A bill to amend the Goals 2000: Educate America Act to eliminate the National Education Standards and Improvement Council and requirements concerning opportunity-to-learn standards, to limit the authority of the Secretary of Education to review and approve State plans, to permit certain local educational agencies to receive funding directly from the Secretary of Education, and for other purposes.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S14961-14962)
Congressional Research Service
Official summary
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Oct 10, 1995
Amends the Goals 2000: Educate America Act (Goals 2000) to eliminate the National Education Standards and Improvement Council (the Council). Eliminates the requirement that the National Education Goals Panel review and approve model or national content standards, national student performance standards, or national opportunity-to-learn standards. Terminates funding for: (1) the Council; (2) opportunity-to-learn development grants; and (3) assessment development and evaluation grants. Revises Goals 2000 provisions for State improvement plans to eliminate Federal requirements with respect to: (1) the composition, duties, and procedures of the broad-based State panel which is to develop such plans in cooperation with the State educational agency and the Governor; (2) establishment of opportunity-to-learn standards and strategies; and (3) peer review and approval by the Secretary of Education of such plans and their amendments. Revises provisions for the Secretary's review of State educational agency applications for Goals 2000 funds to eliminate certain conditions of approval. Revises provisions for Goals 2000 subgrants for local reform and professional development to eliminate certain requirements with respect to local panel appointments, composition, and procedures in developing local plans. Authorizes the Secretary to bypass any State that does not participate in the Goals 2000 program and use its allotment to award competitive grants to local educational agencies in such State with applications approved by the Secretary. Makes technical and conforming amendments to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, the General Education Provisions Act, and the Education Amendments of 1978.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Explore the bill from different angles
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Neutral evidence review
Objective
Analyze S.1301 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
View full prompt & sources
Fairness and public impact
Progressive lens
Examine S.1301 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
View full prompt & sources
Institutions and government scope
Conservative lens
Examine S.1301 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
View full prompt & sources
Individual rights and government power
Liberty lens
Examine S.1301 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.