Nomination of Ms. Shalanda D. Young (S. Hrg. 117-24)
Summary
Senate Hearing 117-24 records the Committee on the Budget's March 2, 2021 hearing and March 10, 2021 executive business meeting on the nomination of Shalanda D. Young, of Louisiana, to be Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget. Chairman Bernard Sanders presides, Ranking Member Lindsey Graham gives an opening statement and Senator Patrick Leahy submits a statement. Sanders says Young served for the past 14 years as a top staffer on the House Appropriations Committee, and that the COVID-19 pandemic is responsible for taking the lives of some 514,000 Americans. At the business meeting the clerk reports the yeas are 14 and the nays are eight on reporting the nomination to the Senate.
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
“Nomination of Ms. Shalanda D. Young (S. Hrg. 117-24).”
Archived at Pandemic Darlings, https://pandemicdarlings.com/source-documents/senate-hearing-117th-congress-the-nomination-of-ms-shalanda-d-young-of-fd16a8179a/
, SHA-256 91bfc5bf76a0c1fd3c6b06cd25370b691e381f0f8df1e2c2835c38c68e317cf4.Full text
[Senate Hearing 117-24]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-24
NOMINATION OF MS. SHALANDA D. YOUNG, OF LOUISIANA, TO BE DEPUTY
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
March 2, 2021--HEARING ON THE NOMINATION OF MS. SHALANDA D. YOUNG, OF
LOUISIANA, TO BE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
March 10, 2021--EXECUTIVE BUSINESS MEETING TO CONSIDER THE NOMINATION
OF MS. SHALANDA D. YOUNG, OF LOUISIANA, TO BE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, OFFICE
OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Printed for use of the Senate Budget Committee
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
44-902 PDF WASHINGTON : 2021
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont, Chairman
PATTY MURRAY, Washington LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
RON WYDEN, Oregon CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan MIKE CRAPO, Idaho
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island PATRICK TOOMEY, Pennsylvania
MARK R. WARNER, Virginia RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon MIKE BRAUN, Indiana
TIM KAINE, Virginia RICK SCOTT, Florida
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland BEN SASSE, Nebraska
BEN RAY LUJAN, New Mexico MITT ROMNEY, Utah
ALEX PADILLA, California JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana
KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
Warren Gunnels, Majority Staff Director
Nick Myers, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
HEARING
Page
March 2, 2021--Hearing on the Nomination of Ms. Shalanda D.
Young, of Louisiana, To Be Deputy Director, Office of
Management and Budget (OMB).................................... 1
OPENING STATEMENTS BY COMMITTEE MEMBERS
Chairman Bernard Sanders......................................... 1
Ranking Member Lindsey Graham.................................... 2
WITNESSES
Testimony of Ms. Shalanda D. Young, of Louisiana, To Be Deputy
Director, Office of Management and Budget...................... 4
Prepared Statement of........................................ 30
Statement of the Honorable Patrick Leahy, A U.S. Senator from the
State of Vermont............................................... 3
MATERIALS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
Statement of Biographical and Financial Information Requested of
Presidential Nominee Ms. Shalanda D. Young To Be Deputy
Director of the Office of Management and Budget................ 32
Pre-Hearing Questions from Chairman Bernard Sanders with Answers
by Shalanda D. Young........................................... 41
Pre-Hearing Questions from Ranking Lindsey Graham with Answers by
Shalanda D. Young.............................................. 43
Post-Hearing Questions from Budget Committee Members with Answers
by Shalanda D. Young:.......................................... 48
Senator John Kennedy......................................... 48
Senator Ron Wyden............................................ 50
Senator Sheldon Whitehouse................................... 52
Senator Jeff Merkley......................................... 56
EXECUTIVE BUSINESS MEETING
March 10, 2021--Executive Business Meeting To Consider the
Nomination of Ms. Shalanda D. Young, of Louisiana, To Be Deputy
Director, Office of Management and Budget...................... 57
Committee Votes.................................................. 58
THE NOMINATION OF MS. SHALANDA D. YOUNG, OF LOUISIANA, TO BE DEPUTY
DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
----------
TUESDAY, MARCH 2, 2021
U.S. Senate,
Committee on the Budget,
Washington, D.C.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:00 a.m., in
Room SD-608, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Honorable Bernard
Sanders, Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Sanders, Murray, Wyden, Stabenow,
Whitehouse, Warner, Merkley, Kaine, Van Hollen, Lujan, Padilla,
Graham, Grassley, Crapo, Toomey, Braun, Scott, Sasse, and
Kennedy.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BERNARD SANDERS
Chairman Sanders. Okay. Let me convene this hearing, the
purpose of which is to speak with Ms. Shalanda Young, who has
been nominated by the President to be Deputy OMB Director. And
let me thank my colleague who are here with us in person. I
know Chuck Grassley is in back, and others will be coming.
Senator Graham is a little bit late but he will be here
shortly. And we thank those who are participating remotely.
We are here today to consider the nomination of Shalanda
Young to become the next Deputy Director of the Office of
Management and Budget. As we all know, the OMB is responsible
for preparing the President's budget, reviewing Federal
regulations, and providing the proper oversight of Federal
agencies. It is a very important task.
For the past 14 years, Ms. Young has served as a top
staffer on the House Appropriations Committee and has done an
excellent job in working with Democrats and Republicans on
legislation that must be passed each and every year that
impacts the lives of tens of millions, and we thank her very
much for her years of public service.
Today, in America, it is no great secret that we are living
through one of the most difficult periods in the modern history
of our country. We have a terrible crisis with the pandemic,
where we have lost half a million Americans, and we are also
living through a terrible economic downturn. The real
unemployment rate in America today is over 11 percent. Over 23
million Americans are either unemployed, underemployed, or have
given up looking for work. More than half of the workers in our
country today, unbelievably, in the richest country on earth,
are living paycheck to paycheck. That means if your car breaks
down, your kid gets sick, you are facing a terrible financial
emergency.
We have the highest rate of childhood poverty of nearly any
major country on earth, and we hope, by the way, to address
that through the American Rescue Plan Act that we will be
discussing this week on the floor of the Senate. And in the
midst of all that, we have a massive level of income and wealth
inequality, which this Committee actually will be discussing in
the near future.
The COVID-19 pandemic is still raging across the country
and is responsible for taking the lives of some 514,000
Americans. At the same time, unbelievably, we have 90 million
Americans who are either uninsured or underinsured. In other
words, we have a major health care crisis and are the only
major country on earth not to guarantee health care to all
people, as a human right.
We have, in the midst of all of this, not just an American
but a global climate crisis that threatens the well-being of
the planet. We have an affordable housing crisis, where
millions of people are paying half of their limited incomes on
rent. Half a million people are sleeping out on the streets.
We have a racial injustice crisis, and we will accelerate
our effort to fight systemic racism. We have an immigration
crisis that must be addressed. It has been ignored for too
long.
In other words, this country today faces an unprecedented
set of crises that must be addressed. And guess what? A lot of
those priorities, a lot of those issues are going to fall
within the purview of OMB, including the Director of the OMB.
Ms. Young, I look forward to working with you as the Deputy
OMB Director, to enact the promises that the Biden
administration has made to the American people, and that is to
increase the Federal minimum wage to $15 an hour; to make
public colleges and universities tuition-free for working
families, and to substantially reduce student debt; to lower
the Medicare eligibility age, and to substantially lower
prescription drugs costs in this country; to rebuild our
crumbling infrastructure and create millions of good-paying
jobs and combat climate change; to make pre-K universal for
every 3- and 4-year-old in America, and make child care
affordable to every family in this country; to make sure that
every worker in America has at least 12 weeks of paid family
and medical leave; and, in fact, in the midst of massive income
and wealth inequality, to make sure that the wealthiest people
and the most profitable corporations start to pay their fair
share of taxes.
Those are not my ideas. That is what the Biden
administration has been talking about. And the job of OMB and
the Deputy Director of the OMB, to my mind, is to make sure
that we keep faith with the American people, that we implement
what the President has been talking about.
So let me thank Ms. Young for being with us. I look forward
to your testimony, and now let me give the microphone over to
Ranking Member Lindsey Graham for his opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM
Senator Graham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think you are a
highly qualified person for the job. Everybody that deals with
you on our side has nothing but good things to say. You might
talk me out of voting for you, but I doubt it. Thank you.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you, Mr. Graham, for that cogent
and brief remark.
My colleague from Vermont, Senator Leahy, wants to
introduce Ms. Young. Can we roll the film, so to speak.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE PATRICK LEAHY, A U.S. SENATOR FROM
THE STATE OF VERMONT
Senator Leahy. I am very happy to be here today to
introduce Shalanda Young. She is President Biden's nominee to
be Deputy Director of the Office of Management and Budget.
Now, for the members of this Committee who also sit on the
Appropriations Committee, Shalanda is a familiar face. She has
worked on the House Appropriations Committee for nearly 16
years. She has been the House Appropriations Staff Director
since 2017.
Actually, it is in that capacity I had the pleasure to
really get to know her well, and I can tell you, without
reservation, I can think of no one better suited to be Deputy
Director of OMB than Shalanda. Her deep understanding of the
often arcane Federal budget process, her years of experience on
the Appropriations Committee, her tenacity, her dedication to
public service, her honesty will serve the agency and the
American people.
Shalanda began her career in public service in 2001, at the
National Institutes of Health. She came first to work on
Capitol Hill as a detailee with the House Appropriation
Committee in 2005. She really made a good impression because
she returned in 2007.
She worked her way up in the committee over the years. Her
work in developing the budget and conducted oversight of key
agencies has given her critical insights into the operation of
some of our nation's most important agencies, including, of
course, the Department of Homeland Security, Department of
Interior, Environmental Protection Agency, the General Service
Administration. She even served as a staff director for the
Legislative Branch Subcommittee overseeing the budget for
Congress.
Then she became Staff Director of the House Appropriations
Committee in 2017. Coincidentally, that was the same year I
became Vice Chairman of the Appropriations Committee. And since
that time she has helped the House navigate some of the most
difficult issues before the chamber. She has a reputation as a
tough, but fair negotiator. That is high praise on Capitol
Hill, and I can attest to the truth of these statements. I have
seen these skills first-hand.
Let me tell you a story. Shalanda was a critical figure in
helping to end the government shutdown in January of 2019. Now
I remember the evening we cut the final deal to end the 35-day
government shutdown, the longest shutdown in U.S. history.
Chairman Shelby, Chairwoman Lowey, Ranking Member Kay Granger,
and I, along with only a very few but highly trusted staff,
went to my office in the Capitol. We continued talks that
started earlier that day. We wanted to get away from being
watched by everybody, from the lobbyists, to the press, away
from the cameras. We wanted to see if we could reach a deal.
Fortunately, Shalanda was with us. As we worked into the
night on these difficult issues, her knowledge of a vast range
of Federal programs, her understanding of the political
process, and her determination to get the country we love back
on track helped us reach a deal.
We shook hands on it that night, and we went out, the four
of us--two Republicans, two Democrats--and we announced it to
the press. If you look closely at pictures of that moment,
Shalanda is there in the background. Hopefully she is as proud
of that moment as I am.
It was a difficult time for our nation, but through
determination and hard work we reached a solution, and that is
what Shalanda is best at. She knows how to work across the
aisle to get a deal done. Her relationships with both Democrats
and Republicans in the House and the Senate will serve her
well.
I have heard it said that the Office of Management and
Budget is one of the most powerful government agencies, that
most Americans have never heard of. It is true. It wields
incredible influence over not just the Federal budget but over
policies that affect people's lives. We need people like
Shalanda Young to help steer the agency in these important
decisions. She is wonderful.
Chairman Sanders. Senator Leahy, thank you very much. And
now, under the rules of the Committee, nominees are required to
testify under oath. Ms. Young, would you please rise. Please
raise your right hand.
Do you swear the testimony that you will give the Senate
Budget Committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth?
Ms. Young. I do.
Chairman Sanders. If asked to do so, and if given
reasonable notice, will you agree to appear before this
Committee in the future and answer any questions that the
members of this Committee might have?
Ms. Young. I do.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you very much. Please be seated,
and we would love to hear your remarks.
TESTIMONY OF SHALANDA D. YOUNG, OF LOUISIANA, TO BE DEPUTY
DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Ms. Young. Chairman Sanders, Ranking Member Graham, and
members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to
testify today as President Biden's nominee for Deputy Director
of the Office of Management and Budget. I want to thank
Chairman Leahy for introducing me to the Committee today.
One of the joys of being Staff Director of the
Appropriations Committee has been seeing the amazing
relationships and results that have come from Senator Leahy,
Senator Shelby, Ranking Member Granger, and my former boss,
Chairwoman Lowey. I still vividly remember the same story that
you just heard from Chairman Leahy, those four meeting to avert
another government shutdown. We had just opened for 3 weeks and
we needed to find a deal quickly, back in February of 2019.
Even in those tense moments, Senator Leahy still took the time
to show me pictures of his beloved family before announcing to
the press that a compromise had been reached. I will be forever
grateful for the kindness Senator Leahy has always shown, even
in the most stressful environments.
I am accompanied today by my parents, Loyce and Ronald
Smith, who are here from Louisiana. My 92-year-old grandmother,
who is still in Louisiana, could not make it due to COVID-19
precautions. I want to thank them and my extended family for
their unwavering support over the years.
Members of this distinguished Committee, I come before you
today as someone who grew up in rural America. I spent most of
my youth in Clinton, Louisiana. Back then, Clinton had a
population of around 2,000 people. It is where my maternal
great-grandparents lived, got married, and had my grandmother
in 1928. Somehow, even then, in the segregated South, my great-
grandparents sent their child, my grandmother, to college. I am
grateful they prioritized education, a commitment that has
stayed in my family for generations.
All families deserve to see their children have that same
opportunity to pursue their potential. Another former boss of
mine, Chairman Obey--and I am sorry if he ever yelled at you--
used to say a budget is your values. I share that belief, and
firmly believe the Federal budget can and should help make the
promise of this country real for all families, in all
communities.
I have spent the last 4 years as both the Minority and
Majority Staff Director of the House Appropriations Committee.
I care deeply about the institution of Congress and have been
very proud to serve in a position that required compromise to
ensure the American people had not only a functioning
government, but one that invested in their future.
My work on the Appropriations Committee taught me that both
sides can compromise without compromising their values, even
when that means no one gets everything they want. I will
forever be indebted to this institution, and if confirmed, I
look forward to using my experience in the halls of Congress to
ensure both branches operate with mutual respect and work
toward solutions that will improve the lives of those we all
serve.
I am not naive about the challenges we face. Last year, I
worked on the first COVID supplemental that Congress passed in
March of 2020. We were using models of past supplementals on
Ebola and Zika because the full scale of the pandemic was still
unclear. With COVID deaths surpassing 500,000, our focus must
remain on beating the virus, delivering immediate relief to
millions of struggling Americans, and ensuring that we emerge
from this crisis even stronger than we were before. If
confirmed, I look forward to engaging with Members of Congress
from both parties on this and other important work.
Chairman Sanders, Ranking Member Graham, and other members
of the Committee, thank you for allowing me to appear before
this Committee, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Young appears on page 30]
Chairman Sanders. Thank you very much, Ms. Young.
Let me begin the questioning, and, in a sense, the
questions I am going to ask you do not come from me, really.
They come from the President, and I just wanted to make sure
that you are on the same page as the President in terms of some
of the most important issues facing our country. So I am going
to ask you the questions and your answers can be very, very
brief.
The President has indicated strong support for increasing
the minimum wage in our country from $7.25 an hour to $15.00 an
hour. Do you agree with him?
Ms. Young. Absolutely, Chairman Sanders.
Chairman Sanders. The President has made clear that he
wants to see public colleges and universities tuition free and
canceling student debt, not completely, but making progress in
canceling student debt for working families making less than
$125,000 a year. Do you agree with that?
Ms. Young. Yes, Senator Sanders.
Chairman Sanders. The President has indicated that he wants
to lower the eligibility age for Medicare from 65 to 60 and
expand Medicare coverage to include hearing, vision, and dental
care. Is that something you support?
Ms. Young. Yes, Senator Sanders.
Chairman Sanders. Good. The President has indicated that he
wants to see Medicare begin negotiating prices with the
pharmaceutical industry to lower the outrageously high cost of
prescription drugs in America. Is that something you support?
Ms. Young. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Sanders. The President has indicated that he
supports guaranteeing 12 weeks of paid family and medical
leave. Is that something you support?
Ms. Young. Absolutely.
Chairman Sanders. Okay. The President has indicated that he
supports providing universal pre-K education to every 3- and 4-
year-old in the country and making child care more affordable
for working families. Is that something you are comfortable
with?
Ms. Young. I have seen it work in my own family. Yes, sir.
Chairman Sanders. Okay. The President has indicated, and we
will be discussing more of that in the next several months,
creating millions of good-paying jobs by investing at least $2
trillion to combat climate change and transform our energy
system away from fossil fuels into renewable energy. Is that
something you are comfortable with?
Ms. Young. Yes, sir.
Chairman Sanders. The President has indicated that he
supports creating millions of additional good-paying jobs by
rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure, our roads, bridges,
sidewalks, schools, water systems, wastewater plants, et
cetera. Is that something that you are comfortable with?
Ms. Young. Yes, sir, and I have worked on it a lot of my
appropriations career.
Chairman Sanders. Okay. Those are my questions, Ms. Young.
Thank you very much.
Senator Graham?
Senator Graham. Thank you. What is the price tag of all
that?
Chairman Sanders. Uh----
Ms. Young. Senator Graham, as you know a lot of these do
have high price tags.
Senator Graham. Oh, just within a trillion or so, what is
it?
Ms. Young. It is some very important, you know----
Senator Graham. You know I am going to vote for you, but I
just----
Ms. Young. I get it. It is expensive.
Senator Graham. But I just want, like, people back home to
know, okay, all that sounds good but, I mean, what does it
cost?
Ms. Young. It sounds good, but I think you have to talk
about the details. So when we talk about the global cost if----
Senator Graham. Is it fair to say you cannot give me a
price tag today but you will work on it and get me one later?
Ms. Young. I will work on it----
Senator Graham. And give me one later?
Ms. Young. --there are some details, I think there are some
bipartisan nuggets in those infrastructure packages and others,
I am sure we will get the opportunity to work on together.
Senator Graham. Are you worried about a run on our border,
southern border, if we keep changing the policies of
immigration?
Ms. Young. You can imagine I have spent a lot of time on
this the last 4 years, and I have spent some time down in
Southern California and Texas.
Senator Graham. Yeah.
Ms. Young. You visit one part of the border, you have not
visited another part. It is all very different, the topography.
So, yeah, I believe----
Senator Graham. Well, let's just talk about policy. Forget
about topography here. The Remain in Mexico policy of the Trump
administration required people seeking asylum in the United
States to stay in Mexico until their court date. Do you think
that was a beneficial change?
Ms. Young. I think there were some side effects that were
not--I think of us as a country, including lack of access to
counsel. Frankly, that if you are interested----
Senator Graham. Well, we are talking about waiting there
until your court date. I mean, there are a million and a half,
over a million person backlog in the asylum system. Are you
concerned that if we go back to the old policy allowing people
to be processed in the United States, released in the United
States for a court date years in the future, most do not show
up, that that will entice more people to come here to seek
asylum?
Ms. Young. Senator Graham, I think the speed in which our
immigration system works is a bipartisan one. No one wants an
asylum system that takes years and years and years. I think one
of the unfortunate side effects of Remain in Mexico is you do
take----
Senator Graham. Do you support changing that policy,
eliminating it?
Ms. Young. Yeah, I do think we need to, and think as the
administration is taking a pause and looking to make sure we
have an immigration system that works.
Senator Graham. They are expecting to be 13,000
unaccompanied minors to hit our border in May. Why do you think
the increase?
Ms. Young. You know, I have not seen the figures you are
using. I think you are well-known as someone who has reached
across the aisle for solutions. The only way we are going to
find any solutions in immigration is a bipartisan one. So yeah,
I am concerned, but I do think there are solutions.
Senator Graham. Let me just, you know, again, you are
highly qualified for the job and I am going to vote for you.
But, you know, Senator Sanders gave sort of a laundry list of
things that you need to support, that the Biden administration
is proposing. Maybe we can find common ground. Maybe we cannot.
But I worked on about every gang bill there is around here for
immigration, and what I see is a retreat on policies that
worked. I was in Arizona a couple of weeks ago, and this time
this year versus last year there has been almost a 100 percent
increase in people coming to our border.
So for us to get immigration right we are going to have to
turn off the magnets that draw people here and try to replace
illegal immigration with legal immigration. Do you support more
work visas, legal work visas for the American economy?
Ms. Young. Senator Graham, there are several work visa
program. I am no expert on them but I do know there are reforms
in the works in the halls of Congress. There are some that need
more reform than others. So yes, I do think the visa programs
are necessary, but I do support congressional work on necessary
reforms where they are needed, and I know a lot of that work is
ongoing.
Senator Graham. Do you think you are ready to be Director
if that job was offered to you?
Ms. Young. Senator Graham, thank you for the question. I am
here nominated as Deputy Director. I hope, after today, you
find me qualified for that position, and I look forward to
hopefully winning your support.
Senator Graham. Well, you will get my support, maybe for
both jobs. Who knows. Thanks.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you, Senator Graham. Now we are
going to hear from Senator Murray via video.
Senator Murray. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, and
before I begin I do want to reiterate my support for Neera
Tanden's nomination to be OMB Director. I have known and worked
closely with Neera for many years. So whether you agree with
her on every issue or not, you cannot question her passion, her
knowledge, her engagement on the issues so critical to families
in our communities. I believe Ms. Tanden would excel and be
director. I hope the Committee, and really the full Senate,
will swiftly move to advance her nomination.
Today I am very pleased we have the opportunity to speak
today with Shalanda Young, who I believe is an excellent choice
for this role. Ms. Young will bring a wealth of experience to
the job. She has a deep understanding of the Federal budget and
the appropriations process, and the know-how of working with
agencies and Members of Congress to make progress on a range of
critical issues.
As our country faces multiple crises, the role of OMB is
critical to addressing these challenges head on, from
navigating the current public health crisis, to stabilizing our
economy, to confronting the climate crisis, to addressing the
rampant inequality throughout our society.
So, Ms. Young, my question for you today is how do you see
this administration prioritizing investments to tackle those
crises, and what is the economic case for strong and decisive
actions to meet this moment?
Ms. Young. Thank you, Senator Murray, and it is good to see
you. I have certainly been a fan from the other side of the
Appropriations Committee in the House. I think you all will be
busy working on the first order of business this week. If we do
not take full steps to crush the virus, the economics of it are
going to come home tenfold. President Biden has certainly
talked about the next step being the need to invest in
infrastructure. During the regular appropriations process we do
the best we can, especially with budget caps, but the types of
investments that are needed to ensure that this country remains
an economic leader and competes with the Chinas of the world,
we have to invest in our roads, bridges--I am sorry Senator
Graham is gone--our dredging projects. Army Corps is woefully
in need of additional funding, if we want our shipping lanes to
remain open.
So I certainly, if confirmed, look forward to working with
Congress on those big investments, because if we go too little,
if we do not do what is needed now, and I worked on the Great
Recession package, and one of the complaints was, in 2009, it
was not big enough. So you certainly have my commitment to work
with Congress, I think on many pieces that have been bipartisan
in the past, to rebuild our crumbling infrastructure.
Senator Murray. Well, thank you very much. You know, from
the beginning of this pandemic I said historic crises like
these demand bold solutions. It is so important the Senate
continues to move quickly this week to pass COVID relief and
get direct relief to all those who are struggling, and to start
our country on a path to more equitable future on the other
side of this pandemic.
Before I close I do want to again raise an issue of
critical importance to Washington State, and that is the
cleanup of the Hanford nuclear site. I talked about this
previously with Ms. Tanden. I look forward to also working in
close partnership with you to make sure the Hanford mission is
on a cost-effective trajectory without compromising cleanup,
and I look forward to talking with you about that once you are
confirmed.
And finally, Ms. Young, I do want to thank you for your
willingness to serve in this position at such a critical time
in this country. I look forward to supporting this nomination.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the time this morning.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you very much, Senator Murray.
Senator Grassley.
Senator Grassley. There are not many people on the
professional staff of the Appropriations Committee who are
anxious to get away, so I question your judgment, but I am glad
for your public service.
It happens that I am more interested in OMB from the
standpoint of what it does on regulatory review than what I do
in regard to the budget part of your work. So I am going to
start out there, and I only have one question in that area. The
president memo entitled, quote/unquote, ``Modernizing
Regulatory Review'' directs OMB to update its guidance to
agencies to, quote, ``fully account for regulatory benefits
that are difficult or impossible to quantify.''
Under the implementation of this memo, how will agencies be
instructed to compare quantitative and non-quantitative
benefits and costs, and how does that differ from the current
cost benefit analysis framework?
Ms. Young. Thank you, Senator. I thought you might talk
about this. I want to reiterate something you heard from the
nominee for the Director job, that the underlying Executive
Order 12866 has been reaffirmed by President Biden, and that
has served both Republican and Democratic administrations, and
it says we must do cost benefit analysis of regulations.
What the improving and modernizing plan you have outlined,
which I certainly hope to have a role as Deputy of looking at
the regulatory process, is an effort to ensure that we are
reaching communities. I talked about one that I grew up in.
Oftentimes it is hard to quantify when you are looking at towns
of 2,000, whether the benefit outweighs a small group of
people. There might be high costs, but that does not mean we
should not be doing something to make those rural lives, the
lives of people who might be from minority racial backgrounds,
those people living with disabilities, those things may not
come out well in a regular cost benefit analysis, but I think
we can all agree that we need to ensure that those amongst us
who need the most help, we find a way. And I think that memo
that you talked about is tasking us with finding a way to make
sure we do not leave certain Americans behind.
Senator Grassley. Okay. Thank you. Another thing that
bothers me over several decades is the fact that the Department
of Defense (DOD) is the only department of government that
can't get a, what you call kind of a certified statement of
fiscal responsibility, a clean audit I guess you would call it.
The Department of Defense relies on hundreds of outdated legacy
financial management systems. These systems cannot produce
reliable data and are one major obstacle to preventing the DOD
from obtaining what I said, a clean audit opinion.
How would you approach this issue through the authority of
the OMB, assuming you have authority, and I am not sure that I
am up to date on that, and ensure that these systems are
replaced or fixed so that they are able to generate complete
and reliable financial data needed to support clean opinions?
Ms. Young. As you can imagine, I have certainly looked at
this from the appropriations angle, and, by the way, it was a
difficult decision leaving someplace I have been and loved for
a long time, so thanks for acknowledging that but hopefully I
can continue to be in service, if confirmed.
I think part of the issue, DOD is not the only one that has
legacy systems that do not serve them well when it comes to
managing their financial house. Part of the problem is a
resource problem. We often, the choice, when it comes to
Congress, and, you know, OMB as well, look at the traditional
spending of DOD. So do you need a new submarine or do you need
an IT system? Well, we probably need both, but it tends to not
be the jazziest thing that can be sold in the halls of
Congress.
So you certainly have my commitment to work with you, and I
certainly will work with the Pentagon, because this is, I think
the least we owe the American people, to ensure that we can
show that these agencies have clean financial audits.
Senator Grassley. Okay. I have only got eight seconds left.
For decades, tax regulation generally skipped the review
process other agencies had to follow in submitting significant
regulations to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs
(OIRA) at OMB for review. This changed in 2018, when the
Treasury Department and OMB entered into an agreement to
subject significant tax regulations to OIRA review. Do you
expect the Biden administration to maintain that agreement?
Ms. Young. Senator, I expect we will use this improving and
modernizing memo to review, and that will be one of the things,
and I would love to work with your staff on this issue and make
sure we are getting your concerns as we are looking at this
review process.
Senator Grassley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you, Senator. Senator Wyden.
Senator Wyden. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and for
holding this important hearing.
I just want to touch, for a quick moment, on the matter of
Neera Tanden's nomination, because I think colleagues should
know that she is very much interested in two bipartisan
priorities of a number of members. For example, Senator
Grassley and I put together a bill to stop pharmaceutical price
gouging, and we basically said if these companies are selling
things like insulin and they are jacking up the prices again
and again and again, which they have, they basically have to
make rebates if they ever raise prices above inflation,
bipartisan support. We also support the effort that Chairman
Sanders is talking about here today, which is Medicare
negotiating the cost of prescription drugs.
So these are bipartisan issues. The same has been true in
terms of rural America, and I asked Ms. Tanden about a matter
that I am pursuing with Senator Crapo and Senator Risch, trying
to help the rural communities get off the roller coaster with
respect to their payments, and we continue to strengthen the
Secure Rural Schools Program.
So Ms. Tanden, as members consider her nomination, on
prescription drugs and on the question of jobs for rural
America, has a bipartisan track record.
I would also like to say that I am very much looking
forward to supporting Ms. Young for this crucial position as
well, and I want to ask her about just a couple of quick
questions. I think we all know that millions of Americans are
unemployed right now. Unemployment insurance expires March
14th. And dollar for dollar, there really are not multipliers
out there like helping people who are laid off through no fault
of their own, because those funds that they get are used for
making rent and buying groceries and paying for medicine, and
kids' shoes. And there has been a major limitation is that
politicians can set an arbitrary end date for the coverage that
folks and communities need to stay afloat.
I have recently proposed, again, with the support of
Chairman Sanders and a number of other colleagues in the
Senate, to basically tie this assistance to economic conditions
on the ground, and the unemployment and relief checks should
basically be part of a stabilizer kind of system so that we do
not get into another situation like we had in the last big
recession, where we simply had gone too small. We ought to put
these programs on approach tied to economic conditions on the
ground what is called an automatic stabilizer, and I am very
pleased to be working on this with Chairman Sanders and a
number of colleagues.
Ms. Young, we have been impressed by the fact that
President Biden is very interested in this idea. Should you be
confirmed for this position, tell us a little bit about your
thoughts, and we would very much like to have a ringing
endorsement today as well.
Ms. Young. Senator Wyden, thank you for the question. So
even though I have been on the Appropriations Committee, we
have had the privilege of putting these packages together so I
am absolutely familiar with the stabilizer idea. I know a lot
of Senators and House members have tried to bring this to
fruition. I am certainly supportive. I think we are about to
hit another cliff on March 14th, you know, which is
unfortunate, and I think last time we did not make the time
frame, so we have people who have to deal with these gaps in
assistance, which should be avoided.
I also understand, from the congressional standpoint, some
of the hurdles to tackling the stabilizer issue has been
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) scoring. It is tough. The way
scoring does has just made it an expensive proposition. But I
think it is important enough, we have to keep working to find a
way to make sure millions of Americans do not face these
artificial cliffs in their unemployment benefits.
Senator Wyden. Well, thank you, Ms. Young. I have got one
other question, but, you know, what you are really touching on
is the heart of what we want to do. We want to empower
communities and we want to empower folks who have been laid
off, through no fault of their own, to be in a position to get
on with their lives. Let's empower them rather than
politicians, who are the ones who, in effect, if they can set
an arbitrary date, they are the ones who use those dates for
leverage. We ought to be empowering people.
Let me ask you about one last issue, very quickly, that is
important to tribes in my State. OMB currently faces a decision
on the poorly made recommendations of the Public Buildings
Reform Board to close National Archives and Records in Seattle,
Washington. This decision affect Oregonians, including our
Klamath Tribes who rely on their access to important historical
records. We sent a bipartisan letter to OMB detailing our
concerns about how Native Americans and Alaskan Natives in the
Northwest were not consulted. Do you commit to working with all
of us to increase transparency of the process, get more input,
and particularly consult with the tribes before any final
recommendations are instituted?
Ms. Young. Absolutely, Senator. I have been involved in
many decisions and fighting those from the congressional side
when offices close. I understand the intense need these
regional and local offices are to ensure that people can
petition and get services from their governments. So you
certainly have my commitment to work with you.
Senator Wyden. My time is up. I have heard nothing but
positive things about you, Ms. Young, and your work, and I look
forward to supporting your nomination.
Ms. Young. Thank you, sir.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you, Senator Wyden. Senator Toomey.
Senator Toomey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Young, welcome
to the Committee, and I know that this is not your decision but
I do have to express just how deeply disappointed I am that
President Biden and our Democratic colleagues have decided to
undertake a purely partisan process to pass a bill with so much
content that has absolutely nothing to do with COVID or an
economic recovery, and that, despite the fact that last year
Congress passed five-five--overwhelmingly bipartisan bills in
response to the pandemic and the economic disaster that we
faced. Those bills added up to almost $4 trillion. Each one of
them got over 90 votes.
The last bill, which was the second-largest economic relief
bill in American history, was signed just about eight weeks
ago. Hundreds of billions of dollars are still unspent. The
economy is in a strong recovery mode. And absolutely there are
pockets that are doing very badly, but on balance and in the
aggregate, the economy is doing very, very well. And despite
all that, rather than working with Republicans on identifying
the areas that have been left behind, despite all of this
massive, massive spending, the approach is just ignore
Republicans, do a partisan approach, and spend almost $2
trillion, the vast majority of which has nothing to do with
COVID or the economic circumstances we are in. Even liberal
Democratic economic advisors are warning--Larry Summers has
famously said about this bill, that it brings on some big
risks. The result could be inflationary pressures of a kind we
have not seen in a generation. So I really am very, very
disappointed that this is the path that we are on.
I want to just be clear about some of the specifics, as I
understand them, from the House-passed bill that has arrived at
the Senate. Can you confirm that a family of four with an
income of $150,000 last year, that had no income decline, no
income interruption whatsoever as a result of the pandemic and
the lockdowns, that already received $5,800, in addition to all
the ordinary six-figure income, and under this bill they will
get another $5,600 from taxpayers. Is that accurate?
Ms. Young. Senator Toomey, I do believe the House bill is
very similar to the bipartisan ones you mentioned earlier, so
yes.
Senator Toomey. Yeah, so this is breathtaking for most
Americans, that affluent families, with no interruption
whatsoever in their income, having already gotten $5,800 from
taxpayers, now they are going to get yet another $5,600. It is
as if money grows on trees, and the Federal Government should
be in the business of sending affluent people checks, maybe
periodically, maybe regularly. There is just no rational basis
for this.
Let me ask you this. In 2020, we now know that according to
the Bureau of Economic Analysis--that is part of the Commerce
Department--the aggregate revenue collected by State and local
governments hit an all-time record high. There are a lot of
reasons for it but that is the fact, all-time record high in
2020. And that is separate and apart, that is revenue that they
collected. That is separate from the $500 billion that went to
State and local governments over the course of last year, under
a variety of bills.
Now we are told that the House bill and the Biden proposal
is to send yet another $350 billion. Isn't it actually quite
likely that a number of States are simply, with all of this
cash being thrown at them, they are going to cut taxes at the
State level. Don't you think that is a reasonably likely
outcome?
Ms. Young. Senator, you talked about President Biden's
bipartisanship. He continues to outreach to governors on both
sides of the aisle who continue to say that they are in need.
It is not just a revenue loss fund but also one in which we
expect those States and locals to continue to provide necessary
services as people depend on their local units of government.
Senator Toomey. I understand, but if you are collecting an
all-time record level of revenue, probably you can provide the
services that ordinarily provide, and if in addition to an all-
time record amount of revenue you got half a trillion dollars
from the Federal Government, it seems like there is lots of
money to go around.
Last question. I wonder, do you think there is any downside
whatsoever, any reason at all, any concerns, about
systematically paying people more not to work than they make
working, designing an unemployment system whereby a very
substantial percentage of workers will get paid more to sit at
home than they get paid to go to their work? Is this how we
should demonstrate our commitment to the dignity of work?
Ms. Young. That was a phrase I was going to use. Certainly
people I know from all walks of life have dignity of work. They
are not accepting government assistance, in my opinion, and in
some of the data we have seen they are using this enhanced
unemployment to make ends meet.
Senator Toomey. I see my time has expired. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you, Senator Toomey. Senator
Stabenow.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. First,
Ms. Young, congratulations on your nomination. I have heard
nothing but extremely positive things, both from Democrats and
Republicans, and I look forward to working with you if you are
confirmed, which hopefully will happen. I also strongly support
Neera Tanden, and I think the two of you would be really an
excellent pair, and I am hopeful that we will have both of you.
I do want to say to my friend who just spoke that when we
talk about bipartisanship, certainly in the last year in the
Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act we
had a bipartisan deal. We moved on some things, but then we got
to, I think it was May, and the Senate Republican leader said
he thought no more needed to be done at that point, you know,
that things were okay, we did not need to act. It took from May
until December to pass additional support for American families
and to address the pandemic and issues around trying to get
children back to school safely.
We do not have that much time now. We just do not have time
to wait another six, eight months. What we have is bipartisan
support in the country, and we have got to get as many shots in
people's arms in possible. We have got to help people in small
businesses, small family farms get through and survive this
pandemic, and we have got to make sure every child can get back
into school safely, period. And so I am glad we are moving, and
we certainly would welcome bipartisan support from our
colleagues in the Senate.
Now on question, let me just say that when I talk--there
are so many things on your plate that I want to talk specifics
on things that I am involved with. As the Chairwoman of
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee, right now when
we look at the climate crisis we have a great potential to
harness our farms and forests as leaders in tackling the
climate crisis. And I am working on several bipartisan bills,
along with my great friend, Senator Braun, and other
colleagues, and I look forward to working with the
administration to enact them, which will give Secretary Vilsack
and others at U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) new tools
to address this urgent issue, in a voluntary, bipartisan,
producer-led way, which is our focus.
So if confirmed, will you commit to working with us to
prioritize climate-smart agriculture and forestry investments
in the President's upcoming budgets and through other actions
at the Department of Agriculture and elsewhere?
Ms. Young. You have my absolute commitment to work with you
on those very important issues.
Senator Stabenow. Great. Let me talk about something else
that is certainly at the forefront in the pandemic, and that is
the mental health of millions and millions and millions of
Americans. We have traditionally, historically underfunded
behavioral health systems in this country. The good news is
that we are making progress.
My friend, Senator Roy Blunt, and I have been leading
efforts strongly supported on both sides of the aisle, to
improve quality care through the creation of new certified
community behavioral health clinics. These clinics, among other
things, require high-quality standards, 24-hour, 7-day-a-week
crisis services, outpatient mental health care, substance abuse
care, and working with emergency rooms, law enforcement, and
veterans' groups, which is very important.
So when we look at this we are actually saving money as
well as doing something very effective. The last Health and
Human Services (HHS) budget found that these services led to a
63 percent decrease in emergency department visits for
behavioral health, 60 percent reduction in time spent in jail,
which is why this is so strongly supported by sheriffs and
police chiefs and so on, and a 41 percent decrease in
homelessness.
The challenge for us is quantifying that in terms of the
budget. First of all, we should be covering these service in
health care above the neck as well as below the neck, and could
you talk about the role of OMB in quantifying some of the
downstream savings from increased access to behavioral health
care, and can we count on you to focus on those issues in
upcoming budgets?
Ms. Young. You absolutely can, and I am very proud of the
behavioral and mental health funding in the current COVID
package. It is much needed. It is an area, again, where I think
the regular appropriations process--would have loved to have
done more, but we have certainly been living under budget caps
for the last ten years. So COVID has exacerbated these
problems. It is appropriate that it be in this package, and I
am glad to see that it is.
Senator, you certainly have my commitment to helping
quantify the benefits of this funding and working to ensure we
have adequate funding and do better by those line items.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you so much. Mr. Chairman, I think
probably my time is up. I will just follow up with Ms. Young
about another passionate, important topic, which is making sure
that we are supporting all efforts to protect our Great Lakes.
So thank you very much. I look forward to supporting your
confirmation.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you very much, Senator Stabenow.
Senator Kennedy.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Young, how
are you?
Ms. Young. Good, sir. How are you?
Senator Kennedy. I am okay. I want to ask you about the
proclivity of the Federal Government to persist in paying dead
people. You probably read about it, but last--let me see here--
last spring, when we sent out our first batch of coronavirus
relief checks, we paid out $1.4 billion to deceased Americans.
And we do not get this money back, and, of course, in some
instances, in many instances the checks are cashed, which
obviously is indicative of fraud.
We have passed legislation, and let me back up. We are not
sure how much we pay out in checks to dead people every year,
but it is a lot. It is in the billions and billions and
billions of dollars, and there is a lot of fraud involved.
The Congress passed legislation to try to fix this problem.
I will not bore you with the details, but because of the
politics we had to put in a provision that the legislation
would not really take effect for 3 years. So we basically had
to agree, because of the politics, that we would continue to
pay dead people for 3 more years.
Can you do something about that when you are running OMB?
Ms. Young. Senator Kennedy, I think you have pursued this.
I know it is very important. You pursued it in the Financial
Services construction of Appropriations Committee so I am very
familiar with your work here and your consistent drumbeat. I
think part of this is the government systems. We talked about
this earlier, with a different Senator, is we have to do better
with our IT systems. That is definitely part of the problem,
and I will certainly commit to working, just like I did
previously, in improving these systems so that we--no one wants
fraud, waste, and abuse in important government programs. It
does a disservice to those who really need government services.
It puts a target on their back. So I think there is a
bipartisan commitment to make sure we do what we can to weed
out----
Senator Kennedy. Can I interrupt you, Ms. Young----
Ms. Young. Yes, sir.
Senator Kennedy. --because, look, I have watched you and I
have followed your career, and you are a very smart person and
I think you can fix this. And, to me it is very simple. We,
meaning the Federal Government, get data every year, every
month, every day from the States about who died. It is not
perfect data but we get it, and it goes into a database at the
Federal Government. But the group in charge of maintaining that
database does not really share it with other agencies. It is
complicated. It is needlessly complicated.
And I think that you are a very smart person. I think that
if you said, look, you call the White House, speak to the
President, and say, ``Mr. President, this is low-hanging fruit.
We really need to stop paying dead people. It is embarrassing.
And Congress has acted on it but because of the politics it had
to delay the implementation of the bill for 3 years. Can't we,
Mr. President, issue some sort of Executive order and stop
paying dead people? I mean, don't we owe that, at least to the
taxpayers?''
And I know it is complicated, you know, but it is
needlessly complicated. It is very simple. We have the data. It
may not be perfect, but it is better than nothing, but we
continue to send out the checks. And I think you are going to
be running OMB. I think you could stop it.
Ms. Young. Well, Senator Kennedy----
Senator Kennedy. I have full confidence in you.
Ms. Young. Thank you for the full confidence. I appreciate
that. If I am confirmed as Deputy you certainly have my
commitment to work with you on this. You have raised some good
points.
Senator Kennedy. You may be more than Deputy. You may be
the sheriff. I do not expect you to comment on that.
Ms. Young. Thank you, sir.
Senator Kennedy. Help me do something about this. I know
you can do it.
Ms. Young. I look forward to working with you. I do commit
to work with you and your staff on this issue. As you said, the
American people deserve a Federal Government who gets its data
right, and I think it is a bipartisan effort to weed out any
whiff of fraud, waste, and abuse. Thank you.
Senator Kennedy. Thank you, Ms. Young. Thank you so much.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you, Senator Kennedy. Senator
Whitehouse.
Senator Whitehouse. Ms. Young, how are you? Welcome. I have
two things that I want to show to you. The first is this book,
which is a compilation of a whole variety of reports that
relate to, as the title says, The Economic Risks of Climate
Change. We all know that it is going to change our physical
world. We all know that it is going to raise sea levels. We all
know it is going to change temperatures, move fisheries around,
change weather, create all of these physical, biological,
natural consequences.
But we have not focused as much as I think we should have
on the economic consequences. For instance, when sea levels
rise and people who have predictive capability are able to see
where the sea levels are going to rise to, they are going to go
to mortgage companies, and they are going to go to insurance
companies, and they are going to say, ``Hey, I have got some
information that you ought to have before you insure that
house, or before you issue a mortgage on that house.''
So, nonetheless than Freddie Mac, the big mortgage
behemoth, has warned that we are going to have a coastal
property values crash when those sea level rise warnings hit
the mortgage and insurance markets that support coastal
property, and that it is going to be worse than the 2008
mortgage meltdown. So that is a pretty serious warning. That is
just one.
We have got a Nobel Prize winner, testifying under oath,
about the catastrophic economic consequences we are looking at.
We have got major banks. We have got the Fed. We have got
foreign sovereign banks. We have got major, pretty rough
corporation organizations who are not exactly eleemosynary. And
they are warning, in their own interests, that this is a big
deal.
So I would ask you to please flip through this--we will
give you a copy--because I think it is going to be really
important for this administration, which has done a great job
on tackling the climate change problem, at least in its early
initial steps--to make sure that these warnings are made loud
and clear. It is probably the most warned of hazard that we
have ever seen, but because the fossil fuel industry has got so
much of our Congress locked up in its grip we have not
responded to those warnings.
So that is one. If you could take that and also take this
issue seriously. I will be hounding you about it, obviously.
Ms. Young. I am from the State of Louisiana, and----
Senator Whitehouse. So you know it.
Ms. Young. Yes.
Senator Whitehouse. Yes. You are losing more of your
coastline than I think any other state in the country right
now, and Rhode Island, my State, is looking to having to redraw
its map. Senator Kaine here is looking at losing Norfolk Naval
Station, because you can build the piers up higher and higher
at Norfolk Naval Station but you cannot build up the schools
and the markets and the roads and the entire community that
supports that naval station there. So the former head of his
naval station has warned that in 20 years that thing is gone.
We are going to have to re-site that naval station.
So this is all serious, and because of fossil fuel mischief
a lot of Members of Congress will not take it seriously, and we
have got to make sure people understand. So thank you.
The second thing is a health care thing. I use this graph a
lot. CBO, back around the time that we did the Affordable Care
Act (ACA), did a prediction of American health care costs were
going to rise, which is this top line. I turns out, after the
Affordable Care Act got passed, health care costs did not go up
so fast, and we actually got the lower line as our experience.
So if you take the current projection from our lower experience
and compare it to what that projection is tagged onto the
previous experience, you get this green differential, which, in
the next 10 years, is $6 trillion savings on Federal health
care.
In 2024, we are going to hit the Medicare trust fund. We do
not have much time. We have got to fix this. Nobody is going to
cut benefits. But whatever is happening here that saves $6
trillion, we need to do a lot more of. And I submit to you that
it is quality improvements and incentives in the health care
system, it is getting away from fee-for-service treadmill in
the health care system, and it is really pushing the
accountable care organizations, the provider Accountable Care
Organizations (ACO), that are doing such a good job.
I have got two of the best ones in Rhode Island. World
class. They are not the best in Rhode Island. They are the best
in the world. They are the best in the country. They happen to
be in Rhode Island. And they are driving costs down, their
patients are getting better outcomes, everybody is happier with
the better service. It is win, win, win. But we have got to
understand that for the big deal that it is, and connect those
little ACOs to this big $6 trillion, and fix the mess that our
health care system is right now, and I hope that we will work
together on that also.
Ms. Young. Absolutely, sir, and the bill you are
considering this week does have some improvements, some
increased subsidies for ACA. Hopefully can get more people in
it, and I think there is a lot more to do on the ACA front to
ensure that that graph continues to get bigger.
Senator Whitehouse. Yeah. We can spread that actually
further with more work that is good stuff. Thanks, Chairman.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you, Senator Whitehouse. Senator
Warner.
Senator Warner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and, Ms. Young, it
is good to see you, at least virtually. I think you have been
very impressive in your answers. I do want to say, though, that
I know some of my colleagues on the Republican side have made
the decision about Neera Tanden. I hope some will still
reconsider. I look forward to supporting you, Ms. Young, but
hope is still that, at least initially, I will be supporting
you for Deputy Director.
I want to get to three quick questions. One, Virginia is
home to about 170,000 Federal workers. They have been under
enormous assault under the Trump administration as the previous
administration tried to politicize the workforce. I saw it
particularly in my role in the Intel Committee what has
happened to our intel workforce. And while I was heartened by
the Biden administration's initial actions to repeal the
Schedule F Executive order that Trump tried to put in in the
waning days of his administration, from bargaining rights to
pay to just general morale, the Federal workforce has been
hurting. Layered on top of that, obviously, all the additional
constraints with COVID.
Can you speak on how you could coordinate with Office of
Personnel Management (OPM) to deal with this overriding issue
of moral in the Federal workforce?
Ms. Young. Senator, I pause because I started my career as
a civil servant at National Institutes of Health (NIH). I
understand how much more this country has benefitted by having
a motivated Federal workforce, who shows up every day, does
over and beyond. They could be in private industry, a lot of
them, making more than they do in their government service. So
it is not about a job for the Federal workers that I have known
and worked with. It is about service.
So that is one of the things I hope, if confirmed as Deputy
Director, certainly within OMB, is to empower and bring a lot
of that back to the career staff. I know that is a goal of
mine, I hope to leave, during my time of service, is to let
them know that we appreciate their service, we trust that they
are good stewards of Federal policy, and you certainly have my
commitment--some will need congressional fixes, congressional
pardoners--to work with you to make sure that our Federal
workers are getting the benefits necessary.
Often in these budget deals that come up one of the main
losers are Federal workers. We tend to cut their retirement. We
tend to do things that do not, I think, do a lot for morale. So
you certainly have my commitment to work with you to bring
back, I think, some of the things that have eroded over the
last few years.
Senator Warner. Well, I would look forward to working with
you on that. I had that issue over my 12 years here, something
started by Ted Kaufman when he served as a Senator from
Delaware, going down on the floor of the Senate, calling out
the great contribution of Federal workers on an individualized
basis. Your work at NIH, you know, as you said, a lot of these
workers could be making a lot more. This was a piece of public
service and it is going to be great working with a partner who
supports that service.
Kind of related to that, one of the areas that the Chairman
has been a big advocate, and I have generally been supportive
of during the period of COVID, trying to help workers with
increased unemployment benefits and trying to make sure we
cover a whole group of folks, for example, gig workers and
others I think is a very positive action. One of the things
that we have had some debate on is whether the economy includes
some of that additional benefits cut back. And we have had, I
think, a good debate on this issue, but the challenge has been,
to be able to do that, we have got to upgrade our IT systems
within the Federal Government. Now, literally, we could not
even put in place economic stabilizers in a rational way
because our IT system is so bad. We have dramatically
underinvested, not just under Trump but candidly even under
President Obama. There is something called the Technology
Modernization Fund (TMF). I hope you will [inaudible]
legislation that I have got. I know President Biden put forward
a $9 billion investment and unfortunately it got cut back in
the House to $2 billion.
In your last two seconds, can you talk to upgrading our
technology?
Ms. Young. Yes. You heard it through several Senators'
questions that, you know, it is central to many issues we have
with payments to individuals, with ensuring our financial
audits, a lot of it comes back down to technology, and you
certainly have my commitment to work with you. I am very
familiar with the TMF, making sure we get investments there.
Senator Warner. Thank you, Ms. Young. I look forward to
supporting you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you, Senator Warner. Senator
Merkley.
Senator Merkley. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and, Ms. Young, I
just want to jump right into questions since we do not have a
lot of time. We had the situation in previous administrations
where OIRA, part of OMB, has proceeded to be a place where
rules go and disappear, and never to be seen again, or to sit
untended for years. Things like mercury air toxics rule,
rearview cameras in cars, the issue of a rule related to coal
ash.
We have the vaping rule, which we had all these illegal
products on the market and nothing happened, and millions of
American youth became addicted to vaping, a situation very hard
to reverse which will affect health care costs and the quality
of life for millions of Americans for generations to come.
And so how do you feel about this section of OIRA becoming
just this place where regulations go to suffer and die with no
transparency about what is happening?
Ms. Young. Senator, it is certainly not the statutory goal
of OIRA and something we should not strive to have that opinion
of OIRA. I do believe we can use the presidential memo calling
for OMB to lead an effort to improve and modernize, to do
something about that perception, and work with our partners in
Congress to make sure that we fix this issue.
Senator Merkley. Thank you, and I look forward to talking
with you when we end up with challenges of disappearing
regulations in OIRA in the future.
I want to turn then to the cost benefit analysis that you
referred to before, and the decision to keep it in place. Often
that cost benefit analysis does not capture externalities, and
certainly not the social cost of carbon. Can you speak to how
OMB's cost benefit analysis can reflect the true cost of
decarbonization or the true advantages of decarbonization?
Ms. Young. Senator, I think you are speaking to the very
core of the presidential memo that we have talked a lot about,
on improving and modernizing. I think it is good to keep a
basic set of facts, a cost benefit, but you are absolutely
right. You see it in carbon, and actually not just carbon, in
greenhouse gases, you see it in regulations that have to do
with servicing people who might be from rural America or living
with disabilities, that often looking just at costs and
benefits is not enough to understand the full impact. If our
goal is to improve the lives of all Americans, I think we have
to, even if it is difficult, find a way to quantify these
things, because as you mentioned and as Senator Whitehouse has
mentioned, climate change is an economics issue as much as
anything.
Senator Merkley. Does that mean that the OMB cost benefit
analysis will now incorporate the social cost of carbon?
Ms. Young. I think, Senator, you have seen administrative
action. I am not there yet, but if confirmed I am happy to get
back to you on the details. I cannot speak about every single
action that has occurred, since I am not there, but my
understanding on the social cost of greenhouse gases, with
carbon being one part of that, there are working groups that
have reformed, that have been done away with in order to help
quantify that cost.
Senator Merkley. Thank you, Ms. Young. President Biden, in
a related issue, has committed to directing 40 percent of green
Federal investments towards environmental justice communities,
necessitating a sort of equity screen and recognizing that low-
income communities are often hit particularly hard by
environmental effects. But that has to be tracked. Do you see
OMB as having a role in tracking and targeting those
investments to address that 40 percent goal?
Ms. Young. OMB will be a part of that process, as stated in
the President's Executive order on climate change. There is a
specific section dealing exclusively with environmental justice
and it lays out the members of the council that will deal with
those issues, and OMB will be a part of that.
Senator Merkley. Thank you. And finally, how do you
envision OMB working to drive solutions to the student debt
crisis in our country?
Ms. Young. I have to imagine OMB will be central to
offering ideas and legislative solutions. I do know that it
will take a partner in Congress to ensure we deal with that
issue. You do not normally like breakups, but one of my
breakups has been with Navient, myself, 3 years ago. It is
crushing, the student loan debt, and I am one of the lucky
ones.
Senator Merkley. I am sorry. I missed that. Your own
personal loan?
Ms. Young. My own personal loans. It was one of the best
breakups I have ever had, was to pay the last payment to
Navient, and again, that was 22 years after I started college,
and I am one of the lucky ones.
Senator Merkley. Well, congratulations. I hope you had a
big party at that moment, and I do hope that OMB will work in
partnership with the administration on the cancellation of loan
debt. I support the broader goal of $50,000. It would be
incredible stimulus and an opportunity for so many to escape
this deep burden that other developing countries do not impose
on their aspiring students. But even at the lower level of
$10,000, it is one thing to have it as a vision and it is
another to actually make it happen, and I hope OMB can help
with that.
Ms. Young. Thank you.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you very much, Senator Merkley.
Senator Braun.
Senator Braun. Thank you, Chairman Sanders. Good to be here
discussing something, Ms. Young, that to me--I have been here a
couple of years, and I know you have been in the House part of
Appropriations. I have run an enterprise that has had to really
be worried about what lies down the road. In other words, how
do you get things to work out financially?
I see a trajectory that we are on that just, to me, looks
unsustainable, and whether you believe in the modern monetary
theory. With what you crafted, being involved in
appropriations, where we are at currently, where we have got
structural, trillion-dollar deficits. We have got a balance
sheet that, I do not care how good you are as a Chief Financial
Officer (CFO), would be something you could not be proud of.
Here, it is different. You know, we are lucky that we are in a
place where we can borrow for nearly zero. That changes as soon
as we are not the reserve currency. You have got an impending
crisis with the Medicare trust fund being completely depleted
here in a little over 5 years. We have been paying into it,
employers and employees, since the '60s. It is social security
that is even more ominous in terms of what would happen if you
let it continue on the trajectory.
Tell me a little bit about how you think, for anyone here,
especially that looks to the Federal Government as a place that
you want to do more with, how do you keep it in a healthy place
going from here forward, and what do you think your input has
been towards being an appropriator, that, to me, looks like no
one really cares about how this is going to work out for future
generations.
Ms. Young. Senator Braun, you know, I perfectly acknowledge
long-term debt has to be addressed. It is probably only going
to be addressed with bipartisan solutions. But I do have to
turn to, you know, people smarter than me, and I would
certainly listen to Secretary Yellen, who tells us we will be
on a worse economic trajectory if we do not do something--not
just do something--if we do not ensure the health of American
citizens and then turn our full sights to ensuring investments
for our economic recovery. At some point we are going to have
to turn to long-term, but I do not think we have ever faced
anything like this pandemic before.
So I certainly agree with you, but I do think there is
still room, as you mentioned. It is very cheap to borrow right
now, which is something I think we also have to look at when we
are looking at the response to the pandemic.
Senator Braun. So normally when you borrow money you do it
for something that is a tangible asset, an investment, only
borrow to invest, never borrow to spend or consume. Of course,
we consume everything here. I think that is another thing to
think about.
Let me ask you, on the revenue side of the ledger.
Everybody is really good at spending here. I have had
conversations with folks on the Budget Committee. Can you raise
revenue? Do you think it is realistic that you can bridge the
structural deficit gap with that, and how would you consider
doing that? And can you do that in a meaningful way before you
start to throttle back economic growth, and also, looking at
maybe what was in place pre-COVID to whereas somebody off the
street, I thought we had it pretty well hitting the mark. We
helped small businesses through the Tax Cut and Jobs Act, C-
corps got probably way too big a break that they did not need.
What do you think about the revenue side, that no one wants to
talk about?
Ms. Young. Senator Braun, I mean, I am sure you already
know this. President Biden has looked to increasing the tax
rate for those over $400,000, and for some corporations who, I
think, some of the lessons from the tax break did not do as
much investing in their personnel as was hoped or touted before
that act.
So I do think there is some room, on the revenue side, to
help out long-term debt. I do think there are some other things
besides revenue and spending. Senator Whitehouse talked about
the cost of health care. We have got to do something so the
government is not paying nearly as much for health care and
neither are private citizens.
So I think there will have to be a multi-pronged view of
how we do this, but, you know, we cannot cut benefits for
people that have paid into them. I have my parents here. You
know, they are called entitlements for a reason. People have
paid their entire careers in their lives for these benefits,
and part of that is ensuring that health care does not cost
what it costs to provide it to the American people.
Senator Braun. Well, thank you, and I think that is a bit
of realism, and it is going to take some really hard decisions
that, in my observation, do not happen often here, along the
lines of having some political will to make those tough
decisions if we are going to have it sustainable in the long
run.
Ms. Young. Thank you, sir.
Senator Braun. Thank you.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you, Senator Braun. Senator Kaine.
Senator Kaine. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks, Ms. Young.
Congratulations to you. I intend to support you, and you have
had a distinguished public service career.
Two editorial comments and two questions. One editorial
comment, I am not sure you should need Senate confirmation. I
think if President Biden wants to hire you to be Deputy
Director I think he should be able to hire you. I am in my
ninth year in the Senate, third President, and an observation
about the Senate is I think we have too many Senate-confirmable
positions, and each one chews up some Committee time and then
chews up some floor time. And by chewing up finite time then
legislative time gets shrunk. So I might start urging that on
my colleagues. I would love to have you here to ask you tons of
questions, but I do not necessarily think that Deputy Cabinet
Secretaries and Deputy Directors of agencies should need Senate
confirmation. That is editorial comment number one.
Number two, Neera Tanden. The controversy about Neera is
largely over her social media comments, which could be levied
at virtually all of us. I mean, it is partly a challenge for
the individual, and she has got to own that, and she has
apologized for it, and it is partly the world we live in, where
we say things in the heat of the moment and social media gives
us the ability to do it.
My editorial comment is this. We faced so many nominees in
the past administration who had really intemperate things to
say in social media accounts, including about me, but they
apologized. And when they apologized their apologies were
accepted by virtually all Republicans and a lot of Democrats.
So Neera Tanden has apologized, and I just worry that there
is a double standard with her that why would we accept the
apologies of others, about comments on social media, that, if
anything, were more extreme, and not accept Neera Tanden's
apologies? And I am nervous about that, and I ask that question
not just to Republicans. I ask it to Democrats.
Two questions.
Ms. Young. And, Senator Kaine, I know you were speaking,
but I have not had the chance to weigh in on this question. I
certainly think before this Committee you saw Neera Tanden
apologize profusely about the tweets. I think what you also saw
is an expansive knowledge of various policy areas. And
certainly I have gotten to know Neera over the last few weeks.
We did not have much interactions before then, and I do think
we both bring some skill sets in different areas where we make
a great team, if both of us were confirmed. So thank you for
those comments and I hope if you listen to her time before this
Committee and Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs
Committee (HSGAC), she really did lay out her vast policy
experience.
Senator Kaine. I completely agree with you. Now, on to the
two questions. One of the things about your nomination that
makes me the happiest is that you have 14 years' experience
working in the Article I branch. The OMB, in the previous
administration, treated us like we were an annoyance on a good
day, or an enemy on a bad day, and there were more bad days
than good days. And they particularly treated those in the
minority party, the Democrats in that administration, as the
enemy. I am not sure they were that good to the majority party
either.
So, for example, with issues like congressional requests
for information, you will take an oath, should you be
confirmed, to the Constitution of the United States, not to the
President. Can I have your assurance--and you have already been
asked this by Senator Sanders, but I want to have your
assurance on this. Will you treat, as somebody who has sat on
the congressional side of this dais, will you treat requests
from Senators on this Committee, be they Democratic or
Republican, with respect, and try to be as responsive as you
can, as promptly as you can?
Ms. Young. I cannot answer that more emphatically. Yes, and
you are absolutely right. I have heard from Republican members
as well who not only could not get information but would see
their things important to them go to OMB to never be seen
again.
Senator Kaine. And if you have a problem, or anybody at
OMB, with committee members just like pestering you so you
cannot do your work, you can take that to the Chairman and the
Chairman can be an enforcer and tell us to knock it off. But
reasonable requests should be dealt with in a prompt fashion,
whether they are made by Republicans or Democrats. I am glad to
hear you agree with that, and I knew you would.
Second question. So I came into the Senate in January of
2013. Sequestration and budget caps went into effect in late
February. We had a 2-week government shutdown in October. We
have had endless CRs. We had a month-long shutdown of a portion
of the U.S. Government in late '18 and 2019. I have an opinion
about how I would grade the Federal budget process since I have
been here. If I was asking you to grade the Federal budget
process, what grade would you give it?
Ms. Young. Wow, that is a tough one, on the process.
Senator Kaine. Well, not the process, not the process as in
the statute, but grade our performance.
Ms. Young. Okay. Get away from the process----
Senator Kaine. Rate our performance.
Ms. Young. --which is often ugly. When we finish I will
give it an A, because we got there, and I think there is a lot
of value in that.
Senator Kaine. I am just going to say, I would not give it
an A, and I would love an acknowledgment that there should be
some significant improvement. That is not going to affect my
vote.
Ms. Young. There has to be improvement, Senator. I still
find a lot of intrinsic value in working through an annual
process, and you and I talked about this, as someone who loves
this institution. And I have told you this personally, my
concern would be if anything would keep Congress from doing
that bare-knuckle negotiations, where you got to hold the
Executive branch accountable each year. So yes, it needs
improvement, but I would hate to see anything that required
less congressional action because of that.
Senator Kaine. Thank you, and thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you, Senator Kaine. Senator Van
Hollen.
Senator Van Hollen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking
Member, and I was pleased with Neera Tanden's nomination to be
Director of OMB, and I am very pleased with yours to be the
Deputy Director. Congratulations.
And I want to pick up a little bit on the process, but
especially the part of the process that has been broken, at
least over the last 4 years. And as the staff director of the
House Appropriations Committee you were deeply involved in
addressing the illegal withholding of funds by OMB during the
last administration, the most prominent case involved
withholding security assistance for Ukraine.
And I asked at the time that the Government Accountability
Office (GAO), the nonpartisan GAO, review that matter and
determine whether a withholding violated the Impoundment
Control Act (ICA), which, as you know, is the law that is
supposed to prevent the Executive branch, regardless of party,
for unilaterally refusing to spend funds that are provided in
laws passed by the Congress. GAO looked at it and confirmed
that the Trump administration violated that law.
As a member of this Committee, the Budget Committee, we
were able to put together bipartisan legislation that included
a provision I proposed to strengthen the Impoundment Control
Act and increase transparency for the apportionment process at
OMB.
We have not yet passed that legislation. I would like to
get your commitment to work with us to strengthen the laws that
protect constitutional separation of powers and Congress' power
of the purse. Having come from the Appropriations Committee I
hope you will work us to do that.
Ms. Young. Again, something near and dear to me, and you
absolutely have my commitment to working on those. I know there
are lots of efforts to strengthen the ICA, and I think also in
my commitment to you I will also, you know, commit to working
with GAO, who are the arbiters in these things, and they found
wrongdoing, and I think we should listen to them when they make
those, I think, very thoughtful judgments.
Senator Van Hollen. I appreciate that. Look, there is a
process, and GAO has pointed out some things we can do to
further strengthen that process. Obviously, the Executive
branch has a role in budget consideration, but as you know,
once Congress has spoken it is imperative that the
administration, any administration, follow the law with respect
to those decisions.
I would like to just briefly ask you about the issue of
long-term unemployment, because we are all hopeful that as we
beat this pandemic and with the passage, I hope, of the
emergency bill, that we expect to pass before the middle of
this month, that the economy will begin to improve. And we hope
to see steady improvement, more people going back to work.
But I am very worried about individuals who are long-term
unemployed. We have over 4 million long-term unemployed
Americans right now. These are individuals who have been out of
work for more than 6 months, looking for work. On top of that
we have over 7 million Americans who have essentially dropped
out of the workforce, and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve,
Chairman Powell, in response to a question I asked him the
other day, indicated that we are going to have to be very
intentional about policies to help the long-term unemployed.
Even before the pandemic, when the economy was working better,
we had over 1 million Americans who were long-term unemployed.
I do not expect you to commit to any details, but just
would you agree that the issue of long-term unemployment is one
that we have to address with intentionality, meaning we cannot
just expect that as the economy improves that the long-term
unemployed will automatically find work, because we know that
has not been true in the past.
Ms. Young. Senator Van Hollen, thank you for bringing this
up. I think one of the goals of government is to ensure that
those who are easily left behind, that we ensure that they are
not. So I look forward to working with you on this.
Senator Van Hollen. I appreciate it. These are individuals
who want to work, they are out there looking for jobs, and
really through no fault of their own unable to find it. And it
hurts them, and, of course, it hurts the larger community when
we are not able to take advantage of their skills in growing
the economy.
So thank you, and, Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you very much, Senator Van Hollen.
Senator Padilla.
Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ms.
Young, for your willingness to serve. I know in a prior hear
for the Director of OMB position I was able to ask questions
generally in regards to concern about equity and the role OMB
can play in policymaking and budgeting to address equity
challenges in America. We also touched on the economic
contributions of immigrants over the course of our nation's
history. I know earlier in this hearing we have heard a lot of
questions about a number of issues, from climate to COVID
response and everything in between.
I say all that because I want to raise a couple of issues
that are unique, important not just to California, my home
State, but the nation as a whole, so let me jump into it.
The first of the two is housing and homelessness. The
COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated our nation's ongoing
affordable housing and homelessness crises. Nearly 1 in 5
renters across the country, including an estimated 2 million
Californians alone, have been unable to catch up on their rent.
Even before the pandemic, a lack of affordable housing and
rising rents pushed too many into our societal safety net and
even into homelessness, with now more than 150,000 individuals
experiencing homelessness in California, which could get worse,
with evictions related to our recent economic downturn.
So as we look to build back better, will you commit to
ensuring that the President's budget requests seek significant
increases for critical housing programs such as Committee
Development Block Grant Program, the Home Investment
Partnership Program, homelessness assistance grants, and
expanded Section 8 vouchers? And I welcome any other
recommendations or suggestions you have in this regard.
Ms. Young. Senator, I certainly do commit--I am not there
yet so I have not been involved in the budget development. But
those are programs I have supported during my time as staff
director of the Appropriations Committee, so I certainly will
look to work with you to make sure that there is adequate
funding in not just the annual programs but I do believe there
is still work to be done as we recover from COVID, and possible
other legislation.
Senator Padilla. Thank you for that. I look forward to
following up with you in the weeks, months, and years ahead.
The second area--again, I think to issues that have been
raised already--is relative to scientific research fundings.
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is the only agency that
funds basic nonbiomedical research, as you know. The
potentially groundbreaking projects that the NSF supports drive
economic growth and spur transformative discoveries that are
critical to our lives.
Over the past several decades, these breakthroughs have
included accelerated supercomputing, bar codes, improving tumor
detection, and even the shaping of the internet as we know it
today. Today the NSF is funding projects to better understand
the inner working of living cells, forecast and predict
earthquakes and tsunamis, advance clean energy technologies,
and more.
Now while Congress has approved funding increase to NSF's
medical counterpart, the National Institutes of Health, NSF
funding has not kept pace. So as we act to reverse the
denigration of science and scientists that we have seen over
the last 4 years, it is critical, in my opinion, that we also
support scientists and scientific research with the additional
funding that they need.
So as you work to develop the President's budget request
for fiscal year 2022, will you consider prioritizing new
investments in scientific research, including increased funding
for the National Science Foundation? And part two of the
question is, will you also work to uphold the integrity of
science as well as support scientist at Federal agencies and
research institutions throughout the nation?
Ms. Young. I started my career at NIH. I am certainly aware
the attention NIH gets from bipartisan members, but its sisters
in science, NSF, National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), all
deserve the same level of support. NSF does great work,
supports great work among universities. So you certainly have
my commitment to ensuring that I would lead my voice to those
who want to prioritize NSF. And we certainly have seen a need
for that increased basic research during COVID, not just at NIH
but NSF as well.
Senator Padilla. As one of the few engineers and scientists
serving in this body I thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you, Senator Padilla. I want to
thank Ms. Young for appearing before the Committee today. Ms.
Young, your full statement will be included in the record. As
information for all Senators, questions for the record are due
by 12 noon tomorrow, with signed hard copies delivered to the
Committee clerk in Dirksen 624. Emailed copies will also be
accepted, due to our current conditions, under our rules. Ms.
Young will have 7 days from receipt of our questions to respond
with answers.
With no further business----
Senator Whitehouse. Mr. Chairman, may I make one last
comment before we close out?
Chairman Sanders. Very briefly.
Senator Whitehouse. Very briefly. I just had an exchange
with Director Wray about the FBI's consistent refusal to answer
questions from Congress through the Trump administration. In
nine different committee hearings, seven got zero Questions for
the Record (QFR) answered. Zero. And what he blamed it on was
the interagency process that all have to go through, which OMB
runs.
So we need to clean that mess up. I think that is a phony,
basically, but we need to clean that mess up.
Ms. Young. On the Appropriations Committee we can barely
produce hearing volumes for lack of QFRs, so you certainly have
my commitment that we need to do better.
Chairman Sanders. Okay. Thank you, Senator Whitehouse.
Under our rules, Ms. Young will have 7 days from receipt of our
questions to respond with answers.
With no further business before the Committee, this hearing
is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:39 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
ADDITIONAL MATERIALS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
[Prepared statement, responses to written questions, and
additional material supplied for the record follow:]
Prepared Statement of Ms. Shalanda D. Young
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
EXECUTIVE BUSINESS MEETING TO CONSIDER THE NOMINATION OF MS. SHALANDA
D. YOUNG, OF LOUISIANA, TO BE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND
BUDGET
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 10, 2021
U.S. Senate,
Committee on the Budget,
Washington, D.C.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:37 p.m., in
Room S-207, The Capitol, Hon. Bernard Sanders, Chairman of the
Committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Sanders, Murray, Wyden, Stabenow,
Whitehouse, Warner, Merkley, Kaine, Van Hollen, Lujan, Padilla,
Graham, Grassley, Crapo, Toomey, Johnson, Braun, Sasse, and
Romney.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BERNARD SANDERS
Chairman Sanders. Okay, ladies and gentlemen.
I call the Committee meeting to order.
The question before the Committee is the nomination of
Shalanda Young to be Deputy Director of the Office of
Management and Budget.
The past 14 years, Ms. Young has served as a top staffer on
the House Appropriations Committee and has done an excellent
job working with Democrats and Republicans on legislation that
must be passed each and every year that impacts the lives of
tens of millions of Americans. There is no doubt that she is
highly qualified for this position and I strongly support her
nomination.
Senator Graham, would you like to make a speech on this
issue?
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LINDSEY GRAHAM
Senator Graham. Yes, it will take 2 or 3 minutes.
The bottom line is Senator Shelby tells me she has been
great to work with on budget matters and appropriations. But
the statement that she gave in response to Senator Hawley's
question about the Hyde Amendment is troubling to many of our
members.
So I am going to vote yes with the understanding she has to
answer one additional question. She said in her statement that
she would follow the law. I think every regulation in the
country comes across her desk and I want her to assure me that
if there is a regulation proposed by the Biden administration
that changes Hyde or chips away at it that the statutory
provisions prevail.
So I am going to vote yes, Mr. Chairman, with that
understanding. And if she does not give the right answer, I am
going to change my vote.
Chairman Sanders. Okay. Do we have a quorum present? I
think we do. I note that a quorum is present and urge a yes
vote on this nomination.
We will vote that the Committee report the nomination to
the Senate with a recommendation that the nominee be confirmed.
The clerk will call the roll.
The Clerk. Ms. Murray.
Senator Murray. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Wyden.
Senator Wyden. Aye.
The Clerk.. Ms. Stabenow.
Senator Stabenow. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Whitehouse.
Senator Whitehouse. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Merkley.
Senator Merkley. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Kaine.
Senator Kaine. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Van Hollen.
Senator Van Hollen. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Lujan.
Senator Lujan. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Padilla.
Senator Padilla. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Graham.
Senator Graham. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Grassley.
Senator Grassley. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Crapo.
Senator Crapo. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Toomey.
Senator Toomey. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Johnson.
Senator Johnson. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Braun.
Senator Braun. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Scott.
Senator Graham. No by proxy.
The Clerk. Mr. Sasse.
Senator Sasse. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Romney.
Senator Romney. No.
The Clerk. Mr. Kennedy.
Senator Graham. No by proxy.
The Clerk. Mr. Cramer.
Senator Graham. Yes by proxy.
The Clerk. Mr. Warner.
Senator Warner. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman.
Chairman Sanders. Aye.
The Clerk. Mr. Chairman, the yeas are 14 and the nays are
eight.
Chairman Sanders. Thank you all.
As information for all Senators, statements for the record
are due by 12:00 noon tomorrow, with signed hard copies
delivered to the Committee Clerk in Dirksen 624. Emailed copies
will also be accepted due to our current conditions.
With no further business before the Committee, this meeting
is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 2:40 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
[all]
File and source
- File
- CHRG_chrg-117shrg44902_chrg-117shrg44902.htm
- Size
- 100,550 bytes
- SHA-256
- 91bfc5bf76a0c1fd3c6b06cd25370b691e381f0f8df1e2c2835c38c68e317cf4
- Original
- No public link identified.