ED OFFICIALS DOWNCAST OVER CONGRESS's PLANS TO BOOST EDUCATION FUNDING - ED OFFICIALS DOWNCAST OVER PLANS TO BOOST EDUCATION FUNDING(Cont.)

Sep 21, 2026

Report on education funding debates in 1987 fiscal proposals, highlighting disappointment from U.S. Education Department officials toward Senate and House budget plans. Budget officers cite doubts about large increases beyond current levels and question congressional logic under the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings balanced budget law. Officials note planned funding allocations for education, training, and social service programs, with differing emphasis, and warn that final outcomes depend on appropriations during Reagan’s signature process.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages5

Reading Time13 min

AccessFree to download

ED OFFICIALS DOWNCAST OVER CONGRESS's PLANS TO BOOST EDUCATION FUNDING

Cont.

EDUCATORS URGE BROADER STROKE IN TEACHING ART IN SCHOOLS

COLLEGES AND TREASURY URGE 5 PERCENT RULE ON FACULTY HOUSING

Tuesday,May 13,1986 # ED OFFICIALS DOWNCAST OVER CONGRESS's PLANS TO BOOST EDUCATION FUNDING Recent House and Senate proposals to significantly increase education fundingin fiscal 1987 may have prompted celebration among education lobbyists,but theEducation Department is not joining the party. "It was a disappointment,"said Bruce Carnes,ED's chief budget officer,refer-ring to the Senate's recent passage of a budget plan that would hike educatlon,spending about $2 billion beyond its current $17.8 billion level. Carnes,deputy undersecretary for planning,budget and evaluation,said he hasserious doubts about the Senate plan and a budget proposal the House BudgetCommittee passed last week that also would significantly boost educationfunding(HED,May 12). "We're not talking about a minor disagreement here.They're not even in theballpark"of the $15.2 billlon that President Reagan requested for education inhis fiscal 1987 budget plan,Carnes said.He noted that the Senate's planwould give ED a 30 percent increase in funds over what Reagan had requested. S14110 defcLt reducetion target for f₁ecea1987 set yothe ora-RudmatheHollings balanced budget law,Carnes charged that members of Congress who ap-proved the education increases voted "as if they had never heard of Gramm-Rud-man."They acted as if the government had"surpluses,not deficits,"he said. While education lobbyists"make a lot of noise"about the need for funds,Carnes added,"I don't hear any great howls"throughout the nation "that thefederal government is not spending more on education." ED Undersecretary Gary Bauer also expressed disappointment in the Senate andHouse Budget Committee proposals."I understand what motivates the ladies andgentlemen of the Congress to take that kind of action,"he said,but"I fearthey're falling prey"to the temptation to "throw money at the problem." Both the Senate and the House Budget Committees'plans would allot about$33 billion for"function 500,"which includes education,training and socialservice programs,but would distribute the education funds differently. The Senate's plan would increase all education programs for inflation and boostmath and science and special education funding.The House Budget Committee'sversion would cut some programs,target high priority and children's programs(more) May 13,1986 # ED OFFICIALS DOWNCAST OVER PLANS TO BOOST EDUCATION FUNDING(Cont.) for increases and add an extra $500 million for an education and training ini-tiative that is part of an omnibus trade bil1 put together by several Housecommittees(HED,May 9). Office of Management and Budget spokesman Ed Dale would not comment on theeducation component of either the Senate or the House's budget plans,but hecharged that neither“cut enough”from domestic programs and both cut too muchfrom defense. Dale added that the crucial budget battles will be fought when Congress seeksReagan's signature on a fiscal 1987 education appropriations bil1. A Senate appropriations staffer said that in the past,"OMB has expressed asurprising willingness to work with the appropriations committees to come upwiths重gnableappropriations bills,"but added that it is unclear whether theprocess wil1 flow as smoothly under Gramm-Rudman-Hollings."It's an entirelynew game with new groundrules,"a House appropriations staffer added. The House staffer said it is too ear1y to predict how education programs wil1fare in the appropriations process,but called its high-priority treatment inthe budget process"a hopeful sign." But education lobbyists have indicated they wil1 not let their guard down unti1a favorable education appropriations measure is signed into law。"We plan todo more than hope,"said Susan Frost,executive director for the Committee onEducation Funding.--Deborah L.Gold # EDUCATORS URGE BROADER STROKE IN TEACHING ART IN SCHOOLS Education departments at colleges and universities do not put enough emphasison the arts,thus producing teachers who spend little time de

FAQs

Why are Education Department officials disappointed with the Senate and House education funding proposals?

They express serious doubts about the Senate plan and the House proposal, arguing the increases are not justified and noting concerns about how Congress voted under deficit-balancing constraints.

How do the Senate and House budget committee plans differ in allocating education funds?

Both target roughly the same total for “function 500,” but the Senate boosts math, science, special education, and inflation adjustments, while the House cuts some programs and reallocates toward high-priority and children’s programs plus an added education and training initiative.

What determines the final direction of education programs after the budget proposals?

Key budget battles occur when Congress seeks Reagan’s signature on a fiscal 1987 education appropriations bill, and staff indicate the appropriations process may follow new ground rules.

Sep 21, 2026

Uploaded by Lucas Martin