URGENT-- Elem/Sec Act Reauthorization

[Peter Milbury <pmilbur@EIS.CALSTATE.EDU>]

Dear LM_NET,
  The following forwarded message came to me from one of the teachers in
my district, a board member of the ISTE, from whence came the original
posting.  Please act on its plea, if possible.
  Peter Milbury

---------- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 94 08:57:34 PST
From: Terrie Gray <tgray@eis.calstate.edu>
To: pmilbur@eis.calstate.edu
Subject: Elem/Sec Act Reauthorization

Peter this is an URGENT message from the DC office. Please pass it on to
the CUSD group. Thank you. Terrie


>From: iste@seas.gwu.edu
>Date: Mon, 7 Mar 1994 18:37:47 -0400 (EDT)
>Subject: Elem/Sec Act Reauthorization
>To: iste-list@tenet.edu, isteoa@cue.bc.ca
>
>From:  D. Bybee at ISTE USA National Office
>
>The US House of representatives has put its technology for education
>provisions in Title II of the Elem/Secondary Reauthorization Act (HR 6).  In
>its present form, Title II includes language on technology for schools
>and libraries which are comparable to those we have championed in the
>Senate's Technology for Education Act (S.1040).
>
>In order for us to get S.1040 made into Law, we need to have a comparable
>Bill passed in the US House of Representatives.  HR 6 is that Bill!
>
>HR 6 is currently being argued on the floor of the US House of
>Representatives and a floor fight has emerged wherein representatives
>Boehner and Miller have introduced an amendment to DELETE ALL EDUCATIONAL
>TECHNOLOGY PROVISIONS!
>
>HR 6 must pass WITH ITS TITLE II PROVISIONS FOR EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY.
>
>The House managers of HR 6 (i.e., Kildee and Sawyer) have asked for our
>help in defeating the Boehner/Miller amendment and passing HR 6 with its
>educational technology provisions.
>
>If you can phone or FAX a message requesting your representatives
>to support the educational technology provisions of HR 6 (i.e.,
>primarily in Title II), it could make a difference in the VOTE.  The
>suggested message is:
>
>"Please VOTE NO on Boehner/Miller amendment and YES on the technology for
>education provisions of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1994."
>
>THIS IS A TIME SENSATIVE REQUEST.
>
>--15944-643278089-763084249:#19891
>Content-Type: APPLICATION/octet-stream; name="esea.txt"
>Content-ID: <Pine.3.07.9403071849.A19891@seas.gwu.edu>
>Content-Description:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>Subject:  Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA)
>
>     ISTE comments for the record on the subject reauthorization
>act and the Boehner/Miller Amendment are as follows:
>
>     "ISTE commends the US House of Representatives for emphasizing
>the catalytic importance of technology in the systemic reform of
>education by including supporting infrastructure provisions in
>Title II of its proposed reauthorization of the Elementary and
>Secondary Education Act."
>
>     "Unfortunately, representatives Boehner and Miller have
>introduced an amendment to strike all educational technology
>provisions from Title II.  Their joint amendment would delete
>provisions of the ESEA which give schools the modern technology
>tools needed to:  (1)  ensure international competitiveness by
>enhancing technological literacy in the American workforce, and (2)
>ensure student achievement of world class education standards
>envisioned by the National Education Goals."
>
>     "If the education technology provisions are deleted from Title
>II, we believe that the National Education Goals Panel will
>continue to report NO IMPROVEMENT in schools as it has just
>reported 5-years after the President and all State governors
>shouted "eureka" from Charlottesville."
>
>     "We hope that the US House of Representatives will VOTE NO on
>the Boehner/Miller amendment; and, thereby VOTE YES on the future
>of education in America."
>
>
>                                Sincerely,
>
>
>
>                                Dennis L. Bybee, Ph.D.
>                                Associate Executive Officer
>
>Attachment:  Organizational Profile
>--15944-643278089-763084249:#19891--
>
>