[House Hearing, 108 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
H.R. 444, BACK TO WORK INCENTIVE ACT OF 2003
_________________________________________________________
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND
THE WORKFORCE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
________
HEARING HELD IN LAS VEGAS, NEVADA, FEBRUARY 18, 2003
________
Serial No. 108-3
________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Education
and the Workforce
86-211
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE
JOHN A. BOEHNER, Ohio, Chairman
THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin GEORGE MILLER, California
CASS BALLENGER, North Carolina DALE E. KILDEE, Michigan
PETER HOEKSTRA, Michigan MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
HOWARD P. "BUCK" McKEON, California DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey
MICHAEL N. CASTLE, Delaware ROBERT E. ANDREWS, New Jersey
SAM JOHNSON, Texas LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California
JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania RUBEN HINOJOSA, Texas
CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia CAROLYN McCARTHY, New York
FRED UPTON, Michigan JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan RON KIND, Wisconsin
JIM DeMINT, South Carolina DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia DAVID WU, Oregon
JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois RUSH D. HOLT, New Jersey
TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania SUSAN A. DAVIS, California
PATRICK J. TIBERI, Ohio BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota
RIC KELLER, Florida DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
TOM OSBORNE, Nebraska ED CASE, Hawaii
JOE WILSON, South Carolina RAUL M. GRIJALVA, Arizona
TOM COLE, Oklahoma DENISE L. MAJETTE, Georgia
JON C. PORTER, Nevada CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
JOHN KLINE, Minnesota TIMOTHY J. RYAN, Ohio
JOHN R. CARTER, Texas
MARILYN N. MUSGRAVE, Colorado
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee
PHIL GINGREY, Georgia
MAX BURNS, Georgia
Paula Nowakowski, Chief of Staff
John Lawrence, Minority Staff Director
Table of Contents
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN JOHN BOEHNER, COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE................................2
STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BUCK MCKEON, SUBCOMMITTEE ON 21ST CENTURY
COMPETITIVENESS, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE..3
STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN JON PORTER, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND
THE WORKFORCE..............................................4
STATEMENT OF MYLA FLORENCE, DIRECTOR, NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF
EMPLOYMENT, TRAINING AND REHABILITATION, CARSON CITY, NV........6
STATEMENT OF ROBERT BREWER, CHAIRMAN, SOUTHERN NEVADA WORKFORCE
INVESTMENT BOARD, LAS VEGAS, NV................................9
STATEMENT OF DEBI LINDEMENN, EMPLOYMENT SPECIALIST SUPERVISOR,
NORTH LAS VEGAS JOBCONNECT, DEPARTMENT O F EMPLOYMENT, TRAINING
AND REHABILITATION, LAS VEGAS, NV.............................12
STATEMENT OF ARDELL GALBRETH, DEPUTY BOARD MANAGER AND DIRECTOR
OF OPERATIONS, SOUTHERN NEVADA WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD, LAS
VEGAS, NV.....................................................14
APPENDIX A - WRITTEN OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN JOHN BOEHNER,
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE......................27
APPENDIX B - WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN JON PORTER,
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE......................31
APPENDIX C - WRITTEN STATEMENT OF MYLA FLORENCE, DIRECTOR, NEVADA
DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT, TRAINING AND REHABILITATION, CARSON
CITY, NV......................................................35
APPENDIX D - WRITTEN STATEMENT OF ROBERT BREWER, CHAIRMAN,
SOUTHERN NEVADA WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD, LAS VEGAS, NV......43
APPENDIX E - WRITTEN STATEMENT OF DEBI LINDEMENN, EMPLOYMENT
SPECIALIST SUPERVISOR, NORTH LAS VEGAS JOBCONNECT, DEPARTMENT OF
EMPLOYMENT, TRAINING AND REHABILITATION, LAS VEGAS, NV.........51
APPENDIX F - WRITTEN STATEMENT OF ARDELL GALBRETH, DEPUTY BOARD
MANAGER AND DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, SOUTHERN NEVADA WORKFORCE
INVESTMENT BOARD, LAS VEGAS, NV................................55
Table of Indexes...............................................61
HEARING ON H.R. 444
"BACK TO WORK INCENTIVE ACT OF 2003"
________________________________________________________________
Tuesday, February 18, 2003
Committee on Education and the Workforce
U. S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C.
The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 9:30 a.m., in
Room 101, the Nevada Job Connect, 2401 Las Verdes Street, Las Vegas,
Nevada, Hon. John A. Boehner, Chairman, presiding.
Present: Representatives Boehner, Porter, and McKeon.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . Good morning.
The Committee on Education and the Workforce will come to order.
We are meeting here today to hear testimony on H.R. 444, the Back
To Work Incentive Act of 2003.
I'd like to thank the Community College of Southern Nevada
and the Southern Nevada Workforce Investment Board for hosting our
hearing this morning. I appreciate their hospitality, and I'm
pleased to be here to hear from our witnesses.
But before I begin, I want to ask for unanimous consent for
the hearing record to remain open for 14 days to allow Members'
statements and other extraneous materials referenced during the
hearing today to be submitted for the official hearing record. And
without objection, so ordered.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN JOHN BOEHNER, COMMITTEE
ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE
Let me start this morning by thanking my good friend and
our new colleague, Jon Porter, for hosting us here today. I'd also
like to welcome all of our witnesses. We are looking forward to
hearing your testimony, and I appreciate the opportunity to discuss
the Back To Work proposal before our Committee and to hear your
thoughts on this important legislation.
During his State of the Union Address, President Bush laid out a
comprehensive plan to speed our economic recovery and to promote long-
term job growth and investment. His plan also provides specific
assistance in the form of personal reemployment accounts to help
unemployed Americans who are struggling to get back to work.
At a time when the economy is struggling, but also improving,
it's important that we focus on giving the unemployed more flexibility
and choices in their employment search. And even though the most
recent Labor Department statistics reveal that the unemployment rate
nationally is down to 5.7 percent, we still need to examine new ways
to help working families across the country during the time when they
need it the most.
I'm particularly attuned to the situation here in the State
of Nevada. I have heard directly from Congressman Porter about how
Nevada is one of the Nation's fastest growing areas, which can leave
it particularly vulnerable when the economy turns sluggish. A growing
population can also mean more unemployed when the number of available
jobs diminishes, as I think we've seen here. So I'm pleased to say
that President Bush and our Committee are looking at additional
solutions beyond basic unemployment compensation that can help
Americans when they need it the most.
On January 29th, Congressman Porter, Congressman McKeon,
myself, and others introduced the Back To Work Incentive Act, which
reflects the President's plan to create personal reemployment accounts
and help unemployed workers return to work quickly.
The Back To Work Incentive Act represents a new and innovative
approach to helping the unemployed get back on their feet. And as
President Bush has said, one worker out of work is one worker too many,
and he believes and we believe, that this plan will help working
families in times when they most need it.
Workers can use their Back To Work accounts for a variety of
different services to help them find a good job, including job training,
child care, transportation, housing, and other expenses to help in
finding a new job. Recipients will be able to keep the balance of
their $3,000 Back To Work account as a cash reemployment bonus if they
become reemployed within 13 weeks, creating, I think, an important new
incentive to return to work quickly.
States such as Iowa, Pennsylvania, and Washington have tried
these reemployment accounts, and they have shown some very promising
success.
One of the exciting aspects of this Back To Work account is
that they empower individual recipients to make choices that are
appropriate for their own circumstances. Recipients will be able to
create reemployment plans that help them navigate the options that
are available, such as career counseling or training, maybe even
training for a new profession in which they can become employed.
By providing choice and flexibility, I think we can get people back
into steady, good-paying jobs more quickly.
This new benefit supplements and enhances the services that
are already available for those who are most likely to face obstacles
in finding and keeping new employment. These new accounts will not
only provide the unemployed with another important benefit to help
them find a new job, but will be efficiently administered through the
easily accessible One-Stop Career Center system, much like the center
we will visit after our hearing this morning.
So I look forward to working with President Bush, Subcommittee
Chairman McKeon, and Congressman Porter to move this proposal quickly
and to make this innovative plan a reality for working families who
need the help the most.
WRITTEN OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN JOHN BOEHNER,
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE - SEE APPENDIX A
Chairman Boehner. I want to thank Mr. Porter for joining us and
hosting us this morning. And I also want to thank our Subcommittee
Chairman, Buck McKeon. We all sit on the Education and Workforce
Committee and I welcome them today.
Let me yield to the Subcommittee Chairman, Mr. McKeon, for
an opening statement.
STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN BUCK MCKEON, SUBCOMMITTEE ON 21ST
CENTURY COMPETITIVENESS, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE
WORKFORCE
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's a pleasure to be here with you and
Mr. Porter today.
I think it's very fitting that we are sitting here at the
Community College of Southern Nevada and right next to a One-Stop
Centers because both the community colleges and the One-Stop Centers
are going to be so important in administering this program.
I also want to compliment you on choosing Jon Porter to be
your Representative. He's an outstanding Member of Congress. In just
the short time that he has been in Washington, his leadership and the
ability that he has to move things forward is why he was chosen to
carry this bill. And that's a compliment to you, the people of this
community. I look forward to working with him and Chairman Boehner.
You know, we try to visit the Districts as much as we can,
but we don't really have a lot of field hearings. This is the first
one we have held in this Congress. And I want to thank the Chairman
for coming, and Congressman Porter for hosting us, and all of you for
being here today. Thank you very much.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . The Chair recognizes
Mr. Porter.
Mr. Porter XE "Mr. Porter" . Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The truth is that the Chairman knew that there would 18
inches of snow in Washington today, so he planned this field hearing
so we could be here in the Southwest.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . I wish I were that smart.
STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN JON PORTER, COMMITTEE ON
EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE
It's an honor for me to be here and to be a new Representative of
Nevada. It's quite historical to hold this 3rd District seat. I
made it a priority during my campaign and when I was in the Nevada
Legislature to try to bring as many folks to Nevada as possible to
see and experience our state, to meet our families and look at the
challenges that we have here, plus the great things we are proud of.
I was selected to be the primary sponsor of H.R. 444, and I
believe that's because Nevada, as the Chairman mentioned, was one of
the hardest hit states, especially after September 11th. The tourism
industry, not only across Nevada, but also across the country
experienced similar challenges. I believe that this bill, with the
guidance of our Chairman and the Committee, and the President of the
United States is really targeting communities like Las Vegas and
states like Nevada, and I'm very proud of that.
I appreciate both of my colleagues being here and I must tell
you that they have been here many times before, and have helped me
and helped the state. So I applaud the Chairman and Congressman
McKeon for sharing again with us.
As was mentioned, we have some serious challenges here in
Nevada, but I'll tell you this is a great opportunity to jump-start
our community and get folks back to work.
I spoke at our first hearing and our press conference in D.C.
about a young lady that lives here. She's a single mother with two
kids, and she is currently receiving about $600 a month in unemployment
benefits. Imagine the challenge for this young woman in trying to
find somebody to watch her kids so she can get out and find a job, or
imagine the challenges of transportation for this young woman. The
$600 a month is helping, but barely meets her minimum needs.
This new bill is going to give her the opportunity to find
somebody to help watch the kids so she can go out and find a job,
and maybe take care of her transportation needs and jump-start her
opportunity for training to get back into the workforce. I'm very
proud of this and look forward to working with everyone and hearing
your testimony this morning.
I enjoy and am honored to be a Member of Congress. It's an
exciting experience for me, but also a very humbling realization that
we have some serious challenges and some pretty tough decisions to be
made.
Last year in Nevada the benefits of 36,000 families ran out,
and for another 19,000 plus the extended benefits were gone. That's
why it's so important that we pass this bill to help our moms and
dads and families get back to work as soon as possible.
Thank you all very much. Again, to my colleagues, I appreciate
your being here in Nevada.
WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN JON PORTER, COMMITTEE
ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE - SEE APPENDIX B
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . Thank you, Mr. Porter.
As Mr. McKeon mentioned, we try to get outside of Washington
to talk to real people that operate many of the programs that we pass
and administer the policies that we oversee.
Mr. McKeon XE "Mr. McKeon" is the author of the Workforce
Investment Act with it's One-Stop Career Centers, and we believe that
these Back To Work accounts can be another step in helping those who
are unemployed to get back on their feet and find long-term sustainable employment.
It's now my pleasure to introduce our witnesses this morning.
Myla Florence is the Director of the Nevada Department of
Employment, Training and Rehabilitation, Carson City, NV. Director
Florence oversees the State of Nevada's employment service and
rehabilitation service systems.
Robert Brewer is Chairman of the Southern Nevada Workforce
Investment Board, Las Vegas, NV, which serves a four-county area
surrounding Las Vegas. In addition, he's a senior manager of corporate
and administrative services for Southwestern Gas. He also serves on
the executive committee of the National Association of Workforce Boards.
Debi Lindemenn is an Employment Specialist Supervisor with the
Nevada Job Connect One-Stop Center in North Las Vegas. As an employment
specialist, she supervises a team that works with individuals seeking
new or better employment. And I think she will be able to help describe
for us how these accounts will help those that are, in fact, unemployed.
And we have Ardell Galbreth, Deputy Board Manager and Director of
Operations for the Southern Nevada Workforce Investment Board, Las Vegas,
NV and he'll provide perspective on the local workforce development
system.
We limit witness testimony to five minutes. Since the Staff
who runs our hearings are all in Washington, we have a timer here. I
think we'll just forgo the timer. But your entire written statement
will be made part of the record; so don't feel constrained by the five-
minute rule. We're going to be pretty easy today.
Ms. Florence XE "Ms. Florence" , why don't you begin?
STATEMENT OF MYLA FLORENCE, DIRECTOR, NEVADA
DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT, TRAINING AND REHABILITATION,
CARSON CITY, NV
Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee on
Education and the Workforce, for the record, I am Myla Florence,
Director of the Nevada Department of Employment, Training and
Rehabilitation. Thank you for inviting me to testify today, and it's
an honor to be here at Congressman Porter's first field hearing in
Nevada.
The Department of Employment, Training and Rehabilitation
administers programs authorized under the Workforce Investment Act,
as well as unemployment insurance, employment services, vocational
rehabilitation, and the Nevada Equal Rights programs.
Our department in conjunction with the Governor's State
Workforce Investment Board and the two Local Workforce Investment
Boards in Nevada has made a remarkable transformation of the
publicly funded workforce system since the passage of WIA in 1998.
We truly have a unified system in Nevada known as Nevada Job Connect.
We are equal partners in combining the various workforce programs
into a seamless system connecting businesses and a trained workforce.
I want to thank the Chairman for scheduling a hearing on
President Bush's "Personal Re-employment Account" proposal and
Congressman Porter for bringing this hearing to Nevada
and introducing H.R. 444, the Back To Work Incentive Act. As
Congressman Porter noted, in the state fiscal year 2002, over
36,000 Nevadans exhausted their regular unemployment benefits.
And of those claimants, 19,000 went on to receive temporary
extended unemployment compensation. For the week ending January
31st, 2003, Nevada reported 31,0092 individuals collecting regular
UI benefits and 4,100 receiving extended benefits. For the last
two months we have seen Nevada's unemployment rate tick slightly
upwards to 5 percent in December of 2002. This is the first time
that the unemployment rate has moved upwards since December of
2001, a concerning trend for us.
Currently, Nevada's average benefit amount is $232.29 per
week, and the average duration for an individual to receive benefits
is about 15 and a half weeks. Through the support and incentives
provided in H.R. 444, if we shorten the duration by even one week,
the state's trust fund could save approximately $8.4 million. That
is a large number by Nevada standards, not a large number by
Chairman McKeon's standards in California, but when you multiply
that across the country, you can imagine the savings this incentive
may translate into. While the personal reemployment accounts would
not be available to all claimants, we believe the heightened
interest in such a program would connect more of the unemployed to
the Nevada Job Connect system and the resources it can provide.
We appreciate the flexibility provided to states in H.R. 444
and envision working with local boards on state options and program
design. We also greatly appreciate the Administration's recognition
of the workforce system in general, and Nevada Job Connect in
particular, to administer this new program. The investment of
the $3.6 billion in additional resources is welcomed and builds on
the successes contemplated when the Workforce Investment Act was
written. It also builds upon worker profiling systems and
reemployment services states currently provide.
In April of 2002, Nevada implemented an Automated Claimant
Call In Letter to select claimants based upon job availability and
their form occupational codes. The call in letter matching program
was later enhanced to include the implementation of an interactive
voice response unit, which enables Nevada Job Connect staff to
increase follow-up contacts with UI
claimants.
The reemployment services goal was to achieve over 1,400
entered employments statewide. However, with the automated
enhancements and increased claimant contacts, Nevada substantially
exceeded its goal with over 4,200 entered employments. The Committee
may want to consider directing a portion of the new funding stream
of $3.6 billion to reinvigorate or support existing programs that
are targeted to rapid reentry of the unemployed to the workforce or
providing governors with the ability to request program waivers where
appropriate.
As this legislation wields its way through the congressional
process, I assure you that our department and the Nevada Job Connect
system stands ready to assist in any way we can.
With regards to WIA reauthorization, as you know, Congress
will be considering several reauthorizations in addition to WIA,
such as Carl Perkins, Vocational Rehabilitation, and Adult Education.
TANF, we've already passed. The timing of these three reauthorizations
provides an unprecedented opportunity to align programs and services to
further enhance the one-stop workforce system.
The system exhibited its capabilities as Nevada Job Connect
quickly responded to the tragic events of September 11, 2001. Nevada
Job Connect partners rallied to assist over 5,500 individuals who
needed in-person assistance to file for unemployment insurance and
other related benefits. We did those at the Culinary Union Hall in
Las Vegas and the Community College of Southern Nevada in Henderson.
More recently, Nevada Job Connect partners have assisted with mass
layoffs at National Airlines, K-Mart, and American Airlines through
the WIA funded Rapid Response program to enable those faced with job
loss to reattach to the workforce more quickly.
Secretary Elaine Chao's testimony to this Committee on February 12
reinforced the notion that WIA requires some fine-tuning and not a
major overhaul. The flexibility provided in H.R. 444 should be
considered in WIA reauthorization proposals and deliberations.
Governor Kenny Guinn, a former businessman, believes workforce
development is really economic development. When he launched Nevada
Job Connect in January 2002, his remarks emphasized the critical
importance of focusing on our state's businesses' needs. He simply
stated, "If we take care of business, the job, skills development,
and strong educational system will follow."
The Workforce Investment Act should have a section devoted
to business services. The section should require input from the
business customer, authorize the provision of the services that meet
businesses' workforce needs and emphasize the linkage between
workforce development and the economic development.
Governor Guinn is our state's CEO and CFO. As such, governors need
to be designated as the ones in charge of determining how WIA will be
implemented in their states. And as you have previously heard, the
size of state and local boards are unwieldy. WIA must be amended to
grant governors and local areas greater flexibility in determining
board memberships that meet their needs, while still requiring a
private sector majority. One-Stop partners should serve as resources
to the boards and not as required board members.
We must diminish the "silo" aspect of federally funded programs
and provide governors and localities greater authority to transfer funds
between programs or at a minimum, a set aside from each "silo" for
infrastructure support for the One-Stop Centers. All workforce programs
should run in consistent program years and the federal agencies must
develop common definitions, data elements, and reporting requirements
among the programs that provide employment and training services.
Nevada businesses have expressed a strong need for incumbent
worker training. WIA resources need to be flexible to meet this need.
Nevada's experience with pilot programs has demonstrated that such
training enables employers to stay in Nevada and supports employee
retention.
Finally, the increased demand for local data under the
Workforce Investment Act must be fully funded. Businesses demand
user-friendly localized data. It is a valuable economic tool that
is positioned to take advantage of existing and emerging technology.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee that concludes my remarks.
I'd be happy to answer any questions that you may have.
WRITTEN STATEMENT OF MYLA FLORENCE, DIRECTOR, NEVADA DEPARTMENT OF
EMPLOYMENT, TRAINING AND REHABILITATION, CARSON CITY, NV - SEE
APPENDIX C
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . We'll hear from all the
witnesses, and then we'll get into several rounds of questions.
Mr. Brewer XE "Mr. Brewer" .
STATEMENT OF ROBERT BREWER, CHAIRMAN, SOUTHERN NEVADA WORKFORCE
INVESTMENT BOARD, LAS VEGAS, NV
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" , Chairman McKeon, Mr. Porter,
and distinguished Members of the Committee, as previously stated my
name is Robert Brewer. I'm the Chairman of the Southern Nevada
Workforce Board. I also serve on the State Workforce Board, and I am
one of the board members of the National Association of Workforce
Boards. I am also Chairman of the Board Policy Committee at the
national level. When I am not wearing all of my Workforce Board hats,
I am the director, not the senior manager, but the Director of
Corporate and Administrative Services for Southwest Gas Corporation,
which is here in Las Vegas.
I'd like to thank the Members of the Committee for inviting me
today to testify before you and about my views on H.R. 444, the Back to
Work Incentive Act. While I will focus my remarks on specific
legislation, I would be remiss if I did not express my strong support
for the locally-based, private sector led workforce investment system
established under the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, and particularly,
the vital role that local workforce investment boards play in the
governance of that system. It is my hope that the reauthorization of
WIA and any new workforce initiatives, such as the Personal Reemployment
Accounts envisioned in H.R. 444, will build upon the WIA system and
continue to provide local boards with a clearly defined role in the
design and oversight of such initiatives.
If I may take a moment, I would like to take this opportunity
to thank Congressman Porter for introducing this important legislation,
and for his support of our efforts here in Nevada in building a highly
skilled workforce. This proposed initiative has a great potential for
providing our most vulnerable dislocated workers with additional
resources that will help them secure new, gainful employment. It is an
important effort to assist the over 2 million workers who have lost
their jobs over the last two years.
In Nevada, and in Las Vegas in particular, the unemployment
rate increased in December to 5 percent. That translates to over
50,000 people out of work; over 40,000 of whom are looking for work
in the Las Vegas metropolitan area. While this number is still nearly
a full percentage point below the national average, it represents a
worrisome increase in the number of unemployed workers in our state
and region.
The good news is that, in spite of the rise in unemployment
recently, employment in Nevada has grown in all sectors but mining
over the past year. Total employment in Nevada reached over 1 million
last year, up 2.4 percent from the previous year. Statewide, key
sectors such as construction, manufacturing, trade, government and
services have continued to grow. The bottom line is we must focus our
energies on connecting unemployed workers with the jobs that are in
demand.
H.R. 444 has the goal of helping the most vulnerable of these
dislocated workers get back to work by providing them with additional
flexibility, choice, and assistance in their search for employment. The
eligible recipients who have been profiled typically have higher levels
of skills deficits, and they will be able to benefit greatly from the
new education and training opportunities that the personal reemployment
accounts can provide. Finding replacement employment with wages that
can support their families now and provide career paths with upward
wage growth for the future will also benefit our communities as well.
In particular, I commend your efforts to make the personal
reemployment accounts established under the bill a part of the workforce
investment system by requiring that funds be accessed through the One-
Stop delivery system. I support the manner in which the funding is
distributed for the accounts, with 5 percent of funding provided up-
front to the local workforce areas for program startup costs and
administration, and the remaining amounts drawn down to the indivi-
duals who are eligible in the form of personal reemployment accounts.
I also support the appropriate role for states in determining
eligibility for the reemployment accounts and in conducting profiling
that will further identify workers who are eligible for services. I
do have several areas of concern that I think, if addressed, would
significantly strengthen this proposal and ensure its successful
implementation.
Our WIA system and local workforce boards provide a ready
mechanism for providing quality assurance and accountability that
cannot be achieved through the states alone. My biggest concern
with H.R. 444, as it is now written, is the lack of a clearly defined
local role for local workforce investment boards, i.e., in determining
how the reemployment accounts will be implemented, in ensuring
accountability over the accounts, and in the planning of how these
additional resources will augment existing resources in the broader
workforce investment system.
Although the proposal requires that personal reemployment
accounts be accessed through the One-Stop delivery system established
under WIA, local workforce boards do not appear to have any authority
over the implementation or oversight of this $3.6 billion in new
funding that will be sent through the workforce system. As written,
the bill would make local workforce areas financially liable for any
misexpenditures or misuse of funds after the fact, and provides local
boards and local elected officials with very little authority up front
to ensure that resources are used properly or wisely. I would urge you
to provide the same levels of authority, responsibility, and
accountability provided to local boards under WIA in this new
legislation. There is an accountability infrastructure already
established in WIA, why should more money be spent to set up something
parallel?
There is another accountability feature that I would strongly
urge the Committee to incorporate in H.R. 444. Build on the current
local planning process by requiring the workforce boards to describe
how personal reemployment accounts would be utilized as part of the
broader workforce investment system to meet individual worker and
regional economic needs. The local plans would describe safeguards,
including how the local boards would identify reputable, high quality
service providers, and, ultimately, would ensure the wise use of these
funds at the local level. Local workforce boards are already doing this
in WIA. This is a public stewardship responsibility that we are
prepared to take on.
My third suggestion regarding local boards' roles further
strengthens program accountability once the program is initiated.
It is aimed at simplifying and speeding up the process and ensures
that quality assistance is available to eligible recipients as they
exercise their flexibility and choice of return to work assistance.
I urge you to utilize the existing WIA infrastructure and processes
for accessing similar training and support services under the personal
reemployment accounts. Doing so will provide greater assurance that
recipients will identify and receive quality assistance, especially
if local workforce boards and states are permitted to add to the lists
of qualified service and training providers. In any case, local boards
must have a role in the identification and approval of such providers
to guard against abuses and to ensure quality and accountability within
the system, particularly if they are to be held liable for these funds.
I also share your goal that individuals should be given
flexibility to use resources under H.R. 444 to meet their individual
needs. This is particularly important for workers profiled as eligible
for these services because they are the most vulnerable of the
unemployed. There is no cookie-cutter solution for their individual
needs. For this reason, we believe there is an important role for
informed guidance in this process.
We have spent the last five years building our public workforce
system, and I believe that local One-Stop systems, in response to the
policies set by local workforce investment boards, have developed a
systematic approach to guide unemployed individuals through the WIA
services presently available. I would urge that you underpin the
flexibility given to the individual in the bill by requiring that
helpful occupational guidance and assistance be available to each
worker to help him/her make choices based on good information and
complete understanding of the full range of resources and opportunities
that are available to them. As such, I recommend that you modify the
proposal to require that each individual accessing a reemployment
account develop a personal reemployment plan as a condition of
eligibility for that account. Quality occupational information and
career counseling should be provided to individuals as they decide
how to manage their accounts. This process should not require
adherence to a rigid plan of action by the individual, but should
provide workers with an understanding of the wide range of occupational
and support services available to them. Having workers understand
pathways to more upward mobile career paths, including those that may
include skills training, will lead them to wise use of their
reemployment account resources.
I do have one final suggestion. Under H.R. 444, individuals
who choose to receive a personal reemployment account are prohibited
from receiving any further services, except for core services, through
the WIA system for one full year after receipt of a PRA. While this
might be appropriate for those individuals who cash out their account,
or possibly even for those who use their personal reemployment account
for the purchase of an automobile, this provision ends up being too
restrictive, and potentially punitive, for those who choose to receive
services through the reemployment accounts. Again, I remind you that
those eligible to receive personal reemployment accounts are the most
vulnerable of the dislocated workers, many of whom have been profiled
as a result of inadequate education and skills levels. They are
likely to need longer-term education and training services in order
to be competitive in today's job market. Due to this, I would ask
that you allow local boards to determine packaging of personal
reemployment accounts, ITAs and other services under WIA for individuals
who are in need of such assistance, with the exception of those
individuals who do cash out their reemployment accounts.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" , Chairman McKeon, Mr. Porter
and other Members of the Committee, again, I commend you for your
leadership in our nation's workforce investment efforts, and on your
leadership in the introduction of this important legislation. Here
in the Las Vegas area, these H.R. 444 resources, in combination with
those provided through the Workforce Investment Act, would provide us
with a greatly enhanced ability to help the over 40,000 workers who are
searching for employment. Nationally, H.R. 444 has the potential for
providing much needed additional resources for the dislocated workers
and for our workforce investment system.
The country's workforce investment boards stand ready to take
on the responsibility for this initiative as a part of our roles and
responsibilities over the workforce investment system. I urge you to
provide the local boards with the clear authority to package these
resources in ways that will both benefit the workers they are intended
to help. In doing so, it will enable our local boards to focus training
on the key sectors of our local economy that are in high demand and that
provide workers with the best jobs and career growth opportunities.
I thank you for this opportunity to address you today.
WRITTEN STATEMENT OF ROBERT BREWER, CHAIRMAN, SOUTHERN NEVADA WORKFORCE
INVESTMENT BOARD, LAS VEGAS, NV - SEE APPENDIX D
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . Mr. Brewer, thank you.
Ms. Lindemenn XE "Ms. Lindemenn" .
STATEMENT OF DEBI LINDEMENN, EMPLOYMENT SPECIALIST SUPERVISOR, NORTH
LAS VEGAS JOBCONNECT, DEPARTMENT O F EMPLOYMENT, TRAINING AND
REHABILITATION, LAS VEGAS, NV
I want to thank the Committee for inviting me to testify today. It's a
personal honor to be in Mr. Porter's presence because I live in the
Congressman's district. I want to state that I did not have an
opportunity to prepare four or five pages. As a supervisor on the
front line, I certainly have had the opportunity to see firsthand the
kind of struggles that these families are going through. We have a
changing job market in Las Vegas.
My perspective on what is most needed for people to become
reemployed involves major childcare issues. In addition, we have
transportation issues, where we are cutting back on some of the bus
services. This leaves a lot of these folks unable to move around to
find better jobs or even the inability to move into an area within the
labor market where they would be better able to become reemployed.
As stated before, and I agree, training is also a big issue.
We know that an estimated 15,000 people were laid off as a result of
September 11th, and although it's stated that visitor figures are up,
the actual figures show that the city has not really recovered yet.
With the continuing migration to the Las Vegas labor market we also
see that the competition for employment remains really high. When
people are underemployed, our services are unable to offer a training
program that would assist them to obtain a better paying wage.
The people who make up most of our population are in the
service industry where their unemployment insurance just covers their
food, clothing, and shelter. They don't have the additional money for
childcare or for the additional training needs, or transportation
should even something as slight as their vehicle breaks down.
Most of these people do not have a lot of reemployment choices.
Many have returned to work in the hotel industry but have really become
underemployed. So, therefore, this has really limited their finances,
leaving them to use most of what they have personally set aside in
their savings just so they can maintain a normal lifestyle.
I do want to state that the State of Nevada at the present time
does have a whole complement of services through the One-Stop and the
WIA partners for the unemployed and that works. From what I can
see as a front-line supervisor, this plan sounds wonderful. It's a great
opportunity. I'm excited to even be on the front lines, but I certainly
see a need for additional staff in order to handle the case management
that is going to be needed to individually take care of these people
that we are most concerned about. And of course, the implementation of
any new program does take time for the program for work.
That's all I have prepared today. So I just want to say thank
you so much for the opportunity to be here today and to speak on behalf
of the public that needs your care and your interest so much.
WRITTEN STATEMENT OF DEBI LINDEMENN, EMPLOYMENT SPECIALIST SUPERVISOR,
NORTH LAS VEGAS JOBCONNECT, DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT, TRAINING AND
REHABILITATION, LAS VEGAS, NV - SEE APPENDIX E
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . Ms. Lindemenn, thank you
for your testimony. I'm sure we'll have an ample number of questions
later and you can be very helpful to us.
Ms. Lindemenn XE "Ms. Lindemenn" . Okay.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . Mr. Galbreth.
STATEMENT OF ARDELL GALBRETH, DEPUTY BOARD MANAGER AND DIRECTOR OF
OPERATIONS, SOUTHERN NEVADA WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD, LAS VEGAS, NV
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you all so much on behalf of the
Southern Nevada Workforce Investment Board. It is indeed an honor
for me to have an opportunity to speak before you and, of course, our
Congressman Porter. I too live in his district and also we go back a
little way when he was serving on the civilian military council out at
Nellis Air Force Base.
I would like to give you my point of view regarding the local
level, particularly how the services impact youth as well as dislocated
workers. There is a workforce crisis looming in our nation's future if
we fail to invest in our youth now. Earmarking proper resources for
youth employment and training services would realize our investment
dividends for decades to come. This is not a guess, but it's supported
by credible labor market studies. Since 2000 there has been a 12 percent
increase in youth who are both jobless and out of school, which translates
into a near 600,000 increase in this particular population. In 2000
there was an average of 4.9 million youth between the age of 16 and 24
who were out of school and out of work. During 2001, the stakes got even
higher. It increased to 5.2 million. Now, due to our lazy economy, we
anticipate a steady increase in youth jobless rates to exceed 7 million
by the end of this year. In plain view, children in poverty
neighborhoods and low-income families have it difficult in the extreme.
Gentlemen, we need your help, and we need it now.
As we work to ensure that no child is left behind, we must
remember that this challenges us, not only to improve our children's
overall education posture, but their lifelong credit to society. One of
the primary reasons that many minorities and children from low-income
families do not achieve the finer goals and rewarding careers is because
of the huge youth employment gap which extends well into adulthood. For
example, according to Northeastern University's Center for Labor Market
Studies, during 2002, youth joblessness surged to 5.5 million for out-of
-school youth between the ages of 16 and 24.
Now we are all in agreement that education is certainly a high
priority for our children, but we need to lean forward just a bit for a
clear view that's beyond the days of school and playground tinkering.
We need to better prepare our children for success in life. Congress is
on the verge of cutting over $300 million in youth employment and
training programs funded by the Workforce Investment Act. Such funding
cuts as these stab at the core of low income youth and their hope to
some day leave the "hood" and enjoy life-quality happiness many of us
are currently experiencing.
I ask you, our elected leaders, to take a look at the picture
from a perspective that if we don't act now to equip our children with
the proper skill set to become productive adults, our current social
security retirement system will be crashing down around us soon by the
year 2020. I urge you to take a strong stance against youth funding cuts
and support youth funding services at respectable levels as to ensure
quality delivery of sorely needed youth employment and training services.
Please understand that the time and the need are now. Review the
numbers. They speak for themselves. One out of every four African-
American youths and one out of every five Latino youths between the
ages of 16 and 24 are out of school, unemployed, and on the streets.
There is a growing need to raise the visibility of these out-of-school
youth. Here in Las Vegas, the fastest growing metropolitan area in the
nation for over a decade, because the present Administration has zeroed
funding for youth opportunity grants, the youth in this area and
throughout the State of Nevada will not be able to tap the benefits
these grants offer. I have read and have been told that since few youth
vote, they are not considered in the political formula for elected
officials. But I refuse to believe that's the case. I'm confident that
through people like me, our youth voices will be heard loud and clear,
that what our congressional leaders need to do is to focus more on
funding worthwhile programs like job corps centers and youth employment
opportunity grants that offer our youth a chance in life and not become
our society's menace.
To help ensure and secure our nation's most treasured resource,
today's youth, I recommend that Congress focus its attention on the
following three items:
One, significantly investing in our youth employment resources
by increasing formula grants to help make a realistic difference in the
quality of life for young people.
new youth competitive challenge grants are good, but they should
not be at the expense of states' formula grants to serve those most in
need.
funding appropriation for youth opportunity grants for states
like Nevada that were not in on the ground level for these funds when
they were initially awarded. It is essential that you continue these
youth opportunity grants for states like Nevada.
Two, introduce and work hard to pass legislation to make youth
councils mandatory with authority to act with its funding stream.
Three, the current 30 percent youth funds expenditure requirement
for out-of-school youth is a good thing as it helped address youth left
behind in the labor market, but attention must also be paid to ensuring
adequate funding is available for in-school youth to help prevent them
from becoming out-of-school youth. Please retain it.
Strong funding deposits with implementation of these
recommendations would secure a solid investment for our nation's future,
youth who are the leading edge of productivity and our most valued
workforce.
Now, with regards to dislocated workers, of which many have
been unemployed for over a year, the view looks just as grim. House
Resolution 444, introduced by our own Congressman Jon Porter, is a
step in the right direction without question to get people quickly back
to work, but the maximum benefit of $3,000 may not go very far for those
living in some of our depressed areas. In addition to establishing
personal reemployment accounts, Congress needs to focus its attention
on increasing the funding for adults and dislocated programs under the
Workforce Investment Act.
Regardless of the amount of supportive services reemployment
accounts may offer, if jobs are not available, people will not be
reemployed quickly. Congress is preparing to cut significant funds
out of the Workforce Investment Act and adult and dislocated worker
programs. Right now, with our sluggish economy, WIA programs are our
only hope to offer people opportunity to acquire new skills by
retraining into demand occupations. With adequate WIA funding levels,
along with the new personal reemployment accounts, job seekers will be
able to effectively tailor their reemployment plans to local area
industry demands and match their skills with employers' needs for prompt
reemployment. For example, let's take here in Las Vegas, which was the
corporate headquarters for the now defunct National Airlines. Through
Nevada's JobConnect Connect system, using our National Emergency Grant
for dislocated workers, we were able to offer training services to
hundreds of laid off workers to allow them to get the proper training
and get back to work. In many cases, airline pilots only needed a new
type rating certification to allow them to sign on with another airline
company or a corporate aviation agency. In some cases, pilots even
increased their annual salary with this new training.
The bottom line, gentlemen, of my testimony is that if our
intent is to return people to work quickly, we need to earmark workforce
funding levels to allow for adequate training to upgrade the skills of
these job seekers to match their employment demands. Our National
Airlines project is a fine example of how adequate training can get
people back to work quickly.
I recommend that Congress view H.R. 444 as a supplement to the
Workforce Investment Act and not a one-time reemployment stopgap. It
is important that Congress in both Houses work to keep WIA as our
nation's primary vehicle to deliver effective employment and training
services to both job seekers and employers by appropriating adequate
funding to do the
job right.
Gentlemen, once again, thank you so much for allowing me the
opportunity to address these issues that are facing our particular
nation.
WRITTEN STATEMENT OF ARDELL GALBRETH, DEPUTY BOARD MANAGER AND DIRECTOR
OF OPERATIONS, SOUTHERN NEVADA WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD, LAS VEGAS,
NV - SEE APPENDIX F
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . Mr. Galbreth, thank you
for your testimony. I'm sure you've heard the old adage that the
President proposes and the Congress disposes. The suggestion you
make about the youth employment opportunity grants and the funding
streams as well as the WIA funds, in my view, are not under any
serious threat XE "Chairman Boehner" in reduction. So I wouldn't
spend a whole lot of time worrying about it, but if I were you, I
would make sure that Congressman Porter gets up to speed on what
those issues are and let him watch them for you.
Mr. Galbreth XE "Mr. Galbreth" . Thank you. That's good to hear
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . Let me just thank all the
witnesses for their testimony. This is a real opportunity for us to
talk to people, not only about the reemployment accounts, but also
about WIA. As I mentioned before, Congressman McKeon kind of
inherited WIA, and redid it after I took a sabbatical from the
Committee and served in the leadership for two years.
Back in the 1980s, I realized as a state legislator that we
had many programs at the federal, state, and local level to assist
workers who needed training, who were unemployed, who needed education,
none of which were coordinated in any way, shape, or form. And I remember
putting a bill together back in the early nineties as a new Member of
Congress that would collapse these programs into a handful of funding
streams in order to better coordinate the services and the funding that,
in my view, is there in order to help these workers.
As I mentioned, the result of all of that and Mr. McKeon's work
became WIA. We are very big supporters of seeing the One-Stop system
work effectively. And as we get into the reauthorization this year,
it's our intent to work with the governors and the local Workforce
Investment Board to fine-tune the legislation to see that these
boards work better and that they be effective. There is no better
example of how they don't work than in my own home state of Ohio,
and so I've paid close attention to the problems that we've had.
Before I get into WIA, let me talk a little bit about these
personal reemployment accounts. All of the states have a profiling
system as mandated under federal law to take a good profile of who the
unemployed are, and what their needs are. When Secretary Chao was at our
Committee last week, one of our colleagues suggested that this profiling
system isn't as up to speed as it should be. Do you want to tell us a
little about your system?
Ms. Florence XE "Ms. Florence" . Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd be
happy to talk about Nevada's experience and worker profiling.
I don't think Nevada is unusual in that many states have
struggled with the changing characteristics of the unemployed in
updating their profiling system to consider those characteristics
in terms of identifying those most likely to exhaust.
I believe our system is probably about 25, 30 years old, Debbie?
Ms. Lindemenn XE "Ms. Lindemenn" . Yes.
Ms. Florence XE "Ms. Florence" . When the director doesn't know
anything, defer to staff that know everything.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . Trust me, trust me.
Members of Congress could never survive without staff.
Ms. Florence XE "Ms. Florence" . But in talking with other states,
I think, as I indicated, it's not uncommon. H.R. 444 does provide up
to 2 percent to make changes in states' profiling systems and the
automated support behind that. I think the difficulty is that any
time you are dealing with technology, as the Chairman knows, I'm sure,
there are proposals that you have to go through from any number of
vendors who all claim they have the latest and greatest profiling
system. They all need to be evaluated. Nevada is very fortunate in
that we work very closely with local partners and we would want them
to be part of that process.
That's why I suggested the Committee might want to consider
providing governors with the ability to request waivers if they think
they have an existing program that can accomplish the same kind of
objective as H.R. 444. That being said, our overall mutual interest
is getting people who are unemployed who may likely exhaust back to
work quickly.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . The reason for the
question was to get a feel from you of how your profiling system
works. Because as we envision these reemployment accounts working,
the states are going to have to identify those people most likely
to be helped the most by them.
If you take up the maximum grant, we could cover about 1.2
million workers around the country. We have about 4 million unemployed.
So, obviously, there aren't enough funds for all of those who are
unemployed.
And my concern or my question is really focused on do you
think we have enough profiling information to determine which of the
unemployed would most likely be helped or could succeed with these.
Debbie, you want to comment?
Ms. Lindemenn XE "Ms. Lindemenn" . There is a plan. Of course,
it hasn't been put into effect, and that has a lot to do with budget.
But the statistical model of how these folks are selected does need
to be updated. There are factors that have changed in the last 15
to 20 years. At present we are looking at how we could update the
statistical model, but that has been put on the back burner.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . So if we have these new
accounts, I think we are going to give states the flexibility to help
develop the parameters around which people they may select, but I'm
trying to get at how it would work here in Nevada. XE "Chairman
Boehner" How would you envision it working?
Ms. Lindemenn XE "Ms. Lindemenn" . Well, you know we have changes
in our industries. What's needed is a statistical model of how these
people are selected, so our research and analysis team needs an
availability of funds to be able to update how those selections are
made. And right now I couldn't give you the bare bones of what is
needed. But I do know that the statistical model is in an outdated
section right now. There is a plan involved, but it's on the back
burner.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . You made a point of wanting
us to make it clear as we move this bill, that the local WIA boards
will run the programs, and there will not be a separate system. Trust
me, there aren't three Members of Congress more determined than we are
to make these One-Stop Centers work and to bring as many of these
funding streams together and to run them through the local workforce
investment boards. I appreciate your suggestions, and we will certainly
take that into account and try to make it clear when we move the
legislation that we expect it to be operated through the One-Stops.
Mr. Brewer, let me ask you about how the One-Stops are working
here and the relationship between the boards, the private sector members,
and the public sector. XE "Chairman Boehner" I won't refer to the
bureaucrats or anything like that. Mr. Brewer XE "Mr. Brewer".
I'll be happy to respond. You threw a number of issues out there,
and I'll try to answer them in order.
Starting first with the relationship of the board and the
One-Stop operation itself, we feel we have a very strong local
relationship with the One-Stop operation. The board in its role
provides the general policy and guidance, and we have what we feel
are good administrators that are working in that system to really
operate it according to its intent, which is to provide benefit to
both local employers and folks that are seeking employment.
Now, could it be more efficient? Yes, it could.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . How would we achieve that?
Mr. Brewer XE "Mr. Brewer" . This efficiency would come from some
of the things that Myla has already brought up in her presentation,
and we probably talked around this morning. There really needs to
be a serious look at the partners as they operate and are involved
in the One-Stop Centers. They come willing, but a lot of times they
come with restricted finances in terms of the way that they can use
the monies that are provided for their individual agencies. A room
full of people with good intent without the proper funding leads to
a level of efficiency and effectiveness sometimes that is less than
desired. And that's our current situation.
We have a lot of good people working very, very hard. There
are a lot of different people with a lot of experience, and many of
the people are doing a good job. But sooner or later, the funds get
short, and you have to make some decisions that you wouldn't otherwise
make because of the funding. So that really needs to be looked at.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . Now, would these be agencies
funded by the federal government out of different pots of funds?
Mr. Brewer XE "Mr. Brewer" . Yes, they're funded by the federal
government from different pots, and they are obligated by the WIA
Act to be part of the One-Stop. But there is no requirement or
obligation to appropriate part of the funds to support your part of
the partnership.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . We have seen collaboration
work in wonderful ways in some areas. I was in Dayton, Ohio, part of
which is now in my district. Dayton has a model One-Stop that was really
a creative waiver over ten years ago. It was incredible to see the
cooperation and the collaboration all focused on the customer, not only
the unemployed, but those who need more training and more education to
improve their job skills not only maintain their current employment,
but to try to advance up the economic ladder towards a better job.
I have been asking myself how can we encourage more collaboration?
I have 11 brothers and sisters, and our parents would come home saying,
"You all are going to get along." I don't know how we write a law that
says that.
Mr. Brewer XE "Mr. Brewer" . I don't know how you write a law to do
that either. We have a strong corroborative effort here that you'll see
as you go through the One-Stop.
I think folks come to the table knowing that they have
restrictions, and that gets us back to things that are even outside
of the Committee. But you have to revisit how you are going to fund
these types of operations over the long haul. I don't know how we get
there. We have to talk about it.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . Please send Mr. McKeon, Mr.
Porter and I a memo in which you outline some of this in more detail.
Ms. Florence XE "Ms. Florence" . There are two issues here. First,
I want to compliment Chairman McKeon for the vision of WIA, and I really
believe that in Nevada we are known as one system, or one brand. Over
time I think people will recognize Nevada JobConnect as the place for
business and workforce services unlike other states where there may be
20 or 30 different names of partners within the system.
With regard to funding, I hate the term "mandatory partners."
I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. It's just an oxymoron in my mind. But if a
portion of the federal agencies funding a mandatory partner were put
into the infrastructure of the system, then you'd have stronger
collaboration, in my mind.
And, secondly, with regard to the workforce boards, as I
mentioned, they are far too large. I notice the Administration now
has a proposal to restructure the state boards to include the partners
of the system, meaning bureaucrats, with a business leader. In my mind,
that is taking five steps backwards.
Our state board is business driven. A business member of that
board leads every subcommittee. It includes the business members of
local boards on the various subcommittees. We are moving in the right
direction here under business leadership. My staff and I merely lend
support to those activities. We don't drive them. We don't attempt to
drive them.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . You're one of the few states
where that would happen.
Ms. Florence XE "Ms. Florence" . I think that's the way it ought to
happen.
Mr. Brewer XE "Mr. Brewer" . That's right.
Ms. Florence XE "Ms. Florence" . We have a marketing committee that
is led by business people with a marketing strategy. We have a committee
on employment of persons with disabilities that, again, is led with
business members. A committee on finance, budgeting, the staff isn't
making budgeting determinations, our business led members are. And that
has to happen at both the state and local level.
Thank you.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . I couldn't agree with you
more.
Mr. McKeon XE "Mr. McKeon" .
Mr. McKeon XE "Mr. McKeon" . Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The reason we left the room is that "Chairman" Porter received a
message that the Cannon House Office Building had been evacuated. So he
and I made a call and found out that it wasn't a terrorist. It was a
leak, and that set off the alarm, so they evacuated. But it gets touchy
when these kinds of things happen. With instant communication, it works.
Mr. Porter XE "Mr. Porter" . Unless they forget to update their
recording, but otherwise the message worked.
Mr. McKeon XE "Mr. McKeon" . Anyway, I missed some of the questions.
Mr. Brewer had said he was a little nervous, he hadn't done this before,
but I want to commend you. Your testimony was excellent.
Mr. Brewer XE "Mr. Brewer" . Thank you.
Mr. McKeon XE "Mr. McKeon" . And I don't say that just because you're
wearing cowboy boots. Before I got involved in politics, I was in the
western wear industry. And when I got in Congress, I started a boot
caucus. I really like people who wear boots. And I always check that
out.
We will really look at your testimony. All of you have been
very, very helpful. I wish all my hearings could be like this. You know,
when we're in Washington, we are up there on a pedestal, and the
Chairman has a big chair, and we're looking down at people. I think
that is really intimidating. We have a lot more Members present and all
want to ask many questions, and if you have cameras in the room, it
really gets exciting, but here it's more intimate.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . That's just an invitation
for Members to talk longer.
Mr. McKeon XE "Mr. McKeon" . This forum is really where we can learn
what is going on. I appreciate your testimony and the opportunity to
be here.
Thank you for giving me the credit for writing this bill, which
includes the One-Stops, but as the Chairman mentioned, he was involved
in it, and prior to his tenure the former Chairman, Mr. Goodling was
involved. When we won the majority and I became Chairman of the
Subcommittee on 21st Century Competitiveness, it was handed over to me.
So there had been a lot of work done before, and I was able to finish
it up and get it passed.
The objective was to take 160 federal job-training programs and
combine them into four, and give the power to the local communities
where "the rubber meets the road" and to really get things done. We
weren't successful in that. We got a lot of "flack" and we had to
regroup and go back to the next Congress. We cut 50 federal job-training
programs down to the three local block grants. But every five years
it's very good that we have a chance to look at it and say, "Where are
we going? What can we do better"? I'm happy we are going to be able to
take a tour and see the programs that you have here.
But when we all get together in Washington, we have a vision of
what we'd like to see, and then write a bill. Then it goes through the
process of amendments and so forth, and we finally get it passed in the
House, and perhaps the Senate passes something similar. And then we get
together and try to work out a compromise, achieve that end, send it to
the President, and he signs it.
Then the bill goes to the departments that write the regulations,
and somewhere down the line, a bill that finally gets to the point to
where you can do something with it. And it takes a few years from the
time those regulations are all written to setting up the One-Stops. And
as soon as that's done, we say, "Whoa, we're going to reauthorize and
going to change everything." We just got started!
So let me tell you one thing, we are not going to throw out WIA
and start over from scratch. We're just going to try to improve on what
is out there, and you are not going to have to say, "Wait a minute.
JTPA is gone, and now WIA is gone, and we're going to start over again."
That's not going to happen.
You have given us some very good recommendations that we can
look at. I think the Personal Reemployment Act, acts as a supplement.
This will help stimulate people that are hard to employ and give some
of them a little extra help. The 15-and-a-half-weeks of benefits, as
you said, total up to about $3,600, and this is an additional $3,000.
That provides quite an impact for help, and it should be something that
is really positive.
We had a hearing in Washington. We got beat up a lot. You know,
"How come you're not doing this and this and this?" And I thought, "Why
don't we concentrate on what we are doing and get it done and get it to
where the people really need it, then we'll focus on some of these other
things." But I couldn't believe we were getting beat up when you provide
$3.6 billion to help people. Why don't we just come together and focus,
and get it done. Then if more is needed, get it, because you made good
points about needing additional monies.
Does the memo that you are going to send us tell how the One-Stop
is funded now?
Mr. Brewer XE "Mr. Brewer" . We have an understanding with the board
and a collaborative agreement with all of the partners, and each one of
the partners brings, "an appropriate amount of funding".
Mr. McKeon XE "Mr. McKeon" . If you have one partner bringing 20
percent and another partner bringing 2 percent, and they say, "Well,
we can't bring 20 percent because we're using our money somewhere
else on some other things, and although we want to help we really
don't have the resources."
Mr. Brewer XE "Mr. Brewer" . Right that's where the collaborative
effort comes in. Yes, their situations might differ, but the partners
just work it out among themselves.
Mr. McKeon XE "Mr. McKeon" . I come from a family of five kids,
and we were all in business together, and I understand. We all paid
ourselves the same amount of money. And you'd always look over and
think that one brother was not working as hard as the other. So I
understand how that works, but if you could address some specifics in
that memo, I think that would be very helpful to us XE "Mr. McKeon"
as we go through this WIA reauthorization. I made a lot of notes on
your statements, and when we get back we'll really look into this.
I hope you will stay in close communication with us as we go
through the WIA reauthorization.
Mr. Brewer XE "Mr. Brewer" . It would be my pleasure.
Mr. McKeon XE "Mr. McKeon" . That would be great.
As Florence mentioned, there is a difference between Nevada and
California. You have the real advantage here of a few million people
versus 30 million people. California is like a country unto itself.
We have full-time legislators that really want to justify what they do,
so they pass lots of laws, and everything gets complicated for
everybody.
Our goal is to get as much authority down to the local area as
we can, whether it be workforce investment or H.R. 1 or whatever; we're
working on that. That's our goal in this Committee, because we don't
think that all wisdom and all abilities to handle all problems reside in
Washington. But the resources all come from you anyway when we take out
a portion, in some cases a bigger portion than others, and then give it
back that way.
One of the problems if you came into the system late is you're
are not getting your fair share. In California, the same thing. We
send about 12 percent of the resources and get back about 10. That's
billions of dollars every year. Is there any press in the room?
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . Probably.
Mr. McKeon XE "Mr. McKeon" . I'm a Westerner, so my solution was to
take the Northeast and add it to Canada and I think that's the only time
I said that in public.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . The Northwest would have to
say something about California.
Mr. McKeon XE "Mr. McKeon" . They sure would. But when you start
talking about money, all of this is really decided in the other body.
California has 36 million people, 53 Congressmen, and two Senators.
Delaware has 600,000 people, one Congressman, and two Senators. So in
Connecticut, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire, the
funding for a lot of these programs is very hard to even out when people
are leaving those areas and coming to Nevada, California, Arizona, and
Texas. I'm just moaning about that because that's a problem that we
deal with and feel the effects of.
Mr. Galbreth XE "Mr. Galbreth" . Definitely.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . It is an institutional
problem.
Mr. McKeon XE "Mr. McKeon" , we had language in the welfare
reauthorization bill last week that would require TANF to work
through WIA with regard to employment, training, et cetera. Would
you care to discuss that?
Mr. McKeon XE "Mr. McKeon" . Every time somebody loses a job or
wants to improve their marketability, our vision is to see everything
go through the One-Stop. But everybody builds his or her own little
kingdom, and it's hard to pull everything together.
But that is our ultimate vision. We don't have total
jurisdiction. The welfare reform bill went through five different
Committees and we had a big part of it, and Ways and Means had a big
part of it. But we have some limited jurisdiction in this because all
of it doesn't go through our Committee. If we did, our goal would be
to have everything would go through that One-Stop.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . One of the reasons we had a
proliferation of job training and retraining programs is because each
Committee had its own programs based on its issues. For example, the
Ways and Means Committee deals with trade issues, and therefore you
have the Trade Adjustment Act that we don't have jurisdiction over.
We'd still like to collapse all of these various programs if we
could get some fellow Committees to cooperative a little bit more.
Because I think One-Stops as people get more used to them are going to
attract more partners. And what I mean by that is that most of our
colleagues now understand the One-Stops are here, and the creation their
own new programs is going to be met with great resistance, not only in
Congress but by the Administration.
So, as we get into it this year, I don't know how much progress
we'll be able to make in terms of more programs being collapsed into
those funding streams, but speaking both for Buck and myself that would
certainly be our goal.
Mr. Porter XE "Mr. Porter" .
Mr. Porter XE "Mr. Porter" . I have a couple of comments.
First, I think Myla's cooperation in our business community with
workforces is a real plus for Nevada. We have a real tight group of
folks that are working together, unlike some of the larger areas. I
think we should be commended here in Nevada for that, and thank you for
your leadership.
We talked about terminology a little bit ago. I'd sure like to
see the word "profile" eliminated from our vocabulary also. I learned
long ago, and I sensed at our first hearing that with political
adversaries it isn't about what's best for the communities, but what is
best for the party. So I anticipate they're going to be using this word
"profiling" in a negative sense when they speak about the reemployment
bill. So we, as an institution, need to find a new word instead of
"profiling".
Debi, thank you for your comments, and I know I missed part of
the discussion when I was out in the hallway. You're on the front line
every day, and you see the folks that have challenges. Hopefully when
this passes and the administrative "regs" are taken care of, are there
some areas that we can address to simplify it, to make it easy for you
to make it easy for your customers? What information should we send to
our staff? Are there some areas that come to mind? I know you mentioned
transportation and childcare. Can you be more specific?
Ms. Lindemenn XE "Ms. Lindemenn" . One of things we had talked about
while you were out in the hallway was determining the statistical model
or updating our statistical model to select folks. There are times when
we get numerous people in the office that really have no need for our
service, I think Myla can agree, and with some of our outdated
statistical modeling we leave out the people that have the need. And
this becomes a challenge because we all know that negative comments
about services can change people's views.
Mr. Porter XE "Mr. Porter" . I understand and well said, that from a
logistics delivery perspective proper statistics make sure the proper
information is disseminated. But what about making sure a person gets
a check when they need it, and fast? What can we do to make sure that
there's simple, fast delivery to these families?
Ms. Lindemenn XE "Ms. Lindemenn" . In the State of Nevada, I can
honestly tell you that with the many people that are moving into our
state from the East to the West, we have a staffing issue. Over the
past twelve years I have seen that happen continually. More and more
folks move in, but staff doesn't increase, thus causing some delays.
I think rules and regulations are in place and certainly
governed, but without the manpower to take care of those rules and
regulations, the persons out there waiting for the check are kept
waiting.
Mr. Porter XE "Mr. Porter" . I think it's important to mention that
my wife did a radio program this morning and many folks who were
listening were not very excited about the 15-and-
a-half week extension program. I think it's important to emphasize
that we save $8.4 million by literally one week, that's substantial.
I didn't know the number when I decided to support and be a part of
this, but that figure is compelling. It also means that this single
mom has a job sooner, she gets to work some, but saves something for
the system. That is a very compelling argument, especially for our
colleagues in Washington. I can imagine what that would mean nationwide
if we could save one week for these families.
Ms. Florence XE "Ms. Florence" . It would be substantial.
Mr. Porter XE "Mr. Porter" . My last comment is, as we talked about
our friends in the Northeast and on the East Coast, we are under funded
in our education system because the East controls the spending, but as
their population moves west, they keep their education dollars. But on a
lighter note, today the headline in the paper said a Member wants to
rename Nevada, East California. If I were there, I would vote no,
absolutely!
Thank you all very much for your input.
Chairman Boehner XE "Chairman Boehner" . Let me just comment on Mr.
Porter's last comment about the education funding.
We, as one of the authors of No Child Left Behind worked diligently
to try to ensure that all of the new money since the passage of the
bill would, in fact, be directed at high poverty areas. There's no
question that over the last 15 years we held states harmless. In other
words, they couldn't lose their funds regardless of what happened to
their population, especially amongst those disadvantaged in their
states. And so all of the new money is much more targeted toward high
poverty areas. And as a result, we are beginning to see a pretty
significant shift of where those federal education dollars are going,
which certainly pleases me.
With that, let me thank our witnesses for your testimony. I'm
sure that Mr. Porter, or his staff and my staff will likely be back in
touch with you to flush out some of the ideas that you've presented.
But we really do appreciate your testimony. It's been very helpful.
And I want to thank those of you in the audience who took the
time to come and participate with us today as well.
With that, the hearing is adjourned.
Whereupon, at 10:55 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.
APPENDIX A - WRITTEN OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN JOHN BOEHNER,
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE
APPENDIX B - WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN JON PORTER,
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE
APPENDIX C - WRITTEN STATEMENT OF MYLA FLORENCE, DIRECTOR, NEVADA
DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT, TRAINING AND REHABILITATION, CARSON CITY, NV
APPENDIX D - WRITTEN STATEMENT OF ROBERT BREWER, CHAIRMAN, SOUTHERN
NEVADA WORKFORCE INVESTMENT BOARD, LAS VEGAS, NV
APPENDIX E - WRITTEN STATEMENT OF DEBI LINDEMENN, EMPLOYMENT SPECIALIST
SUPERVISOR, NORTH LAS VEGAS JOBCONNECT, DEPARTMENT OF EMPLOYMENT,
TRAINING AND REHABILITATION, LAS VEGAS, NV
APPENDIX F - WRITTEN STATEMENT OF ARDELL GALBRETH, DEPUTY BOARD
MANAGER AND DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS, SOUTHERN NEVADA WORKFORCE
INVESTMENT BOARD, LAS VEGAS, NV
Table of Indexes
Chairman Boehner, 1, 4, 5, 9, 12, 14, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23,
24, 26
Mr. Brewer, 9, 19, 20, 21, 23
Mr. Galbreth, 17, 24
Mr. McKeon, 5, 21, 22, 23, 24
Mr. Porter, 4, 21, 25, 26
Ms. Florence, 6, 17, 18, 20, 21, 26
Ms. Lindemenn, 12, 14, 18, 19, 25