1990s.

But the big hikes of a few years ago have tapered off. In fact, Congress, which typically had raised the final budget above Mr. Bush鈥檚 request, last year for the first time provided less than he asked for. The final discretionary number for the Education Department in fiscal 2005, $56.6 billion, was an increase of almost $1 billion over the previous year, or 1.6 percent.

This year, Mr. Bush has especially set his sights on high schools for added focus, and money.

He is asking Congress to provide $250 million to help states meet his plan to require expanded high school testing. He also wants to create a flexible $1.2 billion pot of money for intervening with high schoolers at risk of academic failure. Beyond that, he wants to boost by eightfold the budget for Striving Readers, a middle and high school reading program, to name a few of the biggest-ticket high school items.

Further, he鈥檚 called for a new, $500 million Teacher Incentive Fund to help pay incentives to teachers in high-need schools and high-need subjects, such as math and science. And, he鈥檚 seeking to carve out an extra $1 billion to increase the budgets for the Title I program for disadvantaged students鈥攖he centerpiece of the No Child Left Behind Act鈥攁nd special education state grants.

鈥淭he budget focuses on key priorities of this department and of the president and on getting results,鈥� Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings said in a Feb. 7 conference call with reporters.

She argued that many of the programs the president wants to shut down have been proved ineffective or are too small to make much of a difference.

鈥淚 will tell you that 15 of those are $5 million or less,鈥� Ms. Spellings said of the programs targeted for extinction. 鈥淚t鈥檚 hard to get a critical mass for a national program . . . with small amounts.鈥�

But big or small, members of Congress rarely seem inclined to say farewell to programs.

At a Feb. 7 rally in Philadelphia, Rep. Chaka Fattah, a Pennsylvania Democrat on the House Education and the Workforce Committee, vowed to fight Mr. Bush鈥檚 plans to eliminate the $307 million GEAR UP program. An acronym for Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs, the program helps low-income elementary and secondary students prepare for college.

鈥淲e have seen it work in every state,鈥� Mr. Fattah said. 鈥淧resident Bush . . . should be ashamed to submit this budget to the United States Congress.鈥�

鈥楽tay and Fight鈥�

In an interview last week, Sen. Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, the top Democrat on the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee, expressed dismay with Mr. Bush鈥檚 request. He and other Democrats have long argued that with the ambitious demands of the No Child Left Behind Act to improve student achievement, the federal government must provide much more aid.

鈥淭he fact is, the education budget of the administration is just inadequate to meet the education needs of this nation,鈥� Mr. Kennedy said. 鈥淭his nation, with a $2.5 trillion budget, ought to be able to afford the kinds of investments in the No Child Left Behind Act, vocational education, and in higher education which are absolutely essential.鈥�

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., said he has decided to remain as the chairman of the Appropriations Committee鈥檚 subcommittee for labor, health and human services, and education this year to protect social spending from the president鈥檚 proposed cuts. He had been contemplating a shift to a new spending panel on intelligence matters.

鈥淪trong advocacy for education, health care, and worker safety will be indispensable if they are to get their fair share of President Bush鈥檚 austere budget,鈥� he wrote in a Feb. 8 op-ed piece in The Washington Post. 鈥淔iscal 2006 looks like an especially tough year, so I鈥檝e decided to stay and fight rather than switch.鈥�

But some members of Congress were more welcoming of the president鈥檚 plan.

鈥淚 commend President Bush for proposing a fiscally responsible budget that will rein in federal spending and protect our top priorities, such as national defense, homeland security, and job creation,鈥� Rep. Virginia Foxx, a freshman Republican from North Carolina who serves on the education committee, said on the House floor last week.

Although she suggested that lawmakers may differ with the president on some details, Ms. Foxx called the plan a 鈥済ood first step in the right direction.鈥�

鈥淚 am encouraged that he wants to hold federal programs to a firm test of accountability and eliminate programs that no longer serve their intended purpose or perform a vital function,鈥� she said.

Rep. Castle said in an interview that while he opposes some of the president鈥檚 proposed cuts, he foresees little, if any, growth in the education budget total beyond Mr. Bush鈥檚 request.

鈥淭his White House is serious about the numbers,鈥� he said, 鈥渟o I think if you want to come back and say, 鈥楬ey look, we鈥檝e got to fund this on education,鈥� we鈥檝e got to be ready to show what we鈥檙e not going to fund this year, unlike a lot of other years.鈥�

One of the most controversial targets in the plan is vocational and technical education.

Mr. Bush wants to redirect the $1.3 billion currently spent on those activities to his new High School Intervention program. The Education Department notes in its detailed budget proposal that the vocational state grants, which account for most of that money, have been rated 鈥渋neffective鈥� by the White House Office of Management and Budget for having 鈥減roduced little or no evidence of improved outcomes for students despite decades of federal investment.鈥�

And yet, many department programs not targeted for elimination haven鈥檛 exactly received a thumbs-up. The OMB analysis rated many programs as 鈥渞esults not demonstrated.鈥� For instance, the OMB said of the nearly $11 billion special education state grants that 鈥渢here is no evidence that this program improves outcomes.鈥�

The new high school program, the Education Department says, would support targeted interventions that raise the achievement of high schoolers, especially those at risk of not meeting state standards. States could still choose to fund vocational programs with that money, though vocational education advocates argue that support for their programs would likely get squeezed out.

Hanging the high school plans on cuts elsewhere may be risky.

Last year, the president tried to cut the vocational and technical education grants by some $300 million, but Congress refused to go along. Vocational programs have some influential friends, from Rep. Castle to Sen. Michael B. Enzi, R-Wyo., the chairman of the Senate education committee, and Rep. John E. Peterson, R-Pa., who serves on the House appropriations panel.

鈥淭his is one of my top issues, and I find it very disappointing that we have to go through the . . . battle again,鈥� Rep. Peterson said in an interview last week.

鈥淲e鈥檙e trying to send everybody down this academic trail,鈥� he said, arguing that many jobs require technical training.

鈥淲e beat it back last year,鈥� Mr. Peterson said of the president鈥檚 previous effort to trim vocational aid. 鈥淚 don鈥檛 think they鈥檙e going to win that battle.鈥�