Labor, Health and Human Services, Education Appropriations for 2022, Part 6 (House Hearing)
Summary
Part 6 of the hearings "Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations for 2022" before a subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations. The part lists hearings on the Department of Health and Human Services; Building Capacity, Building Community: Increasing Investments in Community Colleges; the U.S. Department of Labor; the U.S. Department of Education; and Mental Health Emergencies: Building a Robust Crisis Response System. The first hearing, on April 15, 2021, heard from Hon. Xavier Becerra, Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, in a fully virtual format.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Cite this document
“Labor, Health and Human Services, Education Appropriations for 2022, Part 6 (House Hearing).”
Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/house-hearing-117th-congress-departments-of-labor-health-and-human-ser-b9cd5c27f5/
, SHA-256 9beaf02a42523f909a5e1a2c9974f1b05cd906de0ba87a2597cdc2e80b2e2e58.Full text
[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN
SERVICES, EDUCATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES
APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2022
_______________________________________________________________________
HEARINGS
BEFORE A
SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
___________
SUBCOMMITTEE ON LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,
EDUCATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES
ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut, Chair
LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD, California TOM COLE, Oklahoma
BARBARA LEE, California ANDY HARRIS, Maryland
MARK POCAN, Wisconsin CHUCK FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee
KATHERINE M. CLARK, Massachusetts JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington
LOIS FRANKEL, Florida JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan
CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois BEN CLINE, Virginia
BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
BRENDA L. LAWRENCE, Michigan
JOSH HARDER, California
NOTE: Under committee rules, Ms. DeLauro, as chair of the full
committee, and Ms. Granger, as ranking minority member of the full
committee, are authorized to sit as members of all subcommittees.
Stephen Steigleder, Jennifer Cama, Jaclyn Kilroy, Jared Bass,
Philip Tizzani, Laurie Mignone, Rebecca Salay, and Trish Castaneda
Subcommittee Staff
_________
PART 6
Page
Department of Health and Human
Services................................
1
Building Capacity, Building Community:
Increasing Investments in Community
Colleges................................
93
U.S. Department of Labor..............
171
U.S. Department of Education..........
259
Mental Health Emergencies: Building a
Robust Crisis Response System...........
345
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
____________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Appropriations
U.S GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
46-639 WASHINGTON : 2022
COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
----------
ROSA L. DeLAURO, Connecticut, Chair
MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio
DAVID E. PRICE, North Carolina
LUCILLE ROYBAL-ALLARD, California
SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia
BARBARA LEE, California
BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota
TIM RYAN, Ohio
C. A. DUTCH RUPPERSBERGER, Maryland
DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida
HENRY CUELLAR, Texas
CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine
MIKE QUIGLEY, Illinois
DEREK KILMER, Washington
MATT CARTWRIGHT, Pennsylvania
GRACE MENG, New York
MARK POCAN, Wisconsin
KATHERINE M. CLARK, Massachusetts
PETE AGUILAR, California
LOIS FRANKEL, Florida
CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois
BONNIE WATSON COLEMAN, New Jersey
BRENDA L. LAWRENCE, Michigan
NORMA J. TORRES, California
CHARLIE CRIST, Florida
ANN KIRKPATRICK, Arizona
ED CASE, Hawaii
ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
JOSH HARDER, California
JENNIFER WEXTON, Virginia
DAVID J. TRONE, Maryland
LAUREN UNDERWOOD, Illinois
SUSIE LEE, Nevada
KAY GRANGER, Texas
HAROLD ROGERS, Kentucky
ROBERT B. ADERHOLT, Alabama
MICHAEL K. SIMPSON, Idaho
JOHN R. CARTER, Texas
KEN CALVERT, California
TOM COLE, Oklahoma
MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
STEVE WOMACK, Arkansas
JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska
CHUCK FLEISCHMANN, Tennessee
JAIME HERRERA BEUTLER, Washington
DAVID P. JOYCE, Ohio
ANDY HARRIS, Maryland
MARK E. AMODEI, Nevada
CHRIS STEWART, Utah
STEVEN M. PALAZZO, Mississippi
DAVID G. VALADAO, California
DAN NEWHOUSE, Washington
JOHN R. MOOLENAAR, Michigan
JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida
BEN CLINE, Virginia
GUY RESCHENTHALER, Pennsylvania
MIKE GARCIA, California
ASHLEY HINSON, Iowa
TONY GONZALES, Texas
Robin Juliano, Clerk and Staff Director
(ii)
DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, EDUCATION, AND RELATED
AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS FOR 2022
Thursday, April 15, 2021.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
WITNESS
HON. XAVIER BECERRA, SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN
SERVICES
The Chair. The hearing will come to order.
As this hearing is fully virtual, we must address a few
housekeeping matters. For today's meeting, the chair or staff
designated by the chair may mute participants' microphones when
they are not under recognition for the purposes of eliminating
inadvertent background noise.
Members are responsible for muting and unmuting themselves.
If I notice that you have not unmuted yourself, I will ask you
if you would like the staff to unmute you. If you indicate
approval by nodding, staff will unmute your microphone.
I remind all members and Mr. Secretary that the 5-minute
clock still applies. If there is a technology issue, we will
move to the next member until the issue is resolved, and you
will retain the balance of your time.
You will notice a clock on your screen that will show how
much time is remaining. At 1 minute remaining, the clock will
turn yellow. At 30 seconds remaining, I will gently tap the
gavel to remind members that their time is almost expired. When
your time has expired, the clock will turn red, and I will
begin to recognize the next member.
In terms of the speaking order, we will begin with the
chair and ranking member. Then members present at the time the
hearing is called to order will be recognized in order of
seniority and, finally, members not present at the time the
hearing is called to order.
Finally, House rules require me to remind you that we have
set up an email address to which members can send anything they
wish to submit in writing at any of our hearings or markups.
That email address has been provided in advance to your staff.
And with that, I would like to acknowledge the ranking
member of the subcommittee, Congressman Tom Cole, and all the
members of the subcommittee on both sides of the aisle who are
joining today's hearing.
And I would like to congratulate and welcome a former
colleague and dear, dear friend, Secretary Xavier Becerra, to
his first hearing as Secretary of the Department of Health and
Human Services.
Today, we are looking forward to discussing HHS's 2022
budget priorities, the Department's ongoing response to the
COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the Biden-Harris administration's
overall response to the many longstanding problems and
inequities in our healthcare system that this pandemic has
underscored and exacerbated this past year.
This is the Labor, HHS, Education Appropriations
Subcommittee's first budget hearing on the Biden-Harris
administration's 2022 budget request. In the coming weeks, we
will also hold budget hearings with Secretary Miguel Cardona,
Department of Education, on April 27; Secretary Marty Walsh,
Department of Labor, on April 28; NIH Director Francis Collins,
along with other NIH IC Directors, in May; and CDC Director
Rochelle Walensky, along with other CDC leaders, in May as
well.
In addition, in May, the subcommittee will hold a hearing
with public witnesses, as well as a hearing for House members
to highlight their requests for 2022. The subcommittee will
circulate further information in the coming weeks on hearings
in May once the dates and details have been confirmed.
Mr. Secretary, as I am sure you are very well aware, you
are taking over leadership of one of the most important
departments in the Federal Government. And it is an immensely
critical time for this country as we recover from simultaneous
public health and economic emergencies. This administration has
made a strong start, and you certainly deserve credit for the
many public health and economic recoveries that are currently
taking shape.
In responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, this administration
increased daily vaccine doses to more than 3 million doses per
day, which puts us well on the way to achieving the President's
updated goal of 200 million doses in his first 100 days.
Tuesday's news of the pause on the Janssen/J&J vaccine may
complicate our vaccination efforts, but we must have confidence
in all of our vaccines as we combat COVID-19. I am grateful
that this administration is committed to following the science.
President Biden also took decisive action to respond to the
economic crisis by proposing the American Rescue Plan, a
$1,900,000,000,000 relief plan to help American families. Most
recently, the President proposed a bold plan to rebuild the
Nation's infrastructure, including the care economy, which
forms the backbone of the overall economy. The President's
proposal includes an additional $25,000,000,000 for childcare
facilities, $400,000,000,000 for home and community-based care,
including resources and support for the millions of workers,
mostly women of color, who provide these important care
services for our loved ones.
This new investment will build on the $50,000,000,000 that
the Congress provided for children through the American Rescue
Plan and the December emergency supplemental appropriations
bill. And now the administration is once again taking the lead
by submitting a fiscal year 2022 budget request for HHS with
investments in health and human services that would improve the
lives of millions of American families.
The investments are vital. After a decade of sequestration
and constraints and 2-year budget deals, we are finally
beginning to address the needs of our Nation's families,
children, and underserved communities. We are finally beginning
to address systematic shortfalls in our health and human
services programs through the American Jobs Plan, the
forthcoming American Families Plan, and annual discretionary
appropriations.
Many of the issues that have become all the more apparent
in the wake of the pandemic--issues like maternal health
crisis, childcare crisis, mental health crisis, and the gun
violence crisis--had already reached a breaking point even
before the pandemic began, which is why I am so pleased to see
that the administration is doubling funding for gun violence
prevention research, which is a priority that I fought for and
succeeded in securing for the first time in 20 years in 2019.
This budget proposal and this administration's response to
the COVID-19 pandemic is certainly a great step in the right
direction, but we are not running a mile here, we are running a
marathon. Our public health infrastructure utterly collapsed
under the weight of this pandemic, and while this budget
addresses some of the failures that occurred in this system,
there is still more work to be done.
We need to consider how we are going to address the
failures that cause 700 American women to die in childbirth
each year. How are we going to address the failures that have
led to 1 in 20 U.S. adults suffering from a serious mental
illness? How are we going to address the failures that are
pushing more women out of the workforce every day because they
do not have access to quality, affordable childcare?
This budget includes a record $8,700,000,000 for the CDC
and $10,700,000,000 to address the opioid epidemic. It also
includes $19,800,000,000 for HHS childcare and early education
programs, an increase of $2,900,000,000 to expand access to
quality, affordable childcare, Head Start, and preschool. It
includes $1,600,000,000 to address the mental health crisis, as
well as $200,000,000 for maternal health.
Significant investments that are desperately needed to
address critical programs, and I am confident this budget
continues to move in the right direction. Combined with the
American Jobs Plan and the American Families Plan, this budget
will improve the lives of the American people.
Mr. Secretary, it is time to be ambitious. We need a budget
and a role for Government that invests to give us a better
future.
Let me focus for a moment on women's health. Thank you for
releasing proposed regulations this week to end the Title X gag
rule. This action will ensure that people across the country
have access to affordable reproductive healthcare and
lifesaving cancer screenings. More than 1,000 health centers
left the Title X program due to the gag rule.
In my State of Connecticut, New Haven is now the only place
in the State where people can access Title X providers. We look
forward to this rule being swiftly finalized so we can begin to
repair the damage of the past 4 years.
I hope you build on this progress by dropping the Hyde
Amendment from your full budget. The time has come to reckon
with the status quo and view this issue through the lens of
racial equity. As I have said before, while the Labor, HHS,
Education bill has carried the Hyde Amendment every year since
1976, 2021 is the last year.
The Hyde Amendment is a discriminatory policy, denies low-
income women access to abortion, and that particularly hits
low-income women of color. The inequities in our country's
healthcare system that have been exposed by the COVID-19
pandemic all further expose the impact of the Hyde Amendment.
Now is the time to empower all women to be able to make deeply
personal life decisions without politicians inserting
themselves into the doctor's office.
I also want to raise the issue of the unaccompanied
children currently in our care at the U.S.-Mexico border. I
recognize, Mr. Secretary, that you inherited a difficult and a
challenging situation, as a record number of children are
fleeing traumatic circumstances and are seeking to be reunified
with family in the United States.
I am encouraged by your commitment to return this program
to its human services mission of protecting vulnerable
children. However, I will continue to push for a more
transparent program. Oversight and monitoring of these
facilities, especially with these large numbers of children,
will be more important than ever.
And I want to emphasize, as I have emphasized for many
years, the need for HHS to comply with the Flores agreement and
to provide legal services, health and education services, and
post release services for these children.
The Trump administration tried to turn HHS into an
immigration enforcement agency. They separated children from
their families. We need to do better. I am committed to working
with you to ensure you have the resources to take care of these
children, which includes housing them in State-licensed
shelters that meet all the standards of care, placing them with
sponsors as quickly and safely as possible.
Mr. Secretary, we have made a lot of progress in recent
months, but there is still much more to do. At a time when the
COVID-19 pandemic has only exposed the already-serious failures
in our public health system, it is time to be ambitious. It is
time to meet the moment. It is time to do whatever it is that
we can not only to put our country back on track, but also to
build the infrastructure for the future and chart a better and
a more equitable course forward for all Americans. And I and, I
know, the committee looks forward to working with you over the
next year and beyond, and we look forward to today's
discussion.
With that, I would like to recognize the ranking member of
the subcommittee, Congressman Cole, for any opening remarks.
Mr. Cole. Well, thank you very much, Madam Chair.
And before I begin my scripted remarks, I want to welcome
our friend and our former colleague to this position, and I
couldn't be more pleased, other than, of course, had there been
a Republican Secretary. But that aside, the Secretary and I,
Madam Chair, had the good fortune of serving together with our
late colleague Sam Johnson for many years on the Smithsonian
board.
And as everybody on this panel knows, on both sides of the
aisle, he is a person of unquestioned ability, a person of
genuine integrity and decency. And while he certainly holds
strong views, which I respect--some of which I agree with, some
of which he knows I do not. When you serve together, you sort
of know where everybody stands. But he has also got a
practicing politician's fine sense of the possible. He was a
great legislator when he was here.
And so I can tell you, just from my experience on this
committee, Mr. Secretary, whether it was under Democratic or
Republican majorities or whether it were Democratic or
Republican Secretaries, this committee has historically been
very supportive of whoever the Secretary of HHS is. We know, as
the chairwoman indicated, how vast your responsibilities are
and how important they are to the American people.
And I don't know if we could do this this time, probably
not because I think your budget request is an ambitious budget
request, which I applaud, quite frankly. But we have given
Secretaries in the last two administrations more money than
they asked for because we thought they had more problems maybe
than they understood coming into these jobs. And again, as our
chairwoman indicated, you are coming in at a challenging time.
So I just want you to know up front we recognize that. We
recognize that we know there will be areas we differ. I will
mention some of those in my formal remarks. But again, I also
know you are somebody we can work with and somebody that
understands how we work.
So I am very delighted that the President made the decision
to choose you. And why you made the decision to leave a
wonderful position in California and come back here, you will
have to explain that to us over a drink sometime, but it is
good to have you back.
So with that, Mr. Secretary, I want to welcome you to your
first hearing of our subcommittee. And I look forward to our
hearing with you today and hope that we can meet in person at
the next one.
The Department of Health and Human Services has broad
responsibilities covering almost every aspect of daily life.
This is, indeed, a monumental responsibility that has been
brought to life for everyone to see over the past year.
I want to start by acknowledging the hard work and
unwavering commitment of the employees of the Health and Human
Services Department. Against nearly insurmountable odds, this
agency has faced a global pandemic, and just over 1 year later,
efforts of your agency have left our Nation well on the way to
having every willing adult vaccinated. Yet another truly
remarkable achievement for the United States.
Despite the many challenges of the past year, I was proud
to see Congress come together five times to pass emergency
supplemental appropriations to help us through the pandemic.
Our work together enabled us to create funding packages that
everyone could be proud of. I am, therefore, disappointed that
the majority has chosen thus far to abandon this bipartisan
course in favor to pursue a partisan budget proposal, complete
with lengthy liberal wish lists replete with items totally
unrelated to the pandemic or public health.
The President pledged an administration of unity, but
sadly, it has begun with a legislative strategy of division. I
certainly hope we can expect a return to an appropriations
process that recognizes the role of bipartisanship, and I look
forward to the release of the complete budget materials next
month.
Your agency oversees healthcare for our seniors and Native
Americans and provides the foundation for core investments in
public health and emergency preparedness. The National
Institutes of Health provides the critical basic research
leading to biomedical innovations, spawning new therapies,
treatment, and medications for countless diseases. And the
social supports under your purview enables those seeking mental
health or substance abuse treatment to have qualified evidence-
based options available.
The budget you put before us seeks to address numerous
challenges--an opioid addiction epidemic, concerning levels of
maternal mortality, a humanitarian crisis at the Southern
border, and a clear need to prepare for the next pandemic.
However, I disagree with the approach taken in the
administration's overall budget request. To put it simply, it
spends far too much on domestic programs, far too little on
defense.
With China and Russia building up their militaries and
becoming increasingly more aggressive, America cannot afford to
stand still or cut back on defense spending. At a minimum, we
need to see a 3 to 5 percent annual increase beyond the rate of
inflation for defense spending over the next several years.
That may require some adjustments in domestic spending
requests.
Looking at the domestic programs, several of which are in
this subcommittee, the budget proposal, like the most recent
coronavirus relief package and infrastructure proposal, simply
spends more than our Nation can afford. Moreover, much of the
spending is not necessary. Our economic recovery is well
underway, and many of the proposed program increases, while
well intentioned, are not warranted on the scale requested.
I do agree with the President that we need to invest more
in the areas of public health and biomedical research. Indeed,
in recent years, this subcommittee has spent more than either
of the last two administrations requested in these areas, and I
think the current pandemic has demonstrated the wisdom of that
investment.
To keep America safe and healthy, the United States needs
to continue to increase funding for the National Institutes of
Health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and
other related programs. And I note that you certainly made
those proposals, Mr. Secretary, in your budget.
We now have faced a pandemic in our lifetime. Let us use
this lesson to leave future generations better prepared to
address the next one. I firmly believe our investments in NIH
over the past several years made us better positioned to
address the challenges of coronavirus. We cannot let that
commitment to sustain increases waver.
Like our national security, American leadership in
biomedical research cannot be compromised. I was disappointed
to see no mention of the Biomedical Advanced Research
Development Authority, or BARDA, in the budget released last
week, but I would expect perhaps to see that when we see a
fuller budget.
The success of Operation Warp Speed to develop, produce,
and distribute multiple safe, highly effective vaccine
candidates in less than a year is unprecedented in medical
history. Now more than at any other time, we need to ensure
BARDA continues its key role in countermeasure development. Our
country needs to be ready to respond to any event to protect
the health of the Nation.
In closing, I just wanted to mention one other important
issue as it relates to this bill and your agency. For more than
four decades across multiple administrations and Congresses led
by both Democrats and Republicans, language has been included
in the Labor, Health and Human Services appropriation bill that
restricts Federal taxpayer funding for abortion under most
circumstances. This provision reflects a time-tested balance of
strongly held and differing perspectives on abortion in this
country.
Our bills have been able to advance year after year with
bipartisan support with this balance in place. As such, I will
strongly oppose any appropriations bill that seeks to weaken
pro-life protections or eliminates Hyde policies, and I expect
that under your leadership, HHS will continue to enforce those
provisions of existing law.
I look forward to our discussion today, and I thank you for
coming before us. And again, it is a genuine pleasure to have
you back and I think a good choice by the President of the
United States to persuade you to come and serve again.
So, welcome and look forward to hearing your remarks.
The Chair. We thank the ranking member and join you in
welcoming the Secretary. And many, many hours we spent at all
kinds of meetings and leadership meetings, et cetera, and you
with a deliberative purpose in focusing on how, in fact, we
could use the institute of the Congress--the institution of the
Congress to provide opportunity to people, to make sure that
people all over this Nation get a better chance at a better
life. And understanding that this is the place where it can get
done and that the role of the Federal Government is imperative
and especially at times of great crisis where the challenges
are so overwhelming for the people of our country.
So, delighted that you are here. I could not be more
pleased and looking forward to a great working relationship.
And with that, Mr. Secretary, you know that your full
written testimony will be entered into the record. You are now
recognized for 5 minutes for your opening statement.
Thank you.
Secretary Becerra. Madam Chairwoman, Chairwoman DeLauro,
Ranking Member Cole, and to the members of the committee, it is
a great pleasure, and I thank you for this opportunity to
appear before you to discuss the President's fiscal year 2022
discretionary HHS budget.
I understand the 5-minute rule. I know you know the subject
matter of this hearing so well. So let me try to be brief.
The COVID-19 pandemic demonstrated how health inequities
and lack of Federal funding leave communities vulnerable to
crises. Now more than ever, we must ensure that HHS has the
resources to achieve its mission and protect the health of our
communities. The budget that the President has put forward
places our agency, HHS, in the right place to achieve that
outcome.
For HHS, the budget proposes $131,700,000,000 in
discretionary budget authority, $119,500,000,000 of which is
for activities funded by this subcommittee. This
$25,000,000,000 increase from fiscal year 2021 discretionary
appropriations underscores this administration's commitment to
prepare the Nation for the next public health crisis, address
racial disparities in healthcare, and invest in behavioral
health, among other very important priorities.
To start, the budget makes significant investments in our
preparedness and response capabilities for the next public
health crisis. It provides $905,000,000 for the Strategic
National Stockpile, which has served a critical role in the
COVID-19 response. It invests an additional $1,600,000,000 in
CDC, the largest CDC fiscal year budget increase in almost two
decades. With these 2022 investments, CDC will address
preparedness within the United States and strengthen global
health security.
Additionally, the President's budget provides funding
increases to address violence in our communities, $489,000,000
to support and protect domestic violence survivors and
$66,000,000 for victims of human trafficking and survivors of
torture. Gun violence, very much a public health issue and one
that disproportionately impacts communities of color, is
addressed by doubling both the CDC and the National Institutes
of Health funding levels for firearm violence prevention
research.
CDC will also receive $100,000,000 to start a new
community-based violence intervention initiative to implement
evidence-based community violence interventions at the local
level. To ensure that HHS is equitably serving all Americans,
the discretionary request does a number of things. It invests
over $200,000,000 to reduce maternal mortality and morbidity,
which excessively affects women of color.
Two, it funds a range of rural healthcare programs and
expands the pipeline of rural healthcare providers. It includes
a $2,200,000,000 increase in advance appropriations for the
Indian Health Service's program within HHS. And four, it
increases funding for the HHS Office of Civil Rights by 24
percent.
The budget also provides $340,000,000 to the Title X Family
Planning Program to improve access to vital reproductive and
preventive health services and to advance gender equity.
To help build the best possible future for our children,
the budget provides $19,800,000,000 for the Department's early
care and education programs, including $11,900,000,000 for Head
Start and $7,400,000,000 for the childcare and development
block grant. The budget invests in improvements to the child
welfare system, particularly to address its racial inequity. It
provides $100,000,000 to new competitive grants for States and
localities to advance reforms that would reduce the
overrepresentation of children and families of color and
address the disparate experiences and outcomes for these
families.
The President's budget also takes action to address the
epidemic of opioids and other substance abuse, investing
$10,700,000,000 across HHS and increasing access to medications
for opioid use disorder and expanding the behavioral health
provider workforce, particularly in underserved areas. And in a
historic investment, the budget provides $1,600,000,000 to the
community mental health services block grant to respond to the
systemic strain on our country's mental healthcare system.
To support innovation in research, the budget increases
funding for NIH by $9,000,000,000, $6,500,000,000 of which will
go to establish the Advanced Research Projects Agency for
Health, ARPA-H, with an initial focus on cancer and other
diseases, such as diabetes and Alzheimer's. This major
investment in Federal research and development will speed
transformational innovation in health research and speed
application and implementation of health breakthroughs.
Finally, given the magnitude of HHS's work and the taxpayer
dollars used to fund it, it is critical that we ensure our
funds are used appropriately. This discretionary request
invests in program integrity including efforts to combat fraud,
waste, and abuse in Medicare, Medicaid, and private insurance.
I want to thank this committee for inviting me to discuss
the President's 2022 HHS budget, and I want to thank the staff
at HHS for their hard work in fighting COVID-19 and for the
health of their fellow Americans. To build back a prosperous
America, we need a healthy America, and President Biden's
discretionary request builds on that vision.
Thank you.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chair. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
I am very, very excited. Before I ask my first question,
let me just mention something.
The 2022 budget blueprint is strong funding for public
health, biomedical research, childcare, early learning, mental
health, maternal health, so many other areas. And we all look
forward to seeing the details of the President's budget next
month and that role for Government that invests in a better
future.
There is one initiative that you mentioned that I am
looking forward to learning about. It is your proposal to
allocate $6,500,000,000 to establish, if you will, ARPA-H. It
appears to be a novel approach in supporting innovation to
address key problems in health and medical research, critical
we strike a balance between this new approach and investments
in basic research and fundamental discovery at the NIH.
Once the full budget is released, this subcommittee will
hold a hearing with the NIH, and we will all have a series of
questions about the ARPA-H program. So I want to hold those
questions at the moment until we get to the NIH hearing.
Let me turn to another issue. Mr. Secretary, your budget
includes $4,300,000,000 for the Office of Refugee Resettlement.
I believe this reflects the administration's intention to
restore the Nation's capacity to care for refugees, including
the Unaccompanied Children Program, which we know is stressed
right now. You inherited a broken immigration system. It will
take time to fix it.
You also inherited a record number of children fleeing
traumatic circumstances in Central America, seeking refuge and
asylum, and I know you are committed to doing what is right for
these children. So a couple of questions here, Mr. Secretary.
I repeatedly pushed HHS to focus on placing children with
sponsors as quickly and safely as possible. I commend you for
rescinding the previous administration's harmful memorandum of
agreement with DHS, so sponsors are no longer afraid that they
will be deported if they sponsor these children. What else are
you doing to safely expedite placement of these children with
their families?
Secretary Becerra. Madam Chair, thank you for the question,
and thank you for your comments about the work we are doing on
this issue.
There is nothing more important than children. And at HHS,
we take very seriously our responsibility to not only provide
the right care and health, but to make sure that we pass this
child on to a responsible sponsor, these migrant children that
we are encountering at the border. And so what we are doing is
in that process of receiving that child from the Department of
Homeland Security, Customs and Border Patrol, and until the
point we can find a responsible sponsor for that child, we are
providing the care that is required.
Typically, that means offering that child a licensed care
facility to be in temporarily until we find that sponsor and as
that child is working through the immigration process to
determine what will happen with regard to their status. While
they are with us, we are hoping to provide them not only with
the medical services that you would expect for any child, but
also the care which would include educational, recreational
services.
With the influx of minors at the border, both ancillary
services, education and recreational services become more
taxing, more difficult, because the spaces that we are finding
are fewer and fewer to be found. And so what we are trying to
do is make sure we provide each and every child with every
opportunity to receive not just the health and well-being care
that we would expect for any child, but also the types of
services that we would want to provide for any child as we pass
them on to a sponsor.
And we are working hard to move responsibly these children
into care of a vetted sponsor. We have to be careful. We want
to make sure we put them in the hands of someone who will be
responsible, and we also want to make sure that we get them
there as quickly as possible.
The Chair. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Just a couple of other points in this area. I know we have
set up emergency intake sites, and that is a new concept. And
one of the issues is, is that because of the record number of
children and the pandemic, that has reduced the capacity at
State-licensed shelters. Where we had 13,000 beds, that was
immediately cut to half or less than half because of the
precautions.
So at the intake sites and the precautions we are taking
there, standards of care, and we have spoken about that, let me
just emphasize that I have said for many years the need for HHS
to comply with the Flores agreement so that the legal services,
health, education services, post release services for the
children are in order.
Let me ask this one other question here. We have got so
many kids arriving at the same time, I am concerned that
children may have to wait for case managers while they are in
the emergency intake sites. What is the plan to address the
shortage of case managers at those intake sites and provider
networks?
Secretary Becerra. Well, Madam Chair, you characterized
this properly. There has been an influx. We are finding that we
are placing some of these children temporarily in these
emergency sites. They still offer those basic services that we
would expect for any child, and we are trying to increase the
number of intake workers that can help process these children
so that we can get them placed.
You can imagine it is a task to make sure that we get
people who are doing the proper vetting, the background checks
of the sponsors, to get these kids placed. We do the medical
check. We do everything we can to make sure that while they are
in our care, they are--their healthcare needs are addressed.
And when we pass them on to a responsible, vetted sponsor, that
we are making sure that we understand that they will continue
to get the care that they deserve.
And so we have increased the number of intake workers that
we have. We have actually called for volunteers throughout the
Federal Government workforce to help us in this regard. We have
been very fortunate. Several thousand Federal workers have
stepped to the plate, and we are pushing really hard with our
contractors that we typically are able to use to do this work
to increase their capacity as well.
And so everyone is trying to team up, but again, it is
difficult. As you mentioned, when we came in, the
infrastructure, the architecture to do this work had, in many
ways, been dismantled. And so not only was the agency not
equipped to deal with the previous upticks in numbers of kids,
but to see the increased number made it almost impossible.
The Chair. Thank you, and I apologize to my colleagues for
going over time. And I just would just finally say I want to
reiterate that we are willing to provide the necessary funding
for this program. Like you, we want to ensure that the children
have the services that they deserve, and I know that you are
clear, as we are, that it is what we want to do is to move to
State-licensed facilities for children as quickly as we can and
to get them to a sponsor as quickly as we can.
Thank you. And again, my apologies to my colleagues for
running over the time.
But Congressman Cole?
Mr. Cole. Madam Chair, you are the chair of this
subcommittee and the full committee. I don't think you have to
apologize to anybody when you take some time.
The Chair. Thank you.
Mr. Cole. Let me start, and this is actually prompted, Mr.
Secretary--it is a little bit off script, but some things you
said in your testimony that I want to agree with and offer you
some thoughts on, and that was your advocacy for increase for
the Indian Health Service.
And we don't actually have jurisdiction over that. It is
the one area of your Department we do not. That is with our
good friends on the Interior Subcommittee. But you are spot on
in terms of the need and the importance of forward funding
those programs to protect them, just like we do the veterans
program.
I would just commend to you and this committee the
challenge that they have over in the Natural Resources
Department--excuse me, Subcommittee. It is simple. They just
simply don't have enough money. This is the biggest part of
their budget, and yet they have the National Park System, they
have the EPA, they have a huge range. And of course, this is
the most important part of our healthcare system that is funded
solely by discretionary dollars.
And so we need to look toward some way to get at least some
mandatory funding. Perhaps similar to what we did a number of
years ago with the community health centers, which used to be
funded only by discretionary dollars when they started, and we
moved to a combination. That has been renewed every time it has
come up for renewal.
So there is a jurisdictional problem here, which is a
problem we have in Congress of not having this all in a single
area. There is just a lot more discretionary dollars in this
pot at Labor-H than there is at Interior. And then there is
this idea that we are going to fund a major health program with
solely appropriated dollars, which we don't do for anybody
else.
And the only reason why it is that way that I could figure
out is just it was the first health program the Federal
Government funded that existed before Medicare and Medicaid and
the mandatory programs. And we sort of forgot about it and put
it over to the side. I would love to have the opportunity on
another occasion to talk to you and address this and find out
ways we could work together. But I really appreciate the
proposals that you put forward here.
Let me move quickly now to BARDA and ask you some things
that you may be able--I may be asking for an advance peek at
your full budget. But as I mentioned in my opening remarks, I
think that agency has done an important job. We also have the
Infectious Disease Response Fund, something that the chairwoman
and I worked on together to both establish, and she has really
been fulsome in funding that.
I am just curious about what your plans are in that regard.
Secretary Becerra. Congressman Cole, first, on Indian
Health Services, I will be making a call because I know your
level of interest, your expertise on this subject matter.
Indian Country is fully aware of your expertise and your
support, and we will be discussing with Indian Country this
issue of mandatory funding.
And I appreciate your words because it will take a
bipartisan effort to make sure we move it in the right
direction to finally fulfill our trust responsibilities, our
treaty responsibilities to Indian Country. So I very much look
forward to working with you on that.
On BARDA, I think we are on the same path. We recognize how
important BARDA is to knowing how to get to the next level and
to avoid these types of pandemics, doing the research and the
development that is necessary. And so I will tell you that I
will look forward to sitting with you to discuss that as well
because BARDA is an agency which is pretty small compared to
others, but it does a mighty lift every time it does something
right. So I look forward to working with you on that.
Mr. Cole. Well, very good. I will welcome that call, and
again, I think we can make those efforts bipartisan.
Let me ask you something on the Weldon clause. As you know,
that basically means we don't force providers to provide
services that are against their faith. This is, I know, a
difficult question. It is a tricky question. But I am just
curious, will you commit to the subcommittee particularly not
to reduce the Conscience Division that we have in the Office of
Civil Rights? That is actually where we protect people's
ability to not be forced to render services that they don't
believe in.
Secretary Becerra. Congressman, as you stated yourself,
some of these issues, while we agree on many paths to take on
some of these issues, sometimes there are some disagreements.
On this issue, where I can tell you that we can agree is that
my responsibility is to follow the law, and you all will decide
what that law will look like, whether it is to be
appropriations measures or through legislation that you all
pass. I can guarantee you that at HHS, we will follow the law.
Where it comes to measures and where we will go where we
have some discretion, what I can tell you is we will take input
from all parties as we move forward, trying to make sure that
we move forward at the executive or administrative level to
make sure that we are responding to all concerns. But I can
guarantee you this, Congressman, we will follow the law.
Mr. Cole. Well, I know you will. I draw considerable
comfort from that, and I know this is an area that we will
disagree with. I mean, the chairwoman and I disagree on this
area, but I really want to work to keep those disagreements in
balance to where we could still have a bipartisan outcome and a
bipartisan budget. And that is the danger here, and everybody
around this table on whatever side of the issue knows that it
is.
So I look forward to our continuing discussion on that. But
again, welcome. It is really good to have you in the position,
and I know there are going to be a lot of areas we can
cooperate.
I take great pleasure in looking at your NIH budget, great
pleasure in looking at your CDC budget. In those areas we
agree--at least I agree very much with what you are trying to
accomplish there. I think you have taken some of the hard
lessons of the last year and responded to them very well, and
replenishment of the Strategic Stockpile is another one where I
think you are on the right track.
So, with that, Madam Chair, I yield back and look forward
to the rest of the hearing.
The Chair. Thank you. And with that, let me recognize
Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
And I want to say thank you Congresswoman Roybal-Allard for
allowing Mrs. Watson Coleman to go before her, since the
Congresswoman has a hearing I believe it is at 11:00 a.m.
So, Congresswoman Watson Coleman, you are recognized.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you very much, Madam Chairwoman,
and thank you to my colleague for yielding to me first.
First of all, congratulations, Mr. Secretary. It is good to
see you here. Yours is such an important agency when it comes
to the health and well-being from our infants to our retiring
adults, from the womb to the tomb, and I can't think of a
better person that can head that agency.
One of the important issues for me--well, actually, all of
the issues that have been discussed already are important to
me, but through the lens of equity and the disparities
regarding minorities, particularly black and brown communities
and women, I am very interested in knowing how we are going to
accomplish the narrative that is throughout your budget, as
well as with the President's presentations to us, when it comes
to ensuring that everyone is treated with dignity and respect
and the resources that are needed to ensure that are allocated
appropriately.
So I want to talk a little about maternal and infant
mortality and morbidity because that is a huge issue, and there
is a demonstrated disparity that negatively impacts black women
in particular. My first lady, Tammy Murphy, under her
leadership and her husband's leadership, has really been
engaging actively in this whole issue and has assembled experts
to deal with the issue and to recommend things like dealing
with bias, implicit bias, ensuring there are more providers, et
cetera.
I want to invite you, either virtually or in person, to
have a conversation with her, with me, of course, and with her
team, so that you might know what we are doing and you might
look at it as some best practices. Because I think that this is
important. For me, all of the good intentions in the world are
great, but I am really focusing on accountabilities and what is
actually going to impact the well-being of the people that we
are targeting. So, with regard to that, I wanted to just share
that with you.
The whole issue of mental health. I am telling you, this
budget, it is very encouraging for me. It signals help is here.
Help is more than just a concept. It is here. And I want to
make sure that you have an understanding of what is on my mind.
First of all, I did an emergency task force on black youth
suicide and mental health because we saw that there was an
uptick in that community, and a report resulted in that and
some recommendations. And I need you to take a look at that and
hopefully be able to support us in those recommendations, both
in resources and in practice.
The NIH has been talking to us and we have been talking to
them because we are concerned that there has not been enough
research in the area that impacts minorities in this situation.
There has not been enough stakeholders discussions. There has
not been enough people reviewing grants. And there has not been
enough allocations of grant money to those issues that have
been identified by people who are expert in the areas and have
community relationships.
So I would like very much to know if you had any
discussions with NIH, if you know of anything that they are
doing right now with regard to making sure that there is
greater conversation among the various stakeholders and if we
are going to be able to move forward in ensuring greater
diversity in NIH, in the conversations that take place, and in
the kind of review of grants and areas of grants.
If you might want to comment?
Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman Watson Coleman, first, it
is a pleasure to be here with you and take your questions and
know again your spirit hasn't changed.
So, absolutely. I look forward to working with you on all
these things. I have had conversations with the various
agencies within HHS. I made it very clear. Equity will permeate
everything we do. And when it comes to NIH, whether it is the
data, whether it is the studies and surveys, and whether it is
the participation rates, we want to make sure that it is done
in a way that incorporates everyone. We don't want to leave
anyone out.
And so I welcome your input, your participation. Look
forward to hearing some of the thoughts that you have. We are
putting more than $200,000,000 into this issue of maternal
mortality, and it is especially high for black women and Alaska
Native women as well. And so we are going to make sure that
what we do is put resources behind what we say, and look
forward to working with you.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. May I just say in closing that the
Office of Civil Rights is so vitally important, and that is
where we will look for the accountability. So I do look forward
to subsequent conversations with you specifically, Mr.
Secretary, regarding how are we going to hold the offices
within your Department accountable in ensuring that the civil
rights and the pursuit of equity is actually happening?
And I thank you. I yield back.
And Madam Chair and to the ranking member, thank you very
much for allowing me to ask questions out of turn.
The Chair. Thank you very much. And let me recognize now
Congressman Harris.
Mr. Harris. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And welcome
to the Secretary.
First off, I do want to echo what the ranking member said
about--and I am glad to hear that you are willing to enforce
the law, as written, including the Church amendments, the
Weldon amendment, ones that are, I think, very important
conscience protection for our healthcare. And as a healthcare
provider myself, something that I think is very important, to
enforce those current laws.
Let me just move on to surprise billing. One concern that
is raised, we have passed the No Surprises Act, but there is
concern among some of the stakeholders that stakeholder input
may be bypassed by issuing an interim final rule instead of a
proposed rule giving them time to comment. And so I would like
to know if you could commit that you will give ample
opportunities for stakeholders to participate in the rulemaking
process by assuring that there will be a proposed rule with a
60-day comment period on this?
Secretary Becerra. Congressman Harris, coming from a
background as the attorney general, where it was always
important to take input whenever we would do rulemaking or
whenever we would take any action, whether in court or
otherwise, I can guarantee you that, at HHS, before we take any
action, we will take the comments necessary, hear from all the
stakeholders to make sure that what we are doing is based on
the facts, the science, and the law. And I can guarantee you,
sir, that you will find that we will have gone through a robust
process to get there.
Mr. Harris. Thank you very much.
With regards to health security and the SNS, I am glad to
see that the appropriations, the suggested budget is
$905,000,000 for SNS, which is--and I want to thank the chair
for supporting my amendment 2 years ago to bring it to that
level. But there is an interesting statement in the budget
proposal that implies that it is not just going to be simply
stockpiling expired material, but that is not what the SNS ever
did. It never was just about simply restocking expired
material.
So I take it that we are going to continue to look not only
to restock what needs to be restocked among expired material,
but then, of course, to expand into areas that we think are
forward looking in terms of what we need to do according to the
PHEMCE plans that have been put forward. Is that right?
Secretary Becerra. Congressman, you are right. We are going
to learn from our experiences with COVID and all the rest to
move forward and be prepared.
Mr. Harris. Okay. Yes, and obviously, renewing some of the
stockpile is part of that, but I am sure that was just
inarticulately written in the budget plan.
Now I am just going to spend the last 2 minutes talking
about NIH, and a concern I have, and I want to know what your
vision is for ARPA-H. Because if it is a vision of merely doing
advanced translational research, then NCATS should have done
that. I mean, we already have the ability within NIH to do
that. But that would move NIH further away from basic research,
which I think is the main role of NIH. Because we know that
other corporate entities, other businesses, they may do some of
the non-basic research, but they are not going to do basic
research.
So is ARPA-H, what is your vision for what ARPA-H is going
to be?
Secretary Becerra. Congressman, we are trying to move
beyond just the basic research to be able to have
transformational results. And we have seen the clearest example
is these vaccines for COVID. We have seen how quickly the
private sector, working with the Government sector, can move.
And so we want to be able to continue that basic research that
has made America the place to go to when it comes to these
discoveries, but we want to try to trigger transformation
faster. Because that is what we need to do is be prepared.
So what we have with ARPA-H is an opportunity to combine
the best of what we already have, that basic research that no
one else can compare to, and also then make it click. And so
while ARPA-H is still fully in development, and the concept is
there, what we think we can do is help make things click a lot
faster by putting some additional money into that research and
development that lets us get something from an idea to actually
in practice.
Mr. Harris. Well, Mr. Secretary, that is exactly my point.
That is called translational science. We already have a center
in NIH for that, and pointing specifically to vaccines, what
made it possible with the mRNA vaccines is that we actually
invested in the basic science research at NIH for over a
decade. So, again, if it is just a new translational center, my
feeling is it would just duplicate what we already have.
So I would urge that basic science be an important part of
an ARPA effort at NIH, and I yield back, Madam Chair.
The Chair. I thank the gentleman, and with that, let me
recognize Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard.
Ms. Roybal-Allard. Mr. Secretary, it is so good to see you.
Like other colleagues, I have had the privilege of serving with
you not only in the House, but also in the California State
legislature. And I want to join with comments made by others
that we could not be better served than to have you as our
Secretary of HHS.
I would like to begin by thanking you and President Biden
for including a request for $200,000,000 to fund a maternal
mortality initiative because so much more needs to be done to
address the maternal mortality crisis in this country, in which
the hardest group of folks are black, Latino, American Indian,
and Alaska Native communities. It also includes, as you know,
mothers and babies also experience different outcomes based on
where they live.
There was a plan put together in recognition of the
disparities in maternal health last December by the Surgeon
General, and he issued a call to action to improve maternal
health. And the Department of HHS rolled out the Healthy Women,
Healthy Pregnancy, and Healthy Futures: Action Plan. And the
plan outlines three specific targets to improve the Nation's
maternal health outcomes by 2025.
And they are to reduce the maternal mortality rate by 50
percent, reduce low-risk Cesarean deliveries by 25 percent, and
to achieve blood pressure control in 80 percent of women of
reproductive age with hypertension. Is it your intention as
Secretary of HHS to continue this work that was underway in the
past administration?
Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman Roybal-Allard, thank you
for the question.
That is an easy one, of course. And you know so very well
from knowing me for so many years that we think it is a
priority. I know you think it is a priority. But my wife, if I
were to go home, who is a maternal fetal medicine specialist,
would not let me in the house if I didn't consider these
priorities.
So we are going to work these hard because it is important
that not only are women allowed to live a healthy life after
they have given birth, but that their children are allowed to
grow up and be healthy as well.
Ms. Roybal-Allard. I have another hopefully easy question
here, Mr. Secretary. Since the initial passage in 2008 of my
Newborn Screening Saves Lives Act, it has helped ensure high-
quality diagnosis and lifesaving follow-up interventions for
over 12,000 newborns diagnosed each year with genetic and
endocrine conditions. And as you know, the Newborn Screening
Act codified the Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in
Newborns and Children to help address the vast discrepancies
between the number and quality of State screening tests.
Because of this committee's work, today 49 States and the
District of Columbia screen for at least 31 of the 35 currently
recommended core conditions.
In September 2019, the reauthorization of the newborn
screening law expired, and it is my hope that it will be
reauthorized this Congress. Unfortunately, the previous
administration suspended the activities of the advisory
committee, which is preventing it from completing its work. As
Secretary, you have the authority, which is reinforced in the
2014 newborn screening reauthorization, to deem the advisory
committee a secretarial advisory committee and to continue its
charter.
Given the essential role the advisory committee plays in
our Nation's newborn screening system, will you use this
authority, and when will you extend the term of the committee
until reauthorization occurs?
Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman, I fully understand the
value of that type of work that has to be done, and what I can
tell you is that while a decision hasn't been made, I can get
back to you as quickly as possible on the course of action that
we will take administratively. But without a doubt, I think
what we want to do is move forward, not step backwards.
Ms. Roybal-Allard. Okay. And I look forward to working with
you on this because this committee, advisory committee, is
absolutely essential in doing the work of protecting newborn
babies.
Secretary Becerra. I appreciate and agree.
Ms. Roybal-Allard. I yield back.
The Chair. Congressman Fleischmann. Oh, let me ask
Congresswoman Roybal-Allard, have you concluded?
Ms. Roybal-Allard. I have. Thank you.
The Chair. Okay, thank you. Congressman Fleischmann.
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Secretary, congratulations, sir, on your appointment
and confirmation. I wish you every success in your endeavors.
And again, thank you for your service in the great People's
House prior to this.
I had hoped to actually speak with you personally before
this, and I have got a constituent issue, major, that I would
ask you to call me perhaps after this. But I wanted to delve in
on some very important issues.
There is a crisis at the border, sir, that includes an
unprecedented number of unaccompanied minors. Once these
children are on U.S. soil, we have a responsibility, sir, I
think to treat them with compassion, regardless of their legal
status.
The administration is relocating these children to ORR
facilities across the United States, one of which is actually
located in my hometown of Chattanooga, Tennessee, and it is
projected that HHS will need an additional 3,400 beds by
September to prevent children from waiting in overcrowded
Border Patrol stations.
My first question, sir, is given the surge of unaccompanied
minors and the lack of bed space due to COVID restrictions,
what kind of funding levels do you anticipate are necessary in
order to operate and maintain HHS detention facilities for the
ORR program, sir?
Secretary Becerra. Congressman, thank you for the question.
A very important subject.
Before I get to that, let me just make sure we connect at
some point soon with regard to the issue that you mentioned.
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, sir.
Secretary Becerra. And I apologize that we haven't had an
opportunity to connect earlier.
Mr. Fleischmann. Yes, sir.
Secretary Becerra. On the issue of the unaccompanied
migrant children, we are expanding our capacities as quickly as
we safely can, and that is the operative word is ``safely.'' We
are not going to jeopardize any child. We are not going to do
things in a way that add to the trauma the child has already
experienced.
And it is a challenge because it is unlike adults and
unlike any circumstance we have seen before. We have to do this
right. We are going to make sure that, at HHS, when we have a
responsibility, we do it as we are supposed to under the law.
And our role is health and human services, and that is what
we are going to do is provide health and human services to
these children while they are temporarily in our possession.
And we have continued to expand our bed capacity far beyond the
capacity that existed even 3 months ago, far beyond the
capacity that ever existed under any other administration.
But we still have challenges, and the team is working
really hard. The fact that several thousand of these kids are
in our care, and they continue to be provided the kind of care
that we would want to see for any child is a testament to the
hard work being performed by the men and women at the
Department of Health and Human Services.
And we will try to keep you all informed because you are so
essential. The type of resources we will need, far beyond what
has been provided in the past. Our request is, I believe it was
$3,400,000,000 for this coming fiscal year.
We believe that if we are able to receive your support, the
funding support, that we should be able to address this, again,
as the law requires us to do it at HHS.
Mr. Fleischmann. Yes, sir. Thank you for your response.
What steps has the administration taken to ensure
transparency throughout the HHS contracting process, sir?
Secretary Becerra. We will be reporting obviously to
Congress on that activity. We are trying to make sure that all
of our work is done with licensed facility operators. We are
trying to make sure that when we operate a site that is more of
an emergency site, that we are working with our local partners
to make sure that the contracts are within the framework of
what we have done in the past.
I think what you will find is that you will have eyes into
this. We have to respect, obviously, the privacy of children.
They are minors. So access to facilities where they are, it is
different from access for adults. But what we will make sure is
that we operate in a very transparent manner.
The most important thing we can do is make sure that you
are apprised and the American people are apprised of what we
are doing because, at the end of the day, what we want is for
everyone to see, at HHS, we believe in our mission on health
and human services for these children.
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, sir. And consistent with that,
I would ask that as we have situations like that in
Chattanooga, that the administration be very transparent and
let us know what is going on in our districts, whether we are
in Chattanooga or anywhere in the United States.
I know my time is running short, Mr. Secretary, and I just
wanted to let you know that I plan to submit several questions
for the record addressing CMS designations for EMS transport
services, which is affecting a lot of our rural areas; a 190-
day cap on inpatient psychiatric services, which I think needs
to be extended; COVID relief for assisted living facilities;
and some other areas.
But again, I thank you for your service. I wish you every
success, and I look forward to hearing from you, sir.
Secretary Becerra. Look forward to calling you soon.
Mr. Fleischmann. Yes, sir.
The Chair. Congresswoman Lee.
Ms. Lee of California. Thank you very much. Good morning.
First of all, Mr. Secretary, I have to associate myself
with all of the remarks that have been made and
congratulations. First of all, I think Congresswoman Roybal-
Allard and myself, we have had the privilege to call you
assemblyman, we have had the privilege to call you Mr. Chair,
Mr. Attorney General, and now Mr. Secretary. So it is always
good to see you, and thank you for your leadership.
I have several questions. So I will try to summarize these
questions very quickly because this Department, which you are
heading, is so critical to the survival, and not only survival,
but young people especially thriving in this country. And so
thank you so much for taking this on.
A couple of things. I hope, and we sent a letter to
reestablish the White House Office on National AIDS Policy. You
know I have been working on HIV and AIDS forever, and so I am
glad to see that the budget includes $670,000,000 for funding
the End of the HIV Epidemic. And so I just want to be sure that
the strategies that you employ in collaboration with other
agencies will help us reach that goal of eradicating HIV and
AIDS by 2030.
And so as it relates to HIV and hepatitis in all
populations, all geographic areas, you know that it
disproportionately impacts people of color and people
especially living in the South. So I want to know how you are
going to prioritize efforts to improve health outcomes to help
us achieve that goal.
Secondly, with regard to public health, and I want to
follow up with Congresswoman Bonnie Watson Coleman's line of
questioning as it relates to disparity. You know, I have
legislation with Congresswoman Pressley and Senator Warren to
declare racism as a public health issue. CDC now has embarked
upon including many of the provisions of our bill in their
declaration that racism is a public health issue.
So as you look at disparities and equity, wanted to find
out do you all have a lens of how we also dismantle those
structures and those systems that are institutionalized and
really present racist outcomes that show as it relates to the
disparities that we have to address in many ways through your
agency? So it is not only equity, but it is about disrupting
those institutions that are the barriers to equity.
And then I had the privilege to go Carrizo Springs and to
El Paso with the delegation, and I wanted to follow up on the
questions with regard to the children, and specifically with
regard to those who were in the Customs and Border Patrol. In
El Paso, of course, and everywhere we have been, we are told--
naturally, we know that our Border Patrol employees are there
to patrol the border, not to take care of children. And so they
were asking us for more help, more case managers so they can be
freed up to do their job.
So your overall plans, are we going to make sure that in
the Customs and Border Patrol departments and agency that we
hopefully transition in case managers to help relieve the
burden?
And if we have a second round, I will ask you my other
question. So, so glad to see you.
Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman, always a joy to be able
to chat with you and work with you on all the subjects that you
mention. I am definitely looking forward to that and your
guidance on how we move on some of these issues.
And I think you sensed that we actually have a real chance
to move on some of those first issues you discussed because we
are putting real money behind some of these efforts. So I am
looking forward to working with you on that.
Let me spend a moment on Carrizo Springs and the
unaccompanied minor migrant children. We have to remember that
our mission is separate and apart and different from the
Department of Homeland Security's mission. And in fact, we make
sure that it is clear. Our role is to care for these kids. DHS
and Customs and Border Patrol is in the mission and in the
business of trying to protect the border.
And so, within 72 hours, they are supposed to hand to us
any child that they have so that that child gets the care that
by law is required. That has become a challenge because of the
numbers that have come through. I believe CBP and the
Department of Homeland Security have done a remarkably good job
of making sure that they are handing us a child who is ready
for our care.
But it has to be quicker, and that is where these case
managers become important. But we have to make sure that it is
clear that there are different roles that we play.
And as you know from the laws, we have to make sure that we
don't cross outside of our own lane. And so that is what makes
it difficult at times, but we are trying to break down those
bureaucratic barriers to make sure that our principal interest
is the well-being of that child. And I want to thank Department
of Homeland Security and Custom and Border Patrol officers and
personnel for working with us to try to make that as smooth a
transition as possible.
It is still a work in progress, but again, our interest is
the care of these kids.
Ms. Lee of California. Okay. On second round, I will go
back to the other questions.
Thank you very much. Thank you, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Herrera Beutler.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you. Thank you very much, Madam
Chair.
So I wanted to follow up on some of the unaccompanied minor
questions. What role, if any, do you, Mr. Secretary, have in
facilitating migrant travel, including expenses, once
individuals or families are released into the interior of this
country?
Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman Herrera Beutler, great to
see you again. Important question.
We have authority to provide for transportation resources
to make sure that these children are united, once we have
identified a responsible sponsor, to make sure that the
reuniting occurs as quickly as possible. So what we try to do
is reserve our resources for the actual care, but we don't want
to continue to see a child languish in our care if there is a
responsible sponsor. So sometimes it is actually more efficient
and cost effective to try to help make that transportation work
so that the child is united as quickly as possible.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. On that piece, are you aware that the
FBI vetting of sponsors for these kids has ceased in many cases
as a result of the overwhelming caseload? Which I know your
concern is these kids' care, as is mine. That is why I am
asking this. And I have heard reports of kids being told--say
you have family in New Jersey, they get sent to New Jersey, and
then a trafficker there says you get to work off the cost of
your fee. I mean, this makes me sick.
So to hear that the FBI vetting is not actually always
taking place means we could be helping traffic children. Am I
way off here?
Secretary Becerra. You have raised a really important,
legitimate concern. But this is one of the--I am glad you
mentioned this and asked the question because this is one of
the issues that takes the time in trying to transfer this child
into responsible sponsor hands. We have to make sure that that
sponsor truly is responsible.
There have been cases in the past, none of that I am aware
of in the time that I have been Secretary, but there have been
cases in the past where a child has ended up in the hands of
someone who has either trafficked them for sex or for labor.
And so what takes a while, and it is unfortunate because we
would like to place these kids in responsible hands as quickly
as possible.
We have to verify, and we will do everything we can. We are
working with all the agencies to help us do those background
checks and verification. We will not let go of a child unless
we have confirmation for our purposes under the law that we can
let go of this child to responsible sponsors.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. Can I ask does HHS confirm whether
these kiddos are COVID negative before they are put on planes
to travel across the country?
Secretary Becerra. All these children are tested so we know
what their status is on COVID-19. Now, remember, sometimes it
can take up to 2 weeks before a diagnosis actually--I mean, a
test can tell you whether or not it is accurate. But what we
have always done is made sure that we test these children as
quickly as we can once they are in our care.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you for that.
Obviously, there are more questions there, but I wanted to
transition a little bit and say thank you for your investment
and leadership on both the maternal mortality issue, which I
know my colleague Lucille Roybal-Allard mentioned, but also on
the opioids and the mental health piece. Obviously, the
pandemic had a large impact on mental health, and it has
increased the use of drugs and alcohol, especially opioids.
And in my home district, the rate of drug overdose deaths
in Cowlitz County has increased by 43 percent in the first half
of 2020. And for all of Washington State, there was a 38
percent increase in drug overdose deaths in the first half of
this year--or last year.
So a synthetic opioid, fentanyl, played a very significant
role in that statewide increase, and I just wanted to see how
HHS is going to target--because you specifically focus on
supporting populations with unique needs, people in rural
areas, underserved, I wanted to see how you plan to target
that.
Secretary Becerra. Thank you for the question.
I think we all agree that we have to really jump on this
issue of the opioid addiction and, actually, substance misuse
and the addiction that comes from it because we have seen how
COVID has stressed everyone and actually made these
circumstances even more difficult. And so we are making a major
investment in addressing opioid and other substance use issues,
and what I can tell you is this. We want to make sure we are
targeting.
I know from my work as a State AG that we are on the verge
of reaching major settlements with a number of these opioid
manufacturers to get monies for abatement purposes. We want to
make sure at HHS that we are working with the State and local--
our local partners to make sure that we combine our monies with
their monies to make it most effective. We are going to try to
work with them the way they see fit to try to use their
resources. Then what we are going to do is make sure we are
concentrating on getting the kind of treatment that helps
someone move off of these very addictive drugs.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you for that, Mr. Secretary.
Madam Chair, I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Pocan.
Mr. Pocan. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Hello, Mr. Secretary. It is good to hear that. I remember
the day you got the offer from the governor to become attorney
general. I was sad to see you leave, but very glad you are back
in Federal Government in a much more significant role. So,
thank you.
First of all, I just want to say you guys did an amazing
job investing in people in this budget, the best CDC budget in
20 years, investing in HIV and opioids, refugee resettlement,
NIH research, on and on and on. Thank you for doing that.
I have 4 things that I am going to--because you know how it
goes in 5 minutes. I am going to ask my four questions and let
you answer them as you know best.
So, first of all, fetal tissue research banning. The last
administration put a ban in place. This is something that is
very important in my district, where we do a lot of research,
the University of Wisconsin-Madison. I would be curious about
the removal of the Federal restrictions imposed by the last
administration on fetal tissue research.
Second, also the last administration had discrimination,
they allowed for discrimination with agencies' contracting. I
would love to know if there is any plans for notification of
non-enforcement and any new rulemaking to provide for
nondiscrimination in HHS programs?
Third area--I got four of these. I am going to go as fast
as I can, Mr. Secretary. An issue around opioid and preventing
opioid abuse. The former HHS a while back had proposed putting
a plant that has helped an awful lot of people get off of
opioids--it is called kratom--as a Schedule I. In the last
administration, actually, the Assistant Secretary did the right
thing. Admiral Giroir sent a letter to the DEA rescinding their
view that it should be a Schedule I drug because recently
within appropriations, we got money for research, and the
research is coming through really well. It is helping people
not just with opioids, but we have a very close family friend
who uses it for another autoimmune disease.
Would love to know that we are going to continue to do
research and not try to push this into Schedule I. Love to know
if you can continue that commitment.
And then, finally, just curious on the Office of Refugee
Resettlement, specifically on refugees coming in. I hear from a
number of agencies that have had people that they were going to
help relocate in my district, and I know the President was
going to have an executive order to help improve the numbers
coming in. And because that has not been signed yet, I am
curious what is the status on that because I have one agency
very aggressively asking me in my district about this issue,
and I would love to be able to get back to them.
Again, I am so glad you are Secretary, Secretary Becerra,
and I look forward to working with you during this
administration.
Secretary Becerra. Congressman Pocan, it is great to see
you again, and as usual, I am not going to have enough time to
get to everything that you are championing. So let me try to do
this. We will try to make sure we respond where I don't get to
it.
But let me on the fetal tissue research ban, we will be
making an announcement, NIH will be making an announcement, I
believe tomorrow. And so you want to keep your ears open for
that. But we believe that we have to do the research that it
takes to make sure that we are incorporating innovation and
getting all of those types of treatments and therapies out
there to the American people.
On the whole issue of nondiscrimination, as you know,
Congressman, from the work we did together, I am all about
making sure we treat everyone fairly. And any time that we see
signs of discrimination, we want to take action. And so we want
to make sure that we are enforcing nondiscrimination laws, and
I can commit to you that, as Secretary of HHS, I am going to be
on that. On that, for sure.
Opioids, I will have to get back to you on where we are on
that issue. Let me put it to you this way. When you have got a
President who is willing to commit over $10,000,000,000 in his
fiscal budget to start tackling opioids, you know he is
serious. And so we are not going to do anything that undermines
our ability to really go after the scourge of opioids and what
gets people caught up in this addiction.
ORR, if you could frame again what the question was? I have
already forgotten it.
Mr. Pocan. Just the President was going to do an executive
order so we could have a larger number of folks, refugees,
coming in. We had people in my district agencies ready, and
then people sell all their goods ready to come here, and now we
are in a holding area.
Secretary Becerra. Briefly, I can tell you that the plan is
to increase the number of refugees we accept in this country to
a number we haven't seen in number of years. And all of that
will depend on what you all do to help us have the resources to
be able to accommodate some of these folks who are fleeing from
death, persecution, and violence.
And so we look forward to working with you on that one.
Mr. Pocan. Great. You did it. You are impressive, Mr.
Secretary.
I yield back, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Congressman Moolenaar. Congressman Moolenaar.
Mr. Moolenaar. Can't hear you. Oh, okay. That should be
good.
Well, good morning, Secretary Becerra, and congratulations.
And welcome back in your new role, and I just wanted to
highlight something.
Recently, along with my colleagues in the Michigan
delegation, we sent a bipartisan letter to President Biden
requesting a surge in vaccine allocation to our State that is
estimated to prevent 10,000 hospitalizations and save 1,200
lives. I believe you may have also received a request from
Governor Whitmer on this.
And so far, as far as we can tell, that has not been
granted. We do appreciate your efforts to send more
therapeutics and boots on the ground. But I am wondering if you
would consider a modification in the strategy and grant this
vaccine request, given Michigan's situation right now?
Secretary Becerra. Congressman Moolenaar, thank you for the
question.
And let me give you a sense, given the work that the
administration has done--and I mean, I am even impressed at
what President Biden has accomplished when it comes to the
vaccine. When you can vaccinate more than 3 million Americans,
as we go forward, I mean, most of us were wondering how many
people we could get vaccinated in a day. But had someone said
to you we could get 3 million Americans vaccinated in one day,
I wouldn't have believed it.
We hit 4 million, I think, over the weekend. And so it is
impressive. The President has also made sure we have the supply
we need to get shots in arms to 300 million Americans,
essentially the adult population, by I think now pretty much
every State is offering vaccination administration to every
adult, not just those that were a particular age. And so we are
moving in that direction.
How we can address those States or those regions where
there is a disturbing increase, that is something we can take a
look at. We can work with you. What we have to make sure is
that we don't get off the plan in making sure the vaccine is
available everywhere where it is needed.
As you can imagine, if we start to focus only in certain
particular regions, we will start to have that disparate
treatment of other regions. And so what we want to do is work
with everyone to make them available. We work with the States
and local governments to make sure that they handle some of
that administration.
We do have some sites that are federally operated to make
sure we are reaching everyone. But we are always open to
conversation about how to do this best and fast and making sure
we incorporate all Americans. And so what I can say to you is
we would be willing to chat with you more about this to make
sure that as we move forward, every American will have access
to that vaccine.
Mr. Moolenaar. Well, thank you. And we look forward to
working with you on this. I was concerned. I think the CDC had
come out and said maybe Michigan should shut down again, and I
just don't think that was a real viable option. But I do think
increasing vaccines, increasing the therapeutics would be
helpful. But appreciate your willingness to work with us on
this.
Also, just my district is predominantly rural, and one of
the things during this COVID pandemic is we have seen the
importance of telemedicine and the value in that. And I am
wondering if, as Secretary, if you will be able to continue to
allow flexibility and incorporation of telemedicine so that we
can continue to grow that. Obviously, rural broadband is a huge
issue in some of the rural areas, but I think some of the roles
that you are going to be involved in in advancing telemedicine
could be really critical in helping our rural communities.
Secretary Becerra. Congressman, because you have touched on
a really important point, I hope that you will be in touch on
that matter. Because what we have learned from--especially from
COVID is that telehealth has been a godsend. It has helped so
many Americans have access to the kind of care that for them is
difficult under normal circumstances, nearly impossible under
COVID.
And so we are going to try to apply all those good lessons
moving forward beyond the pandemic on how we deal with
telemedicine. And so you probably have some good thoughts. You
probably have a lot of constituents who are stakeholders who
have a lot of good ideas. We hope that you will reach out and
provide some of that because, as we move forward, we want to
make sure that we remove every barrier that we can from
Americans accessing the kind of quality healthcare that they
are entitled to.
Mr. Moolenaar. Well, thank you. And just in closing, thank
you again for being here.
I would also like to add my voice to those who have
expressed concern about repealing the Hyde Amendment. I do
think this is something where when I consider how children are
affected by abortion and including children of color, I think
this is very much the wrong direction and hoping that we can
work towards a bipartisan effort on this.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Clark.
Ms. Clark. Oh, thank you, Madam Chair.
And it is such a delight to have you, Secretary Becerra,
and I associate myself with all the comments about how excited
we are for your leadership and the incredible work that we can
do together on behalf of the American people.
And on a personal level, you were the first Member of
Congress after I won my special election to invite me to
Washington. So I am delighted to be here for your first
appropriations hearing and just, really, welcome back. And we
are so excited to have you.
One of the issues that is so pressing for American people
and especially for American women is the childcare crisis. We
know that one out of four women have left the workforce since
the pandemic specifically because they are not able to find
care for their children.
So as we look at a study from HHS in 2016 that said if we
tripled the childcare development block grant from 2016
numbers, which would be $8,000,000,000, we could bring 652,000
women back into the workforce. Can you elaborate on how you see
this connection, especially for low-income women, and how you
view childcare as economic infrastructure?
Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman Clark, first, forgive me
if I am smiling so much, but I feel like I am attending a
family reunion and----
[Laughter.]
Ms. Clark. We do, too.
Secretary Becerra [continuing]. It is nice to see so many
familiar faces. I know how hard you all work, and even as I
think Congressman Cole had mentioned, sometimes we are not
going to agree. But there is a relationship you develop with
colleagues, and I so much appreciate the chance to be back and
to work with you. And even on those couple issues where we
don't necessarily agree from the beginning.
On the issue of childcare, the President is making a major
investment in childcare, including that block grant for
childcare, more than $7,000,000,000. He understands not only
how important it is to care for kids. Look at the work he has
done addressing migrant children at the border. Clearly, the
work we are doing for kids here in America, he is on it.
And what I will tell you is this. We are going to make sure
that money is well used. We are going to work with you to
partner and make sure that we have--we are doing everything we
can to deal with the care that a child needs. Because at the
end of the day, you hit on it. If we don't do this, the
economic vitality of our country will never reach its pinnacle
because so many women will be left with the inability to really
just blossom within their careers.
So not just for the kids, but for all those talented
Americans who would be out there productively working, we have
got to make sure childcare is taken care of.
Ms. Clark. Thank you. And you mentioned the incredible
investment that the administration has already helped us make
through the American Rescue Plan. Can you tell us a little bit
about how that distribution is going of that funding?
Are there areas where we can be helpful in helping, making
sure that funding gets to childcare providers efficiently? And
are you concerned about the need for more discretionary CCDBG
funding to offset a potential cliff after States exhaust that
stabilization funding?
Secretary Becerra. Yes, those cliff issues are always
difficult, and that is where we are going to really need to
partner with you to make sure we don't find families reaching
that cliff. So I look forward to working with Congress to make
sure that we continue to have some predictability, the
certainty that families need on how they can budget forward and
protect their children and be out there working.
In terms of how the resources are being distributed, once
again, we will need your help to make sure that we are doing
this right. We are going to do a lot of oversight and
accountability. But some of this money will go out based on
formulas that determine where the kids are and how it goes out.
Others will be based on grant funding, where applications are
put in by different stakeholders who apply to provide services.
But at the end of the day, and this is where I put on for a
second my hat as a former attorney general, we expect
accountability. We are going to bird dog this because it is so
essential that we provide the oversight to make sure that those
dollars reach the child.
And so we will look forward to working with you in a
partnership because I know you want to make sure that the
monies you will allocate to us are well spent, and we all want
to make sure that whether it is the child or the parent, that
we have allowed them to be as prosperous and productive as
possible.
Ms. Clark. Thank you so much, and I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Cline.
Mr. Cline. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for appearing today.
I wanted to circle back to the crisis at the border and in
particular regarding the Unaccompanied Children Program under
HHS supervision. You talked about accountability, and I think
that this administration is abdicating its responsibility when
it comes to not only making sure that our border is secure, but
caring adequately for those who are coming across.
Because of the rhetoric on immigration policies, we have
seen spikes in illegal border crossings. Record numbers coming
as a direct result of the changes in policies of this
administration. So we have high numbers of children being
placed in the Unaccompanied Children Program, a startling
number of whom have tested positive for COVID-19 after being
transferred out of border stations, sparking concerns of our
cramped and overcrowded facilities that may allow the virus to
spread.
You have several facilities that are being operated, some
of which are being--are in nonprofits. Other temporary
accommodations. But for example, from March 1 to March 30,
there was a total of 647 COVID-19 cases in 40 out of 50 Texas
HHSC Office of Refugee Resettlement operations. These are self-
reported positive COVID-19 cases in migrant children in care.
At the Carrizo Springs, Texas, facility for migrant
children, 10 to 11 percent of kids tested positive for COVID-
19. There were 766 unaccompanied migrant minors stationed at
the site, which had 952 beds at the time. I think what we are
seeing is a failure by this administration and a failure by
your agency to adequately care for these children and to
prevent them from contracting COVID-19 and passing it on once
they are released into the interior of this country.
So I would like to hear from you what this administration
is planning to do to ensure that people coming across this
border, whether legally or illegally, do not have the
coronavirus, and they are stopped at the border before they are
entering this country illegally if they do to prevent Americans
from contracting this deadly virus.
Secretary Becerra. Congressman Cline, thank you for the
question, and the spirit in which you asked the question, I
appreciate that.
I think, actually, I have heard from everyone the same
thing. We all have the interest of these children at heart, and
regardless of what their ultimate outcome is, whether they end
up being sent back home or they are able to qualify to stay
here, the concern that we have at HHS is that while they are in
our care, we do it right. We do it under the law, and we
provide that health and human service that they expect.
So let me respond to some of the points that you make
because it is important that we make sure when it comes to
COVID that whether these kids or certainly anyone within the
American family, that we are doing all to protect them.
First, the reason you can cite those different numbers is
because HHS is being transparent. We are not trying to hide
anything. We want folks to know what we are doing, how we are
doing it, and we want you to see it because it is important. We
are not interested in hiding anything about the care for these
kids. It is important for us that people see it. Because when
you hide things, you are not doing it by law, and we are going
to do everything by law.
When it comes to COVID testing, as I mentioned previously,
we test every one of these children. We do not release any
child that has been tested--certainly we do not release a child
who is COVID positive out into the community. We also provide
care for kids who are COVID positive.
We make sure that we don't have them comingling with kids
who have tested negative, which, again, of course, is an
additional responsibility and burden for us because it means
less space. By the way, I should add here we are able to place
fewer kids in licensed facilities today because of COVID. We
have had to provide for the adequate spacing for children, and
so the type of facilities that would have been available before
to deal with the unaccompanied migrant children no longer
available to those capacities.
We are having to deal with fewer licensed beds, but more
kids. And so you can see how it has become a challenge. But we
are doing it, and we are doing it safely, protecting these kids
and protecting the American public. And at the end of the day,
our job is to protect and to offer care and to do it according
to the law.
Mr. Cline. Mr. Secretary, I only have a couple of seconds
left. I just wanted to close, shift over to the issue of fetal
tissue research. I hope you are going to continue the Trump
administration policy, and that is going to be your
announcement tomorrow.
And then just one last question, Madam Chair, if I might?
Do you consider the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision to be settled
law?
Secretary Becerra. Congressman, I believe that Roe v. Wade
has given women the opportunity to exercise their rights under
the Constitution and our laws to provide for their health, and
I hope that we continue to see that Roe v. Wade was a
compromise on how we can make sure that women, their rights are
not violated when it comes to how they get their healthcare.
Mr. Cline. But you would agree that it is settled law?
Secretary Becerra. I have no question that Roe v. Wade is
an important legal precedent that we must abide by that makes
sure that women have access to the healthcare that they need
and that they get to make the decisions on that healthcare.
Mr. Cline. Because the reason I ask is because the Hyde
Amendment was passed only 3 years later. So that should be
considered settled law as well.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Congresswoman Frankel.
Ms. Frankel. Hello. Okay, let me see if I see myself. Okay,
here we go.
Hello, Mr. Secretary. It is so nice to see you.
Congratulations.
I would like to just start with a couple of comments and
then get to my questions. Just following up on Congresswoman
Clark's discussion on daycare, the daycare industry is in
crisis, and even before the pandemic, costs were too high for
parents, and the pay was too low for workers. And now, with
this pandemic, getting parents back to work, especially the
women of this country, which have been--women workers have been
hit very hard, just keeping in mind that parents cannot get
back to work if they don't have safe, nurturing places for
their children.
And so it is so important that we consider childcare not
only as advancing our children, but advancing jobs.
As to the Hyde Amendment, to me, the Hyde Amendment is the
ultimate form of discrimination against low-income women. I
won't say anything more about that other than that. And as to
Title X, thank you to the Biden administration for the new rule
reversing Trump's what I call a suffocating gag rule that put
so many women at risk, risk at not getting--many, over a
million, million and a half couldn't even get basic primary
care and putting women at risk for abortions in unsafe
conditions, death related to pregnancy, and increased STDs. Not
even being able to get a mammogram.
Now to my question. The Affordable Care Act's birth control
mandate ensures that women will have coverage for at least one
of each type of birth control method approved by the FDA by
requiring employer-sponsored plans to cover birth control
without a copay. In May of 2017, President Trump issued an
executive order which set the stage for expanding the use of
religion to discriminate against people seeking reproductive
care, and this allowed employers to deny birth control coverage
to their employees by claiming in some instances vague
religious or moral objections to certain methods of birth
control. And I agree with those, and I will say the majority of
people in this country, that the type of birth control that a
woman uses should be her decision, not her employer's.
Question. Will the Obama era rules that allow exceptions
only for the houses of worship but still ensures women, that
these employees could access contraception through their
insurance company or a third-party administration be restored,
and can you explain the reasoning?
Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman Frankel, great to be here
with you, and thank you for always having that spirit and fire.
But you are not going to like my answer here because I am
recused from responding to questions on this subject because of
my previous role as the attorney general in California, where I
was involved in litigation on this very subject. So while I
have a team at HHS who is working on these matters, I have to
keep myself distanced from them because I had a role that was
very obvious where I was as the attorney general for California
on this matter.
Forgive me.
Ms. Frankel. Well, at least I thank you for being on the
correct side of this issue, and just wish your folks the best
in reversing this order.
So let me get on to another subject quickly. Every day in
the United States, 10,000 people turn 65, and the number of
older adults are going to more than double over the next
several decades. That is a lot.
I read an article that said 70 percent of 65-year-olds will
need some long-term support before they die, but they really
have not done any planning. They think their kids are going to
take care of them, or their grandchildren, which who knows if
that is true. But if it is, it is going to take lots of people
out of the workplace.
So question is I see that there is a big request for home
and community-based services to help older adults and
individuals. Could you just tell us how this funding is going
to be used and the Biden administration concept?
Secretary Becerra. Absolutely. For those of us who are baby
boomers, we see the value in having our Government believe that
we have to continue that--or have that continuity of care. We
are going to try to make sure--this President and this
administration are making major investments to try to make sure
that caregivers of some of our family members are able to stay
where they are and make a living as well.
And so whether it is providing $550,000,000 for home and
community-based services, which is, by the way, an increase of
about $158,000,000 over the previous fiscal year. We are making
sure that we make those types of opportunities available to
families. We want to make sure that older Americans continue to
receive access to the nutrition that they have come to rely on
when it is hard for them to afford it, and so we make
additional investments in some of those nutrition programs for
our seniors.
And we continue to make every effort to try to make sure
that everyone who is under the age of 65 and doesn't yet
qualify for Medicare can qualify to have access to healthcare,
whether it is through the Affordable Care Act's exchanges or
perhaps through some of the proposals that the President is
gearing up that would help a lot of our older Americans who are
not yet Medicare eligible have access to the kind of care that
they need.
I could go into more details, but you and I know that the
importance of Meals on Wheels for so many seniors, but it is
also making sure that those caregivers that some of our older
Americans rely on are actually able to do the work and afford
to keep that as a living.
Ms. Frankel. Thank you.
Thank you. I yield back, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Bustos.
Mrs. Bustos. Mr. Secretary--yes. Yes, I am on.
The Chair. Yes, Congresswoman Bustos.
Mrs. Bustos. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And Mr. Secretary, it is so great to see you. I will echo
the kind words of my colleagues and just how excited we are
that you are serving in the Biden Cabinet. You are going to do
remarkably well. We know that.
Mr. Secretary, I would like to cover the Centers for
Disease Control social determinants of health program, and I
also want to throw out my thanks to Chairwoman DeLauro and also
to Ranking Member Cole. With them, we have been able to stand
up a $3,000,000 program that is based on legislation that we
wrote out of my office called the Social Determinants
Accelerator Act.
And so the program provides grants to State and local
governments to develop plans to combat social determinants of
health like food deserts that we see in a congressional
district like mine, long drive times to doctors that you see in
very rural congressional districts. And they are negatively
impacting health outcomes for people.
I cannot tell you the level of excitement that I feel when
President Biden announces a $153,000,000 request for the
program this fiscal year. So, Mr. Secretary, a few questions.
First of all, as part of last year's funding bill, we
directed Health and Human Services to create a social
determinants interagency council that would be made up of
representatives from Health and Human Services, Education,
Labor, and many others to help communities applying for these
grants. If you could, do you know the status of the council as
it stands right now?
Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman, great to be with you, and
believe it or not, I don't. And I am going to admit that I
don't, but I will check with my team because as I said to
everyone beforehand, we are going to be on this one. And so I
will get back to you quickly on that.
Mrs. Bustos. Okay. Okay, we will wait to hear back from
you, and it makes me feel good that you are committed to making
sure that that gets up and running, if it hasn't already. But I
don't know the status either. And because it is a bill that we
wrote out of our office, very, very interested in knowing that.
Secretary Becerra. Congresswoman, you had me at hello on
that one. [Laughter.]
Mrs. Bustos. Okay. All right. Look forward to talking with
you more about it.
So when local communities, if you know the answer to this,
if you know when local communities would be able to apply for
the $3,000,000 worth of social determinants grants? I can tell
you this. We have heard from many of our communities in the
congressional district that I serve in central and western and
northern Illinois about their interest in being able to apply
for grants. Anything you can maybe let us know about that?
Secretary Becerra. Yes, you are really getting granular on
me, and as much as I did a lot of homework to prepare, I can't
give you the answer on that, Congresswoman. But I can do this.
I can make sure my team is taking notes and we get back to you
as quickly as we can. Because although we have got a budget--we
are talking over $130,000,000,000, $3,000,000 for a lot of
communities is going to make a big difference. So we will get
back to you on that.
Mrs. Bustos. Absolutely. Okay. So let us then shift to kind
of a bigger picture part of social determinants. With President
Biden's announcement of $153,000,000 that he is requesting in
his initial budget, how that would have the possibilities of
assisting so many communities around the country. I am guessing
you have been involved in those discussions with President
Biden. Can you talk a little bit about how you envision that
work? What are the next steps?
What would you like to see happen with this $153,000,000?
You probably even know how the $153,000,000 number came to be.
But if you can talk a little bit about that from a bigger
picture perspective?
Secretary Becerra. And thank you for that.
Let me give you a sense of how I hope to approach this.
One, can't use a cookie-cutter. What works in one community may
not work in another.
Two, you have got to look at every corner because we often
miss those corners where communities are trapped. And if you
miss them, then you have really not dealt with the whole issue
of healthcare and making sure that you are dealing with social
determinants of health. So make sure you turned over every
stone.
Three, we are not going to know how to best do this from
Washington, D.C. And so that means partnering with the local
communities to ask them. Looking to the people who are
respected and are the leaders in the community to help guide us
on how we are going to do this work. Because they are going to
know where we are lapsing, we are not doing as well as we
should when it comes to addressing the social and healthcare
needs of communities that have been left behind.
And so working closely with partners at the local level,
turning to respected leaders, making sure we don't assume that
the communities in that corner of the region were hit, were
already addressed, and making sure that we are doing this in a
way that we partner with everyone who understand this, who are
the experts. We should be able to come up with a good way to
address this.
And at the end of the day, as I said earlier to some other
questions, to me, accountability is so important. I want to
show that we delivered on our dollars, and I want to make sure
that if someone gets that money, that they delivered on that
dollar as well. The taxpayers deserve that.
Mrs. Bustos. Well, again, Mr. Secretary, thank you so much
for your commitment to this. I look very much forward to
working with you, and I know you have gotten many invitations
already but would love for you to come to our congressional
district and see some of the struggles that so many families
and individuals are going through as it pertains to access to
healthcare and just some of the struggles.
But thank you. Wonderful to see you.
Madam Chair, I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Harder.
Mr. Harder. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And thank you, Secretary Becerra, for coming before the
committee. Given your deep knowledge of the State of
California, I am really looking forward to working with you to
make sure that all the Federal dollars we are talking about
today come to areas of the State like my district in the
Central Valley that are sometimes overlooked by Federal budgets
like this one.
Specifically, I think that COVID has exposed some of the
cracks that have existed for a long time in our healthcare
system. One of those is the providers, especially in rural
areas like the Central Valley, when we had zero percent ICU bed
capacity for many months in many parts of our State, it wasn't
because we didn't have the physical bed capacity. It was
because we didn't have the doctors, the nurses, the healthcare
workers that were necessary to get people the care that they
desperately needed.
The American Rescue Plan that we passed a couple weeks ago
had funding for 100,000 new public health workers, and I was
hoping that you could give us an update on the hiring of those
workers, the implementation timeline for putting those folks to
work, and how you see that really supercharging some of the
capacity needs that we have across our country.
Secretary Becerra. Congressman Harder, great to see you on
this committee and doing some great work.
When the President sought to get those 100,000 public
health workers out there, it was principally to make sure that
on COVID, we were on it, and we wouldn't have a shortage of
personnel to keep us from getting Americans the access to the
testing and certainly now to the vaccines. And so, principally,
right now the effort is to make sure that no community doesn't
get the service they need when it comes to dealing with the
pandemic because they have a shortage of personnel.
And so how those 100,000 public health workers will be
distributed will be based on the needs in those various
communities. And we can discuss that with you as well. I know
your district so well, as you know, and you are absolutely
right. And there are other aspects to the American Rescue Plan
that are going to help places like your district because
whether it is the increased number of residency slots that are
going to be available now to provide those newest doctors out
there providing services, healthcare services through the
training they are getting.
Or in the case of your area, having UC Merced, which is a
new university that is going to be able to provide access to a
lot of different services to a lot of folks, and maybe in the
future have a medical school and those kind of things.
Those are the kinds of investments that we can make that I
think at the Federal level we can partner with you and the
local leaders there to make sure that we are servicing and not
forgetting folks who live in the Central Valley of California.
Mr. Harder. Absolutely. On the healthcare workers
specifically, there was a note from the administration that
there was a desire to make at least some of these workers a
permanent improvement on the capacity of our public health
system across the country. I didn't see a lot on that in the
sort of blueprint of the budget. Is that something that you
anticipate fleshing out, and can you give us any detail on how
you would anticipate funding those public health workers going
forward?
Secretary Becerra. No question that many of these workers
could easily become permanent and help many of our communities.
I know a lot of areas in rural America would be desperate to
have some of these folks become permanent workers in their
areas.
We quite honestly will have to partner with you because we
would have to figure out a way to make sure that, working with
our local leaders, we can make those positions permanent. And
that takes money, and that takes Congress, and that takes the
support and partnership of our leaders, State and local leaders
to make that happen.
Mr. Harder. Absolutely. One of the other challenges, moving
beyond just the public health worker, we focused a lot on
nurses and doctors. As you know and mentioned, the Central
Valley has half the doctors per capita that the rest of the
country has. I have been working a long time on trying to
expand the Public Service Loan Forgiveness Program to include
California and Texas. It doesn't today.
I know this is primarily a Department of Education issue,
but it really does affect your agency and making sure that we
have healthcare available to everybody across the country,
would love your support to try to include California and Texas
at long last into this program, which would lead to 10,000
physicians coming just to our State in areas of need.
But more broadly, is there anything else that we could be
doing to accelerate some of the programs necessary to get
physicians and nurses in areas like the Valley?
Secretary Becerra. Congressman, if that is an open
invitation for some suggestions, I think the most important
thing is to make sure the local stakeholders don't wait until
they hear that there is going to be money to let us know. Plant
the seed now because I don't think most people believed that
the American Rescue Plan would have been out there and been
able to do so much good so quickly.
And so plant the seed now with HHS. Let us know where there
is a need, and we will try to work with those local communities
to make sure that when we are ready to launch, we don't forget
places like the Central Valley.
Mr. Harder. Absolutely. Looking forward to working with
you, and thanks so much for your leadership.
Back to you, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Lawrence.
Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you so much. I join my colleagues in
being so excited to see your leadership.
I have a couple questions for you. I am so appreciative of
the skinny budget and all that President Biden has done.
President Biden has stated that we have a gun violence epidemic
in this country, and we must address it. We are going through
this very troubling time in dealing with violence from police,
seeing so often that it is mental health that is needed, but
the only response we have is a police officer pulling up and
discharging a weapon.
Can you please let me know how the Department will use
increased funding to promote partnerships between mental health
providers and law enforcement? We know that there are so many
people who are in prisons right now who, instead of needing to
be incarcerated, need mental health. And your Department is
going to be very, very important in that role.
And the other issue I would like for you to address,
everyone has talked to you about the need for mental health.
And as our children are being confronted with such a different
reality that generations of children have never experienced,
the number of suicide rates and everything has increased. So we
must infuse in education a mental health component, and it is
not optional, in my view, at this time. And I feel that you can
be a leader in this and also provide it.
My last point is everyone has talked to you about mental
health. What are we doing to incentivize children or young
people going into college to get degreed in mental health?
Everywhere I go, they tell me there is a shortage of mental
health professionals, and you can't just throw up a shingle and
provide mental health. It must be through education.
So those are my three issues, and I just want to tell you
how excited I am for you to be in that role, and I look forward
to working with you.
[Pause.]
Mrs. Lawrence. Are you there, Mr. Secretary?
Secretary Becerra. There we go. Yes, how about now? I was
just saying, Congresswoman, great to see you again, and thank
you for the fight that you have always made on some of these
issues. Let me try to respond quickly to them.
Gun violence. We all know, what is it, about 40,000
Americans die from firearm injuries as the result of our lack
of action on this every year. It is the third-leading cause of
death for Americans age 10 to 24, the third-leading cause of
death.
And so President Biden has made it very clear. This is a
public health crisis, and we have to address it. That is why he
has made sure that we are in our budget providing $100,000,000
to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to start a
new community-based violence intervention initiative that will
work at the local level with stakeholders who want to deal with
this gun violence crisis.
We know that we need to do more with regard to domestic and
gender-based violence. That is why he is making a major
investment, close to $500,000,000, within our Administration
for Children and Families to support and protect domestic
violence survivors. We know that 1 in 4 women and, by the way,
about 1 in 10 men have experienced contact sexual violence,
physical violence, or stalking at some point.
And so we are making real commitments because it is one
thing to talk it. It is another thing to walk it. And I think
the President made very clear we want to try to address these
things.
When it comes to mental health, Congresswoman, as you know,
this is one of those areas where we have never, none of us have
ever fully come through to match our words. And I think
President Biden has made a major commitment here to start to
fund the services that we need to deal with mental health
conditions that a lot of Americans are suffering from,
especially during this time of pandemic.
And so I think you are going to find that this budget is
more than just numbers. It is a statement on values by the
President of the United States.
Mrs. Lawrence. Do you have any plan on how we are going to
get more mental health professionals so that we can meet the
need that we know is going unaddressed right now?
Secretary Becerra. I know that a lot of those current
mental health professionals would say a more commensurate
salary so that you can attract professionals into that work,
and unfortunately, because we have lagged behind in treating
mental health the way we treat physical and other customary
health issues, we haven't seen the kind of investment that we
would like. And so, hopefully, we can make that happen.
Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you.
The Chair. Thank you.
We are coming to noon, Mr. Secretary, and I want to alert
my colleagues that we really don't have time. We would all love
to have a second round, but which we will be unable to do.
But I just want to make a comment before I yield to the
ranking member for any comments or question or closing before I
close. But what an incredible discussion today, and that is
testament to your commitment, your expertise, and your approach
to dealing with difficult issues, the difficult issues we are
facing today.
I would also just say that we thank you for your clarity
and also for your candor. If you can't answer a question, you
can't. If you disagree on something or maybe potentially
disagreeing is to lay that out. But it really has been really
so forthright, Mr. Secretary, and the way in which hearings
should go forth in this effort.
And I also want to say at the same time to my colleagues on
both sides of the aisle, I thank you for your--the expertise
that you bring and the questions that you bring for what has
been just an extraordinary exchange and done in a manner that
befits the really very significant challenges that we face
today and that we need to be wherever we are coming from or
whatever our own disposition or interests that we can come
together.
I found in a book that I wrote 4 years ago when this
country was formulating a social safety net, that it was
crafted by legislators on both sides of the aisle, Democrats
and Republicans, who understood the nature of the problems that
we face today--that we faced then and the challenges. And
whatever their political disposition, they came together and
they forged agreement and legislation that has accrued to the
benefit of the American people.
And I know it is your hope, it is our hope that that is the
same kind of ability that we can bring to the challenges that
we all face today.
And with that, let me just yield to my ranking member,
Congressman Cole, for any comments or any further questions and
to close, and then I will close.
Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
And I want to associate myself with your remarks about the
nature of the hearing we have had today, and I think that
reflects, Mr. Secretary, partly a great deal of confidence in
you on both sides of the aisle. We know who you are. We have
had the opportunity to work with you.
When we have differed, we have differed respectfully. But
you are a person that has a gift for finding common ground
without surrendering his principles, and I think that will
serve you well.
I hope, in listening to the committee, I love the
Appropriations Committee. I mean, I really tell people I don't
care if you are on the left or the right, the appropriators are
deal makers in the end. That is not true of all of our members
on other committees. They may be on the left or right, but they
are what I like to call ``shirts and skins committee.'' You
figure out pretty quickly where is everybody at, and the teams
don't change, and the lines don't change. That is not
necessarily true here.
There is a great deal in your budget where we will find
common ground. I applaud again the emphasis on NIH, CDC,
certainly the discussion we had about--which is not something
we will deal with on this subcommittee--the Indian Health
Service and forward funding proposal. There is a lot there.
And there is other areas where that we have shown we can
work together in other parts of your Department, everything
from early childhood and first generation college students. A
lot of this is under your purview, and again, it is a broad
swath of responsibility. So some under you, some not. But
again, there is a lot here that we can find common ground on.
And I appreciate the respectful manner in which we talked
about Hyde, but I will be very clear there, and I don't do this
in any kind of way to try and start a fight or whatever. But I
do remember on one occasion on not the Hyde Amendment itself,
it was actually another one of these life issues. And my friend
the chairman and I were involved in negotiation with our
friends in the Senate, and one of our good friends in the
Senate, I had the Speaker at the time that was very much
interested in this particular issue of this. I am going to
leave them all unnamed.
But my friend on the other side of the aisle in the other
chamber said, ``Tom, you can have a deal or you can have a
fight, but you can't have both.'' I thought that was a pretty
wise saying. I actually took that back to the then-Speaker,
reported it, and I said, ``What do you want?'' He thought for a
minute, and he said, ``I think I want a deal.''
And that is where we arrived. And 6 years in a row. I am
very proud of this, by the way. Four years I was chairman. And
when we got to the end of the day after the negotiations, my
good friend, the then-ranking member, now chairman of this
subcommittee and the full committee, voted for final passage
because we worked toward a deal. In the 2 years that she has
chaired this subcommittee, we ended up in the same place. I
voted for final passage as well.
And I would very much like to get to the point where I
could do that again. And so the commitment I will make to you
is I will work toward that end. But again, just as I understand
there are positions that put my friends in awkward
circumstances that they can't violate their principles, the
same thing is true on our side. So I just say that to be
mindful of it going forward.
But I think you saw in your first session before this
committee, it is a committee that wants to work together. The
first thing I figured out when I was fortunate enough to chair
and figured out the areas that was wanted. NIH was one of them.
Early childhood was another one of them. First generation
college students over in the education side was another one.
Where were the areas they wanted? And I hope you noticed,
because I certainly did, I thought all the questions by all our
members were thoughtful and respectful and asked in a good
spirit, and I think they are trying to figure out how they can
work with you.
I do think the range of responsibilities you have are
exceptional. I sometimes think we ought to rename the--your
title ought to be Secretary for Biodefense because that is a
big part of your job. I look on what we do here as every bit as
important in defending the American people as what is done over
on the Department of Defense, and I sit on that subcommittee as
well.
And I think this pandemic has illustrated that like nothing
else. Losing a half million plus people in a year is an
indication of how critical the work that this agency does--or
excuse me, this subcommittee does and your agency does for the
American people. And so I take the responsibility like that. I
don't see this as just a dollars and cents game, but I see
these as programs that really protect the American people and
are absolutely indispensable.
And I also see them as programs that improve the quality
and address some of the disparities that you and other members
of this--you addressed in your remarks and other committee
members on this subcommittee have dealt with for many, many
years and worked hard. And we know there is a lot left to do.
So I just end by welcoming you to your new position of
responsibility and letting you know that the door is always
open, that we want to work with you. We want you to be very,
very successful in what you are doing, and I am quite certain
that this subcommittee will try to find common ground with you
and try to help you achieve some of the goals you have laid out
that I think all of us, in a bipartisan sense, would agree are
for the good of the country and in many cases for the good of
humanity.
Because, again, what some of the agencies you do obviously
may impact on our country first and foremost, but this
committee has the power, the subcommittee has the power to do
good all over the world. I mean, some of the work that you will
be doing at the CDC and NIH and cooperating with people around
the world in terms of dealing with the pandemic are important
for all of us and enrich the lives of all humanity.
So I think you are well chosen and well positioned, and we
look forward to working with you.
With that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you. And I think we share sentiments on
the Secretary and his knowledge and his goodwill, and I look
forward to working with you as we go forward.
Mr. Secretary, let me just make two points, and then I will
close. I wanted to ask you for a commitment. I have serious
concerns about the Strategic National Stockpile. I think we
need to review the mission, the scale, the management, the
transparency of this very, very, very important Federal asset.
And I would like to have your commitment that you will task
your team with beginning a rethinking of the Strategic National
Stockpile so that we can move forward, and the American people
can continue to have confidence in this asset.
I say that because I asked over and over and over again in
the last several years for an accounting because we
appropriated serious, serious dollars, believing that this
was--it really is a national asset, without any response,
without knowing what was there or so forth and so on. So I
would very much love to have your commitment on that effort.
And the other point is with regard to the unaccompanied
children, and I know that you are working in this direction,
with regard to a long-term plan. And we want to move as quickly
as we can to help these children, and the administration, I
know, is developing that long-term strategy.
And given your comments today that children who--ensure
that those children in our custody are housed in State-licensed
shelters, and they are treated with respect, and they are
placed as quickly and safely as possible with sponsors. And I
know that those are the values that you bring to this issue.
And if I might just say that I am really pleased with the
2022 budget for HHS. It includes strong funding increases for
public health, biomedical research, childcare, early learning,
mental health, maternal health, so many other areas. And for
me, we are finally moving toward a budget and a role for
Government that invests to give us a better future.
We are moving toward a budget and a role for Government
that elevates our education and our healthcare institutions so
that ordinary citizens have the increasing prospect for
success. And it tilts the playing field so that normal citizens
have a better and a better shot at life and that parents
understand that their children can get a better shot at the
American dream.
And above all, it says that poverty is unacceptable. It is
unacceptable, and that we have, this institution and this
committee, this subcommittee has the capacity to abolish it.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for your testimony today. Thank
you for who you are, and thank you for your public service.
And with that, I am supposed to bang a gavel, which I do
not have. So I will bang the phone. This hearing is adjourned.
Thank you.
[Questions and answers submitted for the reccord follow:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Tuesday, April 20, 2021.
BUILDING CAPACITY, BUILDING COMMUNITY: INCREASING INVESTMENTS IN
COMMUNITY COLLEGES
WITNESSES
WALTER BUMPHUS, PH.D., PRESIDENT AND CEO, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
COMMUNITY COLLEGES
MARY ALICE MCCARTHY, PH.D., DIRECTOR, CENTER ON EDUCATION AND LABOR,
NEW AMERICA
WILLIAM T. BROWN, PH.D., CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, GATEWAY COMMUNITY
COLLEGE
KELLI JORDAN, DIRECTOR, IBM CAREER, SKILLS, AND PERFORMANCE
The Chair. The hearing will come to order.
As this hearing is fully virtual, we must address a few
housekeeping matters. For today's meeting, the chair or staff
designated by the chair may mute participants' microphones when
they are not under recognition for the purposes of eliminating
inadvertent background noise.
Members are responsible for muting and unmuting themselves.
If I notice that you have not unmuted yourself, I will ask if
you would like the staff to unmute you. If you indicate
approval by nodding, staff will unmute your microphone.
I remind all members and witnesses that the 5-minute clock
still applies. If there is a technology issue, we will move to
the next member until the issue is resolved, and you will
retain the balance of your time.
You will notice a clock on your screen that will show how
much time is remaining. At 1 minute remaining, the clock will
turn to yellow. At 30 seconds remaining, I will gently tap the
gavel to remind members that their time is almost expired. When
your time has expired, the clock will turn red, and I will
begin to recognize the next member.
In terms of the speaking order, we will begin with the
chair and ranking member. Then members present at the time the
hearing is called to order will be recognized in order of
seniority and, finally, members not present at the time the
hearing is called to order.
Finally, House rules require me to remind you that we have
set up an email address to which members can send anything they
wish to submit in writing at any of our hearings or markups.
That email address has been provided in advance to your staff.
With that, I would like to acknowledge Congressman Andy
Harris, who is stepping in today for Ranking Member Cole, who
is currently engaged with the Rules Committee. So I want to
thank Congressman Harris and all of my colleagues for joining
this morning.
As we celebrate Community College Month, it is especially
important for us to recognize how community colleges foster an
educated populace and a highly skilled workforce and how they
make college more affordable and more accessible for more
Americans. Not everyone needs a 4-year degree, but everyone
does need the education necessary to find good-paying jobs that
provide economic security for themselves and their families.
And compared to traditional 4-year colleges, community colleges
provide a more cost-effective approach to education.
Community colleges educate 41 percent of all undergraduate
students in this Nation, and their student body is often more
diverse, providing pathways to opportunity for traditionally
underserved communities. Nationally, 27 percent of community
college student identify as Hispanic, 13 percent identify as
African American, 6 percent identify as Asian and Pacific
Islander. Fifty-seven percent of community college students are
women, while 15 percent of community college students are
single parents, and 29 percent are first-generation students.
Community colleges serve a broad array of students when
considering age as well. The average age of community college
students is 28, including 36 percent between the ages of 22 and
39, and 8 percent over the age of 40. The majority of community
college students also work while pursuing their credentials,
and 33 percent receive Pell grants.
While Federal funding makes up only 11 percent of community
college revenue, these institutions rely on the programs and
funding under the Labor-H bill--Pell grants, work study,
Perkins, CTE, adult education, apprenticeship programs,
Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act grants, and the list
goes on.
From 2011 through 2014, we invested a total of
$2,000,000,000 in community colleges through the Trade
Adjustment Assistance and Community College and Career Training
Grant Program, or TAACCCT. These programs help community
colleges successfully partner with expanding economic sectors
in their region to ensure a skilled workforce for high-growth
local and regional industries.
The investments go a long way, since community college
education is drastically less expensive than a degree from a 4-
year college. And nationally, the average annual tuition and
fees at community colleges during the 2021 academic year was
just $3,770, and generally, anyone can enroll. By contrast, the
average annual tuition and fees for a 4-year public college was
$10,560, and the annual tuition and fees for a 4-year private
college was $37,650, price tags that are usually accompanied by
often strict enrollment requirements.
In my home State of Connecticut, for example, the average
in-State community college tuition is approximately $5,300 per
year, compared to the $13,000 it costs per year for public 4-
year college and the almost $27,000 it costs a year for a
private 4-year college in Connecticut.
In my district around New Haven, we have three community
colleges--Gateway in New Haven, from which Dr. Brown joins us
this morning; Middlesex in Middletown, Connecticut; and
Naugatuck Valley in Waterbury. I have worked extensively with
all three colleges for years and have held my annual
congressional arts competition at Gateway for the past few.
I have seen firsthand the wonderful impact these
institutions have on the lives and future of those that they
serve, and I know that, as a nation, we owe it to our students
to provide what President Lyndon Johnson once described as--and
I quote--``the only valid passport out of poverty.'' That is
why I have made it one of my top priorities in the Congress to
fight for our Nation's community colleges, get them the robust
funding and Federal support that they need.
In fiscal year 2016, we worked to establish the
Apprenticeship Grant Program, which helps connect businesses to
workers with the skills necessary to fill jobs in a variety of
industries. Proud to lead this subcommittee's efforts to create
the Strengthening Community Colleges Training Grants Program to
support workforce development at community colleges. We started
the program 2 years ago, expanded it last year to $45,000,000,
an increase of $5,000,000 above its initial year funding level.
But despite the success of these and other programs, the
COVID-19 pandemic has had a devastating impact on our Nation's
community colleges and the students that they serve. Most
students who attend community college do not have reliable
computer equipment of their own or access to the Internet.
Students often rely on the colleges' computer labs to access
the technology, which make telecommuting or working remotely
all but impossible in many cases.
Moreover, many community college students who are working
their way through college either lost their jobs, had their
hours or incomes reduced, or found themselves working on the
frontlines of the pandemic, putting themselves, their families,
and their fellow students at risk. Already-existing challenges
like food insecurity, inadequate access to transportation, a
dearth of mental health services have only been further
exacerbated by the pandemic and have often hit those who attend
community colleges the hardest.
Since the beginning of this pandemic, enrollment in
community colleges has declined by 10 percent in the fall of
2020, and early estimates for 2021--the 2021 spring term
indicate enrollments will decline by another 9.5 percent. This
decrease in enrollment has been much more pronounced for
community colleges than other higher education institutions.
This is all the more reason why community colleges need our
help. We need to provide more than just increased funding. We
must drill down into where exactly is the greatest need, work
to identify programs, practices, and solutions that need the
most support.
This includes working to foster better partnerships between
community colleges and businesses and emerging businesses and
providing more resources to greatly expand and increase the
registered apprenticeship program. This means more coordination
between Federal programs and grants with these institutions and
providing more wraparound services that are needed by so many
of our nontraditional students.
Finally, it means supporting students and navigating
barriers, postsecondary programs, and credentials. The Biden
administration has proposed making historic investments in our
Nation's community colleges to provide cost-effective job
training to workers dislocated by the COVID-19 pandemic and to
equip future students with technical and occupational skills to
succeed in what is an evolving labor market.
So as we write the fiscal year 2022 appropriations bill, we
must take stock of the strengths and the challenges of our
community colleges and the potential they have to help develop
our Nation's workforce and revitalize our economy in the wake
of the pandemic. We need to invest in these institutions, build
the architecture of the future at the Federal as well as local
levels.
Our community colleges are the backbone of our education
system. It is crucial that we provide them and their students
with the funding and the resources needed to build a brighter
and a more prosperous future for all Americans.
And with that, let me recognize Congressman Andy Harris for
his opening remarks. Congressman Harris.
Mr. Harris. Good morning, Madam Chair, members of the
subcommittee, and our testifying witnesses. I look forward to
our hearing today discussing the important role played by
community colleges.
The United States holds over $1,500,000,000,000 in student
debt, with over 40 million borrowers. Students are graduating
with tens of thousands of dollars of debt, or even hundreds of
thousands of dollars of debt. We know this model is not serving
students well.
Community colleges can serve as an affordable, accessible
alternative to a 4-year institution. Community colleges can
save students anywhere from $5,000 to $20,000 or more each year
in comparison to traditional 4-year universities. Several
States also offer additional funding to make the cost of
enrolling in community colleges extremely low, opening a door
to higher education for many who would otherwise have been
unable to participate.
Community colleges were some of the first schools to offer
enrollment options around a full-time working schedule,
attracting new students and opening options to higher education
to those who couldn't enroll in daytime classes. Roughly 60
percent of all American community college students, in fact,
study part time.
In addition, the curricula at community colleges are
designed for nontraditional students. These schools have been
leaders in meeting students where they are and designing an
education that fits the needs of the nontraditional student who
may be a parent or someone who needs to work full time but
wants to increase their skills for more job opportunities.
Community colleges have proven they can adapt to a changing
environment, meeting students where they are, working with
local businesses to develop programs that lead to good-paying,
sustainable jobs. As the cost of higher education skyrockets
and the value of some 4-year college degrees decline, community
colleges could prove to be an affordable alternative path to
enhanced employment, particularly in fields in constant demand
for more workers like cybersecurity, technology, and advanced
manufacturing.
In fact, two of my local community colleges in Cecil and
Harford Counties in my district just announced an innovative
alliance with other community colleges statewide that would
allow students to earn their associate degree or certificate by
completing coursework uniquely offered by another partnering
community college. The participating alliance college indicates
how their shared resources and expertise can help to generate
cost savings that are passed on to students. By creating this
pathway for students to easily move among colleges, they
decrease the need to run specialized, costly, and sometimes
low-enrolled programs at several locations.
In Maryland, as across the Nation, community colleges are
not just degree-seeking, but also play a vital role in
occupational training and certificate programs. In my State,
they provide training to over 100,000 students annually for
occupational licensure and certificate training. In fact, of
the over 500,000 Marylanders that attend a Maryland community
college, 70 percent of them are in continuing education or
workforce development courses.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today on this
topic and want to thank you, Madam Chair, for holding yet
another very important hearing.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The Chair. Thank you very, very much.
And so it gives me great pleasure now to introduce our
witnesses and delighted to welcome Dr. Walter Bumphus,
president and CEO of the American Association of Community
Colleges; Dr. Mary Alice McCarthy, Director, Center on
Education and Labor from New America; Dr. William T. Brown, the
chief executive officer of Gateway Community College.
And if you will just bear with me for a moment, I just
would like to say and I am so excited to have Dr. Brown here.
Gateway is in the heart of downtown New Haven, Connecticut, and
Dr. Brown has served as a research laboratory director, a part-
time, full-time college faculty member, an elementary school
counselor, consultant to schools, school districts, nonprofit
organizations regarding issues of diversity, psychological
health, and academic engagement and success.
So I am so grateful to have your continued support, Dr.
Brown, in helping to foster strong relationships between our
community colleges and the Federal Government. So thank you for
being here with us today.
And also would like to introduce Ms. Kelli Jordan,
Director, IBM Career, Skills, and Performance.
Let me remind the witnesses that the entirety of their
written testimony will be entered into the record, and I would
now like to recognize for 5 minutes Dr. Bumphus. You are now
recognized.
And thank you very, very much for all the work that you
have done and appreciate the strong relationships that we have
had over the years in achieving your goal and achieving what is
our goal with the subcommittee on behalf of community colleges.
Dr. Bumphus.
Mr. Bumphus. Good morning, Chairwoman DeLauro and Ranking
Member Harris and members of the subcommittee. I am Walter G.
Bumphus, president and CEO of the American Association of
Community Colleges, which represents the Nation's 1,044
community colleges.
I am, indeed, honored to be with you this morning to
discuss community colleges and the Federal Government's
essential role in supporting them and their students. I have
had the privilege to serve as a community college leader
through some very trying times, including leading the Louisiana
Community and Technical College System during Hurricane
Katrina. Never in recent history or in my 40-plus years in
higher education has the country faced such a collective
reckoning like the one that came with the COVID-19 pandemic.
Almost everything changed. What did not change was the
resolve, ingenuity, and commitment of our Nation's community
colleges to continue to provide a pathway to a better life for
millions of Americans.
Community colleges enroll nearly 11 million students each
year and promise access to educational opportunities. Many of
our students are the same Americans most harshly impacted by
the pandemic.
Higher education is the pathway to a better life, better
communities, and a better country. Our community colleges
strive to level the playing field for all Americans to achieve
their educational goals and stand ready to continue their role
as catalysts for growing the Nation's workforce pipeline.
Community colleges provide access to traditional higher
education and the necessary skills training that allow students
to enter the workforce, many of whom are then able to earn a
family-sustaining wage. These pathways to education and to jobs
were deeply impacted by the pandemic.
As you know, our community college enrollment was impacted
as well. Enrollments declined 10 points--10 percentage points
this fall from the previous year. These numbers mean that more
than 500,000 people are no longer pursuing higher education.
It is disturbing to note that the declines were
concentrated in black and Latino male populations. Colleges are
working to identify and engage students that did not enroll in
college or stopped attending during the pandemic and get them
back on track to graduate.
But there is a silver lining in the COVID cloud. As the
pandemic has accelerated, the transformation of academic
programs and services to ensure that students are well served
in our ever-expanding digital world. Fortunately, the Higher
Education Relief Fund has provided a lifeline to students and
colleges trying to weather the pandemic. Our students and
leaders cannot thank Congress enough for this support.
Colleges are busily strategically developing and
implementing HEERF spending plans. The Department of Education
also deserves kudos for HEERF guidelines that provide and
promote maximum flexibility.
Community colleges have an ongoing partnership with the
Federal Government to foster equity and excellence in
education. I will highlight some of the most critical
investments. Others are in my written statement.
First and foremost is the Pell grant. AACC staff worked
side by side with Senator Pell to develop the program in 1972,
and we support sustained increases to this maximum grant.
Roughly one-third of all community college students receive a
Pell grant each year.
With relatively low tuition, increases in the maximum Pell
grant will generally cover nontuition expenses that plague our
neediest students and hinder completion. Enhanced Pell grant
funding would address some of the food and housing insecurity,
childcare costs, and technology needs facing community college
students and enable them to work less, borrow less, and focus
more on their studies.
The Strengthening Community College Training Program is a
model for effective Federal support of community college job
training. The program requires close collaboration with
business, but allows grantees to prioritize regional needs.
This program mirrors the extremely successful TAACCCT
program. In 2020, the program received approximately 150
applications and was only able to fund 11. AACC is thankful for
the $45,000,000 appropriation in 2021, but we strongly urge the
subcommittee to bring the SCCTG program to scale.
Community colleges are enthusiastic about President Biden's
proposed $12,000,000,000 for community college infrastructure
in the American Jobs Plan. The increased sophistication of
technical education requires continuous large-scale capital
investments. We estimate immediate infrastructure needs to be
around $60,000,000,000.
The Strengthening Institutions Program helps low-resource
colleges that serve percentages of needy students.
Madam Chairwoman, we want to thank you especially for your
support of SCCTG this morning. So thank you very much this
morning.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chair. Thank you so much for your testimony.
I now would like to recognize Dr. McCarthy. You are
recognized for 5 minutes.
Thank you.
Ms. McCarthy. Thank you.
Good morning. Thank you, Chair DeLauro and Ranking Member
Cole and Congressman Harris, and thank you to all the members
of the committee for the opportunity to speak with you today on
this important topic of the need to invest in our country's
community colleges.
My name is Dr. Mary Alice McCarthy, and I direct the Center
on Education and Labor at New America, a nonpartisan public
policy thinktank in Washington, D.C.
As Dr. Bumphus noted, and others have as well, the effects
of the pandemic recession have not been evenly distributed.
Low-wage workers, workers without a college degree, black and
Latinx workers have borne the brunt of layoffs and reduced
wages from this recession. And in striking contrast to previous
recessions, this recession has led millions of students to
either drop out of college or delay their plans to enroll, both
of which could have lasting repercussions on their and our
long-term economic prospects.
Drop-out rates have been highest among our most
economically vulnerable students, including first-generation,
low-income, black and Hispanic, and adult students--all of whom
make up a large share of community college enrollments.
Now community colleges are accustomed to being on the
frontline of recessions, and this time is no different. At the
Center on Education and Labor, we have been conducting
extensive research on community colleges, on how they can
support an equitable economic recovery, and what we can learn
from the last recession and how community colleges were part of
that recovery.
In 2019, we published a meta-analysis of the last large-
scale direct investment in community colleges, which has
already been mentioned, the Trade Adjustment Assistance College
and Career Training Grant Program, also referred to as TAACCCT,
which was designed to build the capacity of community colleges
to serve adult learners and workers displaced by the Great
Recession. Through our analysis of outcomes data reported in
the grant evaluations, we found that students who participated
in TAACCCT-funded programs were significantly more likely to
complete their programs and earn a credential than comparison
students and, more importantly--or most importantly, had better
employment and earnings outcomes than comparison students.
So that is all a way of saying that by investing in the
capacity of community colleges to serve the students and
workers most affected by the recession, that generated positive
outcomes for those students and workers. And that is why we
believe the timing is right for another large-scale capacity-
building investment in community colleges.
But it is not enough to just repeat what we did the last
time. We need to build on what we learned and craft an even
better investment that meets the specific challenges of this
moment to get students back into school and to create pathways
to economic security.
In my written testimony, I outline four evidence-based
interventions that colleges could implement that we believe
would have a significant impact on student success, both in
college and in the labor market. Specifically, a large-scale
investment could expand--could help colleges expand student
support services. We already know that providing a suite of
student supports, from advising to emergency cash assistance,
can make all the difference for students making it to the
finish line.
And that is likely to be especially true in the near
future. As families recover from the pandemic, colleges will
need help developing and upgrading these services.
A large-scale investment could help colleges build more
industry partnerships or sectoral partnerships, which have
already been mentioned--thank you, Chair DeLauro--and which
have already been highlighted in the Community College Training
Grant investments. This is an evidence-based practice that
comes out of the workforce development world and is highly
effective for tightly linking skills training programs with
good jobs.
But it is expensive. It is expensive to get started, I
should say. There are significant start-up costs. Colleges need
help with those start-up costs.
Also, apprenticeship has already come up. Investment in
community colleges could help us significantly expand access to
apprenticeship. It is the gold standard when it comes to
connecting work and learning, and it also could make college
significantly more affordable. Expanding apprenticeship into
industries like information technology, healthcare, and
business services is possible. Community colleges are the right
institution to do this, but again, there are high start-up
costs, and they will need resources to do it.
And then, finally, I think we all know that colleges have a
real need to improve online learning. It is hard to imagine a
time when colleges were better positioned to make good
investments in technology to support online learning.
It has been a year of sort of a crash course on how to
deliver high-quality online learning. Enabling colleges to
build on what has worked and perhaps replace what hasn't would
be a very good way to put all those hard-learned lessons of the
last year to use.
I think it is worth noting--and I will leave you with one
last request, which is that we are very concerned about
students needing--who won't go back to school because they need
to work. We have a Federal Work Study Program that we believe
we are underleveraging. We think we could add money to the
Federal Work Study Program specifically dedicated to community
college students, an extra formula within that, and I am happy
to talk more about that in the question and answer period.
And again, thank you very much for your time.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chair. Thank you. Thank you so much for your testimony.
I would now like to recognize Dr. Brown. You are recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Brown. Andy Harris and to all the members serving on
this subcommittee of the House Committee on Appropriations,
thank you for this opportunity to testify before you today.
I am Dr. William Brown, and I serve as the chief executive
officer for Gateway Community College, headquartered in the
heart of downtown New Haven, Connecticut. Gateway is the
largest community college in Connecticut and home to over 90
associate degree and certificate programs and dozens more
workforce and continuing education programs.
This academic year, more than 8,600 students enrolled in
credit courses at Gateway, and more than 600 students enrolled
in our noncredit workforce programs. Gateway's student body is
diverse. The majority of our students are African American and
Hispanic Latinx, and Gateway has been designated as a Hispanic-
serving institution since 2018.
More than 40 percent of our students are 25 years of age or
older. Most of our students are challenged economically. Almost
6 in 10 students receive some form of financial aid, and 45
percent are eligible for Pell grants. Almost 7 in 10 of our
students attend Gateway part time.
Our students are attending college full time when they can,
part time when they must, while facing many life challenges
that too often get in the way of them attending and completing
college, including unemployment, underemployment, food
insecurity, lack of reliable transportation, inadequate
childcare, the digital divide, and unmet needs for healthcare
and mental health services.
The fact is that the COVID pandemic has aggravated every
single one of our students' challenges and laid bare all of
their vulnerabilities.
Over the last several years, Gateway has extended its
supports for our students by directly providing wraparound
services, and these programs have been extremely successful in
helping them succeed in their programs. I am especially
gratified with how employers, community partners, and private
philanthropy, from Yale University and Yale New Haven Health to
our own Gateway Community College Foundation, have rallied
around and partnered with Gateway to provide critical supports
and services for our students.
Despite all the challenges, our students have powerful
stories of resilience and dedication, and I detail some of
those in my written testimony. And their successes are a
testament to what can be accomplished when ambition, hard work,
and unrelenting perseverance meet with a challenging
educational environment and a supportive community.
Honorable Representatives, we truly appreciate your support
to Gateway and to our students. HEERF funding has enabled us to
keep our campus safe, preserved our courses and services, and
provided critical financial support to our students during this
devastating pandemic.
We have used funding from the Childcare Access Means
Parents in School, the CCAMPIS grant, to expand childcare
available at Gateway into the evening. Gateway is receiving
funding through the Strengthening Community Colleges Training
Grant, enabling us to develop and expand critical healthcare
programs and train the workforce that will assist with our
region's recovery from the pandemic.
We encourage you to continue making the investments
necessary to support our students to expand your support for
established programs like Pell, GEAR UP, TRIO, and Perkins and
to seize the promise of newer programs like the Strengthening
Community Colleges Training Grant. Any and all funding policies
and regulations that support students and their families caring
for and educating themselves, meeting childcare, healthcare,
and transportation needs will have a tremendous impact on their
prospects for a brighter future.
Representative DeLauro has been a longtime champion for
Gateway, and she and members of the Connecticut delegation
regularly visit our beautiful campus. Gateway is always happy
to host any member of this committee, and we invite you to come
and see our work firsthand and how your investments have
impacted our amazing students.
If you come, we will also offer you the opportunity to
support small business and enjoy some of our legendary New
Haven pizza.
On behalf of Gateway Community College and community
colleges across the Nation, thank you again for this
opportunity to address you.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chair. Thank you so much, Dr. Brown. I would very much
like to get the committee to New Haven to see Gateway and to
enjoy really which is the very best pizza in the entire
country. So, bar none. So thank you very much.
Ms. Jordan, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Jordan. Good morning, Chair DeLauro, Ranking Member
Cole, Congressman Harris, and distinguished members.
My name is Kelli Jordan, and I am IBM's director of career,
skills, and performance. I manage talent programs at IBM that
empower IBMers to build skills and have fulfilling careers. I
am honored to speak today at this hearing on the essential role
of community colleges.
IBM knows that quality education on in-demand skills opens
doors to good jobs and better pay. Today, education in career-
line skills is not sufficiently available to meet the needs of
businesses or job-seeking Americans. Additional, more
accessible skills pathways, such as those offered by community
colleges, are key to helping more people, particularly those in
underserved communities, get on course for better jobs.
As this committee explores increasing investment in U.S.
community colleges, I offer three suggestions for ensuring that
those investments help our country build back a more equitable
economy.
First, expand job-related skills education in high school
through community college partnerships. Fostering partnerships
between community colleges and high schools can help students
build relevant skills early, while preparing them to easily
transition to a career or further education immediately upon
graduation, all while minimizing costs to students.
IBM has experienced the power of these partnerships
firsthand. Ten years ago, IBM launched Pathways in Technology
Early College High Schools, P-TECH, a 21st century approach to
high school career education. It combines traditional high
school courses with a no-cost associate's degree, hands-on
professional mentoring, and a real workplace experience.
P-TECH has proven so successful that it has expanded to 162
P-TECH schools in the U.S., including Connecticut, Maryland,
Texas, and California, among others. Increasing funding through
existing authorizations to promote more P-TECH-style
partnerships between community colleges and high schools would
expand the acquisition of in-demand skills, promote a more
inclusive workforce, and reduce barriers to well-paying
careers.
Second, make skills education more widely available at all
stages of life. Collaboration with community colleges has been
the foundation for many IBM initiatives to prepare students and
workers for ``new collar'' jobs, where in-demand skills matter
more than a specific degree.
In 2017, IBM launched our New Collar Apprenticeship
Program, focused on fast-growing fields, such as cybersecurity,
cloud computing, and more. This ``earn while you learn''
program includes robust learning content, coupled with hands-on
experience and was so successful that it grew twice as fast as
expected in the first year.
As IBM has testified previously, funding for
apprenticeships is shockingly low for a pathway that can be an
economic gamechanger for both students and mid-career
professionals. Funding for U.S. Department of Labor
apprenticeships should be increased, and community colleges
should play a central role in these programs nationwide.
Third, improve the infrastructure for sharing credentials.
Today, there is simply no good or easy way for job seekers to
share their skills and credentials with prospective employers.
Establishing a national skills infrastructure would streamline
the process by which students and workers share verified
skills, certifications, and degrees. It would also empower
learners to align their skills with in-demand jobs.
IBM has joined with other institutions to pilot a skills
exchange infrastructure that utilizes blockchain technology to
protect individual privacy and ensure that a job seeker or
student retains full control over their personal information.
This pilot is a first step, but greater support for technical
infrastructure is required to create a learning and employment
credentials exchange that is accessible to all Americans. The
Appropriations Committee should include resources for
educational institutions and workforce boards to join this
exchange.
At IBM, we believe this era of technology must be an
inclusive one. This can only happen if more people can acquire
the skills needed for the jobs that are made possible by
breakthrough innovations like AI and quantum computing.
Community colleges have proven through their flexibility,
reach, and willingness to partner in innovative ways that they
can be catalysts for more inclusive approaches to skills and
education.
We applaud the committee for focusing on the vital role of
these invaluable institutions, and I thank you again for the
opportunity to testify. I look forward to answering any
questions.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chair. Thank you so much. We thank all of our witnesses
for their testimony.
And if I may, just before I begin my own questions, it is
really rewarding to listen to the four of you, who have so much
experience in this area of community colleges and the
partnerships that are critical to really increasing educational
opportunity. And what struck me again, which has in several of
our other hearings this year, is the consistency of message, if
you will, from all of you, which is the essential role that
community colleges play--their strength, the pandemic effects,
the need for serious investment, the need to create the
business partnerships.
And so we are going to look forward to all of you being
able to provide us with recommendations as we move forward with
the appropriations process. So thank you all very, very much.
Let me ask my first question to Dr. Brown. Dr. Brown,
earlier this year, the Department of Labor awarded a first
round of grants under the Strengthening Community Colleges
Training Grants Program. Gateway received a grant under this
program in partnership with other local community colleges. One
of the goals is to support those partnerships between community
colleges and expanding economic sectors in the region.
Now just my question is, what type of education and
training programs and resulting careers will be available as a
result of this grant? Who are your partners? How did you choose
the healthcare industry as a focal point for your grant?
Dr. Brown, can you unmute?
Mr. Brown. I apologize for that. So with regards to the
careers that are available, we have designed our program, which
is entitled CT SHIP--Connecticut Statewide Healthcare
Industries Pathways--so that students who are interested in
programs of CNA, certified nursing assistant; patient care
technician, medical office assistant, those kinds of programs--
medical coding--that they would be able to be trained in those
programs.
And what is nice about those is that they are also set up
to lead to other programs, other jobs in healthcare. So, for
example, we are also using the grant to support a central
sterile processing program, and those kinds of programs can
lead to surgical tech and beyond. So those are some of the
programs that would be supported by the grant.
In terms of partners, as you mentioned, we are partnered
with Norwalk Community College, Housatonic Community College in
Bridgeport, Middlesex Community College, and Tunxis Community
College in Connecticut. And along with our fellow community
colleges, the Connecticut Department of Labor, the Department
of Economic and Community Development, our workforce
development boards are all working with us. And the employers
that we are partnered with include Yale New Haven Health,
Hartford Healthcare, Norwalk Hospital, and Stamford Health.
So we have a very broad partnership with business and
industry, with the State, as well with the Federal Government.
How did we choose healthcare? The focus of the grant is on
displaced workers, workers who have been displaced by the COVID
pandemic. We are also very, very interested in addressing
disparities in postsecondary training. And with healthcare, we
were already, as a State, like many other places, suffering
from a shortage of healthcare workers. The pandemic has
aggravated that entire situation.
And so this is really investing in it would be nice to say
the workforce for tomorrow, but we are really talking about the
workforce for today. There is such a need for healthcare
workers at all different levels that this--it just made sense
to invest in those particular areas.
The Chair. Thank you. Thank you very much.
Let me ask, if I can, Dr. McCarthy and Dr. Bumphus, this is
about the TAACCCT grant. You said it was--Dr. McCarthy, you
said it was successful in helping students finish a program,
earn a credential, secure employment. As we continue to grow
the Strengthening Community Colleges Training Program, which is
its successor, how can we make the program more effective?
And I am going to ask Dr. Bumphus--because my time is going
to run out here--in your testimony, you talk about the
overwhelming response from the colleges to the Strengthening
Community Colleges Training Grant.
I am going to ask Dr. McCarthy for her recommendations and
then ask you, Dr. Bumphus, if you have any additional
recommendations as how do we maximize the partnerships between
the colleges and high-growth economic sectors.
Ms. McCarthy. Thank you, Chair DeLauro.
I would have three recommendations for building on
Strengthening Community Colleges Training Grants Program, which
is an excellent investment and has also built on previous
lessons. What I would say is that I think the program, given
the situation that we are in, needs to be much larger. It is
just there needs to be more researchers out there.
The TAACCCT program was $2,000,000,000, and I don't even
think that came close enough to the kind of--and it touched
almost--it touched almost every State, and it touched a large
share of community colleges. And that is what we need as we are
moving out of the pandemic is every community college in the
country needs some capacity-building dollars, and this would be
a good vehicle for doing that.
The other two things I would add to the Strengthening
Community Colleges Career Training Grants Program would be to
include a role for the State, a set-aside for the State
agencies. One of our findings in our research of the TAACCCT
grants was that there were a lot of really exciting innovations
that never got lifted up that could have been sustained and
scaled through State policies.
Colorado did this with the TAACCCT Innovation Drug
Developmental Education that the community colleges developed,
but we didn't see that in any other State. It is a real missed
opportunity.
Our community colleges are often boutiques or islands of
innovation and excellence. This investment should be a way--the
States could be a way to get out of it.
And then, similarly, we would like to see a more sort of
cross-agency--structured cross-agency collaboration between the
Departments of Education and Labor. These programs are about
helping community college students move from college into the
labor market successfully.
The Labor Department knows all about the transitions into
the workforce. The Department of Education has lots of
expertise on things like student support services and pedagogy.
There is not enough information sharing. So we recommend
standing up--we would recommend standing up an office, staffing
it, allowing it to deliver technical assistance.
One last point on the importance of bringing States into
the equation, too, is that a lot of the times, the evaluators
of these programs in TAACCCT had a hard time getting a hold of
good data. If the State were involved as a mandatory partner in
these grants, we believe that they would be--that colleges
would have an easier time getting a hold of better data and
that, in turn, would create stronger evaluations.
Thank you.
The Chair. Dr. Bumphus, I am going to apologize to you. My
time has run out. My hope is, is that you might be able to add
on in one of your answers, or if I can come back to that. So,
again, my apologies to you.
And with that, let me yield to Congressman Harris.
Mr. Harris. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
And thank you to all the panelists today.
With regards--I just want to comment because, Mr. Brown, I
know you mentioned the importance of health training coming out
of the COVID pandemic. The demographics, combined with what we
learned from the COVID pandemic, and I am afraid some of the
diminution in the health workforce following the COVID pandemic
means that institutions like our community colleges, which I
think are excellently situation to train a lot of our needed
healthcare workforce--physician assistants, nurses. At many,
many levels, community colleges can do a great job, and I think
that is one of the things that we should emphasize in community
colleges.
But I want to ask all of you or any of you who care to
answer, we are learning a lot about online, doing things
online. We are doing something online right now. We are all
better at it than we were a year ago, hopefully.
And I think that what we are learning from online education
is there are some students who do very well online. There are
some who don't do well, but there are some who do very well and
that it can be an incredibly efficient way to deliver
education. What is the role or what are community colleges
doing to go to this new paradigm of learning that I think will
be with us? Just like telemedicine will be with us for
healthcare, I think online learning is going to be with us for
a while.
Again, it doesn't work for everyone. But for some students
in some subjects, it is probably very well suited. What is the
role of community colleges in that? And I would open it up to
any of the panelists who want to answer.
Mr. Brown. If I might, I will go ahead and take the first
stab at this. So what we have learned is that online can be
very, very powerful for helping students to engage with
college. And particularly we mentioned some of the life issues
for students, transportation and childcare. What online can
offer to students who are dealing with a lot of life issues is
a measure of convenience and--more than convenience, but a way
to really engage with the college and navigate through some of
these transportation issues, for example, would be a prime one.
So, for some students, it really makes a whole lot of sense.
What we have seen at Gateway is that a number of our
younger students, the ones coming right out of high school,
they have been out of school in some way, shape, or form during
the last year, that we are really going to have to work to
engage them. And so we are considering very seriously making a
number of our courses on ground for them because we really want
to link them up with the college and meet people and get to
know us, and that engagement will help support them through
their college careers.
So I think that looking at our students and listening to
them and figuring out what makes the most sense for them, given
their situations really is the way to go.
The other thing that I would add for online education is
that there are a number of models. There are hybrid models.
There are all different kinds of ways to deliver online
education. And so looking at those and refining those and
making them the best that they can be, at the end of the day,
will do nothing but good things for our students.
Mr. Harris. Thank you.
Mr. Bumphus. If I could join, Congressman Harris, in terms
of responding to your question? First of all, I think it was a
great question, and you are absolutely correct. That is going
to be the way of the future.
But what has happened, I think it has only exacerbated the
problem of the digital divide. We are finding that many of our
students just aren't able to participate. And for me, what is
most concerning is I think when you start to look at the lost
learning that has occurred over the last year plus, some of our
students have fallen even further behind.
You have heard the stories about--and I think Chairwoman
DeLauro spelled some of these things out in her opening
statement. But we have had lots of our students that have had
to go to parking lots to get a hotspot to access their learning
opportunities, their research opportunities.
And so, for us, we have got lots of our colleges that are
investing in digital equipment for their students to learn, but
what I become increasingly concerned about are those colleges
that cannot afford to do this. And in that respect, a lot of
our colleges are having students that are falling further
behind.
The one thing I would and I have suggested this in meetings
I have had with college presidents, my question is always what
are you doing in regards to professional development? Not all
faculty members--most faculty members are great teachers, but
not all of them are adept at teaching online.
As you well know, effective teaching online is more than
putting a camera in a classroom. And I have heard stories of a
lot of our students who are embarrassed by their family
circumstances, don't want a camera in their living room, dining
room, if they are able to have one, and some of those
limitations.
Mr. Harris. Well, thank you. Yield back.
The Chair. Thank you very much.
I would now like to yield to Congresswoman Roybal-Allard,
and what I am going to do is to recognize Congresswoman Roybal-
Allard and hand her the gavel while I just move quickly to the
Interior Committee to see this new Secretary of the Interior
and be able to welcome her and ask a question. And then I will
be back.
And with that, let me relinquish the gavel and recognize
Congresswoman Lucille Roybal-Allard.
Ms. Roybal-Allard [presiding]. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And thank you to all the panelists for being here. I know
just how valuable community colleges are, particularly
representing one of the poorest minority districts in the
country.
Also, as having been a single parent, I also know how
critical childcare is and how stressful and difficult it can be
to find quality, affordable childcare.
Dr. Bumphus, you wrote that 58 percent of community college
students are women, and the average student age is 28. And many
are single mothers. According to the Institute of Women's
Policy Research, just 28 percent of single mothers graduate
with a degree or certificate within 6 years of enrollment, and
another 55 percent leave school before earning a college
credential.
In your statement, you say that the CCAMPIS program needs
more congressional commitment. Can you elaborate a little bit
on how it works? And is it just the commitment of dollars, or
are there other kinds of support or changes that are needed to
the program to make it more accessible and less burdensome?
Mr. Bumphus. Thank you very much for that question,
Congresswoman.
Bottom line for me is that the resources are so important,
and it is just not dollars. What we have got to provide at each
one of our colleges is more opportunities for apprenticeships,
work and learn opportunities for these students.
Our female students, and this is particularly special to
me. I have got two daughters, and I have six sisters. And I
have had both daughters go through college, and I know the
challenges that they have had. I have watched my sisters go
through college and the challenges that they have had.
And each one of our institutions talk about the many
challenges, and sometimes the challenges for our female
students are greater than our male students because many of
them are working mothers. And we try and provide the childcare
necessary for them, but the mentoring opportunities would be
something I would add to the program and certainly monies to
support food and housing insecurity if that were an issue for
them.
Ms. Roybal-Allard. Okay. Dr. Brown, just as a follow-up, my
understanding is that Gateway Community College is a recipient
of the CCAMPIS grant. Can you elaborate a little bit on the
program? How many parents at your college request childcare,
and how many actually are able to receive it, and what impact
it has on those that don't receive it?
Mr. Brown. Sure. So Gateway Community College has an early
childhood education program, academic program, as well as a
laboratory school. We have three classrooms, and they hold up
to 20. So approximately 60 young people are able to take
advantage of the services there.
I don't know, I can find out how many people ask for it,
but I can guarantee you that whatever we are doing, it is not
enough. There are still way too many students that we have that
need childcare, and we have partnerships in the community. And
there really is, I would say, a community-wide recognition of
the need for appropriate and adequate childcare.
It has effect not just for the young people themselves, but
for their families and certainly for their parents who are
trying to complete school. So I am happy to get more
information on our program for you, but I can tell you now that
it is not enough.
What I will add, if you don't mind, is that in addition to
the childcare program that we have here, and we used our
CCAMPIS grant to extend those hours for the laboratory school
into the evening, we also have a program called the Family
Economic Security Program, the FESP program, that works with a
number of our female students, helps them to navigate the
college. Connects them with resources and services in the
community, provides coaching and a number of other things.
And what we are finding is that when we provide those
supports, that those students are remarkably successful. The
retention rate for those students is something like 65 percent,
and these are some of the most vulnerable students we have.
And so in addition to childcare, there are a number of
other things that we are looking to do and to provide for not
only young mothers, but also some of our single dads. We do
have those as well to facilitate their success in college by
helping support them in terms of navigating their
circumstances.
Ms. Roybal-Allard. I see my time is up. Mr. Fleischmann.
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And good morning to all of my colleagues on both sides of
the aisle, and to the distinguished witness panel, I have
really enjoyed your discussion.
I am really excited about this because in my home State,
the great State of Tennessee, we are already there. And it is
truly incredible with what we have done with the Tennessee
Promise.
In our State, we afford all high school graduates with the
opportunity to attend community or technical college free of
tuition and mandatory fees through the Tennessee Promise. This
is a last dollar scholarship program that allows students to
attend any of Tennessee's 13 community colleges or 27 colleges
of applied technology. And as my colleagues know, I am a big
fan of applied technology education.
While the Tennessee Promise is available to all graduating
seniors, regardless of socioeconomic standing, counselors
across the State work to target at-risk students who might not
pursue a secondary education.
My first question is for Dr. McCarthy. You mentioned in
your written testimony that community colleges are uniquely
well positioned to address the economic fallout from the
recession. How has COVID impacted the need for specialized
skills, and how will prioritizing high-demand, high-quality
credentials help stabilize the workforce, and how can we better
incentivize community and technical enrollment?
Ms. McCarthy. Thank you very much, Congressman Fleischmann,
for the excellent question, and I share your enthusiasm for the
Tennessee Promise program.
Yes, I believe that the COVID pandemic is having an
important impact on our labor market that will translate into
changes in the nature of jobs and changes in the skills that
are going to be most in demand.
I think there is little question that the pandemic has
accelerated automation trends in certain sectors, and so there
are certain types of jobs that we may not see come back. So we
are going to be dealing with how to help workers. For example,
toll booth operators and some workers in the retail and
hospitality sector are going to need to reskill.
I think there is little question that there is going to be
a real need for programs that are specifically designed,
similar to the Great Recession, for adult learners, people who
have been out in the workforce for a while. The Tennessee
Reconnect Program is a good example of a program that is
thinking about not just young--I am going to talk a little bit
about high school students, but we really do need to think a
lot about the displaced workers.
The workers who have been hardest hit by this pandemic are
workers without a college degree. These sometimes are workers
who are very wary of going back to school or maybe didn't have
a great experience in postsecondary education. So we have
learned a lot over the last decade about ways to help adults
get used to college. Again, this gets back to full support
services.
But the other key is that we have to make sure--we need to
have a jobs strategy that goes along with this skills strategy.
And that is where, again, these sectoral partnerships and
thinking broadly not just about how community colleges can
train people, but how they can be part of a set of partnerships
that actually create jobs and make sure that those transitions
are good transitions that lead to good jobs.
And I will second the notion, too, though, that high school
students, too, are going to--it is critically important that
they be aware of the changing nature of skills. And in this
case, we never want to be too specialized. I think there is
always that mix between very specific skills, but also making
sure that young people have the kind of broad-based skills that
make them resilient and capable of engaging in lifelong
learning.
So I think we need a set of--we need different strategies,
depending on where people are in their working life journey and
where they are in their educational journey.
Thank you.
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you so much.
Dr. Bumphus, how can community and technical colleges
partner with industries or employers to meet the demands of the
local economy, sir?
Mr. Bumphus. Thank you very much for that excellent
question, Congressman Fleischmann.
And I want to also congratulate you and the wonderful folks
in Tennessee for that excellent Tennessee Promise program. I
have had opportunities to meet with former Governor Haslam and
Randy Boyd and others down there, as we have used them as a
model for my office about what can be done and done statewide.
Now back to your question, I think what needs to happen
more than anything else is something that we feel like
routinely is being done, but it is not. And that is the
communication between our governmental entities and some of the
business leaders in our community to talk about what needs to
happen in the workforce side of the house.
And in my opinion, those are some things that would enhance
the program. I think Mary Alice spoke to that. I think we have
got to develop a companion piece of maybe some job action with
what is happening in terms of the studies that are happening in
Tennessee and in other places.
The academic programs are excellent in regard to how they
are being structured, but maybe not enough emphasis being put
on the workforce training needs.
Mr. Fleischmann. Well, thank you, Doctor.
And my time has expired, but before I yield back, Madam
Chair, I do want to say the impact on the lives of not only
high school students, but also older students, who are now
being given a second chance, is truly inspiring.
So thank you, to each and every one of you all, for your
great work, and I will yield back.
Mr. Bumphus. Thank you, sir.
Ms. Roybal-Allard. Ms. Clark.
Ms. Clark. Thank you so much, and thank you for this
wonderful hearing. And I appreciate all the witnesses coming
forward today.
I want to follow up on questions started by my colleague
Congresswoman Roybal-Allard and go back to CCAMPIS for a
moment. And specifically, I would like to ask you, Dr. Bumphus,
about the fact that Congress has tripled CCAMPIS funding from
$15,000,000 to $50,000,000, but we are still serving less than
1 percent of those who could benefit from this program.
Can you speak a little bit about the importance of this
program, and also that in at least 30 States, the average
yearly cost of childcare surpasses that of in-State tuition and
what it means to parents who are balancing both childcare and
community college tuition?
Mr. Bumphus. Excellent question, Congresswoman Clark, and I
really wish I had an answer for you that would maybe address
totally I think some of the challenges we are having.
First and foremost, I want to say that AACC supports this
program, and we have been vocal advocates for this program. But
you are correct. We haven't had the kind of participation that
any of us would like to see at this point, and yet we still
hear about the needs of many of our students in regards to
childcare.
We have got so many parent learners. We have got so many
working parents. And we would think that this would be a
natural, but it just hasn't been that way.
What we have called for from our office is continued
meetings of community college leaders, trying to connect the
dots between what we are hearing from, I guess, the ground
regarding the need for childcare and what we are seeing
happening with these applications for this particular program.
I personally feel it is an excellent program and would
recommend it highly to community college presidents.
I have got a daughter that is a community college
president, very proud of her, and she and I have talked about
some of the challenges of childcare and being able to make,
especially in some of our poorest communities, these kinds of
resources that are out there. But I am afraid I don't have an
honest answer I could give you in terms of what would be a
silver bullet.
I will say to you, and as I prepared for these hearings, I
have been able to also identify that there are some needs that
are not being met, and yet there are some resources out there.
And I would like to say that most community college presidents
I know can smell a dollar a mile away. If there are resources,
they will find them.
But yet this is one particular resource that we haven't
been able to fully utilize, and I will promise you this today.
We are going to look into it and see what we can do to get more
activity in this regard.
Ms. Clark. Well, thank you for that. Thank you for your
honesty around that.
And you know, these are complicated issues, but you have
spoken so passionately and eloquently about the combination of
needing to meet this pandemic, which we know has had a
devastating effect on women in our economy and especially women
of color. And so I am interested in how we can support not only
the CCAMPIS program, but how can we support creating incentives
for workforce development in early childhood education, which
community colleges play a critical role?
I have a bill that proposes student repayment if you stay
in the early childhood field, but I am interested in ideas you
have and how we can support this workforce.
Mr. Bumphus. Is that question for me?
Ms. Clark. Yes, yes. Or anybody.
Mr. Bumphus. Okay. I had a childcare program at Brookhaven
College, when I was president there some 20 years ago, that was
world class. And it was world class because we had hired such
an outstanding faculty that were prepared to teach students no
matter where they came from. The problem was the pay was so low
when they finished the program.
Ms. Clark. Right, right.
Mr. Bumphus. And the one thing we didn't want to do is have
a student spend their good money, their Federal money to attend
a program that would give them less than what I call family-
sustaining wages. Or another way, have them graduate and then
still almost be able to qualify to be in a poverty line.
So we have got to come up with a way that we can present
opportunities for students when they finish these childcare
programs to be in a status that they will have more resources
to support their lifestyle and what they are doing and still
get them through the best programs. I hate to say it, but
probably more pay would be helpful.
Ms. Clark. I don't think you should hate to say it. That is
the key.
Thank you so much. I yield back.
Ms. Roybal-Allard. Ms. Herrera Beutler.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you. So I wanted to ask about
childcare, if anybody can take care of my child, but that has
already been asked.
Ms. Clark. Send her over, Jaime.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. This one, she is my third. I am not
going to send her. I will send the first two.
Okay. In my district, career and technical education is
vital to meeting the workforce needs. I think, Ms. Jordan, you
were talking a little bit about that. And I wanted to see if
you could speak to best practices for developing partnerships
with our community colleges and employers in response to each
local community's needs.
Because that is one of the things I have observed with my
community colleges is they are so specific to that community--
and that is not to say you don't want to prepare young people
for whatever--or older people. I was an older person when I
went to community college, and I loved my community college
education. But we want to make sure that they are responding to
what the needs are in that community and preparing people.
And I have seen really, really awesome partnerships there,
but then I have also seen that there needs to be more. So I was
hoping you could maybe speak to that.
Ms. Jordan. Absolutely. For us, it really starts with that
dialogue. Engaging with the community college to really help to
understand what are the skills needed by a company in that area
and having that commitment between the community college and
the company to talk about how the company can give back.
Looking at a syllabus, providing subject matter experts to be a
guest speaker in a class, providing pathways to employment. So,
for us, that could mean internships or apprenticeships as part
of our program.
Our P-TECH program I think is also a really fantastic
example of that. Industry partnerships is key, and so it helps
students to transition from high school into that dual
enrollment associate's degree program, and it brings industry
into the classroom. We start with mentorship in Grade 9. They
are getting exposure to learning about what it means to work at
that particular industry partner, and those industry partners
are local to that school.
So it is really relevant to what they might be hiring when
the students graduate, which makes it really easy for them to
transition after 4 years, 5 years, or 6 years, however long it
may take them to complete both that high school and associate's
degree, into employment. Hopefully, at that company or in
another company in the area.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. I think, to that point, one of the
other things I have seen--I think Congressman Fleischmann was
talking about this--is the early partnership. So we always
think about community college is a 2-year degree. You know, you
are at a certain point.
But in Washington State, we have pathways for high school
students, and so you can dual--you can do both the dual
associate's degree along with finishing your diploma. And this
dope was like, no, why would I want to leave my senior year and
be off campus? Which I look back and I thought perhaps maybe
paying--free first 2 years of college and saving that time
versus paying for it at a 4-year institution.
And so I think marrying that community college time with
industry, you know, just access. Just seeing like, ``Oh, is
that something I want to go into?'' is really critical. I am a
huge fan of our community colleges. I think they are such a
flexible, tough key to making sure that our workforce will
continue to evolve in the way that it should.
They are nimble and they--if we can make sure there is
childcare, they make sure that nothing gets old and stale. Like
they are always having to revamp.
Whoever it was that I think who said they know how to
squeeze a dollar, I love that about you guys. So I am looking
forward to hearing and supporting your request as we move
forward in this committee.
So I will mute myself and yield back. Thanks, Madam Chair.
The Chair [presiding]. Let me say thank you to my
colleague, Lucille Roybal-Allard, for taking over in my
absence.
And with that, let me recognize Congresswoman Frankel.
Ms. Frankel. Good morning. How is everybody?
Thank you to our guests today.
I wanted to tell you something first. Ava Parker, who is
our very able leader of our community college in Palm Beach
County, actually they call them now State colleges, but it is
similar to yours, it was a community-type college. Here is what
she told us.
Enrollment has declined 13 percent in the fall and 15
percent for the spring. Many students don't have laptops or
Internet. So they can't do remote learning. And many students
work, and when their jobs were cut, they had to stop school.
Faculty are concerned about returning to the school as some
students refuse vaccines. The State cut the budget and vetoed
the funding for an online library system. Forty-eight colleges
are accepting less transfers from community colleges.
They have had to decrease class size because of social
distancing. There are not enough rooms for all classes on
campus. So I am assuming that is a common issue across the
country.
My first question is in regards--and whoever wants to
answer this. Is AACC undertaking any efforts to improve the
transfer process for students, particularly disadvantaged
students, when they want to transfer from a community college
to, I guess, to one of their State schools or another what we
call a university or college? And are additional Federal
resources needed?
Mr. Bumphus. Representative Frankel, I will take that
question, if you don't mind? I would say, first and foremost,
your State of Florida probably has the best system of transfer
in the country.
And by the way, your president is outstanding. She is on my
board, and I can attest to work closely with her on a lot of
different things.
But despite some progress, transfer remains problematic in
many places, and that is due to a variety of things. In some
States, it is a policy issue. In other States, there are not
enough folks in the universities that are communicating with
community colleges, and AACC initiated what we are calling an
Equity in Transfer project about 6 months ago that is getting
rave reviews.
We are addressing States where the equity issues are
becoming clear regarding those students that are students of
color being able to transfer and have their credits accepted on
par with white students. And that is happening. And we have got
some policy things that we are working on at a lot of different
levels.
So the Equity in Transfer initiative is one thing I would
speak to that is occurring that is bringing more transfer
programs in line, and we are seeing increased numbers already.
We are working closely with AAC&U, the Association of Colleges
and Universities, and APLU, the land grant universities in the
country. And so that relationship has really started to be
executed, and we are starting to see the increased progress
just in terms of the relationships between our college
presidents and our university presidents.
Ms. Frankel. This may be sort of a simpleton question. But
just could you explain why it is so much more expensive or I
should say less expensive to go to a community college than a
regular college? I don't know what I call ``regular,'' but a
college or a university?
Mr. Bumphus. I get that question a lot, surprisingly, and I
don't want to speak to the expenses of a university. But in all
likelihood, some of those expenses revolve around the cost of
the faculty.
You know, we focus on teaching in our colleges. Not a lot
of research necessarily, but excellent teaching. We focus on
hiring faculty members that want to teach, that want to work
with students. And I have to say my comments are based not just
on my experience working in community colleges, but I worked at
the University of Texas at Austin, where I was a fully tenured
professor, in fact was chair of the department.
And when it comes to hiring faculty members who are
researchers, those expenses become a little bit more
significant. And so that is a part of the increased cost, but
also you are talking about a student that perhaps will maybe
want to attend a football game on Saturday and some other
things that are associated with university life, of which we
all perhaps participated and greatly enjoyed. But those
expenses become a little bit more expensive for a student to
matriculate than probably the nuts and bolts for a community
college.
Ms. Frankel. Thank you. I yield back, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Cline.
Mr. Cline. Thank you, Madam Chair, for holding this
hearing.
Community colleges are invaluable to the localities and
students they serve to educate and prepare them to enter the
workforce. They provide more flexible education and skilled
opportunities at affordable cost. They work to ensure that
students of all ages are able to succeed in completing their
education by providing options that work for those with
families dependent on them or those who are balancing current
employment. And their pathways to completion and employment are
effective and provide opportunities for profitable careers.
In my home State of Virginia, we are blessed to have many
wonderful institutions of higher education. Community colleges
play a large role in providing those opportunities for
Virginians, and I have three different community colleges that
serve the students of the Sixth Congressional District.
We have programs like FastForward Virginia that work with
community colleges to provide job training in essential fields
that are completed in a matter of weeks, not years. And with
this program, trainees are responsible for one-third of the
cost, and the participating colleges are held accountable to
provide training by only receiving the remainder of the funds
once the student completes the program.
These programs are designed to meet the needs of local
employers, and some have guaranteed interview agreements with
the local businesses after completion. This type of training
provides an affordable education and skilled learning that
gives the students the opportunity to get into the workforce
sooner. I look forward to continuing to work with community
colleges in Virginia to provide innovative opportunities like
FastForward to students, and I am thankful for those dedicated
to teaching and educating the future generation in my home
district.
Let me go ahead and throw it out there to anyone who might
want to answer. Community colleges offer education
opportunities to many students who are caring for a family. And
with the K-12 school closures particularly in the State of
Virginia being as strict as they were or have been, I would
like to know how this impacted community college students who
are now having to step into a new role of assisting with remote
education for their children. And did it impact enrollment
numbers, and did any other closures across the country impact
students at community colleges?
Mr. Bumphus. Congressman Cline, I will try that question if
you don't mind? Certainly, we have heard from a lot of our
students who did not return that are trying to make sure that
they were caring in some cases for a multigenerational home, if
you will. Their students attending K-12 and having to work with
them on virtual learning, they themselves in a virtual learning
classroom that was probably more than they could take.
A lot of students, as you know, pivoted rapidly in March of
2020, going from in-person classes that they were doing very
well with to having to go to school virtually with no option.
That was what they had to do. And in many cases, they did it.
They didn't really complain much, I guess. But they, bottom
line, did it.
But when it was time for them to return in the fall, we had
some students saying to us not so much for them for that fall
and then again for the spring. Another challenge that we have
heard folks talking about has been I talked about that digital
divide. I want to keep talking about that.
In fact, I did a presentation recently for some group, and
I got introduced as Walter ``Broadband'' Bumphus. They said,
``We know you are going to talk about broadband and the
challenges.'' I said, ``Well, look, I won't say much about it,
but I will say this,'' you know?
But the other side of the coin has been you are exactly
right. That has been a challenge. When you are trying to
navigate Zoom for the first time in your life and you really
aren't familiar with technology, that can be a major challenge.
And then you double that with trying to deal with your
students' lessons, and they are not prepared to be a teacher,
that is another challenge. So----
Mr. Cline. Thank you very much.
You know, I have heard from some community colleges in my
home district and in Virginia that instead of supporting a
doubling of Pell, they support expanding it to be permitted for
use for shorter-term training programs like the one I described
earlier. What other initiatives can make classes and programs
provided by community colleges more accessible to students?
Mr. Bumphus. I will try that one and then let my colleagues
add on. You know, the short-term Pell, if you ask most
community college presidents, that will be their top priority.
More so than doubling Pell.
Now certainly an enhanced Pell award would make it easier
for our students to afford some more wraparound services, if
you will, and so I won't continue to elaborate on that. I see
our red light on, and so with that, I am going to say thank you
so much for your question. You have got a great system of
colleges in Virginia, sir.
Mr. Cline. Thank you very much.
Madam Chair, I yield back.
The Chair. Congresswoman Bustos.
Mrs. Bustos. All right. Thank you, Madam Chair. I
appreciate it.
I had something really, really awesome happen yesterday,
which was the First Lady came to visit one of the community
colleges that serves the congressional district that I
represent, Sauk Valley Community College. Also with her was the
Secretary of Education. And it leads to what I am really
curious about and what I am hoping maybe, Dr. McCarthy, I am
going to address this to you. But if anybody else would like to
chime in. But one of the labs that we all visited together,
along with our Governor of Illinois, J.B. Pritzker, was a lab
for nurses.
And we met this 64-year-old nurse who had been an LPN and
was going back to community college so she could get her RN
degree. And as we were talking with her, I thought this is what
we need more of, people to maybe advance their degrees in some
line of healthcare or people to go into this line of work.
Because the congressional district that I serve is 14
counties, covers the entire northwestern corner of the State of
Illinois. But nine of the counties are provider shortage areas,
all right? So 9 of the 14 counties are short on dental care, as
well as mental health. Eleven of the 14 counties are short on
primary care providers.
So it is clear to me, especially after this visit by the
First Lady, that community college can play an incredible role
in providing nursing--people coming out of the nursing
programs, dental programs, dental hygienists and other degrees.
So, Dr. McCarthy, why don't I address this to you? But what
role should community colleges have in fighting healthcare
provider shortages that we are seeing all over this country,
especially in rural areas like the one I represent? And
probably part two of that question is what more can Congress do
to support community colleges to help address those shortages?
Ms. McCarthy. Congresswoman Bustos, thank you for that
excellent question, and yes, I couldn't agree more.
Community colleges do need to be on the frontline of
replenishing our healthcare workforce and creating
opportunities, too, for our frontline and essential healthcare
workers that have been working so hard and who need that next
step in their career. So I would tell you the community
colleges are really the workhorse of the healthcare workforce
development. They are the primary source of our nursing
workforce and then also all of our, again, our frontline
healthcare workers.
So, again, I think targeted investment to help colleges
sort of meet this need would be very helpful. Also targeted
investments that include some sort of opportunities to create
more partnerships with nursing homes, hospital systems,
different clinical settings. Because one of the major obstacles
for a lot of these colleges in expanding these programs is
access to clinical opportunities.
So we need to think more about how do we get more clinical
opportunities available to community college students and what
sort of incentives and how can we structure an investment that
gets those providers of clinical spaces to open those up a
little bit more.
I will just say two more things quickly. One of the other
big challenges that we have is that community colleges also
provide a lot of training for our very first step into
healthcare jobs. Those are certified nursing assistants and
some of the patient technical assistance--patient techs and
pharma techs that we have been hearing about. But a lot of
students, those jobs, as we have been talking about, pay so
little that a lot of students have a difficult time doing just
what the person you talked about, the LPN going back for their
RN.
So we need to do something about the wages of those
frontline certified nursing assistants, home health aides, and
other sort of frontline healthcare workers who just make too
little and are in a lot of economic uncertainty because of it.
And then the last thing I will say, too, is that what we
have been seeing, we have been doing a lot of research on
community colleges that take their students all the way to the
bachelor's degree. Both the State of Florida and the State of
Washington community colleges, they do that quite a bit. And
that has been a big driver of increasing the share of
respiratory therapists, nurses at the bachelor degree level,
and other healthcare workers.
So, I mean, I think thinking about how can we free
community colleges up, particularly in rural areas, to bring
their healthcare workers from the entry level all the way to
the bachelor's degree is something we need to focus on more.
Thank you.
Mrs. Bustos. Very good. Thank you, Dr. McCarthy.
I have only got about a half a minute left. So rather than
ask a follow-up question that will take a little bit too long,
I will yield back the remainder of my time.
And again, Madam Chair, thank you very much for hosting
this hearing today.
The Chair. Thank you. Thank you very much. Congresswoman
Watson Coleman.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you to each of the witnesses. You all have been a
fountain of information.
I am a huge fan of county colleges because I think the
county colleges meet so many different diverse needs and get to
our very diverse populations. So, ``hear, hear'' from me. I
just need to know what you need in order to be able to do the
things that are important in our communities.
I am very interested in this issue of new collar positions
that Ms. Jordan spoke about. I would like to know more about
that because I think that that is something that transitions
people from high school to college to workable programs to
good-paying jobs. So if you would just elaborate on what these
new collar positions include?
Ms. Jordan. Absolutely. For us, new collar can really
include most jobs that exist, anything that requires a skill,
but not necessarily a traditional degree. So that could include
jobs in healthcare. It could include jobs in technology. For
us, we really looked heavily at technology roles, and that is
why we created our apprenticeship program to focus on
cybersecurity developers, software developers, designers, data
scientists, building those skills from within.
Our P-TECH dual enrollment program as well is another great
example. We do have many graduates of that program that choose
to transition on to higher education, but allowing those
students to earn both their high school degree and that
associate's degree at no cost becomes a fantastic bridge into
employment immediately upon graduation in many cases. So----
Mrs. Watson Coleman. How do you all pay for that? Does IBM
underwrite the cost of that?
Ms. Jordan. P-TECH is funded through dual enrollment
programs in the different States. So it is funded through the
State for the community college degree. Industry partners
provide mentorship, job opportunities, internships, and in many
cases, job opportunities upon graduation like IBM does.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. I invite you all to the State of New
Jersey. We have got a very robust county college system, and I
represent at least four of them. And I have worked with all of
them in every one of the 21 counties when I was a trustee for
the 4-year colleges and my husband was a trustee for the 2-year
colleges. So we are very much supporters of both the 4-year
State colleges and the county colleges.
I also like the idea of county colleges having the programs
available for students who are in high school. I wish that we
could get to them at even an earlier age so they could
understand what opportunities exist, how that English course is
important, how that math course is important, how that science
course relates to the next level in their lives.
I am very interested in seeing that the Pell grants are
increased. And Dr. Bumphus, you said that if you had a choice,
you would want to see an increase in the short-term Pell
programs as opposed to just an increase in Pell grants.
Could you elaborate a little bit on that? What are the
short-term Pell grant uses? I am not sure I followed you, but I
got kind of sidetracked out of the committee hearing. So----
Mr. Bumphus. I will elaborate if you would like, yes.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. I would. Thank you.
Mr. Bumphus. Thank you very much for the question,
Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
Specifically speaking, Pell grant eligibility requires you
to be taking a certain number of courses and credit hours, and
you might have to enroll for nine credits when a student really
should go and take a three-credit course or a six-credit course
and still have a certificate that would allow him or her to do
whatever program they are being trained to do.
Right now, the Pell grant--so my comment was not an either/
or. I would like to see both/and, if you will. But it would
allow those students who want to just come and come for a short
period of time, and oftentimes, these are students who have
already earned their degree. Something like 15 to 17 percent of
students in community colleges already have a baccalaureate or
a master's degree and are simply wanting to return to get their
qualifications and certification to get a job, you know, as
quickly as they possible can.
And so that was the point I was making. Certainly, the Pell
grant would open up many more resources for a student.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. I appreciate that because I think
there is a whole bunch of retooling that is necessary now, and
then we find that there are very valuable jobs that 4-year
college graduates or even master's graduates don't necessarily
qualify for. But some specific education in the field that they
are interested in is very viable, very important, and we should
think about doing what we can to support it.
In New Jersey, we have a lot of articulation agreements
between county colleges and State colleges. And there are some
county colleges where you can get your 4-year degree right on
the county college campus, even though it is with the
relationship with another 4-year college.
So there are just so many opportunities that exist on that
level, and I, for one, am a supporter of county colleges. And
whatever we need, I would like to be able to support.
I am also a supporter of the TRIO program because getting
to those first-generation, those underserved communities and
those young people that don't have the kind of confidence,
courage, or even the kind of support that they need in their
home life, letting them know that there are options for them is
so vitally important.
I thank you so much for today's hearing. And Madam Chair, I
yield back my time.
The Chair. Thank you very, very much. Congressman Harder.
Mr. Harder. Wonderful. Thank you so much, Chair DeLauro,
for hosting this hearing on a very important topic.
And thank you to the witnesses for contributing their
testimony.
As a former instructor at Modesto Junior College, I have
seen firsthand the positive impact that community colleges can
have in transforming lives. And in my district, only about 17
percent of adults actually end up with a 4-year bachelor's
degree. Eighty-three percent don't. And so community colleges
and the opportunity they offer are incredibly critical to folks
that I represent.
Knowing the value of apprenticeship opportunities, I
introduce a trades and career education package, a skills
package last Congress that was focused on addressing different
needs within the career and trades education space, including
giving students more opportunities for career education in
community colleges and throughout the lifecycle of their
educational journey.
It breaks my heart when I meet with employers who say they
are having trouble filling high-paying jobs with local
students, and then right afterwards, sometimes within a matter
of hours, I will meet with community college students who are
looking to graduate and are scared that they won't be able to
find a job in our communities. And that lack of matching
strikes me as a real failure and something we can do much
better on.
Ms. Jordan, I was very interested reading your testimony
about the work that IBM is doing with community colleges. I
believe in business and community college collaboration to
build skills-based programs, and I think there are far too few
of these programs across the country. What do you think limits
this type of collaboration, and what can the public sector and
this committee do to better incentivize that the type of
programs that we are talking about today are the norm and not
the exception?
Ms. Jordan. I think in many cases, some of it is an
awareness challenge. When we first started developing our
apprenticeship program, there weren't a lot of apprenticeships
in the technology industry. They were very historically limited
to trades roles.
And so we started from scratch building our program. And it
was very successful. As I mentioned, it grew twice as fast as
expected. And in the 3\1/2\ years since it has existed, we have
had over 500 apprentices enter our program.
But we regularly heard from others who were interested in
doing the same and did not know where to start. And so, in
2019, we teamed up with the Consumer Technology Association to
launch the CTA Apprenticeship Coalition, where we essentially
open sourced all of our frameworks, playbooks, and guidance to
help other companies start their own apprenticeship program.
So what took us roughly 6 months from conception through
DOL registration, other companies have been able to do in a
period as short as 2 to 4 weeks, leveraging all of the
materials that we have shared with them.
We also share those frameworks and guidance with members of
the Business Roundtable, Aspen Institute, through many of our
partnerships. We have also worked with the California
Department of Technology, who recently adopted our
apprenticeship framework to launch their own apprenticeships.
And so we have seen really a groundswell there, helping other
companies to adopt these types of programs.
There is the need for replicable models on the community
college side as well. For schools to then understand what is
required for an apprenticeship and ensure that we are able to
deliver the curriculum, if that is the type of partnership that
the company would seek.
Programs like the Learning Credential Network that I spoke
about as well are also valuable. That type of infrastructure
would actually provide job seekers with the transparency around
how their validated skills can match to open and in-demand
roles. So infrastructure will play a key role in helping those
job seekers find opportunities.
Mr. Harder. Terrific. Thank you.
It feels like there is just so much interest from the
community college side, from the employer side, from the
student side, and yet these programs are altogether too rare.
Dr. Bumphus, would love to hear from you in sort of our
final minute. From the community college side, what do you
believe is limiting the proliferation of programs like the ones
we are talking about today?
Mr. Bumphus. Oftentimes, and I know this is going to sound
basic, the only limitation I have seen is when there is not
appropriate communication between that business member that you
said that you ran into and that college president. I have found
that there is little that can't be accomplished when you have
the business community and college presidents chatting and
coming together.
I have been a college president off and on between being a
university professor and the job I am in now over the last 30
years, sir, and I have found that each and every time I have
sat down with a corporate or a business CEO, there was never
anything we couldn't really work out as we started chatting
about it at our level. And if there was a need for us to
develop a program, oftentimes corporate leaders say, hey, look,
we will build it. Or we will support--we will provide support
for the expensive equipment.
And when you can do that, get your faculty involved, sir,
not much you can't accomplish.
Mr. Harder. Terrific. Well, thank you so much. And I see my
time up.
With that, I yield back to the chair. Thank you.
Mr. Bumphus. Thank you.
The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Lee.
Ms. Lee of California. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Thank you to our witnesses.
This is such an important hearing, and I really appreciate
you, Madam Chair, for holding this and also with our witnesses
today. I come from California, and community colleges are
really the primary means for black and Latino students to gain
an education, a skill, job training, whatever. Community
colleges provide us. Community colleges are it. And so I just
want to thank you and salute you and just say how supportive I
am of this.
We have in California, unfortunately, the end of
affirmative action in the 1990s. So, primarily, students of
color, especially black and Latino students are--they don't get
admitted to the University of California. And my alma mater, UC
Berkeley, maybe between 2 and 4 percent are students of color.
And the highest number of students from any State going to
HBCUs are from California because of the barriers to higher
education in California.
And so, having said that, I wanted to drill down a little
bit on minority-serving institutions. We have no HBCUs west of
the Mississippi. So we have PBIs through community colleges and
Hispanic-serving institutions. Want to find out do you know
where they are? Because some PBIs don't even know that they are
eligible to be a PBI, and what type of benefits are there for
becoming a minority-serving institution or PBI.
And then, secondly, Mr. Fleishmann and I work on additional
funding every year for computer science for all for our young,
K through 12 black and girls--black and Latino girls of color,
low-income girls in public schools. So how can community
colleges work with our public schools to get some of these
resources out of what we appropriate every year for technology
education?
Mr. Bumphus, I guess I would start with you. And thank you
all again so much for being here.
Mr. Bumphus. Congresswoman Lee, thank you so much for your
always great support for our community colleges. We really
appreciate that.
But to your question, first of all, I don't know if you are
aware, but there are a lot of community colleges that are MSIs,
HSIs, and PBIs, and we proudly make that statement. But what we
can do more of is perhaps have them jointly do programs for
students. And I want to back up for a minute and just say
community colleges greatly support our MSIs and PBIs, and I
work very closely with Lezli Baskerville and a number of the
folks that lead those programs.
But we believe that if we can get more of our students
attending some of those PBIs and MSIs, then we have a better
transfer relationship as well. We have great relationships, but
they need to be improved. We don't have enough of our students
looking at our HBCUs as options, and we have started to do more
in that regard.
Ms. Lee of California. Let me just mention one thing really
quickly.
Mr. Bumphus. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Lee of California. A lot of our students don't know
that community colleges have that designation as minority-
serving institutions or PBIs.
Mr. Bumphus. You know what is really sad? Some of the
colleges didn't realize they had that distinction. I think that
was your point earlier.
I was at a college recently in New Jersey, and they got
information that I believe was something like 24 or 25 percent
of their students had to be from a Hispanic background to
qualify as an Hispanic-serving institution. They had the
largest celebration I think I had ever seen just because of
that designation. I think you are going to find more of our 2-
year colleges looking at that because of where the resources
are.
I made a statement earlier in my testimony today that
college presidents can generally smell money, and where there
is money, they will try to find a way to address programs to
access some of those resources. These are some outstanding
programs that are available through these particular programs,
and regretfully, not enough of our colleges have taken
advantage of that.
We need to do more. I agree.
Ms. Lee of California. Yes, yes. Well, Madam Chair, and Dr.
Bumphus, and to all of our witnesses in this space, I would
like to figure out a way we can follow up with you. Because I
know just in California, for example, in my community colleges,
they do not have that information.
They do not know what Federal funds are available as PBIs
or minority-serving institutions for them to go after. And so
we have got to figure out how to communicate that to them.
Mr. Bumphus. I will make a commitment to you here today.
Eloy Oakley is a great friend of mine, the chancellor of the
system out there, and we have got several of your college
presidents that serve on my board. I am going to make this a
priority for just me personally to communicate with Eloy and
those presidents, and we will follow up with you, and we will
get something done on this.
Ms. Lee of California. Thank you again. Because the only--I
am telling you, community colleges for black and Latino
students are it in terms of higher education in California. And
so I will do anything I can do to help support and grow those
resources for the education of our young people, who really
have many barriers to the universities in California.
Thank you.
Mr. Bumphus. That is sad, but true. But I will commit to
get back to you on that.
Thank you.
Ms. Lee of California. Okay. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Thank you. What I want to do now is if we can
keep ourselves, I would like to deal with a kind of a second
round, but a lightning round here. If we can do this in 2
minutes each and then wrap it up?
And I know several people are still here. So let us just go
very, very quickly. And I don't know--anyone, Dr. Bumphus, I
get to you, but anybody else can jump in, or you can get back
to me.
We fund formula grants--Perkins, CTE, adult education,
WIOA. We do competitive grants--apprenticeships, the
Strengthening Community college Colleges Training Grant, et
cetera. What are the most effective Federal levers for
supporting community colleges? Where should we go?
I would like to get your opinion and if I could quickly get
others.
Mr. Bumphus. I would perhaps start with the Pell grants
because of what they do. But in regard to programs, we worked
with the Labor in regards to the apprenticeship grants. They
are so important.
Perkins I can't say enough about, and TRIO programs. Those
are the grants that I am probably most familiar with as a
practitioner. My very first job at a college was working in
TRIO, and I am so intimately familiar with all the nuances that
are involved with TRIO grants and the difference that they
make. So I would cite those again.
The Chair. Okay. Let me ask anyone else, please jump in. I
have got a minute and 2 seconds. Let us go.
Ms. Jordan. From our perspective, anything that could help
to fund pathways to employment. So the apprenticeship grants or
funding to support the expansion of P-TECH programs would be
critical for us.
The Chair. Okay. Great. Thank you.
Mr. Brown. I would say----
Ms. McCarthy. I would say that----
Mr. Brown. Oh, go ahead. I will go last.
The Chair. Okay.
Ms. McCarthy. Okay. Very quickly, I would just say again we
need investments that help community colleges build their
capacity. So it is important that we fund the student aid
programs. Pell grant is absolutely critical, but we also have
to have dollars that go to build the capacity of the colleges,
either through competitive grants, Perkins, WIOA, and of
course, the adult ed and the investment in apprenticeship. But
it is capacity plus student aid.
The Chair. Okay. And Dr. Brown.
Mr. Brown. Last, but not least, all of those programs,
particularly the ones that sort of are directed to community
colleges, are all absolutely necessary--Pell, TRIO, and so on.
But I would also encourage not to forget the kinds of funding
and supports that are going to help students outside because,
again, the barriers that our students face to completing are
connected with family and childcare and so on.
The Chair. For supportive services. Thank you.
Let me yield to the Congressman Harris.
Mr. Harris. Thank you very much.
And I would just like to give Ms. Jordan and McCarthy an
opportunity to follow up on my question before, which is that
community colleges can be at the forefront of figuring out how
this new paradigm of adult education of online learning can
exist going into the future. What do the community colleges
need in order to refine this technique? Again, looking to the
future as this becomes the way adults will learn.
Ms. Jordan. Access to a tool like the Learning Credential
Network is certainly one thing to focus on. Infrastructure
needs. There has been a lot of conversation about the
supportive services. We believe online education is absolutely
a huge play as well. Many IBMers are very regularly learning
online.
But for many learners, they don't have access to secure
Internet or even to laptops, and so as we think about the
proliferation here, infrastructure services will also be really
critical.
Ms. McCarthy. And I think--thank you Congressman Harris,
and I would agree with all of those, and I would just add in,
too, I think there needs to be more resources for community
colleges to collaborate. It was mentioned earlier about
community colleges sort of going in together on equipment
purchases, things like simulators. And some of these things can
be very big capital investments. Enabling colleges to sort of
go in on those together and develop shared use programs is
something that we have been seeing over this last year, and
that has been very effective.
And then, again, also just dollars for--to buy the
necessary infrastructure equipment and software needed and to
do the professional development that Dr. Bumphus has mentioned
many times is so important for the faculty and the support
service staff to be effective using these new technologies.
Mr. Bumphus. Congressman Harris, if I could add one more
thing, that I didn't speak about the importance of
infrastructure. I can't say enough about that, but we haven't
talked much this morning about our small and rural colleges.
Such needs there. Everything we have said today, this morning,
has been perhaps magnified in terms of the need in our small
and rural colleges.
Mr. Brown. And I would only add professional development,
as several of us has mentioned, but also programs like
apprenticeships that really help our students to both work and
learn at the same time.
Mr. Harris. Thank you. I yield back.
The Chair. Congresswoman Roybal-Allard.
Ms. Roybal-Allard. Okay. I would like to raise two issues
very, very quickly. Dr. McCarthy, according to the Child
Welfare League in America, 11 percent of students at 2-year
institutions are experiencing homelessness due to the pandemic.
While up to 30 percent of 2-year institutions offer on-campus
housing, many students still find themselves with no access to
housing, food, or broadband access. Where should this
subcommittee focus to help community colleges address this
issue?
And secondly, my second question would be is that--and you
partially answered this when you were responding to Mrs.
Bustos. In your written statement, you say that one of the
barriers to expanding apprenticeships into industries beyond
construction is that career entry and advancement in high-
growth fields like health, which you talked about earlier, but
also you include business services, information technology,
manufacturing, require college degrees, which only institutions
of higher education can deliver.
Can you also give some additional examples of what you
would consider targeted investments? Because you mention that
they need to be targeted. So if you could answer those two
questions in the time I have, I would appreciate it.
Ms. McCarthy. Thank you, Congresswoman.
Yes, I will start with the last one, which is, again, I
think we need targeted investments similar to--targeted
investments in helping community colleges build degree
apprenticeship programs because you have career advancement in
many fields, particularly in licensed professions, and areas
like healthcare do require academic or credentials that only
institutions of higher education can award.
But colleges really do not know how to build these programs
very well. They just don't have experience, and I think with
some targeted investments on how can colleges build credit-
bearing apprenticeship programs with industry that result and
they culminate in a degree would help move the field forward.
And then, in terms of your first question around how to
help the many students who are--again, that need access to many
more benefits, housing, food. Again, I think we need some
targeted investments around that specific issue of how colleges
can work with their local health and human service agencies,
community-based organizations, come up with some models that
allow for them to be able to reach the students who need them
and sort of deal with their housing and food insecurity needs
and childcare needs.
But it requires partnerships. The community colleges cannot
do this on their own, and that is one of the biggest
challenges, I believe.
Ms. Roybal-Allard. Thank you.
The Chair. Congressman Cline.
Mr. Cline. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I want to thank Dr. Bumphus for recognizing the importance
of rural institutions as well. Most of my district is rural,
and the five community colleges that go across the whole
district definitely are responding to the need to serve rural
students.
One of the ways that we are serving--that these colleges
are serving students in our area is through dual enrollment.
These opportunities give high school students a great
opportunity to start earning college credits that will allow
them to graduate early. And I spoke with President Blosser from
Lord Fairfax Community College and Dr. Downey from Blue Ridge
Community College about dual enrollment opportunities that they
offer and ways to help ensure that they are truly serving their
communities.
Can you identify some of the main barriers that you see
that discourage high school students, current high school
students from taking dual enrollment courses and getting a jump
start on their higher education?
Mr. Bumphus. There are a couple barriers I would cite, sir.
First being who is going to pay for it? And it is not the
student, but is it the K-12 district? Is it going to be the
community college?
Secondly, and maybe the biggest barrier sometimes, is
finding qualified faculty to teach the courses. Not that the K-
12 faculty aren't qualified and certainly the community college
faculty would be qualified, but the SACS, Southern Association
of Colleges and Schools, the accrediting arm that accredits
your State and others in the South, requires that the faculty
member of record teaching the course has to have a master's
degree and 18 graduate credit hours in whatever subject they
are teaching.
And oftentimes while the K-12 teacher might be very
qualified in teaching a given course, they may not be qualified
by SACS accreditation standards. And so those are a couple of
the barriers.
I would draw your attention to an article that Dan
Domenech, who is head of AASA, the school superintendents
association, and I co-wrote about 3 weeks ago about dual credit
programs and what can be done. In fact, I will get you a copy
of that as soon as this meeting is over.
We hold meetings twice a year on dual credit and what can
be done. We bring together 12 superintendents, 12 college
presidents for that specific purpose. Because we believe there
are so many opportunities out there, and we have got a lot of
low-hanging fruit that we are not taking advantage of.
But thank you for your support, and we will get you some
information on that.
Mr. Cline. You hit the nail on the head with flexibility
among the States for training teachers. That is so important.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Frankel.
Ms. Frankel. Thank you. And to the panel, thank you again
for your time and your service to our communities.
I want to just follow up on my colleagues' questions on the
digital divide, and really how is--what is the best way for
Congress to help the situation and just in terms of funding? Is
it through grants, loan programs at the community college? Are
there any programs that you know of that are successful, and
can you quantify the problem?
Mr. Bumphus. I will take a shot at that, Representative
Frankel, and I will start by saying, and I think Congressman
Cline touched on it. And the flexibility piece, I really
applaud the Department of Ed and the flexibility that they have
provided in their most recent guidance, if you will, for how
the CARES funding to be spent, the CRRSSA funds, and the rescue
funds. And if we had more opportunities to utilize some of the
funding that we get in a way that colleges can provide laptops
and other technology equipment to their students, it would go a
long way towards addressing some of the digital issues that we
have.
Ms. Frankel. What would be the format? Are you thinking of
a loan, a grant? How would--if you had the ability to do that,
how would you get the equipment to the students? What would be
the format?
Mr. Bumphus. Great question, and a pretty complicated
question for just a simple answer. Right now, the mechanism I
think may be the best mechanism would be to utilize some of the
monies we get for these in terms of stimulus dollars that we
received. Being able to have more flexibility with those
dollars as the Department has awarded----
Ms. Frankel. I am just going to interrupt you, but what is
the connection with the school and the student? In other words,
do you see giving a computer to a student or lending a computer
to a student?
Mr. Bumphus. Both/and. Most colleges received some stimulus
dollars over the last 6 or 8 months. And they in the past were
prevented from utilizing those dollars for equipment. Most
recently, we have been given some latitude of how we can spend
those dollars.
In the CARES Act initial funding, 50 percent of the dollars
a college received had to go to students, but they were
prevented from utilizing those dollars for the purposes of
digital support. And most recently under the new Secretary of
Ed Cardona, they have allowed us to use many more of those
dollars for this purpose.
Mr. Brown. If I could add, our college has a laptop lending
program that we have used through our library. And then our
foundation over the past year raised funding to distribute 650
laptops to students who needed them to deal with the pandemic.
So absent a sort of a complete sort of taking care of this,
I think it is going to be a number of different mechanisms for
funding coming together to support the needs of our students.
Ms. Frankel. Thank you. Madam Chair, I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you. I just might add on that point
because I think the digital divide is such an important issue
because it is not just at this moment in terms of an education.
I think we are going to look at the jobs of the future being
more targeted at digital, and what we don't want to do is
exacerbate that digital divide now so that those people who are
already behind will get further behind.
And I think we have to look at philanthropic organizations
as well who are willing to help us out with this effort in a
number of ways.
Let me just ask Congressman Harris for any closing remarks
or comments that he would like to make, and then I will wrap it
up. But you have all been wonderful.
Congressman Harris.
Mr. Harris. No, thank you all very much, and thank you,
Madam Chair, for calling the hearing.
Look, the bottom line is that community colleges I think in
the past, present, and especially into the future are
incredibly important, as we get into the 21st century economy,
the 21st century learning environment, where they are the
interface between what people need to know and meeting people
where they are. So anything we can do. The digital divide is
important. We have to make sure we know in rural areas, we are
bringing broadband that last mile, and that will open up
incredible opportunities, especially in rural communities.
So thank you all, and thank you, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Thank you.
Thank you very, very much. And I just want to just repeat
even not only with the testimony, but with the range and
breadth of the answers that our witnesses have given this
morning, it really is so striking to me again about the
consistency, the consistency of directive to all of us. The
essential nature of community colleges and the further
investment that we need to make because of the direction that
our country is going in at the moment.
And if we want to build that architecture for the future
with regard to education, that we need to really be looking at
the investments in what is a kind of a core and central
component of that education. And I am most appreciative of the
recommendations that you all have made. I think it is helpful
in guiding us as to where we need to go when we are moving to
put the appropriations bill together.
This is about high-quality education and about equipping
students with the skills that they need. One of the--I never
got around to this question, but I would love to hear from
folks on this. It just seems that somebody did talk about best
practices. But there is so much out there, like the new collar
program that we are talking about, about P-TECH and some of
these other areas.
Would you all think that what we needed was some sort of a
national clearing house to know what is out there? And I know
people talked about a skills exchange with employment, I think
with just some central apparatus for that, but a national
clearing house that then allows us to know what is happening in
what State. And what are the requirements? Where is the
flexibility? All of that which has been talked about.
And given the universe that you--of really work with
nontraditional students, adult learners, single parents, first-
generation college students, part-time students, low-income
students, a more diverse student population that is out there,
it seems to me that there is the statistic. Seventy percent of
people in the United States do not have a 4-year college
education.
And while it is wonderful to get one, and we should
continue to promote that, it isn't the end of your life if you
don't have one or your economic well-being. And so we need to
find the route to have people realize their dreams and their
aspirations and their economic aspirations for themselves and
their families.
You face challenges juggling academic programs that the
students face with difficulties in their lives, that whole
range of supportive services that are critically necessary. And
we do have Federal programs and this committee, most of these
programs come through this committee, which is why I asked the
question about where we try to focus our attention. And I
appreciate your being so specific about that.
And I believe that I can say to the committee on both sides
of the aisle that we are committed to making strong investments
in community colleges through the appropriations bill because
it all leads to how people can get a shot at that American
dream.
So I want to just say thank you very, very much, all of
you, for your candor, your clarity, the great work that you are
doing in making sure that people have the opportunities that
they need in order to succeed. And it is all about, and what
this committee is all about in appropriations, of giving people
the opportunity for a better chance at a better life.
Thank you all for doing that every single day and for your
willingness to work with us as we move forward through this
appropriations process.
And with that, I am going to use a remote here to call the
adjournment of the meeting. Thank you so much. I appreciate
your help and your time.
And all of our members, great questions.
Wednesday, April 28, 2021.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
WITNESS
HON. MARTIN J. WALSH, SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
The Chair. This hearing will come to order. As this hearing
is fully virtual, we must address a few housekeeping matters.
For today's meeting, the chair or staff designated by the chair
may mute participants' microphones when they are not under
recognition for the purposes of eliminating inadvertent
background noise.
Members are responsible for muting and unmuting themselves.
If I notice that you have not unmuted yourself, I will ask you
if you would like the staff to unmute you. If you indicate
approval by nodding, staff will unmute your microphone.
I remind all members and witnesses that the 5-minute clock
still applies. If there is a technology issue, we will move to
the next member until the issue is resolved, and you will
retain the balance of your time. You will notice a clock on
your screen that will show how much time is remaining. At 1
minute remaining, the clock will turn to yellow. At 30 seconds,
I will gently tap the gavel to remind members that their time
is almost expired. When your time has expired, the clock will
turn red, and I will begin to recognize the next member.
In terms of speaking order, we will begin with the chair
and ranking member; then members present at the time to hearing
is called to order will be recognized in order of seniority;
and, finally, members not present at the time the hearing is
called to order.
Finally, the House rules require me to remind you that we
have set up an email address to which members can send anything
they wish to submit in writing at any time of our hearings or
markups. That email address had been provided in advance to
your staff.
Okay. With that, first of all, I am going to acknowledge
Ranking Member Cole, but we are all going to wish Ranking
Member Cole a happy birthday.
So happy birthday, Tom.
I was going to suggest that we all sing, that we sing, but
we may spare of you that, and, in addition, to which, I would
say, probably, everyone would say, you know, keep your day job
and don't get into a cappella singing or so. But a very, very,
warm, warm wishes to you, Tom, for your birthday, obviously,
from all of us.
So I want to say a thank you to our colleagues for joining
this morning.
And we want to welcome Secretary Walsh. It is really great
to have you join our subcommittee for the very first time
today.
Today, April 28, in addition to being Tom Cole's birthday,
is Workers Memorial Day, a day to honor the over 5,000 working
people who die on the job in the United States each year. Today
is also the 50th anniversary of the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, OSHA, which has helped to transform
America's workplaces and significantly reduce workplace
fatalities, injuries, and illnesses. I am especially grateful
that today we have Secretary Walsh with us to discuss how the
Biden administration is helping to keep our Nation's workers
healthy and safe.
Secretary Walsh, I especially appreciate how your
experiences as the son of Irish immigrants who have faced his
fair share of hardships qualifies you as a, particularly,
powerful voice in this discussion.
Like you, I also have an immigrant heritage. I often tell
the story of how my Italian-American mother worked in the old
sweatshops, and how my friend's mother was one of the 15 people
who died in the Franklin Street fire, a fire just down the
street from my home, when I was barely a teenager.
It is impossible to be an eyewitness to events like that,
to witness the struggle of hardworking families, and not be
touched by the gravity of our responsibility to one another,
which is why I have long dedicated myself to fighting for
workers' rights and workplace safety laws so that every
American can achieve the American Dream.
But while our Irish and Italian communities have now
largely worked their way into the middle class, many
communities today still face continuing obstacles, such as
racial inequities and discrimination, that make the path to
middle class more difficult. That is why I look forward to
working together with you to help open the American Dream to
all Americans.
As the COVID-19 pandemic has devastated our economy and
workforce, Americans across the country are struggling to make
ends meet. In April 2020 last year, the unemployment rate in
this country peaked at 14.8 percent, the highest since the
Department of Labor began collecting this data in 1948.
Meanwhile, the long-term unemployment rate, the percentage
of people who continue to remain unemployed for 27 weeks or
more, has increased almost fourfold, from 1.2 million in March
2020 to 4.2 million in March 2021. And while we have seen a
considerable decrease in overall unemployment over the past
year, over 143,000 Connecticut residents are still without
jobs.
And as I have said before, we know that women and people of
color have been disproportionately affected. For example, there
are about 3.7 million fewer women working now than in February
last year. And to be clear, these women are not opting out of
the workplace; they are being pushed out by inadequate
policies.
Challenges like access to childcare, workplace flexibility
are still making it much more difficult for women to reclaim
the jobs they lost. Many have been forced to consider new
careers because the jobs they had prior to the pandemic no
longer exist.
That is why I am so encouraged that you and President Biden
have made it a priority invest in American jobs. And that means
investing in workforce development, including sector-based
training, apprenticeship programs, partnerships between
institutions of higher education and employers.
As you know, this subcommittee was instrumental in creating
the Apprenticeship Grants Program in fiscal year 2016; has
continued to fund this program with $185,000,000 in fiscal year
2021. I am pleased that the President's American Rescue Plan
and American Jobs Plan include so many critical investments for
our Nation's workers and working families.
The American Rescue Plan extends its emergency unemployment
benefits to millions of families, a critical lifeline for
American workers who are temporarily out of a job. The American
Jobs Plan will invest in American workers by providing
$100,000,000,000 over 10 years to strengthen our workforce,
protect workers against wage theft and workplace
discrimination. The American Jobs Plan also includes the
protecting the right to organize, to PRO Act, which ensures all
workers have a free and fair choice to join a union, strengthen
bargaining rights for public service workers. And it includes a
new subsidized jobs program to tackle long-term unemployment
and underemployment.
I am glad that President Biden's discretionary funding
request builds on the American Rescue Plan and the American
Jobs Plan by proposing $14,200,000,000 for 2022 for the
Department of Labor, and that is an increase of $1,700,000,000.
The request includes $285,000,000 for apprentice grants to
expand access for women, for people of color, and historically
underrepresented groups, as well as expand apprenticeships to
new industries.
I am encouraged that this request increases funding for
State grants under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act
and Wagner-Peyser. And for worker protection agencies to
protect workers to combat wage theft and enhance worker health
and safety.
As you also explain further in your testimony, Mr.
Secretary, this pandemic revealed many longstanding problems in
the unemployment insurance system, which disproportionately
affect workers of colors. I am pleased that this budget request
seeks to rectify these continuing inequities.
The investments are vital. Shining a light on these
challenges, the subcommittee has already held hearings on
community colleges and workplace health and safety. Two years
ago, we also held a hearing on combating wage theft, which the
Economic Policy Institute estimates amounts to as much as
$50,000,000,000 stolen from workers' paychecks every year. The
previous administration exacerbated this problem. But the Biden
administration wisely has proposed to rescind and withdraw the
Trump administration's joint employment and independent
contractor rules, which were poorly drafted end runs around
worker wage theft protections included in the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
I believe the Biden administration can quickly build on
that progress by ensuring that the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration quickly issues an emergency temporary
standard to protect workers from COVID-19, which continues to
infect thousands of Americans each day. Establishing
enforceable, comprehensive requirements from OSHA is the only
way to guarantee that all workers receive protections from the
coronavirus that will help to keep them safe. And witnesses at
our recent hearing highlighted the importance of including
requirements to limit airborne transmissions in the meat and
poultry plants and to have robust protections for agricultural
workers.
We stand ready, I stand ready to support you and the
administration in the work to release a strong, enforceable
standard as soon as possible.
Mr. Secretary, there are a lot of promising proposals, and
we have made a lot of progress in recent months, but there is
still much more work to be done. As F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote
in his classic meditation on the American Dream, ``The Great
Gatsby'': We must beat on, boats against the current, resisting
the inclination to be borne back ceaselessly into the past.
So I look forward to working with you as we build the
architecture of the future, allow more people the opportunities
to achieve the American Dream.
And, with that, let me turn to my friend from Oklahoma, the
Ranking Member Congressman Cole for opening remarks he may
have.
Mr. Cole. Well, thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you for
the robust birthday congratulations. Thank you, particularly,
for not mentioning, as my colleagues on my side of the aisle
often do, that I share my birthday with the late Saddam
Hussein. So you were very generous in your omissions.
And I would rather say before I get into any kind of
prepared remarks, I always come to these meetings because, of
course, it is my obligation as a ranking member, but I always
want to see what background you choose. Today's is particularly
colorful. It is one--where are you at? You are muted.
The Chair. In Washington. So next time we can all gather,
that we will be here.
Mr. Cole. That is perfect. It is fantastic, as it always
is, except when you are broadcasting from your conference
hideaway in the Capitol.
The Chair. There is nothing there at the moment.
Mr. Cole. Thank you. It is better.
Mr. Secretary, let me first welcome you, and a couple of
personal remarks. We had a scheduled call, which I was unable
to make because I was caught in cell phone hell in the rural
part of my district where it was scheduled, and we never made
the connection. So it is the first time we have had a chance to
meet. But I followed your confirmation hearings with a great
deal of interest. I know you bring a great deal to your job in
terms of your expertise and your background, and I certainly
look forward to working with you.
As a matter of fact, the chairwoman made reference to your
Irish background. Your last Democratic predecessor, Secretary
Perez, was a particular favorite of mine because we shared an
affection for Nicaraguan cigars. So, since you are Irish, if
you like Guinness, Irish green ale, or Irish whiskey, we will
have a working basis for a relationship.
And my quarrel today with your budget insofar as we know
it, because we haven't seen the full budget yet, is less with
the particulars than with the overall strategy behind the
President's domestic spending proposal.
As I am sure you are aware, your Department is broadly in
line with this President, has owe proposed a 16-percent
increase in domestic spending overall and basically flat-
funding, really, inflation-adjusted, for defense. I simply
think that is a wrong sense of priority. I think most of my
Republican colleagues share that view. We think we live in an
extraordinarily dangerous world right now, particularly one
where the Russians and the Chinese are, if anything, more
assertive, and we would argue we need to readdress the balance
in there and the overall budget.
There are particular areas where you will find very little
difference between how we see the world and how you see the
world. I am, particularly, pleased to see the robust increase
in the apprenticeship spending. That was an area that I
supported under President Obama. President Trump actually
increased that with support on a bipartisan basis. I am glad to
see you building on that as well.
And there is a variety of other job training programs that
I think are extraordinarily important. And, frankly, nobody is
going to quibble with worker protection programs. They are
necessary, and we know that that is a very important part of
your job. So I think we will find a mixture of areas that we
can work with you on, again, particularly in job training,
where I think there is a strong bipartisan commitment in this
subcommittee. We see it not only in this budget but in the
education budget on everything from Job Corps to, again, the
apprenticeship program to career tech kinds of programs where
we manage to work together. And I know that is an important
part of what you want to do, is to increase the skill sets of
American workers so more of them can be productively employed
and receive the wages that their hard work and expertise
demand.
So, again, we look forward to working with you. I am not
going to say we agree with everything. Obviously, we will
disagree on something like the PRO Act, where I would argue
overturning 28 States' separately enacted right-to-work laws is
a terrifically misplaced priority and, frankly, anti-democratic
with a small ``d'' in my State because that was a law that was
passed by the people of Oklahoma, not by the legislature of
Oklahoma, in an open election. And that is the case with many
of these laws.
But, again, I look forward to getting to know you better. I
look forward to working with you in the important areas that
are under your supervision.
One last housekeeping matter, Madam Chair, if I can. I may
not be here at the end of the hearing. As you know, I am on the
Rules Committee as well. And our good friend Chairman McGovern
is holding a hearing on the challenge of hunger in America. I
know where you would want me to be on a topic like that. So I
will be probably here for about 90 minutes of our hearing. At
that point, I will need to withdraw.
But, with that, again, Mr. Secretary, welcome.
Madam Chairman, thank you for holding the hearing, and I
look forward to today's deliberations.
The Chair. I thank the ranking member. And I just might
add, probably not for the cigar smoking, but I will certainly
be around if we can enjoy Irish whiskey or, you know, others.
So we should be all inclusive in this area. So thank you.
And, with that, let me just yield to the Honorable Marty
Walsh, the Secretary of the United States Department of Labor.
And what I want to do is to turn to my colleague,
Congresswoman Katherine Clark of the State of Massachusetts to
introduce the Secretary.
Congresswoman Clark.
Ms. Clark. Thank you so much, Chairwoman DeLauro, Ranking
Member Cole, and members of the subcommittee. It has been a
great pleasure to know Secretary Marty Walsh for years as a
friend, as a colleague in the Massachusetts House of
Representatives, and as a partner in the fight for working
families.
Born and raised in Dorchester by immigrant parents, Marty
is a second-generation union member. At age 21, he joined the
Laborers Union Local 223 and served as the union's president
until 2013. As mayor of Boston, he oversaw the creation of over
140,000 jobs and helped secure a statewide $16/hour minimum
wage, paid leave, and family leave. He also establishes
universal pre-K for all children in Boston, and free community
college for low-income students.
As Secretary of Labor, he will continue to advocate for
workers, job seekers, union members, and families. His
dedication to working families has made him a key partner to
President Biden in our COVID recovery as we work to get
vaccines in arms, money in pockets, and stability back into our
local economies.
Marty understands that it is America's workers who keep our
Nation running. And it is Washington's job to ensure every
family has a fair shot at success. Without safe working
conditions, livable wages, good union jobs, and paid family and
medical leave, American families can't succeed; America can't
succeed. By investing in workers, we can rebuild an even more
equitable and thriving economy.
Secretary Walsh, we look forward to a robust discussion
about the needs of working families and how Congress can
partner with you and the Department of Labor to ensure that
workers have the support they need. Welcome to our
subcommittee. We are so grateful to have you here today.
Thank you, Chairwoman, and I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you so much.
I would just want to associate myself with Congresswoman
Clark's remarks. We are delighted and excited to have you here.
And I think your background really I think reflects something
that Frances Perkins said so many years ago, as the first head
of the Department of Labor, and that she came to work in
Washington for God, for FDR, and for the working men and women
of this country.
So we know where you are. Thank you. And, with that, let me
let you know that your full written testimony will be included
in the record. And you are now recognized for 5 minutes for
your opening statement. Thank you. Hello.
Secretary Walsh. Can you hear me?
The Chair. We can now. Go ahead.
Secretary Walsh. Oh, sorry. Okay. Well, I started with
thanking you, Madam Chair, for----
The Chair. Start again. It is all right.
Secretary Walsh. All right. Thank you, Madam Chair. I
appreciate it. Technology is crazy.
Thank you for the introduction. And thank you for what you
do.
Ranking Member Cole, thank you, and happy birthday to you.
To my friend, Congresswoman Clark, thank you for that
introduction. And what I said was that we are a long way from
the third division, which is where we sat in the House of
Representatives back in Massachusetts.
To the members of this committee, it is a pleasure to
appear before you for the first time, as the chairwoman said
earlier. I look forward to outlining the Biden-Harris
administration's vision for the Department of Labor in fiscal
year 2022 and beyond.
I am honored to lead the Department in its work. As I have
said before, this is personal for me. As you heard, my parents
both came from Ireland and immigrated from Ireland in the
1950s. I followed my father into the labor's union. That
journey brought me here today and made everything that I have
in my life possible with every step. I continue to work for
worker advocacy, worker protections, and access to good jobs.
These, what we are talking about today, just aren't budget
numbers to me. I know that they are not to you either. People's
lives and dreams are at stake. And right now, our country's
future needs these protections.
As a pandemic has fallen, it has taken millions of lives
and half a million Americans lives' throughout the pandemic.
Through it all, working men and women have carried us and cared
for us. They put their lives on the line every single day, and
millions lost their livelihoods.
So it is our ability to meet this historic moment. It
depends on how we support and empower working people. Congress
worked with President Biden to pass the American Rescue Plan,
delivering relief for American workers and a way out of this
pandemic. This legislation is enabling the Department of Labor
to keep vulnerable workers safe and supported as we reopen our
economy. But as the President has made clear, reopening isn't
enough. We need to build back better.
The President has proposed a bold path forward with the
American Jobs Plan. We have got infrastructure that we need to
win the future, and a vision to understand that a strong
economy depends on a strong workforce. The Department of
Labor's fiscal 2022 budget would advance this vision by
investing in American workers. This budget requests
$14,200,000,000 in discretionary funds and includes $3,700,000
for job training and employment services through State formula
grants under the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act and
the Wagner-Peyser Act. It asks for $285,000,000 for registered
apprenticeships. We request $2,100,000,000 for our worker
protection agencies. For unemployment insurance, this budget
fully funds and updates the States' funding formulas for the
first time in decades. It requires $100,000,000 to develop
technology solutions in state systems. These investments focus
on deep needs that have been clearly needed and often cruelly
exposed by this pandemic. But they are not new. Too many
Americans face too many barriers to a good, safe, fairly paid
job. People of color are held back by structural racism. Women
have been pushed out of the workforce. Dislocated workers in
changing industries. Our veterans, our service members, and
military spouses facing difficult transitions. People with
disabilities underemployed and underpaid. At-risk youth and
justice-involved adults who need a real chance and a better
path. The Department of Labor, with our partners, can meet
these workers where they are, and we can train and support the
way they need to be trained and supported so they can
contribute their talents and join the middle class.
I know we all know this is the right thing to do, and our
future and our economy depends on it. The pandemic has shown
why worker protection is a fundamental right and an essential
function of government. As the chairwoman mentioned earlier
today, it is Workers Memorial Day. It is a day that we honor
thousands of workers who died on the job each year. I have had
friends that lost their lives in working construction. It is
truly devastating for their families, and these are largely
preventable tragedies. Our country has made progress on
workplace safety. But after losing hundreds of health and
safety inspectors during our last administration, our progress
was put at risk. These funds will allow us to hire and deploy
staff to prevent injury, illness, and death on the job, recover
back wages and address misclassification, respond to
whistleblower complaints, help retirees get their benefits, and
address pay inequities.
The last year has also proven that unemployment insurance
is a lifeline for millions of workers, an essential backstop
for our economy. The pandemic shined a light also on
longstanding problems in States' UI systems that hurt families
and local economies. This budget would finally address them in
a comprehensive way.
Madam Chairwoman and Ranking Member and members of this
committee, American workers get our Nation through hard times
like we have just been through. We need to have their backs,
protect their rights, and get them the tools they need to build
on our future. I look forward to working with you in
partnership with all of you, Democrats and Republicans. And I
know that we will have disagreements along the way, but we will
always have conversations. We will always talk about what our
differences are, and I am person that firmly believes there is
always middle ground. So I am happy to answer any questions
that you have, and I look forward to the hearing.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chair. Thank you so much, Mr. Secretary.
Let me get right to it. We know the meatpacking industry
has been pushing against an enforceable emergency temporary
standard for COVID-19. They use these arguments that they are
protecting workers from illness by installing flimsy plastic
barriers, implementing, quote, ``distancing when feasible,''
policies. This is the same industry that succeeded in receiving
waivers from the USDA to increase production line speeds during
the first few months of the pandemic. They made it almost
impossible for workers to move further apart.
I have to be honest with you, Secretary Walsh, I am
disappointed that the administration has yet to finalize that
OSHA ETS to protect these workers. Can you assure me that the
meat industry's bogus arguments, shameless lobbying are not
behind the administration's delay in finalizing the ETS?
Secretary Walsh. The short answer to your question, Madam
Chair, is, yes, they are not behind this. We are going through
a process. We went through a process, and that is exactly where
we are moving towards. And right now, the OIRA process can
vary, but we can't give you a deadline on when--predicted
deadline. But right now, all that information on the ETS is at
the White House--
The Chair. Okay. And----
Secretary Walsh [continuing]. Not necessarily the White
House, but in the next step.
The Chair [continuing]. Right. I understand. But we really
do need--and if you can get back to us--very much as things can
languish forever at OIRA, and we don't have forever.
And just as a quick question here is: The industry has also
said that the supply chain would be disrupted. Now, in
California, Virginia have adopted their own standards. They
don't seem to be having any problem selling steaks or
hamburgers. Is the supply chain argument bogus or disconnected
from reality?
Secretary Walsh. Well, in some ways, the supply chain could
be a real issue, but it really depends upon what mask we talk
about. I think when we talk about--when we talk about masks, we
talk about safety, we talk about N95s for are hospital staff,
that is a completely different situation to what we want to do
with masks.
So I think that we are going to be working to make sure
that we never leave any employee behind and put them in
safety--and put them at risk. I just spent the last 7 years as
mayor. I spent the year as mayor of Boston. I joined the
pandemic--in the very beginning of the pandemic, there was some
big issues around supply chain. That has changed. I have a mask
right here. And the CDC has said, in some cases, you double up,
and you do masks. So, again, this is all going to be worked out
through the OIRA process.
The Chair. Okay. And, please, we need a deadline on that
and when it is coming forward.
Let me move now to community colleges. As I mentioned, we
had a hearing just a couple of weeks ago. From 2011 to 2014, we
put in $2,000,000,000 community college through the Trade
Adjustment Assistance and Community College and Career Training
Grant, TAACCCT. And the investment supported partnerships,
community colleges and economic sectors, to develop education,
the training programs to ensure a skilled workforce for good
jobs. We created a new program 2 years ago, the Strengthening
Community Colleges Training Grant Program to return to what we
viewed as a successful model.
How will the Department of Labor leverage this program,
bring it to scale to address the economic effects of the
pandemic to support community colleges, dislocated workers, and
their families?
Secretary Walsh. Well, I think that that question is key to
the success in the rebound of America right now. I think we
have to work closely with community colleges. I have already
had one meeting with the National Community College
Association. As the mayor of Boston, I had very close relations
with my community colleges in Boston. We provided free
community college for all graduates if they chose to go to
community college in the city of Boston. We have leveraged the
development in the city to pay for it. And I think that that is
a way back. And one of the things that I spoke about--well, I
was asked often about in my confirmation hearing, from both
Democrats and Republicans, was about doing more collaboration
with community colleges because community colleges oftentimes
are the industry in small communities all across America.
So what we are going to do is the Department of Labor is
working on these programs; that has been approved by Congress.
And we are going to continue to strengthen those programs. And
I think there is a tie-in as well with workforce development
and community colleges, even a closer relationship, that we can
train and help retrain more workers in our workforce and kids,
young people that go to college--and older people, quite
honestly.
The Chair. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. I have got
about, you know, just a few seconds left. So what I will do is
I am going to yield back my time. And I want to get into the
issue of IRAPs, and the, you know, just calling for an end to
IRAPs, what the Biden administration has done, and but that
authority still exists. So I want you to be thinking about
that, and we will get around to that question.
With that, I yield back, and let me recognize Congressman
Cole.
Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
And, again, Mr. Secretary, it is good to have you here
today. According to a report from Government Accountability
Office, the Department has experienced some challenges with
assessing the impact of job training for dislocated workers
often under programs such as the Trade Adjustment Assistance
for Workers Program and Dislocated Worker Formula Program.
The Department actually agreed with the GAO's
recommendation that the agency prioritize improving the quality
of evidence on the impact of job training for dislocated
workers.
It is early in your days there, I know, but have you had an
opportunity to look into this, and what steps the DOL has made
in response to that recommendation?
Secretary Walsh. Thank you very much, ranking member, and,
again, happy birthday to you today.
Mr. Cole. Thank you.
Secretary Walsh. You are right. I am early in my tenure
here. This is my fifth week. But certainly I have been having
briefings with the different departments on this. I will give
you a more thorough answer after the hearing because I still
have to do some work on it. But the Department's duty, as you
know, is to support workers in our communities, even during the
aftermath of disasters, of COVID, and other things like that.
The grants that we are working on will impact workers and will
help us with temporary employment. So what I would like to say
to you today is I will try and get an answer before the hearing
is over, but I look forward to working with you and getting a
more thorough answer for you.
Mr. Cole. Well, I appreciate that. And I know, again, that
it is a bipartisan concern. We all want to get people back to
work that have been put out.
Let me ask you, and this also you may need to get back to
me later. But I am going to be very shamelessly parochial here.
A particular Air Force base is in my district, and when I talk
to--it doesn't matter who the commanding general--it is
actually the largest, single site employer in the State. These
are very sophisticated air depot, 16,000 civilian jobs in
overhauling planes. And they always tell me two things. I could
hire every computer software engineer that could be produced in
the State of Oklahoma by either your comprehensive [inaudible]
And I really need cyber security experts. And you actually have
several funds at your disposal through the H-1B application fee
really for the purpose of retraining workers in high-skill
areas. I certainly wouldn't expect an answer today, but I would
love it if you would look at that. Because, I think, again,
particularly, in the cyber securities space, all across the
country, the need is real. It is going to continue to grow,
and, again, these are jobs that a lot of people, I think, could
be trained for, and it could be really helpful. So you actually
have a pot of money where that might be something you and your
folks would be interested in looking at. So I wanted to kind of
put that in front of you as a suggestion.
Secretary Walsh. No, thank you. You know, certainly, it is
very interesting and could be a very great proposal. So I look
forward to working on that. I actually think that in the
economy that we are in today, after COVID, we have to think
differently about job training. When I think about some cities
around America, lots of tech companies moving in, lots of
companies moving in, as we think about retraining workers, we
should train them in these different industries, whether it is
cyber security or other places like that.
And so I look forward to, not just working with you, but
other members of the committee. And I have asked my team here
to look at some of the job training stuff, to think outside the
box a little bit. Not so much this, I don't mean to say, like
there is the same ole, same ole, but let's think outside the
box. It could be--because there are lot pockets of industry
like you have in your district and other people have in their
district that having a job training program or access to
funding to help build up skills for cities and towns that, I
think, a lot of cities and towns would welcome that, as well as
mayors and Governors would welcome that as well.
Mr. Cole. Yeah, I agree. There would be a lot of bipartisan
support for an issue like that.
The last question here because of the short time, the
budget outline mentions an update for the formula for
determining the amount States receive to administer
unemployment insurance, as well as significant investments in
unemployment insurance administration information technologies.
Can you give us a little bit more detail--and, again, it is
early, you may not have developed all of the specifics yet as
the targets of these investments--in other words, what will the
updated formula look like, how will the investments in
information technology address fraud and unemployment systems?
But I know in my own State, you know, we were almost
overwhelmed by the pandemic in terms of the unemployment needs.
And, you know, again, they did the best they could, but they
simply didn't have the technology or the personnel they needed
for the extraordinary situation, like all of us that is running
our States.
Secretary Walsh. No, you are absolutely right. And I think
that 30 million Americans were unemployed last March. That
overwhelmed the system as a whole, in Massachusetts as well.
And I think that, you know, between the money that is invested
in the American Rescue Plan and some of the money that we are
looking for in this budget, I think we are going to take a deep
look into all UI. I know, later on the conversation, I am sure
fraud will come up. But it was a safety net for a lot of
people. It kept food on the table. It kept a roof over their
head. And there is lots of different aspects. And we are going
to look at the different answers. How we can work with the
States--I know my time is up. If you give me 2 more, 10 more
seconds. Working with the States and strengthening their
systems, but also working here at the DOL to figure out how do
we make sure something like this--what the problems we have
experienced don't happen----
Mr. Cole. Yeah.
Secretary Walsh [continuing]. Again. So, again, that is
another issue that--I know that it is an issue for almost every
single Member of Congress. It is an issue, probably, for 50
Governors, and it is an issue for 180 million Americans for the
future.
Mr. Cole. Well, fraud can always be a problem, but I
certainly agree with your basic point that this was a program
that was needed that helped a lot people that really needed the
help at the time. So I am just trying to figure out how to
administer better going forward. But I don't have any
complaints with what we did and how the Department performed
under difficult situations.
With that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you. And let me now yield to Congresswoman
Barbara Lee.
Ms. Lee. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you for
this hearing. Good morning, everyone.
And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being with us today.
Congratulations. A couple things I want to ask you. One is you
mentioned the issue of structural racism, and I think this
administration gets it. I mean, when you look at even, I think,
the unemployment rate is now, what, 5.4 percent for White
workers, 9.6 percent unemployment rate for Blacks, African
Americans, and about 7.9 percent--I think these numbers--for
Latinos--are fairly accurate. But bottom line is there have
been many Secretaries who I have asked to submit a report to
this committee on for, and they have never submitted it.
So I just want to ask you, and you mentioned structural
racism, how do you see the barriers to employment or within the
Department of Labor? And how do you dismantle those barriers as
you move forward on your equity agenda to make sure that there
are policies and a budget--and budget priorities to make sure
that these unemployment rates are closed and that people of
color are employed without the--and we know the structural
racism. So you will have to dismantle the barriers first.
Then, secondly, and let me just ask you, is Executive Order
11246 still on the books? That was President Johnson's
executive order that prohibits Federal contractors from
discriminating against people of color, people--I believe the
language is sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national
orientation. And it was designed to expand opportunities for
people who had been shut out of the employment sectors, all of
the sectors in our country. So is that still on the books? And
if so, are you looking at Executive Order 11246 to begin to use
that to prohibit discrimination?
Secretary Walsh. Yes, and it is--I always have been told it
is OFCCP's jurisdiction, and is on the books--
Ms. Lee. Yes.
Secretary Walsh [continuing]. Yes. It is on the books.
Ms. Lee. It is. Okay. Have you looked at how you are going
to use it? I don't think it has been used much in the past.
Secretary Walsh. No, I haven't, and I will----
Ms. Lee. Okay.
Secretary Walsh [continuing]. Thank you for that----
Ms. Lee. And what about----
Secretary Walsh [continuing]. Sorry. Thank you for the
question. Let me start with the first part of your question.
How do you deal with structural racism? I think it is
leadership. I think it is empowering people that--when I say
empowering people that I work with. I think it is coming up
with a comprehensive plan. And I do agree with you have to have
benchmarks and you have to have reports because if we don't
give a report to someone, then it will linger on and not move
forward.
I think when we think about equity, we think about equity
in procurements, that is a big issue that I work with in the
city of Boston, that we didn't do a great job with. We put down
a good system, but I learned a lot of lessons from that
opportunity. We learned about creating opportunities and
pathways for people to be able to get into the middle class.
And I think you start in departments. I think I start here at
the Department of Labor.
When I talk about structural racism, and I talk about
opportunities, I think if we don't create them within the
Department of Labor, how can I go out and talk to employers
around America and tell a story to them, ``This is what I
expect you to do, but I am doing it myself''? And I think that
that is something that is really important that we have done.
And I have learned that over the last bunch of years as an
elected official.
And I think that we have unique opportunity right now. I
know in the Department of Labor, almost every single
conversation that we have, whether we are talking about a
policy, or we are talking about how we are moving forward, we
are talking equity inclusion, we are talking about structural
racism, we are talking about all the issues. It has become part
of the conversation. It is not just brought up when I am in
front of a camera and I am doing a hearing in front of
Congress. When the camera shuts off and I talk to my team, we
are talking about it all the time.
So I think there is--we have a real opportunity--and
because of COVID, because of COVID--and we all know this; it is
no secret--COVID put a bigger spotlight on structural racism in
our country. And we have to start addressing it, not by giving
speeches--and I am talking about me--we have to start
addressing it by actually policy and making some real strong
changes in the workforce.
So that is what I plan on doing. And if you ask me for a
report, I don't know what my predecessors did, I will give you
a report. You ask me to come your office, I will come to your
office. You want to shoot me a phone call, I will do whatever
it is, and I will tell you our progress. And if our progress
isn't good, I will tell you our progress isn't good. And if our
progress is good, that is for you to decide to tell me you are
doing okay.
Ms. Lee. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. I am really happy to
hear that because this is--you have such an important role in
our economy and in ensuring that people are employed with good-
paying jobs, but also with apprenticeship programs, for
example, there is so many barriers with people of color to
enter into apprenticeship programs. So I assume that this is
also part of what you are talking about and how we eliminate
those barriers and make sure there is no discrimination and
that there are opportunities for people of color in
apprenticeship programs?
Secretary Walsh. Yeah, I know. I have a strong history of
that, of breaking down those barriers. I am not going to get
into it right now, unless you want me to. But I created
opportunities in Boston to do things. And the opportunities I
brought were--we can scale out them. And one of those
opportunities was a program--I want to briefly talk about
this--called Operation Exit I created as mayor of the city of
Boston. It was a 3-week career apprenticeship program. The
people that went into that program, most of them had been
incarcerated. Some of them had bracelets on their--some of them
had court cases open. Some of them were gang-involved people.
And the success of that program has been unbelievable. And I
would like to take that program and scale it up in Boston. I
think we have about 104 people that have gone through that
program. It proves it works. And we can take that program
around the country with the help of the Department of Labor,
but also with the help of industry.
Ms. Lee. Thank you, again. Thank you, Madam Chair. I look
forward to working with you, Mr. Secretary. Thank you.
The Chair. Congressman Harris.
Mr. Harris. Thank you very much.
And thank you, Mr. Secretary. Congratulations, again.
Thanks for the courtesy call last week. Let me follow up on a
topic we talked about on that call, the H-2B visas. As you
know, Ms. Pingree and I moved the--included amendments that
allowed the Secretary of Homeland Security after consultation
with the Secretary of Labor to issue additional visas. Now the
Department of Labor has already certified the need for 127,000,
and yet only 22,000 additional ones were issued. So can you
just let me know, were you consulted by Secretary Mayorkas, and
if you were, what was your recommendation for the number of
additional visas to issue under the amendment?
Secretary Walsh. Yeah, let me get the information on the
amendment, but I have been talking to Secretary Mayorkas. We
have had several conversations about this. We are working
through the process. I had a meeting yesterday with some people
on my team talking about the regulation around the additional
visas that will be allocated. I don't have the exact number in
front of me right now, but I can get the number for you.
Actually, I do have the number, 22,000----
Mr. Harris. Right.
Secretary Walsh [continuing]. Additional visas will be
there. Yesterday, we had a meeting, you had talked to me about,
I believe, the crab processing plant that you have in your
district. I have also gotten calls from several Senators and
Congressman Keating and other folks. So we had a meeting
yesterday and trying to move that long. Those regulations
should be done shortly. And it goes on to the next step. So I
don't see much further delay in this other than just getting
the regulation together.
Mr. Harris. Yeah, and, again, you know, the Department of
Labor has certified the need for about 130,000. We are only
going to get 88,000. So, you know, I am hopeful that the
Department of Labor can have more input into that process of
determining the number of additional visas because your
department has already gone through the legwork of figuring out
what is necessary.
Let me just bring up one other topic, the ERISA standalone
telehealth benefit. You know that, during COVID, ERISA
employers were allowed to provide standalone benefits to people
for telehealth for temporary workers and other people who
didn't qualify for full benefits. Is that something that the
Department is considering extending based on experience with
the telehealth standalone benefit?
Secretary Walsh. Congressman, if you don't mind, I haven't
heard about this before. But, respectfully, I ask if I could
get--either call you with the answer or in writing to you. It
is the first time I have heard this.
Mr. Harris. Okay. No, that will be great. And I appreciate
it. You know, you are drinking from a firehose right now. No
question about it.
With regard to the minimum wage, I know the President is
new--wants to advance the minimum wage, but there is great
concern from especially small businesses and restaurants in my
district about the--including the tipped minimum wage, about
raising tipped minimum wage because the statistics are that
most people who are getting paid under the tipped minimum wage
actually earn more than the minimum wage when tips are entered
in or included. And our businesses that are small businesses,
especially restaurants, that were so damaged under COVID have
told me if they have to pay a minimum wage to their tipped
employees, you know, they will just close up; they will go out
of business. They can't afford to do it. The market will not
bear that.
So considering that tipped minimum wage employees earn more
than the minimum wage when you include tips, is this something
that you would consider, you know, separating out from the
minimum wage discussions that are going to, you know, go
forward in the next few months?
Secretary Walsh. Again, that is an issue that we have had
many conversations about. And I don't think there has been any
final decisions on where we go--where we are going with this. I
have heard from both sides of--I won't say the aisle. When I
say ``aisle,'' I am not talking Democrats or Republicans--from
restaurant people. I have gotten some calls from Boston,
saying, you know: Don't change the rule, the rule is great. And
I have gotten restaurants in Boston saying that, workers
saying: The rule isn't great.
So we are doing--I am doing a deep dive on this to look to
see what is best way to move forward. So I have not personally
made a final decision, not that it is necessarily all my
decision, obviously, but I am going to--we are going to
continue to have conversations around this.
Mr. Harris. No, I appreciate that, and thank you. Because,
again, in other areas of the country, you know, my rural areas,
you know, that, you know, $15 minimum wage for tipped employees
would be very harmful to our small businesses.
Finally, one last issue, and I read with interest your
testimony, I mean, of supporting good union jobs. And I believe
every American has the right to be in a union. These are good-
paying jobs. Do you have concern that the Keystone XL pipeline
cancellation canceled, you know, basically canceled 10,000
union jobs. The four big unions were supporters of it. I think
it is an energy independence issue. It is a high-paying
American job issue. Did that give you a little heartburn?
Secretary Walsh. One of those four unions that had a
problem with it is LIUNA, Labors International Union of North
America, which I am I member of. But inside the American Jobs
Plan, there is money in there for workforce development and job
training. And I do feel we have an opportunity at this moment
in time to train and retrain some of our workers in those
different industries for the green economy and the tech
economy. There is lots of opportunities there. So I think,
again, we will be having probably many conversations about
that, but at some point I do think we have look at the job
training because these jobs President spoke about the other
day, the green jobs, they can be good-paying jobs and put lots
of Americans to work.
Mr. Harris. All right. Thank you.
I yield back.
The Chair. Congressman Pocan.
Mr. Pocan. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
And welcome, Mr. Secretary. Sorry I missed our call last
week, but I do want to let you know I am a 30-year member of
IUPAT, Painters in Allied Trades, and cofounder of the Labor
Caucus. We look forward to working with you on moving things
forward.
First, I just want to say I completely agree with the chair
of the committee who has brought up the issue around OSHA and
meatpacking. And whatever we can do to get that resolved. I am
still stunned that JBS was only fined $15,000 for its lack of
COVID safety protocols after six workers died at a Colorado
plant. The average funeral was more than they were fined, and
they are a $50,000,000,000 profitable company. So, clearly,
that is important to a lot of us.
Let me ask you a question about Amazon. You know, last
year, a lot of people were overcome by the pandemic. And people
were trying to put, struggling to put food on their tables.
Amazon reported its best year ever, shattering records and
reporting an astronomical annual profit of $21,300,000,000. And
yet, despite their exploding profits, Amazon has repeatedly
flouted worker safety rules and shown little care for its
workers and their well-being.
Most recently, their terrible treatment of their employees
was highlighted when drivers and warehouse workers leaked, no
pun intended, that because of their schedules they are put on,
they can't even take bathroom breaks and are forced to urinate
in bottles and defecate in bags.
Amazon tried to deny it, originally, on Twitter, until so
many people put actual photos of employees of what they had to
do. They had to apologize because those claims are true.
What steps can the Department of Labor take to ensure that
companies like Amazon are held accountable for their
mistreatment of workers? And I am hoping that we are going to
commit to direct the Department of Labor to investigate claims
from workers like those at Amazon about their working
conditions.
Secretary Walsh. Thank you.
Thank you, Congressman, for that. And I didn't realize you
were a member of the Painters. So it is great to have a fellow
trade person on a Zoom call.
When you think about--when I think about whether it is the
workers at Amazon or any other workers in America, it really is
about strengthening up our enforcement.
When I became the Secretary of Labor, we looked at OSHA. We
found that we were down almost 200 inspectors. We look at wage
and hour; we are down inspectors. It really is about building
up enforcement. And I don't mean just to enforce when something
bad happens, but it would be great to get to a point where we
are working collaboratively with employers on the way how to
treat employees fairly.
So the enforcement aspect of it is the best way we can do
it. And as we move forward here in the next coming months, we
are going to be hiring people and training them, getting them
ready so we can get them out on the job sites across America.
Right now, quite honestly, we don't have enough inspectors to
be able to inspect every single complaint that comes into OSHA
or anything in the Department of Labor, quite honestly. So we
really have to build up our strength there.
Mr. Pocan. Great. Well, thank you. You know, also, since
the National Labor Relations Act was passed in 1935, 86 years
ago, there really haven't been any major pro-worker labor laws
that have been passed. And as a result, I think we have seen
corporations chip away at the middle class over the last
several decades. You know, now more than ever, it is important
that we update our labor laws and empower the Department of
Labor to protect our workers. Given the emergence of the
megacorporations like Amazon, 50 percent of all e-commerce
sales, 5 percent of all retail sales in country, given the rise
of the gig economy, what can we do, besides the PRO Act that we
passed out of the House, to continue to make sure that workers
no matter in what format they are working have rights that
unfortunately we have seen erode especially in the last 4
years?
Secretary Walsh. I think that we have to stop looking at
worker protection as antibusiness, and it isn't. It is pro-
employee. And many of the people, all the employees that we are
talking about, we represent them one way or the other. And so I
think that that is number one. I think that would be important
for us to move forward, yes. And, two, an educational component
of it. I think we have educate people as well as how to make
sure that we treat our employees right. When it comes to
misclassification and independent contracting, those folks
retreat as employees. They should get the same protection and
the same benefits an employee does because they are providing
the same services as other employees in other industries. So I
think that we are going to have many conversations about this.
And I think we get stuck up on one or two certain company
names, and saying, oh, my God, this industry, we can't change
it. It is not about the industry; it is about the employee. It
is about making sure we treat the American worker correctly.
And, again, I think that the biggest thing I would say is that
worker rights are not antibusiness. So we want to see business
succeed, and I want to see business succeed because business
employs employees, and we need to continue to work together and
not draw lines in the sand.
Mr. Pocan. Great.
Two seconds back. I yield back, Madam Chair, thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
The Chair. I thank the gentleman.
Now let me now recognize Congressman Fleischmann.
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Secretary, I have been actually participating in two
hearings concurrently. I am the ranking member on Homeland
Security, but I wanted to let you know that I wanted to take
the time to speak with you today, first and foremost, to
congratulate you on your appointment, and to thank you for the
very kind phone call you made to me last week. I think we had a
very good, deep conversation about a lot of things and, of
course, about some very important things like baseball as well.
So I wish you every success in your endeavors, sir.
The Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation
Program was intended to correct decades-old injustices
perpetrated on the Department of Energy employees, such as
uranium, miners, millers, and oil transporters, to ensure that
they receive fair compensation for illnesses incurred on the
job. The reality is that the program is a far cry from what the
workers and their advocates envisioned. Some decisions made by
the DEEOIC for this program have been contrary to the letter
and spirit of the original law.
The program was intended to be a claimant-friendly process.
Unfortunately, bureaucratic red tape has restricted these
benefits from our sick nuclear workers and their survivors. And
as you may know I represent the Oak Ridge Reservation, but
there are several DOE reservations affected by this agency.
My question, sir, my first question, stakeholders feel that
the final rule proposed in 2015 and published in 2019 are more
restrictive than the previous regulations and the statute
itself. What are your thoughts on rescinding the rules and
entering into a negotiated rulemaking process with stakeholder
representatives, sir?
Secretary Walsh. Thank you very much, Congressman, for your
question. Thank you also for the conversation the other day. I
don't have a lot of information about that rule in front of me,
but, certainly, the way you just explained it to me, the
intention is to help the worker, and I absolutely will make
that a priority of mine. Actually, people in the room right
now, they will probably want to find out what is going on. I
will make it a priority of mine right now to see, how do we
strengthen that? There shouldn't have been anything that was
worker protection or helping workers that shouldn't--the
intention behind it should have been to help workers. And if
that is not what happened, then that is something that we have
to fix. And I will work with you on that. And I will try to
find an answer before the hearing is over. I apologize. This is
the first I have heard of it.
Mr. Fleischmann. Yes, sir. And as a followup to that. And
it is a very niche thing on DOE areas, of course. These are men
and women, overwhelmingly good, strong union workers who for
years worked around some very dangerous substances, like
beryllium, and things like that. And they have been adversely
affected, and many are sick, and we just try to get them that
compensation.
A followup question that we can get information on, during
the advisory board on toxic substance and worker health meeting
last week, this DEEOIC notified the board that they will be
provided with a support contractor. I think that is a good step
in the right direction. My question for you will be then--and I
will await an answer when you can look into it--how long do you
anticipate the procurement process to take before the board
receives the much-needed assistance?
Secretary Walsh. Yeah, thank you for that. I will get back
to you on that too. I will look into that. You know, I have had
some good briefings about black lung and some other illnesses
that get workers sick. And this is one area that was not
touched upon. Maybe it is because it is a unique area. But it
is certainly something--and I will also look into other areas
of safety for workers that I am part of what you ask me today
just to make sure the Department is doing everything they can.
A worker is a worker, and illnesses are illnesses. Just because
something gets more play in the press, it doesn't mean we
shouldn't look at the other issues. Let me look at that, and I
promise I will get back to you on that.
Mr. Fleischmann. Yes, sir. And concluding, I am just going
to say I have worked very hard on computer science literacy. I
see my friend and colleague, Ms. Lee, as well, she has worked
on that as well with a lot of companies. I look forward to
working with you so that we can expand computer science
literacy, not only to inner city America but also to rural
America for education and for workforce development.
And, with that, Madam Chair, I will yield back, and I thank
you.
Secretary Walsh. Let me just quickly respond to that. I
have already had a meeting with Secretary Raimondo from
Commerce and Secretary Cardona from Education to talk about how
do we partner the three of us together to expand some
opportunities. And computer science can be one of those areas
that we could all fall into because of the Commerce, the Labor,
and the Education.
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, sir. Madam Chair, I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you. I have just been informed that there
is a series of tech issues that we are having here, and that is
with the livestream. So I just want to let folks know and Mr.
Secretary and members that I have been told that we need to
pause a few minutes. I hope it is a shorter period of time. I
apologize, Congresswoman Clark, as you are next, but this is--I
am taking the advice from the techies here in terms of what we
need to do to get the hearing livestreamed. So I hope it is
shorter period of time than that. But we will be right back to
you. So thank you. Thank you for your indulgence.
[Recess.]
The Chair. Hi, this is the chair. I am waiting to get some
indication of--it is the livestream mechanism that apparently
isn't working. We have an issue with whether or not, if you
don't livestream, if there is a compliance issue with the House
rules, and et cetera, trying to get very quickly a
determination and to figure out how we can proceed. So
apologies while waiting for an answer, so I will be back as
quickly as I can. Sorry. Sorry, Mr. Secretary. Sorry to my
colleagues.
Secretary Walsh. Madam Chair, no worries. It is not your
fault. Technology.
Ms. Clark. Rosa? I have an event with my virtual guest at
11:30. It is going to be about 10 minutes. Do you think I
should do that now or----
The Chair. Well, why don't you go ahead and do it and then
get back, and we will--you know, I will get you. I am waiting
now for a call back as to whether or not--they are checking
with Congressman Cole and others, et cetera--with Congresswoman
Granger--if we can proceed forward. But why don't you go--what
time is it now actually?
Ms. Clark. It is 11:30.
The Chair. Okay. Go do it and then come back, and we will
make sure that you get your questions in. Okay?
Ms. Clark. Okay.
The Chair. All right. Thank you. And then I know
Congressman Cole has to leave as well, so anyway. So sorry,
okay.
Hi. We are back, Mr. Secretary. So what we are going to do
is to proceed with the hearing, and we will post it at the
conclusion so as to be in concert with rules.
So, with that, let me--Ms. Frankel, Congresswoman Frankel.
Ms. Frankel. I am here. I am getting my act together. Okay.
The Chair. Okay.
Ms. Frankel. Here we go. Hello. Okay. Thank you. Thank you,
Madam Chair, Mr. Secretary. Nice to see you all. I see that
little girl. She is so cute. Okay.
Mr. Secretary, thank you. I enjoyed our conversation last
week, and I know you are ready for my questions, and
congratulations, you sound like the right person for this job.
So I am not going to go through all the statistics that our
chair ably did about women being out of work. We know they have
been hit the hardest by this pandemic, especially
disproportionately women of color. Millions lost their jobs.
Millions of jobs have disappeared.
And, you know, I think our President is the right person,
you know, to get us moving forward. I love his plans, his job
plan. I love the, what I expect will be part of the family
plan.
What is concerning to me is that he talks about them as two
separate plans because I think it is very important that we get
people back to work, and that means women getting back to work.
So that we shouldn't have one job plan that gets mostly men
back to work and then have a separate job plan that maybe is
going to get women back to work.
And so I want to talk about that, and I also want to talk
about what has happened in the childcare industry. I know--I am
hoping Katherine Clark is going to do that too, but there is
obviously a crisis. We just lost a lot of centers and slots
because people were not using childcare, and so we know this:
Parents can't go back to work if we don't have childcare.
And we also know that childcare is a great industry for--
especially for moms to work in if we can get their salaries up,
which is what we absolutely should do. And shortchanging women
is not just about the women; it is about shortchanges to
families they support, the men in their families, families
having to work two or three jobs.
So let me just start with your comment, because in terms of
how we are going to make sure that, as we move the President's
packages along, women are all going to get jobs, because--one
more thing is this: What I am concerned is by having two
funding, funding the jobs program one way, the family plan
another way, that women are going to be left out.
So my question to you is, how are you going to make sure
that women are going to get back into this job market, that
they are going to be paid fairly, and that we are going to
restore our childcare industry, and make sure that we are
training enough moms or people who want to be childcare
workers?
Secretary Walsh. Thank you very much, Congresswoman, and
thank you for your conversation the other day and your interest
in pushing us.
First, I just want to say, the Women's Bureau is the only
Federal office exclusively focused with serving and promoting
the interest of women in the workforce. So, within the
Department of Labor, we are the only office that exclusively is
focused on women in the workforce. If I have time, I will go
through some of the areas that the Women's Bureau is focused
on.
Number two, you know, I don't look at--I don't think we
should look at the two plans the President put forth--or
actually three plans, the Rescue Plan, the Jobs Plan, or the
Families Plan, as three individual plans. They all collectively
work together. And in the Jobs Plan, there is money in there
for workforce development. There is money in for the care
economy. When I say the care economy, I am not just talking
about strengthening the employees that work in the Jobs Plan
but also creating opportunities.
You are absolutely 100 percent right when you said that
many of our childcare facilities might not come back after the
pandemic. They lost their revenue. They lost their support.
They lost their kids. And the women that left the workforce,
some of those families are never going to go back into
childcare. We need to get them back in. It is important for our
economy to get----
Ms. Frankel. I am sorry. I am so rude to interrupt you, I
know, but I only have a few seconds. Here is what I would
really appreciate--I think this is important--is that you
analyze the so-called Jobs Plan how many women you believe are
going to get back into the workforce with that plan versus the
family plan. And let's stop calling, truthfully, one a Jobs
Plan and one a family plan, because what I see in the family
plan, what I expect is a Jobs Plan.
Secretary Walsh. Yeah.
Ms. Frankel. And I just really would like you to start
thinking about that because otherwise I think women are going
to just be left out.
Secretary Walsh. Okay. No, I will, and we will get numbers
on that for you.
Ms. Frankel. Thank you, sir.
I yield back, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Thank you.
Congresswoman Herrera Beutler.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And thank you, Secretary, for reaching out to all of us. I
really appreciate that. I know you have more than a few things
on your plate. So it is very honorable for you to reach out and
start the conversation. Even though I know, even on the other
side of the aisle, we are going to have a lot of disagreements,
I just really appreciate that. I think it is nice to see those
types of things being restored.
I wanted to ask--now, this is a little bit of a harder
issue. You know, obviously, the pandemic exposed the fact that
our unemployment system is inefficient and seriously
underprepared to respond to crises. And I know that State
agencies were given a very large task in this last year to
administer benefits to millions of people.
And I have got to tell you, whether--every day in my
office, I hear--would hear from single parents or a pregnant
woman or a senior who waited for hours on the phone to have
their call dropped or their identities were stolen. No joke.
There is a class action suit started in Washington State. I
mean, it was just horrific. Over a billion dollars was
basically given away to fraud, and I think those weaknesses in
our system really impacted the most vulnerable folks.
Recently, the Department of Labor OIG issued a memorandum
that stated that the employment and training administration
needs to take immediate action to ensure State agencies
implement effective controls to mitigate fraud and improper
payments. OIG estimated that the improper payments could be
around $89 billion with a significant portion of that being due
to fraud. Again, it was $1.1 billion in my own State of
Washington.
And despite that fraud, the individual who is now in charge
of the Department of Labor program that oversees unemployment
insurance benefits is Suzi LeVine, who was the head of
Washington's unemployment--or ESD when it gave away those
billions of dollars, and it was a very frustrating experience
across the board. It was a very bipartisan frustration with
what we felt like someone who was put in place to do a job she
just was not equipped to do.
I know a number of us sent a letter alerting you to those
concerns as she was being now put on the Federal--in that same
role on the Federal level. But I raise all this because I don't
want to see what happened in Washington State happen on the
national level. And I wanted to see, you know, in your budget
proposal, it doesn't mention integrity measures or fraud
prevention, or at least if it does, I didn't see it. And
unemployment is a high error program, but I need to know from
you that you are going to not allow this to happen nationwide
and kind of what measures you are going to be putting in
place--maybe I just missed it in the budget--to attack this
problem.
Secretary Walsh. No, thank you very much for your question
and your concern. As I said earlier, just to kind of recap real
quickly, last March, 30 million Americans kind of were
unemployed at one time. In my own State of Massachusetts, you
know, we didn't have enough people to be able to take the
requests that came in. The city of Boston partnered with the
State, with my Governor to help with call takers and to better
kind of put these processes in place.
I wasn't the Secretary of Labor last year. I wish I was
because, as these problems were coming in, as Secretary of
Labor, I would have intervened with States all across America,
and I would have said, how do we help with the distribution of
the benefits, and how do we make sure we are catching the
fraud? So I think there is a lot of opportunity here. We could
point at different people for whatever happened.
But moving forward, later on today, I have a meeting with
my folks at UI to talk about fraud and to talk about some of
the things that happened and how we move forward. But as we
think about investing the $2 billion into fixing the system, I
believe there is something like $600 million, $700 million that
is going to go into technical support for States, and there is
going to be other money that is going to go into other ways of
helping.
So fraud needs to be at the forefront of this, to eliminate
fraud in the system. Integrity needs to be put back in the
system. The people that collected unemployment insurance feel
confident when they get the check finally, but many of them
waited months or weeks and months to get the check. So we have
to put integrity back in the system.
You have my commitment, 100 percent of my commitment that
this will be one of the top areas that I work on as the
Secretary of Labor to make sure that something like this
doesn't happen. God forbid we have a pandemic in the future,
that something like this happens, but we have to have a system
that works for everyone.
In 2008, when we had a recession in the country, there was
issues with unemployment, I believe, back then. There was
issues in 2020. And we have to make sure our--future looking,
that we don't have issues in the system. So I look forward to
working with you, and I also look forward to working with this
Congress in order to pass--if we have to pass legislation, we
pass legislation, but to take the issues in UI out of them.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. I appreciate that. And you are right,
we had those problems in 2008, and Congress thought it took
steps to fix it, and so, when it happened again in 2020, it was
frustrating. So I appreciate your emphasis on this because I
don't want to be here again.
And thank you, Madam Chair. I yield back.
Secretary Walsh. Thank you.
The Chair. Let me inquire, is Congresswoman Clark back?
Ms. Clark. I am.
The Chair. Okay. You are on, Congresswoman Clark.
Ms. Clark. Thank you, Chairwoman DeLauro.
And thank you again, Secretary Walsh, for joining us.
I want to follow up on some of the questions from
Congresswoman Frankel. As we know, and I know you understand,
that women have borne the brunt of this pandemic's weight, from
taking on more child and family care responsibilities to
disproportionately serving in some of the most dangerous roles
as healthcare workers and other frontline workers.
This year has been extremely difficult for women in the
workforce. A sociologist, Jessica Calarco, summed it up well
when she said: Other countries have social safety nets. The
United States has women.
As a result, a disrespect loss of jobs for women and in
particular women of color have arisen throughout this pandemic.
In December, the economy lost a net 140,000 jobs, and every
single one of those jobs belonged to a woman.
I would like to know, to follow up, I know from your work
on universal pre-K in the city of Boston that you understand
that there isn't a hierarchy of infrastructure, that childcare
is as valuable to getting our workforce going, to growing jobs,
and to making sure that we get women back into the workforce
and get us out of this 33-year low we have in workforce
participation.
Can you expand a little on your approach and that of
President Biden as equating the Families Plan that we are going
to hear more details about tonight and the Jobs Plan and how
they really are one infrastructure investment?
Secretary Walsh. Thank you very much, Congresswoman, for
your question. I hear background. I don't know if that is me.
I think, first and foremost, I think in the American Jobs
Plan, when the President is recommending allocating $400
billion to the care economy, the issue around women in the
workforce is also a bigger issue because you have women who are
paid less than men; you have women of color paid less than
White women; you have Latino and African American paid less.
So, in the Jobs Plan, a lot of that is addressed. It is about
raising wages for women that work in that particular industry,
but it is also about creating opportunity.
The Women's Bureau, if you could bear with me for 2
minutes--or 1 minute here because we only have 2 minutes. The
Women's Bureau has designed four goals to respond to the
current conditions that women face navigating the pandemic
recovery and economic recovery: Disrupt occupational
segregation and get more women pathways to good jobs, Jobs Plan
and the American Families Plan will address that; reducing
penalties for women in low-paid work by expanding access to
paid leave, medical leave, paid sick, sick days, childcare,
eldercare; closing the gender gaps in programs like
Unemployment Insurance; and eliminating the gender-based
discrimination in the workplace through policies and practices
that promote equal pay and confront sexual harassment in the
workplace, pregnancy discrimination, disability and sexual
orientation and gender identity related discrimination.
All of this has to be done together. We can't just do one
aspect and not the other, as you know that. Even in our time in
the legislature, we passed lots of pay equity bills, but we
didn't--in Massachusetts, but we didn't change the narrative,
and we have to be laser focused on how do we change the
narrative. So that is some of the stuff--I don't want to take
your time. I will go back to you, and I can answer more
questions later as well.
Ms. Clark. Specifically earlier you raised the issue around
apprenticeships and high-quality registered apprenticeships,
and we know that women and people of color have often faced
barriers into accessing those programs. Do you plan to engage
with these communities as we look to the future of our
workforce, in particular with these apprenticeship programs?
Secretary Walsh. Yeah, I think we have to engage with the
stakeholder community, and we also have to engage in the
apprenticeship programs to make sure that people understand how
do they access these jobs, how do they access these programs,
and what are the barriers there. And, quite honestly, some of
the barriers are childcare. So we need to make sure that, as we
set up these apprenticeship programs, there is an opportunity
for childcare.
Construction industry is the best example. We don't have
childcare. Boston is doing a pilot right now. The building
trades is doing a pilot to create childcare opportunities in
the city. If that works, we can take that, scale it across the
country, and make it work for women so that the barrier isn't
childcare.
Ms. Clark. In my last 20 seconds, going back to the
opportunity to create good-paying green jobs, what do you say
to workers in the fossil fuel industry who are concerned about
the vast potential for work in Biden's Jobs Plan?
Secretary Walsh. There is great, good-paying jobs coming
down the road from the clean energy sector. These are good
jobs. Some of these jobs are construction jobs. Some of these
jobs are tech jobs. Some of these jobs are retrofitting jobs,
and we need American workers to do those jobs.
Ms. Clark. Thank you, Secretary Walsh.
Secretary Walsh. Thank you, Congresswoman.
Ms. Clark. And I yield back.
Secretary Walsh. Thank you.
The Chair. Thank you.
Congressman Cline.
Mr. Cline. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Ranking Member Cole.
Secretary Walsh, thank you for being here. While,
unfortunately, we don't have President Biden's complete budget
to allow us to fully discuss the funding needs and oversight
that this committee will be working on, I appreciate the
information on funding levels you provided in your testimony
and look forward to reviewing the completed budget when it is
released.
Many from my local chambers of commerce have voiced
significant concerns with legislation such as the PRO Act,
which I have consistently voted against during my time on the
House Education and Labor Committee and on the floor. My home
State of Virginia being right to work is one of the reasons it
has been named as the best State to do business by CNBC, but
now both Federal and State laws are threatening this.
Every American should have the right to get and hold a job
free from their requirement that they join a labor union. The
PRO Act would preempt and prohibit that right. Workers, quite
frankly, deserve more. What will you do to protect their right
to privacy of their personal information and to protect their
ability to work as an independent contractor free from the
requirements--or as an employee free from the requirement to
join a labor union?
Secretary Walsh. Thank you, Congressman, for the question.
And I know that your State is one of the ones ranked the
highest, if not the highest, to do business. And, you know, I
think I said to you on the phone the other day when I talked to
you, as mayor of the city of Boston, I want to put a good
business tone out in the city.
For 7 years as mayor, we had a AAA bond rating. For 7 years
as mayor, we approved billions of dollars in new development in
the city of Boston. We recruited companies to our city. As
mayor of the city of Boston, we are on a pace to have our
pension liability fully funded by 2024. So I felt that, as a
mayor, I created a good business culture in the city of Boston.
Also, as mayor, I supported the rights of organizing in the
city of Boston, and I feel that workers deserve the right to
choose without interference if they want to improve their
workplace and to be able to join the union if they choose. I
mean, that is the worker's right, just like it is their right
to vote when I was the mayor in or out.
So I look forward to--I will work with you on this. And I
don't think it is an either/or. I think there is an opportunity
for both, and I think that there is--we will have many
conversations about this, but I do feel that people have the
right, if they choose to join the union, they should have that
right.
Mr. Cline. Absolutely. I am a supporter of unions. I
believe they have provided worker protections in many dangerous
employment areas, and I do want labor--I do want workers to
have that right to choose.
I have also heard from many small businesses in my district
that, in addition to operational complications COVID has
caused, they are dealing with significant staffing shortages
despite offering higher than current minimum wage employment
opportunities. Inflated unemployment benefits create an
unworkable environment for the businesses to attract employees,
and there are not proper enforcement mechanisms for these
benefits.
Local chambers of commerce in my district are saying that
even when businesses are able to find prospective employees,
they frequently don't show up for interviews as requested. The
focus needs to be on getting people off unemployment and back
into fulfilling jobs in their communities, not continuing to
expand unemployment benefits. What will you do to shift that
focus? And I will have a followup if I could.
Secretary Walsh. No, thank you. I think that the
President's plan to vaccinate people is a big step moving
forward. Over 200 million vaccination shots have happened in
our country. We are not at a place where we are at herd
immunity yet or the majority of people yet, but I think that
that is a big step forward. I think we have to get this virus
under control.
I want to commend the Congress for two things: One is, when
I was the mayor, of passing the CARES Act, that that actually
gave $600 additional benefit to people that were unemployed
when the pandemic began. Many people were in fear of losing
their homes, losing their apartments, losing their ability to
put the food on the table. Also, in the American Rescue Plan,
the ability to get additional $300, not the $600 that was given
in the CARES plan but $300, because people are still struggling
out there.
I honestly feel in my heart that the American worker would
rather be at work than unemployed. I don't think anyone wants
to stay on unemployment because it is eventually going to run
out. But I do think that as we move forward here in the coming
months, between the vaccines and getting this virus under
control all across this country, that that is the most
important thing.
You know, I would love to open our economy back up and get
people back into work. I think most people want to get back to
work at this point, but I think we still have to take a day-at-
a-time approach here. But I am hoping that, next time, when we
have the next budget hearing, which I think is in about a
month, I am hoping we are in a whole different place when it
comes to coronavirus and we are talking about different things.
Mr. Cline. I appreciate that. You had an OIG report from
back last October. State cited vulnerabilities in detecting
fraud while complying with CARES Act UI program self-
certification requirement. Fifty-three percent of respondents
cited fraud vulnerabilities within the PUA program, and the
self-certification requirement was the top fraud vulnerability.
And they issued another report in February of this year
that identified $5.4 billion of potentially fraudulent UI
benefits paid to multistate claimants, deceased individuals,
Federal prisoners, and those with suspicious email accounts.
And can you update us on----
Secretary Walsh. Congressman, you froze there. Sorry. Can
you just repeat the question? You froze. My screen froze on
you.
Mr. Cline. I apologize. Madam Chair, with some--with your
indulgence----
The Chair. Right.
Mr. Cline [continuing]. I am just following up on an OIG
report that identified $5 billion of potentially fraudulent UI
benefits paid to----
The Chair. I understand. I understand, but time has
expired. So I will have a brief answer because we have been
delayed, and there are other folks who are in the queue. So we
cannot hear you.
Secretary Walsh. Congressman, if you want to get me--if you
can--I can't hear you, but if you can hear me, if you want to
get us the question, I will do that. But $300 billion--all
right. Never mind.
Mr. Cline. I understand.
The Chair. Congressman Cline, I am hoping that you and the
Secretary can address this offline because we need to move on.
Congresswoman Bustos is recognized.
Mr. Cline. I appreciate that.
Mrs. Bustos. All right. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And welcome, Secretary Walsh. It is good to see you. I
wanted to ask you about something in President Biden's American
Jobs Plan. So he has got $40 billion that is included for a new
dislocated worker training program. We are really, really
excited to see that. I believe also that we need to do more to
help dislocated workers to find good, quality jobs, including
those who are displaced by technological advancement.
So in my own home State of Illinois, there is a study from
Ball State that showed between 50 and 60 percent of jobs in
Illinois could be at risk of becoming automated, you know,
pretty alarming. And then you have got COVID-19 that
accelerated these trends. You have got 43 percent of businesses
that anticipate reducing their workforce due to increased
technological integration.
So I introduced a bill very recently called the Investing
in Tomorrow's Workforce Act, and what the bill would do is
create a Department of Labor grant program to work--that would
support industry partnerships in developing training programs
for workers who are likely to become dislocated because of
advances in technology. So we are pretty proud of that bill.
So, Mr. Secretary, what I am wondering is, if you have a
thought on the level of investment that we should put into
dislocated worker programs in this coming fiscal year and then
kind of the part B of that is how else we can support workers
who are displaced by technological advancement. So if you could
talk a little bit about that, please.
Secretary Walsh. Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
I am sorry. Thank you, Congresswoman. I don't know if I got
myself in trouble now with the chair.
You know, one thing that--I have said this already today,
with the pandemic has certainly put a spotlight on dislocated
workers in industries that might not come back. You are
absolutely right to think about some of the manufacturing and
technology jobs that we have in America that could be
eliminated.
And I think what we have to do, and your bill is a good
part of that, we have to get ahead of the curve. And the $40
billion investment, we need to get it out in the street. And we
need to come up--somebody asked me a question earlier. We need
to have a good process to be able to get ahead of the
situation, not react when a plant shuts down and not react when
a pandemic hits.
We need to have this ground work down there now to think
about what are the jobs of the future and how can we have
people that we know that potentially in the next 5, 10 years
could be dislocated because of technology changes? How do we
train them? So I look forward to working with Congress on this.
I look forward to working with you on this. And I think that it
is really important.
And, also, the ETA, the national dislocated worker grants,
we were able to--the Department has awarded $400 million
already in dislocated worker grant money, so we have to get the
money out to the systems, out to the States sooner and not have
it sitting in a bank somewhere when it needs to be out in the
street in these programs retraining workers.
Mrs. Bustos. Absolutely. I am glad I have got a little bit
of extra time. I want to shift gears a little bit. Also, very
happy to see President Biden's commitment to green jobs. We
have got--there is provisions in a bill that we have. It is
called the SCALE Act, it stands for Storing CO2 and
Lowering Emissions Act, that President Biden has included as
part of the American Jobs Plan.
So the bill that I introduced with a group of bipartisan
colleagues--we always like to be able to say that, but it would
provide funding for CO2 transport infrastructure and
storage. And then, in addition, the bill would help create jobs
in, you know, various places, but I am very happy that it would
create jobs in the congressional district that I serve,
including in rural communities. We have got a plan where we can
transport and store CO2 at the Mount Simon Sandstone
basin in my home State.
So, Mr. Secretary, how could investment in clean energy
jobs help bolster our economy, including in rural America and
the Midwest? If you can kind of focus on that component of it
in rural America.
Secretary Walsh. Yeah. You know, similar questions I got
earlier about fossil fuels, Keystone Pipeline, how do we move
forward here. You know, there are many workers in rural America
that have worked in different industries that aren't
necessarily as strong as they were, and they are concerned
about what is going to happen to these industries over the next
5 to 10 years or maybe even before that.
So I think that, you know, like we did with the veterans
program, we create a program that was a competitive grant
program prepared for eligible veterans, transitioning
servicemembers, military spouses for careers in the clean
energy sector. There is no reason why we can't be targeting
areas of this country the same way and targeting with these
types of grants to be able to make sure that a city or town
that might have had whatever it was in the town that we know is
going away, why we can't focus, again, and get in there the day
before because if we wait for the day after, then we know what
happens to the city and town if they lose an industry. People
have to move and leave and areas become depressed.
So I do think that we have to do--when I say ``we,'' the
government, but I will say the DOL right now, have to do a
better job of working with Members of Congress to target the
areas that need the investment.
Mrs. Bustos. Well, please see me as your partner in this,
Mr. Secretary. We are out of time.
I yield back. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Thank you.
Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking
Member.
And it is good to see you face-to-face, Secretary Walsh.
Thank you for the conversation that we had the other day.
I have another hearing that I have to go to, and I had a
million questions to ask. So I am going to run through some
stuff really quickly and then just kind of ask you, can we work
on these things together?
First of all, let me just say, it is good to have a
Secretary of Labor that believes in the importance of labor and
unions.
Among my priorities are Federal jobs guarantee programs,
guaranteed income, living wages and eradicating discrimination
in the workplace. I want us to always be focused on the fact
that the minimum wage is a minimum wage, and for those
individuals who work in those tip-type jobs that they deserve a
minimum wage. And if their service is good enough that their
customer gives them a tip, all well and good because we are
trying to build back better and stronger in our economy.
I want to look forward to working with you. I am very much
concerned about the fact that--first of all, let me just say
that I am encouraged by the President's government holistic
approach to equity and opportunities, fairness, and justice.
And I just need to let you know that I have worked under those
environments before, but at the end of the day, those who were
minority communities and those who were women still got left
out. And I want to make sure that when we build back better and
bigger this time, that that is not the case.
So I am very interested in how your department will hold
entities who are responsible for pre-apprenticeship programs,
apprenticeship programs, training programs, and jobs programs
not only have high expectations and have the resources to do
things, but how will they be held accountable by your
department, whether or not it is to hold the State accountable
or others?
And what do you envision as potential consequences of not
doing everything that you can to ensure that minorities and
women are utilized in the workforce to the degree that they are
available? Because their workforce availability is crucial when
we determine whether or not we are measuring those standards.
I am concerned about the elimination of discrimination. I
am the sponsor of the CROWN Act, which makes it illegal to
discriminate against someone because of the way they wear their
hair, particularly the sort of ethnic expressions that are
manifested in their hairstyles. The Department of Labor has
the--the Secretary of Labor is the actual enforcement agent for
that law, and I hope that you will be able to work with us on
that.
I am also very concerned about reentry programs, second-
chance programs, youth programs. What are you looking forward
to in terms of giving those individuals, those formerly
incarcerated individuals and those individuals who are most
vulnerable to incarceration because there haven't been these
alternatives to incarceration programs, opportunities so that
they can become productive workers?
I think that when we look to make sure that we are holding
up and protecting and ensuring opportunities from training to
working happens for those who have been most underrepresented
in the workforce, and that is minorities, Black and Latino in
particular, and women, Black and Latino in particular, and even
White women, then we are really building back bigger and
better.
And so I really am interested in just kind of how you see
your role in supporting the States and the programs and holding
them accountable to do what it is the President envisioned.
And I also want to put a pitch in for my Department of
Labor, which is overwhelmed by so many cases that people have
months and months before they get a response. What can we do to
alleviate some of that backlog?
Secretary Walsh. Thank you, Congresswoman, for that. And
there is a lot there, and everything you said I have worked on
or supported in my entire time. But I just want to kind of
quickly say that we are 21 years into the 21st century, and the
fact that we are still talking about the issues of racism,
discrimination, inequality, inequity for our country, as the
United States, is somewhat a very sad story.
And all I can say is that we have an administration in
Washington right now, we have a President in President Biden
and a Vice President in Vice President Harris that are not
afraid to put these policies embedded in whether it is the
Rescue Plan, the Jobs Plan, the Families Plan or just talk
about on a daily basis.
So I just want you to know, you have my commitment, and I
know the team that works with me every day that I have met in a
very short period of time, both the career staff and the
political staff, we are focused and dedicated at the Department
of Labor to tackle every single issue you brought up. And I
could rattle off a whole bunch of things we have already done,
but we will have other conversations, so I want to thank you
for bringing it to the forefront today.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you. I look forward to working
with you.
And, Mr. Secretary, the one thing I also would like to
suggest is that we eliminate any discussion on nontraditional
work environments for women because I think that is an
overused, outdated term. We can do just about anything other
than the few biological things that only men can do. Thank you
very much.
Secretary Walsh. Thank you, Congresswoman.
The Chair. Well said, Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
Congressman Harder.
Mr. Harder. Thank you so much, Chair DeLauro, for hosting
today's hearing.
And thank you, Secretary Walsh, for being here. For over a
year, I have been very focused on some of the ongoing problems
at the Employment Development Department in California, EDD. I
will just come out and say it: I think EDD has been a complete
disaster, a total and complete mess, many of those programs
preceding the last year.
It is supposed to be the last resort for a lot of folks
before hunger and homelessness, yet it has totally failed to do
its job. Fewer than 10 percent of calls to EDD in California
actually get a human response at all. Tax forms are going to
folks who never got a dime on unemployment, and, of course,
criminals have stolen more than $11 billion through fraudulent
claims.
Just to make this personal, I sat recently with a mom of
two kids who said she called EDD 100 times a day after they
shut off her benefits, and she still couldn't get through to a
live person, even after 6 weeks of calling them up to 100 times
a day. They need the money to support her kids and yet the
system let her down.
Two months ago, we voted to pass the Rescue Plan, which
gave $2 billion in funding to EDD to help fix this disaster in
California and many other States. It was supposed to go to
preventing fraud and ensuring families get their payments
quickly. It is my understanding that none of that $2 billion
has gone out the door yet.
Secretary Walsh, I know you don't have the power to single
handedly fix the disaster that is the California Unemployment
Office, but when can States expect these funds we passed 2
months ago, and what is the plan to get them out ASAP?
Secretary Walsh. Yeah, no, we want to get the funds out the
door as quickly as possible, and we are working right now.
There is a proposal, setting up a grant proposal that we are
doing, a structure, I should say, not a proposal. It is a large
amount of money. And as I mentioned earlier, about I think a
little less than half it have it is going to go for technical
support and other money is going to go for other supports that
we have to do. So we want to be very intentional about making
sure when this money goes out, it is meant for what you voted
for, to change the systems.
And I know that you have concerns in your system and your
State and other States have concerns, maybe different concerns
in their States, but there is probably not many States in the
country that don't have some type of concern around their whole
system. So we are working to get that out, and I will keep you
abreast to as soon as we get it out the door or get it proposed
to get out the door.
Mr. Harder. Please do. Do you have a sense of the timeline?
I mean, how long do you think it might take until some of these
funds are available?
Secretary Walsh. No, I don't want to put a timeline on it
at this point because I know there are people, as we speak
right now, in this hearing, there are people working on it
here. And I would want to ask them what is the better--what
would be their hopefulness to get it out quickly.
Mr. Harder. Great. Next question, I hate to be cynical, but
I think we have seen organizations like EDD get more cash again
and again, but it doesn't seem to make the situation any
better. So my next question is, what does the oversight look
like? How are we going to ensure these funds are actually put
to good use instead of thrown out the window like we have seen
happen historically with unemployment offices like California?
And what do you think the Department of Labor's use of that
oversight is going to look like in the future?
Secretary Walsh. No, thank you, Congressman. You are
absolutely right in that, and I think that, as I said earlier,
we have had a couple periods in the 21st century that we have
had large groups of people on unemployment, and we have had
concerns in those unemployment.
The pandemic has given us all an opportunity to really look
at--put a spotlight on the system. Some of that spotlight shows
a good part of the system where somebody gets a check in their
home and they can put food on the table, and some of the
spotlight is that it wasn't great, and whether it was fraud or
not being able to get through to the office in different
States, things like that.
So I think it is incumbent upon all of us, the $2 billion
investment is not a small investment. I think the American
people, it is their money, it is their taxpayer dollars, you
appropriate it, you voted for it, and I think that we owe the
American people a good policy and a good process that we are
not--that somebody 10 years from now, Secretary of Labor and a
Congressman from your district are having conversations about,
oh, 10 years ago, they blew it. We have an opportunity to do it
right, and I think we need to.
Mr. Harder. Absolutely. And I think, as you said,
unfortunately, it often feels like Groundhog Day where every
single economic crisis we have the same conversation about how
broken our unemployment system is. And I guess my question for
you is, how are we going to know if we fix it, as we emerge
sort of out of the other end of this tunnel, as people are
getting back to work, and the demands on our unemployment
office are hopefully diminished?
You know, 6 months from now, after this money has gone out,
what are you going to be looking at from the Department of
Labor to see whether or not we are actually on track to getting
this right for the next economic crisis that could be down the
road?
Secretary Walsh. Well, I can't speak to what the
relationship was in the past, but we are going to work closely
with States and territories to stay connected with them to see
what is working, what is not working. We are also going to be
talking to Governors and mayors around the country to see what
they are hearing.
I mean, one thing, the way you can tell if it is fixed is
the way people are treated on unemployment. If they need
unemployment benefits, they apply, they get them, and when they
don't need them anymore they don't get them. And I think it is
really listening to people. It is listening to the public.
I was a mayor. I wasn't the Governor. I heard every single
day about somebody waiting to get unemployment benefits. Now,
the concerns weren't as great as some other States in the
country but they were concerned. They called their mayor. They
called my office. They called their local elected officials,
and I think that that is going to be, number one, the
benchmark.
But, two, we, the Department of Labor, needs to put a
process, a check and balance in place so that we can monitor
these systems across the country to make sure they are working
because, again, a $2 billion investment--and then I think we
are asking for another $100 million in this budget--that is a
large investment to make in the UI system and get nothing back
for it. Maybe the investments were made in the past; I am not
sure what they were. But I can guarantee you we are going to do
everything we can to make sure the system is--I don't want to
say fixed--the system is a better system moving forward.
Mr. Harder. I look forward to working with you. Thank you
so much.
And, with that, I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you.
Yes, Congresswoman Lawrence.
Mrs. Lawrence. Yes, thank you so much.
I want to say congratulations to you, Secretary Walsh. We
have not had an opportunity to have that one-on-one, and I look
forward to that. Being a former mayor, I wanted to bring forth
the issue that I appreciate your understanding of the
intersection of all of the funding that we are talking about,
the JOBS Act, the transportation funding that we are talking
about.
If we do not grab hold of these funding opportunities to
ensure that all ships rise during this, I wanted to quote James
Clyburn who made an amazing statement to me. He said, when we
were meeting with the President, you know the New Deal was the
transformational moment in American history, but it left
pockets of poverty all over this country. And we have an
opportunity to ensure that, as we infuse the much-needed
funding and resources to rebuild better, that we are doing it
so all ships rise.
So, with that, I am the chair of the Women's Caucus, co-
chair, I am the vice chair of the Black Caucus, and I am also
the co-chair of the bipartisan skilled trade workforce caucus.
With that being said, I am very interested, because I believe
your money speaks louder than what you say, the budget.
So I want to talk about the Women in Apprenticeship and
Nontraditional Occupations, the WANTO. Now, it has been
underfunded. It has not been funded in a way that it could be
transformational. And so I wanted to know, what is your plan to
fund that and to energize that account so that when we look at
these construction sites in our cities, that it look like the
people who work there?
Secretary Walsh. Well, thank you very much. First and
foremost, I appreciate the question about the funding and
increasing the funding, but we also have to increase the access
to these programs. You know, when I ran the building trades, I
helped create a program called building pathways. It was a pre-
apprentice program. The trade stepped up. And it was guaranteed
admittance into the union.
And the second cycle of building pathways--the third cycle
of building pathways training apprentices was a class of all
women. It was probably the first time in this country that we
had 12 women, I think it was 12 or 13 women in apprenticeship
class, pre-apprentice class to get into the building trades,
and we have to create those opportunities to get in.
So it is not just simply--and I am not putting this down--
not simply about the money training, but how do we build up a
network around the country? The Women's Bureau has already
reached out to--I know in Massachusetts and in Boston, we have
women in the trades chapter, and we need to collaborate and
partner with those different associations around the country so
that we get the grants around the country and we create
opportunities and pathways into the--building trades is one
aspect. There is other aspects as well.
In my city, in our police class, the last class we just put
on before I left as mayor, I want to say 32 percent of the
people in the class are women. I want to create--we have to
create opportunities so women have opportunities into good-
paying jobs that have been historically, traditionally labeled
a man's job, which today, as the previous Congresswoman said,
doesn't exist anymore. So I think that we need to do more work
around advocacy and recruitment and advocacy.
Mrs. Lawrence. I thank you for that. And I want you to know
that the funding of that--and I would love to get a briefing
with the Women's Caucus on what your plans are and how we can
work with you on the WANTO program and also on the Skilled
Trade Caucus, and know that you have an advocate. You have
heard from all of us, the issue of minorities and women. We
cannot build back better unless we build back with women. We
cannot build back better unless our workforce is reflective of
this amazing diversity we have in our country.
Secretary Walsh. No, thank you. And I had a conversation
with Congresswoman Frankel the other day, and I did say that I
would love to present in front of the Women's Caucus as well as
bring in the Women's Bureau in front of the Women's Caucus to
have these conversations so that we are not just having a
conversation and we are talking--you know, you are saying to
me, ``We want to do this,'' and we are like, ``Yeah, we are
going to,'' and it doesn't happen; I want to actually roll our
sleeves up and actually get some work done.
Mrs. Lawrence. Okay. Thank you very much. And I look
forward to having my one-on-one with you as well.
I yield back, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Okay. Thank you.
Just to follow up very briefly on what my colleague just
talked about, Mr. Secretary, and I will be quite honest with
you, almost every year, and that is true whether it has been a
Republican or Democratic administration, we have had to--and I
say ``we,'' and I have had to, as chair of this subcommittee,
really lobby, fight hard for increased funding. In some
respects, it may have even been eliminated both for the Women's
Bureau and for the WANTO program.
These are critical programs, and I am hopeful when we do
see the President's budget, that there will be a significant
increase in this area, particularly as we face the situation
with, you know, close to 4 million women are out of jobs. And
as you pointed out, as I pointed out, women are not opting out
of the workplace. They are being pushed out of the workplace.
So I look forward to working with you on that.
And let me just say to my colleague, Congressman Harris, I
am going to ask a question on behalf of Congresswoman Lucille
Roybal-Allard, who is chairing the Homeland Security meeting,
but I will--before we begin to wrap up and close, Congressman
Harris, I want to give you an opportunity to be able to ask
another question as well.
On behalf of Congresswoman Roybal-Allard, Mr. Secretary,
and I concur overwhelming with her, that one of the disgraceful
things that happens in this country is that children who work
in agriculture are not protected under the same labor laws as
children in every other industry. There was a recent GAO report
found that over 50 percent of all work-related child fatalities
occur in the agriculture industry.
Since 2001, Congresswoman Roybal-Allard has a bill, the
CARE Act, amends the Fair Labor Standards Act, corrects the
inequities in current law, allow children employed in
agriculture that allow children to work longer hours at younger
ages and more hazardous conditions than children working in
other sectors.
Her bill preserves the family farm exemption, sets
standards for the ag industry, strengthens provisions on
pesticides, et cetera. And I am going to be very honest, there
has never been any movement in either Republican or Democratic-
run Congresses to fix the double standard in child labor
protections.
What are you going to be able to do to protect these
children in the agriculture sector, Mr. Secretary? And the GAO
child labor report from 2018 found that agriculture ranks much
lower as a sector in the number of wage and hour investigations
that lead to violations. Will the Department seek a new,
comprehensive child labor enforcement strategy that better
aligns investigations with fatal occupational injuries?
Secretary Walsh. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. That is
an important issue, and as we move forward here, I will be
happy to work with the Congresswoman on this issue and to see
how her bill would interact with some of the work here at the
Department of Labor.
The Chair. Uh-huh.
Secretary Walsh. And on your previous point, just for the
record, I have asked for a couple of million dollars additional
to be put into the Women's Bureau on top of what we have asked,
so this is all from my first couple meetings with the Women's
Bureau. We have a great Director there and a great staff there,
great team there, I should say, and I look forward to working
with them. So I am excited about working with them as well on
other issues that we talked about today and in the future.
The Chair. Thank you. Thank you very, very much. I think it
is critically important right now.
And I understand that Congressman Harris has left. Let me
just--and I will close in a second, but I want to--and if you
can get back to me on this, with regard to the IRAPs, the Biden
administration has called for an end to IRAPs. They have done
that through an executive order. But the authority for the IRAP
model still exists.
We need to know and I want to know the steps that you are
going to take to rescind the authority for the IRAP rule. And
how will you ensure that Federal funding is not used for this
purpose?
Secretary Walsh. Thank you. As you mentioned, the President
did issue an executive order asking the Department to consider
taking steps to rescind the regulations. Our review is
currently ongoing right now. I want to reiterate the commitment
I made during my confirmation process that we will ensure that
every voice of the industries are heard. And to that end, the
rulemaking that we do with regards to IRAP will be transparent
and go through a public notice and comment period. So we are
working through that process now.
The Chair. Okay. And--well, yeah, and we will continue to
pursue registered apprenticeships.
Secretary Walsh. Yes.
The Chair. Is that correct?
Secretary Walsh. Yes.
The Chair. Okay. Thank you. Also, with--and, you know, we
didn't get much chance to talk about wage theft, but we will
proceed with a question on that because we both know that that
is rampant and that, you know, workers really suffer.
I just have--again, before I close, and this is--I really
need to get answers on this. This is about ILAB and the USMCA
funding. This is about democracy in Mexico. We provided $180
million to ILAB, supporting reforms for the labor justice
system in Mexico, funds for worker capacity to train workers to
build independent unions. Mexico, even after the passage of
their reforms, employers are signing the protection contracts
that don't represent workers' interest. Alarming reports on
intimidation, harassment, incarceration of union organizers.
And what I am asking DOL is to dedicate more of its USMCA
resources to support Mexican workers' efforts to build
independent and democratic unions. I don't know what your plan
is, which I would very much like to see, of how you are going
to monitor, enforce the capacity-building role in the USMCA,
and address the concerns that have been raised in Mexico.
And with regard to that as well, the funding for the
Mexican Labor Inspectorate, it is an important role in
protecting Mexico worker rights. It enforces the labor laws,
supports new labor justice institutions. Since 1919, its budget
has been cut by roughly 40 percent. It impacts operations and
efficacy. So, again, will the administration be raising the
concern with the appropriate Mexican budget authorities to help
ensure that the Labor Inspectorate gets sufficient funding?
Secretary Walsh. Yeah. The short answer to that is,
absolutely, yes. And just ILAB, we have already awarded $80
million for projects to support labor reforms in Mexico,
strengthening the democratic union process, reducing workforce
discrimination and addressing child labor, and forced labor and
human trafficking.
And we also--I had a conversation the other day with our
team about making sure that the five inspectors that were
supposed to be hired, we get them on the ground there and we
move forward with that. So this is a fluid process, and but we
are--but the short answer to your question, the initial
question is, yes, we will do everything we can.
The Chair. Well, what I would like to do is to work with
you and with your team on this issue. I was part of the working
group that the Speaker stood up in terms of the renegotiated
NAFTA agreement, and someone in the past who did not support
the TPP because of the outsourcing of jobs and other
agreements, which have outsourced the jobs, but we had
assurances that the Mexican reforms were going to be
transformative, and, thus far, that is not the case.
So I very, very much want to work closely with you in
seeing that they are held to the standards that were laid out--
and I was in Mexico and discussing with the President these
issues, the President of Mexico--and that what we need to do is
to make sure that workers--and I know where your heart is on
where workers--you know, workers' rights, that those rights are
adhered to and that the Mexican labor has the opportunity to be
able to have independent unions where they can bargain for
wages and safe workplaces. So it is a critically important
area, Mr. Secretary, so look forward to that conversation,
okay.
Secretary Walsh. No, thank you. We have a really strong
team in ILAB as well, so I will make sure that they stay
connected to your office as we move forward here. Actually, as
a matter of fact, while I have a moment, we have a strong team
at DOL completely, and I want to thank them for the incredible
work they have done, the career people in particular for all
the great work they have done over the last 4 years here
keeping the ship moving forward, and also the political people
that are coming in, the dedication.
So I am fortunate and blessed to have such great people
work with me every single day, many whom I haven't met yet
because of coronavirus, but the work still continues. So I just
want to give a shout-out to the team at DOL for the great work
they do.
The Chair. Thank you. And in the past, DOL has not had
anywhere near the resources that it needs. We have tried to
address that in the Labor-H Committee over the years, and now
so it is critically important to see what the Biden
administration has done here and so pleased with the budget for
Labor. This is strong funding increases for worker protection,
job training, apprenticeships, we talked about, community
colleges, and so many other areas.
I view what you are doing as central to addressing the
issues that workers in this country have faced, particularly--
they have in the past but particularly as a result of the
pandemic, and they need your strength and the strength of your
team to get help to them to get back on track.
Let me reiterate my strong support for OSHA, and we move
forward with the emergency temporary standard to protect
workers. You know, I think that we are moving to a government
that invests in workers and puts workers and their families
ahead of corporate profits in this country, so it is so good to
see a tilt in that direction. This is from my personal
perspective.
And it is all about what your immigrant parents and what my
immigrant parents strove for, and that was their children to be
able to get a shot at the American Dream. We are both in
positions where we can help to make that happen, and I know
your commitment in this effort. And the other piece of this is
poverty is unacceptable, and we have the capacity to abolish
it. And Robert Kennedy said that in a land of plenty, poverty
is evil. The United States is a land of plenty.
So, again, look forward to working with you as we try to
turn some of these things around. Thank you so much and your
patience with regard to our delay and so forth. I thank you for
your testimony today. And, with that, this hearing is
adjourned. Thank you.
[Questions and answers submitted for the record follow:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Wednesday, May 5, 2021.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
WITNESS
HON. MIGUEL CARDONA, SECRETARY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION
The Chair. The hearing will come to order.
As this hearing is fully virtual, we must address a few
housekeeping matters.
For today's meeting, the chair or staff designated by the
chair may mute participants' microphones when they are not
under recognition for the purposes of eliminating inadvertent
background noise.
Members are responsible for muting and unmuting themselves.
If I notice that you have not unmuted yourself, I will ask you
if you would like the staff to unmute you. If you indicate
approval by nodding, staff will unmute your microphone.
I remind all members and witnesses that the 5-minute clock
still applies. If there is a technology issue, we will move to
the next member until the issue is resolved and you will retain
the balance of your time.
You will notice a clock on your screen that will show how
much time is remaining. At 1 minute remaining, the clock will
turn to yellow. At 30 seconds remaining, I will gently tap the
gavel to remind members that their time is almost expired. When
your time has expired, the clock will turn red and I will begin
to recognize the next member.
In terms of the speaking order, we will begin with the
chair and ranking member, then members present at the time the
hearing is called to order will be recognized in order of
seniority, and finally members not present at the time the
hearing is called to order.
Finally, House rules require me to remind you that we have
set up an email address to which members can send anything they
wish to submit in writing at any of our hearings or markups.
That email address has been provided in advance to your staff.
With that, I want to acknowledge Ranking Member Cole and
all of our colleagues.
I am excited this morning to welcome Secretary Cardona who
joins the Biden administration from my home State of
Connecticut.
It is a pleasure to have you with us today and to have your
voice in this discussion. As the son of Puerto Rican parents
who grew up in the projects and entered school as an English
learner and now as Secretary of the Department of Education,
you bring an important wealth of knowledge and personal
experience to our discussion.
I know many in Connecticut are grateful for your service
working for two decades in our Meriden Connecticut Public
Schools and then as State commissioner of education. We are
proud of the example you set for students not only in
Connecticut, but across this country.
This week we celebrate Teacher Appreciation Week, a time to
give back and show our gratitude to the countless hardworking
teachers who dedicate their lives to educating our Nation's
students. This is why we must continue to support teacher
training and preparation programs, including additional
resources for Title II.
But in recognizing our educators this week, I also want to
recognize you, Secretary Cardona. Thank you for the sacrifices
you have made to help students of all ages, races, sexes, and
backgrounds to reach for the American Dream. You know firsthand
how education can serve as a great equalizer that opens doors
and opportunities to jobs, higher wages, and a better life.
But, as you will expand further in your testimony, it can
only serve as this great equalizer if, and only if, it is
affordable, accessible, and achievable for all. I am so
grateful to see that the Biden administration has made it a top
priority to reverse years of underinvestment in our Federal
education system.
Sadly, our schools, our teachers, our students have been
struggling for far too long. As the richest country in the
world, it is unconscionable that we still have teachers forced
to take money out of their own pockets to buy paper, pencil,
even food for their students, and students who struggle in
school because they are hungry or homeless or are not having
their unique needs met.
And it is unacceptable that schools and school systems that
predominantly serve students of color are often considerably
more underfunded than schools that serve White populations.
That is why I am grateful that President Biden took
decisive action to respond to the economic crisis by proposing
the American Rescue Plan, a plan which includes $170 billion to
help K through 12 schools, colleges, and universities safely
reopen and to accelerate learning for students impacted by the
pandemic.
Further, the administration initiated a bold plan to invest
in American jobs, which includes $100 billion to rebuild K
through 12 schools across the country, an additional $12
billion investment in community college infrastructure, the
cornerstone of education and training, especially for
nontraditional and disadvantaged students.
And, more recently, the President released the American
Families Plan, which includes groundbreaking proposals for
universal pre-K, free community college, and a major increase
to the Pell Grant program to make college more affordable for
disadvantaged students.
The investments for universal pre-K would improve the lives
of millions of children. Studies show that children attending
universal pre-K programs do better academically in later
grades. And so I believe investing in pre-K plays a critical
role in ensuring our students are equipped with the tools they
need to succeed early on.
Let me though stress that these investments in pre-K must
go hand in hand with investments in childcare. We cannot afford
to think of childcare and pre-K as separate systems. We must
make sure that our investments in childcare and pre-K keep
working families in mind. Breaking pre-K out from the overall
childcare umbrella could leave behind families who work beyond
school hours, those with infants and toddlers, or those with
students with disabilities.
So I want to stress the importance of ensuring that we are
also providing both education and childcare services to working
families.
I am grateful to see that the administration budget is once
again taking the lead by submitting the 2022 budget request for
education that lays out a plan for how to improve the lives of
millions of American students and families.
Mr. Secretary, your budget request for ED programs under
the Labor, HHS, Education Subcommittee is $102.8 billion, an
increase of $29.3 billion over the current levels. These
increased investments are unprecedented. They are sure to go a
long way to reverse years of underinvestment in our Federal
education system.
It is not enough to just throw money at a problem. We need
to work to ensure that the dollars go to those who need them
the most, particularly those schools and students who come from
underserved communities.
No student in any State should have to accept a lower-
quality education simply because of where they live or the
color of their skin, which is why I am encouraged to see that
the administration is working diligently to reverse such
funding inequities for students of color by more than doubling
the funding for Title I grants.
Last year, House Democrats included the maintenance of
equity provisions in the President's American Rescue Plan to
protect low-income school districts from disproportionate cuts
by States like we saw during the Great Recession.
States need to step up and do a better job of equitably
funding their highest-need districts, and I look forward to
reviewing more details on this proposal in the President's full
budget release.
I am also pleased that the administration is helping to
increase the availability of wraparound services to underserved
students, providing $443 million, an increase of $413 million
for full-service community schools.
Since becoming chair of the subcommittee, we have increased
funding for community schools by more than 70 percent. We
included the program in our initiative on funding for social
and emotional learning and whole-child approaches to learning.
It is a bold investment, and we are hoping that it builds
on the strong foundation established by this subcommittee.
If I can just for a second, I would like to quote Dr. Pam
Cantor from Turnaround for Children, who worked with us on this
initiative, and something she often says in relation to the
whole-child approach to learning. And this is the quote.
``Adversity doesn't just happen to children. It happens
inside their brains and bodies through the biologic mechanism
of stress. This is why students in poverty are well served by
schools that provide holistic services and support that account
for their social, emotional, physical, and academic needs.''
And I think that that really is appropriate.
I would be remiss if I did not say thank you for the
critical funding increase that you are making for IDEA Part B,
grants to States and for programs serving Historically Black
Colleges and Universities, minority-serving institutions,
Tribal colleges, community colleges, and underresourced
institutions of higher education.
I applaud the investment you are making to postsecondary
education in making it more affordable for students with low
incomes. In combination with the American Families Act, this
administration would provide an increase of more than $1,800 to
the maximum Pell Grant, the largest increase to Pell ever.
Also, it would include $250 million for the increase to
IDEA Part C, which supports infants and toddlers with
disabilities with early interventions and therapies that lay
the groundwork for later learning. And the President's request
also proposes $144 million for the Office of Civil Rights.
Thank you for putting an increased focus--and I know it is
an interest of all of the members of our subcommittee--that you
are putting our students' mental health in this request. It is
an important issue and one that became particularly clear in
our hearing in March on how COVID-19 has exposed and
exacerbated the mental health and substance abuse crises we
have in our country today.
The investments are crucial. We are finally moving toward a
budget and a role for government that works to level the
playing field so that anyone, no matter where they are, where
they are from, can achieve the American Dream.
With that, let me thank you again, Secretary Cardona, for
joining us. I look forward to working with you.
And with that, let me recognize Ranking Member Cole for any
opening remarks.
Can I ask people to be on mute, anyone who is not speaking
to mute? Thank you.
Ranking Member Cole.
Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Before I begin my formal remarks, I have to say, I always
come to these meetings and know they are going to be
interesting. But I also come because I want to see the visual
background you are going to treat me to every time. I mean, I
feel like I live in dull places and work in dull offices every
time I see this. But it looks terrific. Always does.
Good morning, Mr. Secretary. I want to welcome you to your
first hearing before our subcommittee, and I genuinely look
forward to your testimony today.
First, I would like to start out by once again expressing
concern regarding the total level of spending proposed by the
administration. The fiscal year 2022 budget request will be
this administration's fourth proposed trillion dollar-plus
package, fourth in barely 100 days in office. The level of
proposed spending is simply unnecessary, irresponsible, and
unacceptable.
I have been a long-time supporter of helping achieve better
outcomes for our students, but a proposed 41 percent increase
for the Department of Education in a single year will leave the
next generation saddled with the highest national debt our
Nation has ever seen.
Average debt held by the national government per taxpayer
is five times higher than average student loan debt. I believe
we can do better than that for these students and for our
future.
As a member of this subcommittee, I understand the
important role played by domestic programs, and I certainly
support increases for these critical programs.
I was pleased to see support for special education. We know
the Federal Government has not upheld its fair share of
responsibility for ensuring that education is provided for
students with disabilities. I hope we can see achieving support
for sustained increases for special education as a bipartisan
goal, so I applaud your efforts in this area.
I also believe in strong support for Pell Grant recipients.
Pell Grants help first-generation college students chart a
course to a better future into the middle class.
I would like to see strong support for civics education,
although there are some areas that I have concerns about there
that I will be raising during my questions.
I also believe we should do more to help underserved
populations and underperforming schools. But an annual increase
that more than doubles the existing program does not strike me
as a responsible or sustainable way to help these students.
I also want to stress the importance of working towards a
bipartisan agreement on overall spending levels for defense and
nondefense discretionary spending. I have made clear the
approach taken in the President's proposal for the Department
of Defense is not acceptable for our Nation's security and our
military readiness. And while we have substantial increases in
domestic programs, essentially flat funding defense is not an
acceptable portion of the budget. We are going to have to come
to some larger agreement there.
I also hope we can restore the authority of the
Appropriations Committee. The recent decision by the majority
to pursue a partisan path of mandatory funding to pay for an
extraordinary expansion of government should not be the new
normal.
These recent proposals outside the customary budget process
represent the greatest increases in taxes and government
spending in modern history. To achieve them could trigger class
conflict on an unprecedented scale.
The President seems to believe he can convince the American
people that they can have unlimited government services at
someone else's expense.
Fortunately, Americans are smarter than that and know there
is no such thing as a free lunch. I view this budget that you
are proposing in the context of that larger disagreement.
I hope there is a return to a path of discretionary
appropriations where these investments belong and where both
sides of the aisle can bring ideas to the table.
I want to thank you, Mr. Secretary, for coming before us
today. I look forward to a future where we can meet once again
in person. I genuinely look forward to getting to know you
because my good friend, the chairman, has spoken so highly of
you on so many occasions, and I know you will make an
outstanding appointee.
So while we will have areas that we differ, I genuinely
look forward to working with you and getting to know you and
welcome you before the subcommittee.
With that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you.
Mr. Secretary, your full written testimony will be entered
into the record, and you are now recognized for 5 minutes for
your opening statement.
Secretary Cardona. Well, thank you and good morning,
Chairwoman DeLauro, Ranking Member Cole, and distinguished
members of the committee. It is really a pleasure to meet you,
and I do look forward to meeting you in person in the near
future. And I am honored and humbled to serve as Secretary of
Education.
I am pleased to join you today and proud to testify on
behalf of President Biden's fiscal year 2022 budget request for
the Department of Education.
I am especially honored to be testifying during Teacher
Appreciation Week, and I would like to recognize all the
hardworking teachers, faculty, and staff for their tireless
dedication to students, in particular this year, which was so
challenging. I want to thank all the educators, all the
teachers for what they have done. I look at this request as a
way to honor the hard work of our educators.
The budget request makes good on President Biden's campaign
commitment to invest in education and begins to address the
significant inequities that students, primarily students of
color, confront every day in schools and in pursuit of higher
education and career technical education.
I first want to thank members of the subcommittee and your
staff who helped ensure passage of the American Rescue Plan,
bringing vital resources to our schools and colleges across the
country. I can tell you from experience that the ARP funds will
ensure that school buildings reopen for full-time, in-person
instruction as safely and as soon as possible.
Once we fully reopen buildings, we still have plenty of
work to do. Generations of inequity have left far too many
students without equitable access to high-quality, inclusive
learning opportunities, including in our rural communities.
Education can be the great equalizer--it was for me--if we
prioritize, replicate, and invest in what works for all
students, not just some.
We must do more to level the playing field, including
providing a strong foundation from birth, improving diversity
among the teacher workforce, and creating learning pathways
that work for all students.
To that end, the budget proposal calls on Congress to
invest nearly $103 billion in the Department of Education
programs, a 41 percent increase over the fiscal year 2021
appropriation, to support student success.
The fiscal year 2022 request also makes a meaningful down
payment toward the Biden-Harris administration's goal of
reversing inequities. It starts with a proposed increase to
double funding for Title I to address disparities between
underresourced schools and their wealthier counterparts,
support teachers in Title I schools earning competitive wages,
expand access to pre-kindergarten, and provide equitable access
to advanced coursework.
Our request would also build on Congress' prior commitments
to support the mental health needs of our students, including
by increasing the number of school counselors, school nurses,
and mental health professionals in our schools.
In addition, the President's request will increase the
availability of wraparound services to students and families in
underserved schools and communities with a significant
expansion of the Full Service Community Schools program.
We also think it is past time for the Federal Government to
make good on its commitment to students with disabilities and
their families, and the request makes a significant move toward
full funding of IDEA, proposing a 20 percent increase for IDEA
State grants.
Turning to higher education, our budget proposal begins the
Biden-Harris administration's critical work to increase access
and affordability for postsecondary education.
The budget's proposal, coupled with increases proposed in
the American Families Plan, would be the largest increase to
the Pell Grant ever, helping millions of students and families
pursue their goals.
Importantly, our proposal would also ensure that Dreamers
may receive full Pell Grants if they meet the current
eligibility requirements.
The fiscal year 2022 request paints a bold picture for the
future of our institutional and student support programs. The
budget increases institutional capacity and student support for
minority-serving institutions with additional funding for
HBCUs, Hispanic-serving institutions, Asian American, Native
American, and Pacific Islander-serving institutions, Tribally
controlled colleges and universities, as well as those TRIO and
GEAR UP programs that we know help ensure underserved students
succeed in and graduate from college.
Finally, we prioritize efforts to enforce civil rights laws
related to education through a 10 percent increase for the
Office of Civil Rights to protect students and advance equity
in educational opportunity and delivery in preschool through
college.
Working together with stakeholders, including educators and
students, we can and will heal, learn, and grow together
through this challenging time.
I am committed to working collaboratively with each of you
to strengthen local decisionmaking and help improve
opportunities, pathways, and outcomes for students across this
country, including in our rural communities.
So I want to thank you. And I look forward to any questions
you may have.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chair. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
The Chair. I am pleased in your testimony to hear about $20
billion for Title I and addressing the funding disparities
between underresourced schools, districts, and their wealthier
counterparts.
What is of concern to me is that 90 percent of K through 12
education funding in this country comes from States and
districts. With just a handful of exceptions, I am concerned
that most States do not sufficiently prioritize funding for
high-poverty districts and communities of color.
Given the reality, how do you see the proposed $20 billion
increase to Title I improve the equity in State funding?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
Well, we know the elements of this plan really serve to
communicate the transformational impact that President Biden
and the team want to have in education and really value the
role that education plays in the growth of this country.
So the Title I allotment really helps level the playing
field by making sure that our schools, especially our students
in greatest need, have additional resources to provide more
reading instruction, more social and emotional support for
these students, providing them the intervention and support
that they are going to need so that it could--education could
be that equalizer for them.
This targeted approach towards Title I schools and programs
really aims to make sure that when we are out of this pandemic
and when we are thinking about education in the years to come,
we are making sure that all students have access to high-
quality opportunities, high-quality instruction, additional
support to be successful in school.
The Chair. Thank you.
And one of the things that we did in protecting high-
poverty districts from disproportionate State cuts, we included
critical maintenance of equity provisions. And what I will do
is, for the record, I think, send a question to you with regard
to that issue of maintenance of effort.
If I can, let me move to the student loan servicing crisis.
In 2017, the Trump administration Office of Federal Student
Aid announced Next Gen. This was a promise to improve student
loan servicing for borrowers and to increase cost savings for
taxpayers.
$277 million later in increases since 2017, three operating
offices at FSA, the Trump administration and FSA failed to
deliver on the promise. At the last moment, they attempted to
create a new system, the Interim Servicing Solution, ISS, to
correct the failure.
In a bipartisan rebuke of this effort, Congress instituted
a 90-day pause on any award under the ISS solicitation. That
pause expired in March of this year.
My question is, where do things stand with regard to the
Next Gen initiative? Will you be moving forward with awards
under the ISS solicitation?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
And just to go back, I do look forward to a question on the
record, but it is critically important that the maintenance of
effort, maintenance of equity is a part of this. So we cannot
be using funds to supplant. Our States need more not less. They
need more now. So we want to make sure that we are working with
our States to ensure that they are doing their part as we do
ours.
And with regard to your question now, the Next Generation,
we do look forward to working on this. It has paused. We
haven't made decisions yet about how we are moving forward, but
I can assure you that I agree wholeheartedly that we need to do
more as an agency.
I am thrilled that we brought on Richard Cordray who is
really known to be a consumer protection guru. We need that
level of advocacy and support for our students who are
borrowing to go to college, and we need to keep the students at
the center of the conversation.
So all these conversations are something that I am really
keenly aware is going to be critical to make sure that we are
protecting our students not our loan agencies. And I can assure
you that I want to work with you and others to make sure that
we are addressing those issues in a timely way.
The Chair. Okay. And I might add that Congress has provided
about $800 million for the Temporary Expanded Public Service
Loan Forgiveness program. That was intended to address the
failures of the Department and student loan servicers in
administering the program. As of November 2020, the Department
has only discharged $95 million in loans.
What is the Department going to do to ensure the funding is
used as intended?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you for the question.
And similarly, I think we need to do better with public
service loan forgiveness. About 98 percent have been rejected
of the claims that are put in.
To me, this really needs a very critical look to make sure
that the intention that you had in Congress is followed through
on and that we are doing everything to put our students at the
center of the conversation, make sure we are serving students.
So, again, a lot of attention is going to be placed on this
moving forward. We are bringing folks on board that have that
mentality to make sure that we keep the students at the center
of the conversation. We serve students. We have to make that
very clear in our policies.
The Chair. Okay. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr.
Secretary.
Let me now yield to Congressman Cole.
Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.
And, again, welcome, Mr. Secretary. It is good to have you
here. I have some big questions I want to ask you, but I have
got something that is important to me personally. It is smaller
and more targeted. And I want to give you an opportunity to
respond.
I know that you and I, and certainly the chairwoman, agree
that our Nation's students need more and better civics
education. I am deeply concerned by a Federal Register notice
published last month by your Department proposing competitive
priorities for the national programs in civics.
That proposal actually triggered just a blizzard, at least
in my office, of bipartisan--I want to stress bipartisan--
critical response. It is effectively, in my view, jeopardizing
civics as a bipartisan priority and potentially jeopardizing a
piece of legislation the chairwoman and I have worked on
together for a long time.
Specifically, the Federal Register notice references The
1619 Project and the work of a controversial scholar. These
references have politicized civic education, whether
intentionally or unintentionally, and created an impression
that the administration cannot be trusted to promote civic
education in a bipartisan, unideological way. Civics education,
in my view, ought to heal what divides our country, and this
proposal, in my view, exacerbates that.
In light of those concerns, would you, number one, explain
the reference if you are familiar with it, which I expect you
are, and then would you consider withdrawing the proposal
pending further consideration?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you for the question.
I came from the local district level. I was fortunate to
serve as commissioner of education in Connecticut. And
curriculum decisions are made there with local control, with
input of local stakeholders and the community there, and that
is where it should stay.
The Education Department does not mandate curriculum nor
does it lean in one way or another. What it does do is provide
parameters for grants to be submitted, clarity so that those
who are submitting grants can submit.
Did you want to speak, Chairwoman DeLauro?
Mr. Cole. Yeah. Well, I appreciate that----
Secretary Cardona. No, I think Chairwoman DeLauro is going
to ask someone to mute.
The Chair. Yes. If I can, please, we are trying to--whoever
is unmuted, please mute so that we can hear the testimony and
the questions.
Secretary Cardona. So, Congressman Cole, I am going to be
quick because I see your time is ticking.
But I do feel this. I have been an educator for over 20,
22, 23 years. It is critically important that our educators
have voice in developing curriculum because we know that
curriculum should serve as a window and a mirror and a sliding
door into their own experiences and other experiences, as Dr.
Rudine Sims Bishop has taught us, in education.
So curriculum does a lot more. What it does is engage
students. And students should always see themselves in
curriculum as well.
So I welcome seeing States come up with creative ideas on
how to have students be seen in their curriculum but do so in a
manner that builds community.
Educators can do that. We can build community under one
flag by doing this. And I have complete confidence in the
educators across the country that they can get it done.
Mr. Cole. Us too. I used to be one and my son is a public
school teacher. And I appreciate your remarks, by the way,
honoring our teachers.
But I am worried [inaudible]. And I agree with your
statement we should not be dictating curriculum at the Federal
level. That is not our role, it is not our responsibility.
But when I see grant standards laid out in The 1619
Project--which we can discuss at length, but it is very
controversial--and I see a scholar, a respected scholar, I am
sure, but, again, controversial scholar, and those are sort of
laid out, the impression left is, okay, we want a particular
version, a particular kind of civics taught, and we are
dictating it here.
And, again, I have had people contacting me. I think you
had 37 Senators write you about this across the political
aisle. It is not just Republicans. We actually have Democrats
that are interested in civics education also raise this issue.
So I don't have a lot of time left. I certainly want to
give you a chance to respond, and I certainly would welcome a
further dialogue about this.
I really want to flag this, because I can tell you, the
political opposition to what I consider a bipartisan bill and
something we ought to be working on together is growing and it
is growing across the political spectrum, and that registry
notice had a lot to do with sparking this off.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you. Thank you, Ranking Member
Cole. I appreciate your perspective, and I can assure you that
I do want to work with you and others to listen to the
different perspectives.
And let me just underscore, our educational system, yes, we
have a divided country, but our education system can unite us.
Again, the goal here is to really build community, have
students engage in their learning, and grow together.
But thank you for your comments.
Mr. Cole. I agree with you, and I will just end with this,
but that registry notice did not unite us. It is doing quite
the opposite.
So I would just ask you to review that, and I would look
forward to a further dialogue with you about it, because I
don't want to lose a good piece of legislation and I think we
are going to over this issue.
With that, Madam Chair, thank you. You have been very
indulgent. I yield back.
I look forward to talking to you about other things, Mr.
Secretary.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you, sir. Thank you.
The Chair. Congressman Pocan.
Mr. Pocan. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
And thank you, Mr. Secretary. It is a pleasure to meet you
virtually. I also serve on the Ed and Labor Committee in
addition to this subcommittee, so I have got the feeling we
will be working together a lot.
I would like to try to get to three subjects, so I am going
to ask the questions right away, and if you can give answers so
I can get to three subjects in 5 minutes, I would appreciate
it.
We know that our public schools have been underfunded,
especially Title I, in IDEA programs, and that has hurt many
kids' educational opportunities. Very glad to see the
significant investment in the fiscal year 2022 budget.
But while we don't have our full budget, I want to discuss
my concerns about the lack of oversight on the hundreds of
millions of dollars distributed by the Department through the
Charter Schools Program.
Between 2006 to 2014, of the 4,829 schools that got charter
school grants, 37 percent of those schools never opened, 11
percent opened and then closed. And it is a large percent of
schools--I might be giving the wrong percent on the second one,
I am sorry--but we had a large percent of schools that have had
this happen. The amount of funding estimated to have been given
to those schools is close to $500 million.
The IG looked at this, and they said that the Department
did not include charter school closure in risk assessments when
they were basing oversight and monitoring decisions, and the
closure process lacked oversight, and the risk of significant
fraud, waste, and abuse of Federal program funds is high.
I would just like to talk to you about if you are willing
to commit to review that previous inspector general reports and
implement their recommendations.
Secretary Cardona. I am interested in making sure that we
are holding folks accountable for the funds that they get and
ensuring that all students get a good education, including in
charter schools, that the money is being used for what it is
intended, and that our students are getting a good return on
investment.
And speaking of support and oversight, I want to just
quickly acknowledge two folks that are in the room with me,
Larry Keane (ph) and Donna Harris-Aikens, for their support and
preparation for the materials today. They don't want to leave
that out.
Mr. Pocan. So you will be looking at those reports and you
will be implementing the recommendations?
Secretary Cardona. I will be reviewing the reports, and I
would be happy to discuss further with you further steps. But I
will be reviewing the reports. Thank you.
Mr. Pocan. Great.
Also on student debt, I introduced a bill back in 2013, a
number of people have done it since then, to try to allow the
refinancing student loans. We know the burgeoning debt is huge,
$1.57 trillion. Right now some people are still paying like 6
percent or a mixture of different loans. It is not easy to
consolidate and get rid of those rates. Rates are historically
low.
Is there any way that you would look at and support the
effort to be able to refinance your student loans at a lower
rate, perhaps the lower--whatever the current rate is, so that
we could help relieve some of that additional burden?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Congressman.
We really have to have a very broad look at how we are
servicing students and how our policies are creating obstacles
for students.
I am really eager to make sure that once Rich Cordray gets
on board and we have our under secretary, that we really
revisit all strategies, including those to make sure we are
giving the students the best opportunity to be successful and
go through college without having a huge debt burden when they
graduate.
So nothing is off the table. Yes, I am interested in
looking at ways to provide easier opportunities for them to
make college affordable.
Mr. Pocan. I appreciate that. And I think this is really
one of the easiest lifts out there. It is bipartisan
legislation that is out there. But, as you know, bills don't
pass Congress these days too often, so anything the Department
could do in this area would certainly be appreciated.
I have had a request from some universities in my district:
When will the Department issue guidelines on spending the
institutional portion of the American Rescue Plan bill? They
are just trying to get some idea of when you might provide some
of that.
Secretary Cardona. They have been very appreciative, and I
respect the need for them to have this information. As you
know, there are different vetting processes and comment
portions that we have to go through. But I am pleased to share
that, I think within the next 2 weeks they are going to be
getting information on that.
Mr. Pocan. That is awesome, Mr. Secretary. Thank you. And
since you have been very brief, I can get to one more question.
Secretary Cardona. Sure.
Mr. Pocan. There is an issue, back on charter school
programs, I have been in the legislature for 14 years before I
came to Congress, on my fifth term. I have seen some of the
worst in these programs. I think a lot of public dollars get
wasted.
There was a program, the charter management organization,
an IDEA charter school that received $100 million in awards.
The school was ruled ineligible by the Department staff, and
yet the Secretary at the time apparently appealed that and let
another million-dollar grant go out in 2020 and a total of $72
million over 5 years for the replication and expansion of high-
quality charter schools.
Would you commit that the charter schools that are
determined to be ineligible by the Department for a grant cycle
don't receive funds?
Secretary Cardona. I am going to look into that further.
But, yes, I think if they are not eligible, I think I would be
hard pressed to understand why we are funding.
Mr. Pocan. Great. I appreciate it. Thank you.
I yield back, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Thank you.
Congressman Harris.
Mr. Harris. Thank you very much.
And welcome, Mr. Secretary. As someone who has been on a
faculty for 30 years in the past, I appreciate your experience
in education as well.
Let me bring up a couple of issues. First, just to
reiterate what Ranking Member Cole said, I am also concerned
about The 1619 Project working its way into some kind of
Federal curricula. I urge you to look.
There is a Wall Street Journal piece written last year by
Ms. Latasha Fields, a Black American from Chicago, and the
article is entitled, ``God, Parents, and the `1619 Project.' ''
I just urge you to consider that and read that before you
consider in any way adopting The 1619 Project into any Federal
curricula.
Now, I also want to follow up on some of the questioning
from your confirmation hearing over in the Senate. Mr. Scott,
Senator Tim Scott, who I think represents the feelings of many
people who feel that the education system is failing them,
asked you about the OSP program, the Opportunity Scholarship
voucher program in Washington, D.C.
You were noncommittal at the time, in the beginning of
February. I would like to know if you have looked into it more
and if now you, in fact, support the idea of the opportunity
scholarships in Washington, D.C.?
Secretary Cardona. Yes, thank you.
So we are looking into that. I am getting more information.
I want to make sure that there is a need, there is an interest
in order to support it. I certainly want to protect the
learning opportunities of those students that already are in
it. Obviously, we will make sure we allow those students not to
have additional disruptions in their program.
But, yes, we are still looking at what the need is and what
the demand is to then make decisions about how to fund it.
Mr. Harris. Well, Mr. Secretary, this is a subject I have
been interested in for years. There is a waiting list for
those. There are lotteries for those. How do you question the
need or demand? I mean, your people at the Department of
Education haven't told you that, in fact, there is always more
need and demand than, in fact, available funding?
Secretary Cardona. Well, again, meeting with my staff, I
will find out more information, more specifics. But there has
also been some question about the funding that goes to it and
whether the demand is there for that funding.
Mr. Harris. Well, we will follow up with you because my
time is short.
Of great concern to me is the revelation in the last few
days that the CDC was in communication with teachers unions to
develop the medical guidelines for school reopening.
Now, teachers unions have a lot of teachers in them. I
don't think they have a lot of doctors in them. And I think
that decision should be made on scientific medical basis.
But of interest is that Ms. Psaki, in a press conference
the other day, said that the administration is going to
involve, of course, the CDC, but they will involve the
Department of Education in coming up with the CDC guidelines.
So I want to know very briefly, are you in contact with the
teachers unions and in contact with the CDC and somehow
communicating teachers unions' demands to CDC using the
Education Department?
Secretary Cardona. Absolutely not. I do feel that my
success in Connecticut with reopening schools was through a
good, thorough partnership with our educators, our leaders. And
then having conversations about how to safely reopen schools
does involve a very strong connection with CDC and our health
partners, but it also includes looking at what the needs are in
the building, because ventilation and things like that that are
woefully underresourced have to be taken into account.
Mr. Harris. Sure. I understand that. But just to get it
straight, so you have not had email communication or other
communications with the teachers unions about the CDC reopening
requirements going into the future?
Secretary Cardona. Correct.
Mr. Harris. Okay. Thank you.
So with regard to reopening schools, I think, medically, I
think there is pretty clear indication that that is something
that should proceed, probably should have proceeded a while
ago, and I appreciate that you did just that in Connecticut.
Now, finally, I want to close following up on what Senator
Rand Paul and Senator Romney asked you about, which is a topic
of great interest to me, has a daughter who is an NCAA All-
American athlete.
The testimony you gave in the Senate indicated that you
actually support biological boys competing with girls in school
sports. So I just want to get on the record, this is the House
side, that was the Senate side, is that true?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Dr. Harris, and
congratulations to your daughter.
I am going to be very clear. And thank you for----
Mr. Harris. I want to thank you for that, because there is
no way she could compete against biologic males. She would
never have gained All-American status. But I await your answer.
Secretary Cardona. Yeah. And there is no way that I
wouldn't support all students in our country to have
opportunities to engage in school activities, which include
extracurricular.
So as I said then and I will say it again, trans students--
Mr. Harris. [inaudible] Biological boys should be competing
with biological girls? That is a very specific question. I
understand, we can create transgender leagues. I don't mind.
Should biological boys be competing with biological girls?
Secretary Cardona. As I said then, I will say again,
transgender students deserve every opportunity to participate
in all school activities.
Mr. Harris. And I will take that as including to compete
against biological girls. I am disappointed.
I yield back, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Congresswoman Clark.
Ms. Clark. Thank you so much, Chairwoman DeLauro.
Welcome, Secretary. We are thrilled to have you. And I just
want to start by thanking you for your last answer and for
standing up for equality for every single one of our kids.
I want to specifically ask you to start off about the
serious shortage of mental health professionals. I am so
pleased to see a billion-dollar request to increase the number
of those professionals in school settings.
But I am interested in if you have thought about strategies
as Secretary of Education for increasing and addressing the
shortage of mental health professionals overall as we are
looking to increase them in our schools.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Congresswoman Clark.
So I will start by saying when I visited this last month,
month and a half, I visited about nine States, ten different
schools, and one thing that came out loud and clear is the need
for our schools to look different than they were prior to March
2020. And one of those differences is the need for better
social, emotional supports, better mental health supports. Our
students are in greater need there.
So your question is a very good one. How do we create the
capacity there? How do we look to connect our K-12 institutions
with our institutions of higher education to make sure that we
are preparing enough professionals to fill the demand that we
have in our schools to meet the social and emotional needs of
our students?
So we need to be creative about creating pipeline programs,
ensuring that our students have pathways in our K-12 systems to
get into the higher education space around that social,
emotional support or degrees in school counseling, social work.
That is critically important. Not only do we have to
rethink our organizational structure for our schools, but we
also have to create clear pipelines for our students who are in
school now to think of themselves as future mental health
professionals.
Ms. Clark. Thank you so much for that and for your emphasis
on it. And we know this has been a time that has really
inflicted great trauma, and, as always, even more so on low-
income children and children of color. We look at nearly 40,000
children in this country have lost at least one parent, and
Black children account for 20 percent of those kids.
And we know that trauma is at the base of sometimes
behavioral issues at school. And the previous administration
rescinded Obama-era guidance on disciplinary practice that
warned schools they may be violating Federal civil rights if
one racial group was overrepresented in disciplinary actions
taken.
As Secretary of Education, will you restore that guidance
on school discipline and update it to address policing in
schools?
Secretary Cardona. Yeah, I remember being an assistant
superintendent when I read that and was shocked, because our
efforts were really to try to reduce disparities in
exclusionary practices. We know students of color, students
with disabilities are targeted differently, and discrimination
of any form is unacceptable, including of our LGBTQ and trans
students.
So, yes, this is a high priority for me to make sure that
all students have a fair shake. Yes, we are going to make sure
that accountability is there. We are going to make sure that
education and support to our systems are there.
And that is what this American Families Plan and American
Rescue Plan can do, training to help our educators understand
the differences of what trauma looks like and what poor
behavior looks like so that we can meet the needs of our
students where they are, especially after this pandemic.
With regard to your question about school resource officers
in schools, listen, this is one that I am going to need more
information. I have seen examples of where it is very helpful
to have members of the school community in the school helping
the learning happen, including police officers, resource
officers. But I have also seen examples where it worsens the
disparities in exclusionary practices. So more to come on that,
but I definitely want to hear more.
Ms. Clark. And in my few remaining seconds, I cannot tell
you what it means to have an administration that understands
the value of early education.
Most of that funding and oversight resides in HHS. If you
could just briefly tell us how we can support your work in
collaboration around early ed with Health and Human Services.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
The research and the practice around early childhood
education, there is a huge gap there. And for us, it is really
about making sure we are creating that culture of understanding
of how important early childhood education is in our country
for our young learners.
We know students that have access to high-quality
instructional programs at the early ages do better in high
school. They get honors courses. Their potential for college is
greater.
So continue to beat that drum with us, make sure that we
are supporting programs that have high quality, and making sure
that as the money makes its way to the States that they are
being invested in high-quality programs. That is how you can
support.
Thank you.
Ms. Clark. Thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Fleischmann.
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Secretary, congratulations, Secretary. I do want to
briefly acknowledge that this is National Teacher Appreciation
Week. I hope you and my friends on both sides of the dais will
acknowledge our great American teachers in their great efforts.
Mr. Secretary, in my previous efforts on this subcommittee,
for years I have worked in conjunction with colleagues across
the aisle and with outside stakeholders to provide STEM
education opportunities to rural and low-income communities.
Most recent data shows that 3.5 million STEM-related jobs
will need to be filled by 2025 in order to maintain a stable
workforce. It is imperative that we continue to support public-
private partnerships to close the skills gap and cultivate a
diverse workforce.
My first question, sir: As we begin to reopen schools, how
do you believe Congress could help in your efforts to increase
STEM and computer science education in low-income and rural
communities? And what is the administration doing to promote
public-private partnerships in this area, sir?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you for that question.
And you are absolutely right. I think, if there is anything
that stood out in topics that I have had conversations with
elected officials at the State and at the national level, it is
the need for us to do more there. I really feel we need to
evolve our systems to make that clearer pathways into the
workforce a reality for students starting in middle school.
And I have had experience on a workforce council where we
brought our workforce partners, our CEOs, around the table with
higher education, with our K-12 leaders, to come up with
strategies to make sure that we have sustainable plans to do
that. And I look forward, as Secretary of Education, to really
moving the needle on that.
I am really passionate about that. I think that has to
blend K-12 expertise with higher education expertise with
workforce partners.
So you are absolutely right, we need to listen to our
workforce partners by have them have a seat at our table when
we are planning, because regionally really is where we can get
the most bang for our buck. When we know what the needs are
regionally we can make internship experiences together, we can
develop curriculum with our partners in the workforce. There is
a lot of room for growth there in this country, and I look
forward to leading that.
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you.
And as a followup to that, Mr. Secretary, I am sure you are
aware, the STEM Master Teacher Corps was authorized by the
Every Student Succeeds Act but has not yet been funded. I would
just respectfully request that the administration work with my
friends in both houses and in both parties to fund that.
A followup question, sir. Girls Who Code reported around 74
percent of middle school girls express interest in STEM, yet
only 0.4 percent of high school girls choose to pursue these
interests in college.
In order to diversify the personnel, how can we better
monitor girls who are already interested in STEM, sir?
Secretary Cardona. That is a great question, and it shows
how our K-12 system needs to evolve to the needs of our
communities. And if they are interested in it early in their
education career, how are we losing them by the high school
years?
So we have to do a better job connecting our female
students out into the field, looking at job potential, looking
at career pathways earlier. We have to be more assertive, more
aggressive, ensuring that they understand that these options
exist for them as well. We should also bring in mentors that
are in the STEM field to come in and talk to our students and
create programs intended not to have that slide off.
So you are highlighting work that I am pretty passionate
about and I look forward to doing as Secretary of Education.
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Secretary Cardona, in closing, I just want to say that many
of these STEM programs do require in-person lab classes. I hope
that you will work with us, with the administration, to
diligently, safely reopen our schools and our economy.
And, Madam Chair, I thank you and I yield back.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
The Chair. Congresswoman Frankel.
Ms. Frankel. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being with us today. I have a
comment and then I do have some questions.
I am sure you are aware that women have really suffered the
brunt of the economic harm of this pandemic, losing the
majority of jobs.
This week the Georgetown Center on Education and the
Workforce released a report that 90 percent of traditional
infrastructure jobs go to men.
So I just want to urge you, in your conversations with the
President and the Vice President and others, that you not only
advocate for the inclusion of women in traditional
infrastructure jobs, but really emphasize the importance of
investing and creating and improving the pay for new childcare
slots, elder care, and especially the early education, which I
know is in your area. And thank you. We are hoping you will be
a good advocate for us.
Question. We know that the issue of sexual violence on
campuses has been a significant health issue. Unfortunately,
many of us believe that the last administration took us
backwards in terms of keeping sexual violence--diminishing it
on campus because of a change in Title IX rules.
Can you give us an update where your Department is in the
process of rescinding those rules and issuing new guidance that
actually protects victims and survivors?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Congresswoman Frankel, first
of all, for your comment.
You are absolutely right. When we talk about the inequities
that were exacerbated by this pandemic, women have had a harder
time recovering from this, because in many cases it has
affected their jobs and when we talk about childcare and the
needs there.
The American Families Plan hopes to address that. But I
absolutely agree with you that as we are thinking about
recovery as a country, we need to continue to make sure that we
are providing opportunities for jobs for women as well.
With regard to the question that you asked about Title IX,
part of this process--and we are looking forward to having
information as soon as possible because I know folks are
waiting for it--but where we are in the process now is in the
listening phase. As you know, public comment is critically
important for us to make sure that whatever we put forth takes
into account the needs and the concerns expressed by those we
serve.
So we are in that process, and that is a very important
part of the process. Once we are done with that, we look
forward to moving quickly to make sure we have guidance out
there, because, like you, I agree that sexual discrimination or
any type of harassment has no place in our college campuses.
Ms. Frankel. Mr. Secretary, do you actually have proposed
rules that are being commented on?
Secretary Cardona. There is a comment period now that is
taking place, yes.
Ms. Frankel. Thank you.
And I know during the pandemic there was a flexibility on
standardized tests and so forth. So we have heard from some
teachers who think that these flexibilities should continue.
Do you have a comment on that? Is the administration going
to try to extend those flexibilities?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
Yes, the issue of assessing students at this point in the
pandemic is a really tough one. It reminds me of the decision
we had to make last July about reopening schools. There is no
one way of doing it that works for everyone.
With that said, as we are thinking about how to distribute
$130 billion in the American Rescue Plan to our schools, any
little bit of data helps so that I can ensure that we are
closing equity gaps through those funds. So if this group of
students was hit harder, I want to make sure that more funds go
there.
But I know teachers across the country don't need a
standardized assessment to tell them how their students are
doing. There is not one teacher that needs that to tell them
how their students are doing. They know.
With that said, when we are making policies and when we are
distributing millions and millions of dollars it helps to know
which communities need double the money, so that when I see
resources being used to make class sizes of 9 in one class
where other classes may have 20, I understand that, based on
how the students performed, the impact of the pandemic.
So I recognize it is not an easy one. And in moving
forward, because your question was about extending them, I hope
to have robust conversation about how to evolve our assessments
to make sure they measure what they are supposed to measure.
Ms. Frankel. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Yield back, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Thank you.
Congresswoman Herrera Beutler.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And thank you, Mr. Secretary.
A little bit in that last question, obviously throughout
the pandemic we have heard--I have heard from parents nonstop
who have struggled to help their kids during the remote
learning, and whether it was we are seeing incredibly scary
increases in mental health challenges and suicidal either
ideation or attempts to just learning loss.
I was looking at a McKinsey study from the end of last year
talking about learning loss experienced by Black students was
about 10.3 months. Latina--well, they say LatinX. That is a
personal thing. I hate the term LatinX, as someone of Latin
descent. So Latina students, 9.2 months. And students from low-
income backgrounds 12.4 months. And that was at the end of last
year. Could be even greater.
And I thought it was really interesting. The Seattle Times
has been following, obviously, the school closures issue
significantly. I think it was just last week Seattle teachers
finally came back into the classroom after the Governor, the
Democratic Governor, announced that we could reopen schools
months ago. And he even put teachers near the front of the line
with regard to getting vaccinations, recognizing you need to
make sure they are safe if you are asking them to go back into
the classroom. All of those things I applauded.
However, the story that I just found talks about how
basically those districts that primarily serve White children
and districts in counties where a majority of them voted for
our previous President reopened more quickly to students than
the more liberal-leaning or racially diverse communities.
And, interestingly, it didn't always follow health
indicators. Like the analysis found that the counties with the
highest COVID death rates had a higher average proportion of
students in classes than the rest of the State, meaning that
the death or the CDC recommendations didn't always get taken
into account when they were deciding how to put kids back in
school.
And I really wanted to see, in light of this learning loss,
especially among our most vulnerable, especially among those
that the whole public education system, in my mind, is really
geared towards, like that is the goal, is that no child is less
than any other child. So how do we make sure we catch them up?
Is your Department more aggressively pursuing making sure
that--one day a week is not good enough for some of these kids
in some of these districts. And, again, I noted our Democratic
Governor has really stepped up to the plate to say: You need to
do this. And yet, they are still not complying.
How are you going to take on some of those bigger, more
intransigent systems that are not geared towards the kids' best
needs?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you for that question. And I
appreciate the way you laid it out.
I agree with you wholeheartedly. The best equity level we
have is in-person learning now--not the fall, now. And we need
to do everything to get our students in. Every day that they
are not in the classroom is a day wasted to have social-
emotional engagement, to have that access to a teacher, a
caring school environment.
Where, as you mentioned at the beginning of your comments,
we know students are suffering due to the trauma that they have
experienced. They need to be in the classrooms.
What we have done is work with our partners at CDC to get
guidance. We had the Reopening School Summit. We have over
1,100 entries of best practices that were submitted. We a
clearinghouse with about 200 practices that districts could
learn from one another.
But we are also building up a system very quickly to get
new data to make sure that we are reaching out proactively,
talking to the governors, talking to the commissioners, talking
to the superintendents, if necessary, sending a team over there
to support them, because we can't wait.
So I am very passionate about that. I agree with you
wholeheartedly. We need to get the solution right away.
Unfortunately, though, what I have seen in my tour is some
of these urban centers have buildings that are 120 years old,
that haven't had a ventilation system looked at in years.
So there is a lot of disparate need that we need to
address. But I do think that you are passionate, and I share it
with you.
[Children heard on webcast.]
Ms. Herrera Beutler. My goodness. Always when it is my
turn.
Secretary Cardona. It is awesome. I love it. This is the
education budget, so it is very appropriate.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. Well, the other piece of that I just
can't get over is that I feel like it really is the most
vulnerable who are going to pay this price, while we are
protecting every other institution in the system of education.
And it frustrates me that we have put a lot of money, $10
billion to the States to help with upgrading HVAC systems, and
to hear people not take advantage of those.
We could send all the money in the world there, unless
there are some sort of teeth, I think those kids are going to
continue to pay. And I want to understand that you have got
their back, even over some of the adults in the system.
Secretary Cardona. Exactly. And thank you for sharing that.
And I want to continue to have conversations with you about
what you are seeing, what you are hearing.
But I cannot agree any more. We need to advocate for
children here. We need to keep students at the center of the
conversation.
You are absolutely right, some kids are being hurt more
than others. We need to be aggressive about reopening now,
providing whatever supports they need. So support and
accountability have to be equal here.
And I totally agree with you, the plans that the States are
providing within the next 3 weeks must include how they are
going to address equity and how they are going to engage
stakeholders. We need to get our kids back right away.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you for that.
Appreciate it, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Thank you.
Congresswoman Bustos.
Mrs. Bustos. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And, Mr. Secretary, great to see you again. I do want to
publicly thank you for visiting Illinois last month with the
First Lady. It was really good to have you at Sauk Valley
Community College.
Today, if I may, I would like to talk a little bit about
teacher shortages. I gave you a little handout when you were in
our region that went over a little bit about this.
But the American Families Plan, it is just so great to see
that President Biden is requesting doubling the yearly TEACH
Grant award from $4,000 to $8,000. And that is for students who
commit to teaching a high-need subject in a high-poverty school
district for 4 years. I think it is terrific. So thank you.
I also want to applaud the $2.8 billion for teacher
residency programs and the $1.6 billion for grants for teachers
to obtain additional certification.
So that plays into helping to address teacher shortages, a
major, major problem in my home State of Illinois where right
now, as we are having this conversation, school districts have
about 4,200 unfilled positions.
Think about that. Shortage of teachers, of
paraprofessionals, of other licensed staff. In the
congressional district that I serve, we have 400 vacant
positions. And that is a lot.
So if you can talk a little bit about the American Families
Plan and how that will impact addressing this teacher shortage
issue.
Secretary Cardona. Sure. First off, let me say Sauk Valley
gets it right. If you want to see an example of how a community
college could lift a community and provide pathways for careers
that exist now, visit Sauk Valley. It is like a commercial.
Really, I am smiling because it was one of the best visits I
have had. Thank you for what you are doing over there. And
thank you, Sauk Valley, for what you are doing.
You are absolutely right, teacher shortages. But we could
throw money there, but I think what I don't want missed here is
we have a President now that values education, understands the
role of education. And together we need to lift up the
profession where it needs to be. We need to honor our
educators, not just during Teacher Appreciation Week, but we
need to make sure that it is a viable profession.
Let me tell you, 30 States, a midcareer teacher, in a
family of four, will qualify for Federal assistance. That is
unacceptable. That is unacceptable in this profession.
So we need to create better pathway programs for our
students to become educators.
You mentioned paraeducators. Paraeducators show up every
single day working hard for our students in those schoolhouses,
in those communities. Let's make them teachers.
How can we create innovative programming to give our
paraeducators or climate specialists an opportunity to become
certified teachers, to then fill those shortage areas where we
need support for our students that can't read, and reading
recovery, or ESL services?
We have to be innovative. And I am hoping, now that there
are financial resources, that we have bold leadership
strategies to really fill those gaps.
But the best way to do that is to really lift the
profession and make sure that the students that we are serving
now feel welcomed in our schools so that they can consider
themselves teachers in the future.
Mrs. Bustos. So as far as teachers' salary, Mr. Secretary,
that was actually my next question. In fact, let's see, let
me--so in 2019, in the State of Illinois, we had more than
5,500 K through 12 teachers earning less than $40,000 a year,
to your point. So I am just wondering what we can do more at
the Federal level.
Just earlier this year I introduced something--again, this
is in the handout that I gave you, Mr. Secretary--but we
introduced something out of my office called the Retaining
Educators Takes Added Investment Now Act--it spells out
RETAIN--and along with other provisions that it has in there.
It creates a fully refundable tax credit for teachers in
Title I schools. The credits start at $5,800 and ramp up to
$11,600 over the years to help retain staff.
So I am wondering what else--and I hope that you will be
supportive, please take a look at that. I am hoping those on
this subcommittee will be supportive.
But is there anything else, any other investment that we
should put into programs that fight the teacher shortage and
help the pay increase, increasing Title I funding to help
school districts increase teacher pay? Just curious as to any
other ideas you have specifically on how we can address that.
Secretary Cardona. Sure. Thank you for sharing that. I look
forward to having more conversation with you about that.
Mrs. Bustos. Please.
Secretary Cardona. And listing best practices. Because it
does take everyone, at the State level, at the Federal level,
but at the local level also. We need to think creatively with
this opportunity that we have to hit the reset button.
So some strategies--yours is a great idea. I talked about
the pathway program to make sure that our paraeducators have an
opportunity.
But I think we need to do a better job, starting in middle
school, looking at pathways for teachers for our students. But
if our students have a good experience, they are more likely to
want to do that.
Competitive salaries are needed. We need to really make
sure that we are giving teachers a competitive salary and an
opportunity to continue to grow.
This is not just about the salary. It is about honoring the
profession by giving professional learning opportunities,
advancement opportunities, additional higher education
opportunities for our educators. It is really about making sure
that we are taking care of the teachers once they choose that
profession as well as recruiting them.
I look forward to discussing more with you on that as well.
Mrs. Bustos. I do too, Mr. Secretary. Thank you very much.
My time is up. And, Madam Chair, I yield back.
Thank you so much, Mr. Secretary.
The Chair. Thank you.
Congressman Moolenaar.
Mr. Moolenaar. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And, Mr. Secretary, good morning, and thanks for being here
with us and for sharing your experience with us. And very much
appreciate your service in education, both at the State, now at
the Federal level, as well as at the local level, and being a
hands-on educator.
I wanted to talk with you a little bit, as we have gone
through this global pandemic, obviously it has affected a lot
of what we have been seeing in the area of education. And it
seems like there have been a lot of people innovating, trying
to make things work and using creative ways, whether it is
online learning, different choice options.
What have we learned through this process that may increase
more innovation, opportunities for parents to tailor programs
that meet the needs of their individual students? Any thoughts
on that?
Secretary Cardona. Yes. Thank you, Congressman Moolenaar.
You brought up something that is really important. Let's
not go back to what it was in March 2020, because that system
that we had before wasn't serving all kids equitably.
So you brought up blended learning. While I think students
need to be back in the classroom, the role of blended learning
I think should be always a part of how we educate students.
How we integrate social-emotional well-being of students
needs to be something that we think about more. It should be
more intrinsic in the curriculum, in the experience of
students, versus wait for a student to have issues and then
react to it.
I have seen creative ways for students in my experience in
Connecticut. So if this is a classroom right now, it doesn't
necessarily have to be taught or the options that the district
provides could be wider, because there might a teacher in a
neighboring community where if two communities work together to
share teacher expertise, we can offer more options for
students.
How beneficial is that for our rural students who maybe
don't have the same choice of classes because there are limited
people in their community that can teach it?
We need to be bold, we need to think outside of the box.
And I encourage that for States, to be creative with the
funding, to make sure that the programming that we give is
better than what it was last year.
Mr. Moolenaar. I appreciate that. And as someone who
represents a rural district, I have seen the importance of
rural broadband and the need to expand that to meet our
educational needs for our students, and have introduced
legislation called the BOOST Act that hopefully will help with
that process, and it is very bipartisan legislation.
I also wanted to get your thoughts, there are people
sometimes who mistakenly refer to charter schools as private
schools. To me, they are part of our educational public school
framework, often offer opportunities for innovation and
targeted opportunities for families who may not have other
opportunities.
I just wanted to get your thoughts on charter schools, the
role that they play, and educational choice in general.
Secretary Cardona. Sure. So I will speak from experience in
Connecticut. Some of the greatest examples of innovation I saw
from charter schools, but I have also seen amazing innovation
from traditional schools. Really they are hubs of innovation.
And I have seen them work and I have seen education where it
hasn't worked. And I have struggled with the accountability in
some places. But I felt the same way about other, traditional
schools as well.
So they provide an option for students. And oftentimes they
are targeted toward a specific learning area or a specific
need. So they are part of the portfolio of choices.
But, again, my thing is I don't ever want to support a
system of winners and losers, and I want to make sure that all
schools provide an opportunity for students to get a high-
quality education. I don't support one school at the expense of
another school. That is my position on that.
Mr. Moolenaar. Sure. I appreciate that.
And I also just want to get your thoughts on The 1619
Project. I recognize that you are not advocating for that. You
are not saying that we should have a Federal curriculum.
But it does appear that in the guidance in the Federal
Register, it did mention The 1619 Project, which according to
the editor in chief of The New York Times said the aim of the
project is to reframe American history.
And I think that raises a lot of concerns about
revisionism, of sort of breaking down the framework of how we
have taught civics education, and as you pointed out, the
importance of building unity.
And I just want to make sure that you are aware of that and
get your thoughts on that.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Representative. And I
appreciate you sharing your concern. And I am open to having
more conversation with you to hear your perspective.
What I will say is, listen, yes, it touched a pain point
for so many because it shows how divided we are as a Nation in
some places.
I really feel that civics education is something that there
is bipartisan support for that. We recognize that we need to do
that. And I feel very strongly, very strongly that when done
well, it should unite us under one flag, one country. And we
can do that while providing students with opportunities to look
at materials and look at different perspectives.
But, again, education in general should really unite us and
lift us as a country. And I feel confident that our educators
can do it. But I understand what you are saying, that it does
bring up divisions that maybe existed already, and we have to
be conscious of that as we move forward in education.
Mr. Moolenaar. All right. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Thank you, Madam Chair. And I yield back.
The Chair. Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
And welcome, Secretary Cardona.
I am glad to have a Secretary of Education who believes in
the power of public education and is willing to support and
protect our students in the public education system.
I am also encouraged that the President has continuously
spoken to the issues of equity and eliminating disparities.
With regard to what our children have been educated in, I
am very much aware of the fact that the experience of the
African-American building of this country has been woefully
inadequately dealt with in our public education system, and
that is something that we need to do something about.
And if we are seeking to look for an expansive civics
program that recognizes the contributions that other
communities, be they indigenous communities, Latin communities,
Black communities, their contribution to making this government
great, the opportunity for students to learn at a very young
age to respect and to recognize that these are communities of
dignity and demand and warrant respect, that is a good thing.
Because our children become our adults, and one thing we
don't want is to have a whole bunch of uninformed adults that
seize upon the Capitol of the United States again, wrongfully
guided, wrongfully coerced into doing things that were anti-
democratic and were also anti-unification of this country.
Mr. Secretary, do you believe that there is any such thing
as separate but equal in education? And that is kind of a yes
or a no.
Secretary Cardona. You know, we need to provide inclusive
opportunities for students.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. So do you believe that you can acquire
equal and separate?
Secretary Cardona. No, I don't.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Okay. Thank you. Because I understand
that there is going to be a huge investment in our underserved,
underperforming schools.
I am particularly aware of the whole Abbott experience in
the State of New Jersey, I am sure you are too, where for
decades we have been putting additional money into urban
schools that have been underperformed, that are intensely
populated by impoverished children from impoverished families,
and how all of that investment has not yielded the kind of
equality and outcomes that we are expecting.
So I would like to know what this administration's plan is
to desegregate our schools, to ensure that there is equity of
education, and to ensure that students, irrespective of the ZIP
Code from which they come, will have access to good, diverse,
and high-performing schools.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you for your passion. And let me
just comment really quickly on what you said earlier about the
experiences of not only African American, Latinos, but also
AAPI and women in our country's history is critically important
for all students to hear, and not just for those students who
are of that background, for all students to see----
Mrs. Watson Coleman. And not to be celebrated one month a
year every year, throughout their learning experience.
Absolutely.
Secretary Cardona. Correct. Thank you for that.
But we have in this budget plan also a request for $100
million to help diversify our schools, provide programming
where students learn in a diverse setting.
I benefit as a father from having my children learn in a
diverse environment. I can tell you there is not a price I
could put on that. For me, it is really important that my
students--my children, my own personal children--learn in an
environment where they see people that look like them but also
people that are very different from them.
That is what we want to do to prepare our students for a
world that is like that. There is an investment in that in this
budget plan and there is a strong belief in this
administration, in this Department, that there is value for our
students in that.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. I know that, Mr. Secretary, and I need
to see how we intend to accomplish that, because all the good
intentions in the world need to be followed by a plan of action
and a degree of accountability. And that hasn't been the
situation. So I really look forward to that.
One quick question. States have to have their plans in to
reopen schools by June the 7th. How soon thereafter do you
think those schools will have the resources to actually
implement the plans?
Secretary Cardona. We want to get the funding out as soon
as possible. So if we can get them in June, we are going to
move to move it along. There should be no delay.
What we want to ensure in that June 7 plan is that there is
aim for equity, as was mentioned today on this call, and also
ensuring that stakeholders are a part of that process. Parents
should be in the conversation at the beginning.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you.
Madam Chair, I realize my time is up. If there is a second
round, I certainly do want to talk to the Secretary about some
other issues, particularly impacting African-American students,
Black students in particular.
Thank you very much. And I yield back.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
The Chair. We will have a second round. It will be 3
minutes.
Congressman Cline.
Mr. Cline. Thank you, Chairwoman DeLauro, Ranking Member
Cole, for holding this hearing.
Secretary Cardona, thank you for being here.
I agree with your comments that education can serve as a
great equalizer. We have to ensure that we encourage equality
of opportunity, not equity of outcome however.
My home State of Virginia has a long history of being a
leader on fighting for equality on the educational front.
Barbara Rose Johns of Virginia led a walkout at the Robert
Russa Moton High School at age 16, which initiated a case
called Davis v. Prince Edward. This later became one of the
five cases that the U.S. Supreme Court reviewed in Brown v.
Board of Education of Topeka when it declared segregation
unconstitutional.
I am grateful for her contributions and look forward to
working with you to ensure that all students have that equality
of opportunity for a high-quality education.
Additionally, I appreciate your recognition of the
unprecedented increase in spending that President Biden has
proposed. Apparently, math was not his strong suit when it came
to his education, because this budget that he has put forward
is so far out of whack. After so much extraordinary emergency
spending, it is quite ridiculous.
The President's skinny budget proposes nearly $103 billion
for Department of Education programs, which is an increase of
almost $30 billion. That totals 41 percent above fiscal year
2021 enacted level. This level of an increase in spending in
the same year that Congress has allocated extensive funds to
mitigate the effects of COVID is highly irresponsible.
When I served in the Virginia General Assembly we were
required to balance our budget. As lawmakers, we must make
difficult decisions and determine how to most appropriately
spend taxpayers' money with sound authority and reason.
With that, I will ask you, Mr. Secretary, much of the
Nation's conversation in recent years has been centered around
student debt, which surpassed over $1.75 trillion in 2020.
This is a problem, but canceling it is not the solution.
That would devalue others' choices who determine that going to
community college for all or part of their education or that
completing an apprenticeship, which would allow them to start
in the workforce debt free, was the right decision for them.
Others have determined that their best path was through a 4-
year degree, while incurring some debt.
With many options that are flexible to students' needs, the
Federal Government should not be picking and choosing certain
life choices to pay for out of the paychecks of others.
What will you do as Secretary to encourage students to look
at all options available to them as a path toward a successful
career?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Representative.
And I want to be very clear. We could talk about individual
strategies. I want to make sure that what we are a part of
right now and what we are asking for is a transformational
shift of how we are looking at education, to make sure that it
serves as the foundation of our country's growth. As the
President stated in his address, other countries are not
waiting.
So there have been years of disinvestment in education, and
what we are trying to do now is correct that. So for those
students who have been underserved for years, generationally,
we are seeing the symptoms of that. And I think intervention
costs more than prevention. I look at a good education system
is the best way to lift our country.
With regard to the student debt, we have to do more in the
agency to make sure we are providing pathways to affordability
for our students. And I think public service loan forgiveness,
ensuring that there is a good return on investment for our
students that go to college, ensuring that we are giving them
every opportunity to be successful in college and not have a
mountain of debt, is to me just as important as revisiting the
loan forgiveness process.
So by hiring Richard Cordray, by bringing talent on board
that understand that, that we have to advocate for students in
all that we do, I feel confident that we are going to get
there.
Mr. Cline. Thank you.
Your Department announced last month it was extending
COVID-19 relief to defaulted borrowers who have legacy loans
under the Federal Family Education Loan Program.
While that decision was expected, you also announced a new
requirement that was not, that guaranty agencies move newly
defaulted loans to the Department.
If the goal is to help these borrowers, this new
requirement will not accomplish that. These State and nonprofit
agencies have relationships with these borrowers and can move
quickly to remove the default and restore their credit record.
In contrast, if the Department takes these loans, it will
be well into 2022 before borrowers see any relief remotely
close to what guaranty agencies can do for them and in an
accelerated timeframe.
As well, transitioning these loans to new for-profit
services will only add to borrower confusion, already
intensified because of new policies and procedures as a result
of the pandemic.
Given all of this, my question to you is, would you be
willing to revisit this mandatory assignment proposal and allow
nonprofit and State guaranty agencies to continue doing what
they do best and, frankly, were created to do? If not, I worry
these borrowers will not be a priority for the Department and
critical relief further delayed.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Representative. And I will be
quick because I know the time is up.
In fact, the reason why we brought them in is because we
want to make sure that we are advocating for them and that we
are keeping them at the center of the conversations and making
the decisions that are in their best interest. Thank you,
though.
Mr. Cline. All right. Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
Madam Chair, I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you.
Congresswoman Lawrence.
Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you.
I reintroduced the Pell to Grad Act, legislation that would
extend students' lifetime Pell Grant eligibility to 16
semesters, and it will allow them to receive the Pell Grant
award during their undergraduate education to utilize their
remaining eligibility for a graduate degree.
Several of my colleagues have referenced the burden of
student loan debt. I believe this legislation is a meaningful
first step toward promoting access to postsecondary education.
So I want to commend the Biden administration for proposing
the largest one-time increase in this program since 2009. I
want to congratulate you and welcome you to this seat, someone
that I feel very confident can rise to the occasion.
So my question to you, can you explain the benefits that
expanding lifetime Pell Grant eligibility could have for
students, especially those able to use their remaining
eligibility for a graduate degree?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you very much.
And I agree, for some students 16 semesters is not enough,
and we need to support them. For many of these students it is
first-gen students who are navigating that space for the first
time and are charting a new course in addressing what their
needs are, and sometimes it takes longer.
So I support that, and I thank you for recognizing that.
The system needs to evolve to the needs of the students and not
the other way around.
Pell Grants, as you mentioned, this is a historic allotment
towards that. In 1979, I think it was 75 percent of tuition was
covered for in-state colleges by Pell. That is significant. Now
it is like about 25 percent. So it didn't keep up with
inflation, clearly. And for many students, when they see that,
they make the decision not to go to college.
So we have to do something about that. We have to give
access, equity to higher education. We know there is greater
earning potential. So this goes a long way to doing that.
So it is something that I know that, for many students, it
is going to be the reason why they go to college. For other
students, it is the reason why they are buying a house or
contributing to the economy by being able to do some of those
things that they couldn't do if they were burdened with debt.
Really breaking the cycle of poverty is what it is.
Mrs. Lawrence. So before I close, I want to touch on our
efforts to return our students back to school. And I believe
your decision to provide free social and emotional learning
course while you were serving as the commissioner of education
was incredibly timely, considering what we are going through
with remote and hybrid learning.
One of my biggest concerns is how we can ensure that
students have the resource that they need to readjust following
this year of pandemic, including access to mental health
services.
Unfortunately, we have seen the number of suicides go up
and just all of the social issues, abuse and other things, that
our children have been going through.
How will you use your experience as a commissioner during
this pandemic to help shape the Department's guidance for use
by schools across the country, particularly in the area of
mental health?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you for that.
We know students have been hit hard. And we have to be
prepared, when we reopen the doors and turn on the lights, to
make sure that we are meeting the students of today. They are
different than the students of March 2020. Our students have
experienced family loss, they experienced joblessness of their
families, they haven't seen their loved ones in over a year in
some cases. We have to be prepared to meet their needs.
So instead of just an additional 15, 20 minutes with the
school counselor for some students, we need to infuse social-
emotional well-being into the curriculum, into the experience
of every child. We need to make mental health support more
accessible and remove the stigma that goes around that. We need
to provide better professional learning opportunities for all
educators to know what to look for, the signs.
Mrs. Lawrence. Secretary, this is the area I want to jump
into. We know that we do not have enough mental health
professionals to meet that goal. And I am so glad you have that
vision. And I would love to talk to you at another time about
how we build the workforce of mental health professionals to
address the children in our schools.
And I don't want to leave without talking about student
debt. Black women carry the largest amount of student debt in
America. So when we talk about the Pell Grant, we talk about
other student loan challenges, we have to recognize that Black
women are carrying the brunt of that.
Thank you so much. My time is up.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
The Chair. Congressman Harder.
Mr. Harder. Thank you so much, Chairwoman DeLauro.
And thank you, Secretary Cardona, for being here.
I have spoken previously about the importance of career and
technical education and how those programs really play a vital
role in helping folks develop the skills that they need that
are in high demand in our current labor market.
In a district like mine, only about 17 percent of adults
have a 4-year college degree; 83 percent don't. And so if all
we are doing is telling folks that the only route to the middle
class is through a 4-year college degree, we are going to be
leaving out the vast majority of a lot of folks across the
country. Even as we are doing more to accelerate people going
to college, we can't forget about everybody else.
It is something that we have been working on a lot. I know
there are a lot of challenges with expanding the availability
of access to CTE and skills programs.
I introduced a bill called the trades and career education
skills package last Congress. I will be doing so again. That
package is very focused on trying to create more opportunities
for hands-on career education starting in elementary school,
going on through high school and community college, really
focusing on partnerships with local industries to make sure
that those students are learning locally relevant skills, as
well as expanding access for Federal scholarship for short-
term, high-quality certificate programs.
Frankly, I would have liked to see career and technical
education discussed more explicitly in the President's
discretionary budget proposal, and that is something I hope to
see when the full budget is released.
My question, Mr. Secretary, is given the critical role that
CTE plays in communities like mine, how do you envision the
Department of Education will support scaling these programs up?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Representative Harder.
I can't agree with you more. I was a graduate of a
technical high school. I learned automotive. And I chose to go
into teaching. But I see the value of giving students options
and connecting those options to workforce needs in the
community. And I am sure in California there are so many
opportunities to do that.
So here are some very tangible things that I think should
happen.
We should take our schools, especially those schools with
labs, and create a second shift. Beautiful building, let's
create a second shift, no reason why the lights are off at 3
o'clock, and give underemployed families, parents, an
opportunity to go and get a credential. We need to connect that
with the learning that the students are getting.
We need to think about how our community colleges are
setting up shop in our high schools after hours. So from 3 to 8
p.m. we have credentialing programs so underemployed adults
have a second chance to go back and get their credential, get
their degree, and go back into the community.
So we need to think outside of the box.
With this funding and these resources, we have the
opportunity to really think big on this. And I agree with you,
we need to make sure that we are not just saying 4 years of
college or bust. There are so many other opportunities.
I look forward to learning more from you, working with you
to expand opportunities, because at this agency that is one of
my goals, to make sure we are doing a better job creating
pathways, not only for our students but for our adults who want
another opportunity at learning.
Mr. Harder. Terrific. Thank you.
It is wild to me that we offer Pell Grants and other
scholarships for some programs, but if you want to be a
maintenance mechanic, which is a job where there is a desperate
shortage of in my community, it pays six figures, it is a
really fantastic career, but you are not eligible for the same
type of scholarships if you want to go on that career path.
Would you consider utilizing Pell Grants and/or any other
funding streams to better support individuals to pursue
certificates and other certifications in that space or other
spaces like that?
Secretary Cardona. Yes, definitely.
As I said before, we have to evolve our systems to make
sure that our policies are supporting students. Obviously,
accountability has to be a part of it. We want to make sure our
students are getting a good return on investment.
But, yes, we have to make sure we are nimble to meet the
demands that are out there and the needs of our learners. So,
yes, I definitely would be in support of reviewing that a
little bit more and getting more perspective on that, making
sure we are serving our students the best we can, definitely.
Mr. Harder. That is great to hear.
One last question. I know early exposure to these skills
programs has been shown to promote career readiness. You
mentioned some ideas for programs at the high school level or
earlier. What could we be doing to support students as early as
possible?
Obviously, not every student, and you are a perfect example
of that, is going to take us up on that opportunity, but at
least it gives folks an option if they decide to do it.
How else can we be sort of supporting workforce development
efforts as early as possible?
Secretary Cardona. Sure. Thank you for that.
So a couple of thoughts on that. Not only does it improve
career readiness, but student engagement. Students learn better
when they are doing things, when they are hands on.
And we learned this year that schooling doesn't have to be
in a schoolhouse. Maybe students early on go on trips and see
what is happening in their community, what advanced
manufacturing looks like in their community, or what STEM
fields look like in their community. So we have to get students
out a lot earlier.
And we have to bring our partners in. Why not focus on
getting some of our workforce partners on our boards of
education to help shape the policy at the local level to make
this something that is not just a fancy program for some
students but infused as part of the program for all students?
Mr. Harder. It is great to hear. I look forward to working
with you on that. And thank you so much for appearing before
the subcommittee.
Madam Chair, I yield back the remainder of my time.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
The Chair. Thank you.
Everyone has been a through a 5-minute round. What I would
like to do is to do a next round with 3 minutes and have people
adhere to 3 minutes so we can get everyone's questions in.
With that, Mr. Secretary, let me begin.
This is about ACICS, the for-profit accreditor which was--
they were reinstated in 2018 by Secretary DeVos and the Trump
administration.
Now, this is the accreditor that was responsible for
Education Corporation of America, Corinthian Colleges, ITT, the
for-profit chains who precipitously closed their doors. There
was Ronald Reagan National University, was accredited as an
institution. They had no students or faculty.
So accreditors are supposed to oversee quality, serve as
gatekeepers, and they need to be removed when they fail in that
responsibility.
Now, the National Advisory Committee on Institutional
Quality and Integrity has recommended that Federal recognition
of ACICS be removed. Will the Department of Education reach a
decision on whether to remove recognition? How will you ensure
proper oversight of for-profit colleges?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you, Chair DeLauro.
Yes, we stand by the decision. And we recognize that it is
our responsibility to protect students by making sure that we
remove folks that are not helping produce a good return on
investment for our students.
They are going to get their due process, and they should,
but we stand by the decision to move in the direction that we
did.
The Chair. Okay.
English learners, particularly challenging year. How will
the Department's Office of English Language Acquisition work
with States and districts to make sure these students are
getting the support that they need.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
We need to do better than ever before. We need to see a new
day for our office for multilingual learners. Going back to
where we were is not good enough.
Early childhood education is one. But language support
services for students, there is such a gap between the practice
and the research on that. We need to go back to what we know
works best, honoring and valuing the native language, while
lifting the second language so we can have multilingual
learners.
There is lot of work that has to be done. I look forward to
engaging with that with my sleeves rolled up because this is
important for our country.
The Chair. Thank you.
With the few minutes I have left, let me just say, in your
conversation with Congressman Harder about utilizing schools in
a different way, it would seem to me that we could use
community schools in a way that these were open usually from
early morning until 8 or 9 o'clock at night, that that might be
a good vehicle for dealing with how we deal with new learning
opportunities and workforce development efforts.
Secretary Cardona. Absolutely. I think you are spot on,
especially because families trust their child's teacher, they
trust their child's principal, they know that school community,
they feel comfortable there. We really need to rethink how we
use our space.
The Chair. Thank you. I once taught as a substitute teacher
at the Dr. Conte Community School in New Haven, Connecticut.
So with that, let me yield to my colleague, Congressman
Cole.
Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I would have
enjoyed that class, I am sure.
Mr. Secretary, two quick questions.
One, I am very heartened to hear about your determination
in reopening schools full time. In my district, most of them
have been functioning since August, in every case where full
time was better than virtual.
And, frankly, in one case, I was talking to the
superintendent yesterday, he offered both options. About two-
thirds of the students came in on a regular basis, about a
third did not. He said it is a dramatic difference between
those that did. And he said, we are actually removing next year
the option of going virtual.
Have you thought about tying any of the distribution of
money that is going to be under your authority to the
restoration of 5-day education?
Secretary Cardona. It is my expectation that by the fall
all students have in-person learning options 5 days a week.
I really--I want it now in the spring. But we will problem
solve with folks. But we need to provide in-person learning
opportunities for all students 5 days a week in the fall. That
is my expectation. [inaudible] Withhold funds if they don't do
it.
Mr. Cole. Yeah. Well, I appreciate that. And I hope you
again use whatever tools you have, because I think the
evidence, both medically, for the health of the kids, and
educationally is pretty clear.
The second question I have also relates to distribution. I
will be very candid with you, I think one of the problems that
my side of the aisle had on the American Recovery Plan was the
lack of information in the original legislation about how money
would be distributed. Let me give you an example that doesn't
relate to education.
But we had a formula in the American CARES Act that
distributed money on a per capita basis. It was changed in the
American Recovery Act, and, frankly, it was changed in ways
that the money was skewed heavily toward Blue States at the
expense of Red States. There were actually 20-odd governors
that protested this.
So I am very interested, as you develop standards, what
your criteria are going to be. It is an enormous amount of
money, $130 billion at your disposal, your Department's
disposal.
What are the kinds of standards you will use? What kind of
transparency will we have in seeing those standards before you
actually begin to distribute those funds?
Secretary Cardona. Thank you for that question.
We have an opportunity, a once in a lifetime opportunity
not only to support students, but to provide equitable
opportunities for students and really address some of those
issues that happened before.
But we also have to be conscious of we are working--we are
using taxpayer money. So we have to be as transparent as
possible. We have to be clear about our intentions and be very
purposeful when communicating what the money should be used
for.
We want to make sure we are addressing the pandemic impact.
Some students were impacted more than others. That should be
driving how decisions are being made, nothing else.
Mr. Cole. As much as you could share that with us as you
are developing them or get there, I think it would be very
helpful to every member of the committee to have that
information.
So thank you very much.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
Mr. Cole. Again, I am going to live by my chairman's
admonition. So thank you very much, and thank you again for
your testimony.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
The Chair. Congresswoman Clark.
Ms. Clark. Thank you. Thank you for the second round.
Secretary Cardona, I would like to go back to some of the
discussion that we have been having around a rule that followed
President Biden's executive order which directed the Federal
Government to pursue a comprehensive approach to advancing
equity for all, especially people of color.
And I wanted to give you a chance to address some of what
my colleagues have raised, both here today and otherwise, about
helping students connect with the history of our country, with
the history of racism and the toxic roots of slavery.
Can you tell us what is at the basis of this and how you
hope that this education around the history of our country will
be uniting and not dividing?
Secretary Cardona. Right. So I think when we talk about
disengaged youth, when we talk about exclusionary practices,
disengaged families from school, we really need to look at
those as symptoms of something greater. And I am speaking now
from my years of experience in education as an educator at
different levels.
We need to do better to engage our students and our
families in learning that is culturally responsive, that sees
our students, sees their experience, validates their
contributions to our country.
I think if you do that all students benefit, not just the
students whose history has been omitted or left out.
So, again, I have seen it done. I have been a recipient of
an educational system where when others are valued, I see how
it builds our country. I mean, that is the beauty of our
country, the diversity and the different stories. This is a
very unique country.
And we shouldn't lose the opportunity to really unite our
students and have pride for their country by doing this. And I
don't think it is mutually exclusive. You can share the rich
history of others and the contributions of others while also
sharing the pride and teaching the pride of our country and how
we are united under one flag.
So I reject the belief that by doing this we are dividing.
In fact, I think those who think that don't really understand
what happens in our classrooms and the roles of our educators
to bring students from different cultures together, learning
together. There is so much benefit to that. I think that
experience is greater in many ways than the experience that
they get from whatever content they have in front of them.
So we recognize the opportunity we have as educators to
bring our country together, and listen to our students, and
give them an opportunity to share their voice. They are ready
for it. Sometimes the adults take a little bit longer, but they
are ready for it.
Ms. Clark. Thank you so much.
The Chair. Congressman Harris.
Mr. Harris. Thank you very much.
And just to follow up on that, I appreciate you want people
to know the rich history and contributions. In Baltimore, when
they tear down a statute of Christopher Columbus, that doesn't
contribute to sharing rich history and contributions.
Now, the Department of Education made the front page of The
Wall Street Journal last Friday with a story that I hope you
are familiar with about the Courtney report on student loans.
Of great concern, this is--we are the Appropriations
Committee. And the focus of this article was that the Biden
administration has outright rejected the Courtney report and
will continue to falsify or to claim large profits on student
loans or even small profits on the student loans portfolio,
when in fact the Courtney report indicated that probably a
third of the student loans will never be repaid.
And this does bear on the ability, for instance, to
refinance student loans, because if on paper refinance results
in less profit that was never there to begin with, you might be
less likely to refinance loans.
So first off, the article says--claims--and I never believe
anything that I read in the media on first blush--it says that
Biden officials never saw Mr. Courtney's report.
Mr. Secretary, did you see Mr. Courtney's report.
Secretary Cardona. My staff is aware of the report, and I
stand by the decision to make sure that----
Mr. Harris. Did you see Mr. Courtney's report? And did any
of your staff see Mr.--read Mr. Courtney's report, see it?
Because the Wall Street Journal claims your staff didn't see
it. They dismissed it out of hand as some Betsy DeVos scheme
against student loans.
Now, Mr. Courtney was in fact a very high-ranking
individual in a very foremost financial services firm who ran
the student loan portfolio. This is not someone with a
political agenda. This is someone who made great success in the
private finance sector.
You stand by their decision having never seen the report.
Is that your testimony today in front of this committee?
Secretary Cardona. You know who else has a lot of
credibility in this field?
Mr. Harris. Mr. Secretary, excuse me. If you don't want to
answer the question, just say, ``Look, I don't want to answer
the question.''
Are you standing by the Biden administration, Department of
Education officials in their assessment, having never seen the
report yourself?
Secretary Cardona. I stand by the decision of my team to
not validate a report that was developed without the same
checks and balances that the report that we use.
Mr. Harris. So you think that it is okay to dismiss it
without actually reading it and seeing what it says? Because
this involves hundreds of billions of dollars of potential
student loan default that is on our budget contributing to our
deficit.
Mr. Secretary, I am disappointed that you would dismiss a
report this serious. And, look, I understand you are smiling
about it. This is nothing to smile out about. This is hundreds
of billion dollars in student loans with the administration
dismissing out of hand without the Secretary even having seen
the report.
I yield back.
Secretary Cardona. I have confidence in my team, and I
stand by the decisions we have made. Thank you.
The Chair. Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Secretary. And thank you for standing by
what you believe is the right thing for our students. And we
had enough of Betsy DeVos and her misguided policies for 4
years.
Let me just say that when I do the Pledge of Allegiance to
the flag and I say one Nation under God, I feel something when
I say that, because I believe it. And so, I am very much
appreciative of the fact that you have mentioned that a number
of times.
I know that most recently there was a collaborative, a new
collaborative that was created, and that there was a national
convening for 2 days around educational issues, particularly
relating to the pandemic learning loss.
Secretary Cardona. The reopening summit? Is that what you
are referring to?
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Well, I have it down here as the
national convening of the collaborative, a 2-day discussion of
leaders and stakeholders to design evidence-based programs to
address the pandemic loss.
Secretary Cardona. The Summer Learning Collaborative, yes.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Okay. I am really interested in
knowing some of the outcomes, particularly as they relate to
the impact of the pandemic learning loss on minority students
and what we are proposing with regard to giving that the
attention it needs.
Secretary Cardona. Yes. Thank you for bringing that up.
The Summer Learning Collaborative was really intended to
make sure we take innovative ideas, best practices from across
the country, share them with a focus on recovering from the
pandemic in nontraditional ways. I often said I would love to
have summer learning programs without one ditto. We need
students to have hands-on experiences. So that is what that
was.
We are going to be releasing a report soon, probably next
month, about the impacts of the pandemic on different students
to make sure that when we reopen schools we are addressing
those with energy and making sure that the resources that we
have are aimed at that. We definitely will keep you in the loop
and look forward to having more conversations with you.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. And particularly mental health
services for Black youth in particular.
Thank you very much.
Let me just say that New Jersey has the reputation of
having one of best school systems in the country, but we also
have the most segregated school system--one of the most
segregated school systems--and you will find the differential
is very stark in what happens in those schools.
And I am very much of a magnet school person. I have got
lots of ideas, I have got lots of ideas. I think that the other
schools should have been laboratories and that we should have
learned from and been able to apply, not substitute for just
plain old public schools.
And I look forward to having discussions with you because
this is a very important subject to me. And I thank you for
being here.
And Madam Chair, I yield back. And thank you for your
indulgence.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you.
The Chair. Thank you. I think that there are--Mrs.
Lawrence, Congresswoman Lawrence? Congressman Harder? Okay.
What I would now like to do is to yield to the ranking
member for any closing comments. Oh, wait a minute.
Congresswoman Lawrence, this is a 3-minute round. You are
recognized.
Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you so much.
Mr. Secretary, thank you for your time.
I just want to just echo and show some bipartisanship here.
I think in our commitment to developing a skilled workforce
that we need to look at Pell Grants and other resources for
those who choose not to go to a 4-year university, that we are
giving them the resources to aid them in attending these
certified community colleges programs.
And, again, the point I wanted to make about the skilled
workforce that we need for the mental health.
When I dealt with Flint and we were trying to mitigate the
lead poisoning in those children, the one thing they said they
needed were social workers and mental health providers in the
schools, because we knew that the lead poisoning would have an
adverse impact on their development and they would act out in
school.
And we didn't need to put them in detention and expel them.
We needed mental health trained professionals so that they
could care for these children.
The number one thing we heard was that there are not enough
people going into social work or the mental health profession.
And so in your role, how do we feed, support, and
incentivize? We have Teach For America. We have programs for
rural doctors. How do we grab hold to this?
Because we are also dealing with this in policing. We need
mental health professionals to address these psychotic
situations instead of calling 911 to arrest somebody, beat
them, and, unfortunately, sometimes kill them.
So we have a crisis when it comes to the mental health
workforce. And that was my second question.
Thank you so much.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you for that.
You are absolutely right, we need to be proactive. What we
saw in Flint should serve as a lesson. We are coming out of a
pandemic and the mental health needs of our students--and our
staff, I would add--needs to be at the forefront, our social-
emotional well-being. So not only do we have to plan for it,
but we have to make sure we have qualified staff.
I think the community school model really helps that. How
are we engaging with our community partners?
I remember having experiences as an assistant
superintendent with a community health center where we had a
good partnership there and we had nonprofits or other agencies
in the community. It takes a village, right? So how do we think
outside of the box.
That is why this investment in community schools is
critically important, to get to those underlying issues. It is
hard to learn, your academic bandwidth is diminished, if you
are hungry, if you have housing instability.
So we need to make sure we are thinking about the whole
child and providing support and services. And you are
absolutely right, we need to do more for mental health.
Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you so much.
And I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you.
Let me now yield to the ranking member, Congressman Cole,
for any further comments or closing remarks that you would like
to make.
Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And thank you
very much for holding the hearing. As always, a great hearing.
Mr. Secretary, it is really good to have you here and have
an opportunity to get to know you a little bit better. I
appreciate your testimony and I appreciate very much the spirit
in which you approached the hearing.
Let me go back and make a few points.
We do, and I would be remiss not to point this out, have a
fundamental disagreement overall with the President's budget in
the sense that we think there is too little in defense, too
much in domestic spending.
Your Department is probably at the top of that list. The 41
percent increase is pretty generous, to say the least, and we
think there is going to have to be some adjustment there.
And if we can't get there, then what I would fear as an
appropriator is it will stumble into what is called a
continuing resolution. You will be living with last year's
budget. That is something that none of us on either side of the
aisle want to do.
But I also want to point out there are some areas of
agreement and I want to applaud some of your efforts. I am
particularly pleased with proposals like IDEA. There is no
question we need to be doing more there. And, frankly, I think
that gives local schools a lot of flexibility as to how they
help students with special needs.
I like the emphasis as well on the Pell Grant, that I know
our chairwoman is also a big fan of. That, again, provides a
lot of opportunity for other students.
When I was chairman, and always with our current chairman's
support, we were very big on TRIO and GEAR UP. We thought those
are very important programs for first-generation college
students to give them the chance to succeed.
So there is a lot of common ground here, and we look
forward to working with you in those areas.
I would also tell you--and I am going to go back, as I did
in the opening question--I am very concerned about the civics
issue.
I am very concerned about when I see a departmental Federal
registry notice that sites The 1619 Project, controversial
scholars, that these are going to be the criteria that we use.
That is going to be a problem. And that is not to me
allowing local people to set the curriculum. It is, quite
frankly, Federal interference, and it is pushing a particular
point of view.
I am not going to drag you into history, but I would feel a
lot better if I saw Joseph Ellis and Ron Chernow and those kind
of people cited. Although I would tell you, you are citing a
grant, you probably should never mention a specific type of
individual, because every historian will have a point of view.
That is not what we are trying to do here in this.
So, again, I welcome a continued dialogue with you about
that important issue.
I appreciate too you seem to agree with a number of our
colleagues that we need in-person learning. I mean, again, I
think the medical evidence is absolutely clear on this. It was
clear a long time ago.
I think the hearings we have had show some of the social
consequences of not having kids in school. Everything from drug
addiction, to isolation, to mental health problems suggest how
important that is.
And I know from talking to my own son, he is a classroom
teacher, how concerned he was that kids weren't in classrooms,
where you had a lot of teachers there that cared about kids
that were in a position to check on them, provide structure in
their life. Some of these kids, that is the place where they
get structure and get protection.
So getting them unhooked as much as possible from virtual
learning and back where they are in a more traditional
classroom setting is a goal I think we all share and I hope we
can work together.
I don't mean we lose the tools. We all know technology can
be a marvelous tool and is something we need. But I think,
again, the evidence is clear, school age children need to be in
school and we need to be using the leverage we have to
encourage people to do that as much as possible. And from your
testimony, I think that you have that same kind of view.
Let me just, again, end with this. I want to thank the
chairwoman again for the hearing. I know how passionate she is
on these issues, and I think rightfully so.
I think we live in a society where education is the key to
upward mobility. We want to give every child that opportunity,
regardless of the circumstances in which they come into the
world. We know they don't all come in on equal footing, and
some folks need more help than others and some communities have
been left behind. So you will find no disagreement there. We
just simply want to work with you on the tools that we think
are effective.
We will go back to my favorites, TRIO and GEAR UP, just to
say sometimes old tools are good tools. I have watched multiple
administrations, they always want to do something new. And that
is good, we need to be pressing on.
But we need to remember sometimes, when we have got
something that works, and it has worked for 50 years, and I
will point to TRIO, produced 5 million college graduates for
this country, I wonder how many of those kids that went through
TRIO would have graduated from college absent that program or
would it even have been there in the first place.
And I would say that is a good program. That is a program
that has produced for the American people and it has given
millions of our fellow Americans opportunities that their
parents and grandparents never, ever had.
So, again, we look forward to working with you to find
common ground. I always look forward to working with my friend,
the chairman. And thank you again.
And, believe me, I am counting the days when we can sit
down in person and have these kind of discussions at length,
because I value your personal experience. I think it is a model
of the American Dream in action.
I appreciate your commitment to educating children, every
child, providing opportunity. You don't only say those things,
it is your experience over a lifetime. And my good friend the
chairman's high praise for you tells me that that is true, that
the values that you profess are the values you live by and the
values you have made your career by.
So, again, look forward to having the opportunity to work
with you.
And thank you, Madam Chair, for holding the hearing. I
yield back.
Secretary Cardona. Thank you, sir. I appreciate that.
The Chair. I thank the ranking member for his comments and
would just reiterate--and I am thankful for the partnership
that we do have on the Civics Secures Democracy Act. And it
specifically prohibits any use of the funds for a national
curriculum in American history or even in civics education.
So I am hopeful that we can continue to pursue that. I
think civics education is something that is really critical for
the people in this country. I think it helps to really
strengthen our democracy in so many ways that we need to think
about for the future.
And I would just a brief personal anecdote.
My father arrived in the United States at age 13 as an
immigrant from Italy, and they put him in the seventh grade in
the city of New Haven, and he was asked to define the word
``janitor'' in one of the classes.
And he didn't speak the language or neither read or write
the language, and he didn't know what the word ``janitor''
meant. But he drew on his Italian heritage and he focused on
the word ``genitori.'' And genitori means parents, and that is
the way he described the word ``janitor.''
And at that moment, his teachers and his classmates laughed
at him.
My father left school in the seventh grade, which was the
end of a formal education, because of that kind of humiliation.
He went on to serve his country in the military, served on
the city council in the city of New Haven, and moved on with a
wonderful career in our community and our city.
But those days of when we do not recognize the strengths of
those who come from different places, different lands,
different experiences, and our need to embrace them is critical
in terms of our children and moving forward in education.
And I want to say a thank you to you, Secretary Cardona,
for your commitment to our children, our students, all ages,
races, sexes, backgrounds, and utilizing, as the ranking member
said, what education is. And my parents spent a lifetime making
sure I had the best of the academic experiences. Who could
foretell that I would wind up where I am today?
But it is the great equalizer, education. Education for
families today is the way that they believe that their children
will be able to succeed for the future, and recognizing that it
is our children's God-given talent that promotes them, and
whatever the old tools--or the new tools--that we want to
utilize to be able to have them realize their dreams and
aspirations, which is what our education should be about.
And I want to say a thank you to you, Mr. Secretary. The
budget does place strong funding increases for Title I, special
education, Pell Grants, higher education, community schools--
let's bring them back--and so many other areas, universal
preschool for 3 and 4-year-olds, free community college,
teacher development, to be more prepared to teach our
youngsters.
And as we reflect on what we do as appropriators, we look
to a budget that, in fact, invests in students and teachers,
public schools, higher education, career technical education.
And we want to make sure, yes, that the funds are utilized in
the manner that has been set forth.
So above all, it is about making sure that average citizens
today have a better chance at a better life and that American
Dream becomes a reality.
I will just close with this. It also says that poverty is
unacceptable. And poverty is, in some of our districts and some
of our communities, is the biggest roadblock to youngsters
being able to get a good education, with good schools, with
good teachers, with good curricula, and a direction for them
for the future.
And we do have the capacity to help to abolish poverty so
that kids can get an equal opportunity for the future.
Mr. Secretary, thank you so much for your testimony today.
And with that, I will bang my hand on the table here, and
this hearing is adjourned. Thank you.
And thank my colleagues very, very much for their interest
and their questions this morning. Thank you.
[Questions and answers submitted for the record follow:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Thursday, May 13, 2021.
MENTAL HEALTH EMERGENCIES: BUILDING A ROBUST CRISIS RESPONSE SYSTEM
WITNESSES
CHARLES DIKE, MEDICAL DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER, CONNECTICUT
DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH AND ADDICTION SERVICES
ROBERT GEBBIA, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, AMERICAN FOUNDATION FOR SUICIDE
PREVENTION
TONJA MYLES, CERTIFIED PEER SUPPORT SPECIALIST, COMMUNITY LIAISON, THE
BRIDGE CENTER FOR HOPE, RI INTERNATIONAL
CHRIS RICHARDSON, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE SERVICES,
MENTAL HEALTH CENTER OF DENVER
STEVEN CASSTEVENS, IMMEDIATE PAST PRESIDENT, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION
OF CHIEFS OF POLICE
The Chair. This hearing will come to order.
As this hearing is fully virtual, we must address a few
housekeeping matters. For today's meeting, the chair or staff
designated by the chair may mute participants' microphones when
they are not under recognition for the purposes of eliminating
inadvertent background noise.
Members are responsible for muting and unmuting themselves.
If I notice that you have not unmuted yourself, I will ask if
you would like the staff to unmute you. If you indicate
approval by nodding, staff will unmute your microphone.
I remind all members and witnesses that the 5-minute clock
still applies. If there is a technology issue, we will move to
the next member until the issue is resolved, and you will
retain the balance of your time.
You will notice a clock on your screen that will show how
much time is remaining. At 1 minute remaining, the clock will
turn yellow. At 30 seconds remaining, I will gently tap the
gavel to remind members that their time is almost expired. When
your time has expired, the clock will turn red, and I will
begin to recognize the next member.
In terms of the speaking order, we will begin with the
chair and ranking member. Then members present at the time the
hearing is called to order will be recognized in order of
seniority and, finally, members not present at the time the
hearing is called to order.
Finally, House rules require me to remind you that we have
set up an email address to which members can send anything they
wish to submit in writing at any of our hearings or markups.
That email address has been provided in advance to your staff.
And with that, I want to acknowledge Ranking Member Cole
and all of our colleagues for joining this morning. You all
should have received a memo with data on mental health and law
enforcement with extensive background for this hearing, which I
would like to say a thank you to Congresswoman Lawrence and
Congressman Harder for suggesting this hearing in February. If
you did not receive the memo, please let staff know, and we
will get you a copy.
Let me also extend a warm welcome to today's witnesses--Dr.
Dike, Mr. Gebbia, Ms. Myles, Mr. Richardson, and Chief
Casstevens. We thank you for being here, especially now as we
mark May as Mental Health Awareness Month, and we look forward
to your testimony. I will further introduce the witnesses in a
few minutes.
Over the past few years and all across our country, we have
seen far too many instances in which local police have had to
deal with individuals suffering from mental health crises or
behavioral issues when what these individuals really need is
medical treatment or a mental health provider. But due to a
lack of mental health resources or teams better equipped to
handle these situations, police are often the first and the
only services to arrive at the scene.
But there is something that we can do about it. Recently,
the City of New Haven announced a new program, which is the
focus of one of my community project requests this year. This
program, the New Haven Community Crisis Response Team, would
divert 911 calls involving someone experiencing mental health
crisis or a behavioral issue to Social Services and to dispatch
specially trained social worker-led teams to address calls
related to homelessness, mental health, and substance abuse
disorder instead of police.
This program will significantly reduce the need for the New
Haven Police Department and EMS responses to incidences that
are not of criminal or health emergency nature. And we are
seeing more models like this around the country, which we will
talk about today.
The issue of mental health and substance use was already a
growing concern in this country before the COVID-19 pandemic.
The isolation, the school closures, the economic anxiety, job
losses, and challenges for obtaining childcare or paid time off
have only exacerbated these already-existing problems and
created new barriers to treatment.
According to the American Psychiatric Association, people
from racial/ethnic minority groups are less likely to receive
mental healthcare even without the additional barriers posed by
the pandemic. For example, in 2015, among adults with mental
illness, 48 percent of whites received mental health services,
compared with 31 percent of blacks and Hispanics and 22 percent
of Asians.
Earlier this year, we had a hearing of this subcommittee on
these growing problems, and today, we are looking at how we can
strengthen the mental health crisis response system so that
mental health providers across the country can respond to
mental health emergencies rather than law enforcement.
Mental illnesses are serious medical conditions, and
without treatment, these conditions can result in a diminished
capacity for coping with the ordinary demands of life.
Untreated mental illness can escalate to a crisis situation
where a family member, friend, or someone in the community
feels they have no choice but to call 911, which inevitably
leads to situations in which law enforcement are responding to
what is actually a mental health emergency.
Meanwhile, for the individual, arrest can cause unnecessary
trauma, which can make their long-term recovery more difficult.
This can lead to high rates of incarceration or even more
tragic outcomes, including needless death, particularly for
black or brown people.
I have just been handed a note that there is an audio issue
with livestream. Is that accurate?
Voice. Yes, Chair, the livestream isn't getting any audio
right now. The CO chief is asking that we briefly recess.
[Recess.]
The Chair. Over the past few years and all across our
country, we have seen far too many instances in which local
police have had to deal with individuals suffering from mental
health crises or behavioral issues when what these individuals
really need is medical treatment or a mental health provider.
But due to a lack of mental health resources or teams better
equipped to handle these situations, police are often the first
and the only services to arrive at the scene.
But there is something that we can do about it. Recently,
the City of New Haven announced a new program, which is the
focus of one of my community project requests this year. This
program, the New Haven Community Crisis Response Team, would
divert 911 calls involving someone experiencing mental health
crisis or a behavioral issue to Social Services and dispatch
specially trained social worker-led teams to address calls
related to homelessness, mental health, and substance abuse
disorder instead of police.
This program will significantly reduce the need for the New
Haven Police Department and EMS responses to incidences that
are not of criminal or health emergency nature. And we are
seeing more models like this around the country, which we will
speak about today.
The issue of mental health and substance abuse was already
a growing concern in this country before the COVID-19 pandemic,
but the isolation, the school closures, the economic anxiety,
job losses, and challenges for obtaining childcare or paid time
off have only exacerbated these already-existing problems and
created new barriers to treatment.
According to the American Psychiatric Association, people
from racial/ethnic minority groups are less likely to receive
mental healthcare even without the additional barriers posed by
the pandemic. For example, in 2015, among adults with any
mental illness, 48 percent of whites received mental health
services, compared with 31 percent of blacks and Hispanics and
22 percent of Asians.
Earlier this year, we had a hearing of this subcommittee on
these growing problems, and today, we are looking at how we can
strengthen the mental health crisis response system so that
mental health providers across this country can respond to
mental health emergencies rather than law enforcement.
Mental illnesses are serious medical conditions, and
without treatment, these conditions can result in a diminished
capacity for coping with the ordinary demands of life.
Untreated mental illness can escalate to a crisis situation
where a family member, friend, or someone in the community
feels they have no choice but to call 911, which inevitably
leads to situations in which law enforcement are responding to
what is actually a mental health emergency.
Meanwhile, for the individual, arrest can cause unnecessary
trauma, which can make their long-term recovery more difficult.
This can lead to high rates of incarceration or even more
tragic outcomes, including needless death, particularly for
black or brown people.
According to the Treatment Advocacy Center, 1 in 10 police
responses involves an individual with a mental health
condition, 1 in 5 incarcerated individuals lives with a mental
health condition, and 1 in 4 individuals killed by police had a
mental health condition, which is especially tragic because
police--most police want to do their jobs well. They just do
not always have the tools or training necessary to respond to a
mental health emergency.
Part of the problem here is that the behavioral health
system has been underfunded for years. We need to make
treatment more available to everyone who needs it and ensure
crisis services are available to anyone. In recent years, we
have made efforts to address this shortfall. We have made
serious investments in our police departments and our crisis
intervention programs, and we will continue to do so.
The Affordable Care Act significantly expanded access to
Medicaid, which in many States is the most important source of
coverage and funding for behavioral health services. And the
American Rescue Plan gave an additional financial incentive to
expand Medicaid for the 14 States that have not yet done so and
allows States to use Medicaid funds to support the expansion of
mental health mobile crisis teams.
In addition, last year we increased our overall funding for
the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
by $133,000,000, for a total of $6,000,000,000. In this
committee, we also increased funding for mental health services
block grants by $35,000,000. We created a 5 percent set-aside
within the block grant specifically focused on crisis services.
And over the past year, in 3 separate emergency bills, we have
provided more than $8,600,000,000 to a variety of programs to
address the mental health impacts of the pandemic.
Meanwhile, President Biden's fiscal year 2022 budget
blueprint would double funding of the mental health services
block grant to $1,600,000,000, an increase of $825,000,000. And
while we have not seen the full budget yet, according to the
administration's blueprint, it is clear they are proposing
additional funding for partnerships between mental health
providers and law enforcement, as well as suicide prevention
activities. Similarly, SAMHSA has put out a roadmap for robust
crisis care services that can divert people experiencing a
mental health crisis from the criminal justice system into
mental health treatment.
Another important tool is going to be the rollout in July
of 2022 of 988 as the new 3-digit number for the National
Suicide Prevention Lifeline. It is a dedicated number for
people experiencing a mental health crisis to call and access
lifesaving resources.
Many communities are implementing model programs where
mental health providers respond to mental health emergencies,
ensuring that you have individuals with healthcare training are
dispatched to address these situations and freeing up police
resources to where they are most needed.
There are a range of different approaches that communities
can take, different levels of police involvement, or no police
involvement, depending on the mental health resources available
in the community. So I am greatly encouraged to see how many
other members have submitted requests across the Labor, HHS and
the CJS Subcommittees for crisis intervention projects,
including crisis response teams, mental health co-responders,
and 911 diversion projects.
Crisis intervention team programs create the connections
between law enforcement, mental health providers, hospital
emergency services, and individuals with mental illness and
their families. These models have something in common. They
bring all the different stakeholders together--mental health
providers, hospitals, law enforcement, people with mental
illness and their families, and we need to engage everyone.
If someone's illness has escalated to a point of crisis,
the system has already failed them. How we respond to that
crisis can be a turning point in someone's life. It can lead to
lifesaving treatment, but if we fail, unnecessary incarceration
or even more tragic, irreversible outcomes.
I am looking forward to hearing from our witnesses about
what we can do to expand access to the mental health crisis
services, different models around the country, how we can
encourage more communities to think about changing the way they
respond to mental health emergencies.
Now let me turn to the ranking member of the committee,
Congressman Cole, for any opening remarks that he may have.
Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
And I want to thank the chair for holding another important
hearing today.
The purview of this subcommittee is broad. However, it is
fair to say, historically, we have probably paid more attention
to physical health than we have to mental health. The past few
years, we have seen a notable realignment to focusing on a
wider range of issues in terms of mental health, particularly
mental well-being, problems with substance abuse, the
importance of social and emotional learning, and the value of
development from the earliest stages of life. I think this
broad perspective has permitted us to view the pandemic in a
way not possible with the flu pandemic of the early 1900s.
Now, as we are still battling the physical toll on our
communities and families, we are also addressing the other
impacts, such as the impact on mental health. This focus on the
whole person isn't just happening in schools and health
clinics. It is a trend also shaping how law enforcement
responds to calls for assistance.
The United States averages over 240 million calls to 911 a
year, a staggering 600,000 calls a day. These calls run the
gamut from extreme emergencies and life-threatening situations
to more mundane matters. Just under 700,000 police officers
stand ready to respond to these calls. These men and women must
be prepared to address the entire spectrum of calls for help
each day they go to work.
Now of the countless responsibilities of law enforcement,
today we are here to focus on their work with people
experiencing a mental health crisis. Three out of 100 people
will experience psychosis at some time in their lives. About
100,000 adolescents and young adults in the United States
experience----
The Chair. Excuse me for interrupting, Congressman Cole. I
have just been alerted that there is another issue with the
livestream, and I would like to have your comments be heard by
everyone. So if you don't mind pausing, we will pause for the
moment and recess until this is corrected.
Thank you.
Mr. Cole. Absolutely. Thank you, Madam Chair.
[Recess.]
Mr. Cole. Okay, Madam Chair, I am going to pick up where I
left off, if that is all right?
The Chair. Okay, that is fine. That is fine.
Mr. Cole. Okay, thank you very much.
Three out of 100 people experience psychosis at some time
in their lives. About 100,000 adolescents and young adults in
the United States experience their first episode of psychosis
each year. In addition to serious mental illness, approximately
50,000 people will commit suicide per year, not including
suicide attempts.
Individuals experiencing mental health issues present
unique challenges for law enforcement. Recognizing this need,
police have identified a need for training to de-escalate a
crisis involving someone experiencing a mental health issue.
Building on the training, several police departments have
established teams, responding units that pair law enforcement
with a behavioral health or other mental health professional to
assist in the response.
Today, we are here to learn about some of the models used
to address the interconnectedness of law enforcement and
someone experiencing a mental health crisis. As is so often the
case, States have been the pioneers, exploring different
options to address the situation. Several States have launched
co-responder models, which pair law enforcement with mental
health professionals to respond to some of the calls in
question.
Many of these programs are new. Program data on
scalability, effectiveness, and applicability to different
communities and situations is limited and will take time to
become more widely available and understood.
We also have the limitations in quality substance use
disorder treatment programs, and most areas experience a
shortage----
The Chair. Congressman Cole.
Mr. Cole. Yes, ma'am?
The Chair. I am going to interrupt you one more time
because we are experiencing the difficulty, and I do want to
have your comments heard.
Mr. Cole. You are more generous than some of my colleagues.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Cole. They might be happy to dispense with them.
[Recess.]
The Chair. I understand we are good to go here, and let me
just apologize to our witnesses and also to my colleagues for
your patience. But Congressman Cole, I just ask you to resume
and, again, my apologies.
Mr. Cole. Oh, Madam Chair, it is certainly not your fault.
Why don't we do this, Madam Chair? I will just submit my
statement for the record.
I know we need time for our witnesses and certainly time
for our members to ask questions. So I will forego the rest of
my statement, submit it for the record, and we can move
straight to the witnesses.
The Chair. Thank you. Thank you very, very much.
Let me introduce our witnesses. Dr. Charles Dike, Associate
Professor of Psychiatry at Yale University, and excited to have
you here, Dr. Dike, and speaking about the Connecticut
experience. And thank you for being with us.
Robert Gebbia, Chief Executive Officer, American Foundation
for Suicide Prevention.
Tonja Myles, certified peer support specialist.
Chris Richardson, Associate Director of Criminal Justice
Services at the Mental Health Center of Denver.
Chief Steven Casstevens, Third Vice President,
International Association of Chiefs of Police.
Our first witness is Dr. Charles Dike. Your full written
testimony will be included in the record, and you are now
recognized for 5 minutes for your opening statement.
Thank you, Dr. Dike.
Dr. Dike. Good morning, Chair DeLauro, Ranking Member Cole,
members of the subcommittee.
My name is Charles--Dr. Charles Dike. I am Associate
Professor of Psychiatry at Yale University School of Medicine,
and I am also medical director at Connecticut Department of
Mental Health and Addiction Services and chair of the Ethics
Committee of the American Psychiatric Association, the APA.
Thank you for this opportunity to testify on behalf of the APA
today.
I would like to begin by thanking you, Chair DeLauro and
Ranking Member Cole, as well as Representative Bustos and all
subcommittee members who supported creation of the 5 percent
set-aside for crisis services in the community mental health
services block grant beginning in fiscal year 2021.
As you know, mental health conditions and substance use
disorders do not discriminate based on age, sex, race,
political party, or where patients reside. As Congress, States,
our local governments work together to implement 988 by July
2022, it is essential that Congress supports community
infrastructure for responding to 988 calls, like EMS, police,
and fire response infrastructure that supports the 911.
As medical director of Connecticut DMHAS, I work to
coordinate delivery of quality evidence-based care at all
levels across our system. Communities in Connecticut and across
the country do their best to patch together various types and
levels of mental health response with insufficient resources.
This patchwork typically relies too much on emergency rooms and
police departments and can result in patients languishing in
emergency rooms, criminalization of persons with mental health
and substance use disorders, and at times, the unnecessary and
tragic loss of life.
Success in the future depends on strengthening and funding
the mental health infrastructure by choosing evidence-based
community crisis systems as essential community services
necessary for 988 implementation. The ideal system provides a
person in crisis someone to talk to, someone to respond, and a
place to go.
Crisis call centers provide someone to talk to and should
be regional 24/7 clinically staffed hubs providing intervention
capabilities through telephone, text, and chat. Mobile crisis
teams provide someone to respond and should be available to
reach any person experiencing crisis throughout a defined
service area in his or her home, workplace, or any other
community-based location in a timely manner.
There are three basic types of mobile response. First,
where police are the primary responders. Second, where a mental
health professional accompanies police. And third, where
behavioral health mobile crisis teams respond with or without
police.
Crisis receiving and stabilization facilities provide
places to go to, to receive appropriate care. They provide
short-term, under 24 hours observation and crisis stabilization
services to all referrals in a home-like, nonhospital
environment. But longer-term services beyond 24 hours can
sometimes be necessary. The most effective system includes a
``no wrong door'' approach, where receiving facilities can
quickly take in individuals in crisis so they do not encumber
police resources or end up in jail or emergency rooms
unnecessarily.
Communities with a full continuum of crisis care services,
including partnership with CIT-trained police, see the best
results. For example, Maricopa County, Arizona's crisis line
resolves 90 percent of its 20,000 monthly calls by phone
without law enforcement involvement.
In my home State of Connecticut, 116 law enforcement
agencies, including police departments and others, have CIT-
trained officers, and 43 police departments have established a
CIT policy. But we have much more to do in our State and across
the country. We are grateful for your attention to mental
health matters.
Thank you very much for the opportunity to testify.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chair. Thank you so much. And thank you for coming in
under the 5 minutes. That is helpful.
Our next witness is Robert Gebbia. Your full testimony will
be included in the record. You are now recognized for 5 minutes
for your opening statement.
Mr. Gebbia. Thank you, Chairman DeLauro and Ranking Member
Cole, members of the committee, for this opportunity to testify
today on behalf of this important topic of crisis response.
I am here today on behalf of millions of Americans who have
lost loved ones to suicide, the 1 in 4 Americans who have a
diagnosable mental health condition every year, 10 million
Americans living with serious thoughts of suicide, and more
than 1 million who attempt suicide annually.
Suicide is a leading cause of death in our country, but
with investments in prevention and access to treatment, many
suicides can be prevented. Yet only half of Americans with a
mental health condition, such as depression, anxiety, substance
use, and other risk factors for suicide are receiving care.
This leads to the question, how can we ensure that people in
crisis are connected to care?
I am here to speak about a crisis response system that is
better able to mitigate suicidal and mental health crises.
While we recognize great strides have been made by the country
and by Congress to support mental health needs of the Nation,
more needs to be done in how we address people in emotional
distress.
As a result of the landmark hotline designation, that 988
will be live nationwide by July of 2022. This offers a unique
opportunity to rethink and reimagine mental health crisis
response. It is an opportunity we must not ignore.
SAMHSA has recognized that crisis call centers and
hotlines, mobile crisis intervention teams, and stabilization
services are at the core of an effective crisis response
system. This describes the system we must invest in creating
for all Americans. What might that look like?
Well, first, 988 will connect callers to the National
Suicide Prevention Lifeline, which consists of a network of
over 180 local and State-funded crisis centers across the U.S.
Counselors at these centers answer millions of calls and chats
from people in distress coming through the lifeline every year.
So, first, we recognize the lifeline is a key component of
crisis response, and it will need increased funding to meet the
anticipated increase in call volume when 988 is promoted and
available nationwide.
Second, local crisis center infrastructure must be
strengthened or calls will go unanswered, wait times will
increase, and people won't receive the help they need. Local
centers must be adequately staffed, and training needs to be
provided so that we have quality culturally competent care
everywhere.
It is important to point out that of the millions of calls
to the lifeline each year, 98 percent of the crises are
successfully de-escalated over the phone, which brings me to my
third point. What happens when additional intervention and
support is necessary and a crisis must be responded to in
person, whether through 988 or 911?
Well, too many communities do not have the capacity to
respond. Too often law enforcement personnel are the only ones
available and aren't trained to respond to these types of
emergencies. Members of law enforcement do not serve as
treatment providers for any other illness, and yet they are the
de facto responders for mental health crises, with 21 percent
of law enforcement staff time and 10 percent of law enforcement
budget spent on responding to and transporting persons with
mental illness.
And what does that lead to? Individuals in distress or who
are suicidal often wait in emergency rooms or jails sometimes
for hours or days without any mental healthcare. And when
released, they also lose contact with the healthcare system and
resurface again during the next crisis. Other individuals are
admitted to psychiatric hospitals, often multiple times, for
expensive care they may not need.
Fortunately, there are models in Oregon and elsewhere that
are providing mobile crisis interventions with mental health
personnel that rarely require police involvement. We must
invest in a comprehensive crisis response system that includes
a continuum of care that can send mobile crisis outreach when
needed, provide follow-up for callers, divert from current
efforts that do not ensure safety, or treat underlying mental
health conditions or suicidality.
A report from the National Association of State Mental
Health Directors and SAMHSA found that by enhancing crisis
response, lives can be saved with the services that reduce
suicide and opioid-related deaths and divert individuals from
incarceration or unnecessary hospitalization and accurately
assess, stabilize, and refer individuals with mental health
challenges.
Soon the committee will receive a report from SAMHSA and
the Veterans Health Administration detailing the funding needed
to make 988 and crisis response more effective. We urge you to
make the financial investments they recommend and to use the
launch of 988 as an opportunity to reimagine crisis response.
It will save lives.
Thank you.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chair. Thank you.
And our next witness is Tonja Myles. And Ms. Myles, your
full written testimony will be included in the record, and you
are recognized for 5 minutes for your opening statement.
Ms. Myles. Good morning, Chairman DeLauro, Ranking Member
Cole, and members of the committee.
I am Tonja Myles, peer support specialist, veteran,
ordained minister, mental health and substance abuse
consultant, wife, and community liaison for RI International,
Bridge Center for Hope, Baton Rouge, Louisiana.
RI International is a nonprofit mental health practice
provider based in Arizona with 9--in 9 States, including Baton
Rouge. We are one of the primary authors of the Crisis Now
model, the National Guidelines for Behavioral Health Best
Practice Toolkit by SAMHSA, and active in the work to implement
988 and the required crisis continuum of care across the
Nation.
I have been in recovery for over 35 years and was properly
diagnosed with PTSD 5 years ago. I am a three-time suicide
attempt survivor. For over 28 years, I have been blessed to
wake up every day on a mission to push hope for those who
suffer from addiction, mental illness, individuals incarcerated
and formerly incarcerated.
I also work with individuals and their families who find
themselves in crisis for a number of reasons. I help them
navigate the behavioral health system to ensure that they
receive the best quality of treatment and available resources.
I am a dedicated advocate for appropriate and effective
mental health and crisis care for communities of color, to
ensure that health systems and policymakers put in place better
systems, which will eliminate disparities in access to adequate
treatment and services. Throughout my career and calling, I
have worked with some of the best organizations nationally and
locally, such as Louisiana Office of Behavioral Health, NAMI
Louisiana, Office of Mayor-President Sharon Weston Broome,
Mental Health Advisory Council, and Equal Justice USA, just to
name a few.
In my hometown of Baton Rouge, I work with law enforcement
as a part of their CIT training, a first responder model of
police-based crisis intervention training. I share lived
experience so that they can see mental illness does not
discriminate, and it can happen to anyone.
I am the primary caregiver to my uncle, who is 76 years
old. He has schizophrenia, bipolar, and HIV. He lives in a
group home, and he has been in group homes for over 50 years.
Since there is no continuum of care available for the elderly
with serious mental illness, in 2019 I had to have a PEC 10
times. Each time involved 911 and law enforcement.
Five years ago, I became the crisis. During a challenging
time in my marriage of 27 years, my husband and I separated,
and I felt like a failure. I felt hopeless, alone, and felt
like my life was over. I felt so ashamed because my husband and
I are leaders in the community, and people seemed to look at us
and think that we have a picture-perfect life.
One dark night, I wrote a four-page letter saying good-bye
to my family and friends. I wanted them to know that this was
my decision, and I was tired. I was tired of fighting for
others while I was the one who was wounded from all the past
trauma, years of trauma.
I took my pills, got in my car to find a place where I
could die in peace, easily be found, and be laid quickly to
rest. I called my cousin to let him know--to let my family know
that they had nothing to do with this. This was all my doing
because I spent most of my life living to die.
I hung up the phone, and 5 minutes later, the phone began
to ring off the hook. Before I got ready to turn it off, a
friend of mine called. I decided to pick up the phone, and my
mind became a little clearer. She asked me to come to her
house, and I told her I didn't, but I would go back to the
house that I was staying and get some clothes and come over. I
asked her not to call the police.
As I turned the corner, I saw the police in the street,
along with my nephew, Trei, who spotted my car, so I couldn't
turn around and flee the scene. I knew I could talk my way out
of this. I could drop some names because I had walked so many
families through this process.
When I got out of my car, I began to address the officer.
He was nice and professional, and the dialogue was well. I even
asked him if he was CIT trained, and he said yes.
Then I began to name drop and told him I was just having a
bad day. He said, ``Look, Tonja, I need to make sure you are
okay.'' Then his supervisor came. When he came on the scene, he
began to get rude and treated me with disrespect.
For some reason, he treated me like a criminal and not
someone with a crisis. For a brief moment, I felt myself
getting angry, and I said, you know what, I could provoke him
now. And what a way to die today, death by suicide, death by
suicide with a cop.
I looked over to see my nephew standing there, and I didn't
want to see--him see me being shot down in the street. The
other police officer got my attention. He seen I was
struggling, and he de-escalated it. I was able to go to the
hospital, where I stayed for 7 days.
I can proudly say I haven't had a suicide attempt for the
last 5 years. That is because I am going to treatment. My
family knows where I am when it comes to my mental health
crisis, and I have a continuum of care.
There is a lot of people like me who don't have that, and
we have to change that. And I believe we can. We have to make a
difference so we can change lives.
Thank you.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chair. Thank you so much, Tonja, for your powerful
testimony this morning.
Our next witness is Chris Richardson. And again, your full
testimony will be included in the record, and you are
recognized now for 5 minutes for your opening statement.
Mr. Richardson. Thank you, Chairwoman DeLauro. It is a true
honor and privilege to be here with you today.
My name is Chris Richardson, and I currently serve as the
Associate Director of Criminal Justice Services at the Mental
Health Center of Denver, a nonprofit community mental health
provider known nationally as a model of innovative care. We
proudly serve the City and County of Denver and support the
communities in their wellness and recovery.
In my role, I oversee multiple programs that focus on the
intersection of mental health and criminal justice. Today, I
would like to talk with you about one of our programs at the
forefront of innovation in mental health crisis response. STAR,
or Support Team Assisted Response, serves as an alternative to
low-risk, low-acuity 911 calls, many of which are related to
substance use and mental health concerns.
Launched June 1, 2020, the STAR pilot is a partnership
between the Mental Health Center of Denver, Denver Health--one
of Colorado's premier healthcare institutions--Denver Police
Department, Denver Department of Public Health and Environment,
as well as community stakeholders like Servicio De Laraza, Harm
Reduction Action Center, Denver Justice Project, DASHR, and
Caring4Denver.
The intent of STAR is to send the right response, not a
``one size fits all'' response, to people in crisis. People
call 911 for an array of reasons, and it is not always
something that presents with a legal nexus. Previously, 911
calls were handled by police, fire, emergency medical response
services. Denver took steps to look at how to best meet the
needs of the community and added the STAR program to the
emergency response system.
Here is how it works. Dressed in street clothes, we provide
direct clinical de-escalation, community service connections,
as well as on-demand resources such as water, food, clothing,
and basic living supports. Our team helps the emergency
response system handle the overwhelming number of 911 calls
that don't require a police response.
When STAR pulls up, the individual can be assured that the
interaction is grounded in a harm reduction, trauma-informed
philosophy with people able to creatively meet whatever need
they are presenting to maximize long-term support. If the STAR
program can handle someone in crisis that frees up police to
handle a robbery or domestic violence call, then that is an
incredible success. We are seeing true results, a paradigm
shift in results.
Over the past 11 months, STAR has successfully responded to
1,323 calls. Of those, there has not been a single arrest, no
injury, and no need for police back-up. I want to repeat that.
Not a single one of these calls resulted in the need for police
response.
The STAR team has the knowledge of social programs and
resources to more easily help people in crisis and connect them
to care. While not all calls have a diagnosable mental health
condition, many individuals identify as experiencing symptoms
of schizophrenia, bipolar, anxiety, and major depression that
benefit from clinical intervention and community resourcing to
best meet their immediate needs.
STAR works in cooperation and coordination with Denver
Police and other first responders. Like any collaboration, if
we need the police on the scene, we trust they will be there to
support our efforts and the safety of the community, much like
we would be supporting them should they require STAR
assistance. They keep an eye out for us, and we rely on one
another's expertise to serve the community.
In closing, I would like to share a call that we ran last
week to demonstrate the need for growth of these programs and
how through coordination, collaboration, and trust, we can
better meet and support community needs.
My colleague Carleigh Sailon responded to a STAR call at
the request of Denver Police to a 7-Eleven store where a woman
was experiencing mental health symptoms and actively refusing
to leave the establishment. 7-Eleven asked that she be
classified as a trespasser, but the Denver Police Department
recognized that this was a mental health situation and not
criminal in nature.
STAR was requested on scene and was quickly able to build
rapport with this woman. After a short time, she agreed to
leave the store and asked to be transported to the local
women's day shelter that frequently partners with STAR. During
the transport, the woman asked for assistance activating her
benefit card. The STAR team provided brief case management and
activated the card so she could purchase food and other basic
need items, which turned out to be the root cause of her issues
with the 911 interaction.
The woman was connected to the day shelter where she could
rest, shower, and do her laundry, and services were set up with
housing support established prior to us leaving. Additionally,
case managers were tagged in and followed up with her the next
morning, bringing her into mental health treatment to build on
her recovery and support her in her goals moving forward.
Through creative thinking, Denver has taken the next step
in supporting the community. It has been an honor to share the
details of how we are using this innovation to move the meter
on mental health crisis response in Denver.
Thank you for your time.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chair. Thank you very, very much.
And now let me recognize our next witness, Chief Steven
Casstevens. Again, your full testimony is included in the
record, and you are now recognized for 5 minutes.
Thank you very much, Chief.
Chief Casstevens. Thank you. Chairwoman DeLauro, Ranking
Member Cole, members of the subcommittee, thanks for inviting
me here today, and I also applaud you for holding this hearing.
The police want to build a robust crisis response system,
and we know we can't do it alone. Sadly, the lack of mental
health treatment options or mental health centers has left
police officers as the de facto mental health providers in our
communities. We encounter mental health crisis on a daily
basis, and we know we are not always the best person to answer
these calls, but we are the first ones to get the call.
To better understand the issue, I want to share a brief
history behind how we got to where we are today. In 1960, the
United States was a country with a population of 151 million,
and it had over 600,000 treatment beds for those affected by
mental illness. Today, we have a population of over 330
million, and less than 60,000 beds available.
This drastic change in availability for mental health
treatment began in 1955 when a massive deinstitutionalization
movement began that transferred those with mental health
disorders out of institutions. The belief at the time was these
institutions were inhumane and that the new use of
antipsychotic drugs would be an effective alternative. However,
these good intentions contributed to the mental health crisis,
since many who were deinstitutionalized were left without
access to medication or rehabilitation services.
In the present day, the effects of deinstitutionalization
are still with us. In fact, the three largest mental health
facilities in the United States right now are Cook County Jail
in Chicago, L.A. County Jail, and Riker's Island Prison. And I
think we can all agree our jails are not where we should be
housing people suffering from mental health crisis.
Let me assure you that our organization supports change for
the mental health crisis in our country. The four most urgent
concerns that we have are as follows. Number 1 is the sheer
volume of the problem. Our attention to this issue should be
the top priority.
Number 2 is the stigma attached to mental health issues
continues to hold strong, with individuals having to struggle
with their illness and how others perceive them.
Number 3, the individuals in crisis that our officers come
in contact with are often suffering from mental illness and, at
the same time, substance use disorder. Sorting out these
overlapping problems and providing smart, cost-effective, and
accessible solutions to address them presents an even bigger
problem. When those individuals experiencing mental health
crises do seek the help they need, the services in our country
is not in any way sufficient to meet these needs.
And we know from our officers on the street that mental
health program availability for individuals they encounter is
often either not available, or the waiting period to access
these programs is so long that it renders the service useless.
We must continue to call for and support improvements in these
overarching problem areas as much as we demand and expect
innovative responses from our officers at first contact.
Legislative and funding support is absolutely essential to
the success of local efforts to build safer communities.
Communities must have adequate resources 24/7 for crisis
response, treatment, housing, and other services. While there
have been calls to shift responsibilities away from the police,
sometimes even removing police from the calls, there must be
systems in place that allow this to happen in a safe,
productive way if that is the solution that is deemed best.
Currently, we play a critical role in responding to mental
health crisis but need appropriate training to enhance crisis
response and decision-making about persons experiencing crisis.
We also need funding assistance and support in establishing the
successful co-responder models of police and mental health
professionals. I ask that support come from the subcommittee in
the form of funding for training, equipment grants, or
innovative approaches to help encourage collaborative
partnerships, crisis service, and mental health courts.
Finally, I would like to take a brief minute to talk about
one of the approaches that the International Association of
Chiefs of Police has taken to help aid officers with encounters
with individuals experiencing crises.
The One Mind campaign, started several years ago, focuses
on uniting local communities, public safety organizations, and
mental health organizations, so that the three become of one
mind. To join the campaign, law enforcement agencies pledge to
do the following--establish a defined and sustainable
relationship with a mental health organization, establish a
written policy, train and certify 100 percent of their sworn
officers in mental health awareness in either an 8-hour Mental
Health First Aid or a 40-hour CIT training.
On behalf of the IACP, I thank you again for the
opportunity to discuss this critical problem, and I appreciate
your time, and I am available for any questions.
Thank you so much.
[The information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chair. Thank you very, very much. And thanks to all of
our witnesses, our presenters today. I think my colleagues and
I would concur that it is really another one of the hearings
that we have had where there is such a consistency of message,
if you will, of identifying the problem and also being very,
very helpful to us and helping to identify solutions and how we
might proceed.
Let me, two questions. I hope I can get to the two
questions. This one I am going to ask Dr. Dike, but anyone else
can jump in.
We know that mental illness and homelessness are a very
intertwined problem. So a person with mental illness who is
also homeless is more likely to have an encounter with the
police and the courts than a person with mental illness who has
stable housing. And often, it is the police who are called to
address the problem, and it is actually a social service and
medical issue for which there may have been limited training.
My question is how do we better reach people who are
homeless with mental health services? How can we make treatment
more widely accessible so we work to break the cycle? And does
a person experiencing a mental health crisis have a better
chance of being linked to housing and other supportive services
if an entity other than law enforcement is the initial
responder? Dr. Dike.
Dr. Dike. Thank you very much, Chair DeLauro.
Let me start my response by bringing in the example of a
program we have in New Haven which is called the Street
Psychiatric services. It is run between Yale School of Medicine
and the Connecticut DMHAS. It has a psychiatrist, a social
worker, a program coordinator, a vocational specialist, a peer
support specialist.
And basically, what this program does is that these
individuals spend a whole day going to where homeless people
congregate, encampments, in the parks, New Haven Green. And
this is not the individuals who would like to come to the
hospital or go to a clinic, and therefore, you have to meet
them where they are. And these individuals--by virtue of the
fact that they also have a prescriber present, engages them as
they see them on the street--are those who need immediate
substance use treatment, maybe Suboxone. They are prescribed on
the spot.
Those who need other medications are prescribed. If the
assessment indicates that somebody needs to go into a hospital
or into a crisis respite center, which they have in New Haven,
they will do the same exact. So this has been an extremely
effective program that only started in 2019, and I think that
the idea of homelessness and obviously all what you said is
correct, that individuals who are both mentally ill and
homeless have a worse outcome than those who are mentally ill
and have housing.
So housing is extremely important. What leads to
homelessness in the first place are things that is all put
together under the social determinants of health, which we
really need to address as much as possible.
In our State, another--some of our mobile crisis teams
actually do the same thing across the State, where they do
rounds. They go to soup kitchens. They go to encampment areas
to see individuals who might be demonstrating signs of mental
illness.
The idea behind both the Street Psychiatry service and the
mobile crisis teams that go out is that we found this
intervention, the first time people might come in contact with
them would be in a moment of crisis when the police is called,
and all kinds of things can happen in that situation. But with
these individuals going to intervene right before this time
happens, they are able to avert crisis, able to connect
individuals to the services and resources they need, whether it
is with the peer support specialists who provide counseling and
coaching to the individuals who are suffering from mental
illness.
So this, I think enhancing the mobile crisis teams such
that they can do this activity as well would be wonderful and
helpful. That would be how I would like to approach it,
certainly what Connecticut is doing to manage the homeless
population in at least New Haven and New London area.
The Chair. Thank you. Thank you. I will wait, but my second
question is about bringing programs up to scale.
Does anyone else have a comment about the issue on mental
illness and homelessness?
Ms. Myles. Yes, ma'am. Yes, ma'am, I do. And thank you so
much for this question.
Here in Baton Rouge, we do, we have a crisis response team
that we work with that go out in the communities. And the cool
thing about it is, is that we collaborate with our city parish,
with law enforcement. So we know where those spots are. We know
where most of the homeless population is, and we go out, and we
also offer harm reduction because we are seeing that opioids
and mental health are, you know, hand-in-hand.
And so we are able to take those crisis mobile teams, and
not only them, but other organizations as well, get the help
that they need, refer them to treatment. But we have to work on
housing because housing is a challenge all over the country.
The Chair. Okay. Thank you very, very much.
And now I would like to yield to the ranking member,
Congressman Cole.
Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
First, to all of you, thank you for your testimony. Just
superb testimony, as the chairwoman said, across the board, and
we are always struck when we see experts from different
perspectives providing similar answers and pointing to similar
problems. So it is very, very helpful.
And Ms. Myles, I would be remiss not to just thank you for
the very personal nature of your testimony. It is a lot that
you would come and share this with us. It is very helpful to
the committee. So, thank you.
Let me start, if I may, Chief Casstevens, with you.
Probably when I talk to my police chiefs that I am privileged
to represent, I always ask them what is your top problem? They
say mental health every single time, the challenges of dealing
with it.
So from your perspective as a law enforcement professional,
we are picking let us just say three things to really make a
difference for the average police department in America, if
there is such a thing as an average police department. They
obviously vary in size and sophistication.
But if there were three programs from a law enforcement
standpoint that you could say, hey, these would really help my
officers when we are called into situations, and this would be
something that would reduce the strain on the departments, made
a successful outcome more likely, what would those things be?
Chief Casstevens. Well, that is a great question. I thank
you for that because that is something that I have pondered and
my colleagues have pondered quite often as we see the
unprecedented increase in mental health-related calls for
service over the past 5 to 10 years that, as I said, law
enforcement, we are the ones out on the streets 24/7. So we are
the true first responders, and we struggle with this.
We trained our officers in Mental Health First Aid. We
trained our officers in crisis intervention. Not as many across
as I would like to see. We need funding to get some of the
smaller and medium-sized departments trained because they don't
have that kind of funding.
But the various co-responder models that I have heard, and
I have heard people talk about, I think that is one of the
things that is going to be very successful. Because law
enforcement should not be in the business of criminalizing
mental health issues. I feel horrible about it anytime that we
have to take somebody who is experiencing a significant crisis,
and we have to take them into custody because we have no other
option. There is nowhere else to go.
And when we take them to a local hospital or facility to be
evaluated, it is a catch-and-release program in the Chicago
suburban area. So they are right back, and we have to deal with
them again and again and again. So we need better services, and
we need a good co-responder model.
I would have never thought, as a police chief, that I would
be hiring a police social worker, but I did 3 years ago. And it
is the greatest thing that I have done for my officers, that
she assists them with a lot of these calls for service. But
that is not cheap, and I wish I could have two more. But I
don't have the budget funding. I am down five officers right
now. I would love to hire more police social workers. So that
would be the second thing.
And when it comes to homelessness, when you talk around the
Chicago suburbs, unlike maybe Denver or some other areas that
have successful programs, we have no place--same as mental
health, we have no place to go. There just aren't facilities,
enough facilities in the suburbs of Chicago to take people that
we encounter that are homeless, and we feel very frustrated
because we have run out of options.
So better training and funding for mental health services,
co-responder model, and more options and facilities to help
people with housing that are homeless. There is my answer, sir.
Mr. Cole. Well, that is a great answer, and very, very
precise and helpful. Thank you.
Mr. Richardson, let me turn to you very quickly in the time
I have left because you sort of dealt with this from the other
side of the equation. And I must say I do worry sometimes about
potentially sending mental health professionals into dangerous
situations, and I really do feel that quite often they do need
an officer with them. Although we need their skill set, maybe
the officer is there primarily for protection, not for
intervention. This isn't his line of work.
Just quickly tell me your experience in working with police
departments. What are the things that work well, any things
that are problem areas for you? And I am sorry I didn't leave
you a lot of time, but whatever insights you could give us I
would appreciate it.
Mr. Richardson. No, I really appreciate the time. I think
Denver has a very wide range of response. We have our co-
responder unit that started in 2016 that really developed
relationships with officers and how do we help people in mental
health distress.
And that allowed STAR to kind of take off with limited,
very little hurdles, where we were able to respond to people
without having an officer present. But having both systems
available is highly important.
I think the biggest thing that I like to talk about when it
comes to like sending us based on 911 calls is the recognition
that a lot of social workers have been doing this for years.
This is our population we work with. This is the community we
go into on a regular basis, and these are individuals that I
know by first name. They just happen to come by a different
avenue, which is 911, and that still allows me to go and
perform the stuff I have been doing throughout my entire career
to be able to help someone in crisis, just in a different
routing capacity.
Mr. Cole. Well, thank you very much.
My time has expired, Madam Chair. But again, thank you for
this panel. It is an excellent panel. And I yield back.
The Chair. Congresswoman Lee.
Ms. Lee of California. Thank you very much, Madam Chair,
and thank you to our members who suggested this hearing. And
thank you to all our witnesses.
Just on a personal level, I have a mental health
background. I am an MSW, clinical social worker by profession,
and so this is extremely important just personally for me as a
professional therapist. And I wanted to ask you a couple of
questions about this as it relates to African-American men
specifically.
I have family members in their 60s and 70s. They won't go
out walking after 5:00 p.m. without me. If they go in a grocery
store, even just to buy a banana--and this is--these are
personal experiences that are constant with myself--they take a
shopping cart and push it because they are concerned they would
be arrested for stealing something, and then they would have an
encounter with the police.
And I can tell story after story after story that are
constantly in my life with black men, as well as I am sure
other members on this committee.
Now let me ask you a couple of things. First of all, the
trauma that is associated with being a black man as it relates
to police encounters is real, and so I am wondering--and if men
in their 60s and 70s who I know personally are constantly
fearful of this, there is deep-seated trauma. So what type of
police training is there to address this type of trauma when we
know what happens in police encounters when unarmed black men
are killed, and it could be some traumatic event that takes
place because of the history of racism in this country. And so
I am wondering if you all are considering or do you do trauma-
informed training for police officers as it relates to African-
American men?
And then I want to know what type of mental health services
are available for individuals who constantly are burdened with
this trauma and tend to have actually physical conditions
sometimes evolve as a result of the trauma of mental health
related to police encounters and the fear of the police?
Who would be able to answer that? Mr. Richardson maybe?
Anyone who could answer that, I would like to hear your
response.
Ms. Myles. Yes. Yes, I can help answer that. I have been
working with an organization, Capital Area Human Services, who
is doing most of the CIT training here in Baton Rouge,
Louisiana, for many years. And so they are definitely trauma-
informed when it comes to community of color, knowing that the
history of trauma between African Americans and police and how
real that is.
And so part of that CIT training talks about that, and it
deals with that and talk about ways to de-escalate. And so I
seen it work not just only with myself, but I have seen it work
when I have had to be with a family member. And depending on
what area code they live in, you know, the signal was
different, and that is the truth.
And so are we doing a great job? Yes, we are. But we have
got to even do better, and we have to let people realize that
trauma is real. That that has been some systemic racism and
trauma that has been in place for years, what, since the 1960s.
We were on a call about that, about 911 and crisis and how that
affected community of color.
So we are making in-roads. I think all CIT training, that
needs to be addressed, and we will see a big difference.
And again, I am excited about 988 because it is easier for
a family member of color when they can call 988 instead of
911----
Ms. Lee of California. Yes.
Ms. Myles [continuing]. Because they know firsthand they
are going to get that law enforcement agency.
Ms. Lee of California. Yes. I have had to call that, yes.
Ms. Myles. And there is going to be a challenge there.
Exactly. And so----
Ms. Lee of California. Mr. Richardson, before my time is
up, can you talk about what you know as it relates to the
services in Denver and from the criminal justice perspective
internally?
Mr. Richardson. Yes, I think we are being able to identify
how do we come at stuff from a clinical lens? How do we make
sure that we are supporting individuals through that trauma-
informed perspective, specifically related to both co-responder
and our STAR program?
And then, through the Mental Health Center of Denver is the
treatment background of allowing individuals to have a place
where race trauma, race PTSD has a place that could be
addressed and identified, and really I think what the previous
presenter kind of referenced is we need to not make this
something we don't talk about, but it should be something that
we are acknowledging and recognizing and continue to support
the community in the stressors that come related to that.
Ms. Lee of California. Okay. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Madam Chair, and I would like to talk with you
offline after this a bit more. Thank you.
The Chair. Thank you. Yes, Congressman Harris.
Mr. Harris. Thanks very much, Madam Chair, for a very
important and very timely topic.
I want to reiterate what the ranking member said and
congratulate Ms. Myles for being here and testifying,
especially being a peer support specialist because when I have
dealt with recovering--people who are in recovery, it is so
important to have peer support like you.
Dr. Dike, thank you for coming and testifying. I do just
want to point out one thing in your testimony where you
referenced the American Journal of Preventive Medicine article
from 2016, and you imply that fatal encounters with law
enforcement are disproportionately high among blacks. That only
is if you refer to population, not to actually the incidence of
nonfatal violent crime occurring in the United States.
Actually, if you use that as reference, white deaths by
fatal encounter with law enforcement is actually
disproportionately higher probably due to suicide by cop, which
is disproportionately high among white men. So that is an issue
that we are going to deal with.
But I do want to talk about--and Chief, thank you very much
for testifying. Your testimony, the most important point of
your testimony is, as a physician, I know, having worked in an
emergency room, frequently come in contact with my emergency
medicine colleagues, there is a desperate need for acute
psychiatric care, and our emergency rooms are not cutting it
with that. They just don't. The fact of the matter is acute
psychiatric care is incredibly important.
So I want to ask Mr. Gebbia, and thank you for the work you
do. We know that because of the COVID lockdowns, for instance,
suicide is an increasingly prevalent issue, needs to be dealt
with. The topic of this is a crisis response system, but I will
tell you that in the Navy, we had a saying that the Navy went
from crisis to crisis uninterrupted by plans.
The fact of the matter is the way to deal with a crisis is
try to prevent it in the first place, and I am afraid that
until we deal with the critical lack of acute psychiatric care
and the ability, for instance, to deliver it because we know in
the statistics people with depression are both prone to suicide
and prone to police encounters. That until we make, for
instance, the more widespread treatment, the new treatments for
depression, very exciting. Esketamine just being labeled, the
NMDA modulators, the G-protein-coupled receptor modulators. We
have some specifics there, but we have to get them to people.
So, Mr. Richardson, could you specifically address how you
think we can--not treating the crisis, but what do we need to
do to avoid these crises from happening?
Mr. Gebbia. Yes, sir. I think that was a question to me,
and I think we would agree completely--Mr. Gebbia. I think we
would completely agree----
Mr. Harris. Yes, I am sorry. Mr. Gebbia, yeah.
Mr. Gebbia [continuing]. More upstream prevention so that
you don't have downstream crisis and people spiraling out and
then needing to have a crisis response.
I think there are two things. One, we have to ensure that
mental health parity allows people to access treatment that
they can afford. So many people who have ongoing mental health
conditions don't have access to treatment, can't find a
provider. There is workforce shortages. Insurances are not
accepted.
And we need to have better access to affordable mental
healthcare. That is one. And certainly tele-mental health is a
big step in the right direction, especially for places where
there isn't a lot of mental health providers.
I would also say education. Family education, working
through our schools to educate about what to do when you see
someone appear who is struggling. How to really educate the
public about mental health in a way that people feel less
stigmatized and are more likely to seek treatment.
I think these things, let us remember, so many people who
are in crisis are not in treatment. So if we can get people
identified, early intervention, they will then not be in a
crisis state later downstream.
So I would agree completely with your suggestion about
upstream prevention and have to invest in that. That is going
to cost some money, as you know.
Mr. Harris. Do you agree with the chief that, in fact, we
are very under-bedded in acute psychiatric treatment in the
country, and that is something we need to deal with?
Mr. Gebbia. Certainly, that is a part of it for people who
need hospitalization, absolutely. And sometimes the short
timeframe they are in is not enough time. They are not stable
enough to be back out in the community, and yet they are
released.
I do think that is a part of the picture, but I also think
there are alternatives. And I think the stabilization centers
and short-term treatment places, that could really help reduce
the cost. Because hospitalization is very expensive, and often,
there is a mismatch. The people who need it are not getting the
hospitalization, and people who don't need it are going because
there is nothing else an emergency department can do.
So I think we have to be better at identifying who needs to
go into a hospital and who we can treat in other ways.
Mr. Harris. Thank you. And Madam Chair, I yield back, and
thank you for the timely topic.
The Chair. I thank Congressman Harris, and I would just
also say for a second that it would seem to me that Medicaid is
one of the biggest sources of being able to pay for this
treatment. It is for opioid use and for mental healthcare. And
so it becomes an important source, I think, for coverage and
funding for behavioral health services. So I think we need to
think about that expansion as well.
And with that, Congressman Pocan.
Mr. Pocan. Great. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Thanks to all the witnesses. This is a great bipartisan
hearing. A lot of important issues are coming up, but
especially I want to say to the chief, thank you for using the
word ``criminalizing'' mental health issues. I spent a number
of years in the State legislature. I was the ranking Democrat
on the committee that oversaw our prison system. Scott Walker
was the chair before he became governor when we were both in
the legislature.
And it always shocked me that we had about 30 percent of
the population in a Wisconsin prison back then that was there
for mental health-related issues. And to me, that is inhumane
to be doing that. It is expensive to be doing that.
If we had 30 percent of the population in prison for
cancer, there would be outrage. And yet when it comes to mental
illness, there is nothing.
Ms. Myles, thank you very much for sharing your very
personal story. Very much appreciate that.
Mr. Richardson, my question for you, one of my main
counties has tried to do something that you are doing right now
in Denver. They are getting closer to that. Just can you talk a
little more about the amount of training that your folks have?
Like you said, your--many folks have dealt with this
population for a very long time, but what kind of training do
they have? What kind of--who provides the training? Can you
just talk a little bit more about the program itself?
Mr. Richardson. Yes. So we actually--all of our individuals
that are on our co-responder and our STAR-based programs are
licensed clinicians. They have 2 years of field-specific work,
including higher-level education related to trauma-informed
care, harm reduction, clinical services, diagnostic criteria.
And then the Mental Health Center of Denver provides
additional training that is specific to populations, whether
that is age related, youth related, individuals with specific
diagnoses, de-escalation specific training. And then the bonus
about being partnered with the city entities and kind of
collaboration across the area is being able to have
experiential learning through other community providers that
say we are really good at delivering this service to this
population. Come and get education, what that looks like.
And I think that is what breaks down the barriers and silos
that actually helps develop relationships to help serve the
population in general, but also gives us more intricate
training throughout the communities in Denver.
Mr. Pocan. When you look at the programs that we have at
the Federal level, how could we prioritize in our upcoming
funding bills so that States and localities can do what you are
doing? Do you have any specific recommendations in this area?
Mr. Richardson. Honestly, I think the funding is the hugest
part of a lot of these barriers. There is a lot of communities
that are trying to set stuff like this up. Their biggest worry,
year to year, is this going to get funded past this year? And
that should never be a concern with these programs. It should
be how do we do good work in the communities? With funding
being something that is just an assumed that it is going to be
there because these programs do need to exist and do need to
work collaboratively with the system.
Mr. Pocan. Yes, I mean, just when you look at the cost of
incarceration, back then I don't know even know what the figure
is now. I should know. It was close to $30,000 a year. And you
have got that many people incarcerated, that alone would give
you an amazing budget to be able to do far more what we could
get done.
A question for Mr. Gebbia, if I could, specifically on LGBT
youth. The Trevor Project has published a study showing that
LGBT youth are four times more likely to commit suicide or
attempt suicide than their peers, and yet they have lower rates
and access to mental healthcare. Can you just talk a little bit
about that population, please?
Mr. Gebbia. Yes, absolutely. And we work closely with
Trevor Project. We know that need is great for LGBTQ youth in
particular. And one of the things in the new 988 system we
would certainly advocate for is to including some type of a
``press 1'', ``press 2'', you know, kind of an option for LGBTQ
youth who are in crisis so those calls immediately go to the
Trevor Project, which has the capacity and has the expertise to
de-escalate and work with LGBTQ youth in particular.
So that is an option. It is similar to what we have for
veterans, which we also support in the current system and will
be part of 988. So it is an area we need to give more attention
to.
We also need to have more providers who are culturally
competent to work with LGBTQ and especially trans youth because
of the fact that they are not comfortable sometimes with the
providers and their training to provide treatment to them.
Mr. Pocan. Yes, and with all the political rhetoric these
days, that certainly doesn't help. I know 50 of my 72 counties
in Wisconsin are I don't know if the right word is ``deserts,''
but mental health professional deserts in general, much less
really specifying populations.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I will yield back.
The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Fleischmann. Congressman
Fleischmann.
[No response.]
The Chair. When Congressman Fleischmann comes back, we will
recognize him. Congresswoman Herrera Beutler.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you
for this conversation. And I, too, want to say thank you to
Tonja for her willingness to share a very person story. It
makes a difference for us.
I wanted to bring up, let us see, I have a couple different
questions. I am co-chairing the Bipartisan Addiction and Mental
Health Task Force, which is the whole goal is to find
bipartisan solutions to our growing mental health and addiction
crisis. And one thing that continues to concern me obviously is
the same thing that we continue to hear is access to care.
Around 56 percent of the individuals with mental illness do
not receive that mental health treatment in my district, which
is located right on the border between two States. So I am
right near the Portland border and then on our right side to
Idaho. They can't access or impede access to care.
So our metro area is across the river. So specifically for
individuals who are on Medicaid, crossing State lines becomes a
real barrier with regard to mental health treatment. So for Mr.
Dike, could you please speak about the current barriers to
accessing care, and if you have seen the Medicaid piece hold
people back, I would love to hear about that and what it means
for people who are seeking treatment.
And then I have a follow-up.
Dr. Dike. Thank you very much.
In terms of barriers to care, I think there are so many
different things that come together in barriers, apart from the
lack of adequate workforce. So you know funding has got to pay
attention to the workforce so that we can have enough people in
all the different disciplines to provide the care that is
necessary.
We also need to increase access in different ways. Maybe
continuing the use of telehealth so that people can actually
see specialists from all over the country, all over the State,
regardless of where they are.
Then the whole issue about stigma. A lot of effort just to
go into drumming up the support for mental health services,
support for accessing care, trying to find out what communities
need, and collaborating with community agencies, which can be
even religious organizations, groups, meeting people where they
are so that you can engage them there.
We don't need to meet people in a hospital or in a clinic.
But in fact, our clinicians can spend some time in these
different locations. In Connecticut, we have IMANI Project,
which is a project that by some resident who is now faculty at
Yale, working with church groups in New Haven, especially black
churches.
And this is one of the questions about how do you engage
black people in mental healthcare that the other Congresswoman
had asked about. You can use this for any other group. It is
identifying where these people congregate, who they trust, how
to engage them in those areas so that you can actually provide
the services they need locally.
And the whole idea of this crisis response continuum is to
focus on other types of facilities that can provide short-term
care and engage people in resources that they need to maintain
their mental health.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. I appreciate that, and I love that it
is typically you are seeking partners in the community. I mean,
that is really how I wish all of our Federal programs would
work because I think that is the only effective way to really
make a difference.
Would you also, Mr. Dike, be willing to speak about
building crisis response teams and infrastructure to respond to
children's mental health needs? And I know I think it was Mr.
Pocan asked, I think he asked a little bit about this, and this
space about young people.
And I know, so data from CDC, kids mental health is
disastrous. And I know in my home State, a typical night at
Seattle Children's Hospital right now includes admitting one to
two children who have attempted to take their own lives. So I
was hoping to hear if you have any wisdom on specifically
talking about mental health teams for children?
Dr. Dike. Yes, and I can use Connecticut for you for an
example. We have also the crisis call lines, the 211 lines,
that anyone can call in. The schools, parents, concerned
individuals in the community. And once you call that number,
you are triaged based on age to mobile crisis teams that are
funded by Department of Children and Families.
And this mobile crisis team actually comes to you where you
are. If you already have providers, they will contact the
providers to get it, saying what is going on? But the idea is
that they can examine, you get the histories, and refer you to
some acute center where you can be held for 2 weeks for
treatment and so on.
Of course, if you need hospitalization because of emergency
situation, they can also refer you there. But this is robust,
very robust services for children that require that kind of
collaboration with our State.
Ms. Herrera Beutler. Thank you so much. Madam Chair, I
yield back.
The Chair. Thank you so much. Congresswoman Frankel.
Ms. Frankel. Thank you, Madam Chair. First off, just thank
you to all our speakers today, and I think obviously this calls
for, Madam Chair, increased appropriations for this training
linking mental health services with our law enforcement.
I have been texting back and forth with one of my police
chiefs during this meeting, and I asked him what his greatest
needs in handling the mentally ill and the homeless? And what
he said to me was we need more support services and social
services to assist in the field. We would love trained
professionals working with us in the field. He also said there
is a lack of institutions that provide effective treatment and
supportive housing.
So to our guests today, one of our colleagues today on a
caucus call talked about a bill she had to provide Medicaid to
people in prison so that they could get access to substance
abuse and mental health services. I would like to get your
comment on that.
And the other question I have is there are many law
enforcement services or agencies throughout the country. Some
are large, some are small. And your suggestion, how do the
smaller ones actually get the kinds of services that you are
mentioning?
Who wants to take the services in the prison question?
Anybody?
Mr. Gebbia. Yes, I would just add that we lose so many
people to suicide who are incarcerated, and you wonder how
could that happen? And there are so many best practices that
aren't used in prison settings, and those who are incarcerated
should be getting mental health treatment.
And how it is paid for, it should be the responsibility of
the institution, the prison system. If they have someone in
their custody and they need mental healthcare, it should be a
standard of care. That should be part of what goes into
accrediting their healthcare in prison systems.
I think there is not enough focus on those standards, and
we would urge that that is something that should be provided to
everyone who is in custody, free of charge. It should be part
of the cost of the prison system to be able to fund and take
care of their mental health needs.
Ms. Frankel. Let me get one more question before we end it.
I think one of the big concerns in this country right now has
been the mass shootings, and so many times it seems like it is
somebody with a mental health issue. So is there any way to be
screened for this kind of activity?
Nobody can answer that?
Chief Casstevens. Well, I will answer----
Dr. Dike. I think--okay, go ahead.
Chief Casstevens. I will just answer briefly from a law
enforcement perspective. It is disheartening to us when we
experience mass shootings, and when you really dig into the
background, nearly every time there is either family or friends
or neighbors who say, well, I was worried about this person or
he made some disturbing statements in the past. Or a variety of
things that should have raised a red flag.
But then this goes back to are the appropriate services
available? And again, the overall stigma of someone suffering
from mental health. If you break your leg and you have a cast
on it, everybody comes running to you to sign your cast. But if
you have a mental health problem, which is an injured brain
instead of an injured leg, everybody runs the other way. So
stigma is part of the issue.
Dr. Dike. If I may----
Ms. Frankel. Yes, go ahead, sir.
Dr. Dike. If I may, this is exactly why we are here today.
I think this tragic example of mass shootings is the reason why
communities need to implement crisis services and train police
officers on how to handle persons in mental health crisis. But
also I think it is very hard to understand without having the
training and having that collaboration between police officers
and mental health professionals to address people in crisis in
real time before--so that we can avert the unfortunate tragedy
that you just mentioned.
Ms. Frankel. Thank you. And just as I yield back, just
again I want to join my colleagues in thanking Ms. Myles for
sharing a very personal story.
Madam Chair, thank you, and I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Fleischmann.
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you, Madam Chair, for holding this
hearing. I think it is extremely important that we address this
as a nation and appreciate your doing this.
In my home State of Tennessee, the suicide rate increased
by 19 percent from 2014 to 2018 and remains 15 percent higher
than the national average. Investing in a robust crisis
response system will help connect at-risk individuals with
proper mental health resources by utilizing early intervention
and addressing their immediate needs before connecting them to
ongoing care.
My question, and I will open it up for any of the witnesses
who wish to answer, how can Congress strengthen the crisis
response infrastructure needed to successful serve our
constituents? What barriers do rural communities face in
connecting individuals with the appropriate mental health
responses and to ongoing care facilities, given the limited
resources in those areas?
Thank you.
Ms. Myles. I think what we are doing here in Louisiana, we
are really trying to be intentional about making sure we have
teams that can go out into those rural areas because they are
not coming to us for so many different reasons, particularly
transportation. So doing more outreach, identifying those
organizations that can go with us because we really need
everybody. Collaboration is key.
We can talk about the mental health treatment all day long,
which is paramount, but we have to talk about how do we
collaborate so people can get the needs that they--their needs
met, if that is transportation, if that is integrative care, if
that is housing, which is biggest issue.
So that is one of the things we are doing. We are doing a
lot of outreach. We are seeing good outcomes when we are able
to take those crisis mobile teams or just regular teams into
those rural areas and then connect them with the resources that
are nearby and making sure that they know how to refer and get
to those places. That is working for us really well.
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you so much. Would anyone else care
to comment?
Mr. Richardson. I think from Denver's standpoint, I think
the recognition is that there has to be innovation across
lines, arbitrary lines. Rural communities that don't have
infrastructure for mental health, the rural communities that
have understaffing or have the ability to hire people that can
respond to the crisis.
We live in a COVID world now that has technological
advances that we can actually start looking at creative
partnerships across the area to really provide services to
areas that may have a need for those responses, but we can do
it virtually or even be able to collaborate more creatively in
different areas.
Mr. Gebbia. I would just add I think that if we think about
crisis response as a part of the healthcare system, not as
something separate, but an integral part of the healthcare
system, it is a door into the healthcare system. But what
happens long term? I think often what happens, people in crisis
come into contact, and then they are out of the system again.
And so if we think about this idea of continuity of care, I
think that will have a long-term impact on bringing down the
rate of suicide because those individuals who are in crisis,
who are struggling, who have suicidal ideation, then will get
the ongoing help they need. It is not just about the crisis. It
is about what happens after the crisis that will be more
preventive from them spiraling again into crisis. So I do think
that whole idea of continuity of care is really important here
to get that suicide rate down.
Mr. Fleischmann. Thank you. Mr. Gebbia, in your written
testimony, you cited over 25 percent of the calls to State
lifeline network go unanswered. How will the implementation of
988 improve response rates and overcome staffing challenges,
sir?
Mr. Gebbia. Well, it won't unless we invest in the
infrastructure, especially in the local crisis centers, who
then link to the national lifeline and then have to answer
those calls. If they don't have more staffing, more training,
and then we don't fill the infrastructure, we are very
concerned that with the promotion of 988, which is wonderful,
the call volume will go up dramatically. Some estimates are
double and more than that.
But if we don't build the infrastructure to support that, I
am concerned that calls will go--more calls will go unanswered.
Wait times will go up. And once people have a bad experience,
they are not going to do it again. I think it is really
important we get this right, and that means investing in the
infrastructure of those local centers.
Mr. Fleischmann. I want to thank all the witnesses for
their testimony and their answers.
Madam Chair, I yield back. Thank you.
The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you to each of the witnesses for the information that
you have shared, the enlightenment that I have experienced that
you all are functioning under. And thank you very much, of
course, again, Ms. Myles, for sharing your personal story.
There are a lot of issues that we need to be dealing with
here, Madam Chair, and I hope that at some point, we will talk
to other people in this circle, particularly as it relates to
what happens with mental health illness when you are
incarcerated and what kind of services follow you out when you
are let out of these facilities.
I also wanted to talk to you all about youth, suicide among
African-American youth and other youth of color, and even the
challenges to the LGBTQ community and the trans community and
other communities, American indigenous communities. Just last
night, I am happy to say that my bill Pursuing Equity in Mental
Health Act passed the House, and that bill came out of a result
of an emergency task force that I want to look at the impact of
the suicide ideation, suicide aspiration, and suicide success
among minority--minority youth.
And what it shows us is that on that level and other
levels, there is a real challenge for cultural competence.
Providers, diversity of providers, at the schools, at the
centers, et cetera. And so I am very concerned that you all
have spoken to very successful, evidence-based programs. I
don't know to what extent you were thinking about youth, and
minority youth in particular, as you were talking. But I would
like to know what is it that we are doing, should be doing, and
need to support to include greater diversity among providers,
greater trusted voices among those that you interact with,
cultural competent training on those who would be answering 988
calls or any other calls, and cultural competency in places
like our police forces to actually understand, get the 40 hours
training or the whatever training. But in addition, cultural
competence training to recognize when one is in a mental health
crisis and when one is really a threat.
And so may I start with you, Dr. Dike? And then I really
would like to hear from you, Chief.
Dr. Dike. Thank you very much.
There is no doubt that systemic racism sometimes has played
a really negative role on the mental health impacts of young
black people, especially not just from the point of view of
lack of adequate workforce or adequate individuals with
cultural competency to attend to them, but even hesitancy to
accept care.
The fact that individuals might feel that they are not
treated with respect and dignity when they approach mental
healthcare institutions, the fact that my colleagues and our
colleagues in the healthcare systems have not been proactive in
reducing the concerns and anxieties of this in the young people
when they come to us is extremely important.
So just that idea alone is important. But there is a larger
problem here of access. The access includes lack of jobs, poor
schools. I think we need to really go back. Poor schools lead
to lack of jobs, lead to underinsured or low insured, lead to
poor access to preventive care, lead to poor access to
healthcare at all.
So there is a whole bunch of things we need to do together.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Doctor. Could I just hear
for a few seconds from the chief? Because I am very impressed
with his observations about the need in this space.
Chief Casstevens. Thank you.
First of all, it is a difficult situation. It is disturbing
for law enforcement. Anytime we see somebody who is thinking
about suicide, attempted suicide, suffering from mental health
issues, it is even twice as bad when we see it in youth. It is
incredibly disheartening for law enforcement.
But I think that situation, like so many others, it goes
back to the police departments have to build trust in their
community. The families and the people who are suffering need
to know that if they do call the police that we are going to
come there to help. We are not coming there to arrest. Our job
is to provide help.
And if we can continue with a co-responder model, I think
we are going to be incredibly successful in this arena.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you. My time is up.
Madam Chair, I hope we do have a second line of
questioning.
The Chair. Let us see where we are on timing. I would be
more than happy to do that. I think this is a great
conversation.
Congressman Cline.
Mr. Cline. Thank you, Madam Chair, for holding this hearing
on this important topic. And I want to thank the witnesses for
attending as well.
Mental health and substance abuse, developmental
disability, all of these things affect people of all ages and
from all backgrounds. These constitute an important area that
needs the Federal, State, and local levels of government
working together collaboratively. And during my time serving as
a delegate in the Virginia General Assembly, I served as the
chair of the Mental Health Subcommittee and authored several
bills that were sign into laws to ensure that the Commonwealth
was able to appropriately connect individuals with their needed
resources.
Several of the bills I sponsored worked to establish a
State registry of available acute psychiatric beds in both
public and private psychiatric facilities and residential
crisis stabilization units, requiring this registry to be
updated daily. The goal was to ensure that once individuals
were receiving the help they needed, they would not be streeted
after a certain amount of time and would be able to get the
help that they needed and deserved.
Work in this space is of great importance. So I am glad we
are discussing it today.
I also want to take a moment during National Law
Enforcement Week to recognize and thank all of those police
officers who so often are the first responders to assist in
getting individuals connected with the help they need.
With that, I would ask Chief Casstevens, although there is
much work to be done, I am thankful that the recent national
dialogue has been focused on destigmatizing the utilization of
mental health resources. There are certain professions, such as
the police force and military service, where the resources are
particularly needed, but the stigma associated with them
remains unfortunately high.
How can we more effectively ensure that these resources are
offered such that those professionals can benefit from their
availability? Those in these professions have given so much of
themselves, and ensuring they have the care they need is of
utmost importance.
Chief Casstevens. Well, thank you, sir, for bringing that
topic up. That is a topic that has been near and dear to my
heart, police officer mental health, PTS, and police officer
suicide. Sadly, but an example, in 2019 we lost 128 officers
killed in the line of duty. We lost 228 officers to suicide.
And part of that, like everyone else, is the stigma
surrounding that. Many officers are afraid to report to their
chief that they are suffering from mental health issues. They
are afraid they are going to lose their job in many cases.
And I think over the last few years, we have made
incredible strides. I work also with an organization called
Blue H.E.L.P., which is specifically an agency that assists law
enforcement entities in developing a program to help officers
who are suffering from mental health issues or contemplating
suicide. And one of the biggest things that we have determined
is we have to have a multipronged approach.
Most police agencies have EAP, Employee Assistance Program,
but in most cases, it is not trusted because they feel it is
not confidential. What has been more successful is developing
peer support groups. Officers trust having a conversation with
other officers. And IACP has a program called CRI-TAC, which
provides funding and professionals to law enforcement agencies
to help develop a successful peer support team in their law
enforcement agency.
And again, it goes back to having the resources that
officers trust, but at the same time reducing that stigma.
Every police chief needs to say to their officers, it is okay
not to be okay.
I was asked by a Chicago Tribune reporter last year when I
discussed this, and he said, wait a minute. If you send an
officer to mental health services, how comfortable are you
going to feel putting that officer back on the street? And my
answer is I will feel more confident in that officer than the
officers I know that might be out there who are refusing, for a
variety of reasons, to seek assistance.
Mr. Cline. Thank you for that.
As I discussed back in a hearing we had on March 11 on
COVID and the mental health and substance abuse crisis, the
mass Government shutdowns have had a significant negative
impact on many people's mental health and substance abuse, as
well as on those who are directly impacted by those needs being
unmet. This has been seen through increased calls to helplines
and fewer professionals who traditionally aid at connecting
individuals to help.
Can you discuss some of the challenges that arose due to
those shutdowns, or that might be a question better answered by
another witness if they want to weigh in?
Ms. Myles. You mean just for people in general, sir?
Mr. Cline. Absolutely.
Ms. Myles. Yes, so one of the things that we have been
doing that kind of started in Baton Rouge, but it escalated to
other places is calling Healing Circles, where we are able now
to have people to log in and provide a space for them, a safe
space for them online. And that has been really helpful in
connecting people to resources and to the help that they need.
Mr. Cline. Thank you for that, and thank you for sharing
your story with us. I appreciate you being here today.
Madam Chair, I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you. Congressman Harder.
And let me just say, Congressman Harder, I want to thank
you and Congresswoman Lawrence for really requesting this topic
here and this hearing. I think it has been a very, very
powerful discussion already. And thank you very, very much for
recognizing the issue and how critically important it is.
So, Congressman Harder.
Mr. Harder. Really thank you so much, Chair DeLauro, for
putting this together. I agree it has been very powerful, and I
really want to thank our witnesses as well for sharing their
incredibly informative testimonies, and I hope we are able to
take this hearing and put it into our budget and do what we can
to address some of the issues raised today.
But before I begin, I also just want to acknowledge a
tragedy that happened in my community this week. Officer Jimmy
Inn lost his life in the line of duty, leaving behind his
wife--a fellow member of the department--and three kids,
including a 7-month-old son. Officer Inn was a member of the
Honor Guard, deeply respected in the community. His chief
called him the epitome of what a police officer should be, and
I know our prayers are with his family and his department.
Officer Inn's death is another reminder of the work that we
need to do trying to get our communities and our police
officers together and make sure that everybody goes home safe
at the end of the night. So in terms of a question, I know we
talked a little bit today about how much we have to do to
improve mental healthcare. Very encouraging to hear some of the
models that have been proven successful in Denver and other
cities across the country.
These models share a lot of similarities, but they also
have some pretty significant differences, whether or not they
invest in more training for police officers, whether or not
they are creating new community-led models.
Mr. Casstevens, my first question is for you. What have you
found to be the most successful partnership models? And do you
think it depends on community needs, and we should really just
evolve that in terms of what works best for one community may
not be successful elsewhere? Or are there lessons and models
that we could be doing to make sure that that is sort of
systematically strengthened across the country?
Chief Casstevens. Thank you. I do think it depends upon the
community. Some of the programs I have heard, especially in
Denver, the STAR model and some of the other ones, I am going
to steal those and put my name on it. I think those are some
great programs. This is what I love is when we can share ideas.
But it is much like many other things, much like policing.
In any community, it varies--the approach and the methods--in
every community because it is based on the community needs. I
would never have thought that in Buffalo Grove, Illinois,
outside Chicago where I am police chief, that over the last 5
years the number of mental health calls for service has
increased exponentially.
We are--my officers, and I have only got 63 sworn, we are
responding to at least 2 or 3 a day. And 5 years ago, it may
have been 2 or 3 a month. So the needs are there, but the
resources over those years have not changed.
And so our officers and me, as the chief, I am throwing my
hands up. I am like I am looking for the resources. There are
some great ideas across the country, but it comes down to
funding. And not to drag this point out, but funding is an
issue for law enforcement right now. I am not going to go into
the defunding issue, but funding as a whole because of loss of
revenues in cities due to COVID, loss of gas tax, real estate
transfer tax, et cetera, I am losing officers.
I am down a number of sworn officers right now. I don't
have the funds to hire them back. So I certainly don't have the
funds to put together a robust program. So I am looking for a
State or Federal grant for that because there is a true need.
Mr. Harder. Thank you. I appreciate that.
Mr. Richardson, a similar question to you. To what degree
do you think the Denver model is applicable to other cities and
to what degree that there may be some differences and nuances,
and how did you come up with the model that you have used, as
opposed to some of the differences that we are seeing in other
cities across the country?
Mr. Richardson. Yes, I think Denver, when we are talking
with other communities that are trying to set up co-responder
programs or STAR-based programs, it really is specific to how
is it going to work within that community, what barriers? And
we give them the information related to us, which is we are a
partnership with the city from a--the mental health provider,
nonprofit mental health provider.
So it is not just about the crisis response to it. It is
immediate access to treatment after the fact. If someone says
that they are ready, in that moment we want to be able to
provide by the Mental Health Center of Denver whatever service
they are looking for, immediate access. Strike while the iron
is hot.
And I think when we were initiating our STAR program, it
really was going up to Eugene, Oregon, and stealing all the
information we could from CAHOOTS, which is going to go down as
like the grandfather of all these responses. But they had a
successful model for 30-plus years, and it has really shown
what groundwork can be for how CAHOOTS is a name recognition
within their community. And then we took that information to
Denver to be able to say this is how we are going to ground our
program, and then be able to build it Denver-centric, and then
be able to provide that information to whatever community may
need it for the future to kind of build on what Denver has as
well.
Mr. Harder. Thank you. Thank you. Well, I appreciate all
your testimonies, and it was very powerful, as the chair said.
And I am so excited to see you all.
With that, I will yield back the lack of remainder of my
time, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Lawrence. I know she
was shuttling between committee hearings. Congresswoman
Lawrence, there you are.
Thank you. Thank you for both you and Mr. Harder, as I
said, for wanting to do this hearing. Appreciate it.
Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you.
As many of you may know, I really feel that the mental
health survival of our country is based upon our leadership.
And thank you so much for the witnesses that are here today. I
know for a fact mental health has an impact on our children
now. With COVID, it just ripped the scab off, and so we see all
of these challenges.
With our policing in America, it breaks my heart when I see
these videocams of a person clearly having a psychotic incident
and being put in handcuffs and slammed to the ground. As a
former mayor, in looking at the 9/11 dispatch system, knowing
that when someone called, ``What is your problem? What is your
situation?'' Very few people say, ``Can you send me a
psychologist or someone to help me, to help my family member
who has--who is off their meds, who is having an incident.''
What they do, they say, ``I need someone to control this
person,'' and that usually our only resource is to send a
person trained to use a gun, a taser, and to arrest that
person.
Can someone here on this committee answer this question for
me? And I appreciate that we are using some models in other
countries--I mean, other States that we really need to look at.
Can we make an impact if we don't build--this is the other
point I want to make.
My hospitals continuously tell me about the challenges they
are having in the ER because the mentally ill are being taken
to a physical health facility, and they are dropped off. And
they usually don't have beds, and they are in the aisle. They
are attacking the workers there because they are there to treat
physical illness, not mental health.
Can we change or address this issue if we don't invest, and
how do you have any--how can we invest in the infrastructure
for mental health so that we can all be together, working
together, and taking care of those in need?
Ms. Myles. I would like to address that. So one of the
things that we are grateful to have is called the Crisis Now
model that is a part of RI. And what it does, it puts
everything in a place, particularly to a stabilization--a
stabilization unit where people can go to where when they do--
first of all, we have to educate people that you have the
right, when you call law enforcement, to tell them you would
like a CIT-trained police officer.
And hopefully, most organizations will have them because
they know what to do when they go to a Code 68, and having a
place where police officers can take someone, where they can
drop them off in 5 to 7 minutes, not stay there for 3 or 4
hours until they get things straight.
So when we decided we needed to have something done in
Baton Rouge, we got a tax pass for our stabilization unit, and
inside that unit, we have a different number of things--
respite, we have detox, we have the living room model. And that
has been working really well.
And what other States are doing and other cities are doing
it as well, because we kind of looked at them to see what they
were doing and how it would fit--how it would fit Baton Rouge,
and we have had great success. That Crisis Now model is
something that I think people need to really look at, and it
can address a lot of the different things that you just talked
about. And we are seeing it make a difference.
Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you. For the police, can someone
address how do you handle the place to take someone? Even if
you have a trained professional, where do you take them? What
do you recommend we look of having a plan in America? And in
Michigan, we totally shut down all of our mental health
facilities.
Chief Casstevens. Well, therein lies part of the issue I
think is, historically, as a society, we have defunded mental
health, and we have now laid that on the doorstep of law
enforcement because nobody has anywhere else to turn. Now we
are slowly making progress. But speaking for my officers and
other agencies in Illinois, what you just stated was the
biggest problem.
People will call the police. We see somebody suffering from
a mental health issue. We have trained our officers in CIT. We
have trained them in Mental Health First Aid. We have trained
them in de-escalation. The last thing we want to do is put
handcuffs and take them to a police station because we have
nothing to treat them with here.
So the best thing we can do is take them to a mental
facility that we have developed a relationship with. But as our
other witness stated, taking them to the emergency room, they
are not equipped to do that. They are dealing with injuries.
They are not equipped to deal with mental health crises, and so
it is always often a quick evaluation and a catch-and-release
program.
And it is so frustrating for law enforcement because we
want people to get help, but we have nowhere to take them.
Mrs. Lawrence. Thank you. And I think this committee should
really look at the model that has become the point of the
identification having a trained response. So where do we put
these individuals after they are captured--not captured, but
after they have intervened to place them in a place where the
help they need is available?
Thank you, and I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you. Congresswoman Bustos.
Mrs. Bustos. All right. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Dr. Dike and Dr. Gebbia, I want to say, first of all, thank
you for your kind words and your testimony about the
subcommittee's work to provide a 5 percent crisis care set-
aside in the mental health block grant. Like you, I was very
pleased that we were able to pass this provision out of my
Crisis Improvement and Suicide Prevention Act, that we could
turn that into law.
The crisis funding helps mental health providers all over.
In districts like mine, we have Rosecrance in Rockford,
Illinois; Robert Young Center for Community Mental Health in
the Quad Cities; and UnityPlace in Peoria, Illinois. And they
fund crisis call centers, mobile units, so they can travel to
patients in crisis and so much more. You get the picture.
I also want to say thank you to the American Psychiatric
Association and the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention
and so many others who supported this effort.
My question to both of you is if you could be specific in
how this dedicated crisis care funding is helping States and
providers so we have a good picture on that.
Dr. Dike, why don't you start, please?
Dr. Dike. Well, thank you very much for that.
I would say that the funds provided by this subcommittee--
by the way, thank you all for doing that. It was very helpful,
sorely needed. But different States are using them differently,
depending on their needs.
I will give you a couple of examples. Some States are
supplementing their existing crisis system. For example, in
Connecticut, the initial goal was to expand our mobile crisis
to 24/7 across all the different areas of Connecticut. Before
then, even though we had mobile crisis across all of
Connecticut, not all of them were 24/7, and that is really
important because crisis does not time itself when it happens.
So that is one way that that is happening.
Some other States are actually starting from scratch, quite
frankly. They are building up their whole emergency crisis
system from scratch. Some States are starting, laying emphasis
on the 988 implementation program--Connecticut is one of them--
mobile crisis teams that I mentioned, crisis stabilization
units.
Now we don't have that in Connecticut yet, but that is
really an important area for us. I happen to be the guy in the
middle when emergency rooms are calling because they have too
many people in the emergency rooms with mental health
disorders, and I am the chief medical officer for the panel on
mental health, and they are saying, ``Where do we move these
individuals?''
So the continuum of crisis care centers, the importance of
them cannot be overemphasized. Even clinical respite crisis
beds in that continuum would be very helpful. Some States are
using it as a one-time fund for a crisis receiving and
stabilization infrastructure for children and families. Others
are using the funds for stakeholder engagement and additional
planning. Some are using it to increase operations with peer
support and peer respite programs to add to mobile crisis
because it is really important for individuals who have lived
experience to participate in this process.
So there is a lot of important ways that States are using
it. Give back.
Mrs. Bustos. Dr. Gebbia, do you want to add anything to
add, please?
Mr. Gebbia. Yes. I think that is exactly right. Each State
is using these funds slightly differently depending on what
infrastructure they already have and what the needs are, and I
think that is the right way to approach it.
I would say this, though. I think it is a start, but I do
think that that level of funding is not going to go all that
far when you look at such massive change in how we want to
respond to crises. And I would certainly suggest that we
increase, if possible, that percent because, in fact, most
States are not going to be able to implement enough change as a
result of that, although it is a terrific start, and we support
it and thank you for that.
I would just add one other thing. I do think that as we
look at changing the system, we are going to need to invest a
lot more over time. As 988 gets out there and demand goes up,
States are going to find they are overwhelmed. I do think that
we have to continue to look at all of these aspects, mobile
crisis training to the infrastructures we are going to need, to
how it works. How does 988 work with 911? What is the
separation?
All of these things we have been talking about, but I do
think that block grant is a step in the right direction. We are
grateful for it. If that could be increased, I think the States
will be able to use it wisely.
Mrs. Bustos. I have got a little less than 30 seconds. So
let us play off of that very quickly.
I also support increasing the crisis care set-aside to 10
percent. If quickly you could outline why that would be needed
to the point that you just made, Dr. Gebbia, and how this
increase would help our communities?
Mr. Gebbia. Well, I think, again, it would just let them
move faster in terms of--and more deeply in terms of how they
set up crisis response and all the kinds of alternatives we
have been talking about throughout this hearing. I think it
would provide a higher level of support that they need.
Appreciate that.
Mrs. Bustos. All right. Very good. I am out of time.
With that, Chair DeLauro, I yield back. Thank you so much.
The Chair. Thank you. And what we are going to do now is
this really is a kind of a lightning round, 2 minutes, and I
will hold folks to the 2 minutes so that we can get more
questions answered today. And I want to thank you all for the
questions you already have asked and also for the clarity of
the response and the candor of your responses from your
professional background.
Let me just very, very quickly for myself. We have talked
about a lot of programs. There are a lot of programs out there.
We have provided funding in the block grant. Just now tell me,
because I have heard everyone say here today that, you know, we
have got some States are doing this, some States are doing
that, some places are not doing anything. How do we, in your
view, reach the country, if you will, in getting up to speed on
what is out there?
There are a lot of models, models that are working very,
very well. And I would like--I am going to ask each of you, but
very, very quickly to tell me how do we get to every State,
police department, et cetera, and try to move these models
forward.
I understand the funding issue, but how do we get word out
about what they are to try to be doing to deal with this issue?
Chief Casstevens. Well, I can say from a law enforcement
perspective, 45 years in the business, and through the
International Association of Chiefs of Police, we have 31,500
members in 165 countries. We come out with great programs, and
in a day, we can push those programs out to all of our 31,000
members. And we cover all 50 States. We cover State police,
sheriff, every law enforcement agency in the country.
The Chair. Okay. Quick.
Mr. Gebbia. And I would add--I would add that as 988
becomes the reality, we need to look at how do we build it out.
And I think we have 2 years, less than 2 years now, to be able
to do that. So I would urge that we really look at trying to
make this a uniform system around the country, provide the
guidance and the standards that will make that happen, along
with the funds.
The Chair. Okay.
Ms. Myles. I believe what we are doing now, you guys are
definitely leading by example, and we appreciate that. And I
think having more conversations like this, inviting more States
into these spaces and having people to share what they are
doing would be great. Because we don't need to duplicate and
reinvent the wheel. We can do it. We don't have to reinvent
this this year.
The Chair. Chris, I am going to give you a second.
Mr. Richardson. These programs are out there. They have
shown success across different cities and communities, and I
think it is about a conversation and communication. And being
able to be vulnerable and say ``I don't have all the answers,
and I want to be a little--create partnerships that are
creative that can be part of a solution.
The Chair. Thank you. Thank you all. And with that, I also
think that we can help to play a role at the Federal level of
really getting word out and information out and helping to get
people access to some of these programs.
Congressman Cole.
Mr. Cole. Madam Chair, our time is short, I know. So I am
going to yield my--I am going to have an opportunity to comment
at the end and make the points I want to make. But again, I
just want to thank the witnesses we have. I just think this has
been an absolutely terrific panel in every way.
So, again, I will comment at the end. Yield back.
The Chair. Okay. Thank you.
If I can--let me just get to Congresswoman Frankel.
[No response.]
The Chair. Okay. Congresswoman Watson Coleman. No, it is
Congressman Harris there. I am sorry.
Mr. Harris. Yes, thank you very much. And thank you for the
second round.
Let me just ask Mr. Richardson. I am fascinated by the STAR
program. From some of the reports I read, about a third of the
calls to this mobile unit actually come from police who, I
guess, have responded and realized they were really not
appropriate for it.
But could you just let us know, so if we had all these
around, that is great, but you still have to bring the person
with mental health issues somewhere. And what are you doing in
Denver to alleviate the problem with the--again, whether it is
a 24-hour, 72-hour facility. I mean, it is just not enough to
have that van. You have got to bring the person somewhere.
Where do you see that, the need for that? And what are you
doing in Denver for that need?
Mr. Richardson. Yes, we are actually in collaboration with
other community members to be able to transport people to their
facilities, whether that is a day shelter, whether that is
their treatment provider. But we also have a pre-established
walk-in crisis center that is a 24/7 capability.
So being able to collaborate with them. We don't want
people in the hospital either. That is not a solution for
people that are really trying to get long-term help. So the
walk-in crisis center within Denver allows us the ability to
get people to someone where time is not an issue, that they can
have someone there talking with them about what next steps they
need to make sure that they are safe and that they have
support.
And Denver also is establishing, I believe, on Monday it is
called the Solution Center, and it is going to be a 24/7 police
drop-off, followed by 7-day respite, followed by 30-day kind of
residential to really make sure that people that are in
distress and need support and need access to treatment, both
physical, mental health, whatever the spectrum of that is, have
access to that.
So I think we have really created kind of an infrastructure
of crisis support outside of just hospitalization.
Mr. Harris. How are those two centers funded?
Mr. Richardson. Caring4Denver--well, it is complicated. All
over the place. [Laughter.]
Mr. Harris. As I imagined. Thank you very much.
I yield back, Madam Chair.
[Pause.]
Mr. Harris. I think you were muted, Madam Chair.
The Chair. Congresswoman Watson Coleman.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Thank you, Madam Chair. I think this
has been a terrific panel, which has really let us think about
what are the other areas that we need to be thinking about.
I know this is more crisis oriented, but I also know that
many of these individuals that we encounter with a mental
health crisis also have a substance abuse crisis. I know they
can be taken into a crisis center. I know that they can be
taken in for 28 days in certain circumstances.
But it doesn't seem to me from what past experiences I have
observed personally that 28 days is not enough days to really
stabilize somebody. You can detoxify them. You can take them
out of a trauma. But are there not more needs, Dr. Dike, are
there not longer, more longer-term, not acute hospitals, but
facilities that will address these types of individuals on a
longer-term basis to ensure stability in what you have been
able to do to de-traumatize them and to detoxify them?
Dr. Dike. Absolutely. Every single individual in crisis is
one person in crisis. They all have different needs.
In Connecticut, we have the civil commitment for substance
use disorders that allows us to keep people in the hospital for
up to 6 months and then go into long-term residential
placements that are specific for substance use disorder. So
beyond the 28 days.
Mrs. Watson Coleman. Let me just say that what I have heard
today are very good programs in very enlightened States and
organizations. Madam Chairman, we need to figure out a way to
get that information out to all States, to incentivize States
to engage in these kind of proactive and reality-based and
real-time based issues and make sure that wherever you live,
you have access to adequate care.
Thank you, and I yield back.
The Chair. Thank you. And you are absolutely right. And we
are going to get our witnesses here today to give us a hand
with that, and I think the police talked about that as well
through the IACP.
Congressman Harder.
Mr. Harder. That is wonderful. I have a follow-up on Dr.
Harris' point with his--the coordination that we are seeing on
the front end of dealing with these calls is--it is terrific,
and there is obviously lots of models there. But it doesn't do
us much good if there is no place for people to actually go.
And Dr. Dike, you talked a little bit in your testimony
about how underserved we are across the country with available
mental health resources. We certainly see that in our neck of
the woods. In the Central Valley, we have half the doctors
overall that other areas of California and very few mental
health practitioners.
In your experience, what role could we play to address the
issues of emergency room boarding of patients, and what should
we be doing to systematically support and make sure that there
is resources for folks to go, no matter how things are
operating with the police department?
I think you may be on mute, sir.
Dr. Dike. Oh, thank you very much.
It is actually tragic that we are boarding psychiatric
patients in emergency rooms. Emergency rooms are loud, chaotic,
more likely actually to cause more deterioration in people's
mental health than not. So the kind of services that we need
would be a range of services that can cater for people at
different stages.
After 24 hours, all these things we have talked about--
crisis stabilization, long-term respite care, and we have what
we call intermediate care system in Connecticut where people
can then move from these crisis areas to a lesser restrictive
hospital and then to--we have--Connecticut has worked really
hard to have robust outpatient residential programs so that
these individuals can then go into.
There is a whole range of communication and collaboration
that needs to happen in communities for this stage to be
successful. So not just hospitals, but respite care, crisis,
residential homes, and so on.
Mr. Harder. I think what all of our witnesses have really
hammered home is that there is obviously no silver bullet here.
We need to make sure that that continuum of care is
strengthened across the entire lifecycle of these
interventions.
So thank you so much for your testimony, and Madam Chair, I
yield back.
The Chair. Thank you very, very much.
And now let me yield to the ranking member for any comments
that you may have before we close out the hearing.
Mr. Cole. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank you again
for a great hearing, great panel, and thank my colleagues--Mr.
Harder, Mrs. Lawrence--for suggesting this. Again, excellent
suggestion, great hearing.
A couple of things. Again, there is a big unanimity across
very many different perspectives here that is actually very
helpful to us as a committee when we have renowned experts in
the field. And we have got police officers, and we have got
folks that work with police departments, and we have got people
that have individual experience, and they are all telling us
very similar things about what we need and the importance of
pairing mental health professionals with police officers so we
can respond to these calls.
Unfortunately, of course, a lot of us represent areas
where, for instance, a team approach probably not going to
happen because there is not enough mental health professionals
out there in the first place in smaller communities. It is one
thing to find those kind of folks in Denver or Chicago and
their environs. It is quite another thing in Wewoka, Oklahoma,
or Chickasha, Oklahoma. But I get the exact same concerns from
the police chiefs that I talk about in those communities. They
are running into exactly the same kinds of problems and, as
Chief Casstevens suggested, with increasing frequency.
I will reflect I remember dealing, Madam Chair, when we
passed the CARES Act and kind of like all authorizing
committees, our friends at E&C authorized more money than we
could possibly ever have as appropriators, and one of the
members of that committee--and there were some terrific
authorizations for mental health matters. And one of the
members of the committee came to visit me about all these
programs, and I said, well, that is great, but the Budget
Committee has actually given me $5,000,000,000 less this year
than I had last year.
And I said, now that is going change. We are going to come
to an agreement, and there is going to be more defense
spending. Then that is going to call for more Labor-H spending.
But we are not going to have the dollars that we would need to
fund everything you have authorized. So give me one or two
things that would really make a difference.
And he thought for a minute, and he said, you know, the
biggest single problem we have is just the shortage of trained
professionals and probably anything you could do to incentivize
the education of more professionals. Otherwise, he said, you
set up these programs, you just get into a bidding war over the
supply that you have.
So I don't think that is a solution. I think, again, some
of these suggestions about team programs and shared resources
and certainly additional training for our police officers, but
also the ability to know when their very limited additional
training isn't going to be enough, and they are going to have
to have a professional. And then by the same token make sure
that our professionals, we sometimes are asking to go into very
dangerous situations with folks that aren't criminally intent
on doing any damage but are mentally of a state of mind where
they might.
The proper pairing of these resources together is a tricky
issue and probably not something we can manage from here. It is
going to take a lot of good judgment locally. Programs like
what Mr. Richardson talked about in Denver, which certainly
seems to be a model that we ought to be looking at.
Now let me just end with this. I suspect this is one of
those things where we are going to be expanding in the years
ahead. I think we have got a series of hearings that suggest
how underfunded we are in the mental health area, how many more
professionals that we need.
I would also, though, caution our witnesses that it is not
all going to come from the Federal Government. We can't take
care of every police department in America, every State in
America. There has got to be enhanced State and local effort in
these areas. These actually aren't traditionally Federal
responsibilities, although I think there is a really important
role here to play in terms of model programs, incentives,
grants, and the like. And I could be persuaded to go beyond
that, quite frankly, because I just think the need is there.
Again, I talk with too many police chiefs who tell me over
and over this is their number-one problem. They don't feel like
they have got the local staff they need to deal with it. They
don't have the places to take people, and that is a real
problem. They quite often have--typically, they are from
smaller communities with relatively limited forces.
My police forces, they dispatch an officer for a day or 2
days as they look for some sort of appropriate place for the
person to stay and get some sort of treatment that just doesn't
exist in their communities. And they are driving hours,
sometimes days. So it is a real problem.
But again, a lot of creative suggestions here. I thank all
our witnesses for that.
I thank our members for the obvious bipartisan interest and
participation in this particular hearing.
And Madam Chair, again, I thank you. I think this was a
very important hearing for us to have, and I am glad you
scheduled it. And I think you could see from the involvement on
both sides of the aisle, this is clearly an area where there is
great potential for bipartisan cooperation, and I hope we are
given the budget to do something here, and we plan to work with
you in a productive way in this particular area.
So thank you very much, and with that, I yield back. Other
than just thank the witnesses again. We see a lot of panels up
here. We have a lot of good panels up here, quite frankly. But
this has absolutely been one of the best panels I think, Madam
Chair, that we have had in our hearings this year.
So yield back.
The Chair. Thank you, and I would agree with the ranking
member. This has been just an outstanding panel and really one
of the best we have seen all year.
And I want to say a thank you for joining us, and I think
the conversation was beyond being important. It was a powerful
discussion and one that was filled with your own professional
experience in delineating the very serious issues that we face
and that the collaboration between mental health providers and
social services and trained personnel, along with a law
enforcement community, because I think our society has--not
unlike we have done with education.
We loaded up the education system with saying not only are
you charged with teaching our kids, but you have got to make
sure that they are safe in schools, and you have got to deal
with that. You have got to deal with nutrition in schools. And
in addition to your making sure that they are educated, you
have all these other social issues that you need to focus on.
It is the same thing I believe we have done with our law
enforcement community, with our police departments. You have to
take on all of this, but we are not in many ways, we are not
providing the tools that are necessary.
I think what was so startling here today is the range and
the number of models around the country, where there are--and
when I sent out the memo with some background on what is out
there, the different approaches, you know it is staggering.
Crisis intervention team model, case management teams, police-
based co-responses, primary co-response teams, secondary co-
response teams, community-based responses, mobile crisis teams,
peer navigator program, the CAHOOTS program, the STAR program,
what Arizona has done.
And I can't just tell you, Dr. Dike, how really proud I am
of the way that Connecticut and that you laid out where
Connecticut is involved in these efforts.
So there are plenty of models, and I think that is what I
was trying to get to in my last question is how do we work with
a system where there are best practices, if you will, to deal
with such an overwhelming crisis that we have? It is a crisis
in our country.
And what is so critically important is that the--we hear so
much today about the lack of communication between communities
and law enforcement. That is the opposite of what is happening
here around this country. We have the very close collaboration
and that what we need to do is to foster that, to be able to
support the efforts that are ongoing.
What I am so pleased to say is in terms of these community
projects funding, which we are engaged in through the
Appropriations Committee, there are a number of members who are
requesting support for crisis responses in their own
communities. That is their--those are their priority that they
put in for funding.
And we got some very, very good ideas here. But improving
the crisis response system, it does make sense, though, when
you think about it on a dollar and cents issue. Possibly more
important is the humanitarian imperative that we deal with, and
that is what this committee is focused on. But when you think
about cost effectiveness, think about where this could take us.
We need to be--and we also need to be assured that people are
treated with dignity and are able to access a healthcare
system.
So the recommendations really are there is a consistency
about it. Just when we talked about the funding for training
for the kind of police, social workers that the chief talked
about, this is something that we can look at, which then
extends the ability of some places who do not have that
capacity at the moment to have that capacity.
These co-responder models, the homelessness issue, which I
think is not a subject in this subcommittee, but we do have a
committee that focuses on transportation and housing. So the
recognition of mental health parity, and again, I will talk
about Medicaid and the expansion of Medicaid and some places
don't want to do it. But Medicaid is one of the ways in which
you could afford to have these costs covered.
I want to just conclude with it feels like we know what
needs to be done to address the problem. We need, I believe--
and the will is there. I would just say it is not just the
will, and it is going to be up to us in the Congress. And it is
going to be up to looking at what the dollar amounts are.
And the ranking member is correct. We are not going to be
able to do it. That is why we asked, and he started that line
of questioning with the chiefs on what are the priorities? And
we need to be back with you with what are those priorities so
that when we craft what we are trying to do with the
appropriation bill, that we are moving in the direction that
creates--I have become so fond of this phrase--building an
architecture for the future on where this is going.
And I think that is so imperative that is what we try to
do. And thank you all for giving us a roadmap. You have given
us a roadmap of how to proceed.
Our own agency that we have funded them, SAMHSA has a
roadmap. But you have the real clarity on the kinds of efforts
that we ought to be engaged in, and I am so grateful and thank
you to all of you for your help here this morning.
And with that, let me call this hearing to a close. Thank
you all very, very much. Be safe, take care, and thanks so
much.
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]
File and source
- File
- CHRG_chrg-117hhrg46639_chrg-117hhrg46639.htm
- Size
- 640,433 bytes
- SHA-256
- 9beaf02a42523f909a5e1a2c9974f1b05cd906de0ba87a2597cdc2e80b2e2e58
- Original
- No public link identified.