[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-325966-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-325966-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","congress-ratifies-86-gramm-rudman-cuts-news-report","CONGRESS RATIFIES '86 GRAMM-RUDMAN CUTS - News Report","","Congress approved a resolution to ratify the sequestration order triggered in March, authorizing $11.7 billion in federal program cuts, including $678 million from Education Department programs. After a U.S. Supreme Court ruling found the initial Gramm-Rudman-Hollings cut process unconstitutional but allowed Congress 60 days to confirm fiscal 1986 cuts or reallocate funds, the House and Senate voted to let the cuts stand. Education funding leaders criticized the move for disrupting services and debated options to respond to automatic cut procedures.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/congress-ratifies-86-gramm-rudman-cuts-news-report/325966/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/congress-ratifies-86-gramm-rudman-cuts-news-report/325966.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Seraphina","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-22","2026-09-21",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",16,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What action did Congress take regarding the March sequestration order?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"Congress approved a resolution to ratify the sequestration order and confirm the 1986 cuts rather than reallocate the funds.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How did the Supreme Court decision affect the first round of Gramm-Rudman-Hollings cuts?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"The Court ruled the process unconstitutional but gave Congress 60 days to confirm the fiscal 1986 cuts or reallocate the funds.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"How did Susan Frost describe the education community’s reaction to reaffirming the 1986 cuts?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"She said members protested in principle because the move disrupted programs and services, but their efforts did not succeed for political and procedural reasons.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},325966,1790378178,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,115,120,123,127],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":112,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,30,"research-report",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":117,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":119},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":118,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":122},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":124,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":125,"show_sort_weight":124,"slug":126},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":128,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":129,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":130},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":132},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":133,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":112,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":97,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},962075114101,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/e000253a75eb197efd?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1780044092746381165","Friday,July 18,1986  \n# CONGRESS RATIFIES '86 GRAMM-RUDMAN CUTS\n\nCongress yesterday approved a resolution to ratify the sequestration order thatin March triggered $11.7 billion worth of cuts in federal programs,including$678 million from Education Department programs。  \nA recent U.S.Supreme Court decision deemed unconstitutional the process thattriggered the first round of cuts under the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings balanced bud-get law,but the Court gave Congress 60 days to confirm the fiscal 1986 cuts orreallocate the funds(HED,July 8)。  \nThe House yestersday voted 339-72 to let the cuts stand,and the Senate adoptedthe measure,H.J.Res.672,in a unanimous voice vote.  \nSusan Frost,executive director of the Committee for Education Funding(CEF),said members of the education community had protested “in principle\"Congress'smove toward reaffirming the 1986 cuts,which\"disrupted programs and services.\"But she said their hope of forestalling the cuts \"didn't materialize\"for pol1-tical as well as procedural reasons。\"Looking at all the options,there werenone,\"she said,but that doesn't make the cuts \"hurt any less.\"  \nED Official Pleased Bruce Carnes,ED deputy undersecretary for planning,budget and evaluation,who last week charged that education 1obbyists displayed\"gluttony\"in opposing the cuts,called the ratificiation\"wonderful.I ampleased that Congress did not open the feeding trough\"(HED,July 11).  \nFrost said CEF has not taken a stance on measures under consideration to revivethe automatic budget-cutting procedure wounded by Bowsher v.Synar(54 USLW3709),in which the Court ruled that giving the comptroller general power toorder,automatic cuts violates the constitutional separation of powers.  \nShe said education advocates are\"trying to find out what kind of jeopardy\"education programs would face if the comptroller general's role in triggeringautomatic Gramm-Rudman cuts were transferred to the Office of Management andBudget,one proposal being discussed to sidestep the Court's objection.Butshe called that option\"a moving target\"since other remedies are likely tosurface in an amendment to a debt ceiling bill pending action in the Senate.  \nReferring to a fallback plan in the law that would require congressional ap-  \nproval of cuts needed to meet Gramm-Rudman deficit targets,Frost said,\"Any  \ntime you have Congress voting\"on funding,“it is better than an automatic pro-  \ncedure。\"But since CEF still opposes the concept of across-the-board cuts,the  \nchoice may be between \"several evils,\"she said.--Deborah L.Gold  \nJuly 18,1986  \n# SMALLER FAMILIES REASON FOR TEST SCORE RISE,RESEARCHER CLAIMS \n\nThe recent rise in student scores on the Scholastic Aptitude Test(SAT)is adirect result of Americans having fewer children and spacing them fartherapart,not from the implementation of school reforms,says a University ofMichigan psychologist.  \nBetween 1963 and 1980,when the typical student taking the test was the third-born in the family,SAT scores fel1 from an average of 490 to 455 in bothverbal and mathematics sections,according to Robert Zajonc,director of theuniversity's Research Center for Group Dynamics.  \nBut the postwar trend toward large families began reversing itself in 1962,andby 1979 the average child taking the test was the second-born,said Zajonc,whodetermined that the rise in SAT scores that began in 1980 started when thechildren born 18 years earlier began taking the test.  \nroł3Br2 grivoTmk,ysofond97 to 92025 Prco1 nor3B30b9 ysngi  \nPredicts Continued Rise\"Because there had been a steady increase in theaverage family size for the students taking SATs between 1963 and 1980,SATs[declined]unti11980 and then began to rise again when birth rate,andtherefore family size,began decreasing,\"Zajonc said.  \nHe predicts that SAT scores will continue to rise into the 21st century asstudents from smaller families continue to take the test.  \nZajonc noted the same trend in the Iowa Basic Skills Test,in which scoresdeclined for children born between 1950","cbCaibDiAnEBYKWR","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaibDiAnEBYKWR","pdf",1213179,"English","# CONGRESS RATIFIES '86 GRAMM-RUDMAN CUTS\n## Congressional and Senate actions\n## Supreme Court decision and congressional confirmation\n## Education funding community reactions\n## Options to address automatic budget-cut procedures","[{\"question\":\"What action did Congress take regarding the March sequestration order?\",\"answer\":\"Congress approved a resolution to ratify the sequestration order and confirm the 1986 cuts rather than reallocate the funds.\"},{\"question\":\"How did the Supreme Court decision affect the first round of Gramm-Rudman-Hollings cuts?\",\"answer\":\"The Court ruled the process unconstitutional but gave Congress 60 days to confirm the fiscal 1986 cuts or reallocate the funds.\"},{\"question\":\"How did Susan Frost describe the education community’s reaction to reaffirming the 1986 cuts?\",\"answer\":\"She said members protested in principle because the move disrupted programs and services, but their efforts did not succeed for political and procedural reasons.\"}]","CONGRESS RATIFIES '86 GRAMM-RUDMAN CUTS - News Report | PDF",1789971847,13]