Senator HATCH. Our next witness will be Mr. William D'Onofrio who is the president of the National Association of Neighborhood Schools, an organization that has been active throughout the country in opposing school busing orders. Mr. D'Onofrio is one of the most articulate opponents of school busing as a remedy for racial imbalance.

Mr. D'Onofrio, we are happy to have you with us.

Again, we would like you to keep your testimony as short as you can-hopefully, within 5 minutes so that we can ask more ques

tions.

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM D'ONOFRIO, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOLS

Mr. D'ONOFRIO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As even many proponents of forced busing now admit to the failure of city-only schemes, as social planners now point to more massive remedies-metropolitan or city-suburbs remedies-my remarks today will deal with the effects of such a sweeping orderthe order by the Federal judiciary in New Castle County, Del. An earlier witness at these hearings described New Castle County as one of the success stories of busing. My remarks will demonstrate otherwise and will magnify the lack of candor of the proponents of forced school busing.

Metropolitan or city-suburbs remedies, we are told, are supposed to inhibit white flight. After all, where can the white kids go?

WHITE FLIGHT IN NEW CASTLE COUNTY, DEL.

During the 4-year period 1971-74 in New Castle County, before the threat of forced busing enveloped the community, white public school enrollment in what was to become the "desegregation area' of 1978 declined by a total of only 6.5 percent or by some 4,500 white children.

During the 3 years 1975-77, as the case dragged through the courts and was publicized and as white parents became aware of the interdistrict intentions of the Federal courts, the desegregation area lost some 11,700 white children-in 3 years.

With its final 1978 order, the court eliminated 11 school districts in New Castle County, combining them into a single district involving two-thirds of the public school children of the entire State of Delaware, with racial balance by busing achieved in each and every school in this large area of Delaware.

During the first 3 years of actual busing—1978, 1979, and 1980— the court-created "superdistrict" lost an additional 14,000 white students. That is 25,700 white kids in 6 years, compared to 4,500 of the 4 previous years-40 percent of 1974 white enrollment.

Even in the third year of busing, with school authorities announcing that white flight had abated, white enrollment decline was still 8 percent, and the white loss in the two most affluent of the four attendance areas in New Castle County remained steady at 10 percent.

With the start of busing, all schools were balanced at 18 to 20 percent black. Now, virtually all schools in the county are over 30

percent black, and schools in the northern part of the county are over 50 percent black. This in the 3 years.

Under coercion from the court, school authorities are now preparing to reassign children to correct racial imbalances developing since 1978.

With it all, white enrollment in private and parochial schools has increased 47 percent since 1975.

EFFECT ON THE QUALITY OF EDUCATION

With the start of busing, as is usually the case under such schemes, the types and methods of testing have been changed so as to render comparisons with prebusing test scores impossible. And, since the start of busing, curiously, no test results broken down by race have been released.

However, a series of scientific polls conducted both before and after the start of busing in New Castle County by the University of Delaware's College of Urban Affairs and Public Policy clearly revealed parental perceptions and experience with regard to the effects of busing on their children.

In a poll taken in 1977 before busing began, 79 percent of the suburban parents rated their suburban school districts as "good or excellent." However, in the latest poll-the postbusing poll-only 37 percent of the same parents rated their court-created "superdistrict" as "good or excellent."

In the prebusing poll, 54 percent of the suburban parents believed that busing would "make education for white students worse." In the latest poll after busing, 57 percent felt that prediction came true. And the pollsters said: "One could say that in the eyes of many suburbanites busing has meant a leveling down of the quality of education."

On the question of whether "desegregation improved the education of black students," while 52 percent of the mostly black intercity parents polled believed that would be the case, only 38 percent felt that way in the postbusing poll-a bitter pill for the probusers to swallow.

With regard to the important matter of parental activities in the educational process, the urban affairs polls offer some grim revelations in comparing such activity before and after the start of busing.

For example, those parents helping their children with homework "often" fell from 83 to 50 percent among suburban parents and from 60 to 40 percent among inner-city parents. There were even larger declines among those parents serving as aides in the schools, visiting classrooms "often," and attending PTA "often." Interviewing a goodly sample of parents who withdrew their children from public schools after busing started, the urban affairs poll found the following reasons ranked highest: Child not learning, 81 percent; discipline, 73 percent; curriculum, 69 percent; safety, 67 percent; quality of education lowered by busing, 66 percent; child not challenged, 64 percent.

In a series of questions asked of parents who withdrew their children and involving factors which would be "very important" in leading to a switch back to public schools, the leading response, at

73 percent, was: "if more discipline." The next, at 56 percent, was: "if more ability grouping in public schools." Ability grouping, you see, is discouraged under forced busing.

The pollsters ominously concluded-and I cannot stress the importance of this enough-"Those who have left the schools are the most concerned about their children's education and the most likely to provide leadership for the public schools."

OTHER EFFECTS ON COMMUNITY ATTITUDES

But those parent leaders are gone, driven away by the essence of forced busing-the leveling down of the quality of education to the lowest common denominator.

In handing down its order eliminating 11 school districts, the court also eliminated 11 school boards and 55 school board members, replacing them with a single, 5-man appointed board.

The first of these appointed positions expired in 1980, and voters in the attendance area involved had their first chance to participate in a school board election since busing began. Five percent of the eligible voters went to the polls.

Now, the Delaware Legislature, pending court approval, has moved to break up the "super district" into four districts, with no effect on the racial balancing aspects.

This past January, about 7 percent of the eligible voters turned out to vote for school board members for the proposed four districts. Then, just this past May 18, with additional school board elections in three of the four proposed districts, only 2,600 voters out of some 200,000 voters-a little more than 1 percent-bothered to vote.

It was a different story last October, however, when New Castle Countians had their first chance since the start of busing to vote on a proposed school tax increase. Under duress from the court, the State legislature, sidestepping a referendum, had raised suburban school taxes in 1978 by an average of 50 percent to help pay for the cost of busing.

Using this sparse voter turnout of the earlier school board election as a guide or so they said-officials failed to provide enough polling places for the tax referendum, and thousands of voters were discouraged from voting by long lines. However, those who did vote did so with a vengeance; 53,000 people voted, many standing in long lines for up to 2 hours, and the school tax increase was defeated 47,400 to 4,800-a margin of 10 to 1.

The State's largest newspaper, a staunch advocate of forced busing and an obfuscator of the effects of that policy, now wails editorially about the stark contrast in voter zeal as concerns school board elections and the school tax referendum.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, this then is the model metropolitan remedy-New Castle County, where forced busing works, without a single act of violence by any adult. You could not find a clearer example of the Federal judiciary's arrogance or of the failure of this outrageous policy of racial balance busing.

I hope I have made my point-that forced busing is no more of a success when it crosses city lines. The American people, Mr. Chairman, have been more than patient with this perhaps the most ridiculous ever of Government policies. Indeed, forced busing is a policy of coercion by Government that has no place in what is supposed to be a free society.

It is my hope that these hearings lead to the Congress swiftly moving to end the policy of racial balance busing and to do so by simple majority legislation built around congressional powers under articles I and II of the Constitution and section 5 of the 14th amendment.

Thank you.

Senator HATCH. Mr. D'Onofrio, in my opening statement for the first day of hearings on this subject, I remarked about the unique political aspects of the school busing controversy. I stated at the time:

Each new Federal busing order has been accompanied by waves of local protests and controversy, school boycotts, disruptive activities, racial animosities, and political turmoil. Just as regularly, however, these passions seem to subside.

Some argue that they subside because busing comes to demonstrate its value, while others argue that they have subsided because the protesters have voted with their feet by fleeing communities or enrolling their children in private or parochial schools. What are your thoughts on busing as a purely political phenomenon? Can communities sustain their interest in this issue for significant periods of time? Do you, for example, still have chapters in places like Detroit or Charlotte?

Mr. D'ONOFRIO. We never had chapters in Detroit or Charlotte. We do have sustaining chapters in Boston, Louisville, Omaha, Texas, and places like that, and we do a pretty good job, I think, in New Castle County.

Addressing one of the points you made, I think apathy is mistaken a lot-apathy and just plain hopelessness on the part of citizens is mistaken a lot and called success of busing.

Senator HATCH. I think you are familiar with Prof. Lino Graglia's contention that our courts began to go wrong when the Supreme Court handed down its second Brown decision.

In that decision, according to Professor Graglia, the Supreme Court exhibited for the first time the tension between commanding a school district to discontinue discriminatory policies and commanding them to undertake affirmative actions to integrate themselves.

Would you agree with this thesis?

Mr. D'ONOFRIO. Of course, I have to agree with Professor Graglia. I would agree that where the Court went wrong was in the remedy that they came up with. I think there are a lot of more viable remedies than forced busing.

Senator HATCH. What are your views with regard to Representative Mathews' and Professor Curtis' view that school busing has contributed to a significant deterioration in the quality of student extracurricular activities? Has this been the case in Delaware? Mr. D'ONOFRIO. It stands to reason, it almost has to. They have tried to keep these programs intact with special buses and so forth. But the time factor weighs heavily. You cannot bus kids all over

the place and take a good 1 hour or 11⁄2 hours out of their day and expect them to continue to participate in these activities. That also applies to their parents.

Senator HATCH. Could you also elaborate upon your view that a disproportionate number of the most civic minded parents tend to remove their children from public schools in response to school busing orders?

Mr. D'ONOFRIO. Yes. Of course, I pointed out the massive enrollment decline in New Castle County, and I have pointed out that the Urban Affairs poll found that these people were the parent leaders of public education.

Incidentally, that same poll discovered that those who have removed their children from public schools are no more racially bigoted than those who remain.

Of course, the cases are legion of the proponents of busing withdrawing their own children from public schools. A notable example is Dr. Kenneth Clark who was one of the proponents of busing in the Brown decision. They asked him why he withdrew his kids from public schools, and he said: "I can't take that chance with my children."

Senator HATCH. I notice we have our ranking minority member on the full committee here, Senator Biden. We are very pleased to have him here. He has been a particular leader in legislative approaches to this subject.

Senator Biden.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH BIDEN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE

Senator BIDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I want to thank you again—you know, I am not a member of this subcommittee for allowing me to sit in on this. I also thank you for accommodating the subcommittee's schedule. I realize that we have asked a lot by asking you to put as many Delawareans on the scheduling list as you have, and for that I thank you.

Senator HATCH. We are happy to do that.

Senator BIDEN. It was not an idle thing, though, to ask Delawareans to testify. Obviously, there is a parochial reason for that. As I represent Delaware, I would like you to hear from Senator Arnold, Mr. D'Onofrio, and even Senator Holloway who said he wanted to testify.

I notice, of late, Delaware is being pointed to as the example of how it works. I think Delaware is a shining example of how busing does not work, and that is why I think it is particularly useful.

Without my speaking more—and I promise I will not interrupt with many questions-I would like to ask Mr. D'Onofrio to expand on one point that I think is central to the cause of those who still believe busing has some merit.

In the first of the hearings that the chairman called, Mr. D'Onofrio, my opening statement which indicated that busing did not work—and Wilmington was the example-was challenged by several of the witnesses, one in particular.

I noticed that one of the things that people are saying as evidence as to why things worked in Delaware is that we were not violent—it was pointed out that there was no violence in Delaware,