THE NATION'S BUSINESS

February 22, 1999

As the U.S. Senate returns following the President's Day break, the nation's governors have also gathered in Washington. The two groups are mapping out their respective agendas. Two governors, Republican John Rowland of Connecticut and Democrat James Hodges of South Carolina, debate their ideas with two senators, Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and Richard Durbin (D-IL).

JIM LEHRER: Some competing political agendas, and to Margaret Warner. MARGARET WARNER: The nation's governors have been meeting in Washington the past few days to discuss their priorities. The Senate and House are reconvening this week as well. Governors of both parties have used the occasion to call on the president and congress to get back to work. This morning, when the governors met at the White House, President Clinton urged them to support his latest education proposals. PRESIDENT CLINTON: The budget that I sent to congress this month after the State of the Union calls for spending $1.4 billion to help states and school districts hire newer and better-trained teachers. That's a 17% increase over the budget I signed last fall, and it moves us considerably closer to our goal of hiring 100,000 new teachers over the next seven years -- now the next six years. It calls on congress to pass our tax proposal to build or modernize 6,000 schools, which is a huge problem in many of your states. But I think it's also important that we candidly assess how we invest the money we are now spending. The school districts accepting federal money must end social promotion, turn around or shut down failing schools, ensure teachers know the subjects they're teaching, have and enforce reasonable discipline codes, and empower parents with report cards on their schools. Some people already are trying to frame this debate here in Washington, however, in partisan or ideological terms, and try to force everyone to take sides, when I'd like to use it as an opportunity for us to debate, discuss, and come together. Some will say the federal government should be giving states more flexibility, not demanding more accountability. I think it's a false choice, and the federal government should be giving you more of both. There may be some who say there's now no longer any need for the federal government to assist on these accountability measures because states and school districts are doing it on their own. I have no doubt that these ideas eventually will spread to every state and school district in America. The question is, how long will it take to happen? It took over a hundred years for laws mandating compulsory free elementary education to spread from few states to the whole nation. That pace of change might have been all right in the 19th century; it won't do for the 21st. We don't have the luxury of waiting and continuing to subsidize failure. MARGARET WARNER: Joining us now to talk about competing political agendas among the states and the federal government are two governors, Republican John Rowland of Connecticut, and Democrat James Hodges of South Carolina; and two U.S. senators, Republican Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Democrat Richard Durbin of Illinois. Welcome gentlemen. Governor Rowland, what do you think of the president's education -- the goals and proposals he laid out this morning? GOV. JOHN ROWLAND: I think you're going to find that they're really not competing proposals. I think the goals and focus are the same whether you're Republican or Democrat, a governor or senator, or a congressman. The debate I think is going to be focused on the strings that are attached. And that's an annual debate that we have on a variety of issues ranging from welfare reform to Medicaid funding to now education. But I also want to say that if we can't have a bipartisan solution and join together on the issue of education, then we'll never be able to do much else in this congress working with or without the governors. So you're going to see some healthy debate. At the end of the day yourself, going to see us in favor of smaller classes and more teachers and more reading programs, more funding for Head Start, which is a fantastic program. But you'll see some resistance from the governors to give too much authority, if you will, to Washington and that will be a good discussion to have. And I think we'll come out of it fine. MARGARET WARNER: How do you feel, Governor? GOV. JAMES HODGES: Well, education is not just an issue of the states. It is a national issue. And I was really pleased that the president chose to join the governors in making that a priority. I think the big question now is where congress will come down on this issue. And we certainly want congress to join all of us, both the governors, Democrat and Republican alike, and the president in making education the number one priority in our country. MARGARET WARNER: Well, do you agree, staying with you for a minute, with the kind of accountability that the president said he wanted to introduce more of in the system? And he seems to be saying he wants the federal government in a position to hold the states accountable. GOV. JAMES HODGES: Well, I think it's reasonable to have some framework for the moneys that come to the state. I agree with John that the states ultimately want flexibility to the able to manage the education programs. But I didn't hear the president saying that he wanted strong strings attached to the dollars. He simply wanted accountability and he wanted some way to measure the accomplishments of the states. And I think that's reasonable. It's reasonable for the nation to expect South Carolina to establish accountability and have a reasonable framework. MARGARET WARNER: Senator McConnell, do the president's proposals seem reasonable to the Republican leadership in congress? SEN. MITCH McCONNELL: Well, education, Margaret, is a high priority for both sides. As a matter of fact, right after we finish the bill that we're going to be working on starting tomorrow with regard to military pay and readiness, we're going to an ed-flex bill, which will do exactly what I heard Governor Rowland saying he'd like to do, which is to reduce the number of strings attached to federal programs at the local level. This is a bill the president endorsed last year, and we're hoping we can get it through the senate in rapid order. MARGARET WARNER: And what about the president's other proposals? I mean, as you know, he wants to earmark a lot of money for specific program, whether it's reducing class size or in the tax bill, school construction. He wants to require school districts that accept money to end social promotions or close schools that are failing. What about those specifics? SEN. MITCH McCONNELL: We would rather try to get 95% of the dollars down to the classrooms, which does certainly involve fewer mandates from Washington. And I think these are the ways the two parties will debate the education issue. But in the end, it's my belief that the local school districts are going to benefit mightily from the fact that education is the number one issue in America now. MARGARET WARNER: Do you see agreement possible with the Republicans in congress on this and around the president's proposals, senator? SEN. RICHARD DURBIN: Well, I think this is a perfect issue for us to be considering after the impeachment. If there's one thing Democrats and Republicans ought to agree on, it's the goal of better education in America. And I hope we don't get really caught up in these old clichés, the Washington political clichés about education and local control and federal regulation. But really try to look at it from a family's point of view. And a family sending their kids 20 school wants some basic things. They want the very best education so their kids have a chance. I just finished a tour across Illinois from Chicago all the way. And I can tell you people are challenging the basic assumptions: The idea of starting kids in school at the age of five or six -- we know now that kids are learning much earlier. The idea of turning kids loose at 3 in the afternoon for what, where do they go -- unfortunately many times to get in trouble; and then three months off in the summer to work on the farm? Well, it might have made sense in 1900; it doesn't make sense in the year 2,000. We ought to with able to come together -- I think on a bipartisan basis have an agenda that really gets beyond the politics. MARGARET WARNER: So, for instance, would you be able to support the Republicans great emphasis on block grants to the states rather than this targeted approach that the president is advocating? SEN. RICHARD DURBIN: Well, you know, I can't disagree with any of the president's goals, having 15 or 18 kids in a classroom k-3, I think, is a better environment. The teachers tell me it's a better environment. Making certain that we have enough classrooms for teachers, that's pretty basic, and also making sure that the teachers are well trained. Those seem to be things most people could agree on. But I would tell you this: I want to look for results. I want accountability. I want to make sure when it's all said and done that the parents coming out of the schools say, "I don't know how those politicians did it, but my kid's doing better in school." MARGARET WARNER: Do you think that's possible, Senator McConnell, that this session of congress we'll see a major education bill like this? SEN. MITCH McCONNELL: Yes. I do think it's a virtual certainty. And we are going to have some discussions about how many strings to attach, but at the end of the day I think there's a great deal of interest in moving forward in this field on a bipartisan basis. MARGARET WARNER: Senator (Governor) Rowland, there's been a lot of commentary the last 13 months during the whole run-up to impeachment and the impeachment that political Washington was really out of step with the rest of the country, even out of step with political figures like yourselves, the governors. One, do you share that, but two, if you listen to these two now, Senator McConnell - GOV. JOHN ROWLAND: They sound reasonable. SEN. MITCH McCONNELL: It's a breakthrough. GOV.JOHN ROWLAND: Well, I think most of us as governors, whether Republicans or Democrats, we have the luxury of not having to deal with this issue on an hourly, minute by minute basis. MARGARET WARNER: You mean impeachment? GOV. JOHN ROWLAND: The whole impeachment process and the hearings and the entire process. And as executives, we also have the luxury of focusing an agenda. And one of the greatest things -- and I'm not encouraging anybody in this crowd to run for governor -- but one of the advantages we have is we can set the agenda and the tone, much as the president does, whether it's welfare reform, tax cuts, or education proposals, or open space preservation, we can kind of steer away from some of the rancor and some of the turmoil that we've watched over the last year. I think things will get back on track. And Dick and I were talking about it. We served together in the House. And I can't think of a better purpose, reason, or issue than education to come together in a bipartisan way, heal some wounds. I mean, the irony of all this is that the good news is that it can be the healing solution that the public really wants to see and needs and certainly Washington. And, as Mitch said, this is a very hot issue right now. Every governor wants to be the education governor. The president wants to be the education president. If we're just going to fight over some strings, that's not a bad debate to have. That's not a bad debate to have at all. MARGARET WARNER: How did Washington look to you the last year or so? GOV. JAMES HODGES: I'm sure glad I wasn't up here and had to be a part of it, I can tell you that. I think from our view in South Carolina, I think there was -- the people were disturbed that as much time was consumed talking about the impeachment issue and the great national debate on how we move education ahead, what we do about Social Security, how we position America to compete in the 21st century. I think there was a disappointment that those items weren't being dealt with, and I'm pleased that there seems to now be an emerging consensus that the congress will deal with the education issue. And frankly, I think we can be partners in this. Sometimes state government tends to look at the federal government as the enemy in these programs. And the fact of the matter is we can partner on this. And I do think that we can reach some reasonable consensus about how we advance the American education agenda. MARGARET WARNER: Do you think, Governor Rowland, that there is a difference, though, if we just look at your party, between a national journal has a cover on this -- this weekly of politics and government called the other GOP saying there are really now two Republican Parties - they said -- the hard-edged ideological federal Republican Party and what they called the more inclusive, pragmatic state Republican Party. GOV. JOHN ROWLAND: Which happen to be the governors? MARGARET WARNER: Which happen to be the governors. GOV. JOHN ROWLAND: Well, I hope that we're not two different parties or two even fractions of a party. I think we're having a little trouble nationally focusing. One of my criticisms about my party nationally is that we've spent the last 20 years explaining to every interest group why we're against them, you know, whether it's women's issues, whether it's immigration issues, we have this image of being opposed to being inclusive. I don't think we've done enough on attracting African-Americans to our party or Hispanics. Conversely, the governors have been very effective - Republican governors -- with policy issues, with appointments and administrations, with legislative agendas. I think we've been very aggressive in reaching out and kind of spreading our wings, mostly northeastern governors, too, I might add. So, we're kind of hopeful that we can - if not just change our national image -- at least have an effect on the spokespersons and what's happening in Washington in my party and, if not, perhaps move the center of gravity, Republican gravity, away from Washington and perhaps get focus on what's happening in the states where I think all of us are pretty much tuned in to what the people want. MARGARET WARNER: Senator McConnell, does that sounds like a fair criticism to you, that the federal Republicans have perhaps presented a face to the country that has alienated a lot of people and needs to move back more to what the state Republicans are doing? SEN. MITCH McCONNELL: Well, this is some of the growing pains of being in the majority. This is also the Republican congress that balanced the budget, passed welfare reform, gave a $500 per child tax credit to families. We've accomplished a great deal. We've had to deal with the difficult impeachment issue, but frankly, it hasn't set us back at all. It happened to have occurred during a period at the beginning of a congress when we're typically not very active anyway. And now that that's behind us we're moving ahead with rebuilding the military and passing an important education bill. And I think we're right on track to get back to doing the kind of work that we'd prefer to do. No one was anxious to deal with impeachment. It came over from the House. MARGARET WARNER: But I think that Governor Rowland is talking not just about impeachment but really over the last several years, that the federal Republican Party has presented a more hard-edged image to the country. SEN. MITCH McCONNELL: Well, it depends on what part of the country you're from. We didn't present such a hard edge that we're not in the majority. We're in the majority for the third congress in a row. So the American people must not be rejecting us at the ballot box. And we're very optimistic that we're going to control the senate after the next election. So I think this gloom and doom is rather oddly directed at a party that's got 31 out of 50 governors and a majority in the House and Senate for three straight congresses and we think has a good chance of electing a president in 2000. MARGARET WARNER: Well, let me direct a similar question to the members of the other party. Governor Hodges, sitting in South Carolina, and you look at the national or the federal Democrats in congress say here, do you feel completely in sync with them, or do they seem more ideological than, say, many of you and your fellow Democratic governors are? GOV. JAMES HODGES: Well, I think John hit the nail on the head. No matter which party you're in, if you're a governor, the issues you deal with are different than the issues of your congressional party. I think that this president and certainly I hear Senator Durbin saying the Democrats in congress are prepared to deal with the issues that are a priority in my state. And that is public education. And ultimately, people look to the leader of your party, in our case Bill Clinton, and look to the direction that Clinton is taking the Democrats. And on the education issue, certainly I think he's right. MARGARET WARNER: Do you think that's true, Senator Durbin, that in a way having former Governor Clinton as president has moved the Democrats, the federal Democrats if we use that phrase, image to a more centrist one so that there isn't the same kind of a split maybe that - SEN.RICHARD DURBIN: I don't think there's any doubt about it. The Clinton/Gore approach has been much more pragmatic and centrist. And I think as a result of it today, we're doing pretty well in public opinion polls when you look at the record of this administration. The fact is that most governors, Governor Rowland in particular, probably Governor Hodges are dealing with surpluses now, which reflect a very positive economy, a economy creating jobs and businesses and opportunities. I think the president deserves some credit for that, not completely, but some credit. And I think as we reflect on what President Clinton and Vice President Gore have done, they've really set us on a course that I think most American people think is the right course for this country. MARGARET WARNER: So do you two governors have any very quick final words to your colleagues here in Washington on how to deal with surpluses, which is also causing some big splits here? GOV. JOHN ROWLAND: One time expenses, retire some debt, do not use the surplus for any structural changes because you may not get a repeat of that financing later on, and use it nor something positive. And I think in our case we've been able to use them mostly in one-time expenses. GOV. JAMES HODGES: I think that's true -- fix Social Security, use some surplus funds perhaps to do some education construction, one-time expense, work on the Medicare issue. I think those are all priorities. MARGARET WARNER: All right. Well, thank you all four very much.