[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-324866-105":59,"doc-detail-324866-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":124,"head_meta":126,"extra_data":128,"updated_unix":130},105,"en","panel-democrats-reject-reagan-ed-budget-panel-democrats-reject-reagan-ed-budget-cont","PANEL DEMOCRATS REJECT REAGAN ED BUDGET - PANEL DEMOCRATS REJECT REAGAN ED BUDGET - Cont.","","House Education and Labor Committee Democrats rejected President Reagan’s plan to cut education funding for fiscal 1987, recommending instead a budget freeze for most programs at 1986 pre-Gramm-Rudman-Hollings levels. The panel approved a 33-page alternate proposal covering education and labor programs and requested additional funds tied to initiatives such as H.R. 3700 reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, including support for historically black colleges, child care provisions, and an academic construction loan program. Republicans did not back the alternative, citing deficit concerns.",{"@graph":69,"@context":123},[70,84,106],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/panel-democrats-reject-reagan-ed-budget-panel-democrats-reject-reagan-ed-budget-cont/324866/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/panel-democrats-reject-reagan-ed-budget-panel-democrats-reject-reagan-ed-budget-cont/324866.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Clementine","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-30","2026-09-21",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":105},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",18,{"@type":107,"mainEntity":108},"FAQPage",[109,115,119],{"name":110,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":112},"What did the House Education and Labor Committee Democrats decide regarding Reagan’s fiscal 1987 education budget?","Question",{"text":113,"@type":114},"They flatly rejected Reagan’s plan to cut education funding for fiscal 1987 and instead suggested freezing most programs at 1986 pre-Gramm-Rudman-Hollings levels.","Answer",{"name":116,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":117},"What key initiatives did the Democrats’ alternate proposal include?",{"text":118,"@type":114},"It sought additional funding connected to H.R. 3700, including increased appropriations for historically black colleges, funding to implement the bill’s child care provisions, and money to start the academic construction loan program.",{"name":120,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":121},"How did committee Republicans respond to the Democrats’ proposal?",{"text":122,"@type":114},"They did not favor the Democratic alternative, fearing it would further increase federal budget troubles and complicate efforts to reduce the overall deficit.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":125,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":127,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":129,"site_id":62},324866,1790214001,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":132},{"doc_id":129,"user_id":133,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":105,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":24,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},1374391974564,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/14000253aa45c000a9e?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1779874745381141002","# PANEL DEMOCRATS REJECT REAGAN ED BUDGET,OFFER SUGGESTIONS\n\nHouse Education and Labor Committee Democrats yesterday flatly rejected Presi-dent Reagan's plan to cut education funding in fiscal 1987 and instead sug-gested a budget freeze for most programs at 1986 pre-Gramm-Rudman-Hollingslevels.  \nDespite the unified opposition of committee Republicans,the panel approved a33-page alternate proposal,covering all education and labor programs,and sentit on to the House Budget Committee。Committee Republicans did not offer analternate plan of their own but may do so in the future.  \nThe panel's plan requests additional funds for severalinitiatives included in H.R.3700,the House bill toreauthorize the Higher Education Act,including increased appropriations for historically black col-  \nleges,new funds to implement the bill's child care provisions and money tostart the academic construction loan program planned with the assistance of theStudent Loan Marketing Association.  \nThe committee's plan does not specify how much money should be spent on the newinitiatives,however.The proposal will serve as a recommendation to the HouseBudget Committee.  \nIt has been only two weeks since President Reagan proposed a $15.2 billioneducation budget for fiscal 1987,some $2.6 billion less than its current$17.8 billion level under the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings deficit reduction law(HED,Feb。6)。Educators and Democratic leaders have spent much of the two-weekperiod criticizing the Reagan plan.  \nImportant InvestmentCommittee Chairman Augustus Hawkins,D-Calif.,saidcuts in education and social services programs during the Reagan years havebeen used to fuel Defense Department increases rather than reduce the federaldeficit.Education programs,he said,are\"the most important investment we asa nation can make.\"  \nThe committee's proposal,although more generous than the Reagan budget,isaustere,Hawkins added.\"I do not think anyone can say we are not being res-ponsible,\"he said.  \nEducation and Labor Committee Republicans did not favor the Democratic alterna-tive,however,fearing it would further increase federal budget troubles.\"Even given the priority we place on these [education and labor]programs,wealso recognize the importance of trying to reduce the overall deficit,\"rankingminority member James Jeffords,R-Vt.,said.(more)  \nFebruary 21,1986  \n# PANEL DEMOCRATS REJECT REAGAN ED BUDGET(Cont.)\n\nJeffords said committee Republicans would begin developing options for Reagan'seducation budget,based on figures used in sequestering 1986 funds in compl1-ance with Gramm-Rudman-Hollings.  \n\"It is difficult for us,though,to provide specific figures until we know howother programs,especially defense,are being treated,\"Jeffords said.TheDemocrats¹plan,calling for support of all programs at current services lev-els,\"will only create unmet expectations,\"he added.  \nYet the tide is turning against Gramm-Rudman-Hollings,according to Hawkin.\"There is no reason why some modifications can't be made in Gramm-Rudman,\"hesaid after yesterday's meeting。\"We feel that many people have seen the light.In September or October when they see what those numbers really mean,I thinkthey will begin to feel the pressure to change it.\"--Bil1 Reinhard  \n# ED REBUKES NEA OVER TEACHER TRAINING PROPOSAL CRITICISM\n\nThe Education Department has lashed out at the National Education Associationfor criticizing its fiscal 1987 teacher training budget.  \nIn a Feb。13 letter to NEA President Mary Hatwood Futrel1,Education DeputyUndersecretary Bruce Carnes objected to comments by Mike Edwards,NEA's chieflobbyist,critical of ED's $75 million teacher training plan(HED,Feb.12)。  \n\"Secretary Bennett places the highest value upon the improvement of teachers'substantive knowledge of their fields,\"Carnes wrote。\"Mr。Edwards'refusal toacknowledge this and to consider our teacher training proposal on its merits isa disservice to those he represents.\"  \nCarnes said he hopes Edwards'statements do not \"represent the official posi-t","cbCainSY75mxN60h","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCainSY75mxN60h","pdf",1161211,"English","# PANEL DEMOCRATS REJECT REAGAN ED BUDGET\n## PANEL DEMOCRATS REJECT REAGAN ED BUDGET (Cont.)\n# ED REBUKES NEA OVER TEACHER TRAINING PROPOSAL CRITICISM\n# HOUSE PANEL ADDS ADDITIONAL BENEFITS TO “NEW” GI BILL","[{\"question\":\"What did the House Education and Labor Committee Democrats decide regarding Reagan’s fiscal 1987 education budget?\",\"answer\":\"They flatly rejected Reagan’s plan to cut education funding for fiscal 1987 and instead suggested freezing most programs at 1986 pre-Gramm-Rudman-Hollings levels.\"},{\"question\":\"What key initiatives did the Democrats’ alternate proposal include?\",\"answer\":\"It sought additional funding connected to H.R. 3700, including increased appropriations for historically black colleges, funding to implement the bill’s child care provisions, and money to start the academic construction loan program.\"},{\"question\":\"How did committee Republicans respond to the Democrats’ proposal?\",\"answer\":\"They did not favor the Democratic alternative, fearing it would further increase federal budget troubles and complicate efforts to reduce the overall deficit.\"}]","PANEL DEMOCRATS REJECT REAGAN ED BUDGET - PANEL DEMOCRATS REJECT REAGAN ED BUDGET - Cont. | PDF",1789969082,13]