« PrécédentContinuer »
Wnited States. Congresso House. Committee on Education ind
Labor, Subcommittee on Equal Opportunities,
(Title IX Regulation)
HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, D.C., JULY 14, 1975
Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Labor
CARL D. PERKINS, Chairman
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 1975
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR
CARL D. PERKINS, Kentucky, Chairman
JOHN M. ASHBROOK, Ohio
JOHN N. ERLENBORN, Illinois JAMES G. O'HARA, Michigan
MARVIN L. ESCH, Michigan AUGUSTUS F. HAWKINS, California
EDWIN D. ESHLEMAN, Pennsylvania WILLIAM D. FORD, Michigan
PETER A. PEYSER, New York PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii (on leave)
RONALD A. SARASIN, Connecticut LLOYD MEEDS, Washington
JOHN BUCHANAN, Alabama PHILLIP BURTON, California
JAMES M, JEFFORDS, Vermont JOSEPH M. GAYDOS, Pennsylvania
LARRY PRESSLER, South Dakota WILLIAM "BILL" CLAY, Missouri
WILLIAM F. GOODLING, Pennsylvania SHIRLEY CHISHOLM, New York
VIRGINIA SMITH, Nebraska
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES
AUGUSTUS F. HAWKINS, California, Chairman WILLIAM “BILL" CLAY, Missouri
JOHN BUCHANAN, Alabama JAIME BENITEZ, Puerto Rico
ALBERT H. QUIE, Minnesota, Ex Officio PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii (on leave) CARL D. PERKINS, Kentucky, Ex Officio
EAT/ 190ct 75
fare; John B. Rhinelander, general counsel; and Richard A. Hast-
Prepared statements, letters, supplemental material, etc.:
Crothers, Diane, president, New York Association for Equal Oppor-
Robinson, James L., director, Office of Government Liaison, Wash-
ington, D.C, letter to Chairman Hawkins with enclosures, dated
Ireland, George M., director of athletics, Loyola University of Chicago,
Chicago, Ill., letter to Hon. Augustus F. Hawkins, dated June 16, 1975. 50
collegiate athletics, Ruston, La., letter to Hon. Augustus F. Hawkins,
Murphy, Walter Y., executive vice president, Florida Southern College,
Lakeland, Fla., letter to Chairman Hawkins, dated June 23, 1975----- 62
Scott, Michael, Cox, Langford and Brown, Washington, D.C., letter to
man Hawkins enclosing statement of Bill Foster, Duke University -----
Üniversity of American Law School, Washington, D.C., letter to Chair-
HEARING ON HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 330
(Title IX Regulation)
MONDAY, JULY 14, 1975
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:45 a.m. in room 2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Augustus F. Hawkins (chairman) presiding.
Members present: Representatives Perkins, O'Hara, Hawkins, Clay, Benitez, Miller, Hall, and Buchanan.
Staff present: Susan D. Grayson, staff director; William Higgs, legislative assistant; Carole Schanzer, clerk; and Richard Mosse, assistant minority counsel.
Mr. HAWKINS. The Subcommittee on Equal Opportunities is called to order. The Chair has an opening statement which will be read at this time.
Mr. O'Hara, we will somewhat delay the proceeding until Mr. Buchanan, who is on the way, arrives. Possibly after I have read my opening statement, it may be that he will have arrived. This is the reason for the short delay.
The subcommittee is convened this morning to hear testimony on House Concurrent Resolution 330, disapproving certain provisions of the regulation implementing title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972.
The subcommittee is acting upon a vote on July 9, by the Committee on Education and Labor, to refer House Concurrent Resolution 330 to the Subcommittee on Equal Opportunities for its consideration for 3 legislative days.
Under section 431(d) of the General Education Provisions Act, Congress has 45 days to review the regulation to determine whether it is consistent with the authorizing legislation. Upon a finding of inconsistency, Congress may, by concurrent resolution, disapprove the regulation.
The concurrent resolution before us cites three provisions of the title IX regulation as inconsistent with the statute: Section 83.3 (c) and (d), requiring recipient institutions to conduct self-evaluation and maintain records; section 86.8, requiring the institutions to adopt a grievance procedure; and section 86.12(b), requiring religious institutions to submit a statement identifying the provisions of the regulation which conflict with a specific religious tenet in order to claim an exemption.