Busing Bill Will Not Affect Cambridge

A recent Congressional decision to prohibit the Justice Department from granting money for court-ordered busing will have little effect in Cambridge and Boston, school officials said yesterday, but they nevertheless said they are disappointed by the amendment's passage.

"Integration and busing may well be the states' prerogatives, but the states won't do a thing, and the sponsors of the amendment know that," Cambridge School Committee member Glenn S. Koocher '71 said yesterday. "We have to look to the federal government for leadership and support," he added.

Committee member Sara M. Berman called the amendment "a great step backwards" yesterday, adding that it would allow "only those who can finance busing on their own to uphold the law."

The proposed anti-busing amendment, tacked onto a $9 billion appropriations bill for the Departments of State, Justice and Commerce, would prohibit the Justice Department from spending money to send children to any school but the one nearest their home.

The amendment would probably not affect Cambridge schools because the city runs its own voluntary integration program, Koocher said.

The School Committee redrew district boundaries in April to balance city schools racially. Students must attend schools in their home district unless being in an outside school "positively affects the racial balance there," Koocher added.

"The present system is working very well, but even if we have to move into another stage of integration, we don't foresee many problems. Fortunately, the city is not large--no school is more than two miles away fromanother--and we bought our own buses two years ago, when we first started thinking about the problem of integration. So we're not really dependent on federal aid," Koocher said.

Charles Hambelton, staff attorney for the Boston School Committee, said yesterday that the amendment will not affect Boston schools, because city busing programs are well-established, but he added the bill could hamper school desegregation in other areas.

He added that the amendment reflects a recent governmental trend to restrict desegregation legislation.