and future testimony of this nature should complement our more academically oriented testimony.

Let me emphasize, in conclusion, my own feelings that the school busing issue is one of the most critical issues facing our society today.

Apart from the relatively narrow question of whether or not school busing orders are justifiable and appropriate in the context of individual communities, we are facing more fundamental issues that relate to the health of our public school system in urban areas as well as the extent to which the Federal Government is going to be allowed to impose its own policy preferences and social objectives upon often unwilling neighborhoods and communities.

We have an excellent group of witnesses today, and I look forward to today's hearing. It is an important record that we are continuing to build here today.

Our first witness today will be the Honorable Jean Mathews, who is a distinguished member of the Missouri Legislature. She represents the suburbs of St. Louis in the House of Representatives of that State. We look forward to her observations on the school busing controversies in that area.

Representative Mathews, if you would take the witness chair we would appreciate it. We will begin with your testimony.

STATEMENT OF HON. JEAN MATHEWS, STATE
REPRESENTATIVE, STATE OF MISSOURI

Ms. MATHEWs. Senator Hatch, ladies, and gentlemen, I am Representative Jean Mathews of Florissant, Mo., a member of the Missouri Legislature. Thank you for allowing me the privilege and opportunity of addressing you regarding the issue of court-ordered, forced busing of public schoolchildren.

I am not here to testify so much as an official representative of the State of Missouri but, rather, as an individual who, as a parent of children in the public schools, and as a former teacher, and as an elected official, has had the opportunities of witnessing the results of forced busing and of listening to the voters' feelings regarding this issue.

Much of my testimony may not be new information to you but will be reflective of 94 percent of the voters in my district and the St. Louis metropolitan area.

Court-ordered, forced busing is a major concern in the St. Louis area. The school district which my legislative district falls within was forced to initiate a court-ordered, forced busing program in 1975.

The city of St. Louis has more recently been forced to accept court-ordered, forced busing, and a case is presently in the Federal courts which would bring about a multidistrict forced busing plan involving the city of St. Louis and the three adjoining counties. It is this proposal that I have come to address.

In my capacity as an elected official, my constituents, both black and white, have voiced to me a concern regarding the massive economic costs of moving bodies around for the sole purpose of achieving racial quotas. The money required for such a plan will rob other areas of serious need.

Because of the vast financial resources required for such a plan, my constituents fear that the time may come when a judge will determine to set a new tax rate for the entire metropolitan St. Louis area without a vote of the people, as was done in 1975 in the Ferguson-Florissant School District where I reside.

Another concern is that of distance. When many miles intervene between the school a child attends and his home, his parents find the family unit under increased stress. Parental input into the school system diminishes or disappears.

It becomes a massive labor or an impossibility to pick up a sick child at school, to attend a play, a football game, a PTA meeting, or a parent-teacher conference. Eventually, there are no football games or plays because the money has to go into school buses, drivers, and gasoline.

Another problem voters fear is that school boards will become unresponsive to parental input because the parents of the children bused to the school at the order of the court may not be voters who elected them.

Another comment voiced repeatedly to me is the doubt that there is a real gasoline shortage, or ever was, if gasoline is plentiful enough to pour into the gas tanks of school buses to move children from one area to another.

As an elected State official, I share all of the concerns I have just mentioned, but particularly the concern regarding the economic ramifications of forced busing during a period when the State of Missouri is having critical financial problems.

Revenue is sharply down, while demands for State services continue to rise. The constitution of the State of Missouri prohibits deficit spending on the part of State government. It also includes a recent amendment requiring that all increases in State taxes, fees, and/or licenses must be put to a vote of the people, and the temper of the voters is such at this time that the passage of any increase in taxes is highly unlikely.

Because of the irresponsibility of the past State administration, the present administration and Missouri General Assembly have found themselves with the need to make cuts amounting to $230 million in State programs by June 30 of this year to avoid being in violation of the State constitution.

Budget cuts have been so severe that mental patients have been released from State institutions onto the streets, and others have been refused treatment.

State revenues are still dropping from anticipated levels, which were estimated as lately as March of this year, requiring immediate cuts of at least $20 million more as we begin a new fiscal year on July 1.

The State has had to freeze funds for teacher pay increases and cut funding for education, but the courts have consistently turned a deaf ear to our dilemma.

Part of this vast deficit in State funds can be attributed to the recent forced busing case involving the city of St. Louis which cost the taxpayers over $22 million in its first year.

The State was arbitrarily ordered by the court to pay one half of that amount. The legislature was not given an opportunity to vote or discuss the issue before the demands of the court had to be met.

Costs for fiscal year 1980-1981 are expected to amount to nearly $7.5 million to continue the present busing program in the city of St. Louis. If these costs, which amount to $546 per pupil per year are transferred to a multidistrict program, the costs threaten to become overwhelming.

Where will Missouri get the money for a massive interdistrict busing program? Will we be forced to turn more mental patients out into the street?

Another major concern I have as a State elected official is the erosion of local and State powers by the courts.

During the recent court case involving the Ferguson-Florissant School District where I reside, the courts ordered a merger of three school districts, then called that merger an annexation, and then raised the tax levy of the citizens residing in the two school districts which were "annexed" without a vote of the people.

My constituents view this as a case of taxation without representation. They are justifiably concerned when they read statements such as this one quoted in the St. Louis Globe-Democrat on May 5, 1980: "U.S. District Judge James Meredith could order a property tax rate increase to pay for St. Louis public schools desegregation, under a precedent set in 1975." That precedent was the FergusonFlorissant case, the school district where I reside.

Quoting further: "*** board attorneys said that such a tax order 'should only be a last resort' if there is not enough money from local, Federal, and State sources."

Quoting from the Journal newspaper of July 16, 1980: "U.S. District Judge James H. Meredith has warned city comptroller Raymond T. Percich that the court may order the city to raise taxes to finance the city's schools integration plan.

"In a letter dated June 26, Meredith told Percich: 'It may be necessary before this case has been finally concluded to levy additional taxes upon the taxpayers of the city of St. Louis in order to help finance this plan.'

Regarding the comment that the raising of taxes would only be a last resort when other funds are not available, it is evident that other funds are not available. Must we then accept that last resort mentioned earlier-taxation without representation?

I have come before this subcommittee to urge you to take action to limit the powers of the courts regarding this issue.

In his first inaugural address, Lincoln said: "If the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court, the instant they are made, in ordinary litigation between parties in personal actions, the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned their Government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."

According to article III of the Constitution, "the Supreme Court shall have appellate jurisdiction both as to law and fact, with such exceptions, and under such regulations, as the Congress shall make."

Here is a tool to defend the rights of parents who wish to send their children to the neighborhood schools which their taxes support, where their votes elect the school board, and where their

opinions are important to the teachers and administrators who educate their children.

The Reagan administration nominee for the post of Assistant Secretary of Education, Vincent Reed-who, by the way, is black and a product of the St. Louis Sumner High-has said: "If we can get parents back to the place where they have a key role to play, we can make the schools work."

How can we put the parents back into the schools and make the schools work if the barrier of distance is placed between them and their children?

We have a saying in the hills of Missouri: "If it ain't busted, don't try to fix it." The concept of the neighborhood school is not "busted," it is an integral part of our society, and to forbid a child the right to attend the school nearest his home because of his color and to bus him miles across town against his will or the will of his parents is just as wrong now as it was 20 or 30 years ago. It was wrong then, it is wrong now, and two wrongs have never added up to one right.

Since the change in administrations at the national level has come about, much stress in the St. Louis area has been shifted from the mandatory busing plan that the courts were designing to a "voluntary plan." But, I firmly believe that if a change in administrations came about tomorrow the courts would then, in the Metropolitan St. Louis area, immediately shift back to the mandatory plan again, and this probability will continue as long as we hesitate to harness the Federal courts in this matter.

There are many social experts who would ask me for another solution, other than busing, to the problems of racial imbalance because I do oppose massive court-ordered busing. Let me again quote Vincent Reed: "Mixing races does not automatically improve the quality of education. The real action is in the classroom itself. It is more important to concentrate on getting good teachers there than anything else."

To end segregation through a natural process and yet protect the neighborhood schools, let us make sure there are no legal barriers to integrated housing. If a more aggressive approach is still demanded or determined to be needed by this body and by the Congress, then let us work together to implement a voluntary program, remembering that a voluntary program should be truly voluntary.

Participation should not be forced under the threat of mandatory busing because, should a man stand upon the edge of a cliff and be given the choice of jumping or being pushed, has he any real choice? The end result is the same.

Participation in a voluntary program should not impute past guilt. A voluntary program should be voluntary for all students of all colors, not just a select few. And a voluntary program must be affordable to all concerned-to State, local governments, and, most of all, the taxpayer.

I urge you, gentlemen, to deal with this issue by utilizing the power of the Congress to limit the powers of the courts, preferably through legislation, but if necessary by a constitutional amendment. And we ask, Senator Hatch, that the issue be addressed

soon.

We have a court system filled with social architects who will continue their efforts to redesign our society in their own image at the expense of our democratic form of government if they are not limited.

As one of my constituents suggested, somewhat facetiously, why don't we bus judges, not students?

Senator HATCH. That is not a bad idea.

Representative Mathews, have there been significant increases in private schools and private school enrollment in the St. Louis area, to the best of your knowledge?

Ms. MATHEWs. Yes; there have been notable increases. I have two private schools within my district. One of them has increased by at least two-thirds since the 1975 merger of the FergusonFlorissant District with the two districts which were annexed to it, and the other is a new private school which is growing very rapidly.

Senator HATCH. Would it be your contention then that forced busing actually is lending impetus to the growth of private schools rather than stronger public schools?

Ms. MATHEWS. Yes; I personally feel, through my own experience and what I have read from those individuals both pro and con on the busing issue, that forced busing, if it is not limited, will destroy the public school system in America.

Senator HATCH. Have there been increased tensions between the white and black communities in the St. Louis area as a result of the busing controversy?

Ms. MATHEWS. Yes; again, I can refer to my own experience in the matter of the Ferguson-Florissant district. There has been a large increase in the ratio of violence in the schools and of racial incidents. Though the first year was, of course, the most acute, they are still very, very notable and still much higher than preceding the merger.

Senator HATCH. Do you feel that the black community in St. Louis desire forced busing in order to achieve integrated schools? Ms. MATHEWS. No.

Senator HATCH. Do you have any idea of percentages?

Ms. MATHEWS. Yes; I have in a handout of what I call enrichment material-that is the teacher coming out in me-a clipping from the St. Louis Globe-Democrat, and I have underlined the areas in the article in a massive, well respected poll which suggests that blacks in the entire metropolitan district who have children in public school of them, 64 percent do not want forced busing. In my area, the ratio is somewhat higher.

Senator HATCH. Thank you, Representative Mathews. We appreciate your taking the time to be with us today. We do appreciate the testimony that you have given us with regard to the St. Louis busing controversy. It is a very difficult problem.

Of course, you are not alone in this. Later in the day, we will get into the Delaware situation which may be even more difficult than yours-although it is hard to believe.

Without objection, the materials you have supplied will be included in the record at this point.

[The material to be supplied follows:]