/  H.R. 2218 - Empowering Parents through Quality Charter Schools Act

H.R. 2218 - Empowering Parents through Quality Charter Schools Act

Bill Text

  • Text of H.R. 2218 PDF XML

    Empowering Parents through Quality Charter Schools Act

  • H. Rept. 112-178 PDF XML

    Report from the Committee on Education and the Workforce

Rule Information

COMMITTEE ACTION:
REPORTED BY VOICE VOTE on Wednesday, September 7, 2011.

FLOOR ACTION ON H.RES. 392: 
Adopted by record vote of 237-163, after ordering the previous question by record vote of 226-176, on Thursday, September 8, 2011.

MANAGERS: Foxx/Polis

1. Structured rule for H.R. 2218.

2. Provides one hour of general debate on H.R. 2218 equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce.

3. Waives all points of order against consideration of H.R. 2218.

4. Makes in order the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee Education and the Workforce now printed in the bill as an original bill for purpose of amendment and provides that the amendment shall be considered as read.

5. Waives all points of order against the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute.

6. Makes in order only those amendments to H.R. 2218 printed in Part A of the Rules Committee report accompanying the resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.

7. Waives all points of order against the amendments printed in Part A of the report.

8. Provides one motion to recommit H.R. 2218 with or without instructions.

9. Structured rule for H.R. 1892.

10. Provides one hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

11. Waives all points of order against consideration of H.R. 1892.

12. Makes in order as original text for the purpose of amendment the Rules Committee Print of H.R. 1892 dated August 31, 2011 and provides that the Print shall be considered as read.

13. Waives all points of order against the Rules Committee Print.

14. Makes in order only those amendments to H.R. 1892 printed in Part B of the Rules Committee report accompanying the resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question.

15. Waives all points of order against the amendments printed in Part B of the Rules Committee report.

16. Provides that the chairman of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence or his designee may offer amendments en bloc consisting of amendments printed in Part B the report not earlier disposed of. Amendments en bloc shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for 10 minutes equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence or their designees, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question. The original proponent of an amendment included in such amendments en bloc may insert a statement in the Congressional Record immediately before the disposition of the amendments en bloc.

17. Provides one motion to recommit H.R. 1892 with or without instructions.

18. Provides that a motion to proceed with regard to a joint resolution of disapproval specified in subsection (a)(1) of section 3101A of title 31, United States Code shall be in order only if offered by the Majority Leader or his designee; and may be offered even following the sixth day specified in subsection (c)(3) of such section but not later than the legislative day of September 14, 2011.

Amendments

#Version #Sponsor(s)PartySummaryStatus
12Version 2Davis, Susan (CA)DemocratLate Would add to the purpose section of H.R. 2218 the importance of innovation in public education to prepare students to compete in the global economy.Made In Order
7Version 1Garamendi (CA)DemocratWould give priority to eligible entities that plan to use materials made in America for the construction and renovation of school facilities.Submitted
8Version 1Holt (NJ)DemocratWould encourage the Secretary of Education to include a priority for green school building practices in the application for states to ensure that federal investment in charter school facilities would be energy efficient and environmentally friendly. Made In Order
9Version 1King, Steve (IA)RepublicanWould strike subparagraph (d) of subsection (6) of Sec.(9) which is part of the definition of "high quality charter schools." Would strike the following language: "(D) has demonstrated success in increasing student academic achievement for the subgroups of students described in section 1111(b)(2)(C)(v)(II)." Made In Order
6Version 1Kline, John (MN), Miller, George (CA)BipartisanWould make technical and clarifying corrections to the bill as reported out of Committee. Would make additional policy changes to improve the Charter School Program, including provisions regarding parent input, annual grants, education for at-risk students, diverse charter school models, transportation needs, high quality applicants, and school lunch participants. Made In Order
11Version 1Lujn (NM)DemocratWould add to the requirement that applicants include in their application a description of how a charter school program would share best and promising practices between charter schools and other public schools, by including in that description how they would share best practices in instruction and professional development in technology, engineering, and math education. Made In Order
1Version 1Moore, Gwen (WI)DemocratWould add new language to the definition of charter school to clarify that current Elementary and Secondary Education Act provisions and sanctions also apply to charter schools.Submitted
2Version 1Moore, Gwen (WI)DemocratWould strike “governor of a state” from the definition of “state entity” on page 20, thus removing Governors’ eligibility to apply for federal grant funding to oversee charter school operations in their states. Made In Order
3Version 1Paulsen (MN), Polis (CO)BipartisanWould change the duration of Subgrants in the Grant Limitations Section from 5 years to 3 years to allow successful and eligible operating schools replicate and expand faster. The school must demonstrate successful operation data for no less than 3 years. Made In Order
10Version 1Peters (MI)DemocratWould add post-secondary persistence and graduation rates to the criteria used to measure the progress of charter schools.Submitted
4Version 1Polis (CO)DemocratWould facilitate charter schools' access to funding by prioritizing states that allow charter schools to be Local Educational Agencies (LEAs). Submitted
5Version 1Polis (CO)DemocratWould promote innovation and quality in charter schools by adding a priority to states that allow charter school authorizers besides local educational agencies. Made In Order